Wikidata:Property proposal/use as citation in Wikimedia page

cited in Wikimedia page

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done

Description	page within a Wikimedia project that uses Template:Cite Q to import data from this item
Data type	URL
Example 1	A measurement of secondary cosmic microwave background anisotropies with two years of south pole telescope observations (Q56603081) → https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pole_Telescope
Example 2	MISSING
Example 3	MISSING

Motivation

Template:Cite Q (Q22321052) is a great way to store information about sources that are used in Wikipedia. Unfortunately, it's currently not easily possible to see whether a given item gets used as source and if so for what pages it gets used. This property intends to store this information. It would likely be likely good to keep this data up to date with a bot. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:11, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Oppose for the bloat this will bring should Cite Q see greater adoption than it presently has at the moment. Mahir256 (talk) 16:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

@Mahir256: Can you be more explict about where you see the bloat? If Cite Q gets used more widely, we will likely get cases where we delete items that are used with Cite Q with resulting drama.

Being able to run queries about how often articles of a given journalist where cited in Wikimedia seems to me a valuable feature. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:58, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

@ChristianKl: If someone decides to implement Cite Q on cebwiki, for example, then there will be millions of links on Updated world map of the Köppen-Geiger climate classification (Q21030635) (and on arzwiki to items like The ninth data release of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: first spectroscopic data from the SDSS-III baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey (Q57630701) and The eleventh and twelfth data releases of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey: final data from SDSS-III (Q57446741)). While the first of these is likely the upper limit as far as backlinks will go, I am sure that even a few orders of magnitude fewer backlinks will cause problems for viewers and users of other article items. Mahir256 (talk) 18:01, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

•  Oppose Not stable, and already possible to find them via [1].--GZWDer (talk) 20:41, 9 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose per GZWDer. NMaia (talk) 00:25, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Attempitng to track this manually would be idiocy. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:46, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose per GZWDer, the more direct link for enwp here is [2] (linked to on the page here under 'Wikis subscribed to this entity'). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:44, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
• @ChristianKl, Mahir256, GZWDer, NMaia, Pigsonthewing, Mike Peel:  Not done. Due to lack of support. Thierry Caro (talk) 16:48, 16 November 2020 (UTC)