Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Takes Perth Foreshore

Australia: Western Australia Project‑class

	Australia portal Wikipedia Takes Perth Foreshore is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Project	This page does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This page is supported by WikiProject Western Australia.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Wikipedia Takes Perth Foreshore page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Aims[edit]

Great idea, but what is the real purpose of this 'Wikipedia Takes' event? It currently says "to capture what the area looks like before any of the changes start", but to be blunt, I'm concerned the Wikipedia banner may be used as a veiled platform to mount another element of opposition to the latest development proposals. I don't take a view for or against the current proposal, but simply point out that you need to be scrupulous that WP:NPOV is followed in both actions and meaning when dealing with political hot potatoes. That includes written content as well as what WP representatives say and do when presentng themselves under our banner. A clear statement of that should ideally appear on this project page. Similarly, associated WP content pages should be patrolled to make sure same doesn't happen there. Moondyne (talk) 04:26, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The real purpose is to take photographs of the area before it under goes significant changes, planned to commence in April 2012. So much of our visual records lack the perspective of what places look bfore change take place, give the substantive area affected this is the best way to cover as much of it a possible. Gnan garra 14:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am pleased to see your comments here and agree with your concerns - but whatever the consequences of the Barnett Government announcements today of a non-negotiable go ahead of the project - it is obvious that doing a wikitakes.. event is in principle a project of taking a snapshot of what is there now - for wiki commons and also showing how wikipedia relates to the project and its ramifications - with a very clear explanation of WP:NPOV and WP:ABOUT (in distinction against WP:NOT Satu Suro 08:58, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I too, was immediately concerned about neutrality and POV when I read this page. Also, this:

... if [people] are happy to talk try to record ... what they think about the development and how they think it'll affect them, ...

is blatant original research. Mitch Ames (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep photographs by their very nature are original research its the only exception to policy see WP:OI Original images created by a Wikipedian are not considered original research, so long as they do not illustrate or introduce unpublished ideas or arguments we are taking photographs of a public area, where possible the inclusion of people using the area is encouraged, identifying the person and gathering information to provide a full picture is acceptable, asking their opinion is gaining a more complete image, there is a lot controversy about the project recording all the various takes on the developmentwhich are already published in multiple sources is not violating Wikipedia policies. Gnan garra 14:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very important to note that the basis for a Wiki Takes .. exercise is essentially a WP:Commons boosting exercise - not necessarily article creation time - the potential for confusion between the two might also get non-wiki people further confused - recording a location (and having an enthusiasm either way) and personal reactions is not in itself OR - that is translating one medium across into another - confusing the categories... Satu Suro 13:42, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with Mitch. This reads like your going to be canvassing what people think about the redevelopment, and if thats the case I'm strongly against this event for reasons stated above. Photos are one thing ... Moondyne (talk) 14:00, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There is no canvassing of people photographers are being requested to seek permission from idenitfiable people if they are a specific element of the composition and to gather what they think so that no-one can be miss represented if an image is reused. Gnan garra 14:44, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didnt write the blurb (and i am sure it is re-writeable), and I would not canvass anyone about anything, if you took the trouble to read my comments here and at Mitch's talk page, I think anyone wanting to deal with the issues surrounding a controversial subject might help in offering suggestions for re-writing rather than instant judgements and dismissals . Satu Suro 14:21, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I read them all. What the page says is my concern here; ~~what people say and do is another thing.~~ Moondyne (talk) 14:41, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good - in that case I have re-written the piece above - I had chopped a large section out without cleaning up which what was left ... cheers Satu Suro 14:59, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Above was poor word choice. What people say and do concerns me also. Moondyne (talk) 12:30, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As the convenor of the last such event in Perth (Wiki Takes Joondalup), I think something has to be said for the format. Firstly, it's about getting photographs onto Commons. Secondly, it's about getting people - mainly non-Wikipedians - involved and give them something of a taste of and sense of achievement about the Wiki projects. That's how we build communities. After the last event, one young contributor was very proud to see one of his photo contributions adorning an article on Wikipedia (and rightly so - was a good shot). Obviously individuals do what they do and have their views, but I have (and I know Gnangarra has as well) often gone to a site that is about to disappear or radically change and take some sort of record. Over time I've been taking shots of the city train station from various views and when I get around to it I can sort them all and upload them (sometime after uploading the rest of the WTJ images - 10 gig per month DSL limits suck!), so we have a "picture in time" of that. As with this. It's not in any way radical, extreme, non-neutral or whatever to do this.

Sometimes pictures tell a story, and the less story-telling we do alongside it, the more powerful they are. As one journo I once knew said, "Pictures, it's nothing without pictures." Yes, this one is about the scene for a future controversial event whereas mine was simply capturing a place without much online coverage, but I get the impression reading this page that the issue has been with some of the attempted elaboration on the descriptors, rather than fundamental attributes of the event. Goes without saying that the standard of behaviour would be "act in a manner which promotes Wikipedia appropriately and informs people of its aims". I don't think the authors of this event, from reading the page, at all intended differently. Orderinchaos 15:48, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The section "Affected articles" is fine except for the paragraph at the end. It has nothing to do with the articles - why is it there? Hack (talk) 08:18, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Becasuse theres a whole host of other articles which are affected but I havent listed as I didnt want it turning into a battlefield on whether to include other articles or not. Gnan garra 10:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Each group will have a Wikipedian, and a guide ...?[edit]

And what else? Or is it a group of two? Mitch Ames (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

the aim will be to have people break into groups for the walk, numbers permitting each group will have someone to guide group based on the chosen walk as well someone with a working knowldedge of Wikis so as to ensure that new people attending have access to people with knowledge from whom they can get answers, this may be the same person or may two or three different people. If you'd like to take on the roll of a guide/wikimedian on the day let me know otherwise I'll just approach people on the morning. Gnan garra 14:52, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What do I need to participate?[edit]

This sounds like a very exciting event and I'm really delighted to see something happening in Perth! I am not a star photographer like JJ Harrison and nor do I own an expensive camera, is there still any way that I could participate (if I could get to Perth)? 110.174.224.43 (talk) 11:19, 12 March 2012 (UTC).[reply]

Of course, the more camera's taking photos the wider the perspective we all see our world differently, while JJ is wonderful a photographer he's here to explain how Commons works, so that people can learn from his experiences, ask him questions and share his knowledge. Come along enjoy the day, meet some people, make some friends and help to record how Perth foreshore looks on the 18 March 2012, I look forward to meeting you. Gnan garra 13:15, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, it's about participation. A star photographer (there may be a few) might pick out certain views to photograph, while others may have entirely different ideas about how to record the area - and likewise, visitors to Wikipedia or Commons may have different ideas of what they want to see. I've only got a point and shoot myself and am no expert, and my photos adorn a fair few articles around Perth and elsewhere. Additionally as Gnangarra says, it's also a social day out. Orderinchaos 06:03, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]