Wikidata talk:Lexicographical data

Latest comment: 4 days ago by Infovarius in topic Broken lexeme
Lexicographical data
Place used to discuss any and all aspects of lexicographical data: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual lexicographical items, technical issues, etc.
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2024/02.



language to bearers edit

The issue not quite related to the project but as related to languages... Recently I found a relation like

and I don't think the P10894 is relevant here. The other variants are indigenous to (P2341), practiced by (P3095), used by (P1535), but all are suboptimal. Let's discuss the best property? Infovarius (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's one of the things indigenous to (P2341) was created for. Why do you think it's suboptimal? - Nikki (talk) 05:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because it seem to be for region. And even if for both, wouldn't it be a mess? --Infovarius (talk) 10:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Similarities between proverbs that are near-synonyms edit

Here they talk about similarities between proverbs in different languages as "similar images" We are currently lacking a property to link near synonyms. Would a new property for senses "similar language image" be a good idea? WDYT? So9q (talk) 04:00, 30 November 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation edit

@Mahir256: why have you ruined translation subpages? Infovarius (talk) 19:57, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Infovarius: The main documentation page, having lingered and festered for so long, has not served newcomers to Wikidata's lexicographical data very well, such that an overhaul was wholly overdue (and is not finished yet, as the remaining few redlinks indicate). I will admit that the removal of translation tags did make restructuring the page a lot easier, but if you would like to make this and other documentation pages translatable again, ask on the Wikidata:Translators' noticeboard. Mahir256 (talk) 20:07, 11 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for making a start on this. The severe outdatedness of most of the Wikidata:Lexicographical data pages has been bothering me for a while and it will be good to have something actually worth translating. - Nikki (talk) 05:40, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Roman numeral and Arabic numeral lexemes edit

We have some lexemes for the "languages" Arabic numeral system (Q176471) and Roman numerals (Q38918), added by Jura a long time ago. A couple of years ago I proposed these for deletion (Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2022/02/27#Bulk_deletion_request:_Roman_numeral_lexemes), which was opposed by Jura (of course), so they weren't deleted.

As I wrote in the deletion requests, Arabic numeral system (Q176471) and Roman numerals (Q38918) are not languages, items are more appropriate for language-independent concepts, and we already have items for these concepts.

Does anyone see a good reason why we should keep them?

- Nikki (talk) 05:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Support These should be deleted. عُثمان (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Oppose But we can have multilanguage ("mul") data in Lexemes, can't we? Punctuation? Taxon names? Chemical notation? Beyound item content these can have etymology, morphology, pronunciation (thought the latter seems to be language-dependent). --Infovarius (talk) 10:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Infovarius Taxon names can be added as New Latin with information about grammatical gender and etymology. The other things can be modeled as items, they do not need lexemes. عُثمان (talk) 13:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Weak support I don't see the benefit of these lexemes (compared to the equivalent items) and - as it was usual with Jura - there is no source or reference. If (and it's a big if) we keep them, we should totally empty them and rebuild on sane basis (beginning by a basic proof that they are indeed lexemes). A galon, VIGNERON (talk) 21:10, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Comment They are languages in the computer science sense, formal language (Q192161)     , an alphabet, some rules to define which strings made of these "letters" are correct. author  TomT0m / talk page 21:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Navigation gadget edit

@Pamputt, VIGNERON:, the 2 testers as users

Hi, I work on a script that allows to navigate between, initially Wikidata and the wiktionaries, but I this last days expanded it to be able to navigate

  • back from wiktionaries to Wikidata lexeme
  • from a lexeme to other lexemes (when there are sereval lexemes with the same label)
  • also from items to lexemes/senses.

It still a work in progress and needs polish, so I’d be happy if you can test it and tell if it’s self exploratory how to use it and what you like or not in it ! You can put the following link

mw.loader.load("//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:TomT0m/LexToWiktionary.js/sandbox.js&oldid=2051468341&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"); // Gadget to go back and forth from wiktionary to Wikidata lexemes

in your global.js on meta so that it’s available on wiktionaries too.

The first 2 ways to navigate are throw interwiki button(s), next to the traditional one or added at the same place (on vector). The "item => lexeme" one is special and currently I don’t add such a button, informations are added in the "alias" section of the labels/description section for an item.

What I’d especially would like to know if it’s the imperfections of the script are OK for you or if you are bothered by some glitches, such as the interwiki button added on loading make the page jump, and same for the placement for the lexemes … Is it worth spending a lot of time in polish ? author  TomT0m / talk page 18:02, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

(Sorry not right now, the announce is a little premature, that’s totally broken right now. Please hold). author  TomT0m / talk page 19:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC) Nevermind, it’s repaired, I put an oldid to the link to the gadget sandbox in case I rebreak it again.Reply[reply]
It works, thanks! --Infovarius (talk) 11:03, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Broken lexeme edit

I've created the lexeme кантонский (L1259271) in semi-automatical way and it has an error (in P898). But now I can't create the lexeme at all! Anyone can? Or maybe admins? --Infovarius (talk) 11:03, 21 February 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Return to the project page "Lexicographical data".