Jump to content

User:Leutha/Archive 12 (December 2018)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The public domain lists

[edit]

And what information is that? I still don't see anything that makes these lists anything other than original research. Taking a set of rules and applying them yourself to reach a conclusion falls under that classification. WP:Synthesis. Sources like this one for a Robert Frost poem are required. Largoplazo (talk) 15:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)

If you follow the blue links you will discover they lead to a fresh Wikipedia page.Leutha (talk) 16:12, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
I just clicked an arbitrary selection of the links in a few of the lists and found most of them don't establish that the works in question are in the public domain. And most of the works listed aren't linked anyway. Largoplazo (talk) 19:14, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
For a lot of works, it's just simple math. For example, the works of Antonin Artaud. Anything he solely created within his lifetime in now public domain in France since he died in 1948 since France is life of the author plus 70 years. Original texts are also public domain in any country with a copyright term of 70 p.m.a. Another example: Gertrude Atherton. Her pre-1924 works are public domain in the United States, and now the original texts of hers are public domain in Life + 70 countries. I'd rather not go through many pages and state that "such-and-such's works entered the public domain in Life + 70 countries on January 1, 2019" to satisfy that this is not merely original research but a list compiled from various other Wikipedia pages Pinging @Ymblanter Abzeronow (talk) 22:10, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
We have List of countries' copyright lengths with references.--Ymblanter (talk) 22:17, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
Well:
  • I suspect you know that Wikipedia isn't considered a reliable source.
  • That list of copyright durations could have errors, so an item could be included in a list when it really isn't in the public domain or was already in the public domain.
  • There could be complexities not covered by that list, so an item could be included in a list when it really isn't in the public domain or was already in the public domain.
  • Finally, applying information from elsewhere and combining it here to reach conclusions is original research, specifically synthesis, as I already noted above. And that isn't permitted.
Wikipedia isn't a forum for initial reporting. For example, if you realize that published proofs of two conjectures, taken together, demonstrate the truth of a third conjecture, Wikipedia isn't the place to record that observation. Wikipedia won't display the combined proof or an assertion that the third conjecture has been proved until that has been covered in a reliable source. Likewise, this isn't a venue for declaring works to have entered the public domain without there already being a reliable source that has said so.
Finally, a statement that a work is in the public domain and is free to be used by all at will is a legal opinion. Wikipedia cannot assume responsibility for issuing legal opinions. Largoplazo (talk) 23:32, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
See Happy Birthday to You#2013 lawsuit for an example of how entry into the public domain isn't always a cut-and-dried affair. I don't see how we can be in the position of making such a declaration, uncited, for hundreds of works. Largoplazo (talk) 23:47, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
mmm, yes, i have read about the misuse of Synthesis, never realised it would end up spread all over my talk page!Leutha (talk) 01:28, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Are you saying I'm misusing WP:SYNTHESIS? Can you explain what part of my analysis is mistaken as opposed to being spot-on what that guideline is about? Largoplazo (talk) 11:34, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
Well, if you look at Wikipedia:What SYNTH is not you will see 25 possible examples of "What SYNTH is not". I am not saying they all apply, but I think several do. It would also be worthwhile to check Wikipedia:These are not original research, particularly Compiling facts and information for further corroboration. Leutha (talk) 14:54, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
I'm looking at WP:NOTSYNTH and finding that it squares away with my conception of synthesis.
  • The discussion and then the example in the first titled section, WP:NOTSYNTH#SYNTH is not useless, seem squarely to mirror the situation with the public domain lists, conveying the danger of assuming a conclusion can be reached as unambiguously as might appear possible. My view seems to be consistent with the observations made in the rest of the essay, other than the ones that are various imitations of WP:IAR, but I'm ignoring those because I'm assuming this debate won't be decided based on a decision that we simply don't feel like following the guidelines.
  • The section that comes closest to aligning with your view is WP:NOTSYNTH#SYNTH is not important per se, but, whereas it would be astounding to find out that no reliable sources inform us that Paris is the capital of France, I don't find it unimaginable that there are works on the public domain lists that haven't been the target of people waiting around for them to enter the public domain and then announce in reliable sources that that has happened.
The situation is the same with WP:NOTOR.
  • I agree with the premise behind WP:NOTOR#Simple calculations—and I wouldn't have brought all of this up to begin with if it were a matter of simple calculations. However, see my arguments above that these aren't simple calculations, or that it is erroneous to assume that the simple calculation implied by the list of copyright durations is the sum and substance of the matter. That's particularly where the part about these declarations being legal opinions comes in. I gave an example as to how lawyers can get involved in these things. These considerations take this out of the realm of "simple calculations.
  • The same section says 'If the source says that "25% of the objects are foo and 75% are bar", then it is acceptable for you to write "One quarter of objects are foo". "Most objects are bar", however, is much more vague, and not an accurate description of the quantitative relationship.' It even frowns on leaping from 75% to "most"! And that seems, to me at least, a great deal more straightforward than determining when a work has entered the public domain—and the latter conclusion involves taking on a great deal more responsibility than simply paraphrasing 75% as "most".
  • As for WP:NOTOR#Compiling facts and information, the section to which you drew my attention, the second and third bullet points don't apply here, but as for the first: "Organizing published facts and opinions that are based on sources that are directly related to the article topic—without introducing your opinion or fabricating new facts, or presenting an unpublished conclusion—is not original research." But these articles are introducing a possibly unpublished conclusion as to the public domain status of each of the works. That was my very first point.
Largoplazo (talk) 22:19, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks Leutha for messaging me at Commons:User_talk:Bluerasberry#20xx_in_public_domain. We are all talking about articles of the sort in Template:Years in Public Domain. One controversy here is whether or how English Wikipedia should present content which seems like original research from lists. That is an ongoing debate. In the longer term I expect that English Wikipedia will get supplements from Wikidata, but I would not expect that to be common within 5 years.
Something that might be relevant sooner is meta:Structured Data on Commons, a Wikimedia Deutschland and Wikimedia Foundation project to apply structured data to every file on Commons to better interlink it first with Wikidata and next with every other Wikimedia project, including Wikipedias. If this worked, then one of its strengths would be reporting the provenance and term of copyright. Linking to a Commons query on one of this "copyright in (year)" pages would generate both lists of files and also data visualizations noting trends in the content. Supposedly Structured Data on Commons was to be announced last month but there must be a delay. There has already been an import of data from Wikisource into Wikidata and I expect that the metadata from Commons will follow that precedent. Yes, of course Leutha, as you suggested Wikisource had a good idea for sorting metadata in a way that Commons was not practicing, and yes it is good to apply the Wikisource model to Commons. There is hardly documentation of where the ideas originate or go but so far as I know, Wikisource is the origin and testing ground of the idea.
I like these pages and I am trying to organize Commons:Commons:Public Domain Day events around the new media that will become available every year from now on. I know it is problematic to keep "public domain in xxxx" pages on English or any Wikipedia because they are incomplete, procedurally generated, and more subject to biased sources than usual because what journalists report as significant is opinion and typically they can only access poor data. Still, this is what we have now, and publishing anything helps our audience think through the impact of the public domain.
I hope all this helps. There are several big issues tied in this and it is hard to untangle them. Bluerasberry (talk) 15:41, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I certainly support Commons:Commons:Public Domain Day, and although recent personal responsibilities have limited my input to any practical organising this year, I shall mention it at the London meetup tomorrow. I agree that having structured data on Wikidata is the way forward. The contribution I have been making as regards 2019 in public domain is working on s:Author:Claude McKay. A fellow editor set up s:Harlem_Shadows, generating a wiki data item for it. If the copyright info was handled by Wikidata, then the template at the bottom of that page could be automatically generated. But I think this will take some time.Leutha (talk) 10:34, 12 January 2019 (UTC)


Leutha I just saw your note to Bluerasberry on Commons, "... for reasons I am not sure of, a discussion has wound up on my talkpage ...." ??? You reverted my addition of "original research" tags to all those public domain list articles. What is unclear about why I then contacted you about your actions on your talk page? Largoplazo (talk) 17:28, 11 January 2019 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for you interest but I am not sure why you are asking the question. "What is unclear about why I then contacted you about your actions on your talk page?" What I stated was "for reasons I am not sure of, a discussion has wound up on my Wikipedia talkpage concerning the 20xx in public domain." – a very different kettle of fish. Please check the page which resulted from your edit. You will notice that the way the template appears on that is quite different from the way it appears on Template:Original research. The latter includes the sentence "Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page." with talk page being a live link to the talk page. I am unclear why the template does not include this sentence which appears on the template page. I would appreciate any explanation you may have for this, but would suggest that it you make it here.Leutha (talk) 22:18, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Arseny Morozov House

[edit]

Hello, Leutha,

Thanks for creating Arseny Morozov House! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 07:24, 10 January 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:50, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 20 – 31 January 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Everything flows (and certainly data does)

Recently Jimmy Wales has made the point that computer home assistants take much of their data from Wikipedia, one way or another. So as well as getting Spotify to play Frosty the Snowman for you, they may be able to answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" Possibly by asking for disambiguation (Coptic?).

Amazon Echo device using the Amazon Alexa service in voice search showdown with the Google rival on an Android phone

Headlines about data breaches are now familiar, but the unannounced circulation of information raises other issues. One of those is Gresham's law stated as "bad data drives out good". Wikipedia and now Wikidata have been criticised on related grounds: what if their content, unattributed, is taken to have a higher standing than Wikimedians themselves would grant it? See Wikiquote on a misattribution to Bismarck for the usual quip about "law and sausages", and why one shouldn't watch them in the making.

Wikipedia has now turned 18, so should act like as adult, as well as being treated like one. The Web itself turns 30 some time between March and November this year, per Tim Berners-Lee. If the Knowledge Graph by Google exemplifies Heraclitean Web technology gaining authority, contra GIGO, Wikimedians still have a role in its critique. But not just with the teenage skill of detecting phoniness.

There is more to beating Gresham than exposing the factoid and urban myth, where WP:V does do a great job. Placeholders must be detected, and working with Wikidata is a good way to understand how having one statement as data can blind us to replacing it by a more accurate one. An example that is important to open access is that, firstly, the term itself needs considerable unpacking, because just being able to read material online is a poor relation of "open"; and secondly, trying to get Creative Commons license information into Wikidata shows up issues with classes of license (such as CC-BY) standing for the actual license in major repositories. Detailed investigation shows that "everything flows" exacerbates the issue. But Wikidata can solve it.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Edward Furniss

[edit]

Hi Leutha! I am interested in the information you have that Edward Furniss was a passenger aboard Emma in South Australia's "First Fleet". This is interesting, as Barry Leadbeater, who maintains a searchable list for FamiliesSA of early arrivals by ship, has only "before 1847". Is it your intention to create an article on Furniss? Doug butler (talk) 23:02, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

My source is the State Library of South Australia: The Old Colonists Banquet Group: Edward Furniss, so we have a photo of him. Actually you have raised a good point as I made a mistake he arrived on a later trip of the Emma in June 1845. This is confirmed here, albeit with a slightly different spelling. Catherine Helen Spence identifies him as a member of the South Australian Literary Society, which makes him pretty interesting. That is why I feel he is notable.Leutha (talk) 23:28, 7 February 2019 (UTC)
Thanks; have passed your info to Barry L.; Doug butler (talk) 02:20, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Manchester meetup 36 - 9 June 2019

[edit]

As you attended one of the previous two Manchester meetups and/or expressed an interest in being notified about future ones, this is a heads-up that I have started organising a meetup in Manchester on 9 June 2019 - details are at m:Meetup/Manchester/36. Please feel free to invite others with an interest in Wikimedia/Wikipedia to join us. Thryduulf (talk) 23:08, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 32

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 32, January – February 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • New and expanded partners
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:29, 26 February 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 21 – 28 February 2019

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 21 – 28 February 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
What is a systematic review?

Systematic reviews are basic building blocks of evidence-based medicine, surveys of existing literature devoted typically to a definite question that aim to bring out scientific conclusions. They are principled in a way Wikipedians can appreciate, taking a critical view of their sources.

PRISMA flow diagram for a systematic review

Ben Goldacre in 2014 wrote (link below) "[...] : the "information architecture" of evidence based medicine (if you can tolerate such a phrase) is a chaotic, ad hoc, poorly connected ecosystem of legacy projects. In some respects the whole show is still run on paper, like it's the 19th century." Is there a Wikidatan in the house? Wouldn't some machine-readable content that is structured data help?

Most likely it would, but the arcana of systematic reviews and how they add value would still need formal handling. The PRISMA standard dates from 2009, with an update started in 2018. The concerns there include the corpus of papers used: how selected and filtered? Now that Wikidata has a 20.9 million item bibliography, one can at least pose questions. Each systematic review is a tagging opportunity for a bibliography. Could that tagging be reproduced by a query, in principle? Can it even be second-guessed by a query (i.e. simulated by a protocol which translates into SPARQL)? Homing in on the arcana, do the inclusion and filtering criteria translate into metadata? At some level they must, but are these metadata explicitly expressed in the articles themselves? The answer to that is surely "no" at this point, but can TDM find them? Again "no", right now. Automatic identification doesn't just happen.

Actually these questions lack originality. It should be noted though that WP:MEDRS, the reliable sources guideline used here for health information, hinges on the assumption that the usefully systematic reviews of biomedical literature can be recognised. Its nutshell summary, normally the part of a guideline with the highest density of common sense, allows literature reviews in general validity, but WP:MEDASSESS qualifies that indication heavily. Process wonkery about systematic reviews definitely has merit.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:02, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:16, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Template:Local Planning Authority

[edit]

A tag has been placed on Template:Local Planning Authority requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion because it is an unused duplicate of another template, or a hard-coded instance of another template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is not actually the same as the other template noted, please consider putting a note on the template's page explaining how this one is different so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{substituted}}</noinclude>).

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Zackmann (Talk to me/What I been doing) 21:28, 19 March 2019 (UTC)

Anarchism

[edit]

Hi Leutha,

I saw your work on articles related to anarchism and wanted to say hello, as I work in the topic area too. If you haven't already, you might want to watch our noticeboard for Wikipedia's coverage of anarchism, which is a great place to ask questions, collaborate, discuss style/structure precedent, and stay informed about content related to anarchism. Take a look for yourself!

And if you're looking for other juicy places to edit, consider expanding a stub, adopting a cleanup category, or participating in one of our current formal discussions.

Feel free to say hi on my talk page and let me know if these links were helpful (or at least interesting). Hope to see you around. czar 11:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

thanks. Leutha (talk) 13:16, 23 March 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 22 – 28 March 2019

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 22 – 28 March 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
When in the cloud, do as the APIs do

Half a century ago, it was the era of the mainframe computer, with its air-conditioned room, twitching tape-drives, and appearance in the title of a spy novel Billion-Dollar Brain then made into a Hollywood film. Now we have the cloud, with server farms and the client–server model as quotidian: this text is being typed on a Chromebook.

The term Applications Programming Interface or API is 50 years old, and refers to a type of software library as well as the interface to its use. While a compiler is what you need to get high-level code executed by a mainframe, an API out in the cloud somewhere offers a chance to perform operations on a remote server. For example, the multifarious bots active on Wikipedia have owners who exploit the MediaWiki API.

APIs (called RESTful) that allow for the GET HTTP request are fundamental for what could colloquially be called "moving data around the Web"; from which Wikidata benefits 24/7. So the fact that the Wikidata SPARQL endpoint at query.wikidata.org has a RESTful API means that, in lay terms, Wikidata content can be GOT from it. The programming involved, besides the SPARQL language, could be in Python, younger by a few months than the Web.

Magic words, such as occur in fantasy stories, are wishful (rather than RESTful) solutions to gaining access. You may need to be a linguist to enter Ali Baba's cave or the western door of Moria (French in the case of "Open Sesame", in fact, and Sindarin being the respective languages). Talking to an API requires a bigger toolkit, which first means you have to recognise the tools in terms of what they can do. On the way to the wikt:impactful or polymathic modern handling of facts, one must perhaps take only tactful notice of tech's endemic problem with documentation, and absorb the insightful point that the code in APIs does articulate the customary procedures now in place on the cloud for getting information. As Owl explained to Winnie-the-Pooh, it tells you The Thing to Do.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:45, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

Ludwig Baehr moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Ludwig Baehr, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. The Duke 16:25, 30 March 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 March 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2019 (UTC)

Forgot Goebbles and Hitler

[edit]

The "Cult of Personality" article seems to completely ignore the originality of Joseph Goebbels and his "ilk" proselytizing the status of Adolf Hitler........ some twenty years befoe that of Josef Stalin, (as mentioned in the article)' Perhaps I missed something, or the article isn't finished. ````4/01/19 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4markbg (talk • contribs) 15:26, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Frederick Wendel moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Frederick Wendel, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page or move it yourself. SSSB (talk) 12:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 23 – 30 April 2019

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 23 – 30 April 2019
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Completely clouded?
Cloud computing logo

Talk of cloud computing draws a veil over hardware, but also, less obviously but more importantly, obscures such intellectual distinction as matters most in its use. Wikidata begins to allow tasks to be undertaken that were out of easy reach. The facility should not be taken as the real point.

Coming in from another angle, the "executive decision" is more glamorous; but the "administrative decision" should be admired for its command of facts. Think of the attitudes ad fontes, so prevalent here on Wikipedia as "can you give me a source for that?", and being prepared to deal with complicated analyses into specified subcases. Impatience expressed as a disdain for such pedantry is quite understandable, but neither dirty data nor false dichotomies are at all good to have around.

Issue 13 and Issue 21, respectively on WP:MEDRS and systematic reviews, talk about biomedical literature and computing tasks that would be of higher quality if they could be made more "administrative". For example, it is desirable that the decisions involved be consistent, explicable, and reproducible by non-experts from specified inputs.

What gets clouded out is not impossibly hard to understand. You do need to put together the insights of functional programming, which is a doctrinaire and purist but clearcut approach, with the practicality of office software. Loopless computation can be conceived of as a seamless forward march of spreadsheet columns, each determined by the content of previous ones. Very well: to do a backward audit, when now we are talking about Wikidata, we rely on integrity of data and its scrupulous sourcing: and clearcut case analyses. The MEDRS example forces attention on purge attempts such as Beall's list.

Links
If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:27, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019

[edit]
Facto Post – Issue 24 – 17 May 2019
Text mining display of noun phrases from the US Presidential Election 2012
The Editor is Charles Matthews, for ContentMine. Please leave feedback for him, on his User talk page.
To subscribe to Facto Post go to Wikipedia:Facto Post mailing list. For the ways to unsubscribe, see the footer.
Back numbers are here.
Semantic Web and TDM – a ContentMine view

Two dozen issues, and this may be the last, a valediction at least for a while.

It's time for a two-year summation of ContentMine projects involving TDM (text and data mining).

Wikidata and now Structured Data on Commons represent the overlap of Wikimedia with the Semantic Web. This common ground is helping to convert an engineering concept into a movement. TDM generally has little enough connection with the Semantic Web, being instead in the orbit of machine learning which is no respecter of the semantic. Don't break a taboo by asking bots "and what do you mean by that?"

The ScienceSource project innovates in TDM, by storing its text mining results in a Wikibase site. It strives for compliance of its fact mining, on drug treatments of diseases, with an automated form of the relevant Wikipedia referencing guideline MEDRS. Where WikiFactMine set up an API for reuse of its results, ScienceSource has a SPARQL query service, with look-and-feel exactly that of Wikidata's at query.wikidata.org. It also now has a custom front end, and its content can be federated, in other words used in data mashups: it is one of over 50 sites that can federate with Wikidata.

The human factor comes to bear through the front end, which combines a link to the HTML version of a paper, text mining results organised in drug and disease columns, and a SPARQL display of nearby drug and disease terms. Much software to develop and explain, so little time! Rather than telling the tale, Facto Post brings you ScienceSource links, starting from the how-to video, lower right.

ScienceSourceReview, introductory video: but you need run it from the original upload file on Commons
Links for participation

The review tool requires a log in on sciencesource.wmflabs.org, and an OAuth permission (bottom of a review page) to operate. It can be used in simple and more advanced workflows. Examples of queries for the latter are at d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource project/Queries#SS_disease_list and d:Wikidata_talk:ScienceSource_project/Queries#NDF-RT issue.

Please be aware that this is a research project in development, and may have outages for planned maintenance. That will apply for the next few days, at least. The ScienceSource wiki main page carries information on practical matters. Email is not enabled on the wiki: use site mail here to Charles Matthews in case of difficulty, or if you need support. Further explanatory videos will be put into commons:Category:ContentMine videos.

If you wish to receive no further issues of Facto Post, please remove your name from our mailing list. Alternatively, to opt out of all massmessage mailings, you may add Category:Wikipedians who opt out of message delivery to your user talk page.
Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes, Issue 33

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 33, March – April 2019

  • #1Lib1Ref
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:41, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

Council of People's Commissars of Belarus moved to draftspace

[edit]

An article you recently created, Council of People's Commissars of Belarus, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Jalen D. Folf (talk) 03:56, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Ways to improve Third All-Russian Congress of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants Deputies' Soviets

[edit]

Hello, Leutha,

Thanks for creating Third All-Russian Congress of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants Deputies' Soviets! I edit here too, under the username Boleyn and it's nice to meet you :-)

I wanted to let you know that I have tagged the page as having some issues to fix, as a part of our page curation process and note that:-

Please add your references.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Boleyn}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . For broader editing help, please visit the Teahouse.

Delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

Boleyn (talk) 20:11, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 May 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:11, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Jamaica

[edit]

Philafrenzy (talk) 19:23, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

The June 2019 Signpost is out!

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes Issue 34, May – June 2019

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 34, May – June 2019

  • Partnerships
  • #1Lib1Ref
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • Global branches update
  • Bytes in brief

French version of Books & Bytes is now available on meta!
Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:17, 31 July 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 August 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:41, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Hans Hauck

[edit]

Hi, can you check recent deletion from the above article? the edit was made by someone who seems to have an obsession with Hans Hauck and has made deletions to List of Nazis of non-Germanic descent‎ in connection with this person. Many thanks Denisarona (talk) 11:11, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 35, July – August 2019

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 35, July – August 2019

  • Wikimania
  • We're building something great, but..
  • Wikimedia and Libraries User Group update
  • A Wikibrarian's story
  • Bytes in brief

Read the full newsletter

On behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:58, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!

[edit]

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

AfroCine: Join the Months of African Cinema this October!

[edit]

Greetings!

After a successful first iteration of the “Months of African Cinema” last year, we are happy to announce that it will be happening again this year, starting from October 1! In the 2018 edition of the contest, about 600 Wikipedia articles were created in at least 8 languages. There were also contributions to Wikidata and Wikimedia commons, which brought the total number of wikimedia pages created during the contest to over 1,000.

The AfroCine Project welcomes you to October, the first out of the two months which have been dedicated to creating and improving content that centre around the cinema of Africa, the Caribbean, and the diaspora. Join us in this global edit-a-thon, by helping to create or expand articles which are connected to this scope. Also remember to list your name under the participants section.

On English Wikipedia, we would be recognizing participants in the following manner:

  • Overall winner (1st, 2nd, 3rd places)
  • Diversity winner
  • Gender-gap fillers

For further information about the contest, the recognition categories and how to participate, please visit the contest page here. For further inquiries, please leave comments on the contest talkpage or on the main project talkpage. See you around :).--Jamie Tubers (talk) 00:50, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 September 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)

Nomination of Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail – Duisburg: Town and Harbour for deletion

[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail – Duisburg: Town and Harbour is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruhr Industrial Heritage Trail – Duisburg: Town and Harbour 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.

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. Largoplazo (talk) 11:36, 28 October 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 October 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:12, 31 October 2019 (UTC)

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

[edit]
Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. 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 site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Books & Bytes – Issue 36

[edit]

The Wikipedia Library

Books & Bytes
Issue 36, September – October 2019

Read the full newsletter

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team --MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:21, 21 November 2019 (UTC)

Google Code-In 2019 is coming - please mentor some documentation tasks!

[edit]

Hello,

Google Code-In, Google-organized contest in which the Wikimedia Foundation participates, starts in a few weeks. This contest is about taking high school students into the world of opensource. I'm sending you this message because you recently edited a documentation page at the English Wikipedia.

I would like to ask you to take part in Google Code-In as a mentor. That would mean to prepare at least one task (it can be documentation related, or something else - the other categories are Code, Design, Quality Assurance and Outreach) for the participants, and help the student to complete it. Please sign up at the contest page and send us your Google account address to google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org, so we can invite you in!

From my own experience, Google Code-In can be fun, you can make several new friends, attract new people to your wiki and make them part of your community.

If you have any questions, please let us know at google-code-in-admins@lists.wikimedia.org.

Thank you!

--User:Martin Urbanec (talk) 21:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2019

[edit]
* Read this Signpost in full * Single-page * Unsubscribe * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:24, 29 November 2019 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Henry Lyell

[edit]
Notice

The article Henry Lyell has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No evidence of any notability. Existed, but why should we be interested?

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. PamD 15:03, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

  • Please remember not to hit "Publish" in mainspace until you have added enough content to show why the topic is notable. Alternatively, create the article in your sandbox and move to mainspace when ready. Or add {{under construction}} while you work on it. At the point where I PRODded it after stub-sorting, it read like a family history listing, with no assertion of notability. I almost put it up for CSD A7 as having no assertion of significance. I agree with the dePROD, seeing the added content, but next time please save us the bother. Thanks. PamD 17:15, 26 December 2019 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Leutha/Archive_12_(December_2018)&oldid=1145685672"