Wikidata editors find a number of mistakes in the data that we get from other places (i.e. authority controls files, GLAMS, ...). We'd like to have standardized tools and processes to give feedback to the institution/company/... that provided the data so it can be corrected at the source and not just in Wikidata.
Potential problems we'd like to report:
- wrong mappings to Wikidata items
- duplicate entries in the source database
- learning how we should map concepts in 2 different domains e.g. should books in Wikidata has the same structure as a library that use BIBFrame, should a church in Wikidata follow the same structure as a church at the Swedish National Heritage use....
- ...
Existing tools and processes:
- Phabricator
How to get out the most value for your organisation when being part of a fast changing open community as the loosely coupled Wikipedia echo system
- change management basics using our Phabricator - our prefered way of interact and our best practise
I see this need is getting bigger and bigger in Swedish about the lack of linked data awareness from most Swedish cultural institutions...
If we should get the full potential of Linked data and create trust between loosely coupled groups like Wikidata we need tools and processes. Seeing no signs of traceability like issue T223259: LIBRIS XL <-> VIAF <-> Wikidata will help no one
Picture from Future Learn Strategic Doing Collaboration and Trust
Notes:
