Wikidata:Requests for comment/Restrictions on making items
| An editor has requested the community to provide input on "Restrictions on making items" via the Requests for comment (RFC) process. This is the discussion page regarding the issue.
If you have an opinion regarding this issue, feel free to comment below. Thank you! |
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
- The proposal is opposed.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:27, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
I just reported two items created by IPs as vandalism, including one that was created way back in May of 2019 and nobody saw. Other projects have restrictions on page creation; for example, English Wikipedia requires that users have an account 4 days old with 10 edits before you can make any articles. As there are so many items being created every minute that it can be hard to catch vandalism items, and it needs to be put on requests for deletion and wait for one of only 59 administrators to see and delete it, should we consider restricting who can create an item, maybe merely requiring them to be registered users? DemonDays64 | Talk to me 04:30, 7 March 2020 (UTC) (please ping on reply)
- I don't think so. We can already find items created by IPs and items created by new users.--GZWDer (talk) 04:58, 7 March 2020 (UTC)
- as with all such proposals, I think there's a fundamental problem here with regard to Wikidata's role supporting inter-language links in the wikipedias. If a user with few Wikidata edits tries to create a link to other languages, they are creating a new Wikidata item, I don't think we can block this. IP users may be a slightly different case, but I don't think it's such a huge problem as to require this. We could use more patrollers here obviously. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- Not a good idea to restrict anyone, in fact one of the beauties of Wikidata is that anyone can create items. On the Dutch-language Wikipedia IP users can create articles and have no restrictions, if a good faith IP editor on the NL-wiki wishes to link an article they created here on Wikidata then this restriction would limit them and would ultimately create more work for others. Good faith users should not have to pay for the misdeeds of bad faith actors. -- Donald Trung/徵國單 (討論 🀄) (方孔錢 💴) 18:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)
- The quantities of the newly created items in the link that GZWDer provides seem patrolable. Maybe we need a more people looking at the list, but that seems a task that's doable. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:13, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
- The problem is that the majority of newly created items are in non-english languages. @ChristianKl:--Trade (talk) 13:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
- oppose, or need info What information do we have about the scale of the problem? A problem report of 2 items among 70 million does not seem worth changing current practice. What supporting evidence is there of damage which requires a change? Blue Rasberry (talk) 23:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)
Comment please more stats. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 00:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
Oppose If a new item is created in bad faith and goes unnoticed for months, that indicates that it is not very prominent---who will even notice it is there? Even good-faith items are sometimes wrong, so I don't think it is worth putting up barriers to entry for new editors in order to prevent rare occurances. We might even need those new people to patrol edits someday :) The-erinaceous-one (talk) 09:28, 15 September 2020 (UTC)- Oppose The-erinaceous-one +1. Lets avoid unnecessary bureaucracy.--So9q (talk) 18:05, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
- As per the above: Oppose This proposal goes against what I perceive as the most fundamental principle of Wikidata: openness. -- Dr.üsenfieber (talk) 01:20, 27 September 2020 (UTC)