2016-03-05 16:09 GMT+01:00 Maarten Dammers <maar...@mdammers.nl>: > Hi Luca, > > Op 5-3-2016 om 14:30 schreef Luca Martinelli: >> >> Probably the threshold we set up for the conversion is too high, and >> this might be one of the causes why the whole process has slowed down >> to a dying pace. > > You call > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Maintenance_script a > dying pace? > > Instead of complaining here people should participate in > https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Addshore/Identifiers/0 . Still plenty of > easy properties that are clearly distinct, unique and have an external url. > It doesn't make sense to discus the more complicated cases if we haven't > gotten the easy cases out of the way yet.
Point taken, I apologise for using too dramatic tones. Nonetheless, I stick to the point that probably a ">99% unique identifier" threshold is too high. Just to make another example (disclaimer: I asked for this property since it is yet another catalogue that my institution runs), P1949 has not been converted to identifier because it has "only 98.82% unique out of 507 uses", that translates in only *six* cases out of 505 items which have two P1949 identifiers. More, I did not intervene because of my blatant conflict of interest AND because I do not know with who discuss this and where, not even the general "what is an identifier" discussion. Probably there is a place where this discussion is going on, and I apologise again for not knowing (though I have some pretty good excuses), and I'm serious when I say that I'd be thankful to you if you please can point me in the general direction of where this is happening. :) (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Addshore/Identifiers maybe? Though that discussion seems to be pretty blocked) L. _______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
