On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 9:54 PM Gergo Tisza gtisza@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 10:31 AM, Magnus Manske < magnusmanske@googlemail.com> wrote:
IMHO the next step is auto-generating short descriptions from the item statements, which will be perfectly fine for the vast majority of cases.
The Wikidata team is not a fan of that idea: T91981 https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91981
Yes, sadly. The argument "not good enough" is a fail IMHO, though. If it's
bad, improve the algorithm and/or add statements. If it's still bad, THEN add a manual description.
I think the worst possible description is the one that's missing.
Back-of-the-envelope calculation: * We have ~45 million manual descriptions at the moment on Wikidata * We have ~18 million items * We have ~250 languages That means that, as of this moment, less than 1% of all possible descriptions are filled in. And the quality of these manual descriptions is everyone's best guess; I've seen plenty "disambiguation page" and "category page", EVEN IS THAT IS NOT TRUE. Some crappy bot filled those in. No chance of quickly fixing this.
So, 99% descriptions missing, with little chance of them getting filled in at all (think: small languages), and a rather dubious track record for the ones that are.
It's like letting people drown in the Mediterranean because the tents to house them temporarily are "not good enough". Frustrating, seriously.