Aprés GLAM

Well, “GLAM-WIKI: finding the common ground” is over and I can now, in theory, get to sleep. However there are still a range of things to do and I really want to try to keep the momentum up and the conversation continuing as much as possible. You can see at the event page all of the media stories that mentioned the event as well as the blog posts that are starting to come in from the attendees. We got a lot of interesting press, including a rather backhanded compliment in the major newspaper of all the biggest cities and I even got on a very popular breakfast radio show across the whole country (audio interview).

The twitter stream for #GLAM-WIKI picked up over 500 tweets from more than 70 different people. It became extremely busy during the “politics and policy” session on the morning of day 2 (panelists listed here).

There will be videos of all sessions placed online sometime soon so you’ll be able to see what happened and feel like you were there! The videos are currently exporting to DVD in real time so that will take a couple of days + editing, post production, transcoding, uploading…

So, in the mean time, I thought I’d give you some speeches to read since I have no videos to show you just yet. The keynote address by Senator Kate Lundy can be seen here at her blog. As you can see – this is a politician who actually “gets” open access. It will help the non-Australian readers to know that “NBN” is the National Broadband Network, a proposal to bring our pathetic internet infrastructure into the 21st century with a national, government funded, fibre-to-the-home network. If this policy were any better it would fart glitter. On the other hand, the Australian government still has the concept of the “clean feed internet filter” as its policy. The internet giveth, the internet taketh away…

The other speech I can share with you is my own opening address. I hope you like it:

“Ladies and Gentlemen, Welcome to “GLAM-WIKI: finding the common ground”. This is the first of what I hope to be many similar discussions around the world about how the Wikimedia community can work with the cultural sector. We’ve heard and talked about each other a lot in the past and so I thought it important that we come together to talk with each other.

What we hope to achieve out of these two days is a brief document, listing some requests from each community to the other that can be used as a basis of discussion in the future and allows each community to officially request things of the other. It is very difficult to advocate for changes in large organisations (or large communities) and this is even more difficult without some kind of proof that the changes are important or even wanted. That’s what we hope to achieve here – to give each other proof of a demonstrable need for reforms. Of course these suggestions are not promises. The Wikimedia community as a whole makes these kinds of decisions on a consensus model but by demonstrating what cultural institutions would like allows us to advocate in our community for a collaborative approach more effectively. Equally, we do not hold you to be bound by any of the suggestions and it is possible that some won’t even apply to your organisation. But at least these suggestions can be used to start discussions within your own department, organisation, sector. If we don’t tell each other what we want and where we come from, then we’ll never know where we need to improve.

The four themes of this conference – Technology, Law, Business and Education – will form the basic structure of discussions today and tomorrow. In the Wikimedia world we do not pretend to be experts in professional practices of these various fields, but our projects do impact on them to some considerable degree.

  • To the Educators – Wikimedia projects are at the bottom of Bloom’s Taxonomy. We give people descriptive information but it is those with expert knowledge at the forefront of their field who perform the important task of new research and analytical work. Wikipedia is not competing with that. In fact, it requires this original research and the verifiable sources to be undertaken.
  • To the Techies – We are an Free-Libre Open Source platform of websites and software that runs on a LAMP stack. You are free to create tools that plug in to our open-API. We provide complete and specialised dumps of the entire database for you to work with. We encourage new tools or improvements to existing tools that can use, incorporate or adapt our content in interesting and educative ways.
  • To the Curators – Wikimedia projects are all about contextualisation of information within a wider catalogue of knowledge. Information is just data if it left on its own, so we attempt to give information an ordered, categorised, structured (yet highly fluid) meaning. The journey that a curator provides can be built from the raw materials of our free-content and equally those interlocking stories can be re-incorporated back.
  • To the business-men and women – Whist we are a free project with no commercials, but we have no non-commercial content. You are free and encouraged to take what we offer and make as much money and commercial advantage as you want with it without asking permission or paying fees. All we ask is that you attribute us and share any improvements you have made to Wikimedia content back to it – and in turn, to the rest of the world.
  • And finally to the economists – Clay Shirkey said that we are living through what you might call a “positive supply side shock to the amount of freedom in the world”. This is disruptive to the system but has enormous potential benefits.

Last time I was here, I went up to the name plaques on the wall and watched lady find her relative’s name – stroking the nameplate, kissing a poppy and wedge it into the wall alongside hundreds of others. Just like people shining up parts of bronze statues, people are compelled to interact with their culture. This lady’s actions are a particularly Australian expression of this desire to interact, a form of expression that is not just permitted but encouraged. This is a form of read/write culture. Not just a static, read-only, memorial where you are but permitted to look. It is subtle but important active engagement. Notable also is the fact that a decision was made to place no entrance fee to participate in this cultural activity or to visit the museum. To charge an entrance fee to this museum would seem incongruous. And so we have at the Australian War Memorial a very apt example of read/write culture and of Free-culture. A culture that is both free in the sense of liberty and free of charge. These are the principles that underpin everything we do in Wikimedia.

We all know the phrase “Tell me and I’ll forget; show me and I may remember; involve me and I’ll understand”. Over the past decades we have been increasingly encouraged to interact with our culture in museums and to become engaged with our heritage rather than just to observe it, locked behind glass display cases.

Now, we also have a digital culture and you can see by the enthusiasm of people taking, copying, sharing re-editing and interacting with their digital culture, that there is not a decreasing interest in cultural engagement, but an increasing interest – just in a new location. The very fact that Wikipedia – the seemingly most mundane of knowledge forms, an encyclopedia – is the 4th busiest location online is testament to this. People are thirsty for knowledge. Thirsty to take it and use it and interact with it on their own terms. However, this kind of behaviour is often discouraged, sometimes criminalised. The old rule of “Look, but don’t touch” is the message that is being send out.

Just as there has been a move to open up the display cases and make engaging physical spaces in cultural institutions I encourage you to think of these two days as working out ways of sustainably opening up the digital display cabinets so that your visitors might be able to continue to interact with their culture in this new space.

At this point I would like to recognise that we are in Ngunawal country. Whose people have been the custodians of this land since the dreaming. Looking after it for future generations whist still living within it. They did not “own” it in the western sense of the word but looked after it out of a sense of profound respect for the land. I would like to draw parallels with you. Your institutions are similarly the cultural custodians of our heritage – not as proprietors of culture but as protectors of it.

I believe there are important parallels between the Aboriginal relationship to the land and Wikipedia’s approach to knowledge. We bring what we can to the common project out of respect for what has gone before. What we are driven by is the creation and maintenance of nothing less than a mirror of our own culture for no other reason than because we think it important to preserve – for our generation and into the future.

So – In passing over to Jennifer Riggs, Chief Program Officer at the Wikimedia Foundation, to open this unprecedented event, I urge you to think about how we all – as custodians of our cultural heritage – can open up the digital display cases.”

Posted in chapters, museums | 2 Comments

GLAM-WIKI attendees

Wikimedia Australia’s forthcoming event “GLAM-WIKI: Finding the common ground” is now fully booked!

Below you can see the list of attending institutions – some are sending one person, several are sending six staff members – to a total of 170 attendees! (Is this the largest Wikimedia event besides Wikimania?) We’re absolutely pleased as punch to have seen such interest from across the Australian and New Zealand cultural sector. Just as there is interest from within the Wikimedia world to learn about the cultural sector, there is very clear interest from them to learn about us. In fact, “Digital New Zealand” has blogged about it a couple of times – asking the “homework questions” that I’ve asked all the attendees to their own readers.

We’ve also put out a press release about the event. Our generous hosts, the Australian War Memorial will also be filming the presentations so we’ll have those online (with a free licenses) soon afterwards. Finally, can I extend my thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation and their Chapter grants program – without which this event would not have been possible.

AARNet
Australian Centre for the Moving Image
ACT Library and Information Service
ACT Museums and Galleries
Art Gallery of New South Wales
Arts Victoria
Atlas of Living Australia
Australian Council of National Trusts
Australian Greens
Australian Labor Party
Australian Liberal Party
Australian Library and Information Association
Australian Museum
Australian National Botanic Gardens
Australian National Herbarium
Australian National University
Australian Policy Online, Swinburne University
Australian Research Council
Australian Society of Archivists
Australian War Memorial
Canberra Museum and Gallery
Centre for Media and Communications Law
City of Sydney
Collections Australia Network
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO)
Curriculum Corporation
CustomWare
Cyberspace Law and Policy Centre
Department of the Environment Water Heritage and the Arts (DEWHA)
Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE)
Dictionary of Sydney
DigitalNZ
Education.au
Historic Houses Trust of NSW
History Trust of South Australia
Horsons Bay Libraries
International Conservation Services
Macquarie University
Ministerial Council for Education, Early Childhood Development and Youth Affairs
Museum of Australian Democracy
Museum Victoria
Museums & Galleries NSW
Museums Aotearoa
Museums Australia
Museums Australia (Victoria)
National Archives of Australia
National Film & Sound Archive
National Gallery of Australia
National Gallery of Victoria
National Library New Zealand
National Library of Australia
National Museum of Australia
National Portrait Gallery of Australia
National Trust NSW
NSW Department of Education and Training
Parliamentary Library
Powerhouse Museum
Queensland Museum
Queensland University of Technology
Sovereign Hill Museum
State Library of New South Wales
Swinburne University
Toowoomba Regional Council
University of Canberra
UNSW Faculty of Law
Western Australian Museum
Western Plains Cultural Centre

… and Wikimedians from the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Queensland, South Australia, Tasmania, Western Australia, Germany and the USA.

[and yes, I did ask permission from the attendees to publish the name of the institution they represent]

Posted in chapters, museums | 4 Comments

Local history and Wikipedia

In the lead up to the (now fully subscribed!) GLAM-WIKI event there is an increasing amount of chatter about how can Wikipedia play a part in helping the cultural sector to get their knowledge out to the world. But I’ve just come across another area that we’ve barely scratched the surface of:

Local history.

(Bachman farmstead workers load produce onto a Dan Patch line boxcar for delivery to market. Richfield Minnesota – date not published )

Every city, town and community has one. A small group of people who try to put together their photos and memories about the place where they live. Often this gets produced into a locally made coffee table book, often this work lies dormant.

But this is where Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons can come in great use. Take, for example, the article [[History of Richfield, Minnesota]]. This is largely written by [[User:Richfieldhistoricalsociety]].

Here’s the story (at the “Museum 3.0” Ning) that put me on to it:

“I can tell you from a small museum perspective Wikipedia is invaluable. I am also on the board of the a tiny historical society in near Minneapolis, Minnesota. I helped them set up a wiki for them to collect and disseminate the history of our community. However, not only did no one contribute – no one bothered even to go to it. Instead, we found that putting our community’s (fascinating) history on Wikipedia reached more eyeballs than we ever could if we left the information ghettoized on our own now defunct wiki.”

– Joe Hoover from the Minnesota Historical Society (on twitter @nyargle and blogging at nyargle.com which is subtitled “figuring out how to market the museum on the web one pixel at the time”)

I find the word “ghettoised” particularly interesting. It raises the very true point that whilst so much work goes on around the world in getting local history written and published, it is largely kept apart from the rest of the world’s collection of knowledge. Isolated. Often this is due to the expense of mainstream publication and the narrowness of the subject matter. But this is exactly where Wikipedia can help! We can host those town’s histories (so long as there are verifiable sources, e.g. the aforementioned coffee-table book) and bring them out of the isolation and stagnation described by Joe.

So what can we do to encourage this more?

1) Let me answer my question with another question:
If you were asked to go along to your local history society meeting and give them a practical training session on editing Wikipedia (even assuming they had access to enough computers) would you either say “yes, I’d love to spend the next 3 months teaching you how to read WikiMarkup” or would you say “Editing Wikipedia is quite complicated and I think I don’t have the time to help your local studies group get up to speed.” Just thinking of how tricky it is to edit tables, add references, explain nested templates, upload images, decrypt infoboxes… gives me the heeby-jeebies.

Editing in MediaWiki is just too damn hard for the majority of the population. It makes them feel stupid and frustrated. The usability team will be able to make this learning curve less steep but I don’t think they have the resources or the time to do as much as is clearly needed within the scope of their current grant. The less steep we can make the learning curve to independent editing of Wikipedia the more likely that different interest groups – especially those that are not particularly technologically inclined – will be able to join in.

2) Localisation support. As Gerard Meijssen often reminds us, and is the reason for his standing for the Foundation board, we have a very haphazard approach to supporting languages other than English. The “in your own language” part of our vision statement is not given much financial support or attention (relative to the “for free” part for example) that it deserves. I’m not sure how this should be fixed but it certainly needs to be addressed. The local histories in the English speaking world are important enough, but imagine how interesting and diverse the local histories from non-English speaking areas of the world are!

(Housing development along Washburn Avenue, Richfield Minnesota, 1950s)

Posted in History, museums | 1 Comment

Charity? Really?!

In the last few weeks I’ve been laughed at several times. Openly, with ridicule.

When introduced to new people they invariably ask me what I do and so I try to explain as quickly as I can the difference between Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, Wikimedia Chapters and (if they’re a techie) MediaWiki. Anyone involved in the Wikimedia world has had this conversation many times.

Now, I usually expect the question that begins “…but who controls it” and the other question that begins “…what if there’s mistakes” but what I’ve not expected is getting questions about how much money the Wikimedia movement makes from advertisements. I demur and say how there are no ads. and that the project is run by a charitable (US Based) foundation.

It is at this point I get laughed at. Most people do not know that Wikimedia projects Do.Not.Have.Ads. Many people don’t believe that We.Exist.Because.Of.Donations. Some people think I’m lying or trying to deceive them when I say it’s a charity and so they laugh in my face. And I mean 20-something, educated professionals who tell me how often they use Wikipedia already. The fact that people who I would have thought know this stuff already does come as a surprise and must be an indictment of our public information on Wikipedia itself. After all – 99% of people who use Wikipedia would never read the bit at the bottom of the page that says “Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.”

I sincerely hope the upcoming Credibility Campaign being prepared by Jay Walsh will hope alleviate this. If people (who are already using Wikipedia!) think that contributing time, effort or money to Wikipedia is just going towards a for-profit company making ludicrous amounts of money from advertisements then we’ve got a problem. At the very least it’s quite uncomfortable to be ridiculed across a dinner table for telling people that Wikimedians do it for the love of it, not for personal or corporate profit.

[n.b. Whilst the Wikimedia Foundation is a charity in the USA and most of the Chapters are also charitable in their respective country, the chapter I am a representative of – Wikimedia Australia – is a non-profit but does not meet has not yet been approved for charitable status in Australia nor has Wikimedia UK yet met their requirements. Hopefully we can sort this out soon.]

Posted in chapters, wikimedia foundation | 1 Comment

Wikipedia: The Endless Palimpsest

I just returned from the 2009 Australian Historical Association conference, held this year at the University of the Sunshine Coast. Lovely name, lovely place! Can’t beat a uni campus with wild kangaroos running through it…

I’ve given copyright presentations to lawyers, and ‘freedom’ presentations to linux folk, but this was the first time I’ve given a history presentation to historians. And, since I’ve just graduated in history, these were the people I had to impress.

So… I chose a chapter from my thesis called “Wikipedia: the endless palimpsest” which argues that Wikipedia can be legitimately used by historians in several ways as a primary source.

Embedded is the video of the presentation and after that is the abstract. The presentation went very well in the end. I got a packed-out room and several people with some fantastic expertise came up to me afterwards and asked how they could get involved.

Wikipedia: The Endless Palimpsest from Liam Wyatt on Vimeo.

(Sorry about the poor quality, it was only filmed on a digital camera and I had no microphone).

Abstract:

The palimpsest is that most unusual of sources as it shows not only the final state of the page but allows us to see what is now valued but was once discarded. The wiki methodology of writing, with its inherent ability to return, compare and restore to previous versions of any page can therefore be seen as an infinite palimpsest—digital vellum being scraped back, written over and restored ad infinitum. Just as Pompeiian graffiti is of interest to academics two millennia later, so might some otherwise unprepossessing text in Wikipedia’s archive be of interest to the future’s linguist, historian or sociologist.
The ability to see snapshots of articles at any given point through history, their corresponding discussion pages, associated paratexts and statistics demonstrating article popularity gives Wikipedia great potential for historians. This paper uses these elements of Wikipedia to highlight practical means by which historians might engage with it as a primary source of history and still maintain professional standards. Therefore, under discussion is Wikipedia’s own historical record and how it could be used to great effect by historians.

Posted in History | 2 Comments