Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 32, No. 331.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                   Hosted by King's Digital Lab
                       www.dhhumanist.org
                Submit to: humanist@dhhumanist.org


    [1]    From: Bob Kosovsky 
           Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.322: thoughts on Wikipedia (41)

    [2]    From: Andre Pacheco 
           Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.327: thoughts on Wikipedia (10)

    [3]    From: miran.hladnik@gmail.com
           Subject: [Humanist] 32.322: thoughts on Wikipedia (13)


--[1]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: 2019-01-14 02:46:33+00:00
        From: Bob Kosovsky 
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.322: thoughts on Wikipedia

Having just returned from a full day's program in honor of Wikipedia Day
(it was founded on 15 January 2001) put on by Wikimedia New York City
(program at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Wikipedia_Day_2019), I'm
a bit surprised at the responses.  To be sure, the majority of people who
"use" Wikipedia use it solely to look up information. I expect more than
passive interaction from academics.

Wikipedia is so much more, particularly for scholarly communities. A larger
portion of the attendees at New York City's Wikipedia Day program were
librarians; another larger portion of attendees were academics who either
use Wikipedia as part of their teaching or are interested in incorporating
it in future classes.

There's no question in my mind that writing for Wikipedia is growing as an
academic phenomenon.  The Wiki Education is helping to guide teachers in
integrating Wikipedia into a variety of curriculums.  (https://wikiedu.org/).
From talks with students and teachers, I believe many academics find
writing for Wikipedia is very different from writing for academia.  In an
academic environment one is constantly being encouraged to assimilate and
synthesize information and come up with novel ideas.  Wikipedia is exactly
the opposite:  synthesis of information is discouraged in favor of unbiased
reportage.  Even more so, the citation of sources for information is a
priority.  Being able to be fluent in these styles I believe to be a
valuable asset to anyone (not just academics).  Sometimes I think if the
typical news reporter was studious in requesting sources for information
from politicians, we'd have a much better citizenry.

There's plenty more to say.  I'd be interested to hear about active
interactions with Wikipedia (and its allied projects).

Bob Kosovsky, Ph.D. -- Curator, Rare Books and Manuscripts,
Music Division, The New York Public Library for the Performing Arts
blog:  http://www.nypl.org/blog/author/44   Twitter: @kos2
 Listowner: OPERA-L ; EXLIBRIS-L ; SMT-ANNOUNCE ; SoundForge-users
- My opinions do not necessarily represent those of my institutions -

*Inspiring Lifelong Learning* | *Advancing Knowledge* | *Strengthening Our
Communities *



--[2]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: 2019-01-13 18:08:09+00:00
        From: Andre Pacheco 
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 32.327: thoughts on Wikipedia

The Italian Journal of Library, Archives, and Information Science (e
JLIS.it), available in open access, has dedicated its latest volume (vol 9,
nº 3 (2018) ) to Wikipedia, Libraries and Archives. Some of the papers
there might be of interest to you.

https://www.jlis.it/

Best
André


--[3]------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Date: 2019-01-13 09:01:42+00:00
        From: miran.hladnik@gmail.com
        Subject: [Humanist] 32.322: thoughts on Wikipedia

People consider and use Wikipedia as a source of information. However,
it is much more than that. In Wikipedia terminology »users« are not
the ones who read the entries but the ones who edit them. Each of us
is an expert at something and is supposed to participate in his/her
particular field. If we don't find our topics in Wikipedia or we are
not satisfied with them, only we are to be blamed. Wikipedia is as
good as *we* are involved in writing or improving it. It mirrors the
state our disciplines. Maybe this necessity to get involved with it is
more obvious when it comes to narrow topics and in smaller Wikipedias
than in the English one. -- miran hladnik, a Wikipedian





_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted
List posts to: humanist@dhhumanist.org
List info and archives at at: http://dhhumanist.org
Listmember interface at: http://dhhumanist.org/Restricted/
Subscribe at: http://dhhumanist.org/membership_form.php

Editor: Willard McCarty (King's College London, U.K.; Western Sydney University, Australia)
Software designer: Malgosia Askanas (Mind-Crafts)

This site is maintained under a service level agreement by King's Digital Lab.