[05:51:17] Hi [06:38:13] hmm [06:51:17] Hi [07:24:22] How does wikidata work? for example I saw there is the metadata of the hebrew bible verses. Are the actual verses there as well? [09:21:13] fizban2: I'd expect the verses to be in wikisource instead, but dunno :) [09:22:45] But there is no semantic data there [09:22:54] so I can't take specific part [09:24:29] Well, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12486364 links to a specific Hebrew wikisource for that chapter, but nothing more specific than that [09:39:44] reosarevok: i wonder why different chapters are needed as own item [09:40:34] other books like "it" do not have their individual chapters listed. [09:40:41] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q602288 [09:48:19] i guess its just pollution like the inclusion of scientific articles as items :p [09:56:21] SothoTalKer: because some wiki has per-chapter pages [09:56:49] that is the best reason i ever heard. [09:57:52] well, i know wikicrap is more important in this little ecosystem than any meaningful decisions :) [09:58:44] if a wiki would make an article for every word, wikidata would include that also. [09:59:41] otoh i actually do not care enough. i will stick to humans and AC data, there's enough to do. [10:04:56] I think it's stupid too, but that's what the system needs to deal with, so [10:05:11] Sadly, I don't think they'll change it just because we think it's stupid :p [10:05:18] fight the system [10:05:51] be happy im not at wdcon, else some people would get a serious slapping ;P [11:18:35] SothoTalKer: it is a bit arrogant of you to condemn this as stupid without looking into why it was done that way. The Hebrew Wikisource has actually created a very elaborate hypertext edition of the Hebrew Bible, complete with annotations, multiple script renditions, and glosses for every verse. To accomplish that using plain wiki (this was done long before Wikidata existed), they had to create individual pages. [11:19:03] That there are Wikidata items is just a side-effect, and not one that could have been taken into account at the time. [11:20:29] i know why it was done. does not mean i have to like it, though. [11:22:25] my personal opinion is that it is not needed, but I won't hinder anyone from adding stuff like this :) [11:24:19] it's like adding follower counts to twitter statements [11:43:29] SothoTalKer: I didn't ask you to like it. I'd like you to not to call other Wikimedians' hard good-faith work "stupid" and "wikicrap". [11:44:00] too bad i already did, huh? [11:46:30] yes, too bad. And too bad you can't see you've been rude and uncollegial, and can't bring yourself to apologize. [11:50:02] How else should I call it? [11:55:59] You could say you think it's inefficient, especially if you can think of an alternative that would still support the structure they built over on Hebrew Wikisource. Or you could just maybe tolerate that not everything in the project is exactly how you would have designed it, without needing to call it anything , really. [12:00:52] you would not accept to "not do it at all", would you? [12:02:28] And I do tolerate it, as I said before. I just have some strong opinions about it. [12:03:43] Strong opinions are fine; the particular epithets you chose to express those strong opinions were rude and uncollegial, in my opinion. I encourage you to find other ways to phrase your strong opinions in the future, or *alternatively*, to keep them to yourself if you just can't find a polite and collaborative way to express them. [12:04:02] thank you for engaging in discussion about this. [12:04:06] I appreciate it. [12:45:54] abartov, actually that is part of the reason of why I'm trying to get the semantic data. I want to put the construct into a database and then generate the pages in a more clean way [12:46:24] abartov, Also to make it easier to make new constructs [12:48:47] I saw a few ways to do this type of things, such a semantic wiki, wikibase and other db like extension. But I'm not familier enought with the eco system to understand which one will be the most logical option [12:49:30] I need #wikimentoring :-) [13:07:52] fizban2: If you speak Hebrew, I would recommend posting on the Hebrew Wikisource's Scriptorium (discussion area) and asking for help from the people who designed that mechanism. Perhaps there is even code you could re-use. [18:46:08] I especially love how unorganized Wikidata is about books. [19:30:57] SothoTalKer: in which way? [19:31:10] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Books exists at least [19:31:31] they are missing :p [19:32:16] i mean all the writers have an item, but most works are missing. [19:32:57] Oh, I see [19:38:01] reosarevok: not only that, but even the most common example has statements in it that would belong to an edition, not the work itself: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q602288 [20:22:11] If every Bible book chapter and every ADB entry gets its own item, then every book by any other author should have an item too, right? [20:22:49] But then you cannot link that book to the author via "notable work" because only notable works should be linked there :P [20:31:06] reosarevok: see what i mean? (: [20:31:34] IMO it should be there, but you don't need to use notable work, because it will be linked the other way around anyway [20:32:28] yes, you can use a query to filter works by author. [20:38:27] I mean, I wouldn't expect to see all books by an author listed on their item anyway [20:38:42] why not? (: [20:38:59] Because it would make a mess of Kim Jong-il's entry, for one :p [20:39:12] (also because it feels like data duplication - that info is already stored on the other side) [20:39:39] Ok, correction: I'd be happy to see all books for an author on their page, but I wouldn't like requiring them to be *entered* there [20:40:17] Run the query and show them, but don't duplicate the data on both sides [20:40:57] you mean it would make a mess like on athletes pages with their world ranking displayed monthly? [20:43:41] reosarevok: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q57747 [20:44:34] and in june 2018 they stopped updating %) [20:54:08] Oh god. Yes [20:54:29] Someone told me once that Wikidata is pretty bad at displaying data that changes fast through time, and this is a good example [20:54:44] Would seem easy to just show preferred with a "see more" for the rest, but [20:55:19] that would mean one would have to order the statements, for example by date. [20:56:13] but first entered things are always shown on top and new ones at the bottom. [20:56:38] there's a userscript to sort statements [20:56:55] Well, it sounds like something worth considering maybe. But devs might also be of the opinion that if someone wants WD data to be pretty they should run some other site prettifying it [20:57:02] (which is also not a crazy point tbh) [20:57:43] great point. let's create a site called "wikidatapretty.org" [20:58:16] and then just pull items via api and display them properly ;) [21:02:55] reosarevok: next funny thing: Stephen King has 36 notable works listed, but only 20 written works with him as author :p [21:04:06] aha! it did not do the full query [21:10:42] is there a "is always used with" type property? [21:11:13] eg. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20580988 is always used with https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6387170 (and the eng wiki needs moving to a separate item too) [21:12:43] it first hand should not be a subclass of gamelan. [21:13:34] hmm. [21:13:44] it's agong-chime os i'll give yo uthat [21:13:59] an instrument cannot be a subclass of an ensemble. [21:16:05] regarding your question, you can use "together with" [21:16:10] oh! [21:16:27] well [21:16:36] I'm also trying to find that property i was told to use for things that are about more thna one subject [21:16:38] i guess it does not apply there actually [21:17:00] but it's the best there is [21:21:14] CatQuest: i don't think, splitting on the english wikipedia will happen. the article is currently quite short already. [21:21:43] yes. i mena to add a separate wikidata item for it (and thne link that to the other itms with this property i cant find righ now :D) [21:23:13] did you see the pictures on the jv wikipedia? The Kempyang seems to be a doubled Kethuk :p [21:23:24] yes! i know! [21:23:29] I'm researching these :P [21:24:47] google has a lot of nice pictures [21:26:47] ffhkt. i can't find it [21:27:33] ok: hello all of #wikidata: i ned te property to use for linking "item that is about several things" to the "separate thing"'s item [21:28:14] 'is part of' and 'has part'? [21:28:49] i asked in here for something ike that and someone came and told me.. possibly a WDME user, possibly multichill? I don't remember and i've searched my logs and also my bookmarks [21:29:11] SothoTalKer: no. this was some type of thing for explicitly "this covers several items" [21:30:16] wait. searching actually worked! [21:30:32] it sometimes does, yeah [21:30:36] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21484471 <-- [21:36:48] great :) [22:14:52] reosarevok: i hope with BB available, it will be easier to populate WD then :p