It's not a black-and-white distinction but one of degrees. If I am in one of the best positions to describe a topic, why shouldn't I add such information to Wikipedia? One thing I ask myself: If someone not in my position added this information would it be accepted? If the answer is yes, then I have no qualms about adding such information. Is it promotion? To an extent it is, but it's information that others may have a difficult time acquiring.
You mention an "exhibit" but I feel that many library exhibits do not achieve notability by themselves (unless an accompanying book is published along with substantial reviews of the exhibit). If there's a lasting website exhibit, then I might add it as a link.
I know others have had difficulty adding links to archival resources, a problem which I've rarely had. I think the difference might be one of reputation. I'm active in several WikiProjects and have created/editing lots of articles, not all necessarily in my professed field (I'm a music librarian, yet I created article on what was the longest river in Manhattan - the article was assessed as a GA). In other words, my track record proves to the community that I'm not on Wikipedia for promotion, but I'm there to add to the encyclopedia.
Bob Kosovsky, Ph.D. -- Curator, Rare Books and Manuscripts,
Music Division, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
blog: http://www.nypl.org/blog/author/44 Twitter: @kos2
Listowner: OPERA-L ; EXLIBRIS-L ; SMT-ANNOUNCE ; SoundForge-users
- My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my institutions -
Music Division, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
blog: http://www.nypl.org/blog/author/44 Twitter: @kos2
Listowner: OPERA-L ; EXLIBRIS-L ; SMT-ANNOUNCE ; SoundForge-users
- My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my institutions -
Inspiring Lifelong Learning | Advancing Knowledge | Strengthening Our Communities