I would say the arguments of users who voted to delete the template have
merit, and the template was kept (and not even banished to the draft space)
under the condition that attemps will be made to reduce the issues.
Cheers
Yaroslav
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 9:27 PM, Robert Fernandez <wikigamaliel(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
While Wikidata certainly has concerns to deal with
about accuracy and
vandalism, I think we need to push back against this mindset that Wikipedia
works perfectly while Wikidata is this unregulated free-for-all. I've run
into editors on en.wp objecting to a Wikidata infobox displaying the very
same information that was unsourced in that Wikipedia article for nearly a
decade. Both are a work in progress, both can do better, and these should
not be barriers to progress or integration.
On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Andy Mabbett <andy(a)pigsonthewing.org.uk>
wrote:
On 19 September 2017 at 19:18, Dario Taraborelli
<dtaraborelli(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I wanted to draw your attention to a deletion
nomination discussion for
an
experimental template – {{Cite Q}} – pulling
bibliographic data from
Wikidata:
Closed as "no consensus"; it's worth reading the full comment:
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Templa
tes_for_discussion/Log/2017_September_15&curid=55240730&diff
=803445497&oldid=803444684
--
Meta:
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WikiCite
Twitter:
https://twitter.com/wikicite
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"wikicite-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
email to wikicite-discuss+unsubscribe(a)wikimedia.org.
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata