Gnangarra,

I was away when Andy was here, and am really regretting missing his
presentation. Can you explain to me why the Wikidata people have to make a
wikidata item of every source before they can cite it?

Anthony Cole


On Sat, Mar 12, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Anthony Cole <ahcole...@gmail.com> wrote:

> 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>

Reply via email to