Xenmorpha

Welcome to Wikidata, Xenmorpha!

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! --Epìdosis 16:15, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Inequality

Hello, Xenmorpha! Why do you think that inequality (Q28113351) is better to use than inequation (Q165309)? For me, Q28113351 is a binary relation which includes <, $\leqslant$, $\neq$ and others, it can be true or not true; while Q165309 is a type of theorem which can be proved. --Infovarius (talk) 17:51, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, @Infovarius:, I think inequality (Q28113351) is better in the sense that the noun form better fits the items as they are commonly referred to. I do think that the objects need to be better differentiated in the sense that of whether the item should be an instance of Q28113351, a binary relation, or Q165309, I don't have a better method than a 'common way' of referring to them, and I don't think there is a strict system. An alternative is to use both on all of them. By 'common way' - I mean - the Central Limit Theorem is a theorem about distributional equivalence, while the Berry-Esseen theorem Berry–Esseen theorem (Q1785872) is an inequation statement as it gives bounds, which implies the existence of an inequality when it is true. The Berry-Esseen theorem is commonly never (from what I read) referred to as an inequality, in the sense of the bound, but rather talked of as a theorem. On the other hand, for all convex functions there is Jensen's inequality Jensen's inequality (Q518131), which is generally not referred to as a theorem but as an inequality (a direct reference to the binary relation itself, not a statement stating the binary relation is true). Honestly I cannot say that I did this calculation or consideration for all values I changed, but I am willing to undo all my changes by using my own contributions log. I would love to hear your opinion on this too. Xenmorpha (talk) 20:53, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

@Infovarius: - Xenmorpha (talk) 21:01, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

I am not sure too. E.g. I can imagine that Jensen's inequality (Q518131) is a theorem, at least ontologically. I can't understand Berry–Esseen theorem (Q1785872) case yet. I suppose we need some broader discussion. --Infovarius (talk) 19:36, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Call for participation in the interview study with Wikidata editors

Dear Xenmorpha,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at the King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized (?) to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me on kholoudsaa@gmail.com or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdmmFHaiB20nK14wrQJgfrA18PtmdagyeRib3xGtvzkdn3Lgw/viewform?usp=sf_link with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me using the email mentioned above if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoud

on deletions

Hi! Could you please elaborate on these deletions you made?

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q105803992&type=revision&diff=1417251607&oldid=1404841878&diffmode=source

--Zblace (talk) 16:59, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

I deleted them as I think DOIs refer to articles, not people. But you can restore them if that is within the data model of Wikidata, although I would find that weird. Xenmorpha (talk) 00:13, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Would this way be more logical? Q105803992#P767 --Zblace (talk) 11:33, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

That probably works. (and honestly I think everyone is also trying to figure out what's the best data model for wikidata as we go along)

However note that https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Q105803992 will already lead to those pages if they have wikidata items, like Q110259384, so in a sense there is duplication of data if the articles are items.

I notice that two of those DOIs are not added yet, but it would be good if they are added and the author is directly linked, then any search will find the author quite easily, such as

https://query.wikidata.org/#SELECT%20%3Fitem%20WHERE%20%7B%20%3Fitem%20wdt%3AP50%20wd%3AQ105803992.%20%7D

(The query can be changed to add for item labels, and so on) Xenmorpha (talk) 13:34, 25 December 2021 (UTC)

Call for participation in a task-based online experiment

Dear Xenmorpha,

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 kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk 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

Kholoudsaa (talk) 23:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Mary Quintal (Q97818708)

Do you have a source for the birth date? https://www.swhf.sg/profiles/mary-quintal/ says 1930 (can be guessed and wrong, plus minus 1 year), enwiki 1929. Florentyna (talk) 15:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

I'm not too sure why I have those edits actually - I might have used the library data last time, which is now no longer public.

If the sources are no longer available and swhf says 1930, it might be better to just use 1930 with that as the reference. Xenmorpha (talk) 18:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

The thing is, that swhf.sg probably also guesses the birth year from the age (from a newspaper article for instance), i.e. it can be plus minus 1 year. See for instance https://www.swhf.sg/profiles/alice-edith-wilhelmina-pennefather/ , correct birth date 16 October 1902, but on swhf.sg 1903. My guess for Mary Quintal would be 22 December 1929, but it is only a guess. --Florentyna (talk) 19:50, 14 July 2022 (UTC)