Hoi,

It is not a red herring, it is lists with facts existing on a Wikipedia that differ from what exists on other sources including Wikidata. When you check out these issues you have a fair chance of finding local errors or contributing to the quality on other sources including Wikidata. This is one of the more relevant moments where sources indeed have value.

It is not about the way we do things, it is about quality. Sorry for refuting your logic.

Thanks,

GerardM

On 20 November 2015 at 09:18, Federico Leva (Nemo) <nemowiki@gmail.com> wrote:

Gerard Meijssen, 20/11/2015 08:18:

At this moment there
are already those at Wikidata that argue not to bother about Wikipedia
quality because in their view, Wikipedians do not care about its own
quality.

And some wikipedians say the same of Wikidata. So "quality" in such discussions is just a red herring used to raise matters of control (i.e. power and social structure). Replace "quality" with "the way I do things" in all said discussions and suddenly things will make more sense.

The first step to improve the situation, imho, is to banish the word "quality".

Nemo

_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata