While Wikidata certainly has concerns to deal with about accuracy and
vandalism, I think we need to push back against this mindset that Wikipedia
works perfectly while Wikidata is this unregulated free-for-all. I've run
into editors on en.wp objecting to a Wikidata infobox displaying the very
same information that was unsourced in that Wikipedia article for nearly a
decade. Both are a work in progress, both can do better, and these should
not be barriers to progress or integration.
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Andy Mabbett <a...@pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
> On 19 September 2017 at 19:18, Dario Taraborelli
> <dtarabore...@wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> > I wanted to draw your attention to a deletion nomination discussion for
> an
> > experimental template – {{Cite Q}} – pulling bibliographic data from
> > Wikidata:
>
> Closed as "no consensus"; it's worth reading the full comment:
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templa
> tes_for_discussion/Log/2017_September_15&curid=55240730&
> diff=803445497&oldid=803444684
>
> --
> Meta: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite
> Twitter: https://twitter.com/wikicite
> ---
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "wikicite-discuss" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to wikicite-discuss+unsubscr...@wikimedia.org.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
