The WMF does not engage in such matters, this is a community issue. And given the unwillingness of admins to act in this case, I think a discussion on the project chat on whether or not these items are notable makes a lot more sense than continued discussion on the administrators' noticeboard (or here). Admins have an easier time implementing consensus than making decisions themselves, and if some don't want to undelete the items then it would cause quite some conflict if others did.

Adrian Raddatz

On Sun, Jul 31, 2016 at 10:23 AM, Info WorldUniversity <> wrote:

Hi Sjoerd,

I'm just asking about unfolding Wikidata community process - and in relation too to WMF.


On Jul 31, 2016 10:20 AM, "Sjoerd de Bruin" <> wrote:

Sorry, but what has "the new head of the WMF" to do with the community matters of Wikidata?


Sjoerd de Bruin

Op 31 jul. 2016, om 19:18 heeft Info WorldUniversity <> het volgende geschreven:

Thanks Andy for helping focus these developing process questions. What role could the new head of the WMF play here in positive regards?

Regards, Scott

On Jul 31, 2016 10:09 AM, "Andy Mabbett" <> wrote:
On 31 July 2016 at 16:43, Adrian Raddatz <> wrote:

> my personal opinion is that these items are
> fine as well. But (and here's the important thing), it's not a big deal
> either way. The site will continue, and this especially should not be a time
> for trying to force an opinion one way or the other onto the community. :-)

The big deal is about how we decide how Wikidata policies are applied
- do we seek to obtain community consensus, or do we allow involved
admins to decide by fait accompli?

Andy Mabbett

Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata mailing list

Wikidata mailing list

Wikidata mailing list