I agree with Tom on this. I would prefer to keep all of the redirects nd just deprecate them (especially for names of people, because hidden in the redirect is an alternate spelling that should be added as an alias to the label field)
On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 6:55 PM, James Heald <[email protected]> wrote: > It might be worth creating a qualifier "reason for deprecation" to > indicate in more detail why a particular value is deprecated (eg > "superseded", "redirected on target website", etc). > > -- James. > > > On 01/10/2015 17:40, Tom Morris wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 4:19 AM, Markus Krötzsch < >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 01.10.2015 00:58, Ricordisamoa wrote: >>> >>> I think Tom is referring to external identifiers such as MusicBrainz >>>> artist ID <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P434> etc. and >>>> whether >>>> Wikidata items should show all of them or 'preferred' ones only as we >>>> did for VIAF redirects >>>> < >>>> >>>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/SamoaBot_38 >>>> >>>>> . >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> Now if the external site reconciles the ids, we have these options: >>> (1) Keep everything as is (one main id marked as "preferred") >>> (2) Make the redirect ids deprecated on Wikidata (show people that we are >>> aware of the ids but they should not be used) >>> (3) Delete the redirect ids >>> >>> I think (2) would be cleanest, since it avoids that unaware users re-add >>> the old ids. (3) would also be ok once the old id is no longer in >>> circulation. >>> >>> >> I agree #2 is best, although #1 could work too. The problem with #3 is >> that an identifier, once minted, is never "no longer in circulation." >> This >> is precisely why Wikidata items are never deleted. There's always the >> possibility that someone will hold a reference to it somewhere. Thad's >> use >> case isn't uncommon. >> >> Is there any benefit in removing old ids completely? I guess constraint >> >>> reports will work better (but maybe constraint reports should not count >>> deprecated statements in single value contraints ...). >>> >> >> >> The constraint reports definitely need to be fixed. I recently saw a >> reference to a VIAF bot run that deleted a whole bunch of VIAF identifiers >> to "fix" things being flagged by some constraint. >> >> >> Other than this, I don't see a big reason to spend time on removing some >>> ids. It's not wrong to claim that these are ids, just slightly redundant, >>> and the old ids might still be useful for integrating with web sources >>> that >>> were not updated when the redirect happened. >>> >>> >> Rather than not wasting time removing, I'd like to see affirmative >> statements that keeping them is a good thing. If people find them >> annoying >> or cluttering, it's because of poor UI design, not because they lack >> usefulness. >> >> Tom >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
