Hi all I'm putting aside time next week to write up an information page on Wikidata for contributors to other Wikimedia projects who want to know more about/may have concerns about reusing Wikidata on other projects. I hope this will help people having the same discussions over and over and allay many of the concerns of users from other projects.
I'm starting off with a list of common arguments for not using data from Wikidata and working my way back from there, please do take a look and brain dump https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:John_Cummings/Wikidata_in_Wikimedia_projects Thanks very much John On 23 September 2017 at 14:34, James Heald <[email protected]> wrote: > It's not just other wikis where cryptic template invocations can be an > issue. > > I sometimes think that on Wikidata itself, with templates {{P|...}} and > {{Q|...}}, we could use a bot to add the label of the property or item in > the default language of the page as an extra parameter to the template. > > (If I remember correctly, both the P and Q templates permit the presence > of such a extra, undisplayed parameter). > > For one thing, this would make discussions significantly easier to > interpret for anyone who is following the diffs as raw wikitext. > > It also might help with people arguing at cross-purposes, basing their > arguments on the label of a property or item in their own language, which > is what is visible to them because it is their language labels that the > {{P|...}} and {{Q|...}} templates show them -- but may be different to what > the {{P|...}} and {{Q|...}} templates show to other participants who have a > different mother tongue. Often both sides think their arguments are right > and obvious, based on the different native labels that the P and Q > templates are showing them. If there was a label added in a single > language, even if displayed only in the wikitext of the page, they might > sometimes realise this sooner. > > So, for both of these reasons, I think there can be a case for > human-meaningful "explanatory" or "identificatory" parameter-slots in > templates, even if they are never displayed in actual page-output. > > A bot-added Harvardesque-ref courtesy field in {{Cite_Q}} could be exactly > another such example. > > -- James. > > On 23/09/2017 05:50, LeadSongDog wrote: > >> My point, Andy, was that some parameters can be required, such as CS1 >> requiring the parameter Title. Further, the Ref parameter can be automated, >> as with ref=harv. >> >> On Sep 22, 2017, at 5:09 PM, Andy Mabbett <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> On 22 September 2017 at 01:45, LeadSongDog <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Not "enforcing", but it's certainly possible to show an error message >>>> for missing parameters. Many other cite templates do so. >>>> >>> >>> The subject under discussion was "a legible refname"; that's not a >>> parameter of the template and no cite templates currently warn if a >>> refname is missing, let alone not "legible". >>> >>> > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by AVG. > http://www.avg.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
