codeforIATI / iati-data-bugtracker

🐛 A public log of issues with IATI data and metadata
https://bugtracker.codeforiati.org
3 stars 0 forks source link

UNICEF publishing thousands of participating orgs #47

Closed sarahshamiso closed 2 years ago

sarahshamiso commented 2 years ago

Discovered by @markbrough while investigating an issue encountered in the CDFD files -- so he likely have more to add here but wanted to get this shared.

It seems that UNICEF is publishing thousands of participating orgs for some of its activities. In this activity, there are 15,652 participating orgs.

http://d-portal.org/ctrack.html#view=act&aid=XM-DAC-41122-Bangladesh-5070%2FA0%2F05%2F101%2F001

amy-silcock commented 2 years ago

Thanks @sarahshamiso,

I've already notified UNICEF as to the error. They're looking into it but I've not yet seen any progress.

codeforIATIbot commented 2 years ago

Hello! There has been no activity on this issue in the last 30 days. I wonder if it has now been resolved?

If you’re reading this, would you mind checking to see if the issue is still applicable?

Thank you!

amy-silcock commented 2 years ago

The issue has been reduced but is not yet fixed. UNICEF are still looking into it.

codeforIATIbot commented 2 years ago

Hello! There has been no activity on this issue in the last 30 days. I wonder if it has now been resolved?

If you’re reading this, would you mind checking to see if the issue is still applicable?

Thank you!

amy-silcock commented 2 years ago

UNICEF have fixed the issues of participating organisations. They still list many organisations and are now using an internal reference for each of them. Work is underway to get their list of internal references onto org-id.

See this activity as an example: http://d-portal.org/ctrack.html#view=act&aid=XM-DAC-41122-Bangladesh-5070%2FA0%2F05%2F101%2F001

andylolz commented 2 years ago

Looks good to me – thanks for the update, @amy-silcock.

Are you happy for this to be marked as resolved, @sarahshamiso @markbrough?

markbrough commented 2 years ago

Looks good to me! There are still a lot of organisations there, but I think this reflects particularities of UNICEF's publication (they are publishing results/programs, rather than projects/contracts).

I think it would be good to think about if there might be a better way of structuring this data in future, but agree this issue should be marked as resolved!