The Echo notifications system on Wikimedia sites is usually maxed out for me across Wikimedia sites due to Wikidata-related notifications, which means I may not see it when you ping me, and Special:Watchlist on Wikidata has similar issues.

Wikidata weekly summary #293

Wikidata weekly summary #294

Wikidata weekly summary #295

Module:Cite

I've made a version in Module:Cite/sandbox. Tonight I got familiar with what the code was doing and added the "display (and link to) the Wikidata ID" functionality. See User:Daniel Mietchen/Interesting publications/Part 1 #Paper collection Obviously it can be formatted to your taste. I'll try to knock off your wish-list as time allows. --RexxS (talk) 19:47, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@RexxS: That looks good — thanks! --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:53, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #296

Item with P106=researcher only

Hi Daniel Mietchen,

Is there a way to add more statements to items like [1]? Their state makes it somewhat hard to match them with wp articles (sample).
--- Jura 10:18, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

The best tool we have for such cases is probably Scholia, which often identifies a more concrete field of work and through which papers can be found that might have affiliation information. I am keeping an eye on such items and adding additional information when I can. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:42, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #297

Wikidata weekly summary #298

Wikidata weekly summary #299

Wikidata weekly summary #300

Wikidata weekly summary #301

Wikidata weekly summary #302

Wikidata weekly summary #303

Please slow down

@Daniel Mietchen: Hi, you're currently making about 70 (rather large) edits per minute. This is stressing the change dispatch infrastructure, causing dispatch lag. Could you please slow down to under 30 edits per minute? Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. My edit rates are fluctuating, but I have adjusted the sleep periods such that the maximum should not go above 30 for long. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:52, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #304

Wikidata weekly summary #305

Wikidata weekly summary #306

Academic article retractions

There is a property you proposed for errata to academic papers, but retraction is two items, Q7316896 and Q45203135. How would one identify an article as retracted? I recall some software from four years ago to flag retracted papers when one goes to cite them. HLHJ (talk) 23:42, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

@HLHJ: Not sure corrigendum / erratum (P2507) is the best way to go here in the long run, but it can certainly be used for experimentation, perhaps with some qualifier. In terms of which retraction item to use, I would go for the document (retraction notice (Q7316896)) rather than the process (retraction (Q45203135)). To identify retractions, the best source is probably Retraction Watch Database (Q51603165) (with currently about 17k entries). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:47, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
Thank you for the database link. Forgive me, I'm ignorant here. How would one best attach the retraction notice (Q7316896) to the scholarly article (Q13442814) that it's about?
I've found only one article labelled as retracted, RETRACTED: A light-emitting field-effect transistor (Q30955338). It uses significant event (P793) with value retraction notice (Q7316896). Are you saying that corrigendum / erratum (P2507) would be better than significant event (P793) here? For comparison, the article EVOLUTION IN MENDELIAN POPULATIONS (Q5418627) has a statement with the property corrigendum / erratum (P2507) holding the value Evolution in Mendelian Populations (Q20746731) (confusingly not titled "Correction to 'Evolution in Mendelian Populations'").
Separately, I've notice that automated OA-signalling seems to be running for some cites on Wikipedia, hurrah and congratulations! Where could I read about how it works? HLHJ (talk) 01:57, 8 April 2018 (UTC)
I gave that paper a try and think the significant event (P793) model works better. It should be using retraction (Q45203135), though, i.e. the action, not the document. Re OA Signalling, most of that automation is actually about papers that are free to read, not open in the sense of Open Definition (Q21605525) and thus not reusable on Wikimedia projects. In any case, you can read about the template approach (signalling the accessibility of the paper) here and the bot approach (linking to free-to-read versions) here. I welcome these efforts but do not contribute much, since my efforts in this space are focused on openly licensed stuff that can actually be (re)used on Wikimedia projects. Further, both approaches are focused on the English Wikipedia (though the templates are finding their way into other languages too), and I think information about accessibility should be curated on Wikidata and reused from there across Wikimedia projects, which is one of my motivations behind engaging with Wikidata:WikiProject Source MetaData and the closely related WikiCite. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:22, 8 April 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #307

Wikidata weekly summary #308

Wikidata weekly summary #309

Wikidata weekly summary #310

Wikidata weekly summary #311

Wikidata weekly summary #312

Invalid DOIs imported from PubMed

Hi!

I just noticed that Research Bot imports invalid DOIs from PubMed - I think it would make sense to make sure they start with "10." before adding them:

Pintoch (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)

Nearing two years now, still seeing some of the old ID's. Has there been a response from PubMed and PMC. Saw there was some cleanup, but still sing more like Q52592126 - https://w.wiki/NL5 (not all from Research Bot, but wondering if there is a plan or process started to clean these up or should these just be removed and rerun? Wolfgang8741 (talk) 10:34, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #313

Wikidata weekly summary #314

Wikidata weekly summary #315

Wikidata weekly summary #316

Parsed citations of the English wikipedia

Hi Daniel, Here is the dataset I was talking about: https://zenodo.org/record/55004 It does include author links in a parsed format. For instance:

{"PublisherName": "International Group of San Francisco", "Title": "Towards Anarchism", "URL": "http://www.marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm", "Authors": [{"link": "Errico Malatesta", "last": "Malatesta", "first": "Errico"}], "ID_list": {"OCLC": "3930443"}, "Periodical": "MAN!", "PublicationPlace": "Los Angeles"}

Pintoch (talk) 08:16, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Representation of Wikidata at the Wikimedia movement strategy process

Hi Daniel, I'm contacting you because I would like your support and your comments on my proposal to represent the Wikidata community at the Wikimedia movement strategy process. I'm contacting you in private because you are a member of the Wikidata Community User Group and I thought that this could be relevant for you.--Micru (talk) 18:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Hi Micru. Saw this only now. Will take a look. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 06:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #317

Wikidata weekly summary #318

Wikidata weekly summary #319

Wikidata weekly summary #320

Wikidata weekly summary #321

Wikidata weekly summary #322

Wikidata weekly summary #323

Wikidata weekly summary #324

Wikidata weekly summary #325

Wikidata weekly summary #326

Translated titles from pubmed being incorrectly put as titles?

Hi, I noticed that the translated title on works originally in a different language such as Studies on human physical capability and gross energy transfer during industrial and traditional work in tropical climate (Q52332146) added by User:Research Bot are being added verbatim both as the title and the item title, including the brackets. Wondering if there's a way to fix this - at the very least we shouldn't have the brackets even if we don't have the original language title? Mvolz (talk) 16:36, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

@Mvolz: Thanks for checking this. It is a known problem that I do not know how to fix. The best I currently have in this regard is a query that will catch such cases. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 19:32, 26 August 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #327

Wikidata weekly summary #328

Academic article conflicts of interest

I've just added Sugars, obesity, and cardiovascular disease: results from recent randomized control trials (Q56479527)      as an example for articles with conflicts of interest, and I'd be glad of your comments on what I got wrong. I wasn't sure how to name the supplements; when I made a list of them, I made up my own numbering, here I expanded from the Pubmed metadata. The editor, publication funder, and lead author are the same person, and are paid by industry groups with a financial interest in the paper topic. HLHJ (talk) 18:58, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

@HLHJ: The article already has a Wikidata item at Sugars, obesity, and cardiovascular disease: results from recent randomized control trials (Q37521442), and I think the modelling there is OK. I am open to the idea that volumes and issues of series might get their own items, but haven't looked at that in detail. As for modelling the conflicts of interest, I think we need some new properties first, and I'm not sure we have an appropriate WikiProject to collaborate around such matters. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 08:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I though I had searched for that. Thank you for the information. I merged the two, resulting in a web and a paper publication date, two representations of the author, and two of the supplement, which I will try and figure out how to fix. If supplements do not get their own items, would each article need tagging with its sponsor? The motivation is a project by Headbomb to make a list of unreliable sources, called en:Wikipedia:CRAPWATCH; see en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine#WP:CRAPWATCH: Early version for details. HLHJ (talk) 00:59, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Yes, we tend to express sponsorship/ funding on a per-article level. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:18, 9 September 2018 (UTC)
Reply at Wikidata talk:WikiProject Source MetaData#Conflict-of-interest metadata. I had previously written about COI metadata there, as it seemed the most relevant Wikiproject, but got no response, and as I obviously don't know what I'm doing, I was hesitant to do much unadvised. Least you are wondering why I am bothering you, en:Conflicts of interest in academic publishing has a photo of you discussing this unphotogenic topic, so I knew you took an interest in it. Thank you for your patience. HLHJ (talk) 19:36, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #329

Wikidata weekly summary #330

Wikidata weekly summary #331

Wikidata weekly summary #332

Suggestion for Research Bot

I have a suggestion regarding your bot when creating articles like Q38917924: is there a way for you to automatically include the Google Scholar paper ID (Property:P4028)? When you search for the article title on Google Scholar, it can be found in hidden in the "Cited by..." link: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?cites=1451297973973942230&as_sdt=5,50&sciodt=0,50&hl=en. Maybe you can think of a way to automatically extract it and include it during entry creation. --Bender235 (talk) 22:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I can think of such ways, but Google does not welcome their implementation. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:49, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
You mean when the scrapping is done at high frequency, or in general? If so, what shall we do about it? Google Scholar is certainly and popular and helpful tool. We should include this identifier (somehow) in my opinion. --Bender235 (talk) 14:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
They basically block anyone who tries to do such things at scale. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:21, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
That's unfortunate. I posted a question on WikiProject Google about this. Maybe somebody is aware of a way to circumvent this. --Bender235 (talk) 13:53, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #333

Unused researcher items

Any reason not to delete Q56960351 and Q56960986, which were part of one of your QS batches? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:34, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

No. Thanks for checking. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 16:06, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

Karel Berka

Karel Berka (Q43370830) has an ORCID iD, so cannot be Karel Berka (Q884500), who died in 2004. I have demerged them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:29, 13 October 2018 (UTC)

For a similar reason, I reverted you here. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:35, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Thanks for checking, in both cases. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 16:07, 13 October 2018 (UTC)
And again, twice more, on Q884500. Please can you find a way to exclude it from whatever is triggering these edits? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:37, 18 October 2018 (UTC)
These are ORCIDator batches that I started weeks ago, so cannot change them now. The problem seems to be that some papers have been assigned to the wrong person here, and the tool then associates the Wikidata entry for the author with the ORCID where the DOI of the paper is listed. So about some 70 paper items need to be cleaned regarding authorship — I put this on my to do list. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:01, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
I have now fixed the authorship for all 77 papers currenttly indexed in Wikidata. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:51, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

There's a similar issue on Alessandro Zorzi (Q2832828). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

And again on Q2832828. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:12, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
This seems to stem from multiple papers having been linked to this person: Special:WhatLinksHere/Q2832828. On that basis, ORCIDator then infers that this person must be the one on whose ORCID profile the papers were listed. The P50 statements on the papers need to be fixed. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 19:44, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #334

Wikidata weekly summary #335

Wikidata weekly summary #336

Wikidata weekly summary #337

How to note an author's correction

@Daniel Mietchen: Greetings. Can you tell me which property I should include in an item, e.g. a scholarly article, if there is a later published revision or change? I'm referring to those events not where the original is completely replaced, just where the author publishes an addendum. Thanks. I hope you dn't mind my adding this topic. I didn't see any others here, but thought it was the right place.

Example:

I think the question might be related to when a subsequent author replies to, comments on, another. Important as references should consider follow-ups to the original citation.

Thank you for any recommendation. -Trilotat (talk) 14:16, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

@Trilotat: Sounds close corrigendum / erratum (P2507) to me, though that does not capture all te possible nuances. If you're looking for properties, try the Property Browser. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:44, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #338

Creating Duplicate P50 in articles

@Daniel Mietchen: Hello again. It seems I have added authors to articles that already exist. Some other info, in case it's helpful for the forensics: it's happening as a result of a stalled batch, 2627; it's creating them without "stated as" and "series ordinal" qualifiers; it appears that batch is running at the same time you created the article. I started to remove them, so there wouldn't be two authors, but now I'm trying to figure out WHY it happened so I avoid it. Deleting these duplicate authors is no fun; is there a bot that removes duplicate authors (and less informative, i.e. no stated as, no series ordinal) from articles? This is the article where I stopped deleting the duplicates without completion. Please let me know if I need to return to the effort. It has to be done, bot or not.

Thank you. -Trilotat (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

@Trilotat: Not sure what the problem is/ was, but what about pausing that stalled batch? My batch 82 that worked on the item is still ongoing. We currently don't have tools to fix superfluous author (P50) or missing object named as (P1932) statements, but I think we should have some in the long run. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:48, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: Yes; paused it as soon as I realized it was happening. I'll go through item that were completed in that batch to remove the superfluous authors. Thanks for reply. You appear to be very busy. I watched the video of you at 2017 wikicite event. Very informative and it motivated me to work on the geology and earth science articles and disambiguation of authors (moving from author name string (P2093) to author (P50)). -Trilotat (talk) 14:16, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Problema with Source MD and Doi

Hello!I'm trying to import scientific articles from the journal Bibliothecae.it inserting the Doi on SourceMD, one per row,but all the attempts fail. What am I doing wrong? the doi should be inserted in full, starting from http: .... or starting from 10 ...?Thank you for your attention, Alessandra Boccone (talk) 23:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Alessandra Boccone: Starting with 10. You can test things using the old version, which has the same functionality in this regard (but not in others). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:58, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #339

Wikidata weekly summary #340

Wikidata weekly summary #341

Your sourcemd batches

Hi Daniel,

Just making sure you are aware of this discussion: Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Source_MetaData#Questions_about_"scholarly_articles". As you are still running various publication imports, it would be great if you could chime in there.

All the best − Pintoch (talk) 00:03, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: did you see this? − Pintoch (talk) 05:30, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
@Pintoch: Yes, but not sure what to say there. My focus is not on imports these days but on cross-linking papers with authors and topics. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:39, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #342

Wikidata weekly summary #343

Wissenschaftliche Artikel finden

Hallo Daniel,

ich ergänze in letzter Zeit deutsche Beschreibungen zu Datenobjekten und nebenbei beschäftige ich mich mit Wegen Außenstehenden einen einfachen Zugang zu Wikidata zu geben. Inzwischen gibt es in Wikidata viele Datenobjekte über wissenschaftliche Artikel. Solche Artikel sind sehr interessant, jedoch sucht man nach einem Thema normalerweise mit Schlagworten und mir fällt es schwer einen bestimmten Artikel in Wikidata zu finden. Gibt es konkrete Überlegungen, wie man die Suche nach wissenschaftlichen Artikeln verbessern kann. Ich würde es schön finden, wenn man nach einem Schlagwort suchen kann und dann einem alle Artikel mit diesem Schlagwort angezeigt werden. Ich selbst kann nicht programmieren, nutze jedoch viel den Queryservice und denke, dass man für den Anfang mit Abfragen vom Query-Service gut arbeiten kann. Mein Vorschlag ist nun hier in Wikidata eine Seite zu erstellen, die hilft einen Überblick über wissenschaftliche Artikel zu bekommen mit Erklärungen, was diese Artikel beinhalten und Abfragen zu verlinken mit denen man sich spezielle Artikel, beispielsweise die in einem bestimmten wissenschaftlichen Verlag veröffentlicht wurden anzeigen lassen kann. Bitte teile mir mit, was du dazu denkst und ob es schon Versuche in die Richtung gibt, ich würde gerne etwas in diesem Bereich machen. In einem Tabellenkalkulationsprogramm sollte es möglich sein, die Abfragen schnell mithilfe der Verkettenfunktion anzupassen und so auf einmal alle benötigten Abfragen einer bestimmten Struktur zu erstellen. Also wenn man nach einem wissenschaftlichen Artikel, der ein bestimmtes Schlagwort enthält sucht, dann kann wenn man die Q-Nummern der Schlagworte weiß, diesen Bereich jeweils abändern und man hat schnell die Abfragen als Link. -- Hogü-456 (talk) 20:54, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Hogü-456: Hast du dir Scholia dazu mal angeguckt? Es zeigt z.B. via https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q202864 Informationen rund um Publikationen zum Thema Zika virus (Q202864), und unter https://tools.wmflabs.org/scholia/topic/Q202864/missing gibt's dann Hinweise dazu, wo Kurationsbedarf besteht, z.B. auch hinsichtlich der Verschlagwortung. Um die entsprechenden Daten in Wikidata einzubringen, nutze ich Abfragen wie diese hier. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:36, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

Possible to delete stopped SourceMD batch?

Hello. I don't know if this is an issue I should be concerned with. I've accumulated quite a list of "stopped queries" using SourceMD. I don't intend to restart them. Can I delete or hide them in my batch history? If not, can I sort my batch history so I see the running and recently completed ones on the top of the list? Thank you. Trilotat (talk) 15:51, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Source Meta: Add authors to publication?

Happy holidays. What is the purpose or use for this tool? I haven't been successful in my efforts to apply the tool. Can you point me to instructions or explain briefly here? Thanks. Trilotat (talk) 00:19, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #344

Wikidata weekly summary #345

Wikidata weekly summary #346

Wikidata weekly summary #347

Duplicate DOI's

Hi Daniel - I was experimenting with some author disambiguation work, and ran across Hierarchical Decentralized Network Reconfiguration for Smart Distribution Systems—Part I: Problem Formulation and Algorithm Development (Q57978745) and Hierarchical Decentralized Network Reconfiguration for Smart Distribution Systems—Part I: Problem Formulation and Algorithm Development (Q57978728) - and a number of other pairs that looked very similar, added by you via Quickstatements. They have identical DOI's (as indicated by the constraint violation shown on the DOI!) and if you look at the "unique value" constraint violations for DOI's you'll see there are over 30,000 of them... I merged a few but it's a pretty major task, any idea what happened, and how best to fix it? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:06, 15 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking — I have an eye on this and am doing regular cleanups. For details, see this ticket. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Item 53 above is a heading, rather than a bullet

@Daniel Mietchen: In item 53 in your table of contents (TOC) above, the "other noteworthy stuff" is a heading whereas ever other "other noteworthy stuff" is a bullet. I guess I'm a bit obsessive as I notice that change in your TOC each time I visit. I'd be happy to adjust it with your permission.   Trilotat (talk) 23:38, 19 January 2019 (UTC)

Kinda fixed — thanks. Was a problem in the newsletter, so is probably present on many other pages. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:21, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

PubMed imports

Hi Daniel,

I left a notice on Research Bot's page under Problematic Items, but perhaps you haven't seen it. The Research Bot is busy importing some *very* dirty data from PubMed. There are numerous issues with importing their metadata into Wikidata, as it is provided by publishers. They do not use an authority file and very few authors have ORCID-Ids. Thus there are many different spellings of author names. Predatory publishers are also mis-using the pre-print format to publish their work, making it appear to be legitimate publication. Most problematic is that you are NOT registerin when a retraction notice has been published about an article and flagging the retraction notice as such.

One example is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q43219180, which is a retraction notice. I put the property in by hand, as this is one of the glaring mistakes in PubMed: I informed the publisher about the problem, they entered my name as the author (!) in the metadata and I have been unable to get this fixed! You really need to deal with at least these problems, there are many others. --WiseWoman (talk) 10:03, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@WiseWoman: Thanks for your note, and sorry I had not noticed your edit on the bot's user page. Yes, some of the imported data is quite dirty — cleanup happens in various ways but is far from complete. Yes, way too few authors have ORCIDs, and of those who do, way too few have content in their profile, and of those who do, way too few make their profile public. However, if there is useful public content in an ORCID profile, we often make use of it (e.g. see WD:SourceMD). Yes, there are lots of ways in which authorship by the same person is indicated, and we have tools like the Author Disambiguator, Scholia's missing pages (which exist for authors and some other aspects, e.g. topic) or dedicated Listeria pages (example) that are beginning to address the issue. Yes, retractions need to be signaled properly — WikiProject Retractions is working on this but there is a long way to go still, and we don't have clean data to start with. No, this bot is not currently busy, but similar imports are ongoing. Yes, we don't have a good handle on preprints at the moment, but I don't think predatory publishers are much of a problem here yet. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #348

inferred from (P3452)=title (Q783521)

  1. This should be used as references, not qualifiers.
  2. The property you used is incorrect - should be based on heuristic (P887) instead.

--GZWDer (talk) 21:45, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

@GZWDer: Thanks — will look into it. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:48, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #349

Wikidata weekly summary #350

Import of links

Hi Daniel, this item Barriers to Accessing HIV Testing Services - A Systematic Literature Review (Q57462812) was created without a title and with no description. A ghost item. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

  Fixed I followed the PubMed ID link and added the English title. Perhaps it has a German title? I don't know. Trilotat (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2019 (UTC)
@Kolja21, Trilotat: Thanks both. PubMed does not treat non-English titles very well, and one side effect is that there are many of such ghosts here. Thankfully, this can be — and sometimes actually is — fixed. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #351

Wikidata weekly summary #352

Erroneous title of scientific article with mathematical symbol

Hi Daniel, I corrected several scientific article title (1, 2, 3 for now). There are probably much more cases. The shared trait between these 3 titles is they contain mathematical symbol (LateX or MathText) in their title (  and so on). Do you have a way to find all the articles you imported and that may suffer of this problem? Pamputt (talk) 19:00, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking, Pamputt! Yes, we have quite a few cases where formatting in the title is garbled. No, I don't have a way to find all of them, though I have been looking into subsets, e.g. for HTML (&amp, &lt etc.), other markup (e.g. <), brackets or even "Formula: see text". Similar issues affect chemicals and taxonomic names too. I have done a bit of cleanup here and there but don't have a good idea on how to do this at scale. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:36, 19 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #353

Wikidata weekly summary #354

Angewandte Chemie ingest problems

Hi Daniel,

There are some data quality issues with Angewandte Chemie articles. In general, papers published in Angewandte Chemie (Q538683) and Angewandte Chemie. International edition in English (Q29043732) are being conflated during SourceMD batch processing. This query is articles published in Angewandte Chemie but if you look at the results, the DOIs starting with 10.1002/ANIE should be published in Angewandte Chemie. International edition in English (Q29043732).

Another problem is duplicates being created with incorrect DOIs for the older articles. For example, your batches appear to have created A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q56953042), A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q57337870), A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q58373467), A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q59101398), A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q60216393), and A New Phase-Switch Method for Application in Organic Synthesis Programs Employing Immobilization through Metal-Chelated Tagging (Q60324889) with the doi 10.1002/1521-3773(20010316)40:6 3.0.CO;2-D, which does not resolve - the correct doi is 10.1002/1521-3773(20010316)40:6<1053::AID-ANIE10530>3.0.CO;2-D. Presumably, this is a problem with parsing the unusual doi format. I've previously merged a number of duplicates with similar DOIs that I've unknowing created but I don't know what needs to happen to stop this from happening. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 16:01, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Geology (Q5535339) journal does the same thing. SourceMD deletes the data between the less than and greater than symbols when it creates the articles from the DOI. When you or someone else attempt that same article, SourceMD won't filter it as a duplicate since the correct DOI isn't present. It's frustrating, to be sure. Trilotat (talk) 21:32, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both. Can't look into this right now but have stopped my SourceMD batches. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:52, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #355

Wikidata weekly summary #356

Problems with SourceMD and AIP Conference Proceedings

Hi - I've been cleaning up a bunch of items for articles from AIP Conference Proceedings, where SourceMD seems to have imported a bunch of extra authors at the end of each article. Do you have any idea where this is coming from? Example is Investigation of [sup 246]Fm : in-beam spectroscopy at the limits (Q60542297) - it was imported with 3 extra authors at the end, not listed on the original article. Those same 3 authors have been appended to a lot of other author lists too; I'm working on cleaning those up. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:32, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith: I don't know for this specific case, but I have seen similar cases with other sources where authors had been confused with editors of the work in question. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 17:29, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
That's a possible explanation. Where does SourceMD get author lists from? A problem in the original source somewhere? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:05, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
Depends. In this case probably Crossref. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:09, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #357

ASGE Technology Committee (Q62515530)

is not a human. 129.13.72.197 11:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Author name string => Author

Hi, most of the imported scientific studies still have authors listed by using author name string (P2093), while the prefered solutions would be to use author (P50). Converting this manually would take a lot of time, then I'm wondering if there could be anything to do to make this process more (semi-)automated. Before diving into this I would ask you if you know if this has already been discussed or if anyone is working on this case. --Cavernia (talk) 12:12, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

@Cavernia: See Author Disambiguator tool at https://tools.wmflabs.org/author-disambiguator/?name= Trilotat (talk) 19:43, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
@Trilotat: Nice tool to help with the part of the process that must be done manually to connect the text strings in author name string (P2093) to the correct elements of the authors. What I desire is a tool that could pick the names from author name string (P2093) - qualifiers and references included, create author (P50) entries and then delete the author name string (P2093) entries. I've tried to do this by pasting the information into an Excel sheet which generates code to import the data using the QuickStatements tool, but this doesn't allow references to be included. --Cavernia (talk) 11:05, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
It is not possible for a tool to relate an author name string automatically to an author. So what you want will probalby not work. 129.13.72.197 11:58, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
That's correct, it can't be automatically done. Example: In The science and policy of identifying and controlling industrial cancer hazards (Q45169961) the text string «Devra Lee Davis» is used as author name string (P2093). I know that this author matches Devra Davis (Q5267942), then it takes me between 1 and 2 minutes to add Devra Davis (Q5267942) to author (P50), then use qualifiers to add «1» as series ordinal (P1545) and «Devra Lee Davis» as object named as (P1932), add a reference by cutting and pasting Europe PubMed Central (Q5412157) into stated in (P248), «7313616» into PubMed ID (P698), and a date into retrieved (P813), and delete the entry in author name string (P2093). Some studies have 10 or 20 different authors, then it will take a lot of time to do this manually. The tool must then have a matrix which converts the text strings into entries, and this matrix must be made manually. One possible problem is that authors with common surnames will use the same name string, i.e. «Davis D» for both Daniel Davis (Q49962435) and Devra Davis (Q5267942). But maybe there is any alternative way of identification in the source from which the data was imported? --Cavernia (talk) 16:04, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
The disambiguator tool I mentioned above automatically copies all the qualifiers from author name string to author. You need only designate which articles should go through the process. I find "grouping by co-authors" (option at top of the tool's screen) to be useful since there's a higher probability that the author whose name (or initials) appears with the same co-authors is indeed the same. It's a great tool.Trilotat (talk) 19:36, 10 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #358

More duplicates

Hi Daniel - I just merged a bunch of scholarly articles with duplicate DOI's that you recently created via Quickstatements - one example is Q62592691 which was a duplicate of Optical conductivity from cluster dynamical mean-field theory: Formalism and application to high-temperature superconductors (Q62592690) but there were many more (Q62499965, Q62592704, Q62592695, Q62592698, ...) I just happened across those due to a common author name string; I suspect you may have accidentally created others. Can you double-check on this, and preferably check the process you're using to generate these files so we don't get so many duplicates? Is this another SourceMD problem? ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:44, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for checking. Yes, this is again the problem that SourceMD relies on SPARQL queries for duplicate detection, which yields inconsistent and/ or outdated results when there are server lags, as was the case during that period. The relevant batch was 6608, which I have stopped, since the lags are ongoing. I am regularly cleaning up subsets of duplicates but we still have way too many. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:33, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Daniel. I think it would be reasonable that both you and GerardM stop using sourcemd. As you seem to have his confidence, can you ask him to stop? I think we have spent enough time discussing this. Unless someone has a particular medical condition that requires the daily use of sourcemd for their survival, I see no basis for continued use of this tool. I would be very happy if we could avoid blocking anyone for this. Many thanks for your kind cooperation! − Pintoch (talk) 17:45, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
I don't think giving up the use of the tool entirely is the way to go here. For instance, we do not have another scalable way to update the Zika corpus (or any other, for that matter) with new publications. Most of the problems stem from the part that used to be the ORCIDator. I am happy to give that one a pause for a while. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:22, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Pintoch, you have been talking at me, you have not been talking with me. Your notions of quality are easy to discuss. Yes, duplicates are created and this is to be avoided. I have demonstrated my involvement by changing my MO. However there is no understanding and acknowledgement of what IS the problem. What I have experienced is personal vilification. In my opinion you fail to appreciate the relevance of Wikicite. It becomes impossible without tools like SourceMD. But you did not think about that I hope. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:09, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #359

Wikidata weekly summary #360

Wikidata weekly summary #361

Editing speed

Hi Daniel,

WDQS is struggling a bit at the moment, and it seems that your batches could have a role in that, since the diff volume is relatively large. Could you please avoid running multiple QS batches in parallel?

Thank you! − Pintoch (talk) 13:02, 24 April 2019 (UTC)

There doesn't seem very much improvement yet, could you please take a look at this? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 13:40, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Hi Daniel, it seems that you started three batches again shortly before noon UTC today, and this coincides with a new episode of WDQS lag increase.
Could you please stop running multiple QS batches in parallel? I realize that my previous message might be ambiguous: could you avoid to do this not just today, but also in the future?
The problem is that you are making edits to items that are relatively large, so the size of the updates is quite big (see https://wikidata.wikiscan.org/hours/24/users).
Thank you! − Pintoch (talk) 13:34, 25 April 2019 (UTC)
I have blocked your account to let WDQS recover. − Pintoch (talk) 14:18, 25 April 2019 (UTC)

@Pintoch, Sjoerddebruin: Just a brief ping that I am back. I note that the current lag is significantly larger than the one we had at the time of my block — did my inactivity during this period give you any insights into the precise mechanisms causing the lag, and my potential role in that? I did some test edits that did not seem to correlate with any of the lag fluctuations. Are you aware of anyone planning a WikiDataCon session on the technical limits to Wikidata? If not, maybe we could put one in together? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:53, 27 April 2019 (UTC)

Yeah, it seems that Renamerr and Florentyna are also impacting big items at the moment, and that probably explains the current lag. When we blocked you, you were the only one with a "total size" of a few gigabytes on Wikiscan. I am not sure to attend WikidataCon but I would be happy to participate in the discussion if I come. − Pintoch (talk) 08:35, 28 April 2019 (UTC)

@Pintoch, Sjoerddebruin: I have done various additional tests — mostly when the lag was within 5 min and occasionally when it was larger but going down — but have not seen anything that would lead me to conclude that starting or stopping my batches is contributing anything significant to the total lag. For example, I have been running four QuickStatements batches in parallel for the last hour (and for some minutes even five), and the largest lag we had during that period was under 3 min. I have also had at least one batch running for most of April 30 and May 1, and the largest lag we had during that period was under 15 min. I understand that editing large items is a strain on the system in principle, and I welcome efforts to reduce that strain by only propagating affected triples rather than the entire page, but I think that type of strain is outweighed by other aspects, e.g. the number of client wikis actually making use of data from a given item. I hope that data from bibliographic items will be used more in the future, so I see conversations like this one as something that has to be kept in mind for such future contexts. For the moment, though, I plan to return to my pre-block habit of running up to three batches in parallel. I will keep an eye on the lag and try not to run my batches during periods when the lag is high. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:51, 2 May 2019 (UTC)

Hi Daniel, thanks for doing these tests. Of course, WDQS lag is a function of the total activity on Wikidata, and the fact that other users also start and stop batches at the same time makes it hard to measure effects accurately. I do not think the dispatch lag is to blame here (WDQS updates and sister sites updates are distinct, non-competing processes), but there are definitely other factors to consider (such as SPARQL query rates). It is great that you will keep an eye on the lag. I also hope that you will also keep in mind the bigger picture: this particular episode is far from being the only obstacle to scaling Wikicite. I think it is really urgent to step back and think about what the project is really aiming for, and how to get there without disrupting Wikidata's infrastructure and community. − Pintoch (talk) 10:55, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #362

Wikidata weekly summary #363

Robert Bauer

Hi Daniel, there are many researchers called Robert Bauer but your Robert Guggenberger (Q42059709) is special, because in the only source given (ORCID 0000-0003-0970-9705) he calls himself "Robert Guggenberger". Has ORCID changed or do your bot has problems? --Kolja21 (talk) 02:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

PS: PubMed-ID 27474965 has a Robert Bauer with a link to ORCID Robert Guggenberger. This might be the problem. --Kolja21 (talk) 02:14, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  OK Problem solved: "I married in 2017. Since then i am publishing as Robert Guggenberger."[3] --Kolja21 (talk) 21:14, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Kolja21, for noticing the issue, digging into it and solving it. Keep up the good work! --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #364

Contributor contact details

Hi Daniel, I just noticed you created and edited Contributor contact details (Q57897148)... there are a couple of these on Wikidata. If I were to delete these (because they are not actually relevant), would they be re-imported? Do we have a way to describe these properly (link the DOI somewhere else so that they don't get imported?). Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 22:45, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

I agree these seem a bit erratic because they are more like book chapters but have been shoehorned into our scholarly articles data model because they have a DOI. However, I think they are relevant because they provide detailed affiliation information for the people concerned, which could serve as a source for statements involving things like employer (P108) or affiliation (P1416). I have not run anything in the last month or so that would reimport something like this, but I cannot exclude this for the future, and I do not know precisely how other people go about deciding what they import/ curate/ otherwise work on. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:06, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that makes sense… I created a new Item contributor list (Q63975091) for this and changed the instance of in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q57897148&type=revision&diff=946077106&oldid=899254744 to that (but only there yet). Do you think it makes sense to do go ahead with that? Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
@Hoo man: Were you able to sort it out? The new item could have scientific publication (Q591041) sub-class too? What is the telling characteristic of this type of publication that makes it unworthy as an article? What was it a problem for you that it was in the article class? It helps knowing if there is a practical problem or if the change was more a structural design decision. Jagulin (talk) 04:57, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #365

Wikidata weekly summary #366

Wikidata weekly summary #367

sourcemd_batch_processing - batch 8020

Hi there! Re: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q30988215&diff=955276402&oldid=prev - it seems your bot confuses the concept of a "new species" with the record company New Records and a scholarly article named New Species. Could you have a look-see when you get the time? Moebeus (talk) 12:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: Should the subject for "new species" be species nova (Q27652812)? Trilotat (talk) 00:28, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks both. I have changed the topic tagging to species nova (Q27652812) for the ca. 50 articles affected. Can't do much else other than pinging Magnus. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:30, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #368

How's ORES working out for you?

Hi Daniel Mietchen, I'm working with User:EpochFail (@halfak on irc) on a research study to look into how mw:ORES is working out on wikis where it has been enabled. I was hoping to talk a little about what the kind of work you do on Wikidata and about how the ORES edit filters and classifiers have been working out. Do you use any tools other than Special:RecentChanges or Special:Watchlist that take advantage of ORES? Do you know of any other tools that are used to patrol that do not use ORES? I'm also interested in any other observations you may have about how the ORES scores are working out. Thank you! Groceryheist (talk) 23:53, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

preprints described as scholarly article

Hi, I found Closed-loop feedback control for microfluidic systems through automated capacitive fluid height sensing (Q59616999) which was created by User:QuickStatementsBot in your name (batch 1899). The item is a preprint (Q580922) published in bioRxiv (Q19835482) (a detail ommited by the bot) and later published as a proper scholarly article (Q13442814) described in identically titled Closed-loop feedback control for microfluidic systems through automated capacitive fluid height sensing. (Q50045828). Could you fix similar items so they are described in instance of (P31) as preprints and not as "proper" scholarly articles? Thanks, DGtal (talk) 07:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

HI, did you understand my request? DGtal (talk) 06:22, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #369

Wikidata weekly summary #370

Mostly blank items about articles

Hi Daniel Mietchen,

I found a couple mostly blank ones from 2017, e.g. Q28681089, Q28705231, Q28661357. Maybe there is a way to identify all of them and fill in the missing info by bot. --- Jura 09:48, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks both for checking and providing the query. These items are about articles where PMC has scans rather than proper full text, and this seems to correlate with poor metadata. In principle, we have tools to fix such things (example), but they can only work with the metadata that is being made available. Things are complicated further by an apparent block of Toolforge servers by NIH, as per this Phabricator ticket. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:52, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  • No problem. Compared to the number of entries, it seems marginal even if it might possibly apply to any such item without a title statement. Sample: Q57728434. --- Jura 11:08, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Looks like sometimes also "published in" is omitted: Q24799245. It's a bit of a mystery to me how the script could generate multiple items with identical label+description combinations. --- Jura 18:14, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Missing "published in" is usually due to the item for the publication venue not existing at the time of creation of the item for the article. In this case, it seems to be due to a mismatch between the journal's official title and the title used in PubMed. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:57, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #371

Wiki Science Competition 2019

Your massive creation of links to Ferenc Bánhidy (Q41693708), an item I created in order to use the uploaded files from the European Science Photo Competition 2015, reminded me to ask you if you want to be a juror for Wiki Science Competition 2019 (WSC is the evolution of the previous European edition).

I am starting to draft the international jury. Would you be interested in joining the new one? here.

Please notice that during the 2017 edition I put on purpose links to wikidata item of all people in the jury as a tool for wikidata literacy, I suppose you could enjoy this aspect. This time I will be also sure that their publications are updated if they are active researchers.

Plus, I did not have the time to verify all top images and the related wikidata items here because there were so many last-minute problems (Saudi Arabia and Poland needed me to step in to be fixed), but this edition I will probably like to do so and stress it as a part of our campaign. Like tweeting about an updated item every time a new picture is uploaded.

Let me know if you are interested. If so, I will inform the main organizers.

If you don't want to be a juror, I can put you in the academic committee or create a volunteer committee. We are quite selective with the uploaded images and we verify them carefully. I would like to write a post for the website discussing also about the use of wikidata.

I can go on, but if you join, we will simply make some skype call soon about it.

WSC starts in November and goes on until the following year.--Alexmar983 (talk) 19:57, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Alexmar983 — count me in. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
Good.--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:03, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
I am going to insert your name here. ok?--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:25, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
Fine with me. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 16:28, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
If you were not contacted, the manager/editor of the webpage User:Reosarevok would like to know which image should be used here. Any preference from Commons?--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:19, 4 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi.Russia completed the WSC2019 upload months in advance, here there are portraits that should be linked or integrated in wikidata. I certainly do not have the time to do it now (maybe one or two), so if you want you can take a look. Please if you are going to help on the wikidata integration of bibliometri item, I would like to describe this work (that I have also done last edition) on the WSC main website in a concise post. Thank you!--Alexmar983 (talk) 13:13, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #372

Wikidata weekly summary #373

Wikidata weekly summary #374

Dieses ist mir lustig...

I got a kick out of L50000. Subtle and nicely done. —Scs (talk) 23:48, 27 July 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #375

Wikidata weekly summary #376

Leslie Barclay (Q61216213)

Hello Daniel, in January, you created the object Q61216213 containing no further information than a name. It was later expanded by another user, adding information about Leslie W. Barclay, a British electrical engineer. Today, I further expanded the object based on a recent obituary. However, a look at the links to this object indicates that it's a different Leslie Barclay you had in mind, so you may want to create another object about that person. Regards, Axolotl Nr.733 (talk) 12:30, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

@Axolotl Nr.733: Done: Leslie Barclay (Q66702520) — thanks for the ping! --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:14, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #377

Wikidata weekly summary #378

Strange dup

Hi Daniel Mietchen, Found a strange dup: Q38563811 and Q41924800. One came up on Wikidata:WikiProject Random.

Is there a place where we could list the different types of issues that come up with these imports? Might make it easier to find people who can identify all similar cases and/or fix them.

In any case, I think it would be good to continue the imports. --- Jura 12:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

I set up User:Research Bot/issues to discuss these things. New imports are not a priority for me right now but I hope we can resume soon. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:04, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Adding articles in the Post-SourceMD era?

Daniel, are you by chance still adding articles since SourceMD has been shut down? If so, are you doing so with any special tools? I'm adding them individually and find it to be quite tedious. I'm just wondering if there's a better tool. Thanks, Trilotat (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

I haven't imported scholarly articles in over a month, yet I think Wikidata:Fatameh still works. It has its own problems and works best with PMCID (P932) for articles not in Wikidata yet. Note that as far as I can tell, it only has a passive understanding of DOI (P356), i.e. it can add it if triggered by PubMed ID (P698) or PMCID (P932) but cannot be triggered by DOI (P356). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
This is awesome! thanks. Another tool for me to use. Thank you!! Trilotat (talk) 04:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
Looks like the old SourceMD is up again. It understands DOI, PMID and PMCID and works fine for single publications or up to a few dozens. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 05:07, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #379

Wikidata weekly summary #380

Add P407 to scientific articles

Hi,
Do you think you can add language of work or name (P407) to new items dedicated to scientific articles created by Research_Bot ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:53, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Not at the moment, sorry. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:17, 5 September 2019 (UTC)
Please, at least for P407:Q1860. I'm pretty sure is'nt more than 2 lines of code in your script.
I can't do this alone anymore. I have a wife and a kid man. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:45, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

More duplicate DOI's

Hi Daniel, I've pretty much finished the cleanup of items with duplicate DOI's (the remaining cases are ones where the labels/titles of the two articles are quite different, suggesting either one of the DOI's is wrong or the journal really issued the same DOI to multiple papers). However, I noticed again even some very recent quickstatements entries by you among these duplicates - I thought this would have been fixed by now. An example is Data sharing in the sciences (Q66677611) and Data sharing in the sciences (Q66677610) (both created by you within the same minute on August 22). ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:55, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Thanks, Arthur, for the merges and for keeping an eye on such issues. I'm not sure precisely what might have gone wrong here, but I think that batch contained DOIs scraped from various sources, and while I did check for duplicates, I probably did not normalize by case before that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:31, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #381

Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Source MD down again?

Does it work for you? I keep getting a "504 Gateway Time-out" error. Trilotat (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Got lots of these today as well (using the old one — haven't touched the new one in a while), but it occasionally works in between. Not sure what the problem is. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:57, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
Seems to be working again. Trilotat (talk) 04:35, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

SourceMD scholarly articles without P1433

Hi there!

Oddly, it seems that some SourceMD scholarly articles (see e.g. Corinne Leveleux-Teixeira (Q30135205)'s Q60515751) have no published in (P1433) claim...

Nomen ad hoc (talk) 11:38, 14 September 2019 (UTC).

Validating and adjusting Medical information in Wikidata with SPARQL and PubMed

Dear Sir,

I thank you for your efforts. I was absolutely honoured to discuss with you last year. As promised, I am beginning this month my work to develop a method for validating amd enriching Medical information in Wikidata. As said, the method uses Wikidata query service and PubMed Entrez API to adjust and enrich Wikidata. I ask if you can join the work. If you like that, I can send you an overview about the work by email.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 14:01, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

@Csisc: Thanks for the note. Yes, please share details, and preferably in public — I do not find it fruitful to discuss such things via email unless there is a specific reason for that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:51, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I thank you for your answer. I already discussed this work in Wikimania 2019. For details, please see presentation slides. After that, I did several discussions on talk pages about this important topic. Currently, we have decided the used method and we are working on the practice of this idea. That is why we use emails for discussion. We do not like to disturb people on the mailing list with our messages as we are working on daily basis. However, we will publish the method in the Wikidata mailing list when we finish working on it to have comments. As well, emails are more practical for me as this allows me to send datasets and documents to the participants. However, I can create a talk page on Meta to discuss the work if you like that. --Csisc (talk) 14:40, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
@Csisc: Well, then let's go for email. I had seen your Wikimania slides before you gave the talk and would indeed like to know more, especially around the PubMed part. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 06:58, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Email sent. I will be absolutely honoured to receive your opinion about the work. --Csisc (talk) 12:48, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #382

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

RMaung (WMF) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #383

instance of (P31) recommendation for Comment and for Reply?

@Daniel Mietchen: What instance of (P31) would use use for a comment and a reply to scholarly article? Also, do you have any suggestions how to connect the comment and the reply to the item(s) to which they are related? Trilotat (talk) 20:34, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I would probably keep this P31 and add a genre (P136) statement but am not sure about that either. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:09, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
In terms of linking back to the item(s) commented about or replied to, I think we could use main subject (P921). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:05, 27 September 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #384

Wikidata weekly summary #385

Books metadata in Wikidata

Hi Daniel, I have difficulty inserting bibliographic metadata related to books through ZotKat: it gives me error, but it is fine with the articles of scientific journals. What can I do? do i need to correct something? If Zotkat is not adequate, which tool do you suggest to automatically create the items of the books starting for example from the ISBN?Alessandra Boccone (talk) 15:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Alessandra Boccone: I don't do books much, so pinging User:Zuphilip on this one. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 03:33, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: Thanks!Alessandra Boccone (talk) 08:56, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
Discussion continued in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User_talk:Zuphilip#Books_metadata_in_Wikidata . Thanks for the ping! --Zuphilip (talk) 19:13, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #386

Wikidata weekly summary #387

Asking for a letter of support to create a research unit in Tunisia

Dear Sir,

I thank you for your efforts. We are managing to create a research unit called "Data Engineering and Semantics" in the University of Sfax, Tunisia. The purpose of this research unit is to gather Wikiresearchers from University of Sfax into a recognized research structure and have funding from Tunisian Ministry of Higher Education. In order to do that, we need to have a letter of support from institutions all over the world. I ask if you or the director of your research department can write a letter of support for us so that we can have our application approved. This will be acknowledged. --Csisc (talk) 14:25, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

OK, just confirming that I've seen this. Happy to do this, and I have ideas on what we could be doing together. What's the deadline? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:49, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
I thank you for your answer. I look forward to collaborating with you. This is absolutely an honour for our team. I just sent an email this morning in which I gave detailed information about the research unit. Concerning the deadline, it will be on November 1, 2019. --Csisc (talk) 20:20, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
I thank you for your efforts. I ask if you can send us the letter of support by tomorrow afternoon as the deadline to send the research unit application is on Friday. --Csisc (talk) 12:16, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

Jessica W. Lynch Alfaro / automatisierte Autorenverlinkung?

Hallo Daniel, ich habe Q72180638 zur Primatenforscherin Jessica W. Lynch Alfaro angelegt und angefangen, sie in ihren Publikationen zu verlinken. Geht das auch irgendwie halbautomatisiert? Denn diese händische Übertragung kostet derart viel Zeit, dass ich bei über 100 Suchtreffern (und somit potenziellen Ergebnissen) schon am Anfang kapituliere. Wenn ich dann mitbekomme, dass der gerade eben noch verlinkte Michael E. Alfaro (angesichts der gleichen Arbeitsstätte und ihrer früheren Autorenangabe Jessica W. Lynch vermutlich ihr Mann) im Artikel Q44302860 ebenfalls nicht verlinkt ist, wächst der Berg an Arbeit gleich noch einmal an. -- Gruß, 32X (talk) 15:24, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@32X: Probier mal den Author Disambiguator. Als Startpunkt eignet sich ein Artikelitem (Beispiel), ein Autorennamenstring (Beispiel), ein Autorenitem (Beispiel) oder eine /missing page in Scholia, z.B. für ein Thema (Beispiel). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:28, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
PS:
--Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:36, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

New page for catalogues

Hi, I created a new page for collecting sites that could be added to Mix'n'match and I plan to expand it with the ones that already have scrapers by category. Feel free to expand, use for property creation. Best, Adam Harangozó (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #388 & Wikidata Birthday

Wikidata weekly summary #389

Label of Q57696956

Hi Daniel Mietchen, seems something went wrong at Q57696956. BTW, you might want to look into ISSN donation. --- Jura 09:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. I fixed Maria Filomena F. Nave (Q57696956). Don't have bandwidth for ISSN right now. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:43, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
If I was sure that just Q57696956 went wrong, I would have fixed it directly. The problem with bot edits is that not only there are generally several to fix, but also it's likely to happen again once one fixed. --- Jura 09:23, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
Yes. The problem here was that the person had put multiple aliases into their author field on ORCID. This is rare but she was probably not the only one. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:51, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Expanding author profiles in Scholia

Thanks for your presentations at the WikiConference such as this talk on Wikidata and Scholia. I was looking at the 1979 chemistry Nobel laureate Georg Wittig, and Scholia lists him as having no publications. See Georg Wittig and Wittig reaction. Is there some way to expand profiles of important scientists like this, and important general topics? Is there a tool to allow us to (say) important all the citations from the corresponding WIkipedia articles? Thanks, Walkerma (talk) 19:47, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

@Walkerma: I just ran a batch for him, and more can be done based on his "missing" page. We have WD:SourceMD and WD:Fatameh for imports, but both are not really usable right now, so the best option for starting an item based on a DOI, PMID or PMCID is the old SourceMD, which sits here. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 17:28, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Daniel! I'll give it a go this weekend. Walkerma (talk) 04:10, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #390

SourceMD batch cleanup

If you're not already aware there are paper corrections imported via sourcemd that are only being imported as "Correction:" when the remainder of the title is in italics. Example: 10.1136/bcr-2018-224213corr1 - Q58770311. This issue is reported in sourcemd as issue 7, but this means there are a handful of DOIs that will need to be rerun from various previous batches or manual fix.Wolfgang8741 (talk) 09:51, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

wrong heuristic

Please STOP using "title" as heuristic for references. The right item would be inferred from title (Q69652283). Thank you. --SCIdude (talk) 16:07, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

OK, will do. inferred from title (Q69652283) makes more sense indeed but it wasn't around when I started doing this, and I followed the recommendations from back then. What are your plans in this space? --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Nothing specific, just pragmatism like yesterday I created inferred from abstract (Q75484171) because I needed it. Earlier I used TCDB BLAST (Q69893291) extensively. I am certain that with enough items of this type someone will write a paper with a classification. --SCIdude (talk) 06:38, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I've used this heuristic as a reference. Will you mass replace or should I try to find all the instances where I've used it? Trilotat (talk) 22:05, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Bad extraction

Hi there can you check this item review of Egypt and Africa. Joyce Tyldesley. Chronicle of the Queens of Egypt from Early Dynastic Times to the Death of Cleopatra (Q58890343) and the ones immediately before and after it? I think they are badly extracted sections of text from a Review article and should not be individual items. Thanks. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

Looks like those titles are aberrant in the respective journal too. Pinging User:Richard Nevell who might know more. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:54, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi folks. With that particular item, the whole title from the publisher would be Egypt and Africa - Joyce Tyldesley. Chronicle of the Queens of Egypt from Early Dynastic Times to the Death of Cleopatra. 224 pages, 273 b&w & colour illustrations. 2006. London: Thames & Hudson; 978-0-500-05145-0 hardback £19.95. - Charlotte Booth. People of Ancient Egypt. 290 pages, 75 illustrations, 25 colour plates. 2006.Stroud: Tempus; 0-7524-3927-8 hardback £20. - Stephanie Moser. Wondrous curiosities: Ancient Egypt at the British Museum. xvi+328 pages, 89 illustrations, 13 colour plates. 2006. Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press; 978-226¬54209-6 hardback. - Jean-Luc Chappaz (ed.) with Nora Ferrero, Sandra Deglon, Delphine Petro & Marie Vandenbeusch. Kerma et archéologie nubienne.60 pages, 69 b&w & colour illustrations. 2006. Geneva: Musée d’artet d’histoiredeGenève/Infolio; 978-2¬8306-0234-0 & 978-2-88474-128-6 paperback. - Graham Connah. Forgotten Africa: an introduction to its archaeology. xiv+194 pages, 67 illustrations. 2004. Abingdon & New York: Routledge; 0-415-30590-X hardback £60; 0-415-30591-8 paperback £18.99. - Saul Dubow. A Commonwealth of Knowledge: Science, Sensibility, and White South Africa 1820-2000. xii+296 pages, 11 illustrations. 2006. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 978-0-19-929663-7 hardback £60.
That's a bit of a mouthful, and more than Wikidata can cope with, so the tool truncates it. Richard Nevell (talk) 23:14, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
I modified it to end in "..." to indicate incompleteness. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 22:29, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
I took the liberty of further truncating the title, moving Daniel's edited title to the "also known as" field, and I hope appropriately, I added the entirety of the remaining "mouthful" into the subtitle field. Also listed it as British English. Trilotat (talk) 20:59, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #391

Wikidata weekly summary #392

WikiCite Satellite 2020 Keynote?

Hey Daniel,

hast du meine Email (8.11.)mit der Anfrage, ob du eine Key-Note bei der WikCite Satellite am 6.-8. Mai in Köln halten möchtest bekommen? Es wäre toll, wenn du dort zum Beispiel was zu Scholia sagen würdest. Gerne kann das aber auch eine adere Metareflexion sein. Meld dich doch, ob wir mit dir rechen können - oder auch nicht.

Herzliche Grüße! Eva

@EvaSeidlmayer: Sorry, hab ich noch nicht gesehen. Ich guck mal nach. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:03, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
OK, hab gerade "Ja, gern" geantwortet. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:08, 28 November 2019 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi, I see you work a lot on the lexemes. Thanks!--So9q (talk) 10:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #393

Thomas Koschny

Hello Daniel!

Who is Q63005302? Some information would be helpful, otherwise I suggest the record for deletion.

Greetings, --HarryNº2 (talk) 14:24, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I think it's premature to delete. A number of articles link to the author. I presume he is this person [6]. Trilotat (talk) 15:27, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
@HarryNº2, Trilotat: Thanks, both, for checking. I added what I could, largely based on the link given above. Always good to check for links and what the Scholia profile says. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 16:34, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
I followed up with some additional articles from results at [7]. I'll try to disambiguate, but I am not familiar with this author or their field of work. Trilotat (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Turns out that all the publications with author name string (P2093) equal to the label or aliases of Thomas Koschny (Q63005302) were actually by the same person, so no need to disambiguate them further unless new publications come in. However, curation of their co-authors, the topics of the publications etc. is still most welcome. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:48, 5 December 2019 (UTC)
Seems your activity has led this item to appear on the Current Highlights section of the main page. Well done! Trilotat (talk) 19:53, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #394

Weekly Summary #395

Ontology Evaluation with SPARQL

Dear Sir,

I thank you for your support. We have sent our research unit application and will shortly know about the final decision. Concerning ontology evaluation with SPARQL, we are working as you already know on developing queries to assess the usage of relation types in Wikidata. Today, I have sent you an updated edition of the work. I ask if you can write "Wikidata as a collaborative ontology: An overview" and "SPARQL in a nutshell" parts and review the work for us. Please reply me soon. --Csisc (talk) 21:37, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #396

WikiProject India Newsletter #2

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

Happy New Year for those who are living in UTC+05:30 (Q6828) (in advance or belated for the rest!). You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter. You can find our second issue of the quarterly newsletter here, where you can get a quick overview of the Wikidata activities related to India over the last 3 months. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards,
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
(on behalf of WikiProject India on Wikidata.)

Wikidata weekly summary #397

Wikidata weekly summary #398

Wikidata weekly summary #399

Wikidata weekly summary #400

Wikidata weekly summary #401

Open infectious disease guide

Hey there! I'm a physician and researcher at the University of Cologne. Yesterday I had a conversation with Jens Ohlig from Wikimedia Germany about a project I am working on. Supported and partly funded by the German Society for infectious diseases we are creating an open platform (based on mediawiki and hopefully wikidata) with information on how to diagnose and treat the most prevalent infectious diseases. We call it 'infektiopedia'. Jens recommended talking to you :) Currently most of our documents are in German so I cannot share much at this point but happy to have a call and talk about the project. --Max.schons (talk) 09:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi Max, happy to talk. I'll send you an email with my contact details. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:11, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
Email sent. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 11:18, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #402

Wikidata weekly summary #403

Wikidata weekly summary #404

Main subject through MAG FOS

HI Daniel, I saw through the Quick Statements logs that you are adding main subject props Property:P921 to academic publications.

It might be of interest to you that I am currently adding Microsoft Academic's Fields of Study. It is a semi-automatically constructed hierarchy of 220K Topics, extracted from Wikipedia to which they map all the articles in their knowledge graph. See [[9]]

Given that they use Wikipedia, the mapping to Wikidata is straightforward and the MAG ID's are currently being added to the corresponding items. For example, "carbon naonotubes" carbon nanotube (Q1778729) is currently a subject of 180K publications [on MAG]. So long story short, maybe there is a more optimal and thorough way to categorize the publications you are interested in.

Drop me a message if you want to discuss it further. Cheers!


Nikola Tulechki (talk) 07:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

@Nikola Tulechki: Благодаря, Никола. Да, щастлив да обсъдим това допълнително. Маппинг е полезно, но лицензът им предотвратява по-нататъшното интегриране. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 15:29, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #405

Wikidata weekly summary #406

Would you like to contribute to a WikiProject COVID-19 ?

Hello,

I am a big fan of your contributions to Wikidata, via the WikiProject Zika Corpus, Scholia, and much more. I was wondering if you would be interested in helping to create a Wikidata WikiProject COVID-19.

The goals would be initially (of course, they can be changed):

create a data model for instances of disease outbreak (Q3241045).

monitor the quality of the pages about national outbreaks listed in 2019–20 COVID-19 outbreak by country and territory (Q83741704).

curate the wikidata items relevant for describing the outbreaks and the virus itself.

curate and improve the information on Wikidata about scientific articles regarding the coronavirus (similar to the Wikidata:WikiProject_Zika_Corpus).

think and develop ways to process these items to improve access to information (for example, via automated articles in languages that currently do not have pages about country-specific outbreaks).

Would you like to participate in this effort?

I am trying to gather the Wikidata editors actively involved in the topic.I believe that if we act together, we can have a shot at aiding the global effort in containing the pandemic.

Thanks!

TiagoLubiana (talk) 00:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@TiagoLubiana: Based on experience with Wikidata:WikiProject Medicine, Wikidata:WikiProject Zika Corpus and Wikidata:WikiProject Humanitarian Wikidata, I think a separate WikiProject for COVID-19 is not necessarily the best way to handle this on the Wikidata end. My preference would be for a COVID-19 Task Force under the umbrella of the Medicine or Humanitarian Wikiproject (or perhaps both — with the former focusing on the medical aspects, the latter on socioeconomics, logistics and such). In any case, I am working on the topic already and shall be very happy to join forces with others who are similarly engaged! --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:46, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: Thanks for the quick response! I trust your preferences, sounds like a great solution. I like the idea of the Humanitarian part, but I feel that two pages could be a bit too confusing, and I do not know if it is possible to have a task force as a subpart of two projects. What do you think about a https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Medicine/COVID-19_Task_Force? Are there any steps I should take before starting a page about such a task force? Thank you! TiagoLubiana (talk) 00:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@TiagoLubiana: That sounds like a good place to get things going. We can sort out the syncing with the Humanitarian pages and similar resources later. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:36, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: In the meanwhile, a different user created a WikiProject (Wikidata:WikiProject_COVID-19). I started putting content there, but already opened in the the talk page a discussion about moving it to a task force page. TiagoLubiana (talk) 01:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
Thanks — I commented there. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 01:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #407

Corpus of COVID-19 articles

Hello again,

I am thinking about how to organize the curation of the articles related to COVID-19 within the scope of the WikiProject COVID-19. The goal would be similar to the Zika Corpus project, but on a smaller scale, at least at first. Any tips on where to start? Thanks again! TiagoLubiana (talk) 23:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@TiagoLubiana: I see Scholia profiles (e.g. for the SARS-CoV-2 virus, for the COVID-19 disease, for the COVID-19 pandemic, for the transmission of the virus or for social distancing) as good starting points to curate scholarly articles and perhaps news on the topic, as mentioned yesterday. For Wikipedia articles, I am hoping for a Wikidata version of Template:COVID-19 pandemic (Q83761248). In a longer term, I am also thinking about an outbreak aspect for Scholia, but that would mean we get a decent data model for outbreaks first. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 02:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Research Bot

Can you stop Research Bot replacing 'scientific article published on 1st January 1970' to just 'scientific article' in the item descriptions like it did here

Thanks Nintendofan885T&Cs apply 10:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

@Nintendofan885: Thanks for checking. As you can see from its contributions, that day was the last day it made an edit. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 13:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #408

SAR

You have added main subject (P921) based on its title, but for example in Metallic electrodes and leads in simultaneous EEG-MRI: specific absorption rate (SAR) simulation studies. (Q51682249) "SAR" means "specific absorption rate".--GZWDer (talk) 23:57, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, thanks for checking. Should be clear now. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:33, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #409

WikiProject India Newsletter #3

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter. You can find our third issue of the quarterly newsletter here, where you can get a quick overview of the Wikidata activities related to India over the last 3 months. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards, Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K) and Mahir256
(on behalf of WikiProject India)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Citation metrics in Scholia

Dear Sir,

As I stated in a previous email, Scholia does not support citation metrics for scientists, papers and institutions. However, such metrics (such as the number of citations) are important to give an overview of the citation activity of the analyzed scholarly entity. That is why I ask if we can integrate SPARQL queries computing citation metrics for a scientist. I already adapted some of the Scholia queries for that:

I am still working on a query to generate the h-index and even the g-index of a scientist. I am also working to apply these metrics on other types of entities.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 20:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC) Csisc (talk) 21:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Csisc, the main reason we have not highlighted citation information in Scholia as much is that it is very incomplete, and almost entirely missing for the last two years. Do you have any plans to bring in citation information at scale, e.g. from Open Citations? I checked all four of your example queries, and they all look fine, so feel free to open tickets and pull requests for them in our GitHub repo. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:56, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Yes, we studied various options to mass upload citations to Wikidata. The first option is to use OpenCitations. However, we can miss many citations with this option. This is just what is currently happening in Wikidata. The second option is the use of Net Scraping. As you already know, this technique can be used to directly retrieve references from the websites of publishers. However, there is a legal concern about this method. But, before dealing with citations, we found another problem in Scholia. The problem is the static data about affiliations. Most of the affiliations of included scientists are not explained in details. What we propose is to involve scholarly affiliations as qualifiers to authors' list of each publication. An example of how to do that can be https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q68471881. Such simple data can be easily found for each publication and can be used later to infer the changes of affiliations of scientists over years. Concerning h-index, the problem is that LIMIT in SPARQL does not support variables. What I propose is to create i20-index and i40-index using the same method as i10-index. Like this, we will have the same information about citation patterns as the h-index. I ask about your opinion of that. --Csisc (talk) 22:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
@Csisc: You touch on a number of problems here, and they tend not to have short answers, but I'll try nonetheless:
  • Ad citations:
    • OpenCitations is a natural starting point. Their materials are compatibly licensed and machine readable, and the communities know each other. Yes, their corpus is incomplete, but at this point, we do not know whether Wikidata would be able to handle a scholarly citation graph that is anywhere near completeness, so starting with a smaller set (which is still hundreds of millions and thus a multiple of what we have right now) would seem more reasonable than going for anything more comprehensive.
    • We want to avoid legal trouble, so are staying away from any grey areas, and including netscraped data (except from sites under CC0/ public domain) is thus not an option. Scraping has non-legal issues as well (e.g. entity recognition, especially in multilingual contexts) but could be useful in a number of ways, particularly for quality control and for finding suitable references for unsourced Wikidata statements. For instance, I could imagine a scraping-based tool that flags issues with information in Wikidata, e.g. missing (or inconsistent, incomplete, unreferenced) publications, authors, author orders, affiliations, citations, keywords, journals, publication dates, identifiers etc. Scholia could then use such information either directly, i.e. by displaying information from the tool (similar to how Wembedder is integrated) or indirectly, i.e. by linking to the tool (similar to how the Author Disambiguator is integrated), and either on the profile page itself or on the corresponding /missing page.
  • Ad affiliations:
    • We are currently lumping together information regarding things like employer (P108), educated at (P69), member of (P463) and affiliation (P1416), and we do not distinguish much between current and past values, in part because all of these properties (and their qualifiers) are still sparsely populated, but also in part because the impact of an organization is not limited to whoever is on staff now. Yes, once the data becomes more complete, we could tease out these details more.
    • When mining affiliation data, largely the same comments as above apply: it may be very useful for sites that are licensed compatibly with Wikidata, but for anything else (i.e. the vast majority of potential sites to mine), the main value would be as a basis for quality control, primarily by flagging inconsistencies and gaps that can then guide further curation on Wikidata.
    • Yes, it would be very useful to have affiliation data at a per-publication granularity (as in your example Wikidata: A large-scale collaborative ontological medical database (Q68471881)), and we could harvest that in principle for more fine-grained Scholia queries, but the way the Wikidata Query Service (Q20950365) query time-out works does not usually allow such granularity to be harvested on the scale of, say, institutional profiles. It should usually (except perhaps for publications with thousands of authors) work on work profiles, and it may be displayed in panels like the one for most recent or earliest publications on a topic.
    • Yes, we are very much aware of many of the limits of the WDQS, and as per Wikidata:WikiProject Scholia/Robustifying, we are actively exploring what can be done about them. As for variable with LIMITS, we could try to use ASK queries before SELECT queries to address that (see ticket for that).
  • Ad metrics:
    • I am not too keen on replicating flawed metrics like impact factor (Q5330) or h-index (Q310663), but yes, there is value in being able to reproduce these metrics based on open data, and we hint at that, for instance, with the "As function of number of published works" panel in the Citations section of a publisher profile (example), which essentially replicates the JIF.
    • In the long run, I think Scholia can help establish new and more sensible metrics. One that I like is the number of statements supported by a given work, and once that is more populated (as per above, mining could be very useful for that!), we could show variants of it on profiles for authors, institutions, topics etc. But any single measure is likely to be gamed once it becomes a measure, so we should also look at more systemic indicators that are harder to game, and the way Scholia is set up allows to explore such things rather flexibly in principle, albeit within the limits of the query service.
--Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:35, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Interesting ideas. I will see how we can directly integrate OpenCitations into Wikidata. Concerning citation metrics, I will open a ticket about the queries in GitHub. After that, we will definitely see what we can do. --Csisc (talk) 11:56, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
  Done. Added four tickets to https://github.com/fnielsen/scholia/issues. Concerning editorial delay, we can add editorial dates for research publications using web scraping of PubMed Central Database. I can add a ticket about that if you like it. Csisc (talk) 16:17, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
Just an update concerning what we have discussed about Scholia, I raise these points:
  • I ask if you can adapt the citation metrics I involved in https://github.com/fnielsen/scholia/issues/1097 and include them in a pull request. I can adapt them to other types of entities like journals, publications and prizes.
  • We can include DOI to DOI references of OpenCitations. However, the CSV dump is currently 106 GB as shown at https://opencitations.net/download#coci. Unfortunately, we do not have the means to store data in a local server. The only solution can be the use of Wikimedia Cloud Services.
  • I ask if you can adapt and include the scholarly networks of single publications as available at https://github.com/fnielsen/scholia/issues/1100 in a pull request.
Yours Sincerely,
--Csisc (talk) 21:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - March Newsletter

This is our fourth newsletter, covering March 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3 and 11.

Becoming a User Group

  • Wikimedians for Sustainable Development are recognized as a Wikimedia user Group [5]

In the news

  • Wikipedia is flooded with information — but it has a blind spot (SDG 11) [1]

New WikiProjects

  • Wikidata:WikiProject COVID-19 (SDG 3) [9]
  • (Arabic) ويكيبيديا:مشروع ويكي طب/فريق عمل كوفيد-19 (SDG 3) [10]
  • (Czech) Wikipedie:WikiProjekt SARS-CoV-2 (SDG 3) [11]
  • (English) Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19 (SDG 3) [12]

Academic studies

  • Uneven Coverage of Natural Disasters in Wikipedia: the Case of Floods (SDG 11) [2]

Events

  • The COVID-19 pandemic halts all in-person events funded through the Wikimedia Foundation (SDG 3) [6]
    • Which lead to a renewed interest in remote events (SDG 17) [8]

Information from the Wikimedia Foundation

  • COVID-19 (SDG 3) [20]

The Sustainable Development Goals

  • The United Nations adopt changes to the Sustainable Development Goal Indicators (SDG-all) [7]

New Wikidata properties

  • GreatSchools ID (SDG 4) [4]
  • food energy (SDG 1) [14]
  • number of recoveries (SDG 3) [15]
  • number of clinical tests (SDG 3) [16]

New Wikidata example queries

  • Updated chart of the number of infections and deaths caused since the outbreak of SARS-CoV-2, as reported by the World Health Organisation (SDG 3) [3]
  • World map of hospitals (SDG 3) [13]
  • Notable people with COVID-19 by number of sitelinks (SDG 3) [17]
  • COVID-19 case statistics for India (SDG 3):
    • State-level map [18]
    • State-level line graph [19]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 20:57, 3 April 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #410

Wikidata weekly summary #411

Updates about our work

Dear Sir,

I have the honour to inform you about these updates:

  • Our paper about ontological validation of Wikidata has received a positive decision from CSCW Journal. We have to provide significant adjustments to the paper and send it again for review. I have send you an email a few hours ago about the matter. Please see it and reply me very soon.
  • Concerning Scholia, we have organized meetings about this Wikidata tool and developed a report about it. Please find the report at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Wikimedia_TN_-_Robustifying_Scholia,_A_viewpoint.pdf.
  • We have added support of COVID-19 status in Tunisia to Wikidata. We think of writing a research paper about that. If this work is interesting for you, I can send you further details about what we have done.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 14:53, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

@Csisc: Sorry, saw this only now.
  • Re CSCW, I had already replied via email.
  • Re your report, thanks for this detailed analysis! As previously discussed, the issues you raise fall into several categories:
    • some (e.g. coverage of citations, affiliations and email addresses) are a matter where we need to engage the Wikidata / WikiCite community, rather than decide them on our own — this is especially important for things like the citations, since their scale (billions if we strive for comprehensiveness of any sort) is reaching the limits of Wikidata (speaking of which, your contributions to WikiProject Limits of Wikidata would be much appreciated).
    • some are things that enhance Scholia's functionality but not within the Scholia team's current priorities, since these revolve around figuring out how to deal with the fact that existing functionality already hits bespoke Wikidata limits on a regular basis, e.g. as per this GitHub project and these on-wiki notes.
    • some are things that we already work on, e.g. a country-level citation graph per topic.
  • Re COVID, yes, happy to collaborate, as discussed in the call on Monday.
--Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Needs assessment for Wikidata Movement Resource

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

CIS-A2K is planning to invest some resources from May-June 2020 to create community movement resource (CMR) materials in English and different Indic languages for Wikidata in the form of tutorials, handbooks, infographics, videos, animations etc. The aim of this initiative is to build a pool of resource materials for Wikidata eventually, which will serve as ready-made handy references for new as well as experienced users. You are requested to fill up this form, so that we can understand your needs on different topics of Wikidata. You are also very welcome to actively participate in the process and help us build the CMR with your different areas of expertise.

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards, Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K)
Wikidata Advisor, CIS-A2K
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:05, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #412

About publishing a letter in Lancet Infectious Diseases

Dear Sir,

I have recently seen that there are several dashboards and datasets related to COVID-19 that were published in Lancet Infectious Diseases. An example of this research items are An interactive web-based dashboard to track COVID-19 in real time (Q87456354) and Open access epidemiological data from the COVID-19 outbreak (Q89000034). I think that not publishing an item about WikiProject COVID-19 will be a waste. Correspondence items for this journal are 400 words length and only involve five references. I ask if you agree on writing with us a correspondence letter about WikiProject COVID-19 in Wikidata. Please reply me soon.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 12:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

@Csisc: I shall be most happy to join in on writings around COVID-19 (I just did so this week), but I signed The Cost of Knowledge (Q1340139) and will thus not publish with Elsevier journals. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
I thank you for your answer. I understand your concern with Elsevier. We are writing two other papers to be sent to ISWC. One of these papers is about adding support of COVID-19 datasets to Wikidata. We will be honoured if you join us. Concerning Scholia, I know that some of the points I raised are more linked to WikiProject Source Metadata and to WikiProject WikiCite. You can take your time which points are to consider by Scholia Project. However, from what we have seen, there are many SPARQL queries that can be built to ameliorate the output of scholarly profiles on Scholia. What I think is that Scholia does not have only to generate a brief report about scholarly items but also to discuss the output by automatically comparing it with other close profiles. This is what I have called a living scientometric study. This means a research evaluation study that is updated in real time and that involves a critical discussion of its output. Concerning scholarly databases support, I have recently attended BIR Workshop and I presented there Wikidata and Scholia Project as a part of a brief discussion. People there gave me a list of CC0 databases that can be used as a reference for scholarly information in Wikidata. I can give the full list to you if you like that. The fact of having high-scale bibliographical databases to integrate to Wikidata was easier than we have thought. Concerning SPARQL, we need to work on the paper next week so that we can resend it to CSCW journal soon. I will send you an email by Tuesday morning to inform you what we have to do. --Csisc (talk) 02:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #413

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - April Newsletter

This is our fifth newsletter, covering April 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15..


News

  • GLAM Newsletter Special report on COVID-19 (SDG 3) [1]
  • Wikidata and the bibliography of life in the time of coronavirus (SDG 3) [7]
  • Video: Wikidata Lab XXII - Wikiprojeto COVID-19 (SDG 3) [20]
  • How Wikipedia is Covering the Coronavirus Pandemic (SDG 3) [21]
  • Open data and COVID-19: Wikipedia as an informational resource during the pandemic (SDG 3) [23]
  • Using CC Licenses and Tools to Share and Preserve Cultural Heritage in the Face of Climate Change (SDG 11) [25]
  • Video: Mapping against COVID-19 (SDG 3) [26]
  • Student-created immunology content on Wikipedia receiving a lot of attention this month (SDG 3) [34]
  • How Wikipedia shows disability matters (SDG 10) [35]

Tools

  • COVID-19 dashboard (SDG 3) [2]
  • COVID-19 dashboard for Tunisia (SDG 3) [22]

In the news

  • Why Wikipedia Is Immune to Coronavirus (SDG 3) [3]

Research

  • Why and how medical schools, peer-reviewed journals, and research funders should promote Wikipedia editing (SDG 3) [4]
  • A protocol for adding knowledge to Wikidata, a case report (SDG 3) [5]
  • Multilingual enrichment of disease biomedical ontologies (SDG 3) [6]

New Wikidata properties

  • FHF establishment ID (SDG 3) [8]
  • FHF hospital group ID (SDG 3) [9]
  • Spanish National Catalog of Hospitals ID (SDG 3) [10]
  • Forest Stewardship Council Certificate Code (SDG 9) [24]
  • Forest Stewardship Council License Code (SDG 9) [27]
  • Psocodea Species File ID (SDG 15) [28]
  • Swedish Glaciers ID (SDG 13) [29]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Infectious diseases and their number of cases (SDG 3) [11]
  • The longest river that feeds into another river (SDG 6 & 14) [30]
  • Longest rivers that do not feed into a sea or ocean (SDG 6 & 14) [31]
  • Recently published works on COVID-19 (SDG 3) [32]
  • Welsh hospitals, health centres, doctors surgeries and temporary Covid19 hospitals (SDG 3) [33]

New Wikidata schema examples

  • pandemic (E184) (SDG 3) [12]
  • hospital (E187) (SDG 3) [13]
  • 2020 coronavirus pandemic local outbreaks (E188) (SDG 3) [14]
  • clinical trial (E189) (SDG 3) [15]
  • Lockdown (E190) (SDG 3) [16]
  • lockdown part of the 2019-2020 coronavirus disease pandemic (E191) (SDG 3) [17]
  • virus taxon (E192) (SDG 3) [18]
  • contact tracing app (E195) (SDG 3) [19]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 18:58, 1 May 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #414

WM Hackathon

Hello, Daniel,

I'm trying to gather the covid-19 related info happening on the WM Hackathon at Wikidata:WikiProject_COVID-19/Status_updates/Wikimedia_Hackathon_2020

If you have some tips on how to shape these updates, or want to add something there, it would be great!

Thanks,

Best,

TiagoLubiana (talk) 13:16, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #415

Not Available

Hi! In MARIE C. STOPES (Q28761166), you asserted that the title of this article was "[Not Available]", which I believe to be a false claim. I invite you to participate in cleaning up this, and any other cases. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 19:57, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

@Bovlb: Thanks for checking. The claim is supported by the indicated source, but I just deprecated that and added the actual title. Not sure yet how best to reference that, but there are more of these, so I have added this to my maintenance queries. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
I looked a bit closer so I could disambiguate the author and found this is actually an obituary for MARIE C. STOPES, not an article by her. I changed the title to reflect her name. Trilotat (talk) 22:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Please don't add content-free entities

I don't understand the point of adding something like Roy Herbst (Q89006575) which consists of nothing more than a name. Without any disambiguating information or strong identifiers, it's completely worthless and confuses reconciliation processes which are attempting to find a valid Wikidata entity. I ran across some older ones today and dismissed them as artifacts of obsolete processes, but this one was created just a couple of months ago. Is there some benefit that I'm missing here? Why do they never contain references to the data source that caused them to be created? Tfmorris1 (talk) 21:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)

@Tfmorris1: Thanks for taking a look and sharing your observation. The bit that you are missing is that while an item may itself be bare-bone, this does not automatically mean that it is "content-free", nor useless in reconciliation processes. We are talking linked open data (Q18692990) here — information about entities is not just stored on their pages but also by way of links to and from them. This item is linked from various other items, as per the corresponding WhatLinksHere. Specifically, those other items have author (P50) statements, on the basis of which we can construct a WD:Scholia profile for the author, which you can access, e.g., via the icon in Roy S. Herbst (Q89006575)  . Such profiles can in turn assist in enriching the author's item, e.g. via Stress hormones promote EGFR inhibitor resistance in NSCLC: Implications for combinations with β-blockers. (Q47423597), I found affiliation information that I added, and from there, I quickly found more bits and pieces. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 06:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Indian scientists datathon

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter.

Hope you and your loved ones are safe and sound during this ongoing COVID-19 pandemic situation.

This is for your kind information that, from 22nd May, 2020 Friday to 24th May, 2020 Sunday, a datathon will be happening on Indian scientists on Wikidata. The lack of data about Indian scientists, their works and publications on Wikidata is the reason behind conducting the datathon. Considering the ongoing pandemic, the datathon will also focus on scientists working on SARS-CoV-2 and COVID-19.

The tasklist of the datathon is flexible. Participants can choose their own preferred task on this topic

Hoping for your active participation.

Take care and stay safe,

Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 06:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Call Wikiproject COVID-19 tomorrow (Monday, May 18th)

Hello, Daniel,

How are you doing?

I can imagine you have been busy, but I am here to invite you for the Wikiproject COVID-19 call tomorrow (Monday, May 18th). If you are able to meet, the call (in this link: https://meet.google.com/vtp-ighz-npx) will happen tomorrow at 15:00 UT.

As a note, 15:00 UTC is:

  • 11:00 AM in New York, USA
  • 12:00 AM in São Paulo, Brazil
  • 4:00 PM in Tunisia
  • 6:00 PM Eastern European Summer Time (EEST)

If you want, also feel free to add topics at the meeting page.

Thanks!

Cheers, TiagoLubiana (talk) 23:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #416

User:Research_Bot and QuickStatements

Hey Daniel Mietchen, can you please reduce the number of parallel QuickStatement batches that you execute with User:Research_Bot? It goes at ~300 edits/min (maxlag<5) and ~60/min (maxlag>5). Unfortunately, our server capacities are limited and other users do want to use their fair share as well. QuickStatement unfortunately does not throttle properly while maxlag>5, and in general values such as 300/min are undesirable anyways. Thanks, —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@MisterSynergy: I am using QuickStatement in background mode, in which the user submits batches into a queue, and the tool then decides which batches from the queue to execute and when. So do you want me to limit the number of batches I have in the queue? If so, to what number? Right now, three batches are running, but I have dozens in the queue (no simple way to know how many, though I am keeping tabs on the range to check). Also pinging Magnus for comment. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
With currently three active batches (per QS batches list) you are going at ~200 edits/min, which is already a pretty high value considering that the servers tend to overload at values of 600–1000 edits/min for all users+bots. I would recommend to ensure that not more than 3 batches run actively at the same time. I am not sure whether Magnus sees this ping, as his notification indicators are usually saturated at 99+ :-) —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:08, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #417

Main subject

Hi Daniel, thanks for the work you've been doing adding subjects to publications. Most of my editing is around the humanities, but I have noticed a couple of odds tags in other areas. For instance, Thirteen Reasons Why: The impact of suicide portrayal on adolescents' mental health (Q58593607) has its main subject (P921) given as veteran suicide (Q45382729). It looks like a lot of the publications with that main subject (P921) may be suited to a more general topic. What do you think? Richard Nevell (talk) 11:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Richard Nevell: Sorry, saw that only now. Thanks for checking. Yes, that tagging seems not ideal. I put that edit batch on my to do list for review. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 10:24, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikiproject COVID-19 call tomorrow (1st of June) - reminder

Hello, Daniel,

How are you doing?

I have been doing some work trying to organize properties related to peer reviewed articles; maybe this page will be of your interest: Wikidata:WikiProject_COVID-19/Data_models/Peer-reviewed_articles

This is a friendly reminder of tomorrow's (Monday, 01 of June) Wikiproject meeting, at 15:00 UTC as usual, and at the usual link: https://meet.google.com/vtp-ighz-npx .

If you want to add something to the agenda in advance, feel free to just edit Wikidata:WikiProject_COVID-19/Project_meeting.

I hope you can make it! :)

Best,

TiagoLubiana (talk) 20:39, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #418

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - May Newsletter

This is our sixth newsletter, covering May 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 4, 5, 15 and 16.

Meetings

  • Next meeting for Wikimedians for Sustainable Development is Sunday, 7 June 18.00-19.00 UTC (SDG-all) [17]

News

  • Wikimedia and COVID-19: April overview (SDG 3) [1]
  • Extract Knowledge from Wikidata to Wikipedia articles related to Coronavirus (SDG 3) [8]
  • How Wikipedia became a trusted source for COVID-19 information (SDG 3) [15]
  • Future Historians Will Rely on Wikipedia’s COVID-19 Coverage (SDG 3) [16]
  • Students document workplace health risks on Wikipedia amidst global pandemic (SDG 3) [18]

New Wikidata properties

  • COVIDWHO ID (SDG 3) [2]
  • DGHS facility code (SDG 3) [3]
  • DPVweb ID (SDG 15) [4]
  • RPPS ID (SDG 3) [5]
  • hardiness of plant (SDG 15) [9]
  • hardiness zone (SDG 15) [10]
  • voting system (SDG 16) [11]
  • DPE school code (SDG 4) [12]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Map of countries receiving the Nobel peace prize (SDG 16) [6]
  • Map of geolocated Argentine libraries (SDG 4) [7]
  • Map of hospitals (blue) and health centers (green) of Argentina (SDG 3) [13]
  • Map of National parks in Sweden (SDG 15) [14]
  • Universities ranked by PageRank on English Wikipedia (SDG 4) [19]

New Wiki projects

  • Wikidata:WikiProject Schools (SDG 4) [20]
  • Swedish Wikipedia: Projekt HBTQI (SDG 5) [21]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 16:39, 1 June 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Keywords as main subjects

These are really quite awkward, and I think another property, rather than main subject (P921), is justified. A keyword/index term is actually of string type: if a link is used, then a change of label means the original term is lost. I certainly see numerous cases where there are main subject originating from keywords that are incorrectly disambiguated.

I'm using a qualifier to tag such main subjects, at present. What do you think?

Charles Matthews (talk) 13:44, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

@Charles Matthews: Sorry, saw that only now. We could perhaps use object named as (P1932) as an additional qualifier on main subject (P921) statements. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 10:20, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Not so urgent. I'm using now both "object has role" and "named as" qualifiers: object named as (P1932) is probably an improvement on "named as".

In the main subject (P921) statements, there are now imports from NIOSH and GOA release 2020-03-11 (Q96105165), for example, as well as PubMed, so the situation is becoming complicated. My main concern is clarity in sourcing.

That is all on the article items. The clinical trial items potentially have the same issues, and something interesting could be done there.

I am concentrating on further MeSH information now, as a general way forward on main subjects.

Charles Matthews (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #419

Reminder of the WikiProject COVID-19 call tomorrow (15 of June)

Hello Daniel,

I hope you are doing well there.

I know you have been tremendously busy, butI am here to send you this friendly a reminder of tomorrow (15 of june) call at 15:00 UTC!

This is the link for the call: https://meet.google.com/vtp-ighz-npx

This is the link for the etherpad: https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/wikidata_covid_notes

The WikiProject seems to be losing momentum. Perception of the size of COVID-19 as an enormous problem is fading. That is good, but it is also dangerous.

In tomorrow's call, I would like to discuss with you two important and related questions: - How can this WikiProject best serve the anti-covid-19 effort? - what does this project can offer for the post-COVID-19 Wikidata world?

As usual, if you have any topics to add, you can do so either before at the Project Meeting Page or at the meeting.

I hope you can make it!

All the best,

Tiago TiagoLubiana (talk) 23:58, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #420

Proposition of « parent language » property

Hello, I see you on Wikidata:WikiProject Linguistics. I’m french wiktionarian who want to work on languages on Wikidata. After testing some properties, I decided to propose a new propety « parent language » to link langagues as natural thing (not like construct thing with based on (P144)). I would like to have your opinion on the issue. Thanks ! Lyokoï (talk) 21:26, 19 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #421

Bibliography of Wikidata

Hi Daniel,

Thanks for editing the Wikidata:Bibliography of Wikidata page! I think to avoid it getting outdated it could have the full automatically generated list that you linked under the chronological section. Could you please edit that into the article? It could still have a featured articles section where we can put the most important publications. Also, could you add an author column to the list? Thanks!

Best, Adam Harangozó (talk) 19:33, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #422

WikiProject India Newsletter #4

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter. You can find our fourth issue of the quarterly newsletter here, where you can get a quick overview of the Wikidata activities related to India over the last 3 months. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards, Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K) and Mahir256
(on behalf of WikiProject India)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:34, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - June Newsletter

This is our seventh newsletter, covering June 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 4, 5, 8, 10, 16 and 17.

Meetings

  • Upcoming: 5 July, Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting (SDG 17) [12]
  • Upcoming: 18 July, Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting (SDG 17) [12]
  • Past: 7 June, Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting (SDG 17) [13]

News

  • Webinar: COVID-19 and human rights: How to share the facts on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [1]
  • Vad menas egentligen med öppenhet? (Swedish) (SDG 4) [2]
  • How Wikipedia Has Responded to the George Floyd Protests (SDG 10) [3]
  • 50 000 kvinnor på svenskspråkiga Wikipedia! (Swedish) (SDG 5) [4]

Videos

  • COVID & health topics on Wikidata (SDG 3) [9]

New Wikidata properties

  • curriculum topics (SDG 4) [5]
  • ISCO-08 occupation code (SDG 8) [6]
  • FEMA number (SDG 2) [7]
  • Democracy Index (SDG 16) [10]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Species of birds (SDG 15) [8]
  • Wikidata Queries around the SARS-CoV-2 virus and pandemic (SDG 3) [11]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 20:50, 2 July 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #423

Wikidata weekly summary #424

wrong main subject

Hello Daniel, your bot appears to take "novel human coronavirus EMC" (e.g. Q36872701) and interpret it at SARS (I fixed already). But EMC is an early name for MERS. --SCIdude (talk) 16:55, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

@SCIdude: Thanks for checking. I took another look at Cell host response to infection with novel human coronavirus EMC predicts potential antivirals and important differences with SARS coronavirus (Q36872701) and do not think that "novel human coronavirus EMC" was interpreted as SARS — SARS was in the title too, and I fixed your fix. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #425

Ideas about Using ADS Bibcode

I think it would be useful if one could enter an ADS bibcode (P819) to the Source Metadata tool (at https://sourcemd.toolforge.org/index_old.php) and have it generate an item based on the DOI (or return a "Other sources with these identifiers exist" response and add the ADS Bibcode to the item). This would add to the brilliant work it already does when a PMID/DOI/PMCID is entered.

Not sure how to take it to the next step, but cites work (P2860) could benefit from ADS Bibcode. Using Aftershock asymmetry on a bimaterial interface (Q58196207) as an example, the citation and reference pages noted below could be the reference url when adding the item to cites work.

I have no idea where to go with this suggestion. I presume it might be something for Magnus Manske, but I'm not savvy enough to propose it well. Trilotat (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #426

RNA + analysis = "RNA analysis"?

Hello, apparently your bot takes a paper title, looks if the words "RNA" and "analysis" appear, and adds the main subject "RNA analysis". I just deleted two such statements that were completely off the mark. Stop these and similar heuristics, please. This is not helpful.

--SCIdude (talk) 16:15, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - July Newsletter

This is our seventh newsletter, covering June 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 15 and 16.

Meetings

  • Upcoming: Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting August 2 (SDG all) [19]
  • Upcoming: Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting August 16 (SDG all) [20]
  • Past: Wikimedians for Sustainable Development online meeting July 5 (SDG all) [18]

News

  • Another Wikipedian is cultivated (SDG 3) [1]
  • Wikijournal of Medicine to be indexed in SCOPUS (SDG 3) [2]
  • How Wikipedia Became a Battleground for Racial Justice (SDG 10) [3]
  • Sask. doctor keeps COVID-19 Wikipedia info accurate with encyclopedic dedication (SDG 3) [4]
  • We stand for racial justice (SDG 10) [10]
  • Edit Loud, Edit Proud: LGBTIQ+ Wikimedians and Global Information Activism (SDG 10) [15]
  • WikiProject Black Lives Matter (SDG 10) [16]
  • The Power of Knowledge: A Look at the AfroCROWD Juneteenth Conference on Civil Rights (SDG 10) [24]
  • #WikiHerStory: a month-long initiative to amplify gender equity work on Wikimedia projects (SDG 5) [25]
  • How the internet will change our coronavirus memories (SDG 3) [26]
  • How volunteers created Wikipedia’s world-beating Covid-19 coverage (SDG 3) [30]
  • COVIWD - A Covid-19 Wikidata dashboard (SDG 3) [31]

Research

  • COVID-19 research in Wikipedia (SDG 3) [11]
  • A Quantitative Portrait of Wikipedia's High-Tempo Collaborations during the 2020 Coronavirus Pandemic (SDG 3) [12]
  • COVID-19 mobility restrictions increased interest in health and entertainment topics on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [13]
  • A protocol for adding knowledge to Wikidata, a case report (SDG 3) [14]

Videos

  • Wikimedia Research: Medical knowledge on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [23]
  • More black stories need to be told -- and more black contributors need to tell them! (SDG 10) [29]

New WikiProjects

  • Wikipedia:WikiProject Black Lives Matter (SDG 10) [17]

Featured content

  • Alpine newt (SDG 15) [5]
  • Dementia with Lewy bodies (SDG 3) [6]
  • Secretarybird (SDG 15) [7]
  • List of procyonids (SDG 15) [8]
  • List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Berkshire (SDG 15) [8]

New Wikidata properties

  • thefreedictionary medical term ID (SDG 3) [21]
  • Naturvårdsverket Anordningar OBJECTID (SDG 15) [22]
  • public transport stop (SDG 11) [27]
  • energy consumption per transaction (SDG 7) [28]
  • BTI Governance Index (SDG 16) [32]
  • BTI Status Index (SDG 16) [32]
  • distribution map of taxon (SDG 15) [34]
  • Queensland Biota ID (SDG 15) [35]
  • Australian Weed ID (SDG 15) [36]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 17:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #427

Wikidata weekly summary #428

Wikidata weekly summary #429

Research Bot adds statement duplicated

Hi Daniel, Research Bot adds duplicated author statements, if corresponding author statements and author name string statements exist (which of course should not be the case). Example: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q35783352&diff=prev&oldid=1260959288 Maybe Research Bot could just remove the author name string statements in such a case? --jmkeil (talk) 09:42, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #430

Wikidata weekly summary #431

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - August Newsletter

This is our ninth newsletter, covering August 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 4, 6, 11, 13, 14, 15 and 17.

Meetings

  • Upcoming: Online meeting - 2020-09-06 (SDG all) [1]
  • Upcoming: Online meeting - 2020-09-20 (SDG all) [1]
  • Past: Online meeting - 2020-08-02 (SDG all) [2]

Activities

  • Ongoing: The 'Climate Translation Project' celebrated its first published translation: 'Réchauffement climatique en Afrique', a French translation of the English Wikipedia article 'Climate change in Africa' by User:J. N. Squire in French (SDGs 4, 13) [20]
  • Past: World Water Week ISA campaign (SDG 6) [21]
  • Past: Editathon about Covid-19 in Swedish (SDG 3) [22]
  • Past: Editathon about water in Swedish (SDG 6) [23]

News

  • Covid-19 is one of Wikipedia’s biggest challenges ever. Here’s how the site is handling it. (SDG 3) [12]
  • Adding biographies of female oceanographers (SDG 14) [13]
  • Wiki Education participants improve COVID-19 local response articles (SDG 3) [14]
  • Wikimedia Policy Brief - COVID-19 - How Wikipedia helps us through uncertain times (SDG 3) [15]
  • Personal perspective on the forming of the user group (SDG all) [19]

Research

  • Wikipedia, The Free Online Medical Encyclopedia Anyone Can Plagiarize: Time to Address Wiki-Plagiarism (SDG 3) [3]
  • Wikidata-focused presentations at the Workshop "Data Science in Climate and Climate Impact Research" taking place on 20-21 August 2020 in Zurich and online. (SDGs 4, 13, 17) [16] [17]

Videos

  • Multilingual Structured Climate Research Data in Wikidata - The Data Perspective (SDGs 4, 13, 17) [18]
  • Video: Wikipedia Weekly Network - LIVE Wikidata editing about water #17 (SDG 6) [24], [25]

Featured content

  • Vermilion flycatcher (SDG 15) [4]
  • Canada lynx (SDG 15) [5]
  • Meteorological history of Hurricane Dorian (SDG 11) [6]
  • Leeches (SDG 15) [7]
  • Gigantorhynchus (SDG 15) [8]
  • List of World Heritage Sites in Iceland (SDG 11) [9]
  • Ursidae (SDG 15) [10]
  • Mephitidae (SDG 15) [11]
  • Orangutan (SDG 15) [32]
  • Horseshoe bat (SDG 15) [33]
  • Hurricane Willa (SDG 11) [34]
  • List of World Heritage Sites in Lithuania (SDG 11) [35]

New Wikidata properties

  • extinction date (SDG 15) [26]
  • Monumentbrowser ID (SDG 11) [27]
  • Nasjonalt skoleregister ID (SDG 4) [28]
  • American Folklore Society Ethnographic Thesaurus ID (SDG 11) [29]
  • Sculptures and cities database ID for sculptures (SDG 11) [31]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Bar chart showing the number of research output (articles, etc) annotated with a SARSCoV2 proteins as 'main subject' (SDG 3) [30]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 10:50, 4 September 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #432

Wikidata weekly summary #433

Wikidata 8th birthday events in India

 

Hello Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2018!,

I am happy to inform you that we are organizing a series of events on the occasion of the 8th birthday of Wikidata on behalf of WikiProject India in the form of webinars, datathon and merchandise distribution. Details of the events can be found here.

  1. Webinars- 3 sessions on 3 very interesting topics will be conducted as follows. The sessions will be open for all.
  • October 11 2020, 6 pm IST:- Jane023 will talk about Sum of all Paintings, describe and demonstrate the workflow on improving data about paintings on Wikidata. A data-thon on Indian paintings will follow for the next 16 days.
  • October 17 2020, 7 pm IST:- DVrandecic (WMF) will be introducing the newest sister project of the Wikimedia universe, the Abstract Wikipedia and WikiLambda to the Indian community and how as a community, we need to be prepared for this upcoming exciting and ambitious project.
  • October 18 2020, 7 pm IST:- Mahir256 will conduct a session on the Wikidata Lexeme. He will explain the importance of lexicographical data and demonstrate the workflow.
  1. Datathon - October 12 to October 28, 2020:- A 16-days long online datathon will be conducted on Indian paintings. The output of the datathon will be given as a birthday gift to Wikidata on October 29.
  1. Merchandise distribution- During the month of October, CIS-A2K will be sending Wikidata special merchandise to Indian affiliates and communities upon request as well as active contributors of Wikidata residing in India. Details on how to request merchandise can be found here.

The above mentioned activities are already finalised. If any of the Indian communities or affiliates are planning activities on the occasion of Wikidata's 8th birthday, please feel free to enlist them here.

Regards,
Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K)
Wikidata Co-ordinator, CIS-A2K
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:10, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #434

We sent you an e-mail

Hello Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2018,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #435

WikiProject India Newsletter #5

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter. You can find our fifth issue of the quarterly newsletter here, where you can get a quick overview of the Wikidata activities related to India over the last 3 months. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards, Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K) and Mahir256
(on behalf of WikiProject India)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:35, 30 September 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - September Newsletter

This is our tenth newsletter, covering September 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 5, 6, 10, 11, 13 and 15.

Meetings

  • Online meeting October 4 (SDG all) [1]
  • Online meeting October 18 (SDG all) [1]

Activities

  • Ongoing: The 'Climate Translation Project' (SDG 13) [17]
  • Ongoing: Survey on gender equality on Wikipedia (SDG 5) [12] [13]
  • Ongoing: The 'Gender equality 2020' editing week (SDG 5) [15]
  • Ongoing: Wiki Loves Fashion 2020 (SDG 5) [16]
  • Past: Climate Justice Editathon (SDG 10 & 13) [3]
  • Past: Wikimedia Foundation hosts Sustainability Community Roundtable Discussion about carbon credits (SDG 13) [8]
  • Past: Wiki loves SDGs - Global Goals Week online edit-a-thon on SDG topics (SDG all) [9] [10] [11]
  • Past: WikiGap Skopje 2020 online edit-a-thon (SDG 5) [14]
  • Past and ongoing: Wiki Loves Monuments (SDG 11) [22]

News

  • Humaniki: Wikimedia Diversity Data Tools (SDG 5) [2]
  • How can I get data on all the dams in the world? Use Wikidata (SDG 6) [4]

Research

  • Using logical constraints to validate information in collaborative knowledge graphs: a study of COVID-19 on Wikidata (SDG 3) [6]
  • Representing COVID-19 information in collaborative knowledge graphs: a study of Wikidata (SDG 3) [21]

Videos

  • Wikipedia Weekly Network - LIVE Wikidata editing #21 - WikiDojo on the Global Climate Strike (SDG 13) [18]

Featured content

  • Zebra (SDG 15) [23]
  • Tropical Storm Vicente (SDG 11) [24]

New Wikidata properties

  • National Park Service place ID (SDG 15) [19]
  • Symptom Ontology ID (SDG 3) [20]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Map of organisations/companies developing/manufacturing a vaccine in trials (SDG 3) [5]
  • Top World Heritage sites by number of paintings depicting them (SDG 11) [7]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 20:10, 1 October 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

Wikidata weekly summary #436

India-specific properties datathon

Greetings Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2018!

 

As part of Wikidata's 8th birthday celebration a 5 days long India-specific properties datathon from October 25, 2020, 00:00 to October 29, 2020, 23:59 (both times Indian Standard Time) being organised to improve India-specific properties and celebrate Wikidata's Birthday by contributing to the free open data movement. Currently there are 76 India-specific properties available in Wikidata. The primary objective of this datathon is to add / improve the usage of Wikidata Properties related to India in Wikidata.

Details of the events can be found here. Please have a look at the event page and please consider joining the datathon by adding your name at the participant's list here

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards,

Gnoeee

Démonstration de Scholia comme un outil ouvert d’analyse scientométrique

Je n'ai pas pu participer qu'à la 2e partie de votre exposé. Super interessant. J'avais entendu parle de Scholia sans jamais l'avoir utilisé. Merci beaucoup pour cette démonstrationLaMèreVeille (talk) 18:13, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - October Newsletter

This is our eleventh newsletter, covering October 2020. This issue has news related to SDGs 3, 4, 8, 11, 13, 15 and 16.

Meetings

  • Online meeting November 1 (SDG all) [1]
  • Online meeting November 15 (SDG all) [1]
  • Past: Prioritization event survey (SDG all) [26]

Activities

  • Ongoing: The 'Climate Translation Project' (SDG 13) [2]
  • Upcoming: Enriching parliamentary documents metadata editathon (in Swedish) (SDG 16) [27]
  • Past: Wiki for UN writing campaign (SDG 17) [28]

News

  • Wikipedia and Sustainable Development Goals: Engaging smaller Wikipedias (SDG all) [3]
  • The World Health Organization and Wikimedia Foundation expand access to trusted information about COVID-19 on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [10]
  • Improving reproductive health articles on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [11]
  • Wiki Loves SDGs: A community of Global Goals factivists (SDG all) [12]
  • Analyze Swedish politics with Wikidata (SDG 16) [17]

Resources

  • GUIDE: How to contribute climate change information to Wikipedia (SDG 13) [25]

Videos

  • 2020-09-29 Houcemeddine Turki, U of Sfax: Wikidata & COVID-19, a collaborative KG from CORD-19 (SDG 3) [4]
  • WikiCite 2020: OpenVirus and Scholia interfaces (SDG 3) [13]
  • WikiCite 2020: Citations in Swedish Parliamentary documents (SDG 16) [18]
  • WikiCite 2020: Gene Wiki (SDG 3) [19]

New Wikidata properties

  • Symptom Ontology ID (SDG 3) [6]
  • SSYK 2012 The Swedish Standard Classification of Occupations (SDG 8) [7]
  • Native Plants Database ID (SDG 15) [8]
  • NBIC taxon ID (SDG 15) [14]
  • Danish educational institution number (SDG 4) [15]
  • economy of topic (SDG 8) [20]
  • American Heritage place ID (SDG 11) [21]
  • DC Historic Sites place ID (SDG 11) [22]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Map of trees whose species is categorized as threatened on the IUCN Red List (SDG 15) [5]
  • Map of outdoor warning sirens, color-coded by manufacturer (SDG 11) [9]
  • Scientific papers explaining backward contact tracing (SDG 3) [16]
  • Invasive species in EU and whether they have articles in different languages (SDG 15) [23]
  • COVID-19 deaths by month (SDG 3) [24]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 12:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

WikiProject India Newsletter #6

 

Hi Daniel Mietchen/Archive,

Happy New Year 2021!

You are receiving this message as you are one of the participants of WikiProject India on Wikidata and/or a subscriber of the Wikidata India newsletter. You can find our sixth issue of the quarterly newsletter here, where you can get a quick overview of the Wikidata activities related to India over the last 3 months. If you do not want to receive this kind of notification further, you can remove your username from here.

Regards, Bodhisattwa (CIS-A2K) and Mahir256
(on behalf of WikiProject India)
Sent through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Altmetric

Hi Daniel,

I am currently working on a project to create the links between the 26 million Wikidata element with a DOI and their Altmetric DOI (P5530). I am about to contact Altmetric to get their approval (their API is limited to 1 request per second and does not allow extraction like I want to perform), and since you've imported most of the scientific papers on Wikidata, I was wondering if you would have any comment or suggestion about this initiative.

Thanks, Dirac (talk) 19:51, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dirac: Thanks for working on this, and your notes are great. I would certainly like to see closer integration with Altmetric, but not sure what their take on this is. In terms of suggestions, a simple one would be to use Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future (Q105082215) as an example. More complex ones would require some more digging on my end — not sure when that may happen. There are also questions I would have for them, e.g. I would be interested in whether and how they are using Wikidata, how many Wikipedia languages they are covering now (I think they had a time with English only, then about a dozen languages, but I haven't looked into this lately, so there may well be more) and whether they pick up anything from Wikimedia Commons or other Wikimedia sites. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:18, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: I received an answer from Altmetric that might change the way we use this metric. I've posted the answer, and my proposal to fix this, on the Almetric ID talk page. Feel free to jump in and give your opinion. And now that I have a contact that is answering my emails, I will ask them your questions about the usage the do of Wikipedia/Wikidata. Thanks, Dirac (talk) 18:53, 1 February 2021 (UTC)

L2927

You created چِلتن/Чилтан/Chiltan (L2927). I pinged you on its talk page, but I see that you do not respond to pings. What is that lexeme supposed to mean (if you added a sense, what would it be)? Mahir256 (talk) 22:44, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

@Mahir256: I see this as a spelling variant of "چلتن". I have seen both (across several languages) in reference to the story of the fourty beings that has been told in the region in many variants and who have quite a few things named after them, e.g. Koh-i-Chiltan (Q6425850). The best published description I am aware of is here, transliterated into چل‌تن/Чилтан (L226820), which is the spelling most familiar to me, since my exposure to variants of this story has been mostly through Tadjik, Uzbek and Russian sources. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 04:05, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikimedians for Sustainable Development - January 2021 Newsletter

This is our fourteenth newsletter, covering January 2021. This issue has news related to SDGs 1, 3, 4, 5, 10, 13 and 15 .

Meetings

  • Online user group meeting February 7 (SDG all) [1]
  • Online user group meeting February 21 (SDG all) [1]
  • Wikimedia Strategy Follow-up calls: Alignment with environmental sustainability February 7 (SDG 13) [10]
  • Wikimedia Strategy Follow-up calls: Identify Topics for Impact February 5 (SDG all) [23]

Activities

  • Ongoing: The 'Climate Translation Project' (SDG 13) [2]

News

  • The Vaccine Safety Project on Wikipedia (SDG 3) [3]
  • Wiki for COVID-19: 2020, the year of Information (SDG 3) [6]
  • One Page At A Time, Jess Wade Is Changing Wikipedia (SDG 5) [18]
  • The Women of Wikipedia Are Writing Themselves Into History (SDG 5) [19]

Research

  • Building a biological knowledge graph via Wikidata with a focus on the Human Cell Atlas (SDG 3) [7]
  • Open Wikipedia Dataset on COVID-19 from IBS Data Science Group (SDG 3) [8]
  • A protocol for adding knowledge to Wikidata: aligning resources on human coronaviruses (SDG 3) [9]
  • Wikipedia, The Free Online Medical Encyclopedia Anyone Can Plagiarize: Time to Address Wiki-Plagiarism (SDG 3) [20]
  • Multilingual Contextual Affective Analysis of LGBT People Portrayals in Wikipedia (SDG 10) [21]
  • Wikipedia as OER: the "Learning with Wikipedia" (SDG 4) [22]

New Wikidata properties

  • derived from organism type (SDG 15) [14]
  • number of aid beneficiaries (SDG all) [15]
  • Australian Fungi ID (SDG 15) [16]
  • Red Cross FDRS ID (SDG 3) [17]

New Wikidata query examples

  • Number of people who have died, or been diagnosed, of COVID-19, grouped by occupation (SDG 3) [4]
  • Map of gram panchayats in Kerala by literacy rate in 2001 (SDG 4) [5]
  • Map of Kolkata wards by number of schools (SDG 4) [11]
  • Red Cross and Red Crescent societies (SDG 3) [12]
  • Mangifera species and mango cultivars (SDG 1) [13]

Links

This message was sent with Global message delivery by Ainali (talk) 20:32, 1 February 2021 (UTC)ContributeUnsubscribe

[WMF Board of Trustees - Call for feedback: Community Board seats] Meetings with the Wikidata community

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is organizing a call for feedback about community selection processes between February 1 and March 14. While the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement have grown about five times in the past ten years, the Board’s structure and processes have remained basically the same. As the Board is designed today, we have a problem of capacity, performance, and lack of representation of the movement’s diversity. Our current processes to select individual volunteer and affiliate seats have some limitations. Direct elections tend to favor candidates from the leading language communities, regardless of how relevant their skills and experience might be in serving as a Board member, or contributing to the ability of the Board to perform its specific responsibilities. It is also a fact that the current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Western Europe. In the upcoming months, we need to renew three community seats and appoint three more community members in the new seats. This call for feedback is to see what processes can we all collaboratively design to promote and choose candidates that represent our movement and are prepared with the experience, skills, and insight to perform as trustees?

In this regard, two rounds of feedback meetings are being hosted to collect feedback from the Wikidata community. Two rounds are being hosted with the same agenda, to accomodate people from various time zones across the globe. We will be discussing ideas proposed by the Board and the community to address the above mentioned problems. Please sign-up according to whatever is most comfortable to you. You are welcome to participate in both as well!

Also, please share this with other volunteers who might be interested in this. Let me know if you have any questions. KCVelaga (WMF), 14:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Return to the user page of "Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2018".