User talk:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE)
Welcome
Welcome to English Wikipedia. I asked a question at WP:VPM. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 20:42, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
Courtesy note re: citations on WikiData
Hi Lydia. Thanks for all your work on the WikiData project. There's a discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Migrating references to WikiData about moving citations to WikiData. I used a quote from you in the Alternative proposal subsection and thought it would be courteous to let you know about it. Kind regards. 64.40.54.208 (talk) 05:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
- Thank you for letting me know! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Denny in Seattle
Re Wikipedia_talk:Meetup/Seattle#Interest_in_talking_about_Wikidata.3F: I'm interested. If nothing else comes together, I'll gladly take him out for coffee or a drink & a chance to talk. I can arrange to be free most weekday evenings or, if that doesn't work, we can see what does. - Jmabel | Talk 00:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
- Cool. I'll send you an email for further coordination. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:41, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Lydia
i wonder if you might take a look and comment on an idea I've put together here: Wikipedia_talk:Category_intersection#A_working_category_intersection_today. This is a reaction to the nasty mess we got in in the media as a result of gendered-categories that were supposed to be non-diffusing but weren't. I'd like to see what we could get done quickly, and how doing something like that might eventually help feed into a wikidata-like solution. Anyway, please take a look and send your comments there. best, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 03:47, 5 May 2013 (UTC)
- Hey :)
- I unfortunately don't really have any comments on that besides that we very briefly talked with Erik Moeller about categories and Wikidata a while ago. The only presentable outcome so far is a sentence here though. So I'd say it is on the plan but not for the next weeks. Hope that helps. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:25, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. With a few tweaks to the approach I've proposed above, some templates, a few bots, and moving the catscan tool over to wikipedia labs, I do think it would be possible to de-ghettoize most of the tree without a massive amount of work - and then when the whole wikidata thing becomes a reality, we'd be in a better position. Check out Category:Singaporean poets for a more refined example than the one I had the other day. In any case, today, in spite of all of the hoopla over the Category:American novelists category, people remain ghettoized by gender, ethnicity, and so on throughout the tree - so quick action might help here. Any possibility of having a few devs chat with me to discuss whether it would be possible to do something quickly, not w.r.t. categories in general, but esp w.r.t gender/ethnic/religious/sexuality categories - which as I said above, currently serve to ghettoize (intentionally or not) tens of thousands of bios. A new op-ed could be written tomorrow about how we ghettoize Indian women novelists or African-American journalists or gay actors or many other things besides, so wikipedia is still completely exposed to the critiques leveled at it in recent days - fixing American novelists was just the tip of the iceberg. Cheers! --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- For this I think the best way would be an email to the wikitech-l mailing list. Good luck! Thanks for pushing this. It's important. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ok - I haven't used that list before - who are the members of it? I guess I'm not sure who I'd be talking to there - but to broader point, if we do come up with what seems like a workable solution and there seems to be editor consensus around it, can WMF throw some short-term dev resources at this issue (since bots may need to be written, cat_scan UI refreshed, etc)? Just to emphasize - more NY times articles could be written today, and tomorrow, and the next day - we're not out of the woods yet, and yet we don't even have a broad wiki-wide consensus to start de-ghettoizing at scale. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- It's the list MediaWiki developers use for coordination. I can't say if the Foundation will spend money on something or not. I have no say in that :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Lydia. I'm not really looking for a final answer, but more a pathway. If you think the best pathway is to go to the devs, I'm fine with that, but part of me thinks this should be escalated - e.g. have some top-level WMF people say "Ok, let's fix this ghettoization problem within a month - wikidata is the long term fix, but this particular fix can be implemented at relatively low cost (most of the work can be done by regular editors, and other bits by bots, and doesn't require any changes to mediawiki itself), so let's throw some resources at it" - how could I get this idea in front of those decision-makers? Thanks again, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:45, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- I would use the same list. The relevant people should be reading it. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks Lydia. I'm not really looking for a final answer, but more a pathway. If you think the best pathway is to go to the devs, I'm fine with that, but part of me thinks this should be escalated - e.g. have some top-level WMF people say "Ok, let's fix this ghettoization problem within a month - wikidata is the long term fix, but this particular fix can be implemented at relatively low cost (most of the work can be done by regular editors, and other bits by bots, and doesn't require any changes to mediawiki itself), so let's throw some resources at it" - how could I get this idea in front of those decision-makers? Thanks again, --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 13:45, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- It's the list MediaWiki developers use for coordination. I can't say if the Foundation will spend money on something or not. I have no say in that :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
- Ok - I haven't used that list before - who are the members of it? I guess I'm not sure who I'd be talking to there - but to broader point, if we do come up with what seems like a workable solution and there seems to be editor consensus around it, can WMF throw some short-term dev resources at this issue (since bots may need to be written, cat_scan UI refreshed, etc)? Just to emphasize - more NY times articles could be written today, and tomorrow, and the next day - we're not out of the woods yet, and yet we don't even have a broad wiki-wide consensus to start de-ghettoizing at scale. --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- For this I think the best way would be an email to the wikitech-l mailing list. Good luck! Thanks for pushing this. It's important. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
- Thanks for your response. With a few tweaks to the approach I've proposed above, some templates, a few bots, and moving the catscan tool over to wikipedia labs, I do think it would be possible to de-ghettoize most of the tree without a massive amount of work - and then when the whole wikidata thing becomes a reality, we'd be in a better position. Check out Category:Singaporean poets for a more refined example than the one I had the other day. In any case, today, in spite of all of the hoopla over the Category:American novelists category, people remain ghettoized by gender, ethnicity, and so on throughout the tree - so quick action might help here. Any possibility of having a few devs chat with me to discuss whether it would be possible to do something quickly, not w.r.t. categories in general, but esp w.r.t gender/ethnic/religious/sexuality categories - which as I said above, currently serve to ghettoize (intentionally or not) tens of thousands of bios. A new op-ed could be written tomorrow about how we ghettoize Indian women novelists or African-American journalists or gay actors or many other things besides, so wikipedia is still completely exposed to the critiques leveled at it in recent days - fixing American novelists was just the tip of the iceberg. Cheers! --Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 15:32, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
