Template talk:Authority control/Archive 4

This is an archive of past discussions about Template:Authority control. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

In the interest of keeping different versions of this template/module somewhat synchronised, I've been adding IDs to Wikisource's equivalent of the module and it currently has a lot more than en.wp. I'm not sure if you want any of these but you seem to be omitting the following: China Academic Library & Information System (CALIS, P270), China Biographical Database (CBDB, P497), Digital Library for Dutch Literature (DBNL, P723), Biblioteca Nacional de Portugal (PTBNP, P1005), Dutch Nationale Thesaurus Auteursnamen (NTA, P1006), Vatican Library (BAV, P1017), National Library of Israel (NLI, P949), National Library of China (NLC, P1213), Narodowy Uniwersalny Katalog Centralny (NUKAT, P1207), Internet Broadway Database (IBDB, P1220), Internet Speculative Fiction Database (ISFDB, P1233), Find a Grave (Grave, P535), Mathematics Genealogy Project (MGP, P549), Netherlands Institute for Art History (RKD, P650), Biblioteca Nacional de España (BNE, P950), National Library of Romania (NLR, P1003), French National Assembly (Sycomore, P1045), and Catholic Hierarchy (CH, P1047). Anyway, if there is any interest, there's a full list here (NB: the template is used for books and subjects too, but they have separate lists) and the code is here. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 00:48, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Authority control, uses definitions of name, person, etc. drawn from librarianship; I'm not 100% clear that some of these other datasources use the same definitions. Isn't that going to be a problem? Stuartyeates (talk) 01:16, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks very much, Adam. Also, Stuartyeates, in the future please make sure you are replying to a specific thread rather from the page as a whole. This lets people who are watching the page know which thread you are responding to. Thanks! Softlavender (talk) 03:43, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

• Most useful, thanks. I wasn't aware of the module at WS so I hadn't looked there for things to add. There are few that are worth adding here too.

Some of those that give information specific to persons are already included (e.g. P546, P950). Not sure about the work/subject related ones: in general, this module is used only on biographies.

A few don't have much of a page to link to (e.g. P1017). For an issue with P1213, see this. -- 签名 _sig at 05:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)

Please see discussion at Template talk:Infobox artist#DAAO record in infobox. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:51, 20 April 2014 (UTC)

I would like to suggest that the EIDR schema is added to the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Authority_control. EIDR is an industry-standard database (see http://eidr.org/membership/) that might provide a controlled vocabulary for media assets. ISAN is part of many of the cross-referenced IDs. BrillLyle (talk) 20:57, 25 April 2014 (UTC)

I shall be attending the ORCID Outreach Meeting and Codefest in Chicago on 21-22 May; in part to speak about the use of ORCID in Wikipedia & Wikidata. If anyone has any suggestions or questions, I'll be happy to raise them there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:47, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

In the Roud Folk Song Index, traditional folk songs are given unique identifying numbers. Our articles about these songs are listed at List of folk songs by Roud number. Would anyone be interested in adding this functionality to this template? — Scott • talk 21:41, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I'm wondering if this template be a sensible place to add Scopus author identifiers? See e.g. Template:Scopus. Duncan.Hull (talk) 12:40, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

A version of this template is now on Wikidata, for use on the user pages of those of you who edit there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:20, 21 May 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Module:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

lccnLink() generates an incorrect URL for subject heading IDs which should link to .../subjects/foo.html instead of .../names/foo.html.

To fix this, lccnLink() should become:

function lccnLink( id )
    local parts = splitLccn( id )
    if not parts then
        return false
    end
    type = parts[1] ~= 'sh' and 'names' or 'subjects'
    id = parts[1] .. parts[2] .. append( parts[3], '0', 6 )
    return '[http://id.loc.gov/authorities/' .. type .. '/' .. id .. ' ' .. id .. ']' .. getCatForId( 'LCCN' )
end

EdwardH (talk) 14:38, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Not done: type is the name of a built-in function in Lua, which your code would clobber. Please pick a different variable name. Also, make sure you declare it with local before using it to avoid polluting _G. (Instead of posting your fixed function here, edit the one in the sandbox.) Jackmcbarn (talk) 03:44, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

I've applied your suggested fixes to the function, which is now in the sandbox. EdwardH (talk) 07:56, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@EdwardH: This looks good from a coding perspective now. Can you provide a link to a page that uses a subject heading ID so I can make sure it works as expected? Jackmcbarn (talk) 15:22, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: COBOL and C (programming language) use subject heading IDs. By the way, other authority files (such as WorldCat and LIBRIS) don't have dedicated pages for subjects, but do allow you to search by them. Do you think it would be worth generating links to such searches? (such as this) EdwardH (talk) 19:16, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Done, thanks. I'm not really a fan of linking to search results, but it might just be me. Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:36, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Discogs is a massive open recorded music database, could it not be added to the AC template much in the same way the much smaller MusicBrainz db has been? Perhaps with the same or similar restrictions on usage as per the AC template help? Jimthing (talk) 22:43, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

What's the exact format of the identifier for people in discogs and how does it relate to the URL? The more we know about the format of the identifier, the better checking we can do. Is there a description of what they give identifiers to (people / identities / groups / etc)? Stuartyeates (talk) 03:34, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

The inclusion of botanical names in this template duplicates that in {{Botanist}}. Please join discussion of how to resolve this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:49, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

Unresolved

This template is not displaying, on our mobile site, nor in the new Android app. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:16, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Tpt, Legoktm, Docu: see also Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 127#Authority control template not showing in mobile. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

We need someone to address the styling issue described there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:03, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Anyone? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:50, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

What do you think about including Pleiades: [1]? See also someone's note down meta:Talk:Requests for comment/How to deal with open datasets. trespassers william (talk) 20:32, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I've just found - and fixed - articles (George Segal, Illeana Douglas) with ISNI's entered as ORCIDs (or twice, as each). Can we test for and fix this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:49, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

One can (and should) stress the difference by enforcing the notation of ORCIDs in the official form with dashes (opposed to ISNIs with blanks as grouping character). -- Gymel (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

+1: One number system but different notations is quite confusing. BTW: Segal and Douglas are rare errors, since there are only 88 Wikipedia articles with ORCID identifiers. Funy are the cases where ORCID is used as personal homepage for non-scientists, see Mika'ela Fisher: ORCID 0000-0002-2923-5255. --Kolja21 (talk) 16:52, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

ORCID isn't just for scientists! It's for "researchers and contributors", with a main focus on academic publishing, which of course includes the humanities. I've checked all our (and Wikidata's) ORCID entries and removed all of the few that were plain ISNIs, but it would be good to trap future errors. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

That wouldn't stop someone putting in an ISNI-with-dashes (or ORCID-without-dashes). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:19, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

Can anyone help with this, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:04, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

I've just taken a look at the code and had a think about this. As I understand it there are two separate things that distinguish generic ISNIs from ORCIDs: (a) separate display and (b) separate allocation ranges. Should we be checking for both of these? Stuartyeates (talk) 22:38, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stuartyeates: The number ranges are the important thing. I think the display is a convention rather than a reliable distinction - no harm in checking that too, though. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:17, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Where can I find which ISNI ranges are assigned to ORCID? Are there other ranges we should be checking for? Stuartyeates (talk) 22:56, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stuartyeates: I've checked with tech support at ORCID; they're assigned the range 0000-0001-5000-0007 to 0000-0003-5000-0001 within ISNI. No other ranges to check. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:33, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

So if I'm reading that right, it's a block of 20 million, right? The very last digit is the check digit (which we already check for in the code). Seems like we should just be able to check the first 8 digits. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:12, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

If we only check the first 8 digits, how would you trap 0000-0001-4999-999Z or 0000-0003-5000-001Z (where Z is whatever the check digit would be)? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:37, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stuartyeates: Also, please see http://support.orcid.org/knowledgebase/articles/116780 - Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:50, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Stuartyeates: Can you help, please? Should this validation also be done in Wikidata? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:03, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, took my eye off the ball here. If we do this in wikipedia, we can provide immediate feedback to users. There is no reason we can't check it in both places. I hope to look at the code in the next couple of days. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:18, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

An interesting version of this template is being used on the Russian Wikipedia; for example on [2]. What do folk think of that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

I think it would be a great standard for the English version. It would format most of the external links into a single format. Did you start an English version already. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:22, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Not yet; I'd like to see signs of emerging consensus, here, before doing so, and taking it to the wider community. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I think we should migrate it over and convert it into English and just get a feel for what fields are there. It doesn't need to be added to any Wikipedia English biographies yet. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

External links have been a battlefield on en.wiki for a _very_ long time. Having a template that incorporates all external links is quite different from just links to authority control sources. If nothing else, some of those sources are full of trolls, mimic, impostors and spammers. Stuartyeates (talk) 07:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

There are two aspects to the Russian template: the style and the content. We could adapt the former, without the latter (or with only parts of the latter). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:22, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

It seems that the Russians have chosen a standard set of external links for living and for dead people. Twitter and Facebook and the official homepage, the entry in a few standard databases like IMDB. It would not replace ALL external links, just the standard 10, and maybe 5 or 6 will be filled depending on if they are alive or dead, and what century they belonged to, and the rest null. I imaging living people would have the most standard references as per the Obama entry you found. For dead people we can have the link to Findagrave, Appletons, Congressional Biography, Britannica that are the standards for English entries. We can start by ranking what we think are the most important external links from top to bottom, so the most used ones are at top. Then as they get filled we can arrange the order to have the field with the most entries be the top one, and the fields with the most null entries at the bottom. If the list gets too big, we can always have just the first 5 or first 10 displayed, and the rest hidden but available by clicking "more" at the bottom. Or: the entire section can appear collapsed by default and clicked to be expanded. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 17:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Can we make this template not display, if there is no data? That way, we could include it in articles and it would magically appear when a value is added to Wikidata. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:44, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

The requested code has been placed in the sandbox, in this edit. This request is fairly uncontroversial, given both that no-one has opposed to Andy´s request and that Edgars2007 posted the same request below at #Empty template.--Snaevar (talk) 16:13, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

As this page is HIGHLY used, please leave this open for a day or so to gather any comments first. — xaosflux ^Talk 23:21, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

The comment has already been made, that this proposal has been here since July without opposition. So I will make the change shortly unless there are any concerns. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:14, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

I suggest adding a (hidden) category for empty auth. control templates, so that they could be tracked down and fixed (by deleting them from articles or adding data). --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 18:28, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The point of this request is that they should not be deleted; if a hidden, empty template sits in an article, and someone then adds a value to Wikidata, the populated template will then magically display. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:04, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Ok, then you can strike out the part about about deleting them. But still, I think there should be added category to track down such articles. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 05:17, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:16, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

@MSGJ: Thank you. Could you also help with the styling issue discussed in #Not on mobile, above, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:12, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

I think there should be check in module if there is some data to show, so that articles with empty authority control could be tracked down and/or hidden. See this article for example. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 10:51, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes, see above (which I've just restored). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:20, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

The markup of the HTTPS link in this template looks confusing. VIAF link is HTTPS and is shown with a lock symbol. WorldCat and MusicBrainz are also HTTPS links BUT NO lock symbol?! Would be nice if somebody could dive into the source code and spot the error? 78.35.214.148 (talk) 21:54, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

The source problem is that the VIAF link is an https link, while the others are protocol relative. In plain english this means that the VIAF link starts with "https://", while the others start with "//" and for the latter they are assigned an protocol based on what protocol is currently being used.--Snaevar (talk) 15:36, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

A version of this template is now available, for taxonomic authors, and on user pages, on Wikispecies. As there is not yet any Wikidata integration with that project, values must be entered manually. Please see species:Template:Authority control. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

And in Wiktionary, where I expect its primary use will be for user pages. See wiktionary:en:Template:authority control. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:50, 15 September 2014 (UTC)

There is a field that displays as "(data)" but when you click on it, it shows a 404 error message. It is for the French National Library. If the person is not in the database we need to show nothing, not a link to a 404 message. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:07, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

On which article did you see this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:55, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

Michael Keaton was the last one I saw it on. I saw it on three biographies today. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 04:54, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks. The other BNF link is OK (and so our data is correct), so I wonder whether they've changed their (data-) URL structure? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

They are still using the same URL structure as this template does, but his page on the data subdomain does not exist. If you try to follow said data link on Michael Keaton's page and then try to search for him, you won't find him. So, I think this is what needs to be done:

1. Agree on an name for an seperate argument for that data link.
2. File a request on Wikipedia:Bot requests, where an bot would fill in that argument for data links that do work.
3. Get an accepted bot flag for that request
4. Create that argument in the module sandbox and get that deployed to the main one.

Should the bot not be accepted, this request becomes stale... well, unless you are willing to do that manually, but that is something I doubt you would do.--Snaevar (talk) 11:09, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Don't worry. The data.bnf.fr website is new. In a few weeks (or months; officially "this fall") it should work for all BnF authority files. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:31, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

The list of Languages links for this template is very long. As our version provides its two links for more and more authorities, I like it less and less.

Thousands of Norwegian NO.wiki pages transclude template no:Mal:Autoritetsdata. Its display differs radically from ours in handling all of the authority targets as we handle the WorldCat link alone. The ID string is not shown and the authority label, like our 'WorldCat', links to that authority's page for the person rather than to a Wikipedia article about the authority. The Norwegians link only the word 'Autoritetsdata' to an article about it. Example: no:George Orwell#Eksterne lenker.

The French fr:Notices d’autorité (1000s of transclusions) template display suppresses ID strings, as the Norwegian does, but uses full names of the authorities rather than abbreviations, such as 'Bibliothèque du Congrès' rather than 'LCCN'. Example: fr:Jeremy Bentham#Liens externes.

The Greek and Swedish templates (immediately above) follow ours --and the Russian (discussed above) and the German-- in providing two links for each authority. --P64 (talk) 19:38, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

I prefer to see data displayed, rather than have generic links. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:49, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Versions of this template are now available in the Greek (el) and Swedish (sv) Wikipedias. Both call data from Wikidata, and could use bots to deploy them, subject to local agreement. I can put any interested bot-owners in touch with English-speaking editors on those projects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:48, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your work but imho not all Wikipedias need all authority numbers. That's the fun of Wikidata: You can pick the info you like. Flooding all language versions with the same info could cause the reaction of the Spanish WP: es:Plantilla:Authority control (red link) has been deleted. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:46, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Local editors are, of course, at liberty to edit those templates, or indeed, to do something as stupid as to delete them. But "flooding"?!? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:52, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Module:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Line 298: { 'RID', 'ResearcherID', 0, ridLink },

Replace with { 'RID', 'ResearcherID', 1053, ridLink }, GZWDer (talk) 06:21, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

 Done and thank you be very clear on exactly what you wanted! — xaosflux ^Talk 11:34, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Please check nclLink(). I don't think you can retrieve the page with the id. --Kovl (talk) 06:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Would it be possible to add OCLC to the authority control template and transclude it from Wikidata? Leutha (talk) 11:48, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I agree; that's P243. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

I think we should add Scopus Author IDs (Wikidata property P1153). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:25, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm trying to configure the Module on Wiki-cy, so as to turn off the Categories with one simple touch of a button. Any ideas please? This is a a short term step until we've worked out how to hide them. Lua certainly complicates things, as this would have been very simple on an ordinary template. Many thanks. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 18:00, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

No need to turn them off. You hide categories by putting __HIDDENCAT__ onto the category page. On en.WP, we do this using {{Wikipedia category|hidden=yes}}. See {{Wikipedia category}}, and the source of Category:User pages with ORCID identifiers, for instance. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:35, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Many thanks! Job done! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 21:57, 16 October 2014 (UTC)

Where I have been unsuccessful finding a VIAF record, I am looking to utilise "no value" statement. The LUA module isn't coping with "no value" so I am wondering whether we are able to modify the script to manage this circumstance. I am less concerned about the authorities utilised as they can be left empty, however, VIAF is the central coordinating reference. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:11, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

Discovered that "no value" is not currently considered a valid statement, though I am addressing that at d:Property talk:P214 as something is required where an author is yet to have something assigned, and it needs to be tracked. — billinghurst sDrewth 23:38, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

"no value" is now acceptable as an entry at WD (where qualified). Would someone please be able to make the requisite update to the module? @Jackmcbarn: Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 00:16, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: Do you know of any pages that currently have "no value" set on a VIAF record? Jackmcbarn (talk) 00:46, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: yes d:Q18200401 though no bio page at enWP — billinghurst sDrewth 03:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I just disabled the MusicBrainz Wikidata property requirements whitelist. It's too tedious to maintain manually IMO. If anyone disagrees, I'm happy to put it back and discuss this further. Legoktm (talk) 23:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm working with a number of editors on non-English Wikipedias, to have {{Authority control}} and its sub-templates and module(s) imported into their projects. A couple are getting errors which they can't resolve (they both speak English, thankfully!). Could anyone kindly assist them, if I point them here? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:46, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Anyone? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:40, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Now resolved. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hello, using this template in its simple form, allowing it to read from wikidata is terrific. I propose to extend its use to automatically provide categories of birth / death. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with the techniques used, so I only give my proposal here. --FocalPoint (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

User:Magnus Manske has created a new tool which lets you check whether an authority control identifier is used on Wikidata, and thus in Wikipedia (including non-English Wikipedias). I wrote about it in http://pigsonthewing.org.uk/finding-orcid-wikidata-wikipedia. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:50, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

This Coen brothers article seems to be the only bio of these brothers, so I added two Authority control templates for them. I don't know whether that might not be a problem. There are two redirects from their individual names (Ethan Coen and Joel Coen), but it seemed even worse to add them to the redirect pages. --Robert.Allen (talk) 03:14, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

The authority control info goes on the redirects. If you notice, the redirects are already in a butt-load of categories and the authority control goes along with that. Stuartyeates (talk) 06:06, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

Just curious, are there many examples of this rather unusual procedure. Putting the Authority control links on the redirect more or less hides them from readers. That's why I think it is a bad idea. --Robert.Allen (talk) 09:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

The authority control links are on the redirects for the readers, they're on the redirect links for wikidata and other websites (such as auhtority control websites) that are linking to wikipedia. Without them on the redirect (which is our representation of the person), we can't 'complete the loop' --- we have have proper bi-directional links with the authority control systems. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:13, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

I see what you are saying, but not many readers will look at the redirect page. In my view the problem is with the page(s) about the Coen brothers. Each brother should probably have his own separate page (with the Authority control data and cats for each) rather than a redirect. Only their collaborative work should be described on the Coen brothers page. That would be more similar to what we have for partner pairs (like Gilbert and Sullivan, etc). --Robert.Allen (talk) 01:12, 12 December 2014 (UTC)

I noticed that the article on Alpha Phi Omega has an Authority control that has both VIAF and LCCN

Should the Usage table in the doc for the LCCN and VIAF be changed so that they are no longer restricted to people, or is this caused by the fact that there is a book where the organization is listed as an author?Naraht (talk) 16:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I wasn't under the impression that VIAF was restricted to people, only that the bot targeted people because organizations are much more fuzzier (and less represented in both VIAF and Wikipedia). I've added the Authority control template for organizations--even manuscripts--when I remember to do so. kosboot (talk) 16:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

According to this, it isn't: VIAF has 5.4 million corporate records out of 41 million total. Perhaps we should @Maximiliankleinoclc: @Federico Leva (BEIC): for further info?LeadSongDog come howl! 20:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm by no means an expert, but I can look for expert advice if needed and if Max doesn't respond. I'm not surprised that VIAF has so many records for entities, insofar bibliographic records attribute works to entities; I don't know however how developed they are. I agree that there should be no problem in mentioning this possibility in the docs.

As for encouraging the addition, it's not trivial to tell whether it would make sense to mass add them, because in this case the authority records' scope and Wikipedia's may diverge more: many "notable" entities never published a work in their name; for many entities the authority record may have little or nothing significant to tell from an encyclopedic perspective. Figuring this out would probably be a project on its own.

In the meanwhile, it's certainly fine to add such identifiers on any entity's Wikidata item, and to some extent people at d:Wikidata:Bot requests may be available to help. Then, if/when Wikipedia decides to use such identifiers en masse, it will be trivial to do so. --Federico Leva (BEIC) (talk) 07:47, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Magnus Manske, User:Pigsonthewing: The values in Wikidata are false. The actual value conforms to /[0-9]{15}[0-9X]/ but it is stored with spaces. This is bad for queries. Unfortunately, some people there blocked my fix, and blocked me. John B. Sullivan (talk) 12:47, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Your comments have already been answered on Wikidata. You were blocked for one day (for edit warring). The bock has now expired, so you may again discuss the issue, but you need to pay heed to what others tell you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:26, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

They have not been answered. They have been rejected with dubious claims. And I was not blocked for edit warring, stop deceiving, I was blocked for having another opinion. John B. Sullivan (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Your Wikidata block log, and your Wikidata talk page, are freely available for anyone to view, and show that you were. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing the Wikidata block log and the Wikidata talk page don't reveal the reason. They show what some people wrote. If edit warring would have been a reason, the other parties would have been blocked too. John B. Sullivan (talk) 15:52, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked per checkuser. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:05, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Currently the VIAF system links to English Wikipedia. That excludes other Wikipedias. Why is this not done via Wikidata? John B. Sullivan (talk) 12:49, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

You'd have to ask them that. This page is for discussing the workings of the Engllish-Wikipedia's template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:19, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing Why you think I have to? John B. Sullivan (talk) 11:17, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Because it is something that can't be controlled by editing the template actually on Wikipedia. The person who could make that change may not even have a wikipedia account. Also, while this could be done in Wikidata, until a wikidata entry is automatically created for *every* page in every wikipedia, it wouldn't make sense for VIAF to connect to it. Does it mean that there are people who have pages on the Russian (picked at random) language Wikipedia who can't be linked from VIAF, sure, but at this point, VIAF has chosen the solution that gives the best coverage.Naraht (talk) 16:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I would not call best coverage a coverage that does not cover items found in Wikidata but not in English Wikipedia. Wikidata stores the VIAF, and stores the link to any Wikipedia. That also means, putting the VIAF in the Authority template could be avoided by putting it directly into Wikidata. John B. Sullivan (talk) 19:26, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked per checkuser. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Where editing was allowed (Wikipedia ... anyone can edit?), I changed the USA bias and put ISNI before LCCN. I could not change

In the module source code:

{ 'LCCN', 'LCCN', 244, lccnLink },
{ 'ISNI', 'ISNI', 213, isniLink },

John B. Sullivan (talk) 13:06, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing moved ISNI behind LCCN in several places [3], thus, enlarging the cultural bias. Any reason why? John B. Sullivan (talk) 15:04, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

For the reason I gave in my edit summary. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:33, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

User:Pigsonthewing: That is "(restore pending consensus in discussion on template talk page)". But there was no discussion. No one opposed the change with any reasoning. John B. Sullivan (talk) 11:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

To be honest, this allegation of cultural bias is nonsense. I'm counting GND, SELIBR, BIBSYS, SUDOC, BNF, BPN, NLA and NDL just to mention a few non-American entries. And I'd also like to note that Pigsonthewing did neither introduce the ISNI parameter to the documentation nor to the Lua module. This was done by Tpt (who identifies as a native speaker of French on his user page) and it was him who added ISNI behind the LCCN list entry [4][5]. De728631 (talk) 19:18, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

User:De728631 To be honest, your post is nonsense. GND, SELIBR, BIBSYS, SUDOC, BNF, BPN, NLA and NDL are not listed before ISNI. John B. Sullivan (talk) 11:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Anyway, to state that the LC Name Authorities have an U.S. bias ist utter nonsense. The Library of Congress hosts the infrastructure, but there are - directly and/or via OCLC's Worldcat collaborationg libraries from all continents (not quite sure about Antarctica though). There might be an english language bias but I would deem this acceptable for the English language Wikipedia. -- Gymel (talk) 11:25, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Utter nonsense, and then no facts. Also, in English it is "English" and "is", not "english" and "is". Greetings to Germany, Mr. Gymel, "only" reading is not sufficient for learning. John B. Sullivan (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

In my comment I was deliberately not referring to the order of the template entries. The number of avalailable entries shows that there is no bias of any sorts which makes the succession of the entries in the template even more irrelevant. I suggest though we sort them alphabetically which would satisfy WP:MOSLIST. De728631 (talk) 23:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

If you were not referring to the order, you missed the topic, which is about nothing but order. John B. Sullivan (talk) 15:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

I seem to remember the British Library participates in the LCCN, so how does cultural bias play a role? There may be a bias toward English, but this is the English Wikipedia after all. --Robert.Allen (talk) 06:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

You can proceed and name more, but that does not remove the bias. LCCN feeds ISNI, and there are many systems that are not in LCCN, so for the number of data sources: "ISNI - x = LCCN". John B. Sullivan (talk) 19:57, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Dear all, there are many more English speaking libraries, even in VIAF there are many more. Singling out the USA-LCCN and put them first IS cultural bias. The ISNI pages are in English language too. John B. Sullivan (talk) 15:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

IMO, the British Library and the Library of Congress are still the most important English-language libraries with regard to cataloging standards and WorldCat is the most important online library catalog, and these items should remain first. --Robert.Allen (talk) 19:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

"IMO" is perfect if you don't care about cultural bias. My proposal was to eliminate cultural bias, not arguing with "IMO" but with facts. LCCN is a source contributing via VIAF to ISNI. The template is for Authority Control and not for linking to the "most important" library for that item. John B. Sullivan (talk) 12:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Now mentioned at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Countering systemic bias#Bias preferring USA based LCCN over ISNI. John B. Sullivan (talk) 13:19, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

More forum shopping. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Let me see if I have the arguments correctly: on the one side, John B. Sullivan is saying that the ISNI is an international number, while the LCCN is a national number. On the other side, Andy and Robert are saying that the LCCN is more used in English than the ISNI? Is that correct? Are there Wikipedia: Reliable sources that someone can cite that compare them, or is this all personal opinion? --GRuban (talk) 14:33, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

If User:John B. Sullivan would only read the web pages he is citing, he might learn something and not continue his assertions. Having some basic knowledge about VIAF and ISNI would help, too. -- Gymel (talk) 15:33, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

I doubt that User:Gymel is correct for the first sentence: "only" reading is not helpful if read content is not memorized. For the second: Having "some" basic knowledge does not seem sufficient. John B. Sullivan (talk) 19:51, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The question I have is, why does it matter? This isn't a debate about omitting one in favor of the other, just the order that they appear. This sounds like a bikeshed problem to me. Mr.Z-man 16:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Quite. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, it's not a world-ending debate. Despite that, we should have some rhyme or reason for the way we order things in templates that are used in a large number of places. Having the international one first, then the national ones would be a reasonable order. Even alphabetical would be an order. --GRuban (talk) 17:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

What makes you think I said that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Hrr. :-(. Right. So to amend, on the other side, Robert is saying that the LCCN is used more often than the ISNI, while Andy is refusing to give his reasons, but is pointing to talk pages that don't answer the question, and answering questions with questions, which is completely useless, but is serving to annoy people who want to understand the issue. Do I have THAT right? Andy, when a stranger comes to you on the street, and asks "do you know what time it is?", do you look at your watch, say "Yes, I do", and walk on? Andy, please, pretty please, with sugar on top, what is your reasoning for the order of the template? --GRuban (talk) 17:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Now you're just making things up. Try reading what I wrote, above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:17, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

You wrote nothing that justifies the reversions. Would Andy Mabbett dare to explain why the international ID should come after the USA-centric one? John B. Sullivan (talk) 19:22, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Please forgive my blindness, Andy, but despite my best efforts, I can not see your reasoning at any point above on this page. I see "For the reason I gave in my edit summary" which is a reference to your edit summary. The edit summary says "(restore pending consensus in discussion on template talk page)", correct? This seems to be the template talk page, and again, lacks any of your reasoning for the current ordering that I can find. Please, do expound. --GRuban (talk) 22:10, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Judging from Andy's summary "restore pending consensus in discussion on template talk page" I suppose he wished you had started a discussion before making any changes to the documentation. I would have understood that if you had edited the live template but I find it a bit strange here because it was just the "help page" of the template if you will. So while there was no discussion when you swapped the entries in the documentation, we're now discussing the positions of US and other authority control items in the general template. That said, it would indeed be interesting to hear Andy's point of view on the order of the list entries, and why the documentation page is worth edit warring (Andy and John, please refrain from reverting each other). If this is in fact a triviality why did Andy care to revert John's changes? De728631 (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The reverts of Andy Mabbett were a violation of WP:BRD "When reverting, be specific about your reasons". But there is nothing, no single reason. John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

And here's a question to John: which single-country parameter would you like to see as the first one of its kind? Simply putting LCCN behind ISNI still grants the pole position to the United States. De728631 (talk) 20:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The pole position goes to WorldCat, then next is VIAF, then ISNI - if Andy Mabbett would not have intervened. Further above there is a request to put ISNI before VIAF. I would also support moving WorldCat next to LCCN if the IDs are the same. My aim would be to have ISNI first. Placement of the other elements I would prefer to discuss in another section, properly named for that task. John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:32, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

And to confirm, your reasoning for this is that the ISNI is the only international code? While all the others are national, or at best multi-national, but do not include all nations? Am I correct in this? --GRuban (talk) 22:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I was asking for national indeces. If LCCN is so inherently biased why should it still be a US index that starts the row of national list entries after WorldCat, VIAF, ISNI, etc.? Shouldn't you prefer another index like LIBRIS from neutral, non-English-speaking Sweden to be the first national index in the list? Or maybe BPN? Your argument of a biased list doesn't hold if you only push the relevant entry one or two places back but keep its position in the context of national control files. De728631 (talk) 22:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

• It's not clear to me that ISNI is mature enough to take "pole position", nor widely used enough to outrank major schemes such as LCCN. All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 11:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC).
  
• Also, giving LCCN precedence does not necessarily reflect USA bias. This assertion seems to be an opinion which is not supported by evidence. As I mentioned previously, the British Library participates and is a "major contributor" to it (see here). Other institutions also participate. Apparently, it is a cooperative program with many members: "NACO partners are global leaders in uniquely identifying authorized names in international databases." It does have a bias toward English versions of names, e.g. Charles III, Duke of Lorraine: LCCN vs ISNI. This seems appropriate for the English Wikipedia, perhaps more so than ISNI. --Robert.Allen (talk) 09:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

The OP has been blocked per checkuser. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:06, 24 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I'm working on authority control on Wikidata and one of the things we've added a lot is RKDartists (P650). It's similar to ULAN and maintained by the Netherlands Institute for Art History. Currently just under 15.000 items on Wikidata have a link and just under 10.000 items are linked to an article here. For the table:

• Parameter : RKDa (also RKDimages)
• Scope : Persons (and some organizations like art galleries)
• Name : RKDartists
• Search : https://rkd.nl/nl/explore/artists/record?query
• Remarks : RKDartists is an online database using a controlled vocabulary currently containing around 200,000+ names and other information about artists. Names in RKDartists may include given names, pseudonyms, variant spellings, names in multiple languages, and names that have changed over time (e.g., married names).

As a link https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/<id> should be used to force the interface language to English. Multichill (talk) 21:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

This edit request to Module:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I updated the sandbox and applied the change. Please update Module:Authority control. Multichill (talk) 13:34, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

 Done. Merry Christmas! Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:07, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Can the template configured so that the template support Wikidata property P345? — Revi 16:01, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

We should not do that - IMDb is not a reliable source, i.e. not an "authority". --Mirokado (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Just wondering if there is a reason why WorldCat doesn't have a link in the template when all the other identifiers do? -- WOSlinker (talk) 16:57, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Worldcat is a bibliographic utility, not an authority file. The LC Authority file is entirely curated. Worldcat is not - there's millions of records that represent "messy data." kosboot (talk) 17:25, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

If you look at the section above, WorldCat has a link. But the ID is the same as for LCCN, so the placement looks weird. John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:00, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The WorldCat identities are based on various catalogues including LCCN but that is not the only source. E.g. here is one that was extracted from VIAF. De728631 (talk) 20:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

De728631 - thank you. How did you find this? John B. Sullivan (talk) 20:34, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

The WorldCat article says that the database is collected from 170 countries. So I did a Google search for one virtually unknown German name that was unlikely to have been indexed by the Library of Congress and ended up with this result. De728631 (talk) 22:09, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Kosboot, there's always a conflict between the goals of comprehensiveness and accuracy. One viable approach to this is to do both: If I understand correctly, OCLC has put the comprehensive data in Worldcat and the curated data in VIAF. VIAF has a history for each record (much like Wikipedia) but for many Worldcat works the creator has no corresponding VIAF entry. OCLC 848067119 is a good one that does, showing where the metadata originated:

• schema:creator <http://viaf.org/viaf/12872178> rdf:type schema:Person schema:familyName "Quedens" schema:givenName "Jens" schema:name "Quedens, Jens" schema:sameAs <http://d-nb.info/gnd/109339878>

On the other hand OCLC 848002910 has a not-so-tidy "experimental" record for an in-progress effort

• schema:creator <http://experiment.worldcat.org/entity/work/data/1359428010#Meeting/convention_of_religions_in_india_calcutta_1909> rdf:type bgn:Meeting rdf:type schema:Event schema:name "Convention of Religions in India, Calcutta, 1909."

It is not wrong to have both, it is just that they fill different needs. LeadSongDog come howl! 21:16, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Eeek, I made an error in what I said. VIAF certainly has corporate entries. I meant Max's implementation of the VIAF bot - as part of his experiment, he excluded corporations, but of course that doesn't mean one can't enter them. kosboot (talk) 02:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Does anyone here know how to find the WorldCat top page for someone, or multiple people with the same name, without any LCCN? Lacking that, I have added a worldcat search report to section External links with a warning that WorldCat does (or may, if I don't know) report hits for multiple people with the same name. --P64 (talk) 17:42, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean in Worldcat Identies? Otherwise there is no "top page" for entries that have the same name but are different people--they are all concatenated together. (It may be worth saying again that Worldcat is a messy utility. It manually uses authority files but there are many millions of records in there without any authority control or connection.) kosboot (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

On the other hand, if you're just looking to get a list of authors with that name, this query will do it. LeadSongDog come howl! 19:17, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

WorldCat does provide identities and thus pages under http:worldcat.org/identities/ for names without LCCNs. Official info, found this hour[6]. The merger and redirection backlog at WorldCat is remarkably "old" in some cases. For example, see Louis Darling[7]--some of which proliferation is derived from the bundling backlog at VIAF but the first two enumerated hits are 'np-darling, louis' (assigned by WorldCat and filled with books by Louis Darling) and 'lccn-n79-134136' (assigned to Louis Darling by LC in 1979).

--P64 (talk) 21:59, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

Have you considered adding a link to the wikidata entry in the Authority control box. This would take a user directly to the source of much of the data used in the box. Please ignore me if this has been discussed before.

Billingd (talk) 16:43, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata is not an Authority. Stuartyeates (talk) 22:55, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

OK Billingd (talk) 02:18, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

Have you considered adding the People Australia identifier (P1315) to the template. This provides a link into the Trove database at the National Library of Australia. I would hope this is in addition to, and before, the older NLA identifier (P409).

Comparing the generated URLs, for Ida Lee we get

• this from NLA identifier (P409)
• this from People Australia identifier (P1315)

Further information on the identifier is available from the NLA

Billingd (talk) 16:35, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

I'm not sure how many national identifiers we need for a single country. Is one a superset of the other? Can one be marked as obseleted? Stuartyeates (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

AFAICT, neither is a superset of the other. There are notable Australians with a People Australia identifier that haven't written or been the subject of books, and so don't have an NLA identifier. Maybe it is better to wait for a while. Billingd (talk) 02:20, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Module:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Use formatter URL (P1630) for creating the links in a similar fashion as MediaWiki:Gadget-AuthorityControl.js (but in lua instead of js) instead of all the hard coded URLs in link functions. This would likely require some sandbox work to get right. 50.126.125.240 (talk) 22:30, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please make your requested changes to the template's sandbox first; see WP:TESTCASES. You are right, so please do the sandbox work and then come back with a Please change X to Y request. :) Happy coding! — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 22:44, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I don't think this is currently possible. I think we need arbitrary access (phab:T49930) for this first. Multichill (talk) 14:06, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Template:Infobox medical condition has been nominated for merging with Template:Authority control. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Alakzi (talk) 21:52, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

There is a pending TfD merge proposal involving this template @ Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2015 February 25#Template:Infobox medical condition. Will someone with the template editor bit please add the required TfD notice template? Thanks. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:21, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Would someone please be able to add "DAAO identifier" (d:Property:P1707) to the module/template. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 08:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Could you put the required code in the sandbox please and reactivate? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:44, 20 March 2015 (UTC)

Why don't we add the IMDB and IBDB profile number to the template? Currently it may appear in WIkipedia as a reference or as an external link, and as an external link it may or may not use the standard IMDB or IDBD template. We would then be the primary database that links VIAF to IMDB and IBDB numbers. We would tie together another authoritative source and standardize the display. The links as sources and external links can remain. It should be easy to migrate the numbers from the existing template automatically. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:19, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I'd be a bit more welcoming of IMDB since anything in the database is easily correctable. That is not true with IBDB, where correction requires one to submit a copy of the original program to the owners who will then decide if the entry is in need of updating. Not very transparent. I've found mistakes in IBDB but the task of fixing them is too onerous. Perhaps Ovrtur, since that is editable by members of the community proved to be reliable by the owners. kosboot (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

I find errors in VIAF weekly, and I know of no way to fix them or who to write to fix them. It is full of unmerged duplicates and errors in birth years, it is missing birth and death years for some entries ... yet we use it. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

These are not Authority control systems. If we're going to have a {{PersonIdentifierInThirdPartyWebsite}} template, that would be a whole separate thing. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:32, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

They were not designed for authority control but we can make them into ones. We accept numbers from libraries that provide no utility to Wikipedia and the average reader. Why not accept the entry number from IMDB and IBDB. It would tie together more useful things than are currently tied together by VIAF alone. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:53, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

"We would then be the primary database that links VIAF to IMDB and IBDB numbers." Wikidata evidently hopes to be that database. ISFDB, IMDB, and IBDB identifiers are now within its scope.

I would prefer more progress there (where data entry is not yet the primary need, if i understand correctly, because basic points need resolution first). And someday see a more economical Authority control template message here. --P64 (talk) 01:27, 24 March 2015 (UTC)

We already link to MusicBrainz, the music equivalent of IMDB and IBDB only because they already incorporate the VIAF number. They are not an authority control system.

@Legoktm, Jackmcbarn, and Tpt: Would one of you mind implementing "no value" in the VIAF identifier component as an acceptable value within the controlling module? It is an accepted value at Wikidata where a tracking date is added. If you are looking for a local page where you can see it in action please see Samuel Dyer. Thanks. — billinghurst sDrewth 11:05, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

@Billinghurst: What behavior would you like the module to exhibit in the "no value" case? Jackmcbarn (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

@Jackmcbarn: "No value" / "no value" was my simplistic approach, though open to other suggestions. — billinghurst sDrewth 09:46, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

It would be great if the null value displayed in the edit mode said something like "searched but not found" and the date the last search was done. {{authority control|searched but not found|date=September 1, 2014}}. I don't think it will be universally understood what the null value means. I probably do a dozen searches a day hoping to find a VIAF number, this would let me know someone tried already. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 06:50, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

The requirement when "no value" is used, is to also add a "retrieved" qualifier with a date. I wouldn't think that you would want to display a qualifier though it may be useful as a popup. <shrug> — billinghurst sDrewth 08:56, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, German DE.wiki tracks such search failures for the value of parameter GND in its Normdaten template de:Vorlage:Normdaten. Having updated several, I initiated one last month: illustration: GNDfehlt; GNDCheck (revision since approved by another editor). The last two parameters report that someone looked and didn't find a GND value on 2015-02-06 (did find only the antepenultimate nameholder). These last three parameters (last and thus easy to find in the illustrated layout that everyone seems to follow) do not affect the template message but they inform editors who read the code. Perhaps they are used to generate some reports too. --P64 (talk) 22:02, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Quite right: The GNDfehlt (fehlt = missing) parameter is intended for differentiating between "accidentially" and "deliberately" missing GND parameters, thus is a way of expressing "no value". It must be accompanied by the GNDCheck parameter which controls a maintenance category subdivided by date. However GNDCheck is not only to be used with missing GND numbers but with any kind of (perceived) deficiency, namely the alternative or additional presence of an undifferentiated GND record (to be recorded in GNDname), or duplicate GND records or anything irregular reported in the request queue for the German National Library we have an established workflow with for almost 10 years. Thus "GNDCheck" stands for "last time an editor confirmed that there is an issue" which of course should imply a retrieval attempt at the date stated.

This mechanism was streamlined towards the specific workflow for GND numbers, actual reinspection of any record in the maintenance category is intended (and promising - about one million "fresh" GND records became visible at 2012-05, several 100.000 actors and other movie personell were integrated into the GND as recently as 2014-11, other integration projects for non-library, biographic resources are under way). The GND feedback for our report from May 2012 recently came in, thus with the oldest entries in the maintenance category being from 2012-03 we're not really lagging much behind. However after 2012-05 unfortunately the figures in the maintenance categories explode (B-league team members, athletes, members of state parliaments in the 1960s? - we don't yet know, the change in numbers is a consequence of the introduction of the GNDCheck parameter - before that there was no difference between inserting no AC template and inserting an empty one) and we will have to devise mechanisms to systematically re-check entries which are likely to be contained in the GND and at the same time skip those where the probability is near zero even after 5 or 10 years...

Knowing an AC number is a relatively stable situation or - thinking of redirections after merging of duplicate entries - changes in the authority files can be dealt with in an automatized way. Knowing that there is no AC number (as opposed to not knowing the AC number) is definitely of a different quality, things may change any minute either by additional items entering the Authority file or inclusion of additional data in the wikipedia article or the authority file enabling us to perform a match or simply if more experienced/insistent/lucky wikipedia editors are able to get more out of the same data. Tracking of retrieval dates in that situation IMHO is the first and basic step in any attempt to cope with that kind of "data about 'no data'" situation. -- Gymel (talk) 07:56, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

We are still displaying a 404 error to a French database. See Clarence Whitehill, for example. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2015 (UTC)

How many databases should I be searching in? I see that sometimes the VIAF number forces other database identifiers to display. For other people I have to do a second search in the LCCN database, and then that forced WorldCat to display. What other databases should I be searching? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 21:00, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

1. If I understand what you mean: it is transclusion of template {{Authority control}} on the page, rather than assignment of its VIAF parameter therein, that "forces other database identifiers to display". The template message includes all those among our EN.wiki-selected identifiers whose values are provided on that Wikidata (WD) page, if any, which points here. Routinely (or universally?) the option Languages:"Edit links" appears in the left margin if a WD page points here; the option "Add links" appears if none does so.

Successful search at VIAF.org hits, among others, those clusters that show LCCN, GND, and other identifiers for the biography subject (literally "show" if you visit the cluster and mouseover the authority icon such as a national flag). Thus search at VIAF is commonly adequate.

interjection hours later: mouseover does not routinely show the template-ready ID format; eg, it does for GND but does not for LCCN -P64

2. The A.c. template message includes a WorldCat link if the LCCN value is at hand, either defined in the template or fetched from the WD page that points here.

Supposing that LC has not identified the person, thence assigned one or more LCCN, it may be valuable to add template {{Worldcat id}} with value np-lastname,%20firstname or viaf-[VIAF cluster number] --with a notice that WorldCat lists works by distinct people who share the name, if appropriate. Example: http://www.worldcat.org/identities/np-macleod,%20iain/ * {{WorldCat id|np-macleod,%20iain|Iain MacLeod}} generates

• Works by or about Iain MacLeod in libraries (WorldCat catalog)

Similarly http://www.worldcat.org/identities/viaf-106143209/

--P64 (talk) 20:03, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

Let me rephrase: Is there any way to automate the addition of LCCN once I add VIAF? Currently I am searching in the two databases and adding each, VIAF= and LCCN=. Nothing is coming from Wikidata since these biographies are being created ab initio. See for instance: User:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- )/Octave Homberg where my template reads {{authority control|VIAF=267759514|LCCN=n90602432}} --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 20:20, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

I suppose that we don't take identifiers from VIAF clusters automatically, nor does Wikidata, because more careful work here and at WD is part of the process that develops (improves, proves) the VIAF clusters. And that VIAF does not cluster identifiers automatically from Wikipedia footers and WD pages for the same reason. Libraries such as LC and DNB must hope, too, that we will report their failures to group works by creator.

Some knowledge of the VIAF workflow may be acquired at the companion Wikipedia talk page, and now its new subpage Wikipedia talk:Authority control/VIAF, where User:Ralphlevan from VIAF participates.

Re: Octave Homberg. Why select VIAF=267759514? Naive search for 'Homberg, Octave' at VIAF.org returns a list of hits from which I would select the first, VIAF 89098578, rather than the second as you have done. In turn, for me that would conclude a "successful search" (per above) because VIAF has bundled many authority pages in that cluster, including all of those with identifiers that I would define locally--LCCN, GND, BNF, SUDOC--one of which is that LCCN you presumably found by search at LOC.gov (I say without checking validity of the Homberg cluster, except that its LCCN page looks good).

Commonly, useful identifiers must be gleaned only from multiple clusters that naive search returns (perhaps true for the majority of entries at Wikipedia:VIAF/errors#Parallel VIAF clusters for one identity, as for the majority of my entries there). Sometimes, multiple searches are fruitful. --P64 (talk) 23:33, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): "Is there any way to automate the addition of LCCN once I add VIAF?" Yes, some Wikipedias have tools like this, see for example de:Benutzer:Schnark/js/personendaten/normdaten. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:26, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

Should a maintenance category be added to this template, similar to Category:Official website different in Wikidata and Wikipedia, so editors can review and make the appropriate fixes? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: There is the Category:VIAF different on Wikidata. Still missing: Category:GND different on Wikidata. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:31, 10 April 2015 (UTC)

The BNF parameter is not being imported from Wikidata properly and displays a second time as "(data)". I don't know how the template is importing that parameter, but it should be easy to fix. See Lawrence Kolb --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 23:33, 22 April 2015 (UTC)

I see in Module:Authority control [http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/' .. id .. ' ' .. id .. '] [http://data.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/' .. id .. ' (data)]' the second (data) part should be removed to fix this. It does seem to work sometimes, see Ahmed Abdul-Malik. Multichill (talk) 12:16, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Please add also the NLA Persistent Identifier (P1315) to this module. Regards, --T.seppelt (talk) 16:29, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Shouldn't the template link to Wikipedia:Authority control instead of Authority control? Erpert ^{blah, blah, blah...} 07:08, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

No; it's used in article space,, so a link to an article not an administrative page, is appropriate. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:56, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

CRISTIN (Current Research Information SysTem in Norway, which also includes the Norwegian Scientific Index) should be added to the template. A person entry (in English) looks like this http://www.cristin.no/as/WebObjects/cristin.woa/1/wa/personVis?type=PERSON&pnr=39812&la=en where 39812 is the identifier (in this case, of Edvard Moser). CRISTIN is the major Norwegian documentation system for academic publications of all sorts, and complements BIBSYS which mainly covers books. Bjerrebæk (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

@Bjerrebæk: is this used in Wikidata? What property number? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:57, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Template:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I would like this Deleted> "For the past twenty years he has been associated with L'abri Fellowship and is currently living and teaching at L'Abri in Huémoz, Switzerland." 2A02:120B:2C7A:90A0:19E4:2BD2:4242:1D2F (talk) 19:54, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Not done: this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template {{Authority control}}. Please make your request at the talk page for the article concerned. That text is in the Greg Laughery article (which is not protected), and has been since its creation in 2006. SiBr₄ (talk) 20:13, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

...and has been uncited for all that time. I've removed it, and more. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:45, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

This edit request to Module:Authority control has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

Line 324 of Module:Authority_control: { 'TLS', 'TLS', 0, tlsLink }, Change "0" to "1362". GZWDer (talk) 05:58, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

I've confirmed that's the correct PID, and I've not found anything that would indicate at its omission being intentional, so Done. Alakzi (talk) 13:21, 28 April 2015 (UTC)

Some errors found in instances of this template are being discussed at User talk:T.seppelt. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:47, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Can you please add the tracking category for SBN identifiers (i.e. libraries in Italy)?

Category:Wikipedia articles with SBN identifiers

See also the relevant Wikidata item to be connected (d:Q18174792)

Thanks, best regards, --Accurimbono (talk) 10:37, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

BTW: Wouldn't it be time to export all authority data to Wikidata (= delete them from the English Wikipedia)? This would save us a lot of work. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2015 (UTC)

Agree, move already done in it.wiki. Authority identifiers are taken from Wikidata. --Accurimbono (talk) 08:59, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Its a bad idea until the template have a "edit on wikidata" buttom. Christian75 (talk) 07:14, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

My bot is currently removing all authority identifiers from enwiki after writing them to wikidata. Regards, --T.seppelt (talk) 07:42, 2 May 2015 (UTC)

What about the SBN category? --Accurimbono (talk) 08:09, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

Already mentioned earlier on this talk page. I think it's time to take the next steps in usage of this authority control template. I see two main steps:

1. Moving the data to Wikidata and removing it locally
2. Adding {{Authority control}} to pages that have relevant authority control data on Wikidata, but no template to display it here

Second part is probably the easiest part. I played around with Autolist2 a bit and got a list of about 50.000 articles that have viaf, but no {{Authority control}} here. Should the template be added here? Anyone feel like firing up a bot or should I give it a shot?

Moving the data consists of several parts. I'll take {{Commons category}} as an example, because for that template this has been setup already:

1. The data is completely local (Category:Commons category without a link on Wikidata)
2. The local data gets imported (Category:Commons category with local link same as on Wikidata)
3. The local data is exactly the same as Wikidata (Category:Commons category with local link same as on Wikidata) or not (Category:Commons category with local link different than on Wikidata)
4. The local data gets removed and the template show the contents from Wikidata (for Commons category the pages end up in Category:Commons category with page title same as on Wikidata or Category:Commons category with page title different than on Wikidata)

This way it's possible for humans and bots to follow the progress and know what pages/items to work on. I would propose to setup a similar system for this template. The four states we should track with categories: Local, both same, both different, Wikidata. Take for example viaf:

• Category:Wikipedia articles with local VIAF identifiers not on Wikidata
• Category:Wikipedia articles with local VIAF identifiers same as on Wikidata
• Category:Wikipedia articles with local VIAF identifiers different than on Wikidata
• Category:Wikipedia articles with VIAF identifiers from Wikidata

We need to do this for the other types too, but we can just start with a couple. Would love to have a tracker category like Category:Wikipedia articles with authority control completely from Wikidata that would be added when the template doesn't have any local data anymore. Any opinions on this structure? The names of the tracker categories are just suggestions. We can bikeshed about the exact names later ;-) Multichill (talk) 13:22, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

The first two cases you'll find at Category:Pages with VIAF identifiers. There is also Category:Wikipedia articles with VIAF identifiers which indeed could be improved, from its current name it's not clear to me whether it contains the union of cases 1-3 only or all cases 1-4. -- Gymel (talk) 17:50, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

Right, forgot about the part in this template. I was looking at the lua module. Looks like it could use some improvement, but it already gives quite a bit of information. At least enough to find pages for which the local value can be removed. Something else I noticed: Category:VIAF different on Wikidata contains a lot of links to redirects. Did anyone ever consider running a bot to resolve these redirects? That should greatly reduce the number of articles in this category. And what about links to deleted clusters like 230168483 on Siw Anita Andersen? Shouldn't we delete these too here? That would reduce Category:VIAF not on Wikidata. Multichill (talk) 19:54, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I aggree with deleting links to deleted clusters but more interesting cases should be ones like Jace Alexander in the "VIAF differing on wikidata" category: VIAF merged two clusters (and wikidata did follow the merge, the templates value here didn't. A bot action based on data from the "persist" file at VIAF download page applied to the VIAF parameters in the AC template here probably will shuffle many entries from the "VIAF different" to the "VIAF identical" category.

As for AC data contained in redirect pages: These pages usually represent defined entities and these entities even might also have a wikidata item. It's "just" that links to redirect pages are not allowed in wikidata. Thus keeping (nonempty) AC templates with e.g. VIAF numbers on redirect pages actually might help to associate the redirect pages to corresponding wikidata items once a solution has been devised allowing that. Does the template language have provisions to implement a switch with the effect that findings with regard to redirect pages can be channeled into maintenance categories of their own, different from those for "regular" articles? -- Gymel (talk) 20:35, 23 April 2015 (UTC)

I think you guys will be interested to know that T.seppelt will be operating Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/KasparBot. Please let me know of how the Bot Approval Group could help you further. -- Magioladitis (talk) 23:44, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@Multichill: In your first post in this section you asked "Should the template be added here?". The answer is: "yes, please!" Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:37, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/KasparBot 2. After approval I will add the template to those articles. --T.seppelt (talk) 06:40, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

The equivalent template used in Commons allows automatic localization according to the user's profile. Could that feature be implemented here?

Also, do the Wikipedias in other languages share this template? --AngelHerraez (talk) 16:39, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Commons is a multi-lingual project; this is the English-lanaguge Wikipedia. Many other-language Wikipedias have their own version of this template: some forked from this one, some very different. You can find a list of them under the "Languages" subheading in the template page's sidebar navigation. Is there a particular issue you're trying to solve? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:55, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

I followed the template addition instructions on Grand Lodge of Massachusetts; I added an empty parameter version but got nothing at all om preview or display, despite finding both a Wikidata and VIAF entry for it. Has something changed in the formatting? MSJapan (talk) 19:30, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

There was no VIAF property on Wikidata; I have now added it. Alakzi (talk) 19:36, 17 May 2015 (UTC)