Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information whatsoever. This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link) articles. We can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that is informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They indicate when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that will present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a template would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we would provide is information that is presented in the same way as we provide it as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching. There may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is evil. All the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider that the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum of all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested information available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly as WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues that will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will have on our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so does Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may be more issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving the information that we have to those that are requesting it. Thanks, GerardM
[1] http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/01/reasonator-is-red-lining-your-dat... [2] http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/test/?lang=oc&q=35610
Note: the [2] link goes to the test site. The correct link is: tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?lang=oc&q=35610
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information whatsoever. This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link) articles. We can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that is informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They indicate when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that will present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a template would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we would provide is information that is presented in the same way as we provide it as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching. There may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is evil. All the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider that the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum of all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested information available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly as WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues that will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will have on our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so does Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may be more issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving the information that we have to those that are requesting it. Thanks, GerardM
[1]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/01/reasonator-is-red-lining-your-dat... [2] http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/test/?lang=oc&q=35610 _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information whatsoever. This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link) articles. We can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that is informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They indicate when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that will present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a template would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we would provide is information that is presented in the same way as we provide it as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching. There may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is evil. All the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider that the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum of all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested information available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly as WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues that will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will have on our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so does Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may be more issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving the information that we have to those that are requesting it.
I have a strong feeling you're going to bring labs to its knees.
Sending editors to labs is one thing, but you're proposing sending readers to labs, to a service that isn't cached.
If reasonator is something we want to support for something like this, maybe we should consider turning it into a production service?
- Ryan
On a technical note, Reasonator is pure JavaScript, so should be easily portable, even to a Wikipedia:Reasonator.js page (or several pages, with support JS).
git here: https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/reasonator
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information whatsoever. This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link) articles. We can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that is informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They indicate when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that will present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a
template
would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we would provide is information that is presented in the same way as we provide it as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching.
There
may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is evil.
All
the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider that the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum of all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested
information
available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly as WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues that will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will have
on
our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so
does
Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may be
more
issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving the information that we have to those that are requesting it.
I have a strong feeling you're going to bring labs to its knees.
Sending editors to labs is one thing, but you're proposing sending readers to labs, to a service that isn't cached.
If reasonator is something we want to support for something like this, maybe we should consider turning it into a production service?
- Ryan
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Can you explain how such a {{Reasonator}} template would actually work. You say that it would be a stand-in until the article was actually written, but how would it know when the article is actually written? Is there a way to access the target article's state via Lua?
From a community perspective, linking to external sites from body content
is normally frowned upon (on en.wiki at least), even if the link is to a sister project. There are two main reasons for this: 1. It discourages the creation of new articles via redlinks 2. It can be confusing for readers to be sent to other sites while surfing Wikipedia content. (This is one of reasons why the WMF Multimedia team has been developing the Media Viewer.)
My suggestion would be to leave the redlinks intact, but to provide a pop-up when hovering over the redlinks (similar to Navigation pop-ups ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups)). This pop-up could provide a small set of core data (via an ajax request) and also a link to the full Reasonator page. I would probably implement this as a gadget first and do a few design iterations based on user-feedback before proposing it as something for readers.
Ryan Kaldari
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Magnus Manske <magnusmanske@googlemail.com
wrote:
On a technical note, Reasonator is pure JavaScript, so should be easily portable, even to a Wikipedia:Reasonator.js page (or several pages, with support JS).
git here: https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/reasonator
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information whatsoever. This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link) articles.
We
can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that
is
informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They
indicate
when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that will present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a
template
would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we would provide is information that is presented in the same way as we provide
it
as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching.
There
may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is evil.
All
the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider
that
the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum
of
all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested
information
available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly
as
WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues
that
will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will
have
on
our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so
does
Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may be
more
issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving the information that we have to those that are requesting it.
I have a strong feeling you're going to bring labs to its knees.
Sending editors to labs is one thing, but you're proposing sending
readers
to labs, to a service that isn't cached.
If reasonator is something we want to support for something like this, maybe we should consider turning it into a production service?
- Ryan
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- undefined _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Hoi,
The mail I send is meant to be a warning in advance. If you are interested in the "Reasonator", it is in continuous development and information is provided on an almost daily basis. When you have read it, you may understand the potential it has. It will help you understand why it can have a place as a stand in for an article in a Wikipedia and also why it can beat the quality of information of most stubs.
There are many ways to skin a cat. The most obvious one is to add a {{Reasonator}} template as a place holder in a Wikipedia. Another is to capture a not found or a red link and insert Reasonator info. What I am trying to do is to give a sense of direction. I am not indicating how it will be done for sure.
When the English Wikipedia community makes a decision, it is what the English Wikipedia community thinks best for itself. No problem in that. It would only become a problem when it is inferred to be a decision for every Wikipedia community.
The he Media Viewer is very similar to the situation at hand with Wikidata and Reasonator. Wikidata data can be used on every Wikipedia and to some extend this is done on many if not most Wikipedias (including en.wp). Like with Media, it can be confusing that the information is actually not on that local project. It is also not that obvious that Wikidata is not necessarily interested in the policies that are dreamt up locally. The alternative is NOT having central storage of images or NOT having central data storage. Both are not really an option.
I like the fact that you come up with some suggestions however, your proposal does not consider disambiguation. At this stage we are improving the information that is provided by Reasonator; the latest iteration has de-cluttered complicated pages like the one for Shakespeare a lot while adding to the information that is made available.
Quality information is provided by the Reasonator, the biggest problem I see is that we do not have info-boxes of high quality available when an article is being written. Thanks, GerardM
On 21 January 2014 20:07, Ryan Kaldari rkaldari@wikimedia.org wrote:
Can you explain how such a {{Reasonator}} template would actually work. You say that it would be a stand-in until the article was actually written, but how would it know when the article is actually written? Is there a way to access the target article's state via Lua?
From a community perspective, linking to external sites from body content is normally frowned upon (on en.wiki at least), even if the link is to a sister project. There are two main reasons for this:
- It discourages the creation of new articles via redlinks
- It can be confusing for readers to be sent to other sites while surfing
Wikipedia content. (This is one of reasons why the WMF Multimedia team has been developing the Media Viewer.)
My suggestion would be to leave the redlinks intact, but to provide a pop-up when hovering over the redlinks (similar to Navigation pop-ups ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation_popups)). This pop-up could provide a small set of core data (via an ajax request) and also a link to the full Reasonator page. I would probably implement this as a gadget first and do a few design iterations based on user-feedback before proposing it as something for readers.
Ryan Kaldari
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 10:02 AM, Magnus Manske < magnusmanske@googlemail.com
wrote:
On a technical note, Reasonator is pure JavaScript, so should be easily portable, even to a Wikipedia:Reasonator.js page (or several pages, with support JS).
git here: https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/reasonator
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ryan Lane rlane32@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijssen@gmail.comwrote:
Hoi,
At this moment Wikipedia "red links" provide no information
whatsoever.
This is not cool.
In Wikidata we often have labels for the missing (=red link)
articles.
We
can and do provide information from Wikidata in a reasonable way that
is
informative in the "Reasonator". We also provide additional search information on many Wikipedias.
In the Reasonator we have now implemented "red lines" [1]. They
indicate
when a label does not exist in the primary language that is in use.
What we are considering is creating a template {{Reasonator}} that
will
present information based on what is available in Wikidata. Such a
template
would be a stand in until an article is actually written. What we
would
provide is information that is presented in the same way as we
provide
it
as this moment in time [2]
This may open up a box of worms; Reasonator is NOT using any caching.
There
may be lots of other reasons why you might think this proposal is
evil.
All
the evil that is technical has some merit but, you have to consider
that
the other side of the equation is that we are not "sharing in the sum
of
all knowledge" even when we have much of the missing requested
information
available to us.
One saving (technical) grace, Reasonator loads round about as quickly
as
WIkidata does.
As this is advance warning, I hope that you can help with the issues
that
will come about. I hope that you will consider the impact this will
have
on
our traffic and measure to what extend it grows our data.
The Reasonator pages will not show up prettily on mobile phones .. so
does
Wikidata by the way. It does not consider Wikipedia zero. There may
be
more
issues that may require attention. But again, it beats not serving
the
information that we have to those that are requesting it.
I have a strong feeling you're going to bring labs to its knees.
Sending editors to labs is one thing, but you're proposing sending
readers
to labs, to a service that isn't cached.
If reasonator is something we want to support for something like this, maybe we should consider turning it into a production service?
- Ryan
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
-- undefined _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org