There was a very subtle typo earlier try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Register_of_Historic_Places_listings_i....
As far as dates, I'd guess most American would prefer the month of July. Folks are on vacation and have the time for recreational photography. The month is also very symbolic, e.g. Independence Day in the US, Canada Day in Canada, Bastille Day in France, etc. Also daylight in the northern hemisphere is near its longest, which can help in photography (sorry Australia!)
One more American quirk - "Monuments" here means lots of things here - but is probably most associated with what we've been calling "public art" - sculptures to famous people. Another use is for "gravestone". So while most of us probably understand how "registered historic places" fits in with "Wiki Loves Monuments" it seems just a bit off. Any chance of getting a new title next July??!
Pete Ekman
Message: 2 Date: Mon, 2 Jul 2012 17:25:49 +0200 From: Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org To: Wikimedia Mailing List wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Cc: "Wikimedia & GLAM collaboration [Public]" glam@lists.wikimedia.org, wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] [Wikimedia-l] Wiki Loves Public Art (WLPA) needs your help Message-ID: CACf6BeteeRO4VRo9iKMoT5KC25HqgqaT=b0kLGYVuWu87m-cdw@mail.gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Hi,
interesting announcement :) I myself have been thinking of organizing a new 'Wiki Loves' in June 2013 (I don't think May is a good month due to the exams everywhere - and students will make up a significant part of the organizers), probably first in the Netherlands. I am still doubting between some 20 different ideas which were shared by several people; ranging from a relaunch of the good old 'Wiki Loves Art' (it would be preferable if WLPA could get a name that is not as easily confused with WLA) all the way to a Wiki Loves Food (photograph food items, dishes etc in your country/region) or Wiki Loves Concepts (photograph concepts like 'love', 'community', 'neighborhood', 'philosophy' etc as explanatory and useful as possible). Wiki Loves Public Art is amongst those ideas too (as are non-photo contests), although I should admit personally it is not my favorite :)
So... would it perhaps make sense to do WLPA one or even two months earlier? (March/April) That way it would leave three months per year to do a contest (but imho running two in a country is already quite a challange!
Best, Lodewijk
On 2 July 2012 17:24, Peter Ekman pdekman@gmail.com wrote:
One more American quirk - "Monuments" here means lots of things here - but is probably most associated with what we've been calling "public art" - sculptures to famous people. Another use is for "gravestone". So while most of us probably understand how "registered historic places" fits in with "Wiki Loves Monuments" it seems just a bit off. Any chance of getting a new title next July??!
This applies in the UK too, where I suspect it was a significant factor in the initiative not taking off, this year.
"Wiki loves buildings", "...architecture" or even "...listed buildings" (the latter very UK specific) would be more descriptive.
Hi Andy,
it is sad to hear that now the *name* is being blamed for WMUK not participating. My impression was that WMUK does not participate because no volunteer wanted to step forward and drive the initiative (no matter the name - that kind of things can be resolved if discussed openly).
Fact is that words mean something else apparently in different parts of the world. In continental Europe, the word monument works just fine in this context. Fact is also that all alternative descriptions that have been suggested when we had this discussion back in January/February (which is the time to have such discussion) were even worse when it comes to being descriptive - usually it was either way too broad, or way too narrow. At least 'monument' is correct when you use the right dictionary definition (although the meaning of the word depends, as you described correctly, on the context). The solution in most countries has been found by using the national word for monument (rijksmonument, listed buildings, historic place) in the beginning of the description.
Again, having such discussion early on is key in a multinational project like this. I hope we can now just work with what we have :)
Lodewijk
2012/7/2 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
On 2 July 2012 17:24, Peter Ekman pdekman@gmail.com wrote:
One more American quirk - "Monuments" here means lots of things here - but is probably most associated with what we've been calling "public art" - sculptures to famous people. Another use is for "gravestone". So while most of us probably understand how "registered historic places" fits in with "Wiki Loves Monuments" it seems just a bit off. Any chance of getting a new title next July??!
This applies in the UK too, where I suspect it was a significant factor in the initiative not taking off, this year.
"Wiki loves buildings", "...architecture" or even "...listed buildings" (the latter very UK specific) would be more descriptive.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Hi all, The main reason the UK did not participate in WLM is because they had the massive image donation of high quality photographs from Geograph. All of the wiki resources were being used to categorize those, and unless some way of easing this work can be linked to WLM, I really don't think there will be a lot of enthusiasm for another large influx of images (with of course mixed quality).
I feel confident that WLM can still be key to getting high quality images of UK heritage, but somehow the contest needs to be positioned there in some way that will ease the current UK burden of categorization, etc.
As far as the US and the term "historic places" is concerned, it was my view that this was just one of many possible US lists for WLM, and in fact there may even be lists of gravestones in the US that qualify for WLM. I know this is the case in the Netherlands. The issue is that the NRHP is the only nationwide US list that is any good on Wikipedia at the moment. The Dutch Rijksmonument lists include things from statues to gravestones, as well as listed buildings and recent architectural accomplishments that are in my mind, not "historical".
So to be clear, the NRHP list is being used just because it is there, not because WLM wants to exclude gravestones (or any other type of heritage monuments). Jane
2012/7/2 Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org
Hi Andy,
it is sad to hear that now the *name* is being blamed for WMUK not participating. My impression was that WMUK does not participate because no volunteer wanted to step forward and drive the initiative (no matter the name - that kind of things can be resolved if discussed openly).
Fact is that words mean something else apparently in different parts of the world. In continental Europe, the word monument works just fine in this context. Fact is also that all alternative descriptions that have been suggested when we had this discussion back in January/February (which is the time to have such discussion) were even worse when it comes to being descriptive - usually it was either way too broad, or way too narrow. At least 'monument' is correct when you use the right dictionary definition (although the meaning of the word depends, as you described correctly, on the context). The solution in most countries has been found by using the national word for monument (rijksmonument, listed buildings, historic place) in the beginning of the description.
Again, having such discussion early on is key in a multinational project like this. I hope we can now just work with what we have :)
Lodewijk
2012/7/2 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
On 2 July 2012 17:24, Peter Ekman pdekman@gmail.com wrote:
One more American quirk - "Monuments" here means lots of things here - but is probably most associated with what we've been calling "public art" - sculptures to famous people. Another use is for "gravestone". So while most of us probably understand how "registered historic places" fits in with "Wiki Loves Monuments" it seems just a bit off. Any chance of getting a new title next July??!
This applies in the UK too, where I suspect it was a significant factor in the initiative not taking off, this year.
"Wiki loves buildings", "...architecture" or even "...listed buildings" (the latter very UK specific) would be more descriptive.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.eu
wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org