Hi Gerard,
I was not trying to judge here. I was just saying that it wasn't much data in
the end.
For me Freebase was basically cherry-picked.
Meanwhile, the data we extract is more pertinent to the goal of having Wikidata
cover the info boxes. We still have ~ 500 million statements left. But none of
it is used yet. Hopefully we can change that.
Meanwhile, Google crawls all the references and extracts facts from there. We
don't have that available, but there is Linked Open Data.
--
Sebastian
On September 27, 2019 5:26:43 PM GMT+02:00, Gerard Meijssen
<gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hoi,
>I totally reject the assertion was so bad. I have always had the
>opinion
>that the main issue was an atrocious user interface. Add to this the
>people
>that have Wikipedia notions about quality. They have and had a
>detrimental
>effect on both the quantity and quality of Wikidata.
>
>When you add the functionality that is being build by the datawranglers
>at
>DBpedia, it becomes easy/easier to compare the data from Wikipedias
>with
>Wikidata (and why not Freebase) add what has consensus and curate the
>differences. This will enable a true datasense of quality and allows us
>to
>provide a much improved service.
>Thanks,
> GerardM
>
>On Fri, 27 Sep 2019 at 15:54, Marco Fossati <foss...@spaziodati.eu>
>wrote:
>
>> Hey Sebastian,
>>
>> On 9/20/19 10:22 AM, Sebastian Hellmann wrote:
>> > Not much of Freebase did end up in Wikidata.
>>
>> Dropping here some pointers to shed light on the migration of
>Freebase
>> to Wikidata, since I was partially involved in the process:
>> 1. WikiProject [1];
>> 2. the paper behind [2];
>> 3. datasets to be migrated [3].
>>
>> I can confirm that the migration has stalled: as of today, *528
>> thousands* Freebase statements were curated by the community, out of
>*10
>> million* ones. By 'curated', I mean approved or rejected.
>> These numbers come from two queries against the primary sources tool
>> database.
>>
>> The stall is due to several causes: in my opinion, the most important
>> one was the bad quality of sources [4,5] coming from the Knowledge
>Vault
>> project [6].
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Marco
>>
>> [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Freebase
>> [2]
>>
>>
>http://static.googleusercontent.com/media/research.google.com/en//pubs/archive/44818.pdf
>> [3]
>>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Primary_sources_tool/Version_1#Data
>> [4]
>>
>>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Primary_sources_tool/Archive/2017#Quality_of_sources
>> [5]
>>
>>
>https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Semi-automatic_Addition_of_References_to_Wikidata_Statements#A_whitelist_for_sources
>> [6] https://www.cs.ubc.ca/~murphyk/Papers/kv-kdd14.pdf
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
--
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
