2017-11-01 15:44 GMT+01:00 helene78 <newshs@numericable.fr>:
The more I read about it-ws Opera namespace, the more I'm interested in it.

On frws we use "multiple editions" a lot, especially on poems and short stories, that have been published in different collections. Do you do that too ?

Also, I had a fantasy, these past weeks, working about "work items" on wikidata, that we could point on wikisource "work" page, whether we have 1 or multiple editions.

Presently, when, for a poem, we have only 1 edition, we put it in its collection subpage, and keed the poem title as redirect, then transform it to "multiple editions" when we get some. This totally prevents to add those to wikidata, because redirects are not supported ; thus, editions are added to work items, by adding redirects.

I was wondering whether adding a template similar to "redirect with possibility" (enwp) could help solve this problem.

Wonder what solution would be best, considering that the creation of a full-developped "work-page" on a poem could be tricky...

So, what do you think all of you ?

Hélène (frwikisource)

From afar, the Opera: pages on it.ws are very close to the pages with the template {{Éditions}} on fr.ws or the template {{Versions}} on en.ws (and similar system elsewhere).

The main difference is having a separate namespace A second major difference is that the templates on fr.ws and en.ws are very light while the {{Opera}} template took data from Wikidata (but that's an independent problem, it's possible to change the {{Éditions}} or {{Versions}} templates to do exactly the same thing without having a specific namespace).

I'm almost convinced too, but in order to create a new namespace on a project you have to convinced the local community. That's why I'm still playing the Devil's advocate role and want to learn about the inconvenients of this system (for instance, since the name of the work is free to use, does people often use it by mistake?).

Cdlt, ~nicolas