| Marshallsumter added a comment. |
Please keep in mind all I'm asking is for those WikiData items that exist to display that WikiData item number in Wikiversity. For example, [[v:Draft:Abstract concept generator]] has WikiData item number Q50011734. Here's the opinions from https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2014/05#What_do_do_with_Wikipedia:Draft_articles:
- neutral - "I'm not sure either way.What do you think?" Filceolaire (talk) 05:42, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "Is there a way we could have Draft items on wikidata - say regular Qitems with 'Draft:' at the start of their names in every language?" Filceolaire (talk) 05:42, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- oppose -"IMO drafts and articles less than 2 weeks only shouldnt be included in Wikidata, let alone imported into Wikidata." John Vandenberg (talk) 05:53, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- oppose - "+1 to wait before creating the item."--Micru (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "We could say that draft articles are allowed to be connected to items here, but that a link to only a draft article is not enough to be notable. This way draft articles can use the data on Wikidata and we don't end up with dozens of empty items." Multichill (talk) 16:50, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "Draft articles may be connected to an item which already has sitelinks to another language of the same project family." John Vandenberg (talk) 00:00, 24 May 2014 (UTC), see 1. oppose above.
- support -"+1 to Multichill." --Ricordisamoa 23:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "To make a good draft, they might need information from Wikidata available. In that case, shouldn't they create an item as soon as possible add add information here?" --- Jura 04:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "The presence of one Wikidata item is sufficient to create an item, but an item does not need a Wikipedia article." TomT0m (talk) 09:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "Draft articles are excluded from search engines for good reason. Consider wikidata as a search engine as well, and you will bring up additional unwanted links to all search engines that use wikidata as a source. It is early enough to link it to wikidata as soon as it is in main namespace, you also don´t need to monitor if an article has moved to a different namespace."--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 16:40, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "As a schematic batch of information we already have Wikidata itself. We don't need linking proto-articles. I don't see the need for hurrying, if the draft doesn't go wrong it'll be linked to Wikidata once it's finished." Totemkin (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- support - "I see no problem having a Q item here, while the article is being developed in en.wikipedia or whatsoever, but clearly (to me, at least) it's not neccesary having them related." Totemkin (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "Draft namespace has been created for articles who may or may not adhere to notabilty rules on en.wiki - which are IMHO already far too permissive, considering the it.wp (or de.wp) ones. I don't think we need that." --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 10:03, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "per above. Unfinished articles have no place here." Mushroom (talk) 11:00, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "draft articles are not part of the encyclopedia (yet)" --CutOffTies (talk) 12:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "per above." --AmaryllisGardener talk 12:24, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
- Oppose - "Drafts are articles in development and are little different to user subpages. Once they are mainspace articles they can be added." Green Giant (talk) 12:53, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
subtracting oppose directed to Wikipedia only or mixed answer (1,4,5,7)
Comment on (3): Google full-web search for "Draft:Minerals" produces "Draft:Minerals - Wikiversity
https://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Draft:Minerals
Jul 8, 2018 - Draft:Minerals. This image shows several amphibole crystals in a glass bowl. Credit: Karelj. Minerals are usually solid, inorganic substances of natural occurrence."
Remaining support (1,2,3,4,5,6,7), remaining oppose (2,6,8,9). Support - Me (0), matej_suchanek corrected the filter (8). Total support for other draft ns = 9
Oppose - "Please restore the filter that prevents Wikidata links to v:Draft: namespace and delete any existing v:Draft: links. Thank you." -- Dave Braunschweig (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2018 (UTC) (10).
Oppose - "Undid Matěj's filter change; perhaps you can undo any edits that were allowed as a result, professor." Mahir256 (talk) 21:16, 14 August 2018 (UTC) (11)
Oppose? - "At this point I don't see any good reason to change Wikidata rules to accommodate this Wikiversity issue, it needs to be resolved there." ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:29, 16 August 2018 (UTC) (11)
Total oppose without changing WikiData rules (2,6,8,9,10,11) = 6. 9/15 = 0.6 not a consensus of support for WikiData Draft: ns items per filter now.
But what about those already there before filter created? support (1,2,3,4,5,6,7,0) = 8, oppose (2,6,8,9). 8/12 = 0.67 , plus matej_suchanek corrected the filter (8). Total support for other draft ns = 9, 9/13 = 0.69. Is that high enough to let the WikiData number be present for those Wikiversity Drafts who have one?
Cc: matej_suchanek, YMS, Ymblanter, GerardM, AmaryllisGardener, Mushroom, Sannita, Jura1, jayvdb, Liuxinyu970226, Aklapper, Marshallsumter, Lahi, Gq86, GoranSMilovanovic, Jayprakash12345, QZanden, Zoranzoki21, LawExplorer, DatGuy, Devwaker, Niklitov, Urbanecm, JEumerus, Tulsi_Bhagat, Wong128hk, Luke081515, SimmeD, Wikidata-bugs, Snowolf, aude, Dcljr, Shizhao, Jdforrester-WMF, Matanya, Mbch331, Rxy, Jay8g, Krenair
_______________________________________________ Wikidata-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-bugs
