Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Well you would have to drill down into the data to find their definitions
of bot users, but the conclusions seem to state that this is all pretty
premature anyway. If you look at the overall statistics that just measure
the basics (number of labels/descriptions/statements per item over time,
etc.) it starts to tell the story of Wikidata in a more meaningful way. See
the stats page here: https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/stats.php

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:01 AM, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:

> The Springer paywall is no longer a problem for open science since there
> is a certain Russian website, but in this case I see that we can find the
> full article on ResearchGate:
> https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alessandro_Piscopo/
> publication/319272942_What_makes_a_good_collaborative_
> knowledge_graph_Group_composition_and_quality_in_Wikidata/links/
> 599fd3d2a6fdccf594266835/What-makes-a-good-collaborative-
> knowledge-graph-Group-composition-and-quality-in-Wikidata .pdf
>
> 2017-09-07 8:46 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen :
>
>> Hoi,
>> Sorry but with only conclusions it is just that.. hidden behind a
>> paywall. Consequently it does not make a difference; our community cannot
>> comment. Please choose a different venue for publications.
>> Thanks,
>>  GerardM
>>
>> On 7 September 2017 at 08:37, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:
>>
>>> Well, here is a fresh paper that seems to have been written to answer
>>> the questions I had after this discussion.
>>>
>>> " We performed a regression analysis to investigate how the
>>> contribution of different types of users, i.e. bots and human editors,
>>> registered or anonymous, influences outcome quality in Wikidata. Moreover,
>>> we looked at the effects of tenure and interest diversity among registered
>>> users. Our findings show that a balanced contribution of bots and human
>>> editors positively influence outcome quality, whereas higher numbers of
>>> anonymous edits may hinder performance. Tenure and interest diversity
>>> within groups also lead to higher quality. "
>>>
>>> https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_19
>>>
>>> 2017-09-02 15:53 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell :
>>>
 Thanks! That really made me laugh and I needed that. The wonderful
 story of Wikidata's history set within the wonderful story of Wikipedia's
 history anno 2014 is truly amazing. Using that information to describe
 Wikidata today is like trying to imagine the "bot wars" that have recently
 become a viral hit on various social media websites. You could say Wikidata
 was born out of a need to end "bot wars" between updating interwikilink
 bots. After that "bot war" ended though, it looks like we created a new
 "bot war" where Wikipedians became afraid of this new project because they
 might get bitten by a bot.
 https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/08/30/wikipedia-bot-pocalypse/

 On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Ettore RIZZA 
 wrote:

> Hi Jane,
>
> I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
> never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just 
> that
> I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in 
> a
> paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
> thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
> part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
> the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
> sorry if I misunderstood.
>
> ** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October
> 2012; see the table here for key facts about its current content. It has
> also become the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per
> minute, or a half million per day, about three times as many as the 
> English
> Wikipedia. Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors
> create for automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are
> still made by humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus.
> Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the
> ACM*, 2014, vol. 57, no 10, p. 78-85.)
>
> 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :
>
>>
>> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>> >
>> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my
>> Wikipedian friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react 
>> the
>> way you did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between
>> Wikipedia and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something
>> about the "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is 
>> technical,
>> or that being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read 
>> and
>> without "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to 
>> help
>> out.
>>
>> I a

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ettore RIZZA]

The Springer paywall is no longer a problem for open science since there is
a certain Russian website, but in this case I see that we can find the full
article on ResearchGate:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Alessandro_Piscopo/publication/319272942_What_makes_a_good_collaborative_knowledge_graph_Group_composition_and_quality_in_Wikidata/links/599fd3d2a6fdccf594266835/What-makes-a-good-collaborative-knowledge-graph-Group-composition-and-quality-in-Wikidata
.pdf 

2017-09-07 8:46 GMT+02:00 Gerard Meijssen :

> Hoi,
> Sorry but with only conclusions it is just that.. hidden behind a paywall.
> Consequently it does not make a difference; our community cannot comment.
> Please choose a different venue for publications.
> Thanks,
>  GerardM
>
> On 7 September 2017 at 08:37, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:
>
>> Well, here is a fresh paper that seems to have been written to answer the
>> questions I had after this discussion.
>>
>> " We performed a regression analysis to investigate how the contribution
>> of different types of users, i.e. bots and human editors, registered or
>> anonymous, influences outcome quality in Wikidata. Moreover, we looked at
>> the effects of tenure and interest diversity among registered users. Our
>> findings show that a balanced contribution of bots and human editors
>> positively influence outcome quality, whereas higher numbers of anonymous
>> edits may hinder performance. Tenure and interest diversity within groups
>> also lead to higher quality. "
>>
>> https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_19
>>
>> 2017-09-02 15:53 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell :
>>
>>> Thanks! That really made me laugh and I needed that. The wonderful story
>>> of Wikidata's history set within the wonderful story of Wikipedia's history
>>> anno 2014 is truly amazing. Using that information to describe Wikidata
>>> today is like trying to imagine the "bot wars" that have recently become a
>>> viral hit on various social media websites. You could say Wikidata was born
>>> out of a need to end "bot wars" between updating interwikilink bots. After
>>> that "bot war" ended though, it looks like we created a new "bot war" where
>>> Wikipedians became afraid of this new project because they might get bitten
>>> by a bot.
>>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/08/30/wikipedia-bot-pocalypse/
>>>
>>> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Ettore RIZZA 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi Jane,

 I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
 never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just that
 I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in a
 paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
 thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
 part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
 the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
 sorry if I misunderstood.

 ** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October
 2012; see the table here for key facts about its current content. It has
 also become the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per
 minute, or a half million per day, about three times as many as the English
 Wikipedia. Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors
 create for automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are
 still made by humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus.
 Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the
 ACM*, 2014, vol. 57, no 10, p. 78-85.)

 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :

>
> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> >
> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my
> Wikipedian friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react 
> the
> way you did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between
> Wikipedia and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something
> about the "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is 
> technical,
> or that being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read 
> and
> without "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to 
> help
> out.
>
> I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that
> you are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata
> is nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.
>
> But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
> Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? 
> Or
> would the vastness of it cause a problem?
>
> I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
> counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
> point wouldn't it be useful if a bot

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Gerard Meijssen]

Hoi,
Sorry but with only conclusions it is just that.. hidden behind a paywall.
Consequently it does not make a difference; our community cannot comment.
Please choose a different venue for publications.
Thanks,
 GerardM

On 7 September 2017 at 08:37, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:

> Well, here is a fresh paper that seems to have been written to answer the
> questions I had after this discussion.
>
> " We performed a regression analysis to investigate how the contribution
> of different types of users, i.e. bots and human editors, registered or
> anonymous, influences outcome quality in Wikidata. Moreover, we looked at
> the effects of tenure and interest diversity among registered users. Our
> findings show that a balanced contribution of bots and human editors
> positively influence outcome quality, whereas higher numbers of anonymous
> edits may hinder performance. Tenure and interest diversity within groups
> also lead to higher quality. "
>
> https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_19
>
> 2017-09-02 15:53 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell :
>
>> Thanks! That really made me laugh and I needed that. The wonderful story
>> of Wikidata's history set within the wonderful story of Wikipedia's history
>> anno 2014 is truly amazing. Using that information to describe Wikidata
>> today is like trying to imagine the "bot wars" that have recently become a
>> viral hit on various social media websites. You could say Wikidata was born
>> out of a need to end "bot wars" between updating interwikilink bots. After
>> that "bot war" ended though, it looks like we created a new "bot war" where
>> Wikipedians became afraid of this new project because they might get bitten
>> by a bot.
>> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/08/30/wikipedia-bot-pocalypse/
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Ettore RIZZA 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Jane,
>>>
>>> I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
>>> never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just that
>>> I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in a
>>> paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
>>> thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
>>> part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
>>> the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
>>> sorry if I misunderstood.
>>>
>>> ** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October 2012;
>>> see the table here for key facts about its current content. It has also
>>> become the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per minute,
>>> or a half million per day, about three times as many as the English
>>> Wikipedia. Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors
>>> create for automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are
>>> still made by humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus.
>>> Wikidata: a free collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the
>>> ACM*, 2014, vol. 57, no 10, p. 78-85.)
>>>
>>> 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :
>>>

 > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
 >
 > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
 friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
 did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
 and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
 "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
 being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
 "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.

 I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you
 are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is
 nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.

 But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
 Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or
 would the vastness of it cause a problem?

 I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
 counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
 point wouldn't it be useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for
 new entries and then added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them
 out?

 I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical
 of the current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.

 //Ed

 ___
 Wikidata mailing list
 Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
 https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata


>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ettore RIZZA]

Well, here is a fresh paper that seems to have been written to answer the
questions I had after this discussion.

" We performed a regression analysis to investigate how the contribution of
different types of users, i.e. bots and human editors, registered or
anonymous, influences outcome quality in Wikidata. Moreover, we looked at
the effects of tenure and interest diversity among registered users. Our
findings show that a balanced contribution of bots and human editors
positively influence outcome quality, whereas higher numbers of anonymous
edits may hinder performance. Tenure and interest diversity within groups
also lead to higher quality. "

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-67217-5_19

2017-09-02 15:53 GMT+02:00 Jane Darnell :

> Thanks! That really made me laugh and I needed that. The wonderful story
> of Wikidata's history set within the wonderful story of Wikipedia's history
> anno 2014 is truly amazing. Using that information to describe Wikidata
> today is like trying to imagine the "bot wars" that have recently become a
> viral hit on various social media websites. You could say Wikidata was born
> out of a need to end "bot wars" between updating interwikilink bots. After
> that "bot war" ended though, it looks like we created a new "bot war" where
> Wikipedians became afraid of this new project because they might get bitten
> by a bot.
> https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/08/30/wikipedia-bot-pocalypse/
>
> On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Ettore RIZZA 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jane,
>>
>> I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
>> never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just that
>> I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in a
>> paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
>> thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
>> part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
>> the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
>> sorry if I misunderstood.
>>
>> ** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October 2012;
>> see the table here for key facts about its current content. It has also
>> become the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per minute,
>> or a half million per day, about three times as many as the English
>> Wikipedia. Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors
>> create for automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are
>> still made by humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus. Wikidata:
>> a free collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the ACM*, 2014,
>> vol. 57, no 10, p. 78-85.)
>>
>> 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :
>>
>>>
>>> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
>>> friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
>>> did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
>>> and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
>>> "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
>>> being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
>>> "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.
>>>
>>> I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you
>>> are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is
>>> nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.
>>>
>>> But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
>>> Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or
>>> would the vastness of it cause a problem?
>>>
>>> I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
>>> counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
>>> point wouldn't it be useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for
>>> new entries and then added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them
>>> out?
>>>
>>> I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical of
>>> the current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.
>>>
>>> //Ed
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Thanks! That really made me laugh and I needed that. The wonderful story of
Wikidata's history set within the wonderful story of Wikipedia's history
anno 2014 is truly amazing. Using that information to describe Wikidata
today is like trying to imagine the "bot wars" that have recently become a
viral hit on various social media websites. You could say Wikidata was born
out of a need to end "bot wars" between updating interwikilink bots. After
that "bot war" ended though, it looks like we created a new "bot war" where
Wikipedians became afraid of this new project because they might get bitten
by a bot.
https://blog.wikimedia.org/2017/08/30/wikipedia-bot-pocalypse/

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 3:05 PM, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:

> Hi Jane,
>
> I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
> never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just that
> I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in a
> paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
> thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
> part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
> the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
> sorry if I misunderstood.
>
> ** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October 2012;
> see the table here for key facts about its current content. It has also
> become the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per minute,
> or a half million per day, about three times as many as the English
> Wikipedia. Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors
> create for automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are
> still made by humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus. Wikidata:
> a free collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the ACM*, 2014,
> vol. 57, no 10, p. 78-85.)
>
> 2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :
>
>>
>> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>> >
>> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
>> friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
>> did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
>> and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
>> "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
>> being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
>> "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.
>>
>> I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you
>> are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is
>> nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.
>>
>> But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
>> Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or
>> would the vastness of it cause a problem?
>>
>> I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
>> counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
>> point wouldn't it be useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for
>> new entries and then added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them
>> out?
>>
>> I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical of
>> the current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.
>>
>> //Ed
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Thanks for your comments Ed. To answer your question, all Wikidata items
created after someone else made a WIkipedia page (like the original Finnish
Wikipedia article at the beginning of this thread) are by definition
"stubs". Often (because of spelling differences in names) these should be
merged and not fleshed out further. This stubby group of possible merge
candidates happens precisely because the person making the item is not the
same as the person making the article. One of the requests I have made
before is to have a tool that generates a list of items linked to the
Wikipedia pages I personally created. In my case, this would be the
Wikipedia pages I created before 2014 or so, which I believe is more than a
thousand. If I had a list of these with the number of statements in the
items I would go through the ones with less than 5 statements and fix them.
Since Wikidata I have flipped my way of work: instead of starting with
images on Commons and then writing an article on Wikipedia, I now start
with items on Wikidata and add images and articles much further down the
road.

On Sat, Sep 2, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Ed Summers  wrote:

>
> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> >
> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
> friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
> did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
> and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
> "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
> being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
> "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.
>
> I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you
> are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is
> nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.
>
> But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
> Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or
> would the vastness of it cause a problem?
>
> I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
> counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
> point wouldn't it be useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for
> new entries and then added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them
> out?
>
> I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical of
> the current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.
>
> //Ed
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ettore RIZZA]

Hi Jane,

I'm really sorry if my naïve comment made you sad. :/ To be clearer, I
never wanted to minimize the contribution of the volunteers! It's just that
I still don't know the internal mechanics of Wikidata. I recently read in a
paper, already a bit old*, that 90% of editions were made by bots. I just
thought that the mapping between the Wikipedia editions and Wikidata was
part of these 90% automated tasks, after which the volunteers had to add
the missing 10%, correct and enrich the automatic operations, etc. I'm
sorry if I misunderstood.

** " Wikidata has grown significantly since its launch in October 2012; see
the table here for key facts about its current content. It has also become
the most edited Wikimedia project, with 150– 500 edits per minute, or a
half million per day, about three times as many as the English Wikipedia.
Approximately 90% of these edits are made by bots contributors create for
automating tasks, yet almost one million edits per month are still made by
humans."* (VRANDEČIĆ, Denny et KRÖTZSCH, Markus. Wikidata: a free
collaborative knowledgebase. *Communications of the ACM*, 2014, vol. 57, no
10, p. 78-85.)

2017-09-02 14:42 GMT+02:00 Ed Summers :

>
> > On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> >
> > Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
> friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
> did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
> and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
> "data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
> being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
> "bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.
>
> I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you
> are motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is
> nothing (IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.
>
> But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in
> Wikidata that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or
> would the vastness of it cause a problem?
>
> I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give
> counter-vandalism efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that
> point wouldn't it be useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for
> new entries and then added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them
> out?
>
> I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical of
> the current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.
>
> //Ed
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ed Summers]

> On Sep 2, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> 
> Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian friends 
> into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you did, with a 
> sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia and Wikidata was 
> ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the "data" word in the 
> same that makes people assume it is technical, or that being 
> "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without "bot" 
> knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.

I appreciate this perspective a great deal. I think it's great that you are 
motivating users to edit Wikidata--it's really important. Wikidata is nothing 
(IMHO) without the human-in-the-loop.

But as a practical matter wouldn't it be useful if there were stubs in Wikidata 
that would help editors identify which entities need attention? Or would the 
vastness of it cause a problem?

I can certainly see an argument for an embargo period to give counter-vandalism 
efforts a chance to triage the new pages. But after that point wouldn't it be 
useful if a bot monitored the language wikipedias for new entries and then 
added them to Wikidata so that people could fill them out?

I'm just throwing ideas around here, and am not trying to be critical of the 
current state of affairs. You all are doing amazing work.

//Ed


signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Your note really made me feel so sad. I try to motivate my Wikipedian
friends into doing more on Wikidata and each time they react the way you
did, with a sentence like "I imagined that the mapping between Wikipedia
and Wikidata was ultra-automated." I guess there is something about the
"data" word in the same that makes people assume it is technical, or that
being "machine-readable" makes it impossible for humans to read and without
"bot" knowlege, there is no place for "normal contributors" to help out.

I am not a bot operator in the sense that I have created any bots. I have
slowly started to appreciate the bots that have been built and do use the
ones available to me on Wikipedia, Commons, Wikidata, and Wikisource. I
also have really learned to appreciate the bot operators who take the time
to create them and tend to them through all the iterations of the mediawiki
software that seem to change ad infinitum. It's important to remember that
these are all volunteers too. Once I tried to follow a very acrimonious
conversation on English Wikipedia about "semi-automated edits" as if this
was the worst thing that could possibly happen. As someone who tends to
leave a lot of typos hanging around, I really appreciate the
"semi-automated edits" that correct them. I don't know what
"ultra-automated edits" are, but I can assure you there is a warm-blooded
human being behind each one of them.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:

> Thank you for your answer, Jane. I had not thought about the fact that
> some professions could be better represented than others. I imagined that
> the mapping between Wikipedia and Wikidata was ultra-automated. It's very
> interesting.
>
> 2017-09-01 19:34 GMT+02:00 Osma Suominen :
>
>> Thank you Jane and everyone else for your speedy responses. Postponing
>> the creation of Wikidata entities for newly created Wikipedia articles that
>> may turn out to be short-lived makes total sense. So we will simply create
>> the corresponding Wikidata entities manually in cases like this.
>>
>> -Osma
>>
>>
>> Jane Darnell kirjoitti 01.09.2017 klo 16:36:
>>
>>> Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not
>>> sure how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
>>> creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
>>> items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
>>> can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
>>> https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history
>>>
>>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Osma Suominen >> > wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!
>>>
>>> While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases
>>> where there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link,
>>> but that page has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that
>>> Wikidata itself does not contain that entity.
>>>
>>> An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page
>>> on the Finnish Wikipedia:
>>> https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro
>>> 
>>>
>>> But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata
>>> gives a few hits, but none of them represent the village.
>>>
>>> What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
>>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages
>>> 
>>>
>>> But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this
>>> happen in the first place? My naïve understanding was that every
>>> normal article in Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata
>>> entity, but apparently that's not entirely true!
>>>
>>> -Osma
>>>
>>>
>>> -- Osma Suominen
>>> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
>>> National Library of Finland
>>> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
>>> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
>>> Tel. +358 50 3199529 
>>> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi 
>>> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org 
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>> 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>> Osma Suominen
>> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
>> National Library of Finland
>> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
>> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
>> Tel. +358 50 3199529
>> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
>> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>>
>> 

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ettore RIZZA]

Thank you for your answer, Jane. I had not thought about the fact that some
professions could be better represented than others. I imagined that the
mapping between Wikipedia and Wikidata was ultra-automated. It's very
interesting.

2017-09-01 19:34 GMT+02:00 Osma Suominen :

> Thank you Jane and everyone else for your speedy responses. Postponing the
> creation of Wikidata entities for newly created Wikipedia articles that may
> turn out to be short-lived makes total sense. So we will simply create the
> corresponding Wikidata entities manually in cases like this.
>
> -Osma
>
>
> Jane Darnell kirjoitti 01.09.2017 klo 16:36:
>
>> Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not sure
>> how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
>> creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
>> items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
>> can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
>> https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Osma Suominen > > wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!
>>
>> While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases
>> where there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link,
>> but that page has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that
>> Wikidata itself does not contain that entity.
>>
>> An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page
>> on the Finnish Wikipedia:
>> https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro
>> 
>>
>> But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata
>> gives a few hits, but none of them represent the village.
>>
>> What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages
>> 
>>
>> But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this
>> happen in the first place? My naïve understanding was that every
>> normal article in Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata
>> entity, but apparently that's not entirely true!
>>
>> -Osma
>>
>>
>> -- Osma Suominen
>> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
>> National Library of Finland
>> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
>> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
>> Tel. +358 50 3199529 
>> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi 
>> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org 
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>> 
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>
> --
> Osma Suominen
> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
> National Library of Finland
> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
> Tel. +358 50 3199529
> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Osma Suominen]

Thank you Jane and everyone else for your speedy responses. Postponing 
the creation of Wikidata entities for newly created Wikipedia articles 
that may turn out to be short-lived makes total sense. So we will simply 
create the corresponding Wikidata entities manually in cases like this.


-Osma


Jane Darnell kirjoitti 01.09.2017 klo 16:36:
Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not 
sure how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot 
that creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids 
creating items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" 
process). You can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.

https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Osma Suominen > wrote:


Hi,

This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!

While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases
where there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link,
but that page has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that
Wikidata itself does not contain that entity.

An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page
on the Finnish Wikipedia:
https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro


But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata
gives a few hits, but none of them represent the village.

What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages


But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this
happen in the first place? My naïve understanding was that every
normal article in Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata
entity, but apparently that's not entirely true!

-Osma


-- 
Osma Suominen

D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
National Library of Finland
P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
Tel. +358 50 3199529 
osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi 
http://www.nationallibrary.fi

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org 
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata





___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata




--
Osma Suominen
D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
National Library of Finland
P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
Tel. +358 50 3199529
osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
http://www.nationallibrary.fi

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Depends on the domain of expertise of the volunteer contributors. I work on
paintings and for painters we have included alias names from painter
databases in the alias field on Wikidata, so searches for painters will
probably work better on Wikidata than on any Wikipedia. For writers, this
hasn't been done (but to be fair I don't know if there are any databases
with alias names in them such as the ones for painters). For items about
women this is a problem when some Wikipedias use the married name instead
of the maiden name. It would be nice if everyone would add proper aliases
to Wikidata, but there are still lots of Wikipedians who write articles and
never go to Wikidata at all.

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Ettore RIZZA  wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> I am glad that Osma Suominen asked this "newbie" question, since I was
> wondering about the same. I'm just looking for compared statistics between
> Wikidata, the different editions of Wikipedia and those of DBpedia.
>
> The question I am trying to solve is simply: what is the probability that
> a place or a person name that is not mentioned in Wikidata can be found
> somewhere in Wikipedia or in DBpedia? If anyone has any elements to answer
> that question, it would be appreciated.
> Ettore Rizza
>
>
> 2017-09-01 17:03 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :
>
>> It is not a language, this depends on the bot owners. I would not be
>> surprised if there projects they never visit.
>>
>> I am a Russian Wikivoyage admin, and we make sure all newly created items
>> have a Wikidata link, but I think if we for whatever reason fail to create
>> an item manually, it never gets bot created.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Yaroslav
>>
>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Ed Summers  wrote:
>>
>>> So each language wikipedia does this on an ad-hoc basis?
>>>
>>> > On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:36 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>>> >
>>> > Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not
>>> sure how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
>>> creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
>>> items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
>>> can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
>>> > https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history
>>>
>>>
>>> ___
>>> Wikidata mailing list
>>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>>
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ettore RIZZA]

Hi all,

I am glad that Osma Suominen asked this "newbie" question, since I was
wondering about the same. I'm just looking for compared statistics between
Wikidata, the different editions of Wikipedia and those of DBpedia.

The question I am trying to solve is simply: what is the probability that a
place or a person name that is not mentioned in Wikidata can be found
somewhere in Wikipedia or in DBpedia? If anyone has any elements to answer
that question, it would be appreciated.
Ettore Rizza


2017-09-01 17:03 GMT+02:00 Yaroslav Blanter :

> It is not a language, this depends on the bot owners. I would not be
> surprised if there projects they never visit.
>
> I am a Russian Wikivoyage admin, and we make sure all newly created items
> have a Wikidata link, but I think if we for whatever reason fail to create
> an item manually, it never gets bot created.
>
> Cheers
> Yaroslav
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Ed Summers  wrote:
>
>> So each language wikipedia does this on an ad-hoc basis?
>>
>> > On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:36 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
>> >
>> > Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not
>> sure how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
>> creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
>> items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
>> can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
>> > https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history
>>
>>
>> ___
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Yaroslav Blanter]

It is not a language, this depends on the bot owners. I would not be
surprised if there projects they never visit.

I am a Russian Wikivoyage admin, and we make sure all newly created items
have a Wikidata link, but I think if we for whatever reason fail to create
an item manually, it never gets bot created.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 4:59 PM, Ed Summers  wrote:

> So each language wikipedia does this on an ad-hoc basis?
>
> > On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:36 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> >
> > Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not
> sure how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
> creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
> items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
> can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
> > https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history
>
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Ed Summers]

So each language wikipedia does this on an ad-hoc basis?

> On Sep 1, 2017, at 9:36 AM, Jane Darnell  wrote:
> 
> Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not sure how 
> the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that creates 
> Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating items for 
> things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You can create 
> the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
> https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history


___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Jane Darnell]

Checking the history of that page shows it was recently created. Not sure
how the Finns do this but like the Dutch they probably have a bot that
creates Wikidata items after a month or so has passed (this avoids creating
items for things that get deleted through the "speedy delete" process). You
can create the item yourself, or wait another month I guess.
https://fi.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Teuro&action=history

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Osma Suominen 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!
>
> While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases where
> there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link, but that page
> has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that Wikidata itself does not
> contain that entity.
>
> An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page on the
> Finnish Wikipedia:
> https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro
>
> But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata gives
> a few hits, but none of them represent the village.
>
> What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages
>
> But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this happen in
> the first place? My naïve understanding was that every normal article in
> Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata entity, but apparently that's
> not entirely true!
>
> -Osma
>
>
> --
> Osma Suominen
> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
> National Library of Finland
> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
> Tel. +358 50 3199529
> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

Re: [Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Yaroslav Blanter]

Hi Osma,

the page youlink to was created on the Finnish Wikipedia on 5 Juky. Usually
Wikidata items are created by bot, and it takes longer for smaller
projects. Apparently, the bot has not yet created the item. An appropriate
way to respond would be te create and item manually.

Cheers
Yaroslav

On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 3:32 PM, Osma Suominen 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!
>
> While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases where
> there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link, but that page
> has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that Wikidata itself does not
> contain that entity.
>
> An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page on the
> Finnish Wikipedia:
> https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro
>
> But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata gives
> a few hits, but none of them represent the village.
>
> What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages
>
> But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this happen in
> the first place? My naïve understanding was that every normal article in
> Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata entity, but apparently that's
> not entirely true!
>
> -Osma
>
>
> --
> Osma Suominen
> D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
> National Library of Finland
> P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
> 00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
> Tel. +358 50 3199529
> osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
> http://www.nationallibrary.fi
>
> ___
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata

[Wikidata] Linking to place with Wikipedia page but no Wikidata link

[Osma Suominen]

Hi,

This may be a total newbie question, sorry about that!

While linking YSO places to Wikidata we have stumbled on a few cases 
where there is a Wikipedia article about the place we want to link, but 
that page has no Wikidata link visible. And it seems that Wikidata 
itself does not contain that entity.


An example is the village Teuro in Tammela, Finland. It has a page on 
the Finnish Wikipedia:

https://fi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teuro

But that page has no Wikidata link. A search for "Teuro" in Wikidata 
gives a few hits, but none of them represent the village.


What's the correct way to correct this? I found this guide:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Linking_Wikipedia_pages

But I'm not 100% it addresses this exact situation. How did this happen 
in the first place? My naïve understanding was that every normal article 
in Wikipedia would have a corresponding Wikidata entity, but apparently 
that's not entirely true!


-Osma


--
Osma Suominen
D.Sc. (Tech), Information Systems Specialist
National Library of Finland
P.O. Box 26 (Kaikukatu 4)
00014 HELSINGIN YLIOPISTO
Tel. +358 50 3199529
osma.suomi...@helsinki.fi
http://www.nationallibrary.fi

___
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata