Hi,
I'm looking into ways to use tabular data like
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Zika-institutions-test.tab
in SPARQL queries but could not find anything on that.
My motivation here is in part coming from the time out limits, and the
basic idea here would be to split queries that typically time out into
sets of queries that do not time out and - if their results were
aggregated - would yield the results that would be expected for the
original query would it not time out.
The second line of motivation here is that of keeping track of how
things develop over time, which would be interesting for both content
and maintenance queries as well as usage of things like classes,
references, lexemes or properties.
I would appreciate any pointers or thoughts on the matter.
Thanks,
Daniel
Dear all,
personally I am quite happy that Denny can contribute more to Wikidata
and Wikipedia. No personal criticism there, I read his thesis and I am
impressed by his work and contributions.
I don't want to facilitate any conspiracy theories here, but I am
wondering about where Wikidata is going, especially with respect to Google.
Note that Chrome/Chromium being Open Source with a twist has already
pushed Firefox from the market, but now there is this controversy about
what is being tracked server side by Google Analytics and Client side by
cookies and also the current discussion about Ad Blocker removal from
Chrome:
https://www.wired.com/story/google-chrome-ad-blockers-extensions-api/
Maybe somebody could enlighten me about the overall strategy and
connections here.
1. there was a Knowledge Engine Project which failed, but in principle
had the right idea:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Engine_(Wikimedia_Foundation)
This was aimed to "democratize the discovery of media, news and
information", in particular counter-moving the traffic sink by Google
providing Wikipedia's information in Google Search. Now that there is
Wikidata, this is much better for Google because they can take the CC-0
data as they wish.
2. there are some very widely used terms like "Knowledge Graph" , which
seems to be blocked by Google: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q648625 and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Knowledge_Graph without a neutral point of
view like the German WP adopted:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google#Knowledge_Graph
3. I was under the impression that Google bought Freebase and then
started Wikidata as a non-threatening model to the data they have in
their Knowledge Graph
Could someone give me some pointers about the financial connections of
Google and Wikimedia (this should be transparent, right?) and also who
pushed the Wikidata movement into life in 2012?
Google was also mentioned in
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/10/30/wikidata-fifth-birthday/ but while
it reads "Freebase <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freebase>, was
discontinued because of the superiority of Wikidata’s approach and
active community." I know the story as: Google didn't want its
competitors to have the data and the service. Not much of Freebase did
end up in Wikidata.
As I said, I don't want to push any opinions in any directions. I am
more asking for more information about the connection of Google to
Wikidata (financially), then Google to WMF and also I am asking about
any strategic advantages for Google in relation to their competition.
Please don't answer with "How great Wikidata is", I already know that
and this is also not in the scope of my "How intertwined is Google with
Wikidata / WMF?" question. Can't mention this enough: also not against
Denny.
It is a request for better information as I can't seem to find clear
answers here.
--
All the best,
Sebastian Hellmann
Director of Knowledge Integration and Linked Data Technologies (KILT)
Competence Center
at the Institute for Applied Informatics (InfAI) at Leipzig University
Executive Director of the DBpedia Association
Projects: http://dbpedia.org, http://nlp2rdf.org,
http://linguistics.okfn.org, https://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt
<http://www.w3.org/community/ld4lt>
Homepage: http://aksw.org/SebastianHellmann
Research Group: http://aksw.org
Hello all,
The Wikidata and Wikibase ecosystem is a huge galaxy of exciting content,
tools, projects, powered by the communities as well as organisations
working with the software and the data. For seven years, people are
gathering, starting projects, developing tools, improving the editors'
workflows, filling various gaps, working all together to give more people
more access to more knowledge.
The *WikidataCon Award 2019* will reward the greatest projects in a variety
of categories. The awarded projects are selected by the WikidataCon Award
committee, based on nominations by the community. Everyone is invited to
participate and nominate one or several projects. The nomination process is
open until *October 7th*.
What we mean by *project*: a project can be a community gathering or other
initiative that led to great results (WikiProject, event, editathon…), a
tool (gadget, script, external tool…) or any other action that led to
improving Wikidata’s data, the workflow of its editors or the outreach.
To read more about the award and participate, please check out this page
<https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikidataCon_2019/Program/WikidataCon…>.
Thanks!
--
Léa Lacroix
Project Manager Community Communication for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
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 27/029/42207.
Hello all,
We are about to make some changes to edit summaries that appear when an
edit is made using wbeditentity API, which includes for example editing
terms (labels, descriptions, aliases) from the new mobile termbox. The
summary messages currently contain “Changed an Item” as a comment. The new
summaries will include the message "*Changed label, description and/or
aliases in # languages*", where # is the count of distinct languages that
terms in them have been affected.
This change will be deployed on Wednesday, October 2nd, and the new edit
summaries will start changing from that point. The old edit summaries will
not be changed. More improvements will follow in the future (for example,
more details regarding the terms that have been changed and the languages).
You can see more details in this ticket
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T220696>. If you encounter any issues,
please let me know. Thanks,
--
Léa Lacroix
Project Manager Community Communication for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
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 27/029/42207.
Dear all,
I thank you for your efforts. As shown in our research paper, many types of Biomedical entities and relations are not supported by Wikidata. When I saw OBO Library known to include many CC0 ontologies related to the medical field, I found that some of the ontologies support missing types of biomedical items and statements. http://www.ontobee.org/. I knew that several OBO ontologies have already been integrated to Wikidata. I ask if there is a work to include all OBO library ontologies to Wikidata. As well, I ask if there is already a work to automatically update Wikidata if OBO ontologies are updated.
Yours Sincerely,
Houcemeddine Turki (he/him)
Medical Student, Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Tunisia
GLAM and Education Coordinator, Wikimedia TN User Group
Member, Wiki Project Med
Member, WikiIndaba Steering Committee
Member, Wikimedia and Library User Group Steering Committee
____________________
+21629499418
-------- Message d'origine --------
De : "Houcemeddine A. Turki" <turkiabdelwaheb(a)hotmail.fr>
Date : 2019/09/29 11:50 (GMT+01:00)
À : "Houcemeddine A. Turki" <turkiabdelwaheb(a)hotmail.fr>
Objet : Important, Integrating OBO Library into Wikidata database
Dear all,
I thank you for your efforts. As shown in our research paper, many types of Biomedical entities and relations are not supported by Wikidata. When I saw OBO Library known to include many CC0 ontologies related to the medical field, I found that some of the ontologies support missing types of biomedical items and statements. http://www.ontobee.org/. I knew that several OBO ontologies have already been integrated to Wikidata. I ask if there is a work to include all OBO library ontologies to Wikidata. As well, I ask if there is already a work to automatically update Wikidata if OBO ontologies are updated.
Yours Sincerely,
Houcemeddine Turki (he/him)
Medical Student, Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Tunisia
GLAM and Education Coordinator, Wikimedia TN User Group
Member, Wiki Project Med
Member, WikiIndaba Steering Committee
Member, Wikimedia and Library User Group Steering Committee
____________________
+21629499418
Dear all,
I thank you for your efforts. As shown in our research paper, many types of Biomedical entities and relations are not supported by Wikidata. When I saw OBO Library known to include many CC0 ontologies related to the medical field, I found that some of the ontologies support missing types of biomedical items and statements. http://www.ontobee.org/. I knew that several OBO ontologies have already been integrated to Wikidata. I ask if there is a work to include all OBO library ontologies to Wikidata. As well, I ask if there is already a work to automatically update Wikidata if OBO ontologies are updated.
Yours Sincerely,
Houcemeddine Turki (he/him)
Medical Student, Faculty of Medicine of Sfax, University of Sfax, Tunisia
GLAM and Education Coordinator, Wikimedia TN User Group
Member, Wiki Project Med
Member, WikiIndaba Steering Committee
Member, Wikimedia and Library User Group Steering Committee
____________________
+21629499418
Hey all,
Andra recently mentioned about finding laureates in Wikidata, and it
reminded me that some weeks ago I was trying to come up with a SPARQL
query to find all Nobel Prize Winners in Wikidata.
What I ended up with was:
SELECT ?winner
WHERE {
?winner wdt:P166 ?prize .
?prize (wdt:P361|wdt:P31|wdt:P279) wd:Q7191 .
}
More specifically, looking into the data I found:
Nobel Peace Prize (Q35637)
part of (P361)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) .
Nobel Prize in Literature (Q37922)
subclass of (P279)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) .
Nobel Prize in Economics (Q47170)
instance of (P31)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) ;
part of (P361)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) .
Nobel Prize in Chemistry (Q44585)
instance of (P31)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) ;
part of (P361)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) .
Nobel Prize in Physics (Q38104)
subclass of (P31)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) ;
part of (P361)
Nobel Prize (Q7191) .
In summary, of the six types of Nobel prizes, three different properties
are used in five different combinations to state that they "are", in
fact, Nobel prizes. :)
Now while it would be interesting to discuss the relative merits of P31
vs. P279 vs. P361 vs. some combination thereof in this case and similar
such cases, I guess I am more interested in the general problem of the
lack of consensus that such a case exhibits.
What processes (be they social, technical, or some combination thereof)
are currently in place to reach consensus in these cases in Wikidata?
What could be put in place in future to highlight and reach consensus?
Or is the idea more to leave the burden of "integrating" different
viewpoints to the consumer (e.g., to the person writing the query)?
(Of course these are all "million dollar questions" that have been with
the Semantic Web since the beginning, but I am curious about what is
being done or can be done in the specific context of Wikidata to foster
consensus and reduce heterogeneity in such cases.)
Best,
Aidan