On 9 April 2014 20:09, Roberto Alsina <roberto.als...@canonical.com> wrote:
> For example: most actors don't have occupation::Actor. Or, publicly traded > companies (example: Microsoft) have a "Traded as" field in their infoboxes > but no matching data in DBPedia. [Resending to list; apologies to Roberto] I've done some work to get things like people's occupations/ reason for notability, and gender, added to their infobox on the English Wikipedia, but have met a lot of resistance (details on request), so it's slow going. An example of success is the role "alpine skier" and gender symbol in the infobox on on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tina_Maze I've also done a considerable amount of work to deploy sub-templates in infoboxes, to improve machine-readability and data granularity, for things like dates, and multiple values, about which I've posted here from time to time. Again, there is resistance in some quarters, but we've had more successes there. I'm always interested to hear about how these are or are not useful and what else Wikipedians could do to improve the reusability of our content. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Put Bad Developers to Shame Dominate Development with Jenkins Continuous Integration Continuously Automate Build, Test & Deployment Start a new project now. Try Jenkins in the cloud. http://p.sf.net/sfu/13600_Cloudbees _______________________________________________ Dbpedia-discussion mailing list Dbpedia-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dbpedia-discussion
