Having sitelinks to redirects in my wikipedia makes it easier for other
wikipedias to link to my wikipedia.
If I dont care about that then I may delete those redirects from my
wikipedia and the sitelink to my wikipedia will go too.
The wikipedias have the final say on what they do and do not include.
Joe
On 16 Oct 2014 20:51, "P. Blissenbach" <publi(a)web.de> wrote:
Hi Jane,
I don't think there is any Wikimedia project
that actively deletes
redirects.
You don't have to believe me. Just check the delete logs. There are tens
of thousands of deleted redirects. Because they were cluttering "Allpages"
lists. Because they were common spelling mistakes and "we do not support
mistaken spellings". Because
people also use redirects as a way of
"bundling concepts"
in a wrong way (Looking for a scientific term and landing on the vita of
the scientist whom it is attributed to, for instance, is annoying) ... and
so on.
So this redicet idea is not suited for all Wikipedias.
Purodha
"Jane Darnell" <jane023(a)gmail.com> writes:
Purodha,
Redirects are cheap - so cheap in fact, that they take up more space when
you delete them, so even if they are misspelled or whatever, they are
mostly left to rot unless they break something (for example when someone
wants to use a redlink like [[redlink]] and someone else makes a redirect
for "redlink"). I don't think there is any Wikimedia project that actively
deletes redirects.
In general, redirects are supposed to be used as alternate names for the
same thing, and in Wikidata, this is done by typing in alternate labels. Of
course people also use redirects as a way of "bundling concepts" - just
take a look at all the redirects to the article for "insurance" for all the
types of insurance that don't yet have their own article.
Before Wikidata there were lots of interwiki links to redirects, and this
caused multiple issues with unresolvable interwikilinks. Wikidata was
invented to be able to use persistent identifiers for Wikipedia articles.
Now everyone is surprised that now the interwikilinks work differently from
before. The fact that redirects are not supported is by design and not a
bug. Going forward, instead of making redirects, Wikidatans should just
keep creating items in Wikidata and let the Wikipedias take care of
themselves by letting them create articles and redirects in the normal wiki
way. It should not be a goal for Wikidata to sitelink to every redirect in
every Wikipedia, just as it is not a goal to sitelink to every image on
Wikimedia Commons.
The subject at hand in this email thread is that instead of creating an
article, the user ThurnerRupert made a redirect in the German Wikipedia
called "afrikanische Pflaume" that links to "Prunus" and expected to
be
able to interwikilink this redirect via the Wikidata item for "African
Plum" to the French Wikipedia's article for "safou". I would say that
Wikidata should not support this workflow and it is incorrect editing
behavior. This has nothing to do with the numbers of redirects or whether
or not they need to be deleted by anybody.
Jane
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 6:09 PM, P. Blissenbach <publi(a)web.de> wrote:I do
not mind having huge numbers of redirects at all, but you must be aware
that there are wikipedias the powers of which will stubbornly and
customarily delete such redirects when you create them. So that cannot be a
solutiion for all.
Purodha_______________________________________________ Wikidata-l mailing
list Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l[https://lists.wikim…
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l