Frederick, I agree that this is a problem, particularly for subjects relating to the global South. There are millions of topics that are worth having in Wikipedia, but which may have few or no internet sources, and whose print sources may all be in non-English languages.
I would like to see us stop having back and forth about whether this is a bug or a feature and put our collective mental energy towards brainstorming creative solutions that could lead to greater inclusion of topics and narratives from the global South that may not have any web presence.
In particular, Frederick, I am curious to hear any ideas you may have on solutions to this systemic problem.
- Mark Williamson On Dec 13, 2014 5:32 PM, "Frederick FN Noronha फ्रेड्रिक नोरोन्या *فريدريك نورونيا" fredericknoronha@gmail.com wrote:
Let's put it this way: Wikipedia sees no flaw in accepting the unquestioned logic that
if-you-don't-have-a-cyber-presence-or-aren't-mentioned-there-you-don't-exist-or-are-anyway-non-notable.
This stacks the cards strongly against those from non-English backgrounds, those from the less digitised parts of the world, and those who may be working in non-print/non-textual media (e.g. people who have worked for the Urdu service of the BBC, for instance, as it struck me when a page on journalist Reba Shahid came up for deletion recently).
I'm attempting to do two things here:
- Question the logic of such a position, and the impact it has on large
parts of the planet.
- Ask whether issues like 'non-notability' need to be such a big issue,
considering both the diversity of the planet, and also the fact that in the case of the Wikipedia, space isn't a huge problem as in the printed text. Those interested will refer to any entry they want; "non-notable" entries would automatically get less traction. Let the 'market' of information-seekers decide what is 'non-notable'.
Take an example of a prominent person from the world of Konkani literature in Goa: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madhavi_Sardesai who also edits the only literary joural in that language here. Her work is all in the Konkani language (Devanagari script) and thus not visible to those on Wikipedia who raise questions of notability.
This is a serious flaw if not systemic bias.
FN
On 13 December 2014 at 16:15, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi. The subject IS notable. The problem indicated is that notabiliy is
stacked
against subjects that are not in the west. You will find that such
subjects
are woefully underdevelloped. When you notive the people involved in this magazine, you have to agree that the magazine is notable.
When subjects like this are well covered in Wikidata, they can be found
in
many Wikipedias. Now this is Wikipedia-l not English Wikipedia-l and consequently many Wikipedias that are centred in India WILL find this information never mind what the English Wikipedia in its infinite wisdom chooses to do.
Yes, Wikidata is relevant and I am not afraid to bang its drums. Thanks, GerardM
On 13 December 2014 at 09:39, Andre Engels andreengels@gmail.com
wrote:
Do you really need to put wikidata into EVERY discussion? I think your comment is RIDICULOUS. At least I HOPE it is. I really hope that when a subject's notability is discussed, it is discussed based on INDEPENDENT sources, not on "oh, the guy has been putting this info all over Wikimedia, then it's probably important."
André
On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.com wrote:
Hoi, One way to raise the profile of this magazine is to make sure that it
is
well connected in Wikidata. I connected it to its founder, made it a magazine and noted when it was founded. Many more things can be
added.
It
is certainly a way to raise available information on the magazine. It
is
one way to establish information on the subject.
I added some information to its founder and in this way I added
surrounding
information. The point is very much that never mind the English
Wikipedia
information, it should not be left to the vagaries of its notability criteria. Wikidata is much more about data and interrelating data. As
such
the Goa Today is easily notable.
<grin> there is more that can be done </grin> Thanks, GerardM
On 12 December 2014 at 17:31, Frederick FN Noronha फ्रेड्रिक नोरोन्या *فريدريك نورونيا fredericknoronha@gmail.com wrote:
This debate is relevant to us, because we have been discussing lit
fests,
the profile of writers being invited/privileged etc... Not only on
the
basis of content, but also on the basis of age, looks, etc [ http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2001/mar/28/books.booksnews]
Sometime in 2013, I started a Wikipedia page on *Goa Today*. As
everyone
reading this knows, this is Goa's oldest monthly, started way back
in
the
1960s, and has played an influential role in the literary life of
the
State. The discussions earlier today between Ben and Peter Nazareth
only
underline this point. And this is truth both when it was owned by
Lambert
Mascarenhas (jointly, if not mistaken, with Printwell owner FD
Dantas,
the
father of our late much-respected journo colleague Norman Dantas;
and
ex-Speaker Machado) and also when owned by the Salgaocars.
As most would know, *Goa Today *has a significant expat audience,
but
hasn't been very active with its own web presence online. The logic probably being that if they had a website, people would prefer to
read
their magazine online and not subscribe to it. I know of a number of
expats
who subscribe to the monthly and read it eagerly each month.
What happens is that its lack of online visibility today gets
translated
(almost) into non-notability:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Goa_Today
See the debate above, which is telling! I've earlier disagreed with Wikipedians and pointed out that as long as their definition of
notability
is based on someone's (or some institution's) web presence, in
English...
this is going to be an unfair world for perhaps the majority on the
planet!
FN
P +91-832-2409490 M 9822122436 Twitter: @fn Facebook:
fredericknoronha
Latest from Goa,1556: http://goa1556.in/book/goa-in-sepia-tinted-postcards/ http://goa1556.in _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
-- André Engels, andreengels@gmail.com
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
--
P +91-832-2409490 M 9822122436 Twitter: @fn Facebook: fredericknoronha Latest from Goa,1556: http://goa1556.in/book/goa-in-sepia-tinted-postcards/ http://goa1556.in _______________________________________________ Wikipedia-l mailing list Wikipedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l