Hoi,
I cannot agree with you at all on this. The main point here is that it is
save for projects like the BLT to use Wikidata to set up the data for the
people they deem to be notable. In this, notable on a Wikipedia level. So
the point is to build the list find the sources etc. Now this whole poin
Hello all,
I am a librarian at the New York Botanical Garden and manage the Plants and
People project. (Project page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/PlantsAndPeople/Lists_of_Articles
).
Having use of the catalog feature within Wikidata to manage the Plants and
People project has
On 7 January 2018 at 04:22, Brill Lyle wrote:
> Hi Charles,
>
> Thanks for taking the time to try to understand the issues that are being
> raised here.
>
> - Wikipedia initiatives need a unique identifier in Wikidata they can use
> on Wikidata to tag items to their initiative -- and most importa
Hi Charles,
I find it frustrating that you did not respond to my response to your post,
which directly answered your questions as best I could to give you context
and hard data to the outreach work and Wikidata activity within that. Yet
you took the time to respond to Pigs'.
Pigs has done nothing
On 6 January 2018 at 02:51, Dan Brickley wrote:
>
>
> Looking at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P972 and poking around
> in query.wikidata.org, http://tinyurl.com/y6v9tab7
>
> May I suggest we explore some modest tweaks to the definition, e.g.
>
> Instead of "catalog for the item, or, as
On 7 January 2018 at 02:05, Andy Mabbett wrote:
>
> Understandably you may not be aware that this is a fork of discussions
> on Wikidata, where several of the points you raise have already been
> addressed. See:
>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_del
> etions#Artist_of_Blac
Hoi David,
No you are not a bully. Indeed as you suggested, "catalog" was used because
there was no agreement to be had for a new property. It is why the
repurposing of an existing property was accepted. Having data makes it
easier because it is relatively easy to replace one property (including
qu
Thank you. This 16 year library veteran is utterly confounded by this
concept of "catalog" (does that make me a bully?). If that was the best
option available at some prior point- repurposing some property for some
new need- all well and good. But it seems clear it was (and is) not a
clear, intuiti
My understanding of identifiers and authorities is that they come from
established entities, i.e., VIAF contributors
http://www.oclc.org/en/viaf/contributors.html
If we can query off a BLT identifier that would be great. But the task list
items don't have unique identifiers established -- and that
These projects all have namespaces on En Wikipedia. If there was consensus
that the projects should have Wikidata namespaces -- if that is something
the community would allow and would embrace, that would be something I
would support doing.
- Erika
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle
Hoi,
What do you mean by an "invitation" ? I do not see how that applies.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 6 January 2018 at 18:03, LeadSongDog wrote:
> Erika,
> Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date,
> and links to the invitation and any generated products externally t
Erika,
Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date, and
links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki worlds.
Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing wikidatan
notability?
> On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle wrote
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 9:53 AM Brill Lyle wrote:
> Yes. This is the crux of the matter, the big question: *"I'm not sure we
> should store this kind of data on Wikidata."*
>
So, I miss the ideas and mantra we had in Freebase. "some data is better
than no data". It really was FREE in the sense t
Yes. This is the crux of the matter, the big question: *"I'm not sure we
should store this kind of data on Wikidata."*
I disagree with "*Point 2 and 3 are for the BLT community to solve.*" In
the interest of transparency, Gerard, myself, and BLT came to and are
coming to the Wikidata community for
Hi LeadSongDog,
Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch
Table has generated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press
Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative. Plus
would it be necessary to use this ref t
Hi Charles,
Thanks for taking the time to try to understand the issues that are being
raised here.
- Wikipedia initiatives need a unique identifier in Wikidata they can use
on Wikidata to tag items to their initiative -- and most importantly run
SPARQL queries on
-- I don't think a Q number will
On 6 January 2018 at 14:21, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
> So by changing the venue and determining that another discussion is more
> "important" you reduce the relevance of what is happening. You also change
> the discussion.
Gerard, I have done none of these things, Stop making such
misrepresentatio
Hoi,
So by changing the venue and determining that another discussion is more
"important" you reduce the relevance of what is happening. You also change
the discussion.
That discussion is already old. That discussion came more or less to a
conclusion. Its conclusion is not accepted by all. So movin
On 6 January 2018 at 01:34, Charles Horn wrote:
> As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
> understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
> property and the points of view behind this discussion.
Understandably you may not be aware that
I have now created a property proposal for a new property, "Wikidata
focus list", to act as a drop-in replacement for some current uses of P972.
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Wikidata_focus_list
Let's sort this thing out.
-- James.
On 06/01/2018 10:40, Maarten Da
On 05-01-18 22:55, Jane Darnell wrote:
I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that
is not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me
to offer an alternative way to track your project. I am not
responsible for your project and don't understand what
*list moderator hat on"
Folks, can we please have this discussion without calling people names
and so on? Wikidata is supposed to be better than this.
Cheers
Lydia
--
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Product Manager for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-
done without a reference. Making these things clear would help to
>> reduce the temperature of this discussion.
>> - LeadSongDog
>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
>> From: "Brill Lyle"
>> To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project
Jane,
When you object, you provide an opinion. In your objection you do not
provide an argument. So there is little substance.
At the time when the suggestion was made to use catalog, it was with the
understanding that the data build could easily be converted to another
property that is accepted f
Hoi,
Charles, thank you for the analysis. You missed some points. It is not only
about the Black Lunch Table, there are other organisations involved in the
development of Wikimedia content that make a similar use of the "catalog"
property. Organisations like the Smithsonian, the Library of the Bota
Hi Jane, Erika, and everybody else,
As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
property and the points of view behind this discussion. I have read all the
emails, and all the linked to discussion
Jane,
I think the narrow definition of catalog and its use as a unique identifier
to collocate outreach initiatives might be the issue here.
Not asking you to be responsible for any outreach projects at all. I think
that is very clear.
Don't appreciate your comment on Wikidata editing. Through t
ou say
> why it has to be done without a reference. Making these things clear would
> help to reduce the temperature of this discussion.
> - LeadSongDog
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
> *From:* "Brill Lyle"
> *To:* "Discussion list for the Wikidata
This might work except it’s not an accurate representation of what BLT is using
the catalog property for. BLT holds roundtables in ADDITION to editathons. And
how do other initiatives use this who are needing the same unique identifier
but have no roundtable as part of their initiative.
This c
On 5 January 2018 at 22:10, Thad Guidry wrote:
> Jane has now put herself into that terrible hurtful persona of a bully
Do we have list moderators who can deal with this outrageous - not to
mention fallacious - ad-hominem slur?
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
__
In looking further into this, I strongly feel that my suggestion of
"participant of" is a really nice fit for this use case. A few things are
needed to make it comfortable for all.
1. Add a new topic in Wikipedia called "Black Lunch Table Artist
Roundtable" and subclass it as an Event to Wikidata
Ericka,
I am speaking up for those that are being bullied now. I have to. I
must. Yes there are bullies on Wikipedia and within the GLAM effort. Jane
has now put herself into that terrible hurtful persona of a bully and is
not being helpful to you but toxic and not representative of our wonder
I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
yo
se things clear would help to reduce the temperature of this discussion.
- LeadSongDog
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
From: "Brill Lyle"
To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project."
Subject: Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach
Hi Jane,
Actually, &q
On 5 January 2018 at 13:33, Brill Lyle wrote:
> Hi Jane,
>
> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>
> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it illustrates
> the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don
I am confused at this statement as it seems very chicken-egg circular:
"I still don't see why this project needs any special property at all when
you can create listeria lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you
have a list anywhere on a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using
Pe
Hi Jane,
Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the problem. I
am a bit baffled at this statement.
The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it illustrates
the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn
about the context of the prob
Hoi,
Jane, you fail to understand it. We do not "just publish a catalog
somewhere" that is EXACTLY not what is done, Wikidata is given a purpose.
The purpose is to prepare editathons for Wikipedia articles. This implies
that all the entries have English Wikipedia notability. It implies that
there i
Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
will address all concerns."
The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog" on
person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. P
First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
outreach, other projects are using the cate
OK thanks Gerard for clarifying.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 4:01 PM Gerard Meijssen
wrote:
> Hoi,
> Neither is valid. Artists recognised by the Black Lunch Table are subject
> of the attention to write articles in (a) Wikipedia. They do not
> participate in and they are not part of the Black Lunch
Hoi,
Neither is valid. Artists recognised by the Black Lunch Table are subject
of the attention to write articles in (a) Wikipedia. They do not
participate in and they are not part of the Black Lunch Table.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 4 January 2018 at 17:42, Thomas Douillard
wrote:
> An artist part
artist "part of" something. All of us here know the difference your
talking about Thomas. I understand your trying to tell me those properties
have semantic differences.
On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 10:42 AM Thomas Douillard
wrote:
> An artist part of ? you confuse «be a part of » and « participate
An artist part of ? you confuse «be a part of » and « participate to ».
Semantically quite a difference.
2018-01-04 17:34 GMT+01:00 Thad Guidry :
> So this is for internal classification only ?
>
> Wouldn't it be useful to think of the approach that I mentioned to help
> externally as well and sh
"tagging" for classification sake, Thomas. Others understand what I mean.
Not confused, thanks.
-Thad
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
For the record, tagging has noting to do with the « part of » properties
as defined by Help:Basic Membership Properties whatsoever. Please don’t
confuse genericity with lack of precision and Giant Mess …
2018-01-04 17:10 GMT+01:00 Thad Guidry :
>
> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled
And you simply add need to add a statement (whatever that is) under
"Q28781198" Black Lunch Table that is has a Wikidata project page.
Pretty simple and solves both uses. The modeling can be drastically
simplified. Use Topics themselves more often. I see this problem that we
don't actually conne
So this is for internal classification only ?
Wouldn't it be useful to think of the approach that I mentioned to help
externally as well and show relationships ?
For instance, I'd like to know that a particular artist was part of the
Black Lunch Table. That's useful information, no ?
-Thad
_
I think James Heald is on the right track, that we should be thinking about
a different or new property. This is a valuable thing to track, and we
should work to find a solution that is satisfactory to everyone, and that
lets this positive effort continue.
(Black Lunch Table is a bit of a sui gen
Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these
people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black
Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal
wiki-world projects.
It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps t
"relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs such
as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.
So, an alternative to the current modeling could be
To amplify what Gerard wrote:
To think of how P972 "catalog" = "Black Lunch Table" was being used, a
useful analogy is to think of the way one might add a maintenance
category for files on Commons -- not to give any assertion of notability
or importance, but simply to mark a group of things (f
Hoi,,
Jane sorry but that is not how it is. At the time there was a request for a
new property. The discussion went into the never never land of personal
opinions. It ended with the suggestion of using the catalog property. This
suggestion was accepted. Literally thousands of edits were made as a
c
Brill Lyle,
It seems you have not reached consensus to use the catalog property in the
way you have been doing, and your edits are now being reverted after not
responding to various objections that can be seen in the links you have
provided. If the "Black Lunch Table" catalog is published, either o
So User:Multichill has taken it upon himself to delete all of the catalog
entries for the Black Lunch Table. One of the first if not only successful
implementations of Wikidata as a task list for Wikipedia.
There are other initiatives also using catalog, which I assume will also be
deleted.
Beyon
55 matches
Mail list logo