Wikidata has a number of structural problems of its own, though, at least when it comes to interacting with the Wikipedia projects it aims to serve.
The model for interlinks connecting different languages assumes a 1:1 correspondence between articles and concepts, although the Wikipedias for each language have different structures, and a given article can document several concepts.
Also, I have the impression that the community of Wikidatans are averse to getting their precious data pool muddied with inconsistent, ambiguous and untidy content. That's understandable, but it means that there will be friction whenever the larger community tries to capture knowledge in a distributed way, without following a single well-defined standard. Things can get messy fast, and the conversations I've followed at Wikidata show that the project maintainers are likely to present significant opposition against doing things in the required "quick & dirty" way required by collaborative editing.
I see at your Wikidata's user page that you get all the needed principles right (pragmatism over theoretical purity, usage over hypothetical cases, design for humans first) but the history of the project doesn't seem to follow them well on the areas where it has gone live and has been used by outsiders.
The model for interlinks connecting different languages assumes a 1:1 correspondence between articles and concepts, although the Wikipedias for each language have different structures, and a given article can document several concepts.
Also, I have the impression that the community of Wikidatans are averse to getting their precious data pool muddied with inconsistent, ambiguous and untidy content. That's understandable, but it means that there will be friction whenever the larger community tries to capture knowledge in a distributed way, without following a single well-defined standard. Things can get messy fast, and the conversations I've followed at Wikidata show that the project maintainers are likely to present significant opposition against doing things in the required "quick & dirty" way required by collaborative editing.
I see at your Wikidata's user page that you get all the needed principles right (pragmatism over theoretical purity, usage over hypothetical cases, design for humans first) but the history of the project doesn't seem to follow them well on the areas where it has gone live and has been used by outsiders.