The opposite is true, it is a must that this data is added to these items.
For a sports season it is basic information to have the sport in question
being added, as otherwise these items are practically useless. The opposite
is their purpose: to be useful. One of the first things users of the data
The Wikidata subclass of ontology/taxonomy is unfortunately a lot of
true-but-unhelpful info if you do some inferencing.
Subclassing in particular is not very useful. As an example, let's take the
Mayor of Madison, WI - for any property we say about her, what are the
classes and superclasses of
Is Wikidata again being held back by the SPARQL endpoint? I thought that
this had been resolved some time ago.
But are these triples redundant? They might be redundant in the sense that
someone who knows how sports teams, leagues, and seasons are put together
would know where to look for
These 2000 something items with no other statement than that it is a sports
season (and hence no redundancy at all) could be prioritized as they are
kind of useless right now: https://w.wiki/698Y
Best,
Jan Ainali
Den fre 23 dec. 2022 kl 22:46 skrev Dan Brickley :
>
>
> On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 at
On Fri, 23 Dec 2022 at 21:32, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <
pfpschnei...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Why should this not be done? It seems reasonable to me. Is there some
> official statement that this should not be done?
>
The Blazegraph Wikidata SPARQL endpoint (as it is a sadly abandoned
codebase)
Why should this not be done? It seems reasonable to me. Is there some
official statement that this should not be done?
More generally, where is any notion of inference in Wikidata defined?
There appear to be more problems with sports season. For example,
Please do not do this,
What you are likely wanting to accomplish is relating a sports season to a
category of sports and this is already done. So the relationships are
inferred.
On Fri, Dec 23, 2022 at 11:01 PM Romaine Wiki
wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Too many items on Wikidata still miss the basic
