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@pigsonthewing.org.uk> a écrit :
On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 20:34, Aidan Hogan <aidhog@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

Wikidata mailing list