Talk:Q180

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Autodescription — Wikimedia Foundation (Q180)

description: American charitable organization
Useful links:
See also


ISNI[edit]

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q180&diff=708609912&oldid=701216597

Not about WMF

http://www.isni.org/000000044914788X 

ISNI: 0000 0004 4914 788X
Name: Wikipedia
Location / Nationality: United States California San Francisco
Notes:

80.171.201.233 20:24, 9 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Too many owner of (P1830) values[edit]

Can't we clean up them? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:31, 15 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: I agree, this isn't going anywhere. The fact that an inverse property exists of owned by (P127) doesn't mean that we should add all inverse values. Multichill (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Wikimedia foundation a academic discipline[edit]

This item appears to be academic discipline (Q11862829). I guess it is an error. Am I wrong? PAC2 (talk) 07:02, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that isn't right. I'll remove it. --LydiaPintscher (talk) 15:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Subsidiary[edit]

@Newt713, @Jklamo, I cannot find reliable sources that Wikimedia Korea, Wikimedia Deutschland, Wikimedia Sverige, Wikimedia Spain are en:subsidiary. They are officially independent organization (associations), but can use name "Wikimedia" and etc. For example, "Wikimedia chapters [33 38] are independent organizations founded to support and promote the Wikimedia projects in a specified geographical region (in most cases, a country)". Proeksad (talk) 17:14, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's still unclear or inconsistent how to map international NGO-Networks. The same problem occurs with World Wide Fund for Nature (Q117892), Greenpeace (Q81307)... An alternative to has subsidiary (P355)/parent organization (P749), which is used most of the time is the vague has part(s) (P527)/part of (P361). This is what I prefer, since every organization is organized differently (by membership, association agreement, ownership, licence agreements / bottom up, top down). Best --Newt713 (talk) 07:31, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Newt713, infoboxes in articles usually use one term: es:Filial, ru:Дочерние общества, ar:شركة تابعة (they don't use two or more). Similar problem with commercial organizations, because they also often do not clarify or often change their connections. Proeksad (talk) 15:29, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
How did you choose 4 chapters out of 38? Proeksad (talk) 19:44, 8 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Proeksad es:Filial is connected to subsidiary (Q658255), which is en:subsidiary. The 4 out of 38 were just the existing properties at the time. --Newt713 (talk) 10:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, but you can not specify a detailed and clear explanation of what is meant in infoboxes. For example, es:Fundación Wikimedia, ru:Фонд Викимедиа, ar:مؤسسة ويكيميديا and etc. Proeksad (talk) 18:27, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia Foundation as model for nonprofit finances[edit]

I am requesting comments on the correctness of the data modeling here for nonprofit finances. Everything here looks good to me, but I wanted to request community comment before presenting this as a model to replicate for other organizations. The Wikimedia Community has an interest in this organization, so this might be a good test case and example.

Here are some example claims in this item right now, made for point in time (P585) 2021 and in United States dollar (Q4917) -

The reference for all of these is Wikimedia_Foundation_FY2020-2021_Audit_Report

WikiProject Companies presents a list of suggested properties on its data model page, including these other properties in use for some other organizations.

I am pinging the following WikiProjects for comment, and also, eventually I hope to present this case as an example and for discussion at all of these places:

Here are the questions: Does this look accurate? Should I encourage the import of data in this way for other organizations? Bluerasberry (talk) 19:18, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the last question: No. 77.11.119.127 19:28, 5 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Generally, model items should have no constraint violations, so I think the current violations should be solved before this item is recommended as a model item. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:07, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hey @Bluerasberry:, sorry I only found this discussion now. Thank you for your initiative! You could add endowment (P6589), even though that's not applicable for the Wikimedia Foundation. In many jurisdictions (especially in Europe), there is the concept of an untouchable endowment for foundations. This capital cannot be spent, the organization can only live from the interests.
Perhaps it would be interesting to prioritize the properties, when presenting it as a model. total revenue (P2139) and donations (P8093) might be more relevant and NPO-specific than others more used to evaluate for-profits. Best Newt713 (talk) 08:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Bitcoin should no longer be accepted, but it is[edit]

See https://bitpay.com/464448/donate also see https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Requests_for_comment/Stop_accepting_cryptocurrency_donations#The_link_still_works 2A00:1370:8184:3AB2:183D:9999:474C:D5A3 23:12, 14 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q180&oldid=2038964181"