Hi Jane, No, I was not referring to books in particular, but of course it could be applied to books as well, and to works of art, and to many things in general. I agree that the statement is valuable and that it should be included, but I don't know how to represent it.
Following your examples, what I am trying to represent is not what you say, but instead: a) uncertainty: "it is hinted that Pete was the son of Klaus, but I have no conclusive proof" b) rebuttal: "Source A says that Pete was the younger brother of Klaus, I can disprove that (but I cannot provide an alternative)" Cheers, Micru On Mon, May 5, 2014 at 2:10 PM, Jane Darnell <jane...@gmail.com> wrote: > David, > I assume you are referring to books. The same is true for works of > art. The reason why these statements are still valuable is because it > is an attribution based on grounds determined by someone somewhere and > based on that loose statement alone are therefore considered of > interest. You basically make a decision to include the statement or > not, as you see fit. > > When it comes to people, one source may say "Pete was the son of > Klaus", while another source says "Pete was the younger brother of > Klaus". I think it's just a question of picking one on Wikidata to > keep the family aspect of the relationship (whichever it is) intact, > and sooner or later one or the other will be chosen. It's a wiki after > all. > Jane > > > > 2014-05-05 11:24 GMT+02:00, David Cuenca <dacu...@gmail.com>: > > Hi, > > > > I'm having some cases where a work has been attributed to an author by a > > source, but the source itself says this attribution is "dubious", or it > is > > contesting a previous attributions as "spurious". > > > > As I see it, the rank of the statement is not deprecated (in fact it is > > "normal" or even "preferred"), but I have no way of representing this > > "claim uncertainty" or "claim rebuttal". > > > > Is there any hidden parameter for this or should it be addressed with a > > qualifier? > > > > Cheers, > > Micru > > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata-l mailing list > Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l > -- Etiamsi omnes, ego non
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
