If anyone wants to follow up the development of these ideas, a report is published on Outreach here: http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/NEXT.
Whiteghost.ink On 17 January 2012 06:58, Gillian White <whiteghost....@gmail.com> wrote: > No, I don't mind. I am not on the Cultural Partnerships list but have > always had a big interest in culture. I think Laura is a leader of things > to do with sport and she seems to know what is needed and be driving it > along. Others could perhaps join in to make similar improvements to sport > and sports history. Presumably, sporting organisations could assist WP, the > way that some GLAM organisations now have, if their needs were worked out. > I don't follow the progress of sports in WP but it seems that Laura is > applying what has been learned in GLAM to a different field and her > championing of it is producing results that could be built on. > > Whiteghost.ink > > > On 17 January 2012 05:35, Sarah Stierch <sarah.stie...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It looks like this conversation has moved beyond the concept of gender >> and into the question of "sport versus GLAM". Whiteghost.ink and Laura, I'd >> like to forward/move this conversation to the Cultural Partnerships Mailing >> List, if you two don't mind? I think it's a pretty valuable conversation! >> >> -Sarah >> >> >> >> >> >> On 1/16/12 5:59 AM, Gillian White wrote: >> >> Well, yes, sport or GLAM? It is arguable. “That which we call a rose by >> any other name would smell as sweet” as Juliet said. (Although it was in >> her interest to think that: her parents thought there was a great deal in a >> name). Nevertheless, here we are not talking about love. We are talking >> about sport and GLAMs in a big project. Articles on the Olympics (and I >> make no distinction between the Olympics, the Paralympics and women’s >> participation in either of them) are articles about élite athletes and the >> organisations designed to help them achieve that impressively high level >> are sporting organisations, not GLAMs. They are sports and should be >> categorised as such for the reasons I give below. >> >> >> >> WP is just a project and so what matters is what helps the project. There >> certainly are arguments to be made about what culture is, but the >> epistemological point about whether the Olympics and Olympians are sport or >> GLAM or both comes down to something quite pragmatic: what will help the >> project to achieve its purpose and what will help it achieve its objectives >> on the way to its grand vision? Those objectives are simply to write and >> maintain good articles. >> >> >> >> In the broad sociological sense, of course sport is culture too, in the >> sense that culture is a way of life and in the sense that *G*alleries, *L >> *ibraries,* A*rchives, *M*useums,* S*port, *H*istory, *E*ducation, >> *E*ntertainment, >> *P*olitics and *S*cience all are. So we could keep going and call it >> GLAMSHEEPS. >> >> >> >> However, as the scope of that would unmanageable, we would only have to >> start breaking it up again according to the needs of the project, the >> appropriate skill sets and what all the stakeholders accept. Projects need >> to control their scope. >> >> >> >> I understood that the organisations responsible for looking after things >> (the GLAMs), in spite of having similar skill sets as each other and >> similar missions to WP, had hitherto been unlikely to engage with us >> because of the perceived risk to the things they were looking after. So we >> needed to understand their needs and they needed to understand our possible >> contribution in order to fill gaps in the encyclopaedia's content - its >> articles. To do that we made them a special category. >> >> >> >> What holds the GLAMs together as a category is probably the skill sets, >> context and the mission - that’s probably the most important thing as we >> try to talk to them or set up partnerships. So, in this sense, seed banks >> such as the one here in New South Wales >> http://www.rbgsyd.nsw.gov.au/science/Horticultural_Research/nsw_seedbank/about_the_nsw_seedbankwould, >> somewhat surprisingly, be more of a GLAM than say, our Theatre or >> Opera Companies. >> >> >> >> At bottom, the articles are more important than the categorisation. >> However, the categorisation becomes important insofar as it assists the >> project to make sense to the people whose contributions and support we >> seek. It would not matter except for the effects on contributions and >> credibility. If we want contributions (of labour or money or images), we >> have to be credible and make sense to them. So if we went to the Art >> Gallery or the Historic Houses Trust or the National Trust or the National >> Library or the Natural History Museum, seeking some form of partnership >> with them and saying we were already working with the Olympic Movement, I >> daresay they would not easily accept that their organisations were similar. >> It would be better to say that we were working with known Galleries, >> Libraries, Archives and Museums. As you say, sport is intensively followed >> in Australia and it is easier to get popular and financial support for it >> than it is for the arts, or for “culture” in the narrower sense, and that >> is another reason for separating it out from the broad culture and paying >> attention to it, all the more reason to be careful that potential GLAM >> supporters do not feel betrayed by the usual diversion of attention to >> sport. Politicians in particular are terrified of arts organisations and >> artists in case they do something scandalous (again) that is >> incomprehensible to the voting public. Sportspeople and their organisations >> on the other hand, are readily excused for their scandals and have easier >> access to sponsors and champions. So these differences in funding and >> understanding make a difference to the way we approach partners. >> >> >> >> Thus, if everyone knows the Olympics as sport, then I guess it’s sport. >> If you asked people in similar industries – for example, if you asked a >> publisher, a curriculum developer, a reporter or writer, athlete or >> politician whether the Olympics was sport or culture they would say: >> “sport.” If you asked Priya if she was contributing to Australian culture >> or sport, I think she would say “sport”. >> >> >> >> I am glad someone is paying attention to sport and especially to women in >> sport as I am not much interested in it. Personally, I wanted to help WP >> with articles on the kind of culture that is found in GLAMs which I have >> been devotedly visiting and studying all my life. >> >> Whiteghost.ink >> >> On 16 January 2012 15:23, Laura Hale <la...@fanhistory.com> wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 12:34 PM, Gillian White < >>> whiteghost....@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> This is great because it means that all the excellent work on the >>>> paralympics and paralympians can be moved to "Sport" where they belong. >>>> >>> >>> Paralympic articles and Paralympians are already under sport. :D It is >>> fantastic that Australian Paralympians are covered under several >>> Wikiprojects like Australia, Sport and the Paralympics. >>> >>> >>>> Articles about women’s sport are not primarily GLAM articles, they are >>>> sports articles, just as articles about women artists are primarily GLAM >>>> articles. >>>> >>> >>> Yes, articles about Australian Paralympians done as part of the HOPAU >>> GLAM program, that are part of the biggest GLAM incentive contribution >>> effort to date and in a country where culture identity is tied into sport >>> are primarily GLAM articles, just like articles about female artists are >>> primarily GLAM articles. >>> >>> >>>> Describing an article on [[Priya Cooper]] as a GLAM article, as we >>>> have been doing, is as confusing as it would be to describe the article on >>>> Bernini’s wonderful [[Apollo and Daphne (Bernini)]] as an article on the >>>> sport of archery. >>>> >>> >>> No, it is a GLAM article. Priya Cooper is a huge part of Australian >>> sporting culture. The article was written as part of the HOPAU GLAM >>> project. Images were donated by the Australian Paralympic Committee. The >>> work was supported by the library called the National Sport Information >>> Centre. :D Isn't it fantastic the opportunity this GLAM has presented to >>> improve women's content related to Australia? And it isn't just an issue >>> of improving sport content, but women's content and disability related >>> content! :D So awesome! Priya Cooper was the first GA in the >>> APC/NSIC/HOPAU GLAM effort. Hopefully, we have many more to come. It >>> would be great to have a list of other GAs/FAs/DYKs/FLs featuring women >>> that were done as part GLAM movement. >>> >>> >>> >>>> So this sports portal means things can be made less confusing. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> The sport portal and sport Wikiproject have been around for a while. >>> :) If you want to learn more about the GLAM project, >>> http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/HOPAU it is there. The Wikiproject >>> about Women's sport is completely independent of the Wikiproject. :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> The obvious overlaps between women and sports (for example, individual >>>> sportswomen and women’s sport, such as individual paralympians or sporting >>>> competitions like the Olympics) are comparable to the obvious overlaps >>>> between GLAM and women (for example, women artists or exhibitions of their >>>> work). Now, with their primary category made clearer, it should all be more >>>> coherent. Good. >>>> >>> >>> >>> The overlap between GLAM is obvious and coherent. It is fantastic >>> that culturally important women are getting recognition on Wikipedia by >>> having images donated by cultural institutions to support them, by having a >>> GLAM support efforts to improve these articles, and by providing resources >>> and access to resources to continue to support them. :D >>> http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/HOPAU/W2G also provides a fantastic >>> opportunity for women in Australia to work on this and gain access to >>> opportunities they might not otherwise have. It is fantastic, and >>> coherent. You should hear the passion from institutional stakeholders in >>> our GLAM about this. :D >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> There are opportunities for good GLAM articles when all three >>>> converge – GLAM, sport and women. >>>> >>> >>> >>> Yes these are good opportunities when a GLAM project, >>> http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/HOPAU , can converge to encourage >>> the improvement of culturally important articles like Priya Cooper. :D >>> Hopefully, we can get more GLAM opportunities to improve similar content. >>> >>> If you know any women Wikimedians in Australia, please encourage them >>> to participate in http://outreach.wikimedia.org/wiki/HOPAU/W2G because >>> it would be fantastic to have women participate, to have women improve >>> women's oriented content, and for them to have an opportunity to attend the >>> London Paralympics to cover the games live… especially if they cover them >>> with a focus on women competitors. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> twitter: purplepopple >>> blog: ozziesport.com >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Gendergap mailing list >>> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing >> listGendergap@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >> >> -- >> *Sarah Stierch* >> *Wikimedia Foundation Community Fellow* >> >>Support the sharing of free knowledge around the world: donate >> >>today<http://wikimediafoundation.org/w/index.php?title=WMFJA085/en/US&utm_source=WMdonate&utm_medium=sidebar&utm_campaign=20110130SB003&language=en&uselang=en&country=US&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fwikimediafoundation.org%2Fwiki%2FHome> >> << >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Gendergap mailing list >> Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap >> >> >
_______________________________________________ Gendergap mailing list Gendergap@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/gendergap
