> > No manual descriptions, on basically any item. And that will remain so for > the (near) future. Automatic descriptions can change that, literally over > night, with a little programming and linguistic effort. ... This is a > "force multiplier" of volunteer effort with a factor of 250. And we ignore > that ... why, exactly?
Not ignoring. In fact, if the auto-generated descriptions near the quality of human curated descriptions, I'm totally and wholeheartedly onboard that their use should be strongly considered. I just disagree that closing the quality gap will involve "little programming and linguistic effort." I lean more toward "massive programming and linguistic effort" end of the spectrum. Specifically, I think it will take massive effort to make the auto-generated descriptions so good that an average person would say, "hey these auto generated descriptions are better than the human curated descriptions" in the examples I posted. But I may, of course, be wrong! On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 1:27 PM, S Page <sp...@wikimedia.org> wrote: > My hero Magnus Manske noted > > The situation, for most languages, is this: No manual descriptions, on > basically any item. And that will remain so for the (near) future. > Automatic descriptions can change that, literally over night, with a little > programming and linguistic effort. ... This is a "force multiplier" of > volunteer effort with a factor of 250. And we ignore that ... why, exactly? > > The potential of AutoDesc is so enormous to attain "a world in which every > single person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all human > knowledge" that it should be the entire movement's top project. I nearly > wrote a career-limiting e-mail rant to WMF-all on that subject last night. > > In this e-mail thread we're talking about it in the limited scope of "Wikidata > descriptions in search on mobile web beta", where the mobile client > presents a useful signpost for *existing* articles, in an emblem on lead > images and in search results. That's important but we're missing the forest > for a single tree when discussing such a transformative technology. If only > WMF had a CTO for such things [1]. > > Anyway, returning to this specific use case: > * Nobody is saying store the AutoDesc in the Wikidata per-language > description field. > * Nobody is saying show the AutoDesc if there is an existing Wikidata > description. > * Is anybody against showing AutoDesc, after some refinement and > productization [2], in these mobile use cases when there is no Wikidata > description? > * I propose the AutoDesc as a quality bar that any edit to a Wikidata > description needs to improve on (but again that's a topic beyond this mail > thread). > > Yours, excitedly, > =S Page > > [1] http://grnh.se/30f54b , apply today! > [2] https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/autodesc/src/HEAD/www/js/?at=master > and https://github.com/dbrant/wikidata-autodesc . It's already a nodejs > service, can we append "oid" and declare victory ? :-) > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Magnus Manske < > magnusman...@googlemail.com> wrote: > >> Oh, and as for examples, random-paging just got me this: >> >> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jules_Malou >> >> Manual description: Belgian politician >> >> Automatic description: Belgian politician and lawyer, Prime Minister of >> Belgium, and member of the Chamber of Representatives of Belgium >> (1810–1886) ♂ >> >> I know which one I'd prefer... >> >> >> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 10:50 AM Magnus Manske < >> magnusman...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> >>> Thank you Dmitry! Well phrased and to the point! >>> >>> As for "templating", that might be the worst of both worlds; without the >>> flexibility and over-time improvement of automatic descriptions, but making >>> it harder for people to enter (compared to "free-style" text). We have a >>> Visual Editor on Wikipedia for a reason :-) >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 4:07 AM Dmitry Brant <dbr...@wikimedia.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> My thoughts, as ever(!), are as follows: >>>> >>>> - The tool that generates the descriptions deserves a lot more >>>> development. Magnus' tool is very much a prototype, and represents a tiny >>>> glimpse of what's possible. Looking at its current output is a straw man. >>>> - Auto-generated descriptions work for current articles, and *all >>>> future articles*. They automatically adapt to updated data. They >>>> automatically become more accurate as new data is added. >>>> - When you edit the descriptions yourself, you're not really making a >>>> meaningful contribution to the *data* that underpins the given Wikidata >>>> entry; i.e. you're not contributing any new information. You're simply >>>> paraphrasing the first sentence or two of the Wikipedia article. That can't >>>> possibly be a productive use of contributors' time. >>>> >>>> As for Brian's suggestion: >>>> It would be a step forward; we can even invent a whole template-type >>>> syntax for transcluding bits of actual data into the description. But IMO, >>>> that kind of effort would still be better spent on fully-automatic >>>> descriptions, because that's the ideal that semi-automatic descriptions can >>>> only approach. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Brian Gerstle <bgers...@wikimedia.org >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Could there be a way to have our nicely curated description cake and >>>>> eat it too? For example, interpolating data into the description and/or >>>>> marking data points which are referenced in the description (so as to mark >>>>> it as outdated when they change)? >>>>> >>>>> I appreciate the potential benefits of generated descriptions (and >>>>> other things), but Monte's examples might have swayed me towards human >>>>> curated—when available. >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ok, so I just did what I proposed. I went to random enwiki articles >>>>>> and described the first ten I found which didn't already have >>>>>> descriptions: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film about a Gulf War friendly-fire >>>>>> incident* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *largest known species of land snail, >>>>>> extinct* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "List of Kenyan writers", *notable Kenyan authors* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *annular eclipse which >>>>>> lasted 77 seconds* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *historic Civilian Conservation >>>>>> Corps post-and-beam building* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *debut 1980 studio album by Goombay >>>>>> Dance Band* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "E-1027", *modernist villa in France by architect Eileen Gray* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Daingerfield State Park", *park in Morris County, Texas, USA, >>>>>> bordering Lake Daingerfield* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *2014 Live album by Mexican pop singer >>>>>> Fey* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *6th UEFA Regions' Cup, won by Castile >>>>>> and Leon* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And here are the respective descriptions from Magnus' (quite >>>>>> excellent) autodesc.js: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film by Edward Zwick, produced by John >>>>>> Davis and David T. Friendly from United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *species of Mollusca* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "List of Kenyan writers", *Wikimedia list article* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *solar eclipse* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *Construction in Connecticut, >>>>>> United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *album* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "E-1027", *villa in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, France* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Daingerfield State Park", *state park and state park of a state >>>>>> of the United States in Texas, United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *live album by Fey* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *none* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> Just trying to make my own bold assertions falsifiable :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The whole human-vs-extracted descriptions quality question could be >>>>>>> fairly easy to test I think: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Pick, some number of articles at random. >>>>>>> - Run them through a description extraction script. >>>>>>> - Have a human describe the same articles with, say, the app >>>>>>> interface I demo'ed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If nothing else this exercise could perhaps make what's thus far >>>>>>> been a wildly abstract discussion more concrete. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If having the most elegant description extraction mechanism was the >>>>>>>> goal I would totally agree ;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Dmitry Brant <dbr...@wikimedia.org >>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IMO, allowing the user to edit the description is a missed >>>>>>>>> opportunity to make the user edit the actual *data*, such that the >>>>>>>>> description is generated correctly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO, if the goal is quality, then human curated descriptions are >>>>>>>>>> superior until such time as the auto-generation script passes the >>>>>>>>>> Turing >>>>>>>>>> test ;) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I see these empty descriptions as an amazing opportunity to give >>>>>>>>>> *everyone* an easy new way to edit. I whipped an app editing >>>>>>>>>> interface up >>>>>>>>>> at the Lyon hackathon: >>>>>>>>>> bluetooth720 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VblyGhf_c8> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I used it to add a couple hundred descriptions in a single day >>>>>>>>>> just by hitting "random" then adding descriptions for articles which >>>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>>> have them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'd love to try a limited test of this in production to get a >>>>>>>>>> sense for how effective human curation can be if the interface is >>>>>>>>>> easy to >>>>>>>>>> use... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jan Ainali < >>>>>>>>>> jan.ain...@wikimedia.se> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Nice one! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does not appear to work on svwiki though. Does it have something >>>>>>>>>>> to do with that the wiki in question does not display that tagline? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se> >>>>>>>>>>> 0729 - 67 29 48 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till >>>>>>>>>>> mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* >>>>>>>>>>> Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-18 17:23 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske < >>>>>>>>>>> magnusman...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Show automatic description underneath "From Wikipedia...": >>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To use, add: >>>>>>>>>>>> importScript ( 'User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js' ) ; >>>>>>>>>>>> to your common.js >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:47 AM Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be even better if this (short: 3 field max) >>>>>>>>>>>>> pipe-separated list was available as a gadget to wikidatans on >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia >>>>>>>>>>>>> (like me). I can't see if a page I am on has an "instance of" >>>>>>>>>>>>> (though it >>>>>>>>>>>>> should) and I can see the description thanks to another gadget >>>>>>>>>>>>> (sorry no >>>>>>>>>>>>> idea which one that is). Often I will update empty descriptions, >>>>>>>>>>>>> but if I >>>>>>>>>>>>> was served basic fields (so for a painting, the creator field), I >>>>>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>> click through to update that too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) < >>>>>>>>>>>>> nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jane Darnell, 15/08/2015 08:53: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fields >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, item descriptions are mostly useless in my experience. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for "get into production on Wikipedia" I don't know what >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it means, I certainly don't like 1) mobile-specific features, 2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overriding >>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing manually curated content; but it's good to 3) fill >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaps. Mobile >>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks often do (1) and (2), if they *instead* did (3) I'd be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> very happy. :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nemo >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Dmitry Brant >>>>>>>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>>>>>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>>>>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> EN Wikipedia user page: >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle >>>>> IRC: bgerstle >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dmitry Brant >>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Brian Gerstle <bgers...@wikimedia.org >>>> > wrote: >>>> >>>>> Could there be a way to have our nicely curated description cake and >>>>> eat it too? For example, interpolating data into the description and/or >>>>> marking data points which are referenced in the description (so as to mark >>>>> it as outdated when they change)? >>>>> >>>>> I appreciate the potential benefits of generated descriptions (and >>>>> other things), but Monte's examples might have swayed me towards human >>>>> curated—when available. >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ok, so I just did what I proposed. I went to random enwiki articles >>>>>> and described the first ten I found which didn't already have >>>>>> descriptions: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film about a Gulf War friendly-fire >>>>>> incident* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *largest known species of land snail, >>>>>> extinct* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "List of Kenyan writers", *notable Kenyan authors* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *annular eclipse which >>>>>> lasted 77 seconds* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *historic Civilian Conservation >>>>>> Corps post-and-beam building* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *debut 1980 studio album by Goombay >>>>>> Dance Band* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "E-1027", *modernist villa in France by architect Eileen Gray* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Daingerfield State Park", *park in Morris County, Texas, USA, >>>>>> bordering Lake Daingerfield* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *2014 Live album by Mexican pop singer >>>>>> Fey* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *6th UEFA Regions' Cup, won by Castile >>>>>> and Leon* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> And here are the respective descriptions from Magnus' (quite >>>>>> excellent) autodesc.js: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film by Edward Zwick, produced by John >>>>>> Davis and David T. Friendly from United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *species of Mollusca* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "List of Kenyan writers", *Wikimedia list article* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *solar eclipse* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *Construction in Connecticut, >>>>>> United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *album* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "E-1027", *villa in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, France* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Daingerfield State Park", *state park and state park of a state >>>>>> of the United States in Texas, United States of America* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *live album by Fey* >>>>>> >>>>>> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *none* >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>> >>>>>> Just trying to make my own bold assertions falsifiable :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> The whole human-vs-extracted descriptions quality question could be >>>>>>> fairly easy to test I think: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Pick, some number of articles at random. >>>>>>> - Run them through a description extraction script. >>>>>>> - Have a human describe the same articles with, say, the app >>>>>>> interface I demo'ed. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> If nothing else this exercise could perhaps make what's thus far >>>>>>> been a wildly abstract discussion more concrete. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> If having the most elegant description extraction mechanism was the >>>>>>>> goal I would totally agree ;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Dmitry Brant <dbr...@wikimedia.org >>>>>>>> > wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> IMO, allowing the user to edit the description is a missed >>>>>>>>> opportunity to make the user edit the actual *data*, such that the >>>>>>>>> description is generated correctly. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Monte Hurd <mh...@wikimedia.org> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> IMO, if the goal is quality, then human curated descriptions are >>>>>>>>>> superior until such time as the auto-generation script passes the >>>>>>>>>> Turing >>>>>>>>>> test ;) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I see these empty descriptions as an amazing opportunity to give >>>>>>>>>> *everyone* an easy new way to edit. I whipped an app editing >>>>>>>>>> interface up >>>>>>>>>> at the Lyon hackathon: >>>>>>>>>> bluetooth720 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VblyGhf_c8> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I used it to add a couple hundred descriptions in a single day >>>>>>>>>> just by hitting "random" then adding descriptions for articles which >>>>>>>>>> didn't >>>>>>>>>> have them. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> I'd love to try a limited test of this in production to get a >>>>>>>>>> sense for how effective human curation can be if the interface is >>>>>>>>>> easy to >>>>>>>>>> use... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jan Ainali < >>>>>>>>>> jan.ain...@wikimedia.se> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Nice one! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Does not appear to work on svwiki though. Does it have something >>>>>>>>>>> to do with that the wiki in question does not display that tagline? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se> >>>>>>>>>>> 0729 - 67 29 48 >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till >>>>>>>>>>> mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* >>>>>>>>>>> Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 2015-08-18 17:23 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske < >>>>>>>>>>> magnusman...@googlemail.com>: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> Show automatic description underneath "From Wikipedia...": >>>>>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> To use, add: >>>>>>>>>>>> importScript ( 'User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js' ) ; >>>>>>>>>>>> to your common.js >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:47 AM Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> It would be even better if this (short: 3 field max) >>>>>>>>>>>>> pipe-separated list was available as a gadget to wikidatans on >>>>>>>>>>>>> Wikipedia >>>>>>>>>>>>> (like me). I can't see if a page I am on has an "instance of" >>>>>>>>>>>>> (though it >>>>>>>>>>>>> should) and I can see the description thanks to another gadget >>>>>>>>>>>>> (sorry no >>>>>>>>>>>>> idea which one that is). Often I will update empty descriptions, >>>>>>>>>>>>> but if I >>>>>>>>>>>>> was served basic fields (so for a painting, the creator field), I >>>>>>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>>>>>> click through to update that too. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) < >>>>>>>>>>>>> nemow...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Jane Darnell, 15/08/2015 08:53: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fields >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> +1, item descriptions are mostly useless in my experience. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> As for "get into production on Wikipedia" I don't know what >>>>>>>>>>>>>> it means, I certainly don't like 1) mobile-specific features, 2) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> overriding >>>>>>>>>>>>>> existing manually curated content; but it's good to 3) fill >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gaps. Mobile >>>>>>>>>>>>>> folks often do (1) and (2), if they *instead* did (3) I'd be >>>>>>>>>>>>>> very happy. :) >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nemo >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>>>>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>>>>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> Dmitry Brant >>>>>>>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>>>>>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>>>>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> EN Wikipedia user page: >>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle >>>>> IRC: bgerstle >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Dmitry Brant >>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mobile-l mailing list >> Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >> >> > > > -- > =S Page WMF Tech writer > > _______________________________________________ > Mobile-l mailing list > Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l > >
_______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list Mobile-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
