Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Hoi, Given my background with OmegaWiki, I do not actively look into the Lexeme part of Wikidata. When I do, I notice things that are really cool and yes, Nobel prijswinnaar is a fine example of a lexeme. I am happy to notice and applaud tools like Ordia, it is this kind of involvement we largely m

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Hi Gerard, The entity would probably be a Lexeme :-) (yeah, I feel your pain also about merging and the loss of valuable data at times) Thad https://www.linkedin.com/in/thadguidry/ On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 12:14 PM Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > What makes "Nobel prize winner" so special

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Hoi, What makes "Nobel prize winner" so special that we need an entity for that. We have thousands and thousands of awards, the recipients of these awards deserve in equal measure to be recognised. There are many other awards like the UN Environment Programme awards that are not even in Wikidata.

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Another thing I see lacking here is the Common Concept itself is NOT in Wikidata currently. There is no entity that matches "nobel prize winner" currently. Perhaps one should be created? Anyways, I have started to help with a simple ShEx for validation that can be edited by all to help with Aidan

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Furthermore, I think the usage of ShEx (which helps folks make Schema and Violation rules) could be beneficial here for the community. What is lacking are improvements on the Wikidata UI to make Schema editing and displ

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Peter, I see your recommendation as approaching to introduce better ways of applying Types or Schema across Wikidata Items. At the minimum, I think improving the interface for property suggestions WITH even sometimes value suggestions, where it makes sense for certain domains like Entertainment, A

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Hoi, I add bucket loads of new awards, awardees and add them to humans. What I have found in the past is that controversial points were adopted that are inherently problematic. Given that I likely add more awards than most, the value of such a consensus is questionable. I find that I lost interest

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Hi, I participated into the edits that ended up with this mess, so I plead guilty /o\. I’d say the problem is that we don’t really have a model at all. At best, there is some WikiProject that try to impose some rules they decided, with the notion of concensus decided by the people of the project.

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 20:34, Aidan Hogan wrote: > In summary, of the six types of Nobel prizes, three different properties > are used in five different combinations > I am more interested in the general problem of the > lack of consensus that such a case exhibits. Has there been any attempt t

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Salgo60/ListeriaNobelData3 Regards Magnus Sälgö Stockholm, Sweden salg...@msn.com From: Wikidata on behalf of Peter Patel-Schneider Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2019 6:36 AM To: wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org Subject: Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Pr

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Indeed.   Thanks for the example.  I'll probably incorporate it in my talk at WikidataCon. As far as I know there is no general method for nudging towards consensus for cases like these.  The onus appears to me to be on whoever is entering the information to look for similar situations and mo

Re: [Wikidata] Nobel Prizes and consensus in Wikidata

Why not flip the question around and instead find a better predicate using the fantastic Wikidata Property Explorer and type in search tree for "award" and click the results in the tree ? I found these that are useful: https://www.wikidata.org/entity/P16