I think from an ergonomic standpoint it would be helpful to treat "descriptions" as "comments". In the case of something from Wikipedia there is a link to Wikipedia and that helps.For objects where curators and users need to know what this object is, what gotchas are associated with using it, etc, such a facility would be necessary.Some standard should exist for "auto-generated descriptions" to be considered good enough, but for records likethere ought to be some kind of red mark to say this record is thinner then we like. If somebody has a problem with that situation they ought to add enough data to autogenerate a description better thanExists(something): something has label "Beanie Babies 2.0" in the English Languagehopefully the community can improve the database in terms of where their needs are.On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 6:18 AM, Thomas Douillard <thomas.douillard@gmail.com> wrote:I also started a lua module on frwiki in the same spirit for on wiki without gadgets description generation: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Module:Description . It's used in the "Lien Wikidata" template, but it's unclear wether or not Wikipedians in frwiki will catch the bait :)
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
--Paul HouleApplying Schemas for Natural Language Processing, Distributed Systems, Classification and Text Mining and Data Lakes
(607) 539 6254 paul.houle on Skype ontology2@gmail.com:BaseKB -- Query Freebase Data With SPARQLLegal Entity Identifier LookupJoin our Data Lakes group on LinkedIn
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata