Sorry, there's a typo in that last paragraph. It should read: The sound argument coming from above is the cry from Gerrard and others that it is hideously difficult to add citations to Wikidata *statements*. If that is so, you should fix that.
Anthony Cole On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:27 PM, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Magnus. > > I'm re-reading this thread and just noticed you linked me to an essay [1] > earlier. I'm sorry, I didn't realise at the time that you were addressing > me. > > Comments have closed there, so I'll post my thoughts here. You describe a > formula for measuring how well Wikipedia is supported by reliable sources. > Basically, correct me if this is wrong, you presume that each sentence > contains one statement of fact and compare the number of sentences with the > number of footnote markers. That ratio is what you call the references per > statement (RPS) ratio. You have another formula for arriving at the RPS > ratio for Wikidata statements. You then compare the RPS ratios of > en.Wikipedia featured articles with the RPS ratios of their associated > Wikidata items. And drew conclusions from that latter comparison. > > Many of the Wikipedia articles I write have a low RPS ratio because whole > paragraphs are supported by one reference, whose footnote marker appears > only once at the end of the paragraph. > > But, really, it doesn't matter. The arguments that "it's a wiki it should > be unreliable", or "Wikipedia is worse" are not really very valid > arguments. > > The sound argument coming from above is the cry from Gerrard and others > that it is hideously difficult to add citations to Wikidata sources. If > that is so, you should fix that. > > > > 1. http://magnusmanske.de/wordpress/?p=378 > > Anthony Cole > > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Andre Engels <andreeng...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> The issue is that you are framing all objections to be of the "it's >> new, so it's bad" crowd. I'm not even convinced that such a crowd >> exists, let alone that it is the mainstream of community is behind it, >> as you seem to imply. To be honest, as a member of the community who >> had a negative opinion about the first released version of visual >> editor, I feel personally insulted by your statements. Which I had to >> be, because I know you have done many good things. >> >> And how would you want to "come together and fix it"? Your average >> Wikipedia/other project editor does not have the software engineering >> skills to just go and repair the Mediawiki code, and even if they did, >> they would not have the power to make their repairs go life in short >> term (and before I'm misunderstood, I am not complaining about that, >> it is entirely logical and doing it differently would probably cause >> disasters). They can of course complain, and file bug reports >> etcetera, but they have no idea what will happen with them. >> >> I think a big part of the blame lies with Wikimedia's way of working >> in this, at least that's what I see in the Imageviewer case. People >> see issues, and want them resolved. But some of those issues are so >> large that they do not want the product at all *until they are >> resolved*. By not only using the user as a beta tester, but also >> forcing the product on them in the period between the discovery of the >> issues/bugs and the time they are resolved, Wikimedia in my opinion is >> instrumental in turning the objections against specific issues into >> resistance against the product as a whole. >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Magnus Manske >> <magnusman...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> > Anthony, it does seem you've missed some of which I wrote in this >> thread. I >> > have no problem with specific criticism where it is deserved, and I do >> well >> > remember that the Visual Editor, in its early incarnation, was not >> quite up >> > to the job. >> > >> > What I do have a problem with is people fixating on some technical or >> > early-lifecycle issues, declaring the entire thing worthless, even >> > dangerous, and spreading that view around. This behaviour, I have seen >> time >> > and again, with the Media Viewer, with Wikidata. >> > >> > It's bad because it's broken - let's come together and fix it. >> > >> > It's bad because ... well, everyone says it's bad. And new. And Not Made >> > Here. THAT is a problem, and not a technological one. >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 2:39 PM Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> > >> >> Magnus, you've missed the point of the visual editor revolt. A couple >> of >> >> people here have tried to explain that to you, politely. And you're >> >> persisting with your idée fixe. >> >> >> >> There were two parts to the visual editor catastrophe, actually. The >> >> product wasn't ready for anyone to use. Not veteran editors. Not >> newbies. >> >> Newbies who used it were less likely to successfully complete an edit. >> It >> >> was broken, and the WMF insisted we had to use it. >> >> >> >> The second part of the problem was arrogance. Yes, a few editors were >> >> unnecessarily rude about the product and the developers. But then most >> of >> >> the developers and tech staff who dealt with the community arrogantly >> >> characterised *anyone* who complained about the product as an ignorant, >> >> selfish Ludite - and you're persisting with that characterisation now. >> >> >> >> The WMF under Lila has learned the lessons from that, and they have >> >> fostered a much healthier relationship between the developers and the >> >> community. You clearly haven't learned all you might have. >> >> >> >> In fact, reading the arrogant responses from you here and in the >> concurrent >> >> thread titled "How to disseminate free knowledge," and from Denny in >> >> earlier threads addressing criticism of WikiData, it seems to me there >> is >> >> still a significant arrogance problem that needs addressing, at least >> over >> >> at WikiData. >> >> >> >> Some people may approach you arrogantly, maybe even insultingly, about >> an >> >> innovation, and I suppose you might be justified in talking down to >> them or >> >> ridiculing them (though I advise against it.). But if you can't >> distinguish >> >> them from those who approach you with genuine concerns and well-founded >> >> criticisms, then no matter how clever you think your technical >> solutions >> >> are, you will soon find you're no more welcome here than those WMF >> staffers >> >> who thought insulting well-meaning critics was a good career move. >> >> >> >> Denny's contemptuous dismissal of valid criticisms of his project, and >> your >> >> contemptuous dismissal of the valid criticisms of the early visual >> editor >> >> and its launch are both very disappointing. >> >> >> >> Anthony Cole >> >> >> >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 7:24 AM, Magnus Manske < >> >> magnusman...@googlemail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> > The iPhone was a commercial success because it let you do the basic >> >> > functions easily and intuitively, and looked shiny at the same time. >> We >> >> do >> >> > not charge a price; our "win" comes by people using our product. If >> we >> >> can >> >> > present the product in such a way that more people use it, it is a >> >> success >> >> > for us. >> >> > >> >> > I do stand by my example :-) >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 10:37 PM Michael Peel <em...@mikepeel.net> >> >> wrote: >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > > > On 18 Jan 2016, at 22:35, Magnus Manske < >> magnusman...@googlemail.com >> >> > >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > > > >> >> > > > As one can be overly conservative, one can also be overly >> >> > enthusiastic. I >> >> > > > would hope the Foundation by now understands better how to >> handle new >> >> > > > software releases. Apple here shows the way: Basic >> functionality, but >> >> > > > working smoothly first. >> >> > > >> >> > > But at a huge cost premium? I'm not sure that's a good example to >> make >> >> > > here. :-/ >> >> > > >> >> > > Thanks, >> >> > > Mike >> >> > > _______________________________________________ >> >> > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> >> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> >> > > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > > Unsubscribe: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> >> > > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org >> ?subject=unsubscribe> >> >> > _______________________________________________ >> >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> >> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> > Unsubscribe: >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> >> > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> >> > >> >> _______________________________________________ >> >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> > New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> >> >> >> -- >> André Engels, andreeng...@gmail.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> > > _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
