Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Archive/Add to unexisting page a link to some Wikidata item
Add to unexisting page a link to some Wikidata item
Outside the scope of Community Tech
- Problem: Before the article was created we can't use the Wikidata information, still it exists for the same article in other languages.
- Who would benefit: Wikipedia readers, to know something about the article before somebody could write it.
- Proposed solution: Add an ability to mark any unexisting page with Wikidata item Q-number. So, we could add, for example, an infobox to MediaWiki:editnotice-0, that will use the Wikidata information, by #property and #statement, and it will look something as Wikidata infoboxes in Commons.
- More comments: It can be implemented, of course, by adding a new section to Wikidata items. But also, this can be local information. Depends on implementation convenience.
- Phabricator tickets: None.
- Proposer: IKhitron (talk) 19:42, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
Discussion
Something similar exists: mw:Extension:ArticlePlaceholder. --Wargo (talk) 20:06, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, I know, thank you. But it is much more complicated, and does not work on any wiki site. I'm talking about using regular local infoboxes, not special pages, so the users will do all the work, and only a little piece of information will be keeped in database. IKhitron (talk) 20:21, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think it's almost like proposal in my ticket phab:T178249, just simple match for new page before creation. — putnik 20:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Putnik. Yes, I believe you can say so. IKhitron (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- It might be more useful implementing this the same way we can preview a given page while editing a template. It could have a text input to put the Wikidata entity ID to override the linked Wikidata item of the article. This could work with any page, and not only with unconnected pages. - Agabi10 (talk) 11:34, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
- Hi, Putnik. Yes, I believe you can say so. IKhitron (talk) 21:15, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think it's almost like proposal in my ticket phab:T178249, just simple match for new page before creation. — putnik 20:57, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
- I think it may be a good idea. Users can create inter-wiki pages in other languages by just clicking the red link on the left, and when they want to create one, they will know there are some existing pages in other wikis they can refer to. --Leiem (talk) 15:29, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
see #Connect a red link to wikidata --W!B: (talk) 12:45, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hi @IKhitron:, the mw:Extension:ArticlePlaceholder extension aimed to tackle this exact problem, and it is available to wikis if they're interested in enabling it (they should just request it). Providing a separate functionality that changes the way we work with nonexisting pages, and potentially storing the information that links back to wikidata in such a way, requires work which is too big for the scope of what the team can provide through the Wishlist process. I suggest summarizing this request in a ticket so it is saved for posterity and so the Wikidata team and communities can perhaps discuss whether this can be done as part of a strategic process. Thank you for your participation in the wishlist, MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Hello, MSchottlender-WMF. Can I try to change your mind, please? This is because (1) the extension is talking about absolutely different issue; (2) ruwiki asked it two years ago and still did not except it because "it is not ready and has bugs"; (3) there is no wiki that used it at all. IKhitron (talk) 18:21, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- @IKhitron: The extension is enabled in about 14 wikis, but if there are issues that are preventing wikis from using it properly, then we could concentrate on that. If you want, you can adjust this wish to ask for a review on ArticlePlaceholder and assistance on deploying it to more wikis. We might not be able to fix a list of 15 bugs, but we can definitely take a look into this extension, review the necessary and most urgent fixes needed, and help moving its deployment along. MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:33, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Exactly as I said, MSchottlender-WMF, we can't use it now. I can't help. because I'm not a developer. And what about "the extension is talking about absolutely different issue"? IKhitron (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- I think I am not completely understanding the different issue, then, @IKhitron:. The extension prefills nonexisting pages with data from Wikidata and some other sources, which is answering the need, it seems, and sounds extremely close to what you're asking. Can you be more specific about what your request is that is not answered by the purpose of that extension? MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, MSchottlender-WMF. Except the issue of wikilink color, the main problem is that the extension creates predefined infobox. I suggest a way to use the Wikidata link according to communities decisions. One community can decide to show the life dates only with no templates at all, and other to check the local infobox template according to wikitext logic. So, my proposal tooks about 1% of work that is needed to code the extension, but extremelly more powerful. IKhitron (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- If I understand right, you're envisioning a way to allow each community to change what ArticlePlaceholder displays according to community decision. I am not yet sure how much work that is, but it sounds like something we can definitely explore. But working on a feature that adds per-wiki infoboxes from wikidata asynchronously on edit has challenges and architectural considerations that are simply too big for the wishlist. If you wish, we can take a look at what ArticlePlaceholder is missing -- which you seem to say does almost everything, except some small things? -- and tackle those so it is actually useful. It will make a lot more sense to make an already existing solution useful than discarding it in favor of a completely different one that requires technical architectural changes. MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, MSchottlender-WMF, something like that. Of course, it's a lot of work to change the existing extension. All I suggested is a two column SQL table in each wiki - existing Wikidata item and some page title. #property will use it as it was the page's item. That's all. It will take an hour to implement. Not keeping infobox type or wikicode, not creating or changing some special page, or something else. For me, it's better than ArticlePlaceholder at the first place, but it's just me. And if it does not work, it's even better. IKhitron (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's a lot more work to change the Database Schema in MediaWiki than it is to fix up the extension. Changing the mediawiki schema and coming up with a way to retain extra data per nonexisting page is huge architectural work that is way outside our scope. Changing the existing extension to make it work better so that it will answer at least most of your needs and be useful for you, is doable. If you want to go that route, please change the wish to request auditing, fixing urgent bugs and helping deploy the ArticlePlaceholder extension. If you do that, I will move the wish back to the wishlist. Otherwise, as it is written, and as with the expectations, it's not possible for us to achieve as part of the wishlist. Just beware that the clock is ticking on this. MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 23:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- I see, MSchottlender-WMF. Maybe next year. I give up. But you say it will take more time than extension, when extension takes years to fix even before adding new features. IKhitron (talk) 13:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- The ArticlePlaceholder is built in a way that makes it possible for each local community to adapt the layout and what is shown to their needs. So that already works. What's missing is making it scale for larger wikis. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- I see, Lydia Pintscher. So, is hewiki small enough? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- I asked the developers but don't have a reply so far. Will let you know. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 18:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- Ok it looks like we can go ahead with hewiki from the technical side. @IKhitron: Do you want to go ahead and get an ok from your community and then file a ticket on phabricator? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I see, Lydia Pintscher. Thank you. Actually, I already w:he:wp:מזנון/ארכיון 378#כמעט קצרמר - האם זה טובsuggested it to the hewiki community, and it was about 40% of support (we need 51%). The problems can be fixed mostly by localization of result. So, could you tell me, please, where can I find the manual? So I could find there answers to a lot of questions. For example: How does it work? Who and when can create a new placeholder? How can I localize it? What will happen with red links? Will there a be a CSS class for links to placeholders. Is there a special page with a list for all existing placeholders. And much more. Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 13:21, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- @IKhitron: Generally information about the ArticlePlaceholder can be found on its MediaWiki extension page.
- So basically we have a special page which uses Lua to render data taken from any Wikidata item (unless the Wikidata item is already linked to an article, in that case the ArticlePlaceholder will redirect to that article instead). Currently the ArticlePlaceholder can be integrated in the search page, but it has no effects on redlinks in articles (there are plans to implement this, but that's in a very early planning stage right now). We currently don't have a special page listing all available placeholders… but in general all Wikidata items (unless an article exists) can be rendered as placeholders. If you have any further questions, I'm always happy to help. Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 10:32, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I see, Hoo man. Thank you very much for the explanation. So, we can't use it in next couple of years. A pity, Wargo and MSchottlender-WMF, that my proposal was archived. It would win for sure, just because it is very simple, needs very little work, and resolves the problems that Placeholder can't. See you next year. I'll propose it again, with detailed demonstration why Placeholder does not fit. Thank you.IKhitron (talk) 12:25, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
- I see, Lydia Pintscher. Thank you. Actually, I already w:he:wp:מזנון/ארכיון 378#כמעט קצרמר - האם זה טובsuggested it to the hewiki community, and it was about 40% of support (we need 51%). The problems can be fixed mostly by localization of result. So, could you tell me, please, where can I find the manual? So I could find there answers to a lot of questions. For example: How does it work? Who and when can create a new placeholder? How can I localize it? What will happen with red links? Will there a be a CSS class for links to placeholders. Is there a special page with a list for all existing placeholders. And much more. Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 13:21, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
- Ok it looks like we can go ahead with hewiki from the technical side. @IKhitron: Do you want to go ahead and get an ok from your community and then file a ticket on phabricator? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:21, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
- I asked the developers but don't have a reply so far. Will let you know. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 18:45, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
- I see, Lydia Pintscher. So, is hewiki small enough? Thank you. IKhitron (talk) 20:25, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
- The ArticlePlaceholder is built in a way that makes it possible for each local community to adapt the layout and what is shown to their needs. So that already works. What's missing is making it scale for larger wikis. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:27, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
- I see, MSchottlender-WMF. Maybe next year. I give up. But you say it will take more time than extension, when extension takes years to fix even before adding new features. IKhitron (talk) 13:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
- It's a lot more work to change the Database Schema in MediaWiki than it is to fix up the extension. Changing the mediawiki schema and coming up with a way to retain extra data per nonexisting page is huge architectural work that is way outside our scope. Changing the existing extension to make it work better so that it will answer at least most of your needs and be useful for you, is doable. If you want to go that route, please change the wish to request auditing, fixing urgent bugs and helping deploy the ArticlePlaceholder extension. If you do that, I will move the wish back to the wishlist. Otherwise, as it is written, and as with the expectations, it's not possible for us to achieve as part of the wishlist. Just beware that the clock is ticking on this. MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 23:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, MSchottlender-WMF, something like that. Of course, it's a lot of work to change the existing extension. All I suggested is a two column SQL table in each wiki - existing Wikidata item and some page title. #property will use it as it was the page's item. That's all. It will take an hour to implement. Not keeping infobox type or wikicode, not creating or changing some special page, or something else. For me, it's better than ArticlePlaceholder at the first place, but it's just me. And if it does not work, it's even better. IKhitron (talk) 21:53, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- If I understand right, you're envisioning a way to allow each community to change what ArticlePlaceholder displays according to community decision. I am not yet sure how much work that is, but it sounds like something we can definitely explore. But working on a feature that adds per-wiki infoboxes from wikidata asynchronously on edit has challenges and architectural considerations that are simply too big for the wishlist. If you wish, we can take a look at what ArticlePlaceholder is missing -- which you seem to say does almost everything, except some small things? -- and tackle those so it is actually useful. It will make a lot more sense to make an already existing solution useful than discarding it in favor of a completely different one that requires technical architectural changes. MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:49, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Sure, MSchottlender-WMF. Except the issue of wikilink color, the main problem is that the extension creates predefined infobox. I suggest a way to use the Wikidata link according to communities decisions. One community can decide to show the life dates only with no templates at all, and other to check the local infobox template according to wikitext logic. So, my proposal tooks about 1% of work that is needed to code the extension, but extremelly more powerful. IKhitron (talk) 18:43, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- I think I am not completely understanding the different issue, then, @IKhitron:. The extension prefills nonexisting pages with data from Wikidata and some other sources, which is answering the need, it seems, and sounds extremely close to what you're asking. Can you be more specific about what your request is that is not answered by the purpose of that extension? MSchottlender-WMF (talk) 18:39, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
- Exactly as I said, MSchottlender-WMF, we can't use it now. I can't help. because I'm not a developer. And what about "the extension is talking about absolutely different issue"? IKhitron (talk) 18:35, 15 November 2018 (UTC)