Page MenuHomePhabricator

[feature request] remove sitelinks / update sitelinks on Wikidata when pages are deleted/moved on client wikis (all users)
Open, Needs TriagePublic

Description

  • When a page is moved on a client wiki, the sitelink should be updated on Wikidata.
  • When a page is deleted on a client wiki, the sitelink on Wikidata should be removed.

This generally happens except when the users is unknown to Wikidata (or blocked).

The question is how these edits should appear on Wikidata.

Forum discussion: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team&oldid=367197823#Deletion_on_WikiSpecies_not_on_Wikidata.3F

Event Timeline

Esc3300 created this task.Aug 20 2016, 3:26 PM
Restricted Application added a subscriber: Aklapper. · View Herald TranscriptAug 20 2016, 3:26 PM
hoo added a subscriber: hoo.Aug 21 2016, 1:42 PM
hoo added a comment.Aug 24 2016, 9:36 PM

The problems here are, that sometimes accounts either don't exist on Wikidata or are not allowed to edit items (or sometimes maybe even both).

Possible solutions:

  • Ignore editing restrictions (like blocks or Item protections)
  • Crate accounts on Wikidata when needed (this could become a little ugly given that we would need to use low level CentralAuth functionality for this)
  • Use a dummy user to do the edits if they for one or another reason(s) can't be attributed to the actual user.
Izno added a subscriber: Izno.Aug 25 2016, 2:06 PM

A dummy user seems okay for a short-term and could probably be worked regardless of a long-term resolution.

The dummy user solution sounds good to me. Magnus Manske is doing something like this with his QuickStatementsBot so maybe a special purpose Bot account on wikidata for this?

Restricted Application added a subscriber: PokestarFan. · View Herald TranscriptJul 25 2017, 3:05 PM

I'd say let's go for the dummy user and somehow record the user who initiated it (in a log message?).

Nikki added a subscriber: Nikki.Aug 7 2018, 3:35 PM

Please bear in mind when fixing this that there are three items (Q5268366, Q16503 and Q4026300) that we have fully protected because we deliberately don't want page moves to be reflected in Wikidata. Those are discussion pages where some projects archive the page by moving the page.

I personally think ignoring semi-protection when moving pages on other wikis would make a lot of sense, it's one of the reasons why we avoid protecting pages (see T189412)

abian awarded a token.Feb 8 2019, 1:02 PM
abian added a subscriber: abian.Feb 8 2019, 1:07 PM

Are there plans to address this in 2019? Is any feedback needed?

I think we need some sort on consensus on what is actually wanted, yeah.

abian added a comment.Feb 8 2019, 1:34 PM

I think all the exceptions that @Nikki mentioned can be covered with abuse filters regardless of the implementation solution you choose. For the rest, the important thing is to have the problem solved (have a sitelink updated whenever the linked page is moved and have a sitelink removed whenever the linked page is deleted) and I would personally be okay with any of the options that @hoo mentioned in 2016, including the dummy user.

ARR8 added a subscriber: ARR8.Mar 4 2019, 1:22 AM