Talk:Events/Proposal - WMUK, Digital Disruption and Demos

From Wikimedia UK
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please do discuss the proposal and ideas here. We're looking forward to hearing from you. --Stevie Benton (talk) 17:15, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Is this appropriate?[edit source]

I can see the potential for collaboration with Demos. But Bold Creative is an Advertising agency and it just isn't appropriate for us to get close to such an organisation. We recently had a whole series of discussions with PR people, that was fairly contentious but at least we weren't being partial between agencies as we were talking to a trade body that presumably they could all join. But this not only looks like collaboration with marketing people, but it smacks of us developing a special relationship with one particular agency. I suspect that would be unwise even if it could be done in a way that didn't make life more difficult for the many volunteers who try to keep spam off the pedia. WereSpielChequers (talk) 22:16, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

    • Thanks for your comments, much appreciated. I understand your concerns, so let me reassure you. We aren't even remotely coming at this from an advertising, marketing, promotional perspective *at all*. Bold have done some incredible work in the digital space in highlighting some of the problems, risks and dangers that young people (in particular) face online. Their Digital Disruption project is a prime example of the work they've done which shows enormous potential. I'm supposed to not even be thinking of working today (so don't tell anyone I've looked at this!) but I hope that if you can spare ten minutes to take a look at the Digital Disruption project website you might get more of a sense of how we can make this a relevant, useful, significant piece of work. It's here. --Stevie Benton (talk) 09:54, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
      • I can see where you are coming from with the digital disruption project, can you rework this into WMUK, Digital Disruption and Demos? If we can make this clear that we are collaborating with that project rather than the agency behind it then I'm more relaxed. Some of the PR people might be useful in advising us how to collaborate with such a project whilst retaining neutrality between agencies. WereSpielChequers (talk) 14:21, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
        • I see your point. I do think though that taking that approach could be mistakenly construed as dishonest (ie. it looks like we're hiding something). It's very simple to connect Bold and Digital Disruption. If we were to at any point to tender for advertising or marketing work, then yes, it would be a genuine concern and we'd of course have to declare that. But at this point I see nothing to worry about, especially as the Digital Disruption project clearly shows lots of overlap with our areas of interest. I'm willing to be persuaded, of course. --Stevie Benton (talk) 11:48, 23 July 2012 (UTC)
          • Rebecca Ford, Director of Digital Disruption here. Just to clarify, Bold Creative is a youth communications agency that works mostly on social and educational projects concerning young people. Digital Disruption started out as a Bold Creative project and is still managed by Bold Creative staff, but in October 2011 Digital Disruption was registered as an independent not-for-profit company (Limited by Guarantee, with no share capital - registered number 07824323) with purely social objectives. Digital Disruption's company mission is "To realise the Internet’s potential to benefit individuals and society – as something that informs, empowers, liberates and enlightens". I hope this helps to alleviate your concerns regarding partnerships with commercial organisations, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts on the proposed event. —Preceding unsigned comment added by User:TheDigitalDisruptionProject (talkcontribs)
            • I've boldly moved the page to a more appropriate name. It shouldn't matter to us if Digital Disruption has links, even seconded staff from an agency. But our links to Wikipedia are such that we need to remain at arms length from any marketing agency. WereSpielChequers (talk) 18:00, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

Topics to cover?[edit source]

It'd be interesting to have a sort of A|B demo on some good/bad wiki articles, well sourced/poorly sourced journalism etc. I used to use this sort of activity when I was teaching with both more sciency articles (psychology) and stuff to do with argument structure (philosophy teaching).

I can imagine the range of audiences having different perspectives and materials to bring to that sort of activity.

It might also be interesting to talk about how users (pupils?) can work together to edit materials, and why this might be beneficial.