It is true that {{Authority control}} does not need arbitrary item access, so we can assume that it is already mainstream, although it would be nice to bring it to all Wikisources
Regarding badges, I agree with Aubrey that we should reuse the current levels, not only for pages, but also for texts. From the usability point of view, I don't think that it is a good idea to use percentage numbers as badge labels, since the numbers are not descriptive, instead I would go for: - incomplete text - not proofread - proofread - validated
Remember that a page can have more than two badges, so for instance a book with some missing pages could have been "validated" and be an "incomplete text". That is probably fine.
Any other comments? Or shall we apply for the wikisource badges already?
Thanks Micru
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 6:54 PM, Nicolas VIGNERON <vigneron.nicolas@gmail.com
wrote:
2015-06-01 18:35 GMT+02:00 Andy Mabbett andy@pigsonthewing.org.uk:
On 1 June 2015 at 16:47, David Cuenca Tudela dacuetu@gmail.com wrote:
Arbitrary access has been enabled in all Wikisources, is anybody doing anything with it that can be replicated in all Wikisources?
{{Authority control}} would be a good use case - we already have plenty of experience - and reusable code - in multiple Wikipedias.
Happy to advise further if needed.
Does {{Authority control}} use Wikidata arbitrary access ? (I don't think so… but not sure). Nonetheless, This template already exists on 8 Wikisources (according to Wikidata maybe some are missing) and works fine. It should definitively be use on all Wikisources.
The template Author could maybe benefit from Wikidata arbitrary access (again not sure, user:Rical works on Modèle:Auteur on fr.ws but I can't understand his coding) (by the way, is it normal/a good idea to have this template on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5615832 mixed with the wikipedia infobox ?)
Cdlt, ~nicolas
Wikisource-l mailing list Wikisource-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikisource-l