Send Wikimediauk-l mailing list submissions to
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
wikimediauk-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
wikimediauk-l-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Wikimediauk-l digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs WP:RS tonight -
editor on hand? (Deryck Chan)
2. Re: BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs WP:RS tonight -
editor on hand? (Gordon Joly)
3. Re: BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs WP:RS tonight -
editor on hand? (Lucy Crompton-Reid)
4. Re: Digitisaton of East India Company/ India Office records
(John Lubbock)
------------------------------------------------------------ ----------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 2017 17:15:06 +0000
From: Deryck Chan <deryckchan@gmail.com>
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs
WP:RS tonight - editor on hand?
Message-ID:
<CA+F5PQ9XuQ2bdw4v0KXVssux3TPu3JY9 >WUjKZPUo-AS3et4LBQ@mail.gmail. com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Interesting question from Chris.
On 9 February 2017 at 15:57, Chris Keating <chriskeatingwiki@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Which leaves the question of "why blacklist the Daily Mail not even worse
> sources?" If anyone can suggest an answer to that which would keep a journo
> happy I'd be interested to hear it .... ;)
>
I think the answer is NPOV and systemic bias.
For several years I've been resisting the urge of other editors to prohibit
the use of "tabloid" newspapers in the context of establishing notability
of subjects in cultures whose primary language isn't English. I see it as a
necessary trade-off to address systemic bias.
Case in point: Some AfD editors don't like Apple Daily as a reference. But
they are the only major news outlet in Hong Kong that is openly critical of
the political establishment and supportive of the (perpetual) opposition.
I guess I'm just adding to David's comparison:
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:47 PM, David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com> wrote:
> compare -
> * not right-wing-ness - e.g. the Times and Telegraph are both serious
> papers that lean right
> * in fact - The Sun is not OK and the Times is, even though same politics
> and same publisher, because one's a tabloid and one's a serious paper
>
So:
- If blacklisting a tabloid source which sometimes produces questionable
journalism would mean a significant POV gets purged, we allow the lesser
evil of citing sources by lower-quality publishers.
- If the same publisher produces different publications that vary in
journalistic integrity, we treat each item differently.
Deryck
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediauk-l/ >attachments/20170209/d1472ef3/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:53:08 +0000
From: Gordon Joly <gordon.joly@pobox.com>
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs
WP:RS tonight - editor on hand?
Message-ID: <6720c7f3-9b30-51c6-67f6-ed9b8b7369b0@pobox.com >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
******************************
A spokesman for Mail Newspapers said: “It is hard to know whether to
laugh or cry at this move by Wikipedia. For the record the Daily Mail
banned all its journalists from using Wikipedia as a sole source in 2014
because of its unreliability.
******************************
Source: Guardian Online.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/ wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as- unreliable-source-for-website
Gordo
------------------------------
Message: 3
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:58:59 +0000
From: Lucy Crompton-Reid <lucy.crompton-reid@wikimedia.org.uk >
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] BBC Newsnight want to do Daily Mail vs
WP:RS tonight - editor on hand?
Message-ID:
<CALAB3_B-e4WYscycCMTswem08QJkya3x+GA=N3 zvUXwAYRV5Bw@mail.gmail.com >
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Well they certainly weren't laughing when they spoke to me...although I was
nearly crying by the end of the call!
On 10 February 2017 at 09:53, Gordon Joly <gordon.joly@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> ******************************
> A spokesman for Mail Newspapers said: “It is hard to know whether to
> laugh or cry at this move by Wikipedia. For the record the Daily Mail
> banned all its journalists from using Wikipedia as a sole source in 2014
> because of its unreliability.
>
> ******************************
>
> Source: Guardian Online.
>
> https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/feb/08/
> wikipedia-bans-daily-mail-as-unreliable-source-for-website
>
> Gordo
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
--
Lucy Crompton-Reid
Chief Executive
Wikimedia UK
+44 (0) 207 065 0991
Wikimedia UK is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and
Wales, Registered No. 6741827. Registered Charity No.1144513. Registered
Office 4th Floor, Development House, 56-64 Leonard Street, London EC2A 4LT.
Wikimedia UK is the UK chapter of a global Wikimedia movement. 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.*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediauk-l/ >attachments/20170210/92756314/ attachment-0001.html
------------------------------
Message: 4
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:06:23 +0000
From: John Lubbock <john.lubbock@wikimedia.org.uk>
To: UK Wikimedia mailing list <wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org >
Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Digitisaton of East India Company/ India
Office records
Message-ID:
<CAHEadKm5siUefX+9vKT8JgJm3oZzfRfDhJW_ >TAtwauxnNTu3+w@mail.gmail.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Hello WhereDevilsDare! I would love to discuss this with you and any other
Wikimedians in the UK who might be interested.
Regards,
John Lubbock
Communications Coordinator
Wikimedia UK
On 9 February 2017 at 04:17, Where Devels Dare <wheredevelsdare@hotmail.com>
wrote:
> I am an inactive volunteer (at present and been so for a while now),
> chanced upon this thread. In the past one of the projects I worked upon and
> was hoping would see light of day, some day, was release of thousands of
> India related images by the British Library under a free license. These
> images are part of our Indian national heritage and are of educational and
> cultural importance. They are from the 17th to the 20th century and include
> oil paintings, murals, portraits, photographs etc.
>
>
> In 2014 I was in London for Wikimania, with the help of Jon Davies (then
> ED), Jonathan Cardy and Andrew Gray we had a meeting at BL and there was a
> serious effort to make this a reality but it was just about the time other
> things took precedence in personally for me and Wikimedia went on the
> back-burner. I attempted to revive talks on my visit to London last summer,
> in vein.
>
>
> If anyone is willing to take this up, I would be most happy to share all
> the correspondence and minutes of meetings from the past (offlist) as well
> as try to put them in touch with BL (though WMUK might be better at the
> latter) and try to help out where possible, though I have severe time
> constraints which would prevent me from playing an active part in such an
> attempt.
>
>
> Regards,
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Wikimediauk-l <wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org > on
> behalf of John Lubbock <john.lubbock@wikimedia.org.uk>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, February 8, 2017 1:57:12 PM
> *To:* Charles Matthews; UK Wikimedia mailing list
> *Subject:* Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Digitisaton of East India Company/ India
> Office records
>
> If you have ideas Charles, I'm very happy to hear them. I just don't know
> what our connections with the Indian diaspora in the UK are right now and
> whether they'd be interested in doing something on these records, rather
> than preferring something on their own culture. You're welcome to propose
> ideas and to suggest people we might work with. I'm all ears. :)
>
> John
>
> On 8 February 2017 at 13:52, Charles Matthews <
> charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com > wrote:
>
>>
>> On 08 February 2017 at 12:46 John Lubbock <john.lubbock@wikimedia.org.uk>
>> wrote:
>>
>> There's quite a lot of interest in this subject also because of the BBC
>> series Taboo, which paints the East India Company in a pretty bad light
>> that is quite believable given what is known about them
>>
>> I think Taboo is great, at a graphic novel sort of level. People should
>> know, though, that the East India Company was run by a board of 25
>> directors, rather than Jonathan Pryce doing a lot of swearing.
>>
>> Among interesting employees were John Stuart Mill, and Thomas Love
>> Peacock.
>>
>> If anybody wants a somewhat long but illuminating read on them, I'd very
>> much suggest the historian William Dalrymple's piece in the Graun
>> <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/04/east-india- >company-original-corporate- raiders
>> from a couple of years ago.
>>
>> I don't know that Dalrymple is taken seriously as a historian. I recently
>> enjoyed In the Footsteps of Stamford Raffles, by Nigel Barley, which
>> complements Taboo in its own way.
>>
>>
>> Personally, I do think that if possible we should look at the possibility
>> of bringing this collection onto Wikimedia projects, but I don't think it
>> would be an appropriate project for trying to work with the Indian
>> Wikimedia chapter or with the Indian diaspora here. I do think we should
>> look at how we could do that in future with subject matter which is less
>> contentious though.
>>
>> For heavens sake, WP has the mechanisms for dealing with contentious
>> subjects. Communications being what they were, until the invention of the
>> telegraph, there was a big disjunction between what the Company could get
>> done from London; and what actually went on in South and East Asia. And
>> what UCL are working on for the West Indies, someone should attempt for the
>> East Indies.
>>
>> Charles
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimedia UK mailing list
>> wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
>> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia UK mailing list
> wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
> WMUK: https://wikimedia.org.uk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediauk-l/ >attachments/20170210/ca4a9c94/ attachment.html
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Wikimediauk-l mailing list
Wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l
------------------------------
End of Wikimediauk-l Digest, Vol 139, Issue 17
**********************************************