Hoi,

I have a list of Dutch people who died in 2015. There is a list of fields associated with them and regularly new facts are added. So I am very happy with the result. the point is that there is a lot of content that is not well maintained (including in Wikidata) they are things like awards. When Wikidata has done its job it is a better job. The trick is to keep them updated and that is where it is easier to do this at Wikidata than doing it on 280+ Wikipedias.

It is fine for some to prevent progress. The problem is that their solution is not one that scales or where they make a positive difference. It is easy enough to update lists and categories on any Wikipedia with content that is of high quality and that is not considered on that Wikipedia.

Why only two exceptions, when there is an obvious opportunity for much more quality?

Thanks,

GerardM

On 19 September 2016 at 11:06, John Erling Blad <jeblad@gmail.com> wrote:

Either the list should just be a an entry point for a list structure or table that is completely created outside the editors realm, or it should be possible to merge any user edit with content from the bot. There should be no in-between where the user needs additional knowledge about how to edit the bot-produced content or even that (s)he can't edit the bot-produced content. From the user (editors) point of view there should be no special precautions to how some pages should be edited.

At the moment there are two pages in the main space at nowiki using listeria bot; Bluepoint Games [1] and Thatgamecompany [2]. It is a (weak?) consensus on not using the bot, so if a discussion is started they will probably be removed. The main argument why it should not be used is because it overwrites edits made by other users.

[1] https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluepoint_Games
[2] https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thatgamecompany

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