Start a discussion with Maxal

Start a discussion

Здравствуйте. Вы не могли бы пользоваться гаджетом объединения элементов, а не просто удалять интервики из одного элемента и добавлять к другому. Помимо интервик там ещё много информации остается неперенесенной. Да и сам элемент с которого вы удалили как бы висит в воздухе: с одной стороны в нем уже нет интервик, а с другой - ещё осталась информация которую нужно перенести. Иначе приходится доделывать за Вами работу как, например, здесь (если уже удалили) TheVovaNik (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Merges

edit

Please do not merge items with different taxon ranks. Thanks. --Succu (talk) 07:13, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

--Succu (talk) 14:01, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Cronopio dentiacutus (Q16014290) is the only representative of Cronopio (Q134994), so it is fine that these two concepts are discussed within a single article (as it is done in Russian article). In fact, the content of English article w:en:Cronopio (mammal) and Russian article w:ru:Cronopio dentiacutus is mostly the same (which can be observed even visually). So I do not see a reason why these articles cannot be linked.

Eurotamandua (Q15297894) links to w:ru:Eurotamandua, which is a redirect to w:ru:Евротамандуа -- so why not merge them even from this perspective? And again, the content of English and Russian articles is mostly the same.

-- Maxal (talk) 14:33, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I ask you not to merge these items, because we need both to model that the species Aaa xyz belongs to the genus Aaa via parent taxon (P171). Move the sitelinks instead. --Succu (talk) 14:43, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Oh, I thought you object to the merge because of the Wikipedia articles content. So you would not mind, say, if I move all sitelinks from Cronopio dentiacutus (Q16014290) to Cronopio (Q134994), would you? Maxal (talk) 14:51, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

I would prefer a move to the lower taxon. Most wikis link them that way (via internal redirects), but I know there are exeptions. A move of the species to the genus leaves the species item empty and you have to undo this if a second species is described. A genus recognised as monotypic can have a lot of (obsolete) species at wikidata. A problem we have to solve somehow in the future. --Succu (talk) 15:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)Reply

Start a discussion with Maxal

Start a discussion