Module talk:Video game wikidata
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 2 sections are present. |
Extraneous argument
[edit]Hello, line 267 please remove the 2nd argument df as it's actually unused (see definition of function buildCite).
df is a module-scope variable, that can be modified using the setDateFormat method.
Ping User:Ferret. Regards, Od1n (talk) 09:55, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
- Removed. Left over from an earlier form of the module. -- ferret (talk) 14:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
Rank is not supported & errors if lower rank is missing platform while higher rank has platform
[edit]Have a Wikidata dataset such as wikidata:Special:Permalink/1450364351#P444:
- Normal rank has no platform (P400) data.
- Preferred rank has platform (P400) data.
Try to use {{Video game series reviews}} (I tested in Ratchet & Clank) with only the seriesQid parameter (seriesQid = Q5170139). The module will fail around line 111 in sortByPlatform(a,b) function: if(a['qualifiers']['P400'] ~= nil and b['qualifiers']['P400'][1] ~= nil) then.
Adding the platform (P400) data to normal rank somewhat works, however now there will be two different scores shown in {{Video game series reviews}} table. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 11:52, 28 June 2021 (UTC); edited 11:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Special:Permalink/1030860870 to see the template with currently available data. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 12:13, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- I've fixed the missing platform issue here: Special:Diff/1030874725. One variable was mistyped, and we can't compare nils so replaced with blank strings. That resolves the module error for missing platforms, though in reality MetaCritic entries should always have platform. As for ranking... Is there any true value in keeping arbitrary snapshots of MetaCritic scores? The score in question doesn't even have an archive so cannot be verified besides. -- ferret (talk) 14:01, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Just now in wikidata:Special:Permalink/1450442497#P444, I had to mark a 83/100 value as deprecated because of an error in the source or sources. I added another 82/100 value to say what was in that point of time (P585) correctly, but also added a preferred rank 83/100 value with a reason for preferred rank (P7452) as the "most recent value" to fix the incoherent data. I see uses for ranking. (This led to one platform score being listed three times, with the same ref name, but different ref "content".) I could remove the false data altogether, but then there's no record the value was incorrect - for almost ten years? - on enwiki. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Not incorrect, just out of date. Metacritic scores change as new reviews are submitted, sometimes years later. Just update the entries. There's no need to add multiple. As for record, it's still there in the diffs. -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- The error in the first 83/100 imported from enwiki (and still present in the Ratchet & Clank series article) is twofold: "retrieved" date precedes publication date, and on the provided archive date the score was different. I disagree with "[j]ust update the entries" per wikidata:Help:Ranking, especially in one case of game score (which I have not bothered to update in Wikidata or add to) had a score of 70% early on instead of current 65%. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 15:09, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Faulty bot imports lacking proper validation should just be fixed. Hand edited data from years ago is prone to all kinds of input errors. -- ferret (talk) 15:13, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- The error in the first 83/100 imported from enwiki (and still present in the Ratchet & Clank series article) is twofold: "retrieved" date precedes publication date, and on the provided archive date the score was different. I disagree with "[j]ust update the entries" per wikidata:Help:Ranking, especially in one case of game score (which I have not bothered to update in Wikidata or add to) had a score of 70% early on instead of current 65%. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 15:09, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Not incorrect, just out of date. Metacritic scores change as new reviews are submitted, sometimes years later. Just update the entries. There's no need to add multiple. As for record, it's still there in the diffs. -- ferret (talk) 14:59, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Just now in wikidata:Special:Permalink/1450442497#P444, I had to mark a 83/100 value as deprecated because of an error in the source or sources. I added another 82/100 value to say what was in that point of time (P585) correctly, but also added a preferred rank 83/100 value with a reason for preferred rank (P7452) as the "most recent value" to fix the incoherent data. I see uses for ranking. (This led to one platform score being listed three times, with the same ref name, but different ref "content".) I could remove the false data altogether, but then there's no record the value was incorrect - for almost ten years? - on enwiki. 84.250.14.116 (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2021 (UTC)