I think in fact all the points mentioned in Charles' and Lodovik's were messages were before the GLAM task force, in at least some form, when we discussed the matter. The term and concept of a "National Monument" does not exist as such in the UK, as opposed to other countries, in itself something of a problem. I believe the Netherlands has a single list, some 30,000 strong, covering all types of sites, buildings, and things. That is certainly not the case in the UK where (I forget the exact figures) when you add listed buildings to Scheduled Ancient Monuments and other types, you get well over a million, but for the most part without easily accessible listings. As Andrew rightly points out, these are not all centralized - listed buildings are by local authority and SAM's under different bodies for the constituent counties of the UK. The time available to assemble such listings, which seems to be a very large task, although in theory the information is available, was probably inadequate.
As well as photos, many Dutch NMs received WP articles, (also in English) apparently on the basis that NM's were inherently notable, but there are several precedents for eg UK listed buildings being held not to be notable, and the same would be true of the lesser sort of SAMs which form the majority (hut circles, medieval moats etc). We felt a rash of deleted articles as a result of a NM project might have a negative effect.
Overhanging all this was the 80,000 (is it now) mostly good quality, photos that are already on Commons from Geograph, that are still unsorted, or incorrectly categorized. Bearing in mind that many of the 326 photos in http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_Loves_Art_at_the_Victor... from February 2009 are still otherwise uncategorized, or not well categorized, we thought that pressing on with digesting the Geograph material was a priority.
In the light of this, and the number of other projects the chapter has taken on, and the lack of anyone pressing to lead the iniative, we decided not to involve trhe chapter this year, and I still think we made the right decision.
John
I will not contest any decision made, although I would have liked seeing UK in Britain, but please let me clarify a few things just in case it would be considered for next year.
National monumens have different names and definitions in every country - it was to be expected that this would also be the case in the UK. Also the numbers vary a lot - in the Netherlands 60.000, in Germany around 700.000. In most countries there are subcategories you can pick and choose from - some countries for example explicitely exclude archaeological monuments or otherwise inaccessible sites.
Creating the lists is definitely the most work - there are quite some motivated volunteers for needed. I am not sure why these would have to come from the GLAM work group though, my initial thought would have been to search them in the online community.
In Dutch first of all we created lists of national monuments. That does not mean every single monument will get an article though. The lists as such were considered notable enough though. See for example [[nl:Lijst van rijksmonumenten in Westland]]. Creating regular articles would not have been a main goal of the project, lists are necessary though.
And importantly, the actual goal of the contest is not just to collect images - but also to familiarize people with Wikipedia, Wikimedia and creating free content. We learned that this motivates people to also release their other material under a free license. The availability of the Geograph photos should therefore by itself not block the project. However I can imagine you set other priorities of course, that is your choice.
Oh, and finally, my name is Lodewijk, not Lodovik ;)
2011/7/15 John Byrne john@bodkinprints.co.uk
I think in fact all the points mentioned in Charles' and Lodovik's were messages were before the GLAM task force, in at least some form, when we discussed the matter. The term and concept of a "National Monument" does not exist as such in the UK, as opposed to other countries, in itself something of a problem. I believe the Netherlands has a single list, some 30,000 strong, covering all types of sites, buildings, and things. That is certainly not the case in the UK where (I forget the exact figures) when you add listed buildings to Scheduled Ancient Monuments and other types, you get well over a million, but for the most part without easily accessible listings. As Andrew rightly points out, these are not all centralized - listed buildings are by local authority and SAM's under different bodies for the constituent counties of the UK. The time available to assemble such listings, which seems to be a very large task, although in theory the information is available, was probably inadequate.
As well as photos, many Dutch NMs received WP articles, (also in English) apparently on the basis that NM's were inherently notable, but there are several precedents for eg UK listed buildings being held not to be notable, and the same would be true of the lesser sort of SAMs which form the majority (hut circles, medieval moats etc). We felt a rash of deleted articles as a result of a NM project might have a negative effect.
Overhanging all this was the 80,000 (is it now) mostly good quality, photos that are already on Commons from Geograph, that are still unsorted, or incorrectly categorized. Bearing in mind that many of the 326 photos in
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikipedia_Loves_Art_at_the_Victor... from February 2009 are still otherwise uncategorized, or not well categorized, we thought that pressing on with digesting the Geograph material was a priority.
In the light of this, and the number of other projects the chapter has taken on, and the lack of anyone pressing to lead the iniative, we decided not to involve trhe chapter this year, and I still think we made the right decision.
John
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
On 15/07/2011 19:34, John Byrne wrote:
I think in fact all the points mentioned in Charles' and Lodovik's were messages were before the GLAM task force, in at least some form, when we discussed the matter.
<snip>
In the light of this, and the number of other projects the chapter has taken on, and the lack of anyone pressing to lead the iniative, we decided not to involve trhe chapter this year, and I still think we made the right decision.
Thanks John, that certainly gives a clearer picture of the reasoning.
I suppose my angle, as a Wikisource person for much of my time, is that "monuments" as a general concept fits well with "historical biography", on which I work, coming next after "portraits" as defining the type of image that adds value to old-time biographical articles. I'd like to see the two issues, Commons categorisation of relevant images, and getting listings of "missing monuments", as complementary.
Charles
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org