Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Wikipedia in the news - rip and read.
User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
kołdry
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Tue Dec 01, 2015 7:16 pm

Mark Graham, Slate, 30 Nov 2015: Why Does Google Say Jerusalem Is the Capital of Israel?
As violence continues in Jerusalem, it is worth remembering what people on both sides are fighting about is not just land or access or rights, but also symbolism.

This ancient city has many contested meanings attached to it. Israelis call it Yerushalayim in Hebrew, while Palestinians refer to it as Al Quds. Both sides also see it as the capital of their respective states.

Pretty much nobody else sees it as the capital of any state. The city does not host one single foreign embassy. But if you type “Jerusalem” into Google, you’re likely to see an infobox that declares the city as the “capital of Israel.”
See also http://cii.oii.ox.ac.uk/2015/11/05/semantic-cities/

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:31 pm

This is the relevant bit:
The Wikimedia Foundation, for instance, has built a project called Wikidata that aims to turn a lot of the information from Wikipedia into linked, structured, data. When new statistics for the population of Nairobi, or any other city, are released, these can be edited into Wikidata and then propagated to many of the hundreds of versions of Wikipedia, instead of humans slowly, manually, editing each of those versions.

Google is trying to go a step further by building what they call a Knowledge Graph: a knowledge base that can gather information from Wikidata, Wikipedia, Freebase (another user-generated knowledge base), and a range of other sources. On releasing it in 2012, Google described the system as “a critical first step towards building the next generation of search, which taps into the collective intelligence of the web and understands the world a bit more like people do.”
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Tue Dec 01, 2015 8:48 pm

When do we blame the Jews?
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:51 am

Poetlister wrote:This is the relevant bit:
The Wikimedia Foundation, for instance, has built a project called Wikidata that aims to turn a lot of the information from Wikipedia into linked, structured, data. When new statistics for the population of Nairobi, or any other city, are released, these can be edited into Wikidata and then propagated to many of the hundreds of versions of Wikipedia, instead of humans slowly, manually, editing each of those versions.

Google is trying to go a step further by building what they call a Knowledge Graph: a knowledge base that can gather information from Wikidata, Wikipedia, Freebase (another user-generated knowledge base), and a range of other sources. On releasing it in 2012, Google described the system as “a critical first step towards building the next generation of search, which taps into the collective intelligence of the web and understands the world a bit more like people do.”
Well, there is a bit more that's relevant to the Wikidata effort. You have to bear in mind that Wikidata, unlike Wikipedia, has a CC0 licence, so no attribution is required and none will usually be given.

This means that internet users will not be able to see where the data they see in Google's Knowledge Graph or Bing's equivalent, Satori, actually come from. Data provenance becoming invisible is one of Graham's main points:
First, because of the ease of separating content from containers, the provenance of data is often obscured. Contexts are stripped away, and sources vanish into Google’s black box. For instance, most of the information in Google’s infoboxes on cities doesn’t tell us where the data is sourced from.

Second, because of the stripping away of context, it can be challenging to represent important nuance. In the case of Jerusalem, the issue is less that particular viewpoints about the city’s status as a capital are true or false, but rather that there can be multiple truths, all of which are hard to fold into a single database entry.

Finally, it’s difficult for users to challenge or contest representations that they deem to be unfair. Wikidata is, and Freebase used to be, built on user-generated content, but those users tend to be a highly specialized group—it’s not easy for lay users to participate in those platforms. And those platforms often aren’t the place in which their data is ultimately displayed, making it hard for some users to find them. Furthermore, because Google’s Knowledge Base is so opaque about where it pulls its information from, it is often unclear if those sites are even the origins of data in the first place.

Jerusalem is just one example among many in which knowledge bases are increasingly distancing (and in some case cutting off) debate about contested knowledges of places. Google searches conducted in London show a range of places in which Google’s databases pick sides in contested political situations. A search for “Londonderry”(the name used by unionists) in Northern Ireland is corrected to “Derry” (the name used by Irish nationalists). A search for Abu Musa lists it as an Iranian island in the Persian Gulf. This stands in stark contrast to an Arab view that the island belongs to the United Arab Emirates and that it is instead in the Arabian Gulf. In response to a search for Taipei, Google claims that the city is the capital of Taiwan (a country only officially recognized by 21 U.N. member states). Similarly, the search engine lists Northern Cyprus as a state, despite only one other country recognizing it as such. But it lists Kosovo as a territory, even though it’s formally recognized by 112 other countries.

My point is not that any of these positions are right or wrong. It is instead that the move to linked data and the semantic Web means that many decisions about how places are represented are increasingly being made by people and processes far from, and invisible to, people living under the digital shadows of those very representations. Contestations are centralized and turned into single data points that make it difficult for local citizens to have a significant voice in the co-construction of their own cities.
Google and Bing stand to reap immense profit from this effort, because the more answers they can deliver on their own pages, the less reason people have to click through to other sites. Note here that the development of Wikidata was kick-started by the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence, established in 2010 by Microsoft co-founder Paul G. Allen (50%), Google (25%) and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, established by Intel cofounder Gordon Moore and his wife (25%).

The potential problem is, if search engines and other platforms come to rely on Wikidata to the same degree people have become happy to plagiarise Wikipedia, then an edit-war won by anonymous accounts in an obscure corner of the internet (i.e. Wikidata) could, with one fell swoop, redefine truth for the entire internet.

It seems a remarkably vulnerable system, especially when you bear in mind that at present 80% of Wikidata is either unreferenced, or only referenced to some language version of Wikipedia.

Image

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:56 am

Note that the graphic posted above is slightly out of date. For current data see https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/stats.php

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Jim » Wed Dec 02, 2015 3:59 am

HRIP7 wrote:The potential problem is, if search engines and other platforms come to rely on Wikidata to the same degree people have become happy to plagiarise Wikipedia, then an edit-war won by anonymous accounts in an obscure corner of the internet (i.e. Wikidata) could, with one fell swoop, redefine truth for the entire internet.

It seems a remarkably vulnerable system, especially when you bear in mind that at present 80% of Wikidata is either unreferenced, or only referenced to some language version of Wikipedia.
Coincidentally, I just made a similar point here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7113&p=164924#p164912

I'm sure they must be aware of this potential weakness. Do you know of any discussions about addressing it, or any steps taken?

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:15 am

Jim wrote:
HRIP7 wrote:The potential problem is, if search engines and other platforms come to rely on Wikidata to the same degree people have become happy to plagiarise Wikipedia, then an edit-war won by anonymous accounts in an obscure corner of the internet (i.e. Wikidata) could, with one fell swoop, redefine truth for the entire internet.

It seems a remarkably vulnerable system, especially when you bear in mind that at present 80% of Wikidata is either unreferenced, or only referenced to some language version of Wikipedia.
Coincidentally, I just made a similar point here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7113&p=164924#p164912

I'm sure they must be aware of this potential weakness. Do you know of any discussions about addressing it, or any steps taken?
It's been on the Wikimedia mailing list for the past few days.

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Zoloft » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:30 am

This is horrifying, and exemplifies the old IT saying:

"Data is not truth."

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


Auggie
Regular
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat Mar 22, 2014 2:30 am

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Auggie » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:32 am

Story checks out.

But seriously, this is just Slate stirring the pot because they're Slate. Everyone knows the dispute. The government is based in Jerusalem, so it's the capital. Good enough.

User avatar
Johnny Au
Habitué
Posts: 2618
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 5:05 pm
Wikipedia User: Johnny Au
Actual Name: Johnny Au
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Johnny Au » Wed Dec 02, 2015 4:56 am

I bet that IBM Watson during its post-Jeopardy days is using Wikidata.

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Jim » Wed Dec 02, 2015 5:05 am

HRIP7 wrote:
Jim wrote:
HRIP7 wrote:The potential problem is, if search engines and other platforms come to rely on Wikidata to the same degree people have become happy to plagiarise Wikipedia, then an edit-war won by anonymous accounts in an obscure corner of the internet (i.e. Wikidata) could, with one fell swoop, redefine truth for the entire internet.

It seems a remarkably vulnerable system, especially when you bear in mind that at present 80% of Wikidata is either unreferenced, or only referenced to some language version of Wikipedia.
Coincidentally, I just made a similar point here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=7113&p=164924#p164912

I'm sure they must be aware of this potential weakness. Do you know of any discussions about addressing it, or any steps taken?
It's been on the Wikimedia mailing list for the past few days.
Thanks. You're asking lots of sensible questions there. Many of the answers are extremely concerning, to say the least.

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Wed Dec 02, 2015 5:39 am

HRIP7 wrote:It's been on the Wikimedia mailing list for the past few days.
I cringe that we are trusting the world's largest pile of open data to people who can't even respond to a mailing list thread without trimming the copy of the 16 messages posted prior to their response. That Gerard Meijssen guy is especially guilty of this, and he seems to be a really uppity tool, doesn't he? I think there's a correlation.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
Jim
Blue Meanie
Posts: 4955
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 10:33 am
Wikipedia User: Begoon
Wikipedia Review Member: Jim
Location: NSW

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Jim » Wed Dec 02, 2015 5:58 am

thekohser wrote: That Gerard Meijssen guy is especially guilty of this, and he seems to be a really uppity tool, doesn't he?
Andreas summarises Gerard M's approach pretty accurately with:
That's "eventualism". "Quality is terrible, but eventually it will be great, because ... we're all trying, and it's a wiki!"
To me that sounds more like religious faith or magical thinking than empirical science.
Not on-topic, but mildly amusing, in the middle of all of it, to see willm stick his head round the door with an irrelevant nothing, which was suitably ignored by all...

User avatar
Zoloft
Trustee
Posts: 13984
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 11:54 pm
Wikipedia User: Stanistani
Wikipedia Review Member: Zoloft
Actual Name: William Burns
Nom de plume: William Burns
Location: San Diego
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Zoloft » Wed Dec 02, 2015 7:21 am

I just read that whole thread. I think a huge scandal will someday erupt from Wikidata.

It might take five or six years.

Some information repository will be found to have been corrupted irretrievably. The information will have been replaced by crappy circularly-eroded Wikidata.

My avatar is sometimes indicative of my mood:
  • Actual mug ◄
  • Uncle Cornpone
  • Zoloft bouncy pill-thing


User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Wed Dec 02, 2015 12:33 pm

I think it's safe to say that the WMF are not losing any sleep about the accuracy of Wikidata. The people at Google really ought to know better, though.

What might worry the WMF is that people find what they want to know from the infobox so never get as far as looking at the Wikipedia article on which it is based. However, I don't think that the introduction of Wikidata makes much difference.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche


User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Mon Dec 07, 2015 3:54 am

Such controls would appear absent at Wikidata today, given that the site managed to tell the world, for five months in 2014, that Franklin D. Roosevelt was also known as "Adolf Hitler".

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Mon Dec 07, 2015 4:55 pm

Excellent research. Maybe a bit long for the general population to read. Prediction: will be pooh-poohed by the usual suspects, and mostly ignored by the Wikimedia Foundation. Remember, Andreas has been asked by Jimbo to never share any news with Jimbo that might be construed as negative toward the WMF. So, you can imagine how far Andreas' output will go toward notifying the Board of problems.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
AnimuAvatar
Critic
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 12:33 am

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by AnimuAvatar » Mon Dec 07, 2015 8:36 pm

The search engine partnerships are very concerning. It's well known how good Jimbo's Bright Red Line works to keep out those evil paid editors. Wikidata can easily be used to game not just Wikipedia, but also search engines.
>greentext
>on a Wikipedia criticism board
ishygddt

User avatar
AnimuAvatar
Critic
Posts: 219
Joined: Fri Oct 16, 2015 12:33 am

Unsourced, unreliable, and in your face forever: Wikidata

Unread post by AnimuAvatar » Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:02 pm

El Reg piece by Andreas Kolbe. Pretty good read.

---(edit)---

On an related note, I decided to stroll over to my search engine's news tab after posting and entered a query for "wikidata", and this popped up (the site is about SEO, presumably). In the section "Promote Your Content With Structured Data", it specifically uses Wikidata as an example, which does give credence to the Reg piece's bit about SEO manipulations.

---(edit #2)---
One more.
Sorry, Two more. Almost posted before I noticed the second one.
>greentext
>on a Wikipedia criticism board
ishygddt

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:18 pm

I've had a letter from WMF board member Denny, who founded Wikidata.

His long-time colleague Markus Krötzsch (it's pronounced something like Krertch) meanwhile asked me how I knew that Google planned to use Wikidata. I referred him to the website of his research group at Dresden Technical University, which said that the move from Freebase to Wikidata would "give Wikidata a prominent role as an inut for Google Knowledge Graph."

His reponse was to delete the bolded subclause from his research group's webpage. Spot the difference:

Before.
After.

He then asked me on the mailing list for any other sources claiming that Google will use Wikidata. (There are of course loads in search engine journals.)
Markus,

On Wed, Dec 9, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Markus Krötzsch <
markus at semantic-mediawiki.org> wrote:

What this page suggested was that that Freebase being shutdown means that
> Google will use Wikidata as a source. Note that the short intro text on the
> page did not say anything else about the subject, so I am surprised that
> this sufficed to convince you about the truth of that claim (it seems that
> other things I write with more support don't have this effect). Anyway, I
> am really sorry to hear that this quickly-written intro on the web has
> misled you. When I wrote this after Google had made their Freebase
> announcement last year, I really believed that this was the obvious
> implication. However, I was jumping to conclusions there without having
> first-hand evidence. I guess many people did the same. I fixed the
> statement now.
>
> To be clear: I am not saying that Google is not using Wikidata. I just
> don't know. However, if you make a little effort, there is a lot of
> evidence that Google is not using Wikidata as a source, even when it could.
> For example, population numbers are off, even in cases where they refer to
> the same source and time, and Google also shows many statements and sources
> that are not in Wikidata at all (and not even in Primary Sources).
>
> I still don't see any problem if Google would be using Wikidata, but
> that's another discussion.
>
> You mention "multiple sources".
> {{Which}}?
>
> Markus
>


For the record, here is what your university webpage used to say.[1]

---o0o---

Wikidata is the free, collaborative knowledge base behind Wikipedia and
many other Wikimedia projects. The Web site has been online since late 2012
and has since become an important data provider for Wikipedias in all
languages. Ten thousands of users have contributed statements about
millions of entities. In December 2013, Google announced that their own
collaboratively edited knowledge base, Freebase, is to be discontinued in
favour of Wikidata, which gives Wikidata a prominent role as an inut for
Google Knowledge Graph
. The research group Knowledge Systems is working in
close cooperation with the development team behind Wikidata, and provides,
e.g., the regular Wikidata RDF-Exports.

Development of Wikidata started in April 2012 with a team of developers
based on the Berlin offices of Wikimedia Germany. The project was heavily
inspired by Semantic MediaWiki and Markus Krötzsch has been acting as an
architectural advisor to the project since its inception.

---o0o---

You were well placed to know. The source I quoted in the op-ed was a
different one though, a snippet from an IRC chat[2].

---o0o---

16:33:55 <dennyvrandecic> also, Wikidata is not a free ticket into the
Knowledge Graph as Freebase was
16:34:07 <dennyvrandecic> it is just one source among many
16:34:27 <Lydia_WMDE> i think we really need to highlight this
16:34:30 <dennyvrandecic> benestar: actually I think that companies editing
Wikidata might be very beneficial
...

---o0o---

As a Google employee working on Wikidata, Denny can be presumed to know
what is and isn't a source for the Knowledge Graph.

Noam Shapiro in SEJ commented on the above IRC chat, saying:[3]

---o0o---

As one of the insiders notes above, “Wikidata is not a free ticket into the
Knowledge Graph as Freebase was.” It may very well be that the direct
relationship observed between Freebase and the Knowledge Graph will not be
replicated in Wikidata’s relationship with the Knowledge Graph. That being
said, it is still “one source among many,” and likely an important one.
After all, the Knowledge Graph thrives on the existence of structured data,
and - especially in the absence of Freebase - that is exactly what Wikidata
provides.

---o0o---

In May of this year, Tony Edward published an article in Search Engine Land
titled "Leveraging Wikidata to gain a Google Knowledge Graph result".[4]

---o0o---

Back in December 2014, Google anounced that it would be shutting down
Freebase <http://wiki.freebase.com/wiki/Main_Page>, a repository of
structured data that helps power Google’s Knowledge Graph, and working to
migrate all its data to Wikidata.

But how does Wikidata measure up? How can marketers leverage Wikidata to
help a business become an entity and gain a Knowledge Graph result? I have
personally had success
with gaining Knowledge Graph entries for my clients
and myself. Below, I have outlined the steps you can take to both gain and
enhance a Knowledge Graph result. [...]

---o0o---

Another article in Search Engine Land, by Barry Schwartz, reporting on the
closure of Freebase:[5]

---o0o---

This means that the data won’t be lost but instead will be transferred to
Wikimedia Foundation’s project Wikidata, which will have their own API to
so that developers who want to retrieve facts automatically, as they did
with Freebase, can still do so. This would include Google also pulling
data from Wikidata, to help power its Knowledge Graph.


---o0o---

There are more articles like that ... I actually only came across your
university web page after I'd written the op-ed.

One other point. Denny said today on the Kurier talk page in the German
Wikipedia that he stands by his opinion, quoted earlier in this thread,
that Wikidata, being under the CC0 licence, must not import data from
Share-Alike sources. It would be irresponsible to do so, he said.[6]

If Wikidata with its CC0 licence must not import data from Share-Alike
sources, then I don't understand why there are mass imports from Wikipedia,
which is a Share-Alike source.

[1] https://archive.is/O8h8K
[2] https://archive.is/LoQXX#selection-2479.0-2519.74
[3] http://www.searchenginejournal.com/wiki ... ph/130459/
[4] http://searchengineland.com/leveraging- ... lt-219706/
[5] http://searchengineland.com/google-clos ... aph-211103
[6] https://archive.is/bu9Io#selection-12005.450-12005.662
It should be noted that according to his Google employee profile, Denny Vrandecic "works at Google Knowledge Graph". Of course, that doesn't mean that Google has any interest in Wikidata. Far from it. Wikidata could be just a hobby for Denny that he likes to work on in his spare time. :)

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Thu Dec 10, 2015 3:29 pm

It's worth highlighting that there is a curious inconsistency about the interpretation of Wikidata's CC0 licence (no attribution, no ShareAlike). Apart from the fact that it obscures data provenance when re-users re-post the data without saying where they come from, I'm unsure whether imports from Wikipedia don't infringe contributors' rights.

https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/w ... 80265.html
According to Denny, Wikidata, under its CC0 licence, must not import data
from Share-Alike sources. He reconfirmed this yesterday when I asked him
whether he still stood by that.

In practice though we have Wikidata importing massive amounts of data from
Wikipedia, which was a Share-Alike source last time I looked. Isn't
Wikidata then infringing Wikipedia contributors' rights?

Why is it okay to import data from the CC BY-SA Wikipedia, but not from
European CC BY-SA population statistics?

There are inchoate and uncomfortable parallels to licence laundering here,
which I would hope is not something the WMF stands for. Could someone
please explain?

Anthonyhcole
Habitué
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:35 am
Wikipedia User: Anthonyhcole

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Anthonyhcole » Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:33 pm

I'm unimpressed by the patronising, insulting tone adopted by Denny, Gerard and Markus toward Andreas. Very similar to the tone WMF Technical used to adopt when dealing with criticism of their project. I hope Lydia at least reads what Andreas and Mark Graham said and addresses their main questions and criticisms.

User avatar
lilburne
Habitué
Posts: 4446
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:18 pm
Wikipedia User: Nastytroll
Wikipedia Review Member: Lilburne

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by lilburne » Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:57 pm

Anthonyhcole wrote:I'm unimpressed by the patronising, insulting tone adopted by Denny, Gerard and Markus toward Andreas. Very similar to the tone WMF Technical used to adopt when dealing with criticism of their project. I hope Lydia at least reads what Andreas and Mark Graham said and addresses their main questions and criticisms.
Its a great pity that most of the WMF crowd and hangers-on were ever allowed to escape the condom.
They have been inserting little memes in everybody's mind
So Google's shills can shriek there whenever they're inclined

User avatar
The Adversary
Habitué
Posts: 2466
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:01 am
Location: Troll country

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by The Adversary » Thu Dec 10, 2015 7:58 pm

Btw, if you google for "Edward Said", google will tell you with their little info-box that he was born in 1935, in "Jerusalem, Israel".


Google have had a zillion complaints about it, but has never changed it.

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Thu Dec 10, 2015 9:19 pm

Anthonyhcole wrote:I'm unimpressed by the patronising, insulting tone adopted by Denny, Gerard and Markus toward Andreas. Very similar to the tone WMF Technical used to adopt when dealing with criticism of their project. I hope Lydia at least reads what Andreas and Mark Graham said and addresses their main questions and criticisms.
Lydia is working on a response on-wiki.

It's surprisingly mellow; a bit like a pep talk, really. Let's all work together (for Google and Yandex :evilgrin: )!

She is trying to address the nuance and referencing issues, but at present says nothing about licensing and the obscuring of data provenance from the end user's point of view. I guess those topics are not up for debate.

In general, she talks a lot about great new software tools (which, to be fair, is what her organisation is working on).

Google makes about $200 million from advertising a day. I worked out once that if they gave one day's revenue to Wikimedia volunteers, as a thank-you for all that Knowledge Graph content that helps keep people on Google's pages, the volunteers would get about 7.5 cents per edit, based on the total number of edits ever made to Wikimedia projects (about 2.6 billion).

That's an indication of the value of free content for the likes of Google.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Thu Dec 10, 2015 10:27 pm

The Adversary wrote:Btw, if you google for "Edward Said", google will tell you with their little info-box that he was born in 1935, in "Jerusalem, Israel".

Google have had a zillion complaints about it, but has never changed it.
Outside Wikipedia, facts can't be determined by campaigns.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
The Adversary
Habitué
Posts: 2466
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:01 am
Location: Troll country

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by The Adversary » Thu Dec 10, 2015 10:42 pm

Poetlister wrote:
The Adversary wrote:Btw, if you google for "Edward Said", google will tell you with their little info-box that he was born in 1935, in "Jerusalem, Israel".

Google have had a zillion complaints about it, but has never changed it.
Outside Wikipedia, facts can't be determined by campaigns.
So it is a "fact" that Jerusalem was belonged to Israel in 1935? :XD

Thats a good one, as todays Israel did not exist prior to 1948.

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Thu Dec 10, 2015 10:52 pm

I might be misunderstanding Poetlister, but I think they were implying the flip side of the logical statement. Inside Wikipedia, "facts" can be determined by campaigns. Which presumably someone did to manipulate the Wikidata (or whatever) to show the nonsensical statement.

User avatar
The Adversary
Habitué
Posts: 2466
Joined: Fri Mar 16, 2012 9:01 am
Location: Troll country

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by The Adversary » Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:57 am

Kingsindian wrote:I might be misunderstanding Poetlister, but I think they were implying the flip side of the logical statement. Inside Wikipedia, "facts" can be determined by campaigns. Which presumably someone did to manipulate the Wikidata (or whatever) to show the nonsensical statement.
Eh, no, :sadbanana: ..from what I know of Poetlister, that was not a "nonsensical statement" to him.


(Gosh, I hope I´m wrong. Seriously hope I´m wrong)

Anthonyhcole
Habitué
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:35 am
Wikipedia User: Anthonyhcole

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Anthonyhcole » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:18 am

Kingsindian wrote:I might be misunderstanding Poetlister, but I think they were implying the flip side of the logical statement. Inside Wikipedia, "facts" can be determined by campaigns. Which presumably someone did to manipulate the Wikidata (or whatever) to show the nonsensical statement.
Regarding campaigns and Wikidata, in the wikimedia-l thread
Yaroslav wrote:The story with Jerusalem is very simple. I created the Wikidata item. The English description was "city in Israel". Then POV pushers came. Some of them wanted "city in Palestine", and others wanted "capital of Israel". Then one user, who later was elected to the board of Wikimedia Israel, canvassed a number of users in Hebrew Wikipedia. When there were too many POV pushers, I just unwatched the page, and it became "capital of Israel". Later on, someone managed to change it to smth neutral. That's it. There is nothing automatic here.
(Andreas then points out that the Wikidata Jerusalem page still says it's the capital of Israel.)

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:38 am

Anthonyhcole wrote:
Kingsindian wrote:I might be misunderstanding Poetlister, but I think they were implying the flip side of the logical statement. Inside Wikipedia, "facts" can be determined by campaigns. Which presumably someone did to manipulate the Wikidata (or whatever) to show the nonsensical statement.
Regarding campaigns and Wikidata, in the wikimedia-l thread
Yaroslav wrote:The story with Jerusalem is very simple. I created the Wikidata item. The English description was "city in Israel". Then POV pushers came. Some of them wanted "city in Palestine", and others wanted "capital of Israel". Then one user, who later was elected to the board of Wikimedia Israel, canvassed a number of users in Hebrew Wikipedia. When there were too many POV pushers, I just unwatched the page, and it became "capital of Israel". Later on, someone managed to change it to smth neutral. That's it. There is nothing automatic here.
(Andreas then points out that the Wikidata Jerusalem page still says it's the capital of Israel.)
That is indeed illuminating, but I was not directly talking about that. The point is that in 1935 there was no such thing as the state of Israel, so saying that Edward Said was born in 1935 in "Jerusalem, Israel" makes no sense, whichever side of the POV war one is on.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Fri Dec 11, 2015 12:54 pm

Quite right; it should say ירושלים, ארץ ישראל

Seriously, the problem is that you'd need dozens of entries for Jerusalem because it has been in so many countries and empires over the millennia, and ensure that the correct entry is picked up on each occasion. And its name has changed too. That's not unique to Jerusalem either; what of Istanbul and Leningrad, for example? There is the famous joke; a man was asked "where were you born, where were you educated, where do you live now, whewre would you like to live?" He replied "St. Petersburg, Petrograd, Leningrad, St. Petersburg." And of course that joke is now obsolete. There could well have been people who lived from around 1910 to 1995 who would have gone through the whole cycle.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

Anthonyhcole
Habitué
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:35 am
Wikipedia User: Anthonyhcole

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Anthonyhcole » Fri Dec 11, 2015 2:45 pm

HRIP7 wrote:Lydia is working on a response on-wiki.
It's been deleted or moved. (linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lydi ... ts_of_View[/link])

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:07 pm

Anthonyhcole wrote:
HRIP7 wrote:Lydia is working on a response on-wiki.
It's been deleted or moved. (linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lydi ... ts_of_View[/link])
The plot thickens (as it always does, when Wikimedians are presented with thoughtful criticism of their projects).
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Fri Dec 11, 2015 3:32 pm

There's nothing sinister about this deletion. The text has been moved to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia ... 2-09/Op-ed

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Fri Dec 11, 2015 4:21 pm

Lydia sez...
...the world is complicated and there is no single truth...
Sounds like they're setting us up for "it's okay if there are a ton of errors in Wikidata".

Oh yes, I see her personal motto now... "I help people make awesome happen."

This is doomed.
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
HRIP7
Denizen
Posts: 6953
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 2:05 am
Wikipedia User: Jayen466
Wikipedia Review Member: HRIP7
Actual Name: Andreas Kolbe
Location: UK

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by HRIP7 » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:08 am

From Denny:
On Thu, Dec 10, 2015 at 4:18 AM Andreas Kolbe <jayen466 at gmail.com> wrote:

> According to Denny, Wikidata, under its CC0 licence, must not import data
> from Share-Alike sources. He reconfirmed this yesterday when I asked him
> whether he still stood by that.
>
> In practice though we have Wikidata importing massive amounts of data from
> Wikipedia, which was a Share-Alike source last time I looked. Isn't
> Wikidata then infringing Wikipedia contributors' rights?
>
> Why is it okay to import data from the CC BY-SA Wikipedia, but not from
> European CC BY-SA population statistics?
>
>
Andreas, what I said was that Wikidata must not import data from a data
source licensed under Share-Alike date source.

The important thing that differentiates what I said from what you think I
said is "import data from a data source". Wikipedia is not a data source,
but text. Extracting facts or data from a text is a very different thing
than taking data from one place and put it in another place. There was no
database that contains the content of Wikipedia and that can be queried.
Indeed, that is the whole reason why Wikidata has been started in the first
place.

In fact, extracting facts or data from one text and then writing a
Wikipedia article is what Wikipedians do all the time, and the license of
the original text we read has no effect on the license of the output text.

So, there is no such thing as an import of data from Wikipedia, because
Wikipedia is not a database.

I have repeatedly pointed you to
http://simia.net/wiki/Free_data
and you yourself have repeatedly pointed to
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikileg ... ase_Rights
so I would assume that you would have by now read these and developed an
understanding of these issues. I am not a lawyer, and my understanding of
these issues is also lacking, but I wanted at least to point out that you
are misquoting me.

Please, would you mind to correct your misquoting of me in the places where
you did so, or at least point to this email for further context?
My reply:
Denny,


I quoted your statement verbatim and in full in the op-ed. Moreover, your
statement had a context. Alexrk2 had said,[1]



---o0o---

Read the above.. at least under European Union law databases are protected
by copyright. CC0 won't be compatible with other projects like OpenStreetMap
or Wikipedia. This means a CC0-WikiData won't be allowed to import
content from Wikipedia
, OpenStreetMap or any other share-alike data
source. The worst case IMO would be if WikiData extracts content out of
Wikipedia and release it as CC0
. Under EU law this would be illegal. As a
contributor in DE Wikipedia I would feel like being expropriated somehow.
This is not acceptable! --Alexrk2 (talk) 15:32, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

---o0o---



Note Alexrk2's three (3) specific references to Wikipedia.

Alexrk2 referred to imports of content from Wikipedia, and how it would
make her or him feel expropriated if WikiData extracted content out of
Wikipedia and released it under CC0.

You replied,



---o0o---

Alexrk2, it is true that Wikidata under CC0 would not be allowed to import
content from a Share-Alike data source. Wikidata does not plan to extract
content out of Wikipedia at all
. Wikidata will provide data that can be
reused in the Wikipedias. And a CC0 source can be used by a Share-Alike
project, be it either Wikipedia or OSM. But not the other way around. Do we
agree on this understanding? --Denny Vrandečić (WMDE) (talk) 12:39, 4 July
2012 (UTC)

---o0o---



Alexrk2 specifically mentioned Wikipedia. So did you in your reply,
assuring Alexrk2 that Wikidata did not in fact plan to extract content out
of Wikipedia at all. Does this lend itself to the interpretation that you
were talking only about databases, and not about Wikipedia?

Alexrk2 then replied to you,



---o0o---

@Denny Vrandečić: I agree. But I thought, the aim (or one aim) of
WikiData would be to draw all the data out of Wikipedia (infoboxes and
such things)
.

---o0o---



You did not respond to that post, or participate further in that section.
And these bot imports of Wikipedia infobox contents etc. have happened and
are ongoing. They have been mentioned in many discussions. There are
millions of statements in Wikidata that are cited to Wikipedia.

Just a few days ago, Jheald said on Project Chat,[2]



---o0o---

But my own view is that we should very definitely be trying, as urgently as
possible, to capture as much as possible of the huge amount of data in
infoboxes, templates, categorisations, etc on Wikipedia that is not yet in
Wikidata
-- and that (at least in most subject areas) calls to restrict to
only data from independent external sources are utterly utterly misguided,
and typically bear no relation to either what is desirable, what is
available, or what is still needed in order to utilise such sources
effectively. Jheald (talk) 23:49, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

---o0o---



It's not plausible to my understanding to argue that Wikipedia's templates,
infoboxes etc. are not "data sources" when contributors speak of capturing
"the huge amount of data" contained in them. Much of the existing content
of Wikidata consists of data extracted from Wikipedias.

If you feel I have misquoted you anywhere on-wiki, please point me to the
corresponding place (here or via my talk page in that project), and I will
do whatever is necessary.



[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Wi ... or_data.3F
[2]
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?ti ... =281906226
Does Denny's argument make sense to anyone here?

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:11 am

No. Is he saying that it is ok to extract text from Wikipedia with no constraint at all?

Anthonyhcole
Habitué
Posts: 1120
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:35 am
Wikipedia User: Anthonyhcole

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Anthonyhcole » Sat Dec 12, 2015 6:29 am

Nope. His reassurances in 2012 contradict what he says now. That is a deep philosophical shift in three years, a shift that I can't imagine happening subconsciously. Such a profound re-evaluation would be based on explainable reasons, wouldn't it? I'd be interested to know what prompted that change in view and, particularly, when it happened.

He's allowed to change his mind, of course, but pretending his views on this haven't evolved over time strikes me as very odd.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Sat Dec 12, 2015 7:31 pm

thekohser wrote:Lydia sez...
...the world is complicated and there is no single truth...
Sounds like they're setting us up for "it's okay if there are a ton of errors in Wikidata".

Oh yes, I see her personal motto now... "I help people make awesome happen."

This is doomed.
Very often, indeed, there is no universally accepted truth. One of the problems of Wikidata is that it seems to be insufficiently flexible.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Sat Dec 12, 2015 9:25 pm

Denny wrote:In fact, extracting facts or data from one text and then writing a
Wikipedia article is what Wikipedians do all the time, and the license of
the original text we read has no effect on the license of the output text.
IANAL, but this seems wrong or seriously incomplete to me. The licence of the original text does have an effect. You can't wholesale quote stuff from copyrighted stuff into Wikipedia. There are somewhat fuzzy but nevertheless real limits on how much you are allowed to quote. Denny seems to be using this incomplete statement to justify indiscriminate extraction of content from Wikipedia.
Just ask Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (T-C-L). I consider the case prosecuting him the worst kind of BURO behaviour, but that is beside the point.

User avatar
tarantino
Habitué
Posts: 4697
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by tarantino » Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:38 pm

thekohser wrote:
Anthonyhcole wrote:
HRIP7 wrote:Lydia is working on a response on-wiki.
It's been deleted or moved. (linkhttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lydi ... ts_of_View[/link])
The plot thickens (as it always does, when Wikimedians are presented with thoughtful criticism of their projects).
It was moved to Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-12-09/Op-ed.

User avatar
Kingsindian
Habitué
Posts: 2593
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 10:07 am
Wikipedia User: Kingsindian

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Kingsindian » Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:47 pm

Here is Lydia Pintscher's op-ed in the Signpost.

My thoughts:
a) The interplay between big search engines on Wikidata is not even mentioned. The words "Google", "Microsoft", "search engine" do not appear.
b) The section on multiple truths misses the point. If there are multiple truths, firstly, you need to give references so people can make up their mind. Secondly, there should not be false equivalences.

I checked one of the "multiple truths": the Jerusalem Wikidata page. The "country" section lists three entries. Two of them state that "East Jerusalem is in State of Palestine" and "West Jerusalem is in Israel": both are unreferenced. The referenced part, stating that both parts are in Israel actually lists the reference as Jerusalem Law (T-H-L).

For people unfamiliar with this, look at the Wikipedia article, which is not too bad. The main point is that Jerusalem Law is accepted nowhere except in Israel. In fact, the UN security council especially passed a resolution declaring it "null and void" (it was unanimous, but the United States politely abstained)

Ironically, the unreferenced parts are closer to the "truth" than the referenced part. Is this the sort of "multiple truths" Wikidata is supposed to facilitate?

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Sun Dec 13, 2015 10:52 am

Kingsindian wrote:"East Jerusalem is in State of Palestine"
That's clearly wrong. There is no State of Palestine and there never has been.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
lilburne
Habitué
Posts: 4446
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 6:18 pm
Wikipedia User: Nastytroll
Wikipedia Review Member: Lilburne

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by lilburne » Sun Dec 13, 2015 11:06 am

HRIP7 wrote:Mark Graham, Slate, 30 Nov 2015: Why Does Google Say Jerusalem Is the Capital of Israel?
Don't they both deserve each other?
They have been inserting little memes in everybody's mind
So Google's shills can shriek there whenever they're inclined

User avatar
tarantino
Habitué
Posts: 4697
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:19 pm

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by tarantino » Tue Dec 15, 2015 4:14 am

HRIP7 wrote:Mark Graham, Slate, 30 Nov 2015: Why Does Google Say Jerusalem Is the Capital of Israel?
I'm pretty sure Tehran and Jerusalem aren't sister cities, or are any of the others added to Wikidata by Yamaha5.

User avatar
Poetlister
Genius
Posts: 25599
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2013 8:15 pm
Nom de plume: Poetlister
Location: London, living in a similar way
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by Poetlister » Tue Dec 15, 2015 12:55 pm

tarantino wrote:
HRIP7 wrote:Mark Graham, Slate, 30 Nov 2015: Why Does Google Say Jerusalem Is the Capital of Israel?
I'm pretty sure Tehran and Jerusalem aren't sister cities, or are any of the others added to Wikidata by Yamaha5.
It's entirely possible that Tehran is nominally twinned with a non-existent purely Muslim Jerusalem (Al-Quds). In the same way, the London Borough of Barnet is twinned with the Greek Cypriot administration of Morphou rather than the Turkish Cypriot one that is currently running the town.
"The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly" - Nietzsche

User avatar
thekohser
Majordomo
Posts: 13406
Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 5:07 pm
Wikipedia User: Thekohser
Wikipedia Review Member: thekohser
Actual Name: Gregory Kohs
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by thekohser » Sun May 01, 2016 7:51 pm

An amusing example of all that is wrong with Wikipedia, Wikidata, and the Google Knowledge Graph is if you ask the simple celebrity question...

Who are Marc Anthony's wives?

Google Knowledge Graph says:
* Maria Von Ritchie Lopez (m. 2000-2004)
* Dayanara Torres (m. 2000-2004) (yes, Google would have you believe Anthony was a polygamist, and there is support for this apparent falsehood at IMDB)
* Jennifer Lopez (m. 2004-2014)
* Shannon De Lima (m. 2014)

Wikidata says:
* Dayanara Torres (9 May 2000 - 1 June 2004)
* Jennifer Lopez (5 June 2004 - 16 June 2014)

Wikipedia says:
* Debbie Rosado (1994) (Wikipedia says "was married or in a relationship")
* Dayanara Torres (9 May 2000 - October 2003) ("The rocky marriage came to an end in October 2003 with Dayanara filing for divorce in January 2004.")
* Jennifer Lopez (June 2004 - 16 June 2014)
* Shannon De Lima (11 November 2014)
"...making nonsensical connections and culminating in feigned surprise, since 2006..."

User avatar
eppur si muove
Habitué
Posts: 1978
Joined: Mon Mar 19, 2012 1:28 pm

Re: Wikidata and the Google Knowledge Graph

Unread post by eppur si muove » Mon May 02, 2016 2:06 am

And here I was thinking of answers along the lines of Octavia and Cleopatra.

Post Reply