2018-11-12 16:48:50 UTC
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it are very incomplete and outdated.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 .
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
There is concern that the project is being influenced by lobbying
companies, PR professionals and search engine optimizers.
As of December 2015, according to Wikimedia statistics, half of the
information in Wikidata is unsourced. Another 30% is labeled as
having come from Wikipedia.