Talk:Personal information management

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Libraries Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Copied from Jones (2005)?[edit]

Compare page text to https://digital.lib.washington.edu/dspace/handle/1773/2155 Natebailey 11:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jones copied himself. The reason I originally came across this page was because someone I went to school with at the UW ISchool (Jone's department) mentioned to me that Jones had edited the article. Indeed, a look at the posting history confirms this fact. (See the nascent discussion on this page.) Of course, the article needs to be rewritten using published, verifiable source material, and not just Jones' word (or more precisely, a copy of his own abstract). –Kables 06:17, 7 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I would say the copying does not hurt in any way. Jones is a very well known researcher in the field, most of the other people know him as he is co-organizing well-known workshops. He is an authority and probably knows what he is talking about, the text is good. Leobard 12:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- another remark: just because a text is copied from somewhere else into wikipedia doesn't make it a "view of one person who did not dicsuss with others", it probably took many years (although I can't say exactly, I am not the author) of discussion at workshops and events, and papers, and products, to evolve a definition of pim down to a few sentences. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Leobard (talk • contribs) 12:19, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

-- The definition of "personal information management" is indeed the same as that used in many other places including the special issue on PIM for Communications of the ACM (Jan. 2006), the chapter on PIM for ARIST (2007), the edited book on PIM by Jones & Teevan (2007) and workshops -- PIM 2005 [(http://pim.ischool.washington.edu/pim05home.htm]), PIM 2006 ([1]) PIM 2008 ([2]). The definition was the outcome of many discussions and has stood the test of time. Good definitions are meant to be copied. -- William Jones

--Still needs to be referenced to the original document. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.21.179.106 (talk) 21:48, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NO merge with Personal Information Manager[edit]

The two abbreviations and terms do differ and must not be merged. There is a scientific field of personal information mangement, there is a series of workshops abou this, there are a bunch of applications like MS-Outlook or Lotus Notes that work in the field, it is a thing on its own. As a science field, it is important already. Also, it is still young (20 years since the term first appeared?), hence the common agreement and settlement still has to be done (a few more books need to be published). Leobard 12:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, personal information management (PIM) as an area of study and a practice (that we all must do in this world of information) is quite different from "personal information managers" also referred to as "PIM tools". The category of PIM tools is not well defined. In broadest definition, the category includes anything that can help us in our practices of PIM. Even a paper notebook qualifies. However, PIM tools or "personal information managers" is more commonly used to refer to a class of computer-based applications that integrate email, calendaring, contact management and time/task management. The term "PIM tool" was particularly in vogue in the 80's (when the term "personal information management" was also coined by Lansdale (1988). Recent work on Chandler is very much in this spirit (but also reflecting the revolution that's happened since the 80's on the Web and in hand-held devices). I suggest modifications in the "Personal Information Managers" article to include the term "PIM tools" and to point, as a subordinate article, to the article on "Personal Information Management". Personal information management (PIM) as a field of study covers not only tools to help but also strategies and organizational schemes of PIM. -- William Jones

I have simply brought the info on P...I... Manager here. So this article has been enhanced keeping in view the comments by above editors. Sanjiv swarup (talk) 05:09, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge "Personal Information Management" and "Personal Information Manager"[edit]

I think that they should be merged as Personal Information Management is the methodology and Personal Information Manager is the IT solution

82.27.197.211 (talk) 11:36, 27 March 2008 (UTC) Rachel Chan[reply]

I agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.169.16.74 (talk) 14:15, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So do I. Stop re-directing from "Personal Information Management" to "Personal Information Manager"! William (talk) 01:19, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For merger Reason : topics are similar Sanjiv swarup (talk) 05:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

merged Sanjiv swarup (talk) 05:07, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]