I've added a section to
about another GLAMish thing happening earlier that afternoon (the
British Library event starts 1800 hrs). We'll be visiting an
exhibition "Many Hands" at the Royal Society
(http://royalsociety.org/events/2011/many-hands/). This ties in
somewhat with the British Museum Ice Age Art project, but I don't want
to overstate that connection: it's an exhibition, you can't just walk
in off the street though, and it finishes 20 January.
If you are coming, please sign up because I'm giving numbers on
Monday. I don't feel it's worth mentioning on the site notice, but
others may not agree, I suppose.
So, I'm doing a talk at the Centre for Creative Collaboration with the Open
Knowledge Foundation on 30 January. We're mostly covering things like open
data, analytics and visualisation, so if you're tech-savvy and this sort of
thing interests you, come along and have a drink on me :). Their GLAM reps
are also going to be there, so if you're interested in that field, please
sign up! Full details are at
http://www.meetup.com/OpenKnowledgeFoundation/London-GB/472892/ - hope to
see a lot of you there :)
Community Liaison, Product Development
This email and subsequent emails on the list refere.
I object to the claim that I was banned from the project for on and off-wiki harassment. If WMUK is going to make extreme claims like this, they should be backed up by evidence (of which there is none, AFAICS).
Regarding photos, I always ask people if they want their photo to be taken, as I did at the November meetup. Indeed, Symonds liked the photos and emailed me with a request for more (which I turned down, because I only post good quality photos).
With every kind wish,
I am just an ordinary Wikipedian. Although I have contemplated becoming an
admin in the past, I have never applied to be one and don't intend to do
so in the foreseeable future. As such, I have no obligation to acknowledge
anything about anyone.
It so happens that the Wikipedian I have probably had most contact with as
a Wikipedian is an anonymous editor and I understand enough of his
circumstances to know why it is appropriate in his case. I am not going to
out him or other ordinary editors or admins who focus on using the brush
end of the broom. However, the higher someone gets up the hierarchy the
less appropriate it is for someone to be granted anonymity.
When someone is active in AE or has an extensive history of using blocks
against established editors, then the right to privacy becomes
questionable. Wikipedia isn't just a private club. It is one of the most
powerful websites in the world.
Arbitrators, senior Foundation staff and directors of WMUK and the like
are in positions of authority over that website and it is entirely
appropriate that they should be scrutinised publcly.
I don't know as much about Buckner as you do. Maybe I would be horrified
by him if I did. But I'm not going to accept that everyone in high-profile
roles should be above external scrutiny. And actually it's surprising how
restrained people are being. As far as I know, no one seems to have gone
to Private Eye.
> The additional issues with Buckner, who routinely tries to uncover
> the identity of Wikipedians who are in high-profile roles, mean it
> is quite appropriate to ban him from these events.
> Nobody said he was a "security risk", but it is the case that he
> has caused stress among many editors for no other reason than that
> he can. A subset of these editors have resigned because of
> Buckner/Damian. He should not be welcome at WMUK events because of
> his behaviour, period. It astounds me that you don't acknowledge
> the ongoing issues with this man's actions.
I've just seen this article. I'd somehow missed this is the planning stages
(I was vaguely aware of some discussion about qr codes, but hadn't realised
anything had progressed this far) - it looks like a great idea.
It's a good article too, I particularly like the quote from John about
being told he should implement his idea himself - that's exactly the
attitude wmuk should have and we should make everyone aware of that.
The only thing I don't like about the article is that it makes it sound
like a Wikipedia project, rather than a Wikimedia UK project. It's not a
big deal, but we should try and get the chapter's role more emphasis.
On 9 January 2012 23:34, Peter Cohen <peterc(a)cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> In-Reply-To: <003b01cccecb$72bcf1d0$5836d570$(a)wikimedia.org.uk>
> Excuse me but is the board really saying that Dr Buckner is a security
> risk? That makes him sound like an axe murderer or something.
As mentioned, he has a history of "outing" people. I imagine it is in
that sense that he is considered a security risk (I've not discussed
this decision with anyone on the board, so I'm just speculating based
on what I know of the board). Some people like to keep their real life
identities secret and that is a little difficult when meeting people
in person. You need to be able to trust the people you are meeting.
"A series of free events will be taking place between February and
March 2012 designed to create an opportunity for North East cultural
and digital communities to work closely together, increasing their
understanding of each other’s work and the mutual benefits of
Anybody interested in getting involved in this, preferably someone
based in the north east.
Wikimedia UK is now hiring a Communications Organiser! The job specification
(and more detail) is at
http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Communications_Organiser_Job - please spread
this as widely as you can (or, indeed, apply yourself).
Don't hesitate to give out Jon Davies' phone number if anyone wants it in
connection with the job - he's more than happy to chat to people about it.
All the best,
Office & Development Manager
+44 7885 764 613
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited, a Company Limited by
Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Our
Registered Charity No. is 1144513. The Registered Office is 4th Floor,
Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
Wikimedia UK is the local chapter of the Wikimedia Foundation (who operate
Wikipedia, amongst other projects). It is an independent non-profit
organization with no legal control over Wikipedia nor responsibility for its
Visit <http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/> http://www.wikimedia.org.uk/ and