[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Lydia_Pintscher]

Lydia_Pintscher added a parent task: T314081: [EPIC] Reorganize sections of 
Wikidata Item and Property pages .

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Lydia_Pintscher
Cc: Masssly, Epidosis, Jsamwrites, abian, Moebeus, Tagishsimon, PKM, 
Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, Ayack, Tpt, 
MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, 
Manuel, Aklapper, Astuthiodit_1, karapayneWMDE, Invadibot, maantietaja, 
ItamarWMDE, Akuckartz, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, 
LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, 
Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Salgo60]

Salgo60 added a comment.


  > In general, I think we should rather restrict the ability to add,
  
  Another pattern used in iNaturalist 
 is that you let more people 
confirm an observation and then set research Grade 

  
  maybe it could be used in Wikidata for P279 
 ?!?!?

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Salgo60
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Quiddity]

Quiddity updated the task description.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Quiddity
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[ArthurPSmith]

ArthurPSmith added a comment.


  Good points from @MisterSynergy and others above. One other case I often run 
into is problems caused by item merges; if both original items had P279 
 statements this can cause significant 
trouble (for example it is a common source of subclass loops).

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: ArthurPSmith
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[MisterSynergy]

MisterSynergy added a comment.


  Good to see this problem being addressed. Some remarks:
  
  - As much as I am aware, we do not fail the classification job completely. 
It's the P279 /subclass-of hierarchy 
which some refer to as the "Wikidata ontology" that is problematic, because it 
is generic in topic, global in reach, and does not closely resemble any other 
ontology from elsewhere so that we cannot stricly build this on sources. I 
suggest to limit modifications to P279  
claims.
  - Main reasons for the poor P279  
ontology, from daily Wikidata editing experience over several years:
- Requires high level of knowledge and experience. We leave editors pretty 
much alone to learn the necessary skills.
- Poor tooling; simple edits in the P279 
 hierarchy can have severe adverse 
effects that are difficult to project even for experienced users.
- Lack of awareness; editors often modify P279 
 claims to fix something else, such as 
e.g. a constraint violation in another item (it would be better to fix the 
item, leave the constraint violation there for others to fix it, or sometimes 
to fix the constraint definition).
- Also: often there is not a clear "correct" or "incorrect" approach when 
classifying data items, and some situations are arguably not easy to resolve. 
This needs more community discussion and probably also an explicit definition 
of the term "Wikidata ontology", its purposes, and its design principles.
  - In general, I think we should rather restrict the ability to add, modify, 
or remove P279  main values by 
introducing a new user group "ontologist" (or so). This would be similar to 
"property creator", which is another user group based on technical skills and 
experience in a certain field. The community could then elect or assign the 
right to interested, qualified users. My only concern is that this might not 
scale well.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: MisterSynergy
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Streetmathematician]

Streetmathematician added a comment.


  I have commented elsewhere 
,
 on the fact that it appears to me to be a very difficult task to collect 
"classifying Properties", but I'd like to comment here on the technical side:
  
  Currently, in the entity view, we group statements based on the datatype of 
their property values: Most everything goes into Statements, but identifiers go 
into Identifiers. This proposal appears to be about adding a third group, 
"Classification", to the top of the list.
  
  If we decide that is a good idea, the next question would be how to select 
which statements go into Classification. The two options I see are to provide a 
fixed list of such properties in the Wikibase configuration file, or to derive 
the list of properties from the Wikidata information itself, by classifying 
properties as "appears in Classification", "appears in Statements", and 
possibly others.
  
  I've looked into the second option and it's straightforward to implement. We 
need a new StatementGrouper that looks up the Property, finds an "appears in" 
statement attached to it, and uses it to determine where the statement appears.
  
  I think that's a good idea as a generic Wikibase feature. It's a few extra 
lines of code.
  
  As for the first option, that would require a strong, immutable consensus of 
which parts of the Wikidata ontology are "Classifying" and which aren't, strong 
enough to justify putting it into the WikiBASE configuration and not deriving 
it from the WikiDATA database. I don't think such a consensus exists.
  
  I think the first option is a bad idea.
  
  (//My// vague intuition is that what people want to see as Classification is 
statements that are true "by definition". That's easy enough to do for some 
statements: elephants are mammals by taxonomical definition. It's impossible to 
do for mathematical objects which often have different, nontrivially equivalent 
definitions (worse, whether or not they're equivalent may depend on the precise 
flavor of mathematics in use))

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Streetmathematician
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Tagishsimon]

Tagishsimon added a comment.


  It's always a huge red flag, when assessing a proposed change, to read a user 
story which is self-evidently detached from reality. This and other klaxons of 
doom are found in this proposal.
  
  1. It's at best a polite fiction to suggest there are any users who "would 
like to quickly see which parts of an Item define the Wikidata ontology". A 
truer user story is: "as as experienced WD user I'd like other people to stop 
breaking the ontology". All that flows from a fictitious user story is water 
from a poisoned well.
  
  2. The key identified problem is that people break parts of ontologies from 
time to time. In this proposal, there's some sort of [miracle occurs here] 
process inferred, wherein changing the order & providing a heading, 
"Classification", for a set of property statements in an item, will make users 
who are sufficiently incautious as to break ontologies, and who may indeed not 
know what an ontology is, not break things.
  
  3. "This dedicated section will make it more obvious that some properties 
modify the ontology." Only in your dreams.
  
  4. PerArthurPSmith, not even The Most Basic analysis of what is an 
ontological property (e.g. ?item wdt:P1647 
* wd:P279 
.  ) has been made by those proposing 
this change. Real HeadDesk stuff.
  
  5. Given the problem issue, conspicuously absent from the proposal is any 
suggestion for evaluating the effect of the change. afaics, we're going to 
evaluate the outcome based on feels - ("user experience with this change") - 
rather than, for instance, metrics on changes to the incidence of reverted 
ontology changes.
  
  6. Come to that, absent from the proposal is any measurement of the incidence 
of ontology-breaking, or an analysis of the edit count of the breakers. The 
whole thing is predicated on some sort of faith and belief.
  
  7. Absent from this proposal are any communty member proposers. ("If 
possible, we should also ping the community members that originally discussed 
this idea.") For whatever reason - Parkinson's Law, presumably - WMDE has 
decided this change is a good thing (proposed by WMDE, promoted on Chat by 
WMDE).
  
  So to sum up, the proposel is an ill-analysed, wishful thinking, cargo cult. 
The main expected outcome is that a bunch of property statements will be 
promoted in prominence on the item UI, delighting ontologists and, for 
instance, depressing geographers and biographers who will see their preferred 
statements sink beneath the fold. New incautious users will continue to bork 
things (see also: scorpion/frog koan).
  
  It does not matter much if you do rearrange the deckchairs as you propose, so 
to that extent, knock youself out. It's not a good substitute for getting on 
with other more pressing problems, and it is emblematic of the capricious 
approach to prioritisation and resource utilisation we are so used to with WMDE.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Tagishsimon
Cc: Tagishsimon, PKM, Naseweis520, ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, 
Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[ArthurPSmith]

ArthurPSmith added a comment.


  Hmm - I agree with the above that P2860 
 should not be on this list. If we are 
including the "partitive" properties like P361 
 and P527 
 (taxonomic in the sense that they 
group parts of something with the whole), what about P355 
 (subsidiary) and P749 
 (parent organization), which are used 
that way for organizations, or other properties of that sort?
  On the other hand your list does not include the truly taxonomic property 
P171  (parent taxon) - which is 
explicitly a subproperty of P279 . 
P10019  (term in higher taxon) seems 
to also be a subproperty of P279 .

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: ArthurPSmith
Cc: ArthurPSmith, Streetmathematician, Csisc, Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, 
TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, 
Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, 
QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, 
Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Csisc]

Csisc added a comment.


  To clarify, I give an example of a Wikidata property that can be included 
there according to our discussion: "Instance of".
  
  - If X is an instance of Y, Y cannot be an instance of X. So, the property is 
taxonomic.
  - Any item can be the subject of "instance of". So, this property is basic.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Csisc
Cc: Csisc, Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Csisc]

Csisc added a comment.


  We already discussed this as Data Engineering and Semantics Research Unit, 
University of Sfax. We should include there the basic and taxonomic properties.
  
  By Basic, we mean elementary and generic relation types.
  
  By Taxonomic, we mean non-symmetric relation types.
  
  If the relation type passes these two criteria, we can include it in 
Classification Part.
  
  For example, "different from" is symmetric. If X is "different from" Y, then 
Y is also "different from" X. So, it cannot be included in Classification Part.
  
  For example, "cites work" is not a generic relation. In fact, it cannot be 
assigned to an item about a football game or a portrait. So, it cannot be 
included in Classification Part.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Csisc
Cc: Csisc, Ayack, Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Tpt]

Tpt added a comment.


  It's a great idea! I just believe P2860 
 (cites work) should be removed from 
the list. It's definitely not a classifying property.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Tpt
Cc: Tpt, MisterSynergy, TomT0m, Salgo60, Mohammed_Sadat_WMDE, 
Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, Akuckartz, 
Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, _jensen, 
rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org

[Wikidata-bugs] [Maniphest] T295275: Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property pages for classifying Properties

[Manuel]

Manuel renamed this task from "Dedicated section on Wikidata Item pages for 
classifying properties" to "Dedicated section on Wikidata Item and Property 
pages for classifying Properties".
Manuel updated the task description.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295275

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: Manuel
Cc: Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Manuel, Aklapper, Invadibot, maantietaja, 
Akuckartz, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, LawExplorer, 
_jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331
___
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org
To unsubscribe send an email to wikidata-bugs-le...@lists.wikimedia.org