Hoi,

What would be nice is to have an option to understand progress from one dump to the next like you can with the Statistics by Magnus. Magnus also has data on sources but this is more global.

Thanks,

     GerardM

On 8 December 2015 at 21:41, Markus Krötzsch <markus@semantic-mediawiki.org> wrote:

Hi Amir,

Very nice, thanks! I like the general approach of having a stand-alone tool for analysing the data, and maybe pointing you to issues. Like a dashboard for Wikidata editors.

What backend technology are you using to produce these results? Is this live data or dumped data? One could also get those numbers from the SPARQL endpoint, but performance might be problematic (since you compute averages over all items; a custom approach would of course be much faster but then you have the data update problem).

An obvious feature request would be to display entity ids as links to the appropriate page, and maybe with their labels (in a language of your choice).

But overall very nice.

Regards,

Markus


On 08.12.2015 18:48, Amir Ladsgroup wrote:

Hey,
There has been several discussion regarding quality of information in
Wikidata. I wanted to work on quality of wikidata but we don't have any
source of good information to see where we are ahead and where we are
behind. So I thought the best thing I can do is to make something to
show people how exactly sourced our data is with details. So here we
have *http://tools.wmflabs.org/wd-analyst/index.php*

You can give only a property (let's say P31) and it gives you the four
most used values + analyze of sources and quality in overall (check this
out <http://tools.wmflabs.org/wd-analyst/index.php?p=P31>)
  and then you can see about ~33% of them are sources which 29.1% of
them are based on Wikipedia.
You can give a property and multiple values you want. Let's say you want
to compare P27:Q183 (Country of citizenship: Germany) and P27:Q30 (US)
Check this out
<http://tools.wmflabs.org/wd-analyst/index.php?p=P27&q=Q30|Q183>. And
you can see US biographies are more abundant (300K over 200K) but German
biographies are more descriptive (3.8 description per item over 3.2
description over item)

One important note: Compare P31:Q5 (a trivial statement) 46% of them are
not sourced at all and 49% of them are based on Wikipedia **but* *get
this statistics for population properties (P1082
<http://tools.wmflabs.org/wd-analyst/index.php?p=P1082>) It's not a
trivial statement and we need to be careful about them. It turns out
there are slightly more than one reference per statement and only 4% of
them are based on Wikipedia. So we can relax and enjoy these
highly-sourced data.

Requests:

  * Please tell me whether do you want this tool at all
  * Please suggest more ways to analyze and catch unsourced materials

Future plan (if you agree to keep using this tool):

  * Support more datatypes (e.g. date of birth based on year, coordinates)
  * Sitelink-based and reference-based analysis (to check how much of
    articles of, let's say, Chinese Wikipedia are unsourced)

  * Free-style analysis: There is a database for this tool that can be
    used for way more applications. You can get the most unsourced
    statements of P31 and then you can go to fix them. I'm trying to
    build a playground for this kind of tasks)

I hope you like this and rock on!
<http://tools.wmflabs.org/wd-analyst/index.php?p=P136&q=Q11399>
Best


_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata