Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour/Outreach

I have publicized this project in two ways:

1. An article in the British monthly magazine Labour Research, which is also published to my blog, here.

2. A message to the 45,000 email subscribers to LabourStart on 7 September 2006 which read:

WIKIPEDIA: TRADE UNIONISTS GET ORGANIZED
Many of you will know about the Wikipedia -- the free online encyclopedia with its five million articles in 229 languages. But what you may not know is that a group of trade unionists has gotten together online to ensure that the trade union movement is properly and systematically covered. This is a hugely important enterprise and I strongly encourage you to have a look, sign up, and do your bit.

Eric Lee ericlee@labourstart.org

Good work! :) - Francis Tyers · 15:34, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

under construction

This page is under discussion, and the format currently displayed should be seen only as my personal suggestion. I hope this is a starting point to something.--Bookandcoffee 19:25, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Added a boilerplate welcome template, could do with some Labour specific details. - Francis Tyers · 15:37, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Previous discussion

Copied from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organized Labour

Well, in the last year or so we’ve managed to expand trade unions considerably, but now we have the ongoing problem of fleshing out that coverage. Articles like Confederation of Trade Unions (Albania) and Union of Workers' Trade Unions of Niger are likely to remain as stubs for quite some time. I think there are a couple ways of working on that problem, but they need some discussion first. I’d like us to consider contacting labour organizations directly for their input into the project. I realize there are issues with this – not the least of which is NPOV - but I think there are solutions as well. I’d like to set up Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Outreach to keep track of ideas, and ultimately, to record actual outreach efforts.--Bookandcoffee 21:04, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested. Expand a bit ... - Dave Smith 02:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent idea. - Francis Tyers · 08:03, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming Wikipedia continues to grow (not so much in size, but usefulness and access) I think it is inevitable that more organizations will begin to pay close attention to the articles about themselves. I’m sure this already occurs with many corporations and others with a sophisticated web presence.

However, unions in general seem to have a bit of a technological lag, and many unions worldwide are only beginning to have the kind of web access that most of us editing here take for granted. By reaching out to these organizations we have two opportunities. We can expand the articles about unions by having those involved update the information – but we can also take an important step in establishing what Wikipedia stands for, and what it does not.

If we ignore these organizations they will eventually show up here, but they will likely show up with the same problem we see right now – strong POV editing. On the other hand, if we approach them first, and say “hey, here is what you do, here is the discussion on POV, here is an example of what a good article should look like” then we stand a better chance of getting productive contributions from them.

Beyond the unions themselves, it would also be good to talk about ways to attract academics (er... that should read more academics. :). They would be very helpful, both for their knowledge, and for their ability to write. Hopefully they would be another moderating force.--Bookandcoffee 15:22, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would you suggest something like a (broadly) boilerplate letter sent to Union press offices? With instructions on how to contribute? - Francis Tyers · 15:28, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly, along with a developed set of tools here to guide them if they did show up.--Bookandcoffee 15:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We could do with compiling a list of people/addresses. The Amicus one is "Catherine Bithell. Press Office, 35 King Street, Covent Garden, London. WC2E 8JG" - Francis Tyers · 16:11, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a rough draft of a letter. I'm not suggesting that we rush off and do this immediately, but this is what I was thinking.--Bookandcoffee 23:12, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is a very good start. I think we have enough to work with here. Now, what should we include in the 'Outlook' section? - Francis Tyers · 07:48, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here's a start. Wikipedia:WikiProject Organized Labour/Outreach Feel free to modify at will, of course.--Bookandcoffee 15:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick question, is there a trade union article which is an FA right now? If not are there any candidates? - Francis Tyers · 15:43, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly - none that I know of. Piotrus' work on History of Solidarity below is headed that way. Ustye is working hard on International Typographical Union, and there are a number of decent candidates, but none submitted, I don't think.--Bookandcoffee 15:56, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]