Promotion to commons?
-
-
I'd like to nominate Philosopher be reviewed for promotion to Commons. The type has been stable and has 1000+ instances. Many philosophers in Freebase are currently most notable as /book/author or simply as /people/person instances.
-
Seems like a good idea. Here are some comments:
Philip hasn't noticed this thread yet, so I'll save him the trouble of mentioning that it needs documentation. Particularly, Interests/Philosophical Subject and School of Thought need to be clearly disambiguated.
I'm not sure that delegating the influence node properties gets us anything -- there's no way to limit the influences to other Philosophers, for example.
-
documentation definitely required. (I'd suggest documentation should be a must-have requirement for any type considered for promotion)
Some useful tools for exploring the schema:
http://schemaviz.pak21.user.dev.freebaseapps.com/?domain=/user/alexander/philosophy
and
http://schemas.freebaseapps.com/domain?id=/user/alexander/philosophy
-
Just as an aside, you may want to use http://1.schemaviz.pak21.user.dev.freebaseapps.com/?domain=/user/alexander/philosophy as I'm likely to be breaking the dev version sometime soon :-)
-
re #2. I'd agree with jeff - instead have /influence/influence_ node as an included type, and remove the /philosopher/influenced and /philosopher/influenced_by properties.
The philosophical era type I'd guess is a time period. I'd have a to and from date. Although I guess it may be hard to exactly define, so a preceded_by and succeeded_by properties, expecting philosophical era may be better.
The school of thought type might also benefit by linking to organizations which promote the school of thought. Perhaps a new philosophical organization type?
-
+1 for removing the influences properties and for adding /influence/influence_node as an included type. +1 for documentation.
-
Just to note that Influence Node is already an included type of Philosopher and Event is an included type of Philosophical Era (which gets us the to and from dates).
-
@jeff ah, yes - I need to pay more attention!
-
Bumping this up. I think we can promote these types pending two things:
- Documenting the types
- Identifying someone to be an admin in a new /philosophy commons (or a good suggestion for an existing commons to add this to.)
Any takers?
-
Dang it, there's always one more thing, isn't there? It might be worth considering deleting the "Interests" property of Philosopher and the Philosophical Subject type. These are copied from the Wikipedia template "Infobox Philosopher", but they're so vague, I'm not sure how to document them.
-
I think "interests" as a property name is indeed too vague -- we don't want users going around entering philosophers' pastime activities such as ping pong here -- but I think we need a property to capture what a philosopher's equivalent of a scientist's research areas are. Something like "research areas" or "research focuses". Hmm, do philosophers research? Or do they just, uhm, philosophize?
-
