I've just been experimenting with adding a quick-statements generator to
https://tools.wmflabs.org/ws-search — search for something, with 'linked
to wikidata = no', and then each row of the results has a popup with
code you can copy and paste into quickstatements.
I don't know if that sort of thing is useful. It's not working with many
fields yet, but I'm finding it faster than entering the basics manually.
—sam.
The more I read about it-ws Opera namespace, the more I'm interested in it.
On frws we use "multiple editions" a lot, especially on poems and short
stories, that have been published in different collections. Do you do
that too ?
Also, I had a fantasy, these past weeks, working about "work items" on
wikidata, that we could point on wikisource "work" page, whether we have
1 or multiple editions.
Presently, when, for a poem, we have only 1 edition, we put it in its
collection subpage, and keed the poem title as redirect, then transform
it to "multiple editions" when we get some. This totally prevents to add
those to wikidata, because redirects are not supported ; thus, editions
are added to work items, by adding redirects.
I was wondering whether adding a template similar to "redirect with
possibility" (enwp) could help solve this problem.
Wonder what solution would be best, considering that the creation of a
full-developped "work-page" on a poem could be tricky...
So, what do you think all of you ?
Hélène (frwikisource)
Le 01/11/2017 à 00:54, wikisource-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org a écrit :
> Send Wikisource-l mailing list submissions to
> wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> wikisource-l-request(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> wikisource-l-owner(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Wikisource-l digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: quickstatements for missing editions (Nicolas VIGNERON)
> 2. Hangout session (Nicolas VIGNERON)
> 3. Re: quickstatements for missing editions (Andrea Zanni)
> 4. Re: quickstatements for missing editions (Sam Wilson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 19:46:06 +0100
> From: Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com>
> To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
> <wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
> Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] quickstatements for missing editions
> Message-ID:
> <CANTrCmge9BLtOMuD=mN+-OX3fx74C5Hf7rKBHrv9PJQzZa5Pbw(a)mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> 2017-10-31 18:45 GMT+01:00 Andrea Zanni <zanni.andrea84(a)gmail.com>:
>
>> For the "work" concept, Italian Wikisource decided to create a real and
>> new namespace, "Opera" (which means work).
>> It's the one page where we store the links to multiple editions of a
>> certain book we have.
>>
>> It's not a disambiguation page in the sense that a disambiguation page
>> works with different books from different authors with the same title
>> e.g. "Poems"...
>>
>> Aubrey
>>
> I forgot about that too.
> Aubrey; Could you tell us the advantage and inconvenient of this system
> (and in comparison to the 'multiple editions' pages of the others
> Wikisources).
>
> Cdlt, ~nicolas
>
> PS: this is the kind of question that would be interesting to have during a
> hangout session like we had (I will write a separate mail to re-launch them)
>
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...
(clearly I need to go to bed, THIS one)
------ Forwarded Message ------
From: "billinghurst" <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>
To: "wikisource-l(a)list.wikimedia.org" <wikisource-l(a)list.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 25/10/2017 11:06:37 PM
Subject: Fw: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...
------ Forwarded Message ------
From: "billinghurst" <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>
To: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
Sent: 24/10/2017 11:48:51 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Gerard,
Then ... what would be valuable is a tool that can change the interwiki
badge. At the moment, there are no tools that enable us to be able to
change a work from not proofread, to proofread, to validated. We know
the status of each work at the respective Wikisource through the Index:
ns page, so we should be able to botify pushing that status through to
the interwiki. There was a technical inability that prevented it being
done from memory. and I have a ticket there somewhere in the phabricator
morass for Wikidata.
For example enW validated works are at
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:PagesWithBadges?badge=Q20748093
[I know that I have incrementally changing flags for the works that I
have done, but as a manual process it just takes time. ]
Taking the validated and proofread works (from Index namespace at enWS)
would give you 4000 works. Once that is done, we can then also start
pulling that data back to the wikis, and with good templating we can
then look utilise that on Author pages.
Regards, Billinghurst
------ Original Message ------
From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
To: "billinghurst" <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>; "discussion list for
Wikisource, the free library" <wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 23/10/2017 10:48:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
>Hoi,
>A Wikipedia matra is be bold and another is that things are a work in
>progress. In my opinion, what we need is the name of a book, its author
>and the fact that people can read it. All the other stuff like what
>"version" is a particular book pales in comparison. We should not let
>the quest for perfection be the enemy of the good.
>
>Also Archive.org and Open Library are two different entities. Both the
>Open Library and the Internet Archive have their own identifiers for
>authors and they are not necessarily linked. We are talking about books
>from the Open Library and they are available as an E-book or a PDF.
>
>My problem is not with Open Library, my problem is that we do not know
>what is available from Wikisource as a finished good ready for reading.
>In the end what we advertise is the author the book, versions are
>secondary.
>Thanks,
> GerardM
>
>On 23 October 2017 at 12:36, billinghurst <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>Hi Nicolas,
>>
>>Still my biggest issues/hurdles for good data are
>>capture of information from WS to WD — it just is hard work, WEF tool
>>is still not sufficiently alignedthe ever problematic inability to
>>link WP book to WS edition through Wikidatathat cannot capture
>>information for Wikidata at archive.org, and relate that through to
>>the file at Commons, and then the edition at Wikisource (or pick
>>another starting point and interrelate0the inability to create an
>>edition from a book/work, the inability to create a work from an
>>edition
>>Maybe you can even ask what we need to improve to get bots to run
>>through and autocapture, is our meta-data in headers not suitable?
>>What is it that is problematic?
>>
>>Thanks for asking.
>>
>>-- billinghurst (being so remote for the action <sigh>)
>>
>>
>>------ Original Message ------
>>From: "Nicolas VIGNERON" <vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com>
>>To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
>><wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>><mailto:wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>>
>>Sent: 23/10/2017 7:30:44 PM
>>Subject: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>
>>>For information, the WikidataCon is this week-end in Berlin. While
>>>there is no talk nominatively around Wikisource, there is some
>>>intervention on relation subjects (inventaire.io, WikiCite, German
>>>National Library, FRBR, and so on).
>>>
>>>The event is sold out, but you can follow remotely some of the
>>>presentation (link will be added here :
>>>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote
>>><https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote>
>>>).
>>>
>>>I'll be there and I'll be happy to talk about Wikisource, who else
>>>will be there?
>>>
>>>Cdlt, ~nicolas
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikisource-l mailing list
>>Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>><mailto:Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>><https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l>
>>
>
If it's ok for you, today I will endorse the new Wikimedia strategy[1]
on behalf of the Wikisource Community User Group.
I participated in the early drafting of the strategy (until May-June), but
later on unfortunately I didn't follow it closely.
I think the new strategy is open enough to be include a lot of what we do
in Wikisource, and I hope that this will lead to increased support from
Wikimedia Foundation and Chapters to our project.
Aubrey
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2017/Direction#…
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...
------ Forwarded Message ------
From: "billinghurst" <billinghurstwiki(a)gmail.com>
To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
<wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 12/10/2017 6:21:28 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] Validated works on kowikisource?
The validation flag for wikisource on wikidata is a manual switch, and
none of the available external tools/toys are able to tweak it at this
point of time.
-- billinghurst
------ Original Message ------
From: "Gerard Meijssen" <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com>
To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
<wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 12/10/2017 5:14:15 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] Validated works on kowikisource?
>Hoi,
>What does it take to get the validation-status in Wikidata. If anything
>it is the most important attribute. Knowing what people can read trumps
>everything.
>Thanks,
> GerardM
>
>On 12 October 2017 at 07:22, Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au> wrote:
>>Nope. The validation-status data is unlikely to ever be in Wikidata.
>>The tool below gets this information from category-membership of Index
>>pages.
>>
>>
>>On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, at 01:18 PM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
>>>Hoi,
>>>Is there a query in Wikidata for all the validated and complete books
>>>in Wikisource?
>>>Thanks,
>>> GerardM
>>>
>>>On 12 October 2017 at 06:14, Sam Wilson <sam(a)samwilson.id.au> wrote:
>>>> > No validated works found for ko
>>>>
>>>>The ws-cat-browser is saying it can't find any validated and
>>>>categorized
>>>>mainspace works on kowikisource.
>>>>
>>>>Is this correct? Is there any meant to be anything in the
>>>>validated-index category?
>>>>https://ko.wikisource.org/wiki/%EB%B6%84%EB%A5%98:%EA%B2%80%EC%A6%9D%EB%90%…
>>>><https://ko.wikisource.org/wiki/%EB%B6%84%EB%A5%98:%EA%B2%80%EC%A6%9D%EB%90%…>
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Sam.
>>>>
>>>>_______________________________________________
>>>>Wikisource-l mailing list
>>>>Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>>><mailto:Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>>>><https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>Wikisource-l mailing list
>>>Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>>><mailto:Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>>><https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l>
>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>Wikisource-l mailing list
>>Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>><mailto:Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
>>https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
>><https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l>
>>
>
Hi all,
For information, the WikidataCon is this week-end in Berlin. While there is
no talk nominatively around Wikisource, there is some intervention on
relation subjects (inventaire.io, WikiCite, German National Library, FRBR,
and so on).
The event is sold out, but you can follow remotely some of the presentation
(link will be added here :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote ).
I'll be there and I'll be happy to talk about Wikisource, who else will be
there?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Here:
Pagina:D'Ayala_-_Dizionario_militare_francese_italiano.djvu/46
<https://it.wikisource.org/wiki/Pagina:D%27Ayala_-_Dizionario_militare_franc…>
and immediately previous and following pages both the text and some
formatting from Internet Archive file bub_gb_lvzoCyRdzsoC_abbyy.gz
<https://archive.org/download/bub_gb_lvzoCyRdzsoC/bub_gb_lvzoCyRdzsoC_abbyy.…>
(in
previous pages only some templates have been added and a little bit of
regex manipulation has be done)
Internet Archive _abbyy.gz files are gzipped, enormous xml files where any
detail of FineReader OCR output is exported - but, even if enormous and
terribly complex, they can be parsed and any detail (a little bit
painfully...) can be used; presently, only bold, italic, smallcaps and
paragraphs have been explored, translated into wiki code by a prettily
simple python code.
Alex
There's a new column on the IA Upload
https://tools.wmflabs.org/ia-upload/ log to permit the download of the
DjVu files, for those files that are failing to upload to Commons. This
is just a work-around until we have larger-file uploading fixed (which
should be soon, see https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T175680 for more
info).
—Sam
Hoi,
Given the discussion about finished books on the Korean Wikisource, I this
demonstrates that we really need to advertise the finished books to a
reading public.
After all what is it that we do it for but for finding a public for the
transcribed books?
Thanks,
GerardM
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2017/10/wikisource-proof-of-pudding.html
The index status information IS available in MediaWiki, see:
https://en.wikisource.org/w/index.php?title=Special:IndexPages
Unfortunately, it is hard to use it as
* it seems to be available only as this HTML special page (no API interface, no LUA interface)
* if is available only for 10000 index pages and it is unclear how data is sorted (i.e. what is the characteristic of pages that exceed the 10000 limit); however it hurts only the two largest wikisources at the moment (fr with over 15600 index pages and en with over 11500)
* the index status is often not up-to-date; index pages need to be purged then.
In pl.ws we use this data to update index status by bot, eg. on this page:
https://pl.wikisource.org/wiki/WS:Wikiprojekt_Proofread
IMO, if this information is available via API or directly in wikicode, it will be more convenient to use, and maybe useful also for automatic Wikidata status update (assuming there is a link to index page there).
Ankry
W dniu 2017-10-12 10:31:29 użytkownik Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen(a)gmail.com> napisał:
Hoi,
Yes we need to have a better mechanism. However, there is nothing stopping us to publish all the books that are finished and ready to be read. That is the proof of the Wikisource pudding..
So is there a Wikidata query showing all the books that are finished and ready to read. With this we can advertise, having all books makes it complete. Knowing all books that are finished is secondary.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 12 October 2017 at 09:23, Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
The validation-status data can and sometimes is stored in Wikidata. See how it is stored here : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Badges and here an example of Wikidata query for all items about validated text : http://tinyurl.com/yaud3uoy
Thad said, most of the times Wikidata is not up-to-date, and there should be a tool to take care of that instead of human being.
Cdlt, ~nicolas
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
Wikisource-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l