FlyPod Blog

How to share your knowledge on Wikipedia - and not get into trouble

The big question in the cultural sector is not why should we engage with the public using means such as Wikipedia but rather why is pollination not always successful?
 
This article hopes to improve the success rate of those who wish to engage with Wikipedia and maybe allay the fears of those who have not yet taken the plunge. I went to a workshop with representatives of museums, galleries and others in the cultural sector to hear from Wikipedia directly: what works and why. I won't go into full detail here but I would just like to make a few key points...
 
An article is actually a community. When you find an article on an area of interest to you, that article will often have a community and discussion board behind it. Introduce yourself to the community and ask if any help is needed. You may also find that some of the people there can help in your work...
 
If you have primary source material or there is detailed information on your organisation's site, you can add a link to it. Only add links where there is a reference to be followed or there is a great deal of extra information to be had. Gratuitous link adding can get people's backs up. On the other hand, useful external links to your website is great for your organisation.
 
Get involved with a WikiProject. There are projects concerning London, history and many other areas that could be relevant you. For example a botanist might go to WikiProject Plants - which is a place to collaborate and has an open call on more articles, taxonomic issues, photos and more.
 
If you wish to add a media item (photos, scans, video etc), you'll need to consider whether you are happy to release this into the public domain. If the copyright is with your organisation or someone else, you should not upload the item. If you own the copyright, decide whether you are happy to release it for free use into the world. You can license it so that you get attribution and that anyone building on your work must also make it freely available. You can also of course keep a higher resolution version that you release to anyone wishing to pay you.

Also, don’t copy and paste text from your organisation’s site or anywhere where it exists under a copyright notice. It will be removed from Wikipedia. By all means, rephrase, cite and comment on content though.

Edit as yourself, ie ‘John Doe’ not ‘Interpretation Team’. Wikipedia will blacklist you if you do!

Write from a neutral point of view, this doesn’t mean bland or avoiding controversy but rather that the reader of the piece would conclude that the author is not acting as an advocate for one side or the other.

These tips are directed at individuals rather an organisation. Your organisation may (or may not) develop a formal relationship with Wikipedia following the lead of institutions like the British Museum and this may affect the way you as an individual are encouraged to contribute in future. But if you have a lot to add on particular topics, there is nothing to stop you getting involved now.

Everything you wanted to know about Wikipedia but were too afraid to ask

Great talk today from Wikimedia's Liam Wyatt to the cultural sector.

We spent a fair while on the thorny issue of copyright and the controversial position of Wikipedia that a scan or photo of an out of copyright 2D image such as a painting is itself in the public domain. Most institutions maintain that their images of paintings etc have a copyright in the reproduction that they can defend. According to Liam, there is no definitive legal position on this apart from a New York court decision which agrees with Wikipedia.

So what does an organisation like the Tate do if Wikipedia has a high resolution image of theirs without attribution? Apparently nothing. Even trying to replace this image with a properly attributed version on a creative commons license is likely to be stripped of that by Wikipedians who feel quite strongly on this issue. One way around for new images, would be to make a partnership with Wikimedia with links, attribution and metadata but be prepared for someone to strip the Creative Commons license off and mark it public domain. If the image is in copyright, say of a recent painting or photo, then a CC license is likely to be respected. Low resolution on Wikipedia and links to your high resolution commercial images becomes a real possibility.

When the reproduction is of a 3D item (such as Kew's botanical specimens) then the law clearly protects the copyright of the organisation making the image and this will be respected by all.

What about content apart from images? Even without a partnership, footnotes and useful links are really important but one can go further. The British Museum has had a Wikipedian in residence and has made better entries in Wikipedia, leading to more readers and more readers seems to lead at a 1% level of conversion to more link throughs. Another idea was to have a Backstage day with Wikipedians and curators meeting it each other and creating new entries. Definitely something that could be done by lots of other institutions. 

Liam has also sent these links over, which you may find interesting:

- if you're keen, the link to the copyright case itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp. 

- or indeed the UK subsection http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.#Relevance_to_U.K._law

- the original blogpost about the event http://www.wittylama.com/2010/03/the-british-museum-and-me/

- the NY Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/arts/design/05wiki.html

- The backstage pass event page: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass (and, equally, the frontpage of that website which describes WM-UK)

- the actual page on-wiki where all the work is being housed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/BM

- the "advice for the cultural sector" page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM

- the GLAM-WIKI event page which links to the recommendations http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/GLAM

Everything you wanted to know about Wikipedia but were too afraid to ask

Great talk today from Wikimedia's Liam Wyatt to the cultural sector.

We spent a fair while on the thorny issue of copyright and the controversial position of Wikipedia that a scan or photo of an out of copyright 2D image such as a painting is itself in the public domain. Most institutions maintain that their images of paintings etc have a copyright in the reproduction that they can defend. According to Liam, there is no definitive legal position on this apart from a New York court decision which agrees with Wikipedia.

So what does an organisation like the Tate do if Wikipedia has a high resolution image of theirs without attribution? Apparently nothing. Even trying to replace this image with a properly attributed version on a creative commons license is likely to be stripped of that by Wikipedians who feel quite strongly on this issue. One way around for new images, would be to make a partnership with Wikimedia with links, attribution and metadata but be prepared for someone to strip the Creative Commons license off and mark it public domain. If the image is in copyright, say of a recent painting or photo, then a CC license is likely to be respected. Low resolution on Wikipedia and links to your high resolution commercial images becomes a real possibility.

When the reproduction is of a 3D item (such as Kew's botanical specimens) then the law clearly protects the copyright of the organisation making the image and this will be respected by all.

What about content apart from images? Even without a partnership, footnotes and useful links are really important but one can go further. The British Museum has had a Wikipedian in residence and has made better entries in Wikipedia, leading to more readers and more readers seems to lead at a 1% level of conversion to more link throughs. Another idea was to have a Backstage day with Wikipedians and curators meeting it each other and creating new entries. Definitely something that could be done by lots of other institutions. 

Liam has also sent these links over, which you may find interesting:

- if you're keen, the link to the copyright case itself: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp. 

- or indeed the UK subsection http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridgeman_Art_Library_v._Corel_Corp.#Relevance_to_U.K._law

- the original blogpost about the event http://www.wittylama.com/2010/03/the-british-museum-and-me/

- the NY Times article http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/05/arts/design/05wiki.html

- The backstage pass event page: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Backstage_Pass (and, equally, the frontpage of that website which describes WM-UK)

- the actual page on-wiki where all the work is being housed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/BM

- the "advice for the cultural sector" page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM

- the GLAM-WIKI event page which links to the recommendations http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/GLAM

UK Pricing and release details for iPad

In recent years, Apple has been remarkably good at simultaneously making its products available across multiple territories. It has been less impressive with pricing opnness especially where third parties are involved. Nevertheless, it is still surprising that Apple is not planning to tell anyone the pricing for its iPad until its launch later this month.

Equally as frustrating is a lack of clarity as to when the iBook service will be available and of course what the selection will be like in the UK. Currently Apple is only committing to a US launch.

This all matters to us because the iPad is a potentially game-changing device for cultural spaces but only if it is reasonably priced and sufficiently specced to get an audience.

Guardian

BBC 'to axe radio stations and halve website' in strategic review | Media | The Guardian

The BBC plans to axe two radio ­stations – 6 Music and Asian Network – cut spending on imported shows and halve the size of its website, it is claimed today

via www.guardian.co.uk

Rather depressing news this morning that may not come to pass. Leaving aside the value of these much-loved radio stations and the slashing of web content, slinging a large number of web people onto a flat jobs market will lead to those skills dissipating.

These are, all the main political parties agree, the kind of skills we need as a nation in the 21st Century. Expect none of them to lift a finger while the BBC flagellates itself though.

Really is it not time that Gulliver stand up and breaks the ropes and chains of the petty private interests out to shackle it? Ask anyone in this country what they value more and trust more: Sky, the Mail or the BBC and there'll be few takers for the first two options.

Update: excellent piece by David Mitchell in the Guardian

Reader's Digest UK in administration

Reader's Digest has gone into administration in the UK, putting 117 jobs at risk.

via news.bbc.co.uk

One of the first websites I ever produced was for Reader's Digest back in 1996 I think.

Apart from lots of stories about people overcoming terrible odds, they also offered readers of the website the chance to win a £1000 or so every month. Surprisingly few people entered and as far as I know no one ever won a thing. Should have known the writing was on the wall even then.

Wikileaks and Iceland MPs propose 'journalism haven'

The Icelandic Modern Media Initiative (IMMI), calls on the country's government to adopt laws protecting journalists and their sources.

It will be filed with the Althingi - Iceland's parliament - on 16 February.

If the proposal succeeds it will require the Icelandic government to consider introducing legislation.

via news.bbc.co.uk

Fascinating idea of a country proposing to be an offshore haven for freedom of expression. You can only wish the Icelandic people well after being buffeted and nearly broken by the banking crisis. I'll be following this closely.

Inside Kingswood Warren: the BBC's technology HQ

I have some very fond memories of this place and the crazy uber-nerds who worked there. I know they can rebuild the technology but I wonder if they can recreate the sheltered atmosphere that let these boffins create solutions to questions nobody was yet asking. 

Kingswood Warren, home to the BBC's team of broadcast technologists since the 1940s, is where standards in HDTV, Nicam digital stereo and teletext were all developed.

via news.bbc.co.uk

Always pay your web designer gracefully

Metropolitan Police Commander Ali Dizaei has been sentenced to four years for assaulting and falsely arresting a man in a dispute over £600.

Southwark Crown Court was told Waad Al-Baghdadi was arrested by Dizaei in a row over work on the officer's website.

via news.bbc.co.uk

I don't care if you are the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, you still have to pay your web person.

Very pleased to see the short web output from my trip to Mali go live. Hopefully this is just a taster of some longer and more detailed pieces that will be shown on TV.

Mobile cinema helps change attitudes about female genital mutilation/cutting in Mali

BOUGOUNISSABA, Mali, 5 February 2010 – When the Cinéma Numérique Ambulant came to Djènèba Doumbia’s village, the young women had no idea how it would change her life.