Firstly, let me say this is very very cool news.

I went to go and have a browse though, and it's all tied up in a
massive (around 3gb) archive file rather than being easily browsable.
I know that WikiData is the obvious place to put it, but perhaps it
would be useful as a reference work on Wikisource in its own right,
decompressed and machine formatted into an easier to search format?


On 25 Apr 2012, at 19:29, emijrp wrote:
> 2012/4/25 Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki at>
>> Thanks for sharing, I had read about it on the NYT but nothing was said on
>> license.
>> So now the USA have more open bibliographic data than Germany/Europe? :)
>> is a very nice initiative, but other catalog systems have very
>> complex interactions between hundreds or thousands of entities and it's
>> very hard to change the licenses.
>> The main problem is usually deduplication and quality of the records, any
>> information on this for Harvard's data?
>> Mateus Nobre, 25/04/2012 19:44:
>>> Add ALL at Wikisource!
>> Wikisource? This is only metadata.
> Perhaps it is OK for Wikidata.
A mass dump of all of the information onto Wikisource wouldn't be good
- but being able to extract complete bibliographies of specific
authors on demand would actually be quite useful for properly building
author pages on Wikisource, rather than the current ad-hoc and
incomplete lists that currently exist. (With the consequence that
bibliographies on Wikipedia could be 'outsourced' to Wikisource,
bringing that project much-needed readers and editors).

Wikimedia-l mailing list

Reply via email to