Hi everyone!
George Oates, the designer behind Flickr, Flickr Commons and Open Library (among others) has looked at Wikimedia Commons and gives tips from her perspective how it can be improved.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/10/29/george-oates-conversation/
The interview is also cross-posted to Medium, where you can leave comments:
https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/how-could-wikimed...
There's also discussion about this post going on at the Wikimedia Commons village pump, and in the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Blog_post:_interview...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/1879946208719868/
Cheers! Sandra
Does anyone else feel weird seeing the Wikimedia Foundation encouraging its volunteers to go to Medium and Facebook to give feedback?
Medium and Facebook are commercial platforms with Medium using paywalls to force visitors to pay to read. Promoting these sites using WMF funded content seems to go directly against the stated WMF top level values.
Thanks Fae
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 08:58, Sandra Fauconnier sfauconnier@wikimedia.org wrote:
Hi everyone!
George Oates, the designer behind Flickr, Flickr Commons and Open Library (among others) has looked at Wikimedia Commons and gives tips from her perspective how it can be improved.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/10/29/george-oates-conversation/
The interview is also cross-posted to Medium, where you can leave comments:
https://medium.com/freely-sharing-the-sum-of-all-knowledge/how-could-wikimed...
There's also discussion about this post going on at the Wikimedia Commons village pump, and in the Wikipedia Weekly Facebook group.
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Blog_post:_interview...
https://www.facebook.com/groups/wikipediaweekly/permalink/1879946208719868/
Cheers! Sandra
-- Sandra Fauconnier Program Officer, GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation Twitter: @glamwiki
How Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums work with Wikimedia communities: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM _______________________________________________ GLAM mailing list GLAM@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/glam
On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again: Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Some quick thoughts from me.
I, too, find the Facebook/Medium discussion reroute unfortunate (I'm not even on Facebook), though it might help attract some more newcomers. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
Cheers, Magnus
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:23 PM Walter Siegmund via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion
about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data
will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again:
Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
I see Sara posted it on the VP as well: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Blog_post:_interview...
:)
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
This is true as well.
BTW: If my initial post sounded a bit rude, please excuse for that. 😊
--Steinsplitter
________________________________ Von: Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Magnus Manske via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 15:43 An: Walter Siegmund; Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Betreff: Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Some quick thoughts from me.
I, too, find the Facebook/Medium discussion reroute unfortunate (I'm not even on Facebook), though it might help attract some more newcomers. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
Cheers, Magnus
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:23 PM Walter Siegmund via Commons-l <commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l <commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l <commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote: On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again: Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Hi everyone,
I did indeed include the link to the Village Pump discussion in my original post, but not in the best or most visible/encouraging way. My apologies. It's not at all my intention to force anyone to use a platform they don't like, and I apologize again if I gave that impression.
Many people in our communities discuss very actively and constructively on Facebook, and increasingly on Telegram, and probably on quite a few other platforms that may or may not be aligned with our values as much as we would like. As a long-time Wikimedian in my free time, I'm a strong open source and OpenGLAM advocate and fan, but I will be the first to admit I'm not a purist, I do indeed use Facebook and a few of these other Evil Places, and I don't mind tracking (and pointing to) conversations happening elsewhere. I do feel conflicted about this (like about many other things in that complicated thing called life) but I give priority to hearing more voices here.
The interview is indeed intended as a 'fresh' perspective from an informed outsider. While we may not agree with everything George says, hopefully there are nuggets of interesting feedback that we can use to our benefit. This is not meant to replace the community's ideas, needs and vision at all. It's additional to it.
Cheers, Sandra
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 3:48 PM Steinsplitter Wiki via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and
there should be an appropriate link for that.
I see Sara posted it on the VP as well: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Blog_post:_interview...
:)
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside
opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
This is true as well.
BTW: If my initial post sounded a bit rude, please excuse for that. 😊
--Steinsplitter
*Von:* Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Magnus Manske via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 15:43 *An:* Walter Siegmund; Wikimedia Commons Discussion List *Betreff:* Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Some quick thoughts from me.
I, too, find the Facebook/Medium discussion reroute unfortunate (I'm not even on Facebook), though it might help attract some more newcomers. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
Cheers, Magnus
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:23 PM Walter Siegmund via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion
about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data
will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again:
Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
So, no learning points from this expensive feedback, cost measured in volunteer time and damage to good will from the most active and committed volunteers.
Sorry, do not expect me to believe in future political statements of values and ethics from the WMF, when they are thrown away at any slight inconvenience.
Fae
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018, 15:23 Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hi everyone,
I did indeed include the link to the Village Pump discussion in my original post, but not in the best or most visible/encouraging way. My apologies. It's not at all my intention to force anyone to use a platform they don't like, and I apologize again if I gave that impression.
Many people in our communities discuss very actively and constructively on Facebook, and increasingly on Telegram, and probably on quite a few other platforms that may or may not be aligned with our values as much as we would like. As a long-time Wikimedian in my free time, I'm a strong open source and OpenGLAM advocate and fan, but I will be the first to admit I'm not a purist, I do indeed use Facebook and a few of these other Evil Places, and I don't mind tracking (and pointing to) conversations happening elsewhere. I do feel conflicted about this (like about many other things in that complicated thing called life) but I give priority to hearing more voices here.
The interview is indeed intended as a 'fresh' perspective from an informed outsider. While we may not agree with everything George says, hopefully there are nuggets of interesting feedback that we can use to our benefit. This is not meant to replace the community's ideas, needs and vision at all. It's additional to it.
Cheers, Sandra
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 3:48 PM Steinsplitter Wiki via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and
there should be an appropriate link for that.
I see Sara posted it on the VP as well: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Blog_post:_interview...
:)
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside
opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
This is true as well.
BTW: If my initial post sounded a bit rude, please excuse for that. 😊
--Steinsplitter
*Von:* Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Magnus Manske via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 15:43 *An:* Walter Siegmund; Wikimedia Commons Discussion List *Betreff:* Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Some quick thoughts from me.
I, too, find the Facebook/Medium discussion reroute unfortunate (I'm not even on Facebook), though it might help attract some more newcomers. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
Cheers, Magnus
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:23 PM Walter Siegmund via Commons-l < commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion
about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data
will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l <
commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again:
Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- Sandra Fauconnier Program Officer, GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation Twitter: @glamwiki
How Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums work with Wikimedia communities: https://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/GLAM _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
There is a detailed and factual post released today on Medium about how poor a reader experience Medium is for blog posts, due to tracking, profiling and banner advertising.[1]
For those that recall discussion in response to the WMF choice of Facebook and Medium to communicate the report from George Oates last month, this seems a decently factual summary of some of the reasons why this is a poor practical choice for comms, as well as an ethical issue when calmly measured against our open movement values.
The conclusion should ring alarm bells for any WMF staffer with responsibility for Communications and is still tempted to promote Medium by posting or cross-posting there, or indeed any other platform which uses the same commercial techniques: "Basically, you’re selling readers to aggressive Medium self-advertising so that Medium could make laughably small money from a miserable fraction of them. And annoy the hell out of everyone else."
Links: 1. https://medium.com/@nikitonsky/medium-is-a-poor-choice-for-blogging-bb0048d1...
Thanks, Fae
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 17:23:
It's not at all my intention to force anyone to use a platform they don't like, and I apologize again if I gave that impression. [...] I don't mind tracking (and pointing to) conversations happening elsewhere.
One thing is to "track" on proprietary platforms, another to encourage them, and yet another to strong-arm people out of free software alternatives (e.g. by shutting them down).
A post that is meant for an internal audience, to ignite discussion, has no excuse whatsoever to be published on Medium.
Federico
Michael
On 31 Oct 2018, at 15:43, Magnus Manske via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
Some quick thoughts from me.
I, too, find the Facebook/Medium discussion reroute unfortunate (I'm not even on Facebook), though it might help attract some more newcomers. I'm sure we can find a suitable place to discuss this on-wiki, and there should be an appropriate link for that.
As for the actual topic of the interview, I am glad to see an outside opinion from someone who has experience with large, community-driven media repositories. I might not agree with all the sentiments, and structured data and out Next Big Thing did not exactly feature prominently, but I find it refreshing to leave the echo chamber once in a while.
Cheers, Magnus
On Wed, Oct 31, 2018 at 2:23 PM Walter Siegmund via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: Why should we Commons contributors participate in a discussion on Facebook, a corporation that has generated great wealth for its founder by distributing advertising that includes democracy-destroying and hate-filled propaganda? It is antithetical to the principles of most of our participants. I’m profoundly disappointed that a discussion on Facebook would be promoted by the office of GLAM and Structured Data, Wikimedia Foundation.
Best wishes, Walter
On Oct 31, 2018, at 6:41 AM, Gnangarra via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote:
I too dislike the idea of having to pay to contribute to a discussion about Wikimedia Commons. I also see some irony in advice from a platform that being generous can be described as having lost its way many years ago, yes we can learn from the mistakes of others. As others have said collectively we are capable of amazing things, we are doing something special as we look forward we mustn't lose sight what our purpose is and our goals are.
Dont forget https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Structured_data will have impact so much of what is spoken about wont be relevant
On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 at 21:15, Iván Hernández Cazorla via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org wrote: On 31/10/18 13:08, Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l wrote:
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Totally agree with both of you, Federico and Fae.
I don't understand the outsourcing of comments nor the promotion from the Wikimedia Foundation of services as Facebook.
Regards, Iván -- Iván Hernández Cazorla Historiador e interesado en las humanidades digitales Miembro de Wikimedia España https://ivanhercaz.com | https://keybase.io/ivanhercaz _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. Noongarpedia: https://incubator.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wp/nys/Main_Page WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com Out now: A.Gaynor, P. Newman and P. Jennings (eds.), Never Again: Reflections on Environmental Responsibility after Roe 8, UWAP, 2017. Order here.
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Agree with Federico.
Additionally:
Wondering why a single person is getting consulted, generally onwiki is the best way to get feedback (at least it was done so for over a decade). Imho the blogpost is biased, i don't agree with everything what is written there. Is she even active on commons?
I thought a while what to write here, honesty ... i was a bit upset after reading the Blogpost.
"How could Wikimedia Commons be improved?" This is something... which the community who created Wikimedia Commons should be asked.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/10/29/george-oates-conversation/
--Steinsplitter http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Steinsplitter/
________________________________ Von: Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 14:08 An: Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l Betreff: Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Federico
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
Sorry, i have to correct: everything --> a few things
[Edit button missing ;)]
________________________________ Von: Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Steinsplitter Wiki via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 14:22 An: Wikimedia Commons Discussion List Betreff: Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Agree with Federico.
Additionally:
Wondering why a single person is getting consulted, generally onwiki is the best way to get feedback (at least it was done so for over a decade). Imho the blogpost is biased, i don't agree with everything what is written there. Is she even active on commons?
I thought a while what to write here, honesty ... i was a bit upset after reading the Blogpost.
"How could Wikimedia Commons be improved?" This is something... which the community who created Wikimedia Commons should be asked.
https://wikimediafoundation.org/2018/10/29/george-oates-conversation/
--Steinsplitter http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Steinsplitter/
________________________________ Von: Commons-l commons-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org im Auftrag von Federico Leva (Nemo) via Commons-l commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org Gesendet: Mittwoch, 31. Oktober 2018 14:08 An: Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l Betreff: Re: [Commons-l] new blog post: interview with designer George Oates about Wikimedia Commons
Sandra Fauconnier via Commons-l, 31/10/2018 10:58:
Medium, where you can leave comments:
It's truly terrible if we're now outsourcing comments to an external proprietary platform.
Federico
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l