Ericka, I am speaking up for those that are being bullied now. I have to. I must. Yes there are bullies on Wikipedia and within the GLAM effort. Jane has now put herself into that terrible hurtful persona of a bully and is not being helpful to you but toxic and not representative of our wonderful Wikipedia community. Everyone can clearly see that. What is especially troublesome is her name in lights on this https://blog.wikimedia.org/2016/08/23/wikidata-glam/ and even its first sentence "As a collaborative project, Wikidata is looking for more partners to fill in data gaps." Which is exactly the effort that your trying to do with Black Lunch Table coordination efforts. So ignore her rudeness and bullying here. Thanks!
But don't worry ! There are others here more than willing to help out such as Dan, Gerard, and myself, that understand your needs and we'll all work together to come up with a way forward. -Thad +ThadGuidry <https://plus.google.com/+ThadGuidry> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:55 PM Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: > I object to your use of the catalog property to link to something that is > not a catalog. I don't see why my objection leads you to expect me to offer > an alternative way to track your project. I am not responsible for your > project and don't understand what it is. If you can't understand that then > you should not probably not be editing Wikidata. > > On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 2:33 PM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Hi Jane, >> >> Actually, "the rest of your email is irrelevant" illustrates the >> problem. I am a bit baffled at this statement. >> >> The rest of the email is the *whole point*, and dismissing it >> illustrates the actual problem here. If Wikidatans don't want to hear about >> or learn about the context of the problem that needs to be solved, then >> what's the point of anything here? I was trying to provide background and >> overview of this problem in my email. If you aren't interested in learning >> about or hearing about what is trying to be done, then a non-indepth >> understanding of the issue won't work to provide a solution. >> >> This is not a casual, rigid WIKI:Rulez situation. The overarching effort >> is a goal to integrate Wikidata into the Wikipedia outreach and page >> improvement / page creation process for multiple projects. We are trying to >> solve a problem with Wikidata. We are trying to use Wikidata in an outreach >> project in a new way, a way that previously *had* consensus and *had* >> implementation that was effective and super functional. If the consensus >> won't meet community standards, please help us solve the problem by helping >> us to figure out another solution. >> >> The bottom line is that we need to be able to tag items with a unique >> identifier to connect the Wikidata items to various outreach initiatives. >> In some way. If that basic functionality is deemed to be not allowed on >> Wikidata, is deemed to threaten and weaken Wikidata metadata (the latest >> complaint, along with accusations of the project work being original >> research, which is a newly creatively inaccurate characterization), if it >> is deemed not welcome, then let us know. It will negatively affect project >> outreach and integrated holistic engagement of Wikipedia editing with >> Wikidata but if that's the bottom line and community consensus, let us know >> before further work is done. None of us want to waste our time here if the >> free digital labor is not welcome. >> >> - Erika >> >> >> *Erika Herzog* >> Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* >> >> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 3:18 AM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Yes to exactly this part of your email: "Gerard and I thought we had >>> consensus on this, but apparently not. We need to find some solution that >>> will address all concerns." >>> The rest of your email is irrelevant to using the property for "catalog" >>> on person items on Wikidata when there is no catalog. Please just publish >>> the catalog somewhere and then link to it from your "Black Lunch Table" >>> item. If you don't have a catalog and the project itself is building the >>> catalog, then this property is definitely the wrong way to go. I have tried >>> to read through the material you made available, but I still don't see why >>> this project needs any special property at all when you can create listeria >>> lists from unordered lists of item numbers. If you have a list anywhere on >>> a Wikipedia project, you can also run queries using Petscan. >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 6:12 AM, Brill Lyle <wp.brilll...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> 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 <jpm.he...@gmail.com> >>>> 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 >>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >>>> >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikidata mailing list >>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list >> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
