{{Shortcut|WP:RSPWDTRANS}}
{{Infobox
| title = [[Wikidata]]
| image = [[File:Wikipedia-logo-v2-en.svg|100px|alt=logo]] ''(not part of original row)''
| label2 = source type
| data2 = foobar ''(not part of original row)''
| label3 = publisher
| data3 = Fooland (state-funded media) ''(not part of original row)''
| label5 = website
| data5 =
| label6 = classification
| data6 = [[File:Achtung-orange.svg|20px|No consensus|link=]] No consensus, unclear, or additional considerations apply
}}
Uniquely among WMF sites, Wikidata's statements can be directly transcluded into articles; this is usually done to provide external links or infobox data. For example, more than two million external links from Wikidata are shown through the {{tl|Authority control}} template. There has been controversy over the use of Wikidata in the English Wikipedia due to its infancy, its vandalism issues and its sourcing. While there is no consensus on whether information from Wikidata should be used at all, there is general agreement that any Wikidata statements transcluded need to be just as – or more – reliable compared to Wikipedia content. As such, [[Module:WikidataIB]] and some related modules and templates filter unsourced Wikidata statements by default; however, other modules and templates, such as [[Module:Wikidata]], do not. ''See also: {{pslink|Wikidata}} (direct citations).''
== Prior discussions ==
{{WP:RSPLinks}}
''Please add links to other significant discussions. When in doubt, read and rely on the discussions themselves, rather than the simple summary.''
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 187#Is Wikidata a 'reliable source' ?]]
* [[WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 242#WikiData source]]
* Simple summary of prior discussions: '''TBD'''
{{DEFAULTSORT:Wikidata, Perennial sources}}
==Notes==
{{notelist}}
==References==
== Original table row for comparison ==
''(remove this when this source page is ready to go live)''
{{Wikipedia:RSPTableHeader}}
|- class="s-nc" id="Wikidata transcluded statements"
| [[Wikidata]] transcluded statements {{WP:RSPSHORTCUT|WP:RSPWDTRANS}}
| {{WP:RSPSTATUS|nc}}
| [[File:Treffpunkt.svg|20px|alt=Request for comment|link=WP:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2]] [[WP:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2|2013]] [[File:Treffpunkt.svg|20px|alt=Request for comment|link=WP:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC#Discussion]] [[WP:Wikidata/2018 Infobox RfC#Discussion|2018]]
| {{WP:RSPLAST|2018}}
| Uniquely among WMF sites, Wikidata's statements can be directly transcluded into articles; this is usually done to provide external links or infobox data. For example, more than two million external links from Wikidata are shown through the {{tl|Authority control}} template. There has been controversy over the use of Wikidata in the English Wikipedia due to its infancy, its vandalism issues and its sourcing. While there is no consensus on whether information from Wikidata should be used at all, there is general agreement that any Wikidata statements transcluded need to be just as – or more – reliable compared to Wikipedia content. As such, [[Module:WikidataIB]] and some related modules and templates filter unsourced Wikidata statements by default; however, other modules and templates, such as [[Module:Wikidata]], do not. ''See also: {{pslink|Wikidata}} (direct citations).''
| style="text-align: center;" | —
|}