User talk:Jheald/Archive 12

5793: 4321: 1679:

en.wikipedia towards Wikidata has two causes, one solvable & the other not easily solvable. The solvable one should be obvious: people at the Foundation are trying to force Wikidata on other projects like en.wikipedia, without any regard to the opinions of volunteers here. (That is a recurring theme with WMF employees, sad to admit.) Were there a Wikidata advocate visibly working Knowledge to explain how Wikidata can make their editing easier, that would help things along. (And for all I know, you may be doing that this very moment.) The less solvable one is based on mentalities: contributors at Knowledge tend to be people taking facts & combining them into an intelligible narrative, while contributors at Knowledge are taking narratives & systematically extracting facts from them. These goals are obviously at cross-purposes, & it's no surprise that members of one group are frustrated at how the other organizes content. Not to mention after one has finished their work, their results reveal much of value that do not easily migrate to the other's domain.

1683:

social history, for example, if one knew how to enter the data -- let alone query & present it correctly. But to do that, one would need to sift through the vocabulary of Wikidata & hopefully find it before boredom or distraction blocked further progress. The more baffling a project, the more likely only nerds with a specific interest in the subject will take it on. To return to my post in the Village Pump, I mentioned Open Stack for a reason: in over 20 years of working with computers, it is the most complex software I have encountered, yet the worst explained. I spent a month learning how to install it so it works, & might have learned sooner had I the benefit of even a screen shot to see the result of a successful install. While I had help with it, the tendency with computer people is to fix the problem without taking the time to explain how they did it. And I have much the same feeling with Wikidata: beyond a few simple things, it remains a dark forest full of grues.

4791: 5425: 6162: 6169: 5995: 4455:

making some new items on Wikidata corresponding to the categories (rather than the galleries) on Commons. Usually this isn't necessary, because usually a Commons category can be linked straight to the main Wikidata item for the corresponding thing; but it can be a helpful thing, when there is a Common gallery as well, because the rule is when there's a gallery then that is the page that should be linked directly. So making these new category items meant there was then a dedicated Wikidata item for the Commons category to be linked to as well, which the templates on the Commons category page can use to draw information from Wikidata.

1694:. This means there must be support for "fuzzy" dates. (Actually, if one could plot out all of these "fuzzy" dates, then overlay them with a grid of known dates of consuls, the result might make a decent amount of progress towards defining the dates of some of these undated consuls. But I'm getting ahead of myself here.) And that a given assertion in the object may not be reliable: many parent-child relationships are not attested in a primary source, but are deduced, inferred, or a speculative guess. Of course, this would need to be presented so that the experts in the Wikidata thesaurus & data tables would be encouraged to help. 4590: 2582: 6469: 2313: 6593: 5949: 5642: 5315: 4749: 4535: 4219: 5799: 2141: 5357: 5437: 4301: 3448: 4625: 4606:, who has attended every Wikimania, and now works as Senior Product Manager for the Wikimedia Foundation. His take on tackling the gaps in the Wikimedia movement is that "if we were an army, we could march in a column and close up all the gaps". In his view though, that is a faulty metaphor, and it leads to a completely false misunderstanding of the movement, its diversity and different aspirations, and the nature of the work as "fighting" to be done in the open sector. There are many fronts, and as an 5746: 3775: 2861: 5703: 2956: 2306: 1885: 6368: 4327: 1208: 4071: 5577: 5864: 5069:

that where there are substantial changes, it makes sense to have new items. My guess is that for wards the balance of convenience will be somewhere between the two -- in most cases, as fairly artificial items, without much historical continuity, distinct new items might well be more appropriate. But where boundary changes have been only minor adjustments, and the wards have a particular tradition and identity, then a single item might make sense.

1926: 2074: 5458: 3996: 3738: 3388: 2923: 2541: 2051: 2590: 2070:), and bots that do the lifting. Much more than dry migration of metadata is potentially involved, however. If paper A cites paper B, both papers having an item, a link can be created on Wikidata, and the information presented to both human readers, and machines. This cross-linking is one of the most significant aspects of the scientific literature, and now a long-sought open version is rapidly being built up. 5151:

seats would keep the same GSS code, however if there is change to the boundary with no change to anything else the GSS code would change. Depending on what modelling route is taken it could lead to Wikidata identifiers and GSS codes having a many to many relationship. I'm not experienced enough on the Wikidata side of things to understand all the implications of this, but thought it worth flagging. --

4474:. Even after the missing reciprocal statements had been added on Wikidata, the old version of the category page continued to be shown, with its red warnings. In this case, just pressing 'edit' and then 'preview' was enough to force the system to rebuild the page and show a current up-to-date version -- in this case with no red warnings any more, because the problem had now been fixed on Wikidata. 4802: 6541: 1837: 6289: 2433: 954: 800: 575: 225: 1351:

it may even be easier than citation templates to deal with -- it's not so different after all from Visual Editor, the citations editor from which is increasingly popular. (It wouldn't surprise me if the Cite_Q method was already integrated into VE). Of course a lot of people hate VE as well, and it isn't something I ever tend to use myself, so that may or may not be such a helpful point.

4062:. There is likely to be a gap, even with the guideline, between conditions taken to be necessary but not sufficient, and conditions sufficient but not necessary, for candidate papers to be included. With around 10,000 recognised medical conditions in standard lists, being comprehensive is demanding. With all of these aspects of the task, ScienceSource will seek community help. 3162:

one. But having the data in Wikidata also makes it possible to write queries, such as displaying the maps which makes it easier to spot missing links, missing stations, and other errors; or classic queries such as 'what route has the shortest number of stops between A and B'; and it gives a dataset that can be extracted for people to play with other algorithms on, such as

6684: 1265:

which therefore stayed in the mind, like an old-school DW cliffhanger). But the opening titles with their suddenly frozen stills were also very striking, and probably more in line with WP conventions (as well as being perhaps a brighter, more engaging, and more dynamic image to stand for the series) -- so I'm happy enough to see the change made.

1286:

this will be a key point in any RfC that will come up. I could see some people arguing that they shouldn't have to leave the wikitext editing window to modify Wikidata items; that seems too insular to me -- we don't think that way about Commons, after all. However, at the other end of the spectrum, Alsee's reaction to Cite_Q that he describes

1227:. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Knowledge. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Knowledge (see 2574:, we quote the observation that "vocabularies needed for many collections, topics and intellectual spaces defy the expectations of the larger professional communities." A job for the encyclopedist, certainly. But the data-minded Wikimedian has the advantages of Wikidata, starting with its multilingual data, and facility with aliases. The 2601:, in jargon, is a potential answer to the GLAM Babel of proliferating and expanding vocabularies. Even if you have no interest in Wikidata as such, simply vocabularies V and W, if both V and W are matched to Wikidata, then a "crosswalk" arises from term v in V to w in W, whenever v and w both match to the same item d in Wikidata. 3752:, with its eminently guessable hashtag, is upon us. We should be utterly grateful that in the past 12 months, so much data on which papers cite which other papers has been made open, and that Wikidata is playing its part in hosting it as "cites" statements. At the time of writing, there are 15.3M Wikidata items that can do that. 5716: 5727: 5120:

I agree it depends on quite what you want to model. If geographical association is important and you plan to import geoshapes and marry wards up to what's inside them, then definitely new items for new boundaries. Otherwise, though, you can probably get by with a single item if it keeps the same name

4477:

I am sorry you got caught up with this, and that the pages ended up with these warning messages on them today, which was all down to my edits. Unfortunately, I still have about 4 more batches of the same size still to do, which will trigger similar problems (albeit transient problems). I do have one

4454:

The warning messages you saw were all down to the batch edits that I ran last night. The messages were mostly to do with various reciprocal relations that there ought to be on Wikidata if there are items both for a category and for an article or gallery for the same subject. My batch last night was

4426:

a few hours later, it showed an error. I tried to fix it, but then I noticed your bot doing something about it already, so I stopped. But the error message still stays in place. Is it just some kind of time delay before it recognizes the changes your bot has done, or did I do something wrong? I'm not

3770:

Some home truths: aggregation is not content management, if it falls short on reusability. The PDF file format is wedded to how humans read documents, not how machines ingest them. The salami-slicer is our friend in the current downloading of open access papers, but for a better metaphor, think about

3431:

For the Wikidatan, a key point is that these matches, however carried out, add statements to Wikidata if, and naturally only if, there is a Wikidata property associated with the catalog. For everyone, however, the hands-on experience of deciding of what is a good match is an education, in a scholarly

1689:

What I have been thinking of doing is to write up a use case for Roman consuls & present it. Start with a description of what the object would include, such as the need to indicate a colleague. And include the known exceptions to that rule -- some had more than one colleague, while some were sole

1682:

But to my primary topic, about consuls & Wikidata. I mentioned this more as an example of how a non-Wikidata person comes to that project with a problem to solve or a goal to achieve, that person is easily baffled, & decides to just walk away. Wikidata could provide a lot of insights on Roman

1504:

How would a machine create a cite, though? E.g. I want to cite John Smith's birthdate; I have the physical book in front of me with the cite. Are you saying it's not going to be feasible for most users to build a Cite_Q from scratch? Or if there's a Cite_Q in the article, but I can see they have some

1285:

Reading your comments in a couple of places, it looks as though your feeling on Wikidata is that it could be a boon to the project but is currently too hard to use. Where exactly on the spectrum are you between thinking it's far too hard to use, and thinking it's almost ready? I ask because I think

1126:

parish was apparently officially "Woughton on the Green". With effect from 1 April 2011 there was a modification to the boundary (under The Milton Keynes (Reorganisation of Community Governance) Order 2011), but the name remained "Woughton on the Green". Then there was the split, with effect from 1

494:

template, but my change didn't work. I've reverted the template, but some of the wiki pages have been cached using the bad version. To make the red message go away, hit edit on the External links section & preview & save, without changing any text. That will refresh the cache for the page,

6714:

Looking ahead, the thirtieth birthday of the World Wide Web falls in 2019, and yet the ambition to make webpages routinely readable by machines can still seem an ever-retreating mirage. Wikidata should not only be helping Wikimedia integrate its projects, an ongoing process represented by Structured

6034:. Translation: scripting for automation, version control, data set matching and wrangling in the large, are on the agenda also for contemporary library work. Certainly there is some possible common ground here. Time to understand rather more about the motivations that operate in the library sector. 4458:

But the job has to be done in two steps, because it was only this morning that I could find out what the Q-numbers were for the new category-items that had been created overnight, and only when I had those Q-numbers could I then put in the statements on Wikidata in the other direction, pointing from

3265:

Similarly, one might have a version that added possible drafts from various sources, and let the user keep or delete or edit whichever they wanted. But the content would need to come from sources that either AWB (with its search & replace functions) or the template being subst'd (with access to

1705:

Anyway, such are my thoughts. When I complete my current task of cleaning up the consular list & related articles, then I'll probably turn my attention to Wikidata & populate the data over there. Hopefully Wikidata won't seem as forbidding then as it was when I poked around there a couple of

1350:

is a step forward. Yes the citation can't be edited locally in Wikitext any more. But on the other hand, it's hard to see how the form-based editing on Wikidata could be made any easier given what it is. It's easily accessible from the formatted citation via the Q-number link, and for new editors

5150:

thought I would chip though basically to agree with what @Andrew Gray says. I just wanted to draw attention to GSS codes which are identifiers for the geography, as opposed to the name/no of seats/electoral term. I assume (though I haven't checked) that a ward where the only change is the number of

5068:

for thoughts. For civil parishes, which typically have (or are considered to have) a long continuity of history, are where boundary changes are typically no more than fairly minor adjustments, we have tended to only have a single item. For constituencies, as you say, Andrew has tended to the view

3271:

Another way to use AWB is to have pre-prepared the right values to slot in, sitting in a text editor -- so AWB opens the page, you copy/paste in the pre-written text, hit save, AWB automatically opens the next page. That's how I've used it eg if I need to add template parameters, and I can somehow

3259:

with this inserted. Subst'ing the template could therefore copy over the descriptions from Wikidata for every page in the run, but in a way that was semi-automated rather than a fully automated bot script, allowing you the user the chance to modify each one before hitting the save button and going

2962:

Another perspective might be likened to a photographic negative of that one: Wikidata as an already-functioning Web hub. Over half of its properties are identifiers on other websites. These are Wikidata's "external links", to use Knowledge terminology: one type for the DOI of a publication, another

2062:

At the beginning of December, Wikidata items on individual scientific articles passed the 10 million mark. This figure contrasts with the state of play in early summer, when there were around half a million. In the big picture, Wikidata is now documenting the scientific literature at a rate that is

1742:

I think you're right that there it is a bit of a different job, building up Wikidata, than building up Knowledge -- a bit more like working on a list article here, perhaps. I described how my own feelings and instincts are different a bit when I'm on each of the projects in one of my earlier posts

1604:

That's quite a lot of work to do manually for one cite. But just as there are already tools on WP to build citations from an ISBN or a PubMed number, so I think there's been quite an effort to try to build machinery to handle at least some of the above item creation automatically, particularly for

1290:

seems like the reaction most editors would have; it's hard to imagine many editors finding that a natural way to handle citations, though many of the computer people among us would applaud the goal of centralizing the data. Do you think an RfC that asks something like "Before edits to Wikidata are

94:

is definitely and unequivocally tabloid journalism, but just as a liar occasionally tells the truth, there may be no harm in using this mundane material. On the other hand, if this stuff is only available in these two low-quality sources, is it really important that we carry it? Could we compromise

5990:

GLAM ♥ data — what is a gallery, library, archive or museum without a catalogue? It follows that Wikidata must love librarians. Bibliography supports students and researchers in any topic, but open and machine-readable bibliographic data even more so, outside the silo. Cue the WikiCite initiative,

5049:

In general I think I *would* separate them into different entities. The City of London wards are fairly historic, so perhaps there I might be less convinced that the term had a separate distinct significance as a general area outwith the identity of the ward. But for the rest, where the term has

3161:

The purpose of having the data in Wikidata is really to support connections boxes for stations at the bottom of articles in other Wikis that may not yet have them -- either to help generate them, or perhaps (in time) to populate them automatically, or to compare the local version against a central

390:

Hi, thank you for updating the BBC Your Paintings links to the new ArtUK format on so many artist pages. Obviously this is a welcome improvement, but are you aware that for a handful of articles this seems to have generated an error message, which is displayed before the link ? Even with the error

3423:

These days mix'n'match can be used in numerous modes, from the relaxed gamified click through a catalog looking for matches, with prompts, to the fantastically useful and often demanding search across all catalogs. I'll type that again: you can search 1000+ datasets from the simple box at the top

3248:

a creation template, that will draw information from somewhere, put it in the right slots of the creation template, and then output the correct wikitext. That way you can use AWB to write the same text string to each page, but it ends up creating different wikitext. It would be fairly easy, for

1586:

page give some good examples to work from. The relevant "book" and "article" sections of the Help:Sources page also cover the ground, as these are also items that need to be created for internal cites from within Wikidata. I shouldn't worry too much about the distinction between a "work" and an

3310:

There might be ways to make this more efficient, as the size of the category with short descriptions gets very large -- eg there might be a service (I'm not sure) that one can use to get recent changes in a category membership. But this one, I think, should not be hard, as a fully automated (but

1467:

Well.... creating Wikidata citations (in my limited experience) is a real pain -- because you have to create Wikidata items for the values all or most of the fields (except the ones where you don't). Maybe I'm just being uncourageous, or haven't yet dared experiment enough, but it's one part of

1264:

Fair enough. For some reason it was the closing titles, over the cave, that I found particularly enigmatic and haunting when I remembered back to the series, which is why it was the name card from the end credits that I used. (Probably also it being the last thing to be seen from each episode,

623:

is discussed the possibility of creating a genealogy-related Wikimedia user group: please submit comments and suggestions, and whether you would like to be a member in such a group. Prime goal for the group is the creation of a new, free, genealogy wiki, but there is also a discussion weather we

1147:

Commons (I think) tries to have category names that quite closely track the Ordnance Survey names, so that it can find and use official boundaries to move incoming pictures that have coordinates (eg from Geograph, or from smartphones) into the right categories. So I was trying to make sense of

5263:

Thanks all for the discussion. Goegraphical association is important to us, so I think generally I'll create a new item for new boundaries. I'll have a look at the City of London wards - it sounds like there might be a good reason to treat these differently. I'll also have a look at wards with

1701:

Until I draft a use case, I am keeping Wikidata in mind: I'm trying to write navigation boxes for the consuls of imperial Rome in a predictable format, & explain things in astandardized manner so a script could scrape the articles & populate the relevant fields correctly in Wikidata's

75:

The facts I'm citing are mundane and routine, not sensationalist or gossipy. There's no reason to believe anything but that they are straightforward and accurate. Isn't it better to indicate where they came from, so people can judge for themselves, rather than to suppress their provenance?

4863:

From an encyclopedic point of view, lack of research also may mean lack of high-quality references: the core medical literature differs from primary research, since it operates by aggregating trials. This bibliographic deficit clearly hinders Knowledge's mission. The ScienceSource project is

4296:

This maintenance issue is one example of where ScienceSource aims to help. Where the reference is to a scientific paper, its type of algorithm could give a pass/fail opinion on such references. It could assist patrollers of medical articles, therefore, with the templated references and more

3304:

A different aspect would be a process to see a new short description had been added to the article page, and write a message to the talk page. I have limited experience with bots, but this one I think ought to be quite easy. The bot simply gets the list of pages in the category with short

1678:

Hi Jheald, thanks for your responses to my comment about Wikidata. I hope it did not come across that I was dismissive of what Wikidata is trying to do, because I understand its potential quite well; I've even contributed a few hundred edits to the project myself. I believe the mistrust on

4469:

However, it can sometimes take time for a page with a template that draws from Wikidata to update, following a change on Wikidata. Instead, for a time, the previous version that has been saved in the server cache can be continue to be shown for a while. This is what you were seeing with

1938:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4462:

The taxonomy template is quite clever, and can tell when those reciprocal statements are missing. So when there's a category-item that has a statement to the main item, but the main item doesn't have a statement pointing back to the category item, the taxonomy template shows a big red

5876:

is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

4805: 5698:

images. An item that has sitelinks but no illustrative image can be tested to see if the linked wikis have a suitable one. This works well for a volunteer who wants to add images at a reasonable scale, and a small amount of SPARQL knowledge goes a long way in producing checklists.

5105:

Fun question. With the UK constituencies, we haven't yet done any significant splitting by "change of shape" - the model does support it but as we don't store geoshapes, it doesn't make much difference, so I'm taking "same name" as "unchanged". At the moment splitting is done by:

4804: 4809: 4808: 4803: 2963:

for the VIAF page of an author, with thousands more such. Wikidata links out to sites that are not nominally part of the semantic web, effectively drawing them into a larger system. The crosswalk possibilities of the systematic construction of these links was covered in Issue 8.

6653: 6002:

In fact there is a broad scope: "Open Knowledge Maps via SPARQL" and the "Sum of All Welsh Literature", identification of research outputs, Library.Link Network and Bibframe 2.0, OSCAR and LUCINDA (who they?), OCLC and Scholia, all these co-exist on the agenda. Certainly more

4810: 511:

I'll go through the pages above with the null edit trick, and hope that that will account for most of them. Sorry to have messed up like this! (I thought I had reverted the bad version of the template within a minute, so was very surprised to see it so much propagated.

3329:

It would seem that you are ahead of me, but maybe not by too far. I also have authorisation to run AWB, but have only used it to find and replace within an article. I may try some more complicated stuff (complicated for me, that is) and see what I can make happen. · · ·

4297:

generally. There may be more to proper referencing than that, indeed: context, quite what the statement supported by the reference expresses, prominence and weight. For that kind of consideration, case studies can help. But an algorithm might help to clear the backlog.

6686: 4495:

Oh, I understand now. Glad to hear that I found the proper string to pull - and thank you for the broad explanation. As you say, the Edit+Preview returns an errorless page, so I guess it will all calm down after the server cache catches up. Thank you and good night!

6690: 6689: 6685: 1127:

April 2012 (under The Milton Keynes (Reorganisation of Community Governance) Order 2012), and the name of the new CP was "Woughton". Then, with effect from 22 May 2014, the boundaries apparently remain the same, but the name is to change to "Woughton on the Green".

3125:

Hi. Just an FYI about your wikidata map of the Piccadilly Line: it's missing Terminal 5. I confess I'm not entirely sure what the purpose of this map is, but I like it and shall show it to my colleagues at LU. Assuming our browsers are recent enough to run it!

2000:

is recommended for arctic clothing). This morning, my garage found that there was a nail in the tyre and explained that it often happens after cars are serviced there as there are lots of building works in the nearby streets and so lots of nails too. Hmm...

6691: 5603:

until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

1505:

details wrong so I want to update the Cite_Q to refer to my edition and correct the information, is that feasible for most users? I don't see a bot ever being able to do either of those things, and surely those represent most of the tasks we face when citing.

5710:

It should be noted, though, that there are currently 53 Wikidata properties that link to Commons, of which P18 for the basic image is just one. WD-FIST prompts the user to add signatures, plaques, pictures of graves and so on. There are a couple of hundred

3786:

query are superior in principle, by far, to existing keyword searches run over papers. Open access content should be managed into consistent HTML, something that is currently strenuous. The good news, such as it is, would be that much of it is already in

6679:

from the University of Mannheim allows Zotero bibliographies to be exported to Wikidata, by item creation. With an extra feature to add statements, that route could lead to much development of the focus list (P5008) tagging on Wikidata, by WikiProjects.

5730:

of properties linking to Commons does contain a few that concern video and audio files, and rather more for maps. But it contains gems such as P3451 for "nighttime view". Over 1000 of those on Wikidata, but as for so much else, there could be yet more.

2563:

Today Knowledge turns 17, with worlds still to conquer. Zooming out from the individual GLAM object to the ontology in which it is set, one such world becomes apparent: GLAMs use custom ontologies, and those introduce massive incompatibilities. From a

4807: 72:, not 'journalism in tabloids'. There is a difference. "Tabloid journalism is a style of journalism that emphasizes sensational crime stories, gossip columns about celebrities and sports stars, junk food news and astrology" as our article puts it. 3791:. The organisational problem of removing further skins from the onion, with sensible prioritisation, is certainly not insuperable. The CORE group (the bloggers in the LSE posting) has some answers, but actually not all that is needed for the 1789:"together with" seems to be the established way to indicate the 'other' holder of an office. It can be given the special value "no value" to indicate distinctly that there was no other (i.e. not just that the data hasn't been populated). 4292:

finds over 450 articles where there is at least one use of the template. Of course the template is merely suggesting there is a possible issue with the reliability of a reference. Deciding the truth of the allegation is another matter.

95:

on restoring the material but with a source improvement tag, giving editors a month or two to find better sources? I'm uncomfortable having an article on a BLP so largely based on such poor sources. I did find one short article in the

6688: 5201:. Where this has been done, there should only be one entry in the "preferred ID" column of the query. However, because the re-ranking can't be done by the most common semi-automated tool, it looks like there are quite a few where 1752:

You're also right that there's a lot to get to grips with, and there's a crying need for a lot more & a lot better documentation -- both introductory how-to and documenting best practice. Reference pages like the front page of

830:

In order to improve communication between genealogy interested wikipedians, as well as taking new, important steps towards a creation of a new project site, we need to make communication between the users easier and more effective.

1697:

And then, there's the matter of providing a source for this data. It exists in the Knowledge, but I haven't figured out how to translate it over to Wikidata. Cite_Q, which you mention to Mike Christie above, might have the answer.

131:-- for example the Lorraine Kelly quote (since removed from our article), the "first person seen on Border TV", "but it became her career for the next twenty-seven years", etc. Amusingly somebody offered a correction a day later 1361:

I do have worries about potential vandalism; and that wikidata edits aren't well-enough integrated into change tracking tools, so that e.g watchlists/page histories/recent changes seemingly can't be configured to show (just) the

5072:

To a large extent, also, it depends what you want to use them for. If having separate items makes it easier to record and analyse data, then have separate items. If it doesn't, and there is appreciable continuity, then maybe

1639:

Will do; thanks for the help. I did create a book and some associated data on Wikidata some time ago in my first attempt to understand it; I don't think Cite_Q existed back then, but I recalling asking for something like it.

1392:

as well, with data that can be patrolled regularly on Wikidata to ensure continued conformity with external sites, where the downside risks are limited but there is real upside value to holding the data in the more structured

3219:

template to a lot of pages. You just use the find/replace function to slot it in where you want it. So with AWB you could certainly create a list of pages to go through, and have it open the wikitext of the next page with

2969:

speaks of them as kept "minimal, meritable, and directly relevant to the article." Here Wikidata finds more of a function. On viaf.org one can type a VIAF author identifier into the search box, and find the author page. The

534:- apologies for not checking that first before posting here. I wouldn't say your change to the template didn't work - I have hundreds of British artists on my watchlist and only a handful have the error message. Many thanks. 1083:

Are you sure that the part of the original Woughton parish left behind when Old Woughton left is really called "Woughton on the Green"? The councils websites both still say "Woughton" or "Woughton Community Council" - see

1766:

is also useful on a wider canvas. Both of these may turn up similar issues to the consuls -- eg joint office holders etc -- so can be useful to see and discuss how people may be thinking about similar issues in parallel

1575:

The main thing you're probably going to have to do is to create a Wikidata item for the book (if the item doesn't already exist), or for the article, if you wanted to cite an article. The wikidata items linked from the

1141:

Conceivably, there might be an 'official' name for legal purposes that might have needed to be continuity in, for the purposes of some legal trust or bequest or something. Or the ONS may just have got it wrong, I don't

155:, is actually a rather cleaner / more informative source for where material may originally have came from, rather than a subsequent "cuttings piece" in a later newspaper, whose own original sources may be opaque at best. 2781:

is falling over. As far as I know the IDs are all sound. (It's possible a couple might have been modified since I last checked -- Art UK sometimes do that -- but I should catch those when I next scan the whole lot).

1732:

over at Wikidata. At first glance it's not the busiest or most developed of projects, but I see that somebody did start a thread last year on the talk page about systematically adding some data for the consuls - see

605:

In order to improve communication between genealogy interested wikipedians, as well talking in chat mode about the potential new wiki, a new irc channel has been setup, and you are welcome to visit and try it out at:

1371:

But I think I'd say that there does need to be some use of Wikidata on Knowledge if progress is to be made in these areas; and that a blanket ban is the wrong approach. And that there are areas of the project, like

5607:

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

495:

using the good version. In time, the red messages will also go away by themselves, as other edits are made to the page, or the page cache is routinely updated. But I don't know how long that may take to happen.

2184: 1587:"edition" for a book unless you know there were multiple editions and there is one that you particularly want to cite. The WikiProjects give a more a more complete reference list of the sort of properties that 1757:

are quite useful; but can often be quite hard to find, or may not entirely not up to date; and there are certainly a lot more of them (and "showcase items" to go with them) needed in many more subject areas.

5687:, and if the number is large, it is still only 5% or so of items that have one. All such images are taken from Wikimedia Commons, which has 50 million media files. One key issue is how to expand the stock. 3409:, it works "to match entries in external catalogs to Wikidata". The total number of entries is now well into eight figures, and more are constantly being added: a couple of new catalogs each day is normal. 2578:— sometimes referred to as a "thesaurus" as term of art — simplifies search: if a "spade" must be called that, rather than "shovel", it is easier to find all spade references. That control comes at a cost. 4027:

The proposal includes downloading 30,000 open access papers, aiming (roughly speaking) to create a baseline for medical referencing on Knowledge. It leaves open the question of how these are to be chosen.

3029: 1609:, I believe). Given existing templated citations, that machinery may be able to identify the journal titles, publishers, even authors etc and automatically populate the relevant fields of the right items. 6060:, WikiCite 2018 program abstract, Christine Fernsebner Eslao of Harvard Library Information and Technical Services and Michelle Futornick, Linked Data for Production Program Manager at Stanford University 1690:

consuls. Then the nature of dates: while a consul held office between fixed dates of a given year -- which changed thru history, another complication -- a large number do not have definite dates: see

5888:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 3305:

descriptions once every few hours, compares it with an offline list of pages it has already notified, and substs a template message, with appropriate added parameters, to the bottom of the talk page.

1950:. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose 5172:

The relationship shouldn't be many-to-many because I think there will only ever be one Wikidata item for a particular GSS code. But it can be one-to-many, as shown by eg the results of this query:

3771:

skinning an onion, laboriously, 100 times with diminishing returns. There are of the order of 100 major publisher sites hosting open access papers, and the predominant offer there is still a PDF.

3230:

already added at the top. You could then fill in the template by hand, hit 'save', and AWB will automatically open the wikitext of the next page on the list. This is the classic mode of AWB use.

4806: 3277:

What I don't know (but have long wondered) is whether it is possible to get rid of the manual cut and paste from the text editor -- whether one can just give AWB a file, and tell it to take

1219: 3760: 6399:, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2019. 1200: 162:

is a now lot more rigorous than it was in 2009. But in this case, I do feel some reassurance that the article appears to have had an edit from a close relative, possibly MM's husband (

4641:(shortcut WD:SSFL on Wikidata), project to tag a first-pass open access medical bibliography on Wikidata, and also overcome the systematic biases in the medical literature by curation. 1785:

In a lot of cases, there probably are already ways to get quite a long way towards what you're looking for, as seen already in the items returned in the query I posted. The qualifier

6687: 5904: 5566: 2556:

on music albums, metadata have stood outside a piece or file, while adding to understanding of where it comes from, and some of what needs to be appreciated about its content. In the

1966: 6556: 6532: 4996:. In general this means creating separate items for Wards vs the general geographical area and creating new items where the Ward boundaries change even when the name stays the same. 1852: 5584: 5568: 4110: 4610:

he feels the gaps experienced both by editors and by users of Wikimedia content are inevitable. He would like to see a greater emphasis on reuse of content, not simply its volume.

1117:. The downloadable version of the database gives a somewhat precise date of 22 May 2014 for the name-change (from "Woughton") to have apparently come into effect from 22 May 2014. 4268: 2468:

and try out the functions. You will find parts of the 18th Pharao dynasty and other records submitted by the 7 first users, and it would be great if you would add some records.

6010:

Wikimedians generally are not aware of the tech background that can be assumed, unless they are close to current training for librarians. A baseline definition is useful here: "

5600: 2653: 5208:

has been added, but the change of rank to deprecated has never actually been done. (Soz!) It looks like the same also applies for constituencies (E14...), which have been more

3698: 2016:

Very glad to hear you got home safely. Did feel a bit guilty as I walked on towards the nice warm tube... Hope you didn't get any more nails after they replaced the tyre...

151:

Even if this Knowledge-involved citogenesis weren't the case, I think one could make quite a general proposition that an actual interview with a subject herself, even in the

4674: 1828: 4478:

idea that I'm going to try that might help to avoid them, but it might not work, so we will see. But it shouldn't be too long before everything is fixed and normal again.

4059: 5617: 1251: 296:

The future of the Genealogy project on the English Knowledge, and a potential creation of a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, is something where you can make a an input.

2948:

concept, around for about as long as Knowledge, and realised in dozens of distributed Web institutions. It sees Wikidata as supplying central, encyclopedic coverage of

6326: 5409:

actually diminishes with the prolific progress of science publishing. No, it really doesn't scale. Wikimedia as movement can do something in such cases. We know from

2178: 1287: 776: 5561: 625: 6823: 6150: 5851: 5759: 3641: 279:

in 2008. Over the years a number of articles has been written, with more or less association to genealogy. And, very exciting, there is a proposal made on Meta by

4964: 2565: 1335:). There is no way I would want to switch that template back to using predominantly locally-held data, and I would resist to my utmost any attempt to force that. 6568: 6548: 2810:

OK, thanks - I didn't think to check their front page. I think the links to Art UK are a great idea, and should be very useful (once they get their site fixed!)

4724: 3838: 1870: 930: 6308:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

4404: 3018: 2762:). When I click on the links generated I get "database error" messages - do you know if this is a fault with the template or is the problem at the Art UK end? 2452:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

973:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

819:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

594:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

244:

for establishing a potential Wikimedia genealogy project on meta, and anyone who during the years showed an interest in genealogy on talk pages and likewise.

5922: 5363:

In an ideal world ... no, bear with your editor for just a minute ... there would be a format for scientific publishing online that was as much a standard as

5050:

had a long previous use for the area as a whole before the creation of the ward, then I would think it would make sense to have separate entity for the ward,

2604:

For metadata mobility, match to Wikidata. It's apparently that simple: infrastructure requirements have turned out, so far, to be challenges that can be met.

1984: 3971: 5734:

Go on. Today is Wikidata's birthday. An illustrative image is always an acceptable gift, so why not add one? You can follow these easy steps: (i) log in at

3847: 6798: 6125: 5826: 5536: 4939: 4699: 4379: 4169: 3919: 3564: 3152:

Thanks for that! It seems the data source I was importing the station adjacency data from was a bit out of date -- it was missing ], and the whole of the

3090: 2719: 2269: 1844: 90:

I do see what you mean; most of the material is not especially controversial. I had a quick look and there really is not much material on this person. The

6769: 6412: 4652: 3153: 1291:

allowed to modify an article, how easy must it be for en-wiki editors to observe and modify those Wikidata items" is the right way to address this point?

4043:

will have to be handled, and the premature exclusion of publications that would be in those marginal positions would reduce the value of the collection.

1601:(author name string) can be used instead, for authors that are not notable; but I think there's no such alternative (at least not yet) for a book editor. 5788: 2660:

Why Mickey Mouse’s 1998 copyright extension probably won't happen again: Copyrights from the 1920s will start expiring next year if Congress doesn't act

1332: 5156: 674: 329: 272: 6043: 1192: 1162: 1097: 5295: 4974:

I'm working on adding information for a set of UK council electoral wards to Wikidata. I'm doing this work in my job as a Data Analyst at mySociety

4427:

very experienced here, but I've done such linking with multiple articles before, and never got this error... Do you have any explanation, please? --

3685: 3190:

Hi Jheald, Are you skilled with AWB or bots or similar methods for systematically producing short descriptions with fewer keystrokes? Cheers, · · ·

6573: 5929: 4833:

these days means a disease not rare, but tropical, and most often infectious or parasitic. Rare diseases as a group are dominated, in contrast, by

5804: 3210:

I have a licence to drive AWB, but in reality I only take it out for a spin once every couple of years or so, so I wouldn't call myself an expert.

2896: 375: 6265: 5622: 3432:

area, biographical catalogs being particularly fraught. Underpinning recent rapid progress is an open infrastructure for scraping and uploading.

3197: 2031: 201: 2952:, and looks ahead to greater support for "federated queries" that draw together information from all parts of the emerging network of websites. 2658: 2067: 2057: 2025: 391:

message the link still works, so this is a matter of article appearance rather than functionality. The pages affected, from my Watchlist, are

4729: 4409: 3763:

puts that issue down to "heterogeneity". A useful euphemism to save us from thinking that the whole concept doesn't fall into the realm of the

2903: 2521: 2208: 1612:

Once you've got the item for the book or the article created (and all the subsidiary items needed to populate the fields of those items), then

1003: 620: 6007:

is coming Wikidata's way. That poses the question about the other direction: is more Wikimedia technology advancing on libraries? Good point.

5115:

changing the number of seats associated with a constituency even if name & boundary are consistent (I'm in the middle of rolling this out)

1657: 1634: 1522: 1487: 1455: 1433: 1407: 1274: 4436: 3656: 3456: 3368: 3285:

template parameters. This I don't know; and I also don't know about what other semi-automated tools that are out there might be able to do.

2850: 5386:. Where scientific papers are delivered as XML downloads, you get all the ingredients ready to cook. But have to prepare the actual meal of 5160: 5130: 4848:

are those developed to treat rare diseases (rare enough not to have market-driven research), but there is some overlap in practice with the

3394: 3337: 3320: 3294: 1734: 6444: 6348: 5481:

platform. Quote: "Disambiguating and merging individuals across multiple datasets is nearly impossible given their current, siloed nature."

4515: 4497: 4446: 4428: 3718: 3185: 2840: 2819: 2805: 2791: 2504: 2477: 2159: 1478:

is okay for minor edits, if somebody else has already created the basic citation; but I'm not sure I'd want to populate one from scratch.

1061: 1034: 913: 886: 724: 697: 357: 5085: 4790: 2883:, which you nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the 1762:

is quite an interesting one, that is trying to build up a full database of all the current and past members of Parliament and the Lords.

856: 5027:

and the movement of some values from one to the other. I wondered if you had any views on the best or preferred approach in these cases?

4199: 3976: 3710: 3179: 2093: 39:

as a source on Knowledge. There is an existing consensus that it should not be used on BLPs, which this is. In addition to the Mail, the

5424: 4097: 3416:, mix'n'match has gradually come to play a significant part in adding statements to Wikidata. Particularly in areas with the flavour of 1822: 1759: 461:

Apologies if this has nothing to do with your edits, but I thought it best to contact you as a first step to finding a solution to this.

6719:. It should also be acting as a catalyst to bring scraping in from the cold, with institutional strengths as well as resourceful code. 5856: 5503: 5225: 5112:

dissolution of XYZ as part of boundary changes (a later XYZ gets a new item with new dates, so we have one 1832-1885 and one 1918-1974)

3503: 1918: 835: 6776: 5367:

are for the content. Likewise cataloguing publications would not be onerous, because part of the process would be to generate uniform

4505: 4490: 3001: 1114:

in the ONS database that is the central official repository for such names and boundaries (which the Ordnance Survey also follows, eg

543: 521: 5589: 4644: 3610: 644:

The future of the Genealogy project, and creation of a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, is something where you can make a an input.

189: 175: 108: 85: 6055: 3640:, but this was changed. I don't know why this change was made nor can I suggest how you might find the discussion that preceded it. 3007: 2409: 1898: 838:

is discussed the possibility of creating a genealogy-related Wikimedia email list. In order to request the creation of such a list,

5013:

and I'm trying to work out if I should separate these into two separate entries. I actually went ahead and did this in the case of

4194: 3967: 3944: 3744: 3589: 3115: 2744: 849:, we need to put a request it in Phabricator, and add a link to reasoning/explanation of purpose, and link to community consensus. 6500:, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year! 4621:

can redress the picture. It comes with the claim to be "the first ever conference about centering marginalized knowledge online".

4264: 3759:

papers in the large, though, there is is less reason for celebration. Access in theory does not yet equate to practical access. A

2560:, the accumulation of accurate metadata for objects is key to the mission of an institution, and its presentation in cataloguing. 1805:

It's also possible to specify just a century (or even a millenium), together with qualifiers for "earliest date" and "latest date"

1239: 1011: 4466:

As I said, I am now in the process of filling in those missing reverse links, in a batch run that's about 60% of the way through.

3363: 2294: 1910: 1715: 1078: 6335:

and try out the functions. You will find parts of the 18th Pharao dynasty and other records submitted by the 7 first users, and

5695: 4263:

enters its second year, with a Cambridge Blue (OK, Aquamarine) background, a new logo, but no Cambridge blues. On-topic for the

2080:

The effort for the lifting of copyright restrictions on citation data of this kind has had real momentum behind it during 2017.

1808:

Or one can even just leave the value for a date as the special value "some value", and give more information through qualifiers.

1308: 166:) -- who removed the Lorraine Kelly quote (and a record cover) -- but seems to have been comfortable enough with all the rest. 6356: 3636:

I'll add that Jewish holy days used to be posted on the day before, as you expected for Pesach two days ago, with the notation

3351: 2485: 1153:

But I agree it does seem very confusing, and if you can make any more sense as to what's been going on, I'd be very grateful.

1042: 894: 705: 163: 4919:

Alberto Martín-Martín, Enrique Orduna-Malea, Mike Thelwall, Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, arxiv.org, submitted on 15 August 2018

6260: 5036: 3949: 142: 3139: 256: 6819: 6642: 6408: 6146: 5918: 5847: 5769:

Find out how @TheContentMine are attempting to mine scientific and medical literature to improve the accuracy of Knowledge.

5557: 4960: 4720: 4400: 4190: 3940: 3649: 3585: 3111: 2740: 2547: 2404: 2290: 1980: 1653: 1622:

would appear to make it reasonably easy to generate a cite for the book as a whole, or a particular chapter or page number.

1518: 1451: 1304: 654: 306: 6527: 4865: 4638: 1729: 6779:, the latest ContentMine grant application to the Wikimedia Foundation, is in its community review stage until January 2. 6736: 4985:. I'm currently working on electoral wards in London boroughs and I can see you have done some work on these previously. 3963: 2010: 1649: 1514: 1447: 1300: 667: 661: 322: 313: 6305: 5375:, it might be reasonably be argued that sandwiches can be packaged much alike and have barcodes, whatever the fillings. 4288:

for short, is used to express dissatisfaction with particular references. Technology can help with patrolling, and this

2987: 2771: 2607: 2449: 1569: 1025: 970: 877: 816: 688: 591: 551: 241: 6534: 4989: 3442: 1830: 6707:

community, and growing networks around other approaches that can integrate datasets into Wikidata, such as the use of

6314: 4906: 4002: 3808: 2615: 2134: 1594:

You might also need to create an item for the book's publisher or the article's journal, if they do not already exist.

1223:. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Knowledge under a 6790: 6617: 6117: 5973: 5818: 5666: 5528: 5339: 4931: 4773: 4691: 4559: 4371: 4243: 4161: 4123: 4065: 3911: 3873: 3556: 3518: 3082: 3044: 2711: 2673: 2261: 2223: 2153: 1686:(Yeah, I know, ask more questions. That works when I'm confident I'll be answered -- or I'll understand the answer.) 2461:

Dear members of WikiProject Genealogy, this will be the last newsletter for 2017, but maybe the most important one!

6745:

Write a Zotero translator and document process for creating new Zotero translator and getting it live in production

6638: 6623: 5979: 5672: 5345: 4779: 4565: 4249: 4139: 3889: 3534: 3420:, but datasets can of course be about practically anything. There is a catalog on skyscrapers, and two on spiders. 3060: 2884: 2689: 2239: 1673: 1438:

Thanks; I'll have a think about your comments. I think I'll try putting Cite_Q in an article and see how it goes.

1356:

And of course there's also the technology coming along to modify templated values directly from the reading screen.

1018: 870: 681: 632: 336: 284: 134:, which was then rebutted a day or two after that, because our own article had had it right all the time after all. 6716: 4079: 4008: 3631: 2931: 1133: 470: 158:

Obviously one needs to be absolutely careful with living people to "first do no harm", and it's a good thing that

52: 6815: 6804: 6451: 6404: 6301: 6276: 6142: 6131: 5914: 5843: 5832: 5553: 5542: 4956: 4945: 4716: 4705: 4396: 4385: 4186: 4175: 3936: 3925: 3581: 3570: 3107: 3096: 2736: 2725: 2511: 2445: 2420: 2286: 2275: 1976: 1188: 1093: 1068: 966: 941: 920: 812: 787: 731: 587: 562: 364: 264: 237: 212: 6699:

There is also a large-scale encyclopedic dimension here. The construction of Zotero translators is one facet of

6281: 5694:

exploits the fact that each Knowledge is differently illustrated, mostly with images from Commons but also with

5195: 5021: 5014: 4975: 2425: 2123: 946: 792: 771: 567: 217: 6794: 6352: 6121: 6048:, book chapter by Mairelys Lemus-Rojas, metadata librarian and Lydia Pintscher, Wikidata Product Manager, from 5822: 5532: 5497: 4935: 4695: 4375: 4165: 3915: 3560: 3345: 3086: 2939: 2715: 2481: 2265: 1038: 890: 701: 5007: 5000: 4275:

guideline, for the referencing of articles at all related to human health, is applied in typical discussions.

3822: 2199: 1228: 6236: 4471: 3464: 2380: 1691: 1085: 2995:

What galleries, libraries, archives, and museums can teach us about multimedia metadata on Wikimedia Commons

1754: 1565: 1088:

for example. The name you give is hard to believe, since WotG itself is in Old Woughton. Citation please. --

6384: 5994: 5897: 4666: 1959: 1702:

objects. (It's amazing how many stock sentences one can accumulate in writing dozens of similar articles.)

1321:

Hi Mike. Tricky question. I don't know whether you saw the bit in the comment I made at WP:VPP about the

268: 31:

Please don't add or restore poorly sourced material on living people that is sourced only to tabloids. Per

5683:

Around 2.7 million Wikidata items have an illustrative image. These files, you might say, are Wikimedia's

4916:

Google Scholar, Web of Science, and Scopus: a systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject categories

4091: 3399:

Around the time in February when Wikidata clicked past item Q50000000, another milestone was reached: the

99:

which might help a bit. Thanks for negotiating in good faith, and I am sure we will work something out. --

6496:

and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a

6420: 6251: 6181: 5909: 3855: 3645: 2395: 2325: 1971: 1875: 859:

where you can support the creation of the mail list with your vote, in case you haven't done so already.

502: 6161: 5279: 5202: 5188: 4868:

at WD:SSFL is trying to ensure that neglect does not turn into bias in its selection of science papers.

4829:

and then there are "neglected diseases". Evidently a rare enough disease is likely to be neglected, but

5720: 5076:

My apologies if that's all been a bit woolly, and not as cut-and-dried as perhaps might be preferable.

4969: 3799:, or in other words the onion heart when it has become fiddly beyond patience to skin, does call for a 3253: 3224: 3120: 1996:

Good to get re-acquainted at the meetup yesterday. FYI, I got the tyre changed before my hands froze (

1184: 1105: 1089: 6168: 5272: 5265: 5181: 5051: 4481:

Sorry again for having caused you this confusion, but I hope it is all sorted out now. Best regards,

2172:

This is a story of my knowledge adventure in New Zealand moths via Wikicommons, Knowledge and Wikidata

1007: 846: 747: 5593: 5402: 2006: 1280: 6071: 4993: 3827: 3819:, CWTS blogpost 17 January 2018, Nees Jan van Eck, Ludo Waltman, Vincent Larivière, Cassidy Sugimoto 3163: 2170: 1111: 5613: 5485: 4618: 4589: 2966: 1176: 450: 6763: 6031: 5394:

for a recent pass at heading off XML with HTML, in other words in the native language of the Web.

4346: 3425: 1468:

Wikidata that I would leave to automatic creation & the machines, at least so far. I suspect

6461: 2099:

But all that is just the beginning. Topics of papers are identified, authors disambiguated, with

1645: 1510: 1443: 1296: 1247: 1597:

It's not necessary to create an item for a book or article author if one doesn't already exist:

6347:

Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from

6246: 6176: 4016: 2949: 2557: 2476:

Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from

2390: 2320: 2111:

on Wikidata has been introduced so that methodology can sit comfortably on items about papers.

1906: 1180: 1033:

Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from

885:

Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from

696:

Don't want newsletters? If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from

613: 531: 405: 5401:

is a traditional mixture of frictional forces, vested interests, and the classic irony of the

4999:

I've come across some situations where the Ward and a geographic area have the same name e.g.

3424:

right. The drop-down menu top left offers "creation candidates", Magnus's personal favourite.

2984:

takes a major step further, allowing both lookup and crosswalk to be encoded in a single URL.

6084: 5885: 5767: 5126: 4586:

to implement it. Besides face-to-face interactions, Wikimedians do need their power sources.

3334: 3235:

What's more challenging, using AWB, is to see whether it can also help you fill in something

3194: 2892: 2759: 2575: 2107:

for researchers, and proposals formulated to identify methodology in a machine-readable way.

1947: 1763: 635:

where you also can support the creation with your vote, in case you haven't done so already.

508:-- specifically, one to draw and display the number of paintings automatically from Wikidata. 280: 276: 132: 6564: 5489: 3601: 3479: 2581: 2063:

about eight times as fast as papers are published. As 2017 ends, progress is quite evident.

1148:"Woughton on the Green" there, and then reflect what I had learnt to Knowledge and Wikidata. 5896:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 5513:

In Europe, Scientists Need to Share Their Research for Free if They Want Government Funding

4415: 4055: 3792: 3249:

example, to make a creation template that pulled the description from Wikidata, and output

2993: 2870: 2815: 2767: 2749: 2002: 1958:, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The 445: 410: 287:

where you also can support the creation with your vote, in case you havnt done so already.

65: 35:

this is not permitted. As regards your edit summary, the RfC is about a blanket ban on the

32: 26: 6023: 5787:

to extract Creative Commons license information from PubMed Central pages, created at the

4982: 3699:

Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Which_day_should_Passover_be_featured_on_the_main_page?

3487: 2998:, Wikimedia Foundation blogpost, 29 January 2018, by Jonathan Morgan and Sandra Fauconnier 2190: 1799: 851:

Therefore we need your vote for this now, so we can request the creation of the mail list.

129: 8: 6741: 6523: 6482: 5778: 5609: 5032: 4058:. There are also a number of potential downloading troubles, and these were mentioned in 3359: 2312: 1866: 1376: 1325: 488: 385: 371: 6703:

that has a strong community and open source basis. In that it resembles the less formal

2127: 1115: 612:(In case you are not familiar with IRC, or would prefer some info and intro, please see 6493: 6468: 6388: 6191: 6155: 5221: 5081: 4983:

a larger project to collect information on elected representatives across all countries

4486: 4356: 4305: 3706: 3679: 3625: 3495: 3417: 3316: 3290: 3175: 3134: 2836: 2801: 2787: 2335: 2021: 1818: 1641: 1630: 1545: 1506: 1483: 1462: 1439: 1429: 1403: 1316: 1292: 1270: 1259: 1243: 1175:

and ... Milton Keynes! So a definite cock-up. Pending a more reliable source (at least

1158: 517: 440: 171: 81: 69: 6669: 3816:

Crossref as a new source of citation data: A comparison with Web of Science and Scopus

3473: 2974:, these days including Open Street Map, Scholia etc., allows this kind of lookup. The 6646: 6443:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

6011: 5872: 5684: 5414: 5180:

I have tended to set the old ID to have "deprecated rank", together with a qualifier

4853: 4830: 4676:

More than 5,000 German scientists have published papers in pseudo-scientific journals

4582: 4113:

blogpost 25 May 2018, second chance this year to participate in referencing Knowledge

3782:

From the discoverability angle, Wikidata's bibliographic resources combined with the

2878: 2852: 2631: 2503:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

1934: 1902: 1711: 1398:

I appreciate that's only a partial answer to your question; but I hope it's a start.

1060:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

912:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

754: 723:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

395: 356:

To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please remove your name from

6660:

Besides the handiness of Zotero's warehousing of personal citation collections, the

4795: 2140: 2108: 1795: 1786: 1737:. It looks like they didn't take it any further though. (Or at least, haven't yet). 1598: 990: 5881: 5511: 5478: 5254: 5211: 5145: 5122: 5063: 4826: 4051: 3861: 3660: 3594: 3331: 3205: 3191: 2888: 2647: 2644:

From snowflake to avalanche: Possibilities of using free citation data in libraries

2598: 2299: 1991: 1943: 1179:), i will do a partial revert. Meanwhile, would you repost your reply to me to the 766: 741: 455: 17: 6560: 6320: 4039:

of diseases that receive less current research. The MEDRS guideline supposes that

4035:

include a concentration on secondary literature. Attention has to be given to the

3484:, workshop on data visualization literacy from Mikhail Popov, Wikimedia Foundation 1802:"circa". There are also some more values to indicate "disputed", "uncertain" etc. 6750: 6232: 6004: 5406: 5060:

In terms of what to do re: boundary changes, it's a good question. Pinging also

4834: 4501: 4432: 4309: 4272: 4032: 2826: 2811: 2763: 2376: 2115: 1616: 1580: 1554: 1472: 1418: 1386: 1344: 1136:

as authority for the name change -- but the name doesn't appear to be in the PDF.

539: 466: 415: 5356: 4994:

https://www.wikidata.org/Wikidata:WikiProject_British_Politicians#Constituencies

4624: 4607: 3447: 3154:

Docklands_Light_Railway#Stratford_International_to_Canning_Town_extension_(2011)

1561: 180:

I've posted at article talk and I suggest we continue the conversation there. --

6516: 6506: 6475: 5893: 5745: 5246: 5096: 5044: 5028: 4841: 4300: 4282: 3664: 3355: 1955: 1856: 1813:... leaving this for now because I have to go; but more to add in due course. 420: 367: 260: 185: 128:

article was in fact drawn heavily from our article as it stood in January 2011

104: 48: 6063: 4050:

Two well-known but rather different areas where such considerations apply are

3801: 5889: 5441: 4898: 3954:

Just a reminder, you phrased your message as a comment and note a !vote with

3833: 3774: 3692: 3671: 3617: 3147: 3128: 2619: 2185:

c:Commons:British Library/Mechanical Curator collection/georeferencing status

1951: 1744: 1168: 435: 159: 6383:

Hello Jheald, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this

4992:, and for wards with changing boundaries I'm trying to follow the advice at 4654:

Knowledge's upcoming Cape Town conference will tackle the issue of diversity

3814: 2860: 6700: 6486: 6367: 6311:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) 5702: 5177: 4822: 4289: 3436: 2955: 2945: 2455:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) 2305: 1997: 1884: 1722: 1707: 1224: 976:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) 822:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) 597:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, please see below) 430: 5991:

which was meeting in conference this week, in the Bay Area of California.

4877: 4646:

Wikimedia Foundation and Kiwix partner to grow offline access to Knowledge

4576:

Officially it is "bridging the gaps in knowledge", with Wikimania 2018 in

4423: 3413: 2100: 2081: 1086:

http://www.woughtoncommunitycouncil.gov.uk/council-information/who-are-we/

6103: 6090: 5418: 5410: 5258: 5250: 5217: 5167: 5152: 5100: 5077: 4845: 4482: 4044: 3756: 3702: 3312: 3286: 3171: 2832: 2797: 2783: 2777:

Hmm. Looks like they have a systems problem -- even the site front page

2553: 2017: 1814: 1626: 1479: 1425: 1399: 1266: 1154: 761: 513: 498:

I've learnt my lesson, and am now developing updates for the template in

167: 121: 77: 6758: 6673: 6342:

And with those great news we want to wish you a creative New Year 2019!

5900:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

5391: 4150:. ScienceSource pages will be announced there, and in this mass message. 3492:, Nancy Cooey, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, February 12 2018 2971: 2471:

And with those great news we want to wish you a creative New Year 2018!

1962:

describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

530:

I just checked your contribution history and seen the edits you made at

6728: 6708: 6223: 6019: 5372: 3749: 3505:

Back to the future: Does graph database success hang on query language?

2755: 2367: 2130:

in compiling the global history of book translation. Watch this space.

1794:

Fuzzy dates are possible. "circa" can be indicated with the qualifier

535: 479: 462: 425: 400: 6665: 5691: 5462: 4333: 3458:

Knowledge goes 3D allowing users to upload .STLs for digital reference

2754:

Hi, I just noticed a couple of your Art UK additions on my watchlist (

2210:

Alpha Zero’s "Alien" Chess Shows the Power, and the Peculiarity, of AI

2092:

over 50% of the citation data is open. Now the holdout publishers are

1772:

It's a useful exercise to gather together a reference page of the key

6497: 6489: 6392: 6199: 5863: 5398: 5387: 4988:

In terms of entering the data I'm currently following the model from

4890: 4857: 4577: 4070: 4040: 4036: 3796: 2796:

But I might hold off adding the remaining templates until tomorrow.

2343: 1925: 1172: 1122:

According to the rows in the downloadable database, the name for the

181: 115: 100: 60: 44: 6704: 6099: 4147: 3897: 3542: 3156:. There may be a few more glitches too, but I'm working through it. 3068: 2697: 2247: 2073: 626:

propose a new project or support the adoption of an existing project

247:(To discontinue receiving Project Genealogy newsletters, see below) 6396: 6321:

list of users who support the potential Wikimedia genealogy project

6219: 6211: 6207: 6195: 5712: 5493: 5379: 5368: 5364: 4914: 4900:

Where do Mayors Come From: Querying Wikidata with Python and SPARQL

3764: 3701:, but nobody seems at all interested, so ... whatever, I suppose. 3606: 3403:

tool uploaded its 1000th dataset. Concisely defined by its author,

2589: 2363: 2355: 2351: 2339: 2104: 2089: 144:

is almost an exact retread of our article. (Not that you like the

4103: 4094:, May update allows wrangling of tabular information into Wikidata 3805:. But the real knack is to do more between the XML and the heart. 3489:

Using Wikidata to build an authority list of Holocaust-era ghettos

2201:"Anyone can edit", not everyone does: Knowledge and the gender gap 1110:. It does seem crazy, doesn't it. The source I was following was 236:

This is the very first newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

6332: 4328:

Timeline of discoveries of natural satellites in the solar system

4047:

misses the point that gate-keeping will be done by an algorithm.

2643: 2465: 2165: 5508:, detailed slide pack by Heiko Paulheim, University of Mannheim. 4451:

Sorry you got caught up with this. I think it is all fixed now.

4322:

World Cup scorers bubble chart, by the league in which they play

4085: 991:

https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-genealogy

6634: 6601: 6215: 6203: 6027: 5957: 5903:

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review

5650: 5601:

Knowledge:Articles for deletion/Rotation group (disambiguation)

5323: 4757: 4543: 4227: 4130: 3880: 3783: 3525: 3051: 2680: 2654:

outreach:GLAM/Newsletter/December 2017/Contents/WMF GLAM report

2359: 2347: 2230: 2187:, Mechanical Curator project on Commons hits 50K maps milestone 1965:

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review

346:

Cheers from your WikiProject Genealogy founder and coordinator

283:

to found a new Wikimedia Genealogy Project, read more at Meta;

6652: 6540: 5796:

to map the London Underground system, whizzed past on Twitter.

4895:

August 6, 2018, by Karen Smith-Yoshimura on OCLC Research blog

1836: 965:

This is the fourth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

777:

Genealogy project need your vote for creation of an email list

586:

This is the second newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

6547:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

6331:

You can already now try out the demo for a genealogy wiki at

6300:

This is the sixth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

4660: 3469: 3352:

Talk:Daily Mail#Request for comment: Other criticisms section

2464:

You can already now try out the demo for a genealogy wiki at

2444:

This is the fifth newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

2161:

WikidataCon: Giving more people more access to more knowledge

1843:

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect

811:

This is the third newsletter sent by mass mail to members in

5453: 5448: 4884: 4335:

4800 Welsh portraits added to Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata

3470:

Formal publication and announcement of ISBN citation dataset

3405: 3012: 3004:, 2018 institutional participation in the #1lib1ref campaign 6645:. It is also an active user community, and has broad-based 5505:

Machine Learning with and for Semantic Web Knowledge Graphs

3461:, Beau Jackson for 3dprintingindustry.com, February 22 2018 2624: 2085: 1201:

Orphaned non-free image File:The Changes closing titles.jpg

931:

WikiProject Genealogy - newsletter No.4: Mail list created!

124:. I strongly suspect the material on Mary Marquis in that 6668:, at work behind the VisualEditor. Metadata from Wikidata 6606: 6078: 5962: 5739: 5723:

and its subcategories provide rich scope for adding more.

5655: 5328: 4762: 4602: 4548: 4232: 4135: 4012: 3885: 3659:, but I can't remember where the original discussion was. 3530: 3056: 2685: 2597:

Case studies in that article show what can lie ahead. The

2235: 1606: 6226:, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! 6050:

Leveraging Knowledge: Connecting Communities of Knowledge

6015: 5783: 5383: 4849: 4088:, a basic search interface for Wikidata lexemes and forms 3823:

Citations with identifiers in Knowledge, figshare dataset

3788: 3400: 2370:, this is a special time of year for almost everyone! 2213:, MIT Technology Review, by Will Knight, December 8, 2017 2137:

one of your New Year's resolutions. Happy holidays, all!

6434: 4340: 4082:, Wikidata's multi-lingual dictionary project gets going 3023: 3021:, Knowledge Signpost special report 5 February 2018, by 2494: 2191:

Historical dataset on the provenance of Knowledge text:

2144:

November 2017 map of geolocated Wikidata items, made by

2119: 1424:

is an experimental template with only 225 uses so far.

1167:

This is the same ONS that thinks that the population of

1051: 903: 714: 670:

with the following code: {{User WikiProject Genealogy}}.

348: 325:

with the following code: {{User WikiProject Genealogy}}.

318:

Check the goal, tasks and see if something interest you.

43:

is also a poor source. Thanks for your understanding. --

6609:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 5965:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 5884:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

5658:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 5582:

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article

5472: 5331:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 4765:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 4551:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 4235:. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page. 4007:

The Wikimedia Foundation announced full funding of the

2146: 1946:

is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the

1780:

that may be most relevant to a project, eg the consuls.

985:

The project email list is now created and ready to use!

621:

m:Talk:Wikimedia_genealogy_project#Wikimedia_user_group

4338:, National Library of Wales blogpost 27 June 2018, by 4017:

ScienceSource Twitter announcement and 60 second video

2980: 4908:

Newspapers On Knowledge Update: Initial Wikidata Pass

4860:, a "neglected public health issue", is on the list. 4419: 3829:

Making women more visible online—with Wikidata tools!

2778: 2570: 6799: