This made me laugh. Thank you. It is a rainy Sunday and this brightened it up a bit. How on EARTH could this be the wrong place to talk about this? I am still laughing. Anyway, I would be happy to generate something for Wikipedia editors like I did for Authority Control. I suspect there will be many more of these datasets moved to Wikidata. I plan on doing at least one lightning talk on these at upcoming editathons and/or WikiWednesdays. I think in addition to training folks on Wikipedia editing it is becoming very clear we need to do some basic Wikidata editing that dovetails with these items. Best, - Erika

I guess we disagree. I don't see this issue as being particularly political or social. That seems like a very odd distinction to make. Because in that approach, how would I have the technical information to know, if I was editing Wikipedia, how to add or update this information? I don't get this distinction -- or the lack of communication -- about these types of changes. Changes which are having a pretty significant impact on Wikipedia editing. Without discussion that I have seen. If this "Wikidata can only provide solutions" approach (as you describe it) is taken I think that does a HUGE disservice to to intersectionality and potential outreach and future growth of Wikidata as both a platform and as a semantic backbone of Wikipedia, English or otherwise. I totally disagree with this, as is probably evident. I am actually really sad to read this. So I guess if Wikidata is seen as purely technical there is no place for end-user issues. Which is what I see this as? That also doesn't really seem logical. - Erika *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:08 PM, Egon Willighagen < egon.willighagen(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

On 09.10.2016 19:46, Brill Lyle wrote: Hi Erika, I guess the starting point would be to contact on-wiki (e.g. on the English Wikipedia) the user who is removing the templates (or the bot owner) and ask for the venue where the issue was discussed. If such venue exists, I am pretty sure it is on Wikipedia. If this has not been discussed, it probably needs to be stopped. Cheers Yaroslav

I found the bot and the editors who are doing the change. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JJMC89_bot I still think Wikidata needs to be part of this discussion, especially if more of these items push to Wikidata.

Andy: Did it occur to you that maybe there were no objections because there was no visibility to the request? Quite frankly, I am amenable to these changes and support pushing granulated data like this and Authority Control to Wikidata. I am. I recognize the value of these efforts, and how great it will be for Wikidata and Wikipedia. However, without proper user-friendly documentation -- not just a template page update that unless you are familiar with templates it will be unintelligible, but a proper set of documentation for newbies and experienced editor alike -- and just as importantly, without communicating this change effectively to the larger spectrum of Wikipedia and Wikidata editors, this approach comes off as a rogue effort. Of concern: I see a list of Bot changes you are initiating here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JJMC89_bot/Wikidata_external_link_templa… It is NOT a trivial amount of items, and will have an impact on both Wikipedia and Wikidata. I am doing nothing wrong here by asking these questions. How you choose to respond and take the questions is your problem. I don't want to take up any further bandwith on Wikidata's mailing list, as it has been explained to me that this is a Wikipedia project issue, not a Wikidata issue. Although the data will now reside and live on Wikidata's project pages. - Erika *Erika Herzog* Wikipedia *User:BrillLyle <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BrillLyle>* On Mon, Oct 10, 2016 at 5:57 AM, Andy Mabbett &lt;andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk&gt; wrote: