Equally, the page may usefully serve to inform
contributors to Wikidata
about legitimate concerns from other projects that have arisen out of test
integrations, that there is a need to do more to address.
-- James.
On 23/09/2017 22:18, john cummings wrote:
Hi all
I'm putting aside time next week to write up an information page on
Wikidata for contributors to other Wikimedia projects who want to know
more
about/may have concerns about reusing Wikidata on other projects. I hope
this will help people having the same discussions over and over and allay
many of the concerns of users from other projects.
I'm starting off with a list of common arguments for not using data from
Wikidata and working my way back from there, please do take a look and
brain dump
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:John_Cummings/Wikidata_in
_Wikimedia_projects
Thanks very much
John
On 23 September 2017 at 14:34, James Heald <j.heald(a)ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
It's not just other wikis where cryptic template invocations can be an
> issue.
>
> I sometimes think that on Wikidata itself, with templates {{P|...}} and
> {{Q|...}}, we could use a bot to add the label of the property or item in
> the default language of the page as an extra parameter to the template.
>
> (If I remember correctly, both the P and Q templates permit the presence
> of such a extra, undisplayed parameter).
>
> For one thing, this would make discussions significantly easier to
> interpret for anyone who is following the diffs as raw wikitext.
>
> It also might help with people arguing at cross-purposes, basing their
> arguments on the label of a property or item in their own language, which
> is what is visible to them because it is their language labels that the
> {{P|...}} and {{Q|...}} templates show them -- but may be different to
> what
> the {{P|...}} and {{Q|...}} templates show to other participants who
> have a
> different mother tongue. Often both sides think their arguments are
> right
> and obvious, based on the different native labels that the P and Q
> templates are showing them. If there was a label added in a single
> language, even if displayed only in the wikitext of the page, they might
> sometimes realise this sooner.
>
> So, for both of these reasons, I think there can be a case for
> human-meaningful "explanatory" or "identificatory"
parameter-slots in
> templates, even if they are never displayed in actual page-output.
>
> A bot-added Harvardesque-ref courtesy field in {{Cite_Q}} could be
> exactly
> another such example.
>
> -- James.
>
> On 23/09/2017 05:50, LeadSongDog wrote:
>
> My point, Andy, was that some parameters can be required, such as CS1
>> requiring the parameter Title. Further, the Ref parameter can be
>> automated,
>> as with ref=harv.
>>
>> On Sep 22, 2017, at 5:09 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk>
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 22 September 2017 at 01:45, LeadSongDog <leadsong(a)webname.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not "enforcing", but it's certainly possible to show an
error message
>>>> for missing parameters. Many other cite templates do so.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The subject under discussion was "a legible refname"; that's
not a
>>> parameter of the template and no cite templates currently warn if a
>>> refname is missing, let alone not "legible".
>>>
>>>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org