Saarik

talk talk

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Saarik/Archive 1 on 2021-10-30.

Hei! Olisiko mahdollista botilla lisätä puuttuvat labelit itemeihin? Esimerkiksi törmäsin äsken Q2061246:iin, jossa oli YSO ID (P2347), mutta ei mitään labelia suomeksi, pohjoissaameksi tai ruotsiksi. Kiitos.

YSOn puuttuvien labelien Openrefinella tehdyissä päivityksissä lisättiin ainakin aikaisemmin aina myös puuttuvat fi-sv labelit. Tuossa on päivityksessä tapahtunut joku virhe, tai viennissä on labelien vienti jäänyt tekemttä. Voin tarkistaa ylläpidosta mitä on tapahtunut. Tällaisia ei siis pitäisi olla. Ilmoita mahdollisista puutteista ko. päivittäjälle täällä wikidatassa tai lähetä postia esim. YSOn palautelomakkeella. https://finto.fi/yso/fi/feedback

Pohjoissaamen labeleita lisätään YSOon erillisessä saamet-projektissa. En tiedä päivittävätkö he Wikidataan labeleita,

Fintossa on myös tekeillä botti, joka tullee tarkistamaan erilaisia virhetilanteita. Terv. Jarmo

Kiitoksia! Yritin ilmoittaa niistä ko. päivittäjälle, mutta YSObotin keskustelusivu ohjautuu tänne. En tiedä miksei ole tullut mieleen, että voi jättää palautetta myös YSO:n lomakkeella! t. Yupik

Hi, you did this edit to item elevation (Q106589819) which I reverted today, because hill, mountain, summit etc... are all elevations of some kind. Hence this item here is to consider as superordinate to hill, not as permanent duplicate. Cheers, Arjoopy

Greetings. The subject we have on WD means both technique and type of music (musical genre). And it looks like we don't have throat singing as an instrument on WD. To be honest I find this wording a bit weird and I don't agree with the hierarchy that is made on urn.fi. I think that on WD the hierarchy is already done more completely and correctly regarding this. I think this branch on that site should be divided into voice registers and voice techniques. Throat singing is definitely a vocal technique, and not a subtype of voice itself. Otherwise, along with "male singing voice (Q54285279)" we could add "death growl (Q335499)" and screaming (Q1932016) etc., which are also responsible for vocal sound (Q4393922), not voice type (Q1063547) or type of musical instrument (Q110295396) and which are absolutely just as different from a normal voice as using a throat to sing. The instrument is voice, the others are techniques.

This SEKO vocabulary is used for bibloographic description in the MARC21 field 382 Medium of performance. https://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/concise/bd382.html -- (and here the techniques are not mediums). I do not know the history of the SEKO hierarchy, but I think it is made to support and ease the description of musical resources (usually recordings and sheet music) without being a full "scientific" hierarchy.

Its corresponding more internationally known vocabulary is the LC Medium of Performance Thesaurus for Music (LCMPT) which is made for the same purpose. See an example of it as the "voice" and its subclasses https://id.loc.gov/search/?q=voice&q=cs%3Ahttp%3A%2F%2Fid.loc.gov%2Fauthorities%2FperformanceMediums

I've had to create several new Wikidata items for various instruments along the way during my mapping. I'm trying to do better in the future. In this case I just tried to do it simply by adding another subClassOf, although it would create a double branch in the hierarchy. But you did not like that solution and perhaps it is against the general guidelines of WD hieararchy formation, althout very commonly observed?

People on wikidata sometimes mix concepts up just because they don't want to deal with separating them at the moment. But in this case it seems like something that should not have been used like an instrument in the first place. I do not see any mention of throat singing on these vocabulary voice lists you provided either. (But if you think it should still be added, I won't insist.)

SEKO: throat singing in Finnish is kurkkulaulu - http://urn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:au:seko:00562 Its broader concept is lauluääni, "singing voice" (linked to LCMPT: Singer) which is a subclass of ihmisääni "human sound" or "voice" (linked to LCMPT: Voice)

In addition to the mapping, I'm simultaneously trying to create a trilingual version of this vocabulary. Now it is monolingual and all the other language terms are listed as alternative labels. There are several other concepts that need clarification, too. Hierarchies may vary due to many reasons, mostly due to cultural differences or historical reasons. I'm working on this openly and constructive comments are welcome. I am making a translation and I am not able nor willing to change the hierarchy at this point. I think I need to create an issue for myself on this at https://github.com/jarmosaarikko/SEKO/issues

Hi Saarik,

I'm not a forest expert and struggle to understand this concept. May you please create a comparison against forest regeneration (Q1535314)?

I'm not sure what you mean by comparison? Forest regeneration os the natural regeneration of forest from naturally fallen or spread seeds or vegetatively from roots. It's opposite is regeneration where forest is created by seeds sown by man or by planting seedlings.

By a talkpage lurker: Instead of artificial regeneration (Q111317566) I would just say planting (Q2083967). What is the defining quality of Q111317566?

I would say that artificial regeneration may include manual spreading of seeds and perhaps the manipulation of the soil, too, not just planting seedlings.

Is Tuomas P. still active? If not may you be so nice to solve this?

Tuomas will be back next year. I answered your question.

Is YSO 1839 more about financial (booster club (Q1238998)) or moral support (supporters' group (Q1070414))?

update: after referring to the YSO editorial group: the Finnish and Swedish terms of this concept refer primarily to financial support. ~~~~

You seem to be the operator of User:YSObot. This bot is not approved and seems to be flooding Wikidata with duplicate items like museum (Q113965327) & theatre (Q113965328). Please get your bot approved. I added your request to Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot.

Thank you for adding the request! I thought the YSObot was already approved as it is an important tool in http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q89345680 to make the linkages between the 30.000+ concepts of YSO and Wikidata.

Considering the cases you linked as an example- those are classes of a Finnish classification by the National Land Survey and I was earlier guided NOT TO ADD these class definitions to existing Wikidata items but instead create a separate item for each class of the classification. (see my earlier user talks) These are then linked to the exisiting equal wikidata items with Property:P2959. As thiis is done manually, I did not finish those relations,yet. Perhaps I should have done this with my personal account then as there were only 154 classes and then YSObot would not be blamed?

Considering duplicates in YSO-ID properties which you might also wonder. The reason for duplicates is that the hierarchical structure with wikidata and YSO are not equal so there are often cases that one wikidata item is split in YSO or vice versa. This is unavoidable. One solution we have been considering is to lift the constraint of single value in that property. However, our current solution is to add the ID to both items and list them in the exeption list of the YSO-ID property. ~~~~

Dear Saarik,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits.

Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at [] or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link

I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa

In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Some items in your recent batch are matched to the same YSO ID, e.g. Sangaste (Q3054128) and Sangaste Rural Municipality (Q570013). Regretfully some YSO entries, such as this one, are rather vague, being linked to several "closely matching concepts" on Wikidata, and so it seems impossible to tell what they are actually about. I think it's better not to backlinks such YSO entries on Wikidata in order to avoid further confusion. Note that YSO ID (P2347) also has distinct-values constraint set.

Thank you for the comments. We are aware of the problem which comes up with especialiiy different ways of viewing place concepts in Wikidata and YSO. The Sangaste example is an error as there is only one Sangaste in YSO (the current one, Sangaste (Q3054128) a built-up area in Otepää. I will check the other cases.

Our policy has been to create the linkages by adding YSO IDs to WIkidata. We may need to change the policy due to these inconsistances but it would take a while. Another option might be to drop the single value constraint. ~~~~

Well, as far as YSO is an ontological database, and accordingly its entries are supposed to be for places and not just place names, then we should be able to tell which place of the same name is its each entry for (former or current municipality, settlement or municipality, settlement A or settlement B). Many YSO place entries in that regard seem inadequate. For instance, I'm not sure based on what you decided that Sangaste entry is for a settlement, as YSO entry also mentions former municipality (kunta). Finnish-language Wikipedia article being mirror in that YSO entry also doesn't help, as that article confusingly mixes settlement and former municipality, while settlement and municipality co-existed, one didn't become another, and it's unclear which data is for which in that article. So, as far as I can see the distinct-values constraint is correct, and the problem is purely on YSO's side.

Currently there constraint violations relating to 54 YSO entries of Estonian places alone. Mostly these entries mix settlement and former municipality, some also mix different municipalities or neighbouring settlements. There are no actual duplicates on Wikidata, though the constraint confusingly may suggest otherwise. Due to current links between Wikidata and YSO, data about municipality may easily get used for settlement, or vice versa. Hence I believe it's better not link these YSO entries in their current form, to avoid further confusion.