Government

Political party: Leadership Property

2008-06-27T22:49:24.0012Z

Good suggestion. We probably need a leadership CVT, to hold person, party, title, and dates of office. Alternately, we could add the type "Employer" as an included type, and use that instead, but I'm not sure how accurate that is -- I imagine a lot of political parties don't pay their leadership.

Political party: Leadership Property

2008-06-27T14:17:56.0012Z

Can you add a property for leadership which would point to a person?

Government Agency: Funding?

2008-06-25T20:09:46.0000Z

I think what Jeff is suggesting is right on the money, no pun intended.

Government Agency: Funding?

2008-06-24T21:21:11.0012Z

I think that a relatively simple CVT as Jeff proposes would suffice to say things like, “The FY 2007 budget of the Department of Homeland Security was G$44.9.” Sources and breakdowns could be added to that CVT later if there is real demand.

Government Agency: Funding?

2008-06-24T19:17:55.0000Z

Not to be difficult here, but most agencies (and organizations) receive "funding" from multiple sources. I would suggest "operating budget" or something else more inclusive sounding to describe how much money was available for use during a certain time period. Either that or add a "Funding source" property to the CVT if you want to be specific about funding.

Government Agency: Funding?

2008-06-24T18:18:21.0012Z

They do seem reasonable. For funding, would a simple CVT that had properties for currency, amount, and year be sufficient?

Government Agency: Funding?

2008-06-23T21:21:50.0005Z

I added a comment to the FBI page, but perhaps it is better suited here. Could a "funding" property be added to the agency? Also, how about a "number of employees" property? These both seem reasonable and necessary.

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2008-06-09T17:04:21.0000Z

Yeah, level of government is complicated. Not all countries are the same, nor are all cities. Some have metro bodies that encompass more than one locality.

I think I've always done 3 levels, and they can mean whatever it means for that country: Federal, Regional, Local:

Federal=country level only
Regional=provinces, states, cantons, administrative divisions (like Spain), or even cross-provincial entities
Local=below state regional (i.e., cities, metro agencies)

I'm not saying that is the best way to go or anything, but just an example.

Government Agency: Government "Agency" vs. "Body"

2008-06-09T16:57:04.0000Z

I disagree. I think at the federal level it would be the country's congress or equiv. It is not an agency (yes it may have employees but I still think it is a "body"), and I think it is a valid distinction. Yes, it is limited in use, but still a distinction. (most govt entities will be an agency)

Government Agency: Government "Agency" vs. "Body"

2008-06-08T17:43:27.0005Z

I am a little anxious about saying anything as a big old newbie, but I don't think the disctinction between "governmental body" and "government agency" is valid, either legally or practically except in limited circumstances. The distinction seems to swing on whether the "body" has employees, in which case it becomes an "agency."

Many government agencies that have employees also have boatloads of politicians who are elected or appointed to leadership or managerial roles in that agency: the FCC, for example.

Second, there are virtually no "government bodies" that are composed of politicians only. Courts, many city councils, legislatures all have employees, even though the people calling the shots in those entities were elected or appointed through the political process. They all have employees / flunkies to carry out the directives of the decision-makers.

The division between government "body" and government "agency" does not take into account the realities of modern government, wherein various "bodies" have employees and "agencies" have politicians on board.

Just my thoughts, but I believe the distinction is artificial. I think that categories based upon the legal status of the entity, such as belonging to the executive, legislative or judicial branches would be a better starting point. The three branches of government are not just a taxonomy, but tell something about the nature and powers of the entities that belong to them.

Thanks for your help! Dennis

Election campaign: Should this link to Political District

2008-05-06T03:09:49.0007Z

Ed, take a look at any of the California legislature or Congressional seats to see how this is modeled with the Primary Election type, for example, this year’s race for the 8th California Congressional District seat, currently held by Nancy Pelosi. There are three primary elections, as well as one write-in candidate who (assuming she collects enough signatures) goes directly to the main ballot.

The presidential model is much messier, since strictly only the Electoral College elects the president, and in some states, the primary is binding on the delegates, while in other states it is advisory or supplemental. No one has taken on the task of modeling this hugely complicated structure yet. Consider also that in November, different sets of candidates will be on the ballot in different states; one would really need to model each state’s presidential election as a separate thing, which is just fantastically messy.

Got a compelling use case? (-:

Election campaign: Should this link to Political District

2008-05-06T02:23:55.0000Z

How about making this type nested, where sub-campaigns are linked to larger ones? For example, we are about to have our NC primaries. Some of the people are running for national seats. There is currently no way to link these state-wide election campaigns to the national ones.

Election: Canadian Elections

2008-01-31T19:20:39.0007Z

Types can only be modified by a domain administrator. So what I would recommend is that you create an "election campaign" type in your private domain to link the campaign contribution type to; it shouldn't have any properties other than those needed for the contribution model. This type would be added as an additional type to the Kevin Falcon (or any other) campaign topic. Note that this would only be a temporary measure, but will allow you to experiment with the contribution types in your private domain, without needing to rely on an administrator. If we ultimately end up moving the types to the governement domain, we would then hook the contribution type(s) directly to the main election type, rather than moving your election type over.

Election: Canadian Elections

2008-01-31T00:37:49.0000Z

I'm getting it - slowly, thank you all for your patience and answers.

So I've laid out the campaign for Kevin Falcon so that it makes sense. Now I'm trying to set up the campaign contribution type so its a part of each Election campaign type. Am I able to add that or does the person who created it need to. Perhaps you can lead me through this again so I can learn the terminology.

The end result should be that when I look at Falcon's campaign entry there should be a Campaign Contribution entry on the right hand part of the page.

Cheers from the snowyn Pacific Northwest

Ray

Election: Canadian Elections

2008-01-30T19:32:37.0007Z

I would hate to have to go this way -- it would be insanely complex. (We actually tried this briefly with the government positions schemata, and had to scrap it because it was too unwieldy.) The election shemata are intended work for just about any election; if they don't, we should try to modify them.

Election: A note about elections in Canada

2008-01-30T19:30:22.0007Z

Thanks for the information. We designed the election schema to be as broadly applicable as possible, and I think it should work well with the Canadian system. Each riding should have an election topic for every election (separate elections for provincial and federal); there would be no election topics for premiers or prime ministers. Does this help?

Election: Canadian Elections

2008-01-30T02:55:29.0005Z

Would it make more sense to add domains like Canadian Elections, German Elections etc. and create sub systems that support each of their different systems? Instinctively this doesn't feel right, but perhaps it will be easier in the long run.

Ray

Election: A note about elections in Canada

2008-01-30T02:18:06.0012Z

I thought it might be helpful to explain one of the differences between our systems. It may be why I'm struggling to sort some of these things in my mind.

In our provinces the government reps (MLAs) are all elected in their own individual ridings. The leader (Premier) is not elected separately - he runs in his own riding and is selected as leader by his own party. If the party wins the most seats - they form the next government. Local municipal elections are all run in separate elections - never at the same time. Its much more streamlined (simpler) - not necessarily better, but easier to understand.

Federally is very similar - we don't vote for our leader (Prime Minister). We vote for a local rep (MP) and the party who wins the most seats (ridings) forms the government and gets to choose the leader.

Where I live I have one Provincial rep and one Federal rep - that's it. We don't ever have an occasion to hold a Provincial election at the same time as a Federal election.

Does this help? Forgive me if you already understand this.

Ray

Election campaign: Should this link to Political District

2008-01-30T01:36:14.0000Z

Okay - I suspect that the 3 entries under the campaign has come in through the campaign contributions and my incorrect setup. I'll make the corrections as you suggest and see how it looks.

I'm not finding it as intuitive as I'd like - thinking that others may struggle as well. To me an election is broader - such as BC General Election. A campaign would be the battles for individual seats or ridings that make up the general election boundary. In terms of your system the General Election is this fall, but campaigns would be waged for seats all across the country.

I'll keep at it though.

Ray

Election campaign: Should this link to Political District

2008-01-30T00:29:59.0000Z

The Election campaign links to an Election, which is linked to a district. I notice you have Kevin Falcon running for British Columbia general election 2005 (in three separate campaigns, no less!); instead, he should run for a particular seat. Surrey Cloverdale Riding 2005 should be an Election, not an Election campaign; Kevin Falcon for BC Parliament 2005 should be an Election campaign contesting that election. Does that make more sense?

Political District: How is this different than Government Jurisdiction?

2008-01-30T00:16:36.0007Z

It should translate; a parliamentary riding would be a kind of Political District. But they aren’t always electoral; for example, in the United States, federal courts are given districts that hear appeals from certain states, but the judges are not elected to those positions.

Governmental Jurisdiction: Why not use Location for this

2008-01-30T00:15:08.0000Z

Sure; San Francisco is indeed a different Location from the Sunset District. But San Francisco is also a Governmental Jurisdiction, and so has a “Government Positions” property and a “Government Bodies” property. The Sunset District is not a Governmental Jurisdiction, and so does not have those properties, which would not be meaningful there.

By analogy, Arnold Schwarzenegger is a Film Actor and a Politician, as well as a Person. It would not make sense to have “Film Performances” or “Government Positions Held” properties on Person, as they would go unused for most people. So we make special types, which include Person. Similarly,”Government Bodies” does not make sense as a property for Coney Island, the Atlantic Ocean, or my house. The property does make sense for cities, states, provinces, nations, etc., so we have a type for modeling those entities.

Does that help?

Election campaign: Should this link to Political District

2008-01-29T21:09:24.0005Z

Can a property be added to this type that links to its Political District? What is the best process to ask for this type of thing?

Ray

Governmental Jurisdiction: Why not use Location for this

2008-01-29T16:18:32.0007Z

Got it - but in theory couldn't you create a location for each instance of these that are different. The name of the location would describe what it was. Or to use my other term Electoral District could have a property called Jurisdiction, which would point to a location that describes the area covered.

I know this may be too much of an effort to "normalize" the structure instead of just free flowing with types and sub types. I'll get the hang of this yet.....

Political District: How is this different than Government Jurisdiction?

2008-01-29T15:02:29.0000Z

Okay I think that will translate to the Canadian system. Is Electoral District a better term to consider than Political District? It seems a bit more descriptive.

Are you tired of my questions yet? :)

Election campaign: Campaign contirbutors

2008-01-29T05:50:27.0000Z

What if you made a campaign contributor type without any included types and add this as an expected type of a contributor property of a campaign contribution type. Reciprocate the contribution type back to the contributor type through its new suggested property. This way, any person, corporation or other could be tagged as a campaign contributor and queried by type or contribution amount through the contributor and contribution types as well as by the co-types of the various contributors. This approach might be a little simpler for data entry and more flexible for queries.

Political District: How is this different than Government Jurisdiction?

2008-01-29T05:19:08.0007Z

A Political District is only part of a Governmental Jurisdiction. For example, the U.S. Congress has jurisdiction over the United States; Nancy Pelosi is the representative from the 8th district of California, but rather than having jurisdiction over that district, she votes (as part of a legislative body) on laws that govern the entire United States.

Governmental Jurisdiction: Why not use Location for this

2008-01-29T05:13:30.0000Z

The answer lies in reciprocal properties. A Governmental Jurisdiction has a government body (or bodies) and government offices associated with it. San Francisco has a city & county government, a mayor, a sheriff, and a board of supervisors; the Sunset district of SF has none of those things, nor does 631 Howard St. in San Francisco, so a Governmental Jurisidiction allows us to be more precise about what properties a place has that may not be applicable to every Location.

Election campaign: Campaign contirbutors

2008-01-29T05:10:46.0000Z

This sounds reasonable, Ray. Note that a campaign right now has a “Total amount raised” property; it could also have one or more properties for contributions, as you point out. I would encourage you to create a test contribution type in your own domain and play with it for a bit. Some interesting questions that come to mind are how to distinguish—or whether it’s important to distinguish—direct cash contributions, in-kind contributions, indirect contributions, and aggregators as well as personal vs. corporate contributions. And what about estimated contributions for politicians in countries without strict reporting requirements, or substantiated allegations of unreported contributions?

Political District: How is this different than Government Jurisdiction?

2008-01-29T02:54:53.0012Z

Isn't this a type of jurisction. An Electoral District should define the area in question for an election. Wouldn't each of them be an instance of the type "Location". Perhaps a location could have ZIP or Postal Code as a property which would allow them to be included in Electoral Districts.

If this makes any sense my suggestion would be to remove Government Jurisdiction and Political District. Make those records instances of Location.

Ray

Governmental Jurisdiction: Why not use Location for this

2008-01-29T01:36:02.0012Z

Why can't location be used to represent an area of jurisdiction?

Ray

Election campaign: Campaign contirbutors

2008-01-29T01:22:12.0005Z

I'd like to find a way of linking campaign contributors to election campaigns. I think that a new type under Government would be the way to do it. The type would include a property linked to election campaign.

I think it would take 3 types - Campaign contributor - personal, Campaign contributor - corporate and Campaign contributor - Other. That way direct links to person and corporation could be included as properties.

Am I on the right path.

Ray

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-11-13T00:25:27.0007Z

Sounds like we're in agreement about the predecessor/successor model. Level of government is an interesting problem. Part of the problem is nomenclature -- "national" and "local" are fairly straightforward, although there can be several levels of government that are arguably "local" (in the US, city/town/village and township are pretty clearly local, and I would guess county is as well). But for the in-between level(s), I'm not sure -- at what point does an administrative division stop being local and start being "state"-level? Are Italian provinces "local" or "regional" (they sit below "region" but above "comune" in terms of hierarchy)? I also wonder if this could just be inferred from the jurisdiction itself? (I.e., this agency has a jurisdiction of something that is a city, therefore it is local?)

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-11-10T22:27:06.0007Z

Scratch my comment about a single government agency splitting in two, as I realized after I posted this that that defines a predecessor/successor relationship! I guess Jeff's suggestion is the best, that a split would involve two or more agencies being separated and that merger would involve two or more agencies being brought together.

On the issue Jeff raised of a "an agency spawning off a section of itself into a new agency, but without dissolving the parent agency," I think you're still looking there at a predecessor relationship. The new agency's predecessor is the parent agency that remains behind.

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-11-10T20:09:59.0007Z

Hello Crism and Jeff - sorry for the lengthy delay in getting back to your replies for more information/comments on my suggestion. It looks like you've acted on some of them, which is great. I looked at the current instances of Governmental Jurisdiction and it looks like I used the wrong term for what I was trying to impart, though I thought from the examples I used -- "(federal, state or provincial, regional municipal or local)" -- that what I meant was a property that embodied that aspect of government. I think this is a very important element that can be used for meaningful queries. That being said, I'll leave it up to you to decide whether the "level" of government, for want of a better term, should be a property of the Governmental Jurisdiction Type, the Government Body Type or some other Type.

Regarding the Predecessor/Successor properties, I believe the Split/Merged properties are required and could work the way Jeff indicates, except a that split would also have to allow for the last example he cites of an agency spawning off a section of itself into a new agency without dissolving the parent agency. In other words, a single government agency can simply split in two, which frequently happens at the state and provincial levels. On the other hand, mergers can encompass any number of agencies being amalgamated. In my part of the world, it would be very unusual for four agencies or departments to be merged into one. More typical is a merger of up to three, with two departments being merged into one representing, I think, the norm.

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-10-30T19:24:36.0007Z

I'm working on revising this model right now. One thought I had is that we could use predecessor/successor properties to represent split/merged as well: If an agency has two (or more) successor agencies, it would indicate a split; if it has two or more predecessors, it would indicate a merge. The only thing this doesn't cover, I suppose, is the case of an agency spawning off a section of itself into a new agency, but without dissolving the parent agency.

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-10-16T01:57:37.0007Z

Thanks for the suggestions, David. The establishment and dissolution dates seem pretty straightforward.

For country and jurisdiction: would it be sufficient if the associated government had more location-based information? Or are there a significant number of agencies whose jurisdictions are different from that of their governments?

Along similar lines, are both predecessor/successor and split/merged needed? Would just predecessor/successor suffice? And what proportion of agencies have this? The answer will influence priorities, I think.

Thanks again for looking at this.

Government Agency: Suggestions for additional properties for Government Agency Type

2007-10-08T03:08:10.0005Z

I would like to suggest the following properties for the Government Agency Type:

Predecessor Agency
Successor Agency
Split From
Merged With
Established Date
Disestablishment Date
Country (as distinct from Government)
Jurisdiction (federal, state or provincial, regional municipal or local)

Thanks!

Government: Streamlining "Political Office Held"

2007-09-21T00:17:48.0007Z

I'd like to thank everyone who's commented on my first attempt at this. Based on various comments, I've come up with a new attempt: http://www.freebase.com/view/domain/user/jeff/government_test_2. Come by, put in some data, and let me know what you think! (More specific details about what I changed are discussed in my private domain.)

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-09-17T08:13:34.0007Z

It should be ready now - I wanted to add a few more politicians, but I can always do that later.

I tried something a bit different - the "Australian MP" type links to an "Australian House of Parliament" type (via a compound type). So you can tell whether an MP is federal or state by which house of parliament they belong to. Not sure yet if this is the best way to do it ...

So the types in question are "Australian Political Party", "Australian Politician", "Australian MP", "Australian House of Parliament" and "Australian Parliament Membership", which are all linked together.

Government: Streamlining "Political Office Held"

2007-09-13T23:59:29.0012Z

I think it might be a good idea to streamline the "us political offices held" type, and make it so that one type can be used for all countries, which should make this domain a bit easier to handle. It will also solve a major problem, which is that there is currently no way in the schema to link from a country to its elected officials. I've posted the modified type over in my private domain. I'd love to get everyone's comments on it and see if we can come to an agreement on this.

The main changes would be to eliminate the "state (if state)", "county (if county)", etc. properties and replace it with a new property that can be used for all levels of government. It would also do away with the need for some country-specific types (politician and political party).

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-08-28T22:44:20.0000Z

Just let me know when you think that Australian politics is ready share,

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-08-22T03:21:46.0007Z

No problem - I notice that lots have things have changed today ...

I've started on a few types for Australian politics in my domain, so I'll keep adding to those following the types for UK and/or US politics as appropriate.

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-08-21T18:26:17.0007Z

Sorry tp be slow responding. I think the UK Politician pattern is worth following since it creates a useful pattern for completion, since the same pool of people tend to hold multiple offices.

It rare for a politician from one country to hold an office in another, so I don't think the general polician template is so useful, and I think people would tend to overuse it.

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-08-14T00:37:48.0000Z

Fair enough. In that case, would it be worth creating some sort of template for a politician type?

Also I see that "UK MP" includes "UK Politician" as a type - is this pattern worth following in general?

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-08-10T21:04:02.0000Z

Yes, that's the idea, because different systems of government have different properties associated with the position.

Government: New Type: President of Germany

2007-08-10T21:02:42.0000Z

done

Government: Types of Politicians for all countries?

2007-07-18T00:03:42.0011Z

Will we need to create a separate politician type for each country? Currently we've got them for the USA, UK, Canada ... will we create them for France, Germany, Russia, ... ? I guess that's useful because you can group all the UK politicians easily, but couldn't this be done as a search on "Politician" and "Nationality: UK"? Otherwise we could end up with hundreds of politician types, but maybe that's not a problem ...

Government: New Type: President of Germany

2007-07-06T23:16:27.0007Z

Welcome to Freebase.

You can create types in your own domain, and an administrator can make them part of the public domain. The help files give guidance on creating types: http://www.freebase.com/view/helpindex?id=%239202a8c04000641f80000000012090ef.

A couple of tips: It's always good to try things out on Sandbox (http://sandbox.freebase.com)--it's wiped clean and rewritten with data from the main site every Monday, making it a good place to experiment. Also, when you've got your model in shape, make sure to add some sample data--flaws in a data model often don't show up until you try incorporating some real data.

Once you're happy with the types you've created, post a note in the discussion area of the domain you're interested in so the admins can take a look at your work.

Meantime, feel free to post again if any questions come up about your model!

Best,
Sarah

Government: New Type: President of Germany

2007-07-06T05:25:07.0012Z

Hi all,

I'd like to create a special "Type" for the 9 presidents we had in Germany since 1946. Can I do that or do I need an admin's special premission?