Wikidata:Property proposal/VIAF partner ID

VIAF partner ID edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

Not done

Description	ID as found on viaf.org
Data type	External identifier
Example 1	BNMM authority ID (P3788) → ARBABN
Example 2	ISNI (P213) → ISNI
Example 3	GND ID (P227) → DNB
Example 4	Library of Congress authority ID (P244) → LC
Source	https://viaf.org/
Planned use	re-use in queries about VIAF source IDs
Number of IDs in source	50
Expected completeness	is complete, but new values may exist in the future (Q47169297)
Formatter URL	http://viaf.org/viaf/partnerpages/$1.html

Motivation edit

VIAF ID and VIAF source IDs (ISNI, LC, GND, etc.) have a high priority in Wikidata, Most, or all, have a dedicated property in Wikidata (P214, P213, P244, P227) with datatype external-id. The latter are listed on item pages before any other external IDs, see MediaWiki:Wikibase-SortedProperties#VIAF-related IDs.

Currently the values are stored:

on property pages using has quality and code (P3295), e.g. Property:P3788#P1552
on item pages? Note: Wikidata is a partner having partner ID "WKP", but no property for this ID set will ever exist. So, all the information should eventually also be stored in the Wikidata item namespace. The partner IDs are used in VIAF cluster to differentiate the source IDs.

Queries are more complex: https://w.wiki/SQa and probably slower, no format constraints exist. If no property for a given source exists in WD, the value cannot be stored in a structured way. It can also happen that a partner ID is deprecated, this information cannot be stored well.

See Wikidata:VIAF/partner#Lists for WDQS and manual lists.

Having them in a proper property will resolve the above issues and make it easier to maintain VIAF data in Wikidata and to provide information about VIAF to users of Wikidata data. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 13:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

@Epìdosis, Kolja21, Vladimir Alexiev, Bargioni: some of the users that I know are involved with VIAF data in Wikidata.

Better to use {{ping project|Authority control}}, as I will do now :)

So,

Notified participants of WikiProject Authority control

I'm sure of understanding correctly the motivation: in the example you say that this property should replace the actual combination of has characteristic (P1552) + qualifier code (P3295), which in my opinion is already fine. The part about the fact that "Wikidata is a partner having partner ID "WKP", but no property for this ID set will ever exist. So, all the information should eventually also be stored in the Wikidata item namespace." and that "It can also happen that a partner ID is deprecated, this information cannot be stored well." remains a bit obscure to me, could you make some examples? Thanks, --Epìdosis 13:48, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Epìdosis: where do you currently store WKP? Where would you store a code for which there is no WD property? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 09:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Probably in the items related to the institution having this code. But, if you intend that this property for VIAF codes should be used on items instead of properties, the examples above are wrong. --Epìdosis 10:02, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the items, and in which property? Can you make the edit for WKP? Apart from that, the "has quality" links to what? And is stored on a property page, but the partner ID is not a quality of the WD property, it is a property of the partnership. Re "the examples above are wrong" - I didn't yet intend that they are not used on the properties. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 10:09, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, I would support the following solution:
- item of the institution (e.g. National Library Service of Italy (Q576951)): new property you propose
- property related to the institution (e.g. SBN author ID (P396)): has characteristic (P1552) + qualifier code (P3295) (as happens at the moment)

I'm not sure this is what you intend. --Epìdosis 13:58, 2 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Epìdosis: one also has to keep in mind that the partners DNB and SZ both use GND/P227 and that not all GND is shared in VIAF [1]. So it is not always 1:1:1 but here it is 1 WD property covering : 1 ID system (GND ID) : (1-x) of this is in VIAF : 2 partner. I would store partner IDs only in the new property and stop using "code" for it. No constraint checks on "code". This would be one step to improve the situation. Others can follow later. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 09:14, 4 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mautpreller, Sotho Tal Ker: a property to describe VIAF sources, could help quality control and tools. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 21:53, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support even though the impact of such prop would not be very large. Note: the code is not associated to an institution but to an authority dataset. And we want to apply it to both the Q representing the dataset, and the P that's external-id pointing to the dataset --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 06:57, 26 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]