I have to admit, I’m not really in love with the term “Librarian 2.0”. I understand that it’s referring to Web 2.0 and branching off of the concept of Library 2.0, but to me, saying an information professional is “Librarian 2.0” implies that others are “Librarian 1.0”, and thus somehow not quite as good as “Librarian 2.0”, and I think that’s a false conclusion. I know in Partridge, H., Lee, J., & Munro, C. (2010), they say that a lot of their focus groups responded to the question “But haven’t LIS professionals always been required to have these skills, knowledge, and attributes?” with something like “Yes, but…” which implies that there really is a perception that Librarian 2.0 has something important that Librarian 1.0 lacks. And the keywords identified in Huvila, I., Homberg, K., Kronqvist-Berg, M., Nivakoski, O., & Widén, G. (2013) offer a glimpse of what these things are. But while I agree wholeheartedly with many principles behind Librarian 2.0, especially those identified in the video “A Librarian 2.0’s Manifesto”, I think Librarian 2.0 is not the best identifier for a librarian who engages with these principles and practices. However, that being said, I don’t have any ideas of what a better term would be, so perhaps I shouldn’t complain about “Librarian 2.0”.