I am not advocating "generating" in the sense of data creation, but am
advocating "generating" in the sense of data visualization. So now the
rijksmonument lists are only visible in the Dutch Wikipedia, though all of
the info about the individual objects is in Wikidata (thanks to the work of
Maart
Yes, but there are other halls certainly who are not a monument. If you
start generating lists it should just be the heritage status, and then
split over city for example.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
> Yes, but broadly speaking this is also the reason t
Yes, but broadly speaking this is also the reason the object made it into
the Rijksmonument list to begin with (the reason it was chosen for heritage
status)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Andre Koopal wrote:
> Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the
> reason t
Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the
reason the object made it into the WLM list, the fact that it is a
'rijksmonument' and thus have a rijksmonument-id is the reason to make it
in the list.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jane Darnell wrote:
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall,
so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance
of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and
when I click what links here I see the WLM list here:
https://en.wikipedia
Yay! (I was quite worried about WLM 2015)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Jean-Frédéric wrote:
> Hi all,
>
>
>> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching
>>> erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able
Hi all,
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko wrote:
>
>> Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching
>> erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument
>> database before 1 September, and having it in one place is quite critical
>> for su
Exactly. And don't forget that Erfgoedbot (the name says it all) is coming
from the Dutch situation, where we don't use WLM as a political instrument
to shame the authorities into ceasing their destruction of local heritage
(as they do in Taiwan and other places). We need to rethink how to help
cha
It is not just launching the bot, it is rewriting. So we need somebody with
python coding skills. As far as I know it needs to be transfered from
compat to core.
If needed I can give people access to the project on toollabs.
Regards,
André
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko wrot
Of course there are tools, but we should not only identify how to put the
monuments in wikidata but also which tools we need, and needs to be build
against wikidata.
Regards,
André
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON <
vigneron.nico...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02
2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal :
> The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
>
The database is not down no but it's going to be.
As erfgoedbot isn't running anymore, all the changes on the wikipédias are
not harvested into the database anymore (eg. in Franc
The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
But the erfgoedbot itself is stopped because there were changes needed for the
changes implemented in the API. Until now it was more or less maintenance free,
now it needs a rewrite, hence this discussion.
And yes, my mail
Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching erfgoedbot
again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument database before 1
September, and having it in one place is quite critical for successful WLM.
Mykola (NickK) WM Ukraine
--- Оригінальне повідомлення ---
Від
2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal :
> Hi,
>
> I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is
> good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
>
> Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were
> scripts using the data. At least f
Hi,
I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good
and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts
using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a
pict
2015-07-26 20:21 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 26 July 2015 at 17:41, Nicolas VIGNERON
> wrote:
>
> > 2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> >>
> >> On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo)
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
> >> > 1) the
2015-07-26 20:13 GMT+02:00 Mykola Kozlenko :
> (Answering to two simultaneous emails immediately, sorry if someone is
> confused).
>
> Ok, those are great ideas but they are not quite feasible for 70,000 items.
>
> 1) Our IDs. It is not quite easy to publish somewhere in a reliable source
> a dat
On 26 July 2015 at 18:12, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
>>
>> More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the
>> exact same label *and* description?
>
> We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label. Again, this can
> be worke
On 26 July 2015 at 17:41, Nicolas VIGNERON wrote:
> 2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
>>
>> On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>>
>> > A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
>> > 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
On 26 July 2015 at 17:38, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
>>>
>>> 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
>>> satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
>>
>> Wikidata does not require unique names.
>
> If so, please f
(Answering to two simultaneous emails immediately, sorry if someone is
confused).
Ok, those are great ideas but they are not quite feasible for 70,000 items.
1) Our IDs. It is not quite easy to publish somewhere in a reliable source a
database of 70,000 items. Especially given that this is stil
2015-07-26 19:05 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell :
> Well it is odd but true that when you have a name+label conflict you can
> adjust the label (add a bit more info) or just forget the label! We have
> lots and lots of items that are just "Portrait of a man" in some language
> with blank label
>
True.
Un
2015-07-26 19:12 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
>
>> More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the
>> exact same label *and* description?
>>
>
> We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label.
Oh, ok...
But how can the
The official policy is "get started and see where your ship strands" (to
use a Dutch term)
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:
> Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
>
>> More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the
>> exact same label *and* des
Many portrait painters have created portraits that are unattributed. So
name= Portrait of a man and label= painting by Frans Hals is perfectly
valid to have multiple times. In WLM terms, any large municipality is bound
to have names like " House" multiple times per street and so on
On Sun, Jul 26,
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the
exact same label *and* description?
We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label. Again, this
can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label or
description (
2015-07-26 19:03 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:00:
>
>>
>> I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of «
>> Unique » in English?
>>
>
> I'm certain I'm not, but maybe the author of the glossary did (it was
> written by a German IIRC).
Well it is odd but true that when you have a name+label conflict you can
adjust the label (add a bit more info) or just forget the label! We have
lots and lots of items that are just "Portrait of a man" in some language
with blank label
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo)
wrote:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:00:
I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of «
Unique » in English?
I'm certain I'm not, but maybe the author of the glossary did (it was
written by a German IIRC).
Nemo
___
Wiki Loves Mo
2015-07-26 18:52 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:41:
>
>> Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want (see
>> french label on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3533061 ). You just need
>> to choose a primary one, is it a problem ?
>>
>
> Yes it
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:44:
Did you have an example?
See an example list http://wlm.wikimedia.it/w/images/9/94/San_Michele.pdf
I find it hard to believe, can't you at least you can say where it is
(at the minimum the country and idealy the city, the coordinates, etc.).
Coordinates a
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:41:
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want (see
french label on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3533061 ). You just need
to choose a primary one, is it a problem ?
Yes it is a potential problem, think of name/label "Municipio" or
"Duomo
2015-07-26 18:38 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) :
> Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
>
>> 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
>>> satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
>>>
>>
>> Wikidata does not require unique names.
>>
>
> If so, please f
2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett :
> On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
>
> > A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
> > 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
> > satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniq
Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
If so, please fix the docs. "Uniqueness for a combination of a label and
a description
On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
> A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
> 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
> satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
>
2015-07-26 13:39 GMT+02:00 Mykola Kozlenko :
> Hi,
>
> In Ukraine, we have two problems Wikidata is not able to deal so far:
>
> 1) Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
> monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have
> identifiers, some
On 26 July 2015 at 12:39, Mykola Kozlenko wrote:
> 1) Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
> monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have
> identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same
> list, e.g. one list h
No worries about Winckelman, you can use the perfectly decent German
Baedeker guides from before 1912 for Italy - most of the older visitor
attractions are in there. Basically as long as you can source the item to
any published list of note you're good to go.
Rome was not built in a day. Wikidata
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 13:36:
Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living
history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you
go back in time to the latest usable list
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
1) the name of the obje
Oh yes, I definitely see advantages. I think the main thing is that if you
have decent lists, you can use properties to assign a status with an
identifier. If you don't then you should go ahead and create the item with
whatever criteria you are using for the handmade lists (former residence of
some
Personally I see several challenges but also opportunities for WLM.
Technically this is a "change" to be managed. If it is managed in a
right manner, it could open a new season for WLM.
As I know the data of monuments are not homogeneous and this is a risk
for migrating data to a dedicated re
Hi,
In Ukraine, we have two problems Wikidata is not able to deal so far:
1) Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have
identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same lis
A similar problem exists for large parts of Germany (mostly former East
Germany municipalities). The answer is simple. Think of these objects as
members of a collection owned by "living history municipal museums". So the
city hall is the list owner and you go back in time to the latest usable
list
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 08:42:
Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata
to enable the next generation of tooling.
As is well known, Italy has no official list of cultural heritage items
and in general no functioning way to discover, document or use cultural
her
But wherever you are in the tree of properties, from any item in the tree
you should be able to navigate up and down from "Heritage objects of
Germany" going from status type to substatus type. Is this spelled out
anywhere? All of the commons categories need to be associated with the
proper wikidat
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell wrote:
> So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use
a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/P
Hi all,
I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work.
Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to
enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has
legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I ex
48 matches
Mail list logo
