Add “Wikidata QuickStatements Export” plugin (import/export) — OJS 3.5 (v1.0.0-3.5)

[saddamalsalfi]

Summary:
This PR adds a new entry to plugins.xml for the Wikidata QuickStatements Export plugin (category: importexport, product/slug: quickstatements). The plugin exports OJS issues/articles metadata to Wikidata via QuickStatements, with optional auto-submit and DOI de-duplication through the Wikidata API. Includes i18n strings (EN/AR).

Repository:
Homepage: https://github.com/saddamalsalfi/ojs-quickstatements-export
Release package:
URL: https://github.com/saddamalsalfi/ojs-quickstatements-export/releases/download/v1.0.0/quickstatements-v1.0.0-3.5.tar.gz

MD5 (matches plugins.xml): e7a6efbbe1a4b4a7d34c26a74e5b449e
Compatibility
OJS: ~ 3.4.0.9, 3.5.0.0

License & contact
License: GPL-3.0-or-later

Authors: Queen Arwa University – Journal Team; Saddam Hussein Al-Slfi
Contact: saddamalsalfi@qau.edu.ye

[asmecher]

@saddamalsalfi, sorry for the delay on this one!

@bozana, could you review this one (or delegate)? Thanks!

[Copilot]

Pull request overview

This PR adds a new plugin entry for the Wikidata QuickStatements Export plugin to plugins.xml. The plugin, developed by Queen Arwa University, exports OJS issue/article metadata to Wikidata via QuickStatements, supporting optional auto-submit and DOI de-duplication. However, the diff also unexpectedly removes the entire Publication Facts Label (pflPlugin) entry, which is a serious unintended side-effect not mentioned in the PR description.

Changes:

• Adds a new <plugin> entry for quickstatements (category: importexport) in plugins.xml
• Removes the complete pflPlugin (Publication Facts Label) entry from plugins.xml — unintended

---

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

[saddamalsalfi]

The branch has been corrected

[asmecher]

@saddamalsalfi, the branch cannot be rebased or merged due to conflicts. Please rebase the PR (and human-verify anything produced by an LLM), and then we'll take a look.

[bozana]

maybe also a note here: I took a first look at the plugin code long time ago, and because the plugin does not use the standard PKP code design and structure it was very difficult to review it. I do not even know the details I should provide the review comments for. If this would be a PKP developer I would have lots to comment, and lots of changes would needed to be done. In similar cases in the future, I could try to concentrate only on the security issues, but even this will not be easy if the code does not apply to our standards...