I’m interested in helping the image of WiRs on Wikimedia and making the meta page more accurate. I’m kind of confused about if Meta needs in-line sources or not.




From: Željko Blaće <zblace@mi2.hr>
Sent: Tuesday, December 21, 2021 11:37 AM
To: Wikimedians in Residence Exchange Network <wren@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: [Wren] Re: WiR and WREN visibility on Wikipedias and Wikimedia


On Tue, Dec 21, 2021 at 6:37 PM Andrew Lih <andrew.lih@gmail.com> wrote:

Actually, this might be a good time to implement what we had talked about for the last year which is a "statement of WIR princples" that might be different than the meta page:



Cool. Statement of WIR principles sounds good, but might be a goal for a dedicated 2022 worksession?



In fact, I can already see that I don't fit some of what the meta page describes, which may focus on a pre-Wikdata definition of what a WIR does.


Indeed and decentering Wikipedia(n)s remains to be a challenge regardless of Commons and Wikidata prominence.



The difficulty in writing about WIR is that it may or may not be in line with a particular community's conflict of interest or paid editing policies. For example, French and Italian accept paid editors (even from for-profit corporate entities) quite openly, whereas some other communities (like English Wikipedia) would view them very unfavorably. So I'm open to ideas on what we might do to advocate for WIR in particular communities. It will be challenging to come up with just one page to capture all that.


I understand, but maybe we do not need to inscribe all precisely and in elaborate, rather point in direction of that 'in Residence' is not only about financial  relations (even art residencies range from paid to those you have to pay)...rather - as WREN is supporting each other and being productive, informative and inspirational in novel ways. Anyone want to take on this together? I can commit to writing a lot on comparisons with art residencies as well experienced on it.


Here's a talk from 2014 Wikimania that discussed some of these dynamics, and also had some case studies of paid editing:


Cool. Will check out with recording https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc9YgFm2eso


Anyone else?





On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 9:15 PM Željko Blaće <zblace@mi2.hr> wrote:

Dear All -
Last December 6th special meeting event

on Wikipedia and NFT with a few invited guests

made me think we could do meeting that are relevant

beyond our immediate scope and be more visible...

...but also last week I was almost topic-banned

on HR Wikipedia (Croatian) as none of the Admins knew
what Wikimedian in Residence is and were thinking

it is either paid editing or problematic self-promotion 

(when I was actually unemployed :-)))

So after a successful event and a monthly HR drama,
I am thinking what can we do better to increase

WiR and WREN visibility on Wikipedia and Wikimedia.


For people coming from most of the arts the notion of

artist-in-residence is super familiar and easy to relate to,

but average Wikipedian (if there is such thing)

has very few chances to come across this term

as well as to grasp what Wikimedian in Residence is.

Only 27 Wikipedia instances have articles on WiRs


What could be good strategies to change that?

15 years ago (so we missed it by a week)
on December 13, 2006 we got this text as a start


Maybe we can draft something short quickly today

and just pass it on later in the day to Wikimedia-L

and potentially to the DIFF Blog of WMF?




Best Z

Wren mailing list -- wren@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wren-leave@lists.wikimedia.org



-Andrew Lih

Author of The Wikipedia Revolution

US National Archives Citizen Archivist of the Year (2016)

Knight Foundation grant recipient - Wikipedia Space (2015)

Wikimedia DC - Outreach and GLAM

Previously: professor of journalism and communications, American University, Columbia University, USC


Wren mailing list -- wren@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wren-leave@lists.wikimedia.org