Criag is right this cant be fixed within the database because the data base is applying one truth where there is no one truth for everyone. This will always be the single biggest flaw of Wikidata no matter how data is presented it can never be the absolute truth unless its measurable through some mathematical scientific process that can replicated by everyone, translated into any language.
Wikipedia's answer is to present all considerations in an equal manor and not interpret the facts.... Wikidata defines what is fact, what is truth, what is right thats a big task and is something the community has never tackled before... should we even try, has the damage already been done or should we narrow the range of recorded data, could we flag alternatives, could we give a measure of acceptance for each fact. are there alternative means.... Quality itself has many different measures and many different ways of being measured all of which are the truth for the question being asked... Are we even asking the questions we need to in the way we need to? On 8 December 2015 at 07:52, Craig Franklin <cfrank...@halonetwork.net> wrote: > Such issues are always going to crop up when you're attempting to describe > the world using Aristotelian propositions. In a source like Wikipedia, we > can provide some nuance, explain both sides of the issue, the history of > both claims, and let the reader decide. In a database, we are limited to > saying that Jerusalem either is or is not the capital of Israel. > > To be fair, this is not an weakness that is implementation-specific to > Wikidata; it is always going to happen when you try to describe the world > in this way. It's not something that can be fixed with adding sources, or > by bolting fancy new technical gadgets onto the side of the database. > > Cheers, > Craig > > On 8 December 2015 at 06:58, Andrea Zanni <zanni.andre...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 9:53 PM, Andreas Kolbe <jayen...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > Hi Yaroslav, > > > > > > Thanks for the background. The "POV pushing" you describe is of course > > what > > > Graham and Ford are examining in their paper. > > > > > > For what it's worth, the Wikidata item for Jerusalem still contains > > the > > > statement "capital of Israel" today. > > > > > > > > > Really, I do not understand the difference between this kind of problem > and > > Wikipedia's edit wars or conflicts. > > Wikidata represents knowledge in a structured, collaborative way: both > > features define it, and it seems the op-ed just doesn't like them (either > > one or both). > > > > Aubrey > > _______________________________________________ > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > > Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.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 > Wikimediaemail@example.com > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> > -- GN. President Wikimedia Australia WMAU: http://www.wikimedia.org.au/wiki/User:Gnangarra Photo Gallery: http://gnangarra.redbubble.com _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimediafirstname.lastname@example.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>