Wikipedia talk:GLAM/National Archives and Records Administration/Today's Document challenge

Liking it

Yes, I like the idea. The potential scope is very broad, though, so I do not have a grasp on what kinds of documents might be available. Any hints? Binksternet (talk) 15:15, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The National Archives has an immense collection, some of which may be surprising. Obviously, most documents will relate in some way to American history, but, as you say, that's a broad category. Try perusing their catalog at [1] to get an idea of what you could use; you can limit the search to digitized items. Dominic·t 15:48, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Where can I find a queue of images that are being readied for future display at "Today's Document"? Binksternet (talk) 16:11, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Good question. It's not a secret, but right now you can only see them by clicking through to future dates from the "Tomorrow's document" link at the bottom of [2] (and repeating), or you can manually change the URL (for example, http://www.archives.gov/historical-docs/todays-doc/index.html?dod-date=601 is June 1 and http://www.archives.gov/historical-docs/todays-doc/index.html?dod-date=823 is August 23). I'll work on putting up a more usable index on Wikipedia, though. Dominic·t 16:17, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Okay, I put up an index at Wikipedia:GLAM/NARA/Today's Document challenge/Index. It's nothing pretty, but hopefully it's workable. Dominic·t 16:51, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Beauty is the eyes, etc. I think your index is very useful! Binksternet (talk) 18:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

The new article got about 600 hits while on the Main page, a very mild showing. The image itself got about 1800 hits; somewhat better! Put in perspective, a very sensational image at DYK can collect tens of thousands of hits. Binksternet (talk) 22:59, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I was just looking at these, actually. And don't worry, your (awesome) article actually got over 13,000 views. Dominic·t 23:21, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Aha! That pesky little preposition. :D

Binksternet (talk) 01:25, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Notability presumption

It seems to be self-evident, so to speak, that selection as Document of the Day evidences notability and it should be taken as a guideline status presumption that any such document is Notable in the Wikipedia-inclusion-criteria sense. That presumption can be subject to rebuttal, but the burden of proof should be against any challenge to notability, not the other way around. GeoBard^Rap 20:37, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

I would rather not make any assumptions like that, actually. It is up to each Wikipedian to make their own best judgments based on Wikipedia policy. I would say that documents are selected because they are interesting or important in some way, but they are often themselves not notable. However, I believe it is a safe bet that any chosen document for Today's document can be used for this challenge, whether that means the the document is a subject of an article, an important source for article, or an important illustration for an article. The one article written in conjunction with this project had to do with a military portrait of the first black Marine recruit. The article was about desegregation in the United States Marine Corps, not that actual portrait as a document, and that's just fine. Compare today's document, the GI Bill, with yesterday's, a photo of a community folk concert in New York in the 1970s. The former is easily notable, but the latter, while striking and informational, requires a little more creativity to give it a proper home at Wikipedia. Dominic·t 20:53, 22 June 2011 (UTC)