2017 Community Wishlist Survey/Wikidata/Integrate Citoid Fully into Wikidata

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

⬅ Back to Wikidata The survey has concluded. Here are the results!


  • Problem: One of the biggest challenges with the trust in Wikidata from existing community members in bigger language communtiies, like English, is lack of trust in the sources, and without full sourcing support, we can't provide the high quality references Wikipedians are used to.
  • Who would benefit: Reusers of Wikidata, and the Wikidata community.
  • Proposed solution: Integrate citoid into the tooling for Wikidata. This should not be too hard, because many of the source types have already been modeled in Wikidata
  • More comments: I recognize that this may be on the Development pipeline of the Wikidata team, but it appears to be competing with a number of other priorities, and most of the expertise for Citoid is at the Wikimedia Foundation
  • Proposer: Sadads (talk) 13:28, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

  • @Mvolz: You may be interested in this proposal. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I really like this idea, seems super useful —TheDJ (talkcontribs) 11:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, it will also improve number of fully written references.--Nizil Shah (talk) 12:25, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
  • This is done in part through a Zotero translator that can create commands for QuickStatements (Zotero is the engine that drives Citoid); see d:Wikidata:Zotero. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:58, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Yes, please help. Adding sources is slow and tedious and a real impediment to improving sourcing on Wikidata. StarryGrandma (talk) 03:31, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
  • I use the Zotero tool, but the hard part for books is still that the author and publisher should be Q Items, not strings, and we need to create both a “work” and an “edition” of that work before we can use it as a reference. A template interface that accepts an ISBN, looks for a match, and if it doesn’t find one creates both work and edition, interlinked, with tools for searching for the author and publisher in wikidata, would be ideal. It would also need to detect when the work exists but the not the specific edition indicated by the ISBN. I appreciate that this use case is hugely complicated. - PKM (talk) 04:47, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Here's another approach, if what we want is to make it easy for editors to add references to books. (I don't think this is original but I have no idea where I saw it.) Add a new property "reference ISBN". It works like <reference URL> - user enters just the ISBN and qualifies with page number, section, etc. as needed. ISBN is clickable (to OCLC or some other source with book data). Companion bot follows behind - if the ISBN matches an Item, it adds the appropriate <stated in> reference. If the ISBN doesn't exist, bot looks for a match on author and title and creates an edition if found. If no match, bot creates minimal linked work and edition records (and adds them to a worklist for Books project or a new References project volunteers to review?). - PKM (talk) 19:23, 18 November 2017 (UTC)
  • This is very important for the use of Wikidata in enwp. Mike Peel (talk) 20:59, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Voting