|WikiProject Sociology||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
|WikiProject Computing||(Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)|
Recently merged in content from Enterprise 2.0, which duplicated some of this article and its references, and needed a context beyond the origins of that term.
There seems to be general agreement that
- Recent changes in enterprise software related to social computing are significant and of lasting importance
- Many people need a shared place to work on describing this generation of software, its features and uses, and how it relates to the rest of the social computing and enterprise worlds.
- The right name for the new generation of enterprise social software is unclear
- Many people currently call this generation of software, and its surrounding culture shift, "enterprise 2.0", though not all of them use it the same way
- While the term is in common use now, it may not itself be of lasting importance
As such, work on describing this generation of software and surrounding movements has been moved to this page, under the heading enterprise social software. When there is more than 3 short paragraphs about the topic, it can be moved into its own article; preferably with that kind of descriptive name. If one or another shorthand for the topic becomes predominant and lasting, the article can later be renamed. Right now, we need more and better content. Thanks to all who are contributing to the quality of this and related articles. +sj + 22:22, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
AfD discussion about Enterprise 2.0
the definition "social computing refers to the use of social software" makes it pretty obvious that this stub article should be merged into social software (identical scope). dab (𒁳) 19:47, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
This article should not be merged with social software unless the title is social computing and one aspect of it is use of social software.
- One way in which I see these two articles as complementary and NOT redundant is that, as in many areas of computing, the "software" side concentrates on the development and implementation issues, while a more broader are of study is concerned with understanding the motivations, use, and impact of the tools in question. Here is an example: Mobile Computing vs. Mobile Software. They both have their Wikipedia pages framed in the sort of way that I described (although not exactly like that) Mobile_software and Mobile_computing. An example that might not follow my argument so well is the one Educational_Software. In the case of Social Software and Social Computing, Social Software can concentrate on the tools, and Social Software on other broader issues such as how issues of crowd behavior, trust, community building and other issues are related to this new form of human interaction. I will be happy to take action if others support this idea. Jsarmi 20:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I also think that the articles should NOT be merged, at least not under the title Social Software. Social Computing is the more general concept. In addition, Social Software is strongly associated with the Web 2.0 and social networking, whereas Social Computing is used in a broader sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 21:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
I think that social computing is distinct from social software. If no one objects, I'm going to take a stab at rewriting the article over the next week or so. Ascii27 17:04, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Assuming the re-write of the first two paragraphs "sits well" with those watching this page, I will go to work on the example section next. Ascii27 18:23, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
I added a rationale section a few days ago. Next week I'll either provide more of a definition, or will expand the list of examples/components of social computing. Ascii27 16:09, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
I added the definition, but then got distracted for quite a while. I do intend to expand the list of examples over the next few weeks. Ascii27 13:57, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
Please consider shortening and/or subordinating the first paragraph of "Rationale." ˜˜˜˜
Please consider explaining near the top why the popular notion that social computing consists mainly of Facebook, Twitter and Google Plus is incorrect.˜˜˜˜ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nhy67ygv (talk • contribs) 04:31, 27 August 2011 (UTC)
Not too sure if NewsReport was the first online newspaper, The Tech ( MIT's newspaper seems to be the first), perhaps go onto explain whether NewsReport was a private paper, only for private circulation. skakria 23:31, 16 October 2013 (UTC)