GLAM-WIKI 2015/Proposals/From "Wiki loves monuments" to "Open Monuments Project". What is missed in GLAM WIKI?

This is an accepted submission for GLAM-WIKI 2015.

Submission no. GW15.1040

Title of the submission

From "Wiki loves monuments" to "Open Monuments Project". What is missed in GLAM WIKI?

Type of submission

pitch

Author of the submission

Ewa Majdecka

Country of origin

Poland

Affiliation

Centrum Cyfrowe

E-mail address

emajdeckacentrumcyfrowe.pl

Username

ewa.majdecka

Personal homepage or blog

Twitter username

centrumcyfrowe

Facebook url

https://www.facebook.com/centrumcyfrowe

Abstract How GLAM WIKI could be helpful or inspirational for social projects or change is more commons questions than what is there still missed. In order to reconsider idea for GLAM WIKI and some improvements we would like to take a closer look at situations where GLAM WIKI has some limitations. When it could not be a good solution and why?

Detailed proposal How GLAM WIKI could be helpful or inspirational for social projects or change is more commons questions than what is there still missed. In order to reconsider idea for GLAM WIKI and make some improvements we would like to take a closer look at situations where and how GLAM WIKI has some limitations. When it could not be a good solution and why?

We are going to base our pitch on our project “Open Monuments” that came from the "Wiki loves monuments" competition. Why didn’t we decided to base our project on Wikipedia? How are the other examples of such projects? Is it only the example of monuments? What should be done in order to make Wikipedia more universal way of opening GLAM?

Are these problems the specific Creative Commons liceses? Are GLAM institutions ready to choose exactly them and not the others? Which information are still missed in Wikipedia that are needed by GLAM community?

It is more and more common to open GLAM institutions. Is GLAM WIKI the simpliest way to make them open? Is there not missed the strategic way of opening these institutions? Is GLAM WIKI an excuse for GLAM institutions not to plan on strategic level?

And what about the institutions that are not convinced about openess? Is Wikipedia and potential “loss” of GLAM resources (meant by GLAM) a friendly environment? What to do to build clear message?

The aim of the pitch is to start a discussion with other professionals about their experience with limitations of GLAM WIKI. How our shared recommendations could improve GLAM WIKI? How to state questions that would build positive doubts? During the pitch we will state many of them, but we hope to encourage stating others. We invite all of you for a positive GLAM WIKI critique session!

Track

Length of presentation/talk

25 Minutes

Target audience

Expected outcomes

Will you attend GLAM-WIKI 2015 if your submission is not accepted?

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. Add your username here.