-
(speaking in Maori)
-
As has been explained,
I'm Siobhan Leachman.
-
I'm a Wikimedian from New Zealand.
-
I contribute to Wikidata,
-
as well as English Wikipedia
and the Wikimedia Commons.
-
I'd like to thank
the Wikimedia Foundation,
-
Wikimedia Deutschland,
-
and, in particular,
-
the organizing committee
of the WikidataCon
-
for enabling me to attend
this conference and present today.
-
Now, in this presentation,
-
I want to tell you about the vital role
-
I think Wikidata and Wikidata editors
can play in surfacing notable women.
-
I want to take you through my workflows,
-
ensuring that these underacknowledged
women and their work
-
can be added to Wikidata.
-
I want to show how the curation
of data on these women
-
can assist with the creation
of citable secondary sources.
-
This, in turn, can encourage and enable
-
the creation of Wikipedia articles
about these women
-
in a variety of languages.
-
Now, I'm sure you're aware
-
that Wikipedia editors are working hard
to write more articles on women.
-
Examples of projects
focusing on this type of work
-
are the Women in Red project
or the WikiProject Women Scientists.
-
But one of the main hurdles
I've experienced
-
when attempting to write
about women in Wikipedia
-
is the notability criteria.
-
When writing articles on women,
-
I've found this criteria
can be a challenge to achieve.
-
I've discovered women
are less likely to be written about
-
in citable secondary sources,
-
and this has particularly
been brought home to me
-
when I've attempted to write articles
about women and the scientists pre-1950.
-
However, just like in our Wiki projects,
-
there are plenty of researchers
and creators of secondary sources
-
out in the wider world
attempting to change this.
-
They just need to be pointed
in the direction of these women,
-
and I believe Wikidata can be their arrow.
-
Now, yes, like Wikipedia,
Wikidata has a notability criteria
-
that must be met.
-
But this criteria is a much lower bar.
-
I'm advocating using Wikidata
to get a foot in the Wiki door
-
for unrepresented groups.
-
By adding these women to Wikidata,
-
editors can then make it easier
-
for the data about them
to be collated, curated, and linked.
-
In doing so, it would make it easier
for researchers and writers,
-
the generators of these vital
secondary sources,
-
to find these women
-
and then to use the data
to guide their research.
-
Once coverage reaches
the Wikipedia notability threshold,
-
Wikipedia editors can then create articles
on these underrepresented people.
-
Now, I want to show you
how I put this into practice,
-
to take you through how I started
on this data journey,
-
and to give you examples
of the collaborations
-
I and others like me
have managed to forge,
-
enabling this type of work to be done.
-
Now, I tend to focus on data about women
in the field of natural history--
-
these women scientific illustrators,
collectors of specimens
-
as well as women scientists,
such as botanists and zoologists.
-
I became interested in these women
-
when I started volunteering
for the Smithsonian Transcription Center.
-
I helped transcribe
natural history specimens
-
or scientific handwritten field notebooks,
-
and, in doing so, I frequently
came across women,
-
many of whom had contributed
specimens to the Smithsonian
-
or had undertaken scientific research.
-
At the same time, I was volunteering
for the Biodiversity Heritage Library,
-
or BHL.
-
Now, BHL is the world's
largest open-access digital library
-
of biodiversity literature and archives.
-
Much of the biodiversity literature
they host is historic
-
and therefore in the public domain.
-
They've got an extensive collection
of scientific illustrations in Flickr.
-
So I would tag those images
with not just taxonomic names
-
but as well as illustrated tags.
-
That metadata is in turn ingested
and stored into BHL.
-
The hope is to use those tags
to become searchable
-
at some point in the future
on BHL's website.
-
But as an added bonus, many of these tags
have been incorporated into Wikicommons
-
as a result of those Flickr files
being bulk uploaded
-
by other Wikicommons editors.
-
It was while transcribing
with the Smithsonian
-
I met and started collaborating
with another volunteer,
-
Michelle Marshall.
-
Both of us were avid taggers
-
of BHL images,
-
and while doing this work,
-
both Michelle and I
were enthusiastically kept encouraged
-
by Grace Constantino, the BHL Outreach
and Communications Manager.
-
And while tagging, we would again
come across women,
-
so many women, amazing women,
-
about whom there appeared
little known or written.
-
Some of these women
would be illustrating multiple articles,
-
books, and scientific publications.
-
Others would be writing
the books or articles,
-
amassing collections of specimens,
or having species named after them.
-
Both Michelle and I were really keen
on making known more about these women,
-
but there was very little
about them on the internet.
-
Every once in a while,
-
there would be a women
who had significant coverage,
-
enough so there was a Wikipedia article
created about them,
-
but this was an exception
rather than the rule.
-
This lack of coverage
was frustrating to both of us,
-
and, as a result, I became keen
on learning how to edit Wikipedia.
-
Both the folk in the Smithsonian
and BHL were extremely encouraging.
-
They too were keen
on addressing this issue
-
of underrepresented women
-
and wanted to highlight
notable women in their collections
-
via various WikiProjects.
-
So both Michelle and I
started researching,
-
me with the aim of writing
Wikipedia articles,
-
her with the aim of writing blog posts
and enriching the BHL Instagram account.
-
Now, on the rare occasion we managed
to find enough sources and references
-
to get these women over
the English Wikipedia notability criteria,
-
I'd actually write an article.
-
But as I've explained, this tended to be
the exception rather than the rule.
-
Historically, much
of these women's illustration work
-
was not regarded
at the time of their creation
-
as being worthy of comment.
-
At most, they received a passing remark
in the reviews of the publication
-
or perhaps an acknowledgment
by the author of the work.
-
This lack results in them
being overlooked by library catalogs,
-
and they and their contributions
were simply not recorded.
-
They created scientific illustrations
-
so didn't tend
to exhibit in art galleries.
-
The art was created to enhance
the scientific publication
-
and wasn't treated as a stand-alone work,
-
worthy of critique and public display.
-
It was, therefore, very rare
to find enough sources
-
to get these women artists
over the notability hurdle.
-
But we tried.
-
Working together, Michelle and I
began researching these women
-
and gathering our information
into a Google spreadsheet,
-
Often, we'd track down enough data
to work out who they were,
-
the works they contributed to,
and who they worked for.
-
BHL recently enabled a full text search,
-
which has significantly improved
our ability to find information on them.
-
We'd search for and, if we were lucky,
find external identifiers,
-
such as the BHL creator ID
-
or the Stuttgart Scientific
Illustrators Database ID,
-
or if we were really lucky, a VIAF ID.
-
However, there was no guarantee
-
an external database
identifier would exist.
-
So we'd tag their plates in Flickr,
-
collate our research on these women
in our spreadsheets,
-
and then wait for more books and articles
-
and institution blogs
and research to be generated.
-
For me, getting them into Wikipedia
was the gold standard,
-
but I could stretch
the notability criteria only so far.
-
My first Wikipedia article
on a woman botanist
-
was nominated for deletion,
-
and ever since that experience,
I've been extremely careful
-
about ensuring I did everything possible
to meet the notability criteria.
-
But I was actively looking for ways
-
to make our work
more impactful and effective.
-
Now, at this point,
I know what you're thinking,
-
what about Wikidata?
-
And I completely agree.
-
As soon as I discovered Wikidata,
I took the leap and started editing.
-
But, again, unfortunately,
-
I came up against
the Wikidata notability criteria.
-
Early on, I had an item deleted
-
due to my failure to meet
even the Wikidata notability criteria.
-
I was having to meet even that low bar.
-
But this was all part
of my learning by mistakes,
-
and I soon adapted
my workflow to allow for this.
-
I realized I could ensure these women
met the Wikidata notability criteria
-
by creating at least
one valid WikiCite link.
-
So my workflow started
-
with me creating a Wikicommons
category page for these women
-
and then manually adding
this category to her illustrations,
-
the illustrations that had been
previously uploaded
-
from the BHL Flickr feed
-
into Wikicommons by other editors.
-
Once the category page was created,
-
I would then create
a Wikidata item for that woman,
-
including that category in the item.
-
I'd then begin to collate
-
all the information
and research we'd found out
-
about that particular woman.
-
I would autogenerate
a creator page in Wikicommons
-
via that Wikidata item.
-
I'd improve the structured data
of the scientific art in Wikicommons
-
by adding the creator markup
to each of her images.
-
And I believe this assists
with the structured data on Commons
-
as it links the Wikidata item
to the artist
-
and to the work in Commons.
-
I'd like to emphasize
this was a manual process.
-
I wasn't working from established dataset.
-
There is no established dataset
for these women that I can find.
-
I would also use the reference section
of the Wikidata statements,
-
not just to reference
the statements themselves,
-
but also with an eye to help collate
-
all the links we discovered
during our research.
-
I wanted to leave a research trail,
-
making it easier for me and others like me
-
to find these links
-
and then write either secondary sources
-
or, if appropriate,
a Wikipedia article on these women.
-
Obviously, if external
identifiers existed,
-
I wanted to include them.
-
Again, to my disappointment,
-
despite the prestige
of the works they were illustrating,
-
many of these women
were not listed in external databases.
-
I would always check VIAF,
-
the Virtual International
Authority File database.
-
But, from my personal experience,
-
there appears to be
a bias against illustrators,
-
no matter what their gender.
-
I admit this is anecdotal
-
because I'm unable to find
any research to support this.
-
But VIAF would often list
the author of the [inaudible] publication,
-
but not the illustrator.
-
And this would even be the case
-
even if the illustrations made up
a large proportion of the work,
-
or the woman was thanked profusely
on the dedication page.
-
I would also check the Stuttgart
Scientific Illustrators database.
-
This is one of the most
comprehensive databases
-
for scientific artists.
-
Sometimes the woman would be in there,
-
but sometimes not.
-
Although a fabulous starting point,
-
this database wasn't
as comprehensive as I needed.
-
But the wonderful thing about it
was how responsive its creator,
-
the History Department
of the University of Stuttgart,
-
was to emails.
-
Both Michelle and I would write to them,
-
including our research
on particular women illustrators,
-
asking for these women to be included.
-
Again, there is a threshold to this.
-
I certainly wouldn't write to them
-
unless I had reasonable
supporting evidence
-
to justify their inclusion.
-
But the information they needed
to generate an external identifier
-
was definitely less than what was needed
to do a Wikipedia article.
-
Folk in charge of this database
were very grateful for our input,
-
and once our research
was confirmed by them,
-
they would add these women
to their database
-
and then would generate
an external identifier.
-
They were also able to access resources
that neither Michelle nor I had access to.
-
Often, more data was added
on these women in the DSI database
-
as a result of their further research.
-
A Wikidata property had already
been created for this database,
-
and so once awarded,
-
it was an identifier I could then add
to the woman's Wikidata item.
-
Now, Michelle and I also contacted
the BHL about these women.
-
This is where our collaborative
relationship with Grace
-
came to the fore.
-
Grace would encourage us
to submit a request
-
that the woman's name be added
to the BHL catalog record.
-
This is a more convoluted process
than it might appear.
-
BHL metadata is sourced
from numerous contributing institutions.
-
Since it was a cataloging change,
-
the BHL protocol required that the change
be submitted as a change request
-
to the BHL cataloging group
for review and final approval.
-
So, again, to obtain
the change to the catalog
-
and the subsequent external identifier,
-
it wasn't an easy rubber stamp process.
-
We had to back up our request
with sources and proof
-
in order for the catalog to be changed.
-
However, because we were doing
this relatively frequently,
-
the catalog group
became used to our requests
-
and were very appreciative of our efforts.
-
If the necessary criteria was satisfied,
-
the institutions were prepared
to edit their metadata,
-
and in doing so,
create another external identifier,
-
the BHL creator ID.
-
At around the same time
we were undertaking this work,
-
BHL, in its intern program,
-
was collaborating
with other Wikidata editors.
-
The BHL resident [Katie Nika]
was working with Andy [Mebert]
-
trialing adding
BHL creator IDs to Wikidata.
-
The original test case was 1,000 names
into the Mix-n-Match tool,
-
But, subsequently,
-
the whole created dataset
was uploaded into Mix-n-Match,
-
allowing the matching
of BHL dataset to Wikidata items.
-
This dataset is huge and continues
to be worked on by editors today.
-
Due to the lack of resources,
-
unfortunately, BHL can't continue
Katie's work in Wikidata,
-
but there are very encouraging
of folk reusing their data
-
and their collections and WikiProjects.
-
Now, editors have also approved
several BHL Wikidata properties,
-
not just for the creator ID,
-
but also the bibliographic ID,
page ID, and item ID.
-
And, as a result, it's now possible
to link these women illustrators
-
to their works via Wikidata.
-
Obtaining a creator ID
and therefore a Wikidata item
-
can ensure a cascade
of linked open data on them
-
that can raise the visibility
of these women to researchers.
-
Slowly, I began to feel
we were making real difference
-
in surfacing these women.
-
At least now when folk googled them
-
the Wikidata item would appear
-
and images they had created
would show up in the image feed.
-
Our research, tags, blogs,
Wikidata items, and external identifiers
-
brought about by our requests
-
were all coming together,
-
making these women
much more easier to discover.
-
Grace had already been using
our tagging work
-
in the BHL social media feeds
-
to highlight the illustrations
in the collections.
-
Member institution librarians
were writing blogs on these women
-
and raising their visibility
to a variety of audiences.
-
These edited, well researched
and referenced blogs
-
were a definite step in the ladder
-
towards obtaining citable sources
for Wikipedia articles.
-
But our work really came to the fore
-
when BHL held their "Her Natural History:
-
A Celebration of Women
in Natural History" campaign.
-
This was a multi-institutional,
multi-platform campaign
-
to raise awareness
-
and to celebrate the contributions
of women to natural history.
-
This campaign resulted
in numerous outcomes,
-
many of which had a direct impact
-
on the richness of the metadata
available on these women.
-
So the BHL cataloging group
-
added more female contributors
to the BHL catalog,
-
generating more external identifiers.
-
More images by the women
were added to the Flickr feed,
-
and these were either
in the public domain or openly licensed
-
so were able to be uploaded
into Wikicommons.
-
Numerous blog posts were written
-
by the employees
of the member institutions.
-
Some of these blogs used the research
Michelle and I had undertaken
-
as a starting point,
-
picking it up and running with it.
-
These blogs often resulted
-
in the discovery of new resources
and sources of information
-
that assisted in pushing
some of the women
-
over the notability threshold
for a Wikipedia article.
-
During the campaign, there were also
three Wikimedia workshops:
-
the Wikimedia District of Columbia
-
ran a workshop concentrating
on generating and improving
-
Wikipedia articles on these women;
-
two additional workshops
were organized by Esther Jackson
-
and jointly hosted
by the New York Botanical Garden
-
and the Wikimedia New York City.
-
The first workshop focused
on editing tags to the BHL Flickr feed
-
and the second workshop focused
on editing Wikidata and Wikicommons.
-
These events made use
of research [inaudible]
-
that Michelle and I had undertaken
in the preceding years.
-
Worklists were generated
-
by both the spreadsheets
Michelle and I had created,
-
as well as from Wikidata items
that I, along with other editors,
-
had helped create.
-
And this campaign, I think,
shows how effective Wikidata can be
-
in assisting with
the interlinking of knowledge.
-
The Wikidata items became
a leaping-off point,
-
providing a framework enabling research
-
to be collated and writing to commence.
-
Now, this is just one example
of a collaboration
-
that can improve linked
open data on these women.
-
Once these women
have a presence on Wikidata,
-
the item itself can be put to use.
-
An example of this
-
is women natural history
specimen collectors.
-
Many underacknowledged women
contributed to scientific knowledge,
-
collecting specimens,
-
and these are held
in museums and herbaria.
-
As more and more
of these collections are digitized,
-
more of the collectors
are coming out of the woodwork.
-
There are now sites being developed
-
to assist scientists in getting
the recognition they deserve
-
from their fieldwork and collecting.
-
The site I've recently been utilizing
is Bloodhound Tracker.
-
It uses the ORCID ID or the Wikidata item
-
to link the collector
to their collected specimen
-
via the Global Biodiversity
Information Facility, or GBIF.
-
Collection information is a rich vein
of data on early woman scientists,
-
particularly as at that time,
they'd been unable to publish works
-
or join scientific societies
-
due to the social norms of the day.
-
Wikidata can be used
to collect information on these women,
-
linking the information held on them
from archives, libraries, and museums,
-
or to the scientific literature,
based on the specimens they've collected,
-
or the species
that have been named after them.
-
Once a Wikidata item is created
-
and sufficient metadata
has been added to it,
-
the Bloodhound Tracker site
-
will then automatically ingest details
about those women into its site.
-
Contributors can help those women
claim their collections,
-
enriching not just the linked open data,
-
but ensuring these women
get the credit for their vital work.
-
But, again, Wikidata notability criteria
can be a challenge.
-
If the women collected significantly
-
but didn't contribute
-
either to the published record
or as an illustrator,
-
it can be difficult to hurdle
the notability criteria for Wikidata.
-
However, as more and more libraries,
archives, and museums,
-
and genealogical databases are gaining
Wikidata external identifiers,
-
it's becoming easier for these women
-
to become notable
for the purposes of Wikidata
-
and then use Wikidata
to link them to their works.
-
I believe similar workflows
to what I've outlined
-
can be used for other
underrepresented groups.
-
By actively working to achieve
the notability criteria for Wikidata,
-
and then expanding the Wikidata items
-
to highlight the contributions
of underrepresented people,
-
it's possible to improve their visibility.
-
This, in turn, assists with the generation
of secondary sources
-
and creates a virtual cycle
-
of information creation,
sharing, and linking.
-
By being proactive and collaborative,
-
it's possible to work towards
eliminating underrepresentation.
-
Thank you.
-
(applause)
-
(women) Have you found any publication
-
in which all of the illustrations
actually need their own item?
-
I think there will be;
there definitely is.
-
But if I went down that rabbit hole...
-
I've got to stop somewhere,
-
and I'm just trying
to concentrate on the women.
-
But, yes, there are classics
of biodiversity literature
-
that not only should have
an item for the book itself
-
but also for each illustration.
-
I mean, Elizabeth Gould
immediately springs to mind.
-
Every piece of art that she ever did--
-
(woman) I would just say Maria Sibylla...
-
Yep, she's a classic too.
-
(man) James [Heald].
While you've been working on this,
-
do you think that the way
the notability criteria
-
have been being applied has changed?
-
- Is there are drift in a good direction?
- Yes, I do think it has.
-
Other than that first item being...
-
I admit it was partially my mistake.
-
I did the item, and I didn't have
an external identifiers,
-
and it seemed, because of the lack
of the information I provided,
-
I am not surprised it got deleted.
-
Now I'm more experienced.
-
But, saying that, I'm pretty sure
I could put the same thing in nowadays
-
and it wouldn't get deleted.
-
I actually do think it has improved.
-
(James [Heald]) Different question.
-
I've seen on your Twitter sometimes,
-
you've found women's work
credited to their husbands.
-
- Oh God, yes!
- Would you say a bit more about that?
-
Okay, there's a whole problem...
-
Specifically, what gets me
-
having to be peeling myself
off the ceiling with rage
-
is when the women botanists
go out and collect
-
and they're known
under their marriage name,
-
and then they put
their specimens into the herbaria
-
and the herbaria have a database,
-
they transcribe the names,
-
but they don't have
a space in their database
-
for the vital, important missus.
-
And so what happens is that always,
-
if it's pre-1950
-
and the guy's known for being prolific,
-
check his wife,
-
because most of the time
either she's typing
-
and helping him produce
the scientific papers
-
or she's out there collecting with him.
-
Yes, that's a definite problem
that I have been raising
-
with a lot of the herbaria.
-
They just keep saying,
-
"Our database doesn't have
a place for the missus,"
-
and I say, "Find a place
because it's important."
-
Yeah.
-
(man 2) What other domains
will you copy this to?
-
Because you're now doing it
for a very specific subject.
-
What comes to mind?
-
It's a good question.
-
I think anything
where people get disappeared,
-
where they're not credited for their work,
-
it tends to be where they get lost.
-
So something historic
and the data just isn't linked.
-
For me, women are the classic example.
-
But I also think if there's, for example--
-
one that does spring to mind
is artists in New Zealand,
-
Maori artists, for example,
who get acknowledged to oral history,
-
but there are no written works,
-
and so the scholarship could possibly be
a problem later on down the track.
-
I think that was a group that's ripe
for using this type of work,
-
to try and get identifiers for them,
-
to make them more notable,
to get them into Wikidata,
-
so that then researchers
are pointed towards them
-
and can start doing the research
needed to rediscover them.
-
(woman 2) Okay, so I do
a lot with women artists,
-
and what I've found,
apart from the married name thing,
-
is they also tend to stay local,
-
so they don't move and cross borders.
-
It turns out notability
is very highly correlated
-
with the number of borders
you cross in your lifetime.
-
Right, yeah.
-
To tell you the truth,
I actually find that a benefit.
-
It's much easier to disambiguate
someone if they don't shift.
-
If they've been in one place,
-
you can then find the database,
-
like the births or deaths
or marriages database,
-
and you can work out
on the basis of their address
-
or you can find them
a lot easier if they don't shift.
-
It's when they shift, and they change
from maiden name to married name
-
that it can get really difficult.
-
(woman 2) Yeah.
-
(woman 3) Just adding to the question
-
that was asked earlier
in what field you could use this.
-
If it's a case where people
are disappearing or are not visible,
-
meaning that for women, in my opinion,
-
that would mean like everywhere.
-
Yeah.
-
(woman 3) One of the things I work on
is Delftware pottery workshops,
-
and that was an official job
in the 17th century.
-
And when the potter died,
there needed to be a new potter
-
that was inscribed
in the official guild book,
-
- unless his wife could take over.
- Ah!
-
(woman 3) And then she could take over
without that diploma,
-
or whatever you want to call it,
-
sometimes for years.
-
And it would be attributed to her husband?
-
(woman 3) Yes, because the pottery
is always attributed to the owner.
-
And they're like one line
in the official encyclopedias...
-
This doesn't surprise me.
-
...where the women are like taking care
of the business for 10 years
-
[and say for a job]
of their husband for two years,
-
but all the pottery items
would be marked--
-
I think this is a really good example
of how Wikidata can actually be used
-
to surface these women
-
and have something
to hang the scholarship off,
-
so that then, eventually,
-
the more people who don't struggle
to try and find the base information
-
can then start the research,
and the in-depth research
-
that's required to surface these women.
-
Wikidata, I think, is the easy way
to have a framework,
-
a skeleton to hang the bare data
that you've got on
-
to enable that research to happen.
-
Yeah.
-
(man 3) I'm sorry we are out of time.
-
We have the lunch break now, so thank you.
-
Well, come talk to me
if anyone else has any questions.
-
(applause)