@crossref and live at https://scholia.toolforge.org/retraction/, of course :)
@crossref and live at https://scholia.toolforge.org/retraction/, of course :)
flash talk #2: "Retracted articles in Wikidata and how to use them" https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiCite_2025_Retractions_-_Egon_Willighagen.pdf
(with huge thanks to Retraction Watch and @crossref !)
flash talk #1: "Update on the Citation Typing Ontology citation intention annotations" https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WikiCite_2025_CiTO_Update_-_Egon_Willighagen.pdf
later today I will give two 8 minute talks at #WikiCite2025 https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite_2025
16:00 CEST: "Update on the Citation Typing Ontology citation intention annotations"
16:10 CEST: "Retracted articles in Wikidata and how to use them"
I got some nice new screenshots lined up!
Linked Open Data awareness in Polish LAM sector – Survey Results
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:WC2025_Siwecka.pdf List of archives in Poland known to Wikidata: https://w.wiki/FC3w via @EvoMRI
hi @opencitations, are you at the #WikiCite2025 too? I am online, but in parallel to the meeting, I was exploring the #wikicite content and found an "author correction" of one of my articles in #wikidata (not sure if a correction is really notable, but that's another thing).
Now, apparently, Wikidata thinks I am citing that author correction myself, and can trace this back to OC content (screenshot)
Does the content of "cited" make sense with two DOIs? or bug?
the current #WikiCite2025 speaker, Fantoli if not mistaken, discusses some ambiguity of Perictione I and II in Wikidata and the Wikipedia's.
This is a recurrent issue and why we need unique, persistent identifiers, just like Wikidata is providing.
#Wikidata is the only database that covers all areas of scholarly research and we it to scale two orders of magnitude that it does now