This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | → | Archive 9 |
I know this doesn't usually fall under what the Wikipedia Library seeks to achieve through agreements but we desperately need to improve our stocks of images of films. Particularly post 60s. The commons coverage particularly after the mid 70s is appalling. I think the quality of the articles would benefit massively if we could make a few agreements with film companies and for them to agree to allow us to use screenshots from films and even trailers in the articles. I think there's a way that the film companies could benefit rather than suffer from having quality screenshots of their films in wikipedia articles as it would make it more likely that somebody would want to watch the film. It is possible you could contact some of the major ones like Warner Bros., Disney, MGM, Paramount, 20th Century Fox etc and see if we can get some of them to donate images or allow images from their films to be uploadable to wikipedia? It would really be a major breakthrough for the film and actors projects on here if this could be achieved. Is it possible somebody here could try to approach them and make some agreements? If nobody here can do it I'll try to contact them myself. I'm of the opinion that images should also be included in what the library looks to make agreements for as for film especially they're a vital aspect of the content which is generally missing from the articles. If we could make agreements with these companies to freely use screenshots and trailers from their films it would be extremely valuable for the site I think and potentially benefit several hundred thousand articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 23:02, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
No they wouldn't "get financial compensation" to work with us, you've totally misinterpreted what I'm getting at. What I'm saying is that images of films on wikipedia wouldn't harm the company. The images would first and foremost benefit us. Given that we have the articles anyway, do you really think having images of films is going to degrade articles to advertising? OK, perhaps a link to their site is a bit much but you're kidding yourself if you think that a lot of the big agreements in the wiki commons haven't been made because of the selling point of driving traffic to their websites directly from the images. If those aren't really that problematic I don't see why these would be. The point is that images of films would massively benefit wikipedia articles, regardless if the companies saw improved DVD sales or whatever. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:57, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
That's what I thought User:Astinson (WMF). It just seems ridiculous that one of the world's leading websites can't feature content which is prevalent on the web anyway, screenshots of films are everywhere! Perhaps though there are some film institutions which feature scholarly videos discussing film which could be approached like The Film Foundation or BFI etc? Perhaps Erik or Shawn in Montreal might have something in mind on that?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:00, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
@ Astinson (WMF):, I've brought it up on Wikipedia talk:GLAM, perhaps a conversation about it could resume there?♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:06, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, is the archive of Time.com accessible through any one of the databases? Regards, -- Mihai ( talk) 12:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello, is the archive of Time.com accessible through any one of the databases? Regards, -- Mihai ( talk) 12:38, 24 March 2016 (UTC)
First, I guess, in general, does anyone know whether there exists a consistent copyright status for government publications from governments other than the US? I ask because I have seen more than a few such publications included in the bibliographies of some reference sources, and think they might be very useful, if they are available.
Second, I think it might be very useful to have at least some of the most respected sources published by governments available in the public domain, like the US Government's country guides, at least available on commons, and maybe set up for transcription over at wikisource. Would there be any way to do so, and/or make it known to the editors that such works are available?
John Carter (
talk) 15:55, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Interested in helping to keep Wikipedia Library partnerships available? Then please sign up to be a metrics coordinator! With over 50 active partnerships requiring tracking and regular reports on source usage and general progress we're struggling to keep up, and would really appreciate an extra pair of hands or two. No particular skills required other than an interest in playing around with data (nothing more complicated than a spreadsheet), the ability to communicate clearly, and a desire to help the library continue to distribute free access to great resources. Feel free to drop me a message on my talk page or an email if you want more information. Sam Walton ( talk) 19:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Library Genesis is a great tool. Yes, it has legal issues (that are in court), but the point is it exists and is a very valuable tool that would be (is...) a great help to many editors. Should we link it here? I know there's a tendency to say no to anything that smacks of copyright problems, but we already have an article on it ( Library Genesis) that links to its search engine, so it's not like it's not here (on Wikipedia) already. Linking it from here, or a subpage, seems reasonable to me. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Just wondering whether there might be any use of mentioning, possibly for use as sources, some of the newer open source college textbooks like can be found here and here, and, I suppose, whether they might qualify as RS or not, although I assume many or most would qualify for use here. They might certainly make writing some of the articles related to their topics easier. John Carter ( talk) 17:09, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The WP:OABOT project aims at enhancing citation templates with free to read links to references, when they are available. We plan to change the visual appearance of many citation templates so we seek consensus here first - we need your input!
Concretely, we plan to change the style of links that are known to link to a free to read resource. Just like links to PDF files have a small PDF icon at the end, we plan to add a small logo indicating that a link is paywall-free. For instance, we know that all links defined by |arxiv=
are free, so all citation templates using this parameter would become like this:
{{cite arXiv | collaboration = LIGO Scientific Collaboration and Virgo Collaboration | last1 = Abbott | first1 = Benjamin P. | arxiv=1602.03840 | title=Properties of the binary black hole merger GW150914 | date=11 February 2016}}
In this case, the free to read icon would appear without changing any of the template arguments - the
Module:Citation/CS1 would be modified directly and this would affect all citation templates globally. We would make this change for other identifiers that are necessarily free to read, such as |pmc=
. Technically, the icon would be inserted using CSS code (the same way PDF icons are currently displayed). It could replace the external link icon (
->) to save space.
We also want to be able to add this icon on arguments that are not always free to read such as |url=
or |doi=
. To do so, we would need to change the template to indicate that the link is free, for instance by adding |doi-free=true
or |doi-free=10.1016/S0168-0072(03)00052-6
{{Cite journal| doi = 10.1016/S0168-0072(03)00052-6| doi-free=true| issn = 0168-0072| volume = 124| issue = 1–3| pages = 71–106| last1 = Coquand| first1 = Thierry| last2 = Sambin| first2 = Giovanni| last3 = Smith| first3 = Jan| last4 = Valentini| first4 = Silvio| title = Inductively generated formal topologies| journal = Annals of Pure and Applied Logic| date = 2003-12-15}}
Of course, multiple links in the same citation template could appear with the free to read icon. − Pintoch ( talk) 21:58, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
I note MBlairMartin claims to be a Wikipedian-in-Residence despite having a brand-new account. How exactly is this possible? Chris Troutman ( talk) 00:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi,
Is there an easy way to see which WL accounts I have, when they started, and when they're due to expire? Perhaps there should be a pubic log page for each user? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:00, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello everyone. I have submitted a grant proposal for Librarybase, an online reference library. My goal is to create a unified lookup database for sources based on data gathered from Wikipedia. I would like this to integrate with the Wikipedia Library so that you can do a lookup and see which databases have the sources you are looking for. Please review and leave your feedback on the grant proposal. Cheers, Harej ( talk) 00:18, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Based on a few peoples request when I went through Google Books and got a previously closed book available for everyone to see, I created User:IJReid/Google Books trick, a relatively step-by-step guide to repeat what I learned to do. I hope many more people can benefit from this, but I am not sure how to inform others, so I am just adding a section here, where I hope it will be received well and then maybe distributed or mentioned more. IJReid discuss 02:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. HiemstraTIME ( talk) 02:29, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
I recently started having issues with my computer, which forced me to switch to a spare. Unfortunately, that meant I no longer have access to my bookmarks, one of which was a direct link to the EBSCO database login that I had gotten from The Wikipedia Library. And i'm having difficulty finding that proper login page again. Going through the EBSCO and EBSCOhost pages doesn't seem to be finding me the right page to actually login. Can someone give me a direct link? Silver seren C 19:16, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello. Is anybody subscribed to The Times? I need to verify the statement of Sting's album rating at [1]. -- Jarash ( talk) 07:35, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Thank you everyone. I don't have enough edits to apply for an Gale account and don't have an opportunity to go to Manchester. -- Jarash ( talk) 12:28, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our publisher donation program. You can now sign up for new accounts and research materials from:
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, DeGruyter, Gale and Newspaperarchive.com.
Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--
The Wikipedia Library Team 18:38, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
I applied, with great excitement, for access to the various resources that have been generously provided by the undying efforts of the volunteers here on this page. Unfortunately I've concluded that they are not actually that useful to me. That, of course, is going to be limited to my own mostly historical interests, but without doubt the main issue is that everything I'm interested in exists on Google Books, or not at all. The various newspaper services, for instance, have a tiny slice of what's available on Google.
With that in mind, and considering the post a few above this, is there any possibility of getting more broad access to full views on Google for accounts registered on the Wiki? Given that what we do here, take notes from books that other people need to look up, is precisely the whole reason for GB, it would seem there is no downside for the publishers. I know that such access is available at universities, for instance, so what is the chance we might arrange similar access?
Maury Markowitz ( talk) 17:55, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
The Wikipedia Library has now posted a report on its spring pilot test of a Research Help portal. As the report outlines, our target audience of readers and new editors generally reacted more positively to the pilot than experienced editors, who raised important critiques for discussion. The report provides more details on the results and some proposed next steps for the project. Your input is welcome on the report talk page. Astinson (WMF) ( talk) 14:42, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Hello everyone, we now have an IRC channel for TWL at #wikipedia-library connect. Feel free to join the channel and ask away your questions. Coordinators, please ask me or Samwalton9 to get voiced in the channel. Regards— UY Scuti Talk 20:30, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Hi everyone! I am happy to announce that we now have a Facebook group The Wikipeda Library for better interaction with users and coordinators. Please feel free to join and invite your friends to join the group! Regards— UY Scuti Talk 17:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials from:
Expansions
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on
our partners page. Sign up today!
--
The Wikipedia Library Team 18:30, 1 November 2016 (UTC)
Hi... I'm interested in accessing materials from Australian newspapers - particularly ones like the Sydney Morning Herald and the Age - and am wondering if any of the resources available through the Wikipedia Library have substantial coverage. Thanks. EdChem ( talk) 09:20, 2 November 2016 (UTC)
The page Wikipedia:Unusual articles seems to have attracted the attention of growing youtube channel Wendover Productions. He has made a series of videos on article in this list, referring to the list as TWL, or That Wikipedia List. Googling "that wikipedia list" provides several links referring to this article, including the first link being this article itself. Said list seems to be becoming known on the internet as TWL, but WP:TWL already redirects to the Wikipedia library. Should the shortcut redirect to Wikipedia:Unusual articles instead? pluma ♫ ♯ 21:23, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
I've been working on a tool of potential use to contributors here - an A-Z list of which periodicals are indexed by which TWL database. As you'll see, though, the search functionality is hacked together and is not private. Anyone have ideas/capability to make this better? Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:28, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
Most of the newspapers in Australia are published by NewsCorp. Currently many (all?) of them are restricting online access to articles. You can view a couple of article for free each day but then you get the paywall message. This is hampering my ability to contribute to Australian contemporary content (I am not discussing historical content for which we have excellent free access up to 1954 thanks to Trove). Today I ran out of "free" articles in The Australian while trying to fix an article on my watchlist that had some newbie-added messed-up citations. So now I can't even finish that task, let alone the rest of my watchlist or anything else I might want to work on today. It's about $200 for an individual to get an annual subscription to just *one* of these newspapers. This isn't really viable for me to do as I may have the problem with one newspaper today and a different one tomorrow and so on. I suspect I am not the only Australian contributer hitting these paywalls. Is there any way that the Wikipedia Library could negotiate a corporate subscription to all the Newscorp papers in Australia that could be accessed by active contributors of Australian content? Kerry ( talk) 07:12, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians! After much contemplation and planning, The Wikipedia Library has decided to move forward its longtime desire of bringing together Wikipedians and librarians by creating a user group. The user group is yet to be recognized by the Affiliations Committee, but you are welcome to sign up as a member by adding your name in the user group meta page. Once you do that, please join the discussion in deciding the user group name, logo, and organizers. You can even volunteer to lead the group! And of course please don't forget to invite your friends! The user group intends to,
Join us and help spread the news! Thank you, AVasanth (WMF), via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:58, 17 March 2017 (UTC)
Hello Wikimedians!
The Wikipedia Library is announcing signups today for free, full-access, accounts to published research as part of our Publisher Donation Program. You can sign up for new accounts and research materials from:
Expansions
Many other partnerships with accounts available are listed on our partners page, including Project MUSE, EBSCO, Taylor & Francis and Newspaperarchive.com.
Do better research and help expand the use of high quality references across Wikipedia projects: sign up today!
--
The Wikipedia Library Team 18:52, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
Hi, is there any subscription available to the Wikipedia Library that gives us access to PubMed? I find myself needing it increasingly, either for the occasional edit to medical articles, or to review others' edits, including at FAC. SarahSV (talk) 22:54, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
At The Wikipedia Library we want to make sure that you have the resources you need to write great articles. We've got a great collection of resources (including more than 80,000 journals!) from over 60 partners already available, and have some top priorities that we're working on adding, but we want you to tell us which databases we should be focusing on! If there's a paywalled database/publisher/archive that you wished that you could grab a free account for through TWL for your contributions to Wikipedia, please add a request on our requests page. And if the site is already there, add a +1 and any relevant details about the material you need so that we know there's additional interest - it helps us prioritise and also helps when we pitch the program to them! Thanks, Samwalton9 (WMF) ( talk) 19:03, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
This was blocked by their spam filter.
--begins--
English Wikipedia makes many references to Aluka.org (see https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:LinkSearch&limit=500&offset=0&target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.aluka.org for a list) - mostly to the African Plants collection.
I have transitioned the relevant specimen pages to plants.jstor.org. The remainder require an understanding of the new naming scheme at the appropriate jstor sites, compared to the naming scheme at aluka.org.
I would be grateful if you could supply me with this information.
Yours sincerely,
Richard Farmbrough
--ends--
Can any of our librarians with direct links to JSTOR help get this message through?
All the best:
Rich
Farmbrough, 18:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC).
My request for access to Newspapers.com was approved but I never received instructions on accessing this resource. Is this the right place to request assistance? My content creation would be significantly enhanced with this access since many of the articles I create are based upon historical content related to newspaper coverage.
I got an email on May 13 that I had been approved for access to Bloomsbury resources, but I haven't received my credentials yet. Just following up... - PKM ( talk) 20:43, 10 June 2017 (UTC)
Just to notify you about the ongoing discussion:
Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RfC: Wikimedia referrer policy. Join in there to comment. --
George Ho (
talk) 16:48, 13 June 2017 (UTC)
Relisted The discussion was moved to Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)/RfC: Wikimedia referrer policy. Then I have relisted the discussion, i.e. gave the discussion additional 30 days. Therefore, more participants would be welcome to comment at the newer page there during the extended time. -- George Ho ( talk) 01:49, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
I am getting weird messages via e-mail from the Library Card Platform. It indicates Dear 34469123 (whoever that is) your application for Alexander Street Press, Cambridge University Press, and Jstor have been waitlisted (each one was a separate e-mail). I already have access to each of those and did not ask for access. Why am I receiving this if I did not request access? Is this to move my existing accounts to the new platform? SusunW ( talk) 21:25, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
Hello, I made an application for American Psychological Association for Wikipedia in January [2] and received a mail last February informing me that I could have an access for Wikipedia, so I filled the form corresponding but since then, nothing happened... Could you help me ? Thank you, best regards, -- Pierrette13 ( talk) 05:38, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
We're excited to announce that email delivery of our bi-monthly newsletter Books & Bytes to your email is now possible. This is such an obvious thing that should've existed way long ago, but we finally got to it. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter via email, please subscribe here. If you have any questions regarding the subscription or the landing page, please drop me an email at avasanth[at]wikimedia[dot]org. Thanks -- AVasanth (WMF) ( talk) 04:15, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
I have just updated some of the partnership pages for which I provide coordination and I noticed that the description of the application process (specifically the process outlined here) is no longer accurate. I do think a template like that might be helpful to applicants to review before they click the Library card platform link, but it needs to be updated for generic use by all partnership pages.
Secondly: For the partnerships that I coordinate, I have marked the WP:PARTNERSHIP/Approved
(and "Not approved") pages as historical and as archives. You can see what I mean at the top of
this page. Do those headers make sense? Should all such pages be marked like this? -
Thibbs (
talk) 15:50, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on the Wikipedia Library for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the sample questions for the interview. Contact me on my talk page and I will set up a different page for for you to answer questions. When you respond, feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. I will be leaving messages on active member's talk pages and invite them to participate also. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them.
The Wikipedia Library team are happy to announce the migration of our free research access signups to the Library Card platform! The Library Card is a centralised location for signing up to all of the free resources available through the library - now totalling over 60 publishers and databases offering access to more than 80,000 paywalled periodicals to help you research and find citations for Wikipedia articles. On-wiki signup pages have been archived, and all future signups will be coordinated on the platform.
Log in directly with your Wikipedia account via OAuth, and if you find resources that would be useful to you, please sign up! Ongoing development will be occurring for the site, so please let us know if you run into any error messages or unexpected behaviour. You can flag bugs directly on Phabricator.
Later this year we'll be integrating an authentication system, enabling direct access to resources using your Wikipedia login. No more need to remember separate logins for each website! We'll also be using this system to allow automated no-application-required access to a subset of partners, and integrating it with a search tool to make it easier to figure out which aggregator or publisher has the content you need! Samwalton9 (WMF) ( talk) 20:26, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
Your support is solicited for the Project Grant that can be seen here. Part of the grant-making process requires notification of those who would like to support this project. I am the potential grantee and believe that this position will make a significant contribution to many projects, including the WP:Library. The University of Pittsburgh intends to release as many historical photos as possible into the public domain. Most of the archival materials are related to United States History. Other projects will also benefit. Some of these are Wikipedia:WikiProject Indigenous peoples of North America, Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups, Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania, Wikipedia:WikiProject United States History, Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/American Revolutionary War task force, Wikipedia:WikiProject Pittsburgh, and Wikipedia:WikiProject African diaspora. Some of these WikiProjects are currently semi-active and would benefit from more contributions from those in the Western Pennsylvania region and the University of Pittsburgh. The University of Pittsburgh has significant archival and historical content related to gaps to these WikProjects. I would also like one or two advisers to give me advice in this capacity. Thank you for your consideration.
Is there any possibility of the Bloomsbury access being extended to cover their Food Library (at https://www.bloomsbury.com/dr/digital-resources/products/bloomsbury-food-library/?) I know there will be a small but very grateful number of editors keen to access the resource. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 10:11, 9 October 2017 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for helping.
I'd like to use this to improve the Svedka article.
http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/case.darden.2016.000009
Does anyone have know how I might get access to this?
Benjamin ( talk) 23:27, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Have there been any conversations about adding access to Newsbank? Billhpike ( talk) 14:31, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Is the Wikipedia Library for all languages of just English? -- Donald Trung ( Talk) ( Articles) Respect mobile users. 11:35, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
Zotero translators are bits of computer code used by Zotero to scrape or parse metadata about an individual work, from a web page. Wikipedia uses them in the Citoid tool that many of us use for adding citations. A list of currently-available translators is here. Some translators are site-specific, others rely on generic embedded metadata.
I have just commented on a proposal to create a pair of translators specifically for the British Newspaper Archive, saying that having one would be useful for Wikipedia editors with access to that site via the Wikipedia Library.
That has led me to think that it would be sensible, when we agree a new WL partnership, to check whether there is a suitable translator (or set of them), and if not, to encourage someone to write one, and in either case to then have the translator(s) added to Citoid. Of course, once they are written, they remain available in perpetuity, for the benefit of the world at large.
The Zotero community may be reluctant to invest effort in creating translators for paywalled sites, so we may have to turn to coders in our own community for assistance.
I'm happy to advise on the process, or act as a link with the Zotero community, when needed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:17, 6 November 2017 (UTC)
Any plans to approach ProQuest for a partnership? I discovered that they have a web interface for accessing periodicals in their collections, as well as being the current incarnation of University Microfilms, which archived many, if not almost all, dissertations published for graduate degrees. Access would be a big help for Wikipedians. -- llywrch ( talk) 20:37, 29 January 2018 (UTC)
To help researchers (and Wikipedians), I've been collaboratively working on a now 24-option guide about how to access sources when you don't have access to them. The folks at WP:RX are pros at this kind of digging. Could you give it 10 minutes and feel free to make comments, suggestions, corrections, or additions? Don't hesitate to be bold :)
You're a Researcher without Access to Research: What do you do?
Thank you!
Jake Orlowitz Ocaasi (WMF) ( talk) 18:47, 19 October 2017 (UTC)
I've applied for access to Newspapers.com and a few other great sources but still have not heard anything about my requests. Can someone help? Best Regards, Barbara (WVS) ✐ ✉ 19:22, 4 March 2018 (UTC)
|via =
Newspapers.com
to the citation template for attribution.
Samwalton9 (WMF) (
talk) 15:09, 6 March 2018 (UTC)"We are happy to inform you that your application has been approved. You can expect to receive details about how to access this source within a week or two. Cheers! The Wikipedia Library." It has been over a month, and I have not received any additional details, unless I missed them somehow. Can anyone help? -- RAN ( talk) 19:20, 11 January 2018 (UTC)