Hoi, There is much more to this. When a publication has been denounced, when the author is denounced for having it ghost written. When ghost written is not to reflect because of the stigma involved.. We should forcefully flag publications, findings and authors when there is a problem.. A query should not include what they publiced what hey "found".
At this moment Wikidata is very much a stamp collection and we should be more than that. Thanks, GerardM
On 5 November 2017 at 11:40, Marco Neumann marco.neumann@gmail.com wrote:
What's the current procedure for disputing a non trivial claim on a wikidata item?
I know I can just go ahead and change a claim (statement and/or its value) but the dispute itself would only be captured in the change-log of the respective wikidata instance.
Would one create a discussion entry on the item page first to motivate a change on an item that's not straight forward?
so for example on the item
Paul Staines https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q16191299
it states that person has
:country of citizenship :United Kingdom (a claim created by Rpfb119 on 1 April 2015 )
but on wikipedia-en it says nationality Irish without a reference https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Staines
is there or should there be a qualifier/reference to flag a statement to be in dispute?
Also is this mailing-list the best place to discuss such (item specific) matters? Or is the Wikidata community portal with the Requests for comment service a better place?
thx Marco
--
Marco Neumann KONA
Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata