Submissions/GibraltarpediA: The Good, The Bad and The Ugly

From Wikimania 2013 • Hong Kong
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Pictogram voting delete.svg

This is a withdrawn submission for Wikimania 2013.

Submission no.
2033
Subject no.
B8
Chart to show number of new articles created by the GibraltarpediA project by January 1st 2013
A colour coded map to show the number of new articles created by the GibraltarpediA project in the official languages of each country by January 1st, 2013
link=http://toolserver.org/~kolossos/openlayers/kml-on-ol.php?la=en&uselang=en&lon=-5.354&lat=36.141&rang=50&map=1 Geocoded articles on Openstreetmap - Compare this with the picture and see what we have achieved
Title of the submission
GibraltarpediA, the good, the bad and the ugly
Type of submission
presentation
Author of the submission
John Cummings and Roger Bamkin
Country of origin
United Kingdom
Affiliation
Wikimedia UK
E-mail address
victuallers@gmail.com
Username
Victuallers and Mrjohncummings
Personal homepage or blog

http://www.gibraltarpedia.org

Abstract

GibraltarpediA is the first Wikipedia project to not only embrace a whole city, but also aspires to bridge two continents. The project aimed to cover every single notable thing and got very close. Despite some determined opposition the project created 900 new articles in about 9 months.

The whole project was unveiled in the light of Wikimania's scrutiny. Reports in the media portrayed the project as paid editing and articles about 17th century battles were seen as PR for the local tourism industry. This will be an overview of the outputs of the project and a calm review of the reaction to the project, bringing up wider question about Wikimedia's relationship with other organisations. If time allows then we will show how you you can tour around Gibraltar now using Wikipedia data and without using QR codes.

Detailed proposal

GibraltarpediA is the first Wikipedia project to not only embrace a whole city, but it also aspires to bridge two continents. The project aims to cover every single notable place, person, artefact, plant and animal in Gibraltar in as many languages as possible. T

Reports in the media portrayed the project as paid editing and PR for the Government of Gibraltar tourism industry. Despite some very enthusiastic close scrutiny and 900 new articles being created not a single example has been found of "promotion" or bias. This will be an overview of the outputs of the project and the lessons learnt.

The work done in Gibraltar

  • Working with schools and the Minister for Education - and the community in Gibraltar
  • Content release from local people - 2,500 images and two web sites: Underground Gibraltar and Discover Gibraltar
  • The bridge to Africa created collaboration with the Catalans and Wiki-Africa, creating over 900 new articles.
  • Sensitive information, geocoding sensitive and delicate places. How did we handle territory disputes?
  • Wikipedians working in remote areas with no meetups - Gibraltar is part of WMUK's territory but with strong links to Spain.
  • New technology - 3D imaging in GLAMs. NFC chips and A.R.
  • Working in politically sensitive areas,(One of us was accused in the Spanish media of being a spy!!)

Questions and issues

  • What should be the relationship between other organisations and Wikimedia, external funding - Wikimedia does this a lot - British Library, why did the community react so strongly? Is Gibraltar the first government in the world to pay people to teach their residence how to edit Wikipedia? Should we ignore anyone who shows enthusiasm for what we can achieve. Should we insist on spending the charity's money?
  • Conflict of interest. If the interests of Wikimedia align with another organisation then is this a COI?
  • The relationship between Wikipedia and the media - should we encourage newspapers to report on wiki debates.
  • What is the "Did You Know?" section for? Should be have special rules that do not target "promotion" but instead target a particular article subject. Laura Hale study will be cited here.
  • Why was all the fuss on the English Wikipedia when the most productive editors were in Hindi and Punjabi?
  • PR explosion - Why? What was the meme? Was it just that "no one knew"?
  • Biting new editors, discouraging new people from contributing, discouraging new? countries from contributing (Morocco).
  • The Wikimedia Foundation Report
  • Wikipediocracy
  • One person representing a whole organisation, the volunteer as representative of Wikipedia
Track
Length of presentation/talk
20 minutes
Language of presentation/talk
English
Will you attend Wikimania if your submission is not accepted?
Possibly
Slides or further information (optional)
Special requests


Interested attendees

If you are interested in attending this session, please sign with your username below. This will help reviewers to decide which sessions are of high interest. Sign with four tildes. (~~~~).

  1. AroundTheGlobe (talk) 05:09, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
  2. CT Cooper · talk 19:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
  3. SarahStierch (talk) 19:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
  4. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:51, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
  5. Ziko (talk) 17:35, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
  6. John Andersson (WMSE) (talk) 23:37, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
  7. LeslieCarr (talk) 03:48, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
  8. Axel Pettersson (WMSE) (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
  9. Superbellymonster (talk) 02:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
  10. Oop (talk) 18:06, 29 May 2013 (UTC)
  11. Beat Estermann (talk) 06:36, 11 June 2013 (UTC), interested to see how you will fit all these topics in 20 minutes ;-)
  12. Chuq (talk) 13:44, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
  13. Add your username here.