On 6 April 2013 23:05, Michael Hale <[email protected]> wrote:
> No, it is not an example of a solution. If you wrote a property inclusion
> like that, and then someone changed the value on Wikidata, and then someone
> made an arbitrary edit somewhere else in the article, then when they save
> the page again the parameter that you have provided makes no sense.
Michael, this makes no sense to me. I think your scenario makes
perfect sense to everyone:
Wikipedia page V1, content written:: x {{#property:population}}
Wikipedia page V1, content stored:: x
{{#property:population|value-when-saving-page=309000000}}
property:population on Wikidata changed to 300
Wikipedia page V2: wikitext x changed to U, property function call
changes on saving to:
U {{#property:population|value-when-saving-page=300}}
In both cases the value-when-saving-page is correct, transparent and
makes sense.
But forget it, if no-one likes it. I am not arguing about this. I am
arguing about employing Wikipedia editors for the sake of proofreading
Wikidata changes, while at the same time avoid making them feel
helpless and no longer in charge of "their" pages.
> The correct solution would be to change the behavior of the renderer to look
> for old versions of templates and data items,
I agree, as I wrote this is a preferrable solution for that part of
the problem.
It does not solve the diff-transparency problem, however, which I
consider the more important problem.
> but Wikidata wouldn't be
> pressured to do this until Wikipedia changed the way it renders templates.
I am not trying to pressure you or make war on you.
I prefer to believe we both are on the side of discussing how as many
contributors as possible are motivated to contribute to the growing
commons of Wikipedia and Wikidata, and how the quality of it can best
be upheld.
Gregor
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l
