Alright everyone, quite enough of this off topic opinions on Wikipedia. We're
talking about historic mapping here, and Wikimedia is doing interesting work.
Let's move on.
* Mikel Maron * +14152835207 @mikel s:mikelmaron
>________________________________
> From: Lester Caine <[email protected]>
>To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
>Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2013 12:17 PM
>Subject: Re: [OHM] Wikimaps reporting
>
>
>Susanna Ånäs wrote:
>> You are right in that the Wikipedia encyclopedia does not lend itself to
>> interpretations or original research, but relies on cited sources of
>> information. It is exactly that what has given it more credibility among the
>> scholars, the GLAMmers - Galleries, Libraries, Archives and Museums - that we
>> trying to work together with in bringing more of the historical stuff into
>> Wikimedia's projects.
>>
>> Also, your observation of deletions with inadequate source references is what
>> has put many unprepared scholars off. Having complemented with (quality)
>> first
>> hand information without referring to sources has been the beginning and end
>> for
>> contributions. I agree that there should be more space for negotiation - but
>> I
>> have not been involved in discussions how to realize this.
>
>I think things are a little better today. But historic material has been lost
>which would better be maintained in parallel with what WAS allowed to remain.
>I
>will not go into detail, but my main grip was with how 'software' was handled
>and many of the deleted packages were important development tracks relating to
>those that were allowed to remain. The important source references are what
>HAS
>now been lost and we can't now track the development of what remains via
>wikipedia :(
>
>> I am very interested in this space between Wikimedia and OSM with historical
>> geography and eventually historical storytelling. The practices have not been
>> invented yet - or maybe they have - but they come together from different
>> sources. I hope you are willing to explore!
>
>I can see a place for 'quality' information, but I can also see a place for
>displaying research for others to assist with. Personally I view the 'history'
>of how material came into existence is as useful as the data itself even if
>the
>final result is different. 'Delete' is not in my method, except for malicious
>actions, and even then they should be retained IN the version history.
>
>If you follow the main OSM list you will see my posts about 'shared material'
>and OSM providing a base for cooperation rather than simply a database.
>Personally I see a lot of the historic data being contained in the main
>database
>with 'start_date', but marrying in third party data like the old OS mapping is
>already available, and the next step is providing 'overlays' of data that can
>use this existing and expanding background data.
>
>> Susanna
>>
>>
>> 2013/7/9 Lester Caine <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>>
>> Mikel Maron wrote:
>>
>> Just seeing this. If you aren't interested in any aspect of projects
>>talked
>> about here, that's fine, but no reason to give this kind of stop
>>energy. But
>> many of us are interested in collaborations, and welcome the thinking
>> and ideas.
>> It's all about the Commons.
>>
>>
>> My objections are not directed to the "don't" but rather to the manor in
>> which contributions to wikipedia then get stripped as "not in line with
>>our
>> objectives". If this attitude has changed in recent years then wikipedia
>> need to reduce the appearance of some of the warnings that appear on
>>what is
>> essentially important content.
>>
>> Contributors who put effort into content need to feel that their work is
>> valued, and will not simply be deleted. This does of cause need to be
>> tempered with the blocking of blatant vandalism but 'advertising
>>activity'
>> should not be limited because someone makes a judgement call that an
>> articles target "does not have enough interest to be valid!" ... We would
>> not block the appearance of material on the mapping simply because it's
>>"not
>> got enough supporting evidence", and on historic mapping this may be more
>> important so that alternate material may need to be supported and
>>disputes
>> documented rather than simply deleted?
>
>
>--
>Lester Caine - G8HFL
>-----------------------------
>Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
>L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
>EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
>Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
>Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk
>
>_______________________________________________
>Historic mailing list
>[email protected]
>http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
>
>
_______________________________________________
Historic mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic
