Not sure it's wrong, as such. Should we not be ...

13528
Reporter: feedback bot
Assignee: mdoering
Type: Bug
Summary: Not sure it's wrong, as such.    Should we not be ...
Priority: Blocker
Resolution: Fixed
Status: Closed
Created: 2013-07-23 15:00:41.598
Updated: 2013-09-26 21:27:55.148
Resolved: 2013-09-26 21:27:55.116
        
        
Description: Not sure it's wrong, as such.

Should we not be providing a link and proper citation for the Wikipedia text content?

*Reporter*: Donald Hobern
*E-mail*: [mailto:dhobern]]]>
    

Author: mdoering@gbif.org
Created: 2013-07-23 16:33:12.498
Updated: 2013-07-23 16:33:12.498
        
The updated version shows a license in addition and a table of content grouped by language:
http://staging.gbif.org:8080/portal/species/1858637

If we show a link should it point to the checklistbank record that is the immediate source for a backbone species page or should we link directly to the external webpage? We do not treat wikipedia special from any other checklist, it is just a dwc archive indexed in checklistbank. And we do get descriptions outside of wikipedia, for example from the Species Files or IUCN: http://uat.gbif.org/species/110284527

In general we link from nub pages internally to checklistbank records from other datasets and only from there to external pages. Does that seem good? In the above wikipedia example we would then link to http://uat.gbif.org/species/116665570#description