thank you Tony, still looking forward to some kind of reconciliation process here in the future. it would make wikidata even more appealing as an attractive information source.
Marco On Mon, Nov 6, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Tony Bowden <[email protected]> wrote: > In this case it was fairly easy to find some suitable sources, so I've > updated the claim, and added references. As the original claim was > unsourced, I think it's fine to simply replace it, rather than marking > it as deprecated. > > Tony > > On 5 November 2017 at 18:39, Nicolas VIGNERON > <[email protected]> wrote: >> 2017-11-05 19:13 GMT+01:00 Marco Neumann <[email protected]>: >>> >>> Andrew, >>> >>> what would be your first choice for conflict resolution here? write an >>> entry into the relevant item/discuss page? or go for a Requests for >>> comment on the Community portal? or to contact the claim author >>> directly? >> >> >> Hi, >> >> For resolving this specific case, I'd go on the talk page of the item >> https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q16191299 and notify the >> people concerned (in this case, the wikidatian that added the claim but, >> ideally, also the main contributors of the Wikipedia article, « with enough >> eyeballs »). Especially in this case where the bottom of the issue seems to >> be the lack of sources. >> >> Community pages are more for broad question or if previous discussions >> failed to come to a consensus. >> >> Cdlt, ~nicolas >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata -- --- Marco Neumann KONA _______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
