Agree, I am also interested in seeing this. I recently did a small comparison on science awards on coverage of laureates in both DBpedia and wikidata and came to the same conclusion. The difference sometimes was quite substantial in favour of Wikidata.
[image: image.png]
I would also be very interested in seeing this. I had a closer look at DBpedia recently for a tutorial and was surprised by how different the data is in comparison to Wikidata. A methodological comparison would surely be helpful.
Of course, it has to be fair, taking into account that DBpedia editions are based on a Wikipedia in one language (hence is always missing entities that Wikidata has). For example, I recently computed the difference between the following two:
(1) The set of all pairs of ancestors that one can find by following (paths of) parent relations on EN DBPedia. (2) The set of all pairs of ancestors that one can find by following (paths of) mother/father relations on Wikidata, but visiting only items that are present in English Wikipedia.
I am not sure if this is fair or not, but I found it an interesting setup (non-local effects of incompleteness) -- and (2) is a nice illustration of something you cannot achieve in SPARQL on principled grounds ;-).
Cheers,
Markus
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
