Re: [Wikimedia-l] [IEGCom] [Wikimedia Announcements] Jake Orlowitz/Ocaasi comes onto the Grantmaking team at WMF with The Wikipedia Library
Great news! Congrats! Best, Heather. Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/ Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters http://ethnographymatters.net/ | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115 http://hblog.org | @hfordsa http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa On 7 October 2014 09:17, Nurunnaby Hasive n...@nhasive.com wrote: Great to know. Congratulation Jake! On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Pine W wiki.p...@gmail.com wrote: It's great to hear that this is official, Ocaasi and colleagues. Thanks also to Siko and Anasuya for supporting this. [COI declaration: I'm on IEGCom and I sonewhat passionately believe that we grow the awesome. :) ] Pine ___ IEGCom mailing list ieg...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/iegcom -- *Nurunnaby Chowdhury Hasive* Administrator | Bengali Wikipedia http://bn.wikipedia.org/wiki/user:nhasive Member | IEG Committee, Wikimedia Foundation https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/People Social Media Interaction Moderator | The Daily Prothom-Alo http://www.prothom-alo.com Bangladesh Ambassador | Open Knowledge Foundation Network http://www.okfn.org Treasurer | Bangladesh Open Source Network (BdOSN) http://www.bdosn.org Task Force Member | Mozilla Bangladesh http://www.mozillabd.org fb.com/nhasive | @nhasive http://www.twitter.com/nhasive | Skype: nhasive | www.nhasive.com ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] [Wikimedia Announcements] Jake Orlowitz/Ocaasi comes onto the Grantmaking team at WMF with The Wikipedia Library
Great news! Ocaasi is a great asset to this community :) Congrats! Best, Heather. Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/ Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters http://ethnographymatters.net/ | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115 http://hblog.org | @hfordsa http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa On 7 October 2014 04:07, Anasuya Sengupta asengu...@wikimedia.org wrote: Dear friends and colleagues, I am delighted to announce that Jake Orlowitz (User:Ocaasi, User:Ocaasi (WMF)) is joining the Grantmaking department at WMF to lead The Wikipedia Library (TWL)[1], an online resource for Wikipedians to get free access to journal subscriptions. In the last year, TWL has helped nearly 2000 unique users access 3000 accounts of sources like JSTOR, Elsevier, De Gruyter, and Oxford University Press,[2] and is now experimenting with community-run branches in Arabic, German and other languages. Jake will be a full-time contractor with part-time support from Alex Stinson (User:Sadads, User:Astinson (WMF)) for an initial period of six months. They are both working with an amazing volunteer team of Wikipedians guided by Head of Volunteer Coordination (User:Nikkimaria). We're particularly looking forward to seeing how TWL can expand its global (non-English) work, and what it can teach us about the best ways to support some of our top contributors, and improve content on our projects. Many of you know Jake well, but for those who don't: Jake (Ocaasi) is a long time Wikipedian, with two Individual Engagement Grants from us, and he has been on the IEG grants committee for the past two years. Jake works remotely from Philadelphia but is frequently in the Bay Area, especially during long and dark East Coast winters. Alex has been involved for many years with both Education and GLAM outreach. He resides in Kansas where he works on Digital Humanities at Kansas State. You can catch up on all of TWL's new happenings in the latest edition of the Books and Bytes newsletter.[7] We're excited to bring The Wikipedia Library on board and look forward to its growth and evolution! Warmly, Anasuya Jake Orlowitz (User:Ocaasi) started editing in 2007 as an ip. Early on he worked on articles about religious groups, political movements, and alternative health. Around 2010 he shifted focus from editing to helping new users, working in the irc-help channel and developing the Plain and Simple guide for New Editors [3] and its COI counterpart [4]. In 2012 Jake began developing projects through the Individual Engagement Grants department at WMF. He built The Wikipedia Adventure,[5] a playful interactive game to onboard new editors. He also began establishing and expanding donation partnerships in The Wikipedia Library to provide free research access to top article contributors. He helps out as a board member of Wiki Project Med Foundation [6] and gives talks about Wikipedia's role in education. Jake grew up in the Philadelphia suburbs and studied political theory at Wesleyan, before starting a tutoring company in Colorado. He currently splits his time between coasts, working full-time on Wikipedia projects. His contract with WMF will focus on expanding the number and global reach of Wikipedia Library partnerships. Alex Stinson (User:Sadads) is a 9-year editor with over 80,000 contributions, actively involved in different forms of outreach. He is currently a project manager with the The Wikipedia Library, a long time volunteer with The Wikipedia Education Program, and supporter of GLAM-Wiki outreach. Alex has a Masters degree in English Literature from Kansas State University with research focused on cultural studies and the digital humanities. He works as a digital humanist at K-State, where he helps develop projects and create partnerships with educators and cultural institutions. [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/The_Wikipedia_Library [2] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IEG/The_Wikipedia_Library/Renewal/Final [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:PANDS [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:PSCOI [5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Adventure [6] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WPMED [7] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:The_Wikipedia_Library/Newsletter/August-September2014 -- *Anasuya SenguptaSenior Director of GrantmakingWikimedia Foundation* Imagine a world in which every single human being can freely share in the sum of all knowledge. Help us make it a reality! Support Wikimedia https://donate.wikimedia.org/ ___ Please note: all replies sent to this mailing list will be immediately directed to Wikimedia-l, the public mailing list of the Wikimedia community. For more information about Wikimedia-l: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Reclaimed the Logo (thanks)
Congratulations :) This is a Great Thing *you all* did :) Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/ Doctoral Programme EthnographyMatters http://ethnographymatters.net/ | Oxford Digital Ethnography Group http://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/research/projects/?id=115 http://hblog.org | @hfordsa http://www.twitter.com/hfordsa On 5 February 2014 09:40, Tomasz W. Kozlowski tom...@twkozlowski.netwrote: Dear all, we would like to use this opportunity to express our sincere thanks to the Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees and the Foundation's Legal and Community Advocacy department for reaching their decision to abandon the trademark registration for the Wikimedia community logo. We are also thankful to all community members who expressed their opinions in the community logo trademark consultation that took place between September and December. We hope that all the legal formalities can be fulfilled in the coming days and weeks, and that the matter can be finally put to rest so to allow our rich history of community logo derivatives and red, green blue logos to continue. Reclaim the Logo squad Artur Fijalkowski (WarX) Tomasz Kozlowski (odder) Federico Leva (Nemo) John Vandenberg (jayvdb) ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [Wikimedia-l] WMF's New Global South Strategy
Thank you so very much for your reply, Anasuya and Asaf. And sorry you've been ill :( Your message was so helpful - thank you for explaining how the decisions were made, and for writing that you are open to changes in the strategy as you learn more about this process. That is much appreciated :) I also want to say that I don't want this to be seen as an attack on the strategy. I think you have done such great work already, and more importantly, have been open to learning from your mistakes (as we have as we've gone through this process with you) at a time when there has been tremendous changes at the Foundation - all of which I appreciate. I just think that there are some foundational challenges that the current strategy brings up that I've been thinking a lot about recently. I share them with you in good faith below :) 1. The first point is that there is a key symbolic and practical difference between focus countries and general support. As Asaf said at Wikimania (my paraphrasing): 'We won't go out of our way to support projects outside of these countries, but will be open to requests for support from anyone elsewhere.' I think the feeling in some countries outside of this scope is that, instead of welcoming their initiatives, they are sometimes met with immediate and pretty vehement opposition. This isn't to say that the WMF isn't supporting those initiatives, it's just that the tone of those conversations is often oppositional and sometimes even aggressive which doesn't bode well for good relationships between the Foundation and community members who, admittedly have a long way to go to developing strong proposals for support, but who need to feel supported and valued if they are to continue doing this work. This makes the 'active focus' so much more of a big deal than it would immediately be apparent: being in an area of active focus often means that the barriers are just much easier to overcome since it is in the WMF's best interests to make things happen there. 2. My second point is that the WMF has chosen to look mostly at active editors at a national level in order to decide on the focus countries, but has added more symbolic reasons in its decision to support Egypt. I totally support the decision to focus on Egypt but I think it points to the need for a systematic approach for choosing what active interventions the Foundation will make. The problem, I think, with the approach of using active editor counts as the primary way of deciding which countries to focus on are as follows: - Countries are being compared to one another without an understanding of the barriers to participation in different parts of the world. The unintended consequence of this is that it gives the impression by people working in places where it is a major success to get just one more active editor, just one more article about a relevant local topic, rather than scores more that their work isn't valued as highly. - We often choose a particular way of evaluating where to focus our efforts because of the availability of the data, rather than because it is the best way of understanding a problem. The problem with this is that it can result in us believing that this is the right way of evaluating whether something will be successful when other alternatives (perhaps more difficult) might prove to be more accurate. - Finally, I was struck that the number of *readers* of Wikipedia aren't taken account in this decision. There is a great paper by Judd Antin and Coye Cheshire called 'Readers are not free riders' [1] that speaks about the importance of reading Wikipedia in becoming a Wikipedian. Active editors shouldn't, I believe, be the only way to think about which communities are most engaged in Wikipedia. 3. All of these issues lead me back to the same question: what is the goal of this programme? And: how will we know when it is successful? Is it about increasing the numbers of active editors in particular countries? Or, is it about trying to actively solve the problem of weak representation of particular subjects and people at the level of geography? I would advocate for the former rather than the latter because increasing numbers cannot be seen as an end in itself. We have the benefit of being a community that doesn't have to be driven by numbers or shareholders or profits. We can think more deeply about the symbolic power of our interventions and about what it means to be successful as a global movement. We're trying to build an encyclopedia in which the sum of all human knowledge is represented. We're only going to do that with the involvement of people around the world. And as people like Mark Graham have shown [2], some of the weakest representation on Wikipedia is of places in sub-Saharan Africa. Understanding why this is a problem *by engaging in projects* in this part of the world seems to me an obvious strategy - but only if this is the type of goal that we're looking towards. 4. What I would advocate for is two
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Go away, community (from WMF wiki at least)
On May 13, 2013, at 6:57 AM, phoebe ayers wrote: You know, it's kind of the ultimate Wikimedian tempest: arguing over who gets to add users and delete pages on what is quite possibly the world's most boring wiki[1]... I would take a stab and stay that it's not about who gets access but about how people are treated. Sending a mass email to a bunch of people saying that they no longer have admin access is pretty much like firing them by mass email with no warning - but it's probably a bit worse than that since the people who do this work do it because they love Wikipedia and because they care about it, and it's a slap in the face to be given the pink slip like this. And it is also rightfully worrying because it isn't the first time it's happened. I know this because a few years ago, while perusing the WMF wiki, I noticed that my name had moved from current to past advisory board members. Shocked, I emailed around to find out what had happened. Apparently I'd been fired and thanked for my service (another mass email that had apparently gone to my iCommons email address and which I no longer had access to) but to this day I have never received any advice on why I was removed, despite asking for clarification in person and via email on a few occasions. I don't like to whine and complain [1] and I thought that it was just me, but it made me sad and upset because I felt like I'd done a lot for Wikimedia, was one of the few advisory board members who showed up to meetings and tried to get things done, and to be discarded like that was really upsetting. This is what this is about. It's about people engaging with one another on a personal, human level and understanding what it means to be a part of this thing, this crazy wonderful thing. Maybe it also takes some deeper engagement in editing these things to understand the implications of what seems to be just a technical thing like removing rights, placing in different categories but is heavily political, heavily personal. And so I'd offer different advice from taking a walk or eating an ice cream or writing more mass emails to this list. I'd suggest that the people concerned to write personal emails to the *individuals* who were affected by this and to engage in a conversation among individuals about why this happened and how they're going to make it better together. At iCommons, when I was on the receiving end of similar anger, I had a mantra that I tried to stick to. When someone sends something that is upsetting, get on the phone with them. Sort it out one-on-one. This, for me, passionately for me, is what's needed here. Best, Heather [1] here I am whining and complaining but hopefully it is to make a point at least. Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] Go away, community (from WMF wiki at least)
On May 13, 2013, at 9:10 AM, Florence Devouard wrote: On 5/13/13 9:27 AM, Heather Ford wrote: On May 13, 2013, at 6:57 AM, phoebe ayers wrote: You know, it's kind of the ultimate Wikimedian tempest: arguing over who gets to add users and delete pages on what is quite possibly the world's most boring wiki[1]... I would take a stab and stay that it's not about who gets access but about how people are treated. Sending a mass email to a bunch of people saying that they no longer have admin access is pretty much like firing them by mass email with no warning - but it's probably a bit worse than that since the people who do this work do it because they love Wikipedia and because they care about it, and it's a slap in the face to be given the pink slip like this. And it is also rightfully worrying because it isn't the first time it's happened. I know this because a few years ago, while perusing the WMF wiki, I noticed that my name had moved from current to past advisory board members. Shocked, I emailed around to find out what had happened. Apparently I'd been fired and thanked for my service (another mass email that had apparently gone to my iCommons email address and which I no longer had access to) but to this day I have never received any advice on why I was removed, despite asking for clarification in person and via email on a few occasions. I don't like to whine and complain [1] and I thought that it was just me, but it made me sad and upset because I felt like I'd done a lot for Wikimedia, was one of the few advisory board members who showed up to meetings and tried to get things done, and to be discarded like that was really upsetting. This is what this is about. It's about people engaging with one another on a personal, human level and understanding what it means to be a part of this thing, this crazy wonderful thing. Maybe it also takes some deeper engagement in editing these things to understand the implications of what seems to be just a technical thing like removing rights, placing in different categories but is heavily political, heavily personal. And so I'd offer different advice from taking a walk or eating an ice cream or writing more mass emails to this list. I'd suggest that the people concerned to write personal emails to the *individuals* who were affected by this and to engage in a conversation among individuals about why this happened and how they're going to make it better together. At iCommons, when I was on the receiving end of similar anger, I had a mantra that I tried to stick to. When someone sends something that is upsetting, get on the phone with them. Sort it out one-on-one. This, for me, passionately for me, is what's needed here. Best, Heather [1] here I am whining and complaining but hopefully it is to make a point at least. Heather Ford Oxford Internet Institute Doctoral Programme www.ethnographymatters.nethttp://www.ethnographymatters.net @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org And for the record, here are the minutes of the discussion which ultimately resulted in the removal of several advisory board members. http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Minutes/November_13-15,_2009#Advisory_Board_Update I sympathize Heather. Regarding your proposition... I believe it is a good one. This said... attempts to implement it may reveal really hard for the person looking for a phone discussion. Calling anyone at San Francisco is a real challenge as everything is done to discourage people to call the office (I understand why :)). Ah, I meant it more as people in the San Francisco office calling (or at least attempting to call) volunteers :) A personal email would be a good second best, though :) Sending apologies to the whole list: certainly. But sending apologies to real individuals affected by this requires personal emails - and not just the ones where you copy and paste! I tried too many times to have good memory of that experience... (answering machine... talking to me in English... asking me unknown extension numbers... pouah) Florence ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.orgmailto:Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
[Wikimedia-l] WikiSym 2013: Wikipedia Research Track CFP
be applied to enrich the academic discourse on Wikipedia? The following types of submissions are invited: • Long research papers (5 to 10 pages) • Short research papers (1 to 4 pages) • Research posters (1 to 2 pages) • Research presentations (1 to 10 pages) Submissions for experience reports (long and short), tutorials, workshops, panels, non-research posters, and demos are also sought but are handled through the community track, please see http://www.wikisym.org/email Submissions to WikiSym + OpenSym’s Doctoral Symposium are also sought but are handled through a separate website, please see http://www.wikisym.org/email Research papers present integrative reviews or original reports of substantive new theoretical or empirical work about Wikipedia. Research papers will be reviewed by the Wikipedia research track program committee to meet rigorous academic standards of publication. Papers will be reviewed for relevance, conceptual quality, innovation and clarity of presentation. They should be written in English. At least one author of accepted papers is required to attend the conference in order to present the paper. Research presentations present integrative reviews or original reports of substantive new theoretical or empirical work about Wikipedia. This is a new format is specifically aimed at the requirements of social science researchers enabling those researchers to use WikiSym as a pre-publication venue before journal publication. Only the abstracts of these papers will be published as part of the proceedings thus leaving open the opportunity for journal publication at a later date. Research papers will be reviewed by the Wikipedia research track program committee to meet rigorous academic standards. Papers will be reviewed for relevance, conceptual quality, innovation and clarity of presentation. They should be written in English. At least one author is required to attend the conference in order to present the paper. Research poster presentations enable researchers to present late-breaking research results, significant research work in progress, or research work that is best communicated in conversation. WikiSym + OpenSym’s lively poster sessions let conference attendees exchange ideas one-on-one with authors, and let authors discuss their work in detail with those attendees most deeply interested in the topic. Successful applicants will display their posters, up to 1x2m in size, at a special session during the event. WikiSym + OpenSym seeks to accommodate the needs of the different research disciplines it draws on. Submission Logistics For a submission, please use the the ACM SIG Proceedings Format, see http://www.acm.org/sigs/publications/proceedings-templates All submissions are due: • Date: March 17, 2012 (notification: May 17, 2013) • Submission site: https://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=wikisym2013 (choose ‘Wikipedia Track’) As long as it is March 17 (or April 14) somewhere on Earth, the system will accept your submission. Committee Heather Ford - Co-Chair Affiliation: Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University Home page URL: http://hblog.orghttp://hblog.org/ Mark Graham - Co-Chair Affiliation: Oxford Internet Institute, Oxford University Home page URL: http://www.zerogeography.net/ Megan Finn Affiliation: Microsoft Research, New England Home page URL: http://research.microsoft.com/en-us/people/megfin/ Stuart Geiger Affiliation: UC-Berkeley School of Information Home page URL: http://www.stuartgeiger.comhttp://www.stuartgeiger.com/ Brent Hecht Affiliation: Department of Computer Science and Engineering, University of Minnesota Home page URL: http://www.brenthecht.comhttp://www.brenthecht.com/ Brian Keegan Affiliation: Northeastern University Home page URL: www.brianckeegan.comhttp://www.brianckeegan.com/ Wen Lin Affiliation: Newcastle University Home page URL: http://www.ncl.ac.uk/gps/staff/profile/wen.lin Felipe Ortega Affiliation: Researcher, Dept. of Statistics and Operations Research, University Rey Juan Carlos. Home page URL: http://felipeortega.nethttp://felipeortega.net/ Dan Perkel Affiliation: IDEO Home page URL: http://blogs.ischool.berkeley.edu/dperkel/ Joseph Reagle Affiliation: Northeastern University Home page URL: http://reagle.org/joseph/ Jodi Schneider Affiliation: DERI, NUI Galway Home page URL: http://jodischneider.com/jodi.html Monica Stephens Affiliation: Humboldt State University Home page URL: https://sites.google.com/a/email.arizona.edu/stephens/ Dario Taraborelli Affiliation: Wikimedia Foundation Home page URL: http://nitens.org/taraborelli Robert West Affiliation: Computer Science Department, Stanford University Home page URL: http://ai.stanford.edu/~west1/ Matthew W. Wilson Affiliation: Department of Geography, University of Kentucky Home page URL: http://matthew-w-wilson.comhttp://matthew-w-wilson.com/ Taha Yasseri Affiliation: Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford Home page URL: http
Re: [Wikimedia-l] new report on Wikipedia sources
that, for example, a particular photo was an 'iconic' image of the protests. Merely capturing one instance probably does not provide the benefits that we expect from secondary sources, namely fact-checking, and most importantly some context. I actually took this example from the 2011 Egyptian revolution article. Editors initially complained that the Latuff images were being used without any understanding of whether they were influential in the protests or whether they were just being used there to market Latuff's work. Another editor came with a photograph of how protesters had actually re-drawn the cartoon and were using it as a banner in the protest - thus showing how it was part of the protest. In other words, the primary source was being reflected in its context, showing its importance in the context of the event (i.e. a secondary source). I thought that made sense :) I think the same concerns would apply to an NYTimes republishing of an amateur video. Mainstream news media wants to be 'social' these days, yet I do not think they have yet solved the puzzle of what their role should be with respect to ireports, tweets, on-the-ground cellphone footage, etc. Certainly. But they are selecting footage in the same way that they might select from photographs or from a variety of potential sources. Last, I just want to acknowledge the particular vulnerability one feels from having an ethnographer evaluate their heat-of-the-moment comments. You were indeed fair, but even with Wikipedia's wide-open transparency, it's a little uncomfortable to be the *subject* of the reports rather than the one who summarizes them ;) And I'm sorry for your discomfort. It actually did feel like I was watching some intimate conversations happening rapidly and among those with little sleep on those talk pages and I felt a little discomfort myself writing about them. That said, I can honestly say that having done this work I feel that I understand better the experience of Wikipedia editing (about time after having been involved at least peripherally since about 2005) -- and I feel like telling the stories of editors in this detailed way can lead to better understanding and empathy by others. Best, Heather. --Ocaasi ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l Heather Ford Ethnographer: Ushahidi / SwiftRiver http://ushahidi.com | http://swiftly.org @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
Re: [Wikimedia-l] teaching people how to edit Wikipedia
Thanks, Ziko. That's really interesting and sounds like an effective way of getting them started. I'm curious what kinds of problems people contact you about when they start editing for real? On Apr 12, 2012, at 1:45 PM, Ziko van Dijk wrote: Hello, Myself, I have a presentation which shows a basic wiki principle; I noticed that showing the same thing onwiki would make me jumping too much from page to page. Showing Wikipedia functionalities then onwiki I call Wikipedia surfing (version history, talk pages etc.). If it is a workshop with the intention to make people edit then I create a pseudo encyclopedia on user subpages. That's a number of simplified Wikipedia articles with hardly any markup. From article to article, the complexity and amount of wikisyntax grows. The newbies in groups of 2 correct the language and content (I put in some errors for them). I prefer that because editing real WP makes people anxious, and I want to be undisturbed with the newbies. Kind regards Ziko 2012/4/11 Heather Ford hf...@ushahidi.com: Have a quick question for some work I'm doing on Wikipedia literacy: What resources are folks using to teach others how to edit Wikipedia? At Wikipedia Academies etc? Thanks in anticipation :) Best, Heather. Heather Ford Ethnographer: Ushahidi / SwiftRiver http://ushahidi.com | http://swiftly.org @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l -- --- Vereniging Wikimedia Nederland dr. Ziko van Dijk, voorzitter http://wmnederland.nl/ Wikimedia Nederland Postbus 167 3500 AD Utrecht --- ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l Heather Ford Ethnographer: Ushahidi / SwiftRiver http://ushahidi.com | http://swiftly.org @hfordsa on Twitter http://hblog.org ___ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l
