User talk:Medievalfran
Welcome to Wikidata, Medievalfran!
Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:
- Introduction – An introduction to the project.
- Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
- Community portal – The portal for community members.
- User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
- Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
- Project chat – Discussions about the project.
- Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.
Best regards! --Epìdosis 14:33, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Avebury museum ID proposal
[edit]Hi I read your ID proposal Wikidata:Property proposal/Alexander Keiller Museum ID, but only because someone watching that queue sent a ping out to members of the WikiProject Museums. Since you skipped the step of creating an item for your museum, I am amazed at your bold move to propose a property for it. I don't quite understand your project or your plan, but if you have parked it somewhere on Commons or Wikipedia I will read it over. I am a fan of Digging for Britain and am generally sympathetic to archeological museums, but often their artefacts don't meet our notability criteria. The people may do however, if they were connected to a university, or the museum itself. I suggest working on a Wikipedia article for the museum separate for the paragraph on the Alexander Keiller page so Wikidatans can get up to speed on the museum itself. As a general rule, if museums have property IDs for both people and artefacts, these tend to be split into two properties. If the number of artefacts or people is less than a hundred, you can probably get whatever you want done easier with a small WikiProject. Jane023 (talk) 10:54, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @ Jane023:! Thanks so much for your message, I really appreciate it! I did try and 'ping' the projects, but my wiki code failed me and I noted on the project talk pages instead. Haven't quite worked out where is best to ask for help yet!
I'm not sure what you mean by the AKM not having an item, it's at Q26647600. If you mean a Wikipedia page, then, you are absolutely right that the info is currently across the article for Alexander Keiller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Keiller_(archaeologist); and also for Avebury https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avebury#Alexander_Keiller_Museum. Do you mean that I should go ahead and create a page for it?
I don't work for the museum, however I'm doing a research project to digitise the collection and link with other collections with relevant materials (archival objects and 'people', as many folks involved in excavating Avebury in the 1930s are 'big in archaeology' for the 20th century). I'm also planning to make an item for each of the Stones at Avebury, which are numbered and each have specific histories/ objects associated with them. You are right that there are (at least 2) systems in place for UIDs at the Museum, with a number string used for objects, and AKM_PID_0001 etc used for the people linked to the collection.
The number of Wikidata items planned are 150 people, approx 50 objects (highlights of the collection which we will be uploading to Wikicommons); and 6 of the most 'important' stones within the monument (which have names, and are associated with excavated objects).
In any case, all is to say, I'm very happy to share more info -- if you have suggestions about best place / way to do so (and consolidate and add to the info outlined above) then I am all ears!! Thank you so much! Medievalfran (talk) 15:52, 25 October 2024 (UTC)
- Like I said, making a project page may help to organize your thoughts and ideas. For example, your proposal does not link out of Wikidata anywhere, so how this serves Linked Open Data is unclear. One of your items that you want the property for only has 3 statements, which is hardly enough to prove its worth to Wikidata or to Wikimedia projects in general. You say it's part of the NT collections, but this object on their website seems to have more information about a 1934 archive of a west Kennet avenue dig here. Perhaps it would help if you explain what the difference is between your items and NT objects. Jane023 (talk) 14:22, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time for further questions, @ Jane023:. So, the object that you linked to in the NT collections online is one of the items that I'm working with - indeed it's a great example as this will be an item that I'm hoping to create on here, to link with digitised images from the same. We're in the progress of enriching this data and updating the website there, and will also be releasing the object metadata 'raw' (as spreadsheets) via the Archaeology Data Service next summer. So, there isn't any difference between 'my items' and NT items - I am working with the NT to improve data about their collection. Does that answer your question? If Wikidata isn't the right place for this, I'm happy to learn more! Medievalfran (talk) 14:19, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for creating Wikidata:WikiProject AveburyPapers. Good to know I was on the right track about the example item Diary of West Kennet Avenue excavations 1934 (Q130611129). Here's the proposal for the Wikidata:Property proposal/National Trust Collections ID which is currently in use on over 12,000 items (mostly paintings probably). If you compare your proposal with this one, you will notice that the examples link out to the National Trust website for the objects. The proposal was made because it seemed like a good way to have items link out to NT info. Wikidata items act as a hub for external information and Wikidata ID properties are used on the item to link out to other websites. Your proposal does not link out anywhere. That's a problem for the property proposal, but isn't a problem if you want your items to link some other place, like the NT website or other archival and other organizations. Wikidata WikiProjects are meant to help organize work on Wikidata, whether you are working on your own or in a group. It's a way to describe what you are doing. I created this one as a way for me to keep track of all the properties and data modelling decisions I needed for art provenance: Wikidata:WikiProject Provenance. You need to find a way to model the items you are interested in. So e.g. for "excavated by" you could probably use some combination of significant event (P793) for digs on items which use the properties discoverer or inventor (P61) and location of discovery (P189) and time of discovery or invention (P575). Jane023 (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for further info, @ Jane023:. I've popped this as a comment on the property proposal, but I'll reiterate it here. To be clear, this property is different to National Trust Collections ID Property:P4373, because of the idosyncratic way in which the Alexander Keiller Museum collection has been created (drawing together items from the Alexander Keiller Museum at Charles Street in the 1930s, with material on long term loan from English Heritage and Historic England, and UIDs used for individuals which are not standardised to National Trust IDs). To put simply: the Alexander Keiller Museum makes use of National Trust IDs for SOME of its items, but not all of them. The project that I am working on has created IDs for new material which MAY OR MAY NOT be adopted by the NT in the future, but will link out to DOIs held by the Archaeology Data Service, who will be hosting the updated databases (long before the NT update theirs). Perhaps it is a case of waiting until information is on ADS, but I wanted to get ahead of myself and add items before that point. I'm therefore still requesting the new property. Do let me know what you think! Medievalfran (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I understand that you want a property that doesn't link anywhere for use specifically for your project. I have understood this from the first time I read the proposal. The problem is you won't attract the votes you need unless you can make a case for the value added for Wikidata users in general, e.g. by improving information about the items you want to use it for. If you are just going to use it for queries about your project, then you can better use the property on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) until you have somewhere to link to per item. Until then you can use your project page to keep track of items, the other properties you want to use and any item queries you need for project tracking. Jane023 (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @ Jane023:. I wonder where I am going wrong in clarifying the project -- as the reason for venturing into Wikidata is precisely to connect items from the collection with other items. There are internal finding aids which are in the process of being uploaded to a stable online environment (the archaeology data service), and its this information which we are improving as part of the project. I plan to make sure that items we create are also used to improve existing wikidata items. For me, as well as enabling the project team to create visualisations/ lists, this was a straightforward case of doing ground work to help folks search Avebury related items that are held across collections, and to connect 'people' who are represented in the collection to any existing UIDs, and create new IDs for folks who we know occur in other collections too but are not yet on Wiki. Medievalfran (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well I guess it's just a problem of miscommunication. Have you been to any in-person meetups with other Wikimedians (or preferably Wikidatans)? Maybe a short youtube presentation? It's hard for me to explain why starting a project with a property proposal is a bad idea, but the most obvious reason is because people look at the proposal lists and vote yes or no on property proposals because they see a use for them right now, and not in some unspecified future. It's fine to create items for important finds at Avebury and link them to existing items for people, museums, places, etc, but as I am sure your have noticed, the whole subject of archaeology is not well modelled on Wikidata and we don't have many collection items yet except for historical highlights in museum collections (like the ones in "A History of the World in 100 Objects"). So a little data modelling is needed to indicate how such items will be described and which properties will be used. Three or four statements per items is just not going to cut the mustard. Jane023 (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Jane023:! I think I can see a way to work for now without the property, and yes perhaps it will emerge as useful in the future. I have spoken to a few wikidatans off wiki about this and proposing the property was suggested... but I'm really happy to get started without and build up as more info emerges. You're totally right the area of archaeology needs some modelling. I proposed the property 'excavated by' some months ago but that didn't go anywhere... might be worth a revisit! Would love to be in touch to chat more if this is something you're working on too. Medievalfran (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah can be a bit depressing to start on a project on Wikidata if you lack community, but I believe the line delivered by Kevin Costner: "If you build it, they will come". I certainly support archaeology on Wikidata, but if I had to choose the best use of my time, I would probably start with adding all the digs by coordinates per county, country, etc. Good luck to you, and remember the best way to learn about data modelling is to start by looking at featured items in the realm of knowledge you are interested in. I learned how to write Wikipedia stubs by copy/pasting templates and formatting from existing ones. Wikidata editing is quite similar. Good luck! Jane023 (talk) 08:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, @Jane023:, really helpful to talk through options for modelling with you. I really appreciate your time! Medievalfran (talk) 14:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah can be a bit depressing to start on a project on Wikidata if you lack community, but I believe the line delivered by Kevin Costner: "If you build it, they will come". I certainly support archaeology on Wikidata, but if I had to choose the best use of my time, I would probably start with adding all the digs by coordinates per county, country, etc. Good luck to you, and remember the best way to learn about data modelling is to start by looking at featured items in the realm of knowledge you are interested in. I learned how to write Wikipedia stubs by copy/pasting templates and formatting from existing ones. Wikidata editing is quite similar. Good luck! Jane023 (talk) 08:50, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Jane023:! I think I can see a way to work for now without the property, and yes perhaps it will emerge as useful in the future. I have spoken to a few wikidatans off wiki about this and proposing the property was suggested... but I'm really happy to get started without and build up as more info emerges. You're totally right the area of archaeology needs some modelling. I proposed the property 'excavated by' some months ago but that didn't go anywhere... might be worth a revisit! Would love to be in touch to chat more if this is something you're working on too. Medievalfran (talk) 14:58, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
- Well I guess it's just a problem of miscommunication. Have you been to any in-person meetups with other Wikimedians (or preferably Wikidatans)? Maybe a short youtube presentation? It's hard for me to explain why starting a project with a property proposal is a bad idea, but the most obvious reason is because people look at the proposal lists and vote yes or no on property proposals because they see a use for them right now, and not in some unspecified future. It's fine to create items for important finds at Avebury and link them to existing items for people, museums, places, etc, but as I am sure your have noticed, the whole subject of archaeology is not well modelled on Wikidata and we don't have many collection items yet except for historical highlights in museum collections (like the ones in "A History of the World in 100 Objects"). So a little data modelling is needed to indicate how such items will be described and which properties will be used. Three or four statements per items is just not going to cut the mustard. Jane023 (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @ Jane023:. I wonder where I am going wrong in clarifying the project -- as the reason for venturing into Wikidata is precisely to connect items from the collection with other items. There are internal finding aids which are in the process of being uploaded to a stable online environment (the archaeology data service), and its this information which we are improving as part of the project. I plan to make sure that items we create are also used to improve existing wikidata items. For me, as well as enabling the project team to create visualisations/ lists, this was a straightforward case of doing ground work to help folks search Avebury related items that are held across collections, and to connect 'people' who are represented in the collection to any existing UIDs, and create new IDs for folks who we know occur in other collections too but are not yet on Wiki. Medievalfran (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
- Yes I understand that you want a property that doesn't link anywhere for use specifically for your project. I have understood this from the first time I read the proposal. The problem is you won't attract the votes you need unless you can make a case for the value added for Wikidata users in general, e.g. by improving information about the items you want to use it for. If you are just going to use it for queries about your project, then you can better use the property on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) until you have somewhere to link to per item. Until then you can use your project page to keep track of items, the other properties you want to use and any item queries you need for project tracking. Jane023 (talk) 20:07, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for further info, @ Jane023:. I've popped this as a comment on the property proposal, but I'll reiterate it here. To be clear, this property is different to National Trust Collections ID Property:P4373, because of the idosyncratic way in which the Alexander Keiller Museum collection has been created (drawing together items from the Alexander Keiller Museum at Charles Street in the 1930s, with material on long term loan from English Heritage and Historic England, and UIDs used for individuals which are not standardised to National Trust IDs). To put simply: the Alexander Keiller Museum makes use of National Trust IDs for SOME of its items, but not all of them. The project that I am working on has created IDs for new material which MAY OR MAY NOT be adopted by the NT in the future, but will link out to DOIs held by the Archaeology Data Service, who will be hosting the updated databases (long before the NT update theirs). Perhaps it is a case of waiting until information is on ADS, but I wanted to get ahead of myself and add items before that point. I'm therefore still requesting the new property. Do let me know what you think! Medievalfran (talk) 18:33, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for creating Wikidata:WikiProject AveburyPapers. Good to know I was on the right track about the example item Diary of West Kennet Avenue excavations 1934 (Q130611129). Here's the proposal for the Wikidata:Property proposal/National Trust Collections ID which is currently in use on over 12,000 items (mostly paintings probably). If you compare your proposal with this one, you will notice that the examples link out to the National Trust website for the objects. The proposal was made because it seemed like a good way to have items link out to NT info. Wikidata items act as a hub for external information and Wikidata ID properties are used on the item to link out to other websites. Your proposal does not link out anywhere. That's a problem for the property proposal, but isn't a problem if you want your items to link some other place, like the NT website or other archival and other organizations. Wikidata WikiProjects are meant to help organize work on Wikidata, whether you are working on your own or in a group. It's a way to describe what you are doing. I created this one as a way for me to keep track of all the properties and data modelling decisions I needed for art provenance: Wikidata:WikiProject Provenance. You need to find a way to model the items you are interested in. So e.g. for "excavated by" you could probably use some combination of significant event (P793) for digs on items which use the properties discoverer or inventor (P61) and location of discovery (P189) and time of discovery or invention (P575). Jane023 (talk) 16:23, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time for further questions, @ Jane023:. So, the object that you linked to in the NT collections online is one of the items that I'm working with - indeed it's a great example as this will be an item that I'm hoping to create on here, to link with digitised images from the same. We're in the progress of enriching this data and updating the website there, and will also be releasing the object metadata 'raw' (as spreadsheets) via the Archaeology Data Service next summer. So, there isn't any difference between 'my items' and NT items - I am working with the NT to improve data about their collection. Does that answer your question? If Wikidata isn't the right place for this, I'm happy to learn more! Medievalfran (talk) 14:19, 28 October 2024 (UTC)