Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Wikidata/Stable data

Random proposal ►◄ Wikidata

Stable data

Problem: It is my firm opinion that the control of incoming data and of changes to the data stored in Wikidata does not work as well as it should. What is a tiny edit on one of Wikidata's ~ 40 million items can cause wrong information to appear in many thousands of pages in more than a hundred other projects, even those which chose to have flagged revisions as part of their quality control. There are many examples where the threat of vandalism not being detected is significantly higher than the possibility that the information provided actually needs to be changed (for instance: Chiapas is located in Mexico), some information is actually timelessly true (such as population numbers from a census at a specific date in time). Allowing such stable data to be actually stabilzed and only be changed under circumstances yet to be defined could not only increase Wikidata's reputation as trustworthy database but also increase its usage, while it lessens its vulnerability.

Who would benefit: Wikidata as a whole (reputation, usage), Wikidata volunteers, other projects' volunteers (less need to focus constantly on changes to Wikidata items), readers (don't get wrong information)

Proposed solution: Develop some kind of flagging single data on Wikidata (i.e. not the whole revision, but a specific statement)

More comments:

Phabricator tickets:

Proposer: → «« Man77 »» ^[de] 13:18, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Translations: none yet

Discussion

Statement ranks sort of do that, although anyone can change them currently. --Tgr (talk) 08:14, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The proposed signed statements tangentially deal with improving trustworthiness of statements too. Spinster (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Voting

Support Goldzahn (talk) 23:32, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support An excellent idea that would help prevent much of the subtle, insidious vandalism that Wikidata is particularly vulnerable to. Gareth (talk) 10:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support β₁₆ - (talk) 13:23, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:30, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 18:54, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kurt Jansson (talk) 21:06, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thomas Obermair 4 (talk) 23:13, 28 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Libcub (talk) 05:51, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 🔒) (My global unlock 🔓) 12:58, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support M11rtinb (talk) 10:06, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support the idea of systems that help to detect or prevent vandalism. However I am unclear about details of this proposal. In Wikipedia we can protect vulnerable articles. Maybe we can set some system of protecting individual statements or whole items. --Jarekt (talk) 13:02, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Superchilum^{(talk to me!)} 21:28, 1 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support → «« Man77 »» ^[de] 14:38, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Emir of Wikipedia (talk) 16:23, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Termininja (talk) 18:13, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 02:51, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Epìdosis 08:09, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support a huge step for wikidata --Herzi Pinki (talk) 14:21, 5 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the general concept - the devil is in the details --Sphilbrick (talk) 16:33, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tacsipacsi (talk) 20:26, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pipetricker (talk) 11:17, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ruslik (talk) 13:53, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perrak (talk) 21:27, 10 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support we'd add some additional ways to maintain data quality. VorontsovIE (talk) 12:11, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support May be not about single statements, but just FlaggedRevs? Infovarius (talk) 13:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Luchesar • T/C 14:21, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]