Amir E. Aharoni wrote:
The last one is my own creation, which has surprisingly caught on; Unfortunately i haven't had much time to maintain it lately, and i'd be very glad if someone could help with that.
I think it's popular because it is easy to collaborate and do something with the problem. As opposed to discussing 'interwikis are broken', on which all of us agree.
However, I'd still improve the interface. Why edit a page to change the group, instead of choosing the meaning with one click? I'd move it to the toolserver with a interface to view the interwiki groups, split and define them, move interwikis on their groups... All of that then backed by some bot.
Moving to the wikipedia scenario, the interwikis could be shown on a different state "conflicted". Thus on normal wiki interaction, wikipedians would notice *on their wiki*, lead to the interwiki managing (having a link on p-lang) and help to fix it (and I say help instead of fix because this is work has to be collaborative).
The briefs for the article groups also could and should be reused for something else (WikitionaryZ, simplewiki, yahoo abstracts...).