Hoi,
It is not a red herring, it is lists with facts existing on a Wikipedia
that differ from what exists on other sources including Wikidata. When you
check out these issues you have a fair chance of finding local errors or
contributing to the quality on other sources including Wikidata. This is
one of the more relevant moments where sources indeed have value.
It is not about the way we do things, it is about quality. Sorry for
refuting your logic.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 20 November 2015 at 09:18, Federico Leva (Nemo) <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Gerard Meijssen, 20/11/2015 08:18:
>
>> At this moment there
>> are already those at Wikidata that argue not to bother about Wikipedia
>> quality because in their view, Wikipedians do not care about its own
>> quality.
>>
>
> And some wikipedians say the same of Wikidata. So "quality" in such
> discussions is just a red herring used to raise matters of control (i.e.
> power and social structure). Replace "quality" with "the way I do things"
> in all said discussions and suddenly things will make more sense.
>
> The first step to improve the situation, imho, is to banish the word
> "quality".
>
> Nemo
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
