[Wiki Loves Monuments] Long term

Sun Nov 4 11:51:34 UTC 2012

Of course :) Let me be clearer: there are loads of alternative projects
that can be run. It's just with a different topic :) But for that, I
suggest to first run national pilots, and then see what works good and
scale that up again.

Lodewijk

2012/11/4 emijrp <emijrp at gmail.com>

> When we finish Wiki Loves Monuments, we can do Wiki Loves Earth, imitating
> this project http://www.geograph.org.uk but worldwide.
>
> One image per km2 in the world (discarding oceans). Coverage is biased for
> now
> https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Geolocated_images_in_Wikimedia_Commons_2012-01-21.png
>
>
> 2012/11/4 Lodewijk <lodewijk at effeietsanders.org>
>
>> (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
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
>> WikiLovesMonuments at lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
>> http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Emilio J. Rodríguez-Posada
> http://LibreFind.org - The wiki search engine
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/c1bd7c43/attachment.html>