Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 13:36:
Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living
history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you
go back in time to the latest usable list
A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
2) the proper way to state something is a cultural heritage item needs
to be confirmed, using P31/P1435 and intermediate items or subclasses or
whatever;
3) it must be fine to create items that contain no information other
than the name;
4) it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with
an on-wiki table;
5) it must be ok to use a self-hosted PDF (a letter from the entity) as
source, as well as to lack any source for some months or years until we
are able to publish said PDF;
6) it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
7) there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items
by region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of
"municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing
items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435,
P279 or whatever);
8) as for Ukraine, there needs to be a way to mark location in a single
string which may contain anything, not necessarily a street address,
while P969 instructions are currently lacking;
9+) probably other things I'm forgetting now.
Of course we could also decide that WMIT doesn't use the "monuments
database" in this form as we didn't use the toolserver database. :) I
realise our situation is too messy to account for.
(usually made up before WWI
during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make
inventory lists of heritage sites).
I'm afraid this fashion has yet to reach Italy, one century later. Can
Germany please send us another Winckelmann?
Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 14:23:
> The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q
> number itself.
This would not be manageable with the system that WLM-IT used until last
year, where the identifier itself contain certain information (like the
municipality code) and other parts of the process relied on this.
Cristian Cenci would need to comment on whether that's still a requirement.
Nemo
_______________________________________________
Wiki Loves Monuments mailing list
WikiLovesMonuments@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikilovesmonuments
http://www.wikilovesmonuments.org
