Just under the section heading - 'the need', a statement is given: “I want the information that appears on Wikipedia to be editable on Wikipedia”. My doubt is: should the last word 'Wikipedia' be replaced by Wikidata? Because Wikipedia can be edited on Wikipedia itself.
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "Pencil icons"
Reply to "Visual Editor"
Reply to "Instructions for template developers"
Reply to "V1 of Wikidata Bridge is almost ready to be tested on Wikipedia"
Reply to "feedback of Wikidata contributors for Wikidata Bridge users"
Reply to "New prototype: editing references and license information"
Reply to ""badge" for bridge enabled infoboxes"
Reply to "Test environment for the Wikidata Bridge"
About this board
The need section
'Wikipedia' is correct here. If the information comes from Wikidata then it's not directly editable in Wikipedia itself and this is exactly why the Wikidata Bridge is needed.
please change "a wrong" to "an incorrect" value
but could you please change the text string "I corrected a wrong value" to "I corrected an incorrect value", in the english version?
I'm not a linguist so I can't tell you grammatically-speaking why "a wrong value" seems too vague and odd, especially when paired with the quite scientific and precise alternative option of "I updated an outdated value". The word "wrong" also has a secondary meaning of morality - that something is wrong because it is bad; whereas "incorrect" can only mean not-true. Thanks :-)
I believe Wittylama is pretty much an expert in English compare to the WMDE team! :D And yes, I do agree with him on this.
At nowiki there are some users that complain loudly about the pencil icon. I tried to do some changes to see how it would turn out in full use, and there will be way to many such icons. It will probably not be acceptable for the users that complain about a few links today.
So, how can it be changed to become acceptable. One option would be adding an edit-link above the infobox to turn them all on, and to replace that with a reload-link when the pencil icons are visible. After reload the edit-link will be back. That would make the links less annoying, but I don't know if it is enough to stop the users from complaining.
On desktop it’s possible to use the hover css property to show them only if the mouse is on them. The equivalent on mobile device may be possible as a tap on the data.
There has been a lot of debate on this on frwiki, it turns out we kept them at least on some infoboxes even if people complained because there was also a requirement by community decision to highlight the data that come from Wikidata as opposed as data present in the article code as an infobox parameter (external project signaling), and the pencils do that job. This usually settled the discussion, and mostly now complains have stopped.
Yes, I proposed to use hover or doubleclick (doubletap – scary name for those into action movies) to turn the pencil icons on through an additional gadget. It just adds a class that overrides <code>display:none</code> for the links. It is pretty straightforward to do.
Interesting argument that use of the pencil shows use of Wikidata, thus it is what the community wants.
The people who complain, finally agree when discover how usefull is. Use hover css may have collisions with link to value (article or item).
In cawiki we had a debate and change size and a soft gray and editors agreed:
Using gray icons is not wise, as it don't signal interaction. That is they signal “disabled”.
we finally use the smaller catalan. It's black, but not solid color.
As far as I can see, you can only use this feature while reading the page. (It appears to work in both desktop in mobile mode, which is very good.)
However, it doesn't appear to work in Visual Editor. It should be possible.
I wonder if the whole idea to add edit interface in a read mode is wrong, it creates a very messy mental model. This is a type of interface that should only be available in VisualEditor. You open the page for editing, and then as part of this editing the infobox will be possible. That has the added benefit of avoiding the overcrowding the small box with tiny edit-links (the pencil symbol).
Allowing editing in read mode is not a bad idea at all. Lots of people love editing categories in HotCat, for example. The more items are editable in small chunks, without having to edit a whole page, the better.
I disagree on that, but I have lost that dispute a long time ago.
I wanted to have it integrated in the Visual Editor from the start first but unfortunately several technical considerations moved us away from that for the initial versions. It's definitely not off the table for later versions.
Instructions for template developers
Does this mean that every wiki that wants to use Wikidata Bridge will have to a have wiki pages with these modules?
More generally, how will templates on various wikis be adapted to using Wikidata Bridge? Is there an existing instructions page?
Wikidata Bridge/Development/DocDrafts/How to Enable Wikidata Bridge for your Infobox is the draft for the instructions page; we’ll finish it up and move it out of “doc drafts” before the first version is released. All that matters to the Bridge is that the final HTML of the page matches the criteria listed on that page; for the showcase, we did that using an infobox template and two Lua modules, because we figured that’s roughly how it would work on e. g. English Wikipedia, but that’s not a requirement. Our browser tests, for example, create Bridge-enabled edit links (here) with plain wikitext, without involving any templates or modules.
Note that the “single best” pattern are extremely rare in a person-related infobox, it does exist for infoboxes with office positions, but there it should really use the last value from time series and not “preferred”.
At nowiki we don't use postal code or category in the infoboxes, they are used as examples in Topic:Vlrzy9sw6ownhafs. I do see the need to start simple, but this isn't very useful.
V1 of Wikidata Bridge is almost ready to be tested on Wikipedia
I have exciting news to share about the Wikidata Bridge! We’re getting close to being able to deploy the first version of Wikidata Bridge. This means that once we achieve the last steps of development, we are ready to experiment with the Wikipedia communities who are willing to try the Bridge on their wiki.
Below, I will summarize what this first version contains and what it does not contain, what the next steps are for us to reach, and how we will work with the communities to deploy the tool step by step.
Feel free to leave comments on this thread and to share this message with your local Wikipedia community!
Summary of what is included in the v1
It is important to understand that the product we are ready to deploy is not the final version. As mentioned on the /development page, we are starting with a first version, with which we want to make sure that the concept fits your needs before moving forward. This means that the communities who are willing to try it will have the opportunity to be involved very early in the process; however, this also means that the product at that point is far from perfect and does not include all the features you expect from it yet.
The v1 will allow you to:
- Enable the Bridge for the infoboxes that you choose, by updating their Lua code and template
- Edit some Wikidata values directly from Wikipedia, values having the datatype string: for example, postal code, Commons category…
- Fix the existing value or update an outdated value, after asking you why you changed the value. This will ensure that the correct edit is made on Wikidata for you including setting ranks correctly
- Display the existing references coming from Wikidata
- Be redirected to Wikidata in case the action you want to perform is not available in the Bridge yet
The v1 doesn’t allow yet:
- Editing values other than strings (for example, other Items, coordinates)
- Adding new values
- Editing Wikidata references from within the Bridge
- Editing local values or switch from local values to values coming from Wikidata
You can read more details on the features on the development page.
Where are we going to deploy?
It is really important to us to work with wiki communities who are onboard with the project and willing to test the first versions of the Bridge. We also want to start with a small scope (only one Wikipedia), learn from our experience, and deploy slowly on new wikis.
Catalan Wikipedia seems like a good start for several reasons: its community is already using Wikidata-powered infoboxes, several people mentioned their enthusiasm for the Bridge and participated in the discussions, and the size of the wiki seems good for experiments. Therefore we would like to start with deploying on Catalan Wikipedia. A few months later, we would follow with 2 to 3 new wikis. Currently, we have in mind the Basque, Romanian, and Russian Wikipedia, based on their existing use of Wikidata-powered infoboxes and interest for the project. If other wikis are interested, they can let us know and we could consider including them in the next rounds.
We will not deploy this first version before making an announcement to the communities and asking for their approval first. This is the part where we need your help! You can talk to your community about the project, help us translate information, for example this message, and prepare the ground for a community consultation, based on the rules in place on your wiki (vote, RFC, etc.)
What are the next steps?
This timeline is not complete and can evolve based on multiple factors. We’re sorry that we cannot give you more precise dates for now, but new announcements will follow.
- Test the Bridge on a beta system: already possible here
- Performance review of the code (done by WMF): unknown, it can take a few more weeks
- Community consultation on Catalan Wikipedia: started here
- Roll out on the first Wikipedia: will be announced once the performance review is done and that we adapted our code if needed
- Monitor the usage of the tool, fix possible issues, get feedback from the community
- More work on Bridge v2: later this year
- Possible roll out on new wikis: end of 2020 or early 2021
Thanks for reading this long message. If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to leave a comment below.
Thanks for posting. I will ask around.
I have a request - consider if this deployment is time for a general wiki community conversation. If it is, can you do the deployment with a little project announcement which I could use to make a story in the English Wikipedia community newsletter, The Signpost? I would rather that this conversation happen sooner and more slowly, so talking about this as a pilot or experiment sooner seems appropriate. I expect that English Wikipedia will be one of the late projects to consider adopting this, but I would like to raise awareness there. Thanks.
Thanks for your interest in the topic, and for your offer to write something in the Signpost.
I agree that it would be interesting to start discussions soon on wikis that will need more time to consider adopting the Bridge, for example English Wikipedia. We planned to reach big Wikipedias relatively soon in the process, once we successfully test the feature on small and medium-size Wikipedias where communities actively support the use of Wikidata.
However, I would be careful to not make this step too soon: at the moment, as described in the announcement, the version we have is quite far from the final product we want to deliver. For example, it doesn't allow editing all data types, it doesn't show the edit in the edit history on Wikipedia, etc. Showing this to people and letting them think that this will be the final Bridge feature could be very counterproductive, as they would point out (rightfully) that the feature is not answering their needs.
We would be interested in continuing this discussion with you in the near future, and we would definitely appreciate your support when bringing the topic to English Wikipedia. Let's stay in touch, maybe we can schedule a call with you in the next months.
feedback of Wikidata contributors for Wikidata Bridge users
Maybe this is explained somewhere, but I was wondering how Bridge users would notice feedback they might receive on their edits. Supposedly Wikidata contributors would just comment on the user's Wikidata talk page. Do they get notified about it by default?
So far, we have seen two models:
- mobile description edit tool. Wikidata are meant to revert the edits so the users gets notified about problems and eventually removed from the user group
- w:Wikipedia:Shortdesc helper where some users don't seem to get notified or react at all.
The Russian js tool might have another approach.
As far as I know, notifications work cross-wikis. Which means if someone edits from Catalan Wikipedia with the Bridge, and another user write on their Wikidata talk page, or ping them with the ping feature on any talk page on Wikidata, they will receive a notification.
It is possible to turn cross-wiki notifications off, but as default I believe it is turned on.
Maybe there should be some info to users to re-activate that or view Wikidata changes in watchlists.
Just to avoid the recent experience with "Shortdesc helper".
After we were about to block the second script user over it, the option for shortdesc helper was changed (d:Wikidata:Project_chat#w:Wikipedia:Shortdesc_helper).
We tag every edit made through the Bridge. Would that be enough for now to spot that the editor might need to be pinged on their home-wiki? Also keep in mind that I expect very few edits to come through the Bridge in this first version because the existing templates on-wiki need to be adjusted to opt-in and the Bridge can initially only edit datatype string. That should cut it down a lot.
Note that shortdesc is supported on very few wikis, and the idea that something should be locally overridden in this manner is somewhat weird and counterintuitive. It is more of an indication that projects lack integration as it is now.
Make sure that Wikidata Bridge is only available for logged-in users, and the user has enabled cross-wiki notifications.
Is there a way to know if the users have notifications enabled?
Let's see how it goes. It's also less likely to generate a high volume of scripted edits as "shortdesc helper" does.
New prototype: editing references and license information
As we are working on the first version of the Bridge, we have been focusing on two specific areas and we would like to ask your opinion about it.
The first one is editing references. In the first version of the Bridge, we won’t be able to offer the possibility to edit or add references directly in the interface, therefore we will redirect editors to Wikidata.
The second part is information related to the license. We want to make sure that editors are aware that their contribution will be published under CC0, the license of Wikidata, and avoid any misunderstanding. We tried to adapt the standard license information message and to integrate it smoothly in the Bridge interface.
If you want, you can also have a look at the interface behaviour when the user’s connection is too slow to properly launch the Bridge, and when a permission error occurs (if the user is blocked on Wikipedia).
You can check the different paths on this prototype. Please keep in mind that it is a click-dummy, not a fully functioning interface, and most of the time you can only click on one element to progress through the path.
We would also like to point out that some functionality that you might have seen in the previous prototype has been removed. The reason behind it is that we wanted to show you the Bridge as it is planned to be rolled out on the very first wiki for testing it’s first features. The previous prototype included features of the second roll out stage that are currently not under development.
We’re looking forward to hearing what you experienced while testing: what did work for you, what didn’t? Did anything block you or happened unexpectedly?
Thanks in advance!
I think we should not access to Wikidata interface as easily: for Wikipedia editors, it is nice to edit Wikidata without exiting Wikipedia. So, in my opinion, it is a bad idea to display a final blue towards Wikidata. Probably the final blue button should be a simple “Done” which would exit the modal window, and you would provide another “Edit on Wikidata” advanced button (maybe with gears symbol). I mean: the default UX would probably not include to finish to Wikidata instead of Wikipedia (else, creating a bridge is pretty useless).
Also, redirecting to Phabricator is not a good idea either: this is not a user-friendly interface, besides it requires O-auth connection. You should insert a form bridged interface, as the one in VisualEditor. Or just redirecting to a structured discussion on mediawiki.org.
Hoping I’m clear, I thank you for your work!
I’ve forgotten: there is bug with the license warning: the “Don’t show this message again” checkbox is only displayed after you’ve submitted “Publish changes” (so it is not reachable).
Hello Pols12, and thanks for your feedback!
- Regarding the links to Wikidata: the first versions of the tool will not allow editing certain data types, because it's a complex technical feature that will require more time. It's the case for references, for example, that won't be handled in the first version of the tool. However, we don't want to leave the editors with a closed path "no sorry you can't perform this action at all", and we definitely want to suggest them to update references. That's why we suggest them to go to Wikidata if they want to make the change.
- Regarding the checkbox, thanks for noticing it, we are going to have a look.
"badge" for bridge enabled infoboxes
To follow them on Wikidata, wouldn't it be interesting to apply a badge to the sitelinks for such templates?
Similar to wikidatapowered, for instance.
Hello there, I think that you two talk about different things :)
Jura suggests a badge that would be displayed on Wikidata, next to the Wikipedia sitelink, such as the quality badges. We didn't plan this so far, we would need to see how we can retrieve the information that a Wikipedia page uses a Bridge-powered infobox.
The template mentioned by Amadalvarez can be included in the design of the infobox on Wikipedia. We could indeed think about how a Bridge-powered infobox could be visually recognized from another infobox, without having to click on the edit button.
Thanks for both suggestions!
Thanks, @Lea Lacroix (WMDE). I see now.
Taking advantage that @Charlie Kritschmar (WMDE) did the "powered by Wikidata logo", may I suggest you to create a similar style image to included in the templates documentation page ?.
Hm .. interesting ideas, something like Special:GlobalUsage/Wikidata_Stamp_Rec_Light.svg could be used to track usage.
I think most badges at Wikidata are bot added/maintained (based on categories), this could easily be expanded to this usecase. I suppose the badge could be non-visual, e.g. merely found by query.
Here is an item that could be used:
Also one for the usecase mentioned by Amadalvarez:
Would you kindly make both available at Wikidata?
Yes, of course. Could we use d:property:P1552 to add the tag in templates affected ?
It would go on the sitelinks once it set up by the devs (see d:Help:Badges )
Ah. Obviously, because is not a characteristic of template, but of template use in a site.
I created a Phabricator task. However, just to be transparent with you, this is not a priority for us at the moment: first, we want to actually finish developing the first version of the Bridge, get it out on some wikis and support the communities to use it, after that we can consider enabling a badge :)
Thanks, @Lea Lacroix (WMDE). Obviously, priorities are priorities. I take advantage to inform you that all our WD_Powered infoboxes are ready to link with Bridge. If you wish, you can account on us to make tests.
Test environment for the Wikidata Bridge
If you want to follow the progress of the development team on the first version of the Wikidata Bridge, you can have a look at the test system.
First of all, a disclaimer: this is a live test environment, and the developers are working in real time on it, which means:
- it is not the final version that you will see onwiki
- some features are missing
- it may be broken or behaving weird sometimes
- the test wikis are almost empty and plenty of data is not there or needs to be created (items, properties)
This being said, here are the links that you can look at:
- https://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Wikidata_Bridge_Showcase is the showcase article on a Beta Wikipedia site, with a basic infobox where you can try the Bridge
- On https://wikidata.beta.wmflabs.org/wiki/Q540739 is the test item that is connected to the showcase page
Feel free to try it and click on the pen icon to open the Bridge pop-up. Please note that in order to be able to edit data, you need to be logged-in on Beta: for this you will need to use or create a dedicated account, that is not connected to centralized Wikimedia account.
To go more into details, here’s an overview of what features are already working on the test system, which ones are not working yet, and which one will not be present in the first version of the Bridge.
What’s already working:
- When clicking on the edit pen, instead of going to the Wikidata item, the Bridge pop-up opens
- When the editor opens the Wikidata Bridge for a value with datatype string, they can edit it from the Bridge pop-up. For all others datatypes, the editor is told that it is not possible yet and offered to go to Wikidata.
- For a value with datatype string, the editor can make an edit and save it, the change takes place on the Wikidata item. However, the new value is not immediately displayed (we’re working on caching issues), you will have to refresh the page to see the new value.
- It is only possible to edit statements having one value. When trying to edit a statement with several values, an error message appears.
- All edits made through the Bridge are tagged on Wikidata with the tag “Data Bridge” so they can be easily spotted in Recent Changes, etc. The edit summary is not very descriptive for now.
- References can be displayed but the format is ugly for now
- Template editors can adapt an infobox to add the “Bridge layer”. A draft of documentation is available here.
- Permissions: when the page is protected, the edit pen will not be shown. For all the other situations where editing should not be allowed (user blocked, etc.), an error message will be shown.
What we are currently working on in order to be ready for the first version:
- Ask the editor if they are updating or fixing a value and make the edit accordingly (for an update, a new value will be added and the rank will be changed; for a fix, the value will be overwritten).
- Inform editors that they are editing a different project under a different license.
- When trying to edit multiple values, special values (novalue and somevalue) or deprecated values, we will show editors an explanation and send them to the Wikidata item.
- Fix caching issues (update the page immediately with the new value).
- Link to the revision history of the Item to give editors a path to check and revert vandalism.
- Support for datatypes external ID and URL.
- Offer a way to Wikidata for adding and editing references on Wikidata.
- Better edit summary
- Better formatting of references
What will not be included in the first version, but potentially later:
- Editing of datatypes other than string, URL and external ID
- Editing of qualifiers
- Editing of special values (no value / some value)
- Reference editing/adding/deleting of existing references
- Adding a reference to new values
- Multi-value editing and viewing
The development will continue over the next few months, as well as discussions here to gather feedback. We will also update you about the wikis where we plan to roll-out the first version of the feature, if these communities volunteer to try it. See also: how to get involved.