User talk:Multichill/Archives/2013/February

Welcome

Welcome to Wikidata, Multichill/Archives/2013!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards! — Arkanosis ^✉ 22:59, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

Bot

Hi, I was wondering if you'd be willing to test your soon-to-be bot on something. It appears that many statements on Wikidata are (in a way) redundant, or to put it more nicely, can be inferred automatically. So, if B has a "father" statement linking to A, we know that A should have a "child" statement linking to B. Also, A is male, and both A and B are (real or fictional!) people. There are also sanity checks that can be performed this way; A would have to be born before B, and (in most cases) cannot have died more than 9 months before B was born (once we have a date type). People can only have a single "sex" statement, a single mother and father, and so on. There are more complex issues; If A is father of B, and C is mother of B, should A be spouse of C (and vice versa)? If we follow all parent/child statements, do we end up in a circle (misconnected parent/child relationships)? I believe such checks and updates need to be run on both the entire existing corpus, and on all subsequent changes. I thought about writing such a bot, but it would probably scale better if you do it :-) Just in case you need something for your bot army to do! --Magnus Manske (talk) 11:00, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Hi Magnus, I thought a bit about this kind of data enrichment and sanitization too. I'm first just playing around a bit with easy things to see what is possible. The Pywikipedia framework is not quite ready for Wikidata yet. Probably needs so serious work on that. I spend some time on this on the side when I feel like it. I don't have very solid plans on what I want to do. I'm probably going to spend some more time on the people.

I was thinking about the visualization. How can we make it easier to browse all these people? Maybe something with rankings (all article lengths combined)? Any thoughts on that? Multichill (talk) 19:27, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

So, I'll probably take a stab at the "implied statements" this week; no big framework, just some code that I'll probably throw away once the API changes...

As for visualization, counting combined article lengths is a nice idea. Maybe normalized for languages (French tends to be quite verbose, but English have more potential writers; maybe normalize on the 100 "most famous" people?). Also, number of languages that have an article. Ratings from the WikiProject templates on en talk pages. And a "real" tree, not the ever-moving node hell I used ;-)

I also thought about viewing single entries. The wikidata interface is practical, but not very pretty for viewing. Depending on the GND type, there could be standard layouts, with the wikipedia links hidden after a click, actual display of a linked image, a small display of relatives, etc. Could be on the toolserver, or a JS/CSS "overlay" here on wikidata. --Magnus Manske (talk) 13:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Regarding "If A is father of B, and C is mother of B, should A be spouse of C (and vice versa)", sometimes yes, sometimes no. Having worked on a lot of royal infoboxes manually already the picture can be complicated by mistresses and concubines. Sometimes their children are listed (usually with illegitimate or claimed in brackets) but the mothers aren't. There's usually a section of the article called Marriage, Children or Issue (sometimes linked from the infobox) that has more details on the relationship. /Ch1902 (talk) 14:38, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Note: ImplicatorBot. --Magnus Manske (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Ch1902, thanks for joining. I already noticed that sometimes these family situations can be quite complicated, that's why I'm just adding the links that are actually part of an infobox and worry about the rest later. According to one of the Wikipedia articles all royalty is linked to Q142017. I wonder if we can proof that :-) Multichill (talk) 18:44, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Back to the visualization. I started playing around with the Charlemagne and I now got User:Multichill/Charlemagne. I also got it in Graphviz format, my tests are at http://toolserver.org/~multichill/temp/dottest/ . Multichill (talk) 22:08, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Roads task force

I think bot assistance will be very helpful for this project. See California State Routes as example what could be added to items. Of course, will be good idea to discuss matters with active project participants like User:Rschen7754. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 16:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not taking on any extra commitments. It's not like I don't have enough things to do, but it's just that Wikidata is very new and I like to explore the possibilities. I first need to get the bot approved anyway..... Multichill (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Heads up on empty item

Hey just so you know I emptied Mathilde Billung of Saxony because I found an existing Matilda of Saxony, I added all the statements to the existing one and a few more from nlwiki. I've not edited your /Charlemagne page in case I mess anything up, hopefully this won't break your bot because it's bound to be deleted soon. /Ch1902 (talk) 19:46, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Your great idea about Wikimedia Commons and other sister project websites

Hi there Multichill, I just wanted to stop by and say I wholeheartedly agree with your great idea here Wikidata:Project_chat#Wikidata_and_Commons about Wikimedia Commons and other sister project websites.

What do you think is the best way to go about getting this off the ground and implemented?

Thanks again for your great comments on this idea so far, — Cirt (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Happy to hear positive feedback! My suggestions should probably be included at meta:Wikidata/Notes/Future#Commons. I was thinking about doing that after I got some more responses. Multichill (talk) 17:53, 26 February 2013 (UTC)