My thoughts, as ever(!), are as follows: - The tool that generates the descriptions deserves a lot more development. Magnus' tool is very much a prototype, and represents a tiny glimpse of what's possible. Looking at its current output is a straw man. - Auto-generated descriptions work for current articles, and *all future articles*. They automatically adapt to updated data. They automatically become more accurate as new data is added. - When you edit the descriptions yourself, you're not really making a meaningful contribution to the *data* that underpins the given Wikidata entry; i.e. you're not contributing any new information. You're simply paraphrasing the first sentence or two of the Wikipedia article. That can't possibly be a productive use of contributors' time.
As for Brian's suggestion: It would be a step forward; we can even invent a whole template-type syntax for transcluding bits of actual data into the description. But IMO, that kind of effort would still be better spent on fully-automatic descriptions, because that's the ideal that semi-automatic descriptions can only approach. On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Brian Gerstle <[email protected]> wrote: > Could there be a way to have our nicely curated description cake and eat > it too? For example, interpolating data into the description and/or marking > data points which are referenced in the description (so as to mark it as > outdated when they change)? > > I appreciate the potential benefits of generated descriptions (and other > things), but Monte's examples might have swayed me towards human > curated—when available. > > On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ok, so I just did what I proposed. I went to random enwiki articles and >> described the first ten I found which didn't already have descriptions: >> >> >> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film about a Gulf War friendly-fire >> incident* >> >> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *largest known species of land snail, extinct* >> >> - "List of Kenyan writers", *notable Kenyan authors* >> >> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *annular eclipse which lasted 77 >> seconds* >> >> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *historic Civilian Conservation Corps >> post-and-beam building* >> >> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *debut 1980 studio album by Goombay Dance >> Band* >> >> - "E-1027", *modernist villa in France by architect Eileen Gray* >> >> - "Daingerfield State Park", *park in Morris County, Texas, USA, >> bordering Lake Daingerfield* >> >> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *2014 Live album by Mexican pop singer Fey* >> >> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *6th UEFA Regions' Cup, won by Castile and >> Leon* >> >> >> >> And here are the respective descriptions from Magnus' (quite excellent) >> autodesc.js: >> >> >> >> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film by Edward Zwick, produced by John >> Davis and David T. Friendly from United States of America* >> >> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *species of Mollusca* >> >> - "List of Kenyan writers", *Wikimedia list article* >> >> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *solar eclipse* >> >> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *Construction in Connecticut, United >> States of America* >> >> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *album* >> >> - "E-1027", *villa in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, France* >> >> - "Daingerfield State Park", *state park and state park of a state of >> the United States in Texas, United States of America* >> >> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *live album by Fey* >> >> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *none* >> >> >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Just trying to make my own bold assertions falsifiable :) >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The whole human-vs-extracted descriptions quality question could be >>> fairly easy to test I think: >>> >>> - Pick, some number of articles at random. >>> - Run them through a description extraction script. >>> - Have a human describe the same articles with, say, the app interface I >>> demo'ed. >>> >>> If nothing else this exercise could perhaps make what's thus far been a >>> wildly abstract discussion more concrete. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> If having the most elegant description extraction mechanism was the >>>> goal I would totally agree ;) >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Dmitry Brant <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> IMO, allowing the user to edit the description is a missed opportunity >>>>> to make the user edit the actual *data*, such that the description is >>>>> generated correctly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> IMO, if the goal is quality, then human curated descriptions are >>>>>> superior until such time as the auto-generation script passes the Turing >>>>>> test ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> I see these empty descriptions as an amazing opportunity to give >>>>>> *everyone* an easy new way to edit. I whipped an app editing interface up >>>>>> at the Lyon hackathon: >>>>>> bluetooth720 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VblyGhf_c8> >>>>>> >>>>>> I used it to add a couple hundred descriptions in a single day just >>>>>> by hitting "random" then adding descriptions for articles which didn't >>>>>> have >>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd love to try a limited test of this in production to get a sense >>>>>> for how effective human curation can be if the interface is easy to >>>>>> use... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jan Ainali <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Nice one! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does not appear to work on svwiki though. Does it have something to >>>>>>> do with that the wiki in question does not display that tagline? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se> >>>>>>> 0729 - 67 29 48 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till >>>>>>> mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* >>>>>>> Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-08-18 17:23 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske < >>>>>>> [email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Show automatic description underneath "From Wikipedia...": >>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To use, add: >>>>>>>> importScript ( 'User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js' ) ; >>>>>>>> to your common.js >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:47 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It would be even better if this (short: 3 field max) >>>>>>>>> pipe-separated list was available as a gadget to wikidatans on >>>>>>>>> Wikipedia >>>>>>>>> (like me). I can't see if a page I am on has an "instance of" (though >>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> should) and I can see the description thanks to another gadget (sorry >>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> idea which one that is). Often I will update empty descriptions, but >>>>>>>>> if I >>>>>>>>> was served basic fields (so for a painting, the creator field), I >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>> click through to update that too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jane Darnell, 15/08/2015 08:53: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of fields >>>>>>>>>>> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1, item descriptions are mostly useless in my experience. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As for "get into production on Wikipedia" I don't know what it >>>>>>>>>> means, I certainly don't like 1) mobile-specific features, 2) >>>>>>>>>> overriding >>>>>>>>>> existing manually curated content; but it's good to 3) fill gaps. >>>>>>>>>> Mobile >>>>>>>>>> folks often do (1) and (2), if they *instead* did (3) I'd be very >>>>>>>>>> happy. :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nemo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dmitry Brant >>>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > -- > EN Wikipedia user page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle > IRC: bgerstle > > -- Dmitry Brant Mobile Apps Team (Android) Wikimedia Foundation https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:36 PM, Brian Gerstle <[email protected]> wrote: > Could there be a way to have our nicely curated description cake and eat > it too? For example, interpolating data into the description and/or marking > data points which are referenced in the description (so as to mark it as > outdated when they change)? > > I appreciate the potential benefits of generated descriptions (and other > things), but Monte's examples might have swayed me towards human > curated—when available. > > On Tuesday, August 18, 2015, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Ok, so I just did what I proposed. I went to random enwiki articles and >> described the first ten I found which didn't already have descriptions: >> >> >> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film about a Gulf War friendly-fire >> incident* >> >> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *largest known species of land snail, extinct* >> >> - "List of Kenyan writers", *notable Kenyan authors* >> >> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *annular eclipse which lasted 77 >> seconds* >> >> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *historic Civilian Conservation Corps >> post-and-beam building* >> >> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *debut 1980 studio album by Goombay Dance >> Band* >> >> - "E-1027", *modernist villa in France by architect Eileen Gray* >> >> - "Daingerfield State Park", *park in Morris County, Texas, USA, >> bordering Lake Daingerfield* >> >> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *2014 Live album by Mexican pop singer Fey* >> >> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *6th UEFA Regions' Cup, won by Castile and >> Leon* >> >> >> >> And here are the respective descriptions from Magnus' (quite excellent) >> autodesc.js: >> >> >> >> - "Courage Under Fire", *1996 film by Edward Zwick, produced by John >> Davis and David T. Friendly from United States of America* >> >> - "Pebasiconcha immanis", *species of Mollusca* >> >> - "List of Kenyan writers", *Wikimedia list article* >> >> - "Solar eclipse of December 14, 1917", *solar eclipse* >> >> - "Natchaug Forest Lumber Shed", *Construction in Connecticut, United >> States of America* >> >> - "Sun of Jamaica (album)", *album* >> >> - "E-1027", *villa in Roquebrune-Cap-Martin, France* >> >> - "Daingerfield State Park", *state park and state park of a state of >> the United States in Texas, United States of America* >> >> - "Todo Lo Que Soy-En Vivo", *live album by Fey* >> >> - "2009 UEFA Regions' Cup", *none* >> >> >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Just trying to make my own bold assertions falsifiable :) >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:32 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The whole human-vs-extracted descriptions quality question could be >>> fairly easy to test I think: >>> >>> - Pick, some number of articles at random. >>> - Run them through a description extraction script. >>> - Have a human describe the same articles with, say, the app interface I >>> demo'ed. >>> >>> If nothing else this exercise could perhaps make what's thus far been a >>> wildly abstract discussion more concrete. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 6:17 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> If having the most elegant description extraction mechanism was the >>>> goal I would totally agree ;) >>>> >>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 5:19 PM, Dmitry Brant <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> IMO, allowing the user to edit the description is a missed opportunity >>>>> to make the user edit the actual *data*, such that the description is >>>>> generated correctly. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 8:02 PM, Monte Hurd <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> IMO, if the goal is quality, then human curated descriptions are >>>>>> superior until such time as the auto-generation script passes the Turing >>>>>> test ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> I see these empty descriptions as an amazing opportunity to give >>>>>> *everyone* an easy new way to edit. I whipped an app editing interface up >>>>>> at the Lyon hackathon: >>>>>> bluetooth720 <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6VblyGhf_c8> >>>>>> >>>>>> I used it to add a couple hundred descriptions in a single day just >>>>>> by hitting "random" then adding descriptions for articles which didn't >>>>>> have >>>>>> them. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'd love to try a limited test of this in production to get a sense >>>>>> for how effective human curation can be if the interface is easy to >>>>>> use... >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 1:25 PM, Jan Ainali <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Nice one! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Does not appear to work on svwiki though. Does it have something to >>>>>>> do with that the wiki in question does not display that tagline? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Med vänliga hälsningar,Jan Ainali* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Verksamhetschef, Wikimedia Sverige <http://wikimedia.se> >>>>>>> 0729 - 67 29 48 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Tänk dig en värld där varje människa har fri tillgång till >>>>>>> mänsklighetens samlade kunskap. Det är det vi gör.* >>>>>>> Bli medlem. <http://blimedlem.wikimedia.se> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-08-18 17:23 GMT+02:00 Magnus Manske < >>>>>>> [email protected]>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Show automatic description underneath "From Wikipedia...": >>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> To use, add: >>>>>>>> importScript ( 'User:Magnus_Manske/autodesc.js' ) ; >>>>>>>> to your common.js >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:47 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> It would be even better if this (short: 3 field max) >>>>>>>>> pipe-separated list was available as a gadget to wikidatans on >>>>>>>>> Wikipedia >>>>>>>>> (like me). I can't see if a page I am on has an "instance of" (though >>>>>>>>> it >>>>>>>>> should) and I can see the description thanks to another gadget (sorry >>>>>>>>> no >>>>>>>>> idea which one that is). Often I will update empty descriptions, but >>>>>>>>> if I >>>>>>>>> was served basic fields (so for a painting, the creator field), I >>>>>>>>> would >>>>>>>>> click through to update that too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 9:58 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) < >>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Jane Darnell, 15/08/2015 08:53: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Yes but even if the descriptions were just the contents of fields >>>>>>>>>>> separated by a pipe it would be better than nothing. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> +1, item descriptions are mostly useless in my experience. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> As for "get into production on Wikipedia" I don't know what it >>>>>>>>>> means, I certainly don't like 1) mobile-specific features, 2) >>>>>>>>>> overriding >>>>>>>>>> existing manually curated content; but it's good to 3) fill gaps. >>>>>>>>>> Mobile >>>>>>>>>> folks often do (1) and (2), if they *instead* did (3) I'd be very >>>>>>>>>> happy. :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Nemo >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>>>> 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 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Mobile-l mailing list >>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Dmitry Brant >>>>> Mobile Apps Team (Android) >>>>> Wikimedia Foundation >>>>> https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > -- > EN Wikipedia user page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Brian.gerstle > IRC: bgerstle > > -- Dmitry Brant Mobile Apps Team (Android) Wikimedia Foundation https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_mobile_engineering
_______________________________________________ Mobile-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
