User talk:Romzre
Feel free to contact me here! Romzre (talk) 09:22, 25 November 2021 (UTC)
Teahouse post
[edit]Hello. I have removed your post to the Teahouse, as I do not feel it is appropriate to that forum, or indeed elsewhere on Wikipedia. Sorry Nick Moyes (talk) 16:02, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes Alright, do you know where to post about external projects related to wikipedia though? I asked and was redirected to the Teahouse. Regards, Romzre (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- To be honest, I took a quick look and I don't see how it is relevant to Wikipedia. It isn't a tool that we would use as editors, is it? I typed "botanists listed on Wikipedia" and got nonsensical results that don't assist my searching of Wikipedia itself. Therefore I am at a loss to appreciate why editors here would benefit from using it. Wikipedia is also not a platform for others to Promote their products, and a second look suggests to me that your product - as exciting as it might turn out to be - is so new that there's nothing on it as yet, nor do I see why we should advertise and encourage those people that do like to volunteer here to leave us and go elsewhere. If I'm missing something, feel free to enlighten me. I'm really sorry I don't feel we can help you here. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes Sure, I can try to explain a little bit more. The idea is that we are training a machine learning model to filter content automatically based on users criteria (see the 5s demo). So far there is almost nothing on the platform and the model doesn't understand much as we just got started and it needs to "learn". But, we are going to work on gathering content (mainly wikipedia articles in the beginning) and data to train our machine learning model and hopefully make it useful.
- It indeed doesn't help to edit, but it could be useful to filter wikipedia articles. For instance, you could use it to get all the list of all the botanists that worked on a given subject in a given country in a very natural and efficient way - much more than using SPARQL queries on wikidata for instance.
- The idea is really not to get people to leave wikipedia and go elsewhere, just to help make all the wikipedia content "searchable" with our powerful search engine. If the project is successful, I'm sure it will be useful for the wikipedian community and could even help to attract new contributors on wikipedia.
- I understand that these kind of posts shouldn't appear in wikipedia articles but don't you think that it would be interesting to have a place to talk about external projects that could benefit wikipedia and its community in indirect ways? Do you have any suggestion? Thank you for taking time to respond anyway! Romzre (talk) 17:04, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- OK, thank you. I still believe it looks far too early to be promoting https://www.sievable.com here. However, if you genuinely feel that access to Wikimedia content could be enhanced by it, I suggest you approach and make your case to the Wikimedia Foundation directly. They develop and support a range of tools across multiple Wikipedia-type projects in numerous languages. I can't say specifically which team you should approach (Product or Technology?), and would leave that to you to investigate and put forward a strong proof of concept. See https://wikimediafoundation.org/ for an overview. I am also aware of, but don't myself use, a number of off-wiki chat fora, on Discord and on Telegram and IRC where you would be far less likely to receive reproach for promoting an un-developed product. I'm really sorry I don't seem able to support you much further in this, but I hope this might guide you a little bit more. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- Ooh - just had a thought, for you. There's nothing to stop you using social media like Twitter and the #Wikipedia or #Wikimedia hashtags to reach out to those folk who keep an eye on those tags and drum up some interest and involvement from people willing to help your tool learn. I see nothing wrong in doing that - my only worry being that it seems so very open-ended. Would it not be better to encourage a more specific focus for your tool to work on, and even offer some form of incentive for participation? My only request is that you don't at this time use Wikipedia as the platform to push that idea. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- Sure, I will investigate that. Thank you very much for the advice! Regards Romzre (talk) 08:22, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
- Ooh - just had a thought, for you. There's nothing to stop you using social media like Twitter and the #Wikipedia or #Wikimedia hashtags to reach out to those folk who keep an eye on those tags and drum up some interest and involvement from people willing to help your tool learn. I see nothing wrong in doing that - my only worry being that it seems so very open-ended. Would it not be better to encourage a more specific focus for your tool to work on, and even offer some form of incentive for participation? My only request is that you don't at this time use Wikipedia as the platform to push that idea. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:35, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- OK, thank you. I still believe it looks far too early to be promoting https://www.sievable.com here. However, if you genuinely feel that access to Wikimedia content could be enhanced by it, I suggest you approach and make your case to the Wikimedia Foundation directly. They develop and support a range of tools across multiple Wikipedia-type projects in numerous languages. I can't say specifically which team you should approach (Product or Technology?), and would leave that to you to investigate and put forward a strong proof of concept. See https://wikimediafoundation.org/ for an overview. I am also aware of, but don't myself use, a number of off-wiki chat fora, on Discord and on Telegram and IRC where you would be far less likely to receive reproach for promoting an un-developed product. I'm really sorry I don't seem able to support you much further in this, but I hope this might guide you a little bit more. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:29, 8 December 2021 (UTC)
- To be honest, I took a quick look and I don't see how it is relevant to Wikipedia. It isn't a tool that we would use as editors, is it? I typed "botanists listed on Wikipedia" and got nonsensical results that don't assist my searching of Wikipedia itself. Therefore I am at a loss to appreciate why editors here would benefit from using it. Wikipedia is also not a platform for others to Promote their products, and a second look suggests to me that your product - as exciting as it might turn out to be - is so new that there's nothing on it as yet, nor do I see why we should advertise and encourage those people that do like to volunteer here to leave us and go elsewhere. If I'm missing something, feel free to enlighten me. I'm really sorry I don't feel we can help you here. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:26, 8 December 2021 (UTC)