Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2022/06

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.


Wikidata usage instructions

Which is preferred in "Wikidata usage instructions", I see a mix of both, for example the instructions for hospital (Q16917) can be written two ways: "For the physical building use hospital building, for the business use medical organization." or "For the physical building use Q39364723, for the business use Q4287745." I prefer the second way using Q-numbers since they rarely change, while we are constantly changing titles for entries and new ones may arise with the same name in the future with a slightly different meaning, and people add synonyms (also known as) liberally making searching for the intended entry difficult. The same goes for any instructions appearing in the "Description". Any thoughts? --RAN (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)

That's not really appropriate. Your edits identify other items in the description of the item. That is not what the description is for. There is also no guarantee that the label of those other items won't change. It would be better to add information about that kind of usage to the different from (P1889) listings. --01:58, 1 June 2022 (UTC)  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by EncycloPetey (talk • contribs) at 01:58, June 1, 2022‎ (UTC).
  • @EncycloPetey: Pay attention please! I did not add the description See this edit I added the usage instructions. Prior to the addition of "Wikidata usage instructions" in 2016, usage was placed in the description for terms that are confusing, and some people may still not be aware that "usage" has been created, and there was no effort to identify, and then migrate usage instructions from "description" to "usage". --RAN (talk) 13:05, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), EncycloPetey: Using Wikidata usage instructions (P2559) as is done for hospital (Q16917) seems perfectly appropriate to me - and yes it should use QID's and not labels. I agree that we should generally not put such things in the description field, rather just make clear what the item is about. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:38, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

WCVP identifier for plant taxa names

I have tried to add the World Checklist of Vascular Plants (WCVP) as a 'Statement' or 'Identifier' for different plant species, but only WCSP (World Checklist of Selected Plant Families) comes up as an option. From what I understand, WCSP is migrating to WCVP so that the latter is now more current and acceptable.

Is there a way to have WCVP as a drop-down option for Wikidata pages?

ThanksTle003 (talk) 12:33, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Conflation or typo?

Michał Rogoziński (Q111359588) I can't figure out if this is a conflation or a typographical error, any guesses? --RAN (talk) 18:09, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

As we have one source giving a date of birth a century after another source gives a date of death, I'd normally suggest separating them into separate items. However, what is the claim to notability here? The item has no incoming links other than error reports and no information besides the name and status as human. I'd be tempted just to delete if it wasn't generated from mix'n'match (it will just get recreated later). From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:01, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
If the only thing we know about a person is in doubt, then better just to delete the item — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Its not typo, it's my wrong match on MnM (it is repaired now). Per Nukat IDs they are two persons. Matlin (talk) 12:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks! People need to come up with new names for their children, or we need to switch to giving people 4 names instead of three, like in Spain. --RAN (talk) 22:49, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

"What Links Here" keeps changing??

Has anybody else noticed that the "What Links Here" special page seems to have been updated annoyingly? I commonly would paste in a QID to get a list of things linking to a particular item, with default 500 links displayed. Now (A) once I hit "Go" the item entry box closes, and (B) when I reopen it defaults to just 50 links instead of 500 again. That means at least 2 more clicks required than previously! ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:15, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Josef Bogdan von Sturmbruck (Q55883637)

There is an english language article on en:Josef Freiherrn Bogdan von Sturmbruck but AFAICT it does not show up in Q55883637.

  1. does it?
  2. if not, ought it to be added?
  3. if so, how does one add it?

— PBS (talk) 22:51, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done
Thank you user:Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) for your reply. So that I will not have to make this type of request in future, please can you explain what was done and where I can find information on how it was done, so I can make a similar change myself. -- PBS (talk) 10:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
There was a duplicate item Josef Bogdan von Sturmbruck (Q107143884) and somebody merged them. Ghouston (talk) 10:07, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

A new Wikidata Query Service community meeting will take place on June 20

Hi all! There will be a new online community meeting for the Wikidata Query Service backend update on Monday June 20, 2022 at 19:00 UTC (link to the meeting).

The topic of the call will be the testing of the backend alternatives and the Blazegraph migration, and this will be also an opportunity to discuss the approach and the details, and to ask other questions about the Blazegraph alternatives work - such as how the Blazegraph-specific features and capabilities will (or will not) be supported. This will also be the last chance to talk to Andrea Westerinen, our Graph Consultant, before her contract expires!

You can find more info about the latest WDQS backend updates here. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Data donation for German construction-relevant administrative territorial entities of Germany

My firm wants to have unique identifiers in a tree representing the construction planning relevant territorial entities in Germany. Unfortunately, there's no universal official designation for planning region of Germany (Q1570561). We need to keep this data up to date for internal reasons, and we would like to make this data available (and globally identified) on Wikidata.

Specifically, we are interested in both uploading and maintaining our list of planning regions (which currently has 54 instances of 111 currently existing) and their constituent Gemeindeverband (Q13405470) (which currently has 5 instances of 4688 currently existing, including collective municipalities consisting only of one municipality), along with the located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) property to indicate which collective municipalities are in which planning regions, and which planning regions are in which federal German states.

Due to the utility of this information to anyone planning to build a new structure in Germany, I feel that this would fulfill the Wikidata goal to serve as a general knowledge base for the world at large. These are all clearly identifiable conceptual entities, which are described in legal documents and have specific legal ordinances. Furthermore, having this data on Wikidata would enable inference of facts summarizing local construction and zoning regulations in Germany, thus fulfilling a structural need. ICodeToTheWind (talk) 14:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Data Quality Days: come and exchange on data quality processes on July 8-10

Hello everyone,

I'm happy to share with you the upcoming Wikidata event Data Quality Days 2022, taking place online on July 8th to 10th. Following up on previous and similar gatherings (Data Quality Days 2021, Data Reuse Days 2022), this event will focus on processes around data quality, and will provide a space to bring the Wikidata community and the Wikidata development team together. During 3 days of presentations, workshops and facilitated conversations, we will discuss how we are currently identifying and fixing incorrect data on Wikidata, how we could improve these processes to increase data quality, and what concrete measures we could put in place together, with policies, tools or documentation.

The event is open to everyone, no particular knowledge or experience needed, and will take place on the open source video conference platform Jitsi. On the event page, you will find some useful information, the list of sessions, and the list of participants where you can already sign up.

The program of the Data Quality Days 2022 is curated by the organizers (Léa Lacroix, Lydia Pintscher and Manuel Merz). Until June 19th, you can propose a presentation, a workshop or a discussion topic. These will be selected and grouped by the organizers, and the final schedule will be ready around June 27th.

If you have any questions, ideas or suggestions, or if you need support to propose a presentation, feel free to write on the talk page of the event or to reach out to me directly by email. I will also post updates on the talk page.

We're looking forward to discussing with you again about data quality! Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 14:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

subterranean river

subterranean river (Q1140845) is currently in the subclass tree of food (Q2095), inheriting via

subterranean river (Q1140845)subclass of (P279)groundwater (Q161598).

What's the best way to fix this? Subterranean rivers are a kind of groundwater, but should not be in the general subclass tree of drinking water (Q7892) and therefore food (Q2095) -- given that we don't classify rivers that way.

Thanks in advance for your suggestions. Jheald (talk) 21:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Pretty much everything I read on en:Groundwater suggests to me that a subterranean river is distinct from and excluded by the definition of the characteristics of groundwater. en:Subterranean_river explicitly distinguishes subterranean river from waterflow associated with aquifiers. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
OK thanks. I've removed the subclass of (P279) statement (diff). Jheald (talk) 09:36, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jheald: Isn't it preferred to deprecate incorrect statements instead of deleting them? --Tengwar (talk) 17:11, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: So now any thoughts on Barrow Blow Wells (Q96782643) -> artesian well (Q177734) -> groundwater (Q161598) -> ... -> food (Q2095) ? Jheald (talk) 09:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
@Jheald: I've removed groundwater (Q161598) -> fresh water (Q102192), again on definitional grounds; groundwater is not exclusively "naturally occurring water with low concentrations of dissolved salts". --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:57, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Full name

I cannot find a property for a person's full name? birth name (P1477) has the description "full name of a person at birth, if different from their current, generally used name", but what can be used for "full name of a person, if different from their generally used name, currently or at times as indicated by time qualifiers?" Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:50, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

"Full name" is not a universal name, nor is it constant through a person's life, nor is it what most modern people expect. For example, the "full name" for Leonardo da Vinci (Q762) was just Leonardo. And in many cultures the "full name" is not given at birth. And what is part of the "full name" can depend on the situation. It sounds as though you are looking for a property designed for modern Western naming practices, but which ignores titles, marriage, and personal practice. I do not think such a property is likely to exist. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:16, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
We do have name (P2561). Also see the many more relevant properties listed at Wikidata:WikiProject Names/Properties. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:47, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Merge help

Special:MergeItems doesn't seem to be able to do it so I want to ask if someone could merge Turkish Hezbollah (Q108607868) with Turkish Hezbollah (Q1621312)? Thanks in advance. --Semsûrî (talk) 21:12, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

  • ✓ Done

Vandalism not being detected

Twice in recent days I have found vandalism that has not been detected, nor repaired, for some time. this lasted for nine days (and is particularly egregious, changing the name of a district to its adjacent neighbour), while this was done in February. Both items are linked from several others, and used in Commons' infoboxes.

Is this symptomatic of a wider issue? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

  • I'm sure the problem is worse than any one person can notice, with hundreds of millions of items and a very limited volunteer pool. This personal attack on a living politician was in place for more than a month. This destructive edit was in place for three weeks. This childish edit was in place for 23 days. Label or description vandalism might get overlooked if it's in a language unknown to the reviewer, and while vandalism in popular items (celebrities, countries, major planets, etc.) is likely to be quickly detected and reverted, who knows how many obscure items (minor battles, insect species, unmarried offspring of noble families, etc.) have longstanding intentional errors just waiting to contaminate the information ecosystem. -Animalparty (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
    I have been reverting a specific type of vandalism lately (adding random names as "partners" on items belonging to famous people – for instance, changing Brad Pitt's description from "actor" to "FlyingAce's boyfriend", or like this). I assume vandalism of this type in English is being reverted quickly – I did a quick check and found nothing, so I have been focusing on Spanish. A lot of the edits I have reverted were from 2020-2021; I think the oldest I found was from 2018. In many cases it went undetected because the vandals changed the Latin American Spanish label/description (not the standard Spanish one). I even found some where the label being changed was the one for an obscure Mexican language... even harder to detect it that way. –FlyingAce✈hello 05:20, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

I think we probably need someone 1/2 or 1/4 of the time reviewing the recent changes logs to keep up with the vandalism / nonsense new items. That's a lot of people but not an impossible number. We could alternatively invest in counter-vandalism bots but that would require a non-trivial amount of skilled labor. Is this something we could get a grant to do? I could help build such a thing if I had the time/resources. BrokenSegue (talk) 00:55, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

  • I encounter 5 to 10 changes to birth and death dates a week. If the change causes the death to occur before birth, I detect it. I worry that an equal number of more subtle changes are occurring, that I do not detect. --RAN (talk) 22:55, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
    • That's the kind of thing that would be easy to automate. We're never going to be perfect at stopping all vandalism. BrokenSegue (talk) 00:54, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
      A database should have administrators that patrol the data. IP-ban has been discussed and was rejected for various reasons (there are also good edits from IPs). Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 08:19, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
      I agree. I did edit as IP myself before creating an account. But I would suggest that edits from IPs be subject to increased scrutiny here on Wikidata. Almost every vandalism I have reverted on Wikidata came from an IP editor. Some of them were years old before I fixed them. I can reliably find vandalisms if I just pick some moderately popular items and look at IP edits. --Tengwar (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
      I wasn't suggesting banning IPs. Just automating certain kinds of high confidence heuristics for reversion of suspicious edits. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Featured queries?

In Wikipedia, we have featured articles and good articles labels. In Wikidata, we have showcase items. Writing a good query in Wikidata is also difficult. Why not creating a label for a featured query? It could be useful. What do you think? PAC2 (talk) 20:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

WD does not store queries, in the way that it stored items, and language wikipedias store items. So there isn't a need for a label for featured queries. The weekly wikidata newsletter (above) has a section for reports this week; and there is the Wikidata:SPARQL query service/queries/examples page - albeit that's not much maintained. Beyond that users write and sometimes share better or worse reports. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:46, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Yes I know. I've noticed that namespace 122 (Help:Namespaces) is dedicated to queries but unused. PAC2 (talk) 06:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
@PAC2 Do you mean something like Wikidata:Showcase Queries? Ainali (talk) 22:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
That's exactly what I had in mind. Thanks. PAC2 (talk) 06:45, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Interesting idea. The query example page is already pretty broad, so for there to be any point of a showcase, the queries should be distinct or uncommon somehow. It is certainly possible to write queries that people aren't likely to ask for, that has broad applications. For instance very few queries even touch value or reference nodes, use normalized values, deal with bounds, or pick a starting point that is not a set of Q-items, use federation etc. Infrastruktur (talk) 19:12, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
See also {{Query page}}, a template that could help having a page for queries. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks TomT0m It's very interesting. That's a good way to store queries in Wikidata. PAC2 (talk) 05:41, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit filter

How can I figure out which edit filter generates the following text: "Adding non-latin script language description in latin script", and what does it actually do? Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:11, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: searching in the MediaWiki namespace returns MediaWiki:Tag-adding non-latin script language description in latin script-description which points to Special:AbuseFilter/48. Multichill (talk) 20:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Special:Tags could be used as well. --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:34, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you. Now, the next question: If I read it correctly, it is activated if a Latin letter a-z or some special characters are used in a non-latin description. Is it clear why characters are added? For example, having + in a Cyrillic description is not impossible. Ymblanter (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
@Ymblanter: the "^[a-z ,]+$" is a regular expression (Q185612). It finds strings that are a full line (^ is the start of a line, $ the end) of at least one character. The only characters should be a to z (makes me wonder if it's case sensitive), a space or a comma. On a site like https://regex101.com/ you can try what matches or not.
So for example this edit trips the filter because the added language "kn" is in the list and the change matches the regex.
User:Matěj Suchánek can probably tell more about this filter. Multichill (talk) 11:14, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
I see, thanks. Ymblanter (talk) 18:36, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Chain of errors in series ordinal.

Many scientific articles in wikidata wrongly transfered the author name string "Seonghoon Kim" to both scientists. This mistake caused chain of errors in series ordinal. Publisher Correction: Ca2+-regulated Ca2+ channels with an RCK gating ring control plant symbiotic associations (Q90574861) is one example. Due to these errors, we are unable to seperate these authors in other articles by author disambiguator. ChoKukSuho (talk) 09:16, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Help and documentation for templates

In my opinion, there us a lack of documentation and help on templates in Wikidata. So I've started a page here Wikidata:Templates which is associated with the WikiProject Templates. I'm trying also to document the process of writing templates Wikidata:WikiProject Templates/Developing templates. Contributions are welcome. PAC2 (talk) 06:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Non standardized units

There are a lot of this old (primarily European) units that have fixed conversion rates but the actual meaning differs from region to region.

For example: 1 lachter = 8 Spann = 80 (Lachter)Zoll = 800 Primen = 8,000 Sekunden = ...

But while always around 2m, the exact size of one Lachter differs between times and regions. We had this discussion before and it was said that we should just create a own item for every definition. But while while it would be possible, but annoying to create ~30 times ~20 units, this would totally hide the concept that these things are in reality the same units which just went through slightly different independent standardization processes and many times it will not specified which one was meant since the accuracy of these later standardized units is not needed. Worse: In many cases when these units were used, there wasn't even the intention to use a particular definition that eventually cam much later.

Like we use seconds without thinking about which definition we want to use: The one from 1956, from 1967 or from before. And these are not just increases in accuracy but also really well known changes of the time a second is. I think we don't want to have 3 "second" "millisecond"... items in wikidata.

So I would like to propose that we have some "definition" property that can have multiple definion items that can have property like standardization Entity, ex. "Kingdom of Bavaria" region/timeframe where it was used on what the unit was based on ex. 10 "neue badische Fuß" and what that would be in SI-Units. --Fabiwanne (talk) 15:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

The issue with attaching multiple units / definitions to one item is that there's no convenient way to refer to a particular definition in a machine readable way. Toni 001 (talk) 09:43, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Agree with Toni. There are templates which will read Wikidata and attempt to convert units. Unless there is one "preferred" definition, this would not be possible. It should be fine to have old deprecated definitions and mark the current definition as preferred — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:18, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
@ MSGJ: I wanted to build exactly that. – A converter. And it is impossible to do that. It works in the SI system (Or on from there derived units like USCS/Imperial.) Even if you are staying in the United States and are using only feet this idea will break if you have things from before 1826. All these calculaters will either wrongly use the newer definitions or won't be able to do the conversion. In that case it doesn't matter so much. But like I said: For seconds form the mid 20th century (where the used definition is sometimes specified since they differ so much in value.) or lachter or other European units that had just multiple definitions depending on the context of use. I explicitly don't want to destroy the system used in wikidata for units used commonly today by spiting (modern) SI seconds from these before 1950, ancient seconds, astronomical seconds, solar seconds, unix seconds and atomic seconds in different items like Toni 001 suggested. But we have a 4 digit number of units where you can't easily add a single conversion to SI unit (P2370). At the moment they are using conversion to standard unit (P2442) for conversions inside their own system. But no whatsoever conversion to SI. For these I need more universal form of conversion to SI unit (P2370). If you don't like a own item it could also be done by using multiple conversion to SI unit (P2370) and adding qualifiers if it is an estimate (like stadia<->meter) or exact by definition (like inch<->meter) and where and when it is used. --Fabiwanne (talk) 12:10, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

How to add image?

Maybe I missed it in Help, but how do I add an image? When I go to add an image for Logo Image and use a city government URL for a city logo (yadayada.gov/city-logo.png) to the logo field, I get a "Could not save due to an error. File names are not allowed to contain characters like colons or slashes" Should I be uploading the image somewhere on Wikidata or Wikipedia, but without any slashes in the name?

SomeWDUser: you may have already solved this, but an image must first be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Fair use or non-free images can't be used in Wikidata, nor free/public domain images that only exist on various Wikipedias or other websites. Colons or slashes can't be in file names on Commons (although semi-colons and dashes are generally okay). Once an image is on Commons, it can be added by simply pasting the file name (minus "File:" prefix) to image (P18) or other image properties. -Animalparty (talk) 05:07, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Volunteers to test a gadget ? A gadget to find "interwikis", items without articles on a project

There is a script that finds « interwikis » according to Wikidata statements. On a Wikipedia article page, it checks Wikidata about

  • The items values of the statements on the item of the page
  • The items with statement values who are the items on our page, if there are not too much of them

and if your wiki have no articles about them, it shows a menu button next to the traditional interwikis with links to the item pages.

It worked only on frwiki until now, but now you can go to your favorite Wikimedia Wiki in which interwikis are Wikidata managed, I think (at least on Wikipedias, please tell me if that works for you), and add this line to your local common.js or even your global.js on meta to activate this on all wikis if you’re bold (seems to work with me). 

 mw.loader.load("//fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:TomT0m/extraInterwiki.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript");

It should work but it’s currently only tested on enwiki and there is only two users on frwiki including the developper of the script, so more testers would be welcome. If that’s good enough I’ll add a line to a future Wikidata Weekly. author  TomT0m / talk page 15:56, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

It indeed need tests, it does not work correctly on other wikis yet, sorry /o\ I’ll correct this and return here. author  TomT0m / talk page 16:02, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Should work now ! author  TomT0m / talk page 16:26, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Geo maximum coordinates and sea boundaries

While working that query https://w.wiki/5FFN, I was thinking of proposing to change this text to the definition of coordinates coordinates of easternmost point (P1334), coordinates of westernmost point (P1335), coordinates of northernmost point (P1332), coordinates of southernmost point (P1333) : "coordinates of southernmost point" to "coordinates of southernmost land point"

But while querying, I discover for instance Q7354#P1334, so my change proposal is not a good idea.

What I am bothered about, is that a geo max coord would have multiples definition. What about a country's territorial sea boundaries, economic sea boundaries has it been modelled somewhere? [Note that territorial sea boundaries are generally +12 nautical milles but there are plenty of exceptions, with treaties]. Would it need 4 specific properties or the set P1334, P1335, P1332, P1333 with qualifyers ? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 19:50, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Easternmost point picks up the properties of the thing it describes, land for a country in everyone's expectation, sea for an ocean, even air for airspaces, and should remain unchanged. territorial waters (Q213204) does not seem to recorded in WD, and coastline (P5141) is recorded as an length, not a fractal line, but if they ever are recorded as a string of numbers, then finding the geographical extremes would seem best done by processing that list in a query. Vicarage (talk) 06:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
As far as practical concerns are involved, no. One usecase is for example to find out problems in the database where object are localized outside of the boundaries, and this can’t be easily done right now if we don’t have the box stored somewhere in Wikidata. Of course in principle this could be computed from raw coastline datas or whatever, but this can’t easily and efficiently be done with, say, the Wikidata query service. author  TomT0m / talk page 06:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #523

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
  • Development
    • Lexicographical data: We finished work on input validation and displaying errors for faulty input (phab:T305854) and are continuing work on accessibility improvements such as screen reader support and keyboard navigation (phab:T290733, phab:T30535).
    • REST API: We finished implementation of conditional statement requests (phab:T307031, phab:T307032) and published the OpenAPI specification document (still subject to change as the API develops). We started working on the write part of the API with adding statements to an Item (phab:T306667).

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Bots added completely wrong values

A few days ago, I detected that a bot -- Adert (WMIT) -- added completely wrong urls like http://https://museoarcheologicoaquileia.beniculturali.it/ to official website (P856), see for instance https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q637182&diff=1655012160&oldid=1653330749. What can be done to prevent such actions? It seems that the constraints were not effective or the regex rules were wrong. It cannot be the task of manual editors to detect and remove all these faults. --RolandUnger (talk) 15:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Talk to the user first. It's a new user, presumably making a mistake. The user happens to be using quickstatements ... not what I'd call a bot, but ymmv. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
But I do not understand why the constraints were not effective or the regex rules were wrong to reject these quickstatements. --RolandUnger (talk) 15:30, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
The main format constraint seems to be limted to ensuring the URL starts with any of http:// https:// ftp:// & ftps:// ... the borked URL added in the above example complied. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

member_of vs. part_of

When people are members of a group of performers, should we be using member_of=Three_Stooges or part_of=Three_Stooges. Initially we only had part_of, but now we have the more precise member_of, should we switch them all? --RAN (talk) 23:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

  • Unlike Tagishsimon I'm a fan of "member of", mainly because it doesn't require or encourage the inverse "has part". It's pain maintaining both sides of the relationship with roles, start/end dates, etc. At least for musicians, that are members of musical groups, I think the "member of" property is a great choice. Moebeus (talk) 00:50, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
    But on opposite: there's some sense in having "has part" at band items with all "roles, dates etc." :) --Infovarius (talk) 12:22, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
  • I agree! I don't think there is any current movement to migrate existing entries, but I will use member_of from now on. --RAN (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

How to handle an entity that was renamed?

Based on some short research, it seems like Barbara S. Ponce Public Library (Q69954596) was renamed to Barbara S. Ponce Public Library (Q35186669) But I'm not sure if these two should be merged and how to deal with the old name vs the new name. I tried poking around in he help section but didn't see any clear answers. It's a bit hard to search for things about places being renamed since the words are so common. If someone could fix this and point me to the related docs it would be much appreciated! Edit: a similar problem with James Weldon Johnson Community Library (Q69954604) and James Weldon Johnson Community Library (Q16997596) RayScript (talk) 16:56, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

I have merged the first two. You can use official name (P1448) to record the name of the library at different times. I have set the times to unknown but you could add them if you have that information — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Second two also merged — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:11, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. I consider this resolved. RayScript (talk) 03:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

How to access a chosen qualifier when a given property has multiple preferred values

I am trying to use Wikidata to display the latest versions and latest release dates for software. For example, for Zammad, I can do something like:

{{wikidata|property|edit|reference|Q71389626|P348}} to display the latest version as 6.3.0[1] Edit this on Wikidata

{{wikidata|qualifier|Q71389626|P348|P577}} to display the latest date, as 17 April 2024

However, for some software, there are multiple values. Bugzilla, for example, has multiple "latest versions", so

{{wikidata|property|edit|reference|Q55671|P348}} displays the latest beta version as 5.1.2[2] Edit this on Wikidata

{{wikidata|qualifier|Q55671|P348|P577}} displays latest dates for both beta and stable versions, as 16 February 2018; 9 February 2019

Returning multiple dates breaks things when trying to format the date, and besides, I would like to only display the data for the latest stable version, not the beta, so 5.0.6 and 9 February 2019 at the time of writing. How can I specify this? Greenman (talk) 19:06, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

References

  1. ↑ "Release 6.3.0". 17 April 2024. Retrieved 27 April 2024.
  2. ↑ Error: Unable to display the reference properly. See the documentation for details.
As far as I know there is no existing module that can do this. You might have to write your own — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Distinguishing osu!lazer from osu!stable in osu! (Q307441)

In osu! (Q307441), it mostly has statements about osu!lazer (open source version) and some that are osu!stable (osu!stable publication date is 2007, osu!lazer is 2017). Because of the large difference, I think the best way to distinguish osu!lazer (2017) from osu!stable (2007) is to create a separate page called osu!lazer, move many statements from osu! (Q307441) to osu!lazer (if applicable and accurate), and rename osu! (Q307441) to osu!stable.

But after some more looking, that might not work because of Interwiki conflicts (because there isn't a separate article on wikipedia for osu!lazer). But still, there's statements on osu! (Q307441) don't apply to both osu!stable and osu!lazer (distinguish with proper references?).

So, what would be the best course of action? JacksonChen666 (talk) 11:59, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps keep the combined item osu! (Q307441) and create new items for the subtopics. Any statements or sitelinks which deal primarily with one of the subtopics can be moved — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:03, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Linking to family name or disambiguation

I would ask at Talk:Q27924673 but I'll go for more visibility and post here. There are a handful of new pages on Romanian Wikipedia like ro:Mincu. On that wiki, it looks like it's OK to identify such pages as going in both "Category:Family names" and "Category:Disambiguation". What's the custom here at Wikidata, to add such sitelinks to family name items like Mincu (Q107443910) or to disambiguation items like Q1936281? Gikü (talk) 17:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I think it depends on the scope of the article. Does it explain the history and etymology of the name or is it just a list of people with that name? In this case it seems like the latter so Q1936281 might be best and de:Mincu is already linked to it — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:32, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Item documentation

So now we have all calls for this template removed. When is it planned to be loaded automatically? --Infovarius (talk) 10:37, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

It already is loaded automatically on every item talk page — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:35, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Paper: 'An Analysis of Links in Wikidata'

The chapter:

Haller, Armin; Polleres, Axel; Dobriy, Daniil; Ferranti, Nicolas; Rodríguez Méndez, Sergio J. (2022). "An Analysis of Links in Wikidata". The Semantic Web: 21–38. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-06981-9_2.

presented recently at the European Semantic Web Conference, is free to read for the next four weeks only; so I'm mentioning it here at the earliest opportunity.

I note two passages in particular:

In fact, every entity in Wikidata that also has a Wikipedia entry includes hundreds of links to Wikipedia.

and:

...as a bottom-up created KG, there is the possibility for anyone who owns a dataset to actually create an outgoing link in the Wikidata namespace to the dataset they own. Many bots (332, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Bots ) have been created for exactly this reason (i.e., automatically creating outgoing links from Wikidata to other datasets), and they improve the discoverability, and as such the visibility, of the external dataset. Every dataset publisher, for their own benefit, should therefore consider creating those outgoing links in the Wikidata KG.

The first stretches credulity, the second would seem to encourage spamming. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

The negative view: Anything that makes Wikimedia more popular encourages spamming. The positive view: This is encouraging the owners of high quality datasets to form links with Wikidata and improve the quality of our offering. As with many things in life, it is a matter of perspective. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:01, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Yes; my concern is that the wording I quoted says nothing - offers no perspective - about quality, nor for that matter about working collaboratively or gaining community consensus. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:03, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

There's also a preprint. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:22, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Derived units

There are a lot of Units that have a different dimension than others but still derived from them. For example square metre (Q25343) is metre (Q11573)² Or more complicated: Is there any way to describe this? Or has someone who is more experienced any idea how this could be made possible? I mean this problem is not isolated there are a lot more things that have more complicated relations: For example newtons second law, population density (inhabitants per area) or just a parabola. Is there really no way to model this more complicated "mathematical" relations. I wonder that none had ever had the same problem since there obvious applications if you are able to query that. --Fabiwanne (talk) 15:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith: Thanks. It is possible to do it whith these properties. (At least as long as all the units have symbols.) But since TeX and similar languages are meant to represent a special appearance of a formula it is in many cases almost impossible to evaluate them automatically without errors. But automation is which wikidata is all about. But even it would be possible to use OpenMath in P2534: It wouldn't help since it is not possible to query that. I would need to download all items that have the P2534 Property to interpret them myself to get the meaning of square meter. Again: I don't think that it is the idea of wikidata that you have to download big chunks of the database, interpret it, and do an other to be able to get the result of your query. Or do I miss something. --Fabiwanne (talk) 11:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
@Fabiwanne: I agree with Arthur and believe that these properties should be enough. What specific question can't you query? --Infovarius (talk) 10:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
One can first look at the values of conversion to SI unit (P2370). If the numeric values are equal, then one can look at the measured quantity value (Q15088658) of the associated unit. If those also match then the units are (essentially) equal. Toni 001 (talk) 09:42, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Maybe I just don't understand. But there is no way to use this property to solve any of the described problems. Can you make an example how this should be done for example for the meter/square meter relationship? --Fabiwanne (talk) 11:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
To give a more explicit example: I want for example to know what the square of 4 meter is. The answer would be 16 square meter. This can't be done by using wikidata since the relationship between meter and square meter is missing or not machine readable. I could go to Wikipedia go to the "SI base units" part of the info-Box and try to interpret this. But it would be unreliable since this was made to be interpreted by machines. Please think about why there is a difference between Content MathML and Presentation MathML and why there is a difference beteewn Wikipedia and Wikidata. --Fabiwanne (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
I think I  had a proposal a … very very long time ago, that did not make it unfortunately. Maybe I should dig this out. author  TomT0m / talk page 13:51, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
I’d propose a few properties to formalize that :
  • « product of » : product of two units
  • {{C|J|product of|kg
  • « power of » : power of some unit
We could have items for m2 and s^-2
I think we already have properties to link the unit to what it measure, like
It’s measured physical quantity (P111) View with SQID author  TomT0m / talk page 14:12, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
@TomT0m: like depicted earlier, "of" is IMHO wrong: Its a very English thing when and how to use it. Not so good for an abstract model there should be some some multiply predicate. measured physical quantity (P111) View with SQID Is the relationship between meter and length. Not between meter and square meter. --Fabiwanne (talk) 11:17, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
@Fabiwanne I think we are not of the same page. It’s labelled in english in this discussion here for convenience but it does not matter, it can be labelled differently in any languages. It’s just used here as a way to list a set of units the item is a product of as a qualifier for a « product of » statement. This model is already used in properties such as disjoint union of (P2738) View with SQID. I’m not aware of the context in which you discussed of to be wrong, sorry, so I don’t understand.
measured physical quantity (P111) is another story, I should not have introduced it it’s confusing, sorry. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

J. Paul Getty Museum artist ID

When I look at Alfred Lorens (Q108411281) at the "J. Paul Getty Museum artist ID" there are two values, I added the second one. The top one takes me to the correct page, but the bottom one is the value that actually shows in the url. Am I doing something wrong? --RAN (talk) 02:31, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

On the face of it, they're redirecting the URLs WD throws at it; and there's no clear way to derive an artist's URL from their new website address schema such that we have a string WD can throw at it. Possibly WD needs to revise its formatter URL and data for this ID :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:40, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
RAN & Tagishsimon look for the "DOR ID" at the bottom of the page. Multichill (talk) 14:59, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Merge Q22887752 and Q22722993

These two items are about the same subject and need to be merged. Can someone help? Thanks Baptista-BJB (talk) 17:08, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Done. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Two items for merging

The pages Category:Physicists from the Republic of Geneva (Q60870689) and Category:Physicists from the Republic of Geneva (Q65628940) describe the same category and should be merged (Physicien in French is Physicist (and not Physician) in English).--Sapphorain (talk) 08:58, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Done --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:14, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Argumentation in academic papers

Over on Twitter, we're looking for examples where Wikidata models "argumentation" in academic publishing - in other words works which refute or challenge the work they're citing. Can anyone add any? Other examples of nuanced citation (supporting, questioning, proving, disproving, etc) would also be welcome. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:39, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Here's one: Estimation of US Children's Educational Attainment and Years of Life Lost Associated With Primary School Closures During the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic (Q102048302)item disputed by (P7378)Comparing Bad Apples to Orange Soda (Q105296365) Infrastruktur (talk) 13:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Guide to appealing blocks

I don't feel that the advice we give to blocked users (MediaWiki:Blockedtext) is very helpful, so I made a start at drafting a Guide to appealing blocks with the intention that it can be linked from that message. Comments welcome. Bovlb (talk) 04:23, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

Looks good to me, but maybe we should mention info@wikidata.org for those who cannot edit their talk page. --Ameisenigel (talk) 06:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Done. Thanks! Bovlb (talk) 00:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Hans Klier (Q73531078)

SS member born 1984? Something's wrong there... --Magnus Manske (talk) 15:02, 10 June 2022 (UTC)

There are at least a dozed Hans Klier on Facebook. I This one fits better *30 Apr 1912 Bayern, +Germany 24 Aug 1943 Russia (eastern Front) https://images.findagrave.com/photos/2015/153/147422644_1433387915.jpg. But he has the wrong rank. And it would be uncommon to join the SS in „Fulda-Werra“ Gera, Thüringen when you are born in Bavaria. People weren't that mobile at that time So I assume this one is meant: https://www.dws-xip.com/reich/biografie/1936/1936.html. SS-NR 1235. Lfbe Nr. (NSDAP-Parteinummer I assume) Born 19.9.1884. 20.4.34: Untersturmführer 9.11.1935: Obersturmführer. --Fabiwanne (talk) 12:24, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
  • 1984 probably a typo in the source database, I find about one in every 500 typed in dates gets a typo error, most databases fix errors, some like LCCN and VIAF, never fix errors that we report to them. --RAN (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata:Deletion review?

Do we have Wikidata:Deletion review? Where do you go to appeal? --RAN (talk) 01:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

WD:AN Bovlb (talk) 04:38, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Deletion review is not matter only for administrators. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:40, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: I agree, but non-administrators are welcome to participate in AN discussions, and the desired result is administrative action. Bovlb (talk) 19:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)

Reference a statement by page nr. (P304) and figure nr. (Property?)

Hi I spend a lot of time cataloguing art according to old catalogs. I want to be able to use separate properties for page number and figure number. Is there a property for "Figure number"? Here is an example painting (it is not illustrated in the catalog, but another source claims it is the painting documented on page 6: Portrait of a Woman, possibly Lucia (van) Siccama (1602-1675), wife of Saco Fockens (Q28061828) - Thanks in advance! Jane023 (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Nearest I can see is section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958), which takes string values ... I think it could legitimately be used to record "Figure XII" or whatever. The full list of Wikidata properties to indicate a source is produced by this report - https://w.wiki/5GqQ --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:04, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Oh interesting thanks! Yes that might work for me, I just need to figure out the order of the statements I will use so I can query the info back in the order used in the catalog. Jane023 (talk) 17:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #524

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events
    • Upcoming
      • Next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call June 14, 2022: Will Kent (Wikidata Program Manager at Wiki Education) and Rosie Stephenson-Goodknight (Wikimedia Foundation Trustee; Visiting Scholar at Northeastern University; co-founder of Wiki Women in Red) will present on Leveraging Wikidata for Wikipedia – running a multi-language wiki project and the role of Wikidata in improving Wikipedia's content gender gap. Agenda
      • Live editing session on Twitch, in French, by Vigneron, June 14 at 19:00 CEST (UTC+2)
    • Ongoing
    • Past
  • Tool of the week
    • ExtraInterwiki. Some language links will never show up in your favorite Wikipedia, those who don’t have a corresponding article in this Wikipedia. This new tool aims to give them more visibility by searching topics closed to the one on an article with no article on your wiki.
  • Development
    • Fixed a bug where Item IDs where shown instead of the label after selecting an Item in an Item selector (phab:T306214)
    • Lexicographical data: finished accessibility improvement for the new Special:New Lexeme page (phab:T290733), improving error messages for the new page (phab:T310134) and worked on a new search profile to make selecting languages easier (phab:T307869)
    • REST API: continued work on creating statements (phab:T306667)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Redundancy

Hello, is redundancy forbidden in wikidata? I am being prevented to adding continent (P30) = Europe in some items. Querying items in Europe is difficult because of France, UK, Turkey, Russia, etc. I can understand the idea of redundancy but then if there is located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), why shouldn't we remove country (P17) : store only the smallest/finest-grained information ? Wouldn't a Europe (full stored P30) query be more intuitive and more faster to run than a query navigating whithin any located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) having P30=Europe (more likely to be timing out) ?Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 07:50, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

It's hard to answer the question properly without knowing what Q-items you tried to add P30 to. The perhaps most important reason redundancy is bad is because it inevitably leads to inconsistencies in the data.
I think a problem with the often supplied P17 and P131 values is that they are administratively bound, not geographically bound, and so I guess you can't/shouldn't use them to infer P30 (I've been guilty of doing this myself). I guess we're meant to use properties such as located in/on physical feature (P706) or location (P276) for things that are geographically bound, but they are nowhere near as much used. But the one item I looked at which used P706 did terminate in P30, so I guess this is the correct model, and can be used for inference, can someone confirm or refute? Infrastruktur (talk) 11:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Adding continent (P30) doesn't seem redundant to me for items which are geographic entity (Q27096213) or subclass of that. I think you are right that country (P17) is generally not enough to determine continent in which a place is located. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:42, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Would be helpful to know on which items Bouzinac is being prevented from adding P30, so that we can understand the nature of that prevention. Redundancy is very much a double-edged sword, as discussed above; but equally, because of France, UK, Turkey, Russia, etc, there seems to be a very strong use case supporting (supposed) P30 redundancy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:16, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
For those countries whose territories are entirely situated on one continent (i.e. most countries) it is entirely sufficient to use country (P17); the four batches I undid concerned rail stations in Germany and Ireland, which are within the aforementioned set of countries.
If you do want to ensure that the continent of a place is unambiguously discernible if that place is in a country with potentially multiple continents, here's one way to do it parsimoniously (using the countries explicitly named in Tagishsimon's comment):
  • Add "continent" to the four constituent regions of the UK, to each of the regions of France, and to each of the British and French overseas territories (that is, each first-level administrative division which is unambiguously on one continent).
  • Add "continent" to most federal subjects of Russia and to most provinces of Turkey--where "most" means "those which do not fall on a continent border".
  • For the remainder of the federal subjects/provinces which fall on a continent border (currently Istanbul and Çanakkale Provinces in Turkey and those federal subjects of Russia near the Urals and possibly the Caucasus), add "continent" to the highest-level subdivisions within them that are unambiguously on a single continent.
    • With respect to Çanakkale, for example, the items for Gelibolu, Eceabat, Gökçeada, and Bozcaada Districts would have "continent: Europe" while the remaining districts in that province would have "continent: Asia".
  • After the above is done, remove "continent" on all entities in those countries which are wdt:P131/wdt:P131* any of the above which do have "continent" added to them, and remove the existing "continent" values on entities situated in the hierarchy above any of the above which do have "continent" added to them.
  • Now any uses of wdt:P131*/wdt:P30 on places with unambiguous continents should properly return the appropriate continent.
(A similar sort of logic, in my view, also applies to located in time zone (P421), but that is an argument for a later day.) Mahir256 (talk) 13:26, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
That seems sensible, if following up geographical and political nesting, only quote both the political and geographical properties when the level above has more than one such property and so becomes ambiguous. But make sure the dominant geographical entity is marked, no one will thank you for having the UK equally in Europe and Oceania merely because of a tiny Overseas Territory.
There is merit in everything having a country though, chasing back the Great Dorset Steam Fair though its village, parish, district and county councils to discover its quintessentially British will be a chore. Vicarage (talk) 13:41, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Yes, it was about railways stations but I think the problem is far beyond.
Wikidata should remain simple to query. You will lose people away if as an answer to the question how to query Europe's objects ?, you answer you shall not query P30 = Europe because xxxxxxx and yyyy. Here's an archive of a query request where people are saying it is not possible to query Europe's objects easily...
I know there are solutions to simulate such a query [make a box boundary with coordinates // select administrative entities whose P30 = Europe, etc] but they do not appear simple and looks "woah, that's so cryptic!".
Is it really forbidden to store statements that might appear to be redundant but that are still true statements, as there are properties designed to be populated, and as there are no restriction/no warnings on the said property ?
Populating P30=Europe in the concerned Turkey objects, for instance, would help simple and without timing-out query of Turkey's objects residing in Europe. Here's a quick-but-false-and-still-funny query of current Turkey's Europe objects Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 14:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
You got one example, and the problem of the asker was solved. It’s really unclear there is so much usecase or person who would want to deal with such query to justify the introduction of maintenance of such a massive number of statement. You just scratched the surface with this batch. author  TomT0m / talk page 16:09, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
You are ignoring
  • the fact that a continent is not a fully transitive property [whilst a P131 is fully transitive to a current country]
  • the fact that by removing this property, it removes information from infoboxes shown on a wikipedia
  • the fact that by removing this property, you prefer cryptic queries than simple queries
  • and it amazes me that my saying something (geographically in Europe) is in Europe is littering for you whilst it's perfectly true to 99,9% of people.
No wonder people don't like wikidata in the wikipedias. Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 17:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Wikidata has a big problem with partial datasets, when something like a railway station has 90% of the key facts it might need, but which 10% is missing varies from station to station, so queries become bitty, and aren't popular compared with infoboxes. The solution is to run reports to flag up the holes. Adding extra properties for edge cases will make the problem worse, as while the benefit a few entries, most would be seen as duplication, and anyone adding a new railway station would never think of adding the extra properties, as they'd just look at a random existing station for inspiration. So the queries will get ever more complicated to calculate defaults. I think the principle of only ever saying something once should dominate WB designs. Vicarage (talk) 18:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Once the problem is solved it can be capitalized in some sort of way.
The biggest problem, I guess, is to have to write SPARQL from scratch for common problems which can be more complex than expected.
For example it can be hard to write in sparql a query « what where the presidents of the world in 1900 » ? By using the recently created template {{ValidAtDate|}} it’s much simpler.
<nowiki> select ?country ?headOfState { 
   {{ValidAtDate|?country|P31|Q3624078|beginTime=1900}} . 
   {{ValidAtDate|?country|{{Pid|head of state}}|?headOfState|beginTime=1900}} 
} 
</nowiki>
This gives this query by using property head of state (P35) and searching states which are « soverein states ». This is incomplete … because P35 is incomplete, which illustrate the problem of completion I guess. It showed Quatar and the Emir of Quatar in 2000 in the first run, because the statement had no end date. More complex queries would be better.
But to return to the topic, I think the goal is to make more template like {{ValidAtDate}} and make it easy to use them when writing query. Including a library of them and making possible to use them in the query helper somehow could be a really good thing to do. Because things are usually more complex than they seem and trying to make everything simple is probably a dead-end. author  TomT0m / talk page 19:00, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I'm interested in events, so I thought I'd do simple queries for instances of film festival (Q220505) in Scotland. Now events are recommended to use location (P276), not located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), but there is no inheritance, so if you ask for Glasgow you get 4 results, but if you ask for Scotland you get a single, different, one. If you use located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) it times out. I can see how you'd want located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) for nested places to get the inheritance, but it makes no sense if you switch to location (P276) a query against that property loses the inheritance chain. Vicarage (talk) 20:28, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
That kind of sucks, but both P706 and P276 are instances of transitive property, so there shouldn't be anything stopping someone from adding a P276 or P706 statement to the Glasgow item is there? I'm still not entirely sure what the difference is, I'm guessing P276 is more appropriate for things, while P706 is intended for areas? That would result in P276?/P706+ chains I guess. In other words P276 isn't really transitive, since the location for something must be an area. Infrastruktur (talk) 21:22, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Glasgow (Q4093) has a located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) of Glasgow City (Q55934339) which in turn has a located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) of Scotland (Q22), so its a short transitive chain, but that doesn't stop a Query Builder simple query (instance of film festival, located in administrative area Scotland) timing out, irrespective of order (I could forgive it finding too many things in Scotland before checking they were film festivals, but not the reverse). And I guess that while location (P276) is transitive, you are relying on someone putting in a chain of them, which no-one would if the P131 chain was in place instead. But if I'm told to use P276 for events, it seems odd that I'd have to search using it for direct attribution, and P131 for indirect attribution. A template might be able to do this, but I'd not even heard of query templates until you mentioned them, so they are not easily discoverable. Vicarage (talk) 22:14, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I disagree that P17 should be used to determine continent or even geographic areas at all, this is an outright broken model, made by the conflation of two unrelated concepts, geographic area and governance. If users need to narrow down their search to a certain landmass, or exclude a landmass, at least don't make it any harder than it has to be. You should be able to cut off an entire area by using a single transitive property.
Mahir256's alternative proposal of pushing the geographic statements down the chain to the largest coherent areas as given by P131 however is consistent and free of ambiguities, and determining continent with a simple P131*/P30 chain is easy. My proposal of using (P276|P706)*/P30 could also avoid ambiguities, but is more expensive to compute and will as of today yield far less results. Infrastruktur (talk) 19:03, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Please no, this is just littering. Multichill (talk) 15:21, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Removing information from infoboxes in wikipedia due to removing statements + removing statements of a property without documenting why on this property is littering. Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 04:44, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Help sought: Possible duplicate from the Peerage

Is Sidney Rowlatt (Q75568667) identical to Sidney Rowlatt (Q7509316)? And: @DarrylLundy: Is Peerage always correct?

Thanks in advance.--Ва-банк (talk) 20:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

Yes, they were the same person so I have merged them.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 21:40, 14 June 2022 (UTC)

You can submit proposals for the Data Quality Days 2022 until June 19th

Hello all,

As a reminder, the Data Quality Days is an online event taking place on July 8-10 and focusing on data quality processes.

If you want to contribute to the program of the event, you have two possibilities:

The deadline to propose sessions is June 19th. Afterwards, the organizers will make a selection among the proposals and integrate them in the schedule. The first program draft will be added on the event page in the next few days.

We hope that this event can encourage active or occasional editors to talk about data quality, highlight some important issues and work on solving them together, so we hope that many of you will propose topics or sessions! If you have questions, or if you're not sure where to start, feel free to contact me.

Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Corrupt politicians

I have seen several people, mostly politicians, described as "corrupt" (see Xu Zongheng (Q8045173) as an example). I believe that descriptions, especially those of living people, should be worded neutrally. In the example above, this person has been convicted of corruption and is currently imprisoned. Would it be appropriate to have "corrupt" in the description if the person has indeed been convicted (not just accused) of corruption? –FlyingAce✈hello 15:06, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

A very basic description is all that is required, enough to disambiguate it from any other items. "Chinese politician" is adaquate, unless there is another Chinese policitian of the same name — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:42, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Advice on Modelling Scottish Witch Hunters Involvement

Hi!

I'm currently working on a data visualisation internship focused on visualising the rich historical data on the Survey of Scottish Witchcraft. We have previously created the Map of Accused Witches website, using data from the Survey imported onto Wikidata. To continue this work I have been trying to import the cases on the database onto Wikidata as well, and have recently submitted a pending Case ID Property Proposal to aid this work.

I've been looking at the different types of involvement people related to the cases could have and how to model them on Wikidata. The unique values on the involvement page are listed below:

  • Assailant
  • Assessor (judge's assistant)
  • Bailie
  • Cautioner
  • Chancellor
  • Cited authority
  • Clerk
  • Commissioner
  • Complainer
  • Confession Witness
  • Defence
  • Defence advocate
  • Elder
  • Execution attendant
  • Expert Witness
  • Investigator
  • Jailor
  • Judge
  • Minister
  • Notar
  • Officer
  • Procurator
  • Prosecutor
  • Rescuer
  • Sheriff
  • Sheriff-depute
  • Witchcraft acquired from
  • Witch-pricker

I was wondering if anyone has done anything related to this or had any advice. I wanted to find some workable consensus/consistency of describing 16th century witch trial/case data and the people involved. I've already had some ideas of how I could put these relationships onto Wikidata, but for a lot of them it seems I'm trying to fit modern day job descriptions to 17th/16th century Scottish occupations. Would it be best to create new items for the specific definitions? For example the item commissioner - Wikidata doesn't seem to fit the Scottish 17th century definition of what a commissioner of a witch hunt is. Any help greatly appreciated!

LadyBirdy38 (talk) Andrawaag (talk) Arlo Barnes (talk) Ciell (talk) MaggieLin1 (talk) Nattes à chat (talk) Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) Tiputini (talk) Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) Adù229 (talk) Zblace (talk) 08:09, 23 December 2022 (UTC) 1ucyp (talk) 09:08, 2 August 2023 (UTC) Waltercolor (talk) 00:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC) Erfurth (talk) 11:23, 3 November 2023 (UTC) Sukkoria (talk) 09:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Natacha LSP (talk) 09:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Requinlama (talk) 09:47, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Hibrideacus (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Ffperruch (talk) 09:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Valquirit97 (talk) 09:46, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Djlucettesoulclub (talk) 09:57, 4 November 2023 (UTC) AdeonasLilas (talk) 09:49, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Mayhem-bae11 (talk) 09:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Pitchgre (talk) 09:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Ash Crow (talk) 09:59, 4 November 2023 (UTC) Veleno16 (talk) 15:12, 18 November 2023 (UTC) 1rhb (talk) 12:53, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject Witches

MaggieLin1 (talk) 16:01, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Short advice is, use existing items if they're entirely appropriate. Create new items, making them an instance of (for the most part) occupation and a subclass of any relevant higher order term. It is absolutely fine to create new specific items for your witch-folk, but ideal to tie them in to the existing structure. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Please advise on surnames

Hello, I am trying to correctly reconcile surnames in a dataset to existing surname items. I've discovered there are about 491,269 surname items right now. However, thousands of them seem to correspond to the same text string based on the values in native label (P1705), having also the same writing system (P282), such as Acchini (Q65096922) and Acchini (Q98890058) or Assandri (Q106956987) and Assandri (Q107453648). The latter have different languages in their native label (P1705) statements - but we're not planning on having one surname per each language, are we? Am I missing something here or are we drowning in duplicates? Thank you for your help on this, Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 19:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject Names I think these are duplicates (also, I think we're not planning on having one surname per each language); if you can easily find such cases, merging them would be very useful. --Epìdosis 19:57, 4 June 2022 (UTC) P.S. I suggest Wikidata talk:WikiProject Names for questions related to given names and family names
@Vojtěch Dostál: you can feel free to merge items that are duplicates. Help:Merge explains how to do it. Place Clichy (talk) 20:07, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Vojtěch Dostál,
No, we don't plan to have a different item for surname in each language : only for each surname in each script... which is already... a lot;..
generally, native label (P1705) in latin script should be "multilingual", and languages where this name is know can be addes as language of work or name (P407), which allows to regroup the identical names (same script, same alphabet) on only 1 item :)
feel free to merge surnames with identical native label (P1705)+writing system (P282) - but beware of labels, since many languages "transcripted" names in other alphabets... Hsarrazin (talk) 20:40, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
@Epìdosis @Hsarrazin @Place Clichy Thank you for your responses. If we search for all surname strings from native label (P1705) which have the same writing system (P282), we get >6000 groups for merging (Wikidata:WikiProject Names/Possible surname duplicates). Many of them are Japanese surnames which we might want to exclude. For the others, is a merge in order or should we do some more filtering on those? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Of course Japanese one should be prudentially filtered out. Also in the other cases, I think we need one more filter: coincidence between labels (or at least one label) with the value of P1705; otherwise, wrong values of P1705 (e.g.) risk to misguide. --Epìdosis 12:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Another check: similarly to the case below you reported, all the cases in which a name has two values of P1705 should be checked manually; usually removing one of them the reason for the merge vanishes. --Epìdosis 12:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for this useful discussion, it made me change my default settings, used when creating Polish surnames items using QuickNames, from "pl" to "multilingual". Powerek38 (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Please note an interesting case of Přívratský (Q111769956) and Privratsky (Q37232314) where the latter has two native label (P1705) statements, one of which would differentiate the two items. A merge might not be desirable in this case, right? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:50, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Differences of diacritics are valuable, of course. I removed the second P1705 from the latter to remove the ambiguity. --Epìdosis 12:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Is there a way to add missing native label (P1705) to surnames? if not filtering out by adding native label (P1705) as a criteria, there'll be around 518, 000 surnames on the Wikidata. Feliciss (talk) 09:56, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

I checked some tens of cases from Wikidata:WikiProject Names/Possible surname duplicates and only a part of them deserved effective merge. I tend to think that the two checks (if there are two P1705; if P1705 coincides with label) are probably too difficult to be done automatically; probably, since the cases are about 250, going manually is the best solution. --Epìdosis 12:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your work, I'll try to help with checking/merging. It's not so bad after all - the Japanese surnames made it look worse than it is. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:20, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Three items for merging

It appears that the following Wikidata items refer to the same person: Mark McCloskey (Q96757132), Mark McCloskey (Q107132260) and Mark McCloskey (Q109553397). The link to the English Wikipedia article in Q109553397 is a redirect (see en:Special:Permalink/1057018924). -Ianlopez1115 (talk) 14:49, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree and have merged them — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:26, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Though this response is very late, I appreciate that you took action regarding this request. -Ianlopez1115 (talk) 14:15, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Youtube links to feature films

I'm looking at 91.203.60.27's contributions and there are 710 instances where they added or updated YouTube video ID (P1651) on items mostly about feature-length films that are still under copyright. Most of the times the links point to videos that are clearly copyright infringements (Special:Diff/1294971127), but there are instances where the video seems to be published on the official Youtube channel of the production company that had released the film (Special:Diff/1305391203). Or the video seems to be behind a Youtube paywall (Special:Diff/1335315059).

Am I right to remove all the links to clear copyvios and keep links to videos published by production companies? What about the pay-to-view videos? Thanks. Gikü (talk) 12:32, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

@Gikü: Sure, the copyvios should be removed and anything official, whether paywalled or not, can stay. (Perhaps adding an appropriate qualifier noting the existence of a paywall would be good.) Mahir256 (talk) 15:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
I've adding YouTube links to soviet filmproduction companies' official YouTube uploades of their films on YouTube for some time now, ploughing through among others Mosfilm's och Lenfilm's uploads. I thought this was uncontroversial since they were "official" uploads, but if this for some reason is considered wrong, I'd like to know. Sabelöga (talk) 10:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
On the Bazelevs part you're right, I was confused by the lack of the "verified" icon next to the channel name. I am yet to find an ID added by you that is not an official production company's work. Sorry. Gikü (talk) 11:21, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
That's okay. Sabelöga (talk) 13:38, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

cheesecake and New York-style cheesecake item sitelinks

Hi! I just moved the link to the Italian article on cheesecake (which is impressively global in scope) from the New York-style cheesecake item, which is very specific, to the cheesecake item. I think other sitelinks on the New York-style cheesecake item should also be moved, but I do not have the language expertise to evaluate all of the articles. If someone could help out, that would be great! Aap1890 (talk) 14:37, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

@Aap1890 : Thanks for reporting. I have moved all but three of the sitelinks over to cheesecake (Q215348). I think the labels could be improved further. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:36, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Invalid normalization for Japan Search name ID(P6698)

I found some problem to retrieve IRI values for P6698.

Wikidata has "Japan Search name ID"(P6698) properties, so I can retrieve their ids using wdt:P6698 or p:P6698/ps:P6698 in Literal form. However, in case of retrieving IRI, wdtn:P6698 or p:P6698/psn:P6698 indicates invalid IRIs. For instance, Wikidata item Hokusai(Q5586) has "葛飾北斎" as Japan Search name ID in literal, and <https://jpsearch.go.jp/entity/chname/%E8%91%9B%E9%A3%BE%E5%8C%97%E6%96%8E> in normalized value.

The problem is encoding of multi-byte letters. "Japan Search name ID" uses IRIs, so appropriate value is <https://jpsearch.go.jp/entity/chname/葛飾北斎> .

I think that it brings inconvenience in situation of using federated query at least. I currently use IRI() and CONCAT() function for workaround, like: https://w.wiki/5JFt . Is is possible to fix it? da1blue (talk) 03:22, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

@da1blue: I think you need to take this issue to Wikidata:Report a technical problem or possibly Wikidata:Report a technical problem/WDQS and Search. Bovlb (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

"shares border with" on roads

Is the use of shares border with (P47) on roads such as Fjordgata (Q5284645) wrong? And what property should be used to connect roads if that is the case. The contributor seems to have made multiple of these edits. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:17, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Seems wrong, if understandable. Roads do not have borders. If a road coincides with a border, then possibly connects with (P2789) is the property to use to connect the two items. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Q1145833 needs to be split

Q1145833 is currently mixing up two distinct expressions. One is the German word "Wutbürger", about which word specifically not only the article in German-language Wikipedia de:Wutbürger, but also Wikipedia articles in Welsh, Spanish, and French exist, e.g. fr:Wutbuerger. It was "word of the year" in 2010 in Germany. Now, there is also en:Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells which describes a similar phenomenon, but a completely different phrase. "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" is not "Wutbürger", the two expressions have different origins and the Wikipedia articles, therefore, also are completely different. So I think that Q1145833 which was originally for "Wutbürger" should be reverted to that state, and a new item for "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells" should be created. But as I'm not very active on Wikidata and often struggle with the interface, I would appreciate it if someone else could do it... Gestumblindi (talk) 16:40, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:42, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
I've created Q112605395 for "Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells", and move the relevant claims to that. I've left the description and instance of, as I'm not sure what to replace them with. Instance of might be Q8171, but I don't speak German, so I'm not confident to do that.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Silverfish (talk • contribs).
Thank you! I'd say that "Wutbürger" is a word as well as a phrase and the existing "instance of" seems to fit. Gestumblindi (talk) 19:12, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

settlement splitted to adjacent municipalities

Hello, the village of Mitterberg (Q96027752) is divided into two parts called Mitterberg (Q110519483) and Mitterberg (Q110519539) and each part is situated in adjacent municipalities. How can I model this? In my example I used coextensive with (P3403), which does not seem to be a good idea. Should I use has part(s) (P527) instead? Or is there another property? Senoloser (talk) 14:41, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

I think P527 seems to be suitable? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:52, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Do I have to add attribution details to non-CC0 images on Wikidata items?

For example on Douglas Adams (Q42) the property image (P18) displays an image which appears to have a CC BY-SA 2.0 license which states that appropriate credit must be given including the name of the creator, copyright notice and details of the license, but none of these appear with this image. Piecesofuk (talk) 15:55, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikimedia's Wikidata project provides attribution and a link to the appropriate licence stored at Wikimedia Commons. This fulfills the licence obligation of providing the information "in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses [our] use". If you want to use the image outside of Wikimedia, then you have to decide on your own method of meeting the licence conditions. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:07, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the reply, just spotted that it says that here... https://wiki.creativecommons.org/wiki/Best_practices_for_attribution#Don.27t_make_it_too_complicated Piecesofuk (talk) 16:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Should item connection notification be shut down by default or not?

Someone commented at my talk page about such notifications: Topic:Wxo03k7chzr9id98, so I've checked my preferences setting about it, it looks like this notification is enabled by default and I don't see why it should be enabled default. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:34, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

The people leaving it at the default setting are likely to be those appreciating them. Karl Oblique (talk) 21:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Taxonomy problem

There are many misspellings of taxon names and I noticed here on Wikidata that due to that many species have more than one entry (Item) assigned. I noticed that many misspellings come from old versions of World Odonata List (current version of this list has correct names). Here is an example:

  • Q920614 - Indocypha silvergliedi - misspelling
  • Q81848187 - Indocypha silbergliedi - it's correct name (it comes from Robert Elliot Silberglied) but that Wikidata Item was created much later

What should I do in such cases? Simply merge these items under correct name, keep them both or maybe something else? Pikador (talk) 08:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

@Brya: I think this is your business? Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't see that I made an edit in either of these items. Speaking in general, it is not easy to determine the correct spelling/name: being named after Robert Elliot Silberglied is not decisive. Merging will not be helpful, since somebody is likely to re-import the error. What would help is putting all the sitelinks in one item, (hopefully) that of the correct name. The other item should indeed be marked as a misspelling (it is at most a name, never a taxon). - Brya (talk) 13:43, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
I would have said merge, redirect and leave incorrect spelling as alias would be better than having an empty item — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
@Brya I'm 100% sure that silbergliedi is correct name. Look here. Could you please correct these Wikidata entries the way you think is appropriate? It would be useful for me for the future. I'm doing only simple editions to Wikidata items and have no idea how to do something more complicated. Pikador (talk) 09:50, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
✓ Done. No guarantees that it will not be 'corrected' again. - Brya (talk) 10:39, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Award presentation

Hoi, often an award recipient gives an acceptance speech. These are often recorded like this one. How can I document this as a qualifier to the award? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 09:52, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

video (P10) perhaps — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:51, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Today's WDQS backend update meeting is cancelled

Dear all, sorry for the short notice, but we are forced to cancel today's meeting about WDQS backend update due to several staff members being out for illness (including me, unfortunately). The meeting will be rescheduled to a new date as soon as possible. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 08:48, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

You can now reuse Wikidata Lexemes on all wikis

Hello all,

In 2018, the Wikidata development team enabled Lexemes, Forms and Senses on Wikidata, allowing everyone across the Wikimedia projects to gather structured data about words and languages. Lexicographical data has been growing, thanks to the effort of the community who added, up to this point, more than 661K Lexemes in 846 different languages on Wikidata (13 languages having more than 1500 Lexemes - see statistics here.

In order to make this data usable and useful, one missing feature was the ability to access and use the data from Wikidata’s Lexicographical Data on the other Wikimedia projects via Lua modules. This feature has been requested for a long time by editors, and after a test phase on a few Wiktionaries, we are happy to announce that Lua access to Wikidata Lexeme will be enabled on June 21st on all Wikimedia projects.

Practically, Lua access means that we created some new Lua functions that will allow you to integrate Lexemes, Forms and Senses from Wikidata on any of the pages of any Wikimedia wiki. Among many possibilities that this feature offers, you will be able to create for example: conjugation or declination tables, stubs of Wiktionary entries, tools displaying the meaning of a word on Wikisource, and many other things, depending on what your project needs. Until someone on your project writes a Lua module that makes use of these new functions and then uses this module on a page, nothing changes for your project.

In order to use it, people with experience with Lua modules and templates can look at the documentation listing the available functions. You can also have a look at simple example showing the singular and plural forms of an English noun: the template, the module, the result.

Following the deployment of this feature, we are confident that several editors will start creating their own modules for Wikisource or Wiktionary - we invite you to share your experiments on this talk page, so other people can discover what you have been doing and get inspired.

If you’re involved on a Wiktionary or Wikisource, feel free to share this announcement around and to try the feature with your community.

If you have any questions or feedback, or if you want to discuss with other editors, feel free to use the talk page of the lexicographical data project or the related Telegram group. To report a technical issue, feel free to use this Phabricator ticket.

Thanks for your attention and have fun with Lexemes! Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 12:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #425

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • Lexicographical data:
      • Enabled Lua access to Lexemes for all Wikimedia projects
      • Continued work on improving the language search for Lexeme languages on the new Special:NewLexeme page (phab:T307869)
      • Improving the accessibility of a design system component and the new Special:NewLexeme page (phab:T290733)
      • Making it easier to understand what to do when the spelling variant isn't available on the new Special:NewLexeme page (phab:T298146)
    • REST API: Continuing work on making it possible to add a statement to an Item

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Admin activity

It seems that User:Cyberpower678/ActiveStats has not been updated since February 22nd. I dropped a note to Cyberpower678 at enwiki, but no response. I think admin activity should be monitored, to see if acitivity criteria are met. I know of at least one former admin who withdrew themselves, but I don't think that is how it is supposed to be. Any thoughts? Lymantria (talk) 13:54, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

How about Admin Stats? It seems to work. --Epìdosis 14:00, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Indeed. Lymantria (talk) 15:53, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
In the past I have developed a similar report, but it has never been deployed to any onwiki presence yet. User:MisterSynergy/activity/Administrator (and other pages) should now provide similar results. There are a couple of other inactivity policies which can be monitored as well.
  • Would this be useful to have regularly updated? If so, what is a good interval? It would be easy to set this up.
  • Any flaws observed? Please let me know.
—MisterSynergy (talk) 21:56, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
This is neat, MisterSynergy! It would be great if it updated is daily? --Lymantria (talk) 05:14, 21 June 2022 (UTC)
This should be set up right now. I am going to monitor it within the next days in order to make sure that nothing goes wrong here. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:10, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Choose qualifier when multiple values

Here is my answer to the archived question Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2022/06#How_to_access_a_chosen_qualifier_when_a_given_property_has_multiple_preferred_values:

Question

The example uses en:Template:Wikidata in Wikipedia to fetch the latest software version using the following:

This leads to multiple results:

  • {{wikidata|property|edit|reference|Q55671|P348}} gives: 5.1.2[1] Edit this on Wikidata
  • {{wikidata|qualifier|Q55671|P348|P577}} gives: 16 February 2018; 9 February 2019

Answer

To reduce the result from multiple results to one, you could for example choose stable version (Q2804309) or beta version (Q3295609) with version type (P548), e.g. P548=Q2804309 according to the syntax and options in en:Template:Wikidata.

References from examples

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 Error: Unable to display the reference properly. See the documentation for details.
  2. ↑ "Bugzilla 5.0.6 Release Notes". 9 February 2019. Retrieved 18 January 2021.

Robertsilen (talk) 06:58, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

When an event can occur

How can I relate pre-order (Q4376555) and pre-order period (Q112628344) to say that pre-orders can occur during the pre-order period?

An analogous relationship would be vote (Q42904171)can occur duringvoting period. Lectrician1 (talk) 14:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

We have something close with valid in period (P1264) View with SQID. author  TomT0m / talk page 18:48, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Desktopverbeteringen-update

Dit de nieuwe standaard maken

Hello. Ik wilde graag een update geven over het Desktopverbeteringen-project, waar het Wikimedia Foundation-webteam de afgelopen jaren aan heeft gewerkt. Ons werk is bijna klaar! 🎉

Wij zouden graag zien dat deze verbeteringen de standaard worden voor lezers en bewerkers op alle wiki's. In de komende weken zullen we gesprekken beginnen op meer wiki's, waaronder die van jou. 🗓️ We lezen graag uw suggesties!

Het doel van het project is om de interface uitnodigender en comfortabeler te maken voor lezers en nuttiger voor gevorderde gebruikers. Het project bestaat uit een reeks functieverbeteringen die het gemakkelijker maken om te lezen en te leren, binnen de pagina te navigeren, te zoeken, te wisselen van taal, artikeltabbladen en het gebruikersmenu te gebruiken, en meer. De verbeteringen zijn standaard al zichtbaar voor lezers en bewerkers op meer dan 30 wiki's, waaronder de Wikipedia's in het Frans, Portugees en Perzisch.

De wijzigingen zijn alleen van toepassing op de skin Vector. Monobook of Timeless worden niet beïnvloed.

De nieuwste functies
  • Inhoudsopgave - onze versie is gemakkelijker te bereiken, context van de pagina te verkrijgen, en door de pagina te navigeren zonder te hoeven scrollen. Het wordt momenteel getest op onze pilot-wiki's. Het is ook beschikbaar voor bewerkers die zich hebben aangemeld voor de Vector 2022-skin.
  • Paginahulpmiddelen - er zijn nu twee soorten links in de zijbalk. Er zijn acties en hulpmiddelen voor individuele pagina's (zoals Gerelateerde wijzigingen) en links van wiki-brede aard (zoals Recente wijzigingen). We gaan deze opsplitsen in twee intuïtieve menu's.
Hoe de verbeteringen te activeren
Global preferences
  • Het is mogelijk het op individuele wiki's te activeren op het tabblad Uiterlijk in de voorkeuren door "Vector (2022)" te selecteren. Het is ook mogelijk het op alle wiki's tegelijk te activeren met behulp van de Globale voorkeuren.
  • Op wiki's waar de wijzigingen standaard voor iedereen zichtbaar zijn, kunnen ingelogde gebruikers altijd teruggaan naar de oude Vector. Er is een gemakkelijk toegankelijke link in de zijbalk van de nieuwe Vector.
Leer meer en doe mee aan onze activiteiten

Als u de voortgang van ons project wilt volgen, kunt u zich abonneren op onze nieuwsbrief. U kunt de pagina's van het project lezen, onze FAQ bekijken, reageren op de project-overlegpagina, en deelnemen aan een online vergadering met ons.

Bedankt. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (overleg) 15:47, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Implicating/mentioning another in formal trial setting

Hi, looking at modelling how accused witches were named in a formal trial process. So the accused witch is defendant (P1591) but during their trial they mention/name/implicate/denounce other people who are subsequently investigated and then brought to trial themselves. And the cycle continues. From historical and legal point of view the nature of modelling this McCarthy-esque witch hunt of ""naming names"" is important and I'm wondering how to do this correctly given the current properties on legal terms and naming don't seem to cover this. Allegation or Denunciation or Mentioning or Implication comes closet I believe. In the Survey of Scottish Witchcraft we have 7 types of mention indicated during the trials:

  • Accomplice
  • Denounced
  • Consulted
  • Hired
  • Known witch
  • Witchcraft precedent
  • Previously tried

The vast majority are either indicated as accomplice or denounced. The property perpetrator (P8031) includes accomplice as an alias but perpetrator doesn't sit right with what is actually being alleged. One thought was to include the property of significant person (P3342) on a trial item to indicate people implicated during the trial process. And using qualifiers object has role (P3831) to link to the type of mention - accomplice (Q706884) or denunciation denunciation (Q1189956) etc. - and extra qualifier of sourcing circumstances (P1480) indicating this is allegedly (Q32188232). An example of what I mean is here trial of Mawsie Aslownae (Q43404889)
This would not help me add mentions of consulted, hired, known witch or witchcraft precedent but it goes some way to get the vast majority of mentions included. From legal/historical point of view of modelling, just wondering if anyone has thoughts on whether there is a better way and whether a property proposal of (1) alleges/allegation or (2) implicates or (3) mentions or (4) names might be appropriate... or misused. Implicates seems the most appropriate and least liable to misuse in my view but let me know what you think. Stinglehammer (talk) 10:25, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Qualified significant person (P3342) is IMO a good way to go. I'd be inclined to create a set of qualifier items for the project, so in trial of Mawsie Aslownae (Q43404889), 'denunciator':'person listed as denouncing a witch" ... and in the 'denunciator' item, part of (P361) Scottish Witchcraft Project dataset. No reason why consulted, hired, known witch &c cannot be covered in this way. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:19, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Edit Statistics and Analytics and metrics

I am wondering if there is a way to see edit statistics similar to Wikipedia's edit summary for a page. ScientistBuilder (talk) 02:10, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder: this? https://xtools.wmflabs.org/articleinfo/www.wikidata.org/Q42 --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:27, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Desktop Improvements update

Making this the new default

Hello. I wanted to give you an update about the Desktop Improvements project, which the Wikimedia Foundation Web team has been working on for the past few years. Our work is almost finished! 🎉

We would love to see these improvements become the default for readers and editors across all wikis. In the coming weeks, we will begin conversations on more wikis, including yours. 🗓️ We will gladly read your suggestions!

The goals of the project are to make the interface more welcoming and comfortable for readers and useful for advanced users. The project consists of a series of feature improvements which make it easier to read and learn, navigate within the page, search, switch between languages, use article tabs and the user menu, and more. The improvements are already visible by default for readers and editors on more than 30 wikis, including Wikipedias in French, Portuguese, and Persian.

The changes apply to the Vector skin only, although it will always be possible to revert to the previous version on an individual basis. Monobook or Timeless users will not notice any changes.

The newest features
  • Table of contents - our version is easier to reach, gain context of the page, and navigate throughout the page without needing to scroll. It is currently tested across our pilot wikis. It is also available for editors who have opted into the Vector 2022 skin.
  • Page tools - now, there are two types of links in the sidebar. There are actions and tools for individual pages (like Related changes) and links of the wiki-wide nature (like Recent changes). We are going to separate these into two intuitive menus.
How to enable/disable the improvements
Global preferences
  • It is possible to opt-in individually in the appearance tab within the preferences by selecting "Vector (2022)". Also, it is possible to opt-in on all wikis using the global preferences.
  • On wikis where the changes are visible by default for all, logged-in users can always opt-out to the Legacy Vector. There is an easily accessible link in the sidebar of the new Vector.
Learn more and join our events

If you would like to follow the progress of our project, you can subscribe to our newsletter. You can read the pages of the project, check our FAQ, write on the project talk page, and join an online meeting with us.

Thank you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 16:59, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Join us on Tuesday

Join an online meeting with the team working on the Desktop Improvements! It will take place on 28 June 2022 at 12:00 UTC and 19:00 UTC on Zoom. Click here to join. Meeting ID: 5304280674. Dial by your location. The following events will take place on 12 July and 26 July.

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes will be taken in a Google Docs file and copied to Etherpad. Olga Vasileva (the Product Manager) will be hosting this meeting. The presentation part will be given in English. At this meeting, both Friendly space policy and the Code of Conduct for Wikimedia technical spaces apply. Zoom is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy.

We can answer questions asked in English and a number of other languages. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the talk page or send them to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org. We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 21:42, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

WDQS backend update meeting rescheduled

Hi all! The online community meeting for the Wikidata Query Service backend update has been rescheduled for Monday June 27, 2022 at 18:00 UTC (link to the meeting).

The topic of the call will be the testing of the backend alternatives and the Blazegraph migration, and this will be also an opportunity to discuss the approach and the details, and to ask other questions about the Blazegraph alternatives work - such as how the Blazegraph-specific features and capabilities will (or will not) be supported. This will also be the last chance to talk to Andrea Westerinen, our Graph Consultant, before her contract expires! You can find more info about the latest WDQS backend updates here.

My sincere apologies for those who showed up last time, only to find the meeting to be canceled. As you know we were forced to cancel last-minute because of several people (me included) being ill, this time we hope it will go better. :)

See you there! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 11:18, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

Copyright question

So I have a couple scenarios that I would like to know the answer to, if they're able to be added to wikidata (not as a url but actual data)

1) For ex a phone manufacturer publishes a datasheet for their phone. The specifications on that document (what types of ports, version of bluetooth, screen resolution etc) (I'm guessing that's allowed?)

2) A website like Gsmarena that's already indexed data from datasheets like mentioned above (I'm guessing this is not allowed, as it's data owned by gsmarena, so only a link to gsmarena would be allowed, not actual data copy)

3) Data about a business (Opening hours, adres, phone number, etc..) on their own website (I'm guessing that's allowed)

4) Data about a business (..) on their Facebook/twitter/ig/.. page (I'm used to that being allowed to a certain degree on Openstreetmap, but that obv doesn't have an actual cc0 license like wikidata does. So I don't know about this one)

5) Let's say there is a photo of product box, that photo is on Commons with a CC by SA license. Taking information from that box photo, can that be used in Wikidata?

Thibaultmol (talk) 08:25, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

Named after

When an item 1 is named after an item 2, the field "named after" is filled in.

With regard to item 2, can we know if it is eponymous, i.e. if it is used to name an item ?

For example: 470 Kilia is named after Kiel.

Is Kiel used to name an asteroid? Nothing says it. Io Herodotus (talk) 11:56, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Well yes, something does say it, but for the most part only via a SPARQL report. The thing about WD is that it is linked data, and the full picture only emerges when the content of links to an item are considered alongside links within the item. There are good reasons why there is no reciprocal property for 'named after' ... consider Queen Victoria, after whom a huge number of things are called ... there's nothing to be gained by adding all of them to her WD item. Much better to point each instance of a thing named after her, at her item. WD is very much not wikipedia; one should not expect all information about an item to be within the item. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:20, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you.
That could be a good reason. However I think an item could be added, in the style of "award received", it could be "honour received". In many cases it could be useful (Kilia for instance).
What is a SPARQL report ?
--Io Herodotus (talk) 14:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
It is, for sure, easy to imagine the new property which could point from the source (person, thing) which gave its name to whatever it gave its name to. But as I say a) it's not necessary and b) it invites the compilation of long lists of property values within an item record, which for all sorts of UI and technical reasons is a bad thing. So - with some dishonourable exceptions (cough tributary (P974) and inflows (P200)) - WD does not encourage reciprocal properties in situations in which there are very-many to one ratios within the datasets to be linked.
SPARQL is the query language used to produce reports from wikidata; a SPARQL report interface for wikidata is at https://query.wikidata.org
Here, by way is example, is a report showing all main-belt asteroids whch are named after someone or something, together with a link to and identification of the thing they're named after (press the 'play' button).
If you're serious about wikidata, then knowing how to write SPARQL reports is fairly necessary. There's an excellent tutorial here - https://wdqs-tutorial.toolforge.org/ - and a helpdesk here - Wikidata:Request_a_query. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:52, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Using Youtube videos for described at URL (P973)

Youtube channels like https://www.youtube.com/c/Drachinifel and https://www.youtube.com/user/TheTankMuseum produce detailed videos on particular ships or tanks which are well regarded and curated and as good an introduction to their subjects as a Wikipedia page. Is their any reason I should not add them to the relevant articles using described at URL (P973) as I have at Marcílio Dias-class destroyer (Q110895911) and Churchill (Q696182). Are there notability/quality thresholds I should be aware of? Vicarage (talk) 11:57, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

IMO use of P973 is fairly subjective; if you think a video warrants a link b/c it is encyclopaedic & you regard the source as trusted, then all's good; do it. Consider whether it would be better to create or use an item for the source - 'TheTankMuseum youtube channel' - as a value for a described by source (P1343) statement, qualified with URL (P2699) pointing to the video (and perhaps media legend (P2096) & any other useful qualifiers). Arguably that would provide a better base for curating the set of links to the youtube channel. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:14, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks. I'm trying that for Churchill (Q696182), but I had to make The Tank Museum (Q112706730) a video recording (Q34508) to allow it to be a described by source (P1343), because YouTube channel (Q17558136) wasn't considered a valid source. Allowing group of works (Q17489659) to be a valid source would fix that, and I've flagged it. Vicarage (talk) 12:54, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Please migrate this property

Statistics Indonesia area code (P1588) should be migrated as identifier because the code is unique, published by Statistics Indonesia (Q3449895), a government department responsible for statistics. I've asked this at Wikidata:Identifier migration/1 but no response there. Hddty (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately there are 1335 non-distinct values as shown in this report — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:54, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
@MSGJ By migrating, hope that it will motivate editors to fix it so it would be like administrative code of Indonesia (P2588) (already an identifier) with few violations. Hddty (talk) 00:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Occupation: actor ?

I suggest that we only use actor and not divide it into television actor, film actor, voice actor, stage actor etc. I think they are too specific. Most notable actors have a carriere that includes several (in many cases all) of these fields. Ezzex (talk) 13:34, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

The more specific the better I think! If they have done various types of acting, you can add multiple values to the property — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree that using the property actor and adding qualifiers for tv/stage/film is best. Easier to write queries that way, and extra modes, like video game don't require new properties. Vicarage (talk) 18:57, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
No it is not. Voice actor is unsurprisingly a subclass of actor. The voice actor specialization is notable, meaning that it has to have its own Q-item, meaning you gain nothing from using a qualifier. I'm with MSGJ on this, I don't know what is the reason for the suggestion, but if has to do with too many items in the infobox, this is better solved on the local wiki. If you don't feel like adding many statements to the occupation, then it should be fine just adding 'actor' assuming you don't remove any more specific statements. Infrastruktur (talk) 12:45, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
On Commons and Wikipedia we love intersecting concepts. In Wikidata we have the option to use other properties to go deeper. So for example instance of (P31) is always set to human (Q5) for humans and not man (Q8441) or actor (Q33999), we use sex or gender (P21) and sex or gender (P21) for that. I would continue on that path and use field of work (P101).
Take for example Tom Hanks who has actor (Q33999) and a whole bunch of subclasses: film actor (Q10800557), voice actor (Q2405480), character actor (Q948329), television actor (Q10798782) & stage actor (Q2259451). Shouldn't we just have actor and put the relevant classes ("film acting", "voice acting" etc.) in field of work (P101)? Multichill (talk) 10:14, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
The problem with that approach is deciding which things count as separate professions and which are only fields of a larger profession. I would find it very strange to replace voice actor (Q2405480) with actor (Q33999), for example, because to me they seem like distinct roles which often have separate names (e.g. Schauspieler versus Sprecher in German, haiyū versus seiyū in Japanese, even English has terms like "voice artist", "voice performer" or "dubbing artist" for "voice actor") and while some actors sometimes do some voice work too, most of the voice artists I know of specialise in that and do very little, if any, standard acting (they're more likely to also be singers than actors).
I do think 18 best-ranked statements is excessive though. Is someone really going to list 18 things when asked what their occupation is? I would say the values which best describe a person's occupation should be set to preferred rank, so if, for example, someone specialises in television work, television actor (Q10798782) is fine, but if they do a broad range of different types of acting, actor (Q33999) should be set to preferred. - Nikki (talk) 05:36, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
P106 is not the conversational answer to "and what do you do?". It - quite reasonably - lists the occupations associated with the subject; such that users can, for instance, query to find items that have a P106 of (some flavour of) actor. In Tom Hanks case, 6 of the occupations are actor, or subclasses of actor. The remainder, writer, director, producer &c &c. It's not clear at all to me what problem would be solved by marking P33999 as preferred. It would, of course, prevent actor subclasses being returned in a query for truthy values. It would, equally, prevent the item from being selected in report looking for, say, truthy voice-actors. And yet Hanks is a voice-actor, and one would reasonably expect his item to turn up when using wdt:. And then, misapplied, Hanks would not be found as a director, producer, writer &c, if actor was set to preferred and other non-acting occupations were not set to preferred. All in all, using rank to ?solve this ?problem seems a poor suggestion fraught with easily forseeable downsides. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
It would be excellent if someone could set out exactly what the problem here is. Right now the OP says "I think they are too specific" and, err, that's it. If, as I had thought, WD is, in part, about specificity, then a single layer of actor subclasses and 6 actor values on Hanks' item does not seem to me to rise to the level of 'too specific'. Is there a problem? What is it? How does it manifest itself? Who is inconvenienced, and how? --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

First version of the program of the Data Quality Days (July 8-10)

Hello all,


A quick update about the upcoming Data Quality Days: a first version of the schedule is published on wiki. As you can see, we will have plenty of interesting sessions taking place during the event, such as:

  • the opening session where you can learn more about data quality and help us choose the topics we will discuss during the 3 conversation slots over the weekend;
  • a bunch of short presentations of projects and tools related to data quality;
  • various presentations from community members about queries, data modelling or cross-wiki issues;
  • a focus on data quality for Lexemes and on Entity Schemas, with presentations and workshops;
  • several slots for editing together, for example a constraint-athon;
  • a fun get-together where we will run quizes and games.

The event takes place online, on July 8-10, and is open to everyone who's interested in data quality on Wikidata. No registration is needed, but you can add yourself to the list of participants. If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to me.

We're looking forward to discussing data quality issues and processes with you! Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 08:08, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Describing membership benefits

For British house museums I'm noting when they are member of (P463) Historic Houses Association (Q5773523). Half the houses offer free access to members of the public who also join the association, half do not, and its a strong split on their website. Any suggestions on how I qualify each statement, some form of reward (P4444) perhaps? Would a new item gratis_entry_for_members be sensible, or use existing terms? Vicarage (talk) 04:55, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

I ended up only adding sites who offered free access to members. Vicarage (talk) 09:45, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
Not sure if we already have a good model for that. I tried using fee and that seems to be a better option than using payment types accepted. Multichill (talk) 09:56, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
@Multichill: applies to people (P6001) looks like a useful relevant qualifier here, to use with a fee (P2555) statement. Jheald (talk) 11:43, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
I struggled with this a bit as well when trying to model museums that give free access to members of International Council of Museums (Q653054). Right now what i did is create a special item for ICOM membership card (Q58220185) and then use that in combination with payment types accepted (P2851) like what Multichill mentioned (payment types accepted). But i think Multichill's solution to use fee (P2555) is probably better, because you're not paying with the card, you're getting free access because of your membership of the organization. Also, some museums tend to give a discount instead of free access, something that we could also model with fee (P2555). So yeah, fee (P2555) in combination with member of (P463) seems like the best solution. Husky (talk) 10:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Adding on to what @Jheald: is mentioning: applies to people (P6001) would be useful indeed. For example, some museums (like Stedelijk Museum Schiedam (Q2779535)) give free access to residents of the city where they're located. Husky (talk) 10:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Club was formed after a merger of two others club

Hello. Example, AEK Larnaca F.C. (Q291447) was formed after a merger of EPA Larnaca FC (Q2317850) and Pezoporikos Larnaca FC (Q2277220). I can show in EPA Larnaca FC (Q2317850) and Pezoporikos Larnaca FC (Q2277220) that they merged together to form AEK Larnaca F.C. (Q291447). See Q2317850#P576. But how can I show in AEK Larnaca F.C. (Q291447) that was created after the merger of the two other teams? Philocypros (talk) 15:31, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You can also use merged into (P7888) but I'm not aware of an inverse property to this — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:00, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
merged into (P7888) is about a subject that was dissolved and merged into the other object, that existed previously. It's not the same case. In my example A and B merged together and created C. Both A and B were dissolved. Philocypros (talk) 00:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
replaces (P1365) and replaced by (P1366)? Ghouston (talk) 10:55, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
You mean to use replaces (P1365) to item C, with values A and B; Philocypros (talk) 12:20, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Yes, and replaced by (P1366) to items A and B with value C — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

There are 53 properties ready for creation

Hi all

Category:Properties ready for creation lists 53 properties. Is there any way to clear this backlog or is there anything non property creators can do to help? I know a few people who cannot continue their projects until these properties have been created.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 09:51, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

We need more property creators. Do you know anyone who could help? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:25, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
@John Cummings I'm able to help on a few of those. Which are the ones holding you off? Tag me in the proposal discussions please and I'll be happy to help at least a little. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:38, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject for Unesco Intangible Heritage

I am planning to create a Wikiproject for Intangible Cultural Heritage (Q84036549). It would attempt to formalize the item structure for intangible heritage entries and keep the items on the three lists UNESCO Intangible Cultural Heritage Lists (Q4435332) updated on Wikidata. If you have worked on this topic elsewhere, or if there is a project for this already, let's join forces! I will create the Wikidata:WikiProject Intangible Cultural Heritage project hopefully during the day today. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 13:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Please help with popes

At Talk:Q19546 we have the official list of popes, but with 266 it is exhausting to fix all the errors. Some are duplicated because of bots, and some early popes have inconsistent start and end dates. I have started with the newest and am working down. You have to edit the entry for the pope to have it fixed in the list. RAN (talk) 23:18, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): for the early popes, be wary that for some of them the historical informations we have is meagre at best. I wouldn't be too suprised if they dates effectively overlap or if their are multiple contenders for the same period of time: it will all depends on the source used. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 19:15, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
@Jahl de Vautban @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) I'd also note that the list on the talkpage is going to seem a little weird before the 1500s: WDQS converts all its dates into "proleptic Gregorian" and doesn't know if they're Gregorian or Julian. It then reports that, via the bot, so eg if you look at John XXI (Q172916), his item reports 1276-09-27 to 1277-05-20, both Julian dates as they should be, but the talkpage list gives 1276-09-27 to 1277-05-27 - seven days difference. The "proleptic Gregorian" date isn't shown anywhere on WD for older Julian dates, just in the query service, so it can get very confusing figuring out what's going on.
There isn't any easy way to correct for this without either manual calculations or some quite substantial changes to WDQS, unfortunately... Andrew Gray (talk) 08:38, 22 June 2022 (UTC)
  • So sad to see the date problem is difficult to fix, but thanks for figuring it out! --RAN (talk) 01:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
  • This is a nasty gotcha, of which I was completely previously unaware. So there is no way in a query to display the Julian date that is entered on the item-page; and no warning that a conversion has been done. (cf https://w.wiki/5Lcr and then compare to the dates of death as shown on the items). That's a recipe for considerable confusion, not least when Wikidata content is reused. And a bug on this
    Tracked in Phabricator
    Task T246731
    has been opened (by users) since March 2020 (thanks @Tagishsimon:), but still no official take or plan from the project team as to what to do about it?
At the very least the documentation at mw:Wikibase/Indexing/RDF_Dump_Format#Value_representation and mw:Wikibase/Indexing/RDF_Dump_Format#Time ought to give a very clear warning about this. But it really ought to be possible to get the Julian-format date, as used on sources and entered on wikidata, out of WDQS. Paging @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE):. -- Jheald (talk) 09:07, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
Someone who doesn't understand rank had dicked around with a P31 rank for Peter. Now fixed. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:15, 25 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Thanks to @Melderick:, I've been able to put together a proof of concept query for getting WDQS to display a Julian date - example. It's not very efficient (it would need extended with one OPTIONAL pair every century or so, and ideally would use exact dates not rounded to years), but it does work OK for what it has to do. Not very helpful in this specific case but might be something useful to keep handy for any medieval queries. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:42, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #426

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • New requests for permissions/Bot:
      • William Avery Bot 7. Task/s: Merge multiple references on the same claim citing Accademia delle Scienze di Torino.
  • Tool of the week
    • IsisCB Explore - is a research tool for the history of science whose books and subjects use imagery from Wikidata.
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • Template Item documentation now includes a query to the corresponding lexemes. This is an attempt to make navigation between lexemes and items easier. For the record, Item documentation is available in the header of the talk page for each item.
  • Development
    • Lexicographical data: We are wrapping up the coding on the new Special:NewLexeme page. Testing and rolll-out will follow soon. We are still working on making it easier to find languages in the language selector on the Special:NewLexeme page. (phab:T307869)
    • REST API: We are continuing to code on the ability to create statements on an Item (phab:T306667)
    • Investigating an issue with labels not being shown after merges (phab:T309445)
    • Preparation for upcoming work: We are planning the next work on the Mismatch Finder to address feedback we have received so far as well as EntitySchemas to make them more integrated with other areas of Wikidata.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Merge request

Could somebody please merge Cotoneaster nan-shan (Q96201349) and Cotoneaster nan-shan (Q70866244) for me? I have never been able to get the merge to work. Thanks! Abductive (talk) 09:04, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

You've made just short of 10k wikidata edits. Probably time to work out what's going wrong with merge. What's going wrong with merge? See also help:merge. (And w.r.t. the instance issue, there does seem to be an issue of the two items having different taxon authors ... ideally that should be checked lest it indicate the merge is unsafe (although I see someone has already merged it, as if these things don't matter ... @Maculosae tegmine lyncis: does it not matter?)). --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
@Abductive @Tagishsimon I think it does matter. Also the taxon names have different spellings. I am reverting the merge for now. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:08, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál, @Tagishsimon, Plants of the World Online (Q47542613) lists the authors as "M.Vilm. ex Mottet", which constitutes good evidence that the two items are talking about the same entity. Auguste Louis Maurice Levêque de Vilmorin (Q4111351) is given as the author in Cotoneaster nanshan and Séraphin Joseph Mottet (Q21340334) is given as the author in Cotoneaster nan-shan. A hyphen is not considered something that makes a difference in biological nomenclature. Abductive (talk) 20:17, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
That all sounds excellent. But here's the thing: merge is the ideal time to fix issues like this. Farming out your merge, having your merge done by someone who doesn't seem to have apprehended that there was an issue here to address, is suboptimal. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I've tried and failed to merge items. I'll just wait until the merge widget or whatever it's called is improved. Abductive (talk) 03:57, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
@Abductive Effectively, you have proven that these are different taxon names, each with a different author. I am now more convinced that these are different taxon names. Indeed, Worldfloraonline keeps them separately : http://www.worldfloraonline.org/taxon/wfo-0001131693 and http://www.worldfloraonline.org/taxon/wfo-0001015841 . If you think they are synonyms (and you have sources showing that), you can join them with taxon synonym (P1420), but please do not merge them. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 05:54, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
They are the same, as they have the same authors. PoWO is the gold standard for flowering plants. But I will have no objections if you adjust the items as you propose above, and leave Cotoneaster nanshan as the rump item. All I wanted was to have only one item to add a wikilink to once I create the article on the English Wikipedia. Abductive (talk) 06:10, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
@Abductive I am on thin ice here as I am not a taxonomist, I just try to follow local Wikidata rules and some of them are pretty complex. Maybe @Succu would care to comment on this?Thanks Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 15:44, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Merged. BTW: Be carefull with any database. --Succu (talk) 05:32, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Have I done it right ?

Merging Creusa (Q28008079) and Creusa (Q10868993) Io Herodotus (talk) 07:33, 27 June 2022 (UTC)

No, you have not! There is a process to automatically merge items. You do not need to manually add/remove each statement and sitelink — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:24, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
@Io Herodotus let me know if I can help — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:29, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

spouse (P26) end cause (P1534) Q105080687 or Q105080700

Just noticed a number of spouse statements with these end cause qualifiers (for heterosexual marriages). Is there a specific reason for this? Usually I would add either death (Q4) or death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) on the spouse items depending on who died first. What's the recommended way to model deaths in marriages? Piecesofuk (talk) 09:11, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

It seems unnecessary and unhelpful to model marriage in a way that requires us identify the male and female participants. CC @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) as creator. Bovlb (talk) 14:57, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
  • When you see end_cause=death, you have to do a search to see who's death ended the marriage. His_death and her_death, answers the question, without the reader having to look at the death dates for the two people involved in the marriage to figure out who died first. Most Wikidata naïve readers will not be aware that death_of_spouse exists, and is the converse of "death". --RAN (talk) 16:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
    • @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): I don't think you're addressing the key point here. The model you propose requires checking the gender of the marriage participants and assumes, not only that both genders are known, but also that one is male and the other female. The check is an unnecessary indirection, and the assumptions, while commonly true, are not valid in the general case. Bovlb (talk) 16:50, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Same sex marriages make up a very tiny proportion of marriages, and can be handled any way you want. Same for any other nonconforming relationship. We require gender identification when we have instance_of=human, so gender is not unknown. In your model end_cause=death, we are always left wondering: who's death?, one died, but which one? When we have end_cause=divorce, it is clear both parties divorced. --RAN (talk) 17:00, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
    • @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): "Same sex marriages make up a very tiny proportion of marriages". While it is true that same sex (and non-binary) marriages are rare, we're on dangerous ground if we choose to design an ontological model that crucially depends on the assumption that they don't exist at all. Why would we want to do that? This is especially the case when the model in question is also inferior for other reasons (compared to Q4/Q24037741). Bovlb (talk) 17:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Calling it "dangerous ground" is hyperbole, we already have a half dozen reasons for marriage:end_cause, finding one that fits unambiguously and tersely for non binary marriages is a challenge, but not "dangerous ground". --RAN (talk) 21:40, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Note that death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) does exist, and should be used where applicable. An item "death of subject" might be appropriate, if it is indeed the subject of the item who has died. Jheald (talk) 21:43, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
"so gender is not unknown" there's ~1312 humans on Wikidata whose gender is unknown, so there's still a possibilty of the gender not being known 🔥HOTm̵̟͆e̷̜̓s̵̼̊s̸̜̃🔥 (talk) 17:21, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
  • We already have massive confusion surrounding "object has role" versus "subject has role" and it will be the same for "death of subject" and "death of object". "Death of subject", I assume would be the person with the Q-number at the top of the page, and the object would be the person listed as spouse? --RAN (talk) 12:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Jura1 created that entry in an attempt to clarify the issue. The problem with death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) is the placement, since it appears with information on the spouse, some were interpreting it as the death of the spouse's spouse. --RAN (talk) 21:50, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
  • "Their death" unfortunately is also ambiguous, it was suggested at one point in English Wikipedia for infoboxes, but even in that debate people were unsure which of the two parties was "their", the person with the Wikipedia entry, or the person listed as "spouse". The problem was that the information appears next to the spouse name, where we store the marriage information and people were thinking "their" was the spouse. The problem is the balance between being terse and being unambiguous. The best would be "death of the person who is listed at the top of this Wikidata entry and not the person that they are married to". I don't see why we can't have a different set of parameters for same sex marriages. We have multiple options to choose from for "gender=", we can have multiple options for marriage:end_cause. --RAN (talk) 21:14, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
    • You make a good point about infoboxes. It is tricky to see how to communicate that information tersely yet clearly. I was considering it from the perspective of crafting queries. It makes no sense that one would have to write one query for male-female marriages, and a different query for same-sex or non-binary marriages. That just leads to having them excluded from query results. It also makes no sense to encode the data in a way that requires the query to also check the genders of the participants. Wikidata's ontological model isn't just for infoboxes. We can't have a different data representation for a minority group. It's not at all the same thing as having multiple options for gender, because it is exclusive rather than inclusive. Bovlb (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
  • I am sure we will come up with a terse and unambiguous version that satisfies all types of marriages, but we have not found it yet. --RAN (talk) 02:29, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
    • It's going to be a heavy lift to satisfy "all types of marriage" – none of our proposals or existing representations handle plural marriage (well) – but it's not clear to me that same-sex or non-binary marriages should be regarded as different types of marriage. I'm only distinguishing them here because you've managed to construct an ontological model that doesn't represent them. Piecesofuk's model does not distinguish them. Bovlb (talk) 16:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
I thought "death of spouse" solved the problem, but if you search for the debate, you will find the objections where at least one person thinks that it means the "death of the spouse's spouse" because it appears under the name of the spouse. The debate about terse vs. ambiguous is still found with "object has role" and "subject has role" which still confounds me. --RAN (talk) 15:32, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
We're talking about two different issues here, and I think it's important to distinguish them. The first is: Do we have a data representation that is efficient, unambiguous, and expressive enough to cover all cases? Death (of self)/death of spouse satisfies that, whereas his death/her death fails all three arms. The second is: Is the information clearly conveyed via some interface, such as an infobox? Your concern is that death (of self)/death of spouse is widely misinterpreted, whereas his death/her death is understood by all, at least in most cases. Your concern is valid, and I take this issue seriously, but I don't think we can resolve it at the expense of the first issue. Our mission at Wikidata is not (just) to generate text for humans can understand. Perhaps it would help if you shared this infobox with us and pointed us to the debate; presumably both can be found on one of our many client projects. Bovlb (talk) 18:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
It only appears clear because you are looking at the paired terms. When you see death of subject (Q99521170) in isolation, you ask: "which person?" The person at the top of the page, or the person where the label has been attached, the spouse, where the actual start and stop dates for the marriage appear. Less so with death of subject's spouse (Q24037741), but at the debate we had people assuming it was referring to the spouse's spouse, because of where it appears. --RAN (talk) 06:09, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): It appears that five users (me, Piecesofuk, Infovarius, Vicarage, Jheald) broadly agree on the appropriate data representation here, with only you in disagreement. You appear to be primarily concerned with the effect this data representation has on some infobox. Do you intend to provide any information about this? Setting aside the infobox, do you intend to engage with the more important data representation issue? Bovlb (talk) 17:50, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
At this point we are just repeating our talking points. Enough information is here for third parties to make up their own minds. "Address any of the points": You can look at an infobox yourself, I don't need to link to one, and I don't need to show you a query, we both agree that there is only a small portion of marriages listing spouses, and an even smaller subset with end_date, and an even smaller subset with end_date that actually use end_cause. No query will give any meaningful information because of the inherent incompleteness of the data. My final summary: there is no good end_cause=death that is both terse and unambiguous. I was happy with "death of spouse", but one person was very vocal that it was ambiguous to them as referring to the "spouse's spouse", look for the guy that objected to it in the previous debate over the issue, and convince them. --RAN (talk) 01:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Bovlb (talk) 16:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree that this is a possible solution but I think there are problems with both death of subject (Q99521170) and death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) that need fixing beforehand. Death of Person seems to be defined by its description and not its statements, also its description seems to contradict its purpose as it refers to the Q-object and not the subject which I believe is what it is supposed to refer to. Also death in office (Q5247364) is currently sub-classing Death of Person which I think is wrong if Death of Person is the opposite of Death of Spouse. Also Death of spouse needs fixing and it is not currently a subclass of death (Q4).
Would it help if Death of Person is renamed as Death of Subject and Death of Spouse is renamed as Death of Subject's Spouse. Piecesofuk (talk) 18:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
All good points.
"Would it help if Death of Person is renamed as Death of Subject and Death of Spouse is renamed as Death of Subject's Spouse" - Not opposed to that renaming. The intent is the important thing for me.
It makes sense for death in office (Q5247364) to be a subclass of Death of Person, because they are both end causes associated with the subject dying; we need to have Q5247364 because it has a sitelink, but it doesn't need to be an end cause. This feels like it is a separable issue.
"Death of Person seems to be defined by its description and not its statements" - Agreed, but an ongoing problem in any ontology, and arguably separable.
"its description seems to contradict its purpose as it refers to the Q-object and not the subject which I believe is what it is supposed to refer to - Strictly speaking, given that this is used as a qualifier value, it is the subject (Q-item) of the subject (a full statement) or the qualifier, but I'm happy to refer to it as the subject, as that works both ontologically and colloquially. I agree that referring to it as "object", while true in another sense, is confusing in this context.
Do we ever have a need for subject/object end causes for other properties representing human relationships, e.g. doctoral advisor (P184)? Bovlb (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Death of subject is as inherently confusing as "Subject has role" and "Object has role", even when shown as a pair, are confusing. I thought subjects were for people and objects for places and things, and so did others based on the usage. You also keep saying we have reached consensus, when we clearly have not. I understand you are eager to end the debate, but I do not think consensus has been reached. Several people have offered their opinions, but they are still offering tentative and diverse solutions. --RAN (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
    The subject is always the Q-item that you are viewing, the objects are the values of each of the properties of that item. The subject will become the object when viewed from another Q-item that uses it as a property value. If I'm viewing the spouse statement of Douglas Adams from within Q42 then Douglas Adams is the subject and his wife Jane Belson is the object. If I view the spouse statement of Jane Belson Q14623681 then she is the subject and Douglas Adams is the object. So since Douglas Adams died first the end cause on Q42 is Death of Person (Subject) and on Q14623681 the end cause will be Death of (Subject's) Spouse (or we could state it as Death of Object). Piecesofuk (talk) 15:06, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
  • Perhaps death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) could be paired with "named as" so we know which partner in the marriage pair. Also perhaps a way to mark same sex marriages without having to click on the spouse to look at their gender. --RAN (talk) 19:16, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
    • "Perhaps death of subject's spouse (Q24037741) could be paired with "named as" so we know which partner in the marriage pair." This is a confusing suggestion for two reasons. You seem to be suggesting that when a marriage ends through death, this fact is documented somehow and the dead partner is named in a way we should record. Secondly, the purpose of this is to identify which participant is the spouse of the subject, which makes no sense as it is recorded already. "Also perhaps a way to mark same sex marriages without having to click on the spouse to look at their gender." This seems an orthogonal suggestion. Same sex marriages can already be queried (to some extent), and there are somewhat more than two types of marriage (with respect to the sexes of the participants). Some marriages change category. What problem is this trying to solve? Do you want to mark same sex marriages differently in infoboxes? Are there any other contexts in which we regularly annotate people with their sex? Bovlb (talk) 07:09, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Confusion of trade unionism (Q49780) and Category:Trade unions (Q6467567)

Based on wikilinks there seems to be some confusion between trade unionism (Q49780) and Category:Trade unions (Q6467567). I noticed this via something that came up on Commons, where a French-speaker had used commons:Category:Syndicalism (Q49780) where commons:Category:Trade unionism (Q6467567) would be more appropriate. But I see that trade unionism (Q49780) is linked to fr:Syndicalisme, which is more related to Q6467567, with the name being a false cognate. I doubt French is the only language where these links line up wrong. Also, commons:Category:Trade unionism might not line up entirely well with the concept represented by Q6467567, in that commons:Category:Trade unionism is perhaps more about activism than theory. Someone may wish to take this on. - Jmabel (talk) 23:23, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Creation of a new class item for instances of a "performance hall"

The performing arts community is considering the creation of new class item for the concept of a "performance hall", which would be defined as room within a building that includes the stage and the audience space. This class would be a subclass of event venue (Q18674739). This idea is further described in this document.

We will be meeting on June 23 at 13:00 - 15:00 UTC to discuss these and other venue-related questions. Everyone is welcome to attend (Zoom information). You may also share your thoughts in this discussion thread.

Beat Estermann
Affom
Vladimir Alexiev
Birk Weiberg
Smallison
Daniel Mietchen
Buccalon
Jneubert
Klaus Illmayer
Katikei
GiFontenelle
Antoine2711
Fjjulien
Youyouca
Vero Marino
Celloheidi
Beireke1
Anju A Singh
msoderi
Simon Villeneuve
VisbyStar
Gregory Saumier-Finch
Rhudson
DrThneed
Pakoire
Gabriel De Santis-Caron
Raffaela Siniscalchi
Aishik Rehman
YaniePorlier
SAPA bdc
Joalpe
bridgetannmac
Nehaoua dlh28
LiseHatt
Zblace
Bianca de Waal
MichifDorian

Notified participants of WikiProject Performing arts Fjjulien (talk) 21:27, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

Certainly sounds like an item which is missing - good idea to create — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:56, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
@MSGJ Thank you for your input. Fjjulien (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2022 (UTC)
The WikiProject Performing arts community met today meeting to discuss this question (see the minutes). There was consensus that a new class item describing a "performance hall" is needed to meet the information needs of the performing arts sector. It will for example for example, make it possible to associating a maximum capacity (P1083) with a specific room as opposed to an entire building. It was deliver cleaner query results and will therefore enable more efficient data reuse.
The suggested description for the concept is:
  • (en) performance hall: "room intended for the presentation of live performances before an audience, generally comprising an audience space and a stage space"
  • (fr) salle de spectacle: « salle destinée à des représentations de spectacles devant public qui comporte généralement une scène et un espace pour les spectateurs »
This concept will be the same as Grand dictionnaire terminologique ID (P9900): 17061281. The Getty Art and Architecture Thesaurus was contacted in advance of the meeting and decided to create a record for the concept: AAT_300449028. The class item will be maintained by WikiProject (P6104): WikiProject Cultural venues (Q107031691).
This discussion and the minutes of the meeting will be documented in the discussion page of the WikiProject Cultural venues.
Beat Estermann (talk) 22:21, 31 March 2017 (UTC) Beireke1 (talk) Beireke1 (talk) 12:07, 2 May 2017 (UTC) - collaborating with Romaine on Belgian data on performing arts venues. Affom (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC) Anvilaquarius (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2017 (UTC) PEAk99(talk) PEAK99 (talk) 20:32, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Boxomi (talk) 22:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC) Antoine2711 (talk) 00:19, 5 December 2019 (UTC) Fjjulien (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2020 (UTC) Vero Marino (talk) 21:15, 13 February 2020 (UTC) Bello Na'im (talk) 08:34, 24 September 2021 (UTC) Titanboo (talk) 17:23, 8 July 2022 (UTC) dlh28 (talk)18:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Cultural venues
I will wait until tomorrow to create the new class item. If you have any thoughts or suggestions about the labels, the descriptions, the alias or the statements for this class item, please share them here. Fjjulien (talk) 17:22, 23 June 2022 (UTC)

"Salle de spectacle" as well as "performance hall" are widely used in their languages for the whole building as well. There will be lots of confusion. --Anvilaquarius (talk) 09:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)

There are lots of buildings which contain more than one performance hall, so I think the distinction is important. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:03, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
@Anvilaquarius I am too well aware of the confusion that exists with the French expression « salle de spectacle ». Similar confusion is experienced with many terms associated with event buildings and rooms (for example "theatre"). However, as @MSGJ pointed out, many performing arts buildings contain more than one performance space (see National Arts Centre (Q105547738)). Moreover, the performing arts community identified several rationales supporting the creation of this class:
  • Performance halls often have a distinct name from the building.
  • Places announced as locations for live performances are very often performance halls rather than the whole building.
  • Technical information such as room capacity and stage dimensions are specific to each performance hall, not to the building as whole.
  • Many industry datasets hold records of entities that are instances of performance halls.
  • And event venue (Q18674739) is too broad and messy to be used by the industry as an alternative to a conceptually clear "performance hall" class. Among other things, this item has too many subclasses that are not related to the performing arts. It is not clear and specific enough to enable data reuse.
Altogether, this class item will serve many structural needs within Wikidata and it will enable better data reuse by the performing arts industry. Fjjulien (talk) 16:50, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
✓ Done: performance hall (Q112688641) created. Fjjulien (talk) 18:42, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
After originally supporting this idea, I now find that we have auditorium (Q230752) which I think is the same concept? Can they be merged or is there a distinction? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:55, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
@Fjjulien your thoughts please? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 04:18, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
@MSGJ The term "auditorium" is not associated with a clearly delineated concept. Although the Wikidata descriptions appear to be relatively similar to the newly created "performance hall" class, other sources provide broader or narrower definitions.
  • The Art & Architecture Thesaurus describes auditoriums rather loosely as: "Rooms or entire buildings designed for a variety of activities such as would occur on a stage before a seated audience; for rooms or buildings used only for theatrical performances, use "theaters;" for rooms with fixed seating designed for lectures, use "lecture halls.""
  • The entry for auditorium in Encyclopedia Britannica is narrower: "Auditorium, the part of a public building where an audience sits, as distinct from the stage, the area on which the performance or other object of the audience’s attention is presented."
  • The EN Wikipedia article for theater (structure) concords with the entry in Encyclopedia Britannica. It affirms the seating area is “known as the auditorium or the house”.
  • During a web search for the terminology associated with performing arts buildings, I found a typology designed by Alta Integra, which says: “Auditorium or Audience Area (audience) where the audience sits to see performers performing the action.”
As you can read from these various sources there is no consensus on the definition of "auditorium" as a concept. I think it would be fair to say that performance halls can also be known as auditoriums (and I listed this term in the series of English aliases). However, the two items are definitely not close enough to be deemed said to be the same as (P460). If anything, I would rather state performance hall (Q112688641)different from (P1889)auditorium (Q230752).
As to the Art & Architecture Thesaurus's suggestion of using "theaters" for performing arts auditoriums, this concept is usually defined as an entire building - which did not meet our information needs either.
The performing arts community met several times since March 2021 to discuss the modelling of architectural structures. We considered both of these options (auditorium and theatre) along with many other options to represent performance spaces, but none was clearly defining the concept that we needed. In order to achieve conceptual clarity (and data quality), we therefore agreed that it was necessary to create a new class. We are in contact with the Art & Architecture Thesaurus to ensure that the term also appears in the thesaurus. Fjjulien (talk) 14:13, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
Okay, no problem, you have obviously thought and researched extensively on this. I agree that auditorium can be used just for the seating area. In general, where there is doubt about the scope of an item, I defer to how the sitelinks describe the item. This also embeds the meaning of the item in different languages. It would be great if there were some sitelinks we could add to the new item. How about performance hall (Q112688641)has part(s) (P527)auditorium (Q230752) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:37, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
@MSGJ: I rather chose to state performance hall (Q112688641)has part(s) (P527)audience space (Q112688943). "Audience space" is a clearly scoped, unambiguous term in the Art & Architecture Thesaurus. The term itself is self-explanatory. I thought it was a preferable value over auditorium (Q230752), whose label is fraught with polysemy. I looked at site links various languages that I am familiar and definitions are quite inconsistent. enwiki describes the term as a "room built to enable an audience to hear and watch performances" (which could be interpreted to be the same concept as a performance hall). itwiki defines it as a concert hall. dewiki and eswiki have definitions that are more closely aligned with the concept of audience space (Q112688943). Based on these two wikis (and other sources), it would be fair to state that audience space (Q112688943)said to be the same as (P460)auditorium (Q230752) (and vice-versa). However, for the purpose of clearly communicating the scope of Q112688943, I believe the relationship with audience space (Q112688943) will be more effective. Fjjulien (talk) 13:51, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
A colleague of mine has volunteered to explore site links that could be redirected to performance hall (Q112688641). frwiki and rowiki are two good candidates. There might be others.
We also need to find the right site link to Wiki Commons, which could be challenging. The category hierarchy Category:Performance_spaces does not match the class hierarchy of performance hall (Q112688641).
We will finally also have too look for Wikidata items that could be stated subclasses performance hall (Q112688641). @Vero Marino is working on this. I am recommending that we do not state ambiguous "room and/or building" classes as subclasses of Q112688641. For example, concert hall (Q1060829) would not be subclass of "performance hall". However, concert hall (Q10547643), could. In order to optimize data reuse outside of Wikidata, we must be careful not to unintentionally capture entire buildings in our queries. Fjjulien (talk) 14:11, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Use of the terms 'pro-life' and 'pro-choice' on WD

I have noticed there are several items that uses both words in description or label. Do you others think this is something that should be avoided? Or are the terms within the scope of our policy of NPOV? --Trade (talk) 18:59, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Does WD have an NPOV policy? If so, not easy to find. Whether or not, WD data should be NPOV. On this issue, the BBC style guide says "Avoid pro-abortion, and use pro-choice instead. Campaigners favour a woman's right to choose, rather than abortion itself. And use anti-abortion rather than pro-life, except where it is part of the title of a group's name."[1] That seems to be a sensible approach. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:46, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I assume there is a policy? People have definitely been banned for it before here. --Trade (talk) 20:18, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
Help:Description has related content, but it's not a formal policy. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:39, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
I think this is actually an unreasonable policy, because it's predicated on "use the language that one group uses for itself and then not the language that another group uses for itself". Why is this NPOV? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:39, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
I agree, whatever you think of the issue, this doesn't seem neutral. Consider if we followed some hypothetical FOX News policy, no idea if it actually exists, and called one side "pro-abortion" and the other side "pro-life"; I'm assuming everyone would agree that is a bad idea. Although actually, I don't even know if pro-lifers object to being called "anti-abortion". 98.170.164.88 17:56, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
So, what? You think the BBC does not strive to be impartial, you think they have a dog in the race? And here you are giving us some sort of bullshit equivalence argument. smh. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:02, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
The BBC may have a bit of a center-left bias, see Wikipedia (in particular the paragraph quoting Mark Thompson) and mediabiasfactcheck. But that's sort of irrelevant. My stance is just that we should apply the same standards to both sides. Either use both of the euphemisms (pro-life, pro-choice) or use more direct language for both (anti-abortion, pro-abortion-rights). The latter is what the English Wikipedia does, btw. Anyway, I was passing through and did not mean to create trouble, sorry. 98.170.164.88 18:17, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
It will depend on the context, a lot of them are titles of articles. What are the problematic ones? Ghouston (talk) 10:50, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
anti-abortion activist (Q61958570) and abortion rights activist (Q63619823). And the items that uses the terms in descriptions of course @Ghouston:--Trade (talk) 21:54, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
I'd prefer labels that mention abortion, i.e., the current aliases, which are anti-abortion activist and abortion rights activist. Ghouston (talk) 10:45, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Hard to find translation

Some of official language (Q23492) in Mexico (Q96) are Spanish (Q1321) and Nahuatl (Q13300). I wish to add the Nahuatl (Q13300) official name (P1448) in Mexico national football team (Q164089) but I can't find the translation... Is there someone that can kindly help me? Many, many and many thanks in advance!!! 2001:B07:6442:8903:5113:8223:C0A6:1A53 14:31, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Extracting Q numbers from a wikipedia category

I'm trying to ensure all Royal Navy ships have a vessel class (P289) property. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Tribal-class_destroyers_(1905) shows there are 13 destroyers in the class, but WD only has one with value Tribal-class destroyer (Q953894). How at the linux command line can I get set of Q numbers starting from a Wikipedia category page, so I can create the QuickStatments to add the vessel classes? I could do a wget and parse the output for pages, wget and parse each of them, but I guess this is a solved problem. Vicarage (talk) 13:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

To answer my own question, as it was easier than I thought
curl -s "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Beagle-class_destroyers" > category.txt
grep HMS category.txt | grep href | sed -Ee 's`.*href="/wiki/([^"]*).*`\1`' > ships.txt
while read LINE; do
Q=$(curl -s https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$LINE | grep -i wikidata | grep sitelinks | sed -Ee 's`.*/(Q[^#]*).*`\1
`')
echo "$Q|P289|Q812904 /* $LINE */"
done < ships.txt Vicarage (talk) 14:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
Or you can use Petscan: [2] Ayack (talk) 14:07, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
A third approach if you like the flexibility of command-line text manipulation tools, but would like to avoid the inefficiency of downloading entire pages and parsing them would be something like this:
Obtain the list of articles in the category from pywikibot, alternatively you can query the API instead, but pywikibot handles continuations on long lists.
pwb.py -family:wikipedia -lang:en listpages -catr:"Tribal-class destroyers (1905)" -ns:0 -format:3 > category.txt
Then replace the values in a query like this, to do exact matching on all the article names in one go, to obtain the corresponding Q-IDs.
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?name ?article 
WHERE {
  VALUES ?name {
    "Keplers lover"@nb
    "Newtons bevegelseslover"@nb
    "Newtons gravitasjonslov"@nb
  }
  ?article schema:name ?name;
    schema:about ?item; 
    schema:isPartOf <https://no.wikipedia.org/>.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "nb,en". }
}
Try it!
Infrastruktur (talk) 22:48, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Can the stop route be marked on Wikivoyage?

No marked has appeared on Wikivoyage before, but Wikidata seems to list every station in the route, resulting in a large number of gray marks on the map of Wikivoyage, and also causing the lag situation to occur. Could it want to stop appearing with similar stations(gray marker)? Maybe Wikipedia needs this part, but we at Wikivoyage don't need it! thanks.(Example, please wait about 1 mins, the route have a gray marker, but this is from the marker points provided by wikidata, Wikivoyage don't need it) Yuriy kosygin (talk) 16:38, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Adjacent maps

Please see some questions I have raised at c:Commons:Village pump#Adjacent maps, about modelling the adjacency of map images in structured data. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Answered on Commons. Suggest shares border with (P47) with qualifier direction relative to location (P654), as used on items like Wem (OSD 326) (Q106156682) for maps in c:Category:Ordnance Survey Drawings.
This has allowed queries like Adjacency map of drawings in the category header; and could also allow a navigation template to let users click from map to map. Jheald (talk) 20:30, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Items left over after merge

Hello, @Pasleim is taking a wikibreak and his bots (either DeltaBot or PLbot) stopped fixing "leftover items" created due to this issue. As a result, empty items such as Alice Springs (Q112352028) are accumulating in Wikidata. Does anyone have any interim or long-term solution to this? It would be great to decrease the number of items with no sitelink and no statement. Thank you, Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:11, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Looks like we need another bot operator for this job. Is Pasleim's source code publicly available? —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:51, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy Yes, it seems to be this code: https://github.com/Pascalco/DeltaBot/blob/master/uncompleteMerges.py Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:01, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Is this task a candidate for scheduled running as an automated cronjob on Toolforge's Kubernetes? I already run a pywikibot bot in that fashion and can advise on how to implement that, or do it myself, if required. William Avery (talk) 10:50, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
@William Avery If you could, it would be great. I think it can be automated without further approval as it has been running like this for years and seems to have been approved as a bot job at one point. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:13, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
I think a new task approval would be nice to have. The source code looks pretty dated, but I can try as well whether I could add this to my bot jobs. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:44, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Thank you both! Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:18, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
Okay I could, but User:DeltaBot has become active again and this job was run today. Maybe User:Pasleim can report what the situation is. Anyways, the backlog of the past 30 days is cleared, but there is likely a period in May and maybe earlier that is not easily accessible anymore to look after as well. There is also another, similar job/script at https://github.com/Pascalco/DeltaBot/blob/master/missingRedirect.py which was also run today.
That said, many of the empty items that we currently have seem to be waiting for a deletion process. I think that the lack of DeltaBot activity is not the main reason why the number of empty items has grown so much. —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:44, 28 June 2022 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy That's good news, happy to see that some redirects are now fixed. It is also true that older merges such as Category:Cities in Friuli-Venezia Giulia (Q9992831) are not fixed any more. Is it possible to access history of items to see where they should be redirected to? For the remainder, I'd be in favor of a mass deletion (we cannot nominate these 11,000 items one by one) but it would be preferable to exclude items linked from a different item from the deletion request. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:28, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
  • The bot uses the recentchanges table of MediaWiki to find modified items that should be redirected. Since only revisions of the past 30 days are contained in that table, older edits are much more difficult to access. It's not impossible, but clearly more difficult.
  • Right now there seem to be two criteria that DeltaBot looks for:
    1. In uncompleteMerges.py, it looks for revisions where a sitelink has been removed. If the item has no more sitelinks and all former sitelinks have been migrated to the same target item (and the item passes a couple of additional background checks), then the item is merged with said target item.
    2. In missingRedirect.py, it looks for merge edits by other users that for some reason did not result in a redirect. This sometimes happens for reasons I cannot remember at the moment (but it's a known issue). DeltaBot simply completes these mergers.
  • Re. deletion: I am actually routinely looking after such items for quite a while, but a backlog of 11k is indeed a lot and this will take some time. We need more admins :-)
—MisterSynergy (talk) 10:05, 29 June 2022 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy I've scraped the query results to obtain the destination QIDs from the page histories. I've got about 1000 items where a merge attempt was made at User:Vojtěch_Dostál/to-merge. I hope it's mostly right (I've excluded items which had multiple merges in their page history). None of the tools I am using (QuickStatements, Wikibase-CLI) are able to do these merges, probably because they are empty items. Can you give it a go? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:16, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
P.S. Maybe you could do a further filter on those based on "last-edited" (these last edits should be all in the time window at the end of May). Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:19, 30 June 2022 (UTC)
These kind of jobs shouldn't be run under a personal bot account, but should be running under a shared account. That way if you can have multiple maintainers and it doesn't all depend on one person. Multichill (talk) 17:39, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Request for data import: US census surname information

Hello,

Over at the English Wiktionary there is an ongoing discussion about surname frequency data, which is included on a number of pages (e.g. wikt:Alvarez#English).

It is quite simple to download and parse the whole US census surname data for 2010 [3] or 2000 [4] (warning: large files!). Could someone please import this into the system somehow so we can access it from a Lua module instead of hardcoding the stats on each page? 98.170.164.88 17:45, 28 June 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2022/06&oldid=1672943151"