Today we have reached the cleaning up of half of all our interwikiconflicts. With this a lot of interwikiconflicts on other Wikipedias have been solved as well.
Romaine
Over the last year, we have seen some discussion about if and how Wikidata can
be useful for Wikimedia Commons. One aspect of this is maintaining meta data as
structured data.
On behalf of the Wikidata development team, I just posted a proposal for this:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Wikidata_for_media_info
We hope you regard this as an invitation to discuss the proposal and to identify
use cases that we do not cover with it.
Please use the proposal's talk page as a central place for discussion about
Wikidata and media meta data.
Please invite others involved with the Wikidata or Commons projects or otherwise
interested in media meta data to take part in the invitation.
Thank you,
Daniel Kinzler
Hello All ,
i was wondering if someone knows roughly the Rate of Wikidata changes per
minute or even per day , i tried to watch the Feed for a while but it
varies a lot
what would be the maximum and minimum rate , should we expect it also to
increase as a result of more contributions ?
i'm taking about updates posted in the RSS feed
here<http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:RecentChanges&feed=atom>
thanks
Regards
-------------------------------------------------
Hady El-Sahar
Research Assistant
Center of Informatics Sciences | Nile University<http://nileuniversity.edu.eg/>
email : hadyelsahar(a)gmail.com
Phone : +2-01220887311
http://hadyelsahar.me/
<http://www.linkedin.com/in/hadyelsahar>
Heya folks :)
Here's your summary of what happened around Wikidata this week:
http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata/Status_updates/2013_06_21
Cheers
Lydia
--
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Community Communications for Technical Projects
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Obentrautstr. 72
10963 Berlin
www.wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
Hello,
I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary
to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use
cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement.
<http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary>
To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this
topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are
building on top of that.
I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the
Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently
reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal.
It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on
the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there.
<http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary>
Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started
yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is
more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might
be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this
depends on the results of the discussion obviously).
Cheers,
Denny
--
Project director Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V. | Obentrautstr. 72 | 10963 Berlin
Tel. +49-30-219 158 26-0 | http://wikimedia.de
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg unter
der Nummer 23855 B. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das Finanzamt für
Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/681/51985.
I'm just back from the LODLAM summit in Montreal, Canada and here there is
a short report.
==About LODLAM and why I was there==
LODLAM (http://lodlam.net) is a gathering of people interested in LOD
(linked open data) and LAM (Libraries, Archives, and Museums), so I thought
it would be interesting to find partners and raise awareness about the
Wikisource revitalization effort, all this thanks to the Grants:IEG
support. The audience was very diverse, not only from cultural
institutions, but also from some research centers and private companies.
OKFN, Europeana, DPLA, and other big players had representatives there.
AFIK, I was the only person from the Wikimedia movement, so I ended up
representing "all things wiki", specially Wikidata. These spontaneous
activities are briefly described here [1].
The format of the event was that of an [[open-space technology]] gathering,
similar to unconferences.
Some information and reflexions to share:
== Rewards & contributor retention ==
During a talk about licenses (which dealt about the difficulties of having
content with different licenses), there were some mention about Datahub
[2], a recently launched project to share datasets, formerly known as ckan.
The discussion revolved around the reward that contributors get for
releasing their datasets. There was some consensus that "the use of the
released data is the reward", which lead to another debate about how to
convey data use to contributors. It can be complicated or simplified to
just leave a gratitude comment by the person using the dataset.
All this led me to think about the emotional vs rational rewards that users
(or institutions) obtain from contributing content to Wikipedia, Commons,
Wikisource, etc. Are really "active thanks", as currently implemented,
suistainable and scalable? Will all the contributors who deserve it get a
thanks some day? Could personalized view counts/ratings reports about
uploaded pictures, major contributions to WP articles, etc. have some
impact on contributor satisfaction/retention? Would "automated personal
impact reports" free collaborators from the duty of thanking one another,
or would that mean less personal interactions?
These are some questions that I leave open here.
==Semantic annotations ==
As you might know there is a GSoC [3] which aims to convert the OKFN
Annotator [4] into a Mediawiki extension. That is a great project that will
enable inline comments in mediawiki projects, but it shouldn't be seen as
the end, but only an step in the direction of semantic annotations.
What could semantic annotations mean for Wikipedia? More precise answers to
questions. Instead of just having "millions of articles" there would be the
possibility of answering "trillions of questions" (or at least pointing to
the text fragment(s) that has/have the answer). This kind of paradigm shift
might need some pondering and broad community discussion.
What could semantic annotations mean for Wikisource? Text
interconectedness. Be able to relate concepts, authors, fragments... and
then be able to query those relationships.
==Input interfaces for linked data==
The best linked data it is the one that is invisible to the user, but then,
how to enable end users to "write" linked data? From the several
approaches, the most convincing seemed to use a text symbol (#, +, !, or
others) to indicate that the text following it represents a linked entity.
In the case of the VisualEditor in Wikipedia, one could write
"#article_name", and right after entering the "#" and the first letters, a
list of options (from Wikidata) would show up to autocomplete/disambiguate.
After selecting the right item, one could continue writing or type a dot to
select a property (like in some object-oriented programming languages do).
This approach simplifies the interlinking and also the data inclusion.
==Other news==
- The Getty vocabularies will be published as linked open data (late 2013,
ODC_BY 1.0 license) [6]
- Pund.it [5] - open source semantic annotation project that won the lodlam
challenge award
- Karma, tools for mapping data to ontologies [7]
Cheers,
Micru
[1] http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata-l/2013-June/002388.html
[2] http://datahub.io/
[3]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Rjain/Proposal-Prototyping-inline-comme…
[4] http://okfnlabs.org/annotator/
[5] http://www.thepund.it/
[6] http://www.getty.edu/research/tools/vocabularies/index.html
[7]
http://summit2013.lodlam.net/2013/06/20/karma-tools-for-mapping-data-to-ont…
Hi Denny,
I've left a message at the Tamil Wiktionary Village Pump.
http://ta.wiktionary.org/w/index.php?title=%E0%AE%B5%E0%AE%BF%E0%AE%95%E0%A…
Cheers,
Sundar
"That language is an instrument of human reason, and not merely a medium for the expression of thought, is a truth generally admitted."
- George Boole, quoted in Iverson's Turing Award Lecture
Original message:
Hello, I would like all interested in the interaction of Wikidata and Wiktionary
to take a look at the following proposal. It is trying to serve all use
cases mentioned so far, and remain still fairly simple to implement. <http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wiktionary> To the best of our knowledge, we have checked all discussions on this
topic, and also related work like OmegaWiki, Wordnet, etc., and are
building on top of that. I would extremely appreciate if some liaison editors could reach out to the
Wiktionaries in order to get a wider discussion base. We are currently
reading more on related work and trying to improve the proposal. It would be great if we could keep the discussion on the discussion page on
the wiki, so to bundle it a bit. Or at least have pointers there. <http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Wiktionary> Note that we are giving this proposal early. Implementation has not started
yet (obviously, otherwise the discussion would be a bit moot), and this is
more a mid-term commitment (i.e. if the discussion goes smoothly, it might
be implemented and deployed by the end of the year or so, although this
depends on the results of the discussion obviously). Cheers,
Denny
Hi there!
I am right now at the LODLAM Summit in Montreal and there was a wish to get
Wikidata information, so I improvised a short talk (6th column of the
13:30-14:30 slot)
http://summit2013.lodlam.net/files/2013/06/BNIm-WPCEAE5b1N.jpg-large.jpeg
There were people from several national libraries (German, Spanish, etc),
their impression was very good and some of them want to start linking.
Also made some other interesting connections (OpenAgris from the United
Nations) which can provide a gateway for government data.
I know it is not much, but I couldn't pass the chance for PR'ing :)
Cheers,
Micru
You’ll do better dealing with bad coordinates if your system can recognize how bad particular cases are.
The worst error I see in Wikipedia is that sometimes people get east and west confused, so there is this mirror image of Europe reflected across the U.K. You find cute little Czech towns out in the Atlantic with the seamounts and the shipwrecks.
If you computed the bounding circle for the points, the radius would be an indicator of the degree of confusion that would be highly effective for smoking out the craziest “rouge points”
There are other cases where reasonable parties could disagree about the exact coordinates for things and it is not worth sweating it. Where exactly is the state of Ohio or Lake Superior? These things are shapes, not points. You couldn’t argue about an uncertainty radius of 10 kilometers for a point like that, in fact, the consumer system should know that it can move those labels around a little bit to improve other layout metrics.
That's an excellent recommendation. I will attempt to research the common properties of the least unique Wikidata items.
Maximilian Klein
Wikipedian in Residence, OCLC
+17074787023
________________________________________
From: wikidata-l-bounces(a)lists.wikimedia.org on behalf of Paul A. Houle
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 6:57 AM
To: Discussion list for the Wikidata project.
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Visualisations of The Most Unique Wikipedias According to Wikidata
I think Poland may do better than average because Polish people, out of
national pride, have made a special effort to be well documented in English
Wikipedia and represent a Polish point-of-view on topics like the city of
Gdansk.
One fascinating thing about Wikidata is that it provides access to all of
the wonderful concepts shared in the Wikiverse, so now sites like Ookaboo
can collect pictures of many beautiful places that don't exist in en
Wikipedia.
On the other hand I'm also interested in the other end of the curve,
those elite concepts which are represented widely across the Wikipedias.
Surely this is connected with subjective importance, with some flavor
towards "global" appeal, whatever that would turn out to mean. Any chance
you could run a report on those?
-----Original Message-----
From: Mathieu Stumpf
Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 4:51 AM
To: wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] Visualisations of The Most Unique Wikipedias
According to Wikidata
Le 2013-06-12 22:22, Klein,Max a écrit :
> Hello Wikidatians,
>
> I made a few visualizations of the distributions of language links
> in Wikidata Items. You can also use these stats to see which Items
> represent wikipedia articles which are unique to a language and
> compare the uniquenesses of all languages. Also I investigate all the
> items with just two language links, to look at Wikipedia "pairs"
>
> See the full analysis:
> http://notconfusing.com/the-most-unique-wikipedias-according-to-wikidata/
> [1]
Interesting! Could you also create that kind of visualisations by
topics : how much uniqueness come from biographies of local football
people, compared with history events or abstract concepts ?
Also, in a completly unrelated topic, you may explain me in private
what you mean with "Create a communal house to live in" which is in your
public todo list, it sounds interesting. :P
--
Association Culture-Libre
http://www.culture-libre.org/
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
