Wikimedia and Libraries User Group/Meeting minutes/2018/March/27

March 27-28, 2018

The meeting started with a few introductions from members who couldn’t make it to the last meeting. After which, the committee worked on the details of managing the user group.

Processes for the group

Discussion about what constitutes a quorum considering that we are a busy and distributed group.

For voting, a quorum of 5 is required, and if voting, simple majority would suffice. Can vote via email. Can hold a meeting with fewer people than a quorum, just not make decisions. Discussion of major topics should be announced ahead of time so that people have a heads up as to what is on the table for a given meeting. Also, announce major topics to the wider community for feedback with the deadline for feedback (typically next WLUG meeting)

Guidelines for running a meeting - how to take turns as we are all equals?

Instead of having a formal chair, rotate facilitation among the group, the facilitator assembles agenda and is responsible for organising the next meeting time slot and handover to next facilitator (based on expected availability).

SWOT Analysis

Strengths

Diverse group: countries, gender
Diversity in library types: “state”, “academic/research”, no public librarian but some of us work with public librarians
Library knowledge, Wikipedia knowledge
Support of other members of the User Group
Experience in working in the Library+Wikipedia intersection, lots of know-how
some WMF staff support
One of the strengths of this group is the fact that there are some founding members still here and could pass on some experiences
Representation from a variety of institution types (in terms of how they are structured, audiences served), gender diversity, the range of Wikipedia experience (including long-term and active Wikipedians).
Support of our user group
Demonstrated experience working in outreach / with the library and broader heritage community

Weaknesses

No resources, no budget, all volunteers (with other busy lives)
Just advisory. No capacity to enforce decisions, only to influence
Multiple time zones, makes it harder to hold meetings
Newness of the group, most of us have never worked together before
Coming from different backgrounds, timezones, cultures and having different temperaments
Inability to meet in person
Relationship with Wikipedia Library is somewhat unclear (goals are somewhat different?)
Inability to resource Wikimedia projects that libraries might want to undertake, difficult to locate local Wikipedians to engage with them
Could be more geographically diverse, particularly representation from the global south [need a better term - feel free to supply!]
Lack deep experience with public libraries
Perception of people who are “paid” to do work - “being accused of conflict of interest crimes”

Opportunities

Spreading the message to the wider library community (staff and patrons) and engaging with them to shift attitudes
Advocating for Wikimedia projects before librarians themselves and the academics
Creating ways for more joint projects between libraries and Wikipedians (edit-athon, digitization, etc)
Roll out more of OCLC course “Wikipedia + Libraries: Better Together” (or things like it)’
Engaging a professional workforce and getting them to see their work as reflected in and important to their future
Chance to extend knowledge about work on Wikipedia to broad audiences that are served by libraries
Attitudes have changed so that librarians are really open to the message of collaboration
Librarians can be great advocates for Wiki work
Opportunity to model peer behaviour

Threats

Conflict of interest on-wiki as paid editors. Need to remind everyone (librarians and Wikipedians) of en:WP:CURATOR (ok for librarians to write about collections, not a collection)