Xaris333

[1]

Hi, I try to create a sports season of a sports club item (now working in 2016–17 Club Joventut Badalona season (Q41991697)), but I did not found any case (full of information, of course) to use as a reference. I see you created a lot of sports season (as 2018–19 Cypriot Second Division (Q52124857) or 1978-79 Cypriot Cup (Q28945). Some questions:

1. Do you have (or know) any sports season of a sports club item ?
   1. If not, What should by its properties structure, in your experience
2. For the sport season items, where should the teams results (points, goals, position, etc.) be informed ?
   1. As a qualifiers of the participants teams ?
   2. As a properties in the sports season of a sports club item ?
3. The sport season items are related with a league or a champioship. However, an sports club can play in several leagues (National league and Champions league, for instance). What should be the ontology in this situation.

Well, any help will be appreciated. Thanks, --Amadalvarez (talk) 21:41, 28 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Amadalvarez: hello! Sorry for the delay.

1. I don't know about sports season of a sports club item.
2. For the sport season item see 2016–17 Cypriot First Division (Q23756432) (participating team (P1923).
3. I have not understood the last question. An example?

Xaris333 (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Xaris333: Thanks so much for your answer. Regarding the 3th question:

• the sport season item are refered just to a one league (La Liga (Q324867) for 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574)) or championship (UEFA Champions League (Q18756) for 2014–15 UEFA Champions League (Q11306107)), defined via sports season of league or competition (P3450).
• a team may participate in more of one league in the same season: Allways the national league, but sometimes in a championship league as happend to a FC Barcelona (Q7156) in these examples.
• So, to describe "the season" for the team it must includes both of them and its results.
• What should be, in your opinion, the ontology ?
  • multivalue in sports season of league or competition (P3450), in league or competition (P118) or in participant in (P1344) ?.
  • In any case, the results must be qualifiers of each value.
  • Does it make sense to have subclass of (P279) or part of the series (P179) to gather all the season items of one team ?.

Thanks, again. Amadalvarez (talk) 07:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Xaris333: In addition to your pending answer, I have a [related] new topic to you: Under which property of "sports club (Q847017)" would you list its items of "sports season of a sports club (Q1539532)"?.

Following the example of Cypriot First Division (Q155965) and its season (Q27020041), the property should be has part(s) (P527), however, the season summaries are not exactly "a part of" in the case of a club. What about history of topic (P2184) ?. I definitely do not consider sports season of league or competition (P3450) in this case. Probably we should need a new property similar to a exhibition history (P608), a kind of record of results. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 19:33, 3 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Came here via Wikidata:Project chat#Sport ontology. First of all some queries for items that are instance of sports season of a sports club (Q1539532), of which we have ~58000:

• Example items with many claims
• Property usage statistics

Unfortunately there is no natural candidate property to link to the competition at which the team competed in that season, and no property to link to the club as well, as I see it. Maybe league or competition (P118) can be broadened in scope, but new properties would be really helpful here. Once it is clear how competitions and club/team are going to be linked, everything else can be negotiated. What do both of you think? —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:32, 4 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Now I just give it a try and proposed:

• Wikidata:Property proposal/season of club or team
• Wikidata:Property proposal/sports competition competed at

Comments are welcomed, of course. —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:07, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Amadalvarez: do the proposed properties are going to solve the problem? Xaris333 (talk) 07:22, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

 

Excuse me, Xaris333 & @MisterSynergy: to show up again so late. I had to leave the topic of sports. Now, I come back. So,

1. The two properties season of club or team (P5138) & sports competition competed at (P5249) are OK to solve some of my previous questions.
2. I draw an entity-relations scheme from the properties descriptions and the present use. See image.
3. Right now we can't know all the sports season of a sports club (Q1539532) from the team item. In any case, hold the list as a multivalue property (IE P527?) would be too much large for some teams. Some idea ?
4. In the schema, there are 2 red relations. My opinion is that should be changed:
   1. The participant in (P1344) for a team points to the competitions (national league & international championships). In old teams (Barcelona, Manchester,..), it will have several hundreds entries. In addition, it is used unevenly. For instance, in Newcastle United F.C. (Q18716) it just contains the final match of Cup.
   2. The league or competition (P118) is not a permanent information, because the teams can change each season. It is not a problem if it is used to have the "current information". However, season by season information is in the sports season of league or competition (P3450) of each season (Q27020041)
5. Finally, I draw players as a participant (P710) of team season. It seems redundant with the member of sports team (P54) that this kind of item has. However, the P54 uses to have one entry by team or by national team with the whole period. The idea of P710 in the team season may hold the player results (match played, goals/points,..). What's your opinion about ?.

If you consider moving this discussion to a project space, just tell me where. Thank you so much for your help. Amadalvarez (talk) 17:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hey Amadalvarez, that’s a pretty neat scheme. Let me directly address your questions:

• on 3: The trend in Wikidata is not to have too many inverse property pairs; they come with too many complications and inconsistencies, but they barely add any value to the situation. To make it short: you need them if you want to retrieve the list of season items in a Wikipedia article about a club, via a template or module (key problem is that you cannot use SPARQL queries in that case); if this is not a scenario for you, you can go without the inverse relation just as indicated in your scheme. It is pretty easy to retrieve the list with the query service, and the items are properly structured without an inverse relation as well. Thus, if Wikipedia does not matter in this exact situation, do not think about P527.
• on 4.1: technically same as 3. Here, however, it appears to be more useful to have the inverse relation with P1344 as indicated in the scheme. One could add qualifiers such as ranking (P1352) and some others to the P1344 claim to indicate the final result within that season and retrieve this relatively easily from Wikipedia.
• on 4.2: I would treat P118 completely independently from the rest. As you indicated it works with qualifiers only anyways, and if you have proper relations to sports season items (and/or team season items), you can infer all the information much more precisely from these relations as the sports season items know their league via P3450. P118 is thus redundant, yet valuable for situations where we do not have sports season items or even team season items.
• on 5: once again this is technically similar as in 3. Whether P710 is the best pick here is debatable. In the past I considered to propose a "team member" property as a quasi-inverse property to P54, but I am not sure whether it adds enough value and whether there is enough need to have something like that. It would be valuable to retrieve squad members of a team directly from one item in Wikipedia. In cycling they use has part(s) (P527) for that purpose right now (see e.g. Sky 2018 (Q39059584)), but to my opinion this is not very nicely modeled.

There is one thing to mention here which we did not talk about yet: the difference between teams and clubs (example: FC Barcelona (Q3091261), the club vs. FC Barcelona (open age) men's association football team, FC Barcelona (Q7156), one of the club's many teams). Although for FC Barcelona the situation seems pretty okay, there are barely any team items and we often use club items instead, but this might not be the best choice in all situations. In the club item there might be information about different teams of the club. I'm afraid there is little we can do about this right now, but in the future there may be a desire to refine this problem.

If Xaris does not complain, we can stay here for the discussion any maybe move it to another place later if this seems appropriate. There is not much more audience to expect in such a detailed discussion anyways. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:43, 22 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi, here again. I see you and @Pasleim: created the first item of sport uniform. Is it the structure to use for this topic ?. I try to transform the template that build the image (football kit) that are almost commons in all WPs and is very difficult to handle this structure.

• Do you think we have to keep the same logic of image construction created 15 years ago when the limitations were others?
• The designs of uniforms are becoming more complex and require having their own image (especially for the "body"). If we need to have a specific image for the body, would it not be easier to have it for the entire kit, instead?
• In addition, under the wears (P3828) of the team item, we'll have directly the image without need 3 new items with a new structure to handle.
• for plain colors uniform, the images with common colors will be use in all teams with this combination.

I understant this require a discussion and, if you consider this is not the best place, can move it wherever you want. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 05:24, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

  Info There was Wikidata:Property proposal/Home kit (football) (not done) and subsequently Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2017/12#Football kit. —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:12, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Amadalvarez: as MisterSynergy said, there were discussions about sport uniform. Please read them and if you have a different idea, propose something to project chat. Xaris333 (talk) 07:24, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Xaris333, as you are editing in the field, you might have noticed Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Sports#A_"How?"-gap_?. In the meantime, I followed-up with Wikidata:Property proposal/Wikipedia glossary entry. In case you are interested.
--- Jura 17:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• What's your opinion on these? I think it could work for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glossary_of_association_football_terms as well.
  --- Jura 12:27, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

I haven't understood what is going on. :) What the problem is and the solution of it. Xaris333 (talk) 13:56, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I don't think we have many items about the different technical aspects of practicing a sport, such as those described in w:Glossary_of_association_football_terms. We can easily make items for many concepts in Wikidata, but it would be good to have some description of these concepts. The property proposal provides a way to link to the entries in the glossaries. (A few alternatives are discussed, some of the better ones unfortunately can't be implemented, e.g. import the glossary or use sitelinks).
  --- Jura 15:55, 15 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

• I rsponded to your comment there. Finally, what's your opinion about it? Do you support it or propose an alternate solution? Do you think the use case is one needing addressing?
  --- Jura 13:36, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi :) Since you speak Greek, could you have a look at User:Mr. Ibrahem/fix descriptions/el? I think the capitalisation or grammar is wrong for some of them, but nobody has checked them yet. - Nikki (talk) 11:50, 12 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

I have just corrected two capital letters. The other are correct. Xaris333 (talk) 16:32, 12 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. :) Are the descriptions in the "old description" column grammatically correct too? I didn't find any results for "στην Παναμάς" in elwiki. - Nikki (talk) 10:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

Done. Xaris333 (talk) 14:34, 15 November 2018 (UTC)Reply

unfortunately I had to undo your contributions. The reason can be seen in the Wikidata property example (P1855) given:

has list (P2354)

⟨ President of the French Republic (Q191954)      ⟩ has list (P2354)   ⟨ list of presidents of France (Q29580)      ⟩

is a list of (P360)

⟨ list of presidents of France (Q29580)      ⟩ is a list of (P360)   ⟨ human (Q5)      ⟩
position held (P39)   ⟨ President of the French Republic (Q191954)      ⟩

According to your attitude, the claim should read:

is a list of (P360)

⟨ list of presidents of France (Q29580)      ⟩ is a list of (P360)   ⟨ President of the French Republic (Q191954)      ⟩

this is unfortunately wrong, because then the items would have to be the president:

⟨ Emmanuel Macron (Q3052772)      ⟩ instance of (P31)   ⟨ President of the French Republic (Q191954)      ⟩

--Labant (talk) 18:08, 31 December 2018 (UTC)Reply

@Labant: Ok. Can you also add your examples to properties talk page for others users who may think as I do in the future? Xaris333 (talk) 00:29, 1 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

good idea, see Property talk:P2354#Using inverse constraint (Q21510855) and of cause: ευτυχισμένο το νέο έτος
--Labant (talk) 02:33, 1 January 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hello.

Can you translate and upload en:List of heads of state of Azerbaijan, en:Template:AzerbaijanPresidents and en:Template:Prime Ministers of Azerbaijan in Greek Wikipedia?

Yours sincerely, Karalainza (talk) 12:43, 26 December 2019 (UTC)Reply

Hi! I am not agree with this change. In Spain, for instance, candidates are members of a "closed list". That means that voters vote a list of candidates, they can not chose an especific candidate. For this reason, in this case (e. g. April 2019 Spanish Congress of Deputies election (Q61744692) or [2]) candidate (P726) are political parties. I think your change should be reverted because it can not be met in the whole elections. --Davidpar (talk) 15:52, 17 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Davidpar: Hi. Ok. But why not to use participant (P710) for parties? Anyway undo my edit and add your example to property's discussion. Xaris333 (talk) 00:56, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Hello! If you're going to add every Greek names, may I suggest that you change the writing system (P282) from Latin script (Q8229) to Greek alphabet (Q8216) to the various names you're using? That way it will be clear that Herodotos (Q91016546) is the original Ηρόδοτος and that Herodotos is a translitteration of it, and not the other way around. Cheers, --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 17:48, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Jahl de Vautban: Is Kyriakos (Q91013392) a good example? Xaris333 (talk) 17:57, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Xaris333: yes, but see Dionysios (Q61761291) for a better one (I don't think you need to be as complete); that way we can distinguish it from Dionysios (Q850139) and others. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 18:03, 18 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

• And please do not create duplicate names, like "Altay (family name)". One is enough. Best. --E4024 (talk) 01:46, 20 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Greetings,

I noticed your message in Wikidata project chat, which led me to look up your profile. Thank you for all the hard work!

I’m reaching out to you because I’m working on a research project about understanding what motivates editors like you to contribute to Wikidata. We’re also interested in learning about how you feel your contributions are being used outside of Wikidata. Since you are such an active community member, I thought you might also be interested in helping to build the broader community’s knowledge about Wikidata, and why it matters.

If you’re interested, let’s schedule a time to talk over Zoom, or whichever platform you prefer. You could leave a direct message or fill in a questionnaire. The conversation should take about 30 min.

Hope you have a great day,

Chuankaz (talk) 01:14, 9 June 2020 (UTC)Reply

Dear Xaris333,

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 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 at kholoudsaa@gmail.com or kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk 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 if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk)