Wikipedia talk:Use of Wikidata in Wikipedia
 | Essays Low‑impact  | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Good start edit
Thanks for starting this Jytdog, I will be watching and contributing when I think of anything additional or different that needs to be mentioned, but you seem to be on the right track so far. · · · Peter (Southwood) (talk): 06:42, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
some drafty stuff edit
Differences in policy and governance
| en-WP | WD | |
|---|---|---|
| Living people | WP:BLP | ? |
| Biomedical information | WP:MEDRS | ? |
| Bots | WP:BOT | WD:BOT |
| Verifiability | WP:V | None; WD:V (draft) |
| Example | Example | Example |
| Example | Example | Example |
| Example | Example | Example |
| Example | Example | Example |
| Example | Example | Example |
| Example | Example | Example |
Sometimes using Wikidata won't matter. Data about a book (its publisher, ISBN, title, etc) are what they are and there are unlikely to be disputes about such content; however the way a citation is rendered may be controversial. On another level certain ways that living people can be classified or otherwise described in Wikidata, are another matter. Likewise some fields in Wikidata about health (drug X can treat disease Y) are not sourced per WP:MEDRS). Thinking this through may involve exclusion of certain kinds of data from en-WP.)
Related Pages edit
A relevant RfC has been held on de.wikipedia Wikipedia:Meinungsbilder/Mehr erfahren. Wikidata played only a minor role in the discussions leading up to it, as far as I can remember. --HHill (talk) 17:47, 10 October 2017 (UTC) The response from the WMF: The Reading team would like to move forward with making related pages a stable feature on mobile web on all Wikipedias (except for the German Wikipedia, which rejected the feature, unless they decided to re-think their vote). --HHill (talk) 17:50, 10 October 2017 (UTC)