You can get the live values from WDQ: https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/tabernacle.html?wdq=claim%5B31%3A%28tree%5B515%5D%5B%5D%5B279%5D%29%5D%20and%20claim%5B6%3A%28claim%5B31%3A5%5D%20and%20claim%5B21%3A6581072%5D%29%5D&props=1082&items=&show=1
You'll have to sort them yourself, though... On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 2:38 PM Thomas Douillard <thomas.douill...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, I put a link about this on the frwiki chat : > https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikip%C3%A9dia:Le_Bistro/21_avril_2015#Liste_des_plus_grandes_villes_avec_des_maires_f.C3.A9minies > > Let's see if this can shake community a little bit :) > > 2015-04-21 13:22 GMT+02:00 Markus Krötzsch <mar...@semantic-mediawiki.org> > : > >> On 21.04.2015 12:28, Maxime Lathuilière wrote: >> >>> nice! >>> >>> but I can't figure out why Paris (P90 >>> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q90>) and Anne Hidalgo (Q2851133 >>> <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2851133>) don't show up in the results >>> given that: >>> >>> Q90 >>> P31: Q515 >>> P6: Q2851133 (with no P582q) >>> >>> Q2851133 >>> P21: Q6581072 >>> >>> what could be wrong? >>> >> >> Interesting. It seems that Paris has no population! >> >> Markus >> >> >>> -- >>> >>> Maxime Lathuilière >>> maxlath.eu <http://maxlath.eu> - @maxlath >>> Inventaire <https://inventaire.io> - @inventaire_io >>> wiki(pedia|data): Zorglub27 < >>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Zorglub27> >>> >>> >>> Le 21/04/2015 12:03, Markus Krötzsch a écrit : >>> >>>> On 21.04.2015 11:27, Daniel Kinzler wrote: >>>> >>>>> 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? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Good question. I don't know. Maybe there is some issue in Virtuoso >>>> here after all. However, the rest of the order looked sensible to me >>>> even in the old query. It could also be that our (non-live) data had a >>>> temporary glitch that has been fixed on Wikidata in the meantime; one >>>> should check the population values we get with SPARQL to be sure. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Markus >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
