[talk-ch] Local rules for Wikidata/Wikipedia

Sarah Hoffmann lonvia at denofr.de
Wed Nov 16 15:18:02 CET 2022


On Wed, Nov 16, 2022 at 10:02:01AM +0100, Mateusz Konieczny wrote:
> > Not all redirects are bad and should be automatically replaced. Sometimes they
> > are there for a reason.
> >
> > Example: the hamlet of Hurnen
> > In OSM: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3099480616
> >
> > It has a wikipedia tag of de:Hurnen, which is fine. It can be considered a
> > placeholder for its own page which at the moment still redirects to the
> > page of Eschlikon, which it is part from.
> >
> > The wikidata tag was derived automatically from the wikipedia tag not
> > taking this situation into account. So it's not a reliable source.
> >
> > The correct handling here would be to delete the wikidata tag.
> >
> > NB: the fact that the wikidata page has Hurnen and Wallenwil as
> > alternative names of Eschlikon makes me seriously question the usefuleness of
> > wikidata.
> >
> oh, there are several things to unpack here:
> 
> - so, I think that this wikidata tag should be remove as clearly invalid
> 
> - I think that wikipedia tag is also invalid - we should link articles that actually
> exist not articles not yet created - with neither redirects nor nonexisting
> nor deleted titles being a valid target

I've fixed a lot of those when going through
https://nominatim.org/qa/#map=3.07/0.00/0.00&layer=same_wikidata

The rule I personally applied was: leave the wikipedia tag if there is a
significant amount of information on the page it redirects to. What
constitutes a significant amount is a bit of a gray area. If there is
a dedicated subsection, then that is clearly significant (and I prefer
the redirect over linking to the subsection of a page). There are
wiki pages that have the entire history of a group of villages. That may
be significant for each village. Just the mention that A is a subpart of B is
definitely not significant.

So in the particular case of Hurnen, I'd lean towards deleting the
wikipedia tag, too.

But that's not necessarily the general rule. So it's probably worth
asking for an opinion on redirects in that case from the wider community.

> - bot edit that edit wikidata tag was simply wrong and invalid and mistaken
> https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/52343388 was made 5 years ago
> but I am still tempted to revert it where possible

I've been fixing a lot of bad wikidata from this import. Note that Yurik did
these edits not only in Switzerland but worldwide. Still, I think that the ship
has sailed. A revert would be a bad idea now. Rather create a MapRoulette
challange of suspicious tags from that import, so that a human can look
at them and fix them.

Sarah


More information about the talk-ch mailing list