GerardM blogged about this the other day:
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2009/07/tropenmuseum-is-blocked.html
It was resolved quickly, fortunately. I would like to kindly request some caution among the Wikimedia Commons admin community when dealing with what appear to be institutional accounts. In the spirit of building better working relationships with GLAM institutions (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums), I think it's important that our first contacts are friendly and professional. I don't think a policy against institutional accounts is particularly helpful in that regard.
And, here's another example of a recently created role account - please be nice to them:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:EgyArt
Maybe we could request that GLAM role accounts verify their identity via the OTRS system the same way we ask for licensing verifications.
When the person in the seat changes then they can send a new email confirming the change in opeator, as it stands at the moment there is nothing to confirm that the person is actually authorised to act on behalf of the University except whats said on a user page.
2009/7/28 Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org
And, here's another example of a recently created role account - please be nice to them:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:EgyArt
Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
There have been examples of successful role accounts in the past - or, at least role accounts that have attempted to edit in a way that is respectful of our policies whilst maintaining information about their company. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:USSTRATCOM_PAO is one from en:wp. Yes, the OTRS idea might be a good way to go about this.
But with role accounts for organisations that have an educative mission (especially GLAM sector) I would have thought it would be an important step for us to allow/accept this kind of editing. We want their expertise and direct involvement and if they are going to let their staff edit Wikimedia Commons in office-hours then they will want to have some official recognition of that fact - i.e. a role account.
For a cultural organisation to actually make the step of having a staff member edit, officially, as part of their job of increasing awareness (and correct/detailed information) about their institution's collection is an extraordinarily important step. I would argue that we should do whatever we can to make them feel welcome and supported. This is not the same as a PR person trying to 'spin' an article about a corporation - which would be a CoI. This is about someone trying to make the mission of their cultural institution fit with our mission - sharing knowledge of a particular aspect of culture with the rest of the world.
Best, -Liam [[witty lama]]
On 7/28/09, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe we could request that GLAM role accounts verify their identity via the OTRS system the same way we ask for licensing verifications.
When the person in the seat changes then they can send a new email confirming the change in opeator, as it stands at the moment there is nothing to confirm that the person is actually authorised to act on behalf of the University except whats said on a user page.
2009/7/28 Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org
And, here's another example of a recently created role account - please be nice to them:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:EgyArt
Erik Möller Deputy Director, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-- GN. http://gnangarra.redbubble.com/
Commons-l mailing list Commons-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Erik Moeller wrote:
GerardM blogged about this the other day:
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/2009/07/tropenmuseum-is-blocked.html
It was resolved quickly, fortunately. I would like to kindly request some caution among the Wikimedia Commons admin community when dealing with what appear to be institutional accounts. In the spirit of building better working relationships with GLAM institutions (galleries, libraries, archives, and museums), I think it's important that our first contacts are friendly and professional. I don't think a policy against institutional accounts is particularly helpful in that regard.
As a point of information, the account was not actually blocked on Commons, but on nlwiki. I'm not so sure Commons admins would actually be that quick to block a role account.
- -- Cary Bass Volunteer Coordinator, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate