[18:31:29] WDQS out here throwing shade: https://i.imghurr.com/e/AZywgC541A.png [19:08:50] Is there a good way in quickstatements to deal with only running a batch that has partial data? Like for instance, if I have the data for length for some items and height for some other items, is there a way to not add anything on entries that are blank? [19:47:17] Hi, I'm wondering a bit about Wikidata. My question is how liberally one can add items - I work at a university, there are a bit of pictures of various buildings across campus on Wikimedia Commons. Would it make sense to add items for the buildings, so that the images can be linked together via that item? Or would that just pollute Wikidata? There [19:47:17] are some buildings that are heritage buildings, and they are already on Wikidata for good reasons, but I'm thinking of just some university buildings that have a name, but aren't really remarkable in any way. [19:54:16] esg: sounds to me like valid items. it's pretty liberal [19:54:41] but also each category might have had its own discussion on some old talk page [19:54:58] back when properties related to buildings were suggested or so [19:55:19] "building" sounds not controversial to me [19:55:46] just create them and see if you get any comments.. one way to find out [19:56:18] it's definitly more inclusionist than Wikipedia [19:58:25] Personally I would say that structured data is both of more value and more compact than articles. therefore the threshold on what to include should be lower. [19:59:17] There are entire projects just on wooden houses: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Wooden_Houses [19:59:34] and public buildings sound like something I would like to see included. also avoiding the one-missing problem. As in if there are some already there, it adds value by having the other ones as well as it makes 'the set complete'. [19:59:35] I wouldn't worry about a campus building not being relevant [19:59:41] Thanks. I'll do that. A metaquestion: when adding items, how do you figure out what properties that make sense to include? In the case of buildings, do you just look up some famous building that you would assume has had a lot of work done on it, and look for inspiration there? Or are there better ways? [20:00:14] esg: start with "instance of" and then see what it suggest to you to add next [20:00:30] mutante: thanks. [20:00:34] it might have ideas what "instance of building" should have [20:00:39] like height or whatnot [20:00:53] also, go to an existing building item and see what they used [20:01:00] like Empire State Buiding or something popular [20:01:17] I would also consider what data you have, and what you would personally be interested in. [20:02:17] plus there might be a context. like a public building might have some aspects that a private one might not have. so maybe it is also good to look up objects of a similar class. [20:03:11] I would definitely use something that your group of buildings has in common, for example.. the things they have in common might be "part of: University X" [20:03:18] or "located in .." [20:03:42] GPS coordinates maybe for maps [20:04:31] Thanks for your help mutante and phschafft. [20:04:48] also linking with OSM (both directions!) is likely a good idea. plus OSM might have additional infos. so maybe worth a look anyway. :) [20:05:08] esg: you're most welcome. but keep in mind that this is all my personal opinion. [21:52:50] Am I blind or does this site not say anywhere what its data is licensed under while seemingly encouraging its use for... stuff? https://animaldiversity.org [21:53:42] There's the copyright notice at the bottom but that seems like just something wrapping the whole site due to university reasons or something if that makes sense. Like it's for the non-data stuff (e.g., logos, text) [21:57:31] if you mean the images, each one has a license field https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Animalia/pictures/collections/contributors/kevin_castle/juvagkistrodon1/ [21:58:04] it's described here https://animaldiversity.org/about/use_conditions/ [21:58:07] nah, was looking at the data [21:58:14] what the heck how'd you find that page [21:59:14] Darn, it's CC. Dataset copyright is so annoying. [21:59:39] it shows up in the right sidebar when you click on about us [21:59:44] very confusing [21:59:55] ahhhh [22:00:01] totally ignored that whole sidebar