Learning and Evaluation/Archive/Share Space/GLAM content donations

This page is for sharing GLAM content donation program examples! Please post questions and comments on the talk page about each other's activities. Not a part of this group? No problem, just use the templates below to add your program experience to the bottom.

Team Program Leaders

Claudia (Austria)

Cooperation with the Austrian Federal Monuments Office

In context of our cooperation with the Austrian Federal Monuments Office, WMAT receives data about all listed monuments in Austria and in addition access to their (historical) library. The data is used for several projects: The "Denkmallisten Projekt" processes the data from PDF files into Wiki lists. These lists then serve as a basis for the Wiki Loves Monuments contest. To make use of the library ressources, WMAT supports a "Wikipedian in residence" in the Federal Monuments Office, who is equipped with two book scanners. The Austrian Federal Monuments Office provides an office for his activities.

Resources used (not including WLM)

Almost full-time Wikipedian in Residence
(Endless) Volunteer time for editing the monument lists (no figures available)
Roughly 6000 Euros for technical equipment
Staff-time for support and infrastructure

Programming activities

Apart from the ongoing activities mentioned above (editing the monuments list, scanning and uploading books), there are regular meetings between our volunteers and representatives of the Federal Monuments Office in order to evaluate the progress and discuss further steps. We created information material about the cooperation (flyers, website), there is a cooperation in context of the annual WLM contest (The Federal Monuments Office features an own subcategory for pictures taken on Federal Monuments Day, which also takes place in September), we feature each other and present the cooperation at events and fairs

Participants

One Wikipedian in Residence and the Head of Communications of the Austrian Federal Monuments Office, who are the prinicipal points of contact for their respective organizations; roughly 100 volunteers over the last (almost) three years who worked on the monuments list and/or used scanned files; WMAT board; two WMAT staff members; some executives and team members of the Austrian Federal Monuments Office

Goals of the program

Document all listed Austrian monuments
Enhance the quality of the monument-related articles and photographs
Sensitize general public and public administration regarding the importance of open data

Any program evaluation strategy used?

Tracking progress of the monument list project: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProjekt_%C3%96sterreichische_Denkmallisten
Tracking scanned files: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:CPB-Scan

Any program results or highlights you were able to measure?

Most monuments in Austria are documented by name, geo location and with a picture. Growing number of descriptions/articles.
Zedler Award 2012 for the monument list project
"Lesenswerte Artikel": http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:%C3%96sterreichische_Denkmallisten/Galerie
High community involvement
40 community members visiting the Wikipedian in Residence and exmining the ressources in the library (usually not accessible for the general public)
Approx. 17.000 Scans
Aprox. 2 million page impressions of results that are already used in Wikipedia articles
Media coverage
New contacts to other institutions / door opener fot other cooperations

Are there any program results that you would like to measure?

-

Is there anything else you would like to share?

All said above.

Jean-Frédéric (France)

Cooperation with the French National Library

The en:Bibliothèque nationale de France (French national Library), as part of an agreement signed in April 2010 with Wikimédia France, donated 1,365 digitised public domain works, taken from its digital library Gallica, so they can be proofread by contributors to Wikisource.

Resources used

Chapter volunteer time:
- discussions and negotiations with the Library upstream − over the course of two years (outside of the scope defined here)
- Three-men team of volunteer developers − over 6 months, very intense in two months (largely unquantified)
- Project steering by two chapter board members
Editors time: input and involvement from the Wikisource community (unquantified)
Help from a Wikimedia Foundation system administrator
Server location (three months): 180€

Programming activities

Signing of an agreement in April 2010. Technical project of converting the resources provided by the BnF (images in TIFF, OCRs in ALTO) into DjVu format that can be used on Wikisource − Research & development (notably on DjVu), writing of a conversion line, upload on Wikimedia Commons (by a Wikimedia Foundation system administrator using a server-side upload) & initialisation on Wikisource. Creation of special templates on Wikimedia Commons. Extraction of more than 22,000 files from the books. Writing of a progress report for the Library and of a project report for the chapter.

Participants

Three volunteer developers − Seb35, Plyd and Jean-Frédéric. Project steering by board members Remi Mathis & Serein, the former also served as liaison with the Library. Wikisource advising by VIGNERON. Help from Wikimedia Commons guru Multichill and WMF sysadmin Tim Starling.

Goals of the program

To help the Library experiment with collaborative proofreading
To bring new content − 1400 public domain books − to Wikisource
To develop public awareness of Wikisource
To gain wide acknowledgement for the chapter

Any program evaluation strategy used?

Seb35, assisted by the rest of the developer team, devised metrics to measure the progress of the proofreading (building among other things on the Levenshtein distance) − report is available here.

Any program results or highlights you were able to measure?

Upload of ~1400 DjVu on Wikimedia Commons (category) − equivalent of 573 310 pages.
Upload of ~1400 TIFF on Wikimedia Commons (category)
Extraction of 22000 images from the books (though not uploaded on Wikimedia Commons)
In Wikisource terminology, 46 books fully finished, 88 to validate
Determination of project editors demographics (appeared editors on the corpus were mainly Wikisource regulars).

Are there any program results that you would like to measure?

Data extraction proved too tedious to regularly update the progress report.

Is there anything else you would like to share?

For more information on this program, all resources are linked from BnF − Wikimédia France cooperation project.

Maarten (Netherlands)

Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed partnership

The Dutch Rijksdienst voor het Cultureel Erfgoed released their complete photo collection (of half a million items) under a free license. We're uploading these photos and volunteers are helping to identify if there is a Rijksmonument in the photo.

Resources used

Building a general bot (source) took a couple of hours
Building the RCE bot (source) took several evenings of fine tuning
Setting up all the project pages and templates for the project was done in a weekend
Setting up the data ingestion template took several evenings because the data changed during the process
Bot ran for several weeks on the Toolserver
Thousands of hours were spend by volunteers to identify images, organize them and add images to lists of monuments

Programming activities

Setup some pages and templates at Commons. Wrote a bot. Uploaded a lot of images.

Participants

Me and Bas are in contact with the RCE and are coordinating this upload. Several very active volunteers helped organize the images and kept the unused images list from overflowing.

Goals of the program

We didn't set hard goals to reach. We did have some general goals:

Upload all the 500.000+ freely licensed photos of the RCE to Wikimedia Commons
Identification of Rijksmonuments for the RCE and get the data back to the RCE
In the end we want to have a photo for every Rijksmonument. With this project we hope to raise it from 70% to 80% illustrated.

Any program evaluation strategy used?

I compile statistics on a daily basis as part of the monuments database. Every once in a while I update the indexed images statistics and the RCE statistics.

Any program results or highlights you were able to measure?

We're not done yet. This is what we have so far:

Uploaded 466084 images of which 245289 (53%) have been identified with a Rijksmonument, 34.000 (7%) without a Rijksmonument and 186772 (40%) left to sort out

Are there any program results that you would like to measure?

The number of images in use over time in the different projects
The number of views the images are getting

Is there anything else you would like to share?

Non-Team Program Leaders