Hi,I just came across the English Wikipedia article on Wikidata. Parts of it are very incomplete and outdated. The section "Reception" offers three sentences that reflect the all-but-neutral POV of a single source, weasel-wording around actually naming the person whose opinion was reproduced here [1].
I feel too involved to edit this, but it would be nice if people who are active in both communities could at least try to cover all relevant aspects of this topic (e.g., awards won by Wikidata, views offered in the media, actual usage with references, updated statistics about statement references with pointers on where to get current numbers). A full section on relevant critique could also be of interest. What is currently there cannot even do this goal any justice, since it only mentions concerns that are generic problems of all Wikimedia projects alike (though not all of them can claim the same rate of citation support ;-).
Cheers, Markus [1] """ ReceptionThere is concern that the project is being influenced by lobbying companies, PR professionals and search engine optimizers.[27]
As of December 2015, according to Wikimedia statistics, half of the information in Wikidata is unsourced.[27] Another 30% is labeled as having come from Wikipedia.[27]
"""
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
