Thanks for this, Galder. It's clear you went the extra mile to make sure
all these issues were addressed and in ways that exceed any education
project I have seen before, and I've been involved with Wikimedia and
education since 2003!
-Andrew
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 12:01 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <
galder158(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
I read this:
On the other side, people who do outreach push too much for results with
lmited understanding of the ecosystem they ask students to interact. I have
met people who ask for "button men" at their initiatives with poor regard
for the real expertise, often overselling what they do. it's not nice to be
treated superficially when you try to explain why a certain topic is not
relevant or why sending a ticket is appropriate for a certain image. If you
are too focused on "your stuff", I wouldn't be surprised if you don't
care
for a functional working environment as well. You just expect someone else
to build it for you.
And I want to talk about what we did in this situation, and why the
environment triggers frustration.
First, when the professors came with the idea of creating multimedia
contents for making richer Wikipedia articles, we focused on some issues:
the content should be as neutral as possible, all the content should be
original and the music used should be cc-by-(sa). We explained this idea
twice in two different meetings, first with one professor, then with all
the team that was going to guide the students.
Second, we stressed on this ideas with students during a four hours (four
hours!) workshop. We gave them examples of bad content, we gave them
examples of good content, we encouraged them to use only free sources and
we explained how to work on Commons and why the content should be there.
Third, the professors spent three more weeks with them, helping develop
the video, how to make good recordins, how to make them more neutral (what
to focus on), and how to find material that could be reused.
Fourth, I went again with them to a four hour class where we revised all
the materials, we certified that all the music was free, we checked all the
illustrations and we asked not to upload those that were of poor value or
had any doubt about their copyright status.
Fifth, we helped students to find suitable songs for their videos, how to
tag that the files were derivative works if applicable using Commons
uploading system, how to fill everything if they were using video2commons
and how to use the materials on wikipedia. It was my fourth morning with
the students, and the third one dedicated to Commons. We also explained
again what was the difference between free access and free license, because
some of the students didn't get why we were not allowing them to upload
some content.
Sixth, yes, there is a sixth, I spent another morning with the professors
evaluating all the materials from a wikimedian point of view, talking about
their quality and designing improvements for next year. Students then
presented their works to a broader audience at the University.
Seventh, students went on vacations. At this moment an admin decided that
all the previous work was not valid and claimed that it should be DW.
Period. And then I noticed that some stuff was missing when I started to
write a report about the experience for the Outreach Newsletter. And as I
have followed all the steps, I have a dedicated place at the Outreach
Dashboard where I can track everything this students created, uploaded or
edited:
https://outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org/courses/HUHEZI/Ikus-entzunezko_komuni…
. This content is public and can be easily reached in our dedicated
education programme portal:
https://eu.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atari:Hezkuntza
It should be maybe few days spent with them explaining how Commons work,
what licenses are suitable and why free content matters. If you feel so,
then I should explain that we have created two videotutorials, a leaflet
and a small book explaining everything we were explaining direcdtly to
them, so if they had any doubt they could read them. And we gave a copy to
each student, so they could have a guidance. And we also gave them a direct
e-mail so they could ask for copyrights issues: two of them did it and we
gave them some answers.
Cheers
Galder
________________________________
From: Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org> on behalf of
Alessandro Marchetti via Wikimedia-l <wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: Monday, May 13, 2019 5:30 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Dispute between Common and Outreach
We have dozens of cross project brainstorming off-wiki. But the general
feeling is often that if you encourage the social dynamics of a platform in
a way that people who like to "play cops" are a key actor... when this is
established there is no point in creating sophisticated or efficient tools,
because as long as they force such people to work in a different way they
will kinda oppose them.
For example, many time I find a deleted file I could spot dozens of
similar in the very same category and the few times I have asked the user
who deleted it or ask the deletion, I could feel he had no real interested
in completing the job. The fight for copyright is not a goal, it's a just a
mean for him. He probably has fun cherry-picking one random file, with no
consistent approach. So how many times for example I found files from the
USA where there is no FOP for statues deleted maybe if uploaded by the
European users but not by the American ones. Because of course if you did
delete them all (as you should), enwikipedia community will notice and it
will be a bigger deal.. it's a problem when all images of a monument
disappear, right? So let's delete some random files, and vanish when
somebody point out the other ones, just to repeat the same pattern
somewhere else after a while. That's why it's so easy to find en-N users
from the USA who have limited clue with rule of FOP. Now, the users who
perform this type of deletion pattern will dislike any tools or preference
who simply encourage to do it in a consistent way... they are expert and
they know how categories work, if they don't complete the job is probably
because they don't want to. If we get close to the issue, we manage to get
around some "the newbes will misuse it" or "its a delicate matter", I
guess
the "good faith " clause will appear.
So, we keep a random patrolling and retropatrolling on this issue, which
means poor overall copyright literacy, angry users because of the
procedural incoherence and in the end a huge backlog (since the bulk of the
files remain there). Take this dynamics, in other fields, with different
nuances, multiplied by a dozens of different legal and workload scenarios
and voilà. You have one of the reason of our current situation.
I guess there is no tool which can fix that, it's just the way a community
really wants to be. Tools can help to encourage people to think differently
of course, but I fear that would be a strong resistance.
A. M:
Il lunedì 13 maggio 2019, 16:56:49 CEST, Samuel Klein <
meta.sj(a)gmail.com> ha scritto:
Ditto. But did not have the impression that this was {a, the} pressing
need.
Perhaps we also need better ways to highlight workload overloads (and
continue conversations about them through time, rather than sporadic
proposals of specific implementations that can easily fail) to stimulate
cross-project brainstorming to solve the most pressing problems of scale
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 6:02 AM James Heilman <jmh649(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I have a fairly good understanding of copyright.
Deal with a fair bit of
copyright issues occurring via paid editing and flicker washing of images
and would be happy to do admin work around that if the Commons community
was interested.
James
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 4:00 AM Paulo Santos Perneta <
paulosperneta(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Wikimedia project communities in general seem to
be quite stagnant, if
not
> declining, apart from Wikidata, which is and always will be a whole
> different case. In the case of Commons it was already very much as it
is
> now when I joined in 2009. I always found it
a very pleasant place, but
> overtime I understood I was the exception there, and most people had
bad
> experiences. And it is as Yann has shown
there, it's a few sysops
running
the
entire show almost alone, not because they want that, but because
nobody else helps with that.
IMO the problem is not with the existing sysops, but because people in
general do not feel attracted to copyright and other similar minucious
stuff which marks everyday life in Commons. And, without that knowledge
it
> is pointless, if not counterproductive, to place a candidacy to sysop.
No
> idea what the solution could be, but it
certainly is not blaming
Commons
> and the existing sysops. If more people was
interested in copyright,
less
> mistakes would be happening in Commons as
well. Whatever the solution
is,
it
probably passes by that.
Best,
Paulo
Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga <galder158(a)hotmail.com> escreveu no dia
segunda,
> 13/05/2019 à(s) 07:09:
>
> > A good question to ask would be why the admin group is not growing.
And
>
maybe (maybe) we can find a common answer to both problems pointed
here.
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> >
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> > Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
James Heilman
MD, CCFP-EM, Wikipedian
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Samuel Klein @metasj w:user:sj +1 617 529 4266
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
-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
---
Email: andrew(a)andrewlih.com
WEB: