Hello John I'm not sure that Wikidata is the right place for this kind of information, due to it's high granularity. As Zolo points out, maintaining a large directory of small things may be quite a burden for the community.
However, Wikibase is by design well suited for representing research data, since it allows for very fine grained sourcing an annotation. Europeana's EAGLE project[1] is already using Wikibase[2] to manage diverse translations of inscriptions (e.g. [3]). Such a local Wikibase installation could still refer to Wikidata as a vocabulary, e.g. using Wikidata Q-Numbers to identify taxons. -- daniel [1] http://www.eagle-network.eu/ [2] http://www.eagle-network.eu/wiki/ [3] http://www.eagle-network.eu/wiki/index.php/Item:Q5102?setlang=en Am 25.10.2014 14:39, schrieb John Cummings: > I'm not sure if this quite fits here but it's related. > > A few months ago I went to a meeting of natural history organisations in the > UK, > they were looking for a way of creating a centralised directory of specimens > held in different institutions in the UK. > > Wikidata seems like a possible place for this to happen, for each species > there > could be a place where specimens are held, however there would be very large > differences between number of organisations holding specimens depending on the > species and also differences in types of specimens e.g jaw bones or whole > skeleton. I also wonder if this would include other organisations like zoos > where they would be alive. > > Any thoughts would be welcome > > Thanks > > John -- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. _______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
