Check consistency WD <-> SWERIKS #27
Comments
|
Thanks!
We have two guys with the surname and same iort -- Edward Magnus and Gustaf Robert. Assuming there's no third Seederholm i Ålberga gård, the ID shouldn't be associated with anything. |
|
I am lost
|
Greate I am on my way to iceskate but will try to do a link check also from the WD side I close this issue |
|
@BobBorges my vision when your project started was that you should have better landingpages that adds value if Wikipedia linked them e.g.
I tried to tell the sv:Wikipedia people that this is a big possibility when a research plattform has same as Wikidata... I felt no one was interested my feeling is that people on sv:Wikipedia like doing cut and paste and are not interested in datadriven solutions... I hope I am wrong and also that your work could be easier to consume by having better landingpages MAYBE we could link SWERIKs from sv:Wikipedia... The way I have populated WD and sv:Wikipedia is that PMs use a datadriven template Mall:Faktamall_biografi_WD i.e. we can just change the template and we will have links to SWERIKS for all PMs with that template |
I'm stepping back for now ;-)Looks like wikidata blocked me ;-) It seems to be related to a user named LevandeMänniska who has been pushing to block me because some of the descriptions are inaccurate (see Ännu fler förvirrade beskrivningar) I'm not sure what's the best way forward, but I see the description field primarily as a way to disambiguate objects.... Out of the 1 million edits I've made, I suppose there are bound to be some errors. I tried reaching out to him by giving him my phone number, but no response.... Lesson learned: I now view Wikidata as a proof of concept for linked data, providing the opportunity to add sources. However, as it's an open platform, anything can happen. Many users on Wikidata lack professional backgrounds in data management or structured data solutions, resulting in more chaos than structure. Additionally, learning linked data feels like a trial-and-error process, and what was considered correct last year may no longer be the best approach today. Therefore, while an open platform can serve as a useful sandbox, it’s not something you can fully trust, as many self-nominated experts often pursue their own agendas—like user LevandeMänniska, who has been trying to block me for months, even though I’ve mostly stopped editing Wikidata, aside from a few BBQ locations here and there.
if you have question you can call me ++46705152802 or salgo60@msn.com
over and out, and good luck navigating the Wikidata landscape! It took me 8 years before I appeared on the radar of user Levande Människa and ended up getting banned....
|
|
Thanks Magnus! This is very helpful, and I'm sorry you got blocked on WD! How can an open data platform block people who aren't blatantly abusive? I'm going to reopen this issue so I remember to look into these cases on our end. |
|
> I'm sorry you got blocked on WD! No problem for me. Now you have to do the changes... 😅 doesn't feel that the user that was getting me blocked has an interest in helping your project... I checked him and he is doing editing on Wikidata getting paid by Swedish Public Employment Service and it feels he doesnt have a vision of how to create an echosystem its more singel edits and chasing people like me I tried to speak with him about things he had edit not following the way I used described by source that I think adds value and make it easier to get an overview (link) and after that an anonymous user started deleting things and argued, using the same logic that URLs are preferred over source descriptions, and began deleting property values. (could be its the same user editing anonymously to make changes appear as if multiple users agree with him The user was active only for a few hours but made edits with Preferred rank that shows this user has done some editing before 😺 plus confirms that he understands Swedish - is not the first time on Wikidata that happens see sockpuppetry) ;-) Would have been better if he could together with you move forward
FYI: I restarted do some cleaning of wikidata when you pinged me 2 weeks ago I found in the report Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P12192 a list of about 100 WD profiles that needs more care....
how can an open plattform produce something useable ;-) its not a group of rocket scientist more older men with there own agenda... or teenagers with to much time... my take is that there is a good technical combination Wikipedia <-> Wikidata but the community is not skilled enough to produce more advanced Linked data.... the potential of the datamodell of Wikidata I feel is "the rub". When you started Riksdagens Corpus it was some people doing good work in WIkidata I did a small check on the people I presented for your project dec 14 2022 doing things with Swedish PM and Riksdagens documents "Sveriges Riksdag 1867–2022: Ett ekosystem av länkad öppen data #84" and it looks 2024 that just one Ainali still working on making WD better for Swedish PM data, but now Ainali is handling it record by record rather than doing "mass imports," and he lacks programming skills... so I guess WD for the Swedish Parliament will degenerate... maybe they will adress it see note 20 oct 2024 I guess not - it was a lot of work user Popperipopp did in 2020 and you need some data skills to fix it... 
portrattarkiv.se - SPAA key success factor was also the work Omar did in scanning all the pages of the book Tvåkammar-riksdagen 1867–1970 and organizing it by 4355 individual persons. Without this work, it would not have been easy to link facts to the book. However, there might be room for improvement, as it turns out some individuals appear multiple times with contradictory data, and there is a certain "simplification" in how independent politicians are described.
Most of the pictures has also "same as wikidata" e.g.
The major problem I see with WikidataThe major problem I see with Wikidata is that we have the competence describe people but get problems to create good WD objects for something like "vilde" BUT having WD objects for church parishes, Swedish PMs since 1885, have it for all nearly all countries Wikidata:WikiProject every politician is magic and as I stated I think the research community could learn some good and some bad patterns from the Wikimedia people and perhaps with an academic community, it would be easier to reach consensus compared to navigating a group of older, often combative individuals who rarely meet in person 😊 and not everyone has a formal education.... I feel its sad that Wikidata and also your project couldnt handle errors in the book Tvåkammar-riksdagen 1867–1970 #157 as linked data... doing something as I did with contradicting sources like Riksarkivet / church books / ..... see #35 The major benefits I see with Wikidata
I feel there are many lessons to take from this, one being that Wikidata isn’t a platform that research professionals can fully trust as stable. Another important point is the need for creating our own Persistent Identifiers for all referenceable objects, as highlighted in FAIR data principles, particularly F1. When I discussed this with Pelle Snickars from your project, he believed Wikidata Q numbers were sufficient. However, as we’re seeing, Wikidata is far from stable. It's essential to have your own persistent identifiers backed by your own sources to confirm statements. In the long run, you'll also need to develop your platform to manage conflicting sources effectively, ensuring data reliability and accountability. I guess PROV is a step in the right direction, but it should be implemented alongside other data governance practices, quality control measures, and security protocols to build a complete framework for reliable and accountable data handling. Things I dont see today at Riksarkivet, RAÄ, Swedish "riksdagen"... |
More backup candidatesAs new contributors with different perspectives and skill sets begin adding to Wikidata, the data is likely to evolve, leading to "scope creep." This means that perceptions of what constitutes good quality or a reliable source may shift—potentially for the better, but also possibly for the worse. Managing an open platform with over 13 000 active contributors each month, supporting more than 200 languages, is undoubtedly challenging. In this context, ensuring regular "backups" of the data is a commendable and proactive measure. 
Managing an open platform like Wikidata, which has over 13,000 active contributors each month and supports more than 200 languages, presents significant challenges. In this context, regularly backing up the data is a prudent and forward-thinking practice. From my six years of experience editing Wikidata, I’ve learned that the challenges you encounter are often unpredictable. The beauty of Wikidata is that you can focus on your specific areas of interest and rarely run into conflicts, especially when working with straightforward data like birth and death dates, political affiliations, or party memberships. When you have reliable sources, such as Tvåkammar-riksdagen 1867–1970, it becomes even easier. However, with 14 million monthly edits, opinions vary widely—some might advocate for the use of primary sources, while others deletes item and just rely on established resources like the Swedish National Archives (Riksarkivet) or SBL ( A project I doubt will ever be delivered — more like 'project drift' than scope creep see "Riksarkivet SBL Projekt på drift - för 62 år sedan var alla överens om att längre än 30 år till fick det inte ta"). Since Wikipedia articles are one of the primary consumers of Wikidata, this also influences changes to the Wikidata. Some Wikipedia contributors, for instance, do not advocate for the use of church records, as they may classify this as "original research." --> they vote for delete those sources.... My advice: avoid asserting that Wikidata can definitively be used for specific purposes like professions / identifying parties. Instead, back up the data you find useful, treating "Wikidata as the source," despite its shortcomings, volatility, and frequent lack of reliable references to support the information, requires careful consideration. Authority control properties having a WD prop SWERIK P12192 and is a human
External properties having a WD prop SWERIK P12192 and is a human
External properties having a WD prop SWERIK P12192 and is a human and is Swedish
WD properties having a WD prop SWERIK P12192 and is a human
SWERIKS and has described by Source P1343
SWERIKS and has "archives at" P485
SWERIKS and has "significant event" P793
|
|
Looks like Riksdagen has added som Swedish PMs also old ones - issue #184 |
|
Yes. We should do a sync against both wikidata and the open data soon. Then check missmatches. |
|
@MansMeg guess WIkidata is your friend
The sad thing is how many SWEDISH PMs are missing at Riksdagens Öppna data
I did a bar chart of birth year for people in Riksdagens Öppna data in the Notebook 
Hittade i veckan massa textsträngar om dom Riksdagsgubbar Riksdagen har...se video finns massa textsträngar om vad många gubbar gjort som har Property:P8388 men är bara ostrukturerad text det verkar som född och namn är det som är strukturerat...
Exempel Riksdagens person-GUID P8388 - a9b3d62e-7665-47bd-98b0-449545cc6c05
KLICKA PÅ BIOGRAFI 
|
I guess WD has some issues with father son
I guess its easier if you check as I havent seen an API if we are in sync
Issues I think I found or is it just a mess with the formatter URL
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: