In general, I think it would be great to store inside Wikidata the graph
of relations between identifiers. Something like:

VIAF linksTo ISNI
VIAF linksTo GND
…
GRID linksTo ISNI
arXiv linksTo DOI

Last time I looked, there was no simple way to do that. So for
WikiProject Universities we have used a manual approach:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Universities/External_databases

Antonin

On 08/09/2017 11:01, Magnus Manske wrote:
> Is anyone working on an "auto-resolve" bot? If you have VIAF (but
> nothing else), you can resolve other identifiers via the VIAF site;
> similarly, if you have only GND, you could try to reverse-lookup VIAF.
> 
> I think a list of items that have zero external identifiers, ordered by
> "importance" (incoming wikidata links, number of statements etc) would
> also be helpful.
> 
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 10:52 AM Jane Darnell <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>     As a basic rule for "which external identifiers are worth covering",
>     I would begin with any  national identifiers we have for people
>     (politicians, artists, writers, theologians, scientists, etc), then
>     national identifiers for organizations (government-related,
>     GNP-related businesses, nonprofits, educational institutions, etc),
>     then national identifiers for places (census-defined population
>     centers, battle-scenes, etc)
> 
>     In my opnion, the question should not be "which identifier has the
>     most coverage" but "which items have the most identifiers"
> 
> 
>     On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:26 PM, Andrew Gray
>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> 
>         Hi Marco,
> 
>         I guess this depends what you mean by "exhaustive". Exhaustive
>         in that
>         every Wikidata item has ID X, or exhaustive in that we have every
>         instance of ID X in Wikidata?
> 
>         The first is probably not going to happen, as the vast majority of
>         external identifiers have a defined scope for what they
>         identify. Some
>         are pretty broad - VIAF is essentially "everyone who exists in a
>         library catalogue as an author or subject" - but still have a limit.
>         We're never really going to reach a situation where there is a
>         single
>         identifier type that covers everyone, unless we're linking across to
>         another Wikidata-type comprehensive knowledgebase, and even then
>         we'd
>         need to ensure we're in a position where they already cover
>         everything
>         in Wikidata.
> 
>         The second can (and has) been done - the largest one I know of
>         offhand
>         for people is the Oxford DNB (60k items) but for non-people we have
>         complete coverage of eg Swedish district codes, P1841 (160k items).
>         It's a bit of a slog to get these completed and then maintained,
>         since
>         the last 5-10% tend to be more challenging complicated cases,
>         but one
>         or two determined people can make it happen. And of course it's not
>         appropriate for many identifiers, as they may issue IDs for things
>         that we don't intend to have in Wikidata, so we will never
>         completely
>         cover them.
> 
>         I should quickly plug the "expected completeness" property which is
>         really useful for identifiers - P2429 - as this can quickly show
>         whether something is a) completely on Wikidata; b) not complete yet
>         but eventually might be; or c) probably never will be. Not very
>         widely
>         rolled out yet, though...
> 
>         Andrew.
> 
> 
>         On 7 September 2017 at 19:51, Marco Fossati
>         <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>         > Hi everyone,
>         >
>         > As a data quality addict, I've been investigating the coverage
>         of external
>         > identifiers linked to Wikidata items about people.
>         >
>         > Given the numbers on SQID [1] and some SPARQL queries [2, 3],
>         it seems that
>         > even the second most used ID (VIAF) only covers *25%* of
>         people items circa.
>         > Then, there is a long tail of IDs that are barely used at all.
>         >
>         > So here is my question:
>         > *which external identifiers deserve an effort to achieve
>         exhaustive
>         > coverage?*
>         >
>         > Looking forward to your valuable feedback.
>         > Cheers,
>         >
>         > Marco
>         >
>         > [1] https://tools.wmflabs.org/sqid/#/browse?type=properties
>         "Select
>         > datatype" set to "ExternalId", "Used for class" set to "human Q5"
>         > [2] total people: http://tinyurl.com/ybvcm5uw
>         > [3] people with a VIAF link: http://tinyurl.com/ya6dnpr7
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Wikidata mailing list
>         > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
> 
> 
> 
>         --
>         - Andrew Gray
>           [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
> 
>         _______________________________________________
>         Wikidata mailing list
>         [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>         https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
> 
> 
>     _______________________________________________
>     Wikidata mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[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

Reply via email to