If having the most elegant description extraction
mechanism was the goal
I would totally agree ;)
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Dmitry Brant <dbrant(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
IMO, allowing the user to edit the description is
a missed opportunity
to make the user edit the actual *data*, such that the description is
generated correctly.
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Monte Hurd <mhurd(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
> IMO, if the goal is quality, then human curated descriptions are
> superior until such time as the auto-generation script passes the Turing
> test ;)
>
> I see these empty descriptions as an amazing opportunity to give
> *everyone* an easy new way to edit. I whipped an app editing interface up
> at the Lyon hackathon:
>
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VblyGhf_c8
>
> I used it to add a couple hundred descriptions in a single day just by
> hitting "random" then adding descriptions for articles which didn't
have
> them.
>
> I'd love to try a limited test of this in production to get a sense
> for how effective human curation can be if the interface is easy to use...
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jan Ainali <jan.ainali(a)wikimedia.se>
> wrote:
>
>> Nice one!
>>
>> Does not appear to work on svwiki though. Does it have something to
>> do with that the wiki in question does not display that tagline?
>>
>>
>> *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali*
>>
>> Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se>
>> 0729 - 67 29 48
>>
>>
>> *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till
>> mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.*
>> Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se>
>>
>>
>> 2015-08-18 17:23 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske <magnusmanske(a)googlemail.com
>> >:
>>
>>> Show automatic description underneath "From Wikipedia...":
>>>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js
>>>
>>> To use, add:
>>> importScript ( 'User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js' ) ;
>>> to your common.js
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:47 AM Jane Darnell <jane023(a)gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> It would be even better if this (short: 3 field max) pipe-separated
>>>> list was available as a gadget to wikidatans on Wikipedia (like me). I
>>>> can't see if a page I am on has an "instance of" (though it
should) and I
>>>> can see the description thanks to another gadget (sorry no idea which
one
>>>> that is). Often I will update empty descriptions, but if I was served
basic
>>>> fields (so for a painting, the creator field), I would click through to
>>>> update that too.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) <
>>>> nemowiki(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Jane Darnell, 15/08/2015 08:53:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of
fields
>>>>>> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> +1, item descriptions are mostly useless in my experience.
>>>>>
>>>>> As for "get into production on Wikipedia" I don't know
what it
>>>>> means, I certainly don't like 1) mobile-specific features, 2)
overriding
>>>>> existing manually curated content; but it's good to 3) fill gaps.
Mobile
>>>>> folks often do (1) and (2), if they *instead* did (3) I'd be very
happy. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Nemo
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Mobile-l mailing list
>>>> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Mobile-l mailing list
>>> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Mobile-l mailing list
>> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mobile-l mailing list
> Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
>
>
--
Dmitry Brant
Mobile Apps Team (Android)
Wikimedia Foundation
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering