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 <andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk> wrote:On 19 September 2017 at 19:18, Dario Taraborelli
<dtaraborelli@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_Se ptember_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+unsubscribe@wikimedia.org .
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata