query-311d77e23b3e88f8bbc2cd45f8bd57e6
Lexeme's should have the ability to have Wiki-links 15:48, 30 June 2018 (UTC)❫ ✉ ❪ChristianKl doublication. (Q15978631)Homo sapiens /(Q5)human In the current version the lexeme feature doesn't allow interwikilinks to be added to lexemes. Given that there are some Wikipedia articles that are about individual words I think the ability to create those links is valuable. Otherwise, whenever Wikipedia has an article about a concept and another article about a name for the concept we have a mess in our ontology. With the ability to add sitelinks to interwikilinks we can also clean up problems like the : "only item about a word of a specific language"? Hm. How about these 173 (and probably many more on deeper levels):VIGNERON@ 23:15, 1 July 2018 (UTC)) talk (VIGNERON is an exception (in fact, AFAIK, it's the only item about a word of a specific language), we shouldn't built the entire structures around one unique case, but true the system should take exceptions into account. Cdlt, (Q7993606)while ). We may need to improve this. What I don't get is how having sitelinks on lexemes would help. (P171)parent taxon and then through (Q15978631)Homo sapiens (P460)said to be the same as (Q5)human (through (Q7380)primate is a (Q937)Albert Einstein ) can be problematic. When we do queries, we had to do circumvolutions to get correct results (which can be a bit speciesist BTW), but it's not undoable and it's possible to infer that (Q16521)taxon has for P31 a (Q492389)Bear JJ1 (or any individual living being, eg. (Q937)Albert Einstein Oh, now I understand you better and I totally agree that the P31 of 18:18, 1 July 2018 (UTC)❫ ✉ ❪ChristianKl in the Q-namespace then it's hard to explain why similar items for other words shouldn't be notable in the Q-namespace. (Q7993606)while If we have items like on Wikipedia that are clearly about individual words. It makes sense to link articles like that directly to lexemes. The relationship between house@enwiki and house@wikitionary is not the same relationship as the relationship between while@enwiki and while@enwikitionary.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WhileFor the human/homo sapiens case this might seem like a hack. However there are articles like of something that can have properties like a heart rate. feels lie(P31)instance of feels like something that should be (Q937)Albert Einstein To me a name, feels like it violates ontological assumptions.(P31)instance of of something that's (P31)instance of is (Q937)Albert Einstein . Saying that (Q502895)common name (P31)instance of is (Q5)human If we only link one of the two to Wikidata, we say that Every Wikipedia article is supposed to be linked to exactly one object in Wikidata. This is necessary because it's the way Wikidata provides sitelinks for Wikipedia. I would like to keep that guarantee but say that sometimes that link is to an object in the Q-namespace and sometimes it's to an object in the L-namespace. .(Q5)human to the lexeme "Homo sapiens"@en but to link it to en:Homo sapiensI didn't advocate linking 17:22, 1 July 2018 (UTC)) talk (VIGNERON. Could you explain a bit, please? Cdlt, en:Human to (Q5)human and (Q5)human to the lexeme "human"@en when there will probably be a indirect link: lexeme "human-S1"@en to en:Human to the lexeme "Homo sapiens"@en will solve the situation. Plus, If we really want links on Lexemes it should be to wiktionaries, not to Wikipedias (we already have items for that). More importantly, I fail to see why you want to directly link en:Homo sapiens to the lexeme "human"@en and en:Human: First "human" and "homo sapiens" are not exactly the same concept (if they were, we would only have one items). But, yes, you're right, they are very close and not well managed ontology-wise right now. But I'm don't understand how linking ChristianKl@ 11:23, 1 July 2018 (UTC)❫ ✉ ❪ChristianKl. It leads to further questions whether the taxon in which a "human bone" exists is "human" or "homo sapiens". It's messy. The ability to link lexemes with items doesn't help at all with the problem. (Q7380)primate is a (Q937)Albert Einstein and as a result it's not possible to infer that (Q15978631)Homo sapiens of (P31)instance of isn't (Q937)Albert Einstein The problem is that both "human" and "homo sapiens" refer to the same concept. Currently, that means 16:07, 30 June 2018 (UTC)) talk (VIGNERON is not a word, it a concept that can be represented by thousands of words) Cdlt, (Q15978631)Homo sapiens : items can have sitelink and soon it will be possible to link lexemes and items, wouldn't it solve the problem ? (and more elegantly I think, ChristianKl@
Use at
- https://query.wikidata.org/sparql
PREFIX wikibase: <http://wikiba.se/ontology#>
PREFIX wdt: <http://www.wikidata.org/prop/direct/>
PREFIX wd: <http://www.wikidata.org/entity/>
PREFIX bd: <http://www.bigdata.com/rdf#>
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?lang ?langLabel
WHERE
{
?item wdt:P407 ?lang.
{ ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q8171. } UNION
{ ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279 wd:Q8171. } UNION
{ ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279/wdt:P279 wd:Q8171. }
SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en,ru,de,fr". }
}