Wikidata talk:WikiProject Ontology/Archive for 2022
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
untitled (Q75320653) (specific mural) is an art genre, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
type https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q219423 en: mural (piece of artwork painted or applied directly on a large permanent surface) [1]
- en: art style (visual appearance of a creative work, shared with other works of the same movement or school) [2]
- en: art genre (form of art in terms of a medium (painted eggs vs. carved tree trunks) or format (landscape vs portraiture) or theme (religious vs funerary)) [3]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:46, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Resolved - https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q219423 was edited Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Conservatory and Botanical Garden of the City of Geneva (Q677516) is an event, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
en: herbarium (scientific collection of dried plants) [4]
- en: arrangement (act of arranging items in some orderly way) [5]
- en: action (something an agent can do or perform) [6]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:13, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- But notice that herbarium (Q181916)subclass of (P279)arranging (Q36993249) is marked as deprecated. --Horcrux (talk) 22:35, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Where it is marked so? I see that it is marked as red but is without "reason for deprecated rank" Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:16, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: I know it would be a good practice to indicate a reason using an appropriate qualifier, but technically a claim is deprecated just when it is marked as such (that's because you see it red, see also Help:Ranking). --Horcrux (talk) 10:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- I just removed it, no idea why it would be present there except making processing data more tricky. Also, I need to find how can I read it in API. I am already checking for "reason for deprecated rank" qualifier but that apparently is not enough :( Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- OK, so not only I need to check for "P2241" in "qualifiers" but also for deprecated in "rank". That is amazingly unfriendly to data users, and at this point large motivation for my hobby processing is morbid curiosity and that it makes other datasets seem friendlier. I wonder whether anyone started putting "actually not deprecated" in P2241 and expects data consumers to process THAT. 12:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- I just removed it, no idea why it would be present there except making processing data more tricky. Also, I need to find how can I read it in API. I am already checking for "reason for deprecated rank" qualifier but that apparently is not enough :( Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: I know it would be a good practice to indicate a reason using an appropriate qualifier, but technically a claim is deprecated just when it is marked as such (that's because you see it red, see also Help:Ranking). --Horcrux (talk) 10:28, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Where it is marked so? I see that it is marked as red but is without "reason for deprecated rank" Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:16, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Resolved But, there is no justification for keeping deprecated rank without P2241 qualifier (and P2241 qualifier with troll behaviour "hahahahahahah you actually need to skip that statement, we got you" is also a terrible design) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:00, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- Sometimes statements are deprecated (and not removed) to avoid re-adding by other users (or bots). See Help:Ranking#Deprecated_rank. This is especially helpful if the link seems likely and the statement could be re-added in good faith. But you're right - it should not be used for mischievous additions. These should be deleted. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:12, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: If you are automatically processing data, do not check both for the deprecation reason and the actual rank (if you are not doing something specific with such reasons), just check for the rank (for example, in SPARQL:
?subject p:PROP_ID ?statement . ?statement wikibase:rank ?rank . FILTER(?rank != wikibase:DeprecatedRank)). Note also that using thewdt:p:- @Horcrux: code checking for deprecation reason qualifier existed already and I will keep it because (1) sooner or later I will run into data without deprecated rank but with deprecation qualifier (2) sooner or later I will need to skip claims based on another qualifier (I am querying Wikidata API, not using SPARQL) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- If you want to check also for the deprecation reason is a choice of yours, but don't say that you «need to check for "P2241" in "qualifiers"», because there is no such need. This was my point. --Horcrux (talk) 09:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Horcrux: code checking for deprecation reason qualifier existed already and I will keep it because (1) sooner or later I will run into data without deprecated rank but with deprecation qualifier (2) sooner or later I will need to skip claims based on another qualifier (I am querying Wikidata API, not using SPARQL) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:31, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: If you are automatically processing data, do not check both for the deprecation reason and the actual rank (if you are not doing something specific with such reasons), just check for the rank (for example, in SPARQL:
Grunwald Monument (Q11823211) is an art genre, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:50, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
type https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q659396 en: equestrian statue (statue of a rider mounted on a horse) [7]
- en: equestrian portrait (art genre that shows the subject on horseback) [8]
- en: animal art (artistic theme of reproducing animals in art) [9]
- en: figurative art (art that depicts real object sources) [10]
- en: visual art (art form which creates works that are primarily visual in nature) [11]
- en: art genre (form of art in terms of a medium (painted eggs vs. carved tree trunks) or format (landscape vs portraiture) or theme (religious vs funerary)) [12] banned as it is an art genre !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- en: visual art (art form which creates works that are primarily visual in nature) [11]
- en: figurative art (art that depicts real object sources) [10]
- en: animal art (artistic theme of reproducing animals in art) [9]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:54, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
Resolved It seems that the problematic statement has been already removed on October 16th [13]. Not sure why it still comes up - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:22, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Fruit Harvest (Q63149011) is an art genre, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:49, 2 December 2022 (UTC) |
en: sgraffito (painting technique also used for wall or pottery decor) [14]
- en: public art (art in public space) [15]
- en: visual art (art form which creates works that are primarily visual in nature) [16]
- en: art genre (form of art in terms of a medium (painted eggs vs. carved tree trunks) or format (landscape vs portraiture) or theme (religious vs funerary)) [17] banned as it is an art genre !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- en: visual art (art form which creates works that are primarily visual in nature) [16]
- en: painting technique (method of applying paint to achieve desired effects) [18]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:07, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Resolved I resolved the issue at hand, but there exist some more issues around the sgraffito item. I brought them up at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:14, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Monument to the Holocaust, Tel Aviv (Q570442) is an art genre, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. note that https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts#Should_%22public_art_in_Jerusalem%22_and_%22public_art_in_Israel%22_be_deleted%3F and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Q58184346 were posted Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 23:01, 4 December 2022 (UTC) |
en: Public Art in Israel [25]
- en: public art (art in public space) [26]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:34, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think that Q58184346 simply should be deleted - but maybe I am wrong (unfamiliar with deletion process here) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:35, 3 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: how would you feel about moving your test cases to their own page? It seems to me like having the test cases here distracts a bit from topics that need longer discussion and where it would be good for the discussion to stay open for a longer time without getting archived? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:14, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I bet that would result in them getting ignored and lost as people will not magically become aware of them. But I can also reduce amount of them being posted so they are less than 20% of all topics? Or to one unsolved one at a given time, with next posted when previous gets archived or solved? Or one once a month or once a year or once a week? Maybe with link to such page listing multiple if there will be people interested in processing them. (I can also do not post them at all - I posted them here as I was directed here from Wikidata:PUMP where I was directed from OpenStreetMap mailing list by some Wikidata enthusiast after I complained about large scale unreliability of Wikidata ontology, and they recommended to report such problems to Wikidata community, but maybe they were wrong about this) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Less than 20% of all topics wwould work for me. You could also have one page where all are listed and another one for those 20%. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:36, 9 December 2022 (UTC)
- I bet that would result in them getting ignored and lost as people will not magically become aware of them. But I can also reduce amount of them being posted so they are less than 20% of all topics? Or to one unsolved one at a given time, with next posted when previous gets archived or solved? Or one once a month or once a year or once a week? Maybe with link to such page listing multiple if there will be people interested in processing them. (I can also do not post them at all - I posted them here as I was directed here from Wikidata:PUMP where I was directed from OpenStreetMap mailing list by some Wikidata enthusiast after I complained about large scale unreliability of Wikidata ontology, and they recommended to report such problems to Wikidata community, but maybe they were wrong about this) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:50, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny A lot of these are reoccuring problems that can be fixed by changing one class. The above examples and others above it are all clearly being calused by visual arts (Q36649). If you can, it would be better if you attempt to fix the classes yourself before posting them here. They're not that hard to fix. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:04, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I also fixed multiple ones where fix was obvious for me - in this specific case which obvious edit should be made? Because that is not at all clear to me @Lectrician1: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is the arts ontology is one MASSIVE mess. I renamed "visual art" to visual arts (Q36649) to make it clear that this is a process and not an object and made public art (Q557141)subclass of (P279)visual artwork (Q4502142) which is the actual object. That should fix it. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- "That should fix it" - this specific object is still indirectly classified as art genre (Q1792379) and it is not obvious to me which edit should be made to fix it Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm using classification.js and I don't see that. What tool are you using to view classes? Lectrician1 (talk) 21:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q570442&diff=1784595018&oldid=1651540859 And I am using https://github.com/matkoniecz/wikibrain/blob/master/test_wikidata_structure.py that is byproduct of testing wikipedia/wikidata links in OSM - https://matkoniecz.github.io/OSM-wikipedia-tag-validator-reports/ Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:57, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm using classification.js and I don't see that. What tool are you using to view classes? Lectrician1 (talk) 21:12, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- "That should fix it" - this specific object is still indirectly classified as art genre (Q1792379) and it is not obvious to me which edit should be made to fix it Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:20, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- The problem is the arts ontology is one MASSIVE mess. I renamed "visual art" to visual arts (Q36649) to make it clear that this is a process and not an object and made public art (Q557141)subclass of (P279)visual artwork (Q4502142) which is the actual object. That should fix it. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:11, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I also fixed multiple ones where fix was obvious for me - in this specific case which obvious edit should be made? Because that is not at all clear to me @Lectrician1: Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:06, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny: how would you feel about moving your test cases to their own page? It seems to me like having the test cases here distracts a bit from topics that need longer discussion and where it would be good for the discussion to stay open for a longer time without getting archived? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:14, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Mateusz Konieczny: Q58184346 Should be probably deleted. I did not find a similar class (combining "public art" + <place>) apart from public art in Jerusalem (Q17524070). When looking at All claims about public art this is mainly used as an art genre and one of the issue around Monument to the Holocaust, Tel Aviv (Q570442) is that it is used as an instance. One way to fix it is to model individual instances of public art in Israel using genre (P136)public art (Q557141) + country (P17)Israel (Q801). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 22:33, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. Link me RFD and I'll support. Lectrician1 (talk) 22:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I first brought it up at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Visual_arts and pinged the creator. I'm not really active in the visual arts field and if they oppose the deletion I will leave the items. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 22:57, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I created https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Q58184346 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Agreed. Link me RFD and I'll support. Lectrician1 (talk) 22:40, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
Wave Organ (Q7975291) is a process according to Wikidata
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2022 (UTC) |
type https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20967773 en: tide organ (structure which creates sound from waves of water) [29]
- en: sound sculpture (type of sculpture that involves sound) [30]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed? Lectrician1 (talk) 17:47, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
@Lectrician1: no, exactly reported problem remains:
en: tide organ (structure which creates sound from waves of water) [38]
- en: sound sculpture (type of sculpture that involves sound) [39]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:16, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Resolved I think I resolved this. I made it an instance of sculpture (Q860861) with genre (P136)sound sculpture (Q2236597). (There are some related issues that I posted in Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Music - just for people interested in any follow-up discussion) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- This specific problem is definitely resolved! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:16, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
St-Michael church (Q26263282) is an art genre, according to Wikidata ontology
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:02, 8 December 2022 (UTC) |
en: cave church (type of church carved into rock within a cave or mine) [47]
- en: cave architecture (caves that are utilized, generally having been excavated or otherwise altered, for sheltering humans or animals, or for use as storage, worship, or another use) [48]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- There is certainly something off with cave church (Q64732764), even though the tree above seems to be obsolete, too: that architecture is a subclass of design has been deprecated since 2016 (and has been replaced this October, if I see correctly). Now architecture (Q12271) is a subclass of built environment and design studies (Q113129241) which is not better in the current case. I brought it up at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Built_heritage#cave_church - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:12, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, it seems that something went wrong with my local cache/Wikidata instance. I changed it to the real one Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
Gunnison Beach (Q5619268) is an event because it is a nude beach
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Well, this specific one is resolved anyway. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:00, 8 December 2022 (UTC) |
type https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q847935 en: nude beach (beach that allows nudity) [49]
- en: nudity (state of wearing no clothing) [50]
- en: occurrence (occurrence of a fact or object in space-time; instantiation of a property in an object) [51] banned as it is an event !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:49, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Changed it to instance of (P31) -> beach (Q40080) & has use (P366) -> nude beach (Q847935). Multichill (talk) 16:54, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Multichill: maybe this can be applied at nude beach (Q847935) to cover all nude beaches in one go? 18:27, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
New archive strategy
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:20, 13 December 2022 (UTC) |
Current archive strategy has a problem: some sections are handled with discussion, maybe even marked as resolved. In meantime other are trickier and had no reaction.
For example lets say that I rerun my test cases again and found 4 new problems and reported them here (BTW, let me know if I do it too often or in too large volume or if that it is unwanted for some reason).
Out of 4 cases 2 were fixed with some comments and 2 were not handled.
What will be archived by a bot? Ones that are still waiting for handling!
So I propose to change archive behaviour a bit and archive sections marked as resolved quicker.
Looking at User:Hazard-Bot/Archiver and Template:Autoarchive resolved section (thanks to User:Hazard-SJ for help in locating the second!) following will likely work, with sections marked as resolved being archived in 7 days, while not marked as resolved would stay for longer than currently. Note that threads would be archived to /Archive for 2022, /Archive for 2023 and so on, to ensure that bots cooperate:
{{User:Hazard-Bot/Archiver
|archive = Wikidata talk:WikiProject Ontology/Archive for %(year)d
|algo = old(60d)
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|minthreadsleft = 8
|minthreadstoarchive = 2
}
}{{Autoarchive resolved section
|age=7
|archive='((FULLPAGENAME))/Archive for ((year))'
|overview=[[Special:PrefixIndex/{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Archive|Archive/]]
|latest archive=[[{{FULLPAGENAME}}/Archive/{{CURRENTYEAR}}|Archive for {{CURRENTYEAR}}]]
}}
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:48, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Mateusz Konieczny Be bold and just change it. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:02, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I find these test cases useful. They may be moved on an own page (as proposed by ChristianKL below). I would follow this page but there may be the problem that other people would not become aware of it as it is more hidden (as you pointed out). For trickier problems in domain-specific parts of the ontology I would move the cases to their dedicated WikiProjects (if existing and relatively active) and mark them as resolved here. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:16, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Would it be OK to post also very minimal amount of test cases here? (only post a single one if there is not even single one unsolved listed here) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:21, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- I'm even fine with the current situation :) If no one else objects I'd say: yes, a very minimal amount is okay. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:19, 6 December 2022 (UTC)
- Would it be OK to post also very minimal amount of test cases here? (only post a single one if there is not even single one unsolved listed here) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:21, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
I applied this. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 02:36, 7 December 2022 (UTC)
Lublin County (Q912777) is an object that exists outside physical reality, according to Wikidata ontology
en: Wikimedia duplicated page (this item duplicates another item, it can be merged once the necessary merges are done in other Wikimedia projects) [52]
- en: Wikimedia article page (article in the main space of a Wikimedia site (note: do NOT use this together with "instance of")) [53]
- en: open content (content that is openly accessible and modifiable to others) [54]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe "Wikimedia duplicated page" should be only on lesser page to be merged in? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed. Just delete instance of (P31) Wikimedia duplicated page (Q17362920). It's conflation anyways. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:05, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ohh nooo. HHhhh I didn't even know Wikimedia duplicated page (Q17362920) was a thing. Aya stupid lsj bot Lectrician1 (talk) 19:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- I guess I'll propose a property to fix this. Lectrician1 (talk) 19:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. This specific one resolved in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q912777&diff=1796012878&oldid=1796012812 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC) |
Kraków Fast Tram (Q1814872) is an object that exists outside physical reality, according to Wikidata ontology - and an event
en: light rail (typically an urban form of public transport using steel-tracked fixed guideways) [58]
- en: rapid transit (high-capacity public transport generally used in urban areas) [59]
- en: urban rail transit (term for various types of local rail systems) [60]
- en: public transport (shared transportation service for use by the general public) [61]
- en: transportation [62]
- en: displacement (vector that is the shortest distance from the initial to the final position of a point P) [63]
- en: length (measured dimension of an object in a physical space) [64]
- en: ISQ base quantity (one of the seven base quantities within the International System of Quantities) [65]
- en: base quantity [66]
- en: physical quantity (quantitative characterization of an aspect of a physical entity, phenomenon, event, process, transformation, relation, system, or substance) [67]
- en: individual quantity (superclass of physical, chemical, ... quantity; members are individual quantities like 5 kg, 2 apples, ...) [68]
- en: quantity (property that exists in a range of magnitudes or multitudes; property that can exist as a magnitude or multitude) [69]
- en: numeric value [70]
- en: value (expression in computer science which cannot be evaluated further) [71]
- en: expression (combination of functions, variables, etc. in a computer program that returns a value) [72]
- en: sequence (ordered list of the same type of elements (finite or infinite)) [73]
- en: function of an integer variable (function whose domain a subset of integers) [74]
- en: function of a real variable (function whose domain a subset of real numbers) [75]
- en: unary function (function that takes one argument. In computer science, a unary operator is a subset of unary function) [76]
- en: operation (mathematical procedure which produces a result from zero or more input values) [77]
- en: partial operation (partially defined mathematical procedure which produces a result from operands; calculation from zero or more input values (called operands) to an output value) [78]
- en: partial function (binary relation whose actual domain may be smaller than its apparent domain) [79]
- en: binary relation (any set of ordered pairs; (on a set A) collection of ordered pairs of elements of A, i.e. subset of A × A; (between two sets A and B) collection of ordered pairs with first element in A and second element in B) [80]
- en: partial function (binary relation whose actual domain may be smaller than its apparent domain) [79]
- en: partial operation (partially defined mathematical procedure which produces a result from operands; calculation from zero or more input values (called operands) to an output value) [78]
- en: operation (mathematical procedure which produces a result from zero or more input values) [77]
- en: unary function (function that takes one argument. In computer science, a unary operator is a subset of unary function) [76]
- en: function of a real variable (function whose domain a subset of real numbers) [75]
- en: function of an integer variable (function whose domain a subset of integers) [74]
- en: sequence (ordered list of the same type of elements (finite or infinite)) [73]
- en: expression (combination of functions, variables, etc. in a computer program that returns a value) [72]
- en: value (expression in computer science which cannot be evaluated further) [71]
- en: numeric value [70]
- en: quantity (property that exists in a range of magnitudes or multitudes; property that can exist as a magnitude or multitude) [69]
- en: individual quantity (superclass of physical, chemical, ... quantity; members are individual quantities like 5 kg, 2 apples, ...) [68]
- en: physical quantity (quantitative characterization of an aspect of a physical entity, phenomenon, event, process, transformation, relation, system, or substance) [67]
- en: base quantity [66]
- en: ISQ base quantity (one of the seven base quantities within the International System of Quantities) [65]
- en: length (measured dimension of an object in a physical space) [64]
- en: process (series of events which occur over an extended period of time) [85] banned as it is an event !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
- en: displacement (vector that is the shortest distance from the initial to the final position of a point P) [63]
- en: transportation [62]
- en: public transport (shared transportation service for use by the general public) [61]
- en: urban rail transit (term for various types of local rail systems) [60]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q178512&diff=1751449707&oldid=1751449536 added during fixing https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Ontology/Archive_3#light_rail_(Q1268865)_is_data_visualization_(Q6504956) is a it suspect Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 05:36, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- What is "transport" here?.. Is it material entity or event or abstract notion?.. --Infovarius (talk) 07:29, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
I removed https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12162227 from https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q178512 as it had subclasses indicating lack of compatibility and no English description Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:32, 28 December 2022 (UTC)
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC) |
Deletion request for SOMA items
I'm sure many of you have seen the "SOMA" items before. I've opened a deletion request for them: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Bulk_deletion_request:_The_SOMA_(Q109582568)_entities Lectrician1 (talk) 03:56, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2022/12/27#Bulk_deletion_request:_The_SOMA_(Q109582568)_entities - all deleted Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:27, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
vote for prop: Computer Science Ontology
Wikidata:Property proposal/Computer Science Ontology topic. It's more of a taxonomy rather than an ontology, but still, it's important for anyone doing CS research. Please vote -- Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 16:38, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
- Ended being created Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
| I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:28, 20 January 2023 (UTC) |
Please check out my proposal for a "negates property" property
⇒ Wikidata:Property proposal/negates property
Thanks :) --Push-f (talk) 14:19, 25 November 2022 (UTC)
Edits about Wikidata "data model"
Hello everyone, I wanted to ask you to take a look at Wikidata talk:Data model. I would also point out the recently created fundamental data model of Wikidata (Q115490755) and fundamental Wikidata entity (Q115490628). Horcrux (talk) 11:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hey, thanks for bringing this up here :)
- In the past week I have created the Wikidata:Data model article in an attempt to better describe the data model(s) of Wikidata.
- I did want to reach out to this and other projects for feedback about the page but had not done so yet because it was still very much work in process (Q357662).
- Please read the introduction of Wikidata:Data model, I think it should clarify what is meant by fundamental data model of Wikidata (Q115490755). I am attempting to describe the "fundamental entities" in Wikidata:Data model#fundamental-entities.
- For a current list of "fundamental entities", see this query.
- --Push-f (talk) 12:12, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Generally, it makes sense to write documents inside a draft namespace on your userpage when they are work in progress and not in the main namespace where it's unclear to users who visit them that they are a work in progress. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:52, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Merging first-order class (Q21522908), class (Q16889133), and type (Q21146257)
To me first-order class (Q21522908), class (Q16889133), and type (Q21146257) look like they are about the same thing. Does anyone see a good reason to have three separate items here? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:42, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl: Your first and last items are the same, did you mean 2 items or three to be merged? ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:57, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- I fixed it. I wanted to link to first-order class (Q21522908) for the first. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:28, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- On the question of whether type (Q21146257) and class (Q16889133) should be merged - they both link to (different) external "equivalent class" URLs; assuming those are correct, are those all considered equivalent to one another by external sources? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:03, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- Can you explain what the difference between them is? If there's no explainable difference merging them makes it easier to interact with them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:34, 28 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl: Ok, first-order class (Q21522908) seems a Wikidata-specific thing, while the others are more general, so I don't think it should be merged with either of them. On the other two, class (Q16889133) is stated to be equivalent to the concept Class in schema.org, while type (Q21146257) is said to be equivalent to DCMIType from Dublin Core. From this page DCMI Type is defined as "The set of classes specified by the DCMI Type Vocabulary, used to categorize the nature or genre of the resource." Where as schema.org "Class" is defined here - "equivalent to rdfs:Class" - anyway I think one would need to dig quite deeply to determine what exactly the relations should be between these two, I can't find anything obvious. Nor that they should be merged as being the same, that's not clear to me at all. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:36, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- What's the point of a Wikipedia specific thing? Why should as they currently do bus type (Q56887437) and class of disease (Q112193867) subclass them instead of either one of the two others? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- I found another item: first-order class (Q104086571) It seems to me the same as well. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:02, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- What's the point of a Wikipedia specific thing? Why should as they currently do bus type (Q56887437) and class of disease (Q112193867) subclass them instead of either one of the two others? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:27, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl The first one was supposed to make the distinction between the « class » concept as used in Wikidata, the way in which we use it, that might not be the same as some academical definitions of classes. Which are several, by the way, there are classes in sociology, social classes, which is very different from classes in set theory (there is several set theories in maths, also).
- « Type » is a different concept in maths, and in computer science, than in set theory. See en:Type_theory. author TomT0m / talk page 11:02, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
- social class (Q187588) is the item for social classes which is again a quite different thing. According to Wikidata type theory (Q1056428) is about data type (Q190087) and not about type (Q21146257).
- The description for class (Q16889133) says "collection of items in an ontology sharing common characteristics. Classes provide an abstraction mechanism for grouping resources with similar characteristics". I don't see how that's different from the class concept as used in Wikidata. The only difference might be that we might have a new classes that don't have any instances. first-order class (Q21522908) does not look like a description that's inclusive of classes without instances. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:22, 30 November 2022 (UTC)
Should we have an "entity of unknown existence" as top node of the subclass tree?
Currently human whose existence is disputed (Q21070568), fictional human (Q15632617), and human (Q5) and correspondigly organisation that may or may not be fictional (Q113584205) and organization (Q43229) don't seem well linked together and I proposed https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#subclass_of_with_uncertain_existance to fix that. Arthur proposed there to solve the problem by creating new items for entities that might or might not exist. That's a valid solution but probably one that we should discuss here. What do you think? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:08, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Probably. But many subclasses of entity (Q35120) are of not obvious existence now... --Infovarius (talk) 07:34, 2 December 2022 (UTC)
- How does this relate to hypothetical entity (Q18706315)? It's declared as a subclass of (P279) of entity (Q35120), but not unconditionally so, as this claim is qualified with nature of statement (P5102)possibly (Q30230067), which looks counterintuitive to me; if A exists but B doesn't necessarily exist, B shouldn't be a subclass of (P279) A in the first place, qualified or not, as an item of unknown existence sounds like a broader class than something that is known to exist (or known not to exist, for that matter).
- But this kind of philosophy is a bit unfamiliar to me and I may have misunderstood part of the terminology in use. Disregarding the confusing class structure, hypothetical entity (Q18706315) could perhaps be useful to you. --SM5POR (talk) 11:57, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- I think the qualifier nature of statement (P5102)possibly (Q30230067) is actually superfluous. entity (Q35120) is defined as "anything that can be considered, discussed, or observed", it does not make any commitment as to the existence of its instances (whatever that means). So entity (Q35120) does also comprise unicorn (Q7246), 1 (Q199) and justice (Q13189320), no matter if they strictly exist or in what form they exist - they are things that may be considered or discussed. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, the entity (Q35120) item has a number of claims suggesting a commitment to existence, such as:
- Also, the current Swedish description literally translates as "something that exists". If this reflects a misconception of the nature of entity (Q35120), those claims should be removed (or changed); it seems self-contradictory that the top node in the class tree, which is supposed to encompass "everything that is or isn't", could even have an "opposite" (which is still a subclass of that top node). It ought to be neutral and void of properties that might implicitly be inherited by inferior items.
- But I agree now that these items won't provide an easy solution to the initial problem that triggered this thread, and their proper definitions and configuration should therefore probably be discussed elsewhere. --SM5POR (talk) 17:11, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- Wow, well I did only look at the description, not at the statements :). Given all these contradictions you pointed out I think the statements should be deleted and the descriptions adapted. This is definitely easier than to end up with two or three trees. And this should be the root item, at least according to its talk page Talk:Q35120. (And we really don't want to get into discussions what it generally means to exist. Most people have a good conception of what it means that a person exists (or not), but what does it mean that 1 (Q199) exists (or not) or that justice (Q13189320) exists (or not)?) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk)
- I think the qualifier nature of statement (P5102)possibly (Q30230067) is actually superfluous. entity (Q35120) is defined as "anything that can be considered, discussed, or observed", it does not make any commitment as to the existence of its instances (whatever that means). So entity (Q35120) does also comprise unicorn (Q7246), 1 (Q199) and justice (Q13189320), no matter if they strictly exist or in what form they exist - they are things that may be considered or discussed. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
- As I understand it the original problem is the following: After we separated humans (or castles or cars or animals) with dubious existence from human (Q5) we still want to easily retrieve them coming from the "standard class" (e.g. human (Q5), castle (Q23413), motor car (Q1420), animal (Q729)).
- An own property explicitly linking a class with entities of dubious existence (A) to the class of entities that exist(ed) (B) has the advantage that A may be easily identified using sparql coming from B. Just using subclass of (P279) does not guarantee that: there are currently 5 super classes of human (Q5); which would be the one "of dubious existence"?
- You could somehow ensure a strong link using subclass relationships alone. One could create a metaclass <class of instances with dubious existence> and when you want to get A coming from B you need to get the superclass that is an instance of <class of instances with dubious existence>. You could also work with qualifiers (e.g. object of statement has role (P3831) <superclass of dubious existence>). In my opinion having an own property is the cleaner solution though. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:12, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
Mount Ebenezer (Q8293195) is an event, according to Wikidata ontology
en: pastoral lease (lease of Crown land from the government for farming) [86]
- en: lease (business contract between two parties, the lessor (owner) and lessee (user), for use of property) [87]
Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 17:46, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
- This one is going to require that we separate an "agreement" as in a object contract over time, and an "agreement" as in the initial action that creates the agreement object. There are already 2 agreement items but one is a subclass of the other and I'm not sure what their difference is: agreement (Q2006324) agreement (Q321839) Lectrician1 (talk) 21:19, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
- German WP is the only one to have articles linked to both items, and while agreement (Q321839) ("agreement" in German and Swedish item descriptions) de:Abkommen gives a broad overview of agreements in different contexts (private law, international law etc), agreement (Q2006324) ("binding agreement" in German and Swedish item descriptions) de:Vereinbarung focuses on the concept as it has evolved in German and Austrian private law, with only minor reference to the corresponding concepts in other countries as well as on the international level.
- The descriptions thus look consistent with the articles, but I don't see how a mere "agreement" (or even a more informal gentlemen's agreement (Q1046626)) can be a subclass of (P279) "binding agreement" (the legal concept). Shouldn't it be the other way around, with the binding agreement being a subclass of agreement in general?
- As I see it, none of those items are limited to the event, the mere action of entering into such a persistent state of affairs. SM5POR (talk) 13:07, 5 December 2022 (UTC)
BTW, if anyone wants listing of other issues like this - see User:Mateusz Konieczny/failing testcases (some may be easier to solve than this one) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:03, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
Tramwaj wodny w Bydgoszczy (Q926453) is an event, according to Wikidata ontology
en: ferry route (regularly scheduled ship route providing ferry service) [95]
- en: boat service [96]
- en: passenger transport (industry in transport) [97]
- en: transport (human-directed movement of things or people between locations) [98]
- en: material flow (transportation of raw materials, pre-fabricates, parts, components, integrated objects and final products as a flow of entities) [99]
- en: energy flow (flow of energy through a food chain, and is the focus of study in ecological energetics) [100]
- en: intentional human action (every human activity led by purposeful motives) [104]
- en: action (something an agent can do or perform) [105] this was unexpected here as it indicates an event !!!!!!
- en: material flow (transportation of raw materials, pre-fabricates, parts, components, integrated objects and final products as a flow of entities) [99]
- en: transport (human-directed movement of things or people between locations) [98]
- en: passenger transport (industry in transport) [97]
Ontology of ranking
My apologies if this is already being discussed elsewhere; I made a quick search for some obvious keywords but didn't get any likely hits.
I found a plea at Talk:Q27949697#This item is a scourge for the elimination of the Wikibase reason for deprecated rank (Q27949697) item due to it being a magnet for spurious subclass of (P279) statements, thereby messing up the class tree with inherited nonsense relations.
While I agree about the problem, I disagreed about the proposed solution (to delete the item), and began investigating what reasons are currently stated with the reason for deprecated rank (P2241) qualifier, in order to write a solid property constraint proposal.
However, as I bring out my Wikidata gardening toolbox to get rid of that annoying piece of stone almost completely buried in my front lawn, it turns out to be just the highest point of the mile-deep bedrock that my lawn rests upon, forcing me to change my plans for the afternoon...
What I found was what seems like an innovative interpretation of deprecated rank, namely a number of subway stations in New York having certain adjacent station (P197) and connecting service (P1192) statements deprecated for being nocturnal (Q101029366), a reason not found in the Wikibase reason for deprecated rank (Q27949697) tree and therefore itself being flagged as a constraint violation.
If I understand the reasoning behind this correctly, it's not that the statement is somehow wrong, but the intent seems to be to hide those stations and services from regular Wikidata applications and users for being unsafe, difficult to access or something. Am I on the right (subway) track here?
I suspect this is not what deprecated rank is meant to be used for, but I must admit it's a clever idea. Has this issue been discussed before, and is there a clarifying policy statement on how to deal with it? Are there other methods to express the same "grading" of the usefulness of factual statements without resorting to the deprecation mechanism?
Considering that I have counted 284 reasons being recognized as instance of (P31) Wikibase reason for deprecated rank (Q27949697) and thus satisfying the constraints, 45 being sub-classes of the recognized items hinting at a perceived or intended connection, and 344 completely outside that tree, I guess there may be a few more "innovations" lurking in the depths of Wikidata and waiting to be discovered, as nocturnal (Q101029366) just happened to be first of these I looked into.
I assume the issue of exactly what reasons should be included in the official set is better discussed somewhere near the Help Talk:Ranking page or similar. My reason for bringing up this issue here in the Ontology project first is that I would like to understand how that set of reasons is best documented, the relationship between their internal Wikidata use and the semantics as real-world items, and any procedural policies regarding Wikidata internal items.
I also hope to find out what general categories of deprecated rank interpretations exist; I'm so far only familiar with two of them, declaring regular statements as "bad" and to enable stating that constraint provides suggestions for manual input (Q99460987). Are there additional categories beyond these? --SM5POR (talk) 21:39, 4 December 2022 (UTC)
The subclass tree top (or root) node
I see that instance of (P31) of entity (Q35120) is simultaneously set to variable-order class (Q23958852) and counting unit (Q78754808). Aren't those actually two different senses of entity (L1393)? I find it difficult to visualize the universal entity of everything and anything also having an underpaid part-time jig as a bean counter (maybe because English isn't my native language). Only the first sense is recognized as L1393-S1 though; L1393-S2 refers to an organizational entity (and the COED, 9th edition, isn't detailed enough to clarify the issue for me). --SM5POR (talk) 19:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)