Hi all, I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work. Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I expect that all large industrial complexes (such as the first airport, or the first steam-powered mill complex, or something like that) should reflect this infrastructure. So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>. This identifier of the form " German industrial heritage site", aka "Industriedenkmal https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industriedenkmal" should be a subclass of Industrial Heritage Site, because it is not equivalent to industrial heritage sites anywhere else in the world. I see that this is not reflected yet in Q1569871
I didn't see this discussion anywhere and I tried to get this infrastructure started before the birth of Wikidata, but we really should finish the job now. Jane
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435
as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
But wherever you are in the tree of properties, from any item in the tree you should be able to navigate up and down from "Heritage objects of Germany" going from status type to substatus type. Is this spelled out anywhere? All of the commons categories need to be associated with the proper wikidata item
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name
of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name
of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the reason the object made it into the WLM list, the fact that it is a 'rijksmonument' and thus have a rijksmonument-id is the reason to make it in the list.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name
of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Yes, but broadly speaking this is also the reason the object made it into the Rijksmonument list to begin with (the reason it was chosen for heritage status)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:
Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the reason the object made it into the WLM list, the fact that it is a 'rijksmonument' and thus have a rijksmonument-id is the reason to make it in the list.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Yes, but there are other halls certainly who are not a monument. If you start generating lists it should just be the heritage status, and then split over city for example.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but broadly speaking this is also the reason the object made it into the Rijksmonument list to begin with (the reason it was chosen for heritage status)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:
Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the reason the object made it into the WLM list, the fact that it is a 'rijksmonument' and thus have a rijksmonument-id is the reason to make it in the list.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
I am not advocating "generating" in the sense of data creation, but am advocating "generating" in the sense of data visualization. So now the rijksmonument lists are only visible in the Dutch Wikipedia, though all of the info about the individual objects is in Wikidata (thanks to the work of Maarten Dammers and countless Wikipedians of course). Wait I will fisrt add the objects to the Wikidata list item and repost the results here, maybe it will be clearer for you then what I mean.
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 3:27 PM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:
Yes, but there are other halls certainly who are not a monument. If you start generating lists it should just be the heritage status, and then split over city for example.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:54 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, but broadly speaking this is also the reason the object made it into the Rijksmonument list to begin with (the reason it was chosen for heritage status)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:
Very quickly (I am at work), no, the original function should not be the reason the object made it into the WLM list, the fact that it is a 'rijksmonument' and thus have a rijksmonument-id is the reason to make it in the list.
Regards,
André
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name
of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name
of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com
wrote:
Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk
wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael, I guess I don't quite follow you. When you say "English, Scottish, Welsh and NI" are you referring to different languages? Are all items available for WLM participation through a mobile "nearby" feature during the month of september to english and welsh speakers?
To be clear, I am just a WLM participant and will not update any other lists - I just made those edits to illustrate my argument for using the Wikidata list items (which don't seem to serve any purpose right now). Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote:
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske < magnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:
Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Jane
As there are good Wikidata entries for the UK, but for no other countries so far as I know, it would be sensible to use those as the basis for building some general, international, tools. Magnus has kindly offered to work on that, on the basis that the community can agree on something of wide applicability and not just country by country.
As of now, there is a tool to find monuments nearby and to upload images to Commons, but it only works in English and for countries that have data items in Wikidata.
I fully agree with you that we now need to start using the Wikidata items and to extend what we have to other countries and languages.
Where would the best place be to work on collaboratively defining the functionality of the tools we want? A page on Wikidata or on Commons?
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:19, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Michael, I guess I don't quite follow you. When you say "English, Scottish, Welsh and NI" are you referring to different languages? Are all items available for WLM participation through a mobile "nearby" feature during the month of september to english and welsh speakers?
To be clear, I am just a WLM participant and will not update any other lists - I just made those edits to illustrate my argument for using the Wikidata list items (which don't seem to serve any purpose right now). Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote: Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
> So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of > your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Dear Jane,
When it comes to monuments as in many things the UK is a federation. Michael was referring to the four different national bodies that the "English, Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish" lists will have come from.
Regards
Jonathan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:19, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Michael, I guess I don't quite follow you. When you say "English, Scottish, Welsh and NI" are you referring to different languages? Are all items available for WLM participation through a mobile "nearby" feature during the month of september to english and welsh speakers?
To be clear, I am just a WLM participant and will not update any other lists - I just made those edits to illustrate my argument for using the Wikidata list items (which don't seem to serve any purpose right now). Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:05 PM, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote: Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
> So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of > your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
As one of the Wikipedians who has been adding images and commons categories to the lists of English listed buildings currently on Wikipedia I rather hope that if the lists on Wikipedia are updated from Wikidata the update will go both ways, and Wikidata will import the additional work on Wikipedia.
Regards
Jonathan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:05, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote:
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Jonathan, You email is a perfect example of an editor workflow that predates Wikidata and should be adjusted. I suggest that we should change all such workflows such that any and all updates regarding images on commons should be going the other way around than they do today. So for example, add or replace the new or better image to the Wikidata item and have a bot update this change in the Wikipedia list and do not expect it to work the other way around. Bots will be much happier working from WIkidata than from Commons or Wikipedia, for reasons which should be obvious to all subscribers of this list by now.
Of course, there is no other way of doing it yet, which is why we need to work on this. Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 1:40 PM, WereSpielChequers < werespielchequers@gmail.com> wrote:
As one of the Wikipedians who has been adding images and commons categories to the lists of English listed buildings currently on Wikipedia I rather hope that if the lists on Wikipedia are updated from Wikidata the update will go both ways, and Wikidata will import the additional work on Wikipedia.
Regards
Jonathan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:05, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote:
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske < magnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:
Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Replying to several points:
Yes, better tools, I'm all for that :-)
Jane, the "has part" list you made just duplicates effort that is already done. It's about as messy as Wikipedia lists. If we really want "has part", fill it with bots, though I think that would be a bad idea as well. Tools can order lists any way you like, by name, coordinate (closeness to a point or whatnot), or any other property that is common to the items being sorted.
WereSpielChequers, I do respect the work that was done with manual lists on Wikipedia, but IMO they should be moved to Wikidata. By that, I mean their contents should be carefully copied to Wikidata, then the lists should be replaced by automatically generated ones, by bot and/or external display tool. There should only be one master copy, on Wikidata. "Syncing" between sites and technologies is hard enough to do once; on a continued basis, it is Madness (see the uppercase M? That's how mad it is!)
All: The tools I wrote so far that are used in WLM are either "working demos", or generic tools (like autolist). If they are not to your liking, I don't take it personally. But don't for a second think "this is the best we can do". As Jane said, people (users) here tend to be silent, so I throw something out there and see what sticks. Now that you have an idea of what can be done (at the very least), I think it is time to brainstorm a tool most people would be happy with (caveat feature-creep and design-by-committee and all that).
I hear the Python-based WLM tool is ported to Labs. I haven't worked with that, but I think it's good to have continuity there. Even if we run primarily on Wikidata, it could serve as a staging and management area; syncing Wikidata to its database would be orders of magnitude better than with Wikipedia manual lists.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:40 PM WereSpielChequers < werespielchequers@gmail.com> wrote:
As one of the Wikipedians who has been adding images and commons categories to the lists of English listed buildings currently on Wikipedia I rather hope that if the lists on Wikipedia are updated from Wikidata the update will go both ways, and Wikidata will import the additional work on Wikipedia.
Regards
Jonathan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:05, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote:
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske < magnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:
Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition < wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org>
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here:
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett < andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:
On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the
name of
your identifier used in WLM>.
I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English):
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435as done, for example, on:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Thanks Michael,
If the lists are migrated to Wikidata and there is one master there then I guess I will shift some of my editing to Wikidata. I agree that this makes logical sense for experienced wikimedians. I just hope that new photographers coming for a photography contest to help Wikipedia don't find the combination of Wikidata, Commons and Wikipedia a little over complex.
On a separate note I suppose that such a move of Wikipedia edits to Wikidata will further worry those who obsess about the perceived drop in the raw edit count on Wikipedia.
Regards
Jonathan / WereSpielChequers
On 30 Jul 2015, at 12:54, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote:
Replying to several points:
Yes, better tools, I'm all for that :-)
Jane, the "has part" list you made just duplicates effort that is already done. It's about as messy as Wikipedia lists. If we really want "has part", fill it with bots, though I think that would be a bad idea as well. Tools can order lists any way you like, by name, coordinate (closeness to a point or whatnot), or any other property that is common to the items being sorted.
WereSpielChequers, I do respect the work that was done with manual lists on Wikipedia, but IMO they should be moved to Wikidata. By that, I mean their contents should be carefully copied to Wikidata, then the lists should be replaced by automatically generated ones, by bot and/or external display tool. There should only be one master copy, on Wikidata. "Syncing" between sites and technologies is hard enough to do once; on a continued basis, it is Madness (see the uppercase M? That's how mad it is!)
All: The tools I wrote so far that are used in WLM are either "working demos", or generic tools (like autolist). If they are not to your liking, I don't take it personally. But don't for a second think "this is the best we can do". As Jane said, people (users) here tend to be silent, so I throw something out there and see what sticks. Now that you have an idea of what can be done (at the very least), I think it is time to brainstorm a tool most people would be happy with (caveat feature-creep and design-by-committee and all that).
I hear the Python-based WLM tool is ported to Labs. I haven't worked with that, but I think it's good to have continuity there. Even if we run primarily on Wikidata, it could serve as a staging and management area; syncing Wikidata to its database would be orders of magnitude better than with Wikipedia manual lists.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:40 PM WereSpielChequers werespielchequers@gmail.com wrote: As one of the Wikipedians who has been adding images and commons categories to the lists of English listed buildings currently on Wikipedia I rather hope that if the lists on Wikipedia are updated from Wikidata the update will go both ways, and Wikidata will import the additional work on Wikipedia.
Regards
Jonathan
On 30 Jul 2015, at 11:05, Michael Maggs michael@maggs.name wrote:
Hi Jane
I've not been following closely what you're doing here, but I assume it is the updating of the existing Wikidata items for UK listed buildings rather than the creation of new ones?
As part of WLM last year, we obtained updated copies of the definitive lists from the English, Scottish, Welsh and NI listing bodies, as well as the scheduled ancient monuments records. Magnus uploaded all of the ancient monument and the grade I and II* listed buildings direct to Wikidata - around 80,000 records if I remember rightly.
We ran the WLM contest in the UK directly from these Wikidata records without going via Wikipedia at all. The old UK monuments database dates from before all that work. It is no longer useful and can be deleted.
If there are inconsistencies between Wikidata and Wikipedia regarding these lists, Wikipedia needs to be corrected/updated.
Happy to discuss in more detail if you'd like to contact me off list.
Michael
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Michael
On 30 Jul 2015, at 10:59, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Well I think your reasoning is what has kept us from doing this, and last year I would have agreed with you. However, let me begin by telling a story: one of the problems we have with filling the WLM lists in general is that we have very few wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas near their home, but oddly, we have lots and lots of wiki(p/m)edians who take pictures in remote rural areas while on vacation (near or not to the homes of other wiki(p/m)edians apparently).
Today we have no unified WLM interface for wiki(p/m)edians to join WLM in any other language-pedia than their own, and I feel this is an unnecessary barrier to entry of potential WLM contributions.
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Magnus Manske magnusmanske@googlemail.com wrote: Ah, do we really want to duplicate information like this? The individual items already have "heritage status: Grade I listed structure" or somesuch. Manually curating a list on Q6646074 seems pointless when we can auto-generate it.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 10:00 AM Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: So now, for the Birmingham list (first link in the mail below), I added the first few monuments to the Wikidata item for this list here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6646074
I used "has part" but maybe there should be a property "list item" or somesuch thing? ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com Date: Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 1:03 PM Subject: Re: [Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata To: Wiki Loves Monuments Photograph Competition wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
OK I am now looking at your Q number Q5642705 and I see that it is a hall, so I expect it to be an instance of hall, but it's not and it's an instance of architectural structure. This item has an enwiki Wikipedia article and when I click what links here I see the WLM list here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Listed_buildings_in_Birmingham Here I see only 4 columns - name, grade, date and architect
An item that is also a hall in NL is a water board building called a gemeenlandshuis. Here is an example item https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2847105 This is an instance of gemeenlandshuis which in turn is a subclass of hall.
On the Dutch Wikipedia when I click what links here I see the link to the WLM list here: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lijst_van_rijksmonumenten_in_Haarlemmerliede_e... This list has eight columns - name, original function, date, architect, location, coordinates, WLM ID, photo
The column headings should be coming from the monuments database, and the original function should be the reason the object made it into the WLM list.
I think both of these items should be part of a corresponding list on Wikidata. When I click what links here on Wikidata I see nothing that takes me to WLM. The only clue is the property P1435 for the British Q and property P359 for the Dutch Q.
Maybe we should augment the corresponding list items with their members so that when you click what links here you are taken to the Q number of of the list item? This effectively migrates the lists to Wikidata
> On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 12:42 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: > On 26 July 2015 at 07:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote: > > > So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of > > your identifier used in WLM>. > > I believe that method has been deprecated, and it is preferred to use > a property P1435 ("heritage status" in English): > > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1435 > > as done, for example, on: > > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5642705 > > -- > Andy Mabbett > @pigsonthewing > http://pigsonthewing.org.uk > > _______________________________________________ > Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list > WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments > http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Hi all,
Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together.
On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier.
It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Nicolas, Your mail makes my Wikidatan heart beat with delight! Yes, this is definitely the direction we need to go, but sadly, not all Wikipedias will adjust their policies at the same rate.
I think we should start by getting this conversation off this mailing list and start to work on some project pages on Wikidata. Right now we only have these: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:Cultural_WikiProjects
There is no "Wiki Loves Monuments" page yet but there should be a whole category, like what we have for SoaP here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings
My original mail in this thread is about moving the monuments db which is currently here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Monuments_database
We need to split that up and move it to Wikidata in all its bits and bobs. Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together.
On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier.
It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-30 14:36 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com:
Nicolas, Your mail makes my Wikidatan heart beat with delight! Yes, this is definitely the direction we need to go, but sadly, not all Wikipedias will adjust their policies at the same rate.
Thank you.
I believe/hope it's just a matter of time.
I think we should start by getting this conversation off this mailing list and start to work on some project pages on Wikidata. Right now we only have these: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:Cultural_WikiProjects
True.
Probably on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage
We started a https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_historiq... for France, maybe other countries should start one too since every country is different.
There is no "Wiki Loves Monuments" page yet but there should be a whole category, like what we have for SoaP here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings
This porject is mad (in a good way). I lack time but that could be a great idea to do the same for monuments !
My original mail in this thread is about moving the monuments db which is
currently here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Monuments_database
Sadly this project seems a bit dead...
Plus, for France, as we started the import semi-automatically and semi-manually, it's now harder for the bots to import the last half of french monuments :s
We need to split that up and move it to Wikidata in all its bits and bobs.
Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together.
On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier.
It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_WLM
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-30 14:36 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com:
Nicolas, Your mail makes my Wikidatan heart beat with delight! Yes, this is definitely the direction we need to go, but sadly, not all Wikipedias will adjust their policies at the same rate.
Thank you.
I believe/hope it's just a matter of time.
I think we should start by getting this conversation off this mailing list and start to work on some project pages on Wikidata. Right now we only have these: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:Cultural_WikiProjects
True.
Probably on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage
We started a https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_historiq... for France, maybe other countries should start one too since every country is different.
There is no "Wiki Loves Monuments" page yet but there should be a whole category, like what we have for SoaP here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings
This porject is mad (in a good way). I lack time but that could be a great idea to do the same for monuments !
My original mail in this thread is about moving the monuments db which is
currently here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Monuments_database
Sadly this project seems a bit dead...
Plus, for France, as we started the import semi-automatically and semi-manually, it's now harder for the bots to import the last half of french monuments :s
We need to split that up and move it to Wikidata in all its bits and bobs.
Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together.
On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier.
It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Hi all,
In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of. * Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial.
* Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get this completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. There will be communities that want to choose themselves which photo they want to show in their monument list (instead the photo from Wikidata), many descriptions of monuments in the list are altered and have footnotes and internal links, many descriptions and other fields are edited/expanded/updated, while Wikidata shows a different text or Wikidata has not the possibility to contain certain complex data. And the majority of users on Wikipedia experience Wikidata as too difficult to easily work with (seeing the Dutch community). (These are just a few issues of a lot more. And this is of course not specifically WLM, but generic.)
I think that the ability to edit the lists in ways Wikidata can't handle, is especially wanted on Wikipedias of the local language. At the same time I think that we need to work to the situation that for example monuments from the Netherlands can be shown on a list in the Japanese Wikipedia and many others. Maintaining lists in 200+ Wikipedias is not possible I think, so the idea of a centralised database is needed, but needs more thinking about how this can work in practise. Another issue there is, is that Wikipedia is built on being able to click on top of the page and edit it without having to struggle with codes. Their are and will be a lot of Wikipedias where it is not acceptable to put a large amount of codes in the main namespace. A solution for that is simple, like categories, lua, portals, etc automated lists need their own namespace, like a list namespace. Then the article namespace remains freely editable and at the same time the information of automated lists is available in the local Wikipedia in the local language.
* Having all monuments in Wikidata: I am not sure if anyone mentioned this, but this should be the first step and only when this is completed we can think of further steps. And then I assume all the data of the database can be added to Wikidata, I am not sure if this is possible. Nevertheless I think all the monuments should have an item in Wikidata. For some countries this is the case already, for most countries this seems not the case. For these monuments in Wikidata we need to set some criteria. There are multiple criteria to be set, but one of them is at least to have **every** monument in Wikidata having a unique identifier. Also all monuments in Wikidata need additional information to be able to identify a monument in Wikidata as a monument on location. These include address, coordinates, municipality or other administrative territorial entity (this should be the lowest level possible), type of monument, and more. And there are more criteria that need to be set before it can be used worldwide.
If it is not possible to set for every monument a unique ID, Wikidata is not suitable for usage in Wiki Loves Monuments. A unique identifier for each monument is crucial throughout the whole infrastructure, the infrastructure has been built on this.
* Lists, rows in lists, articles about an individual monument on Wikipedia, categories on Commons and Wikidata items all need to be connected with each other. I think it is already possible for a part in Wikidata. However, this is far from ready to be used. Adding information to Wikidata is great, and that is what many people do, but there is a high need for connecting Wikidata items with for example categories on Commons. For any future tooling, scripts, gadgets, etc, this is needed in general, but specific for WLM too. The importance of this part is so much underestimated.
Greetings, Romaine
2015-07-30 15:43 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_WLM
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:45 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-30 14:36 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com:
Nicolas, Your mail makes my Wikidatan heart beat with delight! Yes, this is definitely the direction we need to go, but sadly, not all Wikipedias will adjust their policies at the same rate.
Thank you.
I believe/hope it's just a matter of time.
I think we should start by getting this conversation off this mailing list and start to work on some project pages on Wikidata. Right now we only have these: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:Cultural_WikiProjects
True.
Probably on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage
We started a https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_historiq... for France, maybe other countries should start one too since every country is different.
There is no "Wiki Loves Monuments" page yet but there should be a whole category, like what we have for SoaP here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings
This porject is mad (in a good way). I lack time but that could be a great idea to do the same for monuments !
My original mail in this thread is about moving the monuments db which is
currently here: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Monuments_database
Sadly this project seems a bit dead...
Plus, for France, as we started the import semi-automatically and semi-manually, it's now harder for the bots to import the last half of french monuments :s
We need to split that up and move it to Wikidata in all its bits and bobs.
Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 2:26 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Just an example how Wikipédia and Wikidata can work together.
On the french Wikipédia, the template:Infobox_Monument already use Wikidata date. For example, on https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manoir_de_Saint-Armel on the infobox, you can see a little +/- sign after the patrimonial status, the country and the coordinates that redirect to the Wikidata corresponding properties to make edition easier.
It's a bit early but in the end, all the Wikipédia lists will come from Wikidata (and not from lists on Wikidata, from separate items for each lines of the lists). We have to wait until 1. the data are all imported in Wikidata (in progress, done for some countries and not started for others ; roughly 50 % done for France but we started with the easy ones so we're kind of stuck right now...) then 2. the templates, tools and modules in the Wikipédias to be adapted.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-31 3:25 GMT+02:00 Romaine Wiki romaine.wiki@gmail.com:
Hi all,
In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of.
- Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will
not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial.
True.
* Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get this
completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. There will be communities that want to choose themselves which photo they want to show in their monument list (instead the photo from Wikidata), many descriptions of monuments in the list are altered and have footnotes and internal links, many descriptions and other fields are edited/expanded/updated, while Wikidata shows a different text or Wikidata has not the possibility to contain certain complex data. And the majority of users on Wikipedia experience Wikidata as too difficult to easily work with (seeing the Dutch community). (These are just a few issues of a lot more. And this is of course not specifically WLM, but generic.)
« completely maintained only in Wikidata » is maybe a fairytale but for me the goal is more : « mainly centralised on Wikidata ».
Did you take a look at the example on frwp I gave? The french community already use Wikidata (for monuments, for people, etc.). Wikidata are *never* forced on frwp (that's a very bad idea and bad practice), you can always use a local value instead of the wikidata value. Sure it's not always perfect - and it took a long time and a lot of explanations and efforts - and some frwp users are still grumbling and complaining but globally it works fine. The grumblers leave the wikidatan in peace and even collaborate quite peacefully ;) No clash here on frwp.
I think that the ability to edit the lists in ways Wikidata can't handle, is especially wanted on Wikipedias of the local language. At the same time I think that we need to work to the situation that for example monuments from the Netherlands can be shown on a list in the Japanese Wikipedia and many others. Maintaining lists in 200+ Wikipedias is not possible I think, so the idea of a centralised database is needed, but needs more thinking about how this can work in practise. Another issue there is, is that Wikipedia is built on being able to click on top of the page and edit it without having to struggle with codes. Their are and will be a lot of Wikipedias where it is not acceptable to put a large amount of codes in the main namespace. A solution for that is simple, like categories, lua, portals, etc automated lists need their own namespace, like a list namespace. Then the article namespace remains freely editable and at the same time the information of automated lists is available in the local Wikipedia in the local language.
With Wikidata, there is actually less code visible in the article (and thanks to the VisualEditor it's even less visible).
* Having all monuments in Wikidata: I am not sure if anyone mentioned this,
but this should be the first step and only when this is completed we can think of further steps. And then I assume all the data of the database can be added to Wikidata, I am not sure if this is possible. Nevertheless I think all the monuments should have an item in Wikidata. For some countries this is the case already, for most countries this seems not the case. For these monuments in Wikidata we need to set some criteria. There are multiple criteria to be set, but one of them is at least to have **every** monument in Wikidata having a unique identifier. Also all monuments in Wikidata need additional information to be able to identify a monument in Wikidata as a monument on location. These include address, coordinates, municipality or other administrative territorial entity (this should be the lowest level possible), type of monument, and more. And there are more criteria that need to be set before it can be used worldwide.
If it is not possible to set for every monument a unique ID, Wikidata is not suitable for usage in Wiki Loves Monuments. A unique identifier for each monument is crucial throughout the whole infrastructure, the infrastructure has been built on this.
When there is no external ID, can't the QXXX ID of Wikidata items be used ?
- Lists, rows in lists, articles about an individual monument on
Wikipedia, categories on Commons and Wikidata items all need to be connected with each other. I think it is already possible for a part in Wikidata. However, this is far from ready to be used. Adding information to Wikidata is great, and that is what many people do, but there is a high need for connecting Wikidata items with for example categories on Commons. For any future tooling, scripts, gadgets, etc, this is needed in general, but specific for WLM too. The importance of this part is so much underestimated.
True.
For instances, on the 18k items about french monument right now on Wikidata, around 6k don't have a Commons category (P373). But mostly because there is no Commons categories, so we're creating them by hand when needed and appropriate; and again it takes time, a lot of time !
But it's not because it's difficult and complex that it can't be done!
In many ways, I find Wikidata easier than Wikipedia and that Wikidata will make life easier for Wikipedians.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
I agree with Nicolas on this, Romaine. WLM is by nature a place where newbies create userids on Commons, not on Wikipedia. For true Commonists, a step from Commons to Wikidata is easier than the step from Commons to Wikipedia.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 9:32 AM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-31 3:25 GMT+02:00 Romaine Wiki romaine.wiki@gmail.com:
Hi all,
In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of.
- Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will
not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial.
True.
- Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get
this completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. There will be communities that want to choose themselves which photo they want to show in their monument list (instead the photo from Wikidata), many descriptions of monuments in the list are altered and have footnotes and internal links, many descriptions and other fields are edited/expanded/updated, while Wikidata shows a different text or Wikidata has not the possibility to contain certain complex data. And the majority of users on Wikipedia experience Wikidata as too difficult to easily work with (seeing the Dutch community). (These are just a few issues of a lot more. And this is of course not specifically WLM, but generic.)
« completely maintained only in Wikidata » is maybe a fairytale but for me the goal is more : « mainly centralised on Wikidata ».
Did you take a look at the example on frwp I gave? The french community already use Wikidata (for monuments, for people, etc.). Wikidata are *never* forced on frwp (that's a very bad idea and bad practice), you can always use a local value instead of the wikidata value. Sure it's not always perfect - and it took a long time and a lot of explanations and efforts - and some frwp users are still grumbling and complaining but globally it works fine. The grumblers leave the wikidatan in peace and even collaborate quite peacefully ;) No clash here on frwp.
I think that the ability to edit the lists in ways Wikidata can't handle, is especially wanted on Wikipedias of the local language. At the same time I think that we need to work to the situation that for example monuments from the Netherlands can be shown on a list in the Japanese Wikipedia and many others. Maintaining lists in 200+ Wikipedias is not possible I think, so the idea of a centralised database is needed, but needs more thinking about how this can work in practise. Another issue there is, is that Wikipedia is built on being able to click on top of the page and edit it without having to struggle with codes. Their are and will be a lot of Wikipedias where it is not acceptable to put a large amount of codes in the main namespace. A solution for that is simple, like categories, lua, portals, etc automated lists need their own namespace, like a list namespace. Then the article namespace remains freely editable and at the same time the information of automated lists is available in the local Wikipedia in the local language.
With Wikidata, there is actually less code visible in the article (and thanks to the VisualEditor it's even less visible).
- Having all monuments in Wikidata: I am not sure if anyone mentioned
this, but this should be the first step and only when this is completed we can think of further steps. And then I assume all the data of the database can be added to Wikidata, I am not sure if this is possible. Nevertheless I think all the monuments should have an item in Wikidata. For some countries this is the case already, for most countries this seems not the case. For these monuments in Wikidata we need to set some criteria. There are multiple criteria to be set, but one of them is at least to have **every** monument in Wikidata having a unique identifier. Also all monuments in Wikidata need additional information to be able to identify a monument in Wikidata as a monument on location. These include address, coordinates, municipality or other administrative territorial entity (this should be the lowest level possible), type of monument, and more. And there are more criteria that need to be set before it can be used worldwide.
If it is not possible to set for every monument a unique ID, Wikidata is not suitable for usage in Wiki Loves Monuments. A unique identifier for each monument is crucial throughout the whole infrastructure, the infrastructure has been built on this.
When there is no external ID, can't the QXXX ID of Wikidata items be used ?
- Lists, rows in lists, articles about an individual monument on
Wikipedia, categories on Commons and Wikidata items all need to be connected with each other. I think it is already possible for a part in Wikidata. However, this is far from ready to be used. Adding information to Wikidata is great, and that is what many people do, but there is a high need for connecting Wikidata items with for example categories on Commons. For any future tooling, scripts, gadgets, etc, this is needed in general, but specific for WLM too. The importance of this part is so much underestimated.
True.
For instances, on the 18k items about french monument right now on Wikidata, around 6k don't have a Commons category (P373). But mostly because there is no Commons categories, so we're creating them by hand when needed and appropriate; and again it takes time, a lot of time !
But it's not because it's difficult and complex that it can't be done!
In many ways, I find Wikidata easier than Wikipedia and that Wikidata will make life easier for Wikipedians.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of.
- Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will
not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial.
+10 Don't start thinking about migrations, this is not something that should be started before November.
- Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get
this completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. (...)
An important point to be taken into account is that Wikidata is *hard* to edit. I can point to a wiki-based list, and no matter the template and curly braces perhaps looking ugly, it can be quickly grasped. I'm not sure we could ensure the same storing things in wikidata. And WLM in many countries is run by organisers that are not exactly wiki experts, much less wikidata ones...
PS: Jean, send a mail if you need help with erfgoedbot.
Yes I can see that it would seem counter-productive to work on an overhaul of the current system in the middle of a competition. My experience in the Wikiverse has taught me two important lessons however: 1) Never assume that I can influence the workload of any other Wiki(p/m)edian 2) Never assume that I know what other Wiki(p/m)edians are able and willing to do
That said, I am always interested when I notice things happening in the Wikiverse that seem relevant to whatever it is that I am doing, wherever I am doing it. I am thinking about WLM now because we are gearing up to it, so it follows that I think about how to improve it, both for me personally as a participant, and for me personally as a Wikidatan.
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 5:44 PM, Platonides platonides@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jul 31, 2015 at 3:25 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.wiki@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
In this discussion I see multiple things being suggested, or maybe only thought of.
- Moving the monument database to Wikidata: for the 2015 edition it will
not be possible because of the amount of workload. If it is possible for the 2016 edition I do not know, but keep in mind that there is more needed then only moving some data from location A to location B. There is a complete infrastructure behind it that needs to work. Let's not think too light hearted about this, the infrastructure is vital and crucial.
+10 Don't start thinking about migrations, this is not something that should be started before November.
- Lists of monuments maintained in one place: sorry to say, but to get
this completely maintained only in Wikidata is a fairytale. Not because it is not possible, but because there are people involved and there are requirements set for articles/lists by communities. From the Wikidata perspective it sounds perhaps ideal to maintain it in one place, but then the (whole) Wikipedia perspective is missing. Then you can say that you edit Wikipedia a lot, but then you missed the point. There is a big clash between some users who have the Wikidata perspective who think a lot of codes in Wikipedia articles is okay, and users from the Wikipedia perspective who think all those codes in articles are not okay. Wikipedia is strongly built from the perspective that anyone can edit articles, and this is something that made Wikipedia big and is often considered an important characteristic of Wikipedia. Of course you can say that users can edit Wikidata when there are codes in Wikipedia, but that is thought too simple for multiple reasons. (...)
An important point to be taken into account is that Wikidata is *hard* to edit. I can point to a wiki-based list, and no matter the template and curly braces perhaps looking ugly, it can be quickly grasped. I'm not sure we could ensure the same storing things in wikidata. And WLM in many countries is run by organisers that are not exactly wiki experts, much less wikidata ones...
PS: Jean, send a mail if you need help with erfgoedbot.
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
Then, isn't the solution to build better tools instead of duplicating the information ?
Maybe something like Crotos ( http://zone47.com/crotos/ ) but for monument. @Magnus : sorting Autolist results wood be great (I'm too puzzled by the « haphazard order »).
@Jane : It's kind of counterintuitive but in the long and the short terms, manual list are a harder and messier way to build list (that's why Marteen build the Erfgoed databse in the first place) and that's a barrier to entry too.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Nicolas, Exactly. What we have never done is create use cases and build tools from that. Our users (if you can call Wiki(p/m)edia readers that) are an unusually silent bunch. Jane
On Thu, Jul 30, 2015 at 12:17 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
The advantage of using the Wikidata list items for this purpose is that
you have some control in presentation, whereas live queries have a haphazard list order based on date-of-creation-of-the-Wikidata-item
Then, isn't the solution to build better tools instead of duplicating the information ?
Maybe something like Crotos ( http://zone47.com/crotos/ ) but for monument. @Magnus : sorting Autolist results wood be great (I'm too puzzled by the « haphazard order »).
@Jane : It's kind of counterintuitive but in the long and the short terms, manual list are a harder and messier way to build list (that's why Marteen build the Erfgoed databse in the first place) and that's a barrier to entry too.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 08:42:
Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling.
As is well known, Italy has no official list of cultural heritage items and in general no functioning way to discover, document or use cultural heritage. https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Italian_cultural_heritage_on_the_Wikimedia_p...
Therefore, WLM-IT lists are hand-made with data shared voluntarily by the (few hundreds) supporting entities and use self-made identifiers. How can such a thing fit in Wikidata?
Nemo
A similar problem exists for large parts of Germany (mostly former East Germany municipalities). The answer is simple. Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you go back in time to the latest usable list (usually made up before WWI during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make inventory lists of heritage sites).
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:13 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 08:42:
Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling.
As is well known, Italy has no official list of cultural heritage items and in general no functioning way to discover, document or use cultural heritage.
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Italian_cultural_heritage_on_the_Wikimedia_p...
Therefore, WLM-IT lists are hand-made with data shared voluntarily by the (few hundreds) supporting entities and use self-made identifiers. How can such a thing fit in Wikidata?
Nemo
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 13:36:
Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you go back in time to the latest usable list
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve: 1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness, 2) the proper way to state something is a cultural heritage item needs to be confirmed, using P31/P1435 and intermediate items or subclasses or whatever; 3) it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than the name; 4) it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with an on-wiki table; 5) it must be ok to use a self-hosted PDF (a letter from the entity) as source, as well as to lack any source for some months or years until we are able to publish said PDF; 6) it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations; 7) there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items by region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of "municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435, P279 or whatever); 8) as for Ukraine, there needs to be a way to mark location in a single string which may contain anything, not necessarily a street address, while P969 instructions are currently lacking; 9+) probably other things I'm forgetting now.
Of course we could also decide that WMIT doesn't use the "monuments database" in this form as we didn't use the toolserver database. :) I realise our situation is too messy to account for.
(usually made up before WWI during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make inventory lists of heritage sites).
I'm afraid this fashion has yet to reach Italy, one century later. Can Germany please send us another Winckelmann?
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 14:23:
The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q number itself.
This would not be manageable with the system that WLM-IT used until last year, where the identifier itself contain certain information (like the municipality code) and other parts of the process relied on this. Cristian Cenci would need to comment on whether that's still a requirement.
Nemo
No worries about Winckelman, you can use the perfectly decent German Baedeker guides from before 1912 for Italy - most of the older visitor attractions are in there. Basically as long as you can source the item to any published list of note you're good to go.
Rome was not built in a day. Wikidata is a wiki like any other. You can go start your d:Wikidata:WLMIT project pages and recreate your lists that correspond to anything you have built on itwiki and slowly add Q numbers to each item. Items with just a name would be problematic, so I would start with everything you have locations for first. Later "instance of" and type of heritage object and so forth can be added.
You can add multiple statements per item while creating items with quick statements. See here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Cultural_heritage
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 5:34 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 13:36:
Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you go back in time to the latest usable list
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness, 2) the proper way to state something is a cultural heritage item needs to be confirmed, using P31/P1435 and intermediate items or subclasses or whatever; 3) it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than the name; 4) it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with an on-wiki table; 5) it must be ok to use a self-hosted PDF (a letter from the entity) as source, as well as to lack any source for some months or years until we are able to publish said PDF; 6) it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations; 7) there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items by region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of "municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435, P279 or whatever); 8) as for Ukraine, there needs to be a way to mark location in a single string which may contain anything, not necessarily a street address, while P969 instructions are currently lacking; 9+) probably other things I'm forgetting now.
Of course we could also decide that WMIT doesn't use the "monuments database" in this form as we didn't use the toolserver database. :) I realise our situation is too messy to account for.
(usually made up before WWI
during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make inventory lists of heritage sites).
I'm afraid this fashion has yet to reach Italy, one century later. Can Germany please send us another Winckelmann?
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 14:23:
The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q number itself.
This would not be manageable with the system that WLM-IT used until last year, where the identifier itself contain certain information (like the municipality code) and other parts of the process relied on this. Cristian Cenci would need to comment on whether that's still a requirement.
Nemo
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
- it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than
the name;
No, this is not OK (and they may be deleted); but nor is it necessary.
- it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with an
on-wiki table;
Why?
- it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
It is.
- there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items by
region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of "municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435, P279 or whatever);
This is, I believe, possible. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Wikidata_lists/Items_with...
is built by a bot.
Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
If so, please fix the docs. "Uniqueness for a combination of a label and a description is a hard constraint that must be satisfied before a change can be saved." https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary
- it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than
the name;
No, this is not OK (and they may be deleted); but nor is it necessary.
How so? We often don't know more than the name-
- it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with an
on-wiki table;
Why?
Because that's the process used to add coordinates.
- it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
It is.
Needs to be verified with those who maintain the list (i.e. Cristian Cenci and WMIT secretariat).
This is, I believe, possible. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Wikidata_lists/Items_with_ORCIDsis built by a bot.
That's a very trivial query, on WDQ just claim[496]. The query I described is way more complex.
Nemo
2015-07-26 18:38 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
If so, please fix the docs. "Uniqueness for a combination of a label and a description is a hard constraint that must be satisfied before a change can be saved." https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary
This doc is right but you can use aliases.
3) it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than
the name;
No, this is not OK (and they may be deleted); but nor is it necessary.
How so? We often don't know more than the name-
Did you have an example? I find it hard to believe, can't you at least you can say where it is (at the minimum the country and idealy the city, the coordinates, etc.).
- it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with
an on-wiki table;
Why?
Because that's the process used to add coordinates.
- it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
It is.
Needs to be verified with those who maintain the list (i.e. Cristian Cenci and WMIT secretariat).
This is, I believe, possible. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Wikidata_lists/Items_with...
is built by a bot.
That's a very trivial query, on WDQ just claim[496]. The query I described is way more complex.
Can't Lua module deal with more complex query?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:44:
Did you have an example?
See an example list http://wlm.wikimedia.it/w/images/9/94/San_Michele.pdf
I find it hard to believe, can't you at least you can say where it is (at the minimum the country and idealy the city, the coordinates, etc.).
Coordinates absolutely not. City is not trivial, the institution holding the item may be anywhere. Country is probably easier, we only need to check for San Marino and Vatican :) ; but that's basically noise, doesn't say anything useful about the thing.
Nemo
On 26 July 2015 at 17:38, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Andy Mabbett, 26/07/2015 18:28:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
If so, please fix the docs. "Uniqueness for a combination of a label and a description is a hard constraint that must be satisfied before a change can be saved." https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary
We're at cross purposes. I read the slash in your "label/description" as "or", you mean"and". Achieving a unique combination of label AND description should not be beyond your resources.
Consider:
Label: St John's Church Description: A church in East Birmingham
Label: St John's Church Description: A church in North Birmingham
- it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than
the name;
No, this is not OK (and they may be deleted); but nor is it necessary.
How so? We often don't know more than the name-
You know that it's (say) a building or a protected monument, or both.
- it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with
an on-wiki table;
Why?
Because that's the process used to add coordinates.
That's a circular argument, and does not answer my question.
- it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
It is.
Needs to be verified with those who maintain the list (i.e. Cristian Cenci and WMIT secretariat).
No: it is. This is inarguable. I have done it, as have many others.
This is, I believe, possible. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Wikidata_lists/Items_with...
is built by a bot.
That's a very trivial query, on WDQ just claim[496]. The query I described is way more complex.
The principles apply.
2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want (see french label on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3533061 ). You just need to choose a primary one, is it a problem ?
- it must be fine to create items that contain no information other than
the name;
No, this is not OK (and they may be deleted); but nor is it necessary.
Why on Earth would someone like to tell nothing but the name ? A lot of properties are very easy to add (P31, P17, P1435, P131, etc.) ; plus, there is some semi-automatic tools to to that « en masse ».
- it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is
with an
on-wiki table;
Why?
Can't https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php do that ? (QuickStatements is a wonderful tool but I struggle a little to use it to its full extent).
- it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
It is.
- there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items by
region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of "municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435, P279
or
whatever);
This is, I believe, possible. For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Daniel_Mietchen/Wikidata_lists/Items_with...
is built by a bot.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:41:
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want (see french label on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3533061 ). You just need to choose a primary one, is it a problem ?
Yes it is a potential problem, think of name/label "Municipio" or "Duomo". The label could be made unique by adding the name of the institution somewhere, of course; no idea whether that's accepted, surely it's ugly (and a maintenance burden).
Why on Earth would someone like to tell nothing but the name ? A lot of properties are very easy to add (P31, P17, P1435, P131, etc.) ; plus, there is some semi-automatic tools to to that « en masse ».
The only thing we know about the items we can from institutions is that they were given by the institution. If this gives us a P31 statement or other for free, that might be something; otherwise, we have nothing to tell.
> 4) it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with an > on-wiki table; Why?Can't https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php do that ? (QuickStatements is a wonderful tool but I struggle a little to use it to its full extent).
Sounds unlikely. The user would need to produce a list of "Q#\tName\tP#\t", then manually enter the coordinates, then remove the name with a regex, then paste into the interface. Even my wikibase_csv.py script is easier than that. :) https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/166629/
On a wiki table, you just edit the whole table at once. If the thing was moved to Wikidata, we'd probably need some ad hoc tool to add coordinates to a list of items, if there isn't one yet.
Nemo
2015-07-26 18:52 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 18:41:
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want (see french label on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3533061 ). You just need to choose a primary one, is it a problem ?
Yes it is a potential problem, think of name/label "Municipio" or "Duomo". The label could be made unique by adding the name of the institution somewhere, of course; no idea whether that's accepted, surely it's ugly (and a maintenance burden).
I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of « Unique » in English? (I made the same confusion as a French speaker).
You have to choose one single label per item (except aliases) but this label could be use on multiple item. Hundreds of item could have the label « Municipio ». It is very common for the churches (look for « église Saint-Martin » in French).
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Well it is odd but true that when you have a name+label conflict you can adjust the label (add a bit more info) or just forget the label! We have lots and lots of items that are just "Portrait of a man" in some language with blank label
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:03 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:00:
I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of « Unique » in English?
I'm certain I'm not, but maybe the author of the glossary did (it was written by a German IIRC).
Nemo
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-26 19:05 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com:
Well it is odd but true that when you have a name+label conflict you can adjust the label (add a bit more info) or just forget the label! We have lots and lots of items that are just "Portrait of a man" in some language with blank label
True. Uniqueness of label+description is more a goal (and a pretty easy one) than a strong constraint. Plus, things can always be improved after, it's a wiki ;)
Cdlt, ~nicolas
2015-07-26 19:03 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:00:
I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of « Unique » in English?
I'm certain I'm not, but maybe the author of the glossary did (it was written by a German IIRC).
Is it clearer on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary/it ? Or maybe https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Label ?
Anyway, could you provide a clear example where you can't « satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness, » More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Many portrait painters have created portraits that are unattributed. So name= Portrait of a man and label= painting by Frans Hals is perfectly valid to have multiple times. In WLM terms, any large municipality is bound to have names like " House" multiple times per street and so on
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:09 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-26 19:03 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:00:
I'm a bit lost, are you not making a confusion about the meaning of « Unique » in English?
I'm certain I'm not, but maybe the author of the glossary did (it was written by a German IIRC).
Is it clearer on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Glossary/it ? Or maybe https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Label ?
Anyway, could you provide a clear example where you can't « satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness, » More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label. Again, this can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label or description (like "object authorised by institution X for WLM"), but first we need a policy, guideline or discussion to state this is ok for Wikidata.
Nemo
The official policy is "get started and see where your ship strands" (to use a Dutch term)
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 7:12 PM, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label. Again, this can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label or description (like "object authorised by institution X for WLM"), but first we need a policy, guideline or discussion to state this is ok for Wikidata.
Nemo
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-26 19:12 GMT+02:00 Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label.
Oh, ok... But how can the object be in WLM if there is no possible description? Is there Wikipédia articles or lists about these objects
Again, this can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label
or description (like "object authorised by institution X for WLM"), but first we need a policy, guideline or discussion to state this is ok for Wikidata.
Nemo
I'm sure it's ok ; you don't need a policy but you can start a discussion if you want.
P1435 could maybe use for "object authorised by institution X for WLM" and NO it's not noise, it's data!
Cdlt, ~nicolas
On 26 July 2015 at 18:12, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
Nicolas VIGNERON, 26/07/2015 19:09:
More explicitely, can you give two items where you are have to have the exact same label *and* description?
We don't have descriptions, so we're left only with label. Again, this can be worked around by adding some "noise" into either label or description (like "object authorised by institution X for WLM"), but first we need a policy, guideline or discussion to state this is ok for Wikidata.
You mint your own descriptions. Consider:
* Church in Milan * Heritage monument on Via Example in Rome
or indeed:
* object authorised by institution X for WLM
You need no prior "policy, guideline or discussion" to do this; it's core to Wikidata's functionality.
On 26 July 2015 at 17:41, Nicolas VIGNERON vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com wrote:
2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com wrote:
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want
No they are not. Both Q915614 and Q19654888 have the (en) label "St Paul's Church".
2015-07-26 20:21 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On 26 July 2015 at 17:41, Nicolas VIGNERON vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com wrote:
2015-07-26 18:28 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On 26 July 2015 at 16:34, Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki@gmail.com
wrote:
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
- the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
Wikidata does not require unique names.
Label are indeed unique but you can add as many alias as you want
No they are not. Both Q915614 and Q19654888 have the (en) label "St Paul's Church".
Yeah, it's probably my french, sorry...
In French, en:single and en:unique are both commonly translated as fr:unique...
What I mean is : there is one and only one label per item (which is called unique in french but apparently not in english ; sorry again).
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Hi, In Ukraine, we have two problems Wikidata is not able to deal so far: 1) Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same list, e.g. one list has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians? 2) Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street, house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery" or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata? In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate 70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who did its job pretty well in our case. Thanks, Mykola (NickK) Wikimedia Ukraine
--- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Jane Darnell" jane023@gmail.com Дата: 26 липня 2015, 08:42:43
Hi all, I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work. Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I expect that all large industrial complexes (such as the first airport, or the first steam-powered mill complex, or something like that) should reflect this infrastructure. So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>. This identifier of the form " German industrial heritage site", aka " Industriedenkmal " should be a subclass of Industrial Heritage Site, because it is not equivalent to industrial heritage sites anywhere else in the world. I see that this is not reflected yet in Q1569871 I didn't see this discussion anywhere and I tried to get this infrastructure started before the birth of Wikidata, but we really should finish the job now. Jane _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
On 26 July 2015 at 12:39, Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net wrote:
- Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same list, e.g. one list has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians?
No, but you could publish them/ have someone publish them.
- Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street,
house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery" or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata?
Give the coordinates.
In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate
70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who did its job pretty well in our case.
Yes; for instance QuickStatements.
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php
(Answering to two simultaneous emails immediately, sorry if someone is confused). Ok, those are great ideas but they are not quite feasible for 70,000 items. 1) Our IDs. It is not quite easy to publish somewhere in a reliable source a database of 70,000 items. Especially given that this is still work in progress - we are lacking many lists - thus we have only about a half of total number, as estimated number of monuments in Ukraine is between 120,000 and 150,000. So far no one managed to publish a database of over 20,000 monuments, thus ours is definitely the best one, but we can hardly imagine who can publish this. In addition, we do not have reliable sources (in terms of Wikipedia/Wikidata) that those objects are monuments - our usual sources are letters from local governments, in best case it's a PDF file, in worst case it looks like THIS http://toolserver.org.ua/132542.JPG Of course we can try to add something like "Wikimedia Ukraine ID", but we reasonably expect to see it rejected - we did not even publish our lists in the Main namespace for this reason. 2) Adresses. * First of all, there is no way we can have coordinates for all monuments - in one city it took about a week for a local resident to add coordinates to all monuments in his city - this requires advanced knowledge of local geography, like being able to distinguish "Central park" and "City park" * Secondly, P969 is an option - but we need it to be multilingual. In case of big cities, we will most likely have street names and we need to have a cyrillic (Ukrainian) and latinic (English) versions for them. In case of Crimea, we happen to have addresses in Ukrainian and in Russian separately and we would need to prefer to keep both if we transfer on Wikidata. * Thirdly, in some cases we have monuments located in an unknown village, i.e. a village that does not exist. In some cases it's a renamed villages (=we have an item for it), in some cases this village became a part of another village (=we change to this another village and put old village into address), in some cases it's an abandonned village (=we don't have an item for it), and in the worst case we do not know what it is (and we hope that a local resident will find it and fix it). * Finally, we can have just no address and two items with the same name (e.g. Church, Common grave, Burial mound) with ID as the only way to distinguish them. 3) Oh, and third problem, a more fundamental one. Will Wikidata be used as a duplicate of on-wiki database (like erfgoedbot's database) or a main source of data? In the second case we need an easy tool being able to: * retrieve all monuments in a given city / region (main way for people to find what they want to picture) * ...and filter monuments of a given type (e.g. monuments of architecture of national significance - we have 4 types and 3 subtypes) * ...and filter monuments built in a given year (FOP monitoring) * update all monuments in a given region (we update lists yearly once we receive new ones, but we do not want to overwrite edits by other users if they fix mistakes, so we need to *compare* and overwrite) * retrieve all monuments in a given region and modify them manually (e.g. add coordinates) All of this is rather easy to do with a wiki-based table, it is also rather easy to do with a good database, but we have a bad database, so what can we do with it? Thanks, Mykola --- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Andy Mabbett" andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk Дата: 26 липня 2015, 18:23:59
On 26 July 2015 at 12:39, Mykola Kozlenko < mycola-k@ukr.net > wrote: 1) Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same list, e.g. one list has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians? No, but you could publish them/ have someone publish them. 2) Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street, house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery" or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata? Give the coordinates.
In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate 70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who did its job pretty well in our case. Yes; for instance QuickStatements.
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php
2015-07-26 20:13 GMT+02:00 Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net:
(Answering to two simultaneous emails immediately, sorry if someone is confused).
Ok, those are great ideas but they are not quite feasible for 70,000 items.
- Our IDs. It is not quite easy to publish somewhere in a reliable source
a database of 70,000 items. Especially given that this is still work in progress - we are lacking many lists - thus we have only about a half of total number, as estimated number of monuments in Ukraine is between 120,000 and 150,000. So far no one managed to publish a database of over 20,000 monuments, thus ours is definitely the best one, but we can hardly imagine who can publish this.
In addition, we do not have reliable sources (in terms of Wikipedia/Wikidata) that those objects are monuments - our usual sources are letters from local governments, in best case it's a PDF file, in worst case it looks like THIS http://toolserver.org.ua/132542.JPG
Of course we can try to add something like "Wikimedia Ukraine ID", but we reasonably expect to see it rejected - we did not even publish our lists in the Main namespace for this reason.
Oo
In this case, can't you go the other way round and use the Wikidata QXXXX as your ID ?
- Adresses.
- First of all, there is no way we can have coordinates for all monuments
- in one city it took about a week for a local resident to add coordinates
to all monuments in his city - this requires advanced knowledge of local geography, like being able to distinguish "Central park" and "City park"
- Secondly, P969 is an option - but we need it to be multilingual. In case
of big cities, we will most likely have street names and we need to have a cyrillic (Ukrainian) and latinic (English) versions for them. In case of Crimea, we happen to have addresses in Ukrainian and in Russian separately and we would need to prefer to keep both if we transfer on Wikidata.
Can't you use P969 multiple times ?
- Thirdly, in some cases we have monuments located in an unknown village,
i.e. a village that does not exist. In some cases it's a renamed villages (=we have an item for it), in some cases this village became a part of another village (=we change to this another village and put old village into address), in some cases it's an abandonned village (=we don't have an item for it), and in the worst case we do not know what it is (and we hope that a local resident will find it and fix it).
Wikidata is used to deal with strange stuff like that; there is several ways to do it. See the P131 of https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1668992 for an example where the town was merge into an other one.
- Finally, we can have just no address and two items with the same name
(e.g. Church, Common grave, Burial mound) with ID as the only way to distinguish them.
Yes, you can have no adress. Maybe you can add other properties?
3) Oh, and third problem, a more fundamental one. *Will Wikidata be used as
a duplicate of on-wiki database (like erfgoedbot's database) or a main source of data?*
More likely the second case.
In the second case we need an easy tool being able to:
- retrieve all monuments in a given city / region (main way for people to
find what they want to picture)
Autolist can do that (all the protected monument in Rennes : http://tools.wmflabs.org/autolist/index.php?language=en&project=wikipedi... )
Maybe other tools can do it; it will be easier and better to build tools like that with Wikidata.
- ...and filter monuments of a given type (e.g. monuments of architecture
of national significance - we have 4 types and 3 subtypes)
same thing, if the data is in Wikidata
- ...and filter monuments built in a given year (FOP monitoring)
idem
- update all monuments in a given region (we update lists yearly once we
receive new ones, but we do not want to overwrite edits by other users if they fix mistakes, so we need to *compare* and overwrite)
That a bit more tricky but Autolist can help.
- retrieve all monuments in a given region and modify them manually (e.g.
add coordinates)
There is no tool to do all of that right now but it shouldn't be complicate to create.
You can retrieve the list with Autolist and modify them with QuickStatement.
All of this is rather easy to do with a wiki-based table, it is also rather easy to do with a good database, but we have a bad database, so what can we do with it?
Thanks, Mykola
--- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Andy Mabbett" andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk Дата: 26 липня 2015, 18:23:59
On 26 July 2015 at 12:39, Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net wrote:
- Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same list, e.g. one list has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians?
No, but you could publish them/ have someone publish them.
- Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street,
house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery" or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata?
Give the coordinates.
In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate 70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who did its job pretty well in our case.
Yes; for instance QuickStatements.
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/quick_statements.php
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing listWikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonumentshttp://www.wi...
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-26 13:39 GMT+02:00 Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net:
Hi,
In Ukraine, we have two problems Wikidata is not able to deal so far:
- Our monument IDs are the ones we invent ourselves. We have 4 types of
monuments times 27 regions (+1 nationwide list), some of these lists have identifiers, some not. Identifiers are not unique even within the same list, e.g. one list has a few monuments with identifier "1", and in total we have several dozens monuments with identifier "1". Thus our governmental IDs are pretty useless, but does Wikidata accept original IDs created by Wikimedians?
Oo. That's gonna be complex. Not sure how to deal with that. You can ask on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal for a property « Wiki monument ID » for creation but not sure if it will be accepted (in fact, pretty sure it won't but I think it's worth the try).
2) Many of our monuments do not have precise addresses like "city, street,
house number", but something like descriptions, e.g. "1.2 km north of the railway station, 500 m east of the road to (some village), 300 m west of the cemetery" or "in the centre of the village, in the park behind the shop". Is there a way to describe this on Wikidata?
It is a bit exotic but there will be no problem to use P969 for that : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P969 (it's a string type so you can put whatever you want).
In addition, we would be glad to know if there are any tools to migrate 70,000+ items to Wikidata, as doing this manually would be probably impossible... If not, we would be still interested in old good erfgoedbot who did its job pretty well in our case.
Same question for France. We have already a lot of monuments in Wikidata but not all of them (generally, all monuments with an article on fr.wp have an item on wikidata). We have a project on Wikidata : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_France/Monuments_historiq... but nobody there has a high wikidata-fu / technic skills.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Personally I see several challenges but also opportunities for WLM.
Technically this is a "change" to be managed. If it is managed in a right manner, it could open a new season for WLM.
As I know the data of monuments are not homogeneous and this is a risk for migrating data to a dedicated repository to Wikidata.
It has been a problem for the first WLM contests too.
IMHO the time is short, and I see as a dream the possibility to run an international contest AND to manage the import in WIkidata.
On 26.07.2015 08:42, Jane Darnell wrote:
Hi all, I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work. Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I expect that all large industrial complexes (such as the first airport, or the first steam-powered mill complex, or something like that) should reflect this infrastructure. So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>. This identifier of the form " German industrial heritage site", aka "Industriedenkmal https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industriedenkmal" should be a subclass of Industrial Heritage Site, because it is not equivalent to industrial heritage sites anywhere else in the world. I see that this is not reflected yet in Q1569871
I didn't see this discussion anywhere and I tried to get this infrastructure started before the birth of Wikidata, but we really should finish the job now. Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Oh yes, I definitely see advantages. I think the main thing is that if you have decent lists, you can use properties to assign a status with an identifier. If you don't then you should go ahead and create the item with whatever criteria you are using for the handmade lists (former residence of someone famous, former castle, former city gate, large natural rock formation used for some obsolete purpose - whatever!). The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q number itself.
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Ilario Valdelli valdelli@gmail.com wrote:
Personally I see several challenges but also opportunities for WLM.
Technically this is a "change" to be managed. If it is managed in a right manner, it could open a new season for WLM.
As I know the data of monuments are not homogeneous and this is a risk for migrating data to a dedicated repository to Wikidata.
It has been a problem for the first WLM contests too.
IMHO the time is short, and I see as a dream the possibility to run an international contest AND to manage the import in WIkidata.
On 26.07.2015 08:42, Jane Darnell wrote:
Hi all, I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work. Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I expect that all large industrial complexes (such as the first airport, or the first steam-powered mill complex, or something like that) should reflect this infrastructure. So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>. This identifier of the form " German industrial heritage site", aka "Industriedenkmal https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industriedenkmal" should be a subclass of Industrial Heritage Site, because it is not equivalent to industrial heritage sites anywhere else in the world. I see that this is not reflected yet in Q1569871
I didn't see this discussion anywhere and I tried to get this infrastructure started before the birth of Wikidata, but we really should finish the job now. Jane
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing listWikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonumentshttp://www.wi...
-- Ilario Valdelli Wikimedia CH Verein zur Förderung Freien Wissens Association pour l’avancement des connaissances libre Associazione per il sostegno alla conoscenza libera Switzerland - 8008 Zürich Tel: +41764821371http://www.wikimedia.ch
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Hi,
I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a picture only specified the ID. Scripts used that id to find the data of that monument and add categories like “rijksmonument in <city>” instead of just “rijksmonument”. Also if it was known from the monument database it was a windmill (for example) it would be categorised as such.
Another important one is making lists of id’s where in the lists there is no picture but there is a picture uploaded. Volunteers would then look at that list and add a picture to the list. This worked quite well for the motivation, because people made a picture, uploaded it, and a couple of days later the picture showed up in the list.
If we think about the future, we will need to think about this side as well. The first one is needed to make the pictures being able to be found and not just a bunch of pictures. The first one is doable I guess, but I fear a bit about the second one. Because the lists are not regularly imported, you don’t know if there is a picture, so we need a way to detect this. I believe there are properties to document a picture, so the storing isn’t the problem I guess.
Regards,
André
On 26 jul. 2015, at 08:42, Jane Darnell jane023@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all, I guess everyoe knows by now that the erfgoedbot will no longer work. Meanwhile, we should be migrating the entire infrastructure to Wikidata to enable the next generation of tooling. So for example, if your country has legislation regarding the protection of industrial monuments, then I expect that all large industrial complexes (such as the first airport, or the first steam-powered mill complex, or something like that) should reflect this infrastructure. So such wikipedia articles should be labelled " instance of" <the name of your identifier used in WLM>. This identifier of the form " German industrial heritage site", aka "Industriedenkmal" should be a subclass of Industrial Heritage Site, because it is not equivalent to industrial heritage sites anywhere else in the world. I see that this is not reflected yet in Q1569871
I didn't see this discussion anywhere and I tried to get this infrastructure started before the birth of Wikidata, but we really should finish the job now. Jane _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org:
Hi,
I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a picture only specified the ID. Scripts used that id to find the data of that monument and add categories like “rijksmonument in <city>” instead of just “rijksmonument”. Also if it was known from the monument database it was a windmill (for example) it would be categorised as such.
Another important one is making lists of id’s where in the lists there is no picture but there is a picture uploaded. Volunteers would then look at that list and add a picture to the list. This worked quite well for the motivation, because people made a picture, uploaded it, and a couple of days later the picture showed up in the list.
If we think about the future, we will need to think about this side as well. The first one is needed to make the pictures being able to be found and not just a bunch of pictures. The first one is doable I guess, but I fear a bit about the second one. Because the lists are not regularly imported, you don’t know if there is a picture, so we need a way to detect this. I believe there are properties to document a picture, so the storing isn’t the problem I guess.
Regards,
André
Since the erfgoed database is going down, I guess erfgoedbotis will no longer be here anymore. Or maybe could it work with Wikidata ? Since Maarten don't want invest time anymore, I guess a new bot is needed.
Same thing goes for a lot of other tools like tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-maps
Meanwhile, there is Wikidata tools that can be esaly use for similar purposes (onsite there is the constraints reports and Autolist can generate list too).
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument database before 1 September, and having it in one place is quite critical for successful WLM. Mykola (NickK) WM Ukraine
--- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Nicolas VIGNERON" vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com Дата: 26 липня 2015, 21:28:24
2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal < andre@molens.org > : Hi, I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more. Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a picture only specified the ID. Scripts used that id to find the data of that monument and add categories like “rijksmonument in <city>” instead of just “rijksmonument”. Also if it was known from the monument database it was a windmill (for example) it would be categorised as such. Another important one is making lists of id’s where in the lists there is no picture but there is a picture uploaded. Volunteers would then look at that list and add a picture to the list. This worked quite well for the motivation, because people made a picture, uploaded it, and a couple of days later the picture showed up in the list. If we think about the future, we will need to think about this side as well. The first one is needed to make the pictures being able to be found and not just a bunch of pictures. The first one is doable I guess, but I fear a bit about the second one. Because the lists are not regularly imported, you don’t know if there is a picture, so we need a way to detect this. I believe there are properties to document a picture, so the storing isn’t the problem I guess. Regards, André
Since the erfgoed database is going down, I guess erfgoedbotis will no longer be here anymore. Or maybe could it work with Wikidata ? Since Maarten don't want invest time anymore, I guess a new bot is needed.
Same thing goes for a lot of other tools like tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-maps
Meanwhile, there is Wikidata tools that can be esaly use for similar purposes (onsite there is the constraints reports and Autolist can generate list too).
Cdlt, ~nicolas _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
It is not just launching the bot, it is rewriting. So we need somebody with python coding skills. As far as I know it needs to be transfered from compat to core.
If needed I can give people access to the project on toollabs.
Regards,
André
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net wrote:
Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument database before 1 September, and having it in one place is quite critical for successful WLM.
Mykola (NickK) WM Ukraine
--- Оригінальне повідомлення --- Від кого: "Nicolas VIGNERON" vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com Дата: 26 липня 2015, 21:28:24
2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org:
Hi,
I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a picture only specified the ID. Scripts used that id to find the data of that monument and add categories like “rijksmonument in <city>” instead of just “rijksmonument”. Also if it was known from the monument database it was a windmill (for example) it would be categorised as such.
Another important one is making lists of id’s where in the lists there is no picture but there is a picture uploaded. Volunteers would then look at that list and add a picture to the list. This worked quite well for the motivation, because people made a picture, uploaded it, and a couple of days later the picture showed up in the list.
If we think about the future, we will need to think about this side as well. The first one is needed to make the pictures being able to be found and not just a bunch of pictures. The first one is doable I guess, but I fear a bit about the second one. Because the lists are not regularly imported, you don’t know if there is a picture, so we need a way to detect this. I believe there are properties to document a picture, so the storing isn’t the problem I guess.
Regards,
André
Since the erfgoed database is going down, I guess erfgoedbotis will no longer be here anymore. Or maybe could it work with Wikidata ? Since Maarten don't want invest time anymore, I guess a new bot is needed.
Same thing goes for a lot of other tools like tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-maps
Meanwhile, there is Wikidata tools that can be esaly use for similar purposes (onsite there is the constraints reports and Autolist can generate list too).
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing listWikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonumentshttp://www.wi...
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Hi all,
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net wrote:
Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument database before 1 September, and having it in one place is quite critical for successful WLM.
It is not just launching the bot, it is rewriting. So we need somebody with python coding skills. As far as I know it needs to be transfered from compat to core.
We discussed this at Wikimania. I’m taking over the maintenance of ErfgoedBot for the time being (help appreciated!) and will port it to core. This is tracked as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T105818 Don’t hesitate to ping me on this.
Yay! (I was quite worried about WLM 2015)
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 11:59 AM, Jean-Frédéric <jeanfrederic.wiki@gmail.com
wrote:
Hi all,
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 9:30 PM, Mykola Kozlenko mycola-k@ukr.net wrote:
Perhaps it might be easier to find someone capable of launching erfgoedbot again? I am not sure we will be able to migrate all monument database before 1 September, and having it in one place is quite critical for successful WLM.
It is not just launching the bot, it is rewriting. So we need somebody with python coding skills. As far as I know it needs to be transfered from compat to core.
We discussed this at Wikimania. I’m taking over the maintenance of ErfgoedBot for the time being (help appreciated!) and will port it to core. This is tracked as https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T105818 Don’t hesitate to ping me on this.
-- Jean-Fred
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
But the erfgoedbot itself is stopped because there were changes needed for the changes implemented in the API. Until now it was more or less maintenance free, now it needs a rewrite, hence this discussion.
And yes, my mail was to think about the other tools, only building a database without the tools to use it makes no sense.
Regards,
André
On 26 jul. 2015, at 21:28, Nicolas VIGNERON vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com wrote:
2015-07-26 21:04 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org: Hi,
I see a lot of discussion about how to get the data into wikidata. That is good and needs to be done, but erfgoedbot did a lot more.
Beside the harvesting (getting the list into the database), there were scripts using the data. At least for the dutch competition, people who uploaded a picture only specified the ID. Scripts used that id to find the data of that monument and add categories like “rijksmonument in <city>” instead of just “rijksmonument”. Also if it was known from the monument database it was a windmill (for example) it would be categorised as such.
Another important one is making lists of id’s where in the lists there is no picture but there is a picture uploaded. Volunteers would then look at that list and add a picture to the list. This worked quite well for the motivation, because people made a picture, uploaded it, and a couple of days later the picture showed up in the list.
If we think about the future, we will need to think about this side as well. The first one is needed to make the pictures being able to be found and not just a bunch of pictures. The first one is doable I guess, but I fear a bit about the second one. Because the lists are not regularly imported, you don’t know if there is a picture, so we need a way to detect this. I believe there are properties to document a picture, so the storing isn’t the problem I guess.
Regards,
André
Since the erfgoed database is going down, I guess erfgoedbotis will no longer be here anymore. Or maybe could it work with Wikidata ? Since Maarten don't want invest time anymore, I guess a new bot is needed.
Same thing goes for a lot of other tools like tools.wmflabs.org/wlm-maps
Meanwhile, there is Wikidata tools that can be esaly use for similar purposes (onsite there is the constraints reports and Autolist can generate list too).
Cdlt, ~nicolas _______________________________________________ Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org:
The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
The database is not down no but it's going to be. As erfgoedbot isn't running anymore, all the changes on the wikipédias are not harvested into the database anymore (eg. in France, since end of June, we add all the news 2014 protected monuments), so the database is more and more obsolete everyday and less and less useful :(
But the erfgoedbot itself is stopped because there were changes needed for the changes implemented in the API. Until now it was more or less maintenance free, now it needs a rewrite, hence this discussion.
And yes, my mail was to think about the other tools, only building a database without the tools to use it makes no sense.
Very true but there is a very big number of tools on and around Wikidata.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Of course there are tools, but we should not only identify how to put the monuments in wikidata but also which tools we need, and needs to be build against wikidata.
Regards,
André
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org:
The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
The database is not down no but it's going to be. As erfgoedbot isn't running anymore, all the changes on the wikipédias are not harvested into the database anymore (eg. in France, since end of June, we add all the news 2014 protected monuments), so the database is more and more obsolete everyday and less and less useful :(
But the erfgoedbot itself is stopped because there were changes needed for the changes implemented in the API. Until now it was more or less maintenance free, now it needs a rewrite, hence this discussion.
And yes, my mail was to think about the other tools, only building a database without the tools to use it makes no sense.
Very true but there is a very big number of tools on and around Wikidata.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Exactly. And don't forget that Erfgoedbot (the name says it all) is coming from the Dutch situation, where we don't use WLM as a political instrument to shame the authorities into ceasing their destruction of local heritage (as they do in Taiwan and other places). We need to rethink how to help chapters who are forging their own lists (like Italy and others) while dreaming up ways we can use Wikidata to improve the set of tools we have been using.
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 10:55 AM, Andre Koopal andre@molens.org wrote:
Of course there are tools, but we should not only identify how to put the monuments in wikidata but also which tools we need, and needs to be build against wikidata.
Regards,
André
On Sun, Jul 26, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON < vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com> wrote:
2015-07-26 21:34 GMT+02:00 Andre Koopal andre@molens.org:
The database it not down, and will be there until somebody does cleanup.
The database is not down no but it's going to be. As erfgoedbot isn't running anymore, all the changes on the wikipédias are not harvested into the database anymore (eg. in France, since end of June, we add all the news 2014 protected monuments), so the database is more and more obsolete everyday and less and less useful :(
But the erfgoedbot itself is stopped because there were changes needed for the changes implemented in the API. Until now it was more or less maintenance free, now it needs a rewrite, hence this discussion.
And yes, my mail was to think about the other tools, only building a database without the tools to use it makes no sense.
Very true but there is a very big number of tools on and around Wikidata.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
wikilovesmonuments@lists.wikimedia.org