Well we should start by filling blank descriptions of course. I should have gone on to explain that in my experience of using listeria lists in my userspace on the Dutch wikipedia, I have noticed lots of Wikidata infrastructure that hasn't been translated yet. So in my example of the Monet painting, in some languages it would not look like "creator Monet|instance painting" but like "Qxyz Monet|Qefg Qklm" (worst case scenario where only the item for Monet has been propagated to all 200+ languages). Having a game where such auto descriptions can be served to people who are able to fill in labels and descriptions could be useful for more than just the one item.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Magnus Manske <[email protected]> wrote: > Ah, but when auto-descriptions get better, how do we know which should be > updated, and which have been "improved" bu humans? Because people will > screem bloody murder if we replace "their" descriptions with automatic > ones, even if those are better. > > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 7:53 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of fields >> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing. This could be a prompt >> to make a game that offers to update the description with an auto-generated >> text. So for a Monet painting, the description could be "creator >> Monet|instance painting". We have over 100,000 paintings on Wikidata thanks >> to the Sum of all Paintings project (yay!) and most museums only have >> titles in the language it was created in and the language of the museum, so >> we are a looooong way from creating meaningful titles for all of these and >> meaningful short descriptions would be a real benefit to the project. >> >> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 8:38 AM, Lydia Pintscher < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 3:43 AM, Dan Garry <[email protected]> wrote: >>> > I've seen arguments on both sides here. Some say automatically >>> generated >>> > descriptions are not good enough. Some say they are. Why don't we >>> gather >>> > some data on this and use that to decide what's right? :-) >>> >>> Please do. Especially pay attention to languages other than English >>> though. Because even if we get algorithms to write good descriptions >>> for English are we going to do the same for all the other languages? >>> Especially those where grammar is tricky and Wikidata doesn't even >>> have the necessary information to make the grammar right? The other >>> tricky side is determining why something is actually notable. That's >>> not a trivial thing to determine based on the data we have. >>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Mobile-l mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Mobile-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >> >
_______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
