User talk:Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2020

Latest comment: 4 years ago by Lea Lacroix (WMDE) in topic Wikidata weekly summary #412

Note that, due to technical issues with the archiving process, some bits from 2020 may be in the Archive for 2018.

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 [[2]]

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 #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 [[4]]

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)

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 [[6]]

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)

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 [[8]]

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 #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 [[10]]

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

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 [[12]]

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)

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 #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 [[14]]

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)

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 #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 [[16]]

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 #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 [[18]]

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

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 [[20]]

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

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 [[22]]

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

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

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 [[24]]

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

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

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 [[26]]

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

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

Return to the user page of "Daniel Mietchen/Archive/2020".