[Wiki Loves Monuments] Feedback for the evaluation of WLM 2012
jane023 at gmail.com
Sun Nov 4 11:07:48 UTC 2012
Well I wouldn't mind changing it to GLAMM - the extra M for monuments...
Sent from my iPad
On Nov 4, 2012, at 10:34 AM, Tomasz Ganicz <polimerek at gmail.com> wrote:
> 2012/11/4 Yaroslav M. Blanter <putevod at mccme.ru>:
>> Another option, which I personally find more attractive, is to create a
>> permanently functioning meta-project, smth like Project Cultural Heritage
>> (scope to be discussed). It could be based on Commons or on Meta (to be
>> discussed, both options have advantages and disadvantages). This must be a
>> meta-project, because it coordinates efforts of many different projects:
>> Different language Wikipedias, Commons (with which the interaction was
>> sometimes not ideal), and potentially different languages in Wikivoyage, may
>> be even Wikidata. Many components of this meta-project already exist on
>> Commons and are supported by Maarten and other enthusiasts.
> Well actually it would be a kind of repetition of GLAM / Outreach
> portal /wiki . I would rather suggest to better integrate WLM with
> GLAM inititative of which WLM is just one of many other projects.
> Quite successful - but not the only one.
> Many of these projects are about the same as WLM is - i.e. they upload
> many photographs and then, there is no-one to effectively use them in
> Wikipedias. Actually there is plenty of photographic/database content
> around which is not very effectively "consumed" by Wikipedia and other
> Wikimedia projects. The bottleneck is manpower of wiki-editors, not
> the number of free pictures or public domain governmental data.
> So, maybe it would be interesting to have a project "Commons heritage
> cleanup project" which might just screen how Common's content is
> organized in Commons and how effectively it is used in other Wikimedia
> Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
More information about the WikiLovesMonuments