Yesterday, I attended a free event at the National Library of Scotland, Edinburgh. It was a Wikipedia Edit-a-thon on all things Gothic, as part of Robert Louis Stevenson Week – happy 166th birthday, RLS!
Wikipedia Edit-a-thons/Editathons are where a group of people gather together to add and improve Wikipedia entries on a specific subject, in this case Gothic fiction, architecture etc. I saw the event advertised via Twitter midweek and I was interested because:
- free training in Wikipedia editing is a great idea;
- I adore RLS and have been to some events in previous years (when it was an RLS Day; it has since grown to a Week) so the chance to make a Gothic/RLS-themed badge (using fab atmospheric designs of bats, howling dogs, RLS etc by Tessa Asquith-Lamb), see the RLS exhibition and attend a talk on illustrations of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde by NLS Curator Andrew Martin (which was really interesting and funny) seemed too good to miss out on; and
- the clincher: when I looked through the list of ideas of articles to be improved, I spotted that Mary Stewart’s Touch Not the Cat was one of the books listed!
So of course I booked a place. I was a little nervous, never having done any Wikipedia editing, but it was a fascinating, enjoyable day. The ‘Wikimedian’, Ewan McAndrew from the University of Edinburgh, was excellent and supported by helpful NLS staff. The Visual Editor option on Wikipedia makes it all feel similar to using WordPress – perhaps as I improve on one, I’ll improve on the other (here’s hoping). And there is a great template on Wikipedia that lets people know that you are a newbie editor and basically begs others to be patient and kind!
It was an interesting morning. Something I had never really considered before is that Wikipedia, being an encyclopedia, is interested in verifiability more than truth – don’t bother putting information on Wikipedia if you can’t back it up with sources. Accompanying this is the generalisation that blogs should not be cited as they might not be reliable sources.
I had thought that I would tie in to the Gothic theme of the day by citing Mary Stewart’s ‘Notes on the Novel’ (from her lecturing days – including notes on Ann Radcliffe) – available right there in the NLS in the Special Collection Room – but, as these have not been published, I can’t use them as a source. Nor can I use her letter in which she reveals her thoughts on being classified as a Gothic writer, as that hasn’t been published either. I get it, of course, I just hadn’t given it any thought before.
[UPDATE: I didn’t mention that one of the Five Pillars of Wikipedia is that there are No Firm Rules. So, generally speaking, primary sources are not used – but you can make a case for using them to improve an article. Saturday’s Editathon was followed up by more links, tips and advice from the organiser, from which I want to quote the following: ‘the act of “publication” is important because of the role of editorial oversight and peer review to ensure quality’ but with ‘notes and personal correspondence in which she gives her views on her own life and career “publication” becomes much less important’ and so I ‘could reasonably cite some unpublished material’. I think I will give it a try!]
After our training was a nice lunch (great veggie platters!) and there were even home-made RLS-moustache-shaped biscuits. Nobly, I took mine home for my son: it was very tasty, apparently.
Then it was upstairs to the Reading Room to get editing. I am not the fastest learner and I need to look at examples of good Wikipedia pages (as provided at the training) to see how to improve on what I have done with the Touch Not the Cat page. Yesterday, I monkeyed about with the first section, adding little pieces of info and giving it the headings of Background and Setting. I left the Plot section alone – it seems a bit too spoilerish to me but I don’t feel confident about changing it because that’s someone else’s work (ditto there is a reference to a blog, as above these aren’t generally seen as good sources and it seems to be a dead link anyway but it still feels a bit pushy if I delete it…) I have added sections on Genre and Intertextuality too. I’m not sure if I’m happy with any of it so I will have another look at it after work tomorrow if I can.
[UPDATE: Having explored Wikipedia, I now know that spoilers should not be deleted solely because they are spoilers.]
I have inserted a template on the page saying it is being changed and inviting others to help with this. Please do! It would be so good if we created a huge and reliable Wikipedia presence for Mary Stewart. Here is the Touch Not the Cat page – have a look and have a go!
[UPDATE: Tip: You will see within the references in the Wikipedia Touch Not the Cat page that I cite the Australian Author magazine several times. Its archive goes back to 2013 (AA Online) or 2005 (AA Singles) – I got hold of this 1977 article by emailing them. Fortunately, I received a friendly and helpful response to my email and, even more fortunately, this article has survived in the incomplete back catalogue.]
The day ended with us getting to take home some swag, as pictured above, and we were given a certificate for taking part. The certificates were created using the printing press on which the first edition of Treasure Island was printed – I think I’ve got that right, I felt a bit swoony with the gorgeousness of it all when we were told about that.
Please get in touch if you have any Wikipedia editing or WordPress blogging tips to share. Has anyone else taken part in an editathon?
Mary Queen of Plots 
What a fantastic idea! It sounds like such a worthwhile thing to do & you’re learning skills that will help you work on more Wikipedia entries in the future – spreading the word about Mary Stewart. I’ve just read Wind off the Small Isles which I enjoyed as I hadn’t read it before. I’ve been reading about Crete & have got Moonspinners off the shelf for a reread although as it must be 30 years since I read it, it will be like a first read as I remember nothing about the plot at all. Also a RLS fan & plan to read Weir of Hermiston soon after hearing a BBC Bookclub program about Kidnapped.
LikeLike
Thanks for your comment – I recommend going along to a wiki editathon event if you can, it offers a good introduction to editing. As you say, what I hope to get out of it is spreading the word about Mary Stewart, also it turned out to be a great day in its own right.
I’m glad you enjoyed The Wind Off the Small Isles, I think it’s a lovely story. It does leave me wanting more – I really wish she’d written the third part of the trilogy. (And just generally written more books.)
You certainly have some treats ahead with the Moon-Spinners and RLS, I hope you get the time to savour them. I’ll have to look up the BBC programme you mention on Kidnapped, it sounds as though I’d love it.
Thanks for getting in touch – I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on The Moon-Spinners once you’ve (re-)read it, so please call in again!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have mixed feelings about Wikipedia. Ideally it is the democratisation of knowledge/education; in practice those who run it tend to be those with the time on their hands to do so, not the best qualified. The standards of writing vary wildly on Wikipedia as well.
Unfortunately, Wikipedia’s notion of verifiability (and notability – its other obsession), seems to revolve solely round Google. If it’s not on Google, more or less forget it. Yet Google feeds into Wikipedia, and Wikipedia uses Google – it’s essentially a feedback loop. They prefer web references to books which is dangerous as web links often have a short lifespan and the article thus deteriorates quickly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Welcome and thanks for your comments! I have to agree with your reservations – although, to be fair, I think that Wikipedia is aware of these problems too and try to address them, in part by holding Editathons. Certainly it’s aware of gender imbalance and so offers Editathons for female participants only, or to increase wiki coverage of female scientists etc. As to writing standards and so on, very few pages, I think, are the work of only one author: look at the edit history of a specific wiki page and you will often see screeds of amendments and editors.
I completely agree with what you say about wiki and Google. And it is certainly important to keep links updated. Book references are allowable of course but there must be the danger of editors creating quotes or even books to back up their arguments, whereas a (working!) link means any reader can verify the reference online just as they use wiki online.
As you say, there is a gap between the ideal and the actual, but the democratisation of knowledge and education is such a worthy goal for us all to work towards!
Have you attended an Editathon? I am assuming you live in Edinburgh’s Corstorphine as that is the only Corstorphine I know – there are frequent Wikipedia events available in Edinburgh, often advertised via Eventbrite. If you have not participated in an Editathon, I thoroughly recommend it – and you can pass on your concerns there too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I edit Wikipedia anonymously these days and I tend to think its golden age (if it had one) is past, because it has been overtaken by bureaucracy. I try and get hard copy references to things in when I can, but I have become a bit fed up with it TBH. Stylistically, Britannica is much better but has a narrower range.
Yes, I live in the west of Edinburgh – technically a bit outside old Corstorphine but the blog and book I’m writing include the surrounding area. I have tracked down a lot of stuff which is on neither Wikipedia nor Google – we tend to assume everything is online nowadays, it isn’t.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have just followed your blog – and had my heart warmed by reference to Robert Louis Stevenson. I shall be exploring further.
I work in a library, including its Local Studies department, so I am well aware not everything of interest is available online, or has even been published in books!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks I’m going to follow your blog too. 🙂 This is one of my earlier entries on Elizabeth Gaskell’s Edinburgh connections –
https://litcors.wordpress.com/2015/08/22/elizabeth-gaskell-and-the-screws/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks for sharing this post, I have just read it but every time I try to ‘like’ it, it jumps to a blank page. Hopefully just a glitch, I’ll try again later.
LikeLiked by 1 person