[Wiki Loves Monuments] Long term

Sun Nov 4 11:37:37 UTC 2012

(changing the title to give it its own thread)

I think this discussion would indeed be best on the feedback page. But I
will respond to some of the points already here.

First off: I personally do not think this will be an ever lasting event. I
think that a country can only organize Wiki Loves Monuments 3 or 4 times in
a row without exhausting enthusiasm about it. I actually have the feeling
next year (2013) might very well be the last year that we organize it on an
international level. But I hope someone will proof me wrong!

I agree with Yaroslav that a real life organization would be a possibility.
We don't need that though. Actually, I think it would be a worse situation
than what we're in right now. It would cause a lot of bureaucracy (conflict
of interest: I would be one of the people who would have to review the
bylaws in the Affiliations committee).

An ongoing project on Commons to coordinate heritage projects would perhaps
be a good idea. Commons isn't exactly suitable for it as it also involves a
lot of other things - but it is probably better than the alternatives.
Outreachwiki would drive us too far from the content side of things etc. I
don't think it would be a priority of myself, but I can definitely see the
added value. I do not think it could or should replace current efforts, but
it should be complementary.

Some people suggested over time that Wiki Loves Monuments is a GLAM
project. Everyone who knows me, knows that I'm no fan of acronyms and
especially not this one. If you would use the alternative 'cultural
heritage institutions' (or if you prefer acronyms: CHI) it indeed fits the
definition well. However, at the same time it is quite different from all
the other initiatives that are ongoing in this field by Wikimedia.

Wiki Loves Monuments is mostly public facing and not institution-facing.
We're focused on participation by individuals, and while the institutions
that provide the infrastructure (the lists) are critical - they are
primarily a tool to reach that goal. That is why I usually consider it more
a seperate thing from traditional cultural heritage initiatives in
Wikimedia - but it has many interfaces. Every national Wiki Loves Monuments
competition has probably one or several Cultural Heritage collaborations.
In the Netherlands we collaborate with the Museum association (prize
sponsor), National heritage board (providing the lists), a
monument/heritage association (networking partner, outreach and prize
sponsor), the Architecture museum (prize sponsor), Open Monument Days
(networking partner and outreach) etc. In other countries you will likely
see similar collaborations especially in the second/third year develop.

Anyway - I definitely cheer upon Poli's great idea to have a cleanup
project. I have been doing a bunch of that myself recently on some
countries (India, Canada, Argentina) and I think it could use some help. I
think Maarten sent recently an email about it (now WLM is over, what's
next).

Yaroslav, Polimerek: would you like to volunteer to set up such portal on
Commons?

Best,
Lodewijk

2012/11/4 Jane Darnell <jane023 at gmail.com>

> 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.
> >
> > http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Partnerships
> >
> > http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM
> >
> > 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
> > projects.
> >
> > --
> > Tomek "Polimerek" Ganicz
> > http://pl.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Polimerek
> > http://www.ganicz.pl/poli/
> > http://www.cbmm.lodz.pl/work.php?id=29&title=tomasz-ganicz
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> > WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/private/wikilovesmonuments/attachments/20121104/19abc04f/attachment.html>