Hi John -
Thanks for joining the conversation here. I'm not ignoring M Journal at
all, but I think that it is being conflated. People cite Wikipedia in
literature that is accepted and published after peer review. This happens.
Whether you agree with it personally or not, it's a factual reality - well
beyond the examples of those researching Wikipedia as an entity.
When an official account conflates the idea of citing Wikipedia as a source
with the model of spoofing journal articles that M Journal has devised, it
gives fuel to the fires of those that seek to discredit the cite broadly
from within the academy.
The mission of Wikimedia reads "... to empower and engage people around the
world to collect and develop educational content under a free license or in
the public domain, and to disseminate it effectively and globally."
Making resolute statements about how that educational content can or should
be used in any context from an official Wikimedia communication avenue is
damaging to that mission. All you have to do is look at the twitter
responses that it garnered.
On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 4:20 PM John Lubbock <john.lubbock(a)wikimedia.org.uk>
> Dear Kathleen,
> I did not say that Wikipedia should not be cited in the literature,
> period. You are choosing to ignore this tweet in which I specifically said
> that a journal article about Wikipedia would be an appropriate context to
> cite Wikipedia:
> There is also the wider context of a website which not only breaks
> WIkipedia's licensing rules
> <https://twitter.com/pigsonthewing/status/1177302213477183489>, but does
> so in order to trick professors into thinking a Wikipedia citation comes
> from a journal.
> I agree that Twitter is not the best place for nuance, and perhaps I would
> have been wise to specifically say that Wikipedia is not an 'academic level
> source' rather than simply a source. However, I stand by this
> characterisation, because the ultimate source for any of the information on
> Wikipedia is not Wikipedia, it's another source. Wikipedia acts as a source
> At Wikimedia UK, we deal all the time with people who flat out refuse to
> use Wikipedia in academic and educational contexts because students use it
> improperly. We use the expression 'write Wikipedia, don't cite Wikipedia'.
> You may have a different context as a librarian, but I very much take
> exception to the way you have mischaracterised our interaction above.
> John Lubbock
> Communications Coordinator
> Wikimedia UK
> +44 (0) 203 372 0767
> Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
> Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Office 1,
> Ground Floor, Europoint, 5 - 11 Lavington Street, London SE1 0NZ.
> Wikimedia UK is the national chapter of the global Wikimedia open
> knowledge movement. We rely on donations from individuals to support our
> work to make knowledge open for all. Have you considered supporting
> Wikimedia UK? Donate here <https://donate.wikimedia.org.uk>.
> The Wikimedia projects are run by the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
> Wikipedia, amongst other projects). *Wikimedia UK is an independent
> non-profit charity with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility
> for its contents.*
> On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 17:53, Merrilee Proffitt <mproffitt(a)gmail.com>
>> I completely agree with Kathleen. I would assert that it is a lack of
>> nuance around the nature of information sources and the research task at
>> hand that has lead educators and others to wholesale "ban" the use of
>> Whether or not a source can be utilized in a research context depends on
>> the researcher, and what information they are supporting with the citation.
>> For my middle school daughter doing some investigation on an element in the
>> periodic table (as she has been doing this week), the Wikipedia English
>> article (or any encyclopedia article) is appropriate for her. For a
>> graduate student in chemistry this would not be appropriate, but the grad
>> student might (appropriately) cite Wikipedia for some basic definitional
>> stuff, just as they might cite a dictionary or something similar. You see
>> Wikipedia utilized appropriately in citations all the time -- why would we
>> discourage this?
>> Having conversations about the veracity of online information is tough.
>> Wikipedia can be challenging because articles are at various levels of
>> development. To my mind, this makes it something that those of us engaged
>> in conversations around information literacy should steer towards, rather
>> than away from, because a) Wikipedia is widely utilized in a variety of
>> contexts and b) it is a great teaching tool for talking about when you can
>> trust information online and when you should steer clear. But saying "no"
>> to *any* information source without having a discussion about it seems
>> lazy. It definitely does not reflect the type of discourse we should be
>> having, especially now.
>> I look forward to more discussion on this topic.
>> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 9:02 AM Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki(a)gmail.com>
>>> Twitter doesn't facilitate reasoned arguments. I suppose as usual the
>>> goal was to encourage greater use of the references and other
>>> meta-content of Wikipedia articles, which are excellent tools for
>>> critical thinking.
>>> Kathleen DeLaurenti, 26/09/19 17:55:
>>> > Hi all -
>>> > As a librarian who uses and supports Wikipedia, I wanted to bring up
>>> > some issues around the BuzzFeed article posted today about M-Journal
>>> > that has led to some messaging from the WikipediaUK twitter account
>>> > I find concerning. I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to
>>> > bring this up, but I wasn't sure where else to reach out.
>>> > For those who missed, a citation cite is not manufacturing journal
>>> > articles if a student submits a Wiki article so that it looks like an
>>> > "official" citation in their school research papers.
>>> > Clearly there are some nefarious potential uses here, but what's more
>>> > concerning is that the WikiUK twitter account has come forward
>>> > forcefully saying that Wikipedia shouldn't be cited in the literature.
>>> > Period.
>>> > https://twitter.com/wikimediauk/status/1177215917534711808
>>> > I work very hard to improve the cite through my courses and academic
>>> > advocacy as do many librarians. It's concern to me to see Wikipedia
>>> > undermining its own authority in such a public way in what appears to
>>> > a misguided attempt to deflect association with the MJournal site.
>>> > Would welcome any insight or ideas on how to navigate this discussion.
>>> > The entire M-Journal use case exists, imho, because we are still
>>> > battling for a critical (not blanket acceptance) view of Wiki as a
>>> > resources, and I find this kind of public statement to be very
>>> > to the hard work so many are doing to create a quality information
>>> Libraries mailing list
Hi all -
As a librarian who uses and supports Wikipedia, I wanted to bring up some
issues around the BuzzFeed article posted today about M-Journal that has
led to some messaging from the WikipediaUK twitter account that I find
concerning. I'm not sure if this is the appropriate place to bring this up,
but I wasn't sure where else to reach out.
For those who missed, a citation cite is not manufacturing journal articles
if a student submits a Wiki article so that it looks like an "official"
citation in their school research papers.
Clearly there are some nefarious potential uses here, but what's more
concerning is that the WikiUK twitter account has come forward forcefully
saying that Wikipedia shouldn't be cited in the literature. Period.
I work very hard to improve the cite through my courses and academic
advocacy as do many librarians. It's concern to me to see Wikipedia
undermining its own authority in such a public way in what appears to be a
misguided attempt to deflect association with the MJournal site.
Would welcome any insight or ideas on how to navigate this discussion. The
entire M-Journal use case exists, imho, because we are still battling for a
critical (not blanket acceptance) view of Wiki as a resources, and I find
this kind of public statement to be very damaging to the hard work so many
are doing to create a quality information resource.
(usual cross-posting apologies!)
* What: Wikipedia & Education User Group Open Meeting
* Who: Guest speakers Florencia Claes and Goran Milovanović
* When: Monday, September 30, from 17:00 UTC to 18:30 UTC
* Where: https://zoom.us/j/876197184
* Why: Be inspired about programs related to Commons and Wiktionary
On behalf of the Wikipedia & Education User Group, we cordially invite you
to attend our next Open Meeting on Monday, September 30, from 17:00 UTC to
18:30 UTC. While our name includes Wikipedia, we support the use of all
Wikimedia projects in educational contexts. Our guest speakers this month
showcase that well!
Florencia Claes, Communication and Journalism professor at Rey Juan Carlos
University in Madrid, Spain, will speak about how she's helped her students
contribute multimedia projects to Wikimedia Commons and add them to
Wikipedia, and her current project to collaborate with a documentary
filmmaking class to have students shoot videos for Commons. Florencia's
talk should be inspiring for anyone who has noticed a trend of students
preferring video over text, as we can all learn from her experiences!
Goran S. Milovanović, PhD, Data Scientist, Software Department, Wikimedia
Deutschland, will speak about the Wiktionary Cognate Dashboard , and how
it can be used for identifying places for improvement on your language
Wiktionary. This is super relevant for anyone running programs on
To join the meeting on the 30th, click this link:
To add the invite to your calendar:
* Google Calendar:
* Outlook Calendar:
* Yahoo Calendar:
* Update from UG board
* Updates from Wikimania
* Updates from working groups
* Featured speakers: Florencia Claes, Goran Milovanović
* Q & A
Apologies for cross-posting, and please forward to communities who you
think will be interested.
In light of the movement’s increased focus on diversity and becoming
essential infrastructure for diverse human knowledge, the Community
Programs team at the WMF has begun investigating the use of content
campaigns in the movement. Campaigns are some of the most reliable ways to
create new content and introduce new contributors to the movement, but we
have a lot of questions like:
What are the different steps that our community organizers have to go
through in order to organize campaigns and contests such as Wiki Loves
Monuments, Wikipedia Asian Month, #1lib1ref Wikidata Menu Challenge etc.?
What are the tools that are being used in organizing these campaigns and
contests such as PetScan, Listeria, CitationHunt, Fountain, wscontest tool,
Outreach Dashboard etc.?
During some initial research into the space, we have developed a draft
that highlights key stages in organizing any campaign/contest and the
documentation that we could find supporting those stages.
Now, we need your help us improve the framework so that we can help less
experienced organizers understand how to better support content campaigns.
Please join us in discussing the framework and provide feedback on the talk
or connect with us on the discuss forum.
If you want to reach out directly, feel free to email us at
astinson(a)wikimedia.org or sgill(a)wikimedia.org.
Alex Stinson and Satdeep Gill
Senior Program Strategist
Learn more about how the communities behind Wikipedia, Wikidata and other
Wikimedia projects partner with cultural heritage organizations:
September 6th marks the end of my time at the Wikimedia Foundation.
At my center has been the belief that I serve the movement above all else.
This was what motivated the creation of a research service for editors in
the first place. Today, it leaves me to look outside the Foundation to how
I can best influence and impact change for the open knowledge community,
and our broadly fractured society.
When I founded The Wikipedia Library in 2011, the course of my life
changed. I became a grantee with an Individual Engagement Grant, guided by
Siko Bouterse and Anasuya Sengupta, to expand TWL. It was a dream fulfilled
to be asked to join the Wikimedia Foundation full-time in 2014 to establish
the program worldwide.
With much mentorship and help, we grew TWL from a one-man, English-only
publisher signup project into an international, multilingual outreach
effort with a global campaign, national convenings, and a functioning
digital library stocked with 100,000 free-to-read scholarly journals. Those
sources can be used to verify information, write new articles, close
content gaps, and remedy systemic bias.
Now, librarians are as likely to be supporters and contributors as they
used to be critics. The movement is full of 'wikibrarians', from the
200-member Wikimedia and Libraries User Group to the 2000 person Wikimedia
+ Libraries Facebook Group. Conferences around the world have strong
advocates for the intersection and alliance of Wikipedia and Libraries.
Along the way I had the true privilege of building a team that gave me
confidence and extremely good company. It's my conviction that good work is
calm, full of humor, and has care for people at its core. I found that
generous spirit heartily alive in my team at The Wikipedia Library. I
cannot thank them enough.
The work is not yet finished and yet it is in good hands. With Sam Walton
in charge of managing The Wikipedia Library, Felix Nartey and Aaron Vasanth
running global outreach, Jason Sherman developing the Library Card
Platform, and a whole crew of coordinated volunteers handling reference
services…much more is still to come.
You can reach out to TWL any time at wikipedialibrary(a)wikimedia.org.
As I look ahead to new vistas, I leave with questions and hope to hear your
thoughts. What needs to be done next? Who could use the most support? Which
organizations are ripe for change? What capacity still needs to be created?
Where can I best advocate and help grow? How can we collaborate?
Email me at jorlowitz(a)gmail.com and share what's on your mind, or just say
It's been a true pleasure to serve our beautiful, messy movement: I
couldn't be more excited to join its ranks again.
Thanks and cheers,
We’re seeking volunteers with a wide variety of skills and backgrounds to join the Program Committee to plan the 2020 LD4 Conference: May 13th and 14th, 2020, in College Station, Texas, USA, at the Texas A&M Hotel and Conference Center<https://www.texasamhotelcc.com/> at Texas A&M University. The Linked Data for Production initiative<http://www.ld4p.org>, supported by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation, is hosting this conference to bring together anyone passionate about the adoption of linked data in libraries.
Our contemporary venue accommodates up to 200 people, with flexibility for multiple simultaneous activities and proximity to local cultural attractions. What kind of community meeting space would you like to create? How can this community gathering best advance the adoption of linked data in all kinds of libraries? Join the Program Committee and shape an event you are excited to participate in!
To serve on the Program Committee, you should plan to attend the conference in College Station, Texas on May 13th and 14th, 2020, and be available for bi-weekly teleconference calls beginning in September.
Fill in this short form<https://forms.gle/MfDNKiWLy5tBeRCAA> by September 6th to indicate your interest in joining the Program Committee. Committee members will be selected based on a diversity of skills, interests, and backgrounds and will be notified by September 13th.
For those not joining the Program Committee, keep an eye out for a call for proposals and other announcements about the 2020 LD4 Conference!
Hilary Thorsen (Linked Data for Production project) and Christine Fernsebner Eslao (Harvard University)
2020 LD4 Conference Co-Chairs
Wikimedian in Residence
Linked Data for Production Project
Digital Library Systems and Services
Stanford, CA 94305