Talk:Q1211529
Latest comment: 6 years ago by Jneubert
Autodescription — overseas territory (Q1211529)
description: Wikimedia disambiguation page
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “overseas territory” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Re. its class and its sitelinks, this item is a bit of a mess: The German, Spanish, French and Italian pages are disambiguation pages. The Polish page is a list of French and Britisch overseas territories, while the English page "Overseas territories" apparently has been merged into en:Territory in 2014, which is much broader in scope.
Suggestion for disentangling:
- Move the Polish site link to overseas countries and territories (Q1451600), which are described as "territories that have a special relationship with one of the member states of the EU".
- Remove the English site link, since en:Territory is already linked to territory (Q183366).
- Replace administrative territorial entity type (Q15617994) with Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) as instance of the current item.
Jneubert (talk) 13:20, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- The item is also used as value with the meaning "overseas territory". As the item is a mess and it's not clear which meaning other sites might use it for, I suggest to split the content into two new items: one for the disambiguation, one for "overseas territory". Once done, just delete this one.
--- Jura 14:07, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- @jura1: Thank you, I missed the use of the item as value. In this case, there are only a few uses, which could probably be fixed manually (using the existing item overseas countries and territories (Q1451600)). I wonder if deleting the item and starting with a new one is in general the preferred strategy over redefining it (changing class administrative territorial entity type (Q15617994) to Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410))? If there is a help page or discussions on such issues, I'd appreciate hints very much. Jneubert (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- Help:Split_an_item#Mixed-up_items (but that wont add much).
--- Jura 17:58, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
- Help:Split_an_item#Mixed-up_items (but that wont add much).
- @jura1: Thank you, I missed the use of the item as value. In this case, there are only a few uses, which could probably be fixed manually (using the existing item overseas countries and territories (Q1451600)). I wonder if deleting the item and starting with a new one is in general the preferred strategy over redefining it (changing class administrative territorial entity type (Q15617994) to Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410))? If there is a help page or discussions on such issues, I'd appreciate hints very much. Jneubert (talk) 15:12, 14 November 2017 (UTC)
Done Split entries, replaced class and changed other items which link to the current one. Jneubert (talk) 12:51, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- I fixed the remaining one on Q142. The remaining problems are:
- The French description is still refering to something else than a description page.
- The sitelinks are translations, not identically spelled names. Normally each should go on a separate disambiguation page.
--- Jura 21:56, 15 November 2017 (UTC)
- I fixed the remaining one on Q142. The remaining problems are:
- Thanks for fixing the second link in Q142! I've removed the french description, this was a leftover.
- If I didn't get you wrong, you are suggesting to create separate items for each disambiguation page (as long as the page names are spelled differently). What is the rationale behind this? Jneubert (talk) 11:33, 16 November 2017 (UTC)
- I wouldn't actually spend time on this, but theoretically yes, as a disambiguation item should just include one sequence of letters. At Wikidata:Bot_requests/Archive/2017/2#Take_care_of_disambiguation_items, there is an outline of points to cover if we would handle them by bot entirely.
--- Jura 19:48, 17 November 2017 (UTC)- Wow, that gets far more complex than I would have ever envisioned. Thanks for the pointer! Jneubert (talk) 08:11, 20 November 2017 (UTC)
- I wouldn't actually spend time on this, but theoretically yes, as a disambiguation item should just include one sequence of letters. At Wikidata:Bot_requests/Archive/2017/2#Take_care_of_disambiguation_items, there is an outline of points to cover if we would handle them by bot entirely.