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@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@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@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@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@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:libraries-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Bettina Cousineau
Sent: 24 October 2013 12:43
To: libraries@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@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries



_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries



_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries


_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries