Slightly off-offtopic, but not back on-topic, yet within scope and looking forward...
- Requirement [a]: Implicit and/or explicit exclusion of a Wikidata Item (explicit could be a special case of implicit but not vice versa)
- Requirement [b]: Wikipedias can opt out of sets of Items (including a single Item)
- Requirement [c]: Wikipedias can opt out of sets of images, templates etc (including sets of one), and of specific Wikidata claims (or types of claim, loosely defined...)
- Requirement [d]: Inclusion of anything subject to [c], if unconditional, implies opt-out by Wikipedias opting out under [c] (opt-outs are inherited upwards by unconditional inclusion)
Do these make sense? Would they address the problem being discussed here in full, or only in part? I would put "short description" under [c], as a "type of claim", but I was already thinking [c] could be divided up. (Now it looks to me as if the "explicit" part of [a] is the same as the "single item" in [b], but they are what they are, for now..."All work is preliminary")
Best regards,
Al.
On Thursday, 30 July 2020, <
abstract-wikipedia-request@lists.wikimedia.org> wrote:
Send Abstract-Wikipedia mailing list submissions to
abstract-wikipedia@lists.wikimedia.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/abstract-wikipedia
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
abstract-wikipedia-request@lists.wikimedia.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
abstract-wikipedia-owner@lists.wikimedia.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Abstract-Wikipedia digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: How to store wikitext along the structured content?
(Peter Southwood)
2. Re: Off-topic, was How to store wikitext along the structured
content? (Peter Southwood)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Message: 1
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:41:17 +0200
From: "Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>
To: "'General public mailing list for the discussion of Abstract
Wikipedia \(aka Wikilambda\)'"
<abstract-wikipedia@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Abstract-wikipedia] How to store wikitext along the
structured content?
Message-ID: <003101d66666$582586c0$08709440$@telkomsa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Amir, That discussion is not so much about undeploying the {{short description}} feature, it is about WMF following up on what they undertook to do to disable display of unsourced and unchecked Wikidata content in a way that suggests it is Wikipedia content once Wikipedia met the WMFs unilaterally imposed conditions against Wikipedia project consensus. I would have expected the closing to have been worked out ahead of time, and a mere formality, but it seems that interminable squabbling is possible even in as straight forward appearing a situation as this.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Abstract-Wikipedia [mailto:abstract-wikipedia-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Amir E. Aharoni
Sent: 30 July 2020 12:22
To: General public mailing list for the discussion of Abstract Wikipedia (aka Wikilambda)
Subject: Re: [Abstract-wikipedia] How to store wikitext along the structured content?
בתאריך יום ה׳, 30 ביולי 2020 ב-13:08 מאת Peter Southwood <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>:
Amir,
“some people are now thinking of undeploying the {{short description}} feature”
Who? Where is this being discussed? I am not sure what you mean by “undeploying the feature”
Agree that it was a badly handled problem and massive time-sink, but would prefer that the baby is not thrown out with the bathwater.
Cheers,
Peter
On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF) now, and a lot of different and contradicting opinions are thrown around there.
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virus-free. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/abstract-wikipedia/attachments/20200730/356bd3af/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Message: 2
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 2020 13:54:41 +0200
From: "Peter Southwood" <peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>
To: "'Charles Matthews'" <charles.r.matthews@ntlworld.com>, "'General
public mailing list for the discussion of Abstract Wikipedia \(aka
Wikilambda\)'" <abstract-wikipedia@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Abstract-wikipedia] Off-topic, was How to store wikitext
along the structured content?
Message-ID: <004701d66668$35e6fa10$a1b4ee30$@telkomsa.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Charles,
There may well be fallacies. Perhaps you could point out one or two of them. There is also evasion of responsibility, and delaying of what should have been done already by an ethical and competent organisation, and as usual, a lot of commenting, queries and demands from people who do not know the background. We are accustomed to this.
Cheers,
Peter
From: Abstract-Wikipedia [mailto:abstract-wikipedia-bounces@lists.wikimedia.org] On Behalf Of Charles Matthews via Abstract-Wikipedia
Sent: 30 July 2020 12:31
To: General public mailing list for the discussion of Abstract Wikipedia (aka Wikilambda)
Subject: Re: [Abstract-wikipedia] Off-topic, was How to store wikitext along the structured content?
On 30 July 2020 at 11:22 "Amir E. Aharoni" <amir.aharoni@mail.huji.ac.il> wrote:
בתאריך יום ה׳, 30 ביולי 2020 ב-13:08 מאת Peter Southwood < peter.southwood@telkomsa.net>:
Amir,
“some people are now thinking of undeploying the {{short description}} feature”
Who? Where is this being discussed? I am not sure what you mean by “undeploying the feature”
Agree that it was a badly handled problem and massive time-sink, but would prefer that the baby is not thrown out with the bathwater.
Cheers,
Peter
On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(WMF) now, and a lot of different and contradicting opinions are thrown around there.
Clearly, if there is a definite demand for scraps of human-readable text attached to things, some people will spend time arguing that the consumer is always wrong in these situations. Just as, if you point out that it provides another way to search, they will argue that people don't, can't or shouldn't search in such ways.
I feel there are fallacies lurking here, or anti-patterns, and would be happy to have names for them.
Charles
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virus-free. <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient> www.avg.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/abstract-wikipedia/attachments/20200730/7956ca2a/attachment-0001.html>
------------------------------
Subject: Digest Footer
_______________________________________________
Abstract-Wikipedia mailing list
Abstract-Wikipedia@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/abstract-wikipedia
------------------------------
End of Abstract-Wikipedia Digest, Vol 1, Issue 103
**************************************************