Hoi,
I add bucket loads of new awards, awardees and add them to humans. What
I have found in the past is that controversial points were adopted that are
inherently problematic. Given that I likely add more awards than most, the
value of such a consensus is questionable. I find that I lost interest and
totally ignore their point of view.
Thanks
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 at 13:41, Thomas Douillard <
thomas.douillard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, I participated into the edits that ended up
with this mess, so I
plead guilty /o\.
I’d say the problem is that we don’t really have a model at all. At
best, there is some WikiProject that try to impose some rules they decided,
with the notion of concensus decided by the people of the project. Some
WikiProjects exists for some domains but are inactive and/or inefficient to
impose rules. Apart from that there is constraints, that are decided by the
sums of individual edits, for example, and occasionally discussions on
project chat or other venue like the french «bistro». In my experience RfCs
on the model does not usually reach a conclusion. In this case there is a
WikiProject Award, that sets up some rule :
https://www.wikidata.org ,
but … I’m not sure how those rules came up and the rationale behind it are
not explained.
Le sam. 28 sept. 2019 à 13:00, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk>
a écrit :
> On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 20:34, Aidan Hogan <aidhog(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > In summary, of the six types of Nobel prizes, three different
> properties
> > are used in five different combinations
>
> > I am more interested in the general problem of the
> > lack of consensus that such a case exhibits.
>
> Has there been any attempt to resolve this through discussion on-wiki?
> Failure to agree a consensus is a much more serious issue than a "we
> have yet to attempt to reach consensus" scenario.
>
> Have you attempted to make edits to align the items concerned, only to
> find them reverted? An active dispute (edit war) over how to model
> data is a much more serious issue than a "we have yet to attempt to
> reach consensus" scenario.
>
> In either case, links or preferably diffs would help.
>
> > What processes (be they social, technical, or some combination
> thereof)
> > are currently in place to reach consensus in these cases in Wikidata?
>
> On-wiki discussion, usually on a project page, sometimes on project
> chat.
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
>
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org