There is also a more general and very useful
discussion of the same
issues at this page
tate_of_affairs
(check recent edits, last 5 days or so).
Since it is not related to any decision-making (at least not yet) I would
expect it is easier to comment there, though some editors are really
hostile (I was at some point labeled as a "part of Wikidata crowd" in a
negative sense and had to point out that I have 15 times as many edits on
the English Wikipedia than the editor who was attacking me).
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Jane Darnell <jane023(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Yes Yaroslav, I totally agree with you (and
don't worry, I wouldn't
dream of commenting there). On the other hand, this is extremely relevant
for the Wikidata mailing list and I am really grateful to Dario for posting
about it, because I had no idea. I stopped following that "2017 state of
affairs" thing when it first got ugly back in January. I suggest that in
cases where (as Dario suggests) highly structured and superior data from
Wikidata *could* be used in Wikipedia, that we create some sort of property
to indicate this on Wikidata, along the lines of the P31->Q17362920 we use
to show that a certain Wikipedia has a pending merge problem. If the
information is ever used on that Wikipedia (either with or without that
"Cite-Q" template) then the property for that specific Wikipedia should be
removed. Ideally this property could be used as a qualifier at the
statement level (so e.g. for paintings, a statement on a collection
property for a painting that it was stolen and rediscovered, or on a
significant event property that it was restored and reattributed, or that
it was owned by the Hitler museum and stored it the depot in Linz during
WWII, etc).
On Wed, Sep 20, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Yaroslav Blanter <ymbalt(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
Thanks Dario.
May I please add that whereas the deletion discussion is of course open
to everyone, a sudden influx of users who are not regular editors of the
English Wikipedia will be looked at extremely negatively. Please be
considerate.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Tue, Sep 19, 2017 at 8:18 PM, Dario Taraborelli <
dtaraborelli(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I wanted to draw your attention to a deletion nomination discussion
> for an experimental template – {{Cite Q}}
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Cite_Q> – pulling
> bibliographic data from Wikidata:
>
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Templates_for_discus
> sion/Log/2017_September_15#Template:Cite_Q
>
> As you'll see, there is significant resistance against the broader
> usage of a template which exemplifies how structured bibliographic data in
> WIkidata could be reused across Wikimedia projects.
>
> I personally think many of the concerns brought up by editors who
> support the deletion request are legitimate. As the editor who nominated
> the template for deletion notes: "The existence of the template is one
> thing; the advocacy to use this systematically is another one altogether.
> Anybody seeking that kind of systematic, radical change in Wikipedia must
> get consensus for that in Wikipedia first. Being BOLD is fine but has its
> limits, and this kind of thing is one of them."
>
> I find myself in agreement with this statement, which I believe
> applies to much more than just bibliographic data from Wikidata: it's about
> virtually any kind of data and contents reused across projects governed by
> different policies and expectations. I think what's happening is that an
> experimental template – primarily meant to showcase how data reuse from
> Wikidata *might *work – is perceived as a norm for how references
> *will* or *should* work in the future.
>
> If you're involved in the WikiCite initiative, and are considering
> participating in the deletion discussion, I encourage you to keep a
> constructive tone and understand the perspective of people who are
> concerned about the use and misuse of this template.
>
> As one of the WikiCite organizers, I see the success of the initiative
> as coming from rich, highly curated data that other projects will want to
> reuse, and from technical and usability advances for all contributors, not
> from giving an impression that the goal is to use Wikidata to subvert how
> other Wikimedia communities do their job. I'll post a note explaining my
> perspective.
>
> Dario
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org