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