Hoi,
Thank you for quoting out of context.

This is a quote to get the context: " However when a list like a Wikipedia
category of alumni of a given university is considered, there are no new
errors introduced by a bot. All the errors included in Wikidata are the
errors that already exist in a Wikipedia".

My reality is that I have imported masses of people with awards and
categories with people who are staff or alumni of universities. I have
observed the issues that I described, I have blogged about it. My reality
is that I make errors like everyone else. Because of this, when I import
data from a category, I have learned to check the first entry and see if it
created the expected statement. The start of this process are statements on
the item for the category indicating what it contains. This allows later
processes to be done fully automated by a bot.

Given that we include data from many Wikipedias, information from ORCID, we
know about more people with articles in any Wikipedia that went to those
universities for study or work. It means that we can, if a "community"
allows for it, add those people to Wikipedia categories.

NB I have blogged about this for years now. People seem not to be
interested in context [1].

However, both Wikipedias, Wikidata get it wrong. My argument, my point is
that when we do work together, we get the facts straight for the subjects
that are under consideration. The notion that Wikidata is done importing
from sources is a fallacy. We are not ready for consolidation, most items
are incomplete, often impossible to disambiguate and we are stuck with
Wikipedia think that prevents us from seeing a bigger picture. The bigger
picture is that the "sum of all knowledge" is not in articles nor in items.
It is in how we bring things together.
Thanks,
     GerardM

[1] https://ultimategerardm.blogspot.com/

On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 22:34, Jennifer Pryor-Summers <
jennifer.pryorsumm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> "All the errors included in Wikidata are the errors that already exist in a
> Wikipedia,"
>
> That's rather far from being correct. I already indicated one form of
> error, caused by erroneous scraping by bot from an external data set.  And
> to the extent that information is inserted by humans from whatever sources,
> that is subject to error too.  And less checkable as Wikidata does not
> reference sources directly as does Wikipedia.
>
> JPS
>
> On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 11:46 AM Gerard Meijssen <
> gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hoi,
> > The biggest benefit of Wikidata is that it knows about more subjects than
> > any Wikipedia has articles. Like Wikipedia it has its own problems but it
> > has its own benefits. The biggest problem with Wikidata is not its
> quality
> > and the biggest benefit of Wikipedia is not its quality. Both have
> issues.
> > All Wikimedia projects rely on their communities, that is where things
> are
> > the same.
> >
> > The notion that a community and text is better is in itself a fallacy
> > because the integrity of data is easier to check with data and not so
> much
> > with text. An example: I have repeatedly indicated that 6% of all the
> > entries in a list in a Wikipedia is wrong. The problem is one of
> > disambiguation..  For instance, for a chemistry award you would expect at
> > least scientists better chemists. When a hockey player or a movie star is
> > among them, it follows that you want to check this out. Easy to do at
> > Wikidata, impossible at Wikipedia. It is possible but only only when
> > Wikipedians and Wikidatans collaborate (they are not really).
> >
> > When you suggest that bots are less secure than humans you are wrong as
> > well. Research shows that a human with the best of intentions has an
> error
> > rate of something like 6%. However when a list like a Wikipedia category
> of
> > alumni of a given university is considered, there are no new errors
> > introduced by a bot. All the errors included in Wikidata are the errors
> > that already exist in a Wikipedia,. When we were to have consolidation
> > processes, once a person is known to have studied at a university we
> could
> > synchronise categories and data. In addition to this, bots import
> > authorised data from ORCID indicating former students of universitiies. A
> > consolidation process could update update both Wikidata and all
> Wikipedias
> > who take an interest.
> >
> > In addition when people search withing Wikidata, never mind the language
> > they will find what Wikidata has to offer. Any Wikipedia is a subset of
> > what a Wikipedia has to offer.
> >
> > So as much as both Wikidata Wikipedia are wonderful products, there is
> room
> > for improvement. Improvement will only happen when we truly care about
> > sharing in the sum of all knowledge, when we truly care about quality and
> > not assume that "we" (whoever we is) has a superior proposition.
> > Thanks,
> >       GerardM
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 10:45, Gabriel Thullen <gabr...@thullen.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > Sorry about this mail, I hate to rain on somebody's parade but:
> > > Ever since Wikidata was set up, there have been more edit made by bots
> > than
> > > by humans (registered contributor + anonymous contributor), except for
> a
> > > few periods in 2017 and 2018. On the other hand, the activity of the
> bots
> > > on the English Wikipedia has almost always been lower than the activity
> > of
> > > anonymous contributors, and that activity has always been well below
> that
> > > of registered contributors. There was one exception, in 2013 where
> there
> > > was a spike of bot activity.
> > > We could also talk about the average number of edits per contributor
> > which
> > > appears to be around 100 on the English Wikipedia and 1,200 on Wikidata
> > > (these numbers are after removing the estimated edits done by bots).
> > Quite
> > > a difference.
> > > The different Wikimedia projects rely on the community to police and
> > curate
> > > the content of these encyclopedias and data collections. I am
> therefore a
> > > bit wary of what is happening with Wikidata where more edits are still
> > > being done by bots than by real humans (by "real" I mean "real" not
> like
> > > "real" as in the TV series "real humans")
> > >
> > > Best regards
> > > Gabe
> > >
> > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:25 AM Olushola Olaniyan <
> > > olaniyanshol...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > This is a good news.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers!!!
> > > >
> > > > Olaniyan Olushola
> > > > CEO DataAccess Systems Ltd
> > > > President, Wikimedia Nigeria
> > > > Member, Affcom ( Wikimedia Foundation)
> > > > Co-director Wiki Women Radio
> > > > www.wikimedia.org.ng
> > > > sh...@wikimedia.org.ng
> > > > olaniyanshol...@gmail.com
> > > > +2348167352512
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019, 08:52 Ziko van Dijk <zvand...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hello Ariel Glenn,
> > > > > Thanks for the notification, very interesting. Well, we all know
> that
> > > > > making a lot of edits on Wikidata is "easier" or happens quicker
> than
> > > on
> > > > > Wikipedia, for various reasons. But still it is a nice milestone to
> > > > > congratulate to Wikidata. Hereby. :-)
> > > > > Kind regards
> > > > > Ziko
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Mi., 20. März 2019 um 07:58 Uhr schrieb Gerard Meijssen <
> > > > > gerard.meijs...@gmail.com>:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hoi,
> > > > > > So in stead of calling us all Wikipedia, let us be known as
> > > Wikidata...
> > > > > > HUUUUU
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > >       GerardM
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Wed, 20 Mar 2019 at 07:48, Ariel Glenn WMF <
> ar...@wikimedia.org
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Wikidata surpassed the English language Wikipedia in the number
> > of
> > > > > > > revisions in the database, about 45 minutes ago today.I was
> > tipped
> > > > off
> > > > > > by a
> > > > > > > tweet [1] a few day ago and have been watching via a script
> that
> > > > > displays
> > > > > > > the largest revision id and its timestamp. Here's the point
> where
> > > > > > Wikidata
> > > > > > > overtakes English Wikipedia (times in UTC):
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py
> -d
> > > > > > > www.wikidata.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./get_revid_info.py
> -d
> > > > > > > en.wikipedia.org -r 888603998,888603999,888604000
> > > > > > > revid 888603998 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > > > revid 888603999 at 2019-03-20T06:00:59Z
> > > > > > > revid 888604000 at 2019-03-20T06:01:00Z
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Only 45 minutes later, the gap is already over 2000 revsions:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [ariel@bigtrouble wikidata-huge]$ python3 ./compare_sizes.py
> > > > > > > Last enwiki revid is 888606979 and last wikidata revid is
> > 888629401
> > > > > > > 2019-03-20 06:46:03: diff is 22422
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Have a nice day!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Ariel
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > [1] https://twitter.com/MonsieurAZ/status/1106565116508729345
> > > > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > > > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines and
> > > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > > New messages to: 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 and
> > > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > > New messages to: 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 and
> > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> > New messages to: 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 and
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
> New messages to: 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 and 
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia-l
New messages to: Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, 
<mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>

Reply via email to