On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote: > On 5 April 2013 22:24, phoebe ayers <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 6:33 PM, Risker <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > On 5 April 2013 19:07, Lydia Pintscher <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, Apr 6, 2013 at 1:00 AM, MZMcBride <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Sorry, I don't know what this means. I thought Wikidata was already > > > > > deployed to the English Wikipedia (and possibly other projects as > > > well). > > > > > > > > I've posted an announcement with more details on the technical > village > > > > pump at > > > > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Wikidata_phase_2_is_coming_soon > > > > Let me know if anything is still unclear so I can clarify. > > > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > Lydia > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lydia, could you please point me to the discussion on *English > Wikipedia* > > > where the community indicated an interest in deploying this software? > > > Infoboxes and sourcing to another website completely outside the > control > > of > > > English Wikipedia is a rather big issue, and I would expect to see a > > > Request for Comment with at least 200-300 participants. > > > > > > Risker/Anne > > > > > > > In my opinion, as a casual Wikidata editor and not-so-casual Wikipedia > > editor, I think the Commons analogy continues to hold up pretty well. > > Commons exists. We can use it, as a project. We don't *have* to (and > indeed > > don't always, on en:wp, where fair use images are accepted). As I > > understand it, the same is true with Wikidata -- it will be around, if > and > > when it seems appropriate to use. Of course Commons and Wikidata will > both > > be more useful and more awesome the more projects do use them. But my > very > > non-technical understanding of this deployment is that basically we made > > the projects able to see that Wikidata exists (correct me if I'm wrong!) > > > > Now as far as I can tell there's a whole lot of work yet to do in order > to > > figure out how exactly one might link to data or produce an infobox and > > what that might look like -- deployment does not seem to mean ready for > > prime-time, yet -- and of course the data-building itself is just barely > > getting started. Best practices for infoboxes does seem like a > project-wide > > RFC to me. But hopefully, when we get to that point, wikidata will be a > > useful option. > > > > > Well, the problem is that we *are* at that point now. Wikidata II *is* > intended to be used in infoboxes. We already have edit skirmishes happening > all over the project with people adding infoboxes where they aren't wanted, > explicitly to take advantage of wikidata, and using wikidata as their > excuse to bring it in.
I fail to see how that's a Wikidata issue. It seems more like a conduct or disagreement between editors. Load it up, okay. But don't turn it on until the > community discusses whether or not it wants it turned on. It's simply > contemptuous of the community to do that. You know as well as I do that as > soon as a feature is available, it's used by some people who will fight to > the death to keep using it, whether or not it is what the community wants. > The community doesn't vote for every single feature turned on on English Wikipedia. Was their a vote for Scribunto? VisualEditor? PostEdit? Nope. They just got turned on and people lived with it. > (See revision deletion which, as soon as it was turned on for > administrators on English Wikipedia before the process had been worked out, > immediately resulted in tens of thousands of inappropriate revision > deletions in its first week. Even now, at least 30% of revision deletions > are inappropriate.) You want to keep editors, you need to actually make > sure that the changes you are adding are what they want, not what they'll > leave over. > Wikidata is a knowledge base. It's up to individual projects/editors on how to use it. We can try and help, but if people use it incorrectly, there's only so much we (Wikidatians) can do. > > I disagree that the Commons analogy holds up. Commons is very active, and > easily accessible, and it's pretty obvious how to remove unwanted > images/media. It is *not* obvious how to remove wikidata, and it is a site > that is extremely not user friendly (I've checked, and even got someone to > give me a tour, and it makes wikitext look simple). > Wikidata is even more active than commons (https://wikipulse.herokuapp.com/) but you're right, it might not be immediately obvious what to do. Is Help:Editing (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Editing) not good enough? Maybe we need a better tutorial? > > There is a rather big difference between images to articles, which aren't > essential but are very complementary, and the information contained in an > article. We know for a fact that there are many different versions of even > supposedly factual data (dates of birth for well-known people, names of > battles, Gdansk/Danzig, etc). In many cases, there has been a careful and > sometimes very delicate consensus reached by local editors to address these > variations. Now we will have infoboxes with one version and the actual > article saying something else - and the information in the infobox will be > outside of the control of the editors of the article absent going to > another site. So now those wars about content will have to go to two sites > at once, one of which will be international. So that means users who have > never logged into Wikipedia will have the ability to control the content of > the project. > So? You just set up the infobox to have a local override if the field is filled in. Using this data is *optional*. If you want it, use it! If not, it's there if you ever change your mind. > > Let's not put this in place until the community decides whether or not it > wants it. > Hasn't the community been asking for interwiki transclusion for a while now? Personally I just see this as the first step to that. > > Risker/Anne > _______________________________________________ > Wikitech-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l > -- Legoktm http://enwp.org/User:Legoktm _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
