Interesting that the question about whether oral history was a valid source 
came up at yesterday`s Paralympics workshop in Melbourne (great day by the way 
for anyone who can get to today`s session).

If someone publishes an oral history do they usually verify facts before 
publishing? We thought not.
Cheers, Pru
Pru Mitchell

> On 8 Mar 2014, at 11:37 pm, Andrew Owens <> wrote:
> that's a very valid point. I heard something a while ago about an initiative 
> between India and South Africa supported by WMF which was collecting oral 
> information from elders in those places in such a way that it could be used 
> as a verifiable source on Wikipedia on topics not readily covered by regular 
> secondary sources.
> kindest regards
> Andrew
>> On 8 March 2014 19:52, Janet Reid <> wrote:
>>> On 8 March 2014 21:54, Craig Franklin <> wrote:
>>> For what it's worth, this is something I thought about a lot during my time 
>>> involved with WMAU.
>>> I don't think an Indigenous language Wikipedia is going to be viable in the 
>>> short term.  
>> It would be nice for there to be a way to recognise Aboriginal perspectives.
>> Citing is likely to be a challenge.
>> Once I showed some community women in Maree the page for Maree
>> It said her language was extinct. She said it was not.
>> I posted to the talk page that local people did still speak the language.
>> But the source was a living person whereas the extinction was citing a 
>> published book.
>> Is there a different kind of wiki project which could accommodate that kind 
>> of perspective/source.
>> Is it possible to make articles which are relevant in their relevant 
>> languages?
>> Not make a full wikipedia but capture descriptions of communities and places 
>> in the relevant language?
>> just a thought
>> j
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimediaau-l mailing list
Wikimediaau-l mailing list

Reply via email to