Absolutely, I don't want to push anything under the rug. I'll put a section in there for issues and what the Wikidata community is planning to do about them.
On 24 September 2017 at 01:00, James Heald <[email protected]> wrote: > Equally, the page may usefully serve to inform contributors to Wikidata > about legitimate concerns from other projects that have arisen out of test > integrations, that there is a need to do more to address. > > -- James. > > > > On 23/09/2017 22:18, john cummings wrote: > >> 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
