Obviously, a main aspect of the data presented in the todo stats is "referenced statements". (even though the chart labels there are wrong). Whether or not this query maps directly to todo is actually not the key issue. Clearly, measuring data quality requires that the arity of statement to reference relationships are quantified. Right?
This assumption is based on Wikipedia's policy of maintaining a NPOV. And, unfortunately, all unreferenced statements contain a "bias" that makes the data theoretically worthless, even though they may in fact be "correct". On 8 Dec 2015 1:52 pm, "Addshore" <[email protected]> wrote: > Addshore added a comment. > > Okay, I'm struggling to see which part of the todo stats this is covering > > > TASK DETAIL > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T117234 > > EMAIL PREFERENCES > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ > > To: Christopher, Addshore > Cc: Wikidata-bugs, Lydia_Pintscher, StudiesWorld, Addshore, Christopher, > Aklapper, aude, Mbch331 > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata-bugs mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
