[OSM-talk] Links from wiki* back into OSM

Marc Gemis marc.gemis at gmail.com
Thu Sep 28 10:03:00 UTC 2017


Thanks for explaining, Andy.

Please note that as I said before, it is not true that there is a
Wikipedia article for each Wikidata item. E.g.  There is a whole group
 working on inventarising art in musea. They do create Wikidata items,
but no Wikipedia articles for the individual items. It is true that
each Wikipedia article (or page) has a Wikidata entry, but not the
other way around.

regards

m

On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 11:55 AM, Andy Townsend <ajt1047 at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 28/09/2017 10:36, Marc Gemis wrote:
>>
>> Andy are you now saying that it is OK to have 1 wikidata tag on each
>> street, so someone can create an external list of streets with
>> Wikidata ids to represent some kind of collection (like "all streets
>> named after Leuven") ?
>
> Firstly I'm not saying "what is or is not OK" - that's essentially the point
> of this discussion, to find out what people do think.
>
> What I'm saying is that the expression of that sort of relationship possibly
> doesn't belong in OSM itself (because it's not really on-the-ground
> verifiable, or at least in many cases it won't be).
>
> If a street passed whatever tests wikipedia impose to have a wikipedia
> entry, and by inference a wikidata one (wikidata items essentially being all
> created from wikipedia, with links added later) then yes, by all means add a
> wikipedia/wikidata link to the OSM object, then add your "etymology" link
> within wikidata.
>
> Obviously wikipedia/wikidata's rules for inclusion are very different to
> ours (in some cases the opposite - wikipedia says "no original research -
> please copy from some other source").  There are plenty of examples of
> things that people think should be in wikipedia and aren't, and also things
> that shouldn't be in wikipedia/wikidata (because they don't exist) and are.
>
> Best Regards,
> Andy
>



More information about the talk mailing list