Wikidata:Property proposal/Namuwiki (2)
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Namuwiki ID[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control
| Description | identifier for content inside the Namuwiki |
|---|---|
| Represents | Namuwiki (Q19832999) |
| Data type | External identifier |
| Domain | wiki (Q171) |
| Example | |
| Source | https://namu.wiki/ |
| Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
| Formatter URL | https://namu.wiki/w/$1 |
| See also | Wikidata:Property proposal/Namuwiki |
2nd nomination: In Google when searching in Hangul (Korean alphabet) about K-pop idols, actor, or musician, Namuwiki is the first result (Korean Wikipedia is second) and for politicians Namuwiki is the second result (Korean Wikipedia is first). It's not the same with Encyclopedia Dramatica & Uncyclopedia (as claimed in 1st nomination) because that website is outright trolling and is not in top search result, while Namuwiki is not trolling. Hddty (talk) 17:31, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
Support: I think this is a pretty reasonable proposal and in line with previous creations. To address the points raised in the previous discussion:
- The inclusion of a property in Wikipedia does not imply an endorsement of a site or its reliability (we have widely used properties for Twitter usernames and IMDb IDs, and neither of those are reliable)
- The sites we link to don't have to have free licenses (in fact, the vast majority of the sites linked with external IDs don't)
- I ran some of the given pages through Google Translate and it seems to be a serious attempt at an encyclopedia (i.e. not a cesspool of trolls and BLP violations, which would be a reason to avoid a property)
- I'm not aware of any way that an item in the Interwiki map would help; as far as I can tell, that only matters for wikitext links. Vahurzpu (talk) 06:39, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
- Support: I agree this is reasonable and we should include it independent of any conflicts between Korean Wikipedia and this wiki. According to its en-wiki article, it is the largest Wiki in the Korean language so it seems strange to not include it. As mentioned above, this does not endorse its content but allows us to link to it. But we should ping the people involved in the first discussion. --Hannes Röst (talk) 18:54, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
- @95016maphack, 책읽는달팽, Mahir256, 26 Ramadan, Liuxinyu970226, 99of9: per last comment; do you agree this is the largest Korean language wiki, and do you have any further comments on this property proposal? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:08, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
- Template:+1 --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:21, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
- @Liuxinyu970226: What does this mean? The template is not exist. Hddty (talk) 12:34, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
Comment my close was just a weighing of consensus, I have no knowledge or strong opinion on this wiki as a property. I have no problem with creation if consensus changes. --99of9 (talk) 06:13, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
