Re: [Wikimedia-l] Community revitalization

Hi Peter -- We're putting this feature into the Android app this quarter where we can test and iterate on the UX. Based on user feedback, we'll have a better idea of how to implement it on the more heavily trafficked platforms. Clearly we'd do an automated fashion. I'll ping the editing folks

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

I have had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Brane at some length, in Belgrade, in Hong Kong, and perhaps elsewhere too. He is thoughtful and dedicated, and as Milos said, has played a huge part in building up Serbian Wikipedia and Wikimedia Serbia. Brane, I wish you a full recovery, and

[Wikimedia-l] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

At some point of time, the best you could do is to reach for a superstition and hope it will work. It doesn't matter how it will be explained after, but at this point of time, it's only that superstition which matters. My particular superstition is that Brane would be able to see his eulogy and

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Branislav Jovanovic, User:BraneJ in critical condition

Pine asked me a good question: Where to express support? I think whatever you think is the most appropriate. This thread works, as well. His email is bra...@gmail.com. You have the link to his Facebook page via WMRS photo. He is using Twitter, as well @branej. On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 12:40 AM,

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

The problem may simply be that the information is not coming to the attention of the people who care, as they don't know that it exists or where to find it. The normal place to put information relating to improvement of an article is on the article talk page, and that is where Wikipedians will

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

Hoi, I respect the policy of Wikipedia. However, when multiple Wikipedias differ and when there is no sourcing does this policy hold? When Wikidata has no attributable sources but multiple statements is it not conceivable that things are easy and obvious.. that they are wrong? When you talk about

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

> > Many data sources have data from the same origin. It does not follow that > without original sources they are all right. Quite the reverse. It does > however take humans to be bold, to determine where a booboo has been made. > Yes, we do decide what is right or wrong, ​No we dont decide what

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

On 20 November 2015 at 22:47, Milos Rancic wrote: > Offtopic: Gerard, during the last half an hour or so, I am just > getting emails from you inside of this thread (including wiki-research > list). I thought my phone has a bug. It's useful to write a larger > email with

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

Hoi, You conflate two issues. First when facts differ, it should be possible to explain why they differ. Only when there is no explanation particularly when there are no sources, there is an issue. In come real sources. When someone died on 7-5-1759 and another source has a different date, it may

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

Sorry to read that Fae, but in your specific case I do think your time is spent more productively on Commons, because the value of your contributions there is huge. Having created Wikidata items for many of your Commons uploads, I think it may be worthwhile at some point to try and get someone to

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Quality issues

agree getting information in is in and of itself a good starting point but ignoring the lessons learnt in other project in doing so is only creating more work for those that follow. Having less clear policy about sources and allowing unsourced information is only going to put Wikidata behind