Talk:Information commons
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
 | The contents of the Software Commons page were merged into Information commons on 27 July 2016. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected page, please see its history; for the discussion at that location, see its talk page. |
Brilliant though the new Information Commons at the University of Sheffield is (and I'm not an entirely unbiased observer), the penultimate bullet point needs to be amended to refer to the more general usage of Information Commons as a library or learning space with pervasive IT. The University of Sheffield's new facility is almost certainly the first in the UK to use this label, but it has gained in popularity in North America and elsewhere during the last decade.
There are two distinct variants in the types of facility so designated
- large standalone buildings, such as Sheffield's, the University of Auckland's, and Loyola University's
- areas of existing buildings, usually university libraries, equipped with student computers and often refurbished and refurnished to accommodate the necessary power and data services
A useful but now somewhat dated guide to IC facilities worldwide was compiled by David Murray in 2001 and is available at http://www.brookdale.cc.nj.us/library/infocommons/ic_home.html.
I will be happy to make an edit along these lines, but will be grateful for comments and other examples first.
Artq55 21:26, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
This page seems to be rather unfocused. The title is 'Information Commons' but it ranges over a number of other areas. These all seem to be taken from http://www.fepproject.org/policyreports/infocommons.II.html. Also, is there any reason for some of the subtitles to use 'common' and some 'commons'? Any objection if I edit them all to 'commons' (as the plural is usual in this context)?
Leornian (talk) 22:11, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
External links modified[edit]
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Information commons. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
Connect with knowledge commons?[edit]
Doing some informal research around this area, it struck me that it might help readers to have a "See also" reference to Knowledge commons? There is already a link back here from there. Does this sound like a good idea for fellow Wikipedians who watch this page? Simon Grant (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Should future generations be linked?[edit]
Please see the discussion at Talk:Future generations#Links to this article which relates to reverted edits to this article. Verbcatcher (talk) 10:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)