On 09 July 2020 at 09:27 Jakob Voß jakob.voss@gbv.de wrote:
I cannot force anyone how to organize references to scholarly publications and software artifacts but I would at least recommend to use Wikidata to do so. We can get nice overviews with Scholia, once the references are collected and organized in Wikidata. The current coverage of natural language generation however is rather shallow:
https://scholia.toolforge.org/topic/Q1513879
Even if Wikidata is not the best tool to collect references, it will surely play some kind of role in Abstract Wikipedia, so it makes sense to get used to it.
As a side issue, maybe (or maybe not), I will mention here a proposal I recently heard, to import from the DBLP computer science bibliography cite to Wikidata. For those familiar with WikiCite, the idea would simply be to do with DBLP what has been done with PubMed. This would be a one year project, basically, using known techniques on a dataset of 4M items.
Rather than explaining more about the bot work that would be involved there, let me just make a basic remark: WikiCite, Scholia and the big effort so far have all concentrated on the biomedical area. In the middle of a global pandemic, it is not likely that I shall be thought to be criticising that emphasis.
But if Abstract Wikipedia means that more attention will be given to DBLP and Wikidata, and any other repositories in the area that will be relevant, that would hardly be a bad thing.
Charles