Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Anders Wennersten]

Thanks, you are right they are called Properties

Our effort consist of 3-5 rather independent botgerantionseffort, each 
talking with wikidata by themselves and I am the one understand the 
technique least. So I can just repeat some of the things I have been told
*Inconsistent licensing (and data protection) for data for French 
communes in comparison to Swiss communes. general if CC0 orCC-BY should 
be used.

*how to handle datatype Coat of arms (in communes cities)
*entitycode for special countryentities (communes and subcommunes and 
variants of communes)
*to ensure correct citycode in wikidata, when it is initiated with data 
from (erronous) enwp data (is now by manual update)

*geocode and polygones for areas, mapdata
*population data over time
*election data for local communes/cities and over time

Anders




David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 17:45:

That is quite unfortunate. I understand that when you say "datatype" you
mean "property"? From my experience those are best suggested in the frame
of a "task force" or "wikiproject", then you have some context and a
broader view on how data can be represented. Sometimes new users come with
the question "where is this datatype/property?" when a better question to
ask is "how do I represent this data?".
When I started I was under the false impression that the data in wikipedias
could be copied structured without much trouble into wikidata, and that is
not always like that. Since wikipedia has no constraints, the data in
infoboxes is not always readily importable into the data item, and
frequently needs to be re-structured. That needs more effort, but in the
end it is rewarding.

And yes, I agree that at the beginning some properties were created that
had to be changed to make the data consistent, I would say that now
everything is more stable, but being a brand-new project is something that
was expected.

As Lodewijk asks, what are the properties/datatypes/functionality that you
need?

Cheers,
Micru




On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:
Just a few examples.
*It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype
defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not
have the time, you fail
*The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying
*The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that
a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes
invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year)
*A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is
released there are still restrictions (that "soon" will be fixed)
*The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On
svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one
has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata

We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a
commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where
you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these
automatically if problems)

Anders

David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40:

  It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what

prevented you of using the data?
And from which different perspectives?

Cheers,
Micru


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten <
m...@anderswennersten.se


wrote:
we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
better a year from now
Anders



Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:

   Hoi,


I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
Thanks,
GerardM

[1]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:

   After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again.
This


time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
fellow wikipedians on svwp

It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give
some
examples
*The students on a university veterinary course was given the
assignment
to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
helped/made
possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
Taxobox,
iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
subjects
not the wikispecialities
*the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
here
Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
d

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[David Cuenca]

That is quite unfortunate. I understand that when you say "datatype" you
mean "property"? From my experience those are best suggested in the frame
of a "task force" or "wikiproject", then you have some context and a
broader view on how data can be represented. Sometimes new users come with
the question "where is this datatype/property?" when a better question to
ask is "how do I represent this data?".
When I started I was under the false impression that the data in wikipedias
could be copied structured without much trouble into wikidata, and that is
not always like that. Since wikipedia has no constraints, the data in
infoboxes is not always readily importable into the data item, and
frequently needs to be re-structured. That needs more effort, but in the
end it is rewarding.

And yes, I agree that at the beginning some properties were created that
had to be changed to make the data consistent, I would say that now
everything is more stable, but being a brand-new project is something that
was expected.

As Lodewijk asks, what are the properties/datatypes/functionality that you
need?

Cheers,
Micru




On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 4:20 PM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> Just a few examples.
> *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype
> defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not
> have the time, you fail
> *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying
> *The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that
> a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes
> invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year)
> *A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is
> released there are still restrictions (that "soon" will be fixed)
> *The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On
> svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one
> has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata
>
> We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a
> commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where
> you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these
> automatically if problems)
>
> Anders
>
> David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40:
>
>  It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what
>> prevented you of using the data?
>> And from which different perspectives?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Micru
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten <
>> m...@anderswennersten.se
>>
>>> wrote:
>>> we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
>>> botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
>>> perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
>>> better a year from now
>>> Anders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:
>>>
>>>   Hoi,
>>>
 I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
 given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
 Thanks,
GerardM

 [1]
 http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
 to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


 On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
 wrote:

   After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again.
 This

> time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
> initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
> fellow wikipedians on svwp
>
> It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
> was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give
> some
> examples
> *The students on a university veterinary course was given the
> assignment
> to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
> became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
> helped/made
> possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
> Taxobox,
> iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
> subjects
> not the wikispecialities
> *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
>There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
> here
> Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
> disputed species. These articles our experts now work with,
> highlighting
> the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these
> manually
> created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these
> only
> take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the
> dispute.
> Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
> correct version on species?
>
> As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
> biggest v

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Lodewijk]

Hi Anders,

for my understanding, could you give a few examples of what kind of
datatypes are still missing that you would need  (ideally datatypes I can
actually understand).

Thanks!

Lodewijk


2014-06-16 16:20 GMT+02:00 Anders Wennersten :

> Just a few examples.
> *It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new datatype
> defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it but do not
> have the time, you fail
> *The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying
> *The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest that
> a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it makes
> invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year)
> *A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is
> released there are still restrictions (that "soon" will be fixed)
> *The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. On
> svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least one
> has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata
>
> We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a
> commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires (where
> you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct these
> automatically if problems)
>
> Anders
>
> David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40:
>
>  It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what
>> prevented you of using the data?
>> And from which different perspectives?
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Micru
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten <
>> m...@anderswennersten.se
>>
>>> wrote:
>>> we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
>>> botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
>>> perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
>>> better a year from now
>>> Anders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:
>>>
>>>   Hoi,
>>>
 I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
 given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
 Thanks,
GerardM

 [1]
 http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
 to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


 On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
 wrote:

   After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again.
 This

> time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
> initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
> fellow wikipedians on svwp
>
> It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
> was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give
> some
> examples
> *The students on a university veterinary course was given the
> assignment
> to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
> became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
> helped/made
> possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
> Taxobox,
> iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
> subjects
> not the wikispecialities
> *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
>There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
> here
> Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
> disputed species. These articles our experts now work with,
> highlighting
> the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these
> manually
> created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these
> only
> take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the
> dispute.
> Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
> correct version on species?
>
> As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
> biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by
> August/September
>
> And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
> researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic
> entities
> from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
>  ___
 Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
 wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
 Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
 Unsubscribe: h

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Anders Wennersten]

Just a few examples.
*It takes up to 6 months and a lot of argumentations to get a new 
datatype defined. If you are commited you succeed but if it just need it 
but do not have the time, you fail

*The discussions among the Wikidatapeople are most trying
*The data and datatypes are not stable. Suddenly someone can suggest 
that a bunch of existing datatypes are redifined/deleted even if it 
makes invested code using these obsolete (it has become better this year)
*A lot of critical functionality is missing, and even when said it is 
released there are still restrictions (that "soon" will be fixed)
*The small number of people understanding the intricicies of Wikidata. 
On svwp there are just 4-7 who really worked with wikidata and at least 
one has now left because of the longdrawn discussions on Wikdata


We can use some dataelements from Wikidata in some articles, but not a 
commit a set of articles to Wikidata which our botefforts requires 
(where you need to be 100% sure of the quality and be able to correct 
these automatically if problems)


Anders

David Cuenca skrev 2014-06-16 15:40:

It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what
prevented you of using the data?
And from which different perspectives?

Cheers,
Micru


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:
we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
better a year from now
Anders



Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:

  Hoi,

I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
Thanks,
   GerardM

[1]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
wrote:

  After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This

time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
fellow wikipedians on svwp

It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
examples
*The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
helped/made
possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
Taxobox,
iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
subjects
not the wikispecialities
*the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
   There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
here
Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these manually
created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these
only
take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the
dispute.
Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
correct version on species?

As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September

And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic
entities
from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.

Anders



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,








___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[David Cuenca]

It would be interesting to know what needs to be improved, so... what
prevented you of using the data?
And from which different perspectives?

Cheers,
Micru


On Mon, Jun 16, 2014 at 1:29 PM, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
> botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
> perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
> better a year from now
> Anders
>
>
>
> Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:
>
>  Hoi,
>> I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
>> given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
>> Thanks,
>>   GerardM
>>
>> [1]
>> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
>> to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html
>>
>>
>> On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
>> wrote:
>>
>>  After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This
>>> time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
>>> initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
>>> fellow wikipedians on svwp
>>>
>>> It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
>>> was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
>>> examples
>>> *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
>>> to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
>>> became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
>>> helped/made
>>> possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
>>> Taxobox,
>>> iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
>>> subjects
>>> not the wikispecialities
>>> *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
>>>   There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
>>> here
>>> Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
>>> disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
>>> the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these manually
>>> created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these
>>> only
>>> take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the
>>> dispute.
>>> Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
>>> correct version on species?
>>>
>>> As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
>>> biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September
>>>
>>> And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
>>> researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic
>>> entities
>>> from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.
>>>
>>> Anders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>



-- 
Etiamsi omnes, ego non
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Lets talk
Thanks,
Gerard


On 16 June 2014 13:29, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our
> botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from many
> perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will look
> better a year from now
> Anders
>
>
>
> Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:
>
>  Hoi,
>> I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
>> given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
>> Thanks,
>>   GerardM
>>
>> [1]
>> http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-
>> to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html
>>
>>
>> On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten 
>> wrote:
>>
>>  After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This
>>> time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
>>> initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
>>> fellow wikipedians on svwp
>>>
>>> It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
>>> was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
>>> examples
>>> *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
>>> to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
>>> became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way
>>> helped/made
>>> possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete
>>> Taxobox,
>>> iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on
>>> subjects
>>> not the wikispecialities
>>> *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
>>>   There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and
>>> here
>>> Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
>>> disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
>>> the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these manually
>>> created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these
>>> only
>>> take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the
>>> dispute.
>>> Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
>>> correct version on species?
>>>
>>> As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
>>> biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September
>>>
>>> And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
>>> researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic
>>> entities
>>> from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.
>>>
>>> Anders
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>>> 
>>>
>> ___
>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
>> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
>> 
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
>
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Anders Wennersten]

we have now spent one year trying to use Wikidata operationally, in our 
botprojects, but found it is impossible in the state it is now, from 
many perspectives. It has been a big disappointment but we hope it will 
look better a year from now

Anders



Gerard Meijssen skrev 2014-06-16 12:44:

Hoi,
I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
Thanks,
  GerardM

[1]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten  wrote:


After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This
time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
fellow wikipedians on svwp

It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
examples
*The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made
possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox,
iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects
not the wikispecialities
*the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
  There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here
Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these manually
created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these only
take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute.
Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
correct version on species?

As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September

And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities
from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.

Anders



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,


___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 




___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

Re: [Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
I blogged about Lsjbot.. [1]. I really hope that a lot of attention is
given in finding the links to existing items in Wikidata.
Thanks,
 GerardM

[1]
http://ultimategerardm.blogspot.nl/2014/06/wikipedia-to-bot-or-not-to-bot.html


On 16 June 2014 12:25, Anders Wennersten  wrote:

> After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This
> time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The
> initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the
> fellow wikipedians on svwp
>
> It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc
> was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some
> examples
> *The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment
> to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These
> became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way helped/made
> possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with complete Taxobox,
> iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students are expert on subjects
> not the wikispecialities
> *the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.
>  There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and here
> Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500
> disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting
> the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these manually
> created articles we find  that on most other language versions, these only
> take data from one authority and are not correctly describing the dispute.
> Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but also most
> correct version on species?
>
> As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second
> biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September
>
> And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our
> researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic entities
> from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a source.
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> ___
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,
> 
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 

[Wikimedia-l] Lsjbot now starting with plant species

[Anders Wennersten]

After having changed job and residence Sverker is now on it again. This 
time Lsjbot will generate some 300 000 articles on plant species. The 
initiative is now receiving full support and even enthusiasm from the 
fellow wikipedians on svwp


It is now close to one year since the 1M article on insects, animal etc 
was generated and we now have had some feedback whereof I here give some 
examples
*The students on a university veterinary course was given the assignment 
to write article on parasitic worms and put them up om Wikipedia. These 
became excellent: complete and voluminous. This was in many way 
helped/made possible by  that there already existed Lsjbot stubs with 
complete Taxobox, iw-links, categories and basic sources. The students 
are expert on subjects not the wikispecialities
*the experts on animal etc among our Wikipedians has now shifted focus.  
There are species where the authorities disagree on the taxonomy and 
here Lsjbot did not generate any article. among birds there are some 500 
disputed species. These articles our experts now work with, highlighting 
the disputes, why, what and by whom.   And when we compare these 
manually created articles we find  that on most other language versions, 
these only take data from one authority and are not correctly describing 
the dispute. Perhaps svwp will after this not only be most complete but 
also most correct version on species?


As a side effect (not a goal in itself) we expect svwp to be the second 
biggest version, when it comes to number of articles, by August/September


And when it comes to botgeneration in general, we are continuing our 
researcheffort into generate some 0,3-0,5 M articles on geographic 
entities from all over the world  by end 2015/2016 using Wikidata as a 
source.


Anders



___
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l,