Hoi,
Technically there is nothing stopping Wikidata from hosting multiple
infoboxes on the same subject. The big thing about such infoboxes is that
their layout is the same for all subjects in the same category. This does
not mean that every one looks the same but it does mean they follow a
consistent pattern.
When people talk about things like colours and stuff, it becomes highly
emotional but in the final analysis at this stage it is just more bike
shedding. It should be obvious that attributes like colour can be
overriden.. Given that info boxes will not be supported in the near future
...
The notion that people should curate the info boxes locally is something
that I do not subscribe to. Not being able to agree on data and sources is
the same as not being able to reach a neutral point of view. This does not
mean that multiple sources may not agree but equally it does not mean that
different sources cannot be maintained from within Wikidata.
Finally, when Wikidata provides data and info boxes, it does not mean that
any project is compelled to use it. As Wikidata matures, it will become
increasingly clear that it is not the best practice.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 14 June 2012 12:11, Gregor Hagedorn <[email protected]> wrote:
> While I agree that it is desirable to support simple, preformatted
> Infoboxes that can, with minimal effort be re-used in a large number
> of language versions of Wikipedia, I strongly disagree with the demand
> to make this the only choice.
>
> I think the present Wikidata approach to allow local Wikipedias to
> customize their infoboxes by accessing wikidata properties
> property-by-property is the right path.
>
> The large Wikipedias with many editors have invested considerable
> creative energy into making quite a large number of infoboxes
> elaborate information containers. That includes formatting, images and
> hand-crafted links in both the "field name" and the "field value"
> side. Some values are expressed through svg graphics, other values
> expressed through background color coding, etc.
>
> Limiting the usability of Wikidata to plain vanilla infox boxes could
> cause considerable resistance in these communities. And although small
> Wikipedia will profit a lot from Wikidata, without the engagement of
> editors from the large Wikipedias into curating Wikidata content, the
> increased synergies will not happen.
>
> Another issue is that (I believe that) Wikidata does not have a notion
> of ordering properties. Correct? This is no issue for the present
> Wikidata approach because infoboxes remain curated in each local
> Wikipedia. However, in a centralized "one size fits all" approach,
> replacing existing infoboxes where information is presented in a
> logical order with an alphabetical property order would create huge
> resistance (and would be a complex issue that Wikidata would have to
> deal with, allowing property ordering and filtering).
>
> I believe that Wikidata correctly aims to provide a smooth transition
> path, where it is possible to obtain only part of an infobox from
> wikidata and inject wikidata content into existing infobox layouts.
>
> That said: I would encourage a third party contributor to try to
> create a default Wikidata infobox generator in a way (extension
> installable in multiple Wikipedias) that enables a wikipedia to
> autocreate a good looking, plain vanilla infobox with minimal effort.
>
> Gregor
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
