Talk:GLAM-WIKI 2010

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Initial[edit source]

Very interesting but can't go.

How will the event be disseminated, please?

Vernon White Cornwall former Public Libarian, now Museum volunteer in the Constantine Village Heritage Centre —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vernon39 (talkcontribs) 07:05, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Yes, it would be interesting to know if there are plans to release any videos of presentations on Commons (on the assumption that they would be respectable quality; often the problem is that audience coughs and chatter gets recorded better than the speaker)? 11:46, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
We're working on recording the talks, but can't promise anything just yet... Mike Peel 08:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Hopefully we'll get the keynote events filmed - but it's proving difficult to get a happy medium between quality and cost. Yes, if we do manage to get them recorded then we'll put them on Commons with an appropriate license. Otherwise, the twitter tag for the day will be #GLAMWIKI. Witty lama 04:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
  • How do you register? I click on the register button and it just takes me to details of the button image. Andrew Davidson 07:23, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Clicking on the register button should take you to - you can register there. It works OK for me (Firefox on a Mac) - can I ask which browser you're using? Thanks. Mike Peel 08:11, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the link. I'm using Chrome. Andrew Davidson 09:46, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
Button works fine for me in Chrome - btw assume there's no problem with attending just Friday evening and the Saturday? The Land 16:25, 30 October 2010 (UTC)
I've tested in Safari and Firefox and it worked... is this still a problem for you?
Technically there is only one registration fee - for the whole event. However, for Wikimedians I think we'd be cool if you just clicked on the "Registered attendee of MCG conference" button (which is half price and indicates that it is only for the 2nd day). How does that sound? Witty lama 04:51, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Timetable[edit source]

I can't seem to find the full timetable of the event - is there one somewhere? I've got lectures in Cambridge until 1pm Friday (although I can skive all of them if I'm really desperate), after that I'm free for the whole event. --Deryck Chan 18:04, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

PS. the link on is still pointing to . --Deryck Chan 18:12, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for spotting the borked link - fixed.
I'm trying to put up the schedule now. It's subject to change but what IS fixed for Friday morning is Cory Doctorow's keynote. Other things on the Friday morning are mainly pitched at bringing the GLAM sector up to speed on things like cc-by-sa. Hope that helps. Witty lama 04:25, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Ok - the schedule is up now. Witty lama 06:46, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks Liam! Just registered. I'll definitely come for that Friday evening and Saturday. --Deryck Chan 16:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Eventbrite[edit source]

It may just be a co-incidence but I very rarely give out my mobile number and after using Eventbrite to register for this event I received a fake message about claiming for accident insurance. Anyone else? 14:18, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Was it an automated call? If so - I received one too, without registering for the event. I think it's more probable that a phone spammer correctly guessed your mobile number than that Eventbrite's database is compromised. The Land 19:38, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
Odd. The mobile phone number field is not a "required" field. But even if it was, I would be surprised if this is something that has a direct relationship with the eventbrite system - more likely just a coincidence. There was nothing done at the Wikimedia end to publish the personal details of attendees I can assure you. Witty lama 05:55, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Nothing happened to my mobile! --Deryck Chan 17:50, 9 November 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, I feel much relieved that it was just a co-incidence after all and the folks at Eventbrite can be counted amongst the good guys. 01:55, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hong Kong delegation[edit source]

Good news: two volunteer members of staff of Wikimedia Hong Kong will be turning up in this event! I'll roll down from Cambridge, and Sam (w:zh:User:CX257) will roll down from Newcastle. --Deryck Chan 21:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Fantastic. :-) Make sure you say hi! Mike Peel 22:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Map[edit source]

Would be helpful to have a map of the event location on this page, or even an address. 08:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

If you click on the Registration link there is a map included. 07:13, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wrap-up notes[edit source]

After discussion at the end of the conference, it might be useful to pen a few thoughts on this talk page though these might be relocated if someone has a better idea of where to take such a discussion. Please add other thoughts as an additional sub-section. 19:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Managing "trusted volunteers" to support organizational requests for help[edit source]

During the conference I had very pleasant personal chats with new folks from the British Library, Natural History Museum, National Maritime Museum, a woman looking for help releasing their image database (who's org name I did not catch but I connected her up with Mike Peel a bit later) and someone I had not met before from the British Museum learning department (which includes school outreach and all those evening programmes they run). This was an impressive selection of folks and emphasises the importance of free-mingling at lunch or other breaks (an easy version of the speed-dating suggestion). A common theme was that these organizations wanted to know who to talk to for help and one suggested there should be some sort of ambassador to represent the Wiki(p|m)edia community. A couple of observations on this theme:

  1. Why "Ambassador" is probably a poor term: if a volunteer goes to help a GLAM (or other org) by supporting internal workshops, "how-to" presentations or brainstorming future options they would not be speaking for Wikimedia and would not be empowered to make any promises or commitments. My later chats with a few fellow Wikipedians might suggest that sticking to "volunteer" is more accurate and keeps the right world-view on how Wikipedia (should) work.
  2. Why we need to qualify those involved: such a volunteer would have to be comfortable and competent in delivering non-standard presentations and fielding a variety of sector-specific questions in a fairly impartial way (one could imagine issues with someone who has strong opinions on copyright attempting to support the NPG, for example). Such interaction might be at a fairly senior level in an organization and though negotiation might be better with direct involvement of a wm-UK board member, the volunteer will probably be seen as trusted and a key advisor even if they are not acting in any official capacity. Personally I would encourage significant flexibility on how to qualify prospective volunteer involvement (horses for courses) though the suggestion (from Seddon) of having an preliminary training session might be an idea, if only to normalize the concept of how such involvement might work, and consideration should probably be taken of the individual's past experience in delivering training and presentations (noting that our volunteers include teachers and those used to giving presentations in different environments). I suggest any significant engagement (say, a session with more than 8 people), should have at least two volunteers participating if not a board member. {N.b. by the word "qualify" I mean filtering possible volunteers using agreed criteria, not passing an exam.}

-- 19:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

WP/WM volunteer network to GLAM volunteer network[edit source]

This point was raised in the last GLAM-WIKI session and I separately discussed this (a little) with Harry Potter and a few others; instead of reaching out to the formal organizational hierarchy (with potential initial reactions of budget and copyright issues) we could offer to support any associated GLAM volunteer network they already have to simply offer "how-to" sessions and mentoring for current volunteers. This is probably an area not investigated with the British Museum and they might consider formally incorporating such sessions within their learning programme. For organizations not yet involved, this would be an interesting start to gaining their commitment on a low risk basis and further partnership or other types of involvement would be supported by internal GLAM volunteers that become enthused about getting their message out on Wiki(p|m)edia. -- 19:50, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thoughts[edit source]

Sorry to say I didn't make it back for Saturday. It seemed I missed a good day. I was saddened by the NPG approach on the Friday, but enthused by the other three panelists. I felt so strongly about it that I got a a twitter account just so I could tweet about it. In my talk on Friday p.m. I mentioned that my local museum had been dragging their feet about involvement.... when I got back I found out that they had decided to send a "holding" note that sounds enthusiastic. I'm quite keen to get involved although I don't feel the NPG are going to get a second date .... how will they ever get breakfast? We need to also decide who we we will deal with. We cannot expect commitment but we need to feel that the GLAM has some flexibility to the outcome. I saw that the figures for the NPG's income from licensing comes to < 15,000 per year. Its not a business driven decision. As someone said on Friday (I paraphrase) there are some people who think that Canute could have saved the music industry.

I'm interested in this ambassador role although I suggest "the interview" should be like the (old) admin process. i.e. Do we think you can do it. Liam was not given a long list of rules and the BM was noting that they felt it was successful because they didn't say exactly what had to be done. i.e. the person will have to think on their feet.

I was pleased my talk was well received. There is a text version that goes with the ppt but I'm not sure what to do with it. If anyone has suggestions then tell me Victuallers 23:37, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Can it not be provided as a pdf on wikimedia? (this facility works on wikieducator)Harrypotter 22:40, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Output - Formal conference report[edit source]

I know that in the conference we said a couple of times that presentations and audio would be "made available" on Commons. However, putting on a GLAM hat rather that a WIKI one, the norm for conference proceedings is to arrange to have them published as a collection of papers (though most presenters were probably uninterested in writing up their talks as an academic style paper) and/or having a conference report or letter published in suitable Journals. Considering the comment of the chap from Brazil about how the impressive list of national organizations would leverage any discussion of involvement in other countries, such a report would be an awfully useful document to share internationally. I'm wondering if a short (2 pages or so) conference report might be co-edited with one of our GLAM partners? There are a number of suitable Journals and we might seek some advice on which academic publications would be the most popular and amenable. -- 04:26, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

One of the most thought provoking sessions - even if most people were attracted elsewhere - was by Daniel Mietchen. Perhaps we can develop the approach he suggested when his talk is made more accessible.Harrypotter 22:20, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Here's the link. Harrypotter 00:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

2011 events[edit source]

During the conference I had chats with Kew, the V&A and the British Museum all of whom are keen to host Hoxne challenge or photography events, and a couple of people are planning to come to London Meetups. I think we need a process for deciding on/prioritising such events - obviously the UK chapter needs a way to endorse and decide whether to fund the coffee and cakes; We also need to avoid having too many geo notices promoting such things and if they really take off we need to minimise clashes with other events such as meetups and Wikimania. I would suggest that we agree what we are looking for in such events so that we can be clear on what basis we can prioritise these. | class=wikitable align="center" width="100%" |+ style="font-size:120%; padding-bottom:5px;" | Potential GLAM collaborations in the UK !Organisation!! Location !! Possibility !! Photography !!Free entry!!Access to experts!!Hub for event!! Wikimedia contact !! GLAM Department !! events !! WikiProjects |- | British Museum ||London||High||?||Yes||Yes ||Yes || ||Learning, Web |||| |- | Kew Gardens ||London||High||Yes||Probably|| || ||||||||Biology, Botany, Architecture |- | V&A ||London||High||Yes|||| || ||||||||Fashion |- | National Portrait Gallery ||London||?||No|| || ||||||||||Art |- | Natural History Museum ||London||Good||?||Yes ||? ||||||||||Art |- | Museum of London ||London||Good||?||Yes ||? ||||||||||Art, Slavery |- | National Maritime Museum ||London||Good||?||Yes||?||?|| ||Web +? || ||Ships, Military History, Astronomy, Art, Time | Table moved to GLAM-WIKI/Events

Would a table like the above help? WereSpielChequers 11:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I think that would be helpful! Names of 'lead contacts' on both the Wikipedia and GLAM sides might also be helpful so people know who to talk to if they need an update on progress. The National Maritime Museum were also keen in principle to do something and Chase me Ladies and I will follow them up. Obviously collaboration can take many different forms, and not all of these institutions will find that an article challenge event works for them. The Land 11:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
This would be good for an overview and I wonder if there might be mileage in having a volunteer/relationship/partnership requests noticeboard where this can be maintained and we can discuss and get feedback on current UK relationships and encourage our own volunteers to help out? A slight word of caution, as this wiki is public I suggest we do not openly share any GLAM contact details (probably to be made available on email request from the WMUK point of contact); the last thing we want is an external marketeer to datamine our contact list. -- 12:02, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
With regard to confidentiality, perhaps we should consider a GLAM specific mailing list per m:Mailing lists to avoid discussing names and events in an inappropriately detailed way for an open wiki? 15:13, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this is good. A couple of months ago I made inquiries as regards the Museum of London (with whom I have previously worked on projects) hosting a Wikipedia in Residence. They said they would get back to me after they had dealt with some internal restructuring.Harrypotter 22:29, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikimedia UK now either has, or can easily obtain, high-level contacts at most national museums. The determination of priority is essentially which museums the community (i.e. you) think is most important to improve Wikipedia's content, further WMUK's mission, and be beneficial to the museum (in no particular order). If you can tell us where you'd most like a Backstage Pass or a similar event, then we can see if we can organise it.
In terms of a 'partnerships manager', at the moment the best individual person to contact within WMUK is probably myself - I've either spoken to the museums involved, or I'll know (or can track down) someone that has. I'm wondering whether we should have a full-time employee to work on connecting organisations with Wikimedians - your input on whether or not it would be worth hiring someone to do this would be most welcome. Mike Peel 00:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
With regard to a full time partnerships manager; I remain unsure but I am aware of Sue Gardener's presentation at GLAM-WIKI on the value (and perceived value) of keeping the employee hub as minimal as possible. We could do with a "professional" and consistent point of contact for GLAMs and other organizations with their own large volunteer networks but as soon as there is an employee, the current involvement of wiki volunteers to help coordinate and discuss might drop off as we automatically (subconsciously?) defer to the employee.
Before making such a decision, a face to face brainstorming to discuss exactly what we can offer on a repeatable basis to GLAMs might be useful (such as a re-usable set of materials and trained "trusted volunteers" to work with the GLAM's own volunteer network in various ways). I know there are some self-starters that only need a little encouragement to run their own local sessions (such as in schools and libraries) but with the larger institutions approaching us (such as the Natural History Museum) I think such a programme needs far more support to ensure good quality outcomes and a persistent team of experienced wiki-volunteers to ensure organizational commitment is sustained and potentially used as case-study materials elsewhere.
Perhaps we could also do with some advice from a seasoned volunteer network manager (such as one from the British Museum or a large charity) to join and enlighten our discussion with their experience? -- 11:20, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
Mike - doesn't how keen the relevant museum or institution is, also influence where we should put our effort? Different institutions will have different levels of willingness (and ability) to deliver backstage pass events, article challenges, etc.... Ditto Wikipedia. It is difficult to tell which subject areas have editors who are quietly crying out for something like this to come along. I think there is a that risk we might only take into account the views of people currently involved with the UK chapter and/or engaged with the GLAM-WIKI concept - which is sort of not the point! None of this is to say that I have a clear view on the way forward myself.... The Land 20:32, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
I've copied the table to GLAM-WIKI/Events. I agree that we should be guided by what our UK editors want not by our own preferences - I think the best way to handle that is to see how successful a trial event is, if it gets hordes as the V&W one did then we should reflect that in our priorities for future events, if its a big yawn then we would be wise not to repeat it. As for the enthusiasm/willingness of the institution I intended to cover that in the in the possibility column - obviously this will change over time, but I see little point in London in knocking on the doors of unenthusiastic potential partners - other cities may be different but if we are doing this on behalf of the editors in general then I think it makes sense to prioritise the institutions that want this and then repeat events where our editors are keen to do so. WereSpielChequers 12:41, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

A list of learning points[edit source]

I have put a list of learning points here - aimed at both sides - would it be useful to copy it over here so others can add and discuss? The Land 11:27, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I'm pasting it below. I think this is a good starter (with the above points) for a brainstorming session (don't know who, where, when or how, yet). -- 17:14, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

These are my notes on lessons from the various content collaborations which were presented. None of this is original to me but hopefully it is a helpful summary. If anyone wants to move this to a different space and use it as the basis for further discussion, please feel free.

Benefits for cultural institutions:

  • Bringing some of the accumulated knowledge of your institution to an immense global audience - well beyond the reach of an individual institution.
  • Reputational benefits: press coverage and word of mouth
  • The opportunity to engage a new, high-impact, group of volunteers

One benefit which doesn't seem to happen: increased web traffic for the institution. Though this might be different for a smaller institution

Benefits for Wikipedians:

  • Access to expertise, information and resources that are normally difficult to get to
  • Engagement with the cultural sector offers for a focus for Wikipedians and can be more fun than sitting in front of a computer!

Ingredients for successful WIKI-GLAM co-operation:

  • A defined project which is not only voluntary for both sides, but which sparks some inspiration on both sides.
  • A project sponsor on both sides who is prepared (and able) to get interested parties to buy in. On the GLAM side, this is likely to involve web, curatorial and perhaps educational staff, and appropriate authorisation. On the Wiki side, no-one needs to authorise anything, but someone does need to make the effort to keep the relevant Wikimedia chapter updated, publicise and promote the collaboration on-wiki.
  • Wikipedians taking the time to de-mystify the way Wikipedia works; and vice versa!

Things to avoid if co-operation is to be successful:

  • Wikipedians treating it as a hit-and-run raid on image libraries
  • The idea that editing Wikipedia now becomes part of any existing staff member's job

Risks of collaboration which have not occurred (or at least not yet!):

  • Reputational risks to museums

Useful things to work on to promote future collaboration:

  • Cultural institutions should designate a point of contact for queries from Wikipedians
  • Wikimedia projects should aim to develop clear documentation for people at GLAM institutions, and also to set up processes which will handle people trying to get in touch.
  • Wikimedia projects should aim to engage with cultural institutions who are raising concerns with us about copyright infringement rather than ignoring them. This can be done without compromising our position.

Online version of talk up[edit source]

I've linked to the online version of my talk - notes and links - to the programme page. Should it go anywhere else? Johnbod 02:15, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks john. I'm going to start linking up all of the slides that people have put in the group on slideshare with their name in the schedule.

Collaboration proposals or requests[edit source]

If you represent a GLAM or a Wikimedian and want to undertake a project, list it here. GLAM-WIKI/Events

You might also be interested in outreach:GLAM. Among other things, it has a list of local GLAM ambassadors which you can (presumably) sign up for should you be interested. Regards, Rock drum (talkcontribs) 13:25, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

On the British Museum residency...[edit source]

I'm not sure referrals from WP (which were not very high) would be the whole story; it would have been interesting to see if their total traffic went up around the period when Hoxne hit the front page. I can well imagine myself reading the Hoxne article and opening a new tab and just typing British Museum into Google. This is en. user Bodnotbod, not logged in. -- 15:39, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The problem is that the BM already has such a high level of internet traffic, that it's difficult to quantify the effects when working on a single article, along with everything else that the BM's been doing. Hopefully with the Derby event, we can show that there is a big effect, since the current levels of internet traffic to the Derby sites are so much lower than the BM's... Mike Peel 13:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you[edit source]

Just wanted to thank people for all the work that went into the event and especially for uploading the audio which was good quality and a pleasure to listen to. I've had a good eight hours down my ears and it was all interesting stuff. So, good job all 'round. --Bodnotbod 15:38, 18 March 2011 (UTC)