#glamwiki

[inspofromancientworld]

Baskets and Basket Weaving

By No machine-readable author provided. Aineias assumed (based on copyright claims). - No machine-readable source provided. Own work assumed (based on copyright claims)., CC BY-SA 3.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=868046

Prior to the advent of weaving or spinning cordage to make nets, people used tree bark to carry thing. These containers were not particularly durable due to lacking flexibility and were limited in size that they could be made. Baskets can be made without spinning, but do require knowledge of weaving. Baskets are flexible and can be made waterproof by being woven very tightly and out of the right materials. These properties likely lead to them to be widely used prior to settled agriculture and the development of pottery.

By This image was provided to Wikimedia Commons by Biblioteca Museu Víctor Balaguer as part of an ongoing cooperative GLAMWIKI project with Amical Wikimedia. The artifact represented in the image is part of the permanent collection of Biblioteca Museu Víctor Balaguer. - Biblioteca Museu Víctor Balaguer, CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=37904574

Basket weaving can be done out of many types of material such a reeds, vines, grasses, and long narrow leaves. They can be woven in any shape that is needed and by using a variety of materials or dying the materials that are used, various designs can be woven in to the basket. The basket can be worked in a spiral or from a base around staves or ribs. This flexibility allows baskets to serve many purposes, come in many sizes, and reflect a culture and a weaver's skill.

Source: https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/archaeologists-uncover-9500-year-old-woven-baskets-and-europes-oldest-sandals-180983001/

The oldest basket that we have found dates between 10,000-12,000 years ago, which predates pottery by almost 4000 years. Basket weaving probably dates back nearly as far as weaving in general, which dates as far back as 25,000 years BCE and is widespread among indigenous populations around the world, but because it is done with organic materials, very few have survived. The oldest that have survived were found in Faiyum in Egypt. In places like Tell Saby Abyad, indirect evidence of basketry, such as impressions in mud or bitumen that have been preserved.

Source https://www.antiquities.org.il/t/item_en.aspx?q=nahal&CurrentPageKey=82_1

Nahal Hemar Cave, near the Dead Sea, held a lot of well preserved organic items, probably because of the items were covered in a type of glue and plaster that dated to about 8310-8110 years ago. Among these were some evidences of basketry as well as netting made of plant materials that would have other wise decomposed.

[dans-la-foret]

Cet APM, je présenterai les ateliers de contribution de @bib2strasbourg_ et pourquoi il est important de les développer en bibliothèque publique #glamwiki @wikimedia (à Archives nationales) https://www.instagram.com/p/BxzDVIRo9tO/?igshid=139lq4318pcym

[thedigitalmuseum]

Martin Fell: Wikipedia projects aren’t built in a day – Roman coinage on Commons Martin Fell, Digital Team Leader, York Museums Trust UK Museums on the Web, 2016

York Museums Trust (YMT) has run two successful – jointly funded – Wikipedia residency programmes looking specifically at the sustainable re-use of openly licensed digital content on Wikipedia. Legacy and sustainability were the two most important issues investigated during our collaborative work with Wikimedia UK and we found there was no silver bullet for achieving either. However, our latest project – devised and led by numismatics curator Andrew Woods – condenses much of what we have learnt during YMT’s two-years of GLAMwiki work and gives a cost-benefit analysis of committing time to working on the world’s most popular encyclopedia. It investigates both the digital ground work that needs to be undertaken as well as the impact Wikipedia projects have on curatorial time, the joys of working with enthusiastic volunteers and the clarity that comes from effective reporting of successes and failures.

[wikinlw]

About 250 Welsh Museums and Galleries added to #wikidata over the weekend bringing the total number of GLAMs to over 750! I've updated the map to include links to venue websites and to exclude institutions that have closed https://t.co/irNkM3Xgz1 #findingGLAMs @glamwiki https://t.co/gskR9IJLxF

About 250 Welsh Museums and Galleries added to #wikidata over the weekend bringing the total number of GLAMs to over 750! I've updated the map to include links to venue websites and to exclude institutions that have closedhttps://t.co/irNkM3Xgz1 #findingGLAMs @glamwiki pic.twitter.com/gskR9IJLxF

— Jason Evans (@WIKI_NLW) February 24, 2020

via Twitter https://twitter.com/WIKI_NLW

[kaythaney]

Join my team @Wikimedia! We’re thrilled to be creating this role entirely focused on underrepresented + marginalized knowledge in a global context. An important step in a more expansive and equitable direction for supporting the @glamwiki community. https://t.co/cNhM2PJmZv

— Ben Vershbow (@subsublibrary) July 10, 2018

[museumstudies]

QR codes, UK

UK's National Archives now working with Wikipedia UK in the GLAMwiki (galleries, libraries, archives museums) project - http://t.co/gIthFF1n

[hstryqt]

Please read the above link prior to reading my admittedly defensive reply below : ).

------------

So, as someone who is at once an emerging museum professional (and technologist) and a Wikipedian...

While I absolutely agree with all of Jasper's points, (in fact they have me very excited!) I do have to make the very obvious observation that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and that is very different from a museum. This basic definition (Wikipedia as an encyclopedia) is the reason that Wikipedia falters in all three of the characteristics that Jasper mentions (brevity, humor, and passion). Though I can't fault him for choosing Wikipedia to frame his points - it's a great way to illustrate what makes museums special - they have the power to NOT just be an encyclopedia. They should not be! They should take advantage of the fact that they can be brief, passionate, and humorous, in a world that craves these characteristics. Wikipedia still has a very important role to play -- as a space to present information as neutrally as possible after discussing all points of view on the talk page (and within a global community.) Museums, in fact, have the power to not be neutral. While many still strive for neutrality, isn't it those museums that aren't that are all the more intriguing? Embrace that. (Hey Jasper - I'd love a post on this point... #4 perhaps?? Lack of neutrality?)

All three of these things (brevity, humor, and passion) are extremely important for museums. That doesn't mean that Wikipedia is bad in comparison because it lacks them. And I'm not meaning to imply that Jasper is saying Wikipedia is bad, but the very act of comparing the two makes Wikipedia look dim, sad, and irrelevant. This is of course not so. Wikipedia is exciting because of its power to build knowledge collaboratively and its ability to spread and share knowledge on a global scale. One day, it may just be one of the last places to find neutral information, and so be it. 

When it comes to the sometimes painfully long articles, I do want to point out something that Jimmy Wales mentioned on his visit to The Children's Museum this past September. He explained that as Wikipedia has grown, it has started to become inaccessible to children and families - something that he hoped a partnership with the Children's Museum might begin to fix. He suggested that we have a renewed effort to fix the [[Lead]] (or introductory) sections of every article so that they really do reflect the most basic information in a concise way. This is the goal already, but it needs to become the focus. So... it's a mandate :), and one that we're working on.

As someone who quite literally makes a living by piloting projects that incorporate Wikipedia into museums, you'll have to forgive my defensive stance.  I believe that museums do a great job at being museums (but can always do better, especially using many of Jasper's great suggestions throughout his blog.) I also believe that Wikipedia does a great job at being a free and open encyclopedia (but can always do better, which is what I am trying to help with every single day.)  In my job, I bring the museum content to Wikipedia, and I help think of ways to incorporate Wikipedia into the museum. There is a place for both, I think. One can compliment the other. Trying to compare the two... well it's apples and oranges.

Oh and for your reading pleasure: [[What Wikipedia is Not]] (courtesy of Wikipedians)

[museumuse]

I am super belated in posting this, it has been sitting in one of my tabs for almost a week now, but you should definitely read it, and if you don't yet follow hstryqt, you should!

[stierch]

Why Wikipedia Needs Archivists

I thought the curators had all the answers and knew the secrets. Then I hung out with the archivists at the Archives of American Art.

Violet Oakley, Jessie Wilcox Smith, Elizabeth Shippen Green, and Henrietta Cozens, ca. 1901, Violet Oakley papers, Archives of American Art

Little did I think I'd be the Wikipedian in Residence at the Smithsonian's Archives of American Art, hanging out with archivists and picking their brains about all the amazing things they know about the collections. This afternoon I had a chance to do just that, as I met with the archivists team here at AAA.

As I sat down for the discussion, led by Barbara Aikens, Chief of Collections Processing, I felt like I was with old friends. Everyone had input, ideas, and genuine interest in the opportunities behind Wikipedia partnerships and GLAMs. Our brief conversation was an eye opener for me, as they spoke about archival descriptions and the work being done by Daniel Pitti; and most importantly, their desire to make information accessible to the world. That seems to follow in the mission of a similar organization I know.

Barbara spoke about how archivists must remain neutral and seek to deliver "just the facts." While researchers often look to archivists to provide the information to make their research a success, archivists are often overlooked by the non-scholar as a source of information. The team was excited about the possibilities of working with Wikipedians share their collections with the public on a broad level. "This is a way to reach the public, not just a small group of scholars," Barbara said, in regards to the exciting possibilities of archives working with Wikipedia.

It was at that moment when I realized - Wikipedia Needs Archivists.

Why?

They write amazing finding aids. Finding aids that give you the basic details about complex collections that often span decades. They are neutral, to the point, and provide an amazing starting point to write articles. These are found in archives around the world, online.

They want to see collections digitized. This allows the public more access to primary documents for transcription, rarely seen photographs, and better awareness and notability about collections. This means more media and more content for Wikipedians to use.

They want to work with you. The archivists want to share what they know, and show you how to find it - whether they do it online or in person.

They want you to be a better researcher. Many of the archivists I have been working with desire to see better documentation available for Wikipedians on how to be better researchers; i.e. How to use the collections, finding aids, and the people at their fingertips. We're going to make that happen, with a how-to guide for Wikipedians that will encourage us all to become better researchers.

They want the world to know what they are preserving and how to use it so it benefits your work to the utmost.

This brief meeting was vital to my role as a Wikipedian, a researcher, an emerging museum professional, and a Renaissance woman. During my time here at the Archives, and the Smithsonian as a whole, I look forward to exploring working relationships with archivists and making the most use of their knowledge.

I hope the Archives of American Art, and this summer's residency at the National Archives and Records Administration, will encourage archives to consider partnerships with Wikipedia, and encourage them to allow their archivists to shine as evangelists of the dissemination of culture in a place where more and more are seeking information - Wikipedia.

[metrolibrarycouncil]

Closing the Gender Gap in Wikipedia Editors and Content

This post is brought to us by Dorothy Howard, METRO's Wikpedian-in-Residence and Open Data Fellow.

In the wake of the widespread media attention on the gender and multicultural gaps in Wikipedia, organized projects online and off have mobilized new and experienced editors from cultural and gender backgrounds.

All too often, articles that castigate gender-based Wikipedia editing practices fail to mention the women and men working to address this problem. The activists behind these projects have organized Wikipedia editing events, campaigns, and education programs focused on adding content to articles on women and increasing the number of women editors.

Here are a few projects working to solve the gender gap on Wikipedia:

WikiProject Women’s History helps Wikipedians who write articles on women’s history organize their editing activities. Wikipedia:WikiProject Feminism has a significant number of members and organizes the editing of articles on women’s rights and feminism.

There was a Global Women Wikipedia Write-In (#GWWI) on April 26th of this year, organized by the broader efforts of the Post-Colonial Digital Humanities project. The project builds on the #tooFEW: Feminists Engage in Wikipedia edit-a-thon that was held globally in March.

Cathy Moran Hajo (@CMHajo), a scholar on the Margaret Sanger Papers at the NYU Archives and Public History Program, wrote an interesting blog post about the coverage of Margaret Sanger on Wikipedia. This type of lit review of content on Wikipedia is a useful medium to help us consider gaps in coverage. 

The FOSS Outreach Program for Women (@fossopw) is run by the Wikimedia Foundation. It provides stipends for women to work on Wikipedia projects, though generally on the technical side. 

In this course at RISD, students were asked to research, write, post, and track responses to an article on women's history in Wikipedia. 

On Tuesday October 15th, Ada Lovelace Day celebrated women in the history of technology. Many regional edit-a-thons improved articles on women in the history of technology and science, including events at London and Harvard. The full list of activities can be found at the related WikiProject page. 

The Wikimedia site has also addressed the gender gap in a page with links and updated statistics, and the email (press@wikimedia.org) can be used if you are a member of the press interested in the gender gap.

Finally, there are also several pages that aggregate information on the articles and research written about gender and diversity concerns on Wikipedia.

The WikiWomen's Collaborative (@WikiWomen) is a volunteer project that publishes articles, a blog, and other resources to provide education on the gender gap and support of women's editing projects. 

The Wikipedia Teahouse is a project to help make new users more accustomed to editing and participating in the community and has a special focus on encouraging women's participation and mentorship. 

These projects are another reason to join in the Wikipedia community and get editing, and all are are open to beginners and advanced editors alike. 

[wikinlw]

All Welsh museums/galleries and their buildings are now modelled as separate items in #Wikidata. Nearly 100 museums in @cadwcymru listed buildings. https://t.co/IR2Jb1m54z #findingGLAMs #glamwiki https://t.co/iojnbayaYP

All Welsh museums/galleries and their buildings are now modelled as separate items in #Wikidata. Nearly 100 museums in @cadwcymru listed buildings.https://t.co/IR2Jb1m54z#findingGLAMs #glamwiki pic.twitter.com/iojnbayaYP

— Jason Evans (@WIKI_NLW) February 22, 2020

via Twitter https://twitter.com/WIKI_NLW

[hstryqt]

Terence Eden, the developer of QRpedia, gives a fabulous Ignite talk at Over the Air 2011 in Bletchley Park, UK.

Featuring yours truly, The Children's Museum of Indianapolis, Derby Museum, the British Museum, and the UK National Archives. (Oh, and Jimmy Wales too.)

[grenzenderbezahlung]

Glamwiki-Konferenz-London

Crossposting mit dem Beitrag in der Wikipedia.

Vom 12. bis zum 14. April 2013 fand die Glamwiki 2013-Konferenz im Konferenzzentrum der British Library London statt. Aber bevor ich jetzt von der Konferenz erzähle, vielleicht für den Anfang noch mal drei Worte, was Glam ist: Glam kommt aus dem englischen Sprachraum und bedeutet Galerien, Libraries (Bücherein), Archive und Museen, kurz: Kulturinstitutionen im weiteren Sinne. Das sind die Institutionen, mit denen Wikipedia/Wikimedia gerne zusammenarbeiten würde, und um deren Aufmerksamkeit Wikim/pedia schon länger buhlt. Mittlerweile kommen wir aber dahin, dass auch Institutionen deutlich interessierter sind, und gerne „irgendwie in Wikipedia“ wären. In der Praxis gibt es allerdings noch sehr große kulturelle Unterschiede zwischen Wikipedia und Wikimedia und den Glams. Auch das, was Glams wollen, das was die ganzen Wikimedias wollen, und dem was die Wikipedianer wollen, liegt zum Teil noch sehr deutlich auseinander. Die Vorstellungen der Gruppen sind nicht unbedingt deckungsgleich, und auch die Gruppen in sich sind reichlich heterogen. Trotzden aber gibt es auf allen Seiten Protagonisten, die diese Zusammenarbeit verstärken wollen. Die Protagonisten sind international mittlerweile recht gut über Mailinglisten, ein Glam Outreach Wiki und auch über persönliche Kontakte vernetzt. Diese Kontakte werden unter anderem bei Konferenzen bestärkt. Die Konferenz im April in der British Library sollte nun wiederum sowohl Wikip/medianer als auch Leute aus den Glams zusammenbringen, um einen gemeinsamen Erfahrungsaustausch zu gewährleisten. Für mich war es eine praktische Gelegenheit, mal die gesamte internationale Glam-Szene auf einem Haufen live zu erleben, mitzukriegen was der Stand ist, wovon sie reden, was Ziele und Probleme sind, und wer in dem Bereich überhaupt aktiv ist. Neben mir waren aus dem weit gefassten de.wikipedia-Universum zB noch Beat Estermann, Christoph Braun, Barbara Fischer, Ruben von WMAT, Daniel Mietchen, Stepro und Jens Best da. Dazu noch jede Menge Wikimedianer, diverse Wikipedianer, und eine ganze Menge Leute, die aus den Glams kamen - allerdings wiederum oft Technik- oder PR-Leute, weniger die Entscheidungsträger oder diejenigen in Glams, die inhaltlich arbeiten. Ein Großteil der Teilnehmer war tatsächlich Berufs-Glam und Hobby-Wikipedianer. Die Anwesenden kamen vor allem aus Europa, besonders die Niederländer waren sowohl was ihre Anzahl als auch die inhaltliche Qualität ihrer Beiträge anging, herausragend. Briten waren natürlich auch viele da, deren Beiträge waren aber qualitativ deutlich weiter gestreut als die Beiträge von der Südküste der Nordsee. Es gab aber auch weltweit angereiste. So unterhielt ich mich zum Beispiel in einer Pause mit einer ursprünglich Deutschen, die mittlerweile mittelbar finanziert durch Google an einer Uni in Hong Kong zu Freier Kultur forscht. Das scheint in Asien aber ein eher schwieriges Konzept: Freie Kultur als Idee ist da wohl noch unbekannter als hier. Auf die Frage in die Runde in einer Veranstaltung, wieviel Anwesende Urlaub nehmen mussten um zu kommen, hat sich soweit ich sehen konnte etwa ein Drittel bis die Hälfte der Anwesenden gemeldet. Die Konferenz diente vor allem der Kontaktpflege. Was die inhaltlichen Aspekte anging, wurde mir bis zum Ende nicht so ganz klar, um es jetzt eher eine Veranstaltung war, bei der Wikip/medianer um Glams werben, oder aber ob es um echten Erfahrungsaustausch ging, aber vermutlich war es irgendwie beides gleichzeitig. Auch das Verhältnis "zur Community" war etwas eigentümöich: zum einen die manchmal explizite, oft implizite, Distanzierung von all' den komischen anstrengenden Menschen, die da Online rumlaufen; zum anderen das Gefühl, dass hier die eigentliche Community ist. Selten nur ergab der WMDE-Spruch von "den Communitys" so viel Sinn wie hier: Glammies sind eine Gruppe von Leuten, die mittlerweile sehr anders organisiert sind als die Kerncommunities, die international vernetzt sind, und die auch langsam und beständig daran arbeiten, sich mit externen Akteuren zu vernetzen.

Das ist eine Community im Wikip/media-Umfeld, die aber deutlich anders funktioniert als die Leute, die Artikel schreiben, in der Eingangskontrolle agieren und sich selten mal zum Stammtisch treffen. Was die "Professionalisierung der Wikipedia" und das Herauslösen aus einem reinen Hobbyprojekt angeht, ist Glam die Avantgarde.

So die Konferenz allgemein. Es war ja das erste mal, dass ich die Nicht-deutsche Glam-Bewegung tatsächlich in Person gesehen habe, und so insgesamt waren meine Eindrücke doch eher gemischt. Ein paar sehr fitte und interessante Leute (Andrew Gray, Maarten Brinkerink, ein paar Leute bei denen ich mich ernsthaft Frage, welches Chapter die freiwillig auf die Menschheit loslässt, eindrucksvolle Menschen beispielsweise vom Smithsonian und vom Rijksmuseum Amsterdam: die Eindrücke waren wild gemischt.

Inhaltlich waren meine Eindrücke auch durchaus gemischt. Gerade die werbenden Talks waren teilweise von deutlich verbesserungsfähiger Qualität. Wäre ich ein Glam, hätten diese Veranstaltungen mich eher abgeschreckt. Trotzdem auch - das mag auch eine persönliche Sache sein: Veranstaltungen auf denen sich alle Beteiligten andauernd versichern, wie toll sie sich gegenseitig finden, und wie unfassbar wichtig sie sind, sind nicht so mein Ding. Die Veranstaltungen der Glams selber waren sehenswert. Michael Edson vom Smithsonian Institute dichtete sehr sehenswert über die Befreiung der Museen. Lizzy Jongman vom Rijksmuseum Amsterdam wiederum war sprachlich nicht ganz so eindrucksvoll, dafür aber inhaltlich wesentlich bestimmter. Die hat ein langes ausführliches Plädoyer dafür und darüber gehalten, warum das Rijksmuseum seine Sammlung unter freier Lizenz in höchstmöglicher Auflösung ins Netz lädt, und was sie auf ihrer Website mit den Bildern machen. Da musste ich dann ja fast ein bisschen weinen als ich an den traurigen Zustand von Commons dachte, und fragte mich, ob "wir" (als Wikipedia/Wikimedia) den Museen wirklich was zu bieten haben. Jongma hat natürlich am Ende pflichtschuldigst auch Wikimedia und Wikipedia gelobt und für wichtig erklärt. Aber so die leuchtenden Augen hatte sie eher bei den Wörtern Pinterest und Europeana.   Die Wikip/medianer waren vor allem sehenswert, wenn sie etwas inhaltsreicher wurden. Hier möchte ich ja besonders den Talk von Maarten Brinkerink  hervorheben, der sich mal ernsthaft Gedanken macht ob und wie man den Erfolg einer Glam-Kooperation eigentlich messen kann. Das Interessiert sowohl die Glams als auch die Wikimedia-Organisationen, und die vorhandenen Meßmethoden stehen da alle noch sehr am Anfang: außer den reinen Aufrufstatistiken lässt sich kaum etwas herausfinden.

Projektweise für mich natürlich besonders spannend: der Vortrag "Professional GLAM staffers on Wikipedia", der sich dann aber letztlich mehr mit den sehr grundlegenden Fragen auseinandersetzte, wie man die Staffers überhaup zum editieren bringt - weniger damit, was eigentlich passiert, wenn sie professionell editieren. (Natürlich außer dem Hinweis: schreibt nicht über Euch selbst]).

Ergiebiger war da der Workshop "Finding the Community" ganz am Ende, bei dem Sarah Stierch (mit dezenter Assistenz durch Andrew Gray) erklärt, wo man die Community findet. Spannend hier auch: "die Community" sind nicht nur die Leute, die schon Community, sondern auch die Externen Freundinnen und Freunde des Museums, die durch Glam-Kooperationen zum Editieren angeregt werden. Und hier nach dem Talk die Fragerunde: erste Frage (nicht von mir!): wie sieht es mit Paid Editing aus? Spontane Antwort: "Oh shit". Letztlich gab es die Diskussion, dass das alles sehr kompliziert ist, und man zu dem Thema eigene Konferenzen oder Workshops machen kann.

Aber auch mein Eindruck hat sich bestätigt, dass das der große Große Gorilla im Raum ist, über den bei Glam niemand gerne redet. „Vermeide Interessenkonflikte“ ist Konsens, aber natürlich gibt es viele Formen des Paid Editing, die kein direkter Interessenkonflikt sind und über die man sehr verschiedene Meinungen haben kann. Besonders schön und nachvollziehbar fand‘ ich dann aber auch Sarah. Irgendein Chapter (Israel? Niederlande?) brachte mal wieder ins Spiel, dass ein "Wikipedian in Residence" alles darf außer Artikel editieren. Worauf Sarah dann sinngemäß meinte „Ich bin Wikipedianer. Ihr wollt mir das editieren verbieten? Dann werde ich depressiv.“ Sie hat es aber schöner gesagt, leider habe ich kein Wortprotokoll und ausgerechnet von der Veranstaltung gibt es auch kein Video.

[wikinlw]

The soothing sound of @NLWales data. Definitely worth a listen! #OpenData @glamwiki https://t.co/uNVAvUQQDX

The soothing sound of @NLWales data. Definitely worth a listen! #OpenData @glamwiki https://t.co/uNVAvUQQDX

— Jason Evans (@WIKI_NLW) February 22, 2020

via Twitter https://twitter.com/WIKI_NLW

[wikinlw]

Fantastic News! @parismusees are opening up access to over 100,000 high resolution digital images of iconic artworks https://t.co/75TdIGyBwZ #openaccess #openglam #glamwiki https://t.co/mQEcySYt46

Fantastic News! @parismusees are opening up access to over 100,000 high resolution digital images of iconic artworkshttps://t.co/75TdIGyBwZ#openaccess #openglam #glamwiki pic.twitter.com/mQEcySYt46

— Jason Evans (@WIKI_NLW) January 23, 2020

via Twitter https://twitter.com/WIKI_NLW

[wikinlw]

In Wales, #Wikidata for our public libraries is now used on the landing page for our main libraries website. https://t.co/0kRY1rsDMr #WikidataCon @glamwiki https://t.co/3dJN0lVfML

In Wales, #Wikidata for our public libraries is now used on the landing page for our main libraries website. https://t.co/0kRY1rsDMr#WikidataCon @glamwiki pic.twitter.com/3dJN0lVfML

— Jason Evans (@WIKI_NLW) October 26, 2019

via Twitter https://twitter.com/WIKI_NLW