Talk:Information silo

Content

I am coordinator of N3P.org. We are a non-profit organization that promotes the use of shared data and business procedures. We grant free use of all tbe text published on our site.

One of our objectives is for the automation of business processes to be discussed using a common language. Rewriting this article using a different set of words would defeat this purpose. I respectfully request that this article be allowed to stand.

As far as Bradyinc, the article uses a minor qoute only.

Confirmation email sent to website contact. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 19:31, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

For some reason, everything I write comes out tactlessly today. Please accept the following knowing that I do have an illness that specifically affects my brain and thought processes, making almost all thought ridiculously tricky and difficult. I sound like a bit of a jerk. I apologize and accept all blame. Stay up for three days straight, run a marathon while horribly drunk, and then try to write something intelligent and polite while staying awake an additional 24 hours hoping for the hangover to wear off. That is pretty close to the state my brain/mind and body are in all the time. Somewhere in here, there are still one or two points that might be worth listening to. Thanks.

I certainly appreciate your openness and honesty in disclosing your identity and your goals. This article seems like a useful start towards a more polished final wikipedia article. But...please take a step back and doublecheck whether a general reader and nonspecialist would find it an unbiased reference tool. The Wikipedia.org standard is to strive for neutral point of view in all of its articles, and the current wording of this article might (humorously) be summed up as "information silos are the devil". Grossly oversimplifying to make my point and hopefully bring a smile to your face, too.

I don't have any expertise on this particular recent catch phrase and concept, and am reluctant to try editing the article without a better grasp of the fundamental facts and issues that are considered relevant by most experts. As always, anybody who feels motivated and qualified to work on it is invited.

Also -- and maybe it's just my usual cognitive problems -- but the article doesn't seem to know whether it is talking about information machinery (e.g., computers) or about business practices in corporations and other institutions. It begins with machinery and then in almost midsentence switches without warning or explanation to business practices. --Laning (still haven't created user account, due to above-mentioned cognitive disabilities, but you can track everything by my IP address anyway) 10:17, 3 March 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.17.65.50 (talk • contribs) .

Cognitive problems notwithstanding, your criticisms of this article are valid as far as machinery vs. business processes are concerned, and the harsh tone it takes. Some tech folks see non-interoperable computers as the cause of silos. Business people, on the other hand, see silos as islands of processes. I'll take a stab at balancing these two approaches. But “Silo” is definitely a negative buzzword. That is its value. It’s a convenient label for a problem that bedevils organizations and consumers. Norm

Merge proposal

Please comment here on the merge proposal. DFH 11:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Stovepipes

Consider adding references / merge with stovepipes (in organisation, information, or hierarchical contexts). [1] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.255.45.53 (talk) 21:20, 12 December 2010 (UTC)