Hi all,
Thanks to Kaldari, the photos from the Wiki Loves Art event at the Victoria and Albert Museum last February are now (finally) online! You can find them at:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ Category:Wikipedia_Loves_Art_at_the_Victoria_and_Albert_Museum
Please help categorize them and add them to articles - the more these images are used, the stronger our argument to museums in the future to get them to participate in this sort of event, so we can get even more photos etc...
Planning for the Britain Loves Wikipedia event next February is ongoing; we have several museums involved already, and a number of others that are interested. Please help develop the event on the wiki: http://uk.wikimedia.org/wiki/Initiatives/Britain_Loves_Wikipedia
Thanks, Mike
Guys,
Rory (copied) sent out a request for Wikipedians on Twitter. Thought I'd forward it to you.
Rory, Wikimediauk-l is the discussion list for Wikimedia UK, the UK chapter of the Wikipedia mothership.
Steve
-- Blogs at BBC A&Mi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live 07768 257 570
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.
Whoever does: care required in talking to the media on this point. The New York Times article on this general area was really quite misleading, and has simply been copied in hundreds of places. The BBC is likely to be taken as a similarly "reliable" source. Anyone trying to compress the story to a Twitter-sized message risks misunderstanding. In any case the basic point I would always try to make is that if you take 2007 as a baseline, when many people were on enWP for reasons of fashion really, it looks like participation has dropped back quite a way; but once we had some proper statistics from 2009 it seemed clear that this year serious participation has been fairly constant.
Charles
I've just spoken to Rory by phone, and managed to touch on a number of different topics with him - including the Usability Initiative, the bookshelf project, Britain Loves Wikipedia and other local events, etc. There were lots of issues that I didn't cover (different language versions, strategy, different viewpoints on the numbers, ...), so I would encourage others to also get in touch with him.
I'm generally uneasy about talking about these particular numbers, as it isn't yet clear to me either how accurate they are or what exactly they mean. As a scientist, I'm very hesitant to talk about results as if they're black and white, as they rarely are - unfortunately that's how the media like doing things, hence the stories that are coming out about how wikipedia is dying - again. Odd how it never actually seems to die...
For information, I spoke briefly to the author of the article from the Times on Monday, but referred him to Jay at the WMF as I didn't real comfortable talking about the numbers. Unfortunately, Jay's in Tokyo for the japanese wikiconference this week, hence wasn't able to respond to the Times before they ran their story.
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
Mike
On 25 Nov 2009, at 11:33, Steve Bowbrick wrote:
Guys,
Rory (copied) sent out a request for Wikipedians on Twitter. Thought I'd forward it to you.
Rory, Wikimediauk-l is the discussion list for Wikimedia UK, the UK chapter of the Wikipedia mothership.
Steve
-- Blogs at BBC A&Mi http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio3 http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/5live 07768 257 570
http://www.bbc.co.uk/ This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated. If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system. Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately. Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received. Further communication will signify your consent to this.
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Michael Peel wrote:
I've just spoken to Rory by phone, and managed to touch on a number of different topics with him - including the Usability Initiative, the bookshelf project, Britain Loves Wikipedia and other local events, etc. There were lots of issues that I didn't cover (different language versions, strategy, different viewpoints on the numbers, ...), so I would encourage others to also get in touch with him.
I'm generally uneasy about talking about these particular numbers, as it isn't yet clear to me either how accurate they are or what exactly they mean. As a scientist, I'm very hesitant to talk about results as if they're black and white, as they rarely are - unfortunately that's how the media like doing things, hence the stories that are coming out about how wikipedia is dying - again. Odd how it never actually seems to die...
For information, I spoke briefly to the author of the article from the Times on Monday, but referred him to Jay at the WMF as I didn't real comfortable talking about the numbers. Unfortunately, Jay's in Tokyo for the japanese wikiconference this week, hence wasn't able to respond to the Times before they ran their story.
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
Mike
On 25 Nov 2009, at 11:33, Steve Bowbrick wrote:
"Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages" By JULIA ANGWIN and GEOFFREY A. FOWLER
Work by Felipe Ortega....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125893981183759969.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Gordo
Gordon Joly wrote:
"Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages" By JULIA ANGWIN and GEOFFREY A. FOWLER
Work by Felipe Ortega....
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125893981183759969.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Gordo
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/wikipedia/6650077/Wikipedia-project-lo...
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 13:08 +0000, Gordon Joly wrote:
Michael Peel wrote:
I've just spoken to Rory by phone, and managed to touch on a number of different topics with him - including the Usability Initiative, the bookshelf project, Britain Loves Wikipedia and other local events, etc. There were lots of issues that I didn't cover (different language versions, strategy, different viewpoints on the numbers, ...), so I would encourage others to also get in touch with him.
Apparently, Mr Ortega's work is based on people who register an account and make one edit or more.
The WMF stats are based on slightly different metrics; only people with five or more edits are classed as "contributors".
I am not a scientist or, more importantly, a statistician. But, these seem like radically different criteria for an analysis.
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
The Press Association are looking for comment.
I chatted briefly to Rory Cellan-Jones as well.
* we're not actually doomed * Felipe is a Wikipedian, his numbers are interesting * it's the subject of lots of interested and animated discussion around the project * it's hard to find new things to write about these days - you need to work at it * we cover more stuff in more depth of obscurity than anyone * usability initiative to make Wikipedia more newbie-friendly
Also - someone is needed for BBC News tonight between five and six. I can't, but I've forwarded the email to WMUK and the WMF comcom. Basically someone who can be at a BBC TV studio anywhere in the country around then!
- d.
2009/11/25 David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com
Also - someone is needed for BBC News tonight between five and six. I can't, but I've forwarded the email to WMUK and the WMF comcom. Basically someone who can be at a BBC TV studio anywhere in the country around then!
I may have this covered - was just phoned by the guy at the BBC and am making arrangements.
Regards,
Paul Williams Volunteers Director Wikimedia UK
*Email:* paul.williams@wikimedia.org.uk
Wikimedia UK is the operating name of Wiki UK Limited. Wiki UK Limited is a Company Limited by Guarantee registered in England and Wales, Registered No. 6741827. The Registered Office is at 23 Cartwright Way, Nottingham, NG9 1RL. The views expressed in this email are, unless otherwise stated, personal and not those of the Board of Directors or Membership of Wiki UK Limited.
Brian McNeil wrote:
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
The Press Association are looking for comment.
The Guardian are running a short piece; Jenny Kleeman called me up about 30 minutes ago, and I did the spin-doctor thing (2009 is going sideways not down on reliable stats, topic saturation in North America, the Indians are coming, quality not quantity is where we see growth). I'm happy to talk to the press (01223 350096) and am mostly in this afternoon, though I need to get to the shops right now.
Charles
On 25 Nov 2009, at 13:18, Brian McNeil wrote:
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 13:08 +0000, Gordon Joly wrote:
Michael Peel wrote:
I've just spoken to Rory by phone, and managed to touch on a number of different topics with him - including the Usability Initiative, the bookshelf project, Britain Loves Wikipedia and other local events, etc. There were lots of issues that I didn't cover (different language versions, strategy, different viewpoints on the numbers, ...), so I would encourage others to also get in touch with him.
Apparently, Mr Ortega's work is based on people who register an account and make one edit or more.
The WMF stats are based on slightly different metrics; only people with five or more edits are classed as "contributors".
I am not a scientist or, more importantly, a statistician. But, these seem like radically different criteria for an analysis.
He's posted his blog article:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/11/wikipedia_on_the_wane.html
Sadly a lot of the points I was hoping to get across didn't make it into the post, but the last paragraph of his post is great, and something I wish the newspaper articles would end with:
"So this is a project that is suffering plenty of growing pains - but with a Wikipedia entry coming top of Google's search results for just about any topic you can imagine, the online encyclopaedia is certainly not on the wane."
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
The Press Association are looking for comment.
They called me shortly after I sent that message; I spent ~ 10 mins talking to them on the phone. Hopefully something good will come out of that...
Mike
I've been invited onto the BBC News Channel for an interview, 7.50 pm this evening.
Charles
That was a good interview. You covered what needed to be covered :)
-----Original Message----- From: wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org [mailto:wikimediauk-l-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Charles Matthews Sent: 25 November 2009 04:01 PM To: wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikimediauk-l] Would anyone like to talk to Rory Cellan-Jones about the falling number of editors?
I've been invited onto the BBC News Channel for an interview, 7.50 pm this evening.
Charles
_______________________________________________ Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
2009/11/25 Douglas Gardner microchip08@btinternet.com:
That was a good interview. You covered what needed to be covered :)
I agree, Charles did a good job. Made some good points while playing down all the sensationalism. Well done!
Next up I think is Andrew, who's talking on BBC Radio 5 Live sometime around 11pm tonight (Richard Bacon show). Hopefully that's the end of the media deluge then. ;-)
Mike
On 25 Nov 2009, at 19:58, Thomas Dalton wrote:
2009/11/25 Douglas Gardner microchip08@btinternet.com:
That was a good interview. You covered what needed to be covered :)
I agree, Charles did a good job. Made some good points while playing down all the sensationalism. Well done!
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
Michael Peel wrote:
Next up I think is Andrew, who's talking on BBC Radio 5 Live sometime around 11pm tonight (Richard Bacon show). Hopefully that's the end of the media deluge then. ;-)
Mike
On 25 Nov 2009, at 19:58, Thomas Dalton wrote:
2009/11/25 Douglas Gardner microchip08@btinternet.com:
That was a good interview. You covered what needed to be covered :)
I agree, Charles did a good job. Made some good points while playing down all the sensationalism. Well done!
I now have a video clip of the interview. Anyone keep a press archive? And know one end of a DAT file from another, which is well ahead of me? I was thinking of transcribing what was said as a record which would make me cringe a little less ...
Charles
On 25 Nov 2009, at 12:53, Michael Peel wrote:
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
I perhaps shouldn't have said that. ;-) I've since spoken to the press association:
"Wikipedia UK 'definitely not dying'" http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ ALeqM5hOPGxuYbADpVcf_j_YveKyuzHm1A
(I've phoned them to explain that Wikipedia UK is the Ukranian language one, and encouraging them to change the headline...)
I've also just spoken to the Daily Mirror about this topic, so expect an article from them soon...
Mike
Michael Peel wrote:
On 25 Nov 2009, at 12:53, Michael Peel wrote:
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
I perhaps shouldn't have said that. ;-) I've since spoken to the press association:
"Wikipedia UK 'definitely not dying'" http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ ALeqM5hOPGxuYbADpVcf_j_YveKyuzHm1A
(I've phoned them to explain that Wikipedia UK is the Ukranian language one, and encouraging them to change the headline...)
I've also just spoken to the Daily Mirror about this topic, so expect an article from them soon...
Mike
I shortened that link....
I have not read the reports, or the actual research, but what does "leave" actually?
Some people make a statement, others just stop editing.
Gordo
From Rory at the BBC:
"@ruskin147: @mike_peel it's a recorded piece at around 1825 on the R4 Six O Clock news - have you seen the blog post? http://tinyurl.com/ yljcrko "
Mike
On 25 Nov 2009, at 17:01, Gordon Joly wrote:
Michael Peel wrote:
On 25 Nov 2009, at 12:53, Michael Peel wrote:
I've had no other calls/emails from any other media organizations about this story.
I perhaps shouldn't have said that. ;-) I've since spoken to the press association:
"Wikipedia UK 'definitely not dying'" http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ ALeqM5hOPGxuYbADpVcf_j_YveKyuzHm1A
(I've phoned them to explain that Wikipedia UK is the Ukranian language one, and encouraging them to change the headline...)
I've also just spoken to the Daily Mirror about this topic, so expect an article from them soon...
Mike
I shortened that link....
I have not read the reports, or the actual research, but what does "leave" actually?
Some people make a statement, others just stop editing.
Gordo
Wikimedia UK mailing list wikimediauk-l@wikimedia.org http://mail.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediauk-l WMUK: http://uk.wikimedia.org
wikimediauk-l@lists.wikimedia.org