subject:"\[Wikidata\] Wikidata \+ Wikipedia outreach"

My understanding of identifiers and authorities is that they come from
established entities, i.e., VIAF contributors
http://www.oclc.org/en/viaf/contributors.html

If we can query off a BLT identifier that would be great. But the task list
items don't have unique identifiers established -- and that would be an
onerous, artificial process.

So I have concerns about this idea, that it doesn't provide a workable
solution.

Maybe some of this is lost in translation as it is very Wikipedia-centric.


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 12:03 PM, LeadSongDog  wrote:

> Erika,
> Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date,
> and links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki
> worlds. Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing
> wikidatan notability?
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
> Hi LeadSongDog,
>
> Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch
> Table has generated
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press
>
> Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative.
> Plus would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata
> entries as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things,
> where to reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to
> establish notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with
> the current interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers
> via VIAF and other sources to establish notability It builds notability
> on top of established library science canons, and provides disambiguation,
> etc. Sorry I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress
>
> I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually
> but what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution
> to the problem these various outreach efforts are requiring.
>
> An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of
> "dirty data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use
> something lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL
> query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata
> significantly.
>
> Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better
> word) property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that
> came up in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus,
> because a maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big
> step organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's
> expertise and knowledge-base on this.
>
> Best,
>
> - Erika
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog  wrote:
>
>> Erika,
>> You might consider using https://www.artsy.net/article/
>> the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting
>> -together-in-the-cafeteria as a ref. There must be something usable
>> there.
>>
>> From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal
>> meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has
>> distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its
>> own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists
>> attending may often already be so described, but as they may edit
>> pseudonymously one must be careful to avoid outing.
>>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

These projects all have namespaces on En Wikipedia. If there was consensus
that the projects should have Wikidata namespaces -- if that is something
the community would allow and would embrace, that would be something I
would support doing.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 11:27 AM, Thad Guidry  wrote:

> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 9:53 AM Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> Yes. This is the crux of the matter, the big question: *"I'm not sure we
>> should store this kind of data on Wikidata."*
>>
>
> So, I miss the ideas and mantra we had in Freebase. "some data is better
> than no data".  It really was FREE in the sense that editathons or curators
> or researchers could actually use Freebase to begin storing their data
> collection.  Freebase had the same worries.  And we solved it quite easily
> and built up a wonderful community of lists, data in the making, partial
> projects, etc.  Just like Black Lunch Table is doing now.  The solution was
> introducing a very simple idea of a "namespace".  Everyone and every
> project could have their own slice of Freebase and anyone could ask
> permission from the namespace owner to help edit or curate.  Our search and
> API allowed you to filter out non-root namespaces if you wanted or filter
> ON THEM.  My personal namespace was /thadguidry.  And it is there to this
> day in the data dumps where you can see all my curated data and lists.  We
> monitored namespaces for simple violations like racism, human dignity data
> violations, etc., but left it free and open in the sense that "some data is
> better than no data".  It resulted in the amassing of over 500,000,000
> namespace facts and they are still used to this day to enrich "less than
> notable" entities where many of those "less than notable/popular?" facts
> actually show up in Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, & Google and where researchers,
> and students have used those facts to enlighten the world and make it a
> better place.
>
> It would be AMAZING, if somehow, this year in 2018...that namespaces could
> actually be used in Wikidata to make it truly free and open to all.
> /blacklunchtable to start.
>
> -Thad
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Gerard Meijssen

Hoi,
What do you mean by an "invitation" ?  I do not see how that applies.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 6 January 2018 at 18:03, LeadSongDog  wrote:

> Erika,
> Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date,
> and links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki
> worlds. Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing
> wikidatan notability?
>
>
> On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
> Hi LeadSongDog,
>
> Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch
> Table has generated
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press
>
> Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative.
> Plus would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata
> entries as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things,
> where to reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to
> establish notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with
> the current interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers
> via VIAF and other sources to establish notability It builds notability
> on top of established library science canons, and provides disambiguation,
> etc. Sorry I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress
>
> I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually
> but what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution
> to the problem these various outreach efforts are requiring.
>
> An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of
> "dirty data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use
> something lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL
> query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata
> significantly.
>
> Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better
> word) property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that
> came up in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus,
> because a maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big
> step organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's
> expertise and knowledge-base on this.
>
> Best,
>
> - Erika
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>
> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog  wrote:
>
>> Erika,
>> You might consider using https://www.artsy.net/article/
>> the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting
>> -together-in-the-cafeteria as a ref. There must be something usable
>> there.
>>
>> From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal
>> meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has
>> distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its
>> own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists
>> attending may often already be so described, but as they may edit
>> pseudonymously one must be careful to avoid outing.
>>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread LeadSongDog

Erika,
Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date, and 
links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki worlds. 
Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing wikidatan 
notability? 


> On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
> 
> Hi LeadSongDog,
> 
> Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch 
> Table has generated
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press
> 
> Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative. Plus 
> would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata entries 
> as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things, where to 
> reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to establish 
> notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with the current 
> interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers via VIAF and 
> other sources to establish notability It builds notability on top of 
> established library science canons, and provides disambiguation, etc. Sorry 
> I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress
> 
> I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually but 
> what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution to the 
> problem these various outreach efforts are requiring.
> 
> An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of "dirty 
> data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use something 
> lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL 
> query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata 
> significantly.
> 
> Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better word) 
> property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that came up 
> in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus, because a 
> maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big step 
> organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's 
> expertise and knowledge-base on this.
> 
> Best,
> 
> - Erika
> 
> Erika Herzog
> Wikipedia User:BrillLyle
> 
>> On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog  wrote:
>> Erika,
>> You might consider using 
>> https://www.artsy.net/article/the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting-together-in-the-cafeteria
>>  as a ref. There must be something usable there.
>> 
>> From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal 
>> meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has 
>> distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its 
>> own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists attending 
>> may often already be so described, but as they may edit pseudonymously one 
>> must be careful to avoid outing. 
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Thad Guidry

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 9:53 AM Brill Lyle  wrote:

> Yes. This is the crux of the matter, the big question: *"I'm not sure we
> should store this kind of data on Wikidata."*
>

So, I miss the ideas and mantra we had in Freebase. "some data is better
than no data".  It really was FREE in the sense that editathons or curators
or researchers could actually use Freebase to begin storing their data
collection.  Freebase had the same worries.  And we solved it quite easily
and built up a wonderful community of lists, data in the making, partial
projects, etc.  Just like Black Lunch Table is doing now.  The solution was
introducing a very simple idea of a "namespace".  Everyone and every
project could have their own slice of Freebase and anyone could ask
permission from the namespace owner to help edit or curate.  Our search and
API allowed you to filter out non-root namespaces if you wanted or filter
ON THEM.  My personal namespace was /thadguidry.  And it is there to this
day in the data dumps where you can see all my curated data and lists.  We
monitored namespaces for simple violations like racism, human dignity data
violations, etc., but left it free and open in the sense that "some data is
better than no data".  It resulted in the amassing of over 500,000,000
namespace facts and they are still used to this day to enrich "less than
notable" entities where many of those "less than notable/popular?" facts
actually show up in Bing, Yahoo, Yandex, & Google and where researchers,
and students have used those facts to enlighten the world and make it a
better place.

It would be AMAZING, if somehow, this year in 2018...that namespaces could
actually be used in Wikidata to make it truly free and open to all.
/blacklunchtable to start.

-Thad
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Yes. This is the crux of the matter, the big question: *"I'm not sure we
should store this kind of data on Wikidata."*

I disagree with "*Point 2 and 3 are for the BLT community to solve.*" In
the interest of transparency, Gerard, myself, and BLT came to and are
coming to the Wikidata community for assistance in solving this problem.
I'm exhaustedly saying we had previously received consensus (with the
understanding that at some point a new property that was more ideal could
be used).

The "squatting" on the property was because BLT had a problem and Gerard
and I were trying to provide an automated solution using the semantic
metadata held in Wikidata. It was also an experiment in integrating
Wikidata into a Wikipedia project, as this is a common need for outreach
projects. The solution was very effective and positive.

The two different list styles is because bulleted lists are easier for
Wikipedians to edit and understand. During editathons/events and hectic
periods of planning, it makes it easier to add items to the task list if
it's a Wikipedia bulleted list. And then add the catalog tag to the
Wikidata item, a Wikidata item that might need to be created as a result of
that addition to the bulleted list. Listeria tables are there to automate
the list for future use, and for the current editathon event. So the two
lists are a workflow tool, which I think is okay, as they serve different
needs, different end users.

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 5:40 AM, Maarten Dammers  wrote:

> On 05-01-18 22:55, Jane Darnell wrote:
>
>> I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
>> not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
>> an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
>> project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
>> you should not probably not be editing Wikidata.
>>
> To add to that. I see three things:
> 1. Using the wrong property ( catalog (P972) ). Solution -> move to
> another property, this depends on point 3
> 2. Notability of the people BLT. Solution -> Add more information and
> links to establish notability (or worse case, delete)
> 3. Using Wikidata as a shopping list for a Wikiproject. Have a discussion
> if we, the Wikidata community,  want that (point 1 might not be needed if
> the end result is don't want)
>
> For the people like Jane and I, you're basically squatting the current
> catalog (P972) property. So we care most about point 1. Point 2 and 3 are
> for the BLT community to solve.
>
> Point 3 is probably the hardest one. On https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Lists_of_Articles I found the shopping
> lists for the BLT project. People seem to be in the hand curated list and
> in the Listeria list. Clicking around I found
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20011585 which seems to indicate that you
> had a Black Lunch Table meetup on 9 december 2017 at " The 8th Floor" and
> judging from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_T
> able/Triangle_Jan_2018 that seems correct. At the bottom of this page is
> another Listeria shopping list based on this. I'm not sure we should store
> this kind of data on Wikidata.
>
> Maarten
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Hi LeadSongDog,

Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch
Table has generated
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press

Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative. Plus
would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata entries
as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things, where to
reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to establish
notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with the
current interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers via
VIAF and other sources to establish notability It builds notability on
top of established library science canons, and provides disambiguation,
etc. Sorry I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress

I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually
but what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution
to the problem these various outreach efforts are requiring.

An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of "dirty
data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use something
lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL
query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata
significantly.

Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better word)
property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that came
up in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus,
because a maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big
step organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's
expertise and knowledge-base on this.

Best,

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog  wrote:

> Erika,
> You might consider using https://www.artsy.net/article/
> the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-
> sitting-together-in-the-cafeteria as a ref. There must be something
> usable there.
>
> From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal
> meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has
> distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its
> own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists
> attending may often already be so described, but as they may edit
> pseudonymously one must be careful to avoid outing.
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Hi Charles,

Thanks for taking the time to try to understand the issues that are being
raised here.

- Wikipedia initiatives need a unique identifier in Wikidata they can use
on Wikidata to tag items to their initiative -- and most importantly run
SPARQL queries on
-- I don't think a Q number will work for this purpose, though I'm not sure
-- Whatever solution will allow for this functionality that the community
can come to consensus on would be used
--- We are not tied to catalog in any way except it has worked as a
solution for our scenario
--- Catalog was suggested to us with consensus. But if there's a better
option that meets this need, we will use that one
- Wikipedia initiatives can then add location and date to the SPARQL query
for specific events that can generate an event-based task list Listeria
table
- Wikipedia can also run SPARQL queries by geographic data (place of birth,
residence, place of death, etc.) to find, within its tagged items, a
suggested list of pages to work on for that geographic location
- Wikidata is key because it is possible to create Wikidata items that
don't yet exist on the various language Wikipedia. Wikidata allows
organizers to create a scaffolding where notability is the ongoing,
over-arching goal, so that new Wikipedia pages in various languages based
on this Wikidata scaffolding can be easily created. This also makes
Wikidata part of every single outreach event, which to me seems a logical,
forward-moving, innovative thing, as this does not typically happen at most
editathons. If I see librarians at editathons I "target" them specifically
because they typically understand identifiers, Authority control, and the
value of VIAF. This again is done to establish and improve notability. I
would assume that a significant portion of my 10,000 manual edits on
Wikidata are identifiers that I pull from VIAF.

Here's an example entry, for the children's book illustrator Carole Byard
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q28860566
[image: Inline image 1]
The Wikipedia editathon was held at the Brooklyn Museum last summer and was
connected to a museum exhibit there.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Brooklyn_Museum_July2017#Wikidata_task_list

- BLT-tagged items might logically include attendees of events but
typically that is not the case
- BLT-tagged items are typically curated with the assistance of the
institution hosting the event, who have expertise in the local and regional
artist community, and can provide BLT with a list of underrepresented
visual artists from the African diaspora. It is often difficult for this
population to have even local or regional coverage in press and scholarly
works, so this curation is even more important. Heather and Jina (who
founded BLT) will then vet this list and create Wikidata items, tagging
them as BLT, location, date (to add to a Listeria task list) and begin the
process of establishing notability on Wikidata in preparation for Wikipedia
articles
- BLT is a two person outreach initiative made up of Heather (a visual
artist) and Jina (an artist and professor). They have minimal grant funding
for the Black Lunch Table project from outside sources that they list here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/About
There is a studio assistant who is updating Wikidata items. Gerard did the
first heavy lifting pass, and I have assisted with the editathon task
lists. But that's it.
- Wikipedia is just one part of the BLT project

- This Listeria task list model is being used in various projects
-- Plants And People (New York Botanical Garden and various Council on
Botanical and Horticultural Libraries

 participate in this initiative):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/PlantsAndPeople/Lists_of_Articles
-- Colección Patricia Phelps de Cisneros:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
-- WIKIarte: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WIKIarte/Tasks
-- Women of Rock Oral History Project:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Women_of_Rock_Oral_History_Project/Tasks

Also using this idea:
-- Women in Red
-- 100 Women BBC: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GerardM/100_Women_-_BBC
-- quite a few by Jane023 :-)
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Lists_based_on_Wikidata=Jane023%2FBiosphere+reserves#mw-pages

All of this information is helpful in providing context. But really, the
question is whether or not Wikidata is okay with integration into Wikipedia
outreach. Is Wikidata a sacrosanct island of pristine metadata that is
intended only for scientific scholarly research queries, trivia, etc. Or is
Wikidata flexible and willing to engage with the various projects in new
and exciting ways?

- Erika



*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 8:34 PM, Charles

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Andy Mabbett

On 6 January 2018 at 14:21, Gerard Meijssen  wrote:

> So by changing the venue and determining that another discussion is more
> "important" you reduce the relevance of what is happening. You also change
> the discussion.

Gerard, I have done none of these things, Stop making such
misrepresentations, now.

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

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Gerard Meijssen

Hoi,
So by changing the venue and determining that another discussion is more
"important" you reduce the relevance of what is happening. You also change
the discussion.
That discussion is already old. That discussion came more or less to a
conclusion. Its conclusion is not accepted by all. So moving the discussion
there is not an option.

Your notion about the notability is one I disagree with and arguably wrong.
Notability is given when the existence of items is necessary for the
completeness of a set of data. Award winners is a perfect example for this.
Thousands and thousands of items have been created as a result. The same is
true for the inclusion through the Mix'n'Match tool. So notability is not
relevant here.

When the argument is that an external party is the authority, when that is
thought not to be acceptable, think again. There are plenty of examples
where external parties are all there is to justify the creation of new
items in Wikidata. Mix'n'Match is full of them .. So given that that
argument does not hold, we are left with the Black Lunch Table. We are left
with diversity.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 6 January 2018 at 14:05, Andy Mabbett  wrote:

> On 6 January 2018 at 01:34, Charles Horn  wrote:
>
> > As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
> > understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
> > property and the points of view behind this discussion.
>
> Understandably you may not be aware that this is a fork of discussions
> on Wikidata, where several of the points you raise have already been
> addressed. See:
>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_
> deletions#Artist_of_Black_Lunch_Table
>
> and:
>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P972#Abuse_of_
> this_property_for_original_research
>
> > Q28781198:Black Lunch Table is P31:instance of  Q21025364:WikiProject
>
> > The objection is that anything entered into P972:Catalog MUST be
> > P31:instance of Q2352616:catalog
> >
> > Is that it?
>
> No. While that is the case, it is also true that "catalogue (P972)" is
> defined as "Either a) catalog where the item appears (used as
> qualifier for catalog code (P528)), or b) catalog of an exhibition
> (Q464980)"
>
> No-one contends that 'b'; applies, and the absence of P528 values fails
> 'a'.
>
> There are also issues of notability concerning many of the items
> created. these should be addressed by evidence (i.e. citations), but
> instead we are being given argument by authority.
>
> Furthermore, there are issues around the ambiguity of the items
> created for such people: "Jane Doe, artist, female" could refer to
> more than one person. With no URL, external ID or other value to
> differentiate them from each other, these items cannot eb sued
> meaningfully by third parties.
>
> > It seems clear that the Black Lunch Table Wiki Project has a list of
> artists
> > they are interested in, so I consider that the Black Lunch Table catalog
> is
> > real thing.
>
> Does it meet our notability requirements? How?
>
> Indeed does it exist? Where? In what form? How can I see it? If the
> answer to these latter questions is "on Wikidata", then the argument
> is circular.
>
> > Perhaps this raises questions about whether stubs or placeholder entries
> are
> > acceptable on Wikidata?
>
> We already have the answer; the notability policy. It is generally
> very inclusive  - far more so than Wikipedia's - so the egregious
> failure of BLT community to demonstrate notability for many of the
> items they are creating is telling.
>
> > Last thing, apparently consensus advice was given to use P972:Catalog in
> > this way
>
> So we're told. Where is it evidenced? I for one don't find any clarity
> about what was intended, in the discussion in which I participated,
> which was a proposal for a property for the supposed catalogue's
> unique identifiers - identifiers which it now turns out do not exist.
>
> As I indicated above, discussion is ongoing on Wikidata. I suggest
> that further discussion take place there, rather than on this list, as
> on Wikidata it will carry more wight in deciding consensus
>
> --
> Andy Mabbett
> @pigsonthewing
> http://pigsonthewing.org.uk
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Andy Mabbett

On 6 January 2018 at 01:34, Charles Horn  wrote:

> As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
> understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
> property and the points of view behind this discussion.

Understandably you may not be aware that this is a fork of discussions
on Wikidata, where several of the points you raise have already been
addressed. See:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Artist_of_Black_Lunch_Table

and:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P972#Abuse_of_this_property_for_original_research

> Q28781198:Black Lunch Table is P31:instance of  Q21025364:WikiProject

> The objection is that anything entered into P972:Catalog MUST be
> P31:instance of Q2352616:catalog
>
> Is that it?

No. While that is the case, it is also true that "catalogue (P972)" is
defined as "Either a) catalog where the item appears (used as
qualifier for catalog code (P528)), or b) catalog of an exhibition
(Q464980)"

No-one contends that 'b'; applies, and the absence of P528 values fails 'a'.

There are also issues of notability concerning many of the items
created. these should be addressed by evidence (i.e. citations), but
instead we are being given argument by authority.

Furthermore, there are issues around the ambiguity of the items
created for such people: "Jane Doe, artist, female" could refer to
more than one person. With no URL, external ID or other value to
differentiate them from each other, these items cannot eb sued
meaningfully by third parties.

> It seems clear that the Black Lunch Table Wiki Project has a list of artists
> they are interested in, so I consider that the Black Lunch Table catalog is
> real thing.

Does it meet our notability requirements? How?

Indeed does it exist? Where? In what form? How can I see it? If the
answer to these latter questions is "on Wikidata", then the argument
is circular.

> Perhaps this raises questions about whether stubs or placeholder entries are
> acceptable on Wikidata?

We already have the answer; the notability policy. It is generally
very inclusive  - far more so than Wikipedia's - so the egregious
failure of BLT community to demonstrate notability for many of the
items they are creating is telling.

> Last thing, apparently consensus advice was given to use P972:Catalog in
> this way

So we're told. Where is it evidenced? I for one don't find any clarity
about what was intended, in the discussion in which I participated,
which was a proposal for a property for the supposed catalogue's
unique identifiers - identifiers which it now turns out do not exist.

As I indicated above, discussion is ongoing on Wikidata. I suggest
that further discussion take place there, rather than on this list, as
on Wikidata it will carry more wight in deciding consensus

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

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread James Heald

I have now created a property proposal for a new property, "Wikidata 
focus list", to act as a drop-in replacement for some current uses of P972.


https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Wikidata_focus_list

Let's sort this thing out.

  -- James.


On 06/01/2018 10:40, Maarten Dammers wrote:

On 05-01-18 22:55, Jane Darnell wrote:
I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that 
is not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me 
to offer an alternative way to track your project. I am not 
responsible for your project and don't understand what it is. If you 
can't understand that then you should not probably not be editing 
Wikidata.

To add to that. I see three things:
1. Using the wrong property ( catalog (P972) ). Solution -> move to 
another property, this depends on point 3
2. Notability of the people BLT. Solution -> Add more information and 
links to establish notability (or worse case, delete)
3. Using Wikidata as a shopping list for a Wikiproject. Have a 
discussion if we, the Wikidata community,  want that (point 1 might not 
be needed if the end result is don't want)


For the people like Jane and I, you're basically squatting the current 
catalog (P972) property. So we care most about point 1. Point 2 and 3 
are for the BLT community to solve.


Point 3 is probably the hardest one. On 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Lists_of_Articles 
I found the shopping lists for the BLT project. People seem to be in the 
hand curated list and in the Listeria list. Clicking around I found 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20011585 which seems to indicate that you 
had a Black Lunch Table meetup on 9 december 2017 at " The 8th Floor" 
and judging from 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Triangle_Jan_2018 
that seems correct. At the bottom of this page is another Listeria 
shopping list based on this. I'm not sure we should store this kind of 
data on Wikidata.


Maarten

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata



---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Maarten Dammers


On 05-01-18 22:55, Jane Darnell wrote:
I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that 
is not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me 
to offer an alternative way to track your project. I am not 
responsible for your project and don't understand what it is. If you 
can't understand that then you should not probably not be editing 
Wikidata.

To add to that. I see three things:
1. Using the wrong property ( catalog (P972) ). Solution -> move to 
another property, this depends on point 3
2. Notability of the people BLT. Solution -> Add more information and 
links to establish notability (or worse case, delete)
3. Using Wikidata as a shopping list for a Wikiproject. Have a 
discussion if we, the Wikidata community,  want that (point 1 might not 
be needed if the end result is don't want)


For the people like Jane and I, you're basically squatting the current 
catalog (P972) property. So we care most about point 1. Point 2 and 3 
are for the BLT community to solve.


Point 3 is probably the hardest one. On 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Lists_of_Articles 
I found the shopping lists for the BLT project. People seem to be in the 
hand curated list and in the Listeria list. Clicking around I found 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20011585 which seems to indicate that you 
had a Black Lunch Table meetup on 9 december 2017 at " The 8th Floor" 
and judging from 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Triangle_Jan_2018 
that seems correct. At the bottom of this page is another Listeria 
shopping list based on this. I'm not sure we should store this kind of 
data on Wikidata.


Maarten

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread Lydia Pintscher

*list moderator hat on"

Folks, can we please have this discussion without calling people names
and so on? Wikidata is supposed to be better than this.


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 27/029/42207.

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-06 Thread LeadSongDog

Erika,
You might consider using 
https://www.artsy.net/article/the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting-together-in-the-cafeteria
 as a ref. There must be something usable there.

From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal 
meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has 
distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its own 
authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists attending may 
often already be so described, but as they may edit pseudonymously one must be 
careful to avoid outing. 


> On Jan 5, 2018, at 7:03 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi LeadSongDog,
> 
> It's not a situation of "has to be done that way" but is about the desired 
> functionality that many outreach projects who want to use the integration of 
> Wikidata for notability, article scaffolding, and SPARQL queries (that can be 
> used to generate location and gender specific task lists in Listeria tables) 
> for both editathon and other potential project work. We had a problem, which 
> was Black Lunch Table wanted to query its editathon task lists in an 
> automated way, both by location and gender, as the initiative is 
> geographically diverse and sometimes focuses on the gender gap. This was the 
> solution, which was reached with consensus. If we can answer that question 
> another way, that would be great.
> 
> I have no answer for the reference question as I have pretty much abandoned 
> references on Wikidata until WikiCite finds a solution that allows end users 
> to add bibliographic metadata to citations that is similar to the WikiMarkup 
> form that is integrated in RefToolbar 2.0. Quite frankly it's clear 
> references are way too time consuming and are an exercise in recreating the 
> wheel, especially if you edit Wikipedia (which I suspect most Wikidatans 
> don't do). One exception: I typically add references to support gender and 
> ethnicity where there might be some questions or concerns.
> 
> Just because I don't add references -- which on the BLP / biographic entries 
> that I typically edit don't typically get populated except the pretty much 
> useless English Wikipedia reference #bellybutton -- doesn't mean I don't 
> understand them. I have a master's in library science and am obsessed with 
> citations and as folks know try to generate between 10 to 20 citations for 
> new articles. #Overkill #YesIKnow
> 
> re: "Temperature" comment? Over 2,000 manually edited and curated items were 
> affected, and this impacts negatively on what I believe is a really great 
> ability to proselytize and positively impact many outreach projects.
> 
> - Erika
> 
> 
> Erika Herzog
> Wikipedia User:BrillLyle
> 
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 12:30 PM, <leads...@webname.com> wrote:
>> Erika,
>> You say "we need to be able to tag items with a unique identifier to connect 
>> the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives". You don't say why it 
>> has to be done that way, vice some other mechanism. Nor do you say why it 
>> has to be done without a reference. Making these things clear would help to 
>> reduce the temperature of this discussion. 
>> - LeadSongDog
>> Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
>> From: "Brill Lyle" <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
>> To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." 
>> <wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> Subject: Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach
>> Hi Jane,
>>  
>> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the problem. I 
>> am a bit baffled at this statement.
>>  
>> The rest of the email is the whole point, and dismissing it illustrates the 
>> actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn about 
>> the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then what's the point of 
>> anything here? I was trying to provide background and overview of this 
>> problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning about or hearing 
>> about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth understanding of the 
>> issue won't work to provide a solution. 
>>  
>> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort is 
>> a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page 
>> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to 
>> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach 
>> project in a new way, a way that previously had consensus and had 
>> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus 
>&g

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Gerard Meijssen

Jane,
When you object, you provide an opinion. In your objection you do not
provide an argument. So there is little substance.

At the time when the suggestion was made to use catalog, it was with the
understanding that the data build could easily be converted to another
property that is accepted for this usage. Consequently it is reasonable to
expect a property. At the time there was no consensus because of all the
opinions / objections. That did not help. The suggestion to use catalog
short circuited all this nonsense.

Jane, it is all about what the purpose of Wikidata is. As more data is
added to Wikidata, it will gain additional purposes for additional
contributors to Wikidata. Wikidata is not mine nor yours, at best we are
its custodian and we nurture it for others to find their reason to
contribute to it.

PS Erika is a trained librarian, an accomplished Wikipedian. She has
substantial knowledge and interest about many issues in Wikidata. Trust me
on this, I spoke at length about many issues with her and she helped me
understand things better.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 5 January 2018 at 22:55, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
> not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
> an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
> project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
> you should not probably not be editing Wikidata.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
>> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>>
>> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it
>> illustrates the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about
>> or learn about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then
>> what's the point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and
>> overview of this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning
>> about or hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth
>> understanding of the issue won't work to provide a solution.
>>
>> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort
>> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
>> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
>> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
>> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
>> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
>> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
>> us to figure out another solution.
>>
>> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
>> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
>> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
>> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
>> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
>> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
>> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
>> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
>> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
>> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
>> free digital labor is not welcome.
>>
>> - Erika
>>
>>
>> *Erika Herzog*
>> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
>>> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
>>> will address all concerns."
>>> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
>>> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
>>> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
>>> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
>>> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
>>> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
>>> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
>>> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
>>> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in
 understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who
 restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.

 Secondly:

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Gerard Meijssen

Hoi,
Charles, thank you for the analysis. You missed some points. It is not only
about the Black Lunch Table, there are other organisations involved in the
development of Wikimedia content that make a similar use of the "catalog"
property. Organisations like the Smithsonian, the Library of the Botanical
Garden of New York.. The problem with the BLT is indeed a conflated issue
and one issue you do not mention has to do with notability.

When catalog is used to build an unsorted list of items that are of
relevance to that project / organisation, it follows that when an item is
created and identified (by the organisation) as part of its catalog, the
item is not only notable but also necessary for the functioning of the
catalog. It follows that like other properties that have a similar status
("award received" is one), the sheer fact that an item identified as such
is not eligible for deletion. The problem becomes trust. Do we trust an
organisation, now the Black Lunch Table, to actively work on this data.

With the "award received" it is **accepted** notability. Here it is enough
that a Wikipedia article or an external source identifies a Joe Blogg as
the award winners and this serves as a reason to add an item and add the
winning of the award as a signal that the item is not to be deleted. The
purpose of these items except for completeness, is that they serve as an
indicator that this item is similar to the other award winners and this is
one reason why automated tools may suggest them for new articles in (a)
Wikipedia.

With catalog and with the Black Lunch Table, there is no external source
that helps people who "sit in judgement". It does not help them to easily
pass or fail. With the Black Lunch Table we are talking about "visual
artists of the African diaspora" the project is explicitly started to bring
visibility to notable artists. So finding sources is not easy. It can be
done and I am thankful to Pasleim for the good work he has done and is
doing.

Finally, it is about purpose; what is the purpose of Wikidata. The problem
we face when we talk about Wikidata that many arguments are used that have
nothing to do with Wikidata but everything with Wikipedia. Original
research is done with Wikidata. Why else the inclusion of all the
bio-medical data? Why else the scaffolding of data through award winners,
generations of royalty, the scaffolding by means of the "catalog" property.

One additional thing to consider; in a "scholarly paper" about Wikidata it
was mentioned that the implementation of constraints had an dampening
effect on the diversity of Wikidata. With the full frontal attack on the
work of the Black Lunch Table organisation, we face a direct attack on the
diversity of Wikidata.
Thanks,
   GerardM

On 6 January 2018 at 02:34, Charles Horn  wrote:

> Hi Jane, Erika, and everybody else,
>
> As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
> understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
> property and the points of view behind this discussion. I have read all the
> emails, and all the linked to discussion and talk pages, and finally had to
> go back to tracing all the Q and P entries and their parent classes
> mentioned in those discussion, to come up with my own understanding of the
> situation from basic principles. It has taken hours, and given how much
> effort has gone into the various discussions in the different locations it
> is frustrating that (as far as I have seen) no one objecting to the usage
> has been sufficiently clear what the problem is, or the exact nature of the
> 'abuse'.
>
> I don't think it is as obvious as some are claiming it to be. Nor do I
> think all people claiming the abuse are even aligned on what the valid
> issues are, since no one has been specific, and in the discussions, various
> issues are being conflated.
>
> Given that people here have different backgrounds, languages, are focused
> on different tasks, and may not be as intimately familliar with some P and
> Q items as others, I believe it is worth spelling out exactly what the
> nature of the problem is, especially since I think every one is aware of
> the good faith nature of the Black Lunch Table, and presumably aligned in
> the goal of making Wikidata better.
>
> I'm replying to Jane's email because this seems like the closest statement
> to what I can determine to be a simple valid complaint, I'm going to try to
> set it down here clearly so others can agree or disagree whether it is the
> entirety of the objection, or if there is more to it:
>
> Q28781198:Black Lunch Table  is
> P31:instance  of
> Q21025364:WikiProject 
>
> but is being used to populate P972:Catalog
> , which is supposed to
> represent an instance of Q2352616:catalog
>

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Charles Horn

Hi Jane, Erika, and everybody else,

As a relatively recent contributor to Wikidata, I have been struggling to
understand the objections to the Black Lunch Table's use of the catalog
property and the points of view behind this discussion. I have read all the
emails, and all the linked to discussion and talk pages, and finally had to
go back to tracing all the Q and P entries and their parent classes
mentioned in those discussion, to come up with my own understanding of the
situation from basic principles. It has taken hours, and given how much
effort has gone into the various discussions in the different locations it
is frustrating that (as far as I have seen) no one objecting to the usage
has been sufficiently clear what the problem is, or the exact nature of the
'abuse'.

I don't think it is as obvious as some are claiming it to be. Nor do I
think all people claiming the abuse are even aligned on what the valid
issues are, since no one has been specific, and in the discussions, various
issues are being conflated.

Given that people here have different backgrounds, languages, are focused
on different tasks, and may not be as intimately familliar with some P and
Q items as others, I believe it is worth spelling out exactly what the
nature of the problem is, especially since I think every one is aware of
the good faith nature of the Black Lunch Table, and presumably aligned in
the goal of making Wikidata better.

I'm replying to Jane's email because this seems like the closest statement
to what I can determine to be a simple valid complaint, I'm going to try to
set it down here clearly so others can agree or disagree whether it is the
entirety of the objection, or if there is more to it:

Q28781198:Black Lunch Table  is
P31:instance  of
Q21025364:WikiProject 

but is being used to populate P972:Catalog
, which is supposed to
represent an instance of Q2352616:catalog

The objection is that anything entered into P972:Catalog *MUST* be
P31:instance of Q2352616:catalog

Is that it?

Perhaps this is obvious after the fact, but I don't think it was obvious
from reading any of the initial objection notifications, or requests for
deletions, or subsequent follow ups. When the usage is made in good faith,
the objection does need to be spelled out so that everyone involved can
check their assumptions and understanding.

If that is the entirety of the objection, I have to agree that it is
technically sound, and hopefully that provides a basis for a solution that
keeps everybody happy.

Some other comments which I hope do not cloud my attempt at clarifying
things:

It seems clear that the Black Lunch Table Wiki Project has a list of
artists they are interested in, so I consider that the Black Lunch Table
catalog is real thing. From my reading of Q2352616:catalog
 there is nothing that strictly
specifies how it must be represented or published, nor can I see anything
clear about how public it needs to be to be valid. These properties would
appear to be inherited from its parent class Q386724:work
  I accept people will have
different opinions about what quality of publishing or how public something
needs to be before it is 'good', but it does not seem like a clear cut
thing, and the arguments could go on and on without much productive
outcome.

Insisting that BLT publish their list elsewhere could be trivially done to
technically meet some publication threshold, and still not be good enough
for some, and would not be a productive use of resources or change anything
in a meaningful way. It might be nice if it were made more accessible
elsewhere, but I don't think it is a technical requirement for BLT to
accomplish what they are trying to do. Feel free to disagree, but the point
I'm trying to make is that I can't see how an objective threshold can be
set here that couldn't be unproductively argued about either way. BLT has a
real catalog, opinions as to its quality, or quality of availability can
vary. I'm sure polite requests to improve things can be made.

One place where another user attempted to clarify a technical objection to
BLT use of catalog is: "

   - More technically: the way how the catalog property is used by BLT is
   technically incorrect, which was mentioned several times and very early as
   well. Catalogs are typically qualifiers to catalog code (P528)
   , or used in exhibition
   items, but not standalone on items about humans. Editors who spend a lot of
   time to fix wrong property use are not happy if we allow permanent
   exceptions.

—MisterSynergy  (talk
) 08:57,

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Jane,

I think the narrow definition of catalog and its use as a unique identifier
to collocate outreach initiatives might be the issue here.

Not asking you to be responsible for any outreach projects at all. I think
that is very clear.

Don't appreciate your comment on Wikidata editing. Through this project
work I am improving engagement to Wikidata by Wikipedia editors. This work
makes Wikidata a holistic part of the editathon and outreach process. It's
both productive and valuable. If none of these facts are clear then I am
not sure what else to say on the matter.

- Erika


*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
> not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
> an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
> project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
> you should not probably not be editing Wikidata.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
>> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>>
>> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it
>> illustrates the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about
>> or learn about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then
>> what's the point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and
>> overview of this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning
>> about or hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth
>> understanding of the issue won't work to provide a solution.
>>
>> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort
>> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
>> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
>> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
>> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
>> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
>> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
>> us to figure out another solution.
>>
>> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
>> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
>> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
>> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
>> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
>> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
>> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
>> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
>> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
>> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
>> free digital labor is not welcome.
>>
>> - Erika
>>
>>
>> *Erika Herzog*
>> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
>>> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
>>> will address all concerns."
>>> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
>>> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
>>> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
>>> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
>>> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
>>> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
>>> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
>>> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
>>> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in
 understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who
 restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.

 Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
 outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
 things." They are not internal WikiProjects.

 An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
 Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
 collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Hi LeadSongDog,

It's not a situation of "has to be done that way" but is about the desired
functionality that many outreach projects who want to use the integration
of Wikidata for notability, article scaffolding, and SPARQL queries (that
can be used to generate location and gender specific task lists in Listeria
tables) for both editathon and other potential project work. We had a
problem, which was Black Lunch Table wanted to query its editathon task
lists in an automated way, both by location and gender, as the initiative
is geographically diverse and sometimes focuses on the gender gap. This was
the solution, which was reached with consensus. If we can answer that
question another way, that would be great.

I have no answer for the reference question as I have pretty much abandoned
references on Wikidata until WikiCite finds a solution that allows end
users to add bibliographic metadata to citations that is similar to the
WikiMarkup form that is integrated in RefToolbar 2.0. Quite frankly it's
clear references are way too time consuming and are an exercise in
recreating the wheel, especially if you edit Wikipedia (which I suspect
most Wikidatans don't do). One exception: I typically add references to
support gender and ethnicity where there might be some questions or
concerns.

Just because I don't add references -- which on the BLP / biographic
entries that I typically edit don't typically get populated except the
pretty much useless English Wikipedia reference #bellybutton -- doesn't
mean I don't understand them. I have a master's in library science and am
obsessed with citations and as folks know try to generate between 10 to 20
citations for new articles. #Overkill #YesIKnow

re: "Temperature" comment? Over 2,000 manually edited and curated items
were affected, and this impacts negatively on what I believe is a really
great ability to proselytize and positively impact many outreach projects.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>*

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 12:30 PM, <leads...@webname.com> wrote:

> Erika,
> You say "we need to be able to tag items with a unique identifier to
> connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives". You don't say
> why it has to be done that way, vice some other mechanism. Nor do you say
> why it has to be done without a reference. Making these things clear would
> help to reduce the temperature of this discussion.
> - LeadSongDog
> *Sent:* Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
> *From:* "Brill Lyle" <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
> *To:* "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <
> wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach
> Hi Jane,
>
> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>
> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it illustrates
> the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn
> about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then what's the
> point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and overview of
> this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning about or
> hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth understanding
> of the issue won't work to provide a solution.
>
> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort
> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
> us to figure out another solution.
>
> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
> free digital labor is not welcome.
>
> - Erika
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
>

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Erika Herzog aka BrillLyle

This might work except it’s not an accurate representation of what BLT is using 
the catalog property for. BLT holds roundtables in ADDITION to editathons. And 
how do other initiatives use this who are needing the same unique identifier 
but have no roundtable as part of their initiative. 

This concept needs to be transferable to all outreach initiatives that want to 
integrate Wikidata into their task lists and establishment of notability. 

> On Jan 5, 2018, at 5:39 PM, Thad Guidry  wrote:
> 
> In looking further into this, I strongly feel that my suggestion of 
> "participant of" is a really nice fit for this use case.  A few things are 
> needed to make it comfortable for all.
> 
> 1. Add a new topic in Wikipedia called "Black Lunch Table Artist Roundtable" 
> and subclass it as an Event to Wikidata  (we already have "Black Lunch Table")
> 2. Add the "participant of" statement on each artist or participant at the 
> event.
> 3. If you want more detail about each particular Roundtable event / meetup 
> itself, then use qualifiers for that ?  Although not all of these in this 
> link are qualifiers (I think) but there's some very useful properties under 
> here to help know more about each "BLT Artist Roundtable" event 
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Q22964785
> 
> Hope that helps and have a great weekend Ericka !
> -Thad
> +ThadGuidry
> 
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Andy Mabbett

On 5 January 2018 at 22:10, Thad Guidry  wrote:

> Jane has now put herself into that terrible hurtful persona of a bully

Do we have list moderators who can deal with this outrageous - not to
mention fallacious - ad-hominem slur?

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

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Thad Guidry

In looking further into this, I strongly feel that my suggestion of
"participant of" is a really nice fit for this use case.  A few things are
needed to make it comfortable for all.

1. Add a new topic in Wikipedia called "Black Lunch Table Artist
Roundtable" and subclass it as an Event to Wikidata  (we already have
"Black Lunch Table")
2. Add the "participant of" statement on each artist or participant at the
event.
3. If you want more detail about each particular Roundtable event / meetup
itself, then use qualifiers for that ?  Although not all of these in this
link are qualifiers (I think) but there's some very useful properties under
here to help know more about each "BLT Artist Roundtable" event
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Q22964785

Hope that helps and have a great weekend Ericka !
-Thad
+ThadGuidry 
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Thad Guidry

Ericka,

I am speaking up for those that are being bullied now.  I have to.  I
must.  Yes there are bullies on Wikipedia and within the GLAM effort.  Jane
has now put herself into that terrible hurtful persona of a bully and is
not being helpful to you but toxic and not representative of our wonderful
Wikipedia community.  Everyone can clearly see that.  What is especially
troublesome is her name in lights on this
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/08/23/wikidata-glam/ and even its first
sentence "As a collaborative project, Wikidata is looking for more partners
to fill in data gaps."  Which is exactly the effort that your trying to do
with Black Lunch Table coordination efforts.  So ignore her rudeness and
bullying here. Thanks!

But don't worry !  There are others here more than willing to help out such
as Dan, Gerard, and myself, that understand your needs and we'll all work
together to come up with a way forward.

-Thad
+ThadGuidry 



On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:55 PM Jane Darnell  wrote:

> I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
> not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
> an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
> project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
> you should not probably not be editing Wikidata.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
>> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>>
>> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it
>> illustrates the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about
>> or learn about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then
>> what's the point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and
>> overview of this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning
>> about or hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth
>> understanding of the issue won't work to provide a solution.
>>
>> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort
>> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
>> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
>> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
>> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
>> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
>> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
>> us to figure out another solution.
>>
>> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
>> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
>> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
>> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
>> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
>> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
>> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
>> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
>> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
>> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
>> free digital labor is not welcome.
>>
>> - Erika
>>
>>
>> *Erika Herzog*
>> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>>
>>> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
>>> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
>>> will address all concerns."
>>> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
>>> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
>>> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
>>> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
>>> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
>>> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
>>> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
>>> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
>>> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in
 understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who
 restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.

 Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
 outreach, other projects are using

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Jane Darnell

I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is
not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer
an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your
project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then
you should not probably not be editing Wikidata.

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Brill Lyle  wrote:

> Hi Jane,
>
> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the
> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.
>
> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it illustrates
> the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn
> about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then what's the
> point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and overview of
> this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning about or
> hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth understanding
> of the issue won't work to provide a solution.
>
> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort
> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
> us to figure out another solution.
>
> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
> free digital labor is not welcome.
>
> - Erika
>
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>
>> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
>> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
>> will address all concerns."
>> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
>> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
>> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
>> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
>> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
>> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
>> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
>> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
>> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in
>>> understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who
>>> restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
>>>
>>> Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
>>> outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
>>> things." They are not internal WikiProjects.
>>>
>>> An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
>>> Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
>>> collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
>>> projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
>>> Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
>>> language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
>>> establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.
>>>
>>> The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
>>> Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
>>> in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
>>> collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
>>> first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.
>>>
>>> Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>>> Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
>>>
>>> This is not a

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread leadsong

Erika,

You say "we need to be able to tag items with a unique identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives". You don't say why it has to be done that way, vice some other mechanism. Nor do you say why it has to be done without a reference. Making these things clear would help to reduce the temperature of this discussion.

- LeadSongDog

Sent: Friday, January 05, 2018 at 8:33 AM
From: "Brill Lyle" <wp.brilll...@gmail.com>
To: "Discussion list for the Wikidata project." <wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
Subject: Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Hi Jane,

Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement.

The rest of the email is the whole point, and dismissing it illustrates the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then what's the point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and overview of this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning about or hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth understanding of the issue won't work to provide a solution.

This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach project in a new way, a way that previously had consensus and had implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping us to figure out another solution.

The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives. In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the free digital labor is not welcome.

- Erika

Erika Herzog

Wikipedia User:BrillLyle

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote:

Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that will address all concerns."

The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog" on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table" item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote:

First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.

Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world things." They are not internal WikiProjects.

An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.

The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.

Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Colecc

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

I am confused at this statement as it seems very chicken-egg circular:
"I still don't see why this project needs any special property at all when
you can create listeria lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you
have a list anywhere on a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using
Petscan."

Where exactly do we get this unordered list of item numbers? So we generate
a spreadsheet of Q numbers of Wikipedia entries? That lives on various
language Wikipedias or on a project page somewhere? Instead of the language
neutral and centralized Wikidata?

How exactly does that work? How do we maintain that dataset in an efficient
and non-manual way? How does it interact with Wikidata?

I really don't understand this glib explanation, and how it solves the
needs the projects have for task lists.

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
> will address all concerns."
> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
>> the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
>> wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
>>
>> Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
>> outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
>> things." They are not internal WikiProjects.
>>
>> An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
>> Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
>> collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
>> projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
>> Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
>> language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
>> establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.
>>
>> The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
>> Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
>> in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
>> collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
>> first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.
>>
>> Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>> Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
>>
>> This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives,
>> Museums) initiative.
>>
>> So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have
>> something specially created to cover this type of outreach?
>>
>> I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want
>> to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this
>> Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common
>> outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure
>> and process that reduces administrative burden and doesn't require
>> re-inventing the wheel over and over again. Because the fact is that there
>> is definitely an exponential need for this work -- and this need is only
>> going to increase and expand in scope, hopefully. As long as things like
>> what happened here don't happen again and discourage this work and destroy
>> outreach efforts.
>>
>> So it would help to have consensus of some type to support this outreach
>> going forward.
>>
>> Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We
>> need to find some solution that will address all concerns.
>>
>> Thanks again,
>>
>> - Erika
>>
>> *Erika Herzog*
>> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>>
>> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:21 AM, James Heald  wrote:
>>
>>> Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these
>>> people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black
>>> Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal wiki-world
>>> projects.
>>>
>>> It is useful to maintain a distinction between

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

Hi Jane,

Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the problem. I
am a bit baffled at this statement.

The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it illustrates
the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about or learn
about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then what's the
point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and overview of
this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning about or
hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth understanding
of the issue won't work to provide a solution.

This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort is
a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page
improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to
solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach
project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had*
implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus
won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping
us to figure out another solution.

The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique
identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives.
In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on
Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest
complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original
research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it
is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project
outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with
Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know
before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the
free digital labor is not welcome.

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
> will address all concerns."
> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
>> the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
>> wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
>>
>> Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
>> outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
>> things." They are not internal WikiProjects.
>>
>> An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
>> Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
>> collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
>> projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
>> Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
>> language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
>> establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.
>>
>> The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
>> Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
>> in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
>> collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
>> first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.
>>
>> Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>> Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
>>
>> This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives,
>> Museums) initiative.
>>
>> So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have
>> something specially created to cover this type of outreach?
>>
>> I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want
>> to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this
>> Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common
>> outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure
>> and process that

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Gerard Meijssen

Hoi,
Jane, you fail to understand it. We do not "just publish a catalog
somewhere" that is EXACTLY not what is done, Wikidata is given a purpose.
The purpose is to prepare editathons for Wikipedia articles. This implies
that all the entries have English Wikipedia notability. It implies that
there is no list. The Listeria list is prepared as a result of the work
done on Wikidata.

So no, we do not publish a catalog somewhere.

What we end up with is trust. The question is, do we trust recognised
organisations like the Black Lunch Table, the Smithsonian, the library of
the botanical garden of New York, the Cisneros Foundation to work in this
way. As we fail to understand the issues, as we fail to trust the
intentions of people like myself who help them to realise objectives in the
Wikimedia ecosystem we get into adversarial behaviour and the victim is the
diversity of the content of Wikidata.

The data build using the "catalog" property can easily be converted once a
"proper" property is available. This is why I find it unconscionable that
the data was removed by a data professional whose business it is to convert
data as and when needed. But let us not dwell on this and come to an
understanding. Have a property for the development of data to be used in
Wikimedia projects. To make it plain, in such situations it is always
possible to have one or multiple people who are the spokes persons for
their project.
Thanks,
  GerardM

On 5 January 2018 at 09:18, Jane Darnell  wrote:

> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
> will address all concerns."
> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog"
> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish
> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table"
> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the
> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried
> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why
> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.
>
> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:
>
>> First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
>> the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
>> wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
>>
>> Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
>> outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
>> things." They are not internal WikiProjects.
>>
>> An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
>> Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
>> collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
>> projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
>> Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
>> language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
>> establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.
>>
>> The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
>> Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
>> in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
>> collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
>> first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.
>>
>> Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
>> Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
>>
>> This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives,
>> Museums) initiative.
>>
>> So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have
>> something specially created to cover this type of outreach?
>>
>> I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want
>> to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this
>> Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common
>> outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure
>> and process that reduces administrative burden and doesn't require
>> re-inventing the wheel over and over again. Because the fact is that there
>> is definitely an exponential need for this work -- and this need is only
>> going to increase and expand in scope, hopefully. As long as things like
>> what happened here don't happen again and discourage this work and destroy
>> outreach efforts.
>>
>> So it would help to have consensus of some type to support this outreach
>> going forward.
>>
>> Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We
>> need to find some solution

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-05 Thread Jane Darnell

Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had
consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that
will address all concerns."
The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog" on
person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish the
catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table" item.
If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the catalog,
then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried to read
through the material you made available, but I still don't see why this
project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria
lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on
a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan.

On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle  wrote:

> First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
> the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
> wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
>
> Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
> outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
> things." They are not internal WikiProjects.
>
> An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
> Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
> collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
> projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
> Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
> language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
> establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.
>
> The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
> Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
> in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
> collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
> first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.
>
> Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
> Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks
>
> This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives,
> Museums) initiative.
>
> So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have
> something specially created to cover this type of outreach?
>
> I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want
> to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this
> Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common
> outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure
> and process that reduces administrative burden and doesn't require
> re-inventing the wheel over and over again. Because the fact is that there
> is definitely an exponential need for this work -- and this need is only
> going to increase and expand in scope, hopefully. As long as things like
> what happened here don't happen again and discourage this work and destroy
> outreach efforts.
>
> So it would help to have consensus of some type to support this outreach
> going forward.
>
> Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We need
> to find some solution that will address all concerns.
>
> Thanks again,
>
> - Erika
>
> *Erika Herzog*
> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *
>
> On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:21 AM, James Heald  wrote:
>
>> Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these
>> people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black
>> Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal wiki-world
>> projects.
>>
>> It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps to
>> avoid the confusion that has been the root of the issue with P972.
>>
>>  -- James.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 04/01/2018 16:10, Thad Guidry wrote:
>>
>>> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
>>> through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
>>> They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs
>>> such
>>> as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.
>>>
>>> So, an alternative to the current modeling could be...
>>>
>>> Are they only persons ?  if so, mark them as "participant of" ->
>>> "Q28781198" Black Lunch Table
>>> Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more
>>> than persons ?  if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch
>>> Table
>>>
>>> -Thad
>>>
>>>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-04 Thread Brill Lyle

First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding
the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the
wholesale deletion of the catalog property.

Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and
outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world
things." They are not internal WikiProjects.

An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de
Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art
collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the
projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English,
Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's
language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the
establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers.

The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in
Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons
in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is
collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But
first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated.

Here's the task lists:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks

This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives,
Museums) initiative.

So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have
something specially created to cover this type of outreach?

I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want
to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this
Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common
outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure
and process that reduces administrative burden and doesn't require
re-inventing the wheel over and over again. Because the fact is that there
is definitely an exponential need for this work -- and this need is only
going to increase and expand in scope, hopefully. As long as things like
what happened here don't happen again and discourage this work and destroy
outreach efforts.

So it would help to have consensus of some type to support this outreach
going forward.

Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We need
to find some solution that will address all concerns.

Thanks again,

- Erika

*Erika Herzog*
Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle *

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:21 AM, James Heald  wrote:

> Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these
> people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black
> Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal wiki-world
> projects.
>
> It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps to
> avoid the confusion that has been the root of the issue with P972.
>
>  -- James.
>
>
>
> On 04/01/2018 16:10, Thad Guidry wrote:
>
>> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
>> through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
>> They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs
>> such
>> as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.
>>
>> So, an alternative to the current modeling could be...
>>
>> Are they only persons ?  if so, mark them as "participant of" ->
>> "Q28781198" Black Lunch Table
>> Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more
>> than persons ?  if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch
>> Table
>>
>> -Thad
>>
>>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

OK thanks Gerard for clarifying.


On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 4:01 PM Gerard Meijssen 
wrote:

> Hoi,
> Neither is valid. Artists recognised by the Black Lunch Table are subject
> of the attention to write articles in (a) Wikipedia. They do not
> participate in and they are not part of the Black Lunch Table.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 4 January 2018 at 17:42, Thomas Douillard 
> wrote:
>
>> An artist part of ? you confuse «be a part of » and « participate to ».
>> Semantically quite a difference.
>>
>> 2018-01-04 17:34 GMT+01:00 Thad Guidry :
>>
>>> So this is for internal classification only ?
>>>
>>> Wouldn't it be useful to think of the approach that I mentioned to help
>>> externally as well and show relationships ?
>>> For instance, I'd like to know that a particular artist was part of the
>>> Black Lunch Table.  That's useful information, no ?
>>>
>>> -Thad
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

"tagging" for classification sake, Thomas.  Others understand what I mean.
Not confused, thanks.

-Thad
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-04 Thread Thomas Douillard

For the record,  tagging has noting to do with the « part of » properties
as defined by Help:Basic Membership Properties whatsoever. Please don’t
confuse genericity with lack of precision and Giant Mess …

2018-01-04 17:10 GMT+01:00 Thad Guidry :

>
> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
> through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
> They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs
> such as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.
>
> So, an alternative to the current modeling could be...
>
> Are they only persons ?  if so, mark them as "participant of" ->
> "Q28781198" Black Lunch Table
> Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more
> than persons ?  if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch
> Table
>
> -Thad
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

And you simply add need to add a statement (whatever that is) under
"Q28781198" Black Lunch Table that is has a Wikidata project page.
Pretty simple and solves both uses.  The modeling can be drastically
simplified.  Use Topics themselves more often.  I see this problem that we
don't actually connect the dots fully first and end up having duplicate
nodes in the graph when they don't really need to be created.

-Thad
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

So this is for internal classification only ?

Wouldn't it be useful to think of the approach that I mentioned to help
externally as well and show relationships ?
For instance, I'd like to know that a particular artist was part of the
Black Lunch Table.  That's useful information, no ?

-Thad
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-04 Thread Pharos

I think James Heald is on the right track, that we should be thinking about
a different or new property.  This is a valuable thing to track, and we
should work to find a solution that is satisfactory to everyone, and that
lets this positive effort continue.

(Black Lunch Table is a bit of a sui generis, it's an independent
cataloging effort that began off-wiki as a project among artists, but is
mostly wiki-based now.)

Thanks,
Pharos

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:21 AM, James Heald  wrote:

> Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these
> people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black
> Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal wiki-world
> projects.
>
> It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps to
> avoid the confusion that has been the root of the issue with P972.
>
>  -- James.
>
>
>
> On 04/01/2018 16:10, Thad Guidry wrote:
>
>> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
>> through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
>> They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs
>> such
>> as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.
>>
>> So, an alternative to the current modeling could be...
>>
>> Are they only persons ?  if so, mark them as "participant of" ->
>> "Q28781198" Black Lunch Table
>> Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more
>> than persons ?  if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch
>> Table
>>
>> -Thad
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach

2018-01-04 Thread James Heald

Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these 
people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black 
Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal 
wiki-world projects.


It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps to 
avoid the confusion that has been the root of the issue with P972.


 -- James.


On 04/01/2018 16:10, Thad Guidry wrote:

"relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata
through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties.
They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs such
as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts.

So, an alternative to the current modeling could be...

Are they only persons ?  if so, mark them as "participant of" ->
"Q28781198" Black Lunch Table
Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more
than persons ?  if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch
Table

-Thad



___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata




---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com


___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Wikidata + Wikipedia outreach