Template talk:Authority control properties

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Thanks for creating this template![edit]

לערי ריינהארט (talk) 22:42, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

+ 1. Looks great! For clarity the section "national" might be divided by continents. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:58, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

other properties[edit]

Mayb one should sort additional properties by type and scope:

  1. Perlentaucher ID (P866) related to authors
  2. related to editions
  3. ...
  4. reference properties
  5. ...
  6. maintenance properties
  7. ...
  8. thesaurus in physiscs, medicine, ...
  9. ...

לערי ריינהארט (talk) 22:42, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Missing properties[edit]

  • NUKAT (Poland: Union catalog)
  • LNB (Latvia: National Library)

--Kolja21 (talk) 02:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I think that NLP should be added together with NUKAT. Please include linkification if possible / known already. Thanks!

We should add the ARAB using libraries between the first:

I have identified a method to detect useful linkifikation to library catalogs using case by case / different ISBN numbers at various projects and analysing the links / the target catalogs inserted by various language communities to the relevant [[special:Booksources]] page; normaly this is [[{{SITENAME}}:Booksources]] or using a SPACE [[{{SITENAME}}:Book_sources]] . Please compare with special:Booksources, Wikidata:Book_sources Wikidata talk:Book_sources and Wikipedia:Book sources (Q131283) talk:Q131283.
To understand a wiki local setting you may use ?title=special:AllMessages&offset=Book at any / most wikis as https://www.wikidata.org/?title=special:AllMessages&offset=Book here.
This would open Wikidata for many other language catalogs. Later I will provide more details. One example can be seen at my contributions at he.Wikipedia.
Regards! לערי ריינהארט (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thing it is not included in the template yet. Thanks in advance for adding. לערי ריינהארט (talk) 09:11, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done --Kolja21 (talk) 09:45, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This looks neat[edit]

Maybe we should create a standard template that uses {{Navbox}} (something like {{Properties navbox}}?) so we can hide all of the not-fun stuff away from users. That way we can keep the style centralized. --Izno (talk) 22:32, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Split participants of VIAF and other[edit]

@Vlsergey: your splitting is a bit misleading, since for example Australia data is not fully shown on VIAF: NLA yes, NLA Trove not. Other countries like Russia are only represented with a test dabase that has not been updated for more than half a year. Please remember: VIAF is a great database and very helpful, but it's a collection of authority files and only should be used for fast lookup and not as a source. It's the basic rule of all scientific work: You have to use the orginal source. Most authoriy files are online and it takes just a click to look them up or verify them. WD is full of duplicates, outdated or wrong numbers because people doing drag & drop instead of serious research. --Kolja21 (talk) 20:00, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Well, feel free to fix it :-) It is not about "is VIAF source or not", it just we have too many sources on single line, and I need a good criteria to split them for navigation purposes. For example, I will use the same criteria to split them in my gadget -- all "VIAF" source will be on the first page, and other -- on the second. Just because there is not enought space for all of them. -- Vlsergey (talk) 20:21, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
o.k. --Kolja21 (talk) 21:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are few left on the first line that can also be found on VIAF. How about putting all of them in one group and split the others by field. --- Jura 20:32, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
No, I wouldn't mix records like ORCID (rarely used, a database where every WP user can created his own authority file) with the authority files provided by national libraries (official records). --Kolja21 (talk) 21:05, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
You don't need to mix them. You can still sort them by field.
Lately we get a lot of erroneous DOB from library authority files. I'm sure ORCID would be a better, more official source for that. --- Jura 21:23, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
ORCID has only a field "Biography" not "Date of birth". And again: It's not an "official" source. It's like a homepage. A statement by the author who can change his ORDIC biography daily. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:35, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Limit to authority control for people?[edit]

It seems like this template is mostly about people already. Should we limit the scope to Wikidata property for authority control for people (Q19595382) rather than Wikidata property for authority control (Q18614948)? And create new templates for Wikidata property related to creative works (Q18618644) and other kinds of authority data? Danmichaelo (talk) 19:41, 11 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I did a regrouping where I grouped all non-people properties together. I would like to eventually move these out of this template unless there are objections. Danmichaelo (talk) 13:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
There are quite a different types of authority control depending on who you talk to. I believe it would be problematic to attempt to restrict this to Wikidata property for authority control for people (Q19595382). Many of the maintained identifiers already span multiple areas, e.g., Library of Congress authority ID (P244) already spans people and organizations (via Library of Congress Name Authority File (Q18912790)), geographic locations and general subjects (al la Library of Congress Subject Headings (Q1823134)), etc. (and actually is a part of Library of Congress Control Number (Q620946) along with Library of Congress Control Number (LCCN) (bibliographic) (P1144) and others) and GND ID (P227) is similarly broad. 50.53.1.33 10:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]