Welcome to Constant Etherpad!

These pads are archived each night (around 4AM CET) @ http://etherdump.constantvzw.org/
An RSS feed from the etherdump also appears on http://constantvzw.org/

To prevent your public pad from appearing in the archive and RSS feed, put or just leave the following (including the surrounding double underscores) anywhere in the text of your pad:

    __NOPUBLISH__

Changes will be reflected after the next update at 4AM.
Events:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_slogans


Beursschouwburg 2
18:00 - arrival
1 8: 15 - start introduction JFTR and link to what lead us to Chanting & Recording 30 min
18:45 - introduce food and resources - small break for grabbing food and installing last bits 10 min
18:55 - introduction Azahara (5 min)
19:00 - Azahara Performance (30 min ish)
19:30ish finish. - Short break to re-set the room (10 min)
19:40 - Oral history presentations (Round of introductions?) (all in 30 min) - Group discussion?
20:15 - Optional second part - editing for those who want to continue (45 min)
21:00ish - Round off


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/nov/13/helen-john-obituary




Beursschouwburg 1

In the occidental history, the publication has since the invention of its paper format, the book, a central position. The written forms, then more precisely printed ones, have become primary compared to other forms of communication. Today they remain primary in many domains, and particularly in academic spheres, where a proposition doesn’t really exist until it is published. In these domains, the publication has the power to make something exist.
It is also the case for new platforms for knowledge like Wikipedia, a project born in the year 2001 which changes the way writing and distributing knowledge has always worked. It proposes a participative platform, open to all and evolutive. But its validation system for the sources of knowledge remains in a tradition of primacy of the published: each information, to be added, must be justified by the quote of a published source. A similar validation system as in the academic spheres defines which information will fit into the online writing of history and knowledge that happens on Wikipedia, and those who will be excluded. — Through time, some publications have been identified as more legitimate than others. Wikipedia continues this tradition, asserting a hierarchy of judging sources, which postulates that an academic publication is more trustworthy than a self-published essay. Secondary publications (a publication about a topic) has more value and weight than a primary source. “Speaking of” has more value than “speaking”.
(historical memory, experiences, )






Myriam:
(Notes de lecture Quand les femmes témoignent)
- oral history and women's history are chronologically two parallel undertakings since the late 1960s
- oral history is necessary to the history of women to fill the documentary gaps of the written sources p.12
 
Distinction, but also permeability between 
oral history and oral tradition:
 
Oral history: history in the form of interviews / interviews of people
 
Oral tradition: "collective sources, transmitted from one generation to the next, and constituting a kind of commual memory, relating to the origins, the dynasties or the great historical events that marked it"
 
Particularities Oral history (in the sense of interviews / interviews)
 
Criticized aspects :
- memory problems, difficulty to trace a chronology especially long after the facts
- excluding topics p.120
- contradictory answers between the testimonies p.120
 
Positive aspects :
- More space for the interviewee. Brings topics that were not addressed at first, which are added to subsequent interviews, so participates in research
- access to the sociological profile of the persons interviewed (class) not present in the written documents
- possibility to ask delicate questions in a roundabout way, to analyze the way things are said to get answers that wouldn’t be available if asked too straightforwardly (silences, hesitations, repetitions, laughs, your etc.)
- Hearing opinions that are not part of "official" opinions 
à Link with Azahara's presentation?
- Mercedes Vilanova (wiki page only in Catalan): it's not about '' giving a voice '' (recurrent expression) to anyone (everyone speaks in different places), but to listen to ''invisible majorities '' and integrate them into the writing of history. '' P.13






Beursschouwburg 2

Schedule outline: 

18:00 - arrival
18:15 - start introduction JFTR and link to what lead us to Chanting & Recording 30 min
18:45 - introduce food and resources - small break for grabbing food and installing last bits 10 min
19:00 - introduction Azahara (1 min)
19:00 - Azahara Performance (30 min ish)
19:30ish finish. - Short break to re-set the room (10 min)
19:40 - Group discussion - 
20:00 - Optional second part - editing for those who want to continue (45 min)
21:00ish - Round off






Loraine: 
In the occidental history, the publication has since the invention of its paper format, the book, a central position. The written forms, then more precisely printed ones, have become primary compared to other forms of communication. Today they remain primary in many domains, and particularly in academic spheres, where a proposition doesn’t really exist until it is published. In these domains, the publication has the power to make something exist.
It is also the case for new platforms for knowledge like Wikipedia, a project born in the year 2001 which changes the way writing and distributing knowledge has always worked. It proposes a participative platform, open to all and evolutive. But its validation system for the sources of knowledge remains in a tradition of primacy of the published: each information, to be added, must be justified by the quote of a published source. A similar validation system as in the academic spheres defines which information will fit into the online writing of history and knowledge that happens on Wikipedia, and those who will be excluded. — Through time, some publications have been identified as more legitimate than others. Wikipedia continues this tradition, asserting a hierarchy of judging sources, which postulates that an academic publication is more trustworthy than a self-published essay. Secondary publications (a publication about a topic) has more value and weight than a primary source. “Speaking of” has more value than “speaking”.
(historical memory, experiences, )




(Mia)




Myriam:
Reading notes taken from Quand les femmes témoignent

- oral history and women's history are chronologically two parallel undertakings since the late 1960s
- oral history is necessary to the history of women to fill the documentary gaps of the written sources p.12
 
Come back ton the Distinction, but also permeability between oral history and oral tradition:
 
Oral history: history in the form of interviews / interviews of people
 
Oral tradition: 
"collective sources, transmitted from one generation to the next, and constituting a kind of commual memory, relating to the origins, the dynasties or the great historical events that marked it"
 
Particularities Oral history (in the sense of interviews / interviews)
 
While there are some Criticized aspects like :
- memory problems, difficulty to trace a chronology especially long after the facts
- difficulty to focus on the topic that is being researched p.120
- contradictory answers between the testimonies p.120
 
There also are specific positive aspects like :
- having access to the sociological profile of the persons interviewed, which not always present in written documents
- possibility to ask delicate questions in a roundabout way, to analyze the way things are said to get answers that wouldn’t be available if asked too straightforwardly (silences, hesitations, repetitions, laughs, your etc.) p.111
- More space for the interviewee to brings topics that were not addressed at first. These new topics can then change the orientation of the historian's research and bring new angles to historical events p.101
- Hearing opinions that are not part of "official" opinions 
- The historian Mercedes Vilanova said the many interviews she conducted with working class and illiterate people influenced greatly her researches about spanish history. Talking about oral history she said: it's not about '' giving a voice '' (which is a recurrent expression) to anyone (everyone speaks in different places), but to listen to ''invisible majorities '' and integrate them into the writing of history. '' P.13




After Performance: 

Round of introductions (name, where you're from, what you do or what brought you here)











Beursschouwburg 3

PLAN



////////



NOTES BSB 3

Mia + Sarah
Welcome
Ahead of starting, to orientation: Languages (We will start with a short presentation in English, followed by etc.) Toilets, child-care and food. 

Loraine: 5 min

Myriam 10 mins  
-- slide: oral history essay
- When we talk about oral history on wikipedia, the fact that it is actually very hard to find information about the official position of wikipedia on the subject already tells a lot
- Appart from the encyclopedic article on the topic ''oral history'', all we found was conversations scattered in different talk pages, a few projects trying to adress the subject and 
- an ''essay page'' on Oral history, which is a page written by members exposing opinions or advice on the platform though it doesn't have a status as strong as official guidelines
-- slide: ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reliability_of_Wikipedia
- Anyways, it seems as though the Wikipedia community suffers a bit from an inferiority complex and is scared to death of not being percieved as a serious and reliable encyclopedia. It even has it's own wikipedia page to prove it is

-- slide welcome to wikipedia
- That's why it fears anything that could question the three core content policies : ''Neutral point of view'',  ''verifiability'' and ''no original research''
and oral history challenges all three of them!
- Acording to these policies, Interviewing people about specific subjects and using this material directly as source is considered unreliable, because it's considered original research since it hasn't been published in other reliable media first. 

- So is wikipedia really the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, well not without written sources!

- The Oral Citations Project is a interesting research project funded by a Wikimedia Foundation grant to help overcome a lack of published material in emerging languages on Wikipedia and explores ways by which alternative methods of citation can be employed when formal printed/textual sources for a commonplace object of lived knowledge do not exist.

- ''The problem with the sum of human knowledge, however, is that it is far greater than the sum of printed knowledge.'' - User:Aprabhala

-- slide statistics
- Publishing is not equally accessible in all countries for financial or cultural reasons
these stats show this clearly: 

- Even though the project got funding by the wikimedia foundation, it still is meeting a lot of resistance from many people in the Wikipedia community
- (By the way we also got funding from wikimedia specifically to adress the gender gap, and it doesn't shelter us from having our edits removed and being told it's not the place to talk about gender equality)

- In the discussion page of the project a wikipedian said ''Just because something is true[1], doesn't mean it belongs in Wikipedia.'' and would rather give up on the original aspiration of gathering all the world's knowledge in one place, than creating what they see as a doorway for anyone to be able to record themselves and write unverifiable articles

--slide NY TIMES
- To illustrate, heres an quote from an article written about the instigator of the oral history project, Achal Prabhala:
'' In the case of dabba kali, a children’s game played in the Kerala state of India, there was a Wikipedia article in the local language, Malayalam, that included photos, a drawing and a detailed description of the rules, but no sources to back up what was written. Other than, of course, the 40 million people who played it as children.
There is no doubt, he said, that the article would have been deleted from English Wikipedia if it didn’t have any sources to cite. Those are the rules of the game, and those are the rules he would like to change, or at least bend, or, if all else fails, work around - http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/08/business/media/a-push-to-redefine-knowledge-at-wikipedia.html

- So it seems like there might be some differences in how the content policies are applied according to the different languages platform where we might find some wiggle room
- The project suggests conducting interviews, which could then be used as source material to cite
- Some users are proposing to post these interviews first in a sister platform called wikinews, because while  No original research is a policy in Wikipedia, Original reporting is a policy in Wikinews. By having these oral sources first published online and checked with the Accreditation policy we can assume the reliability of the interview, they could then become reliable sources to cite on wikipedia

-As of now oral citations are still considered to be illustrations in articles, but the dialogue is opened to find solutions











Sarah - 7min



Material and resources: 
(which means that it would be interesting if it was mentioned as a specific type of oral history on the wikipedia article about oral history)
Templates for naming audio-files on Wikipedia https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:List_of_audio_templates_for_the_Wikipedias/list#EN.wikipedia.org
oral history sources:

Sharing knowledge orally

Privileged access to writing history

wikipedia requests

Chanting:

audio archive:

Video:

Slogans:
    http://www.foleffet.com/40-ANS-DE-SLOGANS-FEMINISTES

Keywords we have been using to search for things: 
- Protest Slogans
- Oral History
- Chanting
- Protest songs
- Banners 
- Alternative history sources
- Ways of recording