A “Wikifacts” sister project is a great idea. “Wikifacts” seems distinct from
both Wikinews and Wikidata. With some schemas for facts, defining their
structure and interrelations, one could, however, utilize Wikidata as a backend.
Brainstorming, while I’m sure that those in these mailing lists are more
familiar with what’s possible with wiki templates, with a “Wikifacts” sister
project, one could envision a wiki template for explicit facts. Perhaps such a
wiki template could resemble:
{{fact|User content goes here.}}
or
{{fact|F12345678|User content goes here.}}
With such a wiki template, editors could add explicit facts to Wikinews and
Wikipedia articles.
End-users could hover over explicit facts in Wikinews or Wikipedia articles to
view information (e.g. the number of informational messages, warnings, or
errors) about the facts in tooltips and could click on a fact – or on a
superscript hyperlink symbol – to navigate to the fact’s “Wikifacts” article.
The use of explicit facts in Wikinews or Wikipedia articles could, potentially,
create new “Wikifacts” articles or synchronize with existing “Wikifacts”
articles. Whenever a fact were updated or annotated via the “Wikifacts” project
website, the editors of any dependent Wikinews or Wikipedia articles could
receive emails, resembling how they can opt to watch articles for edits.
Wikinews and Wikipedia editors could receive emails so as to be able to revisit
an article if or when any facts upon which the article depends change.
A “Wikifacts” project could also serve as a fact-checking resource for a set of
end-users broader than the editors of Wikinews and Wikipedia articles. Through
an API, end-users could perform real-time fact checking via “Wikifacts” while
authoring or reviewing documents.
Best regards,
Adam
P.S.: Thank you for the information about the Wikipragmatica proposal.
From: Douglas Clark<mailto:[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 6:50 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Idea of a new project: Wikifacts ?
I proposed a project,
WikiPragmatica<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikipragmatica>, that can
support fake news detection. The retained context of the paraphrase graph can
identify fake news patterns similar to what MIT does with their detector.
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 12:42 PM Galder Gonzalez Larrañaga
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Does Wikinews cover this aspect?
From: Wikimedia-l
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
on behalf of Chris Gates via Wikimedia-l
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 8:20 PM
To: Wikimedia Mailing List
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: Chris Gates <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [Wikimedia-l] Idea of a new project: Wikifacts ?
Hello,
Independent of my opinions on the validity of such a new Wikimedia project,
there is currently an experiment of similar goals (and potentially structure)
over at Twitter:
https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/product/2021/introducing-birdwatch-a-community-based-approach-to-misinformation.html
Best,
Verm
On Thu, Feb 4, 2021 at 2:17 PM Leinonen Teemu
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi all,
Has there been any discussion to start a new Wikimedia project focusing on fact
checking?
Fact checking of course is in the core of editing Wikipedia, but I was thinking
about dedicated wiki-site that is dedicated for fact checking of current events
and news. Why this would be important?
(1) There are many fact checking site in the English speaking world but much
less elsewhere. I am afraid that there is still greater need for fact checking
in the rest of the world. {{Citation needed}}
(2) Our community is very well educated to do fact checking the wiki-way. Again
internationally, many of our community members are real fact champions in their
home countries and language groups. The practice of Wikipedia could be applied
to fact checking of fast moving current events and news, too.
(3) This could help us to get new young people to the movement, as editing
Wikipedias is not anymore so easy to start (because they are so good already).
(4) In many parts of the world, fact checking can also be dangerous. With our
anonymous and community driven practices and services we could protect the fact
checkers in many parts of the world.
I am not sure what is the state of the Wikinews, but my impression is that it
is not really working. It was a good idea, but maybe wiki or wiki-way is not
the way to produce news. Also the beautiful idea of citizen journalism has not
really become reality. Maybe we could try if wiki and the wki-way works better
in fact checking.
Peace,
- Teemu
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to:
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
<mailto:[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>?subject=unsubscribe>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
