Re: [Wikidata-l] next 2 rounds of arbitrary access coming up
Hi Egon, The main use of the codes is to test it in the Wikidata sandbox or in the user sandboxes. Other usage is so far I know not implemented. The basic reason for that is that there is no consensus about the usage of Wikidata data in templates on the Dutch Wikipedia. The usage of properties in templates is considered a big change, and big changes need consensus first, as it is not easy to go back if it gives problems or unwanted situations, and it has impact on many users. The usage of the codes directly in articles is not the what parser functions are for, parser functions do not belong in articles. Usage of these codes directly in articles is not accepted. If there is consensus of using Wikidata, the question also will be where this would be welcome and where not. And also which data may be used. (In the past we had for example discussions about the number of inhabitants, and there it came up that CIA Factbook data is is not allowed for quality reasons.) Also some guidelines need to be defined to avoid problems and to assure quality. The focus of the Dutch community is (concerning Wikidata) currently mainly to get all the articles with basic statements on Wikidata. This we do by hand to make sure all the basic statements are actually there, as most of them can't simply be added by a bot. Also this makes sure that there are no/less duplicate items on Wikidata. As Wikidata is pretty new, most users need to get a bit acquaintanced with Wikidata in the first place. In April a user organised a voting, which resulted in the situation that all local interwikis have been removed from all the articles. This was completed in April. So we do not accept local interwikis any longer. When all local interwikis were gone, I wrote in the central discussion page a call for all users to add there articles on Wikidata + to add certain basic statements as described in the message. Since then, a group of local users is working on getting the number of not connected articles in Wikidata down. From the 4000+ unconnected articles already 75% have been done. At the same time, new articles have been checked for being linked on Wikidata. If users forget to add their article, we add their article for them on Wikidata and a personal message with basic information is added to the user talk page who created the articled. The message says that maybe you have been forgotten, or was still intending to add the article to Wikidata, then the message is not needed, but it is needed that the author of an article adds his/her article to Wikidata. In the message is also described why this is needed, where someone can find links, and how to add an article to Wikidata. There are two types of messages: one for users who should have added their article to an existing item (assuming the existing item already has the basic statements), and one for users who should have created a new item with the basic statements. The basic statements include *instance of* (for everything), (for places and objects:) *coordinates*, *country*, *located in the administrative territorial entity*, (for people:) *gender*, *date of birth*, *place of birth*, *date of death*, *place of death*, *occupation*, (music:) *performer*, *date of publication*, (animals/plants:) *taxon rank*, *taxon name*, *parent taxon*, and anywhere if exists: *Commons category*. These are the basic statements for the most written articles. With these statements it is possible in case of multiple items with the same label, to add a sitelink to the right item and to easily check if an item is added to the right item. By adding their own article for them to Wikidata with the basic statements, they have a good example (close to home) what is expected. We ask them with the next article to do it themselves. Also, something that is important, I say they can come to me with questions any time. Adding a sitelink mostly works (only 3 people do not want to do this or find it too difficult). All other users which have been informed, add their articles now to Wikidata, mostly, if they do not forget as they still get to be used to it more. Only authors that only write once in a while need to get informed. The last group of users, the new users, should then still be acquaintanced with Wikidata, but that is something that is probably only useful when they manage to write an article that follows the conventions of Wikipedia. But when informing the users about it is needed to add their articles to Wikidata, the most heard reaction is I didn't know. The second most heard reaction is that they do not find it easy or intuitive to get to Wikidata, add the article and add some statements. This feedback is given, but having users add their article on Wikidata is a great success. We notice that users like it to have someone who looks over their shoulder and helps when it is not added properly. In this way already some users have grown to do it completely by themselves. But I also see the signals of users that
Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata for Wiktionary
I personally am waiting for Meta to be added. Romaine 2015-05-07 14:08 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk: On 7 May 2015 at 11:57, Ricordisamoa ricordisa...@openmailbox.org wrote: Let's focus on Commons, OpenStreetMap, queries, arbitrary access, new datatypes? OSM in what context? Also, we should throw WikiSpecies into the mix. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata for Wiktionary
Only for some templates, project pages and categories. The only way it makes sense to link to an article of Wiktionary is when someone wants to look up what a word can mean. Romaine 2015-05-07 14:56 GMT+02:00 Yair Rand yyairr...@gmail.com: Task 1 as described on the proposal page isn't completely clear on how it would work. Would the generated items have Q-ids? Would it be possible to link Wiktionary entries to non-Wiktionary pages in the very rare situations that make sense (articles on particular series of (not-language-associated) symbols/characters)? Regardless, I think that doing Task 1 is a very worthwhile idea. The rest of the tasks, however, should probably wait until much later. On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 8:28 AM, Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hey folks :) You're absolutely right that we need to focus on a few other things first (UI redesign, units, queries, arbitrary access, data quality tools incl watchlist improvements). However we also need to look into the future. Wiktionary support needs a lot of input to make sure we're doing the right thing. And it's good to give that time. So please do read the latest proposal Denny posted. It even has some mockups to make it easier to understand what it'd look like in practice. If we can get rough consensus that this is the way forward things will fall into place. And we'll not abandon the things I mentioned that are right now more important. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Can we make this item a featured one?
Hi all, Can we expand this item in such way that this can be a featured item: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q267877 ? What properties can be added to make this sufficient to feature? I think the subject is excellent for this as it is a worldwide food. Thanks! Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Using Special:Unconnected Pages? Please read.
Hi Lydia, The Dutch community (on the Dutch Wikipedia) had a voting in which was decided to get rid of all the interwikis on articles, categories, templates, project pages and help pages. The moving or removal of all interwikis has been completed a few days ago, with what we have tried to fix all the interwiki conflicts we found. We also have an active abuse filter that prevents users to add local interwikis to these pages. Instead we actively communicate in person to every user that creates a new article which has not been added to Wikidata. We aim for that every article is added to Wikidata with a label in Dutch and at least the property *instance of*. And for many subjects multiple statements. With actively communicating to users that they should add their new article to Wikidata, the most heard reaction is that they did not know that it is good to have it added to Wikidata. The second most heard issue we hear is that they find it difficult to add articles to Wikidata (including adding statements). For those users who were in the past used to add interwikis are now actively adding their articles to existing Wikidata items. This special page we use to found out which articles have been forgotten to add to (existing) items on Wikidata. I have a templated message that notes those users if they forgot to add their article to an existing item and reminds them that such is needed. For users who are writing articles about typical Dutch subjects which are not expected to have an article in another language Wikipedia, it is new and I have a templated message that informs them why it is needed to create an item on Wikidata, tells them how to, and asks them to add some statements. We use the special page UnconnectedPages to see which articles have not been added yet to Wikidata. Another group of pages we try to find with this special page are the ones that have been removed from an item without being added to an item. The special pages makes it possible for me to just select with my mouse the list and then compare it in Autowikibrowser (still a pity we can't use AWB for items on Wikidata) to have see which of the unconnected pages is in which category, or which template, so we can groupewise add them to Wikidata. So to conclude, this special page is essential for our work to get all the Wikipedia articles to Wikidata. The adding, by the way, we like to to do by hand so that we can at least add some basic statements depending on the subject. Sometimes it is possible to use a tool to create items and add statements to a group of articles, but most of them are done by hand. (If it is done by bot/tool we get like 1000 items with only p17=q55, and that is as bad as nothing.) To do it by hand we make sure the most basic properties are added. The biggest issue we face with using is that the page is not real time updated, and that pages that already are added to Wikidata are still in the list. We then have to do a nulledit on the article to get them removed from the list. Another delay are the articles that were removed from an item do not show up directly. (Was it removed correctly from that item or was it an error or vandalism? It requires a lot of searching to find that out, if it is found.) Another subject we have, but we can work around it by just ignoring them, are those articles that are newly created and nominated for deletion as non encyclopaedic or too worse written to be kept. They are nominated for deletion. The procedure for this kind of articles is that they have a template on them which says they are nominated, and after 2 weeks an admin looks at them and judges if they should be kept, deleted or the nomination period is extended to give extra time to the writers/users to fix the issues. During this period of two weeks the article is on the special page of unconnected pages, of which a part is expected to be deleted. During these two weeks the articles nominated for deletion are making the special page a bit clumsy. (Maybe it is an idea to have magic word added to the deletion templates so that the articles that are nominated for deletion and not connected on Wikidata, show up at the bottom of the articles. I think those articles nominated for deletion should be on the special page, because I can imagine users would accidental add such magic word to the article and a magic word that would prevent being shown on the list is risky for abuse/mistakes. However, as most users start at the top of the special page, the pages nominated for deletion clutter on top of the special page as they are ignored.) In the current special page besides articles (ns:0) also other namespaces are shown: Wikipedia, Templates, help pages, categories, portal pages, modules. The problem with many pages in those sections are subpages. Examples: archive pages of discussion pages, /doc pages of templates, archive pages of our helpdesk, and subpages of portals are not needed to be added to Wikidata. With categories have
Re: [Wikidata-l] External identifiers vs. Wikidata-internal links data
Hi Lydia, If a separate section is needed for identifiers, I do not care. From the user perspective point of view my question would be what happens when a user tries to add an identifier in the statements section instead of the identifiers section? Besides users are used to add identifier statements to the statements section, it can cause misunderstanding if it is no longer possible to add identifiers to the statements section. I would then recommend (if this is not yet thought of) to allow users to add identifiers to the statement section, and with reloading the page they show up in the right section. (Maybe the other way round as well.) Also when I currently want to add a statement, I press [ end ] on my keyboard, there I click [ add ]. If I must add the a statement to the right section, this would make it much uncomfortable to have to search somewhere between the statements and the identifiers where the [ add ] is for the statements section. If this would happen, it would make adding statements more annoying. (I would like to recommend to make it less annoying and more easier to add statements.) An alternative idea to solve this is to be able to add statements at the top of the statements section. Navigation will be an important issue to have attention for, otherwise splitting it up in identifiers and other statements would make the improvement for users nett less improving but instead worse. If it is wished for to split the identifiers from the other statements, I would more like it see just all the identifiers on the bottom of the statements section. If all statements in the source code ( div class=wikibase-statementgroupview-property ) would get an id=... based on the property number, it is easy to arrange having all identifier properties on the bottom. At the same time this would be easier for users to put certain properties always on top of the statements section of an item PS: Not all properties with URLs are identifiers, like the official website: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P856 PS2: Not all identifiers have or will have an URL available. Romaine 2015-04-06 16:08 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: Quick hack: On your user common.js page, add: importScript( 'User:Magnus Manske/ext-props.js' ); This will move all statements for external IDs (to be exact, all properties with a URL formatter property) to the sidebar. The statements in the main body are just hidden; there is a toggle link in the sidebar to make them visible again, qualifiers and all. This is, of course, just a demo to show what the main body would look like without such statements. Magnus, as always you're a treasure ;-) I hadn't thought about the toggle option yet. So let me summarize the options I see for identifiers: 1) we give them their own section below statements 2) we give them their own section in the right sidebar and have some compact way of showing and editing references and qualifiers 3) we do both of the above and have a way to toggle between the two I initially was set on 2 but am coming around to 2. 3 seems like the easiest way out right now but it'll feel awkward to new users. On the technical side I see the following options to identify which statements to group into the identifiers section: 1) we make them sitelinks 2) we we give them a special datatype (We should be able to migrate the existing ones in a one-time operation without changing their property IDs) 3) we rely on a statement on the property 4) we have a list in the wiki configuration 1 seems bad because we'd lose references and qualifiers 3 seems problematic from a performance point 4 is ugly and not maintainable So I am coming around to 2. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Please help test next step for header redesign
Hi Lydia, Perhaps it is for many users handy to have the collapsible option, but I personally like to know and I hope that I can disable the collapsible option in my .css. Otherwise it would be unhandy for those users who speak multiple languages and edit in multiple languages and do want to see at once all the languages they have selected to see. Second, I would like to suggest to have all other languages in a collapsed section, as the current gadget labels list is not the most user friendly way to edit labels in the various other languages. In the current version of this item http://wikidata.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Q27946 I can't edit languages like cy, cs, it, as I do not have those languages selected with my preferences. Besides the feedback I would like to say thank you for all the hard work on Wikidata. Thanks. Romaine Op zaterdag 14 maart 2015 heeft Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de het volgende geschreven: Hey folks :) We've been working on completely rewriting the header section and moving it towards the new design. We're not there yet but the next step is ready for testing and then rolling out on Wikidata. Please go ahead and test it thoroughly at http://wikidata.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Q27946. This will allow you to collapse the in other languages box for example and adds a hint about how to configure the displayed languages. The remaining known issues are tracked at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T75654. In addition to the new header the next deployment will bring a lot of under-the-hood changes and bug fixes. The most relevant changes for you are: * we made the diff for time values more meaningful * we fixed a lot of bugs in the time datatype * edit links are no longer cached incorrectly based on the users permission (This lead to users sometimes seeing edit buttons on pages that they could not edit and no edit buttons on pages that they could edit.) * we fixed some issues with propagating page moves and deletions on the clients (Wikipedia, etc) to Wikidata * we corrected an issue where you would see new data in the old part of a diff (This affected qualifiers mainly.) * the sitetointerwiki gadget now also works on diff pages * the precision is now detected correctly when entering a quantity in scientific notation * we added mailto as an accepted protocol for the URL datatype Unless you find big issues during testing we plan to deploy this on Wikidata on 24th of March. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] OpenStreetMap + Wikidata
Maybe we should ask the question how many translations already are in OpenStreetMap that can be used/added to Wikidata? Romaine 2015-03-10 14:31 GMT+01:00 Amir E. Aharoni amir.ahar...@mail.huji.ac.il: Hi, [ Aude and Christian Consonni, this should especially interest you. ] I was throwing around ideas with a friend about how OpenStreetMap could be integrated with Wikidata. The thing that I care the most in any software is internationalization. Having a map in which all labels of towns, streets and everything else is translated to all languages sounds like a super-wonderful thing. Wikidata allows labeling everything, translating everything, and attaching properties to everything, so it sounds like it could be a good match. But then the question of what IS everything came up. Wikidata was created mostly with Wikipedia in mind, so Wikipedia's notability policies influenced Wikidata. Roughly, Wikidata has items for every thing about which there is, or can be, a Wikipedia article and for things that are useful, or if it fulfills some structural need https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Notability. Towns obviously have or can a Wikipedia article about them, but probably not every street or shop. But do they fulfill a structural need or is it way too much? If it's way too much, how can this be bridged, or federated, or whatever the current popular word is? I don't even know exactly how does OSM store labels and translations now, but it sounds like another instance of Wikibase, if not Wikidata itself, can be used for it. I don't have much to add, but I'd love to hear ideas from people who do (again, Aude and Christian Consonni, I'm looking at you :) ). -- Amir Elisha Aharoni · אָמִיר אֱלִישָׁע אַהֲרוֹנִי http://aharoni.wordpress.com “We're living in pieces, I want to live in peace.” – T. Moore ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Impossible to add interwiki links
Hi all, Again, for already so many times, many users have complained on nl-wiki that it is for them impossible now to add interwikilinks on Wikidata. They are sick of all the changes all the time, especially if they experience the new design as impossible to use, as it now is. They are lost with the current design and can't add new interwikilinks. That this pops-up so many times is a serious problem that needs a solution. Wikidat is not meant for techno users only, but that is how many regular users experience Wikidata. If regular users find themselves impossible to add/update pages, the software needs a big change to re-enable them to work with Wikidata again. Ow, I am just the messenger... [1] Romaine [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2515525 ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Users do understand Wikidata less than before
Hello Lydia, This is a different problem from the other issue I described in an other mail. I notice two different problems that occur with the same version. One is about the workflow, one is about less experienced/less technical users have difficulties in adding site links. I am happy hearing you say it is a high priority. Romaine 2014-10-12 8:39 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 4:01 AM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: For more than a year I am asking users to add their articles to Wikidata when they have written it. That seems succesful, they added their articles more and more and did understand how to do that. Until recently. Now I get more and more complaints from users that they do not understand any more how to add a newly written article to an item. They seem to have tried, but fail in actual getting it managed. That is a worse development! Romaine, How more can I help you? I already told you that I recognize the problem and that a fix is high priority. The only thing I did not tell you yet is how we are going to fix it exactly. That is because that will depend on discussions I can hopefully have tomorrow. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Users do understand Wikidata less than before
The impression I get from experienced users is that they are much annoyed and use now some work around to get things done, but they do not understand it. Less experienced users do not understand it either and also aren't able to add site links any more. Instead they ask experienced users to add it for them as they do not manage themselves to do it. Explaining to less experienced users was never easy, but now I can't let them understand at all. The current version of the software of Wikidata is not built for less experienced and less technical users. The current situation is not logic and not understandable. In general I am in favour of educating users how it works, but this isn't explainable as I have seen how inexperienced users already before had great difficulty working with Wikidata, even while they had a coach next to them. It is overestimated how easy the Wikidata software is, and underestimated how much less experienced and less technical users have difficulties with the software. For Wikidata we need software that noobs can handle and can work with, so that everyone can participate in this wiki. Romaine 2014-10-12 4:18 GMT+02:00 Scott MacLeod worlduniversityandsch...@gmail.com : Romaine, Lydia and Wikidatans, In what ways can we engage the weekly summary and the newsletter, and other approaches, for example, to help educate users about best ways to add a newly written article to an item, or a language, easily, since wikidata/wikibase beneficial changes to Wikipedia may well lead to less authorial/editorial ease? Wikipedia's initial wondrous growth into 287 + languages is due significantly to ease of crowd-source editing this collaborative wiki encyclopedia, as I see it, and this is well worth trying to continue to facilitate for many, many reasons. Flourishing users and editors are one of the most important communities to nurture, as I see it. How best to help users understand wikidata? Scott On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:01 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: For more than a year I am asking users to add their articles to Wikidata when they have written it. That seems succesful, they added their articles more and more and did understand how to do that. Until recently. Now I get more and more complaints from users that they do not understand any more how to add a newly written article to an item. They seem to have tried, but fail in actual getting it managed. That is a worse development! Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- - Scott MacLeod - Founder President - 415 480 4577 - http://worlduniversityandschool.org - World University and School - like Wikipedia with MIT OpenCourseWare (not endorsed by MIT OCW) - incorporated as a nonprofit university and school in California, and is a U.S. 501 (c) (3) tax-exempt educational organization, both effective April 2010. World University and School is sending you this because of your interest in free, online, higher education. If you don't want to receive these, please reply with 'unsubscribe' in the subject line. Thank you. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Re-enable quick editing in Wikidata please
You can discuss the general user friendliness, but that is not the topic of this thread. You also miss the problem that is described. All the rest you write is not relevant here at all. There is a problem with the workflow and we (I have seen several users who complaint about it) would like that to be taken seriously. Romaine 2014-10-10 8:14 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: Hoi Romaine, I am sorry but while I understand your frustration, you are not realistic and you do no justice to the situation. To start with Wikidata is not user friendly at all. It never was because development has been concentrating on basic architecture and basic functionality. At that we are still waiting for much needed basic functionality for instance statements that indicate what unit they are (kilo, meter, calories etc) and queries. When you read the replies of Lydia, it is quite plain that what we have is an intermediate step towards a different user interface. What we have now will pass. When you consider the old UI, it may have worked for you but I find it is lacking basic functionality for editors. My pet pieve is that when I add a URL for an item, it is not able to strip all the web junk away to be left with the Qnumber. Now I have to do it by hand and, I do that a lot. Some work on similar issues were done in the paper cuts. What I am looking for in the new UI is similarity with what Reasonator looks like. My motivation is that in this way it will be possible to have an overview of all the data. The data becomes informative in this way. That may not help editors much. Much of the data is entered by bots and external tools, they are likely to be affected in different ways by the continuing stream of changes as well. I am sure you have seen all the huha around Flow and the visual editor. I loathed the way people bullied their opinion on everybody else. PLEASE let us not go that way with Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM On 10 October 2014 04:20, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Sorry Lydia, but I can't read that in your reply. I point on an overlooked issue with designing the current version. I see no recognition that this is an issue that is taken serious and needs to be solved. You mention that there are issues that will be solved, but the issue raised here is not taken into account (it seems). You say that you will move forward. I reply on that the current design is a downfall compared with how it was. I conclude based on what I notice in the editing workflow that the change is not an improvement. In your reply you do not give the impression that the issue raised here is going to be solved, nor that you want to restore the previous workable version, so in that perspective you keep the current design which is troubling. It is a step back. If someone would ask me to put the versions in chronological order of development based on how it works for users, than the current version would come before the previous version. If the current design would have been followed by the previous design, I would have congratulated the Wikidata team with this major improvement, which makes editing Wikidata for users much easier. Are there any plans yet in what the workflow of users is restored to a workable situation? Romaine 2014-10-09 18:08 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de : On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Lydia, I can understand that it is not restored back in the previous situation, but this is not an improvement. Editing Wikidata is made harder, more difficult, and more clumpsy. This change of a new design is counter-productive. For months we are asking people to add stuff to Wikidata if they created an article, we stop with that. We really can't explain this change. It is also counter-productive if a wrong decision is made and the effects for end users are ignored, while they have (or had) to deal with it every time. This version is not an improvement but a step back in time. I am sure you and your team have been working hard on this, but apparently in the process it has been missed how a lot of users work with Wikidata. That you notice some issues is fine, but that is no answer at all to the current complaints. Seeing the reactions from other users elsewhere I am not alone in this. But one question is answered, you are not willing to restore a better version of the software to restore the downfall but want to keep this annoying not handy working version. No that's not what I said. I said we are going to move forward and make this better so the issues you are having now will no longer be there. By no means do I want to insist on keeping the current status - quite the opposite. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer
Re: [Wikidata-l] Re-enable quick editing in Wikidata please
Hello Lydia, I can understand that it is not restored back in the previous situation, but this is not an improvement. Editing Wikidata is made harder, more difficult, and more clumpsy. This change of a new design is counter-productive. For months we are asking people to add stuff to Wikidata if they created an article, we stop with that. We really can't explain this change. It is also counter-productive if a wrong decision is made and the effects for end users are ignored, while they have (or had) to deal with it every time. This version is not an improvement but a step back in time. I am sure you and your team have been working hard on this, but apparently in the process it has been missed how a lot of users work with Wikidata. That you notice some issues is fine, but that is no answer at all to the current complaints. Seeing the reactions from other users elsewhere I am not alone in this. But one question is answered, you are not willing to restore a better version of the software to restore the downfall but want to keep this annoying not handy working version. To everyone: The second question is not answered yet: is anyone able to write a gadget/script to bypass this not working situation? Thanks! Romaine 2014-10-09 9:27 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 11:24 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Hello all, Recently Wikidata was changed which caused it much more work for especially power users. It is no longer easy to add/change parts of pages. Each time I now have to edit a section and save it before I can continue in another section. A simple adding of 4 pages results in much more clicks. Was: click + paste + save + add + lang + paste + save Now: edit + click + paste + scrolling + save (outside my screen) + edit + add + lang + paste + save (on not expecting place) And that four times... This creates a much less efficient working situation. That is not workable. Can the previous situation be restored? Or can someone write a gadget so that this change is bypassed? Hey Romaine, What you are seeing is an intermediate step in the work on the new design. Looking back we should have given this another two weeks of work before rolling it out. We will not be rolling this back however as that'd be non-trivial and counter-productive. We will instead fix the issues the current version has and push further towards the new design. The current issues I am aware of: * Edit conflicts often happening when editing more than one data point. In our testing this didn't happen so we are investigating why this is happening on the live-system now. Fix is high priority. * Long scrolling when editing an item with many sitelinks. You can press enter to save whatever you entered without needing to scroll up. That will help you right now. We will look into additional improvements over the next days. In the bug report you mention being able to edit a section while in edit mode for another section. That has never been possible. Can you clarify that please? Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Re-enable quick editing in Wikidata please
Sorry Lydia, but I can't read that in your reply. I point on an overlooked issue with designing the current version. I see no recognition that this is an issue that is taken serious and needs to be solved. You mention that there are issues that will be solved, but the issue raised here is not taken into account (it seems). You say that you will move forward. I reply on that the current design is a downfall compared with how it was. I conclude based on what I notice in the editing workflow that the change is not an improvement. In your reply you do not give the impression that the issue raised here is going to be solved, nor that you want to restore the previous workable version, so in that perspective you keep the current design which is troubling. It is a step back. If someone would ask me to put the versions in chronological order of development based on how it works for users, than the current version would come before the previous version. If the current design would have been followed by the previous design, I would have congratulated the Wikidata team with this major improvement, which makes editing Wikidata for users much easier. Are there any plans yet in what the workflow of users is restored to a workable situation? Romaine 2014-10-09 18:08 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Hello Lydia, I can understand that it is not restored back in the previous situation, but this is not an improvement. Editing Wikidata is made harder, more difficult, and more clumpsy. This change of a new design is counter-productive. For months we are asking people to add stuff to Wikidata if they created an article, we stop with that. We really can't explain this change. It is also counter-productive if a wrong decision is made and the effects for end users are ignored, while they have (or had) to deal with it every time. This version is not an improvement but a step back in time. I am sure you and your team have been working hard on this, but apparently in the process it has been missed how a lot of users work with Wikidata. That you notice some issues is fine, but that is no answer at all to the current complaints. Seeing the reactions from other users elsewhere I am not alone in this. But one question is answered, you are not willing to restore a better version of the software to restore the downfall but want to keep this annoying not handy working version. No that's not what I said. I said we are going to move forward and make this better so the issues you are having now will no longer be there. By no means do I want to insist on keeping the current status - quite the opposite. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] [Wikitech-ambassadors] badges support on Wikidata
Hello Lydia, I wrote a text with explanation, why, what, where, etc to inform the Dutch community about the long wanted change at: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:De_kroeg#Vooraankondiging:_Verhuizing_ster-icoontjes_in_interwikilijst_naar_Wikidata Another short announcement is placed at: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Mededelingen Greetings, Romaine (tech ambassador for the Dutch projects) 2014-08-15 20:04 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: Hey folks :) Just an update on badges support on Wikidata. We will be rolling out support for badges on Wikidata on August 19th. At this point you will be able to store the information that a given article is a good or featured article on English Wikipedia for example. More badges can be added on request. One week later we will enable showing those badges on Wikipedia/Wikisource/Wikiquote in the language links in the sidebar. If your Wikipedia wants them to be removed from the wikitext please get in touch with Amir. He has a bot to do it for you. You can try out the Wikidata-side of it on our test system: https://test.wikidata.org/wiki/Q296 Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikitech-ambassadors mailing list wikitech-ambassad...@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-ambassadors ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Time for some selfies!
Hello all! Today we had a Wikinic [1] in Eindhoven, the Netherlands. Photos in https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wiknic_Eindhoven_2014 We brought food and drinks, at the site Dutch pancakes were baked and a diverse selection of food was brought in, like: strawberry pie, rice pie (both from one of the finest bakeries in the Netherlands), cinnamon breads, sausages, fruits, breads, and much more, but off course also the most important and best: stroopwafels https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Stroopwafel_Addicts. I told the people present about the e-mail of Wikidata selfies and we went all on photo with the logo clearly visible: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wiknic_Eindhoven_2014-07-06_at_14.39_Wikidata_selfie.jpg Romaine [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wiknic 2014-06-30 17:45 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: Hey folks! Wikimania is coming up and I need your help! I will be giving a keynote about Wikidata and would like to show the human side of our awesome project. Wikidata wouldn't be what it is without all of you and I see Wikimania not only as an opportunity to highlight all of the exciting software developments around Wikidata, but to also show off what an awesome, creative and diverse community we have here! To do this, I would like as many of you as possible to send me a photo of yourself - a selfie (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12068677) would be perfect. Bonus points if it either demonstrates a connection you have with Wikidata or includes the Wikidata logo somehow. You can be subtle and sneaky with the logo or go big and bold—the only limit is your creativity! All submissions should be licensed CC-BY and you must have the right to upload and use the image. Additionally it’d be awesome if you could send me a sentence or two about what Wikidata means to you. (Either use my user talk page or send me an email.) Submission deadline is July 20th. When you're ready, upload your file to Wikimedia Commons in the category “Wikidata selfies” (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikidata_selfies). Need some inspiration? Check the category. I’m sure we can be just as famous as the Oscar selfie: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/mar/07/oscars-selfie-most-retweeted-ever :P Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Time for some selfies!
Does this count: https://twitter.com/Wikimedia_BE/status/484506937720324096 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014-07-03-vergadering-2.jpg The guy on the right wears a t-shirt with the logo. Romaine 2014-07-04 14:59 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 5:45 PM, Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de wrote: Hey folks! Wikimania is coming up and I need your help! I will be giving a keynote about Wikidata and would like to show the human side of our awesome project. Wikidata wouldn't be what it is without all of you and I see Wikimania not only as an opportunity to highlight all of the exciting software developments around Wikidata, but to also show off what an awesome, creative and diverse community we have here! To do this, I would like as many of you as possible to send me a photo of yourself - a selfie (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12068677) would be perfect. Bonus points if it either demonstrates a connection you have with Wikidata or includes the Wikidata logo somehow. You can be subtle and sneaky with the logo or go big and bold—the only limit is your creativity! All submissions should be licensed CC-BY and you must have the right to upload and use the image. Additionally it’d be awesome if you could send me a sentence or two about what Wikidata means to you. (Either use my user talk page or send me an email.) Submission deadline is July 20th. When you're ready, upload your file to Wikimedia Commons in the category “Wikidata selfies” (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Wikidata_selfies). Need some inspiration? Check the category. I’m sure we can be just as famous as the Oscar selfie: http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/mar/07/oscars-selfie-most-retweeted-ever :P The category is starting to fill up \o/ But we still need quite a few more for this stunt to work. I just uploaded a picture for the dev team. Please consider joining. You can also send the image to me if you want. Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Time for some selfies!
It was an attempt to make a group selfie in the middle of a discussion... Romaine 2014-07-04 16:29 GMT+02:00 Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Fri, Jul 4, 2014 at 4:25 PM, Romaine Wiki romaine.w...@gmail.com wrote: Does this count: https://twitter.com/Wikimedia_BE/status/484506937720324096 https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:2014-07-03-vergadering-2.jpg The guy on the right wears a t-shirt with the logo. I fear it doesn't count as a selfie anymore :) Cheers Lydia -- Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher Product Manager for Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24 10963 Berlin www.wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] We should have a property for WikiMapia
Hello all, I think we should create a property for the items of Wikimapia, they are of additional value to Wikipedia articles as they mark the area of a certain subject instead of only a coordinate. http://wikimapia.org Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Please create option for two links to a Commons category
In an item there is since recently a section for a link to Commons. I noticed that only one item can be linked to one category on Commons, while we have for many years two places where we would like to the same category on Commons. Example: We have a category and an article about Germany. From both the article as the category we would like to link to the Category:Germany on Commons. This system is in use on many Wikipedias. So please enable the possibility for items that contain categories only two add the Commons category also to that page. Now we keep having Commonscat links in the section Statements and in the section Wikimedia Commons page linked to this item and it is only implemented half... Secondly I also would like to know in the sidebar on Commons both which articles and which categories on Wikipedias link to this Commons category. So please split the section in the sidebar in two sections of interwikilinks, one section for categories on Wikipedia about that subject and one section for articles on Wikipedia about that subject. Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] All interwikis from nl.wikivoyage have been moved to Wikidata
Hello all, I am happy to announce that all interwikis from all articles, templates, project pages (except some archive pages) have been moved to Wikidata. This includes the removal of all local interwikis. With this I roughly checked all pages if they are connected to the right article on Wikidata. I solved a lot of interwikiconflict, often with disambiguation pages. I also made sure that every articles has an item on Wikidata. The Dutch Wikivoyage is the first Wikivoyage that fully switched to Wikidata. Greetings, Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] All interwikis from nl.wikivoyage have been moved to Wikidata
About 3000-4000. Romaine On Mon, 7/29/13, Denny Vrandečić denny.vrande...@wikimedia.de wrote: Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] All interwikis from nl.wikivoyage have been moved to Wikidata To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Monday, July 29, 2013, 12:28 PM That's amazing! And so fast! Any idea how many links there have been? (Just curious). Thanks for reporting!Denny 2013/7/29 Romaine Wiki romaine_w...@yahoo.com Hello all, I am happy to announce that all interwikis from all articles, templates, project pages (except some archive pages) have been moved to Wikidata. This includes the removal of all local interwikis. With this I roughly checked all pages if they are connected to the right article on Wikidata. I solved a lot of interwikiconflict, often with disambiguation pages. I also made sure that every articles has an item on Wikidata. The Dutch Wikivoyage is the first Wikivoyage that fully switched to Wikidata. Greetings, Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Project director Wikidata Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985. -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Update nl-wiki request for bot
Today we reached at nl-wiki the situation that + 64% of the interwikiconflicts have been solved. A lot of this work has been done by the Dutch community, but also a lot of work is done by users form other projects, thank you very much for the help! I have checked the complete template namespace and category namespace for local interwiki's and all are removed from these pages, so these namespaces are now clean on nl-wiki. If users from especially smaller Wikipedia's want to know on what pages of their wiki are local interwikis left, you can use AWB, download the latest databasedump and do a query on that dump. If you want to know what query you need exactly, e-mail me personally as the string of the query is a bit long. But it is even for noobs on bots and codes easy to do. (I can also do it for you.) With doing all this solving of interwikiconflicts, we came across several things: * A lot of biological conflicts are in our list of interwikiconflicts. Certain genus do only have one species under it, what makes some Wikipedias make that together one article, while others want two articles as it are two layers in the taxonomical tree. One article on the English Wikipedia that created hundreds of interwikiconflicts was a list to which many redirects were linking which were used for interwikis. All have been removed with a bot. * Another thing we notice is that a lot of renamings of articles to make place for a disambiguation page haven't been proparly executed, as on Wikidata in an item of a group of articles, one of the links was to a disambiguation page. (It would be nice if a bot could check for disambiguation pages (based on the presence of a template from [[MediaWiki:Disambiguationspage]] on that wiki in it) so that we know where we need to fix this.) * Another thing we see is that a lot of interwikis are still local because the local interwiki links to a page that is a redirect because the page was renamed, while this wasn't changed by a bot. Most interwikibots do not recognize that the redirect is the same page as the one added to Wikidata. So we need a bot to remove all interwikis that link to a redirect linking to a page that is in the same item as the page where the local interwikis are in. Let's clean this mess up! Romaine --- http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] over 51% of interwikiconflicts are solved on nl-wiki
Today we have reached the cleaning up of half of all our interwikiconflicts. With this a lot of interwikiconflicts on other Wikipedias have been solved as well. Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] 20% of interwiki conflicts solved at nl-wiki, others?
In the past weeks the community of the Dutch Wikipedia has been working hard to solve interwiki conflicts. A few months ago we had more than 14000 interwiki conflicts, today less than 10800. With fixing these interwiki conflicts, often we also fix them on other wikis. But are other Wikipedias also active on massively fixing interwiki conflicts? Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Is an ecosystem of Wikidatas possible?
Hello GerardM, Interwikis between categories and disambiguation pages serve a purpose, they form a navigational structure to enable people to find information. Certainly navigational pages make information also reachable. I use them, many other users use the interwikilinks, and so on. Romaine --- On Tue, 6/11/13, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: From: Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Is an ecosystem of Wikidatas possible? To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Tuesday, June 11, 2013, 8:10 PM Hoi, The initial application for Wikidata is to replace the interwiki links of Wikipedia. Arguably many of the interwiki links do not serve a purpose. In my opinion there is no need for interwiki linking disambiguation pages or categories. I fail to see the value in these. Having links to Wikivoyage or Wikibooks or Wikisource can have an application. Making use of Wikidata to add tags to Commons is an application that would REALLY help Commons gain usability. Given that Wikidata is NOT Wikipedia, the requirements of notability are not necessarily requirements that are relevant in the Wikidata context. Thanks, GerardM On 11 June 2013 20:41, David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com wrote: While on the Hackathon I had the opportunity to talk with some people from sister projects about how they view Wikidata and the relationship it should have to sister projects. Probably you are already familiar with the views because they have been presented already several times. The hopes are high, in my opinion too high, about what can be accomplished when Wikidata is deployed to sister projects. There are conflicting needs about what belongs into Wikidata and what sister projects need, and that divide it is far greater to be overcome than just by installing the extension. In fact, I think there is a confusion between the need for Wikidata and the need for structured data. True that Wikidata embodies that technology, but I don't think all problems can be approached by the same centralized tool. At least not from the social side of it. Wikiquote could have one item for each quote, or Wikivoyage an item for each bar, hostel, restaurant, etc..., and the question will always be: are they relevant enough to be created in Wikidata? Considering that Wikidata was initially thought for Wikipedia, that scope wouldn't allow those uses. However, the structured data needs could be covered in other ways. It doesn't need to be a big wikidata addressing it all. It could well be a central Wikidata addressing common issues (like author data, population data, etc), plus other Wikidata installs on each sister project that requires it. For instance there could be a data.wikiquote.org, a data.wikivoyage.org, etc that would cater for the needs of each community, that I predict will increase as soon as the benefits become clear, and of course linked to the central Wikidata whenever needed. Even Commons could be wikidatized with each file becoming an item and having different labels representing the file name depending on the language version being accessed. Could be this the right direction to go? Cheers, Micru ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -Inline Attachment Follows- ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Request: please tell me where local interwikis are left in template namespace (nl-wiki)
Hello Jan all, Thank you for the list, I manually saved each page, I have put it in an spreadsheet to have the article names only. So I could check for the template namespace only. All the templates in the list I have checked manually and the few with interwikis I moved the interwikis to Wikidata. I noticed that after offset=6000 the pages aren't reloading but keep showing the same page even if I changed the url with +200. So still a lot of templates are left over with only one interwiki on the template pages. I want to clean up those too. Can someone make a list of templates (nl-wiki) with an interwiki still on them? Romaine --- On Fri, 5/31/13, Jan Dudík jan.du...@gmail.com wrote: From: Jan Dudík jan.du...@gmail.com Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Request: please tell me where local interwikis are left in template namespace (nl-wiki) To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project. wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Friday, May 31, 2013, 8:11 AM Look at http://tools.wmflabs.org/addshore/addbot/iwlinks/index.html?lang=nl , but its not updated last few days JAnD 2013/5/31 Romaine Wiki romaine_w...@yahoo.com: In the past weeks I have cleaned up the interwikis in the template namespace on the Dutch Wikipedia. What I would like to know where is on what templates there are stille local interwikis present. Can anyone do a query/... to help me find that answer? Thanks! Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- -- Ing. Jan Dudík ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Good to know tools, tools, tools
Good to know: * The Dutch Wikipedia had on its own more than 14.000 interwikiconflicts. I have created weeks ago on nl-wiki a project page where all those interwiki conflicts are mentioned and users started to clean up those conflicts. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Interwikiconflicten_oplossen Thanks to a botowner I was able to have such list, but this should have been made easy with a tool! + for every Wikipedia! * Besides interwikiconflicts there are also a lot of pages on which users added one interwiki with the creation of the page, but after years it appears that no bot has ever put the interwiki to that page on the other language version + if there were interwikis on that page in another language that those interwikis wern't placed on the newly created page by a bot. * I also notice that if interwikis were connected between pages on several Wikipedias, that not on every language variant all interwikis had been placed by bot, but only some of them... This has as result that with the moving of interwikis from the local articles to Wikidata, that if the bot is focussed on a certain project - which does not have all the interwikis - the bot also doesn't move all the interwikis from pages in another language but only moved the ones which were there on the focus project. * A lot of bots have/had difficulties with synonyms of namespaces. On other language versions of Wikipedia, the template namespace for example has besides the local name also the generic Template name. If someone added an interwiki with the non-local namespace, the bots have ignored them. This also counted for changes in the namespace name on a wiki. * I almost fully cleaned the template namespace from many left interwikis. I think I will continue with the category namespace next. I noticed that users from other Wikipedias also want to clean up their articles and other namespaces from local interwiki's, but they miss the tools! * On a lot of projects the templates for infoboxes and others have sub pages like /doc where interwikis are added. Mostly the interwikis are already on Wikidata, but still are the interwikis also local on the /doc page. Users on various projects need a tool to know where this is the case and/or a bot is needed which is able to remove all these interwikis from these subpages if the core page already has these interwikis on Wikidata. * On a lot of projects there are permanently projected pages which have interwikis on them. These should also be removed from these pages and moved to Wikidata. The local communities need a tool to know which projected pages still have interwikis that can be removed from these pages. * I also notice that a lot of island groups of interwikis are on Wikidata. An island group of interwikis means that a certain subject has two items on Wikidata (with two groups of interwikis) while it should have only one item. We need a tool which can suggest which two items may be the same. * Also many pages do not have any interwikis, nor locally, nor in Wikidata, while there are articles about that same subject in other languages. Communities need tools to detect those articles to be able to connect those pages to those on other language Wikipedias. ** Some years ago we had a user who had created a tool which suggested for categories a possible interwiki, if the category was like Category:subject in country. What the tool did was, it checked the interwikis of the categories the category was in, compared the names, checked for the existing of that category and then suggested it to the user who had to check and decide. Hack on one of these... Let us complete the first phase properly please. Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
[Wikidata-l] Request: please tell me where local interwikis are left in template namespace (nl-wiki)
In the past weeks I have cleaned up the interwikis in the template namespace on the Dutch Wikipedia. What I would like to know where is on what templates there are stille local interwikis present. Can anyone do a query/... to help me find that answer? Thanks! Romaine ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Interlanguage-link-bug?
Hello Marco, Here I see a lot of articles in the section ''Other languages''. Most likely an older version of the page is shown due caching somewhere. If not all languages are shown, purging a page (go to the history page and changing =history in =purge in the url) would help mostly. Greetings, Romaine --- On Sat, 4/6/13, Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@wikipedia.at wrote: From: Marco Fleckinger marco.fleckin...@wikipedia.at Subject: [Wikidata-l] Interlanguage-link-bug? To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project. Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Saturday, April 6, 2013, 12:55 PM Hello, regarding to the actual discussion of this French Radio Transmission station, I looked up the article on WP. On enwiki it says that there is only a French article ([1]) regarding this topic, but Wikidata ([2]) shows a German one as well, which is also shown on frwiki. So, is this a bug or will it simply take a while, until the page will be rerendered on the squid? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_radio_station_of_Pierre-sur-Haute [2] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q10369016 Cheers, Marco ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
