Discussion:
Fw[2]: Re[2]: WikidataCon 2017
(too old to reply)
billinghurst
2017-10-25 12:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...

(clearly I need to go to bed, THIS one)

------ Forwarded Message ------
From: "billinghurst" <***@gmail.com>
To: "wikisource-***@list.wikimedia.org" <wikisource-***@list.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 25/10/2017 11:06:37 PM
Subject: Fw: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017

oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...

------ Forwarded Message ------
From: "billinghurst" <***@gmail.com>
To: "Gerard Meijssen" <***@gmail.com>
Sent: 24/10/2017 11:48:51 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017

Gerard,

Then ... what would be valuable is a tool that can change the interwiki
badge. At the moment, there are no tools that enable us to be able to
change a work from not proofread, to proofread, to validated. We know
the status of each work at the respective Wikisource through the Index:
ns page, so we should be able to botify pushing that status through to
the interwiki. There was a technical inability that prevented it being
done from memory. and I have a ticket there somewhere in the phabricator
morass for Wikidata.

For example enW validated works are at
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Special:PagesWithBadges?badge=Q20748093
[I know that I have incrementally changing flags for the works that I
have done, but as a manual process it just takes time. ]

Taking the validated and proofread works (from Index namespace at enWS)
would give you 4000 works. Once that is done, we can then also start
pulling that data back to the wikis, and with good templating we can
then look utilise that on Author pages.

Regards, Billinghurst


------ Original Message ------
From: "Gerard Meijssen" <***@gmail.com>
To: "billinghurst" <***@gmail.com>; "discussion list for
Wikisource, the free library" <wikisource-***@lists.wikimedia.org>
Sent: 23/10/2017 10:48:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Hoi,
A Wikipedia matra is be bold and another is that things are a work in
progress. In my opinion, what we need is the name of a book, its author
and the fact that people can read it. All the other stuff like what
"version" is a particular book pales in comparison. We should not let
the quest for perfection be the enemy of the good.
Also Archive.org and Open Library are two different entities. Both the
Open Library and the Internet Archive have their own identifiers for
authors and they are not necessarily linked. We are talking about books
from the Open Library and they are available as an E-book or a PDF.
My problem is not with Open Library, my problem is that we do not know
what is available from Wikisource as a finished good ready for reading.
In the end what we advertise is the author the book, versions are
secondary.
Thanks,
GerardM
Hi Nicolas,
Still my biggest issues/hurdles for good data are
capture of information from WS to WD — it just is hard work, WEF tool
is still not sufficiently alignedthe ever problematic inability to
link WP book to WS edition through Wikidatathat cannot capture
information for Wikidata at archive.org, and relate that through to
the file at Commons, and then the edition at Wikisource (or pick
another starting point and interrelate0the inability to create an
edition from a book/work, the inability to create a work from an
edition
Maybe you can even ask what we need to improve to get bots to run
through and autocapture, is our meta-data in headers not suitable?
What is it that is problematic?
Thanks for asking.
-- billinghurst (being so remote for the action <sigh>)
------ Original Message ------
To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library"
Sent: 23/10/2017 7:30:44 PM
Subject: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Hi all,
For information, the WikidataCon is this week-end in Berlin. While
there is no talk nominatively around Wikisource, there is some
intervention on relation subjects (inventaire.io, WikiCite, German
National Library, FRBR, and so on).
The event is sold out, but you can follow remotely some of the
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote>
).
I'll be there and I'll be happy to talk about Wikisource, who else
will be there?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
<https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l>
Anika Born
2017-10-27 08:46:24 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hallo there,

I just wanted to tell you, that I am also at WikidataCon in Berlin
(Saturday, Sunday). I would be glad, if I could help out regarding
de.ws-issues.

@Andrea, just to remember: at WikiCite there was agreement on Work, Edition
(Translation beeing an edition) and Volume, I am correct?

Best
Anika
Post by billinghurst
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...
(clearly I need to go to bed, THIS one)
------ Forwarded Message ------
Sent: 25/10/2017 11:06:37 PM
Subject: Fw: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
oops, circulated reply settings weren't correct yesterday ...
------ Forwarded Message ------
Sent: 24/10/2017 11:48:51 PM
Subject: Re[2]: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Gerard,
Then ... what would be valuable is a tool that can change the interwiki
badge. At the moment, there are no tools that enable us to be able to
change a work from not proofread, to proofread, to validated. We know the
status of each work at the respective Wikisource through the Index: ns
page, so we should be able to botify pushing that status through to the
interwiki. There was a technical inability that prevented it being done
from memory. and I have a ticket there somewhere in the phabricator morass
for Wikidata.
For example enW validated works are at https://en.wikisource.org/
wiki/Special:PagesWithBadges?badge=Q20748093 [I know that I have
incrementally changing flags for the works that I have done, but as a
manual process it just takes time. ]
Taking the validated and proofread works (from Index namespace at enWS)
would give you 4000 works. Once that is done, we can then also start
pulling that data back to the wikis, and with good templating we can then
look utilise that on Author pages.
Regards, Billinghurst
------ Original Message ------
Sent: 23/10/2017 10:48:45 PM
Subject: Re: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Hoi,
A Wikipedia matra is be bold and another is that things are a work in
progress. In my opinion, what we need is the name of a book, its author and
the fact that people can read it. All the other stuff like what "version"
is a particular book pales in comparison. We should not let the quest for
perfection be the enemy of the good.
Also Archive.org and Open Library are two different entities. Both the
Open Library and the Internet Archive have their own identifiers for
authors and they are not necessarily linked. We are talking about books
from the Open Library and they are available as an E-book or a PDF.
My problem is not with Open Library, my problem is that we do not know
what is available from Wikisource as a finished good ready for reading. In
the end what we advertise is the author the book, versions are secondary.
Thanks,
GerardM
Hi Nicolas,
Still my biggest issues/hurdles for good data are
- capture of information from WS to WD — it just is hard work, WEF
tool is still not sufficiently aligned
- the ever problematic inability to link WP book to WS edition
through Wikidata
- that cannot capture information for Wikidata at archive.org, and
relate that through to the file at Commons, and then the edition at
Wikisource (or pick another starting point and interrelate0
- the inability to create an edition from a book/work, the inability
to create a work from an edition
Maybe you can even ask what we need to improve to get bots to run through
and autocapture, is our meta-data in headers not suitable? What is it that
is problematic?
Thanks for asking.
-- billinghurst (being so remote for the action <sigh>)
------ Original Message ------
To: "discussion list for Wikisource, the free library" <
Sent: 23/10/2017 7:30:44 PM
Subject: [Wikisource-l] WikidataCon 2017
Hi all,
For information, the WikidataCon is this week-end in Berlin. While there
is no talk nominatively around Wikisource, there is some intervention on
relation subjects (inventaire.io, WikiCite, German National Library,
FRBR, and so on).
The event is sold out, but you can follow remotely some of the
presentation (link will be added here : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/
Wikidata:WikidataCon_2017/Program/Remote ).
I'll be there and I'll be happy to talk about Wikisource, who else will
be there?
Cdlt, ~nicolas
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
_______________________________________________
Wikisource-l mailing list
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l
Loading...