Grants:IdeaLab/Compare Wikidata content with other sources

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
IdeaLab beaker and flask.svg
Compare Wikidata content with other sources
There is an overwhelming amount of data on Wikidata without sources. Just adding sources will not have a meaningful effect on quality as the majority of facts is correct. By comparing external content with external sources areas of controversy are highlighted where sources DO make a significant difference.
Hex icon with lightning white.svg
idea creator
GerardM
Hex icon with hexes white.svg
developer
TomT0m
this project needs...
Hex icon with hand black.svg
volunteer
Hex icon with hexes black.svg
developer
Hex icon with circles black.svg
designer
Hex icon with star black.svg
project manager
Hex icon with bee black.svg
community organizer
Hex icon with flask black.svg
researcher
join
endorse
created on07:58, 3 March 2016 (UTC)


Project idea[edit]

What is the problem you're trying to solve?[edit]

Perceived problems with quality in Wikidata is a problem. Having people add sources helps but has no real effect because most statements are correct. What is needed is to compare sources and where they differ spend time to curate these differences. A workflow is missing. Finding differences has been done on many occasions.

What is your solution?[edit]

There is enough experience finding differences. What is needed is a workflow where people can address differences and when they are "done" remove an item from the list. This should result in reports that can be generated to the "other" source what has been determined.

In this way we actively engage in communication with other parties without breaking copyright. When an item has been improved on the Wikidata end and the issue recurs, the workflow has to be cognisant about it.

Goals[edit]

Suggestion: The wonderful Wikidata Game by Magnus Manke has tools that sort through Wikipedia articles so that dates, occupations, and nationalities can be gleaned from the text and added to wikidata. The same/similar tool could skim though on-line sources like the ODNB to extract facts (ie no copyright). This could be used to either check existing wiki-data, supply the missing ref for a factoid, or add new reffed data to wikidata. Victuallers (talk) 17:07, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Get Involved[edit]

About the idea creator[edit]

I have been involved in Wikimedia for a long time. I blog, and edit. I am (in)famous for having opinions that often differ. I love a good argument and have invested a lot of time understanding quality in Wikidata.

Participants[edit]

  • Developer Develop tools to cross check datas -
  • wikidata games for example, there is an idea to cross chek wikidata datas with date categories on wikipedia to spot inconsistencies, develop autocategorisation in wikidata infoboxes ... TomT0m (talk) 13:34, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Endorsements[edit]

Support Pro Xavier Combelle (talk) 10:43, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

  • see suggestion under goals Victuallers (talk) 17:09, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
  • I agree that curation and quality management of Wikidata is very important. Good work processes are needed. Jtuom (talk) 11:18, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Support Pro With wikidata it bacame easier to cross check datas by importing datas from different wikis to spot differences. However if it's easy to import data from wikidata to other wiki seems a little bit difficult - wikipedians can be picky and would not allow mass wikidata infobox into frwiki (see this community consultation : w:fr:Wikipédia:Sondage/Clarifications_sur_l'ajout_d'Infobox_Biographie2) even if this could allow to spot inconsistencies more easily. Still the work can and should be done. TomT0m (talk) 13:28, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Expand your idea[edit]

Would a grant from the Wikimedia Foundation help make your idea happen? You can expand this idea into a grant proposal.

Expand into an Individual Engagement Grant
Expand into a Project and Event Grant