The Signpost

News and notes

Wikimedia fellow working on cultural collaborations; video animation about Wikipedia; brief news

Contribute  —  
Share this
By Tilman Bayer

Wikimedia Foundation announces "GLAM fellow" working on cultural partnerships

Liam Wyatt (User:Witty lama) has become the sixth recipient of a Wikimedia fellowship, for a one-year project (until December 2011) where he "will be working to build the capacity of the Wikimedia community to undertake partnerships with cultural institutions – known as GLAMs [Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums] a term he popularized", according to the announcement by the Wikimedia Foundation's Human Resources Manager Daniel Phelps. A Wikipedian since 2005, Wyatt has been doing volunteer work in this area for two years. He convened the "GLAM-WIKI" conferences in Australia (2009, Signpost coverage), and the UK (2010, Signpost coverage), and a Wikipedia workshop at the "Museums and the Web 2010" conference (Signpost coverage). Also in 2010, he volunteered five weeks as "Wikipedian in Residence" at the British Museum, a pilot project to facilitate collaboration between Wikimedians and the institution (see Signpost coverage).

Witty lama, who is currently based in Sydney, has also been the Vice President of the Australian Wikimedia chapter, and one of the hosts of the "Wikipedia Weekly" podcast.

Through his blog post last November, entitled "How to make cultural collaborations scale?", concerns were voiced that "the sheer number of collaboration projects being offered to us" meant that many such opportunities would be irreparably wasted unless there was a "consistent, easily findable, and easy to understand processes for handling potential partnerships when they are presented to us". He added that we must put in place processes to "scale-up our capacity to professionally manage" collaborations, whilst being "consistent with the grassroots nature of Wikimedia projects."

Work on documenting such processes has now started on the Outreach wiki (with as a shortcut), where a "WMF Fellow's to do list" has been developed since December 20. The page also features a "'This month in GLAM' report". Volunteers will be invited to collaborate on improving the "Guide to batch uploading" on Commons during the next one or two weeks. In February, Liam Wyatt will travel to India (like other WMF staff before him), meeting with Wikimedians in Mumbai, Bangalore and Delhi to explore collaboration possibilities with GLAM institutions there.

Watch for an interview with Liam in an upcoming issue of the Signpost.

Video animation illustrates "The State of Wikipedia"

A 3:43 minutes long video titled "The State of Wikipedia", narrated by Jimmy Wales and produced by Washington D.C. based creative agency JESS3, was published last week on video sharing sites and on, under a CC-BY-SA license. It illustrates the history of Wikipedia with colorful animated computer graphics (some stills), accompanied by quirky electronic music. On its inception, Wales said that "As a founder of Nupedia, I led the group to establish a farm team of sorts for future Nupedia articles. We used a new software platform to make collaboration easy - the wiki; Wikipedia." Wales also commented about his current role on Wikipedia and the importance of the Foundation ("I still lead the community, and the Wikimedia Foundation helps us to make Wikipedia what it is today"), and looked into the future: "There has never been anything like Wikipedia before, and its future horizon is very very long."

On the company's blog, Leslie Bradshaw and Becca Colbaugh from JESS3 explained that the video was "aimed at teaching the layperson Wikipedia’s initial concept and consequent evolution into becoming one of the most visited web sites across the globe", and that it had been developed over months together with the Foundation, as the company's gift to Wikipedia on its tenth anniversary. Wikipedian William Beutler (User:WWB) was involved in the project as an Executive Producer. On YouTube, the video had received almost 83,000 views at the time of writing.


+ Add a comment

Discuss this story

These comments are automatically transcluded from this article's talk page. To follow comments, add the page to your watchlist. If your comment has not appeared here, you can try purging the cache.
  • Feel free to revert me if I did wrong. --Elitre (talk) 11:17, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reverting, I can get it, I asked for it. Reverting in such a manner, no. The news about an article being deleted is now outdated, as the article was deleted. Plus, the very fact that an article (not the only one that was written by the user I guess) was going to be deleted or has been deleted does not say anything about the real experience of the guy, whether he/she is disappointed now, plans to leave, understood what was wrong and so on. But hey, thanks for reminding that I should lurk more and help less in some cases. --Elitre (talk) 11:52, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here I thanked you for your help fixing another story, right before you posted the above comment. I think your last comment and this edit summary are a bit unfortunate - your input is truly valued; you just can't expect people to agree with everything of it, especially if it consists of deleting what others wrote.
Signpost articles are not encyclopedia articles. They consists of news reporting and carry a date (and a byline), and feature expressions like "currently", so the concern about the statement being "outdated" is beside the point. I explained the revert in the edit summary. A main reason why Signpost articles should not be changed significantly after publication without a pressing need is that, like most newspaper articles, most readers will only read them once, soon after publication, and should not feel the need to check back for changes to get the full picture or the correct information. (Another is that articles are likely to be construed as expressions of the writers named in the byline, see also Wikipedia:Signpost/About.) And I do not understand your rationale for the deletion - the AfD was not mentioned to entice people to vote there, but to illustrate that this newbie's continued contributions after the course ended had not been without problems. Many megabytes of discussion have been written about the possible effects of AfDs on newbies. If you disagreed with the judgement that the AfD was newsworthy in this context, you would still have been welcome to rewrite the story before publication (possibly getting included in the byline), or to write up this news item yourself - check the Signpost Newsroom in the days before publication.
Regards, HaeB (talk) 12:33, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that your edit summary was unfortunate, being harsh for no reason, as I was the first one implying "I don't know the rules, you're free to revert my edit". Anyway I previously stated the reasons for my edit, but I guess I just can't expect people to agree with everything. --Elitre (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry if it sounded harsh, it certainly wasn't meant to. I was just trying to explain the reasons for the revert (including one such rule, about changes after publication) in a concise way. Regards, HaeB (talk) 14:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The Signpost · written by many · served by Sinepost V0.9 · 🄯 CC-BY-SA 4.0