> Generally yes, but a lot of "authors" are just names, numbers, multiple > persons, titles of congresses etc. It would be helpful if we could > delete this entries.
Unless an author ID has *never* had any works associated with it, I would argue that such entries still should be redirects, not deletions. That's the point of the ID; it should be usable over time, hopefully incorporating corrections and improvements. > - Name (without year of birth or bio) Often these can still be obvious as to who the intended person is; other times not so much. If it is obvious who is intended from the works attached, then it still should be a redirect. For ambiguous names, something like Wikipedia's disambiguation pages would be nice. > - Institution, organisation etc. These are still valid authors and should be merged and redirected appropriately, the same as individuals. > - Wrong entry: numbers, multiple names etc. (no redirect useful; Multiple names should be split in the work into their component author IDs, and the multi-name-entry eliminated. But I would still argue that it should not be deleted, but redirected to one of the authors. Not perfect, but still a "bread crumb trail" for someone following old data. - Alan _______________________________________________ Ol-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.archive.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ol-discuss To unsubscribe from this mailing list, send email to [email protected]
