Hi,
Would it be possible to have a link to the project(s) that have a focus on a given topic, when editing an item. For instance (because that's what I'm mostly interested in ;-), it would be useful to have a link to
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Informatics/FLOSS
when editing
Loomio https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15975673
because it is released under a license that is a subclass of a Free Software license. Has this been discussed before ? And maybe discarded because it's a bad idea(TM) ?
Cheers
--
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
On 08/02/2016 03:01 PM, Markus Kroetzsch wrote:
> On 02.08.2016 13:11, Ghislain ATEMEZING wrote:
>> Thanks Yuri. I will try to define a kind a metric for those having a
>> number of wikipedia entries. For example, a person with 127 entries
>> would be "famous" while another with just 10 is not "famous"...
>
> Side remark @Stas: it could be very helpful to have the number of
> Wikimedia project articles stored as a numeric value for a new property
> in RDF. Doing a SPARQL query that computes this number and does
> something with it afterwards almost always times out. The number could
> be very useful as a heuristic "popularity" measure that can also help to
> give the most "important" items first in a number of queries.
>
> Best,
>
> Markus
The kind of queries alluded to (I think) are ones like:
# Famous Danes
SELECT ?person ?personLabel (count(?articles) as ?rank) WHERE {
?person wdt:P27 wd:Q35 .
OPTIONAL {?articles schema:about ?person}
SERVICE wikibase:label {bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" }
}
GROUP BY ?person ?personLabel
ORDER BY DESC(?rank)
LIMIT 50
Which is derived from the Repository Fringe Wikitalks by Navino Evans
and Ewan McAndrew
This one with property counts times out if not restricted to females:
# Famous Danish females
SELECT ?person ?personLabel (count(?properties) as ?rank) WHERE {
?person wdt:P27 wd:Q35 .
?person wdt:P21 wd:Q6581072 .
?person ?properties ?something
SERVICE wikibase:label {bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" }
}
GROUP BY ?person ?personLabel
ORDER BY DESC(?rank)
LIMIT 50
Persons in Wikidata may not necessarily be famous. Persons may be in
Wikidata because of structural needs.
/Finn
>>
>>
>> El mar., 2 ago. 2016 a las 12:52, Yuri Astrakhan
>> (<yastrakhan(a)wikimedia.org <mailto:yastrakhan@wikimedia.org>>) escribió:
>>
>> Any person in wikidata is "famous" - otherwise they wouldn't be
>> notable and therefore wouldn't be there))
>> If you prefer the stricter notability requirement(as used by
>> Wikipedia), search only for those that have a wikipedia page
>>
>>
>> On Aug 2, 2016 1:44 PM, "Ghislain ATEMEZING"
>> <ghislain.atemezing(a)gmail.com <mailto:ghislain.atemezing@gmail.com>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Ahoy,
>> I am curious to know if there is a way to know that a given
>> person is "famous" in Wikidata. I want for example to retrieve
>> "all famous French people born after a given date".
>>
>> Thanks in advance for your help.
>>
>> Best,
>> Ghislain
>> --
>> -------
>> "Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none" (W. Shakespeare)
>> Web: http://atemezing.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> <mailto:Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org <mailto:Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org>
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>> --
>> -------
>> "Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none" (W. Shakespeare)
>> Web: http://atemezing.org
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
Hey all,
Lydia (or somebody operating the @Wikidata handle :) posted this question
on Twitter and a few great ideas started trickling in
<https://twitter.com/wikidata/status/708384895375163392>.
I went ahead and created an AllOurIdeas poll <https://t.co/IbsBmY6Kpg>,
seeded with the first ideas posted on Twitter, to crowdsource the
generation of new ideas and produce a robust ranking.
If you're unfamiliar with AllOurIdeas </>, it's an open consultation engine
allowing people to choose which idea they like best via pairwise
comparisons (I am cc'ing Matt Salganik, the project lead). It's very simple
on the surface but it uses algorithms such as the Condorcet method
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method> to test how strongly each
idea performs against another, reducing the weighing of the oldest ideas to
create a level playing field for newly created ideas and preventing gaming
or self-promotion of one's own ideas.
Try it out or post new ideas: the more votes it gets, the higher the
confidence of the ranking. Real-time results and statistics are here
<http://www.allourideas.org/wikidata/results>.
Dario
Hi Wikidatans,
On Commons, I have been seeing some puzzling Wikidata edits appearing in
the properties for Commons files on my watchlist.
For example: for File:Ada Lovelace portrait.jpg
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ada_Lovelace_portrait.jpg> (Q736316
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q736316>) I see the edit (Created claim:
Property:P18 <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P18>: Chalon Portrait
of Queen Victoria - 1837.jpg; Added reference to claim: Property:P18
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P18>: Chalon Portrait of Queen
Victoria - 1837.jpg)
This portrait of Ada Lovelace is decidedly not a portrait of Queen
Victoria. Upon further investigation, I see that the artist for both
paintings is the same. Still, why is this edit appearing for File:Ada
Lovelace portrait.jpg
<https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Ada_Lovelace_portrait.jpg>? I
don't know why I should be seeing this edit on my watchlist for the
Lovelace portrait.
Similarly, for File:John Jay (Gilbert Stuart portrait).jpg (Q100
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q100>), I see on my Commons watchlist (Language
link added: eml:Boston <https://eml.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boston>). Further
investigation reveals that Boston was the place of death of artist Gilbert
Stuart.
Can someone clarify why these Wikidata edits would be appearing in my
watchlist on Commons? These edits appear to be related to the artists
rather than to the image files.
I do have "Show Wikidata edits in your watchlist" checked, but I would
think that this would refer to Wikidata edits about the files themselves or
the original artwork from which the photos were derived, rather than the
artist who created the artworks from which the files on Commons were
derived. Noting that the artist who created a particular image also created
another image that we have on Commons seems to be particularly far-removed
from information that I need to know as someone who would be interested in
knowing about Wikidata changes about the particular file that I'm watching
(as opposed to the Wikidata information about the artist.)
Pine
Ahoy,
I am curious to know if there is a way to know that a given person is
"famous" in Wikidata. I want for example to retrieve "all famous French
people born after a given date".
Thanks in advance for your help.
Best,
Ghislain
--
-------
"Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none" (W. Shakespeare)
Web: http://atemezing.org
Hi!
Right now, quantities with units are displayed by attaching unit name to
the number. While it gives the idea of what is going on, it is somewhat
ungrammatical in English (83 kilgoramm, 185 centimetre, etc.) [1] and in
other languages - i.e. in Russian it's 83 килограмм, 185 сантиметр -
instead of the correct "83 килограмма", "185 сантиметров". For some
units, the norms are kind of tricky and fluid (e.g. see [2]), and they
are not even identical across all units in the same language, but the
common theme is that there are grammatical rules on how to do it and
we're ignoring them right now.
I think we do have some means to grammatically display numbers - for
example, number of references is displayed correctly in English and
Russian. As I understand, it is done by using certain formats in message
strings, and these formats are supported in the code in Language
classes. So, I wonder if we should maybe have an (optional) property
that defines the same format for units? We could then reuse the same
code to display units in proper grammatical way.
Alternatively, we could use short units display [3] - i.e. cm instead of
centimetre - and then plurals are not required. However, this relies on
units having short names, and for some units short names can be rather
obscure, and maybe in some language short names need grammatical forms
too. Given that we do not link unit names, it would be rather confusing
(btw, why don't we?). Some units may not have short forms at all.
And the short names do not exactly match the languages - rather, they
usually match the script (i.e. Cyrillic, or Latin, or Hebrew) - and we
may not even have data on which language uses which script, in a useful
form. So using short forms is very tricky.
Any other ideas on this topic? Do we have a ticket tracking this
somewhere? I looked but couldn't find it.
[1]
http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/22082/are-units-in-english-singu…
[2]
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9E%D0%B1%D1%81%D1%83%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0…
[3] https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T86528
--
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org
