My understanding of identifiers and authorities is that they come from established entities, i.e., VIAF contributors http://www.oclc.org/en/viaf/contributors.html
If we can query off a BLT identifier that would be great. But the task list items don't have unique identifiers established -- and that would be an onerous, artificial process. So I have concerns about this idea, that it doesn't provide a workable solution. Maybe some of this is lost in translation as it is very Wikipedia-centric. *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 12:03 PM, LeadSongDog <[email protected]> wrote: > Erika, > Well, any authority record for each event could capture location, date, > and links to the invitation and any generated products externally to wiki > worlds. Would that not be constructive in the context of establishing > wikidatan notability? > > > On Jan 6, 2018, at 10:42 AM, Brill Lyle <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi LeadSongDog, > > Yes that is an article that is part of the press list that the Black Lunch > Table has generated > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Meetup/Black_Lunch_Table/Press > > Again, not a huge fan of using refs to justify an outreach initiative. > Plus would it be necessary to use this ref to justify including Wikidata > entries as BLT? I guess I am confused as to the need to reference things, > where to reference things, and how that would work exactly. References to > establish notability on Wikidata seems like a nightmarish requirement with > the current interface. I would much prefer to use established identifiers > via VIAF and other sources to establish notability.... It builds notability > on top of established library science canons, and provides disambiguation, > etc. Sorry I'm obsessed with this stuff, so I digress.... > > I am not sure an authority control item -- I understand this conceptually > but what form does it take in practical terms? -- will provide a solution > to the problem these various outreach efforts are requiring. > > An authority control item for each editathon might be a large set of > "dirty data" on Wikidata, wouldn't it? I think the idea was to use > something lightweight, already existing, and efficient to provide a SPARQL > query/Listeria task list -- and not impinge on existing metadata > significantly. > > Having a Wikimedia project-centered maintenance (for lack of a better > word) property might be a solution, too. But I think this is the issue that > came up in the main discussion and why catalog was suggested by consensus, > because a maintenance project for the WikiWorld would be a somewhat big > step organizationally to implement, I think? Apologies, I defer to Gerard's > expertise and knowledge-base on this. > > Best, > > - Erika > > *Erika Herzog* > Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* > > On Sat, Jan 6, 2018 at 4:45 AM, LeadSongDog <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Erika, >> You might consider using https://www.artsy.net/article/ >> the-art-genome-project-why-are-all-the-black-artists-sitting >> -together-in-the-cafeteria as a ref. There must be something usable >> there. >> >> From what I've seen it seems that BLT is principally a series of informal >> meetings, only some of which pertain to the editathons. Each meeting has >> distinct constituency and subject. As such, each could in principle get its >> own authority control, as for a convention. The individual artists >> attending may often already be so described, but as they may edit >> pseudonymously one must be careful to avoid outing. >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
