Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 18:38, 18 February 2013

Interwiki conflicts

Template loop detected: Wikipedia talk:Wikidata/Wikidatans

Please list interwiki link conflicts here

If you find an interwiki conflict, please list it here so that a Wikidata editor can investigate and clear up the issue. Sven Manguard Wha? 01:52, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Portal:Technology ([1])

Could probably create a temporary noticeboard or something for it. This page could get really long otherwise. --Izno (talk) 02:23, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is one on Wikidata. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not sure it's necessary to list it here, or even on Wikipedia at all. Part of the point of Wikidata is to centralize the data; it makes sense to me to centralize the discussion of that data as well. --Izno (talk) 14:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If they're easy ones, I can knock them off right here, and if they're too difficult, I can forward them to the main board on Wikidata. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:13, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't an "interwiki conflict", we just had two pages that linked to the same page on another wiki. Wikidata doesn't handle that case so the guy removing the links was correct to just leave those ones behind. 86.44.163.139 (talk) 02:31, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, that's still a conflict. The Wikidata community will sort out which is the correct link. Sven Manguard Wha? 02:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But there is no "Correct" link. It looks like to me that we have Portal:Science AND Portal:Technology, whereas they only have Portal:Science & Tech. If we want both English portals to link to that one portal, then one of the pages will have to keep a local interwikilink. In any case, the links that are working can still be removed just fine. It makes it easier to which links are causing problems and what (if anything) needs to be done. 86.44.163.139 (talk) 02:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one to start with: Appomattox Court House National Historical Park is messed up with Appomattox Court House. I did not touch the second one, and in the first one, I added the note that the links should not be removed until the interwiki conflict has been solved.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's been handled and both pages are now cleared for Wikidata. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:44, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Edit summary

Can users who are removing interwiki links please link to this Wikidata project, it looks like vandalism otherwise. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I started this page for precisely that reason. --Izno (talk) 15:33, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This needs to be a priority. Removal of content without a valid reason will be treated as vandalism or inadvertent error unless clearly stated otherwise. JFW | T@lk 22:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've put in several hopefully prominent references to this, and I've also asked d:User:Yair Rand if he'd consider adding a default summary to his script. — PinkAmpers &^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 00:07, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Should" and "should not"

I've attempted to remain agnostic on whether this page should give the community guidance on whether actions should or should not be performed. My opinion is that the RFC (unclosed) was a no consensus on any policy or guideline, so we should attempt to avoid giving such guidance. --Izno (talk) 19:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata and Interwiki links

Wikidata has been deployed to the English Wikipedia. Wikidata manages interwiki links on a separate project on pages such as this.

Further information: m:Wikidata/Deployment Questions and https://blog.wikimedia.de/?p=13892.

All interwiki bots that run on the English Wikipedia have now stopped adding interwiki links.

Removal of interwiki links on a page linked to a wikidata item that contains the links is NOT vandalism. Please use this script which can identify if the links are found on wikidata.

If you have any questions regarding wikidata please use the talk page Wikipedia talk:Wikidata. ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 21:04, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made a fork of that script that handles language codes with hyphens. See [2] William Avery (talk) 00:42, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! :) ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 00:54, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would not have attempted it without your shared insight into the problem of underscores and hyphens. William Avery (talk) 00:57, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It is rather odd how the API uses underscores and the rest of the world hyphens! I hate javascript though ;p Glad you managed to fix it! ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 01:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

William: Would you mind contacting Yair on wikidata to see if your fix can be implemented in their script? Many users already have his/hers installed so it would be good if we can fix all of those. Legoktm (talk) 01:13, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's fixed now. William Avery (talk) 13:06, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I really would urge people to link to this page in their edit summaries. I've just seen links removed by an IP, who can't be using a script to run checks. William Avery (talk) 23:29, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could someone please point me to a page that actually explains how to use this new "facility"? Deb (talk) 14:02, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

recent/early deletions of IW links too opaque?

I've seen some recent edits by User:Xqbot that initially looked suspicious and/or wrong. A little investigation revealed they are related this Wikidata project/initiative. This is probably a good thing, but seems a bit opaque right now in the early stages.

While there is the "edit links" thing over in the languages frame, these otherwise unexplained edits might catch editors unawares. Providing very explicit edit summaries along with a link to the associated wikidata page may be helpful during this transition. --Dfred (talk) 04:30, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, I just spotted a message on the users talk page about this and I have also had a message regarding my bot even when linking to the wikidata page explaining what wikidata is and the entry where the wikilinks can be found. ·Add§hore· ^{Talk To Me!} 11:37, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Splits and merges

A useful thing to add might be advice on what Wikipedians are supposed to do to update Wikidata when there are page splits and page merges here -- what needs to be done to make interwiki links reflect the changed page scopes; and how much will or will not automatically be picked up by bots? Jheald (talk) 09:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually been wondering that as well. That might be worth a broader topic at Wikidata, because those are issues which other wikis will have to deal with also, if it hasn't been discussed there yet. --Izno (talk) 14:32, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Namespace bug

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T46536

There is something seriously wrong with editing the interlanguage links on Wikidata for pages outside mainspace. I've started a thread at d:Wikidata:Project chat#Namespace ignored. --Redrose64 (talk) 13:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is a known bug per the thread there. --Izno (talk) 14:25, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

There is a fix, which will be backported during todays deployment. Legoktm (talk) 15:26, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the large banners

They largely duplicate the actual content of the sections without adding substantially to understanding, in my opinion. I think the nutshell already captures the intent fine. --Izno (talk) 14:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I put the top one back because we really do need people to see the link to the conflict section so that these things can get fixed and not languish forever. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder AGAIN

Please can all Wikidata editors ENSURE they place a link to this project in their edit summaries when they remove interwiki links. I mean a LINK, not just a passing nod to WIkidata. This roll-out has confused many editors and anything we can do to prevent unnecessary confusion is good. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The only ways to fix the problems are a) tell specific offending editors and b) explain to specific confused editors. There is nothing else that can be done by noting your problem here. --Izno (talk) 18:38, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please list interwiki link conflicts here