Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata for Wiktionary
Citiranje Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: The interwiki links to Wiktionary are from an interwiki point of view EXTREMELY easy to do. The problem with those links is that they cannot be uniquely linked to existing items to Wikidata and thereby it becomes unrealistic to do it in a meaningful way at this time. Wiktionary has one article for multiple lemmas in multiple languages and they are based on the way they are written NOT on being about a subject. Would it be possible to ask the Wiktionary community to stop with this practice? I have never understood why is it done in the first place, never saw any benefit from it, nor known who came with the idea and why. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata for Wiktionary
Citiranje Yair Rand yyairr...@gmail.com: The Wiktionary communities tend to strongly disagree that splitting entries per language would be easier for either editors or readers. It has been discussed before numerous times over the years. I do not see this strong disagreement. The last discussion about it was at http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Grease_pit/2014/February#Embrace_the_wiki and to me it seems that the majority of users support it. (Other discussions are listed at http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wiktionary:Per-language_pages_proposal#Past_discussions ) On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 1:17 PM, Smolenski Nikola smole...@eunet.rs wrote: Citiranje Jo winfi...@gmail.com: What you get on a Wiktionary page is a description of words in several languages with that particular spelling. Of course 1 spelling can also be several words in 1 language already. And why? Why not having a separate page for every language, while the spelling would just be a disambiguation page? This would be easier for Wiktionary readers, writers and for linking with Wikidata. 2015-05-07 12:03 GMT+02:00 Smolenski Nikola smole...@eunet.rs: Citiranje Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: The interwiki links to Wiktionary are from an interwiki point of view EXTREMELY easy to do. The problem with those links is that they cannot be uniquely linked to existing items to Wikidata and thereby it becomes unrealistic to do it in a meaningful way at this time. Wiktionary has one article for multiple lemmas in multiple languages and they are based on the way they are written NOT on being about a subject. Would it be possible to ask the Wiktionary community to stop with this practice? I have never understood why is it done in the first place, never saw any benefit from it, nor known who came with the idea and why. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata for Wiktionary
Citiranje Jo winfi...@gmail.com: What you get on a Wiktionary page is a description of words in several languages with that particular spelling. Of course 1 spelling can also be several words in 1 language already. And why? Why not having a separate page for every language, while the spelling would just be a disambiguation page? This would be easier for Wiktionary readers, writers and for linking with Wikidata. 2015-05-07 12:03 GMT+02:00 Smolenski Nikola smole...@eunet.rs: Citiranje Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com: The interwiki links to Wiktionary are from an interwiki point of view EXTREMELY easy to do. The problem with those links is that they cannot be uniquely linked to existing items to Wikidata and thereby it becomes unrealistic to do it in a meaningful way at this time. Wiktionary has one article for multiple lemmas in multiple languages and they are based on the way they are written NOT on being about a subject. Would it be possible to ask the Wiktionary community to stop with this practice? I have never understood why is it done in the first place, never saw any benefit from it, nor known who came with the idea and why. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] External identifiers vs. Wikidata-internal links data
Citiranje Thad Guidry thadgui...@gmail.com: I think a simple naming convention would suffice (and clean up the existing ones): blah ID such as for example: CANTIC ID Freebase ID Munzinger IBA ID NLP ID dmoz ID Oxford Biography Index ID SELIBR ID How would you name ISBN, for example? ISBN ID? :) ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] External identifiers vs. Wikidata-internal links data
Citiranje Erik Moeller e...@wikimedia.org: Have we considered separating in some way (in the UI, and possibly the data model) properties which track identifiers in external databases vs. properties that describe the item using Wikidata-internal links? As more and more external identifiers are added, it's easy to get lost in them while looking for the right property to describe an item. We're effectively already doing this with Wikimedia identifiers by calling them sitelinks and it seems like a potential logical extension of that concept to group other kinds of external identifiers in their own section rather than having CANTIC, BIBSYS identifiers, Freebase identifiers or even DMOZ links mixed together with the primary descriptors of an author or work, for example. I agree this would be a nice idea. I believe it would be relatively easy to do, if only properties could have properties of their own. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] annotating red links
Citiranje Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: We can't really just put the link to the non existent article into the Wikidata item because the article might be created and then cover a completely unrelated topic. We already have this problem with red links on Wikipedia but it would be even worse on Wikidata. Would it be acceptable if such links would somehow be singled out, for example with the nonexisting badge I suggested? Then, it would be possible to periodically check Articles that exist in Wikipedia but have nonexisting badge on Wikidata and see if they cover appropriate topics. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: On 22/10/2014 14:23, Smolenski Nikola wrote: Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. It's no problem if multiple redirects link to the same place. For example, on en-wiki, we have Luke Havell (redirect)- Havell family Robert Havell (redirect) - Havell family Daniel Havell (redirect) - Havell family etc It's no problem if we have different items Q(Luke Havell) - Luke Havell (redirect) Q(Robert Havell) - Robert Havell (redirect) Q(Daniel Havell) - Daniel Havell (redirect) different items, for different people, sitelinked to different places on en-wiki, that happen to be redirects. All right, that may not be a big problem. However, it would be a big problem if we have: Q(Coat of Arms of Novi Sad) - Coat of Arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of novi sad - Novi Sad ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com: I do think though that having something like what you describe happen is more of a user error though. Can you think of any possible Q(something) that Right now, since only linking to articles is allowed, and only one article can be linked from anywhere on Wikidata, such errors are difficult to make, and easy to find and rectify. If linking to redirects is allowed, such errors will become easier to make, and more difficult to find and rectify. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Users do understand Wikidata less than before
Citiranje Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com: 2) There is no way of making an interwikilink for a redirect, and the German Wikipedia's afrikanische Pflaume is currently a redirect to Prunus You should still be able to make an interwiki link for a redirect the old way, are you not? ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Wikidata / Wikipedia integration : redlinks and items
Citiranje Lydia Pintscher lydia.pintsc...@wikimedia.de: On Sat, Sep 6, 2014 at 12:51 PM, Thomas Douillard thomas.douill...@gmail.com wrote: As for simply allowing sitelinks to non-existing articles in Wikidata: I fear we can't easily do that. If someone adds the link to a specific item and then another person comes and creates an article under the same name but for a different topic we have an issue. This is a problem, though note that it can already happen if someone changes the topic of an existing article. Is anyone interested in thinking this through together and writing up a plan? Once we have that we can figure out if there is someone to help with implementation. Some time ago I wrote http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Notes/Article_generation . If it is too confusing, I am here to clarify it. (Or if it is outright wrong, I am here as well :) ) ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
