Hi Dario,
Thanks for your proposal and starting the discussion. I'm skeptical about
any items that refer to internal aspects of Wikidata so I wonder whether we
actually need a rather artificial class such as "Wikidata item collection".
You wrote:
2. create and document individual collections (e.g.
the Wikidata Zika
corpus [Q-Y]) as instances of this class: [Q-Y] --P31--> [Q-X]
3. add appropriate metadata to describe such
collections (its main
topic(s), creators, any external identifiers, if applicable)
4. mark individual bibliographic items as part of
[P361] the
corresponding collections
We already have several classes for collections, e.g. bibliography
(Q134995) or bibliographic database (Q1789476), what's wrong or missing
when using them? The Zika corpus is a bibliography. We also have a large
number of other bibliographic databases that might get imported into
Wikidata, e.g. PubMed that can be linked to bibliographic items in the same
way.
Some criteria would be needed to determine an
appropriate threshold for
legitimate
collections (we wouldn't want arbitrary
collections to be created for
sets of items generated as part of a test import).
That's the more important question. There should be at least a WikiProject
page about the collection and I'd classifiy such projects as bibliographies
or other kinds of catalogs.
If something similar already exists in the context of
structured data
donations/imports for GLAM, I'd be most grateful for any
pointers.
See property catalog code (P528) and its use e.g. at Mona Lisa (Q12418).
Jakob
P.S: At the moment we have 9275 instances of catalog (Q2352616) or its
subclasses.