Talk:Q96278781

Rollback

Ciao @Nehaoua:. You rolled back my edit, restoring the link to arwiki I deleted. I continue to think your action is an error, as this is an item about a person (Sarah Hegazi), and you linked a generic article about LGBTQ rights in Egypt, where only in a sentence Sarah is named. Are different entities, you are a rollebacker here in Wikidata, so I suppose you know what that means. Althought I don't want to engage an edit war, I still consider that arwiki link here has nothing to do with this biography and it's to be deleted. --Camelia (talk) 23:53, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

@Camelia.boban:sorry, I restored my revocation --Nehaoua (talk) 00:30, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

To any Wikidata administrator: I know is not a wiki spirit and maybe is also technically hard to do it, but please find a way to protect this item from incorrect changes. This item is about a biography which entry was deleted in arwiki. So, connecting this item with an arbitral entry in arwiki (an article about LGBT rights in Egypt, which is this item Q1272833) and making random changes just to show to have the last word doesn't make sense. --Camelia (talk) 21:17, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Camelia.boban: I think there might a misunderstanding, and on the slim possibility there might be one, I'll try to explain what @Nehaoua, Mr. Ibrahem were, in my opinion, trying to do: Sarah's article was deleted (following an AfD) and replaced with a redirect to a section in the LGBT Rights in Egypt article, which is talking primarily about the one unique event she's known for, as it was mentioned in the deletion discussion. So, the link is not meant to be to a portal, instead, to an article's section talking primarily about Sarah. Just to clarify the situation. --Ahmed M Farrag (talk) 21:47, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

@Ahmed M Farrag: I understand but is still wrong because a piece of an article cannot be an item/entity for its own (otherwise we can have an item for any section of an article who talk about person A, person B and so on, but is also logically wrong). In arwiki you decided to make a redirect of the deleted biography to the article about LGBT rights in Egypt, but this article has his own item, which is this one Q1272833 (so an existing article and a redirect to it cannot have two wikidata items). The logical association is 1 item = 1 Wikipedia entry; so, please don't mix pears and apples. The link to arwiki can be added when arwiki will have a specific biography of the (only) person Sarah Hegazi. I explained this three times, Nehaoua understood the error, but someone continues to come here and revert the right edits. --Camelia (talk) 22:42, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Hello Camelia, as few users asking about my opinion here, so I'd clarify that per Wikidata Notability policy «Sitelinks to redirects should typically not be created unless (a) there is a substantial section about the subject on the _target page of the redirect, reflecting all or most of the information in the Wikidata item; and (b) there is good reason not to merge the two corresponding Wikidata items.». And based on what I see that arwiki redirect compatible with both criteria. I'll wait your replay before adding it again. Thanks --Alaa :)..! 08:50, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Hi @علاء:. As the policy says (that and between the sentences), both conditions need to be observed.

• (a) there is a substantial section about the subject on the _target page of the redirect. What I'm seeing in arwiki is not a substantial section, but 3 lines (and 2 times named in the middle) in a subsection named Incident of rainbow flags of a big section named The history of homosexuality in Egypt and the legality of same-sex sexual activity which starts from ancient Egypt.
• (b) there is good reason merge the two corresponding Wikidata items. I cannot understand which is the good reason to merge.

For this reason, in my opinion, none of the sentences are observed, and the article is still not to be added. --Camelia (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Camelia. First point make sense, so I'll ping arwiki users who involved on above issue (@إسلام, Nehaoua, Ahmed M Farrag:) if they can expand those 3 lines to be separate section. About second point, I see it arwiki issue, and if the community want to merge, then it's arwiki thing not WD --Alaa :)..! 09:58, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

As I don't want this to become an edit war, if you agree, we can engage other thirds long term Wikidata users/admins to have other opinions. --Camelia (talk) 11:31, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Camelia ummm, yes why not? please remember I'm neutral part here, and after my comment above I don't think any edit war will happened! but yes more opinions will be welcomed. Hello @1997kB, Bencemac, DannyS712, Kostas20142: (sorry for mass pings), but maybe you can share your opinions with us here? Thanks a lot --Alaa :)..! 11:52, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

I don't consider myself as a long term admin, but thanks! :) Anyway, I agree with Alaa, I think redirects are fine and useful occasionally. However, I'm neutral in this case because I cannot judge it because of the language barrier: sorry about that! Personally, I would follow the advices of arwiki users. Regards, Bencemac (talk) 14:00, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

@Fuzheado, Harmonia Amanda, PKM:, can you please give an opinion on this? I also added a message on the Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Women#Sara_Hegazi_arwiki_link_on_Wikidata_item. Thank you all. --Camelia (talk) 16:43, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Camelia. And Thanks for all people we pinged, and as a summary we are talking here about Wikidata Notability policy in relation to redirect --Alaa :)..! 17:21, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Update Now there's separate section about Sara Hegazi. This comment related to first point above, about "substantial section about the subject on the _target page of the redirect" --Alaa :)..! 17:19, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Ok, the section was improved, thank you @Alaa:. Using this Wikidata image in that article, in order to observe "reflecting all or most of the information in the Wikidata item" criteria, and for me the discussion can close. --Camelia (talk) 13:55, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Camelia. I added the photo with good caption, then re-added the link to WD. Thanks and I'll put all related pages on my watchlist. --Alaa :)..! 14:27, 26 June 2020 (UTC)