Hoi,
English Wikipedia does not have all the facts; check Wikidata for that
truth.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 24 October 2017 at 00:17, Ben Salvidrim <[email protected]> wrote:
> (reformatted the below message for readability)
>
>
> ========================================
>
> ~ Ben / Salvidrim<http://www.salvidrim.net><https://salvidrim.net/>!
>
> · English Wikipedia Administrator & SPI Clerk
>
> · <https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page> Wikimedia Canada<
> https://ca.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page> member
>
> · UTRS Ambassador<https://utrs.wmflabs.org/home.php><https://
> utrs.wmflabs.org/team.php#tamb>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Wikipedia-l <[email protected]> on behalf of
> Steve Cooney <[email protected]>
> Sent: October 23, 2017 5:58 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Wikipedia-l] Ideas of development
>
> Some ideas:
>
> * Add topical forums to Wikipedia, by a rough count around eighty
> different topics. The encyclopedia article (primarily the one in the
> current global common language of American English) is the central document
> which contains the facts around any particular issue, and forums serve not
> just as a centralized discussion place around the article, but serve as
> more general discussion places and a way of coordinating article
> development. Currently discussion about article development tends to be
> spread out across too many talk pages and WikiProject pages tend to be too
> development oriented.
>
> * Integrate Wiktionary and Wikidata entries in Wikipedia searches. As a
> technical idea where the problem is one of "'this particular data belongs
> in an encyclopedia, while this other nuancedly-different set belongs in a
> dictionary." Specifically dealing with Wiktionary and Wikidata because
> together with Wikipedia these should cover the whole Semantic Field.
>
> * Similar to above: Clicking on links is like doing a specific search..
> deliver similar Wikidata and Wiktionary entries at top in addition to going
> to article. Clicking on links has that pidgeon-holing problem as well, of
> this topic (a link is basically a search entry already filled-out for you).
> Solution.. show a little related metadata at the top, and as a
> consequence.. continued..
>
> * Formalize the way disambiguation links are handled. An approach to
> developing Wikipedia is simply covering all possible topics. Including
> Wiktionary and Wikidata entries in Wikipedia searches is a technical idea
> that helps develop these other two projects and also lets them and their
> different handling help Wikipedia build and integrate articles, and
> Wikidata allows the idea of including.. continued..
>
> * Categorical language to cover the whole Semantic Field of ideas
> (building a dictionary of ideas, in term and phrase forms, which formalize
> "talking generally"): Talking about a thing might receive suppression (from
> either or both governments in the World) because talking about a thing
> along would (or in some legalistic arguments "might") reveal secrets about
> people. But news and history still have to be documented based on a
> reporting of events, and talking categorically is a way to say what's going
> on without being "defaming," because we aren't being specific.
>
> * Update opinion/policy regarding Machine translation-transformation and
> its implementation. The idea of each language getting its own wiki was the
> open ended approach, and was successful even though it has had some
> drawbacks. The other is using the big languages to receive users into more
> and more assisted arenas, where machine translation (contract with
> Army/Google) is mature enough to integrate into the editing and discussion
> form.
>
> * Political: Fortify against the slippery slope that lets defamation
> arguments receive automatic or near-automatic suppression. Indicate what
> laws govern Wikipedia suppression and keep only to those suppressions to
> which the law has power and then indicate publicly the categorical type of
> suppression enacted.
>
> * The idea of "suppression" (was called "oversight," really..) as
> permissible gets to that issue much debated about what kind of world are we
> going to have.. does it have too much suppression of reporting in it, such
> that there are things that we are categorically forbidden from reporting..
> even though we in the United States and other non-monarchial regions do not
> live by an anti-democratic philosophy of government..
> Steven Cooneyeditor class of 2002
>
>
>
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=
> https%3A%2F%2Flists.wikimedia.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%
> 2Fwikipedia-l&data=02%7C01%7Cbenoit_landry%40hotmail.com%
> 7C97d1edef25434d45f9d708d51a61d5d5%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaa
> aaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636443929858109086&sdata=1aPM1NBF004P5140VPlFFUN3NDFb6F
> FhfTTmC4krzXE%3D&reserved=0
> _______________________________________________
> Wikipedia-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
>
_______________________________________________
Wikipedia-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikipedia-l
