Thanks, it made me realize the datas of my city are not up to date :) I thought : I wondered if I would see https://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q16037012 (although the city is not that big, but Rennes, a comparable on, showed up in the results, so ...) and it did not.
There is redundancy in this area: the ''head of goverment'' of cities is also present as a ''office heald'' : ''mayor of foo'', if there is an item ''mayor of foo'' (and this seems better than just ''office heald:mayor''). Tom 2015-04-21 11:27 GMT+02:00 Daniel Kinzler <daniel.kinz...@wikimedia.de>: > Am 21.04.2015 um 00:50 schrieb Markus Krötzsch: > > On 20.04.2015 23:47, Daniel Kinzler wrote: > >> Something seems to be wrong with the order, though. Munich (pop > 1m in > all > >> statements) is listed way after Chemnitz (pop < 300k in all > statements). Any > >> idea why? > > > > Good catch. My query was too simple (using one "random" population > instead of > > the biggest one). Here is a better query, this time even with > populations given: > > I still wonder how the old result came about, since the *all* population > values > for Munich are much bigger than *all* the population numbers for Chemnitz. > Even > with picking a random value, how could the order have been reversed? > > > -- > Daniel Kinzler > Senior Software Developer > > Wikimedia Deutschland > Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata-l mailing list > Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
