Dominic,
It's interesting that you found that comment so negative, because I agree with Bettina
that this does seem to be a common attitude: ownership over stewardship. We see the same
problem on Wikipedia, where people feel they own articles, families of articles, and of
course, images.
The stewardship should go beyond the objects themselves, and become part of a larger
story, That's where Wikimedia projects come into play, where context is offered
through the simple act of aggregation and categorization.
One of my greatest "achievements" as a Wiki(p/m)edian was seeing a painting in
storage in a local museum collection get restored and put back on display after it was
added in over 10 different language-pedias to illustrate an article. That
"hooked" me into contributing more than anything else I have experienced here
yet (and as I type this I realize that painting probably deserves its own article by now).
Most museums and archives today focus on their own local stories and rarely look at their
collections in a wider context.
Jane
Sent from my iPad
On Oct 28, 2013, at 8:04 PM, Dominic McDevitt-Parks <mcdevitd(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bettina,
I just want to point out that this is a public mailing list, and it is a good idea to
think about how the institutions we might mention here would react to seeing this
discussion come up in a google search for them. It is probably best not to say things that
would cast them in a negative light (like that they are more interested in ownership than
stewardship), especially if our goal is to partner with them, or to not specifically name
institutions unless necessary if you are saying something that might damage a potential
partnership.
Dominic
On 25 October 2013 08:21, Bettina Cousineau <bdcousineau(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes Susanna,
That's right! I'm interested in getting these materials onto Wikimedia Commons
(and other appropriate WMF projects), however if the Local History Room is staffed by
volunteers, it's often more difficult to explain why getting involved with
Wikimedia/Wikipedia makes sense - there is a strong sense of "ownership" of the
materials, as opposed to "stewardship" of the materials.
Stepping back, I'm also v curious as to how prevalent the model I wrote about might
be across the US.
Cheers,
Bettina
On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 2:11 AM, <giaccai(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Bettina,
it is not clear to me wich is the connection you see between the situation you describe
of Local History Rooms of Kent District Library and Wikipedia; does you suppose to
describe this materials in Wikipedia?
Ciao Susanna
.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.-.
Susanna Giaccai
Firenze
2013/10/24 Derric Atzrott <datzrott(a)alizeepathology.com>
I know that Frederick County Public Libraries (FCPL) has something similar that they do.
Though I’m not entirely sure how much was donated by the city, there are lots of materials
that have been donated by others living in the area. Two of the branches here have these
rooms. They’ve assigned them their own prefix similar to how the reference materials are
and keep track of the materials using the regular cataloguing system. The rooms are kept
under lock and key and in order to enter you have to relinquish everything you have on you
besides paper, pencil (no pens allowed), camera, or laptop.
I believe they handle ownership issues by assigning ownership to the library just like
any other donated material would be. Though I’m not entirely sure on this as I do not
work for the library, just make use of their history rooms.
If you’d like I can try to put you in touch with someone from my local library system?
Thank you,
Derric Atzrott
From: libraries-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org
[mailto:libraries-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bettina Cousineau
Sent: 24 October 2013 12:43
To: libraries(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: [libraries] Local History Rooms in Public Libraries
Hello!
Background: In the Kent District Library District (MI) 9 of the 18 branches have Local
History Rooms. The physical building (including the LHRoom) is owned by the city/town, as
are the Local History contents/collections, while the public library materials are owned
by the library district.
The Local History collections are grown by local donations, and overseen by volunteers,
who may or may not be library staff.
The ownership of the collections is exceedingly murky, as there may be no paperwork
generated by the city/town when items are donated. Also, cataloging of the collections
may/may not exist, or exists on volunteers' personal laptops.
Question: Are there other examples of this relationship across the country that you might
be aware of?
I'm curious as to how others may be handling this, if it all.
Thanks, Bettina
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries