Wikimedian in Residence Summit Follow Up 2017: Difference between revisions

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
(Replaced content with " ===Attendees=== ===Notes from last event== Wikimedian_in_Residence_Summit_2016 ===Resources built/available since last event=== https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wi...")
Line 7: Line 7:




===Problems with being a WiR===
===Resources built/available since last event===
[[File:WiRS.JPG|thumbnail]]


*WP:RUMTRUM - bureaucratic procedures
https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Discussion#Replacing_the_Case_Studies_and_Model_Projects_Pages
*Scottish Wikidata problems - Nationality
https://coggle.it/diagram/WJHOxQptLgABlIDB
*Lack of help pages to explain, and lack of videos to help
*Lack of help file to get started, no one file to rule them all, or "Here is the help area". 1-2 min videos etc
*Not enough time, 2 days a week, scheduling meetings, planning in long and short term.
*People thinking I'm a comedian in residence
*Keeping metadata current, maintenance of metadata to keep it current, updating based on new knowledge.
*At an institutional level, organisations do not understand what they want, and it's quite a delicate piece of work to arrive on a shared understanding of a project
*Editathons being reverted by admins.
*Notability debates - a lack of clarity and inconsistency
 
===Best things about being a WiR===
 
*A feel that it's the cutting edge of Wikimedia outreach, engaging experts
*Answering a need for innovation, creating specific solutions
*Being asked "What do you do?" and then pitching what it is
*Working with a diverse group of people
*WiRs are deep projects that connect Wikimedia to the wider world, in a way that doesn't just draw people back to Wikipedia, but uses Wikimedia to help other areas.
*People's excitement about adding content to Wikipedia for the first time
*Boring data coming to life for the first time
*The richness of combined datasets
*All the editathons
 
 
===Why is it good for the organisation, or why do *they* think it's good===
 
*A single sustainable site for Wellcome content
*Reducing the gender gap
*An official point of contact for Wikimedia
*Dissemination of knowledge requires a relationship with the largest source of knowledge in the world
*The digital literacy of the staff of the organisation
*To be seen as innovative, to be associated with the internet
*Press attention
*Outreach activities with a measurable impact
*PR
*Something concrete that an organisation can do.
*Fits in with a library's mission, a reputational gain, and sharing
*Organisations giving their content more reach
*An excuse to finally do something....
 
==Creating an overview of the process steps of organisations becoming open (and a WiR role in it)==
 
=== '''Problems/Solutions''' ===
 
==== '''Setting up/running WiR''' ====
Strange people apply
 
No money
 
Org restructure
 
Difference of opinion with org
 
Loss of contacts
 
Not enough time - '''Think about extension to project before the project'''
 
Institutional sloth - '''Showing off peer projects'''
 
Professional suspicion of "open"
 
Defining project, scope, and job spec '''- Formal agreement with objectives'''
 
Making a case for open - '''Stats - Treeviews, BaGlama2'''
 
==== '''General -''' ====
Disconnect between WiRs & Community '''- Project pages on affected Wikis, add self to list of WiRs on Meta'''
 
Balancing engaging wiki community with new member engagement
 
Expectations of existing community '''- Go to meetups where possible'''
 
WP:Rumtrum = Bureaucratic processes that are slow and obstructive
 
"Help" pages that don't help
 
Bad documentation
 
How to guides are like Wikipedia articles
 
Lack of video tutorials
 
Unhelpful replies to questions
 
Fumbling in the dark: A "do it" over "model it" methodology
 
Tools to measure re-use are buggy
 
Not enough tech support
 
Lots of potential, but projects aren't linked
 
Templates are tricky
 
Difficulty of capturing impact, wrong metrics
 
Ending without a sustainability plan
 
==== '''Advocacy -''' ====
Tricky to explain what's important
 
Institutions not understanding what a WiR is
 
Struggle to be seen as relevant to everyone's work '''- Smithsonian Report, SMK report, Europeana report'''
 
==== '''Wikipedia -''' ====
Notability debates
 
Arbitrary decisions limiting content translation to users w/500 edits
 
Admins reverting edits during editathons
 
Speedy deletions
 
Making templates work with VE is hard and undocumented
 
Creating accounts from IP addresses max per day '''- Get Account Creator'''
 
Knowing which hashtags to use
 
Keeping track of edits '''- Herding Sheep tool'''
 
==== '''Commons -''' ====
Lacks features '''- Hotcat, Cat a Lot'''
 
Mass uploads are very technical '''- Commonist'''
 
Keeping metadata current? How? '''- Visual File Change, AWB'''
 
Maze of metadata formats
 
Test upload has no instructions
 
Measuring views of a category '''- GLAMorgan - Measures views by category, to the level Glamerous, BaGlama'''
 
Aim: All GLAM content is on Commons '''- Quick Statements'''
 
Aim: All GLAM content is re-used on Wikimedia '''- Quick Statements'''
 
==== '''Wikidata -''' ====
Wikipedians resistant to Wikidata
 
Incorrect data
 
Difficult to get consensus on structure for data import
 
Importing data into Wikidata is time-consuming '''- Mix & Match, Histropedia Wikidata Query Viewer'''
 
Struggling for help
 
Sharing data on Wikidata '''- Histropedia'''
 
Importing data and then people "fixing it"
 
No easy way to keep data imported in-sync
 
No templates to follow for how to run simple queries on Wikidata '''- WANTED, query templates, a tickbox approach?'''
 
== Tools as solutions ==
 
==== Wikimedia social search - ====
Search for hashtags to keep track of edits using them. [[toollabs:hashtags/search/|http://tools.wmflabs.org/hashtags/search/]]
 
==== '''GLAMorgan -''' ====
Measures views by category
 
As at current date and use of images (not historic)
 
Double counts if multiple images are used on the same page.
 
==== '''BaGlama2 -''' ====
Dates can be range bound (over a certain period)
 
Categories must be uploaded by Magnus, not by anyone.
 
==== '''GLAMourous -''' ====
Shows you which project and page content has been used
 
By category, depth, and then
 
==== '''Hot Cat -''' ====
Enables you to add categories to categories and files.
 
Needs to be added in Wikimedia Commons prefences. Gadgets tab
 
==== '''Cat a Lot -''' ====
Enables you to add categories to categories and files.
 
Needs to be added in Wikimedia Commons prefences. Gadgets tab
 
== Resources for Advocacy ==
* [https://siarchives.si.edu/sites/default/files/pdfs/2016_03_10_OpenCollections_Public.pdf Smithsonian Report on Open Access]

Revision as of 17:02, 8 June 2017

Attendees

=Notes from last event

Wikimedian_in_Residence_Summit_2016


Resources built/available since last event

https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM/Discussion#Replacing_the_Case_Studies_and_Model_Projects_Pages https://coggle.it/diagram/WJHOxQptLgABlIDB

Retrieved from "https://dev.wikimedia.org.uk/w/index.php?title=Wikimedian_in_Residence_Summit_Follow_Up_2017&oldid=72779"