Topic on User talk:ValterVB

Hi, You unmerged two pages, Delta Tauri (Q5480905) and Delta Tauri (Q1307884), while both *do* concern the same thing. The :en page (in Delta Tauri (Q1307884)) is purely a disambiguation page — it is literally the same text, word to word, as on :fr (in Delta Tauri (Q5480905))! The :pl page (the only other page in Delta Tauri (Q1307884)) is more detailled (because it has no detailed articles about the three actual stars) but nonetheless deal with the same subject as all the others: the set of stars called “Delta Tauri”. There is therefore no sense to have two different pages for a single, unique subject.

They are different type of page on wikipedia: en and pl aren't disambiguation and you cant't find them in en:Special:DisambiguationPages .

Pages in other item are true diasmbiguation and you can find them in Special page. We don't mix different type of pages. You can read more info in Wikidata:WikiProject_Disambiguation_pages/guidelines

I understand the Wikidata policy. However, it seems just to not care about the actual implications it can have on the articles, e.g. in cases like here. There is a link problem between the articles (all these articles should be linked, because it is the same subject (fact), but they are not, because of WD's page-managing system), and it is the internal WD managing system (“disambiguation” vs. not) that should be corrected/adapted to fit the reality of facts (the page should nonetheless be linked, based on the factual content), and not facts that should be “faked” to fit the managing system. For languages where there are detailed articles for the three individual stars, the pages are in practice disambiguation pages, no matter how classified the :en page is, and it would make little sense to falsely unclassify all these page purely due to Wikidata's management system. In the other side, the Polish page has no reason to be considered as a “disambiguation” page since it deals with all the stars in a single structured article. I really like WD on many points, but here this policy of dealing primarily with the internal page classification rather than the actual fact content of the pages, it creates more problems that anything else. So now, I am seriously asking you: what solution do you propose? Writing all the missing links by hand is not a viable solution (missing links when a new language creates a corresponding article), so is “breaking” (“faking” as I said before) the disambiguation status of the pages the only solution to have correct links between the pages? If so, well we will have to do it, but I really don't like it if it has to be done that way.

The problem is in wikipedia side, not in wikidata. Disambiguation pages are pages that can list every thing, the only rule is the "spelling" , the meaning is not relevant. If next year Cameron produce a movie titled "Delta Tauri" I can add it in a disambiguation page titled in same manner, but I can't add it in english page called en:Delta Tauri. The more correct solution is change this type of disambiguaion pages where is necessary limit the content in normal pages or set index pages.

All the “disambiguations” have been removed. Can you now please revert back to the merged version? Or at least move the WP pages to the good WD (non “disambiguation”) page, if you want to keep a (void) page for any potential future “disambiguation” page. (certainly useless right now). Thank you in advance.

I have ave moved :ast, :fr and :pt from the “disambiguation” page to the other (:en+:pl) page. The :es revert the change in their article so I have invited them to read the present discussion. The .es page is therefore alone now on the “disambiguation page”. Now it is their problem if they complain not to be linked to any other page — they cannot claim that they are not aware of the situation.

I see that you already moved the sitelinks, good. To simplify the move of sitelink you can use the gadget Move. For es wiki we can wait. If the disambiguation item will be empty we will delete it. I add the items to my watchlist.