This is an archive of past discussions with User:Barbara (WVS). Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!
The 2018 Cure Award
In 2018 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.
Recently Jimmy Wales has made the point that computer home assistants take much of their data from Wikipedia, one way or another. So as well as getting Spotify to play Frosty the Snowman for you, they may be able to answer the question "is the Pope Catholic?" Possibly by asking for disambiguation (Coptic?).
Headlines about data breaches are now familiar, but the unannounced circulation of information raises other issues. One of those is Gresham's law stated as "bad data drives out good". Wikipedia and now Wikidata have been criticised on related grounds: what if their content, unattributed, is taken to have a higher standing than Wikimedians themselves would grant it? See Wikiquote on a misattribution to Bismarck for the usual quip about "law and sausages", and why one shouldn't watch them in the making.
Wikipedia has now turned 18, so should act like as adult, as well as being treated like one. The Web itself turns 30 some time between March and November this year, per Tim Berners-Lee. If the Knowledge Graph by Google exemplifies Heraclitean Web technology gaining authority, contra GIGO, Wikimedians still have a role in its critique. But not just with the teenage skill of detecting phoniness.
There is more to beating Gresham than exposing the factoid and urban myth, where WP:V does do a great job. Placeholders must be detected, and working with Wikidata is a good way to understand how having one statement as data can blind us to replacing it by a more accurate one. An example that is important to open access is that, firstly, the term itself needs considerable unpacking, because just being able to read material online is a poor relation of "open"; and secondly, trying to get Creative Commons license information into Wikidata shows up issues with classes of license (such as CC-BY) standing for the actual license in major repositories. Detailed investigation shows that "everything flows" exacerbates the issue. But Wikidata can solve it.
Administrators who are blocked have the technical ability to block the administrator who blocked their own account. A recent request for comment has amended the blocking policy to clarify that this ability should only be used in exceptional circumstances, such as account compromises, where there is a clear and immediate need.
A request for comment closed with a consensus in favor of deprecating The Sun as a permissible reference, and creating an edit filter to warn users who attempt to cite it.
Technical news
A discussion regarding an overhaul of the format and appearance of Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is in progress (permalink). The proposed changes will make it easier to create requests for those who are not using Twinkle. The workflow for administrators at this venue will largely be unchanged. Additionally, there are plans to archive requests similar to how it is done at WP:PERM, where historical records are kept so that prior requests can more easily be searched for.
A new IRC bot is available that allows you to subscribe to notifications when specific filters are tripped. This requires that your IRC handle be identified.
Late response (but you replied late to me anyway) to this: SashiRolls brought up in that same page, including a collapsible, some weird comparisons that he felt were worthy of being highlighted in a traffic report. I thought it fit more the Humor page. Re-read it and see if you agree. igordebraga≠01:37, 1 February 2019 (UTC)
Yes! Blurbish is the thing that makes you like a blurb. For example: He talks too much with his blurbs. OF COURSE it is a totally fictional word! In the article, you could could strike the word and add your own. That would be funny. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉02:02, 26 February 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.
We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Wikimedia New York City Team 08:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Art+Feminism’s sixth-annual MoMA Wikipedia Edit-a-thon will take place at the Dorothy and Lewis B. Cullman Education and Research Building, The Museum of Modern Art, New York, 4 West 54 Street, on Saturday, March 2, 2019 from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. People of all gender identities and expressions are encouraged to attend.
Systematic reviews are basic building blocks of evidence-based medicine, surveys of existing literature devoted typically to a definite question that aim to bring out scientific conclusions. They are principled in a way Wikipedians can appreciate, taking a critical view of their sources.
PRISMA flow diagram for a systematic review
Ben Goldacre in 2014 wrote (link below) "[...] : the "information architecture" of evidence based medicine (if you can tolerate such a phrase) is a chaotic, ad hoc, poorly connected ecosystem of legacy projects. In some respects the whole show is still run on paper, like it's the 19th century." Is there a Wikidatan in the house? Wouldn't some machine-readable content that is structured data help?
Most likely it would, but the arcana of systematic reviews and how they add value would still need formal handling. The PRISMA standard dates from 2009, with an update started in 2018. The concerns there include the corpus of papers used: how selected and filtered? Now that Wikidata has a 20.9 million item bibliography, one can at least pose questions. Each systematic review is a tagging opportunity for a bibliography. Could that tagging be reproduced by a query, in principle? Can it even be second-guessed by a query (i.e. simulated by a protocol which translates into SPARQL)? Homing in on the arcana, do the inclusion and filtering criteria translate into metadata? At some level they must, but are these metadata explicitly expressed in the articles themselves? The answer to that is surely "no" at this point, but can TDM find them? Again "no", right now. Automatic identification doesn't just happen.
Actually these questions lack originality. It should be noted though that WP:MEDRS, the reliable sources guideline used here for health information, hinges on the assumption that the usefully systematic reviews of biomedical literature can be recognised. Its nutshell summary, normally the part of a guideline with the highest density of common sense, allows literature reviews in general validity, but WP:MEDASSESS qualifies that indication heavily. Process wonkery about systematic reviews definitely has merit.
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72h for topic ban violation. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.
I blocked your account for 72h for a clear violation of your topic ban on sexuality broadly construed. It is pretty clear that the essay [Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2019-02-28/Humour], of which you are a coauthor, touches the topic of sexuality, and, in this sense, is a clear violation of a topic ban. I have chosen 72h since this account has previously been blocked for 24h. Note that this block in no way expresses my position on the publication of the essay, in particular, whether it should be deleted or not, or whether it should have been in the Signpost or not. It is merely about a topic ban violation.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I am blocking this account, because both of your account have been topic-banned, and you have signed the essay by this account. However, I would like to remark that it is definitely not a good idea to use this account for anything not directly related to WVS. It would have been more appropriate if you have used your volunteer account. In any case, I blocked the person, not an account, and using your volunteer account until the block expires would result in a block of that account as well.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
I've unblocked. From my unblock rationale: "Block was *far* too hasty; it is definitely not even clear that the essay was covered by this topic ban, either in words or in spirit. Discussion is in progress at ANI, no reason to short circuit that. *If* consensus for a block develops, obviously an admin can impose it without being accused of wheel warring.". --Floquenbeam (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Just for info-both of my accounts are 'volunteer' and I don't get paid for contributing to Wikipedia and all sister projects. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉17:37, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
Consistent with what I thought in the first place. I commend Gibbs' Rule No. 6 at this point. You did nothing wrong on this. Collect (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
You've got mail
Hello, Barbara (WVS). Please check your email; you've got mail! It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Fæ (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2019 (UTC)
About WVS
Hello. I have recently read your user page, and I have a difficulty to parse Barbara (WVS) ... has been a Visiting Scholar at the University of Pittsburgh since 2015. Should I read : "B. is a VS since 2015", or "B. has been a VS from 2015 until an unspecified date" ? I have tried to look at some pages at meta, but the weren't more specific. Thanks for your attention. Pldx1 (talk) 13:21, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
I will be glad to help you out. Earlier today I resigned from the position and decided that I will use my Bfpage or Barbara Page as my user name. I hope to get you this information sooner rather than later. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉00:30, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
This linkshould give you the information you have asked for. I am preparing a more formal apology as soon as I am able and then post it in all the places that I think others can see it. I am sorry and admit my poor judgement in publishing the essay. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉00:44, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Apology
I apologize for taking this to arbitration. I was not aware of all the facts and I am an inexperienced editor. I am now aware that conduct disputes are being resolved privately. Leugen9001 (Talk) (he/him) 20:30, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Howdy. Just letting ya know, you ain't suppose to answer statements of other editors within their own section. :) GoodDay (talk) 22:34, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
Following discussions at the Bureaucrats' noticeboard and Wikipedia talk:Administrators, an earlier change to the restoration of adminship policy was reverted. If requested, bureaucrats will not restore administrator permissions removed due to inactivity if there have been five years without a logged administrator action; this "five year rule" does not apply to permissions removed voluntarily.
Technical news
A new tool is available to help determine if a given IP is an open proxy/VPN/webhost/compromised host.
Arbitration
The Arbitration Committee announced two new OTRS queues. Both are meant solely for cases involving private information; other cases will continue to be handled at the appropriate venues (e.g., WP:COIN or WP:SPI).
paid-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private evidence related to abusive paid editing.
checkuser-en-wpwikipedia.org has been set up to receive private requests for CheckUser. For instance, requests for IP block exemption for anonymous proxy editing should now be sent to this address instead of the functionaries-en list.
Dear fellow Wikipedians and Wikimedians,
Without a doubt, my errors in publishing an essay in the most recent Signpost has divided us instead of bringing editors together. I made a serious mistake that offended many. I don't like doing that to people-I would rather make them laugh. I'm not sure if anyone laughed, but if they did they are like me and don't understand the serious issues behind the struggles of young, transgendered youth who, I hope never read the piece. I am sorry.
I am going to do something that I've not seen anywhere. I am asking for forgiveness for this.
It is not only transgendered youth who were affected by my mistake; look at how many of us got distracted and had to spend time dealing with this serious issue! Wouldn't it be great to see something good come out of this? I hope to educate myself more on these topics. (Does anyone know of a good online encyclopedia I can consult?) And thank you for reading the Signpost. Please contribute. For those who do contribute, thank you very much. I actually read the 'rag' and laugh more at the other articles than my own. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉21:25, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
Not a comment that has been like your past ones over the past year...so this means a lot to me. Imagine if more people said they were sorry. I sure am. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉15:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
Especially considering that she did not even write it but only edited it for length. She made a big mistake when she let her name appear in the article, and that's it. As for the "this is not humorous" issues, in my experience Wikipedia is a poor place to use any humor at all since you can be certain that a lot of editors are going to take you serious. But I forget that and still do it from time to time...to my regret. Live and learn. Doc James gave some of the best advise of all: Make fun of people above you in power and class, not of those seen as "below" you. Or something like that - he put it very well. Chin up Barbara, you did nothing to be ashamed of. Gandydancer (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
...my chin would be higher without my topic ban and my blocks and the critics. I am not sure about the advice since I don't see anyone lower than myself. Who is higher-ok Jimbo. I just missed meeting him in Sarasota. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉15:45, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
I meant my apology but how can this fiasco be summarized? How many people participated in the discussion? I got a block and no apology. I guess that doesn't mean anything either. Yawn. I guess it's cool that I won't be writing for the Signpost, right? Funny how that was never a thing-just a legend in my own mind. Blowing kisses to all the readers. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉01:36, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind note on the new page I created. I know it takes a little more effort to leave a note but it helps keep us motivated. I am just getting the North Carolina militia units organized and plan on adding more to them as time permits. I want to make sure they link to what is already in Wikipedia and sourcing is included. 19:45, 9 March 2019 (UTC) User talk:G._Moore
You civil war writers are amazing. I am from PA and loved visiting the battlefields and reinactments. Contact me again if you want a GA review or DYK nomination and review. Do you need any more articles reviewed? I don't mind being your personal reviewer and tell the other editors, too. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉19:49, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
How many user names do you have? There are those who will hunt you down and then block you if you have more than one user name. If you forgot a password and made a new one, not a problem. Here is how I can tell what needs to be reviewed for you: I open your editing history. At the bottom of the page there is a menu where I can chose "Articles created". I click on each article you have created and see if the article has been reviewed. Easy peasy. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉20:09, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Polynesian multihull terminology
Hi, Many thanks for your kind words on the new Polynesian multihull terminology page. In reality, I just cobbled together 3 existing pages on "ama", "aka" and "vaka" (thereafter turning those pages into redirects). The referencing may be a bit below par - that's not my forte, so perhaps others will assist! Looking at your talk page, we may be kindred spirits, albeit that I am a Zambian-born Englishman who feels more European than British, and who is despairing of the imminent Brexit. At least we don't have a lunatic trying to build a wall! Arrivisto (talk) 17:45, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for your thank you. I hope you keep pumping out articles like this. I'll go back and tidy up the references. We've had a wall for quite a while. There is even one between us and Canada. For some reason, it makes the news every time you-know-who itches his nose. Everyone needs the photos of the pre-Trump southern border walls/fences. You'll scratch your head and see, "Hmmm, looks like a fence/wall to me". Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉20:15, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
NPR Newsletter No.17
Hello Barbara (WVS),
News
The WMF has announced that Google Translate is now available for translating articles through the content translation tool. This may result in an increase in machine translated articles in the New Pages Feed. Feel free to use the {{rough translation}} tag and gently remind (or inform) editors that translations from other language Wikipedia pages still require attribution per WP:TFOLWP.
Discussions of interest
Two elements of CSD G6 have been split into their own criteria: R4 for redirects in the "File:" namespace with the same name as a file or redirect at Wikimedia Commons (Discussion), and G14 for disambiguation pages which disambiguate zero pages, or have "(disambiguation)" in the title but disambiguate a single page (Discussion).
NPR is not a binary keep / delete process. In many cases a redirect may be appropriate. The deletion policy and its associated guideline clearly emphasise that not all unsuitable articles must be deleted. Redirects are not contentious. See a classic example of the templates to use. More templates are listed at the R template index. Reviewers who are not aware, do please take this into consideration before PROD, CSD, and especially AfD because not even all admins are aware of such policies, and many NAC do not have a full knowledge of them.
NPP Tools Report
Superlinks – allows you to check an article's history, logs, talk page, NPP flowchart (on unpatrolled pages) and more without navigating away from the article itself.
copyvio-check – automatically checks the copyvio percentage of new pages in the background and displays this info with a link to the report in the 'info' panel of the Page curation toolbar.
Six Month Queue Data: Today – Low – 2393 High – 4828 Looking for inspiration? There are approximately 1000 female biographies to review.
Stay up to date with even more news – subscribe to The Signpost.
Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.
We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! This month, optional post-meetup drinks afterward at 9pm!--Wikimedia New York City Team 18:46, 19 March 2019 (UTC)
Organized by Asia Art Archive in America]and Miriam and Ira D. Wallach Division of Art, Prints and Photographs of the New York Public Library and in collaboration with Asia Art Archive in Hong Kong, the Art+Feminism: Wikipedia Edit-a-thon on Women in Art in Asia helps participants edit Wikipedia to create and improve articles about women artists and practitioners in and from Asia, including architects, designers, filmmakers, curators, and art historians. Books and research materials—as well as refreshments—will be provided.
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
FR30799386's User Scripts
Dear all. Recently, FR30799386 (talk) was blocked for sock puppetry. Among their projects were a number of user scripts that they left behind. I (DannyS712) have copied the scripts, and have taken over maintaining them. You currently import one or more of FR30799386's scripts, and I thought that you might want to import a maintained version. Links to each script are provided below.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:27, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for thinking of me. Yes, that is my signature piece. It was because of that piece that I started writing for the Signpost. I think the talk page is funny, too. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉22:59, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
DYK for Mud pie
On 1 April 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mud pie, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a mud pie is not meant to be eaten and may contain pebbles as an ingredient? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mud pie. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Mud pie), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.
(talk page stalker)Bri, the DYK credit was given last year, when the squirrel hook first ran. It was resurrected this year to replace a problematic lead hook in the second April Fools set that went up at 12:00 UTC. BlueMoonset (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
DYK that the squirrel article received 11,620 pageviews on 4/1/2018 and it has received a total of 28,000 pageviews in all? I recently wrote an article about a lady who was a bubble-gum-bubble-blowing champion and was arrested for it. It didn't make into the April Fool's DYK list, though. I seem to get reviewers who aren't laughing. Thanks for letting me boast. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉23:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
You are invited to join the Wikimedia NYC community for our monthly "WikiWednesday" evening salon (7-9pm) and knowledge-sharing workshop at Metropolitan New York Library Council in Midtown Manhattan. Is there a project you'd like to share? A question you'd like answered? A Wiki* skill you'd like to learn? Let us know by adding it to the agenda.
We will also follow up on plans for recent and upcoming edit-a-thons, museum and library projects, education initiatives, and other outreach activities.
(note this month we will be meeting in Midtown Manhattan, not at Babycastles)
We especially encourage folks to add your 5-minute lightning talks to our roster, and otherwise join in the "open space" experience! Newcomers are very welcome! Bring your friends and colleagues! --Wikimedia New York City Team 21:05, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Translat-a-thon NYC 2019 @ LaGuardia Community College is hosting the second annual Wikipedia Translatathon! At this event on Thursday evening and during the day Friday this week, anyone from the public is invited to LaGuardia to join students, professors, and CUNY faculty in translating Wikipedia articles among any languages which attendees understand. Themes for this event include public health and the history of New York City.
New York City has a large immigrant population and great diversity of speakers of various languages. Among all schools in New York City, LaGuardia has the highest percentage of immigrant students, the highest percentage of students who speak a language other than English as their first language, and the greatest representation of language diversity. It is a strength of LaGuardia that it can present "Wikipedia translatathons", which are Wikipedia translation events.
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for NYC-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)
Many of my edits were deleted - 2,402. See here. When I click on the stat "deleted edits", I am directed to this page where I don't have the permissions needed to look into this. If you want to email the results to me, that would be fine. Best Regards, Barbara ✐✉18:55, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
The Wikimedia Foundation's Community health initiative plans to design and build a new user reporting system to make it easier for people experiencing harassment and other forms of abuse to provide accurate information to the appropriate channel for action to be taken. Please see meta:Community health initiative/User reporting system consultation 2019 to provide your input on this idea.
Two more administrator accounts were compromised. Evidence has shown that these attacks, like previous incidents, were due to reusing a password that was used on another website that suffered a data breach. If you have ever used your current password on any other website, you should change it immediately. All admins are strongly encouraged to enable two-factor authentication, please consider doing so. Please always practice appropriate account security by ensuring your password is secure and unique to Wikimedia.
As a reminder, according to WP:NOQUORUM, administrators looking to close or relist an AfD should evaluate a nomination that has received few or no comments as if it were a proposed deletion (PROD) prior to determining whether it should be relisted.
Talk of cloud computing draws a veil over hardware, but also, less obviously but more importantly, obscures such intellectual distinction as matters most in its use. Wikidata begins to allow tasks to be undertaken that were out of easy reach. The facility should not be taken as the real point.
Coming in from another angle, the "executive decision" is more glamorous; but the "administrative decision" should be admired for its command of facts. Think of the attitudes ad fontes, so prevalent here on Wikipedia as "can you give me a source for that?", and being prepared to deal with complicated analyses into specified subcases. Impatience expressed as a disdain for such pedantry is quite understandable, but neither dirty data nor false dichotomies are at all good to have around.
Issue 13 and Issue 21, respectively on WP:MEDRS and systematic reviews, talk about biomedical literature and computing tasks that would be of higher quality if they could be made more "administrative". For example, it is desirable that the decisions involved be consistent, explicable, and reproducible by non-experts from specified inputs.
What gets clouded out is not impossibly hard to understand. You do need to put together the insights of functional programming, which is a doctrinaire and purist but clearcut approach, with the practicality of office software. Loopless computation can be conceived of as a seamless forward march of spreadsheet columns, each determined by the content of previous ones. Very well: to do a backward audit, when now we are talking about Wikidata, we rely on integrity of data and its scrupulous sourcing: and clearcut case analyses. The MEDRS example forces attention on purge attempts such as Beall's list.
XTools Admin Stats, a tool to list admins by administrative actions, has been revamped to support more types of log entries such as AbuseFilter changes. Two additional tools have been integrated into it as well: Steward Stats and Patroller Stats.
Arbitration
In response to the continuing compromise of administrator accounts, the Arbitration Committee passed a motion amending the procedures for return of permissions (diff). In such cases, the committee will review all available information to determine whether the administrator followed "appropriate personal security practices" before restoring permissions; administrators found failing to have adequately done so will not be resysopped automatically. All current administrators have been notified of this change.
Following a formal ratification process, the arbitration policy has been amended (diff). Specifically, the two-thirds majority required to remove or suspend an arbitrator now excludes (1) the arbitrator facing suspension or removal, and (2) any inactive arbitrator who does not respond within 30 days to attempts to solicit their feedback on the resolution through all known methods of communication.
Two dozen issues, and this may be the last, a valediction at least for a while.
It's time for a two-year summation of ContentMine projects involving TDM (text and data mining).
Wikidata and now Structured Data on Commons represent the overlap of Wikimedia with the Semantic Web. This common ground is helping to convert an engineering concept into a movement. TDM generally has little enough connection with the Semantic Web, being instead in the orbit of machine learning which is no respecter of the semantic. Don't break a taboo by asking bots "and what do you mean by that?"
The ScienceSource project innovates in TDM, by storing its text mining results in a Wikibase site. It strives for compliance of its fact mining, on drug treatments of diseases, with an automated form of the relevant Wikipedia referencing guideline MEDRS. Where WikiFactMine set up an API for reuse of its results, ScienceSource has a SPARQL query service, with look-and-feel exactly that of Wikidata's at query.wikidata.org. It also now has a custom front end, and its content can be federated, in other words used in data mashups: it is one of over 50 sites that can federate with Wikidata.
The human factor comes to bear through the front end, which combines a link to the HTML version of a paper, text mining results organised in drug and disease columns, and a SPARQL display of nearby drug and disease terms. Much software to develop and explain, so little time! Rather than telling the tale, Facto Post brings you ScienceSource links, starting from the how-to video, lower right.
Please be aware that this is a research project in development, and may have outages for planned maintenance. That will apply for the next few days, at least. The ScienceSource wiki main page carries information on practical matters. Email is not enabled on the wiki: use site mail here to Charles Matthews in case of difficulty, or if you need support. Further explanatory videos will be put into commons:Category:ContentMine videos.
