Wikidata talk:Scholia

About this page

I was interested in Scholia so I made this as a wiki documentation page to introduce the project and showcase publications. Blue Rasberry (talk) 22:40, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Scholia logo proposal

proposed logo

@Theklan: I see that a couple of weeks ago you shared this logo. It is cool! Have you presented it or discussed it anywhere published on wiki? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: I make it for the Hackathon and presented it to @Daniel Mietchen: -Theklan (talk) 18:40, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Yep. Check out the pages using it on the Basque Wikipedia — I hope this will find broader uptake soon, and in the meantime, we're working on making Scholia better still. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:58, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Theklan, Bluerasberry: PS: I still think it would be useful to have the file as a SVG, so if you could arrange that, this would be great. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:59, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Daniel Mietchen: I couldn't save a good svg file, I don't know why. Maybe there is someone who can rasterize this. -Theklan (talk) 19:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Theklan: If you are taking requests, can you also make a version with just the image and no text? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:04, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: That's the easy part. -Theklan (talk) 19:25, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Subjects in Scholia

Hi, I think this is a really cool tool. I'm interested in how my contributions could help improve Scholia. How are the subject pages created? The one for ethics was really interesting, but so far there isn't anything on Mormon studies. Is it as simple as adding a content category to related journals on Wikidata? Rachel Helps (BYU) (talk) 21:00, 13 August 2018 (UTC)

Check out this paper from a doughnutologist - Characterizing the cellular structure of air and deep fat fried doughnut using image analysis techniques (Q56035789). It has "instance of - scholarly article" and "main subject - food science". Therefore it contributes to a Scholia profile of "food science".

Building out this profile could mean applying Mormon studies (Q3850041) to scholarly articles indexed in Wikidata. Something I do not know is how to include all papers from a journal like The FARMS review (Q15710054). Scholia right now does not have a way to recognize that every article in a particular journal can also have a main subject. We could tag everything in that journal with main subject Mormon studies, or it could be a direction of technological development to somehow check for supercategories at a higher level.

To start, you could add main subject tags to 5+ articles then check the Scholia profile. I can help with any part of this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:13, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

very useful

Blue Rasberry just wanted to leave a note, this is very useful (have added it in a link to my toolbar)awesome!--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:45, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Preliminary white paper profiling Scholia

• ARL, Wikimedia, and Linked Open Data: Draft White Paper Open for Comments through November 30

The paper is not published yet but I thought to hold this here pending its release. Blue Rasberry (talk) 21:15, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

How exactly can you link a university to a publication using Scholia?

I'm struggling to understand how this query works. From what I read in the SPARQL query, you search for authors linked to either Technical University of Denmark (Q1269766) or University College London (Q193196). If an author is employed by multiple organizations, does that mean that any publication is linked to multiple universities? For example, there Jens Nielsen (Q16733372), employed by both Technical University of Denmark (Q1269766) and Chalmers University of Technology (Q836805). He published this work, A gRNA-tRNA array for CRISPR-Cas9 based rapid multiplexed genome editing in Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Q64018790). Is this article going to be linked to both universities? Thanks!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tetizeraz (talk • contribs) at 17:38, 16 June 2019‎ (UTC).

Tetizeraz Yes, you identified a contemporary challenge in university profiling which exists in both Scholia and competing products.

The problem is identifying which papers come from which university when the information we have is author and their institutional affiliations.

The answer that most products give is to return the full bibliographies of all researchers currently employed by an institution. Obviously this is wrong - what users typically want from a query is which papers specifically came from the authors only at the time when they were at a certain university.

The path to the correct answer is noting a date range of affiliation.

Are you asking for help about this specific query, or are you trying to devise a query to give you certain data? Thanks. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:31, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Actor as scientist

We had a complaint about Scholia! Someone did a Scholia query on an actor. This returned a report that the person published scientific papers, so the assumption was that Scholia must have confused an identity. The reality was that Scholia identified someone who was both actor and chemist!

• en:special:diff/907389623#"Added_a_Scholia_link"
• d:Q37876
• Scholia profile

Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:38, 22 July 2019 (UTC)

Feedback from WikiProject Africa

• Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Africa#Template:Scholia_&_automatic_indexing

Thanks for speaking out, @Walkuraxx:. The short answer to all your questions about Scholia is that right now, everything is experimental. Use common sense. There is a Scholia team but we are developing this as a peer-to-peer project which anyone can join and not as a top-down planned effort where someone has answers. If you want to share profiles with this tool then do so in a few places and try to get feedback from others. If anyone has questions then you can refer them here.

Yes, you have an awesome pilot case - publications at intersection with Africa (as a publishing region, as a topic, as a research location) are very welcome because we already know that competing products do less to curate and enrich this information. Thanks for your interest. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

Linking with SourceMD and inclusion in WikiJournals

One of the limitations in scholia has so far so far been that many researchers' wikidata profiles are gappy. Would it be possible to link SourceMD to this so that when a query is made on scholia, it first pulls data from ORCID on the doi or orcid?

I'd love to link authors in WikiJournals who quote an ORCID to their scholia profiles, bit want to avoid people getting confused by missing data. Any ideas? T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 03:52, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
@Fnielsen, Magnus Manske, Daniel Mietchen, Bluerasberry:

Circling way back to this, over at the WikiJournals we've tried to implement a bit of a workflow to fill in missing elements and putting together a grant app to test filling in even more and eventually be able to generate interesting statistics (like time-to-decision for different journals). I'd be interested in ideas of what else could be useful to include (e.g. author disambig of author's other publications). T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 05:55, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Posters in WikiData

Hi all,

I've been thinking of all of the things I'd like to add to the Scholia author aspect to make it more like (and then far beyond) a resume/CV. I was looking around to see if there was a class on Wikidata for scientific posters and didn't find anything. Should I make one? Or is this the type of thing the user groups on Wikidata should discuss first?

-Charlie

@Cthoyt: Hi Charlie, we have things like WikiCite and Scholia - a Linked Open Data approach to exploring the scholarly literature and related resources (Q58484849), which is instance of (P31): conference poster (Q54670950) and can maybe serve as a starting point for things we still need. For anything that requires work on Scholia, please open a ticket at https://github.com/fnielsen/scholia/issues. PS: If posting on talk pages here, please sign your post by ending it with four tildes (i.e.~~~~), which will be converted to your signature upon saving the page (you can test that in preview). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 23:51, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Named archives and libraries. Bibliography

Hello how can I make data from Named archives and libraries. Bibliography usable from Scholia? What's missing in the items?Alessandra Boccone (talk) 09:29, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

Additional parameter to display: open access

It would a be a particularly good feature for Scholia to indicate what percentage of an author's publications have been published in OA journals or as OA in a hybrid journal (possibly split by first/middle/last author). T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 00:51, 11 November 2019 (UTC)

What should the default Scholia queries on COVID 19 be?

See discussion at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_COVID-19

Wikidata:Bibliography of Wikidata

Hi All,

I've created a Wikidata:Bibliography of Wikidata page, feel free to expand if interested.

Best, --Adam Harangozó (talk) 13:07, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

French translation

I've started the translation of the documentation that you can find here. Your help is welcomed.Full Stack Dev & CS Teacher (talk) 15:43, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

English Wikipedia user manually compiles research list

• en:User:RandomCanadian/The origins of COVID-19: literature review

@RandomCanadian: thanks for making this list.

I am posting this list here as an example of the kind of research an English Wikipedia editor might try to compile. Scholia can replicate some of these functions, so I wanted to share this example so that we can discuss what kind of features Scholia ought to have. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:45, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Adding altmetrics and other proposals

To everyone interested in open science here, I have several questions and proposals for Scholia:

1. Could you please add the Altmetric tile to pages about studies?
2. Once this is added, I'd suggest developing your/our own altmetrics which could be made configurable by the user to give different weights to things like number of mentions on Twitter, selected assessment of societal importance of topic/goal, number of news outlets features in general, or number of features in large/reputable news outlets.
   1. Making it transparently configurable by the user would also show how the score was calculated. Also Altmetric is missing a lot of data/mentions such as sometimes when a paper is linked via it's DOI rather the plain URL etc.
   2. The scores or parts of it (like number of news articles about it) could also be added to tables that show many studies such as the pages about topics.
   3. This may require creating new crawlers of social media sites (or relevant data-forwarding of existing crawlers and indexing). It doesn't necessarily need to crawl the live-websites but could use data-dumps and iterative dumps. It don't know how Altmetric gets all its data.
3. How are references / studies getting added to Wikidata (and thereby Scholia)? Are there already crawlers and so on that do (or could do) this on a large scale (including for papers published recently)?
   1. It would be very useful if one would only need to add a DOI to cite a study on Wikipedia and instead of using refill to fill in the manual reference data, it would simply fetch the data from Wikidata via this DOI (but not every time the Wikipedia page is loaded of course).
4. Could you make all sections be collapsed so that it's not a gigantic nonoverseeable page but a quick-loading small clear one (and with no information-overload and better to browse, especially when browsing many pages)?
5. The paragraphs of where the reference is included in Wikipedia articles could be directly included (it could be shown with the click of a button) in the page module about Wikipedia mentions.
   1. The size of text to include for sufficient context could be improved upon later – at first one could include simply the entire paragraph or ≤3 sentences overall.
6. It seems like the different modules are loaded each time a user opens a page. This may be wrong, but if it's the case it should probably be configured so that it only refreshes the data (different from loading the data) e.g. at most once a day after the first month of publication has passed (e.g. a few times per day during the first month) and keeps the data cached.
7. Is this page the right place to propose and discuss such proposals? If there's a more well-suited page, please link it here.
   1. If this large (and probably still incomplete) list of proposals clutters the talk page a bit, it could be wrapped in a collapsed template.

---

---

Further ideas which are probably too advanced for the current state of Scholia but could be worked on at a later point:

1. It may be possible to identify and link to 'follow-up papers' (e.g. same highly-specific topic) and to reviews (in specific) which reference the paper
2. Please add metadata about study disciplines (it can be multiple). This would allow for pages that show trends of disciplines (like number of papers or growing topics) and overview pages (which could include/make use of altmetrics). Often the study's scientific fields are at the paper's page (like tags for the Nature journal).
3. Showing comments and responses from peers and other scientists and researchers like via a number of and links to comments of sciencemediacentre.org, pubpeer, retractionwatch, reddit (including reddit posts of news articles about the study not just of the study itself) & e.g. nondownvoted phys.org comments. It may be useful to somehow scan for criticism/concerns & open questions (not mere discussion or expressions of approval/support/appreciation etc) and constructive criticism/valuable questions in specific if possible.
   1. This would also make it easier to see when a paper('s findings) is disputed and highly controversial and identify issues etc.
4. Maybe something like a reproducibility-score/metadata for papers could be added.
   1. Something like this could somehow show studies that subsequently or earlier confirmed/reproduced, questioned or nonconfirmed a study's findings and any other related / followup studies as well as how reproducible the results were made by the authors. There are many ways such data could be provided: e.g. from the journals, via users of your website, via some website dedicated to that, etc.
   2. Maybe you could add scite.ai tiles (See 'Citation Statements' at the top of some studies that feature this, it's currently in beta; see this)

I have also proposed some of these things to ScienceOpen (a very useful site in general and for e.g. 2021 in science) and am also using Google Alerts. Maybe they could be integrated (like adding a 'subscribe to this author via Google Alerts') or be collaborated with somehow as well.

This field of R&D has been called 'applied metascience'. Also happy new year.
@Fnielsen, Magnus Manske, Daniel Mietchen, Bluerasberry, Evolution and evolvability:

--Prototyperspective (talk) 13:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Prototyperspective: I wish that I could immediately grant you everything that you have requested. Thanks for the feedback. Give us some time - perhaps a few weeks - to talk this over a reply. I expect we can have partial replies sooner. Thanks for the feedback and considering your interest in this, if you like, email me if you want a voice or video chat about Wikidata, WikiCite, Scholia, etc. A conversation might be productive. Also, if you are comfortable posting to GitHub, feel free to visit https://github.com/WDscholia/scholia/issues to propose each of your requests briefly as an issue for developers to consider for response. If you do not do that, then I might. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: Thanks for the feedback, really glad it was appreciated/considered. I totally didn't notice that there's a GitHub page, thanks for the link. Maybe it would be a good thing to add the link as "Code" or "Develop" to the panel at the upper right (above "Talk"; note that doing so could also help attract more developers for it). I certainly wouldn't have had a problem if you created new issues from these proposals.

I have created issues at the GitHub repo now (#1724 – #1734). Discussion will probably continue there (and as I find new relevant info, material or ideas I'm updating these issues). --Prototyperspective (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Physical Review E

Hi everyone - I'm not sure if this is the best place to post this, but the Topic page for Physical review E points to Q27714390. This is resulting in broken queries. I think it should point to Q2128181. Pointing to this item allows for query results. I'm not sure how to update this on Scholia or if there's a layer of redirection going on that should be happening in a different way. Thanks! Will (Wiki Ed) (talk) 21:27, 15 November 2022 (UTC)

What query are you running? Jarash (talk) 20:22, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

Mark subpages for translation ?

Hi Fnielsen,

Any opposition or reason why not to translate the subpages? I'm thinking in particular to translate Wikidata:WikiProject Scholia/Instructions.

Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 13:58, 20 February 2023 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: No, please fill free to translate. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

🚸 Scholie, understand how to use a different language

Programming languages and keywords are very important. Wikidata 41.122.3.145 01:51, 3 February 2024 (UTC)