Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 25. Oct 2017, at 08:43, Frederik Ramm  wrote:
> 
> Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
> something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
> compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.


To illustrate this: we just had a case on the Italian mailing list where an 
armchair mapper has changed the wikidata link on a highway to a person after 
which the street is named from wikidata to wikidata:etymology . But he missed 
the fact that the street was named after a partisan fighter, not an actress 
with the same name (for whom was the wikidata object). 

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Златовратский Павел]

25.10.2017 9:43, Frederik Ramm пишет:
"Half a good edit" is not good enough though. 
When we talking about single edit "half-good" is not good. But process 
of semi-automated and automated wikitags fix could be easily separated 
in many independent edits even within single changeset(change of 
wikitags for one object does not depend of changing wikitags for other). 
And even when some of these edits is bad while most of edits is good 
whole concept seems good too.


I don't research situation about (semi)automated wikidata fix deeply. I 
just find out that number of arguments against it are same that used 
against whole amateur cartography concept.

Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.
No-no... I'm not talking about generating wikitags by matching. Just 
oppose: I mean we should use separate wikitags, but managing these tags 
require more understanding of Wikipedia than just local knowledge.  And 
_*if *_we focus on local knowledge as major and only source for any tags 
_*then*_ we should forbid wikitags as they could not be supported with 
just local knowledge.


And I really doubt that intentionally link to redirection page instead 
of true page as Tomas Strapius do here: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history is good idea in 
Wikipedia-way.


--
С уважением, Златовратский Павел.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

>
> Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
> something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
> compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.
>

I think this is a straw man argument - I don't think anyone is proposing to
add tags automatically based on a heuristics - like the name matching.
There are two things -  One is a tool that may suggest a match based on
some heuristic, but let human decide and pick the best option, or say that
this is incorrect. There is no "adding by a machine" here.  I think Mapbox
was building a tool like that.

The other portion is what has been happening - an automated addition of
wikidata based on existing wikipedia tag.  This was done automatically by
iD editor every time someone added Wikipedia link.  And it was also done by
me for the older objects. While this was clearly an automated process, it
was not a guess work based on name (discussed in another thread).  I
haven't been doing it for 1.5 months, iD has been doing it all this time
without any substantial problems uncovered.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 2:22 AM, Tomas Straupis 
wrote:
>
>   Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql
> tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread. This change gives a
> lot of confusion on what are we really talking about. Only when
> talking about automated adding of wikidata or changing other tags
> based on wikidata I am strongly opposing and doing reverts. I'm
> strongly in favour of automated checking, comparing etc. - we've done
> a number (~40) of Lithuania specific rules starting with addressing
> information and up to topological rule checking.
>

Tomas, I must be blind, or you must be confused. Where have I spoken about
the "osm-wikidata-sql tool"?  I think you have mixed up a few threads...  I
did create a QA tool that quickly spot tens of thousands of errors. And
using it as a base, I also created a different tool for quick fixes (which
is not related to Wikidata, despite sharing the code). But neither were
mentioned in this thread from what I can see in the history. I know which
hunt could be a fun activity, but lets not do that. (i'm still in shock
over Malawi's vampire scare with many people dead. Sorry for side comment)
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 25.10.2017 08:09, Златовратский Павел wrote:
> Well. That's the problem in your position: you point to specific
> problems and ask to stop whole process.

Which "process" exactly are you talking about? There have been many
processes mentioned in this discussion.

> I met such behaviour with software implementation: people reject to use
> software miss some feature even when software already do half of their job.

"Half a good edit" is not good enough though.

> I don't think any number of problems with automated edits is reason to
> stop them.

Automated edits need to be discussed in a suitable forum before they are
executed, and must not be executed if there's significant opposition. An
automated edit that affects only Russia may be sufficiently discussed on
the .ru mailing list but one that is run in Latvia not.

> Otherwise on next step we should ask to stop using of wikipedia links:
> only name=* could be validated on the ground, there is no label on
> object with wikipedia URL and 'guessed' wiki links sometimes became wrong.

Well, certainly Wikipedia links should only be added by people who know
something about the feature in question, and not by a machine that
compares name tags to Wikipedia entries and takes a wild guess.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

On 25.10.2017 05:53, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> You mean "stop any editing, 

More like "stop any Wikidata-related large-scale editing or setting up
of tools that have the intent of causing Wikidata-related large-scale
editing".

It's totally ok for individuals to add Wikidata links to things they are
mapping anyway, it's just not ok for people from 1000 miles away to
fiddle with Wikidata tags, ESPECIALLY if these people lack OSM experience.

If you're new to OSM then a good choice of task is to do some mapping in
your local area, not to shower the whole planet with "helpful" Wikidata
edits.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

2017-10-25 8:56 GMT+03:00 Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Roland, thanks for the links. Local knowledge is very important, but lets
> not make it into a sacred cow at the cost of common sense.  I have not been
> to every single street in New York City. I am nearly 100% sure that all
> editors has edited objects that were near their location, but that they have
> not actually visited, or walked by without walking in, etc.  Local knowledge
> is an important concept, but its physically impossible to walk into every
> building and research every tag for every building.  Or are you saying Tomas
> has visited every single street/building in Lithuania?
> ...

  Check the name of this topic: "stop ... wikidata ..."

  This started as a discussion about automated adding of one specific
wikidata tag and about doing it without discussing with local
community. My whole response was about THAT.

  Yuri later tried to change the whole theme from "osm-wikidata-sql
tool" to "new general qa tool" in the same thread. This change gives a
lot of confusion on what are we really talking about. Only when
talking about automated adding of wikidata or changing other tags
based on wikidata I am strongly opposing and doing reverts. I'm
strongly in favour of automated checking, comparing etc. - we've done
a number (~40) of Lithuania specific rules starting with addressing
information and up to topological rule checking.

  So if you really want to talk about that DIFFERENT topic: new QA
tool (alongside years of existence of keepright, osm inspector,
osmose, some other ones) - you need to create a new thread and discuss
it there. I would really want to know what new functionality you are
proposing etc. Collecting errors from a number of different sources
for fixing is already somewhat complex so it would be nice to
understand what is a benefit of creating a new tool rather than adding
new rules to one of the existing QA tools.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Златовратский Павел]

25.10.2017 7:46, Tomas Straupis пишет:

   But this topic has already listed numerous problems with your
automated (or semiautomated) edits all around, ignoring local
communities etc. You have been asked to stop numerous times.
Well. That's the problem in your position: you point to specific 
problems and ask to stop whole process.
So instead of fix these problems (you did not ask for this) people just 
ignore you.


I met such behaviour with software implementation: people reject to use 
software miss some feature even when software already do half of their job.


I don't think any number of problems with automated edits is reason to 
stop them. I think it is reason to fix problems. Like: don't fix 
disambiguation wikipedia links if there is wikidata point to
disambiguation page(i.e. it is intentionally disambiguation link) and 
don't add wikidata to disambiguation wikipedia page.


Otherwise on next step we should ask to stop using of wikipedia links: 
only name=* could be validated on the ground, there is no label on 
object with wikipedia URL and 'guessed' wiki links sometimes became wrong.


--
С уважением, Златовратский Павел.

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Roland, thanks for the links. Local knowledge is very important, but lets
not make it into a sacred cow at the cost of common sense.  I have not been
to every single street in New York City. I am nearly 100% sure that all
editors has edited objects that were near their location, but that they
have not actually visited, or walked by without walking in, etc.  Local
knowledge is an important concept, but its physically impossible to walk
into every building and research every tag for every building.  Or are you
saying Tomas has visited every single street/building in Lithuania?

Also, local knowledge doesn't trump tagging standards - if I start tagging
national highways as power lines simply because I happened to be in the
area, it does not mean I am right -- more likely it means I am a novice
editor that should be helped by anyone - even if they are on the other side
of the planet.

My reading of Tomas answer is not that the Wikipedia tag was not fixed, or
that it can't be fixed, but that it should be left untouched because it
should be fixed in a perfect way only by a local, with all other tags too,
and it is better to have completely wrong tags than to have good tags but
other tags in less than perfect state. This is not local knowledge, this is
an editing preference, and a strange one at that.  Local knowledge needs to
coexist with OSM as a global movement, so I do hope this is not a turf war,
but rather a misunderstand that can be easily solved by reason.

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 1:08 AM, Roland Olbricht 
wrote:

> But what you are saying is very strange if I understood you correctly.
>> What I read here is that the only people allowed to fix things are those
>> that know ALL tags and their meaning.
>>
>
> See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_use
> rs#Original_research_always_wins
>
> Or similar statements on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Getting_Involved#Working_on_the_map
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.
> 27s_on_the_ground
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule
>
> It is the local knowledge that matters. Tomas does know what it looks like
> there, and deems the wikipedia link correct. This is in line with similar
> cases like the mentioned distinction Aldi Nord/Aldi Süd and other.
>
> We expect you to assure that the tool is used only (or almost only) in
> cases where the user has local knowledge, i.e. has been there, physically,
> in person. Otherwise the tool is considered a disguised bot, no matter how
> it is dressed.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Roland
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Roland Olbricht]

But what you are saying is very strange if I 
understood you correctly.  What I read here is that the only people 
allowed to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning.


See 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welcome_to_Wikipedia_users#Original_research_always_wins


Or similar statements on
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Getting_Involved#Working_on_the_map
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputes#On_the_Ground_Rule

It is the local knowledge that matters. Tomas does know what it looks 
like there, and deems the wikipedia link correct. This is in line with 
similar cases like the mentioned distinction Aldi Nord/Aldi Süd and other.


We expect you to assure that the tool is used only (or almost only) in 
cases where the user has local knowledge, i.e. has been there, 
physically, in person. Otherwise the tool is considered a disguised bot, 
no matter how it is dressed.


Best regards,

Roland

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

2017-10-25 6:53 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> You mean "stop any editing, cause we need two weeks or two years to make
> sure refs are correct and we don't have any other means to remember about
> the problem than to leave some obvious mistake everyone will trip over until
> we are sure about those refs"? Like, start a discussion at one of the
> hillfort articles in Wikipedia and live a note inOSM to check refs from time
> to time, with a link to the Wikipedia discussion?

  No. If you take that one particular edit out of the whole context -
it would be incorrect to revert it.

  But this topic has already listed numerous problems with your
automated (or semiautomated) edits all around, ignoring local
communities etc. You have been asked to stop numerous times. You have
ignored all those and continued bulldozing. THAT is the reason for
reverting. The fact that some edits were not totally wrong does not
change anything, your edits were still useless (doable by autoscripts)
and unwanted (explicitly stated) in this situation anyway.

  I do not want to spend time and do WORK to check if your automated
NON-WORK has produced WORK for others.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 24 October 2017 at 17:19, Tomas Straupis  wrote:

> 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to
> > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in
> > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in
> > Wikipedia?
>
>   So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags
> fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing
> guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script.
>
>
You mean "stop any editing, cause we need two weeks or two years to make
sure refs are correct and we don't have any other means to remember about
the problem than to leave some obvious mistake everyone will trip over
until we are sure about those refs"? Like, start a discussion at one of the
hillfort articles in Wikipedia and live a note inOSM to check refs from
time to time, with a link to the Wikipedia discussion?



-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Steve Doerr]

On 24/10/2017 18:07, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Tomas Straupis 
> wrote:


2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM
point to
> disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to
Hillfort 1 in
> Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in
> Wikipedia?

  So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags
fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing
guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script. 


  But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time
being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so
unwanted.


Tomas, I do agree that there should not be an automatic script setting 
tags based on a heuristic. But what you are saying is very strange if 
I understood you correctly. What I read here is that the only people 
allowed to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning. 
This goes counter to the common sense (nobody knows all 65000+ tags), 
and counter to the existing warnings, such as JOSM's validator "when 
in doubt, ignore them".  You can never have a person who knows 
everything about both - the place and OSM tags.


There are two axis of editing:  local knowledge and OSM knowledge. 
They are orthogonal - I could be a tagging expert, but not know the 
area, or a novice editor with the expert local knowledge.  
Additionally, "local knowledge" very rapidly decays as you move away 
from where you live - another street, neighborhood, city, state, 
country, continent.  If I see a problem, I can reasonably research the 
topic, gain knowledge, and fix the problems in my area of expertise. 
Of course someone who lives in the incorrectly tagged building, and 
happens to be an expert OSM editor would be ideal, but sorry, no such 
luck.


In most cases, the editors who decide to help will make data better. 
It might not be perfect, but it is better than before.  When you say 
you will revert things despite making data worse, just because you 
disagree with HOW the problem was found, and not on the basis of 
decreasing data quality, you go against the very idea of a common sense.


There is only one reasonable approach to editing - data should be in a 
better shape after you than before.  More accurate. More complete.  
Please don't make assumptions that the data has gotten worse just 
because you disagree that there should be a qa script - after all, you 
are using them yourself, and no one is reverting all your work based 
on that.




+1
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Tomas Straupis 
wrote:

> 2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to
> > disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in
> > Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in
> > Wikipedia?
>
>   So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags
> fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing
> guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script.

  But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time
> being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so
> unwanted.
>

Tomas, I do agree that there should not be an automatic script setting tags
based on a heuristic. But what you are saying is very strange if I
understood you correctly.  What I read here is that the only people allowed
to fix things are those that know ALL tags and their meaning.  This goes
counter to the common sense (nobody knows all 65000+ tags), and counter to
the existing warnings, such as JOSM's validator "when in doubt, ignore
them".  You can never have a person who knows everything about both - the
place and OSM tags.

There are two axis of editing:  local knowledge and OSM knowledge. They are
orthogonal - I could be a tagging expert, but not know the area, or a
novice editor with the expert local knowledge.  Additionally, "local
knowledge" very rapidly decays as you move away from where you live -
another street, neighborhood, city, state, country, continent.  If I see a
problem, I can reasonably research the topic, gain knowledge, and fix the
problems in my area of expertise. Of course someone who lives in the
incorrectly tagged building, and happens to be an expert OSM editor would
be ideal, but sorry, no such luck.

In most cases, the editors who decide to help will make data better. It
might not be perfect, but it is better than before.  When you say you will
revert things despite making data worse, just because you disagree with HOW
the problem was found, and not on the basis of decreasing data quality, you
go against the very idea of a common sense.

There is only one reasonable approach to editing - data should be in a
better shape after you than before.  More accurate. More complete.  Please
don't make assumptions that the data has gotten worse just because you
disagree that there should be a qa script - after all, you are using them
yourself, and no one is reverting all your work based on that.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

2017-10-24 15:56 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to
> disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in
> Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in
> Wikipedia?

  So that the case is not forgotten and fixed properly (i.e. ALL tags
fixed) by people who know how to do it, not by those who are doing
guesswork and just silencing the "qa" script.

  But in general all automated guess-edits are reverted for the time
being because it was clearly stated they are unhelpful and so
unwanted.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

Please, PLEASE, stick to the case.

The case is:
1) there are two hillforts, let's call them Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 for
simplicity.
2) both have big information tables on the ground, with their names on them
3) so they are named Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2 in OSM and nobody objects
that.
4) both have their articles on Wikipedia. The articles may be a little
mixed up, but they are articles on Hillfort 1 and Hillfort 2

Why, in this case is it better to have Wikipedia links in OSM point to
disambiguation page instead of link Hillfort 1 in OSM to Hillfort 1 in
Wikipedia, link Hillfort 2 accordingly and fix Wikipedia doubts in
Wikipedia?

On 23 October 2017 at 13:33, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
>
>> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia
>>
>
> Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable
> at wikipedia.  For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
> Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on
> each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo,
> one does not.  Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of
> each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>



-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Andy, both sr: and sq: languages describe the same CONCEPT - "republic of
Serbia".  Both articles mention Kosovo as a territory with the special
status.  So the content is the same, and both can be used to describe the
ground truth of Republic of Serbia. The articles just choose to show a
slightly different map image -- but that's exactly where OSM comes in - we
are the ones who can draw the ground truth correctly, and simply reference
the object to the Wiki.  Or should we base OSM data on Wikipedia?

If we draw two OSM objects - with Kosovo and without, we ourselves step
into the ground truth debate, and need to decide which object corresponds
to the Wiki article better, or perhaps mark both with the same Wikipedia
article. Again, this debate is mostly about disputed territories and how to
tag them, not the Wiki* links.

On Mon, Oct 23, 2017 at 7:33 AM, Andy Townsend  wrote:

> On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
>
>> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia
>>
>
> Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable
> at wikipedia.  For example https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> %D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Serbia are allegedly the same article and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
> Q403 lists them both. However, as can be seen by looking at the maps on
> each page, they aren't the same geographic entity - one includes Kosovo,
> one does not.  Neither is "wrong" from the point of view of the authors of
> each page yet they can't both be "correct" at the same time.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy
>
>
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 12:39, Tomas Straupis wrote:



How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

   Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)


For completeness, I pointed this out 11 months ago, in English, on 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43836371#map=8/54.872/22.250 .  
The advice was ignored.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

>>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
>> other tool which is not using wikidata.
> Could you point me to that tool?

  It is a local Lithuanian tool. But here you can have a look at results:
  http://patrulis.openmap.lt/wikipedia.html

> That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
> automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
> attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
> to decide what is correct.

  And I'm showing you examples of exactly the opposite. Most of the
errors found need fixer to READ, LOOK around and make DECISION. Even
with those "simple" ones as missing wikipedia link on a school object
needs reading, because there could be a wikipedia article about some
former school which currently is something else.
  As far as I know wikipedia has no way to specify object as
"historic" - which does not belong to OSM.

>>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
>> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
> That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
> faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
> about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
> the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia, than
> go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I would go
> and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and waited until
> Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In fact, I have
> done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your decision.

  I claim it is better if the person who knows about such stuff is
doing the changes. Not somebody applying auto-guesswork and hoping
somebody else to finish (to do actual work, and usually do MORE work).

> How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
> can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

  Have you noticed the title of this thread? ;-)

> My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
> needed - see above.

  It looks ridiculous that we now have to put up signs all around to
avoid guessfixers... It is much simpler to just revert and be done
with it.

> You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

  Would it be enough to put nowikidata=yes, noautoupdates=yes,
noguesswork=yes on the node for Lithuania as a country? ;-)

> And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
> wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?

  It will not stop it. Wikidata based tool is also a very good idea. I
have no doubt we will be using it as well.

  But its current implementation is unacceptable to us. We want people
to know and think, not to be dumb commiters of auto-calculated
guesswork. So removing wikidata is currently the only way to avoid
such unwanted fix-hikers. And note, we're not mass-removing wikidata
tags, only on objects which attract attention by this
wikidata-"fixer".

  And again. If you guys were asked a number of times during previous
years to STOP doing updates at least in Lithuania (and also in other
countries), what is a point of continuing doing that? You're not
helping.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 23/10/2017 11:40, Ryszard Mikke wrote:

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia


Part of the problem is that some of these problems simply aren't fixable 
at wikipedia.  For example 
https://sr.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A1%D1%80%D0%B1%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0 and 
https://sq.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbia are allegedly the same article and 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q403 lists them both. However, as can be 
seen by looking at the maps on each page, they aren't the same 
geographic entity - one includes Kosovo, one does not.  Neither is 
"wrong" from the point of view of the authors of each page yet they 
can't both be "correct" at the same time.


Best Regards,
Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 23 October 2017 at 07:17, Tomas Straupis  wrote:

> 2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > So, to sum up:
> > 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected
> until
> > it was detected by Yuri's tool.
>
>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
> other tool which is not using wikidata.


Could you point me to that tool?


> That other tool gives more
> than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there
> is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It
> could take two weeks, it could also take two years.
>

That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
to decide what is correct.


> > 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės
> II
> > piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
> > 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
> > even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
> > information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names
> "Žagarės
> > piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.
>
>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
>

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia,
than go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I
would go and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and
waited until Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In
fact, I have done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your
decision.


>   And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local
> knowledge.
>

How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
needed - see above.

You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

> Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?
>
>   It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a
> tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things
> could be fixed automatically.
>

I still think that correct linking to wikipedia is a good idea in this
case. For the reasons above.

  I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a
> problem:
>
>   Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in
> OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers
> church" and wikidata ref 12345.
>
>   Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real
> world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica".
>
>   OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed),
> wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church'
> page as a redirect only).
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St.
> Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into
> geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected
> to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change
> it in name and name:xx tags in OSM.
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong
> here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page.
> Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with
> outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not
> always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible,
> we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name).
>

On the contrary, AFAIK redirection pages don't have wikidata item, so the
wikidata-based tool would detect them. It is even possible to automatically
detect such cases (i.e. Wikidata article's title has changed, and there is
a redirect under old title) and correct wikipedia link in OSM to the new
title in Wikipedia. It would leave the name, but hey, it's easier to detect
name change manually if there is an obvious difference between name=* and
wikipedia=* tags, than to compare wikipedia=* tag with the current
Wikipedia article.

BTW such automatic correction is also possible even if the redirect would
have it's own wikidata item, or if there is no redirection at all.

And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?
-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Roland Olbricht]

So, to sum up:
1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected 
until it was detected by Yuri's tool.
2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės 
II piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* 
tag even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big 
information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names 
"Žagarės piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.


No, that is plain wrong.
I sum it up more correctly:

Up to version #4 of http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history
that object had a useful wikipedia link for a human being.
An average humans can cope with a disambiguation page like this.

Version #5 broke that wikipedia link. Given the changeset comment, this 
was apparently due to a faulty wikidata link.


Version #6 reinstated a useful wikipedia link for a human being. Linking 
to the currently matching Wikipedia page might have been even better, 
but it is up to a local mapper to decide whether the page title of the 
Wikipedia page title reasonably matches the OSM object.


To avoid having the same problem again, the wikidata tag has been 
dropped in that version.


Best regards,

Roland

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> So, to sum up:
> 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected until
> it was detected by Yuri's tool.

  There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
other tool which is not using wikidata. That other tool gives more
than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there
is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It
could take two weeks, it could also take two years.

> 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės II
> piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
> 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
> even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
> information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names "Žagarės
> piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.

  It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
  And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local knowledge.

> Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?

  It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a
tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things
could be fixed automatically.

  I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a problem:

  Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in
OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers
church" and wikidata ref 12345.

  Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real
world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica".

  OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed),
wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church'
page as a redirect only).

  If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St.
Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into
geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected
to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change
it in name and name:xx tags in OSM.

  If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong
here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page.
Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with
outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not
always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible,
we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name).

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 15 October 2017 at 16:05, Tomas Straupis  wrote:

>   Lets take an example. History of this hillfort:
>   http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history
>
>   What happened here:
> 1. I've added a hillfort object "Žagarės piliakalnis" (Žagarės hillfort).
> 2. Med fixed wikipedia tag (removed underscores - good change, my
> mistake fixed).
> 3. I've updated local Lithuanian heritage id's (fine, we use that for
> synchronisation).
> 4. rmikke added a wikidata entry... chrm... could be fine as we do not
> use wikidata at all, somebody else might, but... then
> 5. kartonage "corrected" wikidata tag (whatever, don't care about
> that) but also wikipedia tag! And let's look what was the change:
> "Žagarės piliakalnis" changed to "Žagarės antrasis piliakalnis". In
> English „Žagarės hillfort“ to „Žagarės SECOND hillfort". Reason stated
> for change is "pointing to disambiquity page" (so fixing wiki* tags
> according to Youris idea/tool). What is wrong here? Name tag is still
> "Žagarės I piliakalnis“ - Žagarės FIRST hillfort. And that is correct,
> because there is a second hillfort nearby called "Žagarės SECOND"
> hillfort:
>  http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/56.35690/23.23084
>   But wikipedia link on this FIRST hillfort now points to the SECOND
> hillfort.
>
>   What happens then. I fixed wikipedia tag and removed wikidata entry
> so that somebody else would not come and "fix" it again (at least
> until we fix the actual problem). But rmikke runs his script again and
> adds the same wikidata value again. So this item will once again show
> up in Youri's tool and somebody else can try to "fix" it.
>
>   The actual "on the ground" problem here is an error in official
> heritage data. Heritage codes or names are mixed/swaped in several
> official sources. It is impossible to fix this stuff by simply looking
> at the OSM data (and even by simply looking at heritage data because
> it contradicts with data of archaeologists). We (local community) will
> have to contact heritage guys, archaeologists to find out who is
> wrong. So it cannot be fixed by somebody without local knowledge and
> without local contacts. And the problem is that Youri's tool gives a
> false impression that it CAN be fixed.
>
>   And this hillfort does show up in our local wikipedia error list
> (which is produced without any use of wikidata whatsoever) and is just
> waiting in queue to be fixed.
>
>   The points I'm showing here:
>   1. Error identification can be done without wikidata tags (and we
> already identify more errors like: no object in OSM or no coordinates
> in wikipedia, multiple objects in OSM for the same wikipedia page).
>   2. Error can not be fixed without local knowledge.
>   3. If it was only wikidata tag I would not have noticed the bad
> change, because there is no way I would somehow know what those 324657
> 897984 65465465 id's stand for. It is only because of wikipedia tag
> that I spotted the problem.
>
>   There was a very logical and practical advice somewhere in this
> thread. If you got approval in OSM-RU, why can't you do your
> experimenting/fixing there first? To the very end. When all (or almost
> all) wiki errors would be fixed in Russia, you could create a report
> about your work. It could then by compared to other processes of
> fixing wiki data and it would be possible for a specific community to
> choose the most appropriate method. And there would be less
> "toxicity", because you would not be forcing your way on people who
> are successfully doing it in a different way.
>
>
So, to sum up:
1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected until
it was detected by Yuri's tool.
2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės II
piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names "Žagarės
piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.

Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?



-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
r.mi...@pl.vwfsag.deryszard.mi...@gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[Talk-cz] Wikidata a roboeditace - Was: WeeklyOSM CZ 374 (Was was: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?)

[Jan Martinec]

On 10/18/2017 11:34 AM, Tom Ka wrote:

Ahoj, je dostupné vydání 374 týdeníku WeeklyOSM:

http://www.weeklyosm.eu/cz/archives/9476

* Stáří zástavby podle OSM?
* Posledních 15 schránek v Brně.
* Statistiky slovenské DB fotek.
* Telenav data v Kanadě.
* PT_Assistant pro JOSM.
* Mapování kanadských budov.
* Postřehy k MapSwipe.
* Budoucnost OSMTracker.
*What3words pro Mercedes-Benz.

Pěkné počtení ...

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz



"Yuri Astrakhan začal hledat jméno pro svůj projekt Wikidata+OSM 
SPARQL." 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata%2BOSM_SPARQL_query_service


V tomhle podání to zní téměř nudně - ale hlavně to začal propagovat jako 
nástroj pro masovou mechanickou editaci všeho všude, a spustil tím, 
řekněme, "smršť připomínek" v OSM-talk hned v několika vláknech 
("Quick-Fix" a 3x "wikidata") 
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-October/thread.html


Mimo jiné tam padla výzva "než se tohle dořeší, prosím, nedělejte 
masivní přetagovávání wikidata=*"

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-October/079069.html
To se sice týká primárně botů, nikoli manuální editace - ale je možné, 
že teď bude na changesety s tímto tagem celosvětově upřeno mnohem více 
očí, než bývá jindy, tj. třeba na Klaudianovy popisky k palácům.


Celkem to asi problém nebude, jen je to trochu věc, která se děje 
maličko neviditelně (mimo ten list jsou vidět jen reverty), ale má 
dopady i třeba sem.


Zdar,
HPM

___
Talk-cz mailing list
Talk-cz@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-cz

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Lester Caine]

On 18/10/17 05:14, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> Lester, I agree with you that Wikidata should not contain an object for
> everything that OSM may have.  I don't believe there should be an entry
> for every McDonalds on the planet, or for every artist's work that
> someone may decide to include in OSM.  But that's up to Wikidata
> contributors.  Lets instead talk about practical usages of our data.

A good example, a list of every McDonalds on the planet is a job for
McDonalds. Does that database exist as a freely indexed? I've not
looked, but if all of the objects in OSM have an operator=mcdonalds:MCID
then an automated bot can identify problems with that cross referenced
list. With a growing access to these sorts of datasets a standard method
of using them would be nice and I include using using wikidata feeds in
that 'good practice'.

> Here is a wonderful site I saw at a conference a few days ago.  It lets
> you plan your trip based on the places you are interested in.  You can
> visualise all sorts of places - cultural, religious, hotels, bars -
> anything, and plot your course.  And it uses Wikidata, images from
> Commons, and Wikipedia text itself to describe the places.  The authors
> spoke at length how Wikidata tags in OSM has helped them build it, and
> the difficulty they had in all sorts of "data voodoo" to figure things
> out.  For example, they often correlate OSM & Wikidata locations by
> proximity, and try to guess if it's a match. They have done an
> outstanding job making sense of our data, but I think we could have made
> their job a lot easier with our communal data curation capabilities, and
> also help others who may have similar needs.
> 
> https://opentripmap.com/en/#14/40.7355/-73.9806
> 

Nice example of cross referencing but it would be enhanced by links back
to the websites of the various locations identified ... and this would
also allow things like my daughter fell foul off recently ... she was in
London and being 'vegan' went to a vegan restaurant ... which was closed
short term for refurbishment. Road closures and other short term changes
are not something OSM can really manage ...

> You do raise an important point about 1:1 vs part of vs ...  In order to
> be useful in data processing by 3rd party, data needs to answer a
> simple  questions:  does the linked Wikidata/Wikipedia represents this
> whole object, or is it simply related to it in some way.  Here, the 1:1
> is meant somewhat loosely - there are some cases when things don't align
> perfectly, but that's a separate topic.
> 
> If wiki* page is about that object, the consumer may choose to use
> multilingual names, show a portion of Wikipedia articles in the user's
> language, use Wikidata statements, and show images from Commons.

Current searches on wikpedia for things like 'sculptors' and the
location of their installations is somewhat difficult when there is not
an english article. wikidata is helping to find other language
references to subject or object, but in many cases currently 'commons'
is still not well indexed into that mix. Not an OSM problem but one that
holds up adding links easily currently.

> If wiki* is only *related* somehow to the object, no such automatic
> usage is possible. The link is still very valuable for the editors of
> the map, but not as much to the data consumers.  Examples include a wiki
> article that has just a section about this work of art, or wiki page is
> a list that includes all churches in the area, or describe a class of
> these objects (e.g. brand) but not this object itself.  Moreover, I
> suspect our favorite tools like Nominatim would also be mislead if they
> rely on Wiki* links that relate to the object, but not about the object
> itself. After all, if the object is well known, it would probably have
> its own wiki page, or at least a wikidata entry.

Past 'bad' experience of wikipedia have not helped in my adoption of
that as a repository of material but I think the sort of material I've
had stripped from wikipedia in the past SHOULD have a safe home in
wikidata.

> Some translations are completely different articles?
> 
> I'm not sure what you meant here. I have heard of rare cases when
> unrelated wikipedia articles are connected to each other, but usually
> those get fixed as soon as someone notices.

Again ... wikidata by it's nature is probably helping to identify
'multiple' articles across the different wiki language bases. Again it's
articles on artists that I've hit with different content where there is
not an english version currently.

> The problem I still see is that many of the items I am looking to
> link to
> are elements of an article rather than the whole article, such as the
> location of the works of a particular artist. At some point in the
> future wikidata may well have a complete index of QID's for every
> artist's work, but currently I don't have the time to add 

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

Lester, I agree with you that Wikidata should not contain an object for
everything that OSM may have.  I don't believe there should be an entry for
every McDonalds on the planet, or for every artist's work that someone may
decide to include in OSM.  But that's up to Wikidata contributors.  Lets
instead talk about practical usages of our data.

Here is a wonderful site I saw at a conference a few days ago.  It lets you
plan your trip based on the places you are interested in.  You can
visualise all sorts of places - cultural, religious, hotels, bars -
anything, and plot your course.  And it uses Wikidata, images from Commons,
and Wikipedia text itself to describe the places.  The authors spoke at
length how Wikidata tags in OSM has helped them build it, and the
difficulty they had in all sorts of "data voodoo" to figure things out.
For example, they often correlate OSM & Wikidata locations by proximity,
and try to guess if it's a match. They have done an outstanding job making
sense of our data, but I think we could have made their job a lot easier
with our communal data curation capabilities, and also help others who may
have similar needs.

https://opentripmap.com/en/#14/40.7355/-73.9806

You do raise an important point about 1:1 vs part of vs ...  In order to be
useful in data processing by 3rd party, data needs to answer a simple
questions:  does the linked Wikidata/Wikipedia represents this whole
object, or is it simply related to it in some way.  Here, the 1:1 is meant
somewhat loosely - there are some cases when things don't align perfectly,
but that's a separate topic.

If wiki* page is about that object, the consumer may choose to use
multilingual names, show a portion of Wikipedia articles in the user's
language, use Wikidata statements, and show images from Commons.

If wiki* is only *related* somehow to the object, no such automatic usage
is possible. The link is still very valuable for the editors of the map,
but not as much to the data consumers.  Examples include a wiki article
that has just a section about this work of art, or wiki page is a list that
includes all churches in the area, or describe a class of these objects
(e.g. brand) but not this object itself.  Moreover, I suspect our favorite
tools like Nominatim would also be mislead if they rely on Wiki* links that
relate to the object, but not about the object itself. After all, if the
object is well known, it would probably have its own wiki page, or at least
a wikidata entry.

Some translations are completely different articles?

I'm not sure what you meant here. I have heard of rare cases when unrelated
wikipedia articles are connected to each other, but usually those get fixed
as soon as someone notices.


> The problem I still see is that many of the items I am looking to link to
> are elements of an article rather than the whole article, such as the
> location of the works of a particular artist. At some point in the
> future wikidata may well have a complete index of QID's for every
> artist's work, but currently I don't have the time to add wikidata
> entries where they don't exist, so a link to the artists wikipedia
> article which may or may not actually list this particular work is
> second best and in many cases there is not even an english version :(
>

Sure, lets just add it as a different tag, not wikipedia/wikidata. We could
call it related:wikidata or related:wikipedia:en, or subdivide it even
further. Note that here, unlike the main wikipedia tag, the
related:wikipedia:en might not be the same as wikidata. Moreover, I would
argue that here we should use related:wikipedia:xx format with the language
code, because the article content is likely to differ between languages.


> Some bot then modifying that link out of context is not helpful and
> while the idea of 'nobot' flags may seem a solution, it's just adding
> another layer of complexity which potentially needs to exist for EVERY
> tag on EVERY object. Something I don't think should be allowed!
>

Agree - I think a bot injecting wikipedia/wikidata tags based on some
heuristics, e.g. "has the same object class and is nearby" is not very good
and error prone. This could be a human-curated process, e.g. ask the user
to help deciding which  Wikipedia articles does this object represent, and
offer some likely candidates, but it shouldn't be automatic.  I think
Mapbox was working on something like that?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Lester Caine]

On 16/10/17 05:24, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> When a Wikidata item is modified to link to a Wikipedia article (or
> Wikivoyage article etc.), the Wikipedia article automatically links back
> to the Wikidata item. This is a software feature made possible because
> Wikipedia and Wikidata are colocated in the same database cluster. No
> bots are involved; this is unlike the process by which interwiki links
> used to be maintained before Wikidata was introduced.
> 
> When a Wikipedia article is renamed, it does temporarily get detached
> from the Wikidata item because the task of updating the Wikidata item
> falls to a process that runs asynchronously on a job queue. It isn't
> possible for OpenStreetMap, as an external site, to automatically update
> its wikipedia tags via the same mechanism. However, in principle, one
> could write a bot that consumes Wikipedia's or Wikidata's recent changes
> feed, looking for features to update. I'm not personally proposing to
> run such a bot, to be clear. And one of the benefits of wikidata tags is
> that such a bot would decrease in necessity over time, since Wikidata
> QIDs are more stable.

Minh ... I can see that there is potential to use the Wikidata QID's as
a more stable path into wikipedia data. The way it is solving the
problem of accessing translated versions of wikipedia articles is
looking good, but I think it will be some time before it is totally
mastered? Some translations are completely different articles? The
problem I still see is that many of the items I am looking to link to
are elements of an article rather than the whole article, such as the
location of the works of a particular artist. At some point in the
future wikidata may well have a complete index of QID's for every
artist's work, but currently I don't have the time to add wikidata
entries where they don't exist, so a link to the artists wikipedia
article which may or may not actually list this particular work is
second best and in many cases there is not even an english version :(
Some bot then modifying that link out of context is not helpful and
while the idea of 'nobot' flags may seem a solution, it's just adding
another layer of complexity which potentially needs to exist for EVERY
tag on EVERY object. Something I don't think should be allowed!

This is just an example but there are hundreds of areas where the object
being identified is part of one or more wikipedia article in one or more
language, so the use of this data in the OSM dataspace needs to be
managed by OSM and only a small part can be automated using the feeds
from the wikidata bot's? Even if it is OSM bots that are doing the
processing. The annoying thing here is that the hierarchy of places that
wikidata provides could be useful to OSM searches ... but it still needs
the likes of Nominatim and/or GeoNames to cross reference that data
which provides an alternate secondary database.

-- 
Lester Caine - G8HFL
-
Contact - http://lsces.co.uk/wiki/?page=contact
L.S.Caine Electronic Services - http://lsces.co.uk
EnquirySolve - http://enquirysolve.com/
Model Engineers Digital Workshop - http://medw.co.uk
Rainbow Digital Media - http://rainbowdigitalmedia.co.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Minh Nguyen]

On 15/10/2017 05:39, Michael Reichert wrote:

And even if detecting disambiguation pages in Wikipedia would miss too
much of them, you could use Wikidata to check if the Wikipedia page the
Wikidata item points to is a disambiguation page according to Wikidata?

While wroting the paragraph above, I wondered how the status of a
Wikipedia page a Wikidata item links to is maintained. Is there a bot
updating them every hour in Wikidata? If there is no such bot (or it is
not running every minute or hour), there is no need for wikidata=* tags
in OSM to find wikipedia=* tags pointing to disambiguation pages because
you could get the status of a Wikipedia page by parsing the Wikipedia
page itself.


When a Wikidata item is modified to link to a Wikipedia article (or 
Wikivoyage article etc.), the Wikipedia article automatically links back 
to the Wikidata item. This is a software feature made possible because 
Wikipedia and Wikidata are colocated in the same database cluster. No 
bots are involved; this is unlike the process by which interwiki links 
used to be maintained before Wikidata was introduced.


When a Wikipedia article is renamed, it does temporarily get detached 
from the Wikidata item because the task of updating the Wikidata item 
falls to a process that runs asynchronously on a job queue. It isn't 
possible for OpenStreetMap, as an external site, to automatically update 
its wikipedia tags via the same mechanism. However, in principle, one 
could write a bot that consumes Wikipedia's or Wikidata's recent changes 
feed, looking for features to update. I'm not personally proposing to 
run such a bot, to be clear. And one of the benefits of wikidata tags is 
that such a bot would decrease in necessity over time, since Wikidata 
QIDs are more stable.


--
m...@nguyen.cincinnati.oh.us


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Tomas Straupis]

  Lets take an example. History of this hillfort:
  http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1717783246/history

  What happened here:
1. I've added a hillfort object "Žagarės piliakalnis" (Žagarės hillfort).
2. Med fixed wikipedia tag (removed underscores - good change, my
mistake fixed).
3. I've updated local Lithuanian heritage id's (fine, we use that for
synchronisation).
4. rmikke added a wikidata entry... chrm... could be fine as we do not
use wikidata at all, somebody else might, but... then
5. kartonage "corrected" wikidata tag (whatever, don't care about
that) but also wikipedia tag! And let's look what was the change:
"Žagarės piliakalnis" changed to "Žagarės antrasis piliakalnis". In
English „Žagarės hillfort“ to „Žagarės SECOND hillfort". Reason stated
for change is "pointing to disambiquity page" (so fixing wiki* tags
according to Youris idea/tool). What is wrong here? Name tag is still
"Žagarės I piliakalnis“ - Žagarės FIRST hillfort. And that is correct,
because there is a second hillfort nearby called "Žagarės SECOND"
hillfort:
 http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/56.35690/23.23084
  But wikipedia link on this FIRST hillfort now points to the SECOND hillfort.

  What happens then. I fixed wikipedia tag and removed wikidata entry
so that somebody else would not come and "fix" it again (at least
until we fix the actual problem). But rmikke runs his script again and
adds the same wikidata value again. So this item will once again show
up in Youri's tool and somebody else can try to "fix" it.

  The actual "on the ground" problem here is an error in official
heritage data. Heritage codes or names are mixed/swaped in several
official sources. It is impossible to fix this stuff by simply looking
at the OSM data (and even by simply looking at heritage data because
it contradicts with data of archaeologists). We (local community) will
have to contact heritage guys, archaeologists to find out who is
wrong. So it cannot be fixed by somebody without local knowledge and
without local contacts. And the problem is that Youri's tool gives a
false impression that it CAN be fixed.

  And this hillfort does show up in our local wikipedia error list
(which is produced without any use of wikidata whatsoever) and is just
waiting in queue to be fixed.

  The points I'm showing here:
  1. Error identification can be done without wikidata tags (and we
already identify more errors like: no object in OSM or no coordinates
in wikipedia, multiple objects in OSM for the same wikipedia page).
  2. Error can not be fixed without local knowledge.
  3. If it was only wikidata tag I would not have noticed the bad
change, because there is no way I would somehow know what those 324657
897984 65465465 id's stand for. It is only because of wikipedia tag
that I spotted the problem.

  There was a very logical and practical advice somewhere in this
thread. If you got approval in OSM-RU, why can't you do your
experimenting/fixing there first? To the very end. When all (or almost
all) wiki errors would be fixed in Russia, you could create a report
about your work. It could then by compared to other processes of
fixing wiki data and it would be possible for a specific community to
choose the most appropriate method. And there would be less
"toxicity", because you would not be forcing your way on people who
are successfully doing it in a different way.

-- 
Tomas

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

If a community has had a well established and agreed process running, which
does not create any new data issues, why should someone outside of that
community be requesting a global halt?  It's not like the data is getting
worse all of a sudden, right? And their work does not prevent global
community from reaching a consensus on how to move forward.  I suspect this
discussion may take a very long time to complete, so proposing to ban
various communities from doing what they have already been happily doing
because somewhere else something is being discussed is strange.  There are
over 40,000 users editing OSM, so reaching a consensus on a fundamental
topic of external DB linking might take years.

Has there ever been a global halt like this in OSM, where several people in
@talk demanded a certain tag to not be (mass) edited globally?  I'm totally
ok if there is a process for that, but global halt does seem a bit extreme
due to a relatively low impact.  After all, we are discussing philosophy of
the project here, not that tag X breaks half of the map renderers all of a
sudden, right?
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Ryszard,

Am 2017-10-12 um 22:41 schrieb Ryszard Mikke:
> On 3 October 2017 at 18:56, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> 
>> On Tuesday 03 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions
>>> vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale)
>>> wikidata edits for a while until more members of our community have
>>> had a chance to form an opinion?
>>
>> I think that is a good idea.
>>
> 
> I'm not happy with it, as the way I do it is sensitive to amount of data to
> work with, so if I don't run it regularly, I have to restart from fragments.
> But well, I might limit the query to Poland where the adding of wikidata
> entries is widely accepted.
> I will repeat Yuri's question here:
> If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban for
> that location?

Please pause your edits of such kind at all!

If a part of the OSM community thinks that an edit of type X is good but
another part of the community opposes, there is not enough consent on
the topic. The question if we shold have wikidata=* tags in OSM and
which objects should have them, is an international questions. As long
as international discussions are going on, everyone has to wait.

Best regards

Michael


-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Michael Reichert]

Hi Ryszard,

Am 2017-10-13 um 01:11 schrieb Ryszard Mikke:
> On 12 October 2017 at 23:23, Christoph Hormann  wrote:
> 
>> As i have pointed out elsewhere doing QA in OSM based on Wikidata does
>> not in any way depend on the automatic addition of Wikidata IDs to
>> OSM - or in other words: Any ID you'd add based on some matching
>> algorithm just for QA purposes you would not need to add at all.
>>
> 
> How exactly would you approach detecting OSM objects with wikipedia=*
> pointing to disambiguation page in wikipedia, instead of the correct one,
> without using wikidata? This is a real problem - e.g. wikipedia link
> "pl:Józefów" is useless as it points to a list of about a hundred places of
> this name. With wikidata one can locate all similar cases and correct them
> - I have done this for Poland as well as for other countries, using Yuri's
> QA tool. Without it, disambig wikipedia links would stay there until
> someone accidentally finds one and will be willing to correct it. One by
> one. There were hundreds of such cases in Poland alone.

You don't need an additional key in OpenStreetMap to find wikipedia=*
tags pointing to disambiguation pages. By parsing the content of the
Wikipedia page and checking if the page looks like a disambiguation page.

And even if detecting disambiguation pages in Wikipedia would miss too
much of them, you could use Wikidata to check if the Wikipedia page the
Wikidata item points to is a disambiguation page according to Wikidata?

While wroting the paragraph above, I wondered how the status of a
Wikipedia page a Wikidata item links to is maintained. Is there a bot
updating them every hour in Wikidata? If there is no such bot (or it is
not running every minute or hour), there is no need for wikidata=* tags
in OSM to find wikipedia=* tags pointing to disambiguation pages because
you could get the status of a Wikipedia page by parsing the Wikipedia
page itself.

Best regards

Michael

-- 
Per E-Mail kommuniziere ich bevorzugt GPG-verschlüsselt. (Mailinglisten
ausgenommen)
I prefer GPG encryption of emails. (does not apply on mailing lists)



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 3 October 2017 at 18:56, Christoph Hormann  wrote:


> * systematic wikidata ID addition/editing efforts (there seems to be
> nothing listed currently on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log)


That may be because there is a bug in wiki, that I have reported a few
months ago. Adding a category in the page does not cause this page appear
in the category. I have just created a page, documenting my edits of
wikidata tags and I can see the problem persists.
See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Rmikke/Adding_wikidata_entries
and try to find it in the "Automated edits log" category.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 12 October 2017 at 23:23, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> As i have pointed out elsewhere doing QA in OSM based on Wikidata does
> not in any way depend on the automatic addition of Wikidata IDs to
> OSM - or in other words: Any ID you'd add based on some matching
> algorithm just for QA purposes you would not need to add at all.
>

How exactly would you approach detecting OSM objects with wikipedia=*
pointing to disambiguation page in wikipedia, instead of the correct one,
without using wikidata? This is a real problem - e.g. wikipedia link
"pl:Józefów" is useless as it points to a list of about a hundred places of
this name. With wikidata one can locate all similar cases and correct them
- I have done this for Poland as well as for other countries, using Yuri's
QA tool. Without it, disambig wikipedia links would stay there until
someone accidentally finds one and will be willing to correct it. One by
one. There were hundreds of such cases in Poland alone.


> With practical applications i was referring to actual external use of
> the data.  If the only practical use of the wikidata IDs is internal QA
> that would be a pretty bad ROI in terms of Mapper's work (the time
> adding IDs would be much better invested into doing actual validation
> work).
>

But how could a mapper validate anything if he (or she) has no way to know
there is a problem?


> > > * To what extent has there been information transferred
> > > systematically from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata
> > > ID references (like adding names in different languages).  As
> > > others have explained this would be legally problematic and it
> > > would be important to know how common this is.
> >
> > To my knowledge nothing automatic of this kind exists so far, so
> > there should be only a few manual edits of this kind.
>
> Yesterday i showed examples of systematic node and name tag additions to
> OSM clearly sourced from Wikidata.  It is clear that this is happening.
> The question is only how extensive such data transfer is.


Yup, you are right, I can see now it's happening.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Thursday 12 October 2017, Ryszard Mikke wrote:
>
> * How many of the wikidata=* tags currently in the database have been
>
> > added through normal mapping (while adding or significantly
> > modifying the object otherwise) and how many have been added
> > through systematic efforts outside normal mapping?
>
> Given that semi-automated edits might be done by unknown number of
> users, i'm afraid this information might be hard to obtain.

If it was easy to determine i would not have asked.

> > * What practical applications exist for the wikidata IDs?  And i am
> > not talking about theoretical ideas here but specific uses for
> > practical purposes in actual use, in particular with open source
> > implementation.
>
> There are QA tools by Yuri Astrakhan and Mateusz Konieczny, both
> based on wikidata.

As i have pointed out elsewhere doing QA in OSM based on Wikidata does 
not in any way depend on the automatic addition of Wikidata IDs to 
OSM - or in other words: Any ID you'd add based on some matching 
algorithm just for QA purposes you would not need to add at all.

With practical applications i was referring to actual external use of 
the data.  If the only practical use of the wikidata IDs is internal QA 
that would be a pretty bad ROI in terms of Mapper's work (the time 
adding IDs would be much better invested into doing actual validation 
work).

> > * To what extent has there been information transferred
> > systematically from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata
> > ID references (like adding names in different languages).  As
> > others have explained this would be legally problematic and it
> > would be important to know how common this is.
>
> To my knowledge nothing automatic of this kind exists so far, so
> there should be only a few manual edits of this kind.

Yesterday i showed examples of systematic node and name tag additions to 
OSM clearly sourced from Wikidata.  It is clear that this is happening.  
The question is only how extensive such data transfer is.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 3 October 2017 at 23:21, Yuri Astrakhan  wrote:

> While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a month,
> we should be very clear here:
> * several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags, e.g.
> Israel. Should they pause their bots?
> * If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban
> for that location?
> * Has anyone actually been doing world-wide bulk wikidata additions ever
> since this discussion has restarted after what I thought was a settled
> matter about two weeks ago?
>

Yup, I have been updating wikidata entries for northern and central Europe
more or less every weekend, with Overpass and JOSM's Wikipedia plugin.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 3 October 2017 at 18:56, Christoph Hormann  wrote:

> On Tuesday 03 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> >seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions
> > vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale)
> > wikidata edits for a while until more members of our community have
> > had a chance to form an opinion?
>
> I think that is a good idea.
>

I'm not happy with it, as the way I do it is sensitive to amount of data to
work with, so if I don't run it regularly, I have to restart from fragments.
But well, I might limit the query to Poland where the adding of wikidata
entries is widely accepted.
I will repeat Yuri's question here:
If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban for
that location?

Also, I'm going to remove wikidata entries where the wikipedia tag points
to a section in a wikipedia article as Spiegel0 pointed in
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52744495 (next weekend, I hope) as
they are obviously erroneous. I won't do it globally, though, only in the
region i have been adding wikidata entries (Denmark, Norway, Sweden,
Finland, Baltic countries, Kaliningrad region, Poland, Belarus, Ukraine,
Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria and Hungary).

* How many of the wikidata=* tags currently in the database have been
> added through normal mapping (while adding or significantly modifying
> the object otherwise) and how many have been added through systematic
> efforts outside normal mapping?
>

Given that semi-automated edits might be done by unknown number of users,
i'm afraid this information might be hard to obtain.


> * What practical applications exist for the wikidata IDs?  And i am not
> talking about theoretical ideas here but specific uses for practical
> purposes in actual use, in particular with open source implementation.
>

There are QA tools by Yuri Astrakhan and Mateusz Konieczny, both based on
wikidata.


> * To what extent has there been information transferred systematically
> from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata ID references
> (like adding names in different languages).  As others have explained
> this would be legally problematic and it would be important to know how
> common this is.
>

To my knowledge nothing automatic of this kind exists so far, so there
should be only a few manual edits of this kind.


> Also i think it would be of great importance for OSM and a functioning
> communication in the community to have better documentation of:
>
> * systematic wikidata ID addition/editing efforts (there seems to be
> nothing listed currently on
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log)
>

Ummm, I think I should document my edits...

Now, to be frank, I can't see anything wrong in adding wikidata entries to
existing wikipedia links in OSM objects and using them e.g. to display
Wikipedia articles in users' preferred langages instead of "native"
language of article pointed by wikipedia=* tag as long as we don't copy the
data into OSM.

mi...@pl.vwfsag.de ryszard.mi...@gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 3:52 AM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> yes, currently it doesn’t seem the deletionists are active in wikidata,
> but also wikipedia was not always like it is today. The notability policy
> is there and one day someone might come and say: these roads are just
> ordinary roads, nothing notable about them to keep, they will likely never
> ever have their own article, image, or page in Wikipedia, Wikimedia
> Commons, or Wikivoyage..
>

But having a corresponding page/article/image is just the 1st of the 3
criteria for keeping an item in Wikidata. These Dutch streets fulfill the
2nd criteria which you already quoted: "The entity must be notable, in the
sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available
references" and the Notability policy only requires that at least 1 of the
3 criteria is met.
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 12. Oct 2017, at 20:17, Eugene Alvin Villar  wrote:
> 
> Wikidata's notability policy is actually very liberal. If you're familiar 
> with the Inclusionist versus Deletionist debate in Wikipedia, Wikidata is 
> heaven for Inclusionists. For instance, Wikidata now has items for 
> practically all streets in the Netherlands. 99% of these will likely never 
> ever have their own article, image, or page in Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, 
> or Wikivoyage.



yes, currently it doesn’t seem the deletionists are active in wikidata, but 
also wikipedia was not always like it is today. The notability policy is there 
and one day someone might come and say: these roads are just ordinary roads, 
nothing notable about them to keep, they will likely never ever have their own 
article, image, or page in Wikipedia, Wikimedia Commons, or Wikivoyage..
;-)

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Wed, Oct 11, 2017 at 9:02 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> From what I have seen so far, this should probably be less of a concern,
> but it is an uncertainty (because it could be interpreted more rigidly in
> the future), I agree. Requirements seem to be much lower than they are for
> wikipedia inclusion, for one because a link to any of these wikimedia
> projects is sufficient: Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikisource, Wikiquote,
> Wikinews, Wikibooks, Wikidata, Wikispecies, Wikiversity, or Wikimedia
> Commons (this paragraph is followed by some clarification and limitation).
> In other words, if you want to save your pet wikidata object from deletion
> it is sufficient to take a picture of it and upload it to wm commons.
>
> There's also a very soft criterion in the next paragraph which allows
> object that "[refer] to an instance of a *clearly identifiable conceptual
> or material entity*. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it *can
> be described using serious and publicly available references*."
> It requires references to be "serious" (how subjective is this?).
>

Wikidata's notability policy is actually very liberal. If you're familiar
with the Inclusionist versus Deletionist debate in Wikipedia, Wikidata is
heaven for Inclusionists. For instance, Wikidata now has items for
practically all streets in the Netherlands. 99% of these will likely never
ever have their own article, image, or page in Wikipedia, Wikimedia
Commons, or Wikivoyage.

Here is the import request (bot task) that imported the Dutch streets into
Wikidata:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/RobotMichiel1972_2
And here is the Wikidata SPARQL query to extract the street items:
http://tinyurl.com/y7k6cfc7
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

sent from a phone

> On 11. Oct 2017, at 16:59, Rory McCann  wrote:
> 
> No-one's said it yet, but to me, that's a con. Not everyone likes the
> share-alike requirement, and that's fine. But there are people, like me,
> who think "share-alike" is a pro.


I also like the idea of share-alike, but in reality it’s a problem because it 
prevents use of open data by other open data projects as soon as they don’t use 
the exact same license. Remember the redaction of OSM data because we changed 
from one share alike to another? Or the incompatibility of wikipedia and osm? 
If we import data it’s a pro if there are no strings attached that would 
potentially force us to remove the data and contributions built upon this data 
in case of another (not so probable) license change.

cheers,
Martin 
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Rory McCann]

Hi all,

On 11/10/17 15:02, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:

For me, criterions pro wikidata are:
- it has a very permissive license (cc0)


No-one's said it yet, but to me, that's a con. Not everyone likes the
share-alike requirement, and that's fine. But there are people, like me,
who think "share-alike" is a pro. I don't really like some corporation
using data I created without having to give it back.

This sort of thing has been argued since the start of (internet) time,
with the "BSD is more free! No GPL is more free!".


--

Rory
who yes, would probably be considered a long haired hippie commie pinko 
socialist by some. ;)


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 October 2017, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> From what I have seen so far, this should probably be less of a
> concern,
>
> but it is an uncertainty (because it could be interpreted more
> rigidly in the future)

I am not judging here, i merely stated the observation that Wikidata in 
its current form would not be capable to function as an universal 
meta-database connecting OSM with other open data sets.

To be honest - even if Wikidata was willing to change their Notability 
rules in a way that fully covers OSM (like by adding a rule declaring 
everything in OSM notable) this would still not work because it would 
also need to cover everything in any other open database OSM might be 
connected to and that quickly scales to a point where Wikidata almost 
certainly does not want to go.

> For me, criterions pro wikidata are:
> - it has a very permissive license (cc0)
> - it is openly accessible
> - it is fully downloadable as a dump (i.e. I don't have to use APIs
> which might log what I look at or limit the speed or quantity of my
> access) - there is overlap with our field of interest

You should be aware that these same criteria are fulfilled by a large 
number of other data sets, like for example almost all geodata 
published by the USGS or other US federal institutions.

> > But my question was specifically to what extent data has been
> > transferred based on wikidata ID references.  The question if such
> > data transfer happened before based on other connections has
> > nothing to do with this.
>
> Is this about reliability of the information, or about licensing
> questions?

If and how wikidata tags in OSM are used by Mappers to transfer 
additional information from Wikidata to OSM is important to know i 
think.  I have no specific hypothesis here.  But obviously such 
transfer can result both in legal and quality concerns.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

2017-10-11 13:42 GMT+02:00 Christoph Hormann :

> * Wikidata is definitely not suited as an universal meta-database
> connecting OSM with other open data sets.  This is because of the
> Notability concept (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability)
> which practically means the vast majority of the >500 million tagged
> features in OSM will never be able to get a Wikidata ID and will
> therefore never be able to be connected to other data sets through
> Wikidata.
>


>From what I have seen so far, this should probably be less of a concern,
but it is an uncertainty (because it could be interpreted more rigidly in
the future), I agree. Requirements seem to be much lower than they are for
wikipedia inclusion, for one because a link to any of these wikimedia
projects is sufficient: Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, Wikisource, Wikiquote,
Wikinews, Wikibooks, Wikidata, Wikispecies, Wikiversity, or Wikimedia
Commons (this paragraph is followed by some clarification and limitation).
In other words, if you want to save your pet wikidata object from deletion
it is sufficient to take a picture of it and upload it to wm commons.

There's also a very soft criterion in the next paragraph which allows
object that "[refer] to an instance of a *clearly identifiable conceptual
or material entity*. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it *can
be described using serious and publicly available references*."
It requires references to be "serious" (how subjective is this?).

On the other hand, even stuff like objects for osm tags don't get removed:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q29637965
likely because it fulfills a structural need.




>
> > * What is the qualification of Wikidata for having its IDs in OSM
> > (both for wikidata=* and X:wikidata=*)?  Is there a particular
> > objective criterion that qualifies it?  Would there be other external
> > IDs that would also qualify under these criteria?  Is there a limit
> > in the number of different external IDs OSM is going to accept?
>


is it something we have to decide now, or can we wait until we can see how
many external IDs mappers actually put into OSM, and whether this can
become a serious problem?
For me, criterions pro wikidata are:
- it has a very permissive license (cc0)
- it is openly accessible
- it is fully downloadable as a dump (i.e. I don't have to use APIs which
might log what I look at or limit the speed or quantity of my access)
- there is overlap with our field of interest



>
> > > * To what extent has there been information transferred
> > > systematically from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata
> > > ID references (like adding names in different languages).  As
> > > others have explained this would be legally problematic and it
> > > would be important to know how common this is.
> >
> > I agree that there are questions about OSM's acceptance of labels and
> > statements copied from Wikidata, though I would've expected this
> > phenomenon to be at least as common with Wikipedia long before the
> > introduction of the wikidata tag.
>
> But my question was specifically to what extent data has been
> transferred based on wikidata ID references.  The question if such data
> transfer happened before based on other connections has nothing to do
> with this.
>


Is this about reliability of the information, or about licensing questions?
As wikidata is published under cc0, the latter shouldn't matter here, it is
the wikimedia foundation that guarantees that they can release this data as
cc0, no?

Although, admittedly, wikimedia foundation themselves have not yet formed a
definitive view on database protection:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights
Disclaimer: "Note: This page shares the Wikimedia Foundation’s preliminary
perspective on a legal issue. This page is not final - if you have
additional information, or want to provide a different perspective, please
feel free to expand or add to it."
And there are also some sentences on this page (
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights#Conclusion ) that
read like WMF would be suggesting to copy protected material from EU
databases "under the radar": "Extraction and use of data should be kept to
a minimum and *limited to unprotected material, such as uncopyrightable
facts and short phrases*, rather than extensive text. For EU databases,
bots or other automated ways of extracting data should also be avoided
because of the Directive’s prohibition on “repeated and systematic
extraction” of even insubstantial amounts of data."

First, under the database directive there is no "unprotected material such
as ... facts and short phrases", and secondly, if you take information from
a database to build another database like wikidata it is a given that all
users together likely do "repeated and systematic extraction", regardless
of using a bot or doing it "manually".

Cheers,
Martin
___
talk mailing list

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 11 October 2017, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Great questions. I've attempted to answer a few of them below:

Thanks for the effort - but from my point of view these answers mostly 
do not actually address the key points of my questions.  

I have made some progress getting answers to some of the core questions 
on the German forum 
(https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=59910=3) so far 
resulting in the following conclusions from my side.

* stability of Wikidata IDs seems limited.  There seems to be a concept 
of redirects so an ID can point to a Wikidata object with a different 
ID and the object formerly under that ID is not necessarily identical 
to the one it redirects to.  To what extent re-structuring of 
information on Wikidata (that would primarily mean merging and 
splitting of Wikidata objects) leading to the creation of redirects 
happens and how much more or less common it is to OSM IDs changing i 
don't know (and given Wikidata is still very young such information 
would also be quite unreliable for the future).

* there definitely is no 1:1 relationship between Wikidata IDs and OSM 
objects in general.  In particular this is not the case for Wikidata 
objects covering several concepts that are separately mapped in OSM 
(where several features in OSM correctly refer to the same Wikidata 
ID).  Also in case of redirects in Wikidata there would be several 
Wikidata IDs corresponding to the same OSM feature (although you could 
of course formally define redirects as invalid Wikidata IDs - which 
however would further limit the stability of those IDs as explained 
above).

* Wikidata is definitely not suited as an universal meta-database 
connecting OSM with other open data sets.  This is because of the 
Notability concept (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability) 
which practically means the vast majority of the >500 million tagged 
features in OSM will never be able to get a Wikidata ID and will 
therefore never be able to be connected to other data sets through 
Wikidata.

There are still a lot of things that are unclear to me about the 
whole "Wikidata in OSM" subject so any further insights into this are 
welcome.  Given that Wikidata cannot function as an universal connector 
of OSM to other databases (something i was not really aware before) i 
would in particular like to re-emphasize the question:

> * What is the qualification of Wikidata for having its IDs in OSM
> (both for wikidata=* and X:wikidata=*)?  Is there a particular
> objective criterion that qualifies it?  Would there be other external
> IDs that would also qualify under these criteria?  Is there a limit
> in the number of different external IDs OSM is going to accept?

Please understand that from my side this is truly an open question, not 
a means to press for removing wikidata IDs from OSM.  But it is a 
question that needs a good answer from my point of view.  And 
deflecting by pointing to other IDs we already have in OSM like 
leftovers from imports and IDs for specific real world uses does not 
really help here.

> > * To what extent has there been information transferred
> > systematically from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata
> > ID references (like adding names in different languages).  As
> > others have explained this would be legally problematic and it
> > would be important to know how common this is.
>
> I agree that there are questions about OSM's acceptance of labels and
> statements copied from Wikidata, though I would've expected this
> phenomenon to be at least as common with Wikipedia long before the
> introduction of the wikidata tag.

But my question was specifically to what extent data has been 
transferred based on wikidata ID references.  The question if such data 
transfer happened before based on other connections has nothing to do 
with this.

We definitely have under-the-radar data imports from Wikidata, sometimes 
partly disguised by moving nodes - but the names matching in all 
inconsistencies is a clear indicator.  Like here:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4996439821
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5073632521
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5121933121

But this is also a different matter unrelated to the Wikidata IDs in 
OSM.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Minh Nguyen]

Great questions. I've attempted to answer a few of them below:

On 03/10/2017 09:56, Christoph Hormann wrote:

* To what extent has there been information transferred systematically
from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata ID references
(like adding names in different languages).  As others have explained
this would be legally problematic and it would be important to know how
common this is.


I agree that there are questions about OSM's acceptance of labels and 
statements copied from Wikidata, though I would've expected this 
phenomenon to be at least as common with Wikipedia long before the 
introduction of the wikidata tag.


Years ago, there was a campaign to add as many translations of country 
names as possible, using Wikipedia as the primary source. [1] A map 
renderer that uses these translations would logically want translations 
or transliterations for as many cities as possible, but my impression is 
that the OSM community would frown on such a massive expansion in city 
name transliterations. Instead, we can point data consumers to Wikidata 
as a source for this data.



* How stable is the identity of what can be found under a certain
Wikidata ID.  As mentioned there are cases where Wikidata aggregates
several concepts under one ID (like an administrative unit and a
populated place in case of cities/towns).  Would it be possible that
this changes?  If yes, would the original ID be re-purposed or would it
cease to exist?


To the extent that an administrative unit and populated place are 
considered separate entities, as they are for some kinds of places, 
Wikidata ideally maintains separate entities for each. The reality is 
less clear-cut, since much of Wikidata's original data on geographic and 
political entities comes from Wikipedia, which generally doesn't make 
such distinctions at the article title level. The Wikidata project aims 
to eventually create separate entities for every concept that Wikipedia 
has traditionally conflated inside the same article. Thus Wikidata 
maintains a separate entity for each Pokémon species, whereas the 
English Wikipedia combines them all into a few list articles. [2][3]


If an administrative unit or populated place (or both) ceases to exist, 
the QID remains valid, but a statement or qualifier is added to indicate 
"former" status, much like OSM's lifecycle tags (disused etc.). An 
entity may be redirected under some circumstances. For example, if the 
Wikidata community discovers that two entities are duplicates, referring 
to exactly the same concept, an editor will manually blank one in favor 
of the other, and a bot will create a redirect automatically. [4]


Many of the duplicate entities were created as a result of incorrect 
linking between Wikipedia article translations at the time Wikipedia 
article titles were being imported into Wikidata. If someone had 
translated the article "Pumpkin" from English to Pennsylvania German but 
neglected to link the English article to the Pennsylvania German one, 
Wikidata might've wound up with two entities, one linking to many 
languages including English, the other linking to only Pennsylvania 
German. Most likely the latter entity would end up redirecting to the 
former.


The English Wikipedia sees a couple dozen geographical articles renamed 
each day. [5] This is a rough estimate based on articles tagged with 
geographical coordinates. I don't know how many of these articles are 
the target of wikipedia tags in OSM -- I think that would require Yuri's 
SPARQL tool.


But the important thing to note is that a redirect on Wikipedia may not 
remain a redirect for long: editors may decide to repurpose the redirect 
page for a disambiguation page or perhaps an article on a subtlely 
different topic. If that happens, an OSM data consumer would have to 
trawl through article history to determine which article each wikipedia 
tag really meant to refer to. By comparison, since integers are cheap, 
Wikidata entities don't tend to get repurposed the way Wikipedia article 
titles do, so even a stale QID can be traced to relevant data pretty easily.



* What is the qualification of Wikidata for having its IDs in OSM (both
for wikidata=* and X:wikidata=*)?  Is there a particular objective
criterion that qualifies it?  Would there be other external IDs that
would also qualify under these criteria?  Is there a limit in the
number of different external IDs OSM is going to accept?


There are at least several other kinds of IDs that have been added in 
large numbers in the past. Off the top of my head, there are the various 
ref schemes used in conjunction with the heritage tag, GNIS feature IDs 
associated with an import of POIs in the U.S., and of course regulatory 
IDs such as ICAO/IATA.


Far from opening the floodgates to external IDs, Wikidata gives us the 
ability to limit external ID tagging. Consider that Wikidata lists seven 
different external identifiers for Hamilton County, Ohio, United 

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Eugene Alvin Villar]

On Wed, Oct 4, 2017 at 11:20 PM, Martin Koppenhoefer  wrote:

> Maybe because these are seen as facts and not copyrightable?
>

Ignoring the issue regarding the provenance of geographic coordinates, for
other types of data (like names), it is the position of the Wikimedia
Foundation that facts are not copyrightable and therefore these can be
inputted into Wikidata which has a CC0 license.

As for the issue of the sui generis EU database rights, it is the position
of the Wikimedia Foundation that this only applies to databases created by
EU citizens/corporations/legal bodies and does not apply to databases
created outside the EU. So when importing data from databases originating
from the EU, permission needs to be obtained. See this page for more
information: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Safwat Halaby]

On Tue, 2017-10-03 at 17:21 -0400, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:
> While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a
> month,
> we should be very clear here:
> * several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags,
> e.g.
> Israel. Should they pause their bots?

I am the Maintainer of the IL bot. I don't think it should be paused.
Everyone here is fine with it, and it's not specific to wikidata tags.
It maintains shop/brand/fuel chains and keeps some of their tags
consistent. I documented[1] the bot transparently, and anyone can
easily modify the bot's "injected" tags easily if it's ever needed. 

Whatever is eventually decided regarding the Wiki tags can easily be
applied to the bot. I see no reason for the bot to cease working. It's
not a Wiki bot.


[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:SafwatHalaby/scripts/brand



___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Townsend]

On 04/10/2017 18:56, Stefan Keller wrote:

(questions from Yuri snipped)
Anyone?


To be honest, that just struck me as more "whataboutery" designed to 
divert attention from the suggestion at the top of this thread:


> pause any (large scale) wikidata edits for a while until more members 
of our community have had a

> chance to form an opinion

Yuri has, to put it politely, been "economical with the actualité" all 
the way through this process, such as the claim that he waited "about 4 
days" for discussion here to die down when in fact the actual time was 
38 hours.


Whilst there's still discussion going on about (for example) which way 
around a colon-separated tag should go it makes sense to me to at the 
very least step back for a bit.


Best Regards,

Andy


___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Stefan Keller]

Hi,

2017-10-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> there is another aspect that could be added to your list for discussion:

I'd suggest to focus on the thread here and to the questions Yuri
asked (trying just to understand the background of this discussion):

2017-10-03 23:21 GMT+02:00 Yuri Astrakhan :
> While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a month, we
> should be very clear here:
> * several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags, e.g.
> Israel. Should they pause their bots?
> * If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban for
> that location?
> * Has anyone actually been doing world-wide bulk wikidata additions ever
> since this discussion has restarted after what I thought was a settled
> matter about two weeks ago?

Anyone?

:Stefan


2017-10-04 17:20 GMT+02:00 Martin Koppenhoefer :
> there is another aspect that could be added to your list for discussion:
> wikipedia and wikidata integration on osm tag definition wiki pages.
>
> * Some wiki editors seem to believe, the first word of a osm tag definition
> should be a link to a wikipedia article about something related to this tag,
> but sometimes these are also interpreted as descriptions of what should go
> into the tag, particularly when the wikipedia link is the only substantial
> content.
>
> * There are many wikidata references on tag definition wiki pages as well,
> there is a field in the keydescription template to do it:
> https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:KeyDescription
>
>
>
> Regarding the license question: wikidata is public domain (so taking name
> translations from there shouldn’t pose a problem), but it started (AFAIK)
> with importing things like coordinates and interlanguage links from
> wikipedia, which has different licenses, how was this step possible? Maybe
> because these are seen as facts and not copyrightable?
>
> Cheers,
> Martin
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Wednesday 04 October 2017, Martin Koppenhoefer wrote:
> there is another aspect that could be added to your list for
> discussion: wikipedia and wikidata integration on osm tag definition
> wiki pages.
>
> * Some wiki editors seem to believe, the first word of a osm tag
> definition should be a link to a wikipedia article about something
> related to this tag, but sometimes these are also interpreted as
> descriptions of what should go into the tag, particularly when the
> wikipedia link is the only substantial content.
>
> [...]

I agree this problem exists but it has existed for many years so it is 
not really something related to the current topic of wikidata and 
systematic addition of wikidata IDs.  I would suggest to separate that 
discussion.

> Regarding the license question: wikidata is public domain (so taking
> name translations from there shouldn’t pose a problem), but it
> started (AFAIK) with importing things like coordinates and
> interlanguage links from wikipedia, which has different licenses, how
> was this step possible? Maybe because these are seen as facts and not
> copyrightable?

AFAIK Wikipedia essentially says you can enter individual pieces of 
information (from any book, any map or any digital database) because 
such individual pieces of information are not protected in any way.  
You can enter such information freely into Wikipedia and from there it 
can be freely transferred to Wikidata (with a different license).  They 
ignore the fact that database law says that if you do so 
systematically, like if you determine the coordinates of all towns and 
cities in Germany from Google, you are subject to the restrictions of 
database protection.  Wikipedia ignores that possibility but OSM does 
not, therefore for OSM any information entered from Wikipedia or 
Wikidata would need to be treated as information from whatever source 
it was originally entered into Wikipedia or Wikidata.  If that source 
is unknown such information should not be used.  Practically this is 
not that much of a problem because if you have some info from Wikipedia 
(like a certain name or coordinates) that you don't know the source of 
and that you cannot verify independently from other sources or from own 
local knowledge it is not information you should enter into OSM anyway.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Martin Koppenhoefer]

there is another aspect that could be added to your list for discussion: 
wikipedia and wikidata integration on osm tag definition wiki pages. 

* Some wiki editors seem to believe, the first word of a osm tag definition 
should be a link to a wikipedia article about something related to this tag, 
but sometimes these are also interpreted as descriptions of what should go into 
the tag, particularly when the wikipedia link is the only substantial content.

* There are many wikidata references on tag definition wiki pages as well, 
there is a field in the keydescription template to do it: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:KeyDescription



Regarding the license question: wikidata is public domain (so taking name 
translations from there shouldn’t pose a problem), but it started (AFAIK) with 
importing things like coordinates and interlanguage links from wikipedia, which 
has different licenses, how was this step possible? Maybe because these are 
seen as facts and not copyrightable? 

Cheers,
Martin ___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Yuri Astrakhan]

While I have nothing against pausing bulk wikidata additions for a month,
we should be very clear here:
* several communities use bots to maintain and inject these tags, e.g.
Israel. Should they pause their bots?
* If a specific community is ok with it, does it override world wide ban
for that location?
* Has anyone actually been doing world-wide bulk wikidata additions ever
since this discussion has restarted after what I thought was a settled
matter about two weeks ago?

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 4:58 PM, michael spreng 
wrote:

> Yes I support a pause. I feel that currently one side tries to outgun
> the other with rather brute force mechanical editing.
>
> Michael
>
> ___
> talk mailing list
> talk@openstreetmap.org
> https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk
>
___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[michael spreng]

Yes I support a pause. I feel that currently one side tries to outgun
the other with rather brute force mechanical editing.

Michael

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Christoph Hormann]

On Tuesday 03 October 2017, Frederik Ramm wrote:
> Hi,
>
>seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions
> vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale)
> wikidata edits for a while until more members of our community have
> had a chance to form an opinion?

I think that is a good idea.

This would also give an opportunity to take the discourse from the 
exchange of spontaneous opinions and reactions with relatively little 
substance to a better founded and thought through basis you can 
reliably form an opinion from.

From my side a number of questions exist in the context of wikidata 
references in OSM where there does not seem to be a reliable answer at 
the moment although this would be important to form a qualified 
opinion.  In particular:

* How many of the wikidata=* tags currently in the database have been 
added through normal mapping (while adding or significantly modifying 
the object otherwise) and how many have been added through systematic 
efforts outside normal mapping?

* How many of the X:wikidata=* tags have been added through systematic 
efforts?  Are those derived from matching the existing X=* tags?  How 
many of those also have a wikidata=* tag?

* What practical applications exist for the wikidata IDs?  And i am not 
talking about theoretical ideas here but specific uses for practical 
purposes in actual use, in particular with open source implementation.

* To what extent has there been information transferred systematically 
from Wikidata and Wikipedia to OSM based on wikidata ID references 
(like adding names in different languages).  As others have explained 
this would be legally problematic and it would be important to know how 
common this is.

* How stable is the identity of what can be found under a certain 
Wikidata ID.  As mentioned there are cases where Wikidata aggregates 
several concepts under one ID (like an administrative unit and a 
populated place in case of cities/towns).  Would it be possible that 
this changes?  If yes, would the original ID be re-purposed or would it 
cease to exist?

* What is the qualification of Wikidata for having its IDs in OSM (both 
for wikidata=* and X:wikidata=*)?  Is there a particular objective 
criterion that qualifies it?  Would there be other external IDs that 
would also qualify under these criteria?  Is there a limit in the 
number of different external IDs OSM is going to accept?

Also i think it would be of great importance for OSM and a functioning 
communication in the community to have better documentation of:

* systematic wikidata ID addition/editing efforts (there seems to be 
nothing listed currently on 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log)
* tag documentation of the wikidata tags.  This needs a lot of 
improvement.  Like:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikidata does not make clear if 
these document 1:1 relationships between OSM features and wikidata 
objects or not and what qualifies a wikidata ID to be 'about a 
feature'.  How does a mapper practically verify if a certain wikidata 
ID is correct on a certain feature?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:brand:wikidata is plain wrong, 
brand:wikidata=* is not a machine-readable form of brand=*.  It in 
particular needs to tell the mapper what types of wikidata object 
should be referenced here and how a mapper can find the correct ID for 
a certain feature.

-- 
Christoph Hormann
http://www.imagico.de/

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

Re: [OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Andy Mabbett]

On 3 October 2017 at 11:02, Frederik Ramm  wrote:

>seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions
> vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale) wikidata
> edits for a while until more members of our community have had a chance
> to form an opinion?

Members of the the community have had chance to form an opinion on the
use of Wikidata for (at least) over four years:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Wikidata was
created in February 2013

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Wikidata was created in August 2103.

There have been numerous mailing list discussions in the interim, as
well as presentations at SotM and at other OSM events. Both ID and
JOSM have Wikidata functionality.

> OpenStreetMap is not, and never has been, in a hurry. Let us take the
> time to find out which level of wikidata integration we would like to
> see, and reach a consensus on this.

It seems to me that such consensus was reached a long while ago, and
that only you and a couple of other people refuse to accept this.

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk

[OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Frederik Ramm]

Hi,

   seeing that the matter is discussed quite intensively and opinions
vary widely, could we perhaps agree to pause any (large scale) wikidata
edits for a while until more members of our community have had a chance
to form an opinion?

I mean it's fine for people to add some wikidata link to something they
are editing but can we just hold off any any automated, semi-automated,
query-driven, "challenge" driven edits for a while?

OpenStreetMap is not, and never has been, in a hurry. Let us take the
time to find out which level of wikidata integration we would like to
see, and reach a consensus on this.

I think that good points have been raised by many different people in
the discussion and these deserve to be more widely heard, translated,
discussed.

I respect the work that Yuri has done on this and I see the potential of
the linked query engine he has developed, but I think it would have been
a better course of action to perfect wikidata linking in a small region,
then demonstrate the usefulness and ask for buy-in from the community to
go full planet. What we're seeing now is a chain of world-wide edits,
then fixes, then other fixes, the development of a query engine that
relies on tags added just a few days ago, all going on *while* this
discussion is happening. Individual cases being brought up in the
discussion quickly leading to another large-scale "fix" - it is really
hard to follow.

Bye
Frederik

-- 
Frederik Ramm  ##  eMail frede...@remote.org  ##  N49°00'09" E008°23'33"

___
talk mailing list
talk@openstreetmap.org
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk