Wikidata:Property proposal/National Library of Ireland ID

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

National Library of Ireland ID[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

RepresentsNational Library of Ireland (Q1672830)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainpersons, organizations, geographical places, etc
Example 1Palladius of Galatia (Q2047944)vtls000269336
Example 2Peter Abelard (Q4295)vtls000003115
Example 3Paulinus of Nola (Q132473)vtls001104988
Example 4St Patrick's Purgatory (Q3445543)vtls000134075
Example 5St Patrick's Cathedral (Q16935457)vtls001111684
Example 6St. Patrick's Cathedral (Q624556)vtls000080325
Number of IDs in source275763 as of 2021-11, reference http://viaf.org/viaf/data/viaf-20211031-links.txt.gz
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URLhttp://viaf.org/processed/N6I%7C$1
See alsoLiterature Ireland ID (P5542), National Gallery of Ireland ID (P8906)
Applicable "stated in"-valueNational Library of Ireland (Q1672830)
Distinct-values constraintyes
Wikidata projectWikiProject Authority control (Q88300058)

Motivation[edit]

Vladimir Alexiev Jonathan Groß Andy Mabbett Jneubert Sic19 Wikidelo ArthurPSmith PKM Ettorerizza Fuzheado Daniel Mietchen Iwan.Aucamp Epìdosis Sotho Tal Ker Bargioni Carlobia Pablo Busatto Matlin Msuicat Uomovariabile Silva Selva 1-Byte Alessandra.Moi CamelCaseNick Songceci moz AhavaCohen Kolja21 RShigapov Jason.nlw MasterRus21thCentury Newt713 Pierre Tribhou Ahatd JordanTimothyJames Silviafanti Back ache AfricanLibrarian M.roszkowski Rhagfyr 沈澄心 MrBenjo S.v.Mering

Notified participants of WikiProject Authority control

This is one of only two VIAF component IDs not yet on WD, see query https://w.wiki/4WWh. When created, add:

Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 08:04, 6 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

This is one case where I'd deprecate the thing rather then deleting it, if it was possible to deprecate props

  • The RfD page says "See Property talk:P1946... Delete based on the discussion on the property talk page". Unfortunately that page is deleted so I can't read it ;-)
  • Luckily, enough of the discussion is copied to the RfD page. The key counter-argument is "it is a downloaded record from the Library of Congress authorities server. So basically a copy of the data with a new number in their own VTLS system"
  • I got historical stats of VIAF links by contributor, so I can check growth. I've now downloaded http://viaf.org/viaf/data/viaf-20211031-links.txt.gz (1.2G) and re-counted:
grep N6I *count*.txt
viaf-links-count-201612.txt:    227699 N6I
viaf-links-count-201807.txt:    227651 N6I
viaf-links-count-201808.txt:    227707 N6I
viaf-links-count-201911.txt:    228054 N6I
viaf-links-count-202003.txt:    228054 N6I
viaf-links-count-202111.txt:    275763 N6I

grep LC *count*.txt
viaf-links-count-201508.txt:   9154093 LC
viaf-links-count-201612.txt:  16256543 LC
viaf-links-count-201807.txt:  10156417 LC
viaf-links-count-201808.txt:  16912675 LC
viaf-links-count-201911.txt:  10560894 LC
viaf-links-count-202003.txt:  10658882 LC
viaf-links-count-202111.txt:  11063770 LC
  • N6I has hardly been updated in 2016-2020 (only 350 new). But in 2021, 78k new items (21%) were added
  • I can't see a correlation to the LC numbers... I guess N6I copied a small subset of LC
  • If the uselessness of "N6I" is confirmed, I'll withdraw the proposal, then:

Updated 9 Dec (added last count lines): given that 21% new items are added in the last year, it seems that N6I is alive and should be created as a prop.

  • I grepped for long VIAF IDs having a N6I link (saved as this GIST) and found many new N6I entries
  • Example below (the dates are from "VIAF History", not the links file)
  • It seems N6I now grows independently of LC, since 4 of the 6 examples are N6I alone
grep -P "viaf/\d{10}.*N6I" viaf-20211031-links.txt>viaf-20211031-new-N6I.txt

--Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:11, 9 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm setting the status to "ready" as the only opposition was by @Pigsonthewing: but I think I've shown enough new evidence. If you disagree, please resume the discussion --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 10:33, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]