Am 04.05.2014 22:50, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
When you see a label in Reasonator, you will find that when it is not in
*YOUR*
language, it is underlined in red. You can hover over a label and you will be
prompted to add a label in the named language.
Nice. Label and Description should
Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de writes:
Am 05.05.2014 01:35, schrieb Joe Filceolaire:
I agree with Gerard that you only edit your language label in the 'label'
edit
box. If the label box is showing the label in a fallback language then it
should
be visually different -
Am 05.05.2014 10:41, schrieb P. Blissenbach:
There are two things which are not directly related to variants but imho
could be
fixed in one go with them:
- Entries are using up much too much valuable space. I wish to delete all
whitespace,
and use a more list orientated approach. At least
Hoi,
When you want to do the stuff you are talking about, you do it in Wikidata
in the area where all the aliases, descriptions and stuff is. That is for
that specific item. When you see fall backs in the statement area of an
item, it is a SERVICE that you can add missing labels. When they are
Hoi,
When the other languages box needs to become more flexible, it is a
different problem that has nothing to do with the ability to understand
what statements are made. At this time it is an absolute inability when
there is no label in *YOUR* language.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 5 May 2014 10:21,
Hi,
I'm having some cases where a work has been attributed to an author by a
source, but the source itself says this attribution is dubious, or it is
contesting a previous attributions as spurious.
As I see it, the rank of the statement is not deprecated (in fact it is
normal or even preferred),
Hi all,
What I don't understand is the need to keep all labels blank until
they are updated by hand. Especially for biographical articles, it
would be nice to have original spellings of the person's name, even if
it's Chinese or something else really far away from English. That
might serve as a
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 11:55 AM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
What I don't understand is the need to keep all labels blank until
they are updated by hand. Especially for biographical articles, it
would be nice to have original spellings of the person's name, even if
it's
Am 05.05.2014 10:57, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Hoi,
When the other languages box needs to become more flexible, it is a
different
problem that has nothing to do with the ability to understand what statements
are made. At this time it is an absolute inability when there is no label in
*YOUR*
Am 05.05.2014 10:55, schrieb Gerard Meijssen:
Daniel, what you suggest is overly complicated and the notion that it has to
be perfect stands in the way of implementing a working solution. A solution
that
is the difference between statements that are useful and statements that are
absolutely
Hoi,
I am talking about statements.. I am not asking for selecting items that
have no label in a language.. This would only work if auto descriptions are
in use.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 5 May 2014 12:52, Daniel Kinzler daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de wrote:
Am 05.05.2014 10:57, schrieb Gerard
David,
I assume you are referring to books. The same is true for works of
art. The reason why these statements are still valuable is because it
is an attribution based on grounds determined by someone somewhere and
based on that loose statement alone are therefore considered of
interest. You
Hello all,
I am playing around with properties at the moment, especially filtering
out a certain kind of properties.
So I wondered if it wouldn't be a nice thing, if properties were
classified in some way.
Example: (Numbering is just for readability and does not hold any semantics)
P… is
Hi Jane,
No, I was not referring to books in particular, but of course it could be
applied to books as well, and to works of art, and to many things in
general.
I agree that the statement is valuable and that it should be included, but
I don't know how to represent it.
Following your examples,
Hmm, I guess I am still not getting it - both of your examples
wouldn't make it into one of my Wikipedia articles, and I would
probably remove them from an existing article if I was working on it.
If it's not factual enough for Wikipedia, then it's not factual enough
for Wikidata.
I recall a
See
Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/How_to_classify_items:_lots_of_specific_type_properties_or_a_few_generic_ones%3F#Subproperty_of
for a discussion of a 'subproperty' relation. where a property can have a
statement that it is a 'subproperty' of another property and the query
engine could search on
Well in the case of attributions of artworks, these things tend to go
back and forth a lot, so museums take a fairly pragmatic approach when
they invent a pseudo-artist. They will attribute something like a
previously attributed B to school of B or follower of B and sort
it as B for all other
Mark it deprecated and include a quotation (It's a string property) about
how dubious it is in the source statements.
Joe
On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Jane Darnell jane...@gmail.com wrote:
Well in the case of attributions of artworks, these things tend to go
back and forth a lot, so
We can't at the moment make statements on properties, nor use properties
as value in statement, so this is a little premature. It's on the devs high
priority list
, amongst queries though.
Atm, properties classification is not really something we do well. We got a
list of properties wikipage and
I think the best scheme I've seen like this yet is at
https://developers.google.com/freebase/v1/search-metaschema
In the RDF model it is easy to make statements about predicates
?p a :SocialRelation .
the key is that it is multi-dimensional so probably a given predicate
will be a member of
David Cuenca dacu...@gmail.com writes:
Jane, this info is in Wikipedia. For instance see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waltzes_(Chopin)
N. 17 was attributed to Chopin (Kobylańska and others),
Chomiński says that claim is spurious. And that is just
one of many examples.
According to
Hi,
I got interested in subclass of (P279) and instance of (P31) statements
recently. I was surprised by two things:
(1) There are quite a lot of subclass of statements: tenth of thousands.
(2) Many of them make a lot of sense, and (in particular) are not
(obvious) copies of Wikipedia
Hi Markus,
You asked who is creating all these [subclass of] statements and how is
this done?
The class hierarchy in
http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/tree.html?q=Q35120rp=279lang=enshows
a few relatively large subclass trees for specialist domains,
including molecular biology and
23 matches
Mail list logo
