In general, I do like the idea of periodically collecting article references into Wikidata. They are a type of structured data that is associated with every article, and there are lots of interesting queries that would be easier to do if that information was in a structured database. I don't know if it will help make issues regarding finding and verifying references that we already encounter on Wikipedia any easier. I spend most of my time on the English Wikipedia, and the only times (so far) that I've intentionally gone to the article in another language are for culturally specific holidays. The only thing that I really notice is that they often have better pictures, because other than that I have to rely on Google Translate.
> Date: Thu, 14 Mar 2013 13:50:02 +0100
> From: psychoslave@culture-libre.org
> To: wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> Subject: Re: [Wikidata-l] question about Inclusion policy discussion
>
> Le 2013-03-14 02:09, Michael Hale a écrit :
> > I think of Wikidata as the symbiotic version of Freebase. I won't say
> > Freebase is a parasite, but I think a core aspect of Wikidata is that
> > edits to the database will often feed back into the encyclopedia in
> > various places. I haven't looked too much at the technical
> > implementation of Wikidata yet, but databases with billions of items
> > aren't that rare anymore.
>
> In this connection, I would like to take advantage to ask if we should
> include references in wikidata, and —what would be even more awesome–
> relations between statements/theses and a particular author. I think
> this could benefit wikipedia with the no-original work goal, and making
> references cross-chapters consistent.
>
> Moreover this could also be used to associate a statement attribution
> reliability and a statement relevancy reliability. Let's say I read an
> article on some foreign antiquity culture. This article report some
> statements which are, at first glanced, well sourced. But one reference
> happened to be a book that I can't get. A research prove me that the
> book indeed exists, but is no longer publicly available. So I can't
> check if what is claimed in the wikipedia article is what is claimed in
> the book. But other people may have a copy, so they could give feedback
> to the community confirming or invaliding that the statement can indeed
> be found in the book. Now an other case may be that a reference is
> readable directly on the internet, but the text is written in a forreign
> dead language that you don't know, nor find an automatic translator. So
> despite having the source right before your eyes, you can't check that
> the text make the statement. You may of course ask a validation in
> discussion page, or check if someone let feedback on the topic. But it
> would be far better if knowledgeable people feedback could be gathered
> whatever the chapter they use, and redistributed in all chapters.
>
> What do you think of that ?
> --
> Association Culture-Libre
> http://www.culture-libre.org/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata-l mailing list
> Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l