Talk:Q195929

IMNSHO is it pointless to save all previous versions; only the newest is of interest to our readers so they see if they are up-to-date and/or the Wikipedia in their mentions the actual current version. There are Wikipedias who take the version directly from here; for them it is absolutely a must that here only the latest can be found.

• if you want for whatever reason, write something about ancient releases say 'obsolete'

 Klaas `Z4␟` V:  15:28, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Hi KlaasZ4usV it has been decided (I do not remember where) to keep all obsolete version. The first readers of Wikidata are not human but are bots. Such data could be used, for example, to plot a chronology of the release of a given software. BTW, Wikidata is able to manage such obsolete values, you have to specify "obsolete" for the concerned values. If Wikipedia get some values from here, then it should get only the data that have "privileged" rank. It already works on French Wikipedia. Please do not remove again "obsolete" values. Pamputt (talk) 17:56, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

So Wikidata is only for bots and not for human beings? Weird. So I was right one has to add to add the "tag" either 'beta', 'obsolete' or 'current/priviledged'. Or similar. Ok, done. Klaas `Z4␟` V:  19:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Now what? You said it needs tags and you revert it??? Why? It's a wiki, not a bureaucracy. Ever heard of Assume good faith?  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  19:26, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

I apologize on my talk page. I did not want ot hurt doing that, just wanted to show you how to manage with such case. About discussion on this topic, you can refer to Property talk:P348 or to this. To tag a stable version or a beta version or whatever else, you can use version type (P548) with the element stable version (Q12355314) for example. Pamputt (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

@KlaasZ4usV: I forgot to mention that the way to specify whether a version is obsolete is to use rank like I did, not by modifying the name. Pamputt (talk) 20:17, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Done. Practically all versions were double so I removed duplicates as well. Sorry for becoming angry, but I can not stand people who do nothing but reverting me without telling why or make things intheir eyes better when they think I do it completely wrong. I have 40 years experience in the subject and you pretend to know it better? How many software years you made? Wikidata-editing I do since it started, but I do not know yet all the rules you made and follow. Again: when you say I do it totally wrong it is ok, but tell exactly how to improve. Reverting and not telling is counter-productive IMNSHO. You would not like that to be done to your edits, do you?  Klaas `Z4␟` V:  06:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@KlaasZ4usV: actually I modified what you did. When the specify an element (Current (Q11295265)for example, make sure that it refers to the good concept (there are homonyms)). The "correct" way to specify a deprecated version is to use rank (see Help:Ranking for explanation). The current version is the good one. Pamputt (talk) 09:00, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Ranking better than version type? I disagree. For me ranking refers to sports, music and other forms of art though there are people who call developing applications a sport and/or an art :-D. Klaas `Z4␟` V:  13:03, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

I do not know if the name Ranking is well chosen but actually this feature is used to "classify" several values for a given property which is exactly the case here. If you want to continue the discussion, I think the best place is on the Project chat or here in order to keep track easily and to collect more opinion. Pamputt (talk) 16:49, 3 May 2017 (UTC)