GLAM-on-Tour/2018/MAMCO/Feedback

Program

Participants

MAMCO

costs

Accomodation

Tools

Ideas

Feedback

GLAM on Tour June 22d – 24th 2018

Results

New Articles

de:Musée d’art moderne et contemporain (Genf) (MAMCO; started before the event & updated during the event)
de:Adelina von Fürstenberg
fr:Françoise Ninghetto
fr:Société genevoise d'instruments physiques
it:Utente:Alexmar983/Ulla von Brandenburg (I will publish it after other tasks)
it:Sylvie Fleury
it:Natacha Lesueur
it:Mai-Thu Perret
it:Marcia Hafif
fr:Église anglaise de Genève (I will update it)
de:Bâtiment d’art contemporain
de:Société genevoise d’instruments de physique (SIP) (I will update it)
de:Holy Trinity Church (Genf) (with new photo)
de:Lionel Bovier
de:Bains des Pâquis
en:Holy Trinity Church, Geneva
de:Catherine Queloz (with photo)
de:Le Magasin
de:Phare des Pâquis (with new photo)

Other results

de:Musée d’Art Moderne et Contemporain (disambiguation page)
de:Religieuse (new redirect with new photo)

New Photos

New Photos & categories for:
- Françoise Ninghetto
- Lionel Bovier

All 43 images of art collections of African artists are now uploded in commons:category:Collections of MAMCO

commons:category:Mokè

commons:category:J. D. 'Okhai Ojeikere

commons:Category:Kane Kwei Carpentry Workshop

commons:Category:Cheik Ledy

Discussions

I'm not happy with this first choice for a GLAM-on-Tour location in Romandie. A contemporary art museum is difficult for two reasons: the objects are not old enough to be in the Public Domain and are generally rather hard to describe for the average person. An archaeological site in Romandie (f.ex. Roman museums in Lausanne, Martigny, or Avenches) or the Chillon Castle for instance would have been better options. --Pakeha (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that with "contemporary art museum" is general a Problem. This type of art are generally to be subject to restrictions of the copyright act, it is never enough old to be in the public domain. A contemporary art museum can typically don't give a CC-by-sa Licences. But the other bigger Problem with Art from living people are; "have you enough science-based literature?". Have the Museum a library with more than exhibition catalogue's? It is a science-based research library with enough secondary literature? Elsewise whe get into trouble with en:Wikipedia:No original research.

I see two big Problems, why are this GLAM are not a good idea.

1. No Photo's from the exposition and work of art (not a result an Commons).

2. Problems to writhing Artikel's, since we have not enough literature and so we became into trouble with "No original research" (not a lot of new ore upgraded articles).

Have we with this two problems a good profit and loss statement from Wikimedia? --Bobo11 (talk) 10:31, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Yes, a modern art museum is not the best choice for contributions to Wikimedia Commons. Nevertheless, the MAMCO has a very rich library that is not available to the general public, and they will select from it and give us access to interesting books about the contemporary artists they exhibit or have exhibited. This should leave Wikipedians many options to contribute to writing or improving articles. My main regret is that their books are mainly in French, and a few in English, so only participants who can read that language will benefit from the stay, nevertheless, they will be able to edit Wikipedia in any language they prefer.

--Flor WMCH (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2018 (UTC

I am very happy with the choice of this museum, because concerning the gender gap for instance, the museum has a rich collection of past women artists exhibition. They have made to effort to prepare documentation by subject, and have not forgotten women. This is a very positive action that I have not seen i other GLAM events so far: we had to design our own working list on women, and this was time consuming. Also it is a nice change to be able to write on contempoary art. Nattes à chat (talk) 06:27, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]