To add up a couple of comments to what Denny said, from my experience with
Wikisource, reaching out to international, loosely connected communities is
already a big challenge on its own. I would like to invite Wiktionary
contributors to take a look to this Individual Engagement Grant project
that Aubrey and me are doing for Wikisource, because maybe it would make
sense that a group of involved Wiktionarians started a similar initiative
for Wiktionary. The original application can be found here:
If anyone from the Wiktionary community wants to step forward, I would be
more than happy to share experiences and provide advice.
Cheers,
Micru
On Sat, Aug 10, 2013 at 3:30 AM, Denny Vrandečić <
denny.vrandecic(a)wikimedia.de> wrote:
[Sorry for cross-posting]
Yes, I agree that the OmegaWiki community should be involved in the
discussions, and I pointed GerardM to our proposals whenever and
discussions, using him as a liaison. We also looked and keep looking at the
OmegaWiki data model to see what we are missing.
Our latest proposal is different from OmegaWiki in two major points:
* our primary goal is to provide support for structured data in the
Wiktionaries. We do not plan to be the main resource ourselves, where
readers come to in order to look up something, we merely provide structured
data that a Wiktionary may or may not use. This parallels the role of
Wikidata has with regards to Wikipedia. This also highlights the difference
between Wikidata and OmegaWiki, since OmegaWiki's goal is "to create a
dictionary of all words of all languages, including lexical, terminological
and ontological information."
* a smaller difference is the data model. Wikidata's latest proposal to
support Wiktionary is centered around lexemes, and we do not assume that
there is such a things as a language-independent defined meaning. But no
matter what model we end up with, it is important to ensure that the bulk
of the data could freely flow between the projects, and even though we
might disagree on this issue in the modeling, it is ensured that the
exchange of data is widely possible.
We tried to keep notes on the discussion we had today: <
http://epl.wikimedia.org/p/WiktionaryAndWikidata>
My major take home message for me is that:
* the proposal needs more visual elements, especially a mock-up or sketch
of how it would look like and how it could be used on the Wiktionaries
* there is no generally accepted place for a discussion that involves all
Wiktionary projects. Still, my initial decision to have the discussion on
the Wikidata wiki was not a good one, and it should and will be moved to
Meta.
Having said that, the current proposal for the data model of how to support
Wiktionary with Wikidata seems to have garnered a lot of support so far. So
this is what I will continue building upon. Further comments are extremely
welcomed. You can find it here:
<http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary>
As said, it will be moved to Meta, as soon as the requested mockups and
extensions are done.
Cheers,
Denny
2013/8/10 Samuel Klein <meta.sj(a)gmail.com>
Hello,
> On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 6:13 PM, JP Béland <lebo.beland(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> I
agree. We also need to include the Omegawiki community.
Agreed.
On Fri, Aug 9, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Laura Hale <laura(a)fanhistory.com>
wrote:
Why? The
question of moving them into the WMF fold was pretty much no,
because the project has an overlapping purpose with Wiktionary,
This is not actually the case.
There was overwhelming community support for adopting Omegawiki - at
least simply providing hosting. It stalled because the code needed a
security and style review, and Kip (the lead developer) was going to
put some time into that. The OW editors and dev were very interested
in finding a way forward that involved Wikidata and led to a combined
project with a single repository of terms, meanings, definitions and
translations.
Recap: The page describing the OmegaWiki project satisfies all of the
criteria for requesting WMF adoption.
* It is well-defined on Meta
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Omegawiki
* It describes an interesting idea clearly aligned with expanding the
scope of free knowledge
* It is not a 'competing' project to Wiktionaries; it is an idea that
grew out of the Wiktionary community, has been developed for years
alongside it, and shares many active contributors and linguiaphiles.
* It started an RfC which garnered 85% support for adoption.
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Adopt_OmegaWiki
Even if the current OW code is not used at all for a future Wiktionary
update -- and this idea was proposed and taken seriously by the OW
devs -- their community of contributors should be part of discussions
about how to solve the Wiktionary problem that they were the first to
dedicate themselves to.
Regards,
Sam.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 |
http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>