WMUK and Tempest Anderson

[Mancunium]

Internet to spread fame of traveller
Yorkshire Post, 11 September 2013 link

His tales of adventure remain largely unknown outside of Yorkshire.

But now thanks to an internet agreement the travels of York adventurer, Tempest Anderson, are set to be catapulted onto the world stage a hundred years on from his death.

During his life the ophthalmic surgeon, who was an expert amateur photographer and vulcanologist, travelled the world photographing volcanoes erupting and the people who lived close to them.

A spokesman for York Museums Trust, whose Tempest Anderson collection includes some 5,000 glass slides and numerous books and scientific papers, said: “Anderson is little known outside of Yorkshire, but now a partnership with Wikimedia UK will see much more information and images put on the Wikipedia page about him.”

The partnership between York Museums Trust and the creators of Wikipedia will see more information and images about Dr Anderson put on his Wikipedia page.

To do this, a new part-time temporary paid role has been created at the Trust, with potential candidates having until Sunday to apply. For further information go to http://www.yorkmuseumstrust.org.uk

Martin Fell, digital team leader, said: “Our partnership with Wikimedia UK will investigate using Wikipedia to boost access to images and information on our collections using a global platform.

“We are delighted to be working with them on this project which will initially be used to raise the profile of one of York’s real characters.”

Wikipedia already has a bio of Tempest_Anderson (T-H-L),
he has an entry in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography: link,
and the Yorkshire Philosophical Society provides a detailed biography: link.

So why does it need a partnership between Wikimedia Foundation UK and York Museums Trust to have "more information and images put on the Wikipedia page about him”?

And why does this require a paid editor? And will the editor be paid by Yorkshire Museums Trust, or by Wikimedia Foundation UK?

If York Museums Trust is paying, why does it need a partnership with WMUK? If the WMUK is paying, how much does it think it's worth to improve Tempest Anderson's Wikipedia article?

You might learn the answers to these questions by applying for the job before Sunday. Or you might find that the job is already spoken for.


Tempest Anderson: so notable that he needs his own paid editor

[EricBarbour]

As I said in my PM, I fully expect them to hire a WMUK insider, who has probably already been chosen.
And then the squawking will start.

[Hex]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

[thekohser]

The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

I need to launch the MyWikiBiz Foundation with the mission of "getting more business content online", where the benefit that will come out of it is an improved (or created from scratch) article about the businesses themselves.

Instead of asking clients for payment, I will be asking donors for grants!

[HRIP7]

See this week's Signpost.

There's been a comment from Wikimedia UK:

Thank you for highlighting the Wikimedian in Residence position with York Museums Trust. However, to state that this is a “paid editor position” is misleading. The following is taken directly from the signed agreement between Wikimedia UK and the York Museums Trust:

"1. The aims of the residency are as follows: The Institution and WMUK agree and acknowledge that the WiR shall perform duties that may require the following tasks to be completed during the course of this Agreement:

To perform the key aims and responsibilities as set out in Exhibit 1;

Work towards the improvement in quality of Wikimedia projects content related to the Institution’s collections;

To promote digital engagement in areas related to the work of the Institution;

To provide training opportunities for staff, volunteers, and researchers associated with the Institution and its networks;

To facilitate knowledge exchange and knowledge co­-creation;

To collaborate with key partners; and

To make information or materials held by the institution available via the Wikimedia projects, e.g. releasing text, images and other multimedia files under a free license.

For the avoidance of doubt the Institution may not under any circumstances direct the WiR to create, edit, comment, or post Wikipedia articles about the Institution and/or create articles on behalf of the Institution. "

I’d be very grateful if you could correct this misunderstanding. I am more than happy to write an article for The Signpost about our Wikimedian in Residence programme and its objectives. I am also happy to answer any questions that your readers may have about the programme, either here or on my talk page. I can also be reached at stevie.benton@wikimedia.org.uk Thank you. Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 09:41, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

I think we also covered this in last week's "News and notes", but this week's note here has also been tweaked. Thank you for the note. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 11:43, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I appreciate it. Stevie Benton (WMUK) (talk) 11:58, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. For reference, the Yorkshire Post said, The partnership between York Museums Trust and the creators of Wikipedia will see more information and images about Dr Anderson put on his Wikipedia page. To do this, a new part-time temporary paid role has been created at the Trust, with potential candidates having until Sunday to apply. For further information go to www.yorkmuseumstrust.org.uk Martin Fell, digital team leader, said: “Our partnership with Wikimedia UK will investigate using Wikipedia to boost access to images and information on our collections using a global platform. “We are delighted to be working with them on this project which will initially be used to raise the profile of one of York’s real characters.” I took and take that to mean that the person will be paid to edit and add content about Tempest Anderson to Wikipedia, referencing the York Museum Trust's collections. If that is a misunderstanding, then please advise. Best, Andreas JN466 12:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

[Mancunium]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

As we all know, when it comes to Wikipedia I've gotten the wrong end of the stick quite often.

I've been meaning to do something about the Montagu-related articles in Wikipedia. A good place to start might be here: link.

I would like improvement in quality of Wikimedia projects content related to the Institution’s collections, &c.

Would WMUK be nice enough to provide £5,000 to pay some qualified person to go through the boxes, so as to make information or materials held by the Cambridgeshire County Archives available via the Wikimedia projects, e.g. releasing text, images and other multimedia files under a free license?

(Although I wonder. Why would they give £5,000 to a WiR to perform duties that "may", or may not, require that task? Why would the Cambridgeshire Archives allow someone to rummage through this significant and irreplaceable collection, if the archive was forbidden, under any circumstances, to direct the WiR to create, edit, comment, or post Wikipedia articles about the Institution and/or create articles on behalf of the Institution? Who would benefit from such an agreement with WMUK-- apart, of course, from the Wikipedian-in-Residence? In any case, would creating and editing WP articles based on archival material not constitute the dreaded WP:OriginalResearch? If such is permitted where GLAM is concerned, why should I not pay for my own dedicated resident Wikipedian? If I did so, could that person not be pilloried and banned for life as a WP:ConflictOfInterest, and a WP:SinglePurposeAccount and, heaven forfend, a WP:PaidEditor? What's the difference between this presumptive WiR being paid by me rather than by WMUK, if this person is chosen by the Cambridgeshire County Council?)

I possess a much larger archive of records (Manchester III) which, being more recent, are not yet in the protection of the Cambridgeshire Archives. I would like WMUK to pay for their curation. My excuse for begging WMUK for the money (I assume the York Museums Trust begged for their money), rather than paying for this work myself, is that I intend to hire someone for this project with the intention of creating and editing Wikipedia articles.


How soon can you start?

[Midsize Jake]

My Mom's got several boxes of stuff from her years in the League of Women Voters that I'd love to have someone sort out in exchange for a Wikipedia article or two.

[HRIP7]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

Do you think WMUK cover the entire salary cost, or is it shared? I'd assumed that with it being described as a partnership, both chipped in.

Of course you could ask, Why this project? The page you linked says,

Anderson is little known outside of Yorkshire, but now a partnership with Wikimedia UK will see much more information and images put on the Wikipedia page about him.

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known? Thinking about it, I'd much rather they paid £5,000 to reputable sex education experts, to get them to assess and improve Wikipedia's sex education articles. Those articles get hundreds of thousands of views a day, and many are of a poor standard. Or pay an expert to look at the most viewed, most critical articles on medicine.

I just hope the person taking up the position is not some Wikimedia UK chap or gal who happens to live in Yorkshire ...

[DanMurphy]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

Do you think WMUK cover the entire salary cost, or is it shared? I'd assumed that with it being described as a partnership, both chipped in.

Of course you could ask, Why this project? The page you linked says,

Anderson is little known outside of Yorkshire, but now a partnership with Wikimedia UK will see much more information and images put on the Wikipedia page about him.

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known? Thinking about it, I'd much rather they paid £5,000 to reputable sex education experts, to get them to assess and improve Wikipedia's sex education articles. Those articles get hundreds of thousands of views a day, and many are of a poor standard. Or pay an expert to look at the most viewed, most critical articles on medicine.

I just hope the person taking up the position is not some Wikimedia UK chap or gal who happens to live in Yorkshire ...

Intelligent allocation of resources is just one of the many things Wikipedia is terrible at. The Wikimedia UK chapter, with its history of trustees deliberately directing educational resources towards promotion of client's interest, is in a class by itself in this regard.

[Hex]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

You're making the same mistake as the original post in this thread. Improving the coverage of Anderson is one of the things the grant will pay for, not the point of the grant.

[Vigilant]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

Do you think WMUK cover the entire salary cost, or is it shared? I'd assumed that with it being described as a partnership, both chipped in.

Of course you could ask, Why this project? The page you linked says,

Anderson is little known outside of Yorkshire, but now a partnership with Wikimedia UK will see much more information and images put on the Wikipedia page about him.

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known? Thinking about it, I'd much rather they paid £5,000 to reputable sex education experts, to get them to assess and improve Wikipedia's sex education articles. Those articles get hundreds of thousands of views a day, and many are of a poor standard. Or pay an expert to look at the most viewed, most critical articles on medicine.

I just hope the person taking up the position is not some Wikimedia UK chap or gal who happens to live in Yorkshire ...

Intelligent allocation of resources is just one of the many things Wikipedia is terrible at. The Wikimedia UK chapter, with its history of trustees deliberately directing educational resources towards promotion of client's interest, is in a class by itself in this regard.

And directing donated monies to their own businesses.

[Mancunium]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

You're making the same mistake as the original post in this thread. Improving the coverage of Anderson is one of the things the grant will pay for, not the point of the grant.

Still gnawing at the wrong end of the stick again, I'm sure, but what is "the point of the grant"?

The aims of the residency are as follows: The Institution and WMUK agree and acknowledge that the WiR shall perform duties that may require the following tasks to be completed during the course of this Agreement:

To perform the key aims and responsibilities as set out in Exhibit 1;

Work towards the improvement in quality of Wikimedia projects content related to the Institution’s collections;

To promote digital engagement in areas related to the work of the Institution;

To provide training opportunities for staff, volunteers, and researchers associated with the Institution and its networks;

To facilitate knowledge exchange and knowledge co­-creation;

To collaborate with key partners; and

To make information or materials held by the institution available via the Wikimedia projects, e.g. releasing text, images and other multimedia files under a free license.

For the avoidance of doubt the Institution may not under any circumstances direct the WiR to create, edit, comment, or post Wikipedia articles about the Institution and/or create articles on behalf of the Institution. "

Unfortunately, I can't see Exhibit 1. Perhaps that will clarify the meaning of the "duties that may require the following tasks to be completed", and also the meanings of these tasks (which may or may not be completed): "work towards the improvement", "promote digital engagement", "provide training opportunities", "facilitate knowledge exchange", and "make information available".

I searched for "WMUK grants" online, and found, amongst the reports of scandal (link & link), only Grants:WM UK: link

Not very helpful. Nor was this: Wikimedia_UK (T-H-L)

What I had wanted to know, you see, is how these arrangements are initiated. Does it begin when a WMUKian and a museum official, hitherto unknown to each other, start casually chatting in a bar?

[HRIP7]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

You're making the same mistake as the original post in this thread. Improving the coverage of Anderson is one of the things the grant will pay for, not the point of the grant.

The job vacancy description says,

York Museums Trust's (YMT) Digital Team is embarking on a major partnership project with Wikimedia UK to help improve online access to our extensive collections and disseminate information about our collections, buildings and gardens to the widest possible audience

As part of a sixth-month project, we will be taking our Tempest Anderson collection and using it as the cornerstone of a major public engagement programme to create, develop and deliver content on an internationally acclaimed and globally used platform.

Hex, please explain it to me. What is the point of the grant? Why should this be a priority use of donors' funds?

[Mancunium]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

You're making the same mistake as the original post in this thread. Improving the coverage of Anderson is one of the things the grant will pay for, not the point of the grant.

The job vacancy description says,

York Museums Trust's (YMT) Digital Team is embarking on a major partnership project with Wikimedia UK to help improve online access to our extensive collections and disseminate information about our collections, buildings and gardens to the widest possible audience

As part of a sixth-month project, we will be taking our Tempest Anderson collection and using it as the cornerstone of a major public engagement programme to create, develop and deliver content on an internationally acclaimed and globally used platform.

Hex, please explain it to me. What is the point of the grant? Why should this be a priority use of donors' funds?

Just to make myself clear: I am not asking Hex all these questions. I am addressing Stevie_Benton_(WMUK) (T-C-L)

[Mancunium]

This Stevie Benton: link

Biography
Stevie has worked in communications for around eight years in a variety of disciplines, including press, internal communications, online and multimedia. He believes that education and access to information are of the utmost importance. He enjoys hearing from Wikipedians and anyone with an interest in any Wikimedia projects. Stevie is interested in all kinds of art, music and literature. He enjoys video games and is a long suffering fan of the Philadelphia Eagles NFL team.

Already noted in this thread, Illustrating failure WMUK style: link

and in lots of other public email threads like: Statement regarding Ashley Van Haeften: link.

Hi, Stevie!


Enjoys hearing from Wikipedians and anyone
with an interest in any Wikimedia projects

[Poetlister]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

Isn't it the function of an encyclopedia to provide information on important people that might otherwise be hard to locate? He is clearly important enough if he has an article in the ODNB, but that's only available in large libraries or behind a pay wall.

[lilburne]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

Isn't it the function of an encyclopedia to provide information on important people that might otherwise be hard to locate? He is clearly important enough if he has an article in the ODNB, but that's only available in large libraries or behind a pay wall.

Everyone in the UK has free access to the ODNB.

[Poetlister]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

Isn't it the function of an encyclopedia to provide information on important people that might otherwise be hard to locate? He is clearly important enough if he has an article in the ODNB, but that's only available in large libraries or behind a pay wall.

Everyone in the UK has free access to the ODNB.

Has anybody told OUP that?

http://global.oup.com/oxforddnb/info/subscribe/

UK and other countries outside North and South America

•Free 30 day trials are available for all prospective institutional subscribers > sign up for free trial
•For pricing details or to subscribe, please email institutionalsales@oup.com
....
Personal subscriptions

UK and other countries outside North and South America

The Oxford DNB is available to individuals by prepaid subscription for periods of 1, 3, and 12 months > visit www.oup.com to purchase a subscription.

[lilburne]

If you have a UK local library card you stick the number in where it says Library Card Login.

Also works for other OUP websites:
http://www.oup.com/uk/academic/online/library/

[HRIP7]

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

Isn't it the function of an encyclopedia to provide information on important people that might otherwise be hard to locate? He is clearly important enough if he has an article in the ODNB, but that's only available in large libraries or behind a pay wall.

Sure, but if WMUK have a few thousand quid to blow on something, isn't spending it on publicising a Victorian figure of merely local notability a bit whimsical?

What I am missing is some information on how WMUK prioritises content areas of Wikipedia that need donors' money to improve. I have asked Stevie about it on the Signpost talk page.

The worst-case scenario here looks like this: No one is in fact doing any such needs analysis, and instead people go round museums and tell them what great publicity it would be for them to be on Wikipedia, with a view towards involving them in Wikimedia projects, improving links between GLAM organisations and Wikimedia, and creating welcome paid jobs for unemployed Wikipedians in the process. Any GLAM that bites gets money, and some lucky Wikipedian gets a paid job.

Now, establishing links to GLAM organisations is not a bad thing to do, and I sometimes get the impression WMUK (and other chapters) have more money than they know what to do with. (Remember, income from donations has increased ten-fold in recent years. One amusing (?) story I heard recently was about how all the board members of a national chapter were paid $5,000 in expenses to hold a "community consultation" event. Besides the board members themselves, exactly one (1) community member turned up ...)

I just wish someone started at the other end: identifying actual weaknesses in Wikipedia's coverage.

You could look at WikiProjects that have a disproportionately low number of good and featured articles, for example, yet attract high page views. You could identify substandard core articles (something Casliber always got involved in, IIRC), or articles where accuracy of information is critical, such as articles giving medical advice. You could reach out to educators to get them involved in Wikipedia, and fund Wikipedians in Residence (people with actual subject matter qualifications, not unemployed Wikipedians) in those areas.

I really doubt that if you performed such a reader-oriented rather than GLAM-oriented analysis, a local figure like Tempest Anderson would come out as a funding priority.

In fact, I have been unable to find any board minutes discussing this item on the Wikimedia UK website, or presenting a rationale for this funding decision. There is an announcement here, dated 16 July 2013, which refers to a "recent" board meeting at which the position was approved. But the most recent board meeting for which there are minutes at the time of writing is May 2013.

[Poetlister]

If you have a UK local library card you stick the number in where it says Library Card Login.

Also works for other OUP websites:
http://www.oup.com/uk/academic/online/library/

Only if your local library happens to subscribe. With drastic cuts in local authority finance, libraries are cutting back on such things. Since I work in Westminster, I have been able to get a ticket from there. Westminster subscribes to these sites but my local library no longer does.

If he is not much known outside Yorkshire, why are we spending donors' money on making him more known?

Isn't it the function of an encyclopedia to provide information on important people that might otherwise be hard to locate? He is clearly important enough if he has an article in the ODNB, but that's only available in large libraries or behind a pay wall.

Sure, but if WMUK have a few thousand quid to blow on something, isn't spending it on publicising a Victorian figure of merely local notability a bit whimsical?

Yes, but at least it's not a complete and total waste, unlike some of their expenditure.

[thekohser]

One amusing (?) story I heard recently was about how all the board members of a national chapter were paid $5,000 in expenses to hold a "community consultation" event. Besides the board members themselves, exactly one (1) community member turned up ...)

Details, please, I beg of you.

[Mancunium]

Alex, you've gotten quite the wrong end of the stick (probably due to that poorly-written news article). The museum is hiring a Wikipedian to help them get more of their collections (including the Tempest Anderson collection) online. One of the benefits that will come out of it is an improved article about the man himself.

The position is paid for by a grant from WMUK. It works out to about £5,000 of funding for a six month contract of two days a week.

As we all know, when it comes to Wikipedia I've gotten the wrong end of the stick quite often.

I've been meaning to do something about the Montagu-related articles in Wikipedia. A good place to start might be here: link.

I would like improvement in quality of Wikimedia projects content related to the Institution’s collections, &c.

Would WMUK be nice enough to provide £5,000 to pay some qualified person to go through the boxes, so as to make information or materials held by the Cambridgeshire County Archives available via the Wikimedia projects, e.g. releasing text, images and other multimedia files under a free license?

(Although I wonder. Why would they give £5,000 to a WiR to perform duties that "may", or may not, require that task? Why would the Cambridgeshire Archives allow someone to rummage through this significant and irreplaceable collection, if the archive was forbidden, under any circumstances, to direct the WiR to create, edit, comment, or post Wikipedia articles about the Institution and/or create articles on behalf of the Institution? Who would benefit from such an agreement with WMUK-- apart, of course, from the Wikipedian-in-Residence? In any case, would creating and editing WP articles based on archival material not constitute the dreaded WP:OriginalResearch? If such is permitted where GLAM is concerned, why should I not pay for my own dedicated resident Wikipedian? If I did so, could that person not be pilloried and banned for life as a WP:ConflictOfInterest, and a WP:SinglePurposeAccount and, heaven forfend, a WP:PaidEditor? What's the difference between this presumptive WiR being paid by me rather than by WMUK, if this person is chosen by the Cambridgeshire County Council?)

I possess a much larger archive of records (Manchester III) which, being more recent, are not yet in the protection of the Cambridgeshire Archives. I would like WMUK to pay for their curation. My excuse for begging WMUK for the money (I assume the York Museums Trust begged for their money), rather than paying for this work myself, is that I intend to hire someone for this project with the intention of creating and editing Wikipedia articles.


How soon can you start?

Help wanted

Dear WMUK,

I expect to learn the identity of the York Museums Trust's Wikipedian-in-Residence today. I must note that there has been no response to my appeal to Stevie Benton, or anyone else at WMUK, re funding a Wikipedian to "work towards improvement, promote engagement, provide opportunities, facilitate knowledge, and make available" The Manchester Collection of the Cambridgeshire Archives.

I know the archival records of Tempest Anderson are WMUK's highest priority, but my own archives are in a deplorable state of neglect, and are scattered around in a very unsystematic way. They are briefly described here: link

They contain information of general interest about the history of England from 1066 to 1951. In addition to the Cambridgeshire Archives, mentioned above, important collections have been deposited in:

The Huntingdonshire Archives
The Norfolk Record Office
The Public Record Office of Northern Ireland
The Parliamentary Archives
The British Library's Manuscript Collections
The University of Manchester Library
The Bermuda Government Library
The New York Public Library's Manuscripts and Archives Division
The Beinecke Library of Yale University
The University of Michigan's Clements Library
The Portsmouth History Centre
The Bodleian Library of Oxford University
and my own warehouse in Los Angeles.

It will require, I think, 15 qualified Wikipedians-in-Residence to undertake an initial survey of the collections, which should take about a year of full-time work for each Wikipedian. I estimate they should be paid about £75,000/year each, for a total of £1,125,000 plus expenses for the first year of the project.

All the Montagu articles in Wikipedia are inadequate. At best they have been plagiarized from the Encyclopedia Britannica, and at worst were written by nasty little boys. I know the Wikimedia Foundation has the funds to finance this proposal
(or could easily raise them),
and therefore I am,

Thanking you in advance, &c.
Mancunium

[EricBarbour]

Best of luck with that. (Maybe if you waved money at Benton he'd do it? Just a suggestion.)

[Mancunium]

Best of luck with that. (Maybe if you waved money at Benton he'd do it? Just a suggestion.)

Actually, I'm serious. The Pontifical Institute cf Mediaeval Studies thought enough of a single book, "Early records of the Duke of Manchester's English manorial estates" to pay for digitizing it in 2011. link

Written in 1892 by Charles Boxall, Steward of the Duchy of Manchester, the book includes:

Facsimiles from Domesday Book and Translations, 1085-6
Extracts from the Cartulary of Ramsey, 1091-1130
Charter of King John, 1200
Inquisition touching St. Ives, 1251
Inquisition touching Little Stukeley, 1251
Verdict touching Houghton, 1252
Extract from Assize Rolls, 1285-7
Pleadings, Stukeley and St. Ives, 1275-91
List of Lords of the Manor of Kimbolton from the Eleventh century to 1892
Records touching attainder of Henry Duke of Buckingham, 1483-5
Grant of the Manor of Kimbolton from Sir Richard Wingfield, 1522
Wingfield Inquisitions, 1525-1604
Conveyance of Kimbolton and Swyneshead to Sir Henry Montagu, 1616
Royal Grant (James 1st) same year
The Kimbolton Customs, 1617
Royal Grant to 1st Earl of Manchester from Charles 1st of Spaldwick with Stoke, St. Ives, Sleepe, and Burstlers

Mr Boxall wrote:

This little book will, I hope, be considered only in the light of a suggestion as to the very interesting record which might be compiled from materials undoubtedly existing, some of which have been only recently available or, at all events, readily accessible; and I venture also to hope that, in abler hands than mine, it will grow into a volume worthy of the subject.

I doubt WMUK knows anything, or cares at all, about English history. The National Archives collections mentioned in my last post are a small fraction of the historical records -- of just one family -- in need of scholarly study and preservation.

England knows very little of English history. Tempest Anderson lived from 1846 to 1913, and that is as far back in time as most English people are able to understand. The infuriating history articles in Wikipedia demonstrate this perfectly, and WMUK's waste of resources is symptomatic of the encyclopedia's absurd intellectual pretensions.

[Mancunium]

I was prepared to go all upside the head of York's new Wikipedian-in-Residence, but I see no announcement has yet been made.

I know the York Museums Trust really really needed that £5000 giveaway from WMUK, because they have also announced an £8 million refurbishment of the York Art Gallery. The deadline for expressions of interest in the Gallery retail project is Monday 23 September 2013: link

[HRIP7]

Just an update – my discussion with Stevie was useful and agreeable.

Some further discussion may follow at the WMUK Watercooler page.

[thekohser]

Just an update – my discussion with Stevie was useful and agreeable.

That was a highly informative and civil discussion.

Remind us again, Andreas -- you're expressly requested to stay off Jimmy Wales' talk page, correct? Why is it that other Wikimedia officials seem able to engage with you in complete cordial exchange of information, but Jimmy seemed unable to tolerate your presentment of information?

[Mancunium]

Just an update – my discussion with Stevie was useful and agreeable.

Some further discussion may follow at the WMUK Watercooler page.

You are very kind. With two days and all the resources of WMUK behind him, the best Stevie could come up with is:

York is an extremely important city in the history of the United Kingdom and Yorkshire is the UK’s largest county.

Then there is his illiterate sidekick Geni (T-C-L), who just had to butt in with:

funding the dissemination of information about the collections, buildings and gardens held by the York Museums Trust is a pretty solid match for WMUK's educational goals. Boosting access to images and information in the YMT collections is again a solid match for what wikipedia does (make as much information as possible as accessible to as many people as possible). Given the extremely broad collection held by the YMT (due to a mix of york's importance dating back to roman times and britian's imperial history) its a given that it will cover areas of interest to those looking to counter systemic bias. Your interest in human sexuality is noted but again I would remind you Eboracum was a roman settlement and I understand the romans has some interest in the topic. Have you ever actually been to any of the YMT's museums? oh and the high traffic articles with conflicts on them tend not to be the ones with the most serious issues.Geni (talk) 04:43, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Geni, you are the wit. Have you ever actually read a book? I note you require this notice on your User page:

Warning: I have not put this page through a spelling checker read at your own risk.

Well I read it anyway, Geni. On your Talk page I find:

A barnstar for you!



The Real Life Barnstar
Thanks for the useful and elegantly succinct contribution to the York debate.

Jon Jon Davies (WMUK) (talk) 09:39, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

These are the people who think they can decide what is or is not of educational value.

[Vigilant]

Just an update – my discussion with Stevie was useful and agreeable.

That was a highly informative and civil discussion.

Remind us again, Andreas -- you're expressly requested to stay off Jimmy Wales' talk page, correct? Why is it that other Wikimedia officials seem able to engage with you in complete cordial exchange of information, but Jimmy seemed unable to tolerate your presentment of information?

Hey! I got this one!

Jimmy's a douche.

[Poetlister]

York is an extremely important city in the history of the United Kingdom and Yorkshire is the UK’s largest county.

For the benefit of Americans, I must explain that Yorkshire has not been a county since 1974.

[dogbiscuit]

York is an extremely important city in the history of the United Kingdom and Yorkshire is the UK’s largest county.

For the benefit of Americans, I must explain that Yorkshire has not been a county since 1974.

To confuse Americans I could explain that Yorkshire remains a county but is no longer an administrative region. There is no doubt a society for its preservation and the Royal Mail are no doubt on the receiving end of their protestations.

[Mancunium]

York is an extremely important city in the history of the United Kingdom and Yorkshire is the UK’s largest county.

For the benefit of Americans, I must explain that Yorkshire has not been a county since 1974.

To confuse Americans I could explain that Yorkshire remains a county but is no longer an administrative region. There is no doubt a society for its preservation and the Royal Mail are no doubt on the receiving end of their protestations.

For the benefit of, and to confuse, Americans: Yorkshire is a geographical territory and cultural region which includes the four Counties of North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and the East Riding of Yorkshire, each having its own Lord Lieutenant.

You could make the argument that the history of the United Kingdom began in 1801, the history of Great Britain began in 1707, and the history of England began in 927.

[Vigilant]

York is an extremely important city in the history of the United Kingdom and Yorkshire is the UK’s largest county.

For the benefit of Americans, I must explain that Yorkshire has not been a county since 1974.

To confuse Americans I could explain that Yorkshire remains a county but is no longer an administrative region. There is no doubt a society for its preservation and the Royal Mail are no doubt on the receiving end of their protestations.

For the benefit of, and to confuse, Americans: Yorkshire is a geographical territory and cultural region which includes the four Counties of North Yorkshire, West Yorkshire, South Yorkshire, and the East Riding of Yorkshire, each having their own Lord Lieutenant.

You could make the argument that the history of the United Kingdom began in 1801, the history of Great Britain began in 1707, and the history of England began in 927.

As an American...

[HRIP7]

[Mancunium]

So when, if ever, is the name of the York Museums Trust Wikipedian in Residence (WIR) to made known? Or has the WMUK grant already been spent on beer and skittles?

Wikipedian in Residence link

Seeking applicants
York Museums Trust [5] York, UK
Recruitment page - [6] Recruitment open till 15 Sept 2013

The Trust is not the only institution seeking presentable Wikipedians without success. The paid residency at the Cochrane Collaboration, for which Ocaasi (T-C-L) created the WP article Wikipedia:COCHRANE/WIR (T-H-L), is still looking. The well-funded Royal_Society (T-H-L) mysteriously "received funding from Wikimedia UK to support" a WIR link, and recruitment was open till 29 September; any news of the lucky candidate yet? Vacancies have existed since early May for WIRs in Israel, Switzerland, and Spain. Interviews were conducted in August for two WIRs in The Netherlands; the posts are still vacant.

If, after seeing the applicants, the institutions all had second thoughts about letting a Wikipedian anywhere near their collections, shouldn't they at least return the money?

[HRIP7]

So when, if ever, is the name of the York Museums Trust Wikipedian in Residence (WIR) to made known? Or has the WMUK grant already been spent on beer and skittles?

See WMUK watercooler and WMUK blog post.

[Mancunium]

So when, if ever, is the name of the York Museums Trust Wikipedian in Residence (WIR) to made known? Or has the WMUK grant already been spent on beer and skittles?

See WMUK watercooler and WMUK blog post.

Thank you. I wasn't able to navigate the WMUK's new website: link. Perhaps the requested gift of £5 would have made it easier. I see that Tempest Anderson is still the focus of the residency:

To begin with Pat will work with the Trust’s Tempest Anderson collection which includes some 5,000 glass slides as well as numerous significant books and scientific papers. Topics covered by the collection include – but are not limited to – early mountaineering in Europe, volcanology, social history, geology, local history, travel, photography, the magic lantern, colonialism, shipping and medicine. The images alone have the potential to improve a wide range of Wikipedia articles and will also be of great value to Wikipedians editing in other languages.

For those who are as curious as I, Mr Hadley's CV is here: link.

He seems to be an ideal candidate, as his MA has made him an expert in:

Public Engagement, Digital Archaeology, Heritage interpretation, Collaboration Technology, Open Access, Visual Communication, Archaeological Theory, Prehistoric Archaeology, Anthropology, Irish/British prehistory, Mesolithic/Neolithic, Mesolithic Ireland, Mesolithic Archaeology, Photography and archaeology, Archaeological photography, Graphic Design, Philosophy of Design, Design Research, Mesolithic/Epipalaeolithic Archaeology, Mesolithic Europe, Archaeology, Ethnoarchaeology, Hunters, Fishers and Gatherers' Archaeology, Animism, Archaeological Visualisation, Archaeological Graphics & Illustration, Information Visualization, Information Visualisation, Archaeological Informatics, Folklore, Scientific Visualization, Design practice, Visual Display of Information, Animals in Culture, Theatre Anthropology, Art History, and Environmental Archaeology

I'm particularly impressed by the fact that his expertise extends to both Information Visualization and Information Visualisation.

[Mancunium]

I've been waiting for news of this taxpayer-funded Residency for several months now.

Wikipedia Edit-a-thon
The Press (York), 16 March 2014 link

Wikipedian-in-Residence at York Museums Trust invites curious residents, history enthusiasts and keen Wikipedians to spend the day learning about Wikipedia, the art of editing and looking into some of the museum’s fascinating collections with expert curators. Ever wondered how Wikipedia actually works? Join Pat Hadley, Wikipedian- in Residence, for this free event to learn the ins and outs of Wikipedia, find out more about some of York’s key 19th and early 20th Century figures and even contribute to Wikipedia articles. So, whether you’re a history buff, a technical wizard or just curious to know more you can book onto this free event by visiting http://www.bit.ly/YorkWiki. Training will be provided from experienced Wikipedians on the day but attendees need to bring their own wifi-enabled laptop and charger. Contact Pat Hadley: Patrick.hadley@ymt.org.uk for special requests. Booking is essential.

When: 16 Mar 2014 10:00 - 17:00 One day only
Where: The Hospitium, York Museum Gardens, YO1 7FR York
Price: Free

[Kelly Martin]

You could reach out to educators to get them involved in Wikipedia, and fund Wikipedians in Residence (people with actual subject matter qualifications, not unemployed Wikipedians) in those areas.

But the whole point of the Wikipedian in Residence program is to get unemployed Wikipedians jobs!

[HRIP7]

You could reach out to educators to get them involved in Wikipedia, and fund Wikipedians in Residence (people with actual subject matter qualifications, not unemployed Wikipedians) in those areas.

But the whole point of the Wikipedian in Residence program is to get unemployed Wikipedians jobs!

Precisely the problem.

[Vigilant]

You could reach out to educators to get them involved in Wikipedia, and fund Wikipedians in Residence (people with actual subject matter qualifications, not unemployed Wikipedians) in those areas.

But the whole point of the Wikipedian in Residence program is to get unemployed Wikipedians jobs!

Precisely the problem.

Perhaps if they spent lees time jerking off on wikipedia, they'd have developed the skills necessary to qualify for gainful employment.

I think full time WOW addicts might be more employable than the average wiki-crack-addict.

[eagle]

The whole Wikipedian in Residence vs. paid editor turns on the GLAM vs. non-GLAM boundary. In theory, GLAMs are non-profits whose only motive is to spread knowledge to the masses. It would never occur to anyone that they might seek Google juice to advance their institutional objectives. So, it is appropriate for Wikipedia to tolerate paid editing in the GLAM context.

In contrast, the for-profit vs. non-profit distinction does not work, because there are many non-profits such as Crossroads GPS or the US Chamber of Commerce that are created for the sole purpose of advancing a political agenda. Of course, if one were to ask the paid PR staff of those groups, they would say that their objective is also to spread knowledge to the masses.

So, then-graduate student Laura Hale gets a paid internship with the Australian Paralympic Committee seeking to pay someone for expanding coverage on Wikipedia (including adding biographies of athletes who may not otherwise meet notability criteria). Is it paid editing or GLAM? Well, it is not a Gallery, Library, Archive or Museum, but with a strong friendship with Sarah Stierch, Peteforsyth, and arbitrator / Chapter President John Vandenberg, the Australian Paralympic Committee is wedged into the GLAM definition and the paid editing problem is resolved with minimal COI considerations.

So, if a GLAM can be broadly defined to include any organization seeking Google juice (and spam links and non-notable articles), why can't the WMF define-away the whole paid editing problem?

[thekohser]

...why can't the WMF define-away the whole paid editing problem?

That has been my question since October 2006. Jimmy Wales refuses to answer it intelligently (perhaps it is beyond his capacity), and the Wikipedia "community" can't possibly figure it out either, tethered as they are to their beloved pseudonymity.

[HRIP7]

The whole Wikipedian in Residence vs. paid editor turns on the GLAM vs. non-GLAM boundary. In theory, GLAMs are non-profits whose only motive is to spread knowledge to the masses. It would never occur to anyone that they might seek Google juice to advance their institutional objectives. So, it is appropriate for Wikipedia to tolerate paid editing in the GLAM context.

In contrast, the for-profit vs. non-profit distinction does not work, because there are many non-profits such as Crossroads GPS or the US Chamber of Commerce that are created for the sole purpose of advancing a political agenda. Of course, if one were to ask the paid PR staff of those groups, they would say that their objective is also to spread knowledge to the masses.

Something like that seems to have been the problem with Harvard's Belfer Center Wikipedian in Residence.

[eagle]

link

This graphic shows all of the early WiRs and the chronology of their deployment. The Belfer Center is not included.

By the way, does anyone know what is the scope of the "Iettera27 Foundation"? Is it a GLAM?

[HRIP7]

link

This graphic shows all of the early WiRs and the chronology of their deployment. The Belfer Center is not included.

That's because Sandole, the Belfer Center's Wikipedian in Residence, was listed as a fundraising contractor.

Erik Möller has now corrected this:

Timothy Sandole ([http://blog.wikimedia.org/2012/04/26/ca ... niversity/ Wikipedian in Residence at Harvard University's Belfer Center], fiscal sponsorship, funded by Stanton Foundation<ref group="HR">A previous version of this report identified Timothy Sandole as a "fundraiser"; this was an error due to the contract being managed through the fundraising department.</ref>)

[thekohser]

...does anyone know what is the scope of the "Iettera27 Foundation"? Is it a GLAM?

Try "L" rather than "I".

http://www.lettera27.org/

It sounds like they are doing some really amazing work:

lettera27 is the 27th letter of the alphabet, the missing letter, the letter yet to be, the hybrid sign, the empty box, the link between oral and written words, the connection to the future, the intersection of analogic and digital.

[Kelly Martin]

Try "L" rather than "I".

http://www.lettera27.org/

It sounds like they are doing some really amazing work:

lettera27 is the 27th letter of the alphabet, the missing letter, the letter yet to be, the hybrid sign, the empty box, the link between oral and written words, the connection to the future, the intersection of analogic and digital.

Especially since it's generally well known that the ampersand (as an abbreviation for et, meaning "and"; older forms of the ampersand more clearly show a stylized combination of 'e' and 't') is the 27th letter. It was widely regarded as the 25th letter in the 18th century and often appeared as such in primers and other educational material. This was, of course, before 'J' and 'U' were considered letters of their own, and thus there were 24 (not 26) letters, not counting the ampersand (of course).

[Jim]

Try "L" rather than "I".

http://www.lettera27.org/

It sounds like they are doing some really amazing work:

lettera27 is the 27th letter of the alphabet, the missing letter, the letter yet to be, the hybrid sign, the empty box, the link between oral and written words, the connection to the future, the intersection of analogic and digital.

Especially since it's generally well known that the ampersand (as an abbreviation for et, meaning "and"; older forms of the ampersand more clearly show a stylized combination of 'e' and 't') is the 27th letter. It was widely regarded as the 25th letter in the 18th century and often appeared as such in primers and other educational material. This was, of course, before 'J' and 'U' were considered letters of their own, and thus there were 24 (not 26) letters, not counting the ampersand (of course).

And never forget Santa's alphabet. 25 letters (No "L").

I can get my own coat...