On the very specific point of knowledge and how it's not always possible to boil it down to a single quantifiable value, I couldn't agree more. Thank you, Andreas, for the detailed anecdote displaying that problem, and I'll be happy to provide more if needed.
Does Wikidata have a way of marking data entries as estimates, or at least dates as circa (not just unknown)? --Ed On Nov 28, 2015 1:24 PM, "Andreas Kolbe" <jayen...@gmail.com> wrote: > Gerard, > > > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > When you compare the quality of Wikipedias with what en.wp used to be you > > are comparing apples and oranges. The Myanmar Wikipedia is better > informed > > on Myanmar than en.wp etc. > > > > > Is it? The entire Burmese Wikipedia contains a mere 31,646 content pages at > the time of writing, covering (or trying to cover) all countries of the > world, and all aspects of human knowledge.[1] > > The English Wikipedia's WikiProject Myanmar, meanwhile, has 6,713 pages > within its purview.[2] I dare say that's more articles on Myanmar than the > Burmese Wikipedia contains. As an indication, the English Wikipedia's > article on Myanmar is more than twice as long as the one in the Burmese > Wikipedia. > > Moreover, according to Freedom House[3], the internet in Myanmar is not > free: > > "The government detained and charged internet users for online activities > [...] Government officials pressured social media users not to distribute > or share content that offends the military, or disturbs the functions of > government." > > > > > When you qualify a Wikipedia as fascist, it does not follow that the data > > is suspect. Certainly when data in a source that you so easily dismiss is > > typically the same, there is not much meaning in what you say from a > > Wikidata point of view. > > > > > Data are always generated within a social context, and data generated by > political extremists or people living under oppressive regimes are suspect > whenever they have political implications. (Looking at the descriptions of > Burmese politics, my feeling is the Burmese Wikipedia is not under > significant government control, but largely written by ex-pats. However, > the situation is quite different in some other Wikipedias serving countries > labouring under similar regimes.) > > > > > PS What does your librarian think when she knows > > > > It was a he, but I'll leave him to join in himself if he chooses to. > > > I happen to work on Dukes of Friuli. Compare the data from Wikidata and the > > information by Reasonator based on the same item for one of them. > > > > https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?&q=2471519 > > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2471519 > > > > > Let's look at this example. Reasonator says of Grasulf II of Friulim, "He > died in 653". There is no source. Wikidata says he died in 653, and the > indicated source is the Italian Wikipedia. > > However, when you look at the (very brief) Italian Wikipedia article[4], > you will find that the year 653 is given with a question mark. The English > Wikipedia, in contrast, states, in its similarly brief article[5], > > "Nothing more is known about Grasulf and the date of his death is > uncertain." > > Do you now see the problem about nuance? Reasonator and Wikidata > confidently proclaim as uncontested fact something that in fact is rather > uncertain. > > The sole source cited by both the English and the Italian Wikipedia is the > Historia Langobardorum, available in Wikisource.[6] My Latin is a bit > rusty, but while the Historia mentions that Ago succeeded Grasulf upon the > latter's death, it says nothing specific about when that was. The > Historia's time indications are in general very vague, usually limited to > the phrase "Circa haec tempora", meaning "about this time". So it is in > this case. > > For reference, the Google Knowledge Graph states equally confidently that > Grasulf II of Friuli died in 651AD. This may be based on the English > Wikipedia's unsourced claim (in the template at the bottom of the English > Wikipedia article) that his reign ended c. 651, or on some other source > like Freebase. > > The other Wikipedias that have articles on Grasulf II provide the following > death dates > > Catalan: 651 > Galician: 653 > Lithuanian: 653 > Polish: 651 > Romanian: Unknown > Russian: 653 > Ukrainian: 651 > > As for published sources, I can offer Ersch's Allgemeine Encyclopädie > (1849), which states on page 209 that Grasulf II died in 651.[7] > > The extreme vagueness of the available dates is pointed out by Thomas > Hodgkin in Vol. 7 of "Italy and Her Invaders" (1895). Hodgkin puts the end > of Grasulf's reign at 645, "as a mere random guess", and adds that "De > Rubeis, following Sigonius", puts the accession of Ago in 661.[8] > > There may well be better and more recent sources beyond my reach, but > having these published dates in Wikidata, with the source references, would > actually make some sense. Unsourced data, not so much. > > Answers are comfortable, but they are not knowledge when they are > unverifiable and/or wrong. > > > [1] https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_Wikipedias#10_000.2B_articles > [2] > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Myanmar_(Burma)/Assessment > > [3] https://freedomhouse.org/report/freedom-net/2015/myanmar > [4] > > https://it.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grasulfo_II_del_Friuli&oldid=76641444 > [5] > > https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Grasulf_II_of_Friuli&oldid=633223880 > [6] https://la.wikisource.org/wiki/Historia_Langobardorum/Liber_IV > [7] > > https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=FzxYAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA209&dq=grasulf+friuli+651%7C653&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiNh5Tz0rPJAhUIChoKHV6lDTYQ6AEILzAC#v=onepage&q=grasulf%20friuli%20651%7C653&f=false > [8] > > https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=8ToOAwAAQBAJ&dq=grasulf+friuli+651%7C653&q=Grasulf+%22mere+random+guess%22#v=snippet&q=Grasulf%20%22mere%20random%20guess%22&f=false > _______________________________________________ > 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, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ 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, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
