Sorry I meant to say "traditional knowledge" box not "traditional
language" box.
Kerry
Sent from my iPad
On 5 Jul 2019, at 9:38 am, Kerry Raymond
<kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On en.WP we prohibit shared accounts and accounts that appear to represent an
organisation so that's a barrier. But assuming there was some special case to allow a
username to represent a community of knowledge, we would still have a practical problem of
whether the individual creating such an account or doing the edit was authorised to do so
by that community, which would require some kind of real-world validation. But, let's
say local chapters or local users could undertake that process using local knowledge of
how such communities identify and operate.
The problem it still doesn't solve is that whatever information is added by that
account could then be changed by anyone. We would have to have a way to prevent that
happening, which would be a technical problem. Also could that information ever be deleted
by anyone (even for purely innocent purposes, e.g. splitting a large article might delete
the content from one article to re-insert into other article). Or is the positioning of
the content within a particular article a decision only that group might be allowed to
take?
A possible technical/social solution is to have traditional knowledge of this nature in a
sister project, where rules on user names would be entirely different and obviously oral
sourced material allowed. The group could then produce named units of information as a
single unit (similar to a File on Commons). These units could then be added to en.WP or
others (obviously the language the units are written would have be identified, as Commons
does with descriptions already) so only English content is added to en.WP and so on. The
content would be presented in en.WP in a way (in a "traditional language" box
with a link to something explaining that what means) so the reader understands what this
info is and is free to trust it or not. The information itself cannot be modified on en.WP
only on the sister project (requests on talk pages of the sister project would need to be
allowed for anyone to make requests eg report misspelling). En.WP would remain in control
of whether the content was included but could not change the content themselves.
It seems to be a sister project similar to the current Commons would be what we need to
make this work.
Sent from my iPad
On 4 Jul 2019, at 6:03 pm, Jan Dittrich <jan.dittrich(a)wikimedia.de> wrote:
>> Maybe not "signed" in the sense of a signature of a Talk page, but
each
> contribution is attributed automatically to its user as seen in the
> history. As someone who edits under my real name, I absolutely put my name
> to my contributions.
>
> That is what I assumed, too, since it was coherent with some of the
> problems described in:
>
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/PG-Slides-Wikimania18.p…
> in this interpretation, Mediawiki (and lots of other software) code-ify
> knowledge production as done by single people [1]– a person can edit, but
> not a group (which was one of the challenges in the project described in
> the slides, if I remember correctly)
>
> I would be much interested in more research on what values are "build in"
> our software (Some Research by Heather Ford and Stuart Geiger goes in this
> direction).
>
> Best,
> Jan
>
> [1] An interesting read on the concept of "transmitting knowledge" (e.g.
in
> articles and via the web) and knowledge as inherently social would be
> Ingold’s "From the Transmission of Representation to the Education of
> Attention" (
http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/ingold/ingold1.htm).
>
> Am Do., 4. Juli 2019 um 02:20 Uhr schrieb Kerry Raymond <
> kerry.raymond(a)gmail.com>gt;:
>
>> Maybe not "signed" in the sense of a signature of a Talk page, but
each
>> contribution is attributed automatically to its user as seen in the
>> history. As someone who edits under my real name, I absolutely put my name
>> to my contributions.
>>
>> Or the other possible interpretation of "signed" here may be referring
to
>> the citations which are usually sources with one or small number of
>> individual authors, as opposed to a community of shared knowledge
>> custodians which is the case with Aboriginal Australians.
>>
>> Kerry
>>
>> Sent from my iPad
>>
>>> On 4 Jul 2019, at 10:28 am, Todd Allen <toddmallen(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I found one error:
>>>
>>> "Even the idea that contributions to the wiki should be signed by
>>> individuals is at odds with many traditional societies where knowledge
>>> expression is mainly collective, not individualised..."
>>>
>>> That's already how it works. Only discussion posts and the like are
>> signed.
>>> I don't know of any language Wikipedia in which contributions to the
>> actual
>>> encyclopedia articles are signed, and I know several of the largest
>>> (German, Spanish, and English) do not have such a practice. (If there is
>> a
>>> project where individual contributions are signed, please let me know,
>> I'd
>>> be interested to see how they make that work. What if it gets edited?)
>>>
>>> Aside from that, the article seems to state that such a project is
>>> incompatible with both NPOV and copyleft, so I'm not sure that Wikimedia
>>> hosting it would be the best fit as those are fundamental requirements.
>>> (That's not to say it's not worth doing at all, of course.)
>>>
>>> Todd
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 3, 2019 at 5:52 PM Nathalie Casemajor
<ncasemajor(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> For those of you who are interested in "small" Wikipedias and
Indigenous
>>>> languages, here's a new academic paper co-signed by yours truly.
>>>>
>>>> Published in an open access journal :)
>>>>
>>>> Nathalie Casemajor (Seeris)
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>>
>>>> *Openness, Inclusion and Self-Affirmation: Indigenous knowledge in Open
>>>> Knowledge Projects
>>>> <
>>>>
>>
http://peerproduction.net/editsuite/issues/issue-13-open/peer-reviewed-pape…
>>>>> *
>>>>
>>>> This paper is based on an action research project (Greenwood and Levin,
>>>> 1998) conducted in 2016-2017 in partnership with the Atikamekw
>> Nehirowisiw
>>>> Nation and Wikimedia Canada. Built into the educational curriculum of a
>>>> secondary school on the Manawan reserve, the project led to the launch
>> of a
>>>> Wikipedia encyclopaedia in the Atikamekw Nehirowisiw language. We
>> discuss
>>>> the results of the project by examining the challenges and opportunities
>>>> raised in the collaborative process of creating Wikimedia content in the
>>>> Atikamekw Nehirowisiw language. What are the conditions of inclusion of
>>>> Indigenous and traditional knowledge in open projects? What are the
>>>> cultural and political dimensions of empowerment in this relationship
>>>> between openness and inclusion? How do the processes of inclusion and
>>>> negotiation of openness affect Indigenous skills and worlding processes?
>>>> Drawing from media studies, indigenous studies and science and
>> technology
>>>> studies, we adopt an ecological perspective (Star, 2010) to analyse the
>>>> complex relationships and interactions between knowledge practices,
>>>> ecosystems and infrastructures. The material presented in this paper is
>> the
>>>> result of the group of participants’ collective reflection digested by
>> one
>>>> Atikamekw Nehirowisiw and two settlers. Each co-writer then brings
>> his/her
>>>> own expertise and speaks from what he or she knows and has been trained
>>>> for.
>>>>
>>>> Casemajor N., Gentelet K., Coocoo C. (2019), « Openness, Inclusion and
>>>> Self-Affirmation: Indigenous knowledge in Open Knowledge Projects »,
>>>> *Journal
>>>> of Peer Production*, no13, pp. 1-20.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> More info about the Atikamekw Wikipetcia project and the involvement
>>>> of Wikimedia Canada:
>>>>
>>>>
https://ca.wikimedia.org/…/Atikamekw_knowledge,_culture_and…
>>>> <
>>>>
>>
https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Atikamekw_knowledge,_culture_and_language_in_…
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>>> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>>> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wiki-research-l mailing list
>> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
>>
>
>
> --
> Jan Dittrich
> UX Design/ Research
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland e. V. | Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 | 10963 Berlin
> Tel. (030) 219 158 26-0
>
https://wikimedia.de
>
> Unsere Vision ist eine Welt, in der alle Menschen am Wissen der Menschheit
> teilhaben, es nutzen und mehren können. Helfen Sie uns dabei!
>
https://spenden.wikimedia.de
>
> Wikimedia Deutschland — Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
> Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
> der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
> Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
> _______________________________________________
> Wiki-research-l mailing list
> Wiki-research-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l