This Interview page is a subpage for the WikiProject desk. I've done things slightly differently and have assigned interview pages for each person in the Wikipedia Library being interviewed. Your answers to questions may be edited for brevity.
|
This interview is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Please answer the following to the best of your ability.
Add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions on their own interview page. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please leave a note on my talk page. |
Please add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign each answer. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them.
When did you first hear about the Wikipedia Library? How did you start contributing to the group?
- I joined The Wikipedia Library (TWL) two years ago after reading an advert that appeared in my Watchlist Notices and it resonated with me so I signed up to help in any way I could. Throughout the course of two different post-grad programs I had the opportunity to make extensive use of both the HeinOnline and EBSCO databases and so I was happy to volunteer as coordinator for both partnerships.
In the role of coordinator, I review applications for access and try to determine whether or not access would be of benefit to the applicant. I screen applicants to ensure that they meet the basic requirements described on the partnership page and then I try to determine how the applicant hopes to utilize the database. If the needs of the applicant can be met by access to the database then I approve the application and try to point out the specific area of the collection I think will be of the most helpful.
Your project seems quite different than others. Can you explain that or the 'mission statement' or goals of the Library?
- As I understand them, TWL's two basic goals both center on the mutual benefit arising from the expansion of a well-cited encyclopedia. In "help[ing] editors access reliable sources to improve Wikipedia", TWL supports Wikipedia's Verifiability Policy (as limited by the "Reliable Source" Guideline) and the hope is that this will result in the growth of the encyclopedia via properly cited content. In "help[ing] knowledge professionals share their collections with the public", TWL provides a service to the partners who have graciously agreed to donate user accounts for distribution via TWL and the hope is that this will encourage additional partnerships with databases and other organizations not currently partnered with Wikipedia. Inasmuch as The Wikipedia Library's efforts aim to benefit off-Wikipedia groups in addition to Wikipedia, this does indeed make TWL something of a rare beast among WikiProjects.
When you are editing, what do you do and what do like most?
- My personal rate of editing has diminished in recent months as I am working full time, but I tend to work in fits and starts anyway. I favor obscure topics that require research and the pulling-in of sources obtained through great effort rather than topics where there is so much reliable source material out there that the editor's job centers more on filtering the noise. There have been several times in my life (always while working as a student at a university) when I have had broad access to a wide array of information sources and my capacity to research obscure topics has been significantly broader than it is today. I recognize that this is a common experience among post-graduates who are no longer affiliated with an institution and in large part this has drawn me to my work with TWL. I especially love being able to connect users researching obscure topics to resources that will enable them to produce material that may represent the internet's first and only article on a topic. Wikipedia's many "necessary" articles are of course essential to form the main body of the encyclopedia and to legitimize Wikipedia's mission as a serious reference work, but I suspect that it is the well-sourced articles on obscure topics (those topics perhaps falling more on the "encyclo-" side than the "-pedia" side) that more often tend to draw good editors to Wikipedia. That's what keeps me interested in editing Wikipedia and that's what motivates me to participate in TWL.
What can a new member do to help out? Is there any 'training'?
- Oh, there is always more work that needs to be done! At the ground level, there are currently 26 account coordinators providing coordination for more than 50 partners so many of us are coordinating for multiple partners. At a higher level, TWL is always seeking to expand its partnerships. Personally speaking, I am very excited by the prospect of new partnerships with non-English organizations and I would love to see growth in the ranks of our global coordinators and the establishment of additional global branches! And then of course there are always opportunities to become a library intern or visiting scholar which further TWL's mission and helps to establish the Wikipedia brand. There is a "Get Involved" section of The Wikipedia Library front page which provides links to all of the areas where we could use help. Some training is involved in coordination, and it's done on an Individual basis. The library coordinators are very responsive and do a fantastic job in facilitating the work of the account coordinators.
Do you work with any WikiProjects? or have any parent/child WikiProjects?
- The Wikipedia Library has thematic overlap with the work of some of Wikipedia's other WikiProjects including WP:GLAM, WP:OPENACCESS, and to a lesser extent WP:LIBRARIES and WP:MUSEUMS. TWL runs certain programs (such as the Visiting Scholar program) in affiliation with sister projects (such as the Wiki Education Foundation), and TWL members are encouraged to participate in otherwise related WikiProjects including (most notably) WP:RX.
You seem to exist to help other editors who create content. Can you explain this a bit more?
- As I see it, the work done by TWL is really nothing more than a natural evolution from the pioneering efforts of those wishing to provide access from individual private libraries and collections like that of Piotrus (whose Bookshelf was founded in mid-2005), Gwinva, Xover, and Michael A. White (whose respective Library, Sources, and Electoral college resources were all launched in 2008) to the combined efforts of WikiProject Reference Libraries like those of WP:CANADA (dating to 2004), WP:VG (2006) and WP:FOOTBALL (2006), to the Wikipedia-wide WP:RX (founded in 2008). This expansion from individual collections to interest group libraries to institutional resource pages in many ways mirrors the history of museums from the humble kunstkammer to the galleries and institutes of antiquity to modern museums. I regard the work done by TWL as the next logical step from WP:RX - from a collection of individually curated reference works to a partnership with institutions whose stock-in-trade are refereed/vetted RSes. Such resource collections are invaluable to editors hoping to create thoroughly researched, high-quality, and authoritative Wikipedia articles. The Wikipedia Library facilitates this access.
How do you connect with all those resources to get free access to what they publish??
- Partnerships are the fruits of considerable behind-the-scenes discussions, persuasions, and negotiations by TWL coordinators. In many cases Wikipedia reaches out to receptive partners, but any editor may suggest a partnership from the TWL main page and prospective partners may themselves reach out to TWL to get the ball rolling. Discussions and negotiations generally concern the number of free accounts that Wikipedia will be granted and the terms and conditions attending the grant. The persuasion aspect is generally very straightforward: a partnership that is functioning as it should provides mutual benefit for Wikipedia and the partner. The benefit for the partner is use of the database by motivated Wikipedians. Just as Wikipedia gains reliable source citations, the partner's collection gains exposure. And part of the calculus for the partner is a recognition that Wikipedia is today commonly proffered in information literacy classes as a good "starting point" for research. Reliable sources enhance Wikipedia and Wikipedia's successes enhance visibility of sources available through partners so it is truly a mutualistic relationship.
Additionally, I should mention that the potential for conflicted or promotional editing in this area does come up from time to time (e.g., as discussed here). But it's important to address several reasons why the perception that TWL may be pushing certain resources at the exclusion of others is inaccurate. To begin with, conflicts of interest are mitigated by a separation of negotiators from account coordinators and of coordinators from applicants. By placing at least two levels between the partner and the applicant, the intent is (and indeed experience has shown) that the use of sources occurs organically. Systemic bias inherent to granting access only to what TWL has available is selective in nature and can be improved by expanding TWL's partnerships and further enhancing access to sources in other databases. Indeed such expansion is one of TWL's goals. Ultimately, the access granted by TWL constitutes additional access beyond that normally open to individuals via free online sources, physical libraries, etc. This is one of those fortunate cases where the interests of Wikipedia simply align with the interests of our partners and both sides of the arrangement benefit.
Anything else you'd like to add?
What editor do you admire the most?
- Well I don't think I can narrow it down to a single editor. There are many who have impressed me with their hard work and dedication, their pragmatism and creativity, their empathy and largeness of spirit, or their leadership and dependability. Generally I feel like I'm in pretty good company at Wikipedia. I guess I would say that the thing that impresses me most is when I run across an editor who has been quietly working in the background for years without acknowledgement. Those editors are my heroes.
