Jane, I think the narrow definition of catalog and its use as a unique identifier to collocate outreach initiatives might be the issue here.
Not asking you to be responsible for any outreach projects at all. I think that is very clear. Don't appreciate your comment on Wikidata editing. Through this project work I am improving engagement to Wikidata by Wikipedia editors. This work makes Wikidata a holistic part of the editathon and outreach process. It's both productive and valuable. If none of these facts are clear then I am not sure what else to say on the matter. - Erika *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* On Fri, Jan 5, 2018 at 4:55 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
