There are several things at play. First, Wikimania and its talks will find its place in Wikidata because typically much of the papers, presentations and registrations will be found in Commons. So they will be registered anyway. Second, this thread is also about the way our policies are maintained. This is done in an arbitrary way and consequently much of the arguments based on policies have lost much of their validity. Third, the number of items involved is so low that it not even registers. When other conferences like TED find their way, it is not a problem so why should granularity be a problem now?

When people want to know about how we think about what we do, the Wikimania talks is a prime resource. Papers are published about what we do. We could easily refer people to Wikimania and other talks. We could and should because it makes sense to do so. In the end it is our history.

On 31 July 2016 at 17:25, Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinzler@wikimedia.de> wrote:
Am 31.07.2016 um 17:04 schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
> Hoi,
> I am not to judge what conferences will be deemed relevant for an item in
> Wikidata. When a conference is relevant, it is the talks and particularly the
> registrations of the talks, the papers and the presentations that make the
> conference relevant after the fact.

So you think that for every relevant conference, all talks and speakers should
automatically be considered relevant? Does the same aregument apply to all
courses and theachers at all relevant universities and schools?

I'm trying to understand your point. To me it's a question of granularity. We
can't manage arbitrarily fine grained information, so we have to stop at some
point. What do you think, where should that point be for Wikimania, for other
(relevant) conferences, for universities, for schools?

Daniel Kinzler
Senior Software Developer

Wikimedia Deutschland
Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.

Wikidata mailing list