yes, being aware that 1/ /the rules for disambiguating can get very
complicated--for examples, the LC cataloging rule interpretation
series does very nicely--the number of detail that arises in a very
large file is hard to believe until you start working on it. and 2/,
there will be items which cannot be unambiguously assigned. There
remain in literature many items of disputed authorship, and many
items of very uncertain dates. For examples of handling them, see the
LC authority file. And consider how many people-years of
highly-trained expert work have gone into making that file.
I note that the projects of ISI and Scopus to produce an unambiguous
list of authors of scientific articles have a remarkably high
proportion of errors of every possible description, although both of
them supplement their algorithms by manual correction.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 6:38 AM, Jodi Schneider <jodi.schneider(a)deri.org> wrote:
On 22 Jul 2010, at 03:13, Jack Park wrote:
"citation signals" will always work until a rock band takes that name
and gets a page in Wikipedia. Try "game theory".
Still directly inputable -- and takes me close to my intended destination
(if I'm a human, paying attention):
"This article is about the branch of applied mathematics. For the discipline
of studying games, see Game studies. For other uses of "Game theory",
see Game theory (disambiguation)."
Sensible disambiguation pages (ideally generated automatically) are needed
for a wiki for citations.
Wiki-research-l mailing list
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.