Wikipedia for Beginners: The Making of the Video
By Al Giordano
Photo: DR 2010 by Jill Freidberg.
That's Sebastian Kolendo, 22, in the photo, above, 2010 scholar at the School of Authentic Journalism, from Eau Claire, Wisconsin. You may have already read his excellent essay, Cameras for the Shy, sharing some of what he learned last month in Mexico at the Narco News J-School.
While there, he also produced this video, tapping on his experience and observations as a volunteer editor at Wikipedia and as co-chairman of the committee there that mediates disputes over the online encyclopedia's content. This video informs you, in simple steps, how you can edit entries at Wikipedia, too, and also talks about the influence of that Internet resource on public opinion:
As part of our "The Making of the Video" series, I asked Seb to share with y'all more details of how he produced this video. He writes:
Three pieces of software were used in the making of this video: Screenium, a screen-capture program; Audacity, an audio tool; and Final Cut Pro, which mixed the video captured by Screenium with the audio recorded with Audacity.
Editing the audio in Audacity was the most difficult part. I actually made two recordings under somewhat different conditions, so they sounded slightly different from each other. Because these two recordings had to be cut together, they needed to sound similar.
In my first recording, the sound never rose above 5kHz. In my second recording, there was a faint crackling and the higher frequencies were significantly louder than in the first. While the tools used to correct this are simple enough, the task of making recordings sound similar was rather tedious. The first thing I did was analyze the spectrum of the two recordings. Audacity does this automatically, and returns a graph where the x-axis represents frequency and the y-axis represents volume. From there, I used a graphic equalizer tool to change the volume level in a given frequency range. Adjusting one audio track to have a spectrum that looks more-or-less like another takes trial-and-error and time.
The next difficulty was removing all the umms and pauses from the recordings. There were plenty: I wasn't using a script during the recording, so I largely spoke off the top of my head. It's fairly easy to hear in the video where the audio is mismatched. (there is a very noticable “are” where I'm explaining the demographics.) It's clear that proper annunciation is important when recording to avoid words bleeding together that you later need to split.
Using Screenium was the easiest task. You just open a browser window to Wikipedia and tell Screenium to record for about 5 seconds. In Final Cut Pro, you can loop those videos as many times as you need for the audio.
Of all the videos that the viral video team produced, this one was probably the simplest to make. Tutorial videos are easy to create but hard to do right. This was my first attempt at a tutorial video – actually, it was my first video ever – so it's easy to see where there's room for improvement.
I personally really like this video. It follows "the KISS rule" ("Keep It Simple, Stupid") and demystifies two things that everyone can do: 1. Write and edit entries on Wikipedia, and, 2. Make videos to share your skills with others.
As Seb notes, he had never produced a video before attending the School. In ten days he learned to use a camera and also to produce video (with audio) and did it.
As to whether this great video can "go viral" (like our Torture in Egypt video that, since last week, already has more than 1,400 views on YouTube or Translations with Father Charlie video that now has more than 350) that's largely up to you. If you think it should, embed it on your websites, blogs, Facebook and other social networking pages, Twitter its link, among all the other creative things we can do to get these instructional and educational videos out there.
And I know that some of our regular readers and commenters here are also volunteer editors at Wikipedia, so please feel free to use the comments' section here to offer additional pointers and advice to our readers who would also like to do so...
Email this page
Comments
Equipment
Submitted March 8, 2010 - 10:21 pm by Lin Wells (not verified)Maybe it a silly question, but I am wondering what kind of equipment you use or recommend. Thanks
Wikipedia video
Submitted March 10, 2010 - 10:48 am by Toby Higbie (not verified)Nice job on the video. It is important to demystify Wikipedia since we rely on it so much. Although I have done some editing and creating, I wasn't aware of the "systemic bias" project. I definitely encourage people to just try it out. As the video says, even if you create a very short article on a subject, chances are someone will come along and expand it. This also means that you probably should go back to your article periodically to see how it is developing.
re: Lin, Toby
Submitted March 10, 2010 - 6:58 pm by Sebastian Kolendo@Lin
I used a Macbook. For recording... I don't remember the model of the mic, unfortunately. But Free Speech Radio News's training guide recommends the Electro Voice RE-50 or the Beyer M-58, apparently available <100$. On the other hand, the built-in mic on my laptop would probably have sufficed.
Interesting sidenote: our recording booth was under a thick, woolen blanket on a rather hot day. I think that incidentally promotes a sort-of professionalism, as well :-)
Of course, editing Wikipedia only requires an internet connection. Working with Google Books and Google Scholar helps tremendously for research and sourcing.
@Toby
Project CSB (countering systemic bias) isn't in the best of shape. It has a lot of lists of articles that need expansion or more viewpoints. Many of them haven't been updated in a while, but they're largely articles that most editors neither have interest nor context for... which means they're probably in the same sorry shape when they were added. CSB also maintains a list of other Wikiprojects in various stages of aliveness. It's still one of the best projects, though.
here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:CSB I'd probably recommend this as a first stop to newbie editors coming from here.
Finally: if you create a very short article without establishing the notability of the subject within it, chances are far more likely someone will tag it for deletion, if not delete it outright (if you're unlucky enough to have a wandering administrator). I'm thinking that most administrators who patrol the speedy deletion side of things are deletionists anyway. Stands to reason, especially since deletionism is basically the status quo. It's easy to dodge, though, after a bit of practice.
Actually, here's a short guide to preventing deletionists from being TOO trigger-happy: When you create an article, mention how the subject is important. The edit summary should say you're doing this for CSB, and that you'll expand later.
Example: Mario Menéndez Rodríguez doesn't have an article. First sentence should say he's the director-general of Por Esto!, third largest newspaper in Mexico, and who coined the term Authentic Journalism. Then glean whatever you can from Mariana Simoes' article on NN and elsewhere. Finally, in the edit summary: "for [[WP:CSB]], important figure in Mexico, will continue to expand."
1st, people are less likely to delete something if you cite something that starts with "WP:" if it's in the first-ever edit summary; it looks officious. Then declare notability. Then say you're working on it. But only do this if you have conviction that the article you're working on is actually important. It's a stop-gap measure is all.
Finally: the video says I'm User:Xavexgoem; you can always ask for some help by clicking here. Try it if you're bored ;-)
Video Equipment
Submitted March 17, 2010 - 1:44 pm by Stephen (not verified)Hi,
Was wondering what type of Videocam are you using in the photo and would you recommend it to others who are new to video?
Thanks!
@Stephen
Submitted March 18, 2010 - 10:55 am by Sebastian KolendoI don't know the exact name of that camera... it was Jill Freidberg's, and it only shot in SD. It's modern-day equivalent is the Sony HVR-A1U, which I'm supposed to get in the mail sometime within the hour! I'd recommend it if it weren't so ungodly expensive.
I don't actually know much about camcorders, so I wouldn't know what to recommend. I used many different ones while I was down there, but Jill's was my favorite. It wasn't bulky (weighs about a pound), and it wasn't tiny like a handycam (I can't bring myself to take something called a handycam seriously... at least I can't take myself seriously holding something called a handycam).
But there are good handycams! They're much easier to use, especially since most record onto a hard-drive, which makes uploading to computer much much easier (the camcorder in the pic records to cassette. I'm not kidding: we still use cassettes.)
The handycam I've been looking at was the CX550V. It's still pretty expensive, but it has more control. That little knob near the lens lets you control zoom, focus, exposure, etc... other handycams don't allow you to do that with any precision. There's probably something better out there, though. Like, you don't need a microphone that records 5.1 sound. I also don't think a camera /really/ needs a GPS chip (?!).
Post new comment