Magnus added a comment. @Lydia is right in that the bot-generated articles were/are generally considered a nuisance. But that is mainly, and you said, because they were never updated. It is, thus, a point against flooding the manual description field with automatic descriptions. It is //not// an argument against dynamically generated ones, even if cached in a field. Which would, IMHO, be the ideal solution; in addition to label/alias/description, the wb_terms could have an "autodesc" type that is updated as required. However, that requires tight integration with wikibase, which I don't see as the way forward //right now//. Code review by WMF has proven to be far to slow and inflexible for developing new code, especially code as complex as automatic descriptions would require.
I think the way forward is to develop the algorithm independently, Labs tool or dedicated VM, and keep it flexible enough to plug it into wikibase once it's working properly for many languages and most items. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T91981 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: Magnus Cc: Jdlrobson, Magnus, thiemowmde, Lydia_Pintscher, Tgr, Deskana, bearND, Dbrant, Aklapper, Cxyshine, Wikidata-bugs, aude, Matanya, Malyacko _______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list Wikidata-bugs@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
