Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
Hmm, maybe another option is to accept BibTeX format on our side, possibly via a Lua module?
-Liangent On Aug 4, 2014 1:15 AM, "Andy Mabbett" andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Possibly relevant as an alternative solution to the problem: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Citoid
I suspect that Google would be reluctant to add a Wikimedia citation format, because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
Luis
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 10:53 AM, Liangent liangent@gmail.com wrote:
Hmm, maybe another option is to accept BibTeX format on our side, possibly via a Lua module?
-Liangent On Aug 4, 2014 1:15 AM, "Andy Mabbett" andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 3 August 2014 19:01, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
I suspect that Google would be reluctant to add a Wikimedia citation format
Trove, the Australian National Library's newspaper archive, are happy to do so.
because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
There isn't, hence I suggested the most suitable for scholarly citations in English.
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 3 August 2014 19:01, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
I suspect that Google would be reluctant to add a Wikimedia citation format
Trove, the Australian National Library's newspaper archive, are happy to do so.
Presumably those materials are all in English, unlike Scholar (and Wikipedia!)
because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
There isn't, hence I suggested the most suitable for scholarly citations in English.
Both Google and Wikimedia claim to be global, multi-lingual solutions. So both we and Google should be aiming higher.
But of course take my perspective with a grain of salt - I've always found it crazy that there is not a standardized citation format across the projects, so I may be putting words in Google's mouth.
Luis
Many reference sites have been happy to do this, and personally I don't see any problem doing it piecemeal, one language at a time, unless and until there is a more efficient solution available.
I think at this point it's clear enough to a reference site why it is in their interest to do so, and they are often happy to pay for solid advice on implementation. So there isn't really any need for a formal, WMF endorsed approach.
Pete [[User:peteforsyth]] On Aug 3, 2014 12:44 PM, "Luis Villa" lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 3 August 2014 19:01, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
I suspect that Google would be reluctant to add a Wikimedia citation format
Trove, the Australian National Library's newspaper archive, are happy to do so.
Presumably those materials are all in English, unlike Scholar (and Wikipedia!)
because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
There isn't, hence I suggested the most suitable for scholarly citations in English.
Both Google and Wikimedia claim to be global, multi-lingual solutions. So both we and Google should be aiming higher.
But of course take my perspective with a grain of salt - I've always found it crazy that there is not a standardized citation format across the projects, so I may be putting words in Google's mouth.
Luis
-- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810
*This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Google Scholar seem to do very well on the Citoid tests: http://zotero-translator-tests.s3-website-us-east-1.amazonaws.com/testTransl...
Just make sure to get that thing running and we will have a more robust solution to ask potential source sites to adjust their metadata to.
*Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali*
Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huvudsida 0729 - 67 29 48
*Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se
2014-08-03 21:44 GMT+02:00 Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org:
On Sun, Aug 3, 2014 at 12:25 PM, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
On 3 August 2014 19:01, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
I suspect that Google would be reluctant to add a Wikimedia citation format
Trove, the Australian National Library's newspaper archive, are happy to do so.
Presumably those materials are all in English, unlike Scholar (and Wikipedia!)
because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
There isn't, hence I suggested the most suitable for scholarly citations in English.
Both Google and Wikimedia claim to be global, multi-lingual solutions. So both we and Google should be aiming higher.
But of course take my perspective with a grain of salt - I've always found it crazy that there is not a standardized citation format across the projects, so I may be putting words in Google's mouth.
Luis
-- Luis Villa Deputy General Counsel Wikimedia Foundation 415.839.6885 ext. 6810
*This message may be confidential or legally privileged. If you have received it by accident, please delete it and let us know about the mistake. As an attorney for the Wikimedia Foundation, for legal/ethical reasons I cannot give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal capacity. For more on what this means, please see our legal disclaimer https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Legal_Disclaimer.* _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Jag kommer träffa Hangsna IRL på fredag 11.00
Kan vi använda kontorets konfrum?
träffen blir väl cirka en timme Anders väldigt kul med Bot Academy och snygg logga du gjort
Hej!
Det går alldeles utmärkt, ni är varmt välkomna!
*Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali*
Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige http://se.wikimedia.org/wiki/Huvudsida 0729 - 67 29 48
*Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* Bli medlem. http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se
Den 13 augusti 2014 10:17 skrev Anders Wennersten mail@anderswennersten.se :
Jag kommer träffa Hangsna IRL på fredag 11.00
Kan vi använda kontorets konfrum?
träffen blir väl cirka en timme Anders väldigt kul med Bot Academy och snygg logga du gjort
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/ wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 3 August 2014 20:44, Luis Villa lvilla@wikimedia.org wrote:
because there is no one Wikimedia citation format. (Happy to be corrected on that if I'm wrong, though.)
There isn't, hence I suggested the most suitable for scholarly citations in English.
Both Google and Wikimedia claim to be global, multi-lingual solutions. So both we and Google should be aiming higher.
I didn't say I didn't aim higher - but it's also pragmatic to start with quick wins, which will help a majority of people, most of the time.
Despite being a monoglot, I spend a good deal of time supporting non-English projects, and multi-lingual editors; and cross-project collaboration.
Does the same apply to other sister projects? It could make sense to make such request for all...
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, at 03:14, Andy Mabbett wrote:
Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
the problem is all projects use a different format :)
Maybe it is worth the effort to investigate if we can come to a single format... at least on the input side.
Lodewijk
2014-08-04 3:43 GMT+02:00 Gryllida gryllida@fastmail.fm:
Does the same apply to other sister projects? It could make sense to make such request for all...
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, at 03:14, Andy Mabbett wrote:
Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Lodewijk: Yes indeed. The citation/footnote coding format for different language editions of Wikipedia is not the same, not to mention the other Wikimedia projects. I wonder if this is something that Wikidata could (eventually) handle? I have been hoping that one day all books (at least those with ISBNs) could have a Wikidata entry. This would mean that all of the bibliographic metadata published as CC0 by a variety of national libraries could be imported and we would have a tremendously useful catalogue of published works. Presubamly then, each Wikipedia could rely on this database for footnotes to specific books (each with its own presentation format if it wants) - rather than having to manually enter each book's bibliographic information every time you want to cite it on a new Wikipedia article... This would be similar to the way Commons is a central repository for Media files, Wikidata could be a central repository of footnote information. Does this make (logical and technological) sense? Is this feasible, or completely out of scope for Wikidata?
Andy: Thanks for pointing out the way "Trove" provides a citation tool for easy use on (English) Wikipedia articles. For those who've not seen it, here's a random example - http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/page/1038049 click the "cite" link near the top-left corner. I asked them to incorporate this into the Trove system in 2009 in association with the GLAM-WIKI conference in Canberra. Over the years this has proved to be hugely beneficial to Trove (a service of the National Library of Australia), and has generated thousands of deep-links to their catalogue http://linkypedia.inkdroid.org/websites/16/ These links made Wikipedia their number one non-search-engine provider of inbound traffic [I was employed at the NLA until recently].
-Liam / Wittylama
On 4 August 2014 09:18, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
the problem is all projects use a different format :)
Maybe it is worth the effort to investigate if we can come to a single format... at least on the input side.
Lodewijk
2014-08-04 3:43 GMT+02:00 Gryllida gryllida@fastmail.fm:
Does the same apply to other sister projects? It could make sense to make such request for all...
On Mon, 4 Aug 2014, at 03:14, Andy Mabbett wrote:
Google Scholar search results each have a "cite" link, which generates citation text to copy-and-paste in three formats (MLA, APA, Chicago).
Is there someone at Google we can talk to, to get Wikipedia's citation format included?
For English-language users (or results), the {{Cite journal}} template is probably most appropriate.
-- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On 04/08/2014, Liam Wyatt liamwyatt@gmail.com wrote: ...
I wonder if this is something that Wikidata could (eventually) handle? I have been hoping that one day all books (at least those with ISBNs) could have a Wikidata entry. This would mean that all of the bibliographic
There is no point in duplicating other free databases which are already excellent. http://worldcat.org (by OCLC) has a free to use API, I've played around with it a little, and it can be integrated in with any tool. As well as all ISBNs, this includes OCLC numbers (duh) and other interesting bits and bobs like LCCN numbers that the Library of Congress uses.
Yonks ago I wrote a greasemonkey script to scrape WorldCat entries which I used to insert or tidy up complex references in Wikipedia articles (this was before I hounded to death and resigned as an admin). The current editing interface on the English Wikipedia has the cite tool which effectively does the same thing if you put in the ISBN, so I have never been motivated to promote my script or repackage it as a user script. If someone wants to look at a copy during the hackerthon, I'll pass it on, though I'd recommend reading the WorldCat API documentation instead. http://www.oclc.org/developer/develop/web-services/worldcat-search-api.en.ht...
Fae
On 4 August 2014 11:43, Fæ faewik@gmail.com wrote:
The current editing interface on the English Wikipedia has the cite tool which effectively does the same thing if you put in the ISBN
I find that often rimes out, sadly. (It works well with Google books URLs, though.)
On 4 August 2014 11:15, Liam Wyatt liamwyatt@gmail.com wrote:
I wonder if this is something that Wikidata could (eventually) handle?
I have a brain-dump about how this might work, in my user pace at:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pigsonthewing/Citations_-_the_future
For me, one of the exciting things about this is being able to quickly and confidently see every article in which an author is cited (see mockup, linked form that page), or in which a specific work is cited.
Thanks for pointing out the way "Trove" provides a citation tool for easy use on (English) Wikipedia articles.
I asked them to incorporate this into the Trove system in 2009
I supposed you might have had a hand in it. Nice work!
I imagine you would have had less success had you asked for a different template for each language; the same would apply with Google.
Over the years this has proved to be hugely beneficial to Trove (a service of the National Library of Australia), and has generated thousands of deep-links to their catalogue
That's a great selling point!
On 4 August 2014 08:18, Lodewijk lodewijk@effeietsanders.org wrote:
the problem is all projects use a different format :)
Maybe it is worth the effort to investigate if we can come to a single format... at least on the input side.
I believe such is being discussed, as part of the wider conversation around using Wikidata as a repository for citations.
But that is months if not years away, and we could in the meantime have, if we can secure Google's cooperation as proposed, a quick solution for the majority of cases in a few days or weeks.
A hack-y work-around, if one is needed, would be for non-english sites to aheva template called {{cite journal}}, and have that always "subst:" into a ,coal template, as en.WP currently does with for example, various de.WP infobox templates .
On 4 August 2014 12:02, Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote:
for non-english sites to aheva template called {{cite journal}}, and have that always "subst:" into a ,coal template
"have a"; "local".
Apologies.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org