Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Wikisource Mailing list
What group or community is this source coming from?
|name of group||Wikisource Community (international)|
|virtual location (page-link) or physical location (city/state/country)||Wikisource-l|
|Location type (e.g. local wiki, Facebook, in-person discussion, telephone conference)||mailing list|
|# of participants in this discussion (a rough count)||3|
The summary is a group of summary sentences and associated keywords that describe the relevant topic(s). Below is an example.
The first column (after the line number) should be a single sentence. The second column should be a comma-separated list of keywords about that sentence, and so on. Taken together, all the sentences should provide an accurate summary of what was discussed with the specific community.
Summary for the discussion:
|Line||Statement (summary sentence)||Keywords|
|1||Curation, attention to detail and metadata production will be the added value that only Wikisource communities can provide.||curation|
|2||Wikisource mission statement is already a strategic vision for our projects.||mission|
|3||Wikisource is a digital library, and the first of Ranganathan laws for libraries is "Books are for use".||impact, effectiveness|
|4||What Wikisource do and can do is to make texts more accessible, linking them with authors, other texts, maybe in the future even other Wikipedia articles, or places on OpenStreetMap. We can make the entire written literature a place like Wikipedia: an interwoven, intertwingled structure of texts and data and links.||hypertext, links, interconnection, accessibility|
|5||Wikisource is not a digital library but a digital typography: it should be focused on scanned text needing proofreading and formatting, not on texts that are born-digital.||typography, proofreading, formatting|
|6||Wikisource should be more integrated with other Wikimedia projects, without entity duplication.||integration, interconnection, Wikidata|
|7||Historically, we have two main metaphors for "the sum of human knowledge": the encylopedia, and the library. The encyclopedia is a single work, with a neutral point of view on "facts", and we are trying to achieve that with Wikipedia. The library is a much more complex "object", full of contradictory books and views and interpretations.||multiple points of view, divergence, plurality, diversity|
|8||We need a Wikimedia "universe" that goes beyond the encyclopedic metaphor, and embrace the idea of a more rich galaxy of connected projects, which provide everything: NPOV articles, free books, OERs, media, data, and maybe, in the future, other ways of representing knowledge and comments and opinions of knowledge.||diversity, interconnection, Wikimedia, platform|
|9||We have yet to tap the idea of letting people comment, customize and personalize our content for studying and learning, annotating, sharing and creating educational material directly on our websites.||customization, annotation, personalization|
|10||AI and machine learning could change dramatically the labor needed on Wikisource. A document transcribed/imported into wikisource, could be regarded as relevant||notability|
|11||Wikisource could in the future be regarded we consider as a relevancy setter.||quotations|
|12||Considering that not all libraries might have the resources to develop their own platform, Wikisource could be used as a neutral platform by external agents as a complement to their own infrastructure.||infrastructure, digitization, GLAM, libraries, institutions|
If you need more lines, you can copy them from Strategy/Wikimedia movement/2017/Sources/Lines.
Detailed notes (Optional)
If you have detailed notes in addition to the summary, you may add them here. For example, the notes may come from an in-person discussion or workshop. If your discussion happened on a wiki or other online space, you do not need to copy the detailed notes here.