Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Hoi, When people want to register for their own reasons as a group, they can make an item for themselves in Wikidata and identify as "member of" their group. We do have process oriented data for Wikipedia in Wikidata so there is a precedent. Thanks, GerardM On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 01:39,

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

On Fri, Jul 5, 2019 at 10:11 PM Ocean Power wrote: > What about Australian indigenous songs that trace the path of songlines > that both document collective history and folk knowledge and also > rhythmically document land contours and other landmarks as a > map/timeline/travel guide and often

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Technically these are primary sources when they are first recorded / written down. The first recorded / written theorizing about them is secondary. Reporting on a concensus reached by that theorizing is tertiary. Assuming that the singing, theorizing and reporting is done by different parties.

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

What about Australian indigenous songs that trace the path of songlines that both document collective history and folk knowledge and also rhythmically document land contours and other landmarks as a map/timeline/travel guide and often compile folkloric and secondary and primary knowledge over

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

The current mechanisms would allow anyone to alter the Indigenous content in an article. That is unlikely to be acceptable to Ingenenous Australians. This is why I propose a sister project with different rules to create such content and then import it into en.WP etc as an unalterable unit into

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Hi Samuel Can you provide examples of tertiary sources from pure oral cultures? I've never heard of any. Cheers Stuart On Sat, 6 Jul 2019 1:19 am Samuel Klein wrote: > I think we have all the mechanics needed for this. > > - Individual revisions aren't editable, once posted, and stay around >

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

I think we have all the mechanics needed for this. - Individual revisions aren't editable, once posted, and stay around forever (unless revdeleted). - Each wiki can have its own guidelines for how accounts can be shared. - Rather than limiting who can edit, you could have a whitelist of

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

I don't think it's impossible. I think the presentation of the material in a box that clearly indicates the nature of the material and its provenance to allow the reader to decide for themselves whether they wish to read it and how much they wish to believe it. We already have the same problem

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Sorry I meant to say "traditional knowledge" box not "traditional language" box. Kerry Sent from my iPad > On 5 Jul 2019, at 9:38 am, Kerry Raymond wrote: > > On en.WP we prohibit shared accounts and accounts that appear to represent an > organisation so that's a barrier. But assuming there

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

At the end of the day, wikipedia is by definition a tertiary source source and built on concepts of Western print culture. Traditional knowledge is immiscible with this model. This is exactly why I stopped promoting mi.wiki locally here --- as I understand the needs of mi speakers and activists

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

On en.WP we prohibit shared accounts and accounts that appear to represent an organisation so that's a barrier. But assuming there was some special case to allow a username to represent a community of knowledge, we would still have a practical problem of whether the individual creating such an

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

> Maybe not "signed" in the sense of a signature of a Talk page, but each contribution is attributed automatically to its user as seen in the history. As someone who edits under my real name, I absolutely put my name to my contributions. That is what I assumed, too, since it was coherent with

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

This looks like a wonderful paper and excellent research. Thank you so much for sharing, Nathalie! I look forward to reading! Best, Heather. Dr Heather Ford Senior Lecturer, School of Arts & Media , University of New South Wales w: hblog.org /

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Maybe not "signed" in the sense of a signature of a Talk page, but each contribution is attributed automatically to its user as seen in the history. As someone who edits under my real name, I absolutely put my name to my contributions. Or the other possible interpretation of "signed" here may

Re: [Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

I found one error: "Even the idea that contributions to the wiki should be signed by individuals is at odds with many traditional societies where knowledge expression is mainly collective, not individualised..." That's already how it works. Only discussion posts and the like are signed. I don't

[Wiki-research-l] New paper - Indigenous knowledge on Wikipedia

Hello, For those of you who are interested in "small" Wikipedias and Indigenous languages, here's a new academic paper co-signed by yours truly. Published in an open access journal :) Nathalie Casemajor (Seeris) - *Openness, Inclusion and Self-Affirmation: Indigenous knowledge in Open