[Wiki Loves Monuments] Moving monuments database to Wikidata

Federico Leva (Nemo) nemowiki at gmail.com
Sun Jul 26 15:34:10 UTC 2015

Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 13:36:
> Think of these objects as members of a collection owned by "living
> history municipal museums". So the city hall is the list owner and you
> go back in time to the latest usable list

A way can be found, but there are multiple issues to solve:
1) the name of the object may not be unique hence we may be unable to 
satisfy Wikidata requirements on label/description uniqueness,
2) the proper way to state something is a cultural heritage item needs 
to be confirmed, using P31/P1435 and intermediate items or subclasses or 
3) it must be fine to create items that contain no information other 
than the name;
4) it must be as easy to add coordinates to multiple items as it is with 
an on-wiki table;
5) it must be ok to use a self-hosted PDF (a letter from the entity) as 
source, as well as to lack any source for some months or years until we 
are able to publish said PDF;
6) it must be easy to publish new groups of items on the go, because the 
list is built gradually (and very slowly) as we get new authorisations;
7) there must be a way to automatically make an on-wiki table of items 
by region (currently I'm not even sure we can make an on-wiki table of 
"municipalities of Emilia-Romagna" with Wikidata? let alone listing 
items which have some connection to them through N levels of P31, P1435, 
P279 or whatever);
8) as for Ukraine, there needs to be a way to mark location in a single 
string which may contain anything, not necessarily a street address, 
while P969 instructions are currently lacking;
9+) probably other things I'm forgetting now.

Of course we could also decide that WMIT doesn't use the "monuments 
database" in this form as we didn't use the toolserver database. :) I 
realise our situation is too messy to account for.

> (usually made up before WWI
> during the period 1890-1910 when it was suddenly fashionable to make
> inventory lists of heritage sites).

I'm afraid this fashion has yet to reach Italy, one century later. Can 
Germany please send us another Winckelmann?

Jane Darnell, 26/07/2015 14:23:
 > The identifier in such cases should not be some random number, but the Q
 > number itself.

This would not be manageable with the system that WLM-IT used until last 
year, where the identifier itself contain certain information (like the 
municipality code) and other parts of the process relied on this. 
Cristian Cenci would need to comment on whether that's still a requirement.


More information about the WikiLovesMonuments mailing list