Sweet! Can I ask that we make the 2% explicitly available to wiki gnomes? :)
On Monday, 9 February 2015, Aaron Halfaker <ahalfaker(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Hey folks,
Dario and I just updated the scholarly citations dataset to include
Digital Object Identifiers. We found 742k citations (524k unique DOIs) in
172k articles. Our spot checking suggests that 98% of these DOIs resolve.
The remaining 2% were extracted correctly, but they appear to be typos.
http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.1299540
Like the dataset that we released for PubMed Identifiers, this dataset includes
the first known occurrence of a DOI citation in an English Wikipedia
article and the associated revision metadata, based on the most recent
complete content dump of English Wikipedia.
Feel free to share this with anyone interested via:
https://twitter.com/WikiResearch/status/564908585008627712
We'll be organizing our own work and analysis of these citations here:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Scholarly_article_citations_in_Wik…
-Aaron
--
Sent from my mobile computing device of Lovecraftian complexity and horror.