Talk:Wikidata

Literature review


This is from 2019 but I am just seeing it, and I do not think it is cited in the article currently. It seems like a summary worth adding.  Bluerasberry  (talk)  19:56, 14 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Added in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata&oldid=1111561502 GrndStt (talk) 16:56, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Another literature review about Wikidata: paper, Alessandro Piscopo and Elena Simperl. 2019. What we talk about when we talk about wikidata quality: a literature survey. In Proceedings of the 15th International Symposium on Open Collaboration (OpenSym '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, Article 17, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1145/3306446.3340822 --denny vrandečić (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Improvements to the article




Since I probably shouldn't be editing this article, I would like to ask if someone could fix the layout? For an article that crosses 5k pageviews every month, it would be nice if it looked a bit better and was more comprehensive. Above I offer a source for the history of Wikidata.

But on the right you can see how the article looks for me, and that certainly offers some opportunity to improve.

Also, I would be surprised if there are by now not enough secondary and tertiary sources to find to improve the article. denny vrandečić (talk) 16:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Limitations
I receive the impression that numeric datasets are not supported. When I discovered wikidata, I thought to myself, I wonder if annual statistics for Britain's railways is covered? Seems not but collecting annualised (and other sorts of) statistics for all sorts of things might be very useful to lots of people who are looking to base their beliefs on evidence, and track trends.

Perhaps we should objectively state the limitations of wikidata. FreeFlow99 (talk) 10:42, 20 March 2024 (UTC)