Markus, Denny and Wikidatans,
I don't, Markus. In the information age, this seems to be a widespread and helpful practice in general (e.g. in LinkedIn and for some medical records,, for example).
On the benefits of this side, this is a way for Wikidata to get most accurate, and potentially, timely data about people.
Are there further criteria Wikidata might add to lessen misrepresentations, etc., or to make more explicit what personal information is welcome, building on past Wikipedia experience in particular here, and not a conflict of interest?
Also, concerning POV, are there sociocultural or linguistic differences in interlingually Wikidata, here that might be relevant? Would people in India in Hindi represent their own personal data (e.g. due to traditions of spiritual "selflessness") differently from Swedes in Swedish (due to a different history of "knowledge generating practices"), for example, that are worth addressing with specific criteria? In what ways has Wikipedia addressed this already?
Cheers,
Scott
P.S. I also should declare a COI on this discussion: I am Q18618630. -- Markus
On 07.01.2015 15:25, Markus Krötzsch wrote:
Back to Denny's original question:
Does anybody see a specific danger of abuse if living people get to edit
their own data right now? Entering wrong claims deliberately would maybe
not be the biggest issue here (since it is already in conflict with
other general policies -- we do not want wrong data, whoever is entering
it -- and the fact that we want to rely on external sources for all
non-obvious data would still apply). Could it be problematic if somebody
enters too much/too detailed data on their own person? Could somebody
use this to place links to external web content (spam) hidden in
personal properties? But this, again, would probably conflict with other
policies too, and it does not seem to be a problem specific to the
particular POVs that a living person may have. Any other ideas of
possible abuse? My main question is: where could POV be an issue when
entering (externally referenced) data of the granularity that we have?
Some proposals of what we could allow/forbid that are specific to our
special form of content:
* Allow living people to edit certain properties on their own page
(whitelist)? I currently don't see any way of really abusing things like
birthdate, given name, etc. that are just personal properties, unless
maybe in rare cases where there is a real dispute (maybe a living person
who insists on being younger than he really is?).
* Alternatively, maybe it could even be enough to have a blacklist of
certain properties that one could be using in illegitimate ways (no
specific idea now what this might be).
* I would also allow people to set their labels and reasonable aliases,
but not have them enter any descriptions (could be POVed).
If living people are asked to not edit all or certain parts of their
entity, then there needs be a process for them to report errors. I would
not like wrong information to be broadcasted about me on Wikidata
without having any way to get it fixed.
In addition, there should be a template that one can use on one's user
page to disclose that one is the person described in a certain item.
Conversely, we should also use our "website account on" property (P553)
to connect living people to their Wikidata user account, so the COI is
recorded in the data. One could further disclose other COIs on one's
user page in some standard format, but maybe with Wikidata we could
actually derive such COIs automatically (your family members, the
companies you founded, the university you graduated from, etc. can all
be specified in data).
Cheers,
Markus
On 04.01.2015 19:57, Andy Mabbett wrote:
Yes. they can. That's stated explicitly:
A Wikimedia Project community may adopt an alternative paid
contribution
disclosure policy. If a Project adopts an alternative disclosure
policy, you may
comply with that policy instead of the requirements in this
section when
contributing to that Project.
And Commons, for one, has already done so:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Paid_contribution_disclosure_policy
which says in full:
The Wikimedia Commons community does not require any disclosure
of paid
contributions from its contributors.
On 4 January 2015 at 07:40, Jasper Deng <jasper@jasperswebsite.com>
wrote:
@Andy: no, the terms of use are the minimum because since a user must
legally accept them when editing a project, everyone is bound by them by
virtue of editing. Local projects cannot override that.
On Sat, Jan 3, 2015 at 11:28 AM, Andy Mabbett
<andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
On 3 January 2015 at 18:13, Joe Filceolaire <filceolaire@gmail.com>
wrote:
The terms of use are the minimum requirements. Each wiki may have
more
requirements.
No, they are the *default* requirements. Each wiki may have *different*
requirements.
--
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l