Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Wiktionary/Flash dialog editing
Flash dialog editingEdit
- Problem: I would say the actual wikicode or VisualEditing of Wiktionary is boring and to much time consuming
- Who would benefit: Wiktionary itself by getting more active users
- More comments: The mentioned option, should be extended. Actual structer of data on all Wiktionaries is not same, but still you have to do everytime the unified structure, which is time consuming. This sould be automated. Once Wikidata will be integrated, the structure is samy so it is much easy to leave as much as possible editing load on software and ask the contributor just those thing which are necesary, with good support (not everbody is perfect linguist) with some flash graphical design.
- Phabricator tickets:
- Translations: none yet
I do agree with the problem, but I am not sure about the solution. I am not fond of Wikidata integration, as I feel it is oriented to comply with wikidatians goals only, without looking at potential improvement for Wiktionaries. Plus, improving editing is not part of Wikidata Community Tech plans. I suggest another way to challenge this issue by adding suggestions into the editor, not only for Wiktionaries but for every project : Community Wishlist Survey 2017/Editing/VisualEditor Template Suggestion Noé (talk) 21:54, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Well I dont insist on Wikidata integration here, as I dont know, weather it is a good idea.--Juandev (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
- Flash?! --Nemo 22:35, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
Until Wikidata respect licenses of content they massively extract to re-license under CC0, I will vote against any integration of Wikidata within Wiktionaries. More generally, they should allow users to use whatever free licenses they wish, just like Commons, and provide proper credit when performing massive import of copyleft licensed material. You can read more in the related proposal I made.
All the more, I red the whole feedback that the community provided and their Lexeme model proposal, and it just doesn't match.
Thus said, I'm all for a more structured data structure, that's exactly what I'm working on with the item template on the French Wiktionary. That's a work in progress. If some successful adoption at any degree outcome from this experiment, I'll see for a proposal that include more requirements taking into account other Wiktionary versions. So this proposal, for what I understand, addresses the same concerns as Improve TemplateData to ease description of lexical items. --Psychoslave (talk) 10:30, 13 November 2017 (UTC)
As it seems I proposed too much things, I do have to drop some of them. Luckily it seems this one also cover the same topic of one my proposal. For memory, here was the proposal:
- Support --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:32, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support Thomas Obermair 4 (talk) 23:35, 28 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support Libcub (talk) 06:12, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Donald Trung (Talk 🤳🏻) (My global lock 🔒) (My global unlock 🔓) 13:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
- Support Agree we need a wizard, potentially copy code from n:WN:Dialog... Gryllida 01:11, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Neutral Yes but not Flash, should be HTML5. Syced (talk) 05:39, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support --Psychoslave (talk) 08:57, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
- Support Give us form editing for Wiktionary! --Infovarius (talk) 15:06, 11 December 2017 (UTC)