My understanding of identifiers and authorities is that they come from
established entities, i.e., VIAF contributors
If we can query off a BLT identifier that would be great. But the task list
items don't have unique identifiers established -- and that would be an
onerous, artificial process.
So I have concerns about this idea, that it doesn't provide a workable
solution.
Maybe some of this is lost in translation as it is very Wikipedia-centric.
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 12:03 PM, LeadSongDog <leadsong(a)webname.com> wrote:
Erika,
Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date,
and links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki
worlds. Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing
wikidatan notability?
On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilllyle(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi LeadSongDog,
Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch
Table has generated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press
Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative.
Plus would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata
entries as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things,
where to reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to
establish notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with
the current interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers
via VIAF and other sources to establish notability.... It builds notability
on top of established library science canons, and provides disambiguation,
etc. Sorry I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress....
I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually
but what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution
to the problem these various outreach efforts are requiring.
An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of
"dirty data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use
something lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL
query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata
significantly.
Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better
word) property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that
came up in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus,
because a maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big
step organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's
expertise and knowledge-base on this.
Best,
- Erika
*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*
On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog <leadsong(a)webname.com> wrote:
Erika,
You might consider using
https://www.artsy.net/article/
the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting
-together-in-the-cafeteria as a ref. There must be something usable
there.
From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal
meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has
distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its
own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists
attending may often already be so described, but as they may edit
pseudonymously one must be careful to avoid outing.
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata