[OSM-talk] Could we just pause any wikidata edits for a month or two?

[Ryszard Mikke]

On 23 October 2017 at 07:17, Tomas Straupis <tomasstraupis at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2017-10-22 23:20 GMT+03:00 Ryszard Mikke wrote:
> > So, to sum up:
> > 1) There was a link to disambiguation page that no one has corrected
> until
> > it was detected by Yuri's tool.
>
>   There was a link to disambiguation page which was detected using
> other tool which is not using wikidata.


Could you point me to that tool?


> That other tool gives more
> than 2500(!) items to fix in osm/wikipedia (Lithuania only). So there
> is enough work to be done until this particular problem is fixed. It
> could take two weeks, it could also take two years.
>

That's exactly my point. I mean, that's why I think it's a good idea to
automate the process as much as possible. Even in cases requiring human
attention it is possible to make it easier if a QA tool gives links needed
to decide what is correct.


> > 2) User kartonage has wrongly linked "Žagarės I piliakalnis" to "Žagarės
> II
> > piliakalnis" in Wikipedia.
> > 3) You have reverted it back to disambiguation link and no wikidata=* tag
> > even though there is an established ground truth in the form of big
> > information tables in front of each of those hillforts with names
> "Žagarės
> > piliakalnis I" and "Žagarės piliakalnis II" in big letters.
>
>   It's not only names, but codes and some other details. Wikipedia
> page content is probably mixed or swaped (haven't done analysis yet).
>

That seems like a problem to fix in Wikipedia and one may assume in good
faith that when it's solved, everything about hillfort I will be in article
about hillfort I and analogically for hillfort II. And hillfort I will be
the one marked as such on the ground, as it is easier to fix Wikipedia,
than go and change information on tables in front of the object. So, I
would go and linked hillfort I in OSM with hillfort I in Wikipedia and
waited until Wikipedia guys fix in Wikipedia, what needs to be fixed. In
fact, I have done so, but then I thought again and reverted it. It's your
decision.


>   And people were asked NOT to do automatic changes without local
> knowledge.
>

How were the people asked? I can only see very short note in Lithuanian. I
can' understand it, but it doesn't seem like "do not touch" request...

My advice would be to put some note in English. If you really think it's
needed - see above.

You can also opt out from my script now by just adding "nowikidata=yes".

> Yet you think that wikidata=* tag is the problem here?
>
>   It would not have been a problem if Yuri would not have created a
> tool which attracts people and fools them into believing such things
> could be fixed automatically.
>

I still think that correct linking to wikipedia is a good idea in this
case. For the reasons above.

  I can give another real world example where wikidata usage WOULD be a
> problem:
>
>   Say we have a church named "St. Brewers church". It has an object in
> OSM with corresponding name tag, a link to wikipedia page "St. Brewers
> church" and wikidata ref 12345.
>
>   Now this church is upgraded to basilica: it's name (in the real
> world) changes to "St. Brewers basilica".
>
>   OSMers do not notice this change (name tag is not changed),
> wikipedians do (wikipedia page title is renamed, leaving old 'church'
> page as a redirect only).
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikipedia link, it finds that "St.
> Brewers church" does not exist anymore (redirect pages do not get into
> geotagged dumps). As soon as I try going to that page I'm redirected
> to "...basilica" page. Now I know that a name has changed and I change
> it in name and name:xx tags in OSM.
>
>   If we use QA tool based on wikidata, it will find NOTHING wrong
> here. wikidata 12345 will be pointing to "St. Brewers basilica" page.
> Nothing wrong. No noticing of a change of name. Which leaves OSM with
> outdated name and no way to notice (names in wikipedia and OSM do not
> always match, comparing wikidata and OSM name is not always possible,
> we need to find the fact of CHANGE of wikipedia article name).
>

On the contrary, AFAIK redirection pages don't have wikidata item, so the
wikidata-based tool would detect them. It is even possible to automatically
detect such cases (i.e. Wikidata article's title has changed, and there is
a redirect under old title) and correct wikipedia link in OSM to the new
title in Wikipedia. It would leave the name, but hey, it's easier to detect
name change manually if there is an obvious difference between name=* and
wikipedia=* tags, than to compare wikipedia=* tag with the current
Wikipedia article.

BTW such automatic correction is also possible even if the redirect would
have it's own wikidata item, or if there is no redirection at all.

And now, think: how the existence of wikidata-based QA tool would stop
wikipedia-based tool from detecting the error?
-- 
--
http://tnij.com/WyszukiwarkaRowerowa     http://jolanta.korwin-mikke.pl/
R.Mikke at pl.vwfsag.de        Ryszard.Mikke at gmail.com

دراجة أكبر
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20171023/b0c3a80c/attachment-0001.html>