 Good evening and welcome to the Wikimedia Australia Affiliate Session for Wikimedia 2021. I'm Alex Long, President of Wikimedia Australia. I want to begin by acknowledging the traditional owners of the many lands around this evening. I'm on the land of the Boon Wurrung and Wurundjeri Wurrung peoples of the eastern Kulin Nation, and I pay respect to elders past and present. I acknowledge them as the first knowledge holders of this place. I'd also like to acknowledge any First Nations people joining us this evening from around the world. Over the next 90 minutes, we'll be hearing from a range of Australian contributors tonight about the different ways they're working to make Wikipedia and the Wikimedia platform a better place. We're going to start with Kirsten Thorpe, a Wurrungi researcher from the Jambana Institute for Indigenous Education and Research at the University of Technology Sydney, and Nathan Mudgey Sentence, a Wurrundjeri activist, librarian and SAS currently working at the Australian Museum. Tonight, they offer us a conversation about the opportunities and risks that Wikipedia presents for First Nations people and the many tensions that exist between Wikipedia's open knowledge principles and other knowledge systems, like those of First Nations people around the world. Kirsten and Nathan, thank you for joining us. Thank you, Alex. We're here together, Nathan. You've got the slides. Yes. I just have to get myself off mute before I go back and present a note. You just can all say that? Fantastic. Nathan, how do we want to do this? So thanks everyone for joining us. Nathan and I are really pleased to be here to talk about representation and erasure and the opportunities and risks that Wikipedia presents for First Nations knowledges. And we're sort of doing this as a bit of a yarn together. So we'll probably ask each other to cue each other on as we go. Nathan, do you want to get started or would you like me to? Yeah, you can get started. Do you want me to go next slide? Yeah. So I guess in the context of what we're doing and always so important to acknowledge country, I'm calling in from the lands of the Gringai people on the edge of Darkinjong Country and really want to acknowledge and thank traditional owners for the care of their land and also acknowledge my family who are one of my people from Port Stevens. So, yeah. Here tomorrow on Nindugi, Nathan says she will not be ready to give it back to you. In the village of Garamagu, Mujigangu, in the village of Garamagu, Nurembangu, in the village of Nari, Mujigangu. So yeah, I just want to echo Kirsten and pay my respects and acknowledge that I'm coming today live from Garamagu Country. The picture on the screen at the bottom is actually across the street from my house at night and I'm very lucky and privileged to live and mostly work on Garamagu Country and I want to pay my respects to the elders past and present and state that while I'm on Garamagu Country, I try to be as respectful as possible and try to do good by their country while I'm here, while I'm visiting. Thanks so much, Nathan. So, what we thought we would do to get started is really share some of our experiences and I guess in the context of the wiki world and wiki media to start to talk about our experiences and what brought us to this conversation. So, we might just spend a couple of minutes each introducing ourselves and as well talking about how we know each other and I guess it's important to reflect on the fact that these are conversations that we've been having for many, many years. So, we're really pleased to be here today and to share some of them with you. Nathan, did you want to go first in this one? Yeah, for sure. So, well, we've introduced myself. So, my name is Nathan Mooji Senates. I'm a Raidri man. Family is traditionally from Maji, New South Wales. But I grew up on Darkinjung Country on the New South Wales Central Coast. Not that too far from where Kirsten is living now. And my background is in, at the moment I work at the Australian Museum on Gadigal Country, the oldest museum in Australia and the sixth oldest natural history museum in the world. And it has a very strong collection in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander history, mostly in cultural objects from different communities from all around Australia. So, around 22,000. But I think, again, what brings us to this conversation is and previous to that I'm also a librarian and that's actually how I know Kirsten. Kirsten used to be the manager of Indigenous engagement at the State Library of New South Wales and I used to be, I used to work under Kirsten in that branch. But, and so I think that's kind of what brought us into this conversation, especially around representation and erasure. I know my time at the State Library, it dealt a lot with the fact that there wasn't, the State Library's collection is almost used as a time capsule to tell the Australian story, to tell the story about the state of New South Wales and its people. And not a lot of the information within that collection is about First Nations people or talks about First Nations people. So, there is an erasure where this thing, this resource that people use to talk about history or to write books about history, there's a lack of First Nations voices within that. And then similarly at the Australian Museum, it's not so much, and this was the same case at the State Library, but it was not so much the issue of a lack of First Nations voices. Well, still a lack of First Nations voices, but not a particularly lack of First Nations content more that the way that First Nations people were talked about or written about was usually without their consent. And usually they are the subjects rather than the knowers of knowledge. They are the subjects of disciplines and knowledge fields. So, you know, the Australian Museum, yeah, as I say, we have 22,000 cultural objects from First Nations communities, but what has been written about previously at the Australian Museum, our previous exhibitions have all been done by non-Indigenous curators, mostly non-Indigenous anthropologists, and their perspectives have really, you know, shaped how First Nations people are viewed in that space and usually without the consent and definitely without the input of First Nations people. And I think that has detrimental effects. Like one of the examples I always give is when I first started at the Australian Museum, I actually looked at the Australian Museum magazine that's digitized online. And one of the articles in a 1921 edition of the Australian Museum magazine basically said the article was about Aboriginal men and women. It was basically saying that grown Aboriginal men and women have the minds of small children. And yeah, so they have limited mental capacity. So, you know, which is, you know, horrible, untrue and, you know, shocking to read, of course, but at the same time that magazine was circulated to a general public and it was written by at that time people that were considered the quote unquote experts of Aboriginal people. So people reading that would read that as fact at that time. And that's detrimental because if you think about that period of Australian history in New South Wales, it was really in that ramping up period of the New South Wales Aborigines Protection Act which led to the stolen generation, which was sort of, you know, the taking of Aboriginal children from their families and taking them on to missions and reserves for quote unquote, you know, education, which a lot of community would refer to as sort of assimilation and cultural genocide. But I was thinking about, you know, if you think about the general public, if they're reading from a highly authoritative source to the Australian Museum that Aboriginal grown men and women have the minds of small children and at the same time here that the government's taking Aboriginal children away from growing Aboriginal men and women, you'd probably be, you'd probably think that's almost justified. And I can, that's the detrimental thing that places like this, the Australian Museum have and places like the State Library and the Memory Institutions that help feed into the national narrative. And I think it's something that I think is of course separate to Wikipedia but I think it very much shares similarities to Wikipedia. So that's sort of what, it's sort of introduction to myself but also what has sort of brought me into this conversation. And as Kirsten said, this is a conversation that me and Kirsten have had for years and I think a lot of people in that work, First Nations people that work in museums, galleries, libraries but also just generally in history often have this feeling that other people are telling our stories and not only telling our stories on our behalf, are telling it wrong or simply just dismissing or ignoring us. Nathan, thank you. I think you've touched on a lot of the key points that I would share as experiences. I guess one of the things that I reflect on in terms of the Wikipedia conversation is that I have very broad interests in the glam sector but key to those are the questions that Nathan talked about is who has control around representation, whose stories are privileged, what stories are kept and who controls the narrative and who gives authority to the sources that are held in our national institutions. My experience has come very much from working with at the outset with government archives that Nathan has clearly described, document Aboriginal people as subjects of the records and people without agency and I think that sort of pervasive system of collecting and documenting Aboriginal people also led into the publishing sector where Aboriginal people were the subject of study and the subject of curiosity in those studies. So we have a really complex legacy in Australia where our collecting institutions where our written documentary heritage is often and frequently biased although you never want to do the broad brush of saying of course Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people and stories are represented in them but unfortunately we have quite a legacy now that we have to respond to to redress that situation of people not having control of their narratives. So Nathan and I, with that context we had a couple of questions that we wanted to go through in terms of the opportunities with Wikipedia we might go over to the next slide Nathan through some of them. Do you want me to keep going with this on Nathan? Yeah. So you know we were in that same light of saying it's a legacy that we need to address you know when Nathan and I have had these conversations and when we've contributed to Wikipedia events you know we think there are real opportunities and you know the first and foremost is to disrupt the invisibility of First Nations sovereignty in histories and in our last conversation around this we talked about some really simple things you know if you go into any page on Wikipedia and look at a local area you know we were talking about wanting to see a statement of indigenous sovereignty in all of those places but really importantly is that you know we want to make sure that this is normalized so it's not you know the indigenous history or the first peoples as the beginning in a colonial narrative and then you know simply going on to a settler history for example and not seeing a continuity of culture so that's been something that we have seen as being really important I had shared previously one of the things that I enjoy doing pre-COVID time that you could go to a hotel was if you pick up the compendium in a hotel and they acknowledge traditional owners you want to see that embedded so that everyone has that respect for country when they go to peoples land and I'll just point to the indigenous archive collectives that Nathan and I are part of have just recently produced a statement around a right of reply so we would see you know the use of Wikipedia being to enable Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people to now have a right of reply to histories that have been dominated by other people I don't know if you wanted to say more about the statement at all Nathan No, besides I think everyone should check it out I'll tweet out it later if anyone wants to follow my Twitter but I think it's important and I think Wikipedia can help with some of those things as Kirsten said the right of reply there has been a lot of history written by First Nations people without First Nations input and there needs to be a space where we can reply to that history or give our perspective especially when in situations where it conflicts and I think a lot about the position statement is also things like the right to know and I think working with First Nations people and collecting institutions there could be potential that Wikipedia could be a space to if allowed to disseminate that information and not really much about the right of reply but following on what Kirsten was saying I also agree that Wikipedia is a great place to disrupt First Nations invisibility because lots of places especially places where I'm traditionally from the Rajri Nation you go to some of those places and they almost in their physical sense almost act as if there's no history before you know Mudgee is celebrating next year it's going to be it's 200th anniversary and so you know they're celebrating if the history of that town started in 1822 so I think there is a place for Wikipedia to sort of bring more into public consciousness First Nations sovereignty and history and that it always wasn't always will be Aboriginal land and I think similarly that normalization one of the issues I think people often put forward about colonial statues because they're in public spaces people pass them daily and the figures they represent get normalized and I think that's similar to lack of representation that gets normalized with its emptiness in public spaces and I think Wikipedia is such a great tool and it's a tool that nearly everybody uses so almost in its own way is a public space and the more First Nations representation is in that space the more it gets normalized embedded in you know what people know and what people talk about Nathan and I had the next one I'll just share briefly Nathan's just raised you know the context of stone generations and you know one of the things that I reflect on in my experiences is that there's really deep trauma that's felt when people don't have that representation when they don't have anything to document their stories so reaching out and doing things in the right way can really fill that gap at the moment that exists around traditional narratives and national truth telling that needs to happen Yeah 100% like I think there's I think it's even called something called double trauma when you know what you've experienced is traumatic and then you go through the other experience of having it dismissed or debated or you know said it's not real which I think happens to a lot of a lot of you know working with our history and stuff like that previously with the State Library with Kirsten and at the Australian Museum talking to survivors of the stone generation like a lot of them just what they want is just to have their story heard and for have it to be believed and I think again yeah that's a space for history but it also could potentially be a space for Wikipedia so yeah and this slide we got now we're just going to talk about some of the you know issue what are some of the things we should be considered before we sort of especially because you know there are a lot of people and we had this when we did our first nations Wikipedia, pedi-a-thon for NAIDOC and there are a lot of people that are passionate and we meet a lot of people in our work especially a lot of non-indigenous people that are passionate and want to assist and create that change but I do believe that we have to there are some things that we need to consider and I think yeah you know the most obvious is not everything is you know open for the public which is you know in first nations knowledges there's a lot of information that's considered secret or sacred or you know some information is considered gendered like it might be referred to as women's business or men's business and then a lot of it also a lot of cultural materials considered ISIP which is Indigenous Intellectual Cultural Property which communities believe they have collective ownership of and as I am a massive fan and one of the reasons why I love Wikipedia is I am a massive advocate for the open access movement as a librarian I think it's like you know educational resources information that needs to be a level of equality to it and I you know I hate sort of the gatekeeping and sort of financialization of knowledge but in considering that I also know we first nations knowledges because of that historical trauma that's with it I mean with the sort of the exploitation of it I mean there is a lot of you know previously anthropologists and many others who just come into communities and sort of have taken that information about consent exploited it and there's also again as I was saying there's cultural protocols around some information so some information should not be you need to be a particular level of initiation and I think we need to be respectful of these cultural protocols we need to be respectful of cultural values and so you know not everything is open for the public and we should be mindful additionally of that history of exploitation you know the fact the fact of that history and those power dynamics at play and we should if we're doing this for the intention of improving first nations representation and improving you know empowering first nations communities through Wikipedia we need to also be mindful that you know some of our if not trading carefully some of our moves will just play into the colonial power dynamics that have previously existed yeah so yeah it's a really fine balance isn't it that you know that's what we always hear that people want to do the right thing but they're also scared of getting things wrong so what we've got on screen here is also the an example of some resources around a traffic light system so Nathan's just talked about cultural knowledge we've talked about material that's really sensitive to use in terms of historical trauma material collected without people's informed consent so I guess it's actually starting to think through the complexity in a way that you can measure well what's an easy win in terms of you know local representation of a community group you know in a regional area versus topics that can be you know a lot more complex and heavy to deal with so there's a resource there that we'll also tweet out later or Nathan will about those resources do we want to go just wrapping up Nathan to our examples as well next yeah so this is one example of a community having a challenging Wikipedia so the Tasmania Aboriginal Center you know they believe that their language is their cultural intellectual property and therefore they didn't actually want it publicly available online they sort of lost this case where Wikipedia I think said you cannot copyright a language but again it's like it does cause harm because a lot of like I was saying a lot of First Nations people have felt their knowledge exploited before and with a lot of cases where First Nations lands have been taken in many regards First Nations knowledge is some of the remaining sort of legacy and sort of commodity for lack of a better term and I don't want to use that term as a commodity but cultural knowledge is one of the few commodities that we may have still control of and so sometimes yeah for cultural reasons that information shouldn't be public which is the case with this language but also in the same ways as also undermines a lot of yeah First Nations cultural ownership and knowledge ownership and there's a real question there Nathan isn't there around who again who has a right to control stories but who is a cultural authority to be able to make these decisions so we really appreciate that in the Wikipedia context that this is really complex but you know I guess our message is to try and build relationships try and talk to people who might be a cultural authority if there are questions like cultural property that come up as areas that need to be documented we would always say do it in partnership with a community yeah yeah and this is just our sort of like a last slide and sort of reiterating kind of what we already spoke about I think yeah representation is of course vital and yeah trying to figure out ways to cite and reference knowledge holders and community members and trying to find especially with some sources because of as we say in the historic nature of around publishing especially you know a lot of written words has sort of blocked out First Nations people so only a narrow group historically have been allowed to publish on everything sorry just generally publishing a lot of people were excluded from that process and as a oral culture we've as a traditionally an oral culture I think written words supremacy sort of dismisses our knowledge a little bit so trying to figure out how you can yeah reference local people histories and cultures those places like the Tasmanian Aboriginal Centre working with them and how you could places community groups elders groups how you can work with them and cite them and a lot of these places now are putting maybe stuff on their own websites and stuff and that's maybe reaching out to them and asking if it's okay some of this stuff is you know cited in Wikipedia and yeah and you know adding to that space where the citations are from a diverse range of sources yeah and and again I think you know as person was saying you know working through collaboration and I think that last point is important is like these these are opportunities to sort of redress historical you know these historical issues with representation but they're also way to sort of yeah create new partnerships and potentially lasting partnerships and but I do I do think you also should be mindful again communities may potentially refuse and that is their right but also this refusal may come from like a historical distrust but if you if you are very up front and you really work very ethically I think you can redress this distrust through sort of being very collaborative question so when Nathan and I Nathan discussed how we had recently curated a Wikipedia workshop for NAIDOC week and you know as we sat down to do the lists we ended up with you know this huge amount of content that everywhere we looked we could think of these exciting opportunities to give visibility to give presence to incredible movements that are happening around Australia to first peoples who have been leaders and represented real social change and there's always that conflict of how much do you do without people's consent and how much do you need to do in partnership and I mean I think the opportunity to do the Wikipedia the Wikipedia was fantastic because it was a group effort you could discuss those ideas but I think as Nathan said if people have ideas and they want to start to do this broad you know dive into Wikipedia and looking at the gaps and looking at the erasure then contact local land councils contact representative groups and get them on board because I think that you know it'll be so great we know how much people use Wikipedia as the first stop it'll be so great to see more content produced but really keeping in mind that historical distrust is there and because people have been so disenfranchised from being their writers of their own history there can be that sort of pushback as Nathan also talked about if people aren't brought on board so there's lots of things like the Aboriginal Institute IAZIS in Canterbury have really fantastic code of ethics that people can look at around ethical processes so we would highly recommend to to build those partnerships and work to mutual benefit in that same way I think that's all I have month thank you so much sorry thanks so much Nathan and Kirsten thank you we still have so much work to do in this space but we're very grateful for your sharing your insights with us today thank you so much thanks everyone see you bye ok next we're going to head across to Perth Western Australia Sven and his team Lea Corry Emily Dotisorot Emily Gray from the University of Western Australia Archaeology Wiki Collective from the Fringe to the Centre they've been working to correct racist sexist and misleading archaeological entries on Wikipedia and constructing entries as lesson plans for Australian school students thanks for joining us Sven take it away thanks very much Alex and hopefully everyone can hear and see if not please sing out we acknowledge the Wajak Buja that we are on ceded land and we also acknowledge all the indigenous and traditional peoples participating in this conference the three of us in the collective are not indigenous but we're archaeologists and so we work on Australia's deep past and today will be a series of case studies of three case studies as always there are lots of thank yous to say I won't read those out other than to people can read them on their own this amount of work gone into today thank you for everyone's efforts both in Wikipedia and all the people that we work with our collective has got this talk today bringing Australian archaeology from fringe to centre so you should be seeing a slide in front of you that has three pictures on it that represent the three case studies or examples that we'll be using today Wikipedia as a meta in the comment Wikipedia is both a good and a bad thing so the bad thing first is that with archaeology there's a lot of misinformation out there and indeed a field called pseudo archaeology and one of its main areas in which people can come to know of it is through portals and platforms like Wikimedia but immediately the good also kicks in in that we can give good information to a very broad bunch of people like Wikipedia us if we publish something in peer-reviewed academic journals a few people read them your mom says she reads it but she probably lies and then Wikipedia will be reached by many many more people so a very simple presentation structure today just really the three case studies and then some a single slide on lessons learned and future work to do so this is all work in Australia and the Pacific and as background it's came to us via what we're calling the Bradshaw problem so Bradshaw is an inverted commas it's a it's a gudja it's a European name for an Aboriginal rock art in the Kimberley proper name is Guion Guion or Cujon or Kiro depending on the language groups but for many years on Wikipedia it had this name Bradshaw which caused a great deal of distress to Aboriginal people of the Kimberley in background so what we have and hopefully it's appearing is the composite slide with a bunch of pictures across the top and the writings of Joseph Bradshaw so in the 1890s 1892 Joseph Bradshaw goes to the Kimberley is looking to establish a capital station and he comes across Indigenous rock art and it's interesting how Indigenous rock art challenged the European colonial imagination generally their opinion of Indigenous people whether it was Australia the Americas, Africa was very negative but they recognised the art as something beautiful and called it indeed art but because they couldn't reconcile that it was made by local Indigenous people they very often invoked an exotic outsider so Bradshaw was a product of his time in the quote there he says if you look at the last line he says looking at some of the groups of paintings one might almost think himself viewing the painted walls of an ancient Egyptian temple so he says this is too good to be Aboriginal it has to be for example the Egyptians and this leads to these pseudo scientific claims that are made this is not inconsequential stuff this is stuff that matters as you can see from these this publication that I won't mention any further because it's not worth mentioning but from these news headlines from 2011 and 2016 we still have to deal with ideas that even aliens came down to earth to make this rock art so in these people's minds it's more likely that aliens made the rock art as in extraterrestrial beings than local Aboriginal people and their ancestors for example so it causes a great deal of hurt it's a form of it encourages racism and systemic racism and structural violence so Wikipedia is a structure as I said before that can be used for good or for bad and we have to understand why the pseudo archaeology comes about and you should be seeing on the slide in front of you something that says pseudo archaeology and then a quote from Ian McNivott that glossing it basically says that when you are in conservative times as much of the world is in now including Australia these kind of weird theories tend to grow and they tend to get fed by all sorts of sources around them so that's where we've engaged with Wikipedia what we really like though is the image that you see in front of you you should be seeing this painting sorry to interrupt we're still seeing your first slide I'm advancing through the slide so there's acknowledgement of country yes the thank you slide do you see that no we are not right that's challenging do you have any advice on how we might get that up let me try and start it again okay yeah oh look it's look it's moving now I've just hang on okay I've just started again um apologies just bear with us starting up and let me go to right share screen stop screen share screen alright so are you seeing the first slide now nothing is up as yet alright so let me stop share let me share again share screen share screen share that allow alright do you see the first slide now yes we do alright let's see if you can move through it to the second one do you see that one at all no we don't right that's very strange um well what we might try and do mindful of the speakers after us is just go from our slides and script and we'll try and create a picture in everyone's minds so so could you if it's not on slide okay can you see that the um the little thumbnails maybe yeah I'm not sure if that would be big enough for everyone to see it might be better than seeing nothing okay yeah we're seeing yes you see one that says pseudo archeology we're seeing that one oh great and if I move do you see the next one it's moving now oh fantastic okay let me just so anyway that you know there was our acknowledgement of country our thanks to Gideon Alex everyone um I'll move quickly through those don't worry about that so this was this just gives you an idea of this wonderful rock art which is something most Australians are not fully aware of and sometimes embarrassingly non Australians know more about Australian rock arts than than we do um and that's what we're looking to change so this is an example the slide just to go over some previous stuff of how this is in the popular media these weird outlandish theories and they keep coming up they don't go away um the quote you see there by Ian McNivin you can read for yourself if you would look at the picture down below the the sort of black picture with the large human like figure on which is known as a Wanjana image this is a painting from Wanjana-Wongwood people of the West Kimberley this is an image shown with permission and they've essentially taken um as as the Australians saying taken the piss um with this European um mis-recognition of aboriginal rock art and they're showing it's called chariots or weavers as in the barbeque of the gods playing on Eric Vandonekin's chariots of the gods they think it's very hilarious that people have these views in some ways and this is there to to um to gloss sort of uh Kirsten and Nathan's talk earlier this is a right to reply they they've just taken that right to reply as is their right and they've done it I think in a very powerful way and above that the screenshots are really of just some some academic books um but I think the two need to be looked at together and they're much more powerful than that anyway to cut a long story short the Bradshaw entry which we tried to change quite some years ago in 2015 got knocked back because the wiki community uh didn't members of the wiki community didn't like that that name was being changed many said well it's part of history you can't change history and all of that kind of thing but with Gideon Digby's help finally in March this year we managed to change it through changing every other uh mention of Bradshaw Rockhart in Wikipedia and then finally changing the title so the little bit in the screen that sort of pulsing there when you go back into the edits you can see this momentous day 24th of March um where uh well uh you know those of you who know who that person is know who that person is and we finally managed to change that and so this encouraged us greatly because it's a model for our further work on Australian Rockhart archaeology archaeologists and related wiki entries so on that note I'm going to pass over to Emily who's going to does Emily dot who's because Emily Gray is unfortunately ill today but her work on colonial and sexist language in Australian Rockhart so Emily over to you thank you Sven and thank you for the organization as well so I'm not Emily Graham the other Emily but um Emily Gray is unwell unfortunately today so I'm going to read um representation um for you um so um today um we will be continuing Sven's discussion of Rockhart and public knowledge and directing us towards the area of gather hunter environmental practices with a focus on expanding our understanding of the relationship between people plants and Rockhart gather hunter words are understood broadly in the public sphere as defined by economic practice um is to say the sourcing of food through hunting and gathering wild plants and animals rather than domesticated species the words of gatherer hunters have been brought into the public sphere in Australia in recent years by works such as Bruce Pascoe's Dark MU which has transformed the way we as a society understand indigenous connection to the environment and in particular plant life Dark MU has triggered many discussions around land rights ecological practices and gatherer hunter ecologies conversely it has also triggered a host of outright conservative anger aimed at okay I've got a French accent so some words are difficult to say for me so these were aimed at descent French sizing indigenous claims to country and plant based environmental practices as well as rewriting frontier histories and even delving into contemporary equality movements as Ben just mentioned these narratives are often disseminated through public media and resources such as Wikipedia are exploited for their wide public influence so access to factual archaeological and anthropological information is key to navigating the myriad of different perspectives and opinions on gatherer hunter environmental relationships and practices contemporary archaeological research has worked hard to circumnavigate many traditional biases in the field the dichotomy of male hunters and female gathers for example the assumption that plants had no social role other than food and that rock art play the role of social metaphor and function to explore human animal economies indeed in Australia research by archaeologists such as Anna Florin and colleagues and India Daxol and colleagues some examples are shown on the slide here have refuted these assumptions and proven that complex plant practices such as wild harvesting and the processing of plant materials extends back up to more than 50,000 years furthermore archaeologists such as Peterbeth and colleagues or Sven Usman and colleagues have expanded this research to incorporate rock art examining the rich assemblage of plant depictions in the rock art of the Kimberley region of Western Australia as evidence of these complex plant practices so plants are basically everywhere in rock art much of this research is not available on public free access media and requires memberships and payments to access more broadly discussion of plants in rock art on Wikipedia are limited to brief mentions where the policy of plant depictions is often attributed to masculine rock art practice where animals are emphasized over other subjects this is a common and traditional archaeological perspective which seems to have provided public discourse on rock art and authorship as well as plenty relationships to contradict this Emily's research Emily Gray's research has through a critical review of word Roger Rock Art Literature identified a whole variety of different plant depictions across the world depictions of mushrooms trees, roots and tubers flowers and hallucinogenic plants such as datura are found in gatherer hunter context worldwide albeit in small numbers while in the monsoon tropics of northern Australia plant depictions are far more common indeed in the Kimberley region of Australia in Queenie Barangara country where Emily's research focuses plants are present at up to 25% of rock art sites so these depictions include paintings of long and round yams and you've got some examples on these slides here and a host of native fruits, grasses and botanical designs motifs are often in compositions with human and animal figures depicted in different art styles which extend back to around 16,000 years and continue into contemporary art practices the identification of these motifs is a multi-faceted approach identifications are based on botanical profiles of individual plant genus and species ethnohistorical records of indigenous plant practices and ethnographic identification of specific rock art motifs forming such a pronounced part of the rock art repertoire of the Kimberley and for such an extended period of time plant imagery embodies the varied relationships between indigenous gatherer hunter communities and their environments in archaeological practice plant rock art can tell us about the different types of plants people have engaged with across time and space the ways in which landscapes were managed and curated and the different mythological stories in which plants are situated but where are the plants in public media despite this prevalence in public media discussion of gatherer hunter plant relationships and rock art is noticeably absent the indigenous Australian art Wikipedia page has no mention of plants or subject matter but emphasizes the dominant themes of animals humans and mythological figures and material objects and you've got examples here again the page has no discussion of the sociocultural roles of rock art in indigenous gatherer hunter culture and is disengaged from contemporary research which emphasizes this role and the entanglement of people with our environments so what can we do to change this so Emily is using her research into plants and rock art to expand public access to gatherer hunter environmental archeologies through our wiki cohort initiative at the University of Western Australia she will be working to edit current entries which discuss gatherer hunter archeologies and likewise to reflect contemporary research and theoretical standpoints and create new entries which engage with indigenous knowledge and heritage practices to communicate the latest archeological research surrounding gatherer hunter environmental relationships this includes the eventual construction of new entries which communicate research about plants in rock art both in Australia and in the UK and also in the UK to counter historical biases towards animals and masculine coded practices and assumptions the value of public media spaces such as wikipedia has been understated in academic discourse for a long time but if we're able to share accurate information and educate communities about the value of heritage and the environment then we're using this media for the right reasons thank you so much for your time Hi everyone thank you Sven and Emily I'm now going to discuss the next part of our wiki project and this was touched on briefly but it's related more to the place of women in the history of archeology and more specifically focusing on the archeology of the Pacific region it is well documented that women are significantly underrepresented in the fields of science and this also includes the field of archeology more generally it has been reported that approximately 18% of biographies on wikipedia are of women this is called the Matilda effect and it's a historical process that's been analysed and documented by historians of science and that characterised bias against acknowledging the achievements of women in the field of science and what this means is that there exists a historical process through which women scientists become progressively erased out of the records of science and they eventually become invisible in the field of science closer to home here in Australia this is evident in the history of female archeologists throughout Australia and the Pacific as one of the first professors of archeology in Australia is well pointed out there was despite their invisibility in our histories in this region an intrepid yet often shadowy even invisible band of women archeologists the Pacific Matilda's project was created by Dr Emily who just spoke to us before and it was designed to investigate the scientific lives of the first women who conducted archeological work in the Oceana from the late 19th, 20th century to the mid 20th century and document their hidden contributions to the development of Pacific archeology it is also important to understand that in the 19th century this was the moment in which archeology itself was being developed into a science and therefore the work of these early scientific pioneers is an important part of shaping the field of archeology as part of the Pacific Matilda's project a large database of written outputs has been produced by the women archeologists and developed by Dr India Delks Hall and associated to a biological database that she is currently working on there are 40 biographies of such women being worked on with scope for much much more to be added an aspect of this project is to convert the data onto a digital platform which will be accessible to all through the internet this database will address the historical silences in archeology by giving these scientific pioneers a voice to further assisting creating strong representation we want to utilize the strength and accessibility of Wikipedia and bringing them from the fringe to the centre this is an example of some of the work that Dr India Delks Hall has done on these biographies to further gain an understanding of the existing representation of these female archeologists we sampled 23 of the 40 women currently being researched as part of the Matilda's project as indicated by the table 11 of them were represented in varying degrees of detail on Wikipedia and on three other three on other platforms this is actually not too bad a result almost 50% of the women archeologists being already represented on Wikipedia however many of the existing profiles need editing and correcting as well as additional information added to them what this did tell us though was that despite the sea of red that you see on the table here indicating the lack of representation Wikipedia is indeed leading the way for representation of these women and validates our decision to add this component of Wikipedia to the Matilda's project it's also noted that in some cases the only representation that these pioneers had was when they were noted on their husbands profiles at the time of their work in the 19th and 20th centuries these women were often only allowed to participate in the archeological and anthropological work if accompanying their husbands and their work was often hidden or credited to their spouses ironically the fact that their contributions are still only credited on their husbands pages is in essence a modern continuation of this silencing and emphasises the need for them to have their own pages independent from their husbands we believe that there are four important factors that need to be considered within this project like anything in life things are nuanced and complex and at the same goes for these women being represented on these pages we've discussed already the need for an increase in gender representation within this we need to also consider the historical and colonial context indigenous and pacific are people's status within such context and when it comes to early women archeologists who are from the indigenous communities of the islands as well as the overall anglophone domination in the pacific and in the scientific field in general if these factors are not considered we'll only continue to further marginalise the minority groups and those unseen the trial blazers website which celebrates and highlights the work of women in these sciences noted this same issue they stated after several years of acquiring biographies of trial blazing women we began to realise that a very particular kind of woman was dominating the stories the typical trial blazer was anglophone, white and upper middle class and had picked up a trial for fun not as a way of earning a living these trial blazers are not a representation of all women in the field and it highlights the need to create a much larger representation of the work done with this in mind we would like to extend the project to take into consideration the linguistic aspects by not only creating pages in English but also French, Spanish and acknowledging the indigenous languages of the region we would like to continue to throw the net wider with the contributions of Australian women and then further throughout the world in order for us to be successful with the creation of these pages and for bringing those on the fringe into the centre we need to raise the issue of notability there's a responsibility of those who create the pages to be focused on the factors we have raised but there's also a responsibility for Wikipedia on challenging existing criteria for notability it has been noted before that on the English Wikipedia topics for inclusion are judged against notability criteria criteria in those who have gained sufficient significant attention by the world at large and over a period of time this compounds the marginalisation of people who have been historically excluded visibility within Wikipedia translates to visibility online and consciously or unconsciously the platform's content shapes how researchers understand their field who is judging the acceptable level of attention and which part of the world is dominating the audience and other women within the project they have never had an opportunity to be seen and develop the level of notability required to be acceptable for inclusion this lies obviously a catch-22 issue and a rise and we need to address this to enable progress by challenging existing restrictions and taking these points into consideration we're asking people to look at their own biases in an effort to create a more inclusive space and help us bring these incredible women to the centre I'll pass you back to Sven now who will just wind everything up for us thank you thanks Lea so mindful of time really we've had a lot of fun with this project it's a collective so people drop in and out as they do various things fun I don't mean it in a frivolous way I think we take enjoyment from thinking that these things matter seeing where the gaps are seeing how we can improve them our digital and advocacy skills and in most of us those could certainly be developed further and so we'd like to see Wikipedia as a place in which particularly teachers and children can get really good information that is multi-vocal but that is not everyone it's not everything goes but that you can have multiple voices whether they're indigenous, female, other all of those kinds of things and on that note I think I'll stop and thank everyone for their attention thank you so much Lea Emily Sven that was brilliant ok next we're going back to take a visual journey through the relationship between Wikipedia and the Order of Australia so for those of you outside Australia the Order of Australia is a series of honours and awards that recognise Australians who have demonstrated outstanding service or exceptional achievement in February 2021 researchers Heather Ford Tanson Peech and Kelly Toll from the University of Technology Sydney School of Communication published the results of a pilot study entitled producing distinction, Wikipedia and the Order of Australia a visual essay looking at who is presented on Wikipedia and who isn't Kelly Toll joins us now from Sydney thanks Kelly hi Alex wow thank you so much for having me and thanks Wikimedia Australia and Alex and Peru for inviting me to present this project that was actually created with a lot of people so I was involved in this project with the University of Technology Sydney and Wikimedia Australia but first of all I'd really like to acknowledge and pay my respects to the traditional owners of the land I'm on which is the Gadigal people of the Iora Nation and I pay my respects to Elders past, present and emerging and I'd also like to acknowledge all the First Nations people who are watching from all around the world so who do we think we are is an initial look at and part of a wider project that explores how Australia and Australians are represented on Wikipedia and we wanted to understand how the two systems of recognition the Order of Australia and Wikipedia overlap as well as stand alone I'm going to take you very quickly through the background of the process of the project sorry I'll just change my slide I've got multiple monitors, there we go I'll take you quickly through the background and process of our project and some of our findings and a few of the opportunities that emerged at the end so as Alex mentioned the team was made up from two researchers from the University of Sydney Heather Ford who's the Associate Professor from the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences and Tamsin Petch who's the Director of the Australian Centre for Public History at UTS and from Wikimedia Australia we worked with Prue Mitchell, Alex Lum and Toby Hudson and then there was me, I'm a freelance data visualisation designer who has connections with UTS our aim was to map the scope of the Order of Australia in relation sorry in relation to Wikipedia and to explore who and what has been admitted and the Order of Australia data that we did include was 1975 to 2020 so if you're going to look at my data set afterwards there is a year missing but I can show you where that is at the end if you actually really want to download it and play with it yourself so our plan was relatively simple and if anyone else here works with data sets like I do you know you always start off with a simple plan but it never turns out that way so we planned to use the Order of Australia Honours List as a proxy for notable Australians and we just wanted to match the names from this list with Wikipedia biographies and if there was a match we get the page date that it was created and then we calculate the difference between the time of the page creation and the honour date which seems quite simple but the reality was it was a lot more complicated and messier than that it was a much more difficult process as most things are with data set creation particularly when you're trying to set match names and so we ended up using wiki data as our source data set or our initial data set simply because wiki data also includes aliases so for the Australian audience out there we have Burt Newton on Wikipedia but we have Albert Newton receiving an Order of Australia on name alone was proving to be quite difficult once we did do the match we realised we were missing a lot of people who had Wikipedia biographies so Alex took this as an opportunity for an data alignment process where he took information from Wikipedia and published that back on wiki data so now wiki data itself has got a very strong record of all of the Order of Australia holders page creation date was also a little bit tricky but I came up with a very hacky way of doing this just by scraping the first edit date and using that in my calculations then it was mostly smooth sailing so for anyone who's not familiar with the levels of the Order of Australia there's five levels knights and dames, companions, officers members and medals it looks like there's no knights and dames issued anymore but it ranges in the type of recognition so companions of the Order of Australia tend to what they call reach the pinnacle of their careers and they've got international or very strong national credibility whereas someone receiving a medal is much more tends to be connected to sort of grassroots organisations and they have a localised level in a particular field so what we did find was that 4,452 people hold both an Order and a Wikipedia page in total that's about 11% of Order holders and what's interesting is the pool of Australians on Wikipedia itself is larger than the Order of Australia itself we did find that the higher the Order you hold the more likely you are to have a Wikipedia page which is fairly intuitive yet the next two levels have about 11,500 people missing from Wikipedia so there's only 19 knights and dames and two of them happen to be the Prince of Wales and the late Duke of Edinburgh so many of them are ex-governor generals and extremely eminent Australians so there's no surprise that all of those 19 people do have a Wikipedia page and also as we expected most companions also have a page but offices on below could have greater representation on Wikipedia what we found was really interesting was the proportional representation of Australian women compared to men there are significantly less women who hold an Order of Australia but those that do also have a Wikipedia page which refers to men so it's 9.7% for women versus 11.2% for men which isn't necessarily as big a gap as what we were expecting so Wikipedia is not doing so badly in terms of like for like representation what we found though was very interesting for companions which at the moment is the highest honour that you can receive the representation of women that have a page is 95% compared to 83% of the men and from a small time observing people who are active in the Wikipedia world in Australia there's a really conscious effort to make sure that eminent Australian women are included so in terms of what comes first the page or the Order we saw that on the week of the announcement of the honours there's a spike in page creation activity before and after is steady one or two pages being created a week but on the week of the announcement of the order it spikes to 47 I'm not sure how clear that is on your side of the screen but this chart looks at the weeks before and after the announcement and you can see there's a really big spike in the middle which is what we call week zero finally we wanted to see if we could glean anything about who the editors might be of these 47 pages so that it was our own Alex Lum who worked on the project with us who created many of them and he told us that he'd look at the list and make sure that people were represented on the site particularly eminent people receiving the order companion this is all kind of interesting what we felt was it wasn't necessarily actionable rather than just saying we need more pages created for eminent people in the lower levels could we see who to focus on only for people who are not cis white men so we looked at the honest citation field to see if there was anything interesting we discovered that you're more likely to have a page if you are in sport, politics or media and entertainment and you're less likely to have a page if a research field relates to areas such as nursing community health and aged care so all the women with an an AO without the Wikipedia page it might be difficult for you to see this level of detail but what it basically tells us is you're more likely to have a page if you're in politics law and entertainment very similar with AMs as well which is the Medal of Australia we also found similar differences emerged when looking at women with pages created before or after receiving the honour if you had a page created before you received the honour you also tended to work in things like politics media, broadcasting and things like that whereas if you received your Wikipedia page after you received sorry if Wikipedia page was created for you after you received the honour that's when you did tend to also work in things like nursing aged care and research areas around that so in terms of opportunities we realised that one of the mismatches that I found was interesting in the data is that there were 280 people who have a wiki data entry but also have no order of Australia sorry they have no order of Australia but they have no Wikipedia page so somewhere they're being mentioned on Wikipedia but they don't have a biography page themselves so for instance we found that these three women who also worked in those fields that we talked about so nursing and healthcare ethics rural healthcare clinical genetics are all women who are mentioned in some their research is referenced in Wikipedia but they have no biography themselves so these women are one of them is also listed on the women in red page now I shared this about six months ago at the Wikipedia birthday party so chances are someone's gone and created these pages but it's just an interesting way that you could look at wiki data to understand potential page people who could have a page created for them so there's an opportunity to create pages for eminent women working in the fields of nursing community health and aged care so there could be opportunities to work with various universities such as Newcastle University New South Wales that has a particular focus on nursing and community health and the other opportunity is just people like me what I really understood was it's no good me saying things like oh there's not enough representation of women or particular groups of women I probably need to go and create the page myself so I've taken part in a couple of Wikipedia activities even the one that Nathan and Kirsten mentioned the one that was run for Natoch week by themselves and the city of Sydney and I've taken part in a couple of different things but now I'm here it's fantastic I'm always looking for interesting data sets for my clients to use and I really did not know that this world of wiki data and Wikipedia existed before taking part in this project so the project can be read here and I think links will somehow go up and the data can also be accessed at a research site at UTS if you're interested in that so I'll hand it back over to Alex and thank you very much for letting me take part thank you Kelly thanks very much that was amazing and we're final presentation for the evening or morning depending on where you are we're joined by volunteer co-won data Margaret Donald who ran the much-loved wiki loves earth competition in Australia this year 182 entrants 162 of whom were new to Wikipedia and 1,510 photos submitted there are a lot of lessons learned which Margaret's going to share with us now so I'm just going to play my video I want to talk about the experience of running wiki loves earth in Australia and I need to share my screen to do that I'll just minimise this and we'll get to the slides hopefully come on from the beginning thank you so this is one of our winning no it's not one of our winning images actually it's one that was certainly in the running to be a winner so anybody who wanted to enter the competition came in by the banner at the top and this should have been straightforward and this first banner you can see was based on the international other countries banners and it didn't work because we were running at something like 20% ineligible photographs so it was replaced by this second banner where our people came in and what was fairly nerve racking in all of this was that one had to set up a landing page and instructions and all sorts of things and make it happen and this was part of what made it happen it was the Australian landing page and it told us things like the instructions and the rules it had a list of protected areas European countries do that somewhat better than us our lists are incredibly incomplete and I will go on about that some time later we had past winners in Australia which was possibly useful if people wanted to see what they were aspiring to and we had a new tool this year which was called the pre-jury and anybody clicking on this could rate the images that were uploaded to Australia you could actually start uploading from this page you could create an account and you could upload and hopefully you read the step by step instructions and the rules first of all but that didn't always happen so now this again was a fairly nerve racking page this is the page on which everything hung to participate in the Wiki Loves Earth competition we had to fill in these this row for Australia and you had to have the right things at the back of those things so this was our landing page this gave the dates here 1st of May to the 13th of June probably too long I think it didn't allow us enough time for the judging we had a list of protected areas this isn't quite right it's only the uploads at a certain level and various other bits and pieces that we did now this was incredibly important this page because this was the page that allowed the turning on of the banner and the turning off of the banner and of course it was turned on from anybody whose IP address was in Australia for the duration of the competition didn't quite come to didn't quite happen on midnight Australian eastern standard time had to get the Europeans to hurry up and get themselves organised they'd forgotten that we're on the other side of the earth and now they start a little earlier than theirs so those were critical worries prior to the competition and really critical worries afterwards just because of the rates the error rates so there was a lot of fiddling it out on those so why does one run such a competition one of the key things is to attract new contributors you really hope that some of the people who upload will be carried away and realise how easy it is to contribute to Wikipedia and to the commons and start contributing so that's a fairly important hope and in fact we attracted 162 new contributors whether that's good I'm not sure I was really hoping for a whole pile of wonderful images to come to fill the extraordinary holes that we have in Wikipedia for all of the species we don't cover plants yet we're nowhere within kui of covering insects we probably cover mammals quite well in Wikipedia but anything less than a mammal is not particularly well covered so all of those things I was hoping for but there is another product that happens and that is that we spent an inordinate amount of time curating those images so to make them available for other language Wikipedia so we spent a lot of time putting in depict statements and putting in categories and these are things that are really very difficult for first time contributors these are some images well the top left hand corner is an image which I was particularly pleased with it's not particularly elegant and it certainly is but it was the first image of a living goods flying squid that exists on Wikipedia so that was a real thrill the other image that we had was of course this wonderful drawing but that was drawn in the 19th century and we did not have a single photograph of this amazing squid so that was a real thrill and part of what I thought the competition was about again for me was what the competition was about we had introduced a new species to Wikipedia tachomaculata cannot get my face in an appropriate spot here tachomaculata there's only 12 pages devoted to that family in Wikipedia so it's not particularly well represented it's a very unusual plant it comes from the remote Kimberley so that was an extraordinary thrill too this one also was a thrill it doesn't actually feature in Wikipedia but it engendered a new article it engendered the finding of new and other pictures that were somewhat better than this slightly less blurry but and of course it reminded me that there was a terrible void in wiki data in Wikipedia of insects in particular beetles so I've just spent some time uploading some wiki data to fill the gap now this is part of the problem in Australia Australia protects areas in other ways than simply national parks or marine parks or indigenous protected areas and all of those things that most people are really aware of it protects them also by state law which notes covenanted properties that have covenants over them to say that they are protected in some form or other to protect biodiversity it in some cases it's meant to be in perpetuity in other cases it's shorter than that and most states have lists of these privately protected lands but you have to go to the registers for those and there is an article about it in Wikipedia, new because of this photograph but we haven't even got all of the legislation up there let alone the lists this is another form of protection that lands can have it's an endangered ecological community and it's protected by legislation in New South Wales and also Commonwealth legislation and any land, woodland that satisfies the definition of this ecological community is protected so in this particular case it happens to be I think just a roadside verge north of Narrabah so there are two other ways in which we extended the notion of protected areas this year and which we hope to see more of in future competitions so we've got our images and of course we need to judge them for ourselves and for the international community and we used a couple of things we had a German pre-jury tool which was used to make it cull because I had hoped the sorts of numbers that the Germans get which are of the order of 13,000 and so for the Ukrainians and so both of them used jury and pre-jury tools and we took advantage of their tools this year so that was again a new thing so we had several rounds oh I put this here it's an output from the German pre-jury tool and I had been worried that people who didn't judge every image that was available in our uploaded images that only the early images would be judged but as you can see from here there's very few images that got fewer than 10 votes so it was actually they must have put them up in a random manner for the people who did not some people contributed 400 some people contributed 10 others contributed the full 1200 images so what did we do? we culled to 100 images with our German pre-jury tool that was an error I think it was too small and I hadn't anticipated then we culled 29 images and that was incredibly much too small partly because really high quality images people had uploaded to other websites which meant that we had to get OTRS statements from the uploaders so there was that then there was a problem that we found that some images were very like each other but we didn't want to put forward images that were like each other so we had two beautiful images of the Lara printer trail but we didn't want to put them both forward to the international competition it really wanted to show a bit more of the diversity of Australia we had two beautiful images of ghost guns and again that seemed a bit much in terms of ghost guns we also thought we had too many birds so when we came together as judges to talk about the images that had been chosen by our ratings we found that really 29 was far too few and I think I would be looking at at least 50 next time and I probably would be the German scale was a rating of 1 to 5 that was what you had to do the Ukrainian tour was slightly different and it allowed you to oh I'm just doing some more things there that was one of the images that we had to reject that was so beautiful it was so nearly a winner but we just couldn't send both of them so we sent the better of one of them so looking at the Ukrainian jury tour it looked something like this now it was actually much more well we didn't get it to incredibly late so that was a real pity because not all of our judges felt comfortable with it I think it comes with a whole pile of scales so you can judge on a plus minus scale you can judge on a 1 to 3 scale or 1 to 5 scale or 1 to 20 scale in retrospect I wish I'd used the 1 to 10 scale with the half stars but never mind we didn't we used the 1 to 5 scale and one of the things that's nice about it is that you can look at it as a gallery and this is really handy for a judge because it allows the judge to see images that he or she has given the same rating to and so when you're looking at them and you go oh I really don't think that's as good an image as that one then you can down rate this one or rate this one higher or whatever it pleases you in terms of what's round and about so it allows a judge to be a little bit more self-consistent than seems possible when you're just filling them in one at a time and you go oh gosh I rated that one 8 was that consistent with the 7 I rated 2 photographs ago so that's very handy the other thing that was incredibly important about it and one of the reasons why you would always use a pre-dury tool if you have them available is that there is no problem with the data entry if someone rates something as 5 then it is attached to the image and it comes down to the administrator attached to the image and you can't change it you don't have a problem with data entry you don't have a problem with somebody trying to merge files incorrectly or whatever so really I cannot emphasise how important it is to have a jury tool just for that yeah we'll keep on going so I thought you might be interested in some statistics I'll shift my face if I can find it no back page up there we go thank you so these are images represented an image of a national park in a particular state or territory we didn't know where our contributors came from and in many cases our contributors did search high and low through their photographic archives and they contributed photographs to several states or territories as you can see there because apparently we have 303 contributors but it's not that it's just that some contributors to some people contributed to several states so WA had the most images New South Wales didn't do too badly Queensland similarly and far fewer photographs that showed Tasmania or South Australia and I'm hoping that if we were to do this next time we might get some sort of competition up to make people feel more competitive about where images are coming from this by the way is an image which Kerry Raymond tracked down using Google Earth and we were able to actually describe it as coming from a river reserve along the Campasby River in Victoria near Rochester so fabulous detective work on the part of Wikipedia and Kerry Raymond because certainly one of the things that was true for most of these images they were fairly badly captioned often with pretty inadequate descriptions I mean you were really glad when somebody gave a decent description and there was an enormous amount of work trying to just verify that they were from a national park and a lot of wiki data work which involved the creation of lots of new wiki data items in fact so that was what it looked like from a statewide point of view there were actually 1510 images uploaded but about 300 of those were ineligible so they weren't considered and I thought you might be interested in the comparisons across the years we've actually done very well in terms of I've actually done some international comparisons which I haven't shown here but you can see that of the files uploaded and I'm assuming that's an artifact of perhaps shifting files and leaving redirects or something because it's certainly a miscount but it's all counted the same way all of these things using Glamorgan which is a tool so we can see that we used 138 of these files which is roughly 9% and that's been pretty consistent across the years and that's way better than most other countries I have to say in 2016 this is pretty phenomenal those 385 files that were used have been used across 1400 and two pages on 92 wikis and in the month of July 2021 the pages on which they were attracted this many views well we're way down on that yet but give us time we've certainly got ourselves across quite a few wikis 32 and that again is in terms of international comparisons we're doing far better than most other countries on that score and I would think as time goes by that will increase I mean as you can see in 2017 the second year of competition 52 wikis so it just depends how conscientious people are about copying places from other language or from English Wikipedia into other languages and then using the images that go with them so I think that's not too badly done so well there are lots of things that I did wrong and I hope to have the opportunity to do them better next time but I have to say thank you very much to Wikimedia Australia and to all of our contributors and to all of those who helped behind the scenes of whom there were very very many and their work was extraordinarily and utterly important I'm going to thank you, thanks Margaret we've got a few minutes left did you have anything you wanted to add oh you're on mute Margaret you're on mute I was wanting to say something about those statistics I mean actually contributed 6000 files but of their files so far they've only used less than 1% of them on Wikipedia pages and on the other hand the Philippines have used 29 sorry 30% of their uploaded files on their pages which is pretty terrific but we are pretty jolly good in terms of international comparisons I mean there are some people that are only represented on 3 wikis and the truth of the matter about Wikilabs Earth is because you're representing species and places that you contribute to can have a matching Wikipedia article in Portuguese, in Nepalese in Vietnamese, whatever and and so we do in many cases and certainly one of the things that I do all the time is I try to spread all of the images that I have of species or whatever across wikis using wiki data apart from anything else but anyway that was all I wanted to say extra and thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to do it it was good fun thank you very much Margaret alright so that's it for today's session thanks for Margaret for her insight they'll surely help the competition grow for many years to come and the stunning winners and finalists have just been announced in the last few days so we encourage you to check them out on Wikimedia Commons that's it for today's session I just want to thank so much again Nathan Mudgey Sentence Kirsten Thorpe Lea Corrie Emily Dotzaro Emily Gray Span Ellsman Kelly Toll and Margaret Donald for their time at work today thank you everyone for tuning into our Wikimedia Australia affiliate session and enjoy the rest of wikimania good night good morning good evening