[OHM] Wikimaps reporting

[Susanna Ånäs]

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 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!

Susanna


2013/7/9 Lester Caine <lester at lsces.co.uk>

> 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<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<http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk>
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> Historic mailing list
> Historic at openstreetmap.org
> http://lists.openstreetmap.**org/listinfo/historic<http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/historic>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/historic/attachments/20130709/7f02c09e/attachment.html>