To amplify what Gerard wrote:
To think of how P972 "catalog" = "Black Lunch Table" was being used, a
useful analogy is to think of the way one might add a maintenance
category for files on Commons -- not to give any assertion of notability
or importance, but simply to mark a group of things (files, items) that
it is useful to consider together, that one can then easily recall as a
group, and run database queries for as a group.
It is a fair objection that P972 may not be the right property for this
kind of use, which should be migrated to use a different property.
But what is not fair is to blame the project for this, when the use of
P972 came out as the recommended approach from a community discussion
nine months ago, and has been used very effectively since then, and
since then has been mentioned really quite often without disapproval, eg
here, or on Project Chat, or the Wikidata+GLAM facebook page.
What is also not acceptable *at all* is for all such uses to suddenly be
removed without warning using an automated process, rather than calmly
and quietly migrated after appropriate discussion to a different property.
I think you can see why that something like that happening, without
warning, to an essential part of their workflow would cause people to be
upset unhappy and confused.
Fortunately, it looks as looks as though things have now been put back
on a more constructive path, and it should be possible to very easily
resolve any concerns people have, by migrating these uses of P972 either
to P4570 "Wikidata project", or to some new property created for
purposes of this kind.
-- James.
On 04/01/2018 10:01, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,,
Jane sorry but that is not how it is. At the time there was a request for a
new property. The discussion went into the never never land of personal
opinions. It ended with the suggestion of using the catalog property. This
suggestion was accepted. Literally thousands of edits were made as a
consequence and a new purpose was given to Wikidata. It has been used as
scaffolding for new articles in Wikipedia (yes, the items created are all
notable under English Wikipedia rules).
The issue is all about notability, inclusion and diversity. Just to remind
you, in a paper written about Wikidata it has been noted that the practices
around constraints are preventing diversity... The issue is also about
trust and purpose. When a well established organisation like the Black
Lunch Table uses Wikidata, they can use Listeria lists to produce lists for
upcoming editathons. They use query to monitor the development of new
articles and information for past editathons. All the items that are marked
with Black Lunch table have seen a considerable amount of edits since the
start of the use of Wikidata. It was a huge quality improvement over using
spreadsheets and Wikipedia lists.
Jane, I have been involved in the initial setup of several catalogs. The
lists I have been involved in are backed by organisations like the
Smithsonian, the Library of the New York Botanical Garden, the Cisneros
foundation. These are not trivial organisations. Jane, I have helped with
the setup and I have monitored development. In your arguments I find a lack
of understanding of what has happened and an apologetic stance where the
policies are to justify what is in effect unacceptable consequences.
What I notice is a huge lack of trust. A lack of understanding of the
situation, a lack of appreciation that there are multiple and acceptable
purposes for Wikidata and that this is one.
The current situation is that the deletions have been reverted. There is
now a need of discussion of acceptable purposes for Wikidata and key should
be diversity and inclusion in stead of doctrine and exclusion.
Thanks,
---
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
