[00:45:11] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> +1 (re @mahir256: Now that looks more fun than the original)
[00:50:28] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> Excellent idea
[08:10:33] <wm-bb>	 <infovarius> What about to rename Wikimedia to Wikiverse?:) (re @Csisc1994: For those proposing Wikiverse as a name for Abstract Wikipedia, see https://www.wikiverse.io)
[08:13:03] <wm-bb>	 <infovarius> It's different in nonEnglish (re @Csisc1994: e.g. {1} in {2} where {1} is the item class and {2} is the country.)
[08:15:19] <wm-bb>	 <infovarius> Imho bots can fill only up to 10% descriptions (re @amire80: I mean, for what purpose.
[08:15:19] <wm-bb>	 <infovarius> What's the problem if an item doesn't have a description?
[08:15:20] <wm-bb>	 <infovarius> If a description can be generated by a bot, maybe it's not necessary in the first place?)
[08:18:39] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> I know. That is why I asked @vrandecic about how to represent the Wikimedia language code in Z-items (re @infovarius: It's different in nonEnglish)
[08:18:52] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> +1 (re @infovarius: Imho bots can fill only up to 10% descriptions)
[08:19:59] <wm-bb>	 <Nikki> that seems rather low. a few years ago (before the dump got too big to extract) I tried comparing English descriptions with statements on the items using a script and was able to match almost 50% of them... and since then the number of bot-generated ones has risen a lot
[08:21:14] <wm-bb>	 <Nikki> and a lot of the cases where it failed to match them, the problem was missing statements
[08:21:49] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> Interesting. This is a lexical-based knowledge graph validation method.
[08:22:48] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> @vrandecic Using ZObjects for lexical-based and data-driven knowledge graph validation can be interesting.
[08:24:15] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> I think that the names that already used should be filtered. (re @infovarius: What about to rename Wikimedia to Wikiverse?:))
[08:25:02] <wm-bb>	 <Csisc1994> It is non-sense to use the brand of another project.