Having links to Wikipedia instead of copying descriptions from Wikipedia could help clear up one licencing issue, that of CC-BY-SA content in what we/some of us would like to be CC0. Mashups (or GreaseMonkey scripts) could retrieve the Wikipedia abstract on the fly (then you'd always have the latest version too). Maybe some caching could be allowed to save bandwith.
Links to Wikipedia appear in the records as 'normal links' and URIs in 'wikipedia' fields (this is the old way). Using this information it would be cool to create an overview of coverage of OL authors in Wikipedia, and vice versa. Wikipedia is free to retrieve lists of works from OL (although with the current data quality I'd wait a bit more before doing so). FYI, work on coverage of scientists in Wikipedia (haven't read it yet): Samoilenko, Anna, and Taha Yasseri. “The Distorted Mirror of Wikipedia: A Quantitative Analysis of Wikipedia Coverage of Academics.” arXiv Preprint arXiv:1310.8508 (2013). http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.8508. Ben On 22 November 2013 02:04, Karen Coyle <kco...@kcoyle.net> wrote: > Fabian, I, too, Wikipede (-;)) and the ready-made WP templates on OL are > not well enough known among Wikipedians. I LOVE THEM! So we should > definitely try to make that more visible. > > I would love to see more linking between OL and Wikipedia, in general. > As you probably know there is a lot of work going on to bring WP and > libraries together, including the "Wikipedia loves libraries" campaign. > This may be another area where we can find energy/reasons to make the > necessary improvements to OL. Maybe an "OL loves Wikipedia" project? > Already there are many Wikipedia links in OL, but more would only be better. > > Thanks for writing. > kc > > On 11/21/13 3:51 PM, fab...@unpopular.org.uk wrote: >> I kind of wandered into OL from Wikipedia and what I thought was great was: >> >> *Generating a Wikipedia citation template >> *Being able to put the OCLC reference in as well >> >> which means that a Wikmedian can add a reference to an article that >> includes a link to World Cat. Any reader can use this to find the nearest >> participating library that has a copy of the book. >> >> So now when I am adding info from a book, I track down the book on OL, >> make sure it has the OCLC info and cut and past the reference. >> >> Does this take me less time? Not at first, but if I come back on another >> day, yes it's easier. >> >> One draw back is that OL is not very user friendly. Lots of books are >> duplicated authors often appear under a variety of names. Perhaps i do a >> little bit, but last time I mentioned that a book was duplicated all that >> happened is that I got an e-mail back, giving some reason why nothing >> could be done about it (as you can see i kind of lost interest, and there >> was no easy way I could back track to the relevant books). >> >> One thing I have noticed amongst London Wikimedians is that not many know >> about OL and its readymade citations. >> >> there is a discussion going on about some joint work between Wikimedia UK >> and Thurrock Libraries (a public library network in a small town about >> twenty miles away from London). >> >> Now I think it would be really neat if people with research interests >> could click through Wikipedia to World Cat to find the nearest library >> copy of a specific book to them. And I see OL could play a significant >> role in this . . . but it does need to be easier to use. >> >> One thing I am not clear about is, to what extent do the sort of library >> staff I meet in my local library know about OL, World Cat etc. Last time I >> went in my local library to ask about some ICT training that was offered, >> I had to show them the page online where it was offered, and they admitted >> they knew nothing about it (I tried more than one library in my borough). >> It seemed to me that there was someone a bit removed from front-line >> service delivery trying to get somethings done, but without the front-line >> staff being effectively put in the picture. >> >> I would be interested if this sort of synergy makes sense to people on the >> list, whether they feel there might be institutions ready to fund some >> work on this. I feel some of the funding should go on development, but >> other funds should go on outreach. >> >> all the best >> Fabian >> (Leutha on Wikipedia) _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list - Ol-discuss@archive.org http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/ol-discuss@archive.org/ To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to ol-discuss-unsubscr...@archive.org
