I assume you are referring to books. The same is true for works of
art. The reason why these statements are still valuable is because it
is an attribution based on grounds determined by someone somewhere and
based on that loose statement alone are therefore considered of
interest. You basically make a decision to include the statement or
not, as you see fit.

When it comes to people, one source may say "Pete was the son of
Klaus", while another source says "Pete was the younger brother of
Klaus". I think it's just a question of picking one on Wikidata to
keep the family aspect of the relationship (whichever it is) intact,
and sooner or later one or the other will be chosen. It's a wiki after

2014-05-05 11:24 GMT+02:00, David Cuenca <dacu...@gmail.com>:
> Hi,
> I'm having some cases where a work has been attributed to an author by a
> source, but the source itself says this attribution is "dubious", or it is
> contesting a previous attributions as "spurious".
> As I see it, the rank of the statement is not deprecated (in fact it is
> "normal" or even "preferred"), but I have no way of representing this
> "claim uncertainty" or "claim rebuttal".
> Is there any hidden parameter for this or should it be addressed with a
> qualifier?
> Cheers,
> Micru

Wikidata-l mailing list

Reply via email to