In my experience with running workshops, I try to get people editing
immediately, in Userspace, as this is generally what they expected, or if
not, they're drawn in by the hands on. The discussions still happen ("if
anyone can edit..") but they're in the context of more experience. I don't
know if this is useful or even comprehensive or up to date, but here's the
page I maintain with help files and other resources for the workshops I
run: https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikipedia_editing_workshopsOn Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 12:39 PM, Paul Foord <foo...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks Gnangarra and Kerry, the policy issues are important as you both > noted - notability, CoI, Copyright/IP. > > A couple of articles that illustrate some of the issues are > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bowman_brothers and > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wallach_brothers > > I am interested in anything to help. The time was suggested by the > Society, Kerry, I will keep in mind what you have written. > > Paul > > > On 24 January 2016 at 18:49, Kerry Raymond <kerry.raym...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Paul >> >> >> >> I talk to local history groups which often have a cross-over with family >> history (often their ancestors lived in that local area). >> >> >> >> I agree with you re Trove obits (I’ve created or expanded articles with >> these many times). The main problem is that the language is a bit flowery >> and needs to be toned down. Also, reflecting the times they were written, >> those obits tend to be somewhat sexist, e.g. it is commonplace to refer to >> the wife/widow and female daughters without any mention of their names (or >> as Mrs Fred Smith), whereas male relatives are generally named. I try to >> ensure that both men and women are described more equally.The obits can >> also very insensitive to Indigenous occupation of Australia prior to >> European settlement. Words like “pioneer” and “discovered” usually need to >> be qualified in that regard, e.g. “European settler” or “discovered by the >> British” or similar. Direct quotes can (in moderation) retain politically >> incorrect language, but I’d tend to do this only a view to making a point >> about the different attitudes of those times. >> >> >> >> I agree entirely that articles written by family historians about family >> members can be problematic. While they often have copious sources and >> those sources are often reliable, those sources tend to be comprehensive by >> their nature (everyone has a birth certificate, everyone buried in a >> cemetery is listed in the burial register, etc). And in country towns, >> everyone gets an obit in the local newspaper. So it’s a situation where the >> general principle of having a lot of reliable sources doesn’t always equal >> being notable. The claim to fame is often pretty marginal – the first >> settler in Smallville, the secretary of the Smallville football club for 30 >> years, etc. I try to divert them into adding these claims into the >> [[Smallville]] article, usually in the History section. It’s also worth >> pointing out that your ancestors are a Conflict of Interest situation and >> that is a good reason not to create articles about them (admittedly it’s >> more a Conflict of Interest in the sense of “your ancestor is more >> interesting to you than to everyone else”). >> >> >> >> Regarding your 1.5 hour timeplan, I would suggest you are overly >> ambitious about how much you can cover in that time. Firstly there are >> always a lot of basic facts about Wikipedia that people want to know and >> need to know. In particular, “if anyone can edit it, isn’t going to be full >> of rubbish?”. You will need to spend a little time explaining how Wikipedia >> manages the vandalism and incorrect information problem. Do not assume that >> they know how Wikipedia “works” behind the scenes, because they don’t. >> Secondly it takes a lot of time to teach them the basics of editing. You >> do not say whether you will be teaching the source editor or the new Visual >> Editor. Having taught using the source editor many times and once with the >> VE, I think people will learn the VE much faster and it’s my plan to teach >> the VE going forward. There are some gotchas to teaching the VE – you can’t >> edit a Talk page with VE, you never want them to open an infobox (they will >> be exposed to source editing) and just about every piece of documentation >> in Wikipedia assumes you are using the source editor L BUT they will be >> able to make basic edits much more quickly. >> >> >> >> I assume you are talking about hands-on editing. If not, I think give up >> now on teaching them how to edit and just give them a talk on Wikipedia >> instead. It’s hard enough to teach them to contribute with a computer in >> front of them; I doubt you can do it with slides alone. >> >> >> >> A family history group is an older group of people (so are local history >> groups). You will also have some people whose idea of “basic computer >> skills” and yours will be very different. A lot of older people send and >> receive email and use Google to search the web and write newsletters for >> their golf club in Microsoft word without managing to learn how to do >> something like copy-and-paste. It’s hard to make a citation without some >> copy-and-paste, particularly copying the URL for web citations. Don’t >> expect them to know what a URL is either (try “web address” while pointing >> to it on the screen in the browser). Many are not accustomed to using >> multiple applications/windows at the same time, so having the Wikipedia >> article open for editing in one window and the source material in another >> may be a new experience for them. >> >> >> >> With any group, you will have issues with copying material from other >> websites and wanting to upload photos of unknown provenance. Most do not >> understand copyright at all. Some will not have had a level of education >> where they were expected to use citations and won’t know what they are and >> why they matter. Even those with university degrees may be completely >> unfamiliar with inline citation, being accustomed to just listing their >> sources at the end without linking them to the claims (particularly true >> for those in the humanities). >> >> >> >> What I tend to suggest when I get asked to do a “short intro” to >> Wikipedia is now offer two sessions. The first one is just a talk about >> Wikipedia aimed at reading Wikipedia with realistic expectations based on >> knowing how it all works. Then have a second hands-on session for those >> interested to want to learn to edit; this will be a much smaller group than >> the first talk and you have got a lot of the learning curve about Wikipedia >> out of the way and can focus on the skills development. If you can have >> multiple sessions to teach the hands-on stuff, even better. Practice is >> important. >> >> >> >> I have some slidepacks for general talks and edit training (source >> editor) available if you want to use them as a starting point. I don’t yet >> have a slide pack for the VE yet although I will be creating one in the >> next week or so, as I have to deliver VE training on 8 Feb. Let me know if >> I can help. >> >> >> >> Kerry >> >> >> >> >> >> *From:* Wikimediaau-l [mailto:wikimediaau-l-boun...@lists.wikimedia.org] *On >> Behalf Of *Paul Foord >> *Sent:* Sunday, 24 January 2016 2:36 PM >> *To:* Wikimedia-au <wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org> >> *Subject:* [Wikimediaau-l] Family History related Australian biographies >> on Wikipedia >> >> >> >> Hi all >> >> >> >> At a meeting of the Genealogy SA Research and Development Committee I >> offered to provide a session on writing biographies for Wikipedia. >> >> Triggers for this were: >> >> - my experience finding obituaries and other sources in Trove that >> appeared to justify an article, or allowed significant expansion of a stub. >> Often for politicians and sportspeople there is already a stub that can be >> filled out. >> >> - finding that a number of the articles apparently written by family >> historians were not encyclopedic in their selection of information nor well >> presented. >> >> >> >> It looks like there will be a 1.5 hour session: >> >> - an intro to WP >> >> - familiarisation with Wikiproject Biography (WP:Notability) >> >> - WP:RS >> >> - Using hardcopy and online resources, (WP:Citing sources) >> >> >> >> Any thoughts, comments, offers to work on the project. Is anybody else >> already doing something along these lines? >> >> >> >> Regards >> >> >> >> Paul Foord >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimediaau-l mailing list >> Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikimediaau-l mailing list > Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l > > -- -- Leigh Blackall <http://about.me/leighblackall> +61(0)404561009
_______________________________________________ Wikimediaau-l mailing list Wikimediaau-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimediaau-l
