Add test for duplicate PubMed in literature curation sheet #1369
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
It's okay to remove the duplicates, they weren't planned to be curated again, and aren't needed in general. I just made small change to keep the more specific tag in the retained instance of each duplicate curation. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I noticed
bioregistry lintwas causing some rows to get deleted, then noticed it was because there were duplicate curations. This PR adds a test for duplicate curations and in the five instances where there were duplicates, I deleted the later curated row. None of these affected the outcome, but there were conflicts in the calls from the curators.@bgyori were you interested in doing inter-curator agreement statistics later? if not, then we can safely delete these duplicate curations