First off, thanks so much for the support and assistance in understanding the work being done here. Thanks to those editors who restored the wholesale deletion of the catalog property.
Secondly: While the Black Lunch Table is unique in both its scope and outreach, other projects are using the category in actual "real-world things." They are not internal WikiProjects. An example of this is the GLAM project for Colección Patricia Phelps de Cisneros (CPPC). CPPC is a large and active private Latin American art collection that is improving coverage of Latin American artists on the projects, with the intention of adding at minimum articles in English, Spanish, and Portuguese. Which is why Wikidata is so helpful, for it's language neutral interchangeability of the scaffolding of metadata and the establishment of notability via VIAF and other identifiers. The CPPC GLAM project has multiple task lists and SPARQL queries in Listeria tables. CPPC also plans on doing an image donation to the Commons in the next 6-12 months as the project develops and as full metadata is collected and implemented in the most robust Wikidata-centric way. But first the publications and artist metadata needed to be populated. Here's the task lists: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:GLAM/Colección_Patricia_Phelps_de_Cisneros/Tasks This is not a WikiProject, but is a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, Museums) initiative. So should GLAM outreach and Wikipedia:Meetup projects like BLT have something specially created to cover this type of outreach? I believe that other potential outreach institutional partners would want to be implementing usage of Wikidata in this way as well. With this Wikidata-in-a-Box approach, the idea is to expand and improve upon common outreach requirements (like task lists), setting up a replicable structure and process that reduces administrative burden and doesn't require re-inventing the wheel over and over again. Because the fact is that there is definitely an exponential need for this work -- and this need is only going to increase and expand in scope, hopefully. As long as things like what happened here don't happen again and discourage this work and destroy outreach efforts. So it would help to have consensus of some type to support this outreach going forward. Gerard and I thought we had consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that will address all concerns. Thanks again, - Erika *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 11:21 AM, James Heald <[email protected]> wrote: > Better to use P4570, or a new bespoke property, since the things these > people are being tagged to be part of, or participants in, like "Black > Lunch Table", are not external real-world things, but internal wiki-world > projects. > > It is useful to maintain a distinction between the two -- it helps to > avoid the confusion that has been the root of the issue with P972. > > -- James. > > > > On 04/01/2018 16:10, Thad Guidry wrote: > >> "relatedness" or "tagging" is typically handled generically in Wikidata >> through the use of "part of" and "has part" properties. >> They work terrifically well to apply some generic classification needs >> such >> as those of the Black Lunch Table efforts. >> >> So, an alternative to the current modeling could be... >> >> Are they only persons ? if so, mark them as "participant of" -> >> "Q28781198" Black Lunch Table >> Are the topics needing some "tagging" for classification sometimes more >> than persons ? if so, mark them as "part of" -> "Q28781198" Black Lunch >> Table >> >> -Thad >> >>
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
