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.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall. On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_… This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list. I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q. Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:

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 <andre(a)molens.org> wrote:

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 Maarten Dammers and countless Wikipedians of course). Wait I will fisrt add the objects to the Wikidata list item and repost the results here, maybe it will be clearer for you then what I mean. On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Andre Koopal <andre(a)molens.org> wrote:

Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it. On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell <jane023(a)gmail.com> wrote:

Hi Jane I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones? As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly. We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted. If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated. Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list. Michael Michael

Jane As there are good Wikidata entries for the UK, but for no other countries so far as I know, it would be sensible to use those as the basis for building some general, international, tools. Magnus has kindly offered to work on that, on the basis that the community can agree on something of wide applicability and not just country by country. As of now, there is a tool to find monuments nearby and to upload images to Commons, but it only works in English and for countries that have data items in Wikidata. I fully agree with you that we now need to start using the Wikidata items and to extend what we have to other countries and languages. Where would the best place be to work on collaboratively defining the functionality of the tools we want? A page on Wikidata or on Commons? Michael

As one of the Wikipedians who has been adding images and commons categories to the lists of English listed buildings currently on Wikipedia I rather hope that if the lists on Wikipedia are updated from Wikidata the update will go both ways, and Wikidata will import the additional work on Wikipedia. Regards Jonathan

Replying to several points: Yes, better tools, I'm all for that :-) Jane, the "has part" list you made just duplicates effort that is already done. It's about as messy as Wikipedia lists. If we really want "has part", fill it with bots, though I think that would be a bad idea as well. Tools can order lists any way you like, by name, coordinate (closeness to a point or whatnot), or any other property that is common to the items being sorted. WereSpielChequers, I do respect the work that was done with manual lists on Wikipedia, but IMO they should be moved to Wikidata. By that, I mean their contents should be carefully copied to Wikidata, then the lists should be replaced by automatically generated ones, by bot and/or external display tool. There should only be one master copy, on Wikidata. "Syncing" between sites and technologies is hard enough to do once; on a continued basis, it is Madness (see the uppercase M? That's how mad it is!) All: The tools I wrote so far that are used in WLM are either "working demos", or generic tools (like autolist). If they are not to your liking, I don't take it personally. But don't for a second think "this is the best we can do". As Jane said, people (users) here tend to be silent, so I throw something out there and see what sticks. Now that you have an idea of what can be done (at the very least), I think it is time to brainstorm a tool most people would be happy with (caveat feature-creep and design-by-committee and all that). I hear the Python-based WLM tool is ported to Labs. I haven't worked with that, but I think it's good to have continuity there. Even if we run primarily on Wikidata, it could serve as a staging and management area; syncing Wikidata to its database would be orders of magnitude better than with Wikipedia manual lists. On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:40 PM WereSpielChequers < werespielchequers(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Hi all, Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together. On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier. It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted. Cdlt, ~nicolas

2015-07-30 14:36 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell &lt;jane023(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: Thank you. I believe/hope it's just a matter of time. True. Probably on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage We started a https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_histori… for France, maybe other countries should start one too since every country is different. This porject is mad (in a good way). I lack time but that could be a great idea to do the same for monuments ! My original mail in this thread is about moving the monuments db which is Sadly this project seems a bit dead... Plus, for France, as we started the import semi-automatically and semi-manually, it's now harder for the bots to import the last half of french monuments :s We need to split that up and move it to Wikidata in all its bits and bobs.

Hi all, In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of. * Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial. * Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get this completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. There will be communities that want to choose themselves which photo they want to show in their monument list (instead the photo from Wikidata), many descriptions of monuments in the list are altered and have footnotes and internal links, many descriptions and other fields are edited/expanded/updated, while Wikidata shows a different text or Wikidata has not the possibility to contain certain complex data. And the majority of users on Wikipedia experience Wikidata as too difficult to easily work with (seeing the Dutch community). (These are just a few issues of a lot more. And this is of course not specifically WLM, but generic.) I think that the ability to edit the lists in ways Wikidata can't handle, is especially wanted on Wikipedias of the local language. At the same time I think that we need to work to the situation that for example monuments from the Netherlands can be shown on a list in the Japanese Wikipedia and many others. Maintaining lists in 200+ Wikipedias is not possible I think, so the idea of a centralised database is needed, but needs more thinking about how this can work in practise. Another issue there is, is that Wikipedia is built on being able to click on top of the page and edit it without having to struggle with codes. Their are and will be a lot of Wikipedias where it is not acceptable to put a large amount of codes in the main namespace. A solution for that is simple, like categories, lua, portals, etc automated lists need their own namespace, like a list namespace. Then the article namespace remains freely editable and at the same time the information of automated lists is available in the local Wikipedia in the local language. * Having all monuments in Wikidata: I am not sure if anyone mentioned this, but this should be the first step and only when this is completed we can think of further steps. And then I assume all the data of the database can be added to Wikidata, I am not sure if this is possible. Nevertheless I think all the monuments should have an item in Wikidata. For some countries this is the case already, for most countries this seems not the case. For these monuments in Wikidata we need to set some criteria. There are multiple criteria to be set, but one of them is at least to have **every** monument in Wikidata having a unique identifier. Also all monuments in Wikidata need additional information to be able to identify a monument in Wikidata as a monument on location. These include address, coordinates, municipality or other administrative territorial entity (this should be the lowest level possible), type of monument, and more. And there are more criteria that need to be set before it can be used worldwide. If it is not possible to set for every monument a unique ID, Wikidata is not suitable for usage in Wiki Loves Monuments. A unique identifier for each monument is crucial throughout the whole infrastructure, the infrastructure has been built on this. * Lists, rows in lists, articles about an individual monument on Wikipedia, categories on Commons and Wikidata items all need to be connected with each other. I think it is already possible for a part in Wikidata. However, this is far from ready to be used. Adding information to Wikidata is great, and that is what many people do, but there is a high need for connecting Wikidata items with for example categories on Commons. For any future tooling, scripts, gadgets, etc, this is needed in general, but specific for WLM too. The importance of this part is so much underestimated. Greetings, Romaine 2015-07-30 15:43 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell &lt;jane023(a)gmail.com&gt;om>:

I agree with Nicolas on this, Romaine. WLM is by nature a place where newbies create userids on Commons, not on Wikipedia. For true Commonists, a step from Commons to Wikidata is easier than the step from Commons to Wikipedia. On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Yes I can see that it would seem counter-productive to work on an overhaul of the current system in the middle of a competition. My experience in the Wikiverse has taught me two important lessons however: 1) Never assume that I can influence the workload of any other Wiki(p/m)edian 2) Never assume that I know what other Wiki(p/m)edians are able and willing to do That said, I am always interested when I notice things happening in the Wikiverse that seem relevant to whatever it is that I am doing, wherever I am doing it. I am thinking about WLM now because we are gearing up to it, so it follows that I think about how to improve it, both for me personally as a participant, and for me personally as a Wikidatan. On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Platonides &lt;platonides(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Nicolas, Exactly. What we have never done is create use cases and build tools from that. Our users (if you can call Wiki(p/m)edia readers that) are an unusually silent bunch. Jane On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

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 (usually made up before WWI during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make inventory lists of heritage sites). On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

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 is a wiki like any other. You can go start your d:Wikidata:WLMIT project pages and recreate your lists that correspond to anything you have built on itwiki and slowly add Q numbers to each item. Items with just a name would be problematic, so I would start with everything you have locations for first. Later "instance of" and type of heritage object and so forth can be added. You can add multiple statements per item while creating items with quick statements. See here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28: If so, please fix the docs. "Uniqueness for a combination of a label and a description is a hard constraint that must be satisfied before a change can be saved." https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary How so? We often don't know more than the name- Because that's the process used to add coordinates. Needs to be verified with those who maintain the list (i.e. Cristian Cenci and WMIT secretariat). That's a very trivial query, on WDQ just claim[496]. The query I described is way more complex. Nemo

Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:44: See an example list http://wlm.wikimedia.it/w/images/9/94/San_Michele.pdf Coordinates absolutely not. City is not trivial, the institution holding the item may be anywhere. Country is probably easier, we only need to check for San Marino and Vatican :) ; but that's basically noise, doesn't say anything useful about the thing. Nemo

2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett &lt;andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk&gt;uk>: 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 ? Why on Earth would someone like to tell nothing but the name ? A lot of properties are very easy to add (P31, P17, P1435, P131, etc.) ; plus, there is some semi-automatic tools to to that « en masse ». Can't https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php do that ? (QuickStatements is a wonderful tool but I struggle a little to use it to its full extent).

2015-07-26 18:52 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of « Unique » in English? (I made the same confusion as a French speaker). You have to choose one single label per item (except aliases) but this label could be use on multiple item. Hundreds of item could have the label « Municipio ». It is very common for the churches (look for « église Saint-Martin » in French). Cdlt, ~nicolas

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) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

2015-07-26 19:03 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: Is it clearer on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary/it ? Or maybe https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Label ? Anyway, could you provide a clear example where you can't « satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness, » More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description? Cdlt, ~nicolas

Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09: 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 (like "object authorised by institution X for WLM"), but first we need a policy, guideline or discussion to state this is ok for Wikidata. Nemo

2015-07-26 19:12 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) &lt;nemowiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>: Oh, ok... But how can the object be in WLM if there is no possible description? Is there Wikipédia articles or lists about these objects Again, this can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label I'm sure it's ok ; you don't need a policy but you can start a discussion if you want. P1435 could maybe use for "object authorised by institution X for WLM" and NO it's not noise, it's data! Cdlt, ~nicolas

On 26 July 2015 at 17:41, Nicolas VIGNERON &lt;vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: No they are not. Both Q915614 and Q19654888 have the (en) label "St Paul's Church". -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

(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 still work in progress - we are lacking many lists - thus we have only about a half of total number, as estimated number of monuments in Ukraine is between 120,000 and 150,000. So far no one managed to publish a database of over 20,000 monuments, thus ours is definitely the best one, but we can hardly imagine who can publish this. In addition, we do not have reliable sources (in terms of Wikipedia/Wikidata) that those objects are monuments - our usual sources are letters from local governments, in best case it's a PDF file, in worst case it looks like THIS http://toolserver.org.ua/132542.JPG Of course we can try to add something like "Wikimedia Ukraine ID", but we reasonably expect to see it rejected - we did not even publish our lists in the Main namespace for this reason. 2) Adresses. * First of all, there is no way we can have coordinates for all monuments - in one city it took about a week for a local resident to add coordinates to all monuments in his city - this requires advanced knowledge of local geography, like being able to distinguish "Central park" and "City park" * Secondly, P969 is an option - but we need it to be multilingual. In case of big cities, we will most likely have street names and we need to have a cyrillic (Ukrainian) and latinic (English) versions for them. In case of Crimea, we happen to have addresses in Ukrainian and in Russian separately and we would need to prefer to keep both if we transfer on Wikidata. * Thirdly, in some cases we have monuments located in an unknown village, i.e. a village that does not exist. In some cases it's a renamed villages (=we have an item for it), in some cases this village became a part of another village (=we change to this another village and put old village into address), in some cases it's an abandonned village (=we don't have an item for it), and in the worst case we do not know what it is (and we hope that a local resident will find it and fix it). * Finally, we can have just no address and two items with the same name (e.g. Church, Common grave, Burial mound) with ID as the only way to distinguish them. 3) Oh, and third problem, a more fundamental one. Will Wikidata be used as a duplicate of on-wiki database (like erfgoedbot's database) or a main source of data? In the second case we need an easy tool being able to: * retrieve all monuments in a given city / region (main way for people to find what they want to picture) * ...and filter monuments of a given type (e.g. monuments of architecture of national significance - we have 4 types and 3 subtypes) * ...and filter monuments built in a given year (FOP monitoring) * update all monuments in a given region (we update lists yearly once we receive new ones, but we do not want to overwrite edits by other users if they fix mistakes, so we need to *compare* and overwrite) * retrieve all monuments in a given region and  modify them manually (e.g. add coordinates) All of this is rather easy to do with a wiki-based table, it is also rather easy to do with a good database, but we have a bad database, so what can we do with it? Thanks, Mykola --- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Andy Mabbett" &lt;andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk&gt; Дата: 26 липня 2015, 18:23:59 On 26 July 2015 at 12:39, Mykola Kozlenko < mycola-k(a)ukr.net > 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 has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians? No, but you could publish them/ have someone publish them.   2) Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street, house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery"  or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata?   Give the coordinates. In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate 70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who  did its job pretty well in our case. Yes; for instance QuickStatements.    http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org

2015-07-26 13:39 GMT+02:00 Mykola Kozlenko &lt;mycola-k(a)ukr.net&gt;et>: Oo. That's gonna be complex. Not sure how to deal with that. You can ask on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal for a property « Wiki monument ID » for creation but not sure if it will be accepted (in fact, pretty sure it won't but I think it's worth the try). 2) Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street, It is a bit exotic but there will be no problem to use P969 for that : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P969 (it's a string type so you can put whatever you want). Same question for France. We have already a lot of monuments in Wikidata but not all of them (generally, all monuments with an article on fr.wp have an item on wikidata). We have a project on Wikidata : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_histori… but nobody there has a high wikidata-fu / technic skills. Cdlt, ~nicolas

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 someone famous, former castle, former city gate, large natural rock formation used for some obsolete purpose - whatever!). The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q number itself. On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Ilario Valdelli &lt;valdelli(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal &lt;andre(a)molens.org&gt;rg>: Since the erfgoed database is going down, I guess erfgoedbotis will no longer be here anymore. Or maybe could it work with Wikidata ? Since Maarten don't want invest time anymore, I guess a new bot is needed. Same thing goes for a lot of other tools like tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-maps Meanwhile, there is Wikidata tools that can be esaly use for similar purposes (onsite there is the constraints reports and Autolist can generate list too). Cdlt, ~nicolas

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 &lt;mycola-k(a)ukr.net&gt; wrote:

Yay! (I was quite worried about WLM 2015) On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Jean-Frédéric &lt;jeanfrederic.wiki(a)gmail.com > Hi all, > > >> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko &lt;mycola-k(a)ukr.net&gt; >>> >>> 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. >>> >> 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. > > > We discussed this at Wikimania. I’m taking over the maintenance of > ErfgoedBot for the time being (help appreciated!) and will port it to core. > This is tracked as <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T105818> Don’t > hesitate to ping me on this. > > -- > Jean-Fred > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org >

2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal &lt;andre(a)molens.org&gt;rg>: 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 France, since end of June, we add all the news 2014 protected monuments), so the database is more and more obsolete everyday and less and less useful :( Very true but there is a very big number of tools on and around Wikidata. Cdlt, ~nicolas

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 chapters who are forging their own lists (like Italy and others) while dreaming up ways we can use Wikidata to improve the set of tools we have been using. On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Andre Koopal &lt;andre(a)molens.org&gt; wrote: