[Wikimedia Brasil] people are knowledge

Quarta Agosto 10 00:04:57 UTC 2011

Pois é, é exatamente esse o ponto atual da discussão: criar uma forma de 
legitimar as entrevistas a ponto de que elas sejam consideradas fontes 
fiáveis. E um dos pontos (não o único) é saber se as gravações são 
verdadeiras. Em uma sugestão meio brainstorming, sugeri a partir das 
políticas atuais (ou seja, sem ter que criar ou modificar nenhuma 
política atual) o uso do Wikinews para as entrevistas, usando a política 
da reportagem original. Conteúdo original é atualmente proibido na 
Wikipedia, mas não no Wikinews. Seguiria aquela linha do trabalho que 
você vem fazendo aqui no Planalto. Além disso, podia-se utilizar o 
conceito de proofreading, como fazemos no Wikisource, em que um outro 
editor confere se a transcrição corresponde à gravação original, 
carregada lá no Commons. Se isso não for o bastante, tem a política de 
credenciamento, pela qual somente editores já experientes, com notícias 
publicadas e avaliadas pela comunidade, poderiam ter esse caráter de 
reportagem original como fonte fiável. O Achal, que é um pesquisador 
experiente, foi contratado para fazer as tais entrevistas, e esse papel 
seria feito pelo tal repórter credenciado.

Estão achando que eu estou querendo dar "enganar" a [[:w:pt:WP:NPI|Nada 
de pesquisa inédita]], mas francamente estava apenas pensando de maneira 
geral, sem me restringir à Wikipedia. O problema é suportar conteúdo não 
publicado, e enciclopédia não é o que vem à minha cabeça para essa 
finalidade. Tive a oportunidade de ver o vídeo, de assistir à 
apresentação do Achal e trocar umas ideias com ele. E mantenho minha 
opinião. Acho que o mais apropriado é publicar o áudio no Commons, com a 
transcrição no Wikinews, adotar todas as providências necessárias para 
tornar a entrevista fiável e então usá-la como fonte para a Wikipedia. 
Se a Folha faz a mesma entrevista e publica (vejam só: sem alterar o 
conteúdo, trazendo apenas a transcrição da entrevista - fonte primária), 
nós aceitamos como fonte. Por que com o Wikinews não pode? E também não 
defendo que todo o conteúdo do Wikinews sirva, mas apenas aquele que 
cumprir todas as exigências atuais (WP:FF, WP:V), que pode ser 
identificado por uma categoria (transcluída de predef ou não), do tipo 
"Reportagens fiáveis" ou algo que o valha.

Bem, opiniões são bem vindas, e inclusive podem ser lançadas diretamente 
na página do projeto:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research_talk:Oral_Citations

CB

Em 09/08/2011 19:44, nevio carlos de alarcão escreveu:
>
>     Once routinely questioned about its reliability --- what do you
>     mean, anyone can edit it? --- the site is now used every month by
>     upwards of 400 million people worldwide.
>
>
> Desculpe, mas o fato de ser usado por mais de 400 milhões de pessoas 
> não significa ser menos questionado sobre sua confiabilidade.
>
>     ...recordings were then uploaded and linked to the article as
>     sources, and suddenly an article that seems like it could be a
>     personal riff looks a bit more academic.
>
> E considero os argumentos do Achal bastante questionáveis. O filme já 
> foi divulgado aqui na lista - Gostei do trabalho. Mas seria preciso 
> uma forma de garantir a veracidade de gravações. Se elas fossem 
> provenientes de broadcast seriam mais aceitáveis. Cairíamos na questão 
> do poder que ele levanta - e aceita.
>
> Att
>
>
> Em 9 de gosto de 2011 18:27, Carolina Rossini <crossini em wikimedia.org 
> <mailto:crossini em wikimedia.org>> escreveu:
>
>
>                 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=wikimania&st=cse
>                 <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=wikimania&st=cse>
>
>
>
>                 LINK BY LINK
>
>
>       When Knowledge Isn't Written, Does It Still Count?
>
>
>                 ByNOAM COHEN
>                 <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/c/noam_cohen/index.html?inline=nyt-per>
>
>
>                 Published: August 7, 2011
>
>       * RECOMMEND
>       * TWITTER
>       * SIGN IN TO E-MAIL
>       * PRINT
>         <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html?sq=wikimania&st=cse&scp=1&pagewanted=print>
>      *
>
>         REPRINTS
>         <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=wikimania&st=cse#>
>       * SHARE
>         <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html?scp=1&sq=wikimania&st=cse#>
>
>     <http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&opzn&page=www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/business/media&pos=Frame4A&sn2=66350d29/867aca44&sn1=ea650d0d/22525d0a&camp=foxsearch2011_emailtools_1629904c_nyt5&ad=MMMM_120x60&goto=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efoxsearchlight%2Ecom%2Fmarthamarcymaymarlene%2F>
>
>     HAIFA, Israel
>
>     "MAKING fun ofWikipedia
>     <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/wikipedia/index.html?inline=nyt-org>is
>     so 2007," a French journalist said recently to Sue Gardner, the
>     executive director of the foundation that runs the Wikipedia project.
>
>     And so Ms. Gardner, in turn, told an auditorium full of Wikipedia
>     contributors and supporters on Thursday in Haifa, Israel, the host
>     city for the seventh annual Wikimania conference, where meetings
>     and presentations focus on the world's most used, and perhaps
>     least understood, online reference work.
>
>     Once routinely questioned about its reliability --- what do you
>     mean, anyone can edit it? --- the site is now used every month by
>     upwards of 400 million people worldwide. But with influence and
>     respect come responsibility, and lately Wikipedia has
>     beencriticized from without and within
>     <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/business/media/31link.html>for
>     reflecting a Western, male-dominated mindset similar to the
>     perspective behind the encyclopedias it has replaced.
>
>     Seeing Wikipedia as The Man, in so many words, is so 2011.
>
>     And that's a problem for an encyclopedia that wants to grow. Some
>     critics of Wikipedia believe that the whole Western tradition of
>     footnotes and sourced articles needs to be rethought if Wikipedia
>     is going to continue to gather converts beyond its current
>     borders. And that, in turn, invites an entirely new debate about
>     what constitutes knowledge in different parts of the world and how
>     a Western institution like Wikipedia can capitalize on it.
>
>     Achal Prabhala, an adviser to Ms. Gardner's Wikimedia Foundation
>     who lives and writes in Bangalore, India, has made perhaps the
>     most trenchant criticism in a video project, "People are Knowledge
>     <http://vimeo.com/26469276>," that he presented in Haifa (along
>     with its clunky subtitle, "Exploring alternative methods of
>     citation for Wikipedia").
>
>     The film, which was made largely with a $20,000 grant from the
>     Wikimedia Foundation, spends time showing what has been lost to
>     Wikipedia because of stickling rules of citation and verification.
>     If Wikipedia purports to collect the "sum of all human knowledge,"
>     in the words of one of its founders, Jimmy Wales, that, by
>     definition, means more than printed knowledge, Mr. Prabhala said.
>
>     In the case of dabba kali, a children's game played in the Kerala
>     state of India, there was a Wikipedia article in the local
>     language, Malayalam, that included photos, a drawing and a
>     detailed description of the rules, but no sources to back up what
>     was written. Other than, of course, the 40 million people who
>     played it as children.
>
>     There is no doubt, he said, that the article would have been
>     deleted from English Wikipedia if it didn't have any sources to
>     cite. Those are the rules of the game, and those are the rules he
>     would like to change, or at least bend, or, if all else fails,
>     work around.
>
>     "There is this desire to grow Wikipedia in parts of the world," he
>     said, adding that "if we don't have a more generous and expansive
>     citation policy, the current one will prove to be a massive
>     roadblock that you literally can't get past. There is a very
>     finite amount of citable material, which means a very finite
>     number of articles, and there will be no more."
>
>     Mr. Prabhala, 38, who grew up in India and then attended American
>     universities, has been an activist on issues of intellectual
>     property, starting with the efforts in South Africa to free up
>     drugs that treat H.I.V. In the film, he gives other examples of
>     subjects --- an alcohol produced in a village, Ga-Sabotlane, in
>     Limpopo, South Africa, and a popular hopscotch-type children's
>     game, tshere-tshere --- beyond print documentation and therefore
>     beyond Wikipedia's true-and-tried method.
>
>     There are whole cultures, he said, that have little to no printed
>     material to cite as proof about the way life is lived.
>
>     "Publishing is a system of power and I mean that in a completely
>     pleasant, accepting sense," he said mischievously. "But it leaves
>     out people."
>
>     But Mr. Prabhala offers a solution: he and the video's directors,
>     Priya Sen and Zen Marie, spoke with people in African and Indian
>     villages either in person or over the phone and had them describe
>     basic activities. These recordings were then uploaded and linked
>     to the article as sources, and suddenly an article that seems like
>     it could be a personal riff looks a bit more academic.
>
>     For example, in hisinterview with a South African villager
>     <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:PeopleAreKnowledge_Mogkope_Interview2.ogg>who
>     explained how to make the alcoholic drink, morula, she repeatedly
>     says that it is best if she demonstrates the process. When the
>     fruit is ready, said the villager, Philipine Moremi, according to
>     the project's transcript of her phone conversation, "we pry them
>     open. We are going to show you how it is done. Once they are
>     peeled, we seal them to ferment and then we drink." The idea of
>     treating personal testimony as a source for Wikipedia is still
>     controversial, and reflects the concerns that dominated the
>     encyclopedia project six years ago, when arguably its very
>     existence was threatened.
>
>     After a series of hoaxes, culminating in a Wikipedia article in
>     2005 that maligned the newspaper editor John Seigenthaler for no
>     discernible reason other than because a Wikipedia contributor
>     could, the site tried to ensure that every statement could be
>     traced to a source.
>
>     Then there is the rule "no original research," which was meant to
>     say that Wikipedia doesn't care if you are writing about the
>     subway station you visit every day, find someone who has written
>     reliably on the color of the walls there.
>
>     "The natural thing is getting more and more accurate, locking down
>     articles, raising the bar on sources," said Andrew Lih, an
>     associate professor of journalism at the University of Southern
>     California, who was an early contributor to Wikipedia and has
>     written a history of its rise. "Isn't it great we have so many
>     texts online?"
>
>     But what works for the most developed societies, he said, won't
>     necessarily work for others. "Lots of knowledge is not
>     Googleable," he said, "and is not in a digital form."
>
>     Mr. Lih said that he could see the Wikipedia project suddenly
>     becoming energized by the process of documenting cultural
>     practices around the world, or down the street.
>
>     Perhaps Mr. Prabhala's most challenging argument is that by being
>     text-focused, and being locked into the Encyclopedia Britannica
>     model, Wikipedia risks being behind the times.
>
>     An 18-year-old is comfortable using "objects of trust that have
>     been created on the Internet," he said, and "Wikipedia isn't
>     taking advantage of that." And, he added, "it is quite possible
>     that for the 18-year-old of today that Wikipedia looks like his
>     father's project. Or the kind of thing his father might be
>     interested in."
>
>     Ouch.
>
>
>
>     -- 
>     *Carolina Rossini*
>     Brazil Catalyst Project
>     /Wikimedia Foundation/
>     +1 415 839 6885 x6747
>     crossini em wikimedia.org <mailto:carolrossiniatwiki em gmail.com>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     WikimediaBR-l mailing list
>     WikimediaBR-l em lists.wikimedia.org
>     <mailto:WikimediaBR-l em lists.wikimedia.org>
>     https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediabr-l
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> {+}Nevinho
> Venha para o Movimento Colaborativo http://sextapoetica.com.br !!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> WikimediaBR-l mailing list
> WikimediaBR-l em lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediabr-l

-------------- Próxima Parte ----------
Um anexo em HTML foi limpo...
URL: http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikimediabr-l/attachments/20110809/5e779e25/attachment-0001.htm 