I think not doing anything at all when the item is presumed not notable is
a bad thing, especially when we have datas. We should be able to at least
generate a description in those cases, maybe in a popup way.
Why not, just not showing the "create" button instead ?
2016-04-03 16:27 GMT+02:00 John Erling Blad <jeblad(a)gmail.com>om>:
Just read through the doc, and found some important
points. I post each
one in a separate mail.
Since it is hard to decide which content is
actually notable, the items
appear-
ing in the search should be limited to the ones
having at least one
statements
and two sitelinks to the same project (like
Wikipedia or Wikivoyage).
This is a good baseline, but figuring out what is notable locally is a bit
more involved. A language is used in a local area, and within that area
some items are more important just because they reside within the area.
This is quite noticeable in the differences between nnwiki and nowiki which
both basically covers "Norway". Also items that somehow relates to the
local area or language is more noticeable than those outside those areas.
By traversing upwords in the claims using the "part of" property it is
possible to build a priority on the area involved. It is possible to
traverse "nationality" and a few other properties.
Things directly noticeable like an area enclosed in an area using the
language is somewhat easy to identify, but things that are noticeable by
association with another noticeable thing is not. Like a Danish slave ship
operated by a Norwegian firm, the ship is thus noticeable in nowiki. I
would say that all things linked as an item from other noticeable things
should be included. Some would perhaps say that "items with second order
relevance should be included".
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016 at 11:09 PM, Luis Villa <luis(a)lu.is> wrote:
On Sat, Apr 2, 2016, 4:34 AM Lucie Kaffee
<lucie.kaffee(a)wikimedia.de>
wrote:
I wrote my Bachelor's thesis on
"Generating Article Placeholders from
Wikidata for Wikipedia: Increasing Access to Free and Open Knowledge". The
thesis summarizes a lot of the work done on the ArticlePlaceholder
extension (
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:ArticlePlaceholder
)
I uploaded the thesis to commons under a CC-BY-SA license- you can find
it at
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Generating_Article_Placeholders_fro…
I continue working on the extension and aim to deploy it to the first
Wikipedias, that are interested, in the next months.
I am happy to answer questions related to the extension!
Great work on something that I *believe *has a lot of promise - thanks!
I really think this approach has a lot of promise to help take back some
readership from Google, and potentially in the long-run drive more new
editors as well. (I know that was part of the theory of LSJbot, though I
don't know if anyone has actually a/b tested that.)
I was somewhat surprised to not see data collection discussed in Section
8.10 - are there plans to do that? I would have expected to see a/b testing
discussed as part of the deployment methodology, so that it could be
compared both to the current baseline and also to similar approaches (like
the ones you survey in Section 3).
Thanks again for the hard work here-
Luis
_______________________________________________
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