Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
OK Andy Gerard, cut it out! I like both of you, but we will never fix things this way. As you correctly point out Gerard, Wikipedians should spend more time adding labels and aliases to existing items and creating new items on Wikidata rather than just making redirects on Wikipedia. As you correctly pointed out Andy, it IS physically possible to include categories and templates on redirects (but if you do this in the way Gerard suggests than it is a small step to create a stub that deserves a sitelink from Wikidata). More Wikidatans should probably spend more time fixing and splitting Wikipedia articles, but since the majority of Wikpedians don't understand Wikidata at all, I think this should NOT be done unless you are already a Wikipedian in good standing. Personallly I think it is ridiculous that Robert Havell, Jr. does not have his own Wikipedia article and is only included in a bundled-up version of a few members of his extended family. Clearly, Derric's comments indicate that this email thread has not helped matters any. I am just as frustrated as Gerard and don't know how to explain why sitelinks to redirects are A REALLY BAD THING because to me it is so obvious. On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 7:43 AM, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: Hoi, When a position is taken that is manifestly wrong, it is worse to desist. Andy I like you too but calling someone a dick because he does not agree with you and calls bullshit on the points taken, the examples supplied is not in the best tradition of our projects. Wikidata is NOT there to serve the English Wikipedia at the expense of its own integrity. A wish has been formulated to support redirects by WIkipedians while Wikidata has been EXPLICITLY designed NOT to support redirects but more importantly parts of articles. If a project does not have or want to have an article on a given subject, Wikidata can provide information when used in combination with the Reasonator. Articles are about a subject and CONSEQUENTLY they should have categories and info boxes that are in line with the subject of the article. The ARTICLE 2014 ISIL beheading incidents http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q17985279 for instance is NOT about a human and it should NOT have a category deaths in 2014 or any other information that is particular to one person. The same is true for Death of Alice Gross; it is NOT about Alice Gross. When an article is just text and nobody cares about such consistencies, fine. However, you want articles like this linked and someone else is to clean up such mess. This prevents automated processes, it is bad practice and it is part of the same practice/school of thought whereby we are to have redirects ... Hell no! Please reconsider your arguments and please do not be a dick yourself.. Thanks, GerardM On 21 October 2014 21:21, Andy Mabbett a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk wrote: On 21 October 2014 07:13, Gerard Meijssen gerard.meijs...@gmail.com wrote: If this Jackson Douglas is the best that you can do, you destroyed the argument that it has merit. Gerard, I like you; but you're being a dick. Please desist. -- Andy Mabbett @pigsonthewing http://pigsonthewing.org.uk ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Gerard Meijssen wrote: Wikidata is NOT there to serve the English Wikipedia at the expense of its own integrity. A wish has been formulated to support redirects by WIkipedians while Wikidata has been EXPLICITLY designed NOT to support redirects but more importantly parts of articles. If we have a need in pointing (at Wikibase/Wikidata) to redirects on a regular basis, it might be time to rethink the relevant project design. I ideally would like the default [[foo]] namespace to be configurable per-wiki, personally, seeing that on some wikis foo is not a valid title for main namespace, while Category:foo or Portal:foo is (and uglily, [[foo]] is forced to redirect to that). -- Svetlana ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Fwd: [Wikidata-tech] Description(s)
Hi Lukas! That really shouldn't happen... Can you tell me on which item that happens? Also, please double-check the namespace and content model of the respective entry in the dump. -- daniel Am 21.10.2014 17:02, schrieb Lukas Benedix: Different keys can still be found in the actual xml dump wikidatawiki-20141009-pages-articles.xml.bz2. This bug/feature is also present in the current dump with history. page_id wd_id keys 111 Q15 ['aliases', 'claims', 'descriptions', 'id', 'labels', 'sitelinks', 'type'] 137 Q24 ['aliases', 'claims', 'description', 'entity', 'label', 'links'] 31500 Q28119 ['aliases', 'description', 'entity', 'label', 'links'] 225144? ['entity', 'redirect'] 3916689 P6 ['aliases', 'claims', 'datatype', 'descriptions', 'id', 'labels', 'type'] 3916937 P10 ['aliases', 'claims', 'datatype', 'description', 'entity', 'label'] Lukas Am Do 09.10.2014 19:32, schrieb Lydia Pintscher: On Thu, Oct 9, 2014 at 3:19 PM, Magnus Manske magnusman...@googlemail.com wrote: I managed to do the task at hand by switching to JSON dumps (because that's the new, officially supported, long-term-stable Wikidata dump format, right? Right???), so no hurry there. Maybe the XML dump process was run in the middle of the switch to the new format, or got a stale cache for some items? It looks like the switch happened in the middle of a dump creation so this one is half old and half new format mixed. The ones after that should be all new format. And yay for switching to JSON! Cheers Lydia ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l -- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
On Wed, Oct 22, 2014 at 10:47 AM, svetlana svetl...@fastmail.com.au wrote: If we have a need in pointing (at Wikibase/Wikidata) to redirects on a regular basis, it might be time to rethink the relevant project design. I think that rethinking the project design is the right approach here. To link to redirects is as bad as leaving relevant article sections unconnected. The challenge is to find another way to associate an article section with an item without using redirects. I have opened a bug report to gather ideas: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72347 Cheers, Micru ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Fwd: [Wikidata-tech] Description(s)
Am 22.10.2014 07:29, schrieb Gerard Meijssen: Hoi, Is this dump going to be cleaned up? Will the next dump be good? Why did this go wrong? Frankly, we have no idea why this is going wrong. I cannot reproduce the problem locally, and it seems to work fine with Special:Export. Dump generation is a bit strange and wonderful, and few people actually know in detail how it works on the live cluster. I vaguely remember that at one point, only new revisions were dumped, and the result stitched into old dumps. That would explain the issue - and it would be something we cannot fix on the Wikibase side. I'm trying to get hold of someone who can confirm/fix this. I have filed https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72348 so this gets tracked. I'll also bring it up in our next call with the foundation. -- daniel -- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Fwd: [Wikidata-tech] Description(s)
Am 22.10.2014 11:06, schrieb Daniel Kinzler: Hi Lukas! That really shouldn't happen... Can you tell me on which item that happens? Also, please double-check the namespace and content model of the respective entry in the dump. Never mind, I found it in the dump. Can't reproduce, though. Strange. Filed https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=72348 -- daniel -- Daniel Kinzler Senior Software Developer Wikimedia Deutschland Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e.V. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Hoi, I do not consider myself confused. I am speaking plain language. The article: Death of Alice Gross has information about a living person while it is NOT a living person. As it is, current practices like with the Death of Alice Gross are problematic already enough. When you want redirects, you make the situation worse because you will want to include many more people who go by a same name. Many of them are already known to Wikidata. We do not need redirects in Wikipedia to link to them . What we need is integrated search where results from Wikidata and Wikipedia are mixed in order to provide the best result. When there is no article about someone or something, we can provide a reasonator kinda screen with information in English. It will refer to all kind of related information and by having this information in Wikidata, this information is available to any and all other languages as well. The point is very much that any Wikipedia does not include all the information we know about. We know in Wikidata about many more items than Wikipedia has articles for. We can express this information in a much more informative way than by having redirects. The examples of redirects given were really not informative. It is not possible to associate categories and templates in a way that makes them useful in any other way. It positively destroys the usability of information from Wikipedia in this way. For what ? We can and should do better. It starts by considering all options. Text is no longer the only game in town. Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2014 10:03, James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk wrote: Gerard, you seem confused. (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. In particular, there would be no change at all to what Reasonator would be showing, apart from a few extra badged sitelinks. (2) You seem to be worried that Wikidata would pick up and import the categories of the article that the redirect redirects to. But there's no obvious reason why this should happen. It would not be those articles that Wikidata would sitelink to, but the redirects. So it would be the categories (if any) of the redirect that would be relevant. Similarly, it would not be the item sitelinked to the redirect that any template on the article that was the target of the redirect would compare itself with -- the target article would have its own item, just as it does today; so just as it is today, that is the item that any templates on that article would compare themselves to; or that any data migration would load data into -- just exactly the same as it is today. Death of Alice Gross is not the article about Alice Gross. But this is not the article that would be sitelinked to Alice Gross. Instead Alice Gross (a redirect) is the article that would be sitelinked to Alice Gross. So none of the problems you foresee should occur. (3) Reasonator is great. But ultimately, Reasonator and Wikidata can only give a summary of the facts. In cases like Daniel Havell, and the question of his exact relationship to other members of the Havell family, Wikidata/Reasonator can note that sources disagree. Wikidata/Reasonator can identify a preferred value. But it is harder for them to present the context as to *why* that value is preferred, in the way that can be done in continuous free text. It is good to make Wikidata/Reasonator as comprehensive as possible; but there is added value in having the ecosystem of text Wikipedia connected to them. (4) One additional point is that by tracking the redirects, specifically by adding a property noting what items an item may redirect to in different languages, we actually improve Wikidata. * We add to the related items that Wikidata can display. * We make it possible to ask whether the item can be connected to these new additional 'related items' within one, two, three, or ''n'' hops, using the item's existing properties. If it cannot, then there is probably an existing property that is missing. So we can identify ways to build and improve the database. In summary: your apparent view that linking to redirects will lead to data being migrated onto the wrong items on Wikidata seems to me to be mis-founded. Instead, allowing sitelinking to redirects that accurately match the topic, rather than enforcing that sitelinks can only be to primary articles (which may not quite so closely match the topic), is, if anything, likely to create a *more* accurate structure, which will make make *less* likely any risk of item data pollution through ingestion from a not-quite-properly-matched article. (ie: if linking to redirects is supported, it will make it *less* likely that users will be tempted to sitelink :en:hatmaking directly to
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
On 22/10/2014 14:23, Smolenski Nikola wrote: Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. It's no problem if multiple redirects link to the same place. For example, on en-wiki, we have Luke Havell (redirect)- Havell family Robert Havell (redirect) - Havell family Daniel Havell (redirect) - Havell family etc It's no problem if we have different items Q(Luke Havell) - Luke Havell (redirect) Q(Robert Havell) - Robert Havell (redirect) Q(Daniel Havell) - Daniel Havell (redirect) different items, for different people, sitelinked to different places on en-wiki, that happen to be redirects. But one advantage of having this structure is that if somebody then changes Robert Havell into a full article, then Q(Robert Havell) is already pointing to the right place. -- James. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Gerard, I still don't see a problem. If somebody wants to search on Reasonator, they can search on Reasonator, and they will get exactly the same Reasonator pages as before -- the only difference is that those Reasonator pages will include more links to relevant Wikipedia pages, with some of them badged as redirects. As for Death of Alice Gross, I don't see the problem there either. Your complaint appears to be that at the moment people directly sitelink Q(Alice Gross) to Death of Alice Gross, causing all sorts of mismatches and confusions. Allowing sitelinks to redirects would actually *solve* this issue, because then people could site-link Q(Alice Gross) to Alice Gross (a redirect). Q(Alice Gross) would then no longer be sitelinked to an article about an event; but instead would be sitelinked to a redirect. Wouldn't that be a better state of affairs ? -- James. On 22/10/2014 12:19, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, I do not consider myself confused. I am speaking plain language. The article: Death of Alice Gross has information about a living person while it is NOT a living person. As it is, current practices like with the Death of Alice Gross are problematic already enough. When you want redirects, you make the situation worse because you will want to include many more people who go by a same name. Many of them are already known to Wikidata. We do not need redirects in Wikipedia to link to them . What we need is integrated search where results from Wikidata and Wikipedia are mixed in order to provide the best result. When there is no article about someone or something, we can provide a reasonator kinda screen with information in English. It will refer to all kind of related information and by having this information in Wikidata, this information is available to any and all other languages as well. The point is very much that any Wikipedia does not include all the information we know about. We know in Wikidata about many more items than Wikipedia has articles for. We can express this information in a much more informative way than by having redirects. The examples of redirects given were really not informative. It is not possible to associate categories and templates in a way that makes them useful in any other way. It positively destroys the usability of information from Wikipedia in this way. For what ? We can and should do better. It starts by considering all options. Text is no longer the only game in town. Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2014 10:03, James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk wrote: Gerard, you seem confused. (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. In particular, there would be no change at all to what Reasonator would be showing, apart from a few extra badged sitelinks. (2) You seem to be worried that Wikidata would pick up and import the categories of the article that the redirect redirects to. But there's no obvious reason why this should happen. It would not be those articles that Wikidata would sitelink to, but the redirects. So it would be the categories (if any) of the redirect that would be relevant. Similarly, it would not be the item sitelinked to the redirect that any template on the article that was the target of the redirect would compare itself with -- the target article would have its own item, just as it does today; so just as it is today, that is the item that any templates on that article would compare themselves to; or that any data migration would load data into -- just exactly the same as it is today. Death of Alice Gross is not the article about Alice Gross. But this is not the article that would be sitelinked to Alice Gross. Instead Alice Gross (a redirect) is the article that would be sitelinked to Alice Gross. So none of the problems you foresee should occur. (3) Reasonator is great. But ultimately, Reasonator and Wikidata can only give a summary of the facts. In cases like Daniel Havell, and the question of his exact relationship to other members of the Havell family, Wikidata/Reasonator can note that sources disagree. Wikidata/Reasonator can identify a preferred value. But it is harder for them to present the context as to *why* that value is preferred, in the way that can be done in continuous free text. It is good to make Wikidata/Reasonator as comprehensive as possible; but there is added value in having the ecosystem of text Wikipedia connected to them. (4) One additional point is that by tracking the redirects, specifically by adding a property noting what items an item may redirect to in different languages, we actually improve Wikidata. * We add to the related items that Wikidata can display. * We make it possible to ask whether the item can be connected to these new additional 'related items'
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: On 22/10/2014 14:23, Smolenski Nikola wrote: Citiranje James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk: (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. Interestingly how no one mentions (or have I missed it?) what to me seems to be the biggest problem, and that is the possibility that multiple Wikidata items link to a single Wikipedia article. If sitelinks to redirects are ever implemented, it would be imperative that it is checked that no two redirects lead to the same place. It's no problem if multiple redirects link to the same place. For example, on en-wiki, we have Luke Havell (redirect)- Havell family Robert Havell (redirect) - Havell family Daniel Havell (redirect) - Havell family etc It's no problem if we have different items Q(Luke Havell) - Luke Havell (redirect) Q(Robert Havell) - Robert Havell (redirect) Q(Daniel Havell) - Daniel Havell (redirect) different items, for different people, sitelinked to different places on en-wiki, that happen to be redirects. All right, that may not be a big problem. However, it would be a big problem if we have: Q(Coat of Arms of Novi Sad) - Coat of Arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of novi sad - Novi Sad ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Hoi, FORGET ABOUT REASONATOR, FORGET ABOUT WIKIPEDIA, FORGET ABOUT WIKIDATA It is about sharing information. That is what this is all about. The information is NOT in Wikipedia, only the data is in Wikidata, there are plenty examples of that. Redirects are something you come up with because it completely focuses on Wikipedia while actually it is VERY much in the way when you want to inform people. You do not see the problem. You do not even understand why your solution is imperfect, not even halfway sane. When you forget about Wikipedia for a moment, you will agree that Wikidata has tons of data Wikipedia does not. Consequently, it would make sense to provide our readers with information when Wikipedia does not have it. Wikidata is NOT informative, it takes something like Reasonator to make the data informative. I do not want anything less for Wikipedia. When we approach our customers with the sum of all the information we have available to us, you will find that Wikidata knows about something like 50% more subjects. It impacts everything from search results, categories, red links and disambiguation pages.From such a perspective linking redirects to Wikidata is an awful idea for all the reasons I presented. Redirects will harm Wikidata, there is no doubt in my mind. There will be not be much of a benefit. Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2014 15:58, James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk wrote: Gerard, I still don't see a problem. If somebody wants to search on Reasonator, they can search on Reasonator, and they will get exactly the same Reasonator pages as before -- the only difference is that those Reasonator pages will include more links to relevant Wikipedia pages, with some of them badged as redirects. As for Death of Alice Gross, I don't see the problem there either. Your complaint appears to be that at the moment people directly sitelink Q(Alice Gross) to Death of Alice Gross, causing all sorts of mismatches and confusions. Allowing sitelinks to redirects would actually *solve* this issue, because then people could site-link Q(Alice Gross) to Alice Gross (a redirect). Q(Alice Gross) would then no longer be sitelinked to an article about an event; but instead would be sitelinked to a redirect. Wouldn't that be a better state of affairs ? -- James. On 22/10/2014 12:19, Gerard Meijssen wrote: Hoi, I do not consider myself confused. I am speaking plain language. The article: Death of Alice Gross has information about a living person while it is NOT a living person. As it is, current practices like with the Death of Alice Gross are problematic already enough. When you want redirects, you make the situation worse because you will want to include many more people who go by a same name. Many of them are already known to Wikidata. We do not need redirects in Wikipedia to link to them . What we need is integrated search where results from Wikidata and Wikipedia are mixed in order to provide the best result. When there is no article about someone or something, we can provide a reasonator kinda screen with information in English. It will refer to all kind of related information and by having this information in Wikidata, this information is available to any and all other languages as well. The point is very much that any Wikipedia does not include all the information we know about. We know in Wikidata about many more items than Wikipedia has articles for. We can express this information in a much more informative way than by having redirects. The examples of redirects given were really not informative. It is not possible to associate categories and templates in a way that makes them useful in any other way. It positively destroys the usability of information from Wikipedia in this way. For what ? We can and should do better. It starts by considering all options. Text is no longer the only game in town. Thanks, GerardM On 22 October 2014 10:03, James Heald j.he...@ucl.ac.uk wrote: Gerard, you seem confused. (1) There would be no change to the item structure on Wikidata in any way -- no change to the values of any of the item properties -- only some extra sitelinks. So I don't see *why* you think there would be any risk to Wikidata's own integrity. In particular, there would be no change at all to what Reasonator would be showing, apart from a few extra badged sitelinks. (2) You seem to be worried that Wikidata would pick up and import the categories of the article that the redirect redirects to. But there's no obvious reason why this should happen. It would not be those articles that Wikidata would sitelink to, but the redirects. So it would be the categories (if any) of the redirect that would be relevant. Similarly, it would not be the item sitelinked to the redirect that any template on the article that was the target of the redirect would compare itself with -- the target article would have its own
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
All right, that may not be a big problem. However, it would be a big problem if we have: Q(Coat of Arms of Novi Sad) - Coat of Arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of Novi Sad - Novi Sad Q(something) - Coat of arms of novi sad - Novi Sad This is an argument against redirects that I am able to understand. I'm not sure what the best solution for this is. Perhaps we could lowercase the name of the page and compare that to other items (similar to what we currently do to ensure that no page is site-linked to more than one item). There would be exceptions, but we could warn them at least that they look like they are linking to something that may already be linked to. There are other redirects that are similar that may cause problems. Items with more than a single name that are conceptually the same thing might fall into this. I do think though that having something like what you describe happen is more of a user error though. Can you think of any possible Q(something) that would work for their of those Q(somethings). I.e. can you find a set of items where this problem might actually manifest. Coat of Arms of Novi Sad is a single concept and I can't imagine that we are likely to find too many cases where folks link it accurately to another Wikidata item. Perhaps a report could be put together regularly of possible conflicts? Thank you, Derric Atzrott ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
Re: [Wikidata-l] Sitelinks to Redirects
Citiranje Derric Atzrott datzr...@alizeepathology.com: I do think though that having something like what you describe happen is more of a user error though. Can you think of any possible Q(something) that Right now, since only linking to articles is allowed, and only one article can be linked from anywhere on Wikidata, such errors are difficult to make, and easy to find and rectify. If linking to redirects is allowed, such errors will become easier to make, and more difficult to find and rectify. ___ Wikidata-l mailing list Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
