Submissions/Wikipedia Primary School research project poster

This is an Open submission for Wikimania 2017 that has not yet been reviewed by a member of the Programme Committee.

Submission no. 7009 Subject - P1

Title of the submission: Wikipedia Primary School research project poster

Type of submission (lecture, panel, tutorial/workshop, roundtable discussion, lightning talk, poster, birds of a feather discussion): Poster

Author of the submission: Florence Devouard (user:anthere); This poster is based on the research work related to the project Wikipedia Primary School implemented by the Laboratory of visual culture at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland (SUPSI) in collaboration with the University of Cape Town. The research team involves Iolanda Pensa, Florence Devouard, Giovanni Profeta, Tobias Schoenwetter, Isla Haddow-Flood, Heather Ford, Serena Cangiano, Fabian Frei, Marco Lurati, Giancarlo Gianocca, Douglas Scott, Theresa Hume, Erica Litrenta, Wikimedia ZA, Wikimedia CH, the Africa Centre with the financial support of FNS and the South African research agency. The project is conceived by Iolanda Pensa (principal investigator).

Language of presentation: English

E-mail address: fdevouardanthere.org

Username: Anthere

Country of origin: France, Italy and Switzerland

Affiliation, if any (organisation, company etc.): Laboratory of visual culture at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland (SUPSI); Wikimedia Italia and Wikimedia CH

Personal homepage or blog: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_Primary_School_SSAJRP_programme

Abstract (up to 300 words to describe your proposal): How can we produce or improve a selection of articles on Wikipedia? How do we know what we need to improve? Once identified, how do we trigger that improvement? Are there ways to trigger the involvement of scholars? Within the project Wikipedia Primary School we selected 100 articles related to the South African curriculum and we tested methodologies to produce, review and improve them. What emerged from our experience is that contests, the involvement of scholars and edit-a-thons with advanced wikipedians appear to be the most efficient ways to trigger the production, the review and the improvement of articles. According to our three-year experience, general edit-a-thons, the involvement of journals and the existing Wikipedia tools designed for triggering collaborations (such as wiki-projects, wiki-portals and quality assessments) appear inefficient. Furthermore the involvement of scholars appears much more efficient when is developed outside Wikipedia and then brought to Wikipedia and general articles appears particularly difficult to be improved.; The evaluation of the methods tested to enhance the production of Wikipedia articles about the South African primary school curriculum is based on qualitative analysis and on the use of visual information based on Wikipedia to trace changes

What will attendees take away from this session?: The goal of the project was to provide wikimedians a review of tools which can contribute to trigger the improvement of specific content on Wikipedia. This review can be particularly relevant for the implementation and further development of thematic projects, i.e. projects focusing in increasing and improving on Wikipedia medical content, articles related to women, archeology or topics specifically related to GLAMs. The poster will present some insights about the methodologies implemented and share some visualisations.

Theme of presentation

WikiCulture & Community

For workshops and discussions, what level is the intended audience?

Length of session (if other than 25 minutes, specify how long)

Will you attend Wikimania if your submission is not accepted?: yes

Slides or further information (optional)

Special requests: This poster proposition is made in parallel to a lecture submission [1]. Whilst we would highly prefer a lecture to present the work done, its results, and key outcome, we submit this poster in case the lecture is not selected by the content committee so that a little part of our research is presented to the Wikimania community.

Is this Submission a Draft or Final?

This is a Completed submission for Wikimania 2017 ready to be reviewed by a member of the Programme Committee.

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 a hash and four tildes. (# ~~~~).

Ziko (talk) 20:58, 4 April 2017 (UTC) Actually, we are busy in Germany, Austria and Switzerland with the Klexikon. Maybe we should talk about primary schools at occasion? Ziko (talk) 21:07, 4 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
1. Ziko, let's do that. Would enjoy knowing more of the current Klexikon state. Anthere (talk) 11:18, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:49, 10 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Much of my great love for Wikipedia came from my love for encyclopedias, which I developed when I was five years old and read an encyclopedia made especially for children. Although it had its flaws, it was good enough to bring to where I am today, dedicating much of my waking time to Wikipedia in one way or another. This is a very interesting topic. Related: Submissions/Working with kids : Wikipedia vs Vikidia. --Amir É. Aharoni (talk) 10:07, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
GastelEtzwane (talk) 12:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
VMasrour (WMF) (talk) 14:42, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]