[OSM-talk] Potential bot tasks relating to Wikidata errors

[Andy Mabbett]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2022 at 13:01, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
<talk at openstreetmap.org> wrote:

> 10 lip 2022, 16:14 od andy at pigsonthewing.org.uk:
>
>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2022 at 13:57, Mateusz Konieczny via talk
>> <talk at openstreetmap.org> wrote:
>
>>> Based on my own similar efforts: Wikidata has large scale issues
>>> with it classificaton and I would recommend manual tool-assisted changes.
>
>
>> Relevant example?
>
> small sample:
[...]

I explicitly asked for a /relevant/ example. None of those you have
given are relevant to the kinds of issues highlighted by the tool
under discussion, or the proposed fixes to them; nor do they preclude
fixes by bot.

> Overall, Wikidata classification system is not allowing to
> reliably answer questions such as "is this an event" or "is it a physical object"
> or "is it ship or group of humans" or "is it physical or non-physical entity".

Yes, it is.

[snip off-topic misrepresentation of Wikidata and its operation]

> I am against any bot editing OSM that would rely on this.
> Human verified edits based on this may be useful (and I am doing them!)

You give no reason why the two kinds of edits would give different
results. Again, examples relevant to the issue at hand are required,
if you wish to substantiate this position.

>>> Note that blind changing on all graves to to buried:wikidata would be
>>> wrong, as some graves are symbolic.
>
>
>> Then they are not graves.
>
> Maybe technically not, but "symbolic grave" appears to be in use.

Example?

-- 
Andy Mabbett
@pigsonthewing
http://pigsonthewing.org.uk