On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Gnangarra gnangarra@gmail.com wrote:
Disclaimer first - I'm not exactly conversant in the intricacies of WikiData, if I was to take the information on 14th Dalai Lama
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/14th_Dalai_Lama
it links to Wikidata at
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q17293
the en article has 2 references that list his date of birth, the WikiData item has two references for the same piece of information WikiData source;
- just says imported from Russian language Wikipedia, which links to
Wikidata page on the Russian Wikipedia not to the source url nor does it link to permanent url so as a source its meaningless, while may just be the result of who did the data import linking to Russian language Wikipedia is kind of obscure for a source, I can understand a tibetan, mandarin, or cantonese language source as they would be associated with the region 2. Integrated Authority File links to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q36578 on WikiData it doesnt provide a url or any other information which enables someone to verify what is said
Despite two reference the data itself appears to be immediately untraceable to a reliable source.
The circular reference of Wikidata to a Wikipedia of any language is ok but the link should be traceable to a specific article version which would then make it possible to verify the data even if the current data on Wikipedia is changed after its imported, that in itself shouldnt be difficult to engineer. If that was the case then to me a Wikipedia reference for all data is a reasonable minimum standard to start at
Would it not make more sense to import (and verify!) the reliable source cited in the relevant Wikipedia version, along with the statement?