I found an enormous amount—close to 50% of site content—of duplicate content during my site inventory. Much of it was dated (as is probably the case with many neglected sites) and differentiated from its duplicate by an omitted “www.” in the URI. Déjà vu during a talk I gave recently on digitization processes—the archivists involved with the project (as is true of most archivists) were very, very reluctant to part with the original, (literally) decadent materials even though most of the objects in question hadn’t been handled since they were first produced. (No offense to archivists; if I were employed in an archive, it would be empty within 2 weeks and re-decorated entirely in Minotti—which defeats the purpose.)
Anyway. When I contemplate IA redesign of my ugly, famous astrology website (my IA vision does not involve Minotti but does involve a sleek, simple approach), I wonder if something like the stereotypical archivist mentality is motivating the presence of duplicate content. (What if one of the copies disappears? What if there is some minute, byte-sized difference between two of the iterations that Mara the inventory-creator didn’t catch?)
Have any of you encountered this archivist mentality in IT-centered information science?