Re: [Wikidata-l] [Wikimedia-l] Google rankings and mobile phone support`

Hoi Pine, Thanks for the link to the test tool. I find that the one project dearest to my heart is doing poorly . It seems that our projects themselves are fairing much better than what the news led me to believe.. The point of it all is that mobile phones need to be well supported. It is good th

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hoi, There are different transliterations per language pair. When you include Wikidata in the mix; Wikidata should in my opinion support the transliteration from Russian to English according to ISO for its label. Anything else including whatever Wikipedia likes may be an alias. Your point about c

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hi! > ISO is a reliable source; it is THE standard Wikipedia is > definitely not a standard by its own admission. No, it's *a* standard (or, rather, two of them). There are 11 of them overall listed just on Wiki, and there might be more too. And of those, ISO not the most commonly used and look

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hi! > My point is that it is not a given that we should follow any WIkipedia > for anything. Also the point of romanisation of Russian is not for the > benefit of Russian speakers, it is for the speakers of English. Same people may speak more than one language. And for English speakers, letters l

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hoi, A fine position statement ... but what is your argument ? WHY Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 23:15, Joe Filceolaire wrote: > When we use auto transliteration to generate English labels then I think > we should follow the practice of the English Wikipedia with other > transliterati

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

When we use auto transliteration to generate English labels then I think we should follow the practice of the English Wikipedia with other transliterations demoted to aliases. Similarly auto generated German labels should follow the transliteration practices in the German wikipedia. When we use a

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Hoi, As you know I am not a fan at all about these special values. I can follow logic but do not need to agree. When "novalue" is not to be seen as a value. What is the point.. The point is to state there is no value right ? .. and that makes it of value. Right ahum, I admit it is confusing but is

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hoi, ISO is a reliable source; it is THE standard Wikipedia is definitely not a standard by its own admission. Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 22:37, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > On 2015-04-26 22:33, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > >> Hoi >> My point is that it is not a given that we should f

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

On 26.04.2015 22:28, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, It is a matter of perspective. From my perspective a value exists or not. Depending on that I may want to process. When you state novalue there is a value of novalue and that is not the same as there not being a value in the first place. Ah, I se

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

On 2015-04-26 22:33, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi My point is that it is not a given that we should follow any WIkipedia for anything. Also the point of romanisation of Russian is not for the benefit of Russian speakers, it is for the speakers of English. Thanks, GerardM On one hand, yes.

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hoi My point is that it is not a given that we should follow any WIkipedia for anything. Also the point of romanisation of Russian is not for the benefit of Russian speakers, it is for the speakers of English. Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 22:30, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > On 2015-

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

On 2015-04-26 22:26, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, Let us be clear that what whatever Wikipedia does is for that Wikipedia to decide. It does not follow automatically that it must be the label for that language.. Thanks, GerardM This is fine with me, but using ISO is really really weird for

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Hoi, It is a matter of perspective. From my perspective a value exists or not. Depending on that I may want to process. When you state novalue there is a value of novalue and that is not the same as there not being a value in the first place. Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 22:25, Markus K

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

Hoi, Let us be clear that what whatever Wikipedia does is for that Wikipedia to decide. It does not follow automatically that it must be the label for that language.. Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 14:22, Yaroslav M. Blanter wrote: > On 2015-04-23 01:21, Stas Malyshev wrote: > >> Hi! >

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

On 26.04.2015 22:16, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, I regularly query for for instance claim[31] ie any instance of whatever... I would also query for the existence of a date of death in a similar way. for me a claim with a "whatever it is that says that there is no value" would be a positive result

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Hoi, I regularly query for for instance claim[31] ie any instance of whatever... I would also query for the existence of a date of death in a similar way. for me a claim with a "whatever it is that says that there is no value" would be a positive result and I would not consider it for any processin

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Quick reply to Denny and Gerard: @Denny: I think it makes sense to treat qualifiers under a closed-world semantics. That is: what is not there can safely be assumed to be false. In this I agree with Gerard. OTOH, I don't think it hurts very much to add them anyway. @Gerard: Please note that

[Wikidata-l] weekly summary #155

Hey folks :) Here's your summary of what's been happening around Wikidata over the past week. Enjoy! Discussions - RfC: Opting out of Global sysops 2 Events

Re: [Wikidata-l] Auto-transliteration of names of humans

On 2015-04-23 01:21, Stas Malyshev wrote: Hi! Careful, this is one of the most debated and dramatic style issues after citation format! Actual transliteration should clearly follow scientific/ISO standards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_transliteration_of_Cyrillic . Well, "scientif

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Could you not add the last active date as a qualifier to the somevalue death date? In general uncertainty in dates are not so easily entered. Born 1969 or 1970 cannot be entered as 1969 with uncertainty decade since that becomes 1960s (at least that is what is shown to readers) so the only legit w

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

For the unknown date case, I also used some imprecise dates in the past, if you set date withe a precision of the century around the last time it wa known active for example, you get something semantically correct and that is probably esaier to handle in queries (athough the way to handle imprecis

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Hi! > It would make sense to have a bot run and add dates of novalue for dob > dod where we know that people must be dead. That would actually be opposite of what we want, since novalue would mean they were not born and are not dead. I think you meant "unknown" for date of death, in which case it

Re: [Wikidata-l] novalue in qualifiers or references

Hoi, It would make sense to have a bot run and add dates of novalue for dob dod where we know that people must be dead. Thanks, GerardM On 26 April 2015 at 08:54, Gerard Meijssen wrote: > Hoi, > There are two ways of doing that.. You can assume given average age and > date of birth in what c