New subject: Wikis in Res published in American Historical Association magazine

21 Dec 2012

Hello all,

Dominic and I are excited to share an article that we had the opportunity
to write for the American Historical Association's newsmagazine, *Perspectives
on History*. We have a bit more context about why this is an exciting
opportunity here on the GLAM-Wiki US blog (which also includes the article
in full).
http://blog.us.glamwiki.org/2012/12/historians-in-wikipedia/

Typically this publication keeps its most recent online articles gated, but
they released ours to the public early due to the nature of our content.
Here's the AHA blog announcing this.
http://blog.historians.org/publications/1870/reading-list-two-new-articles-…

This article would not have happened without Sarah, who was first
approached about the opportunity and who helped in the shaping of the
article. So this was truly a group Wiki-in-Res effort : )

For mobile-friendliness and general ease, here is the article text in its
entirety...

*Historians in Wikipedia: Building an Open, Collaborative History*

What will the historian's craft look like in the age of social media,
...
   crowdsourcing,
and Wikipedia? It is a question often addressed in the pages
 of this magazine, and here we want to expand on one answer offered last
 year by AHA President William Cronon, who encouraged historians to
 "contribute to the greatest encyclopedia the world has ever known." As
 Wikipedians in residence, we facilitate the contribution of subject matter
 expertise from cultural institutions—such as the Children's Museum of
 Indianapolis, the National Archives, and the Smithsonian—to Wikipedia. The
 future will see more of this type of engagement, which brings the insights
 of authorities to the world's most widely accessed online encyclopedia. 

...
  Many see Wikipedia's open, collaborative editing
model to be contradictory
  to established processes within the academic
world. In fact, the work of
 academics is not in competition with Wikipedia, but is the key to its
 quality and development. Ultimately, if the field of history is to become a
 part of an online collaborative culture, historians will need to be full,
 participating members of the Wikipedia community. We see this happening
 through partnerships with cultural institutions and through an embrace, by
 Wikipedians and historians alike, of an emerging model of collaboration
 called "open authority." 

...
  In urging historians to join in the improvement of
Wikipedia, Roy
  Rosenzweig, founder of the Center for History and
New Media, called
 Wikipedia an example of "the massive democratization of access to
 knowledge."1 As the world's fifth most-visited website, Wikipedia and its
 sister projects receive around 490 million unique visitors a month, and its
 openly licensed content frequently appears on other websites.2 The
 popularity of Wikipedia, and especially of its history articles, makes it,
 for better or worse, the most prominent public history project in the
 world. Compare, for example, the 20 million page views in 2011 of
 Wikipedia's "United States" article to the 17 million views of all the
 National Archives webpages on archives.gov in the same year. Trends like
 these prompted the National Archives to make a concerted effort to
 collaborate with Wikipedians. In the words of Archivist of the United
 States David Ferriero, "You need to be where the people are."3 Historians
 will continue to publish their scholarship in academic journals, but that
 scholarship is best communicated to the general public through Wikipedia. 

...
  Wikipedia needs the contributions of expert
historians. Although Wikipedia
  generally succeeds at providing an amazing
breadth of knowledge, it needs
 historians and other experts on specific topics who can provide depth.
 However, because any person is entitled to contribute to Wikipedia
 regardless of credentials, experts often struggle with their role as
 authorities within Wikipedia. They often fear worthy contributions are not
 given proper recognition in a community of amateurs. But, in fact,
 collaboration with Wikipedia does not undermine scholarly authority.
 Rather, it enhances it by putting it to work and adding value to a
 high-profile public representation of the topics experts are passionate
 about. 

...
  The combination of expertise and transparent
collaboration is an emerging
  model known as open authority.4 Public
historians, academics, and many
 others have expressed concern over the shifting role of expert authority in
 an increasingly connected digital world where everyone is a curator. Open
 authority is the coming together of expert authority with user-generated
 content on free and open platforms. This typically takes the form of
 dialogue between experts and the public on a virtual forum, leading to a
 more inclusive representation of a topic. Wikipedia, as an open forum for
 discussion and collaboration, is one of the best examples of open
 authority. The open-source software movement from which Wikipedia evolved
 has demonstrated that open, collaborative communities can create large,
 complex projects that meet even the highest standards of the profession.
 Experts in diverse fields are learning to embrace the potential of
 collaborative online communities, and are entering dialogue within
 transparent, open forums that reflect the connected environment in which we
 live. 

...
  It is important to understand that Wikipedia
contributors are not amateur
  historians but encyclopedists. Wikipedia, as a
tertiary source, does not
 seek to crowdsource the interpretation of the past, but to document the
 state of the field on a given topic. Scholars sensitive to this mission
 will understand Wikipedia's policy of "no original research," which
ensures
 that all interpretive claims are referenced to a published and accepted
 source. This insistence on verifiability is necessary to maintain the
 reliability of contributions, and avoids the slippery slope of (sometimes
 eccentric) self-proclaimed experts promoting unpublished interpretations.
 That said, Wikipedia does not reject the use of primary sources altogether.
 Wikipedia editors will, however, question contributions based on primary
 sources alone when they offer an interpretation that cannot be found in the
 secondary literature. 

...
  Just as historians are moving towards a better
understanding of the
  Wikipedia community, the Wikipedia community
itself is becoming more
 welcoming and accessible to new contributors, professional historians
 included. To this end, the Wikipedia community is developing an improved
 editing interface and supporting new editors through various projects.  In
 recent years, a community-driven project known as GLAM-Wiki ("GLAM" stands
 for Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums) has united hundreds of
 Wikipedians around the world with the goal of supporting cultural
 institutions as they share subject matter expertise with Wikipedia.5
 Initiatives like these will lower the barriers to entry for new expert
 contributors—but there is still much more work to do. And, as with any open
 community, the best way to make it reflective of one's values and
 experience is simply to join in. 

...
  In the meantime, Wikipedians in residence are bridging
the gap between the
  Wikipedia community and cultural professionals by
providing insight,
 outreach, and in-person assistance for institutions committed to
 establishing partnerships with Wikipedia. Wikipedians in residence work for
 an institution—often a museum, library, or archive—to serve as a liaison
 between experts and the Wikipedia community. Wikipedians in residence have
 been supported in esteemed institutions around the world, from the British
 Museum and the Smithsonian Institution to the United States' National
 Archives and the Israel Museum—and interest continues to grow. This
 enthusiasm illustrates the cultural sector's growing acceptance of
 Wikipedia, not only as a platform for sharing content, but as a valuable
 community worthy of long-term partnership. This coupling of expert
 authority with the collaborative community of Wikipedia is open authority
 in action. 

...
  Issuing a challenge to scholars, Rosenzweig wrote,
"historians probably
  have a professional obligation to make
[Wikipedia] as good as possible."6
 While Wikipedia continues to provide free knowledge to millions each day,
 the discipline of history risks becoming isolated if scholars do not become
 more engaged with the online communities of this new information
 commons. Contributing to Wikipedia makes a scholar's work more accessible
 than ever before. As a wiki that is open to everyone, Wikipedia only works
 if everyone feels empowered to be involved. To this end, we urge historians
 to make the first step in contributing. Follow Wikipedia's unofficial
 mantra and "Be Bold!" Do not be afraid to click that edit button. 

...
  —Lori Byrd Phillips is the 2012 US cultural
partnerships coordinator for
  the Wikimedia Foundation and a digital marketing
content coordinator at The
 Children's Museum of Indianapolis. She has served as the Children's
 Museum's Wikipedian in residence since 2010, and holds a Masters in museum
 studies from Indiana University and a BA in history from George Mason
 University. 
 —Dominic McDevitt-Parks has been the Wikipedian in residence for the
  National Archives and Records Administration
since May 2011. He holds a BA
 in history from Reed College and is currently completing his MS in library
 science from Simmons College. 
 Notes

...
  1. Roy Rosenzweig, "Can History Be Open Source?
Wikipedia and the Future
  of the Past," Journal of American History
93:1 (June 2006), 117–146. 
 2. All figures include information from all Wikimedia projects, including
  all Wikipedia languages and projects such as
Wikiquote, Wikinews, etc.
 Monthly stats can be found in the Wikimedia Foundation's Monthly Report. 
 3. David Ferriero, "Remarks of Archivist of the United States David S.
  Ferriero" (Speech presented at the Wikipedia
in Higher Education Summit,
 Simmons College, Boston, MA, July 9, 2011).
 www.archives.gov/about/speeches/2011/7-9-2011.html. 
 4. Lori Byrd Phillips, "Defining Open Authority in Museums," MIDEA Blog
  (New Media Consortium, January 13, 2012). 
 5. "GLAM-Wiki US," Wikipedia. (2012).

 6. Rosenzweig, see note 1.

 -- Lori Phillips
Digital Marketing Content Coordinator
The Children's Museum of Indianapolis

US Cultural Partnerships Coordinator
Wikimedia Foundation

703.489.6036 | http://loribyrdphillips.com/