Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

other_agent entries which need to move to Projects #3815

Closed
mkoo opened this issue Aug 5, 2021 · 4 comments
Closed

other_agent entries which need to move to Projects #3815

mkoo opened this issue Aug 5, 2021 · 4 comments

Comments

@mkoo
Copy link
Member

mkoo commented Aug 5, 2021

Ref:low-data agent issue, #3813

Tackling this in chunks (see #882). Several of these are other_agents are better captured as Projects-- see all the Bolivian Expeditions. Or the "class" or "surveys". (i.e., discrete efforts of specific duration) These will never be found in the agent interface.

EG. https://arctos.database.museum/info/agentActivity.cfm?agent_id=21256035
(two MSB collections) but its Project link shows that it does have the cataloged records linked.

A lot of these are MSB so not sure how you want to tackle. Discuss at intern meeting (could be a good task and aligns with Project focus this summer)? @campmlc ?

I also suggest we delete the other_agents with absolutely no records attached.

@dustymc
Copy link
Contributor

dustymc commented Aug 5, 2021

delete the other_agents with absolutely no records attached.

That bar is too high - see https://handbook.arctosdb.org/documentation/agent.html#verbatim-collectors

@Jegelewicz
Copy link
Member

suggest we delete the other_agents with absolutely no records attached.

That bar is too high

Huh? If these are not being used for anything, why not delete them? I feel like many may have been added as part of some bulkloading operation, then never used. Can we get a list of unused agents along with the date those agents were added?

@campmlc
Copy link

campmlc commented Aug 6, 2021

Let's not delete any agents or change them to projects only without bringing in MSB folks. There is a lot of legacy info here that could be cleaned up, but we don't want to lose data in the process.
@jldunnum

@dustymc
Copy link
Contributor

dustymc commented Aug 9, 2021

"Is used" does not and should not prevent deletion, and deletion does not remove any information for eg https://arctos.database.museum/agent/1010681.

That's actually a good example of the kinds of problems these create - the agent is much older than the usage, that link is almost certainly from some glitch in the APSU upload process, the low-quality data agent is almost certainly affecting the quality of other data objects merely by existing. We should be more aggressive in cleaning up things which don't follow the guidelines (and adjusting the guidelines as necessary), and less hesitant to isolate questionable Agents to verbatim collector, from which they can't pollute other records.

@dustymc dustymc added this to the Needs Discussion milestone Aug 11, 2021
@dustymc dustymc closed this as completed Feb 18, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants