Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2016/06

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.

Problem linking to Wikipedia page

I edited the description for item Church of St John the Baptist (Q17524540) and planned to add a link to the Wikipedia page, Church of St John the Baptist, Royston. Unfortunately, every time I add the url for the page, I get a message back that the article could not be found. The details sections says 'The external client site "enwiki" did not provide page information for page "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_of_St_John_the_Baptist,_Royston". But the link is correct. Am I adding it wrong?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leschnei (talk • contribs) at 18:51, 31 May 2016‎ (UTC).

The Wikipedia page was already used on Q20128042. I've merged that with Church of St John the Baptist (Q17524540), as they are duplicates. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the help!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leschnei (talk • contribs).
@Leschnei: You should still have got a more useful error message than that - normally it mentions that the link is in use on another item. Which browser (including version) are you using? Knowing that may help the developers track down any bugs. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 00:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I tried it in both Safari 9.1.1 and Chrome 50.0.2661.102.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Leschnei (talk • contribs).

color backgrounds of properties

Sorry to bother you, but I cannot find a piece of information. Sometimes some properties ore identifiers have a cyan background and this is related, as far as I know from my experience, to the references or claims to be approved. Where is this explained in detail?

Also, if a color background can be introduced, could we use it in theory to highlights some specific subclass of properties? --Alexmar983 (talk) 04:27, 1 June 2016 (UTC)


Hi Alexmar983,

  1. the properties with cyan background are those provided by the Wikidata:Primary sources tool. These statements are not part of the item (until approved) and are not displayed if the tool is not enabled.
  2. you could highlight specific properties with something like: #P31 .wikibase-statementgroupview-property { background-color: pink;} in your Special:Mypage/common.css will change the label in statements for instance of (P31)

--Geraki (talk) 05:46, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

thanks Geraki.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Problems with IE

Hi. Does anyone know why I get permanently the message ”An error occurred while saving. Your changes could not be completed. Details: Forbidden” when I want to save something? I use IE11/Win 8.1 and for a while I can not save anything. Thanks. Haptokar (talk) 06:54, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

You've got an older browser that's no longer fully supported. Some functions might indeed not work. Upgrade to a newer version of IE or use another browser. Mbch331 (talk) 08:10, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
Maybe this is related to this problem? --Succu (talk) 08:51, 21 May 2016 (UTC)
@Haptokar: if you are using a computer where you can't install new programs then you can run Firefox portable without installing it --John Cummings (talk) 20:49, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you all. There is no problem with Chrome and Firefox, but only with IE, the browser I use for editing Wikipedia pages and it become frustrating to change browsers. Haptokar (talk) 02:46, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

It probably is the problem linked by Succu. The developers are looking into the problem. Mbch331 (talk) 06:48, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
when will there be a solution? --Hannes 24 (talk) 16:50, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
FYI, the same problem was reported by User:Massimo Telò at the Italian village pump, it is quite important to fix it, I guess. So far the only solution we can suggest is to use another browser.--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

I believe we have fixed it now. If you still have issues can you please let me know? Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 07:56, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hide some bots from watchlist?

Is there a way to exclude certain bot edits from my watchlist (e.g. based on a partial string match of the edit summary) without hiding all bot edits? For example I'd like to hide the "bot: import label/alias from" edits by user:Cewbot but not the "Added link to" edits by user:S205643bot. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 23:43, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

You can use c:MediaWiki:Gadget-rightsfilter.js from Commons. At special:mypage/common.js place this line:
mw.loader.load( '//commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-rightsfilter.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' );
--Edgars2007 (talk) 15:00, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Not perfect, but good enough. Thank you. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 20:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
But it's flexible, that's why I like it :) --Edgars2007 (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
BTW, w:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Hide one user's edits from watchlist. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Linking to Wikidata from Meta to show tem names in specific languages

Hi

I'm not sure what this is called (which is why I'm struggling searching for it), I'm looking for if there is a template (or other method) I can use on Meta to link through to Wikidata items that will show their name if I just input the Q number or if I just use the name and use a normal link? If it is possible is it also possible to force it to show in a specific language? I have a big list of numbers I want to link to and adding the names individually is going to take me ages.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 09:26, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

meta:Template:Label ought to help you, but at the moment it doesn't work properly; you can try to adjust Wikidata's version of the template to work with Meta. Mahir256 (talk) 17:30, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
@Mahir256: thanks, I think I would make it more broken if I changed it..... do you know anyone who might be able to fix it? Also is there some way that the name can be a link to the Wikidata item? John Cummings (talk) 13:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@John Cummings: It works now. Just do something like {{Q|322155|bn}} on Meta to get a similar result. Note that this second parameter does not work on Wikidata itself just yet. If you want to use the template on other wikis, just copy Meta's version to the appropriate wiki's Template:Label page. Mahir256 (talk) 16:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mahir256: Amazing, thanks so much, I'll share what I've done with it soon :) --John Cummings (talk) 19:54, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Pywikibot question

Hello. I am trying to use pywikibot to add relegated (P2882). I am using:

pwb.py harvest_template.py -lang:en -cat:Cypriot_First_Division_seasons -template:"Infobox football league season" -namespace:0 relegated P2882 promoted P2881 -pt:0

(I am using the Greek version of category and template)

Its working. But it only add the first team. Not all of them. For example, en:2014–15 Cypriot Second Division at promoted parameter we have

[[Enosis Neon Paralimni FC|EN Paralimni]] <br/> [[Pafos FC]] <br/> [[Aris Limassol F.C.|Aris]]

It only add Enosis Neon Paralimni FC. What can be done?

Xaris333 (talk) 21:40, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

It works as it's meant to be working, because in some cases (like place of birth) you would want to add only one value, but at parameter there may be many links (city, adm. division, coutry). But yes, some option for adding all values would be nice, also for other infoboxes (like film infobox for actors etc.). --Edgars2007 (talk) 08:44, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

So there is no solutions for my problem? Xaris333 (talk) 11:53, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Simple solution - no. A little(?) bit harder - include such option in harvest_template.py :) --Edgars2007 (talk) 14:49, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
How? Xaris333 (talk) 22:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Adding Language-labels for an Item

How would new language-labels be added to an item? I would like to add Finnish and German to the item labeled The Story of a Candy Rabbit. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 21:47, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

If you know or are generally interested in the languages in question, you can add a babel box for the languages in question to your user page. Other than that, unless those languages already have something defined in one of the label/description/alias fields, then you must use the "labelLister" gadget in your preferences and add an arbitrary language definition that way. (There is a task for this at phab:T126510.) --Izno (talk) 22:20, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
As a temporary workaround, you can also use a url like this: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:SetLabelDescriptionAliases/Q19099978/en (changing en to the language code (in your case fi and de)). --Hardwigg (talk) 00:18, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions; I used the labelLister gadget. --Lo Ximiendo (talk) 05:17, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Arm

In the English language the word "arm" is a polynsym. It happens to both refer to the upper arm as well as refering to the full arm.

Q43471 is currently named "arm" and is linked to the FMA concept meaning upper arm.

On the other hand Q43471 has the German name "Arm" which only means get's full arm and doesn't mean upper arm. In German the word can include the hand but doesn't have to. The description suggest that in this case the whole Free upper limb is meant (Hand + Forearm + Upper Arm).

Q43471 is linked to [[ http://www.ontobee.org/ontology/UBERON?iri=http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/UBERON_0001460%7CUBERON_0001460]] which describes the upperarm + forearm.

There's an existing concept for the upper arm: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q379859

Q43471 also has names in a lot of other languages where I don't know what the word means. Is there a process for untangling the mess?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by ChristianKl (talk • contribs) at 14:04, 26 May 2016‎ (UTC).

"refer to the upper arm as well as refering to the full arm" Really? Do you have a source for that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:16, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
The FMA concept "Arm" means the upper arm. That's easily verificable by seeing that the Free upper limb is made up of the parts "Arm", "Forearm" and "Hand". The Forearm in FMA is not part of the Arm. NBCI's MeSH Controlled Vocabulary defines "Arm" as: "The superior part of the upper extremity between the SHOULDER and the ELBOW."
For extra fun NBCI's MeSH Controlled Vocabulary defines "Arm Bones" as "The bones of the free part of the upper extremity including the HUMERUS; RADIUS; and ULNA." Radius and Ulna are bones in the forearm that are not between shoulder and elbow. That definition of arm bones doesn't include the bones in the hand hand. Webster defines "Arm" as " : a human upper limb; especially : the part between the shoulder and the wrist". The human upper limb includes the hand. Thus we have at least three distinct concepts that are named "Arm" in English.ChristianKl (talk) 11:23, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
In every day English "arm" means either the upper arm and forearm as a whole, or any part of your upper arm or forearm when specificity does not matter. It may sometimes include the hand, but usually does not. "Arm" is not used to refer only to the upper arm. "Upper arm" is less likely to be used than "fore arm" when specificity does not matter, but "arm" is more likely to be used in all cases. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 12:26, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
"fore arm" is no valid term in English. "forearm" is the term. In any case scientific usage of the term "arm" matters. Because "arm" means "upper arm" in the scientific sense of the word, Q43471 is currently linked FMA24890. If we decide that Q43471 refers to forearm + upper arm it shouldn't link to FMA24890. Q43471 should then also get a English description that doesn't just say "body part" but that makes it clear what's meant. Then Q379859 should get FMA24890. The problem is that various interwiki links do think that Q43471 currently describes the upper arm. For example the Occitan Wikipedia (https://oc.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bra%C3%A7_%28anatomia%29) shows an image of the upper arm and talks about Os bones being about the "umèrus" with sounds like humerus (the bone of the upper arm) but with doesn't mention the bones of the forearm.ChristianKl (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

I think there's disagreement here that arm (Q43471) shouldn't refer to upper arm. I would propose to rename Q43471 into `arm (including hand)`, create a new property called `arm (excluding hand)` and move everything related to the upper arm to the existing Q379859. Given that there a mix of various translation on Q43471 I would then delete most of the language links in languages where I'm not sure whether the name is saying upper arm or arm and hope that sooner or later people who speak those languages add terms themselves. I still don't fully understand to what extend I'm supposed to seek consensus over an issue like this before going and making the change. Does anybody disagree with my proposal? ChristianKl (talk) 08:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I do not know how, but after this discussion user ChristianKl managed to delete *all* the languages from the wikidata item arm. That was not the outcome of this discussion, so please check what you did, and repair what damage was created. Edoderoo (talk) 09:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Sitelink to redirect - need opinions

In centimetre (Q174728) @Cycn: has deleted sitelink from it.wikpedidia because is a redirect, but in notability we say «Currently, the community has chosen to have redirects allowed, although the necessary changes have yet to be deployed on Wikidata.» My opinion is that we can add redirect in sitelink, the second problem specific to this item is that in it.wikidata we need to have the redirect because is used a lot in template, without the sitelink we can't add a link to the unit page using wikidata, so we need some other opinion. (nb. in it.wikipedia we have other redirect used in the same manner) --ValterVB (talk) 19:22, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd really like feedback on this. As of now adding redirects isn't implemented, but people keep doing it and, appart from Valter, I only get wishful thinking in stead of arguments about it. "It should be possible" isn't a reason to do it, it should be implemented. So I hope this pushes the issue to implement this, as it was decided it should be implemented, or the issue should be re-evaluated to the point that the consensus states that adding redirects is never an option. Either is fine by me, as long as it's clear. - cycŋ - (talk • contribs • logs) 19:29, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I only add an information. There are a lot of these redirects in sitelinks:
If these redirects will be removed, in itwiki we have to re-create the articles, because items like centimetre (Q174728) can't stay without a sitelink. --Rotpunkt (talk) 19:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
They can't? - cycŋ - (talk • contribs • logs) 19:47, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Sure, the sitelinks are always fundamental. They are needed (1) when you are reading quantities with units of measurement: in a module I read from Wikidata 30 picometre (datavalue.value.amount=30, datavalue.value.unit=Q192274) and I want to show "30 picometre" I need the sitelink from Q192274 to the article w:en:picometre (2) sitelink are always needed when traversing items used in properties/qualifiers through arbitrary access and you want to show the link to the current traversed item. --Rotpunkt (talk) 20:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
I reverted your reverts User:Fomafix regarding redirects to dewiki. --Succu (talk) 22:06, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
Why? --Fomafix (talk) 07:05, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
@Succu: We are discussing, so you can't delete redirect. For now redirect are allowed and you haven't reason to delete them. --ValterVB (talk) 17:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, let's talk. Redirs are a lot less stable than articles. They can point to anything within a current article version. They can point to a whole subsection or to special location within a subsection. They could be a relict of a former article version because the article was moved to another lemma. An not uncommon reason is a (not notable) misspelling of some kind. So on which basis we could decide about the usefullness of an redirect? I think redirects should be only maintained by the local wikimedia project involved, not us. They should not created with tricks some users are advocating here. If a template relies only on or is only used together with a redirect then these constructs are volatile Fomafix, ValterVB. --Succu (talk) 21:29, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
@Succu: Hi, millimetre (Q174789), centimetre (Q174728) are very important items, but in itwiki millimeter and centimeter (and many other smallest units) are redirects to meter. So in millimetre (Q174789), centimetre (Q174728) we have redirects in sitelinks. We *need* sitelinks for millimetre (Q174789), centimetre (Q174728) because we need to construct wikilinks for these items. If you delete these redirects in sitelinks then what we should do in itwiki? In your opinion should we replace in itwiki all the redirects with new articles? It's possible but it's a big work. --Rotpunkt (talk) 22:00, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
If this is unit specific, you could try to use the unit from the conversion to SI unit (P2370) statements and link to that page.
--- Jura 22:09, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi Jura, link to which page? --Rotpunkt (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC).
Rotpunkt: For millimetre (Q174789) this would be "metro" from "0,001 metro" (see wikisource). Maybe formatted as millimetro.
--- Jura 06:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Jura, but no, we need a general solution, that works everytime we need a wikilink from an item. Are redirects allowed as sitelinks? (1) Yes, we will continue in this way (2) No, we will replace redirects with articles. --Rotpunkt (talk) 09:55, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
My opinion is that we should let each client decide themselves if they should allow redirect as sitelinks or not. The potential problem and the potential gains are all theirs. While I see some redirect-sitelinks here as hazardous, I see others as very helpful. A redirect to a spouse are among those I dislike, while I think redirects in "millimeter" to meter makes sense, even if I personally do not think links in units are important. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:08, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Technically, you can't currently create wikilinks to redirects. This is a good thing as these create maintenance issues at Wikidata. Sometimes they happen following pagemoves and we end up with two items at Wikidata, one to the redirect, one to the article. This is problematic for the client wiki as well, as the information needed may not be on the item associated with the article. On a side note, we did have a mess with units as some languages imported all redirects leading to an article about a unit as aliases to the associated item (sample)
    --- Jura 10:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't understand this part: << you can't currently create wikilinks to redirects >>. Go to itwiki and write in a sandbox: [[millimetro|mm]]. It works and "millimetro" is a redirect. What did you mean? --Rotpunkt (talk) 10:34, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
It should read "sitelinks on items to redirects at a wiki".
--- Jura 10:42, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Ah ok, yes we know, as written in the first post << ... although the necessary changes have yet to be deployed on Wikidata. >> --Rotpunkt (talk) 10:48, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
It would probably need additional functionalities to ensure that the problems we encounter with pagemoves and the like don't proliferate. Ideally we would already have these tools now, just to ensure that we keep the amount of noise in the database low.
--- Jura 11:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
It is not only after page moves redirects appear. They often appear after an article has "de facto" been deleted or merged. The article has been converted to a redirect to a list-article. Or, the cases I hate the most, when they are redirected to their "father"/"spouse" or company they are related to. I currently work with top-level Internet domain (P78) and sometimes redirects to list-articles are used here in the present Wikipedia-templates. Not all redirect-sitelinks looks bad to me, especially not those who leads to list-articles. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:50, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Maybe a log of sitelinks that are new redirects would be a good start.
The (probably simpler) problem we have with sitelinks on disambiguation items is somewhat related and I don't think we get closer to solve it.
--- Jura 13:12, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Did you read my message Rotpunkt? Good night --Succu (talk) 22:12, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
@Succu Yes, I read, "these constructs are volatile", I agree, but then which is the solution? Should we have in itwiki articles instead of redirects for "millimeter", "centimeter", ... ? Surely we can, but it's quite a big work. But If this is the solution we will do it, no problem. --Rotpunkt (talk) 22:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Note we have discussed allowing redirects as sitelinks for a LONG time and nothing has been done - people who care about this should probably go comment at the T54564 phabricator discussion
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T54564
; perhaps we need a new RFC to establish consensus here on this. Personally I think this would be a very useful thing to implement properly (right now it is obviously possible but not well-supported by the wikidata UI and not at all supported by the wikipedias on the other end insofar as they do not see wikidata links to redirects at all). There are a number of other suggested options in the phabricator discussion. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:03, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Recap

At today redirect are allowed (see at Notability policy), technical feasibility is not a problem we can use some workaround (is the same for coordinates not on the Earth, we can add them only with API). I think that to change this situation is necessary a new RfC, and without a new RfC delete redirect isn't allowed (except for vandalism error etc.) --ValterVB (talk) 10:06, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I have another general question I would like to know if it has been globally addressed.

The vast majority of our "wiki-related" information for a generic item (I hope you can tolerate my vague terminology) is usually hosted in the interlink section of the items and are the links to other platforms.

There are also some "wiki-centric properties" that we use, such as for example Wikivoyage banner and in the field of Identifiers Wiki Loves Monuments ID or Wikimedia database name ... and so on.

I am not an expert but isn't it potentially misleading to mix up properties and identifiers from external sources with something we use on the wikimedia platforms? If I were more expert I would also say that those properties and IDs should be treated "differently" in some way. they could have a different color background, or be listed physically separated at the end, or something like that.

I don't think we even have a generic property to describe them. For example P2186 is an instance of Wikidata property for authority control for places and multi-source external identifier, both encompassing also IDs from external sources, there is nothing like a "wikimedia internal identifiers" as an instance, am I right?

Any feedback?--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, my opinion is that page banner (P948) can be useful for any project who wants to use a panorama-file. It then have the same purpose as image (P18), but for a special kind of picture. Any project who wants to use this property can use it. Maybe we should rename it? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I have never said it is useless, my comment was not about removing them at all and I don't have problem with the "name" per se, my question is about a general hierarchy of concepts, which is something I really try to focus when discussing newbies doubts onwiki and offwiki. I can still close an eye on image (P18) because it is an image who can be used outside wikimedia platforms, and if it is on commons it can be hosted anywhere or come from everywhere, so i don't see a strong "wiki nuance" in its presence, I think a generic metadata archive would have an image property taken from the internet with appropriate copyright even if the wiki platform never existed. I am not so expert, we can debate, but it is a feeling that a commons category property (as far as i know the gallery should be in the interlink section, not the commons cat) or a wikivoyage banner could be considered something more wiki-related. I mean we can debate where to cross a line, but there is some sort of line, Commons category (P373) is not the same type of property of a birth date, it is specific of our platforms. And with the identifiers, that's even more clear: "Wiki Loves Monuments ID" exists because of us, it not a third-party ID. it is not formally correct to mix them up. there should be at least a specific subclass for them. Excuse me if my language is not proper, I hope the core of my doubt is at least clear--Alexmar983 (talk) 06:04, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Any image property currently requires it to be hosted on Commons. The full list is at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:ListProperties?datatype=commonsMedia
Properties can have a limited use and don't necessarily combine with others. If they are sorted in one way or the other on some page, this is generally fairly random.
--- Jura 06:41, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
yes, they have to be on commons, but I don't understand why you're telling me that. The "if it is on commons" is not about a possibility regarding P18, it is about the general concept of images compared to other databases. These are free images, they can therefore be as well on another database even if wiki platform never existed, the image per se is in theory independent of the wiki platforms. On the other side, the commons cat is not, it is a property we, as wikimedians, introduced. that's why I don't have problem with P18 but I do find bizarre we put on the same level wiki-related properties with "thrid-party" properties. BTW forget the P18, I didn't even cite that in my original question, i know it can a little bit on the edge of the concept. But not the other ones.
Again, I agree it is random sorting, the point is that the random sorting is strange for this wiki-related properties (and also IDs), there is an intrinsic difference. or at least it is strange to display them with no difference with the other properties or IDs (for example a specific color background), because they come from us, not from the sources.
If we like to focus on details here, take the detail of the instances of P2186 for example. Shouldn't we have at least an instance specific for wikimedia IDs? I din't find it from its page.--Alexmar983 (talk) 07:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I think that was made for Wikimedia Italy as they were looking for a way to reference some photography permit. They didn't actually start using it .. You might want to read the property creation discussion. Commons category (P373) would probably be best together with other sitelinks to Wikipedia, but for some reason, this can't be implemented. I don't think these two properties have much in common. You could add "issued by" as statement on the property page (sample at Property:P214#P2378).
--- Jura 08:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
It was done by them and some other chapter can do something similar, fine. it is not the specific case is the lack of framework. I can cite also the properties Commons Creator page, topic's main category, corresponding template... all these examples have in common that they are wiki-related, their value is a "wikimedian object" (something that exists because of our wikimedia system). Should we at least monitor them? For example it is already controversial how "free" a propertycreator user should be, someone says a preliminary discussion is needed by default. Well, if it is the case for a standard property I think that for such "self-referencial" properties we should be a little more careful, if possible. Now I grab them here and there but I feel that a specific definition and a link where to find them all together would be better than nothing.--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, despite its usefulness to its users, the overall impact of a "Commons Creator page" property is fairly low if not nil, as the scope is limited. In comparison, the property "cite" changes the scope of the project fundamentally. Property documentation is ongoing work and contributors are always welcome.
--- Jura 11:17, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
As an idea, separating the two would solve the sourcing problem. "Wikimedia-center" properties such as Commonscat do not require to be sourced reliably, for example, "imported from Wikimedia Commons" is just fine. Then the projects can be more easily convinced to directly import these properties from Wikidata, since the sourcing is usually the main issue blocking the import.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Medicines

Hoi, the BMJ has indicated that only 12% of medicines are proven effective other sources indicate even less efficacy. A bot is going around adding substances that are registered as a medicine. In my opinion this is harmful when the efficacy is not noted. Arguably it is better not to include data that is correct in that it has been registered but wrong in that the upside is better than the downside for such substances. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:42, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I have never heard that it is a requirement for a substance to be effective to be a medicine! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:21, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
So it is ok with you to have homeopathic nonsense? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
You never said it was homeopathy involved! I have no problems with having items about such substances here, nor about astrology, psychiatry or politics. If it is nonsense or not doesn't matter to this project! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 11:35, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I think that you need to think in terms of "medicines proven effective" as being a subclass of "medicine". It's also more complicated than just being effective, e.g. things like an antibiotic that was formerly effective but is now completely resisted, medicines that are effective but have side effects that are (sometimes) judged to be too severe, medicines that are effective for some people but not others (e.g for my allergic rhinitis (Q272436) cetirizine (Q423075)-based tablets work but loratadine (Q424049)-based ones don't), medicines that are of unproven effectiveness, medicines that are effective but less so than others, medicines that are not (very) effective for their intended use but are effective for something else, medicines where the effectiveness is disputed, etc. You also need to be clear what is regarded as "effective" in each case. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 12:03, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I am not sure using P31 is the best approach here, just like "instance of:107,356-population city" probably is less good than "population:107,256", even if both methods technically works.
And I am not a big fan of using one kind of "science" to "prove" another. Which mathematician would judge any medicine as efficient? Therefor, I do not think we should mix modern medicine with homeopathic medicine any less than we should let astrological methods judge astronomical observations.
-- Innocent bystander (talk) 15:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
It has been proven yet again that irony does not work. When a substance is marked as a medicine and research proves that it does not work, it is important to know this. Wikipedia uses our stuff in its infoboxes and we have a duty to properly inform. The notion that something is a medicine because it may have been once registered as such is dangerous. People get killed in that way.. (no irony intended) Thanks, GerardM (talk) 18:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
If it is a homeopathy substance/medicine, it should be stated as such. That far I fully agree. They should not be mixed with modern medicine. But this project is not only devoted to modern science. We have mythology, fiction and there is of course also room here for alternative methods, homeopathy is one of them.
Yes, I have very biased feelings toward modern medicine. If I would have let the Doctors treat me according to their scientific methods, I do not know if I would have still been alive today. I do not trust homeopathy more than you do, but at least, I have never heard of anybody being killed by their methods. But I have friends who are not among us because of bad modern medicine. These scientific methods you trust, kept me unconscious during twelve months, and hospitalised me during another eighteen months. What was wrong? They gave me wrong medicine. All symptoms they found came from the medicine they put in my veins. It was not until I revolted and used my legal rights to refuse treatment I became better. I am marked for life, and that because of these scientific methods. An nescis, mi fili, quantilla prudentia mundus regatur? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:01, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
It seems we're on an english language related ambiguity here. In french "medecine" is about the science for sure, "médicament" is about the (active) substances, and "traitement" is about the classes of way some illness is treated. author  TomT0m / talk page 18:54, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
When a scientist or his papers are controversial we state that as a fact. When it is scientifically proven that a substance has no effect as a medicine but is registered as such, we should mark this in a way that will be exposed strongly. The notion that some institution says that a substance is recognised as a medicine is secondary to the harm that the substance can do. We do have a responsibility in this. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:56, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
I think you are missing the point that "medicine" has much broader meanings than you are using it as, and that "effective" also has several possible definitions and even for a single definition is not a binary. We are not here to make value judgements about what is and is not correct and we must cover the facts of everything that meets our notability criteria, which includes many homeopathic and other substances as well as those used by western medicine (currently and historically). If I have understood what you are trying to do correctly then I think we should:
  • Be more specific with instance of (P31) statements, e.g. use items for "homeopathic medicine" and "clinical medicine" (or whatever better term) (and subcategories) rather than just "medicine"
  • Have a property for "approved for use as a medicine by" with items for various national/supranational drug regulation bodies and regulatory bodies for other medicine systems. This should use qualifiers for start time and/or end time, using applies to jurisdiction (P1001) as a qualifier if needed (e.g. for medical cannabis (Q1033379))
  • Use statement is subject of (P805) (or other suitable property) to link an items to studies about a substance.
  • Use external links or identifiers to link to clinical information about substances.
Because of the range of possible meanings and values for "effective" (my previous comment) I think that a single property for that is beyond the scope of Wikidata (we are not a resource for health information). Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 10:34, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Link WP article with different name

Hi. I created a WP Page called Scott Bishop. However there is already a WikiData article with this name so I created a Wikidata article called Scott Bishop (admiral). How do I make the WP page link to the correct wikidata entry?I tried adding wikidata:QXXXX to the WP article but that didn't work Gbawden (talk) 10:05, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Your article is en:Scott Bishop and you created Scott Bishop (Q24287188). You need to add the former, to the latter, by editing the latter's "Wikipedia" section, choosing "enwilki" and pasting in "Scott Bishop". Q24287188 should be labelled "Scott Bishop", not "Scott Bishop (admiral)". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:29, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I have renamed Scott Bishop (Q24287188). Took me a while to figure out how to add the page to the Wikipedia section but got it now. Thanks for the help. Gbawden (talk) 12:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Single value constraint for P856

I've raised a question about the single value constraint for official website (P856) on the talk page but it has so far gathered no response in about 5 days, so I'm posting here for greater visibility. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 10:45, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

some questions about Properties

Hi, I'm now working in a great review of "Infobox of organization" in catalan versions. It will be shared also by "companies" or "business". It will recover from WD as much as possible data we can use. I did not find or I'm in doubt about real meaning about:

  • Does exist a property for:
    • "Acronym" ?. short name (P1813), perhaps ?
    • the (annual) budget of a company ? The budget (P2769) property seems to be restricted to an specific project, not to a regular running.
    • "Expenses" or "Operating expenses" ?
  • What's the difference between member of (P463) and affiliation (P1416) for an organization ?. Initially, both of them were restricted to people, but after discussion, it seems that member of (P463), now is available for organitzations and countries. What should be its opposite ? (ex.:part of (P361) is opposite of has part(s) (P527))

Please, use a {{Ping}} in answer. Thanks--Amadalvarez (talk) 06:24, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

@Amadalvarez: For "budget", in wikidata you can use a "qualifier" to specify a date of validity of the statement. So if the budget of "whatever company" was "1 million €" in 2010 this can be written
⟨ whatever company ⟩ budget (P2769) View with SQID ⟨ 1 000 000 € ⟩
point in time (P585) View with SQID ⟨  2010 ⟩
. The precision of the year will have to be set to "year", I guess. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:14, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: Thanks, it sounds logic. --Amadalvarez (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
But ignore that "Eiichiro Oda" - in the real item you simply will have to input year (you'll see). --Edgars2007 (talk) 08:39, 1 June 2016 (UTC). @Edgars2007: Fixed !, thanks.--Amadalvarez (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
P2769 is the assigned budget? Is that number even public in ordinary private companies? Maybe "sales"/"revenue"-property is more useful here? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:07, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: As I understand, budget is a pourpose of incomes & expenses for next year and total revenue (P2139) is the real figures of the current or previous years. Thanks,--Amadalvarez (talk) 12:56, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@Amadalvarez: I can imagine to use short name (P1813) for the acronym, but perhaps acronym should be proposed as its subproperty. Lymantria (talk) 08:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@Lymantria:, Yes. I'm using short name (P1813) by now. For instance, NATO (Q7184) and European Union (Q458) hold acronym in this property. Thanks,--Amadalvarez (talk) 22:26, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Q3998906

This may be very basic, but I can't see how to fix the typo in the "label / eo" field (currently "Helraldika Triunuo", should be "Heraldika Triunuo"). I can only see how to edit the English, French, and Latin labels/descriptions... AnonMoos (talk) 03:38, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

@AnonMoos: There is a link "More languages" right under the frame on this item that lists your default set of language labels and descriptions. Alternately, you may activate gadget "labelLister" in your Preferences. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 04:57, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata Module:Taxobox

@PhiLiP, FelixReimann, Succu, Infovarius: As I don't seem to get anywhere, (no response since 10 March) with implementing the WD taxobox on cywiki, I've suggested that the only way forward is for me to automatically create all infoboxes similar to one of these here on WD on my userspace. I can then harvest the info onto a csv file and write to cywiki. Any problem with this? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 12:03, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

@Llywelyn2000: There is just nobody interested in Cymru wiki.--134.169.240.18 13:39, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
I think you're right. Maybe we should all just work on one wiki - Chinese? Thanks for your positive comments. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 13:53, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
You're right, Llywelyn2000: China has taken us.--134.169.240.18 14:23, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Sorry but I can not help, because I have no LUA knowledge. But maybe the ArticlePlaceholder extension is helpfull for you (taxon 1, taxon 2). See Lydias email. --Succu (talk) 14:59, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Succu. We have a discussion about enabling ArticlePlaceholder, which is still open. I should think we may agree in 3 weeks - when technical issues are sorted. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2016 (UTC)
@Llywelyn2000: It would be nice if we could have centralized Modules for the smaller Wikis, so we don't have to create 300 out-of-sync versions of the same code. In any case we really need more people involved in writing easy to understand documentation for the Wikidata modules and Wikidata-powered Templates. Maybe a good Hackathon for Wikimania? --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:19, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Hey! Thanks for this! Yes - 100%!!! 279 language wikis have to reinvent the wheel every time they need a new template - or import and translate, which is very time consuming. All templates should be on Meta (imho!) with translation of visible text ONLY on local wiki. And pigs will fly... Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
See Phab:T6547 for exactly this, but it's not exactly happening quickly - it's been open since 2006! Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 09:21, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Verifiability policy

I think it is well beyond time that we created a workable policy regarding sourcing of information. Much of the disputes regarding Wikidata:Notability revolve around the vagueness of the second point regarding "serious" sources, and Wikidata:Living people only makes sense if we define what verifiability means to us. I know that we strive to keep policies at a minimum, but with most of our information lacking sources, our database isn't as reliable as it should be.

I hope to solicit enough ideas to draft an RfC. To start it off, I think that the principle that anyone should be able to verify the information in our database should be applied. In terms of reliability, we have to exclude inherently unreliable sources such as most social networks, forums, blogs, and other wikis (since they can be easily edited).--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:11, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Jasper Deng I agree although at the moment I am just observing the debate on the topic. Have you seen m:WikiCite 2016 by the way?--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:15, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@Alexmar983: No I haven't. From the looks of it, though, I think WikiCite is putting the cart before the horse - how are we to host citations if we have no concrete policy on them?--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:22, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
My dear chap I agree, that's why I am trying to learn something here. I also have the feeling the situation is as usually evolving in a very fragmented and non-linear way, so I do the only neutral yet useful thing a wikimedian can do: spreading the information. I also wanted to open a RfC in general about "overall source policy on wikimedia platform", that's why I am trying to learn as much as possible. I don't think I can help you more than that.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:26, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree something is needed here. My first thought on your proposal though is that I don't think we can simply social networks, etc. as unreliable for all purposes - e.g. Facebook Places ID (P1997) and Facebook username (P2013) can likely be reliably sourced to Facebook, although I certainly agree that it is going to be an unreliable source for most other properties. en.wp allows official blogs to be used as sources for statements made by the blog's author and factual information about themselves - I can also see a potential need here for those sorts of sources for people who are notable only based on the structural need criterion.
The practical upshot of this is that any policy provision about reliable sources is going to have to be nuanced, but I believe that such is possible. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 11:08, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think a policy will help sourcing, actually. More use of Wikidata will. Plus our main clients, wikipedias, already have sourcing policies. In the end those policies should by side effect bring sources when it will be easier to enter and use them from wikidata. This is the key, and certainly not the policy. Please also note that technically Wikidata is potentiallyTemplate:Ref needed way more source intensive as sourcingTemplate:Ref needed a wikidata statement is roughly the sameTemplate:Ref needed as having several referencesTemplate:Ref needed for a single sentence in a wikipedia articleTemplate:Ref needed. author  TomT0m / talk page 14:42, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: I view it differently. At least with respect to the English Wikipedia, they are hesitant to rely on our data if it doesn't meet their quality control standards, most notably verifiability. --Jasper Deng (talk) 02:15, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: I doubt that in their policy there is a need to source every field in every infobox. They can know if a statement meets their standards by checking its source, or don't use using software non sourced statements. They can also enforce their policies by working on their wiki through our data. author  TomT0m / talk page 06:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: Strictly speaking, policies like en:WP:BLP (similar to our proposed living persons policy) require it for infobox parameters. It's also not their job to filter our data for verifiability, that is our job to do - the whole premise of our project is that machines can use our data and be assured it's reliable.--Jasper Deng (talk) 17:01, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: Jasper Deng Wait a minute, how could we make such a frontier beetween wikidata and wikipedia ? When wikipedians filled infoboxes, it was their job, but when they use datas, they are just consumer ? Then this will never work. We're a small community, we can't handle the sum of all wikipedias infoboxes by ourself. author  TomT0m / talk page 09:10, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
It is difficult to identify for a module/template which information needs sources and which does not. The statement "Elvis Presley occupation:Singer" is probably nothing anybody have any objection against, not even unsourced in a BLP. But saying "Barack Obama occupation:Singer" would probably need a source. In the templates I have helped to develop on svwiki, I have tried to always make it optional to opt-out from the Wikidata and add local data instead. People uses that options from time to time. I even do it myself. Sometimes it has been necessary to keep it completely Wikidata-free. The objections against "imported from:Wikipedia"-sources has been fewer than I have expected, but they exists. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:23, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I think every wikidata infoboxes on frwiki have an opt-out feature (and an opt-in for some fields since very recently is activated and possible) It's been a requirement and a global community agreement to develop infoboxes from the start, and we included it in the infobox-building lua modules and templates from the start by default. As all infoboxes use those they all have opt-out by default as a side effect. On the "imported from: Wikipedia" it's usually enough to recall they definitely and obviously are here for tracability and not for sourcing, (good faith) people usually understand. It would be easy to develop an include a filter to exclude those statement in the templates that pulls data from wikidata if a community became really adverse to those statements. The problem I see with opt-out is that you kind of lose the ability to be updated if the data from wikidata are corrected and finally meets your requirements for example, and that you cut yourself from the possibility to enhance Wikidata for other wikipedias and data consumers. Too much use of it would be very damaging for us. author  TomT0m / talk page 09:47, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: But this is precisely what Wikidata is for - centralizing all of Wikipedia's and other projects' information into one central location (here), which implies maintaining it. That this requires a lot of manpower is not a valid argument against the need for verifiability of our information.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:02, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: Please reread the beginning of the discussion. Our main goal is to have good datas. Will a policy really add good datas and sources ? It remains to be proven. What I think is required actually is manpower. And we won't have manpower if we persuade or acknowledge wikipedians to be mere consumer. What we must make them understand is that as data providers we will just have datas that are as good as our users will enter them. If they have high data standards, then ... it's their responsability to raise the quality of wikidata datas. As it's a centralizing tool, as more wikipedias will create and use the datas, we'll enter a win-win state where the high standard of the sum of wikipedias will make better all the wikipedias datas. We will centralize the manpower. This is how this will be a success. As our consumers already have high data standards, do we have to have it ourself ? This is an open question. This is a social matter : if it's necessary to reach a win-win state, then maybe we need it. BUT : this could be a big headeach and a big fight and as such a very high risk. Some people are probably very proud of their quality standards and could look not as high standards with condescension and dedain "we won't use datas with such poor requirements" or in the opposite "wikidatans are pain in the ass reverting good datas because of their ridiculously high standards impossible to reach". So we could reach a lose lose state where everybody stays at home ... author  TomT0m / talk page 10:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
A few users on svwiki sees the presence of bad sources and lack of sources as a reason to come here and edit. Bot they are only a few. One problem here is that sometimes the infobox and the text tells two different things. They may be contradicting but most often one of them are not updated (and not always Wikidata). There are also some disputes about what information we should allow in our articles. How do we see that a spouse, child or other relatives are notable enough to be mentioned in a BLP? And how do we create red links? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:32, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: You cannot even speak of "good datas and sources" when that has not even been defined. The purpose of a policy is to define this so everyone is in agreement over the meaning of that. Everything else in your comment is irrelevant to that. Innocent bystander's comment above shows the need for it. A policy is in general a record of the community's consensus for everyone to follow. Clearly there's no such agreement yet, so it's time to create one.--Jasper Deng (talk) 10:43, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: What do you mean ? You want a metric for data quality if I understand. Do we need a policy for that ? How is your argumentation different from "we need a policy because we need a policy" ? The reason for a policy should however be at least discussed, overwise we may reach a dead end and take useless risks. Your rejecting of my arguments are way too harsh. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: No you don't understand, please re-read my initial comment at the top of this thread. I don't understand your argument, which seems to be that "writing down what the community expects will not help the community fulfill those expectations". That just doesn't make sense. I want the community to write down its verifiability standard, so we have a clear and consistent standard to apply. The need for that has been exhibited by disputes over the notability policy and other places. In addition, the living persons policy, an important principle of Wikimedia, is hard to write without a verifiability policy. What other projects choose to do about it is simply tangential to that. --Jasper Deng (talk) 10:54, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jasper Deng: No, it's not tengential, it's the keypoint because we're in an ecosystem. If we don't take into account our clients, we might lose them or not winning them, which is probably the worse that could happen to Wikidata. Is Wikidata here to serve clients ? probably, as it's a data repository, and a data repository is nothing without use of their datas. By keeping us application neutral, we could maximise our potential usage and usefulness and minimise the interprojects conflicts. If it's to the client to check if the data meet their quality standards, then we don't lose any client and potential usecase. Do we want to maximize usefulness or enforce strict policies for the sake of enforcing strict policies, with all conflits and energy waste that comes with that are implied ? That's the key question of Wikidata in my humble own. Do we want to align on the standards of the most inclusive wikipedia or the worst one ? Whatever we do, we might lose both. And it's not an unimportant thing. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:25, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
On the other hand, if we keep it that way, we may be useful for the most inclusive wikipedia by putting their datas to the standards of the most exigent one :) author  TomT0m / talk page 11:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @TomT0m: Again, it is not their job to check the veracity of our data, and the convention is that they won't; it is not any more appropriate for Wikipedia communities to directly dictate our verifiability standards than it is for Wikipedia to dictate Commons' policies. Your argument remains unconvincing: Wikipedia's do not trust us precisely because we currently do not have a verifiability standard they can easily refer to (a common reason for other wikis not using Wikidata phase 2), and there has been discord in our existing community caused by a lack of a single agreed-upon standard. Also, nowhere did I ever suggest that we should be more biased towards one wiki's standards or another's. The whole point of enacting a verifiability policy is a policy of our own, one that is acceptable to and created by our own community. There's no loss of neutrality there. By your argument we could not create any policies such as WD:N because they somehow violate "neutrality". Complete nonsense, as you can see - we have the ability to independently create policies without prejudice towards a particular wiki's standards. Also, Wikipedia editors do not come here in isolation from one another. Applying different standards from different projects is a recipe for edit warring and other conflicts. You are also plainly incorrect that this policy must somehow be draconian - WD:UCS is still our primary guidance and we make policies only when that fails to stave off conflict (which is the case here). The bottom line is: we need to get agreement on what verifiability means, not just to reduce internal project conflict, but to also make clear to other projects what our community decides to do (others will want to know what information can be included here or not), and to also formulate WD:Living people. There is no arguing with that, period.--Jasper Deng (talk) 12:13, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: That's kind of dictatorial. Then it may just fail. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata helpers needed in Edinburgh for Wikidata training event

Hi, are there any Wikidatans based in or around Edinburgh who would be free to help out in a practical Wikidata editing session on 1st August? It's for a Wikidata showcase and training event taking place at the Repository Fringe 2016 event.

The session is basically an introduction to Wikidata, demo of some of the coolest things about Wikidata, then practical session to teach everyone how to edit. We're expecting an audience of up to 64 people, and currently have two people with wikidata knowledge so a couple more would be very handy for practical part. Many thanks, NavinoEvans (talk) 17:29, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

South East England is not quite close, but I could be up for it. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 19:18, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Similarly, I'm in London but if you can't find anyone closer I'll happily help in return for some help with expenses. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 23:26, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

NavinoEvans I can give you some name of users with interest in Scottish topics and active on wikidata. Maybe some of them are living in the area, if they don't state the opposite in their profile. I just don't know who are the people you contacted. I supposed User:AmaryllisGardener as a sysop was already contacted? Than I guess you have some chances with User:Drchriswilliams and also User:Foxj (not a lot of edits, but enough to teach the basics). All other users related to Scotland I scrolled down have a very limited activity on wikidata, I don't think they can really help. I can also look for users in Northern England if needed.--Alexmar983 (talk) 02:40, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I, while interested in Scottish topics, live in North Carolina, and have actually never been to Scotland, or any of the UK for that matter. Sorry I cannot attend. --AmaryllisGardener talk 03:24, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
I should be able to help out with this. Drchriswilliams (talk) 08:44, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Wow, thanks so much to all for jumping in with so many offers of help. @Alexmar983: - a really helpful list, much appreciated! @Andreasmperu, Thryduulf:, it is a long way to travel and the session actually starts at around 10am so would ideally need a night in a hotel to avoid ridiculously early travel (I'm coming from London myself). If you're still interested despite this extra hardship I can see if we can get travel and accommodation funds organised? @Drchriswilliams: Much appreciated! How far away are you based in Scotland? would some travel expenses be required? Cheers again :) NavinoEvans (talk) 10:26, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
AmaryllisGardener i am sorry i did not see your "geographical" category on your enwiki profile, there were a lot to check if I remember. NavinoEvans you're welcome, it took only 10 minutes so if you need another name I can find some more. I can look for some expats living in Scotland but active on other wiki, I guess. Or i can search on enwiki for people living in/related to northern England. Just let me know.--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:31, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Superb, thanks again. It looks like we've got the numbers covered now, but will get back in touch if anyone can't make it. NavinoEvans (talk) 10:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@NavinoEvans: I have no problem getting there a day earlier. Also, it would be extremely convenient it you manage to get travel and accommodation funds. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 15:23, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
@NavinoEvans: Ditto. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 09:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
@Andreasmperu, Thryduulf: I've send the request for some funding, will let you know how we go as soon as I hear back. Thanks again :) NavinoEvans (talk) 16:02, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

@Andreasmperu, Thryduulf, Drchriswilliams: We've managed to arrange an £80 per person bursary (and free entry to both days of the conference of course). Looking at the prices that would cover a plane ticket from London (Heathrow airport is a bit more expensive though) and would leave a bit left over towards accommodation - however, we will not be starting until 11:30am now so it would be feasible to do it all in one day, which the £80 should cover (we may even be able to start after lunch but will have to confirm soon). How does that sound? do let me know if the offer isn't quite good enough and I'll do some more grovelling :)

Feel free to respond by email if you have any questions - navino at histropedia . com NavinoEvans (talk) 09:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

P17 and military bases

We had some discussion some time ago about Embassies and country (P17). I do not remember what conclusion we came to, and I do not find the discussion. Here I have found another potential problematic area. A military base in Canada, which is operated (or at least has been operated by) United States of America (Q30). -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:26, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

allegiance (P945)? There was this question and this more or less related discussion... -- LaddΩ chat ;) 13:07, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
I was sure I had contributed to a discussion on this but couldn't find it in the archive. Sure enough it was there in my contributions history, and it was correctly added to the archive by the bot when discussion was 7 days old, and nothing was deleted from the archive. So I did a bit more investigation and found that a single character typo was obscuring much of the archive. The discussion I was thinking of, and probably you too, is now visible at Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2016/05#country (P17) of an embassy?. The suggestion that I made which Aude said they agreed with and that nobody else commented on was to use: country (P17) for the host country, operator (P137) for the country whose embassy it is as operating area (P2541) for the area that embassy covers. e.g
⟨ British Embassy Holy See ⟩ country (P17) View with SQID ⟨ Italy (Q38)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
operator (P137) View with SQID ⟨ United Kingdom (Q145)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
operating area (P2541) View with SQID ⟨ Holy See (Q159583)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
.
I'm not sure whether operator (P137) or allegiance (P945) is better for military bases though? Maybe both if operator (P137) is used for the branch of the armed forces that operates the base, e.g. ? Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 21:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Good find, the issue with the typo! Didn't know the indexing was so sensitive. "Operated by" sounds indeed as good as "allegiance" for embassies, but better for military bases, IMHO. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 23:07, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Could you clarify that comment please - I can't decide whether you are saying operator (P137) is better than allegiance (P945) for military bases or the exact opposite! Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 09:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
If "Royal Air Force" is the "operator" for an "military base". (That makes sense) Then it is probably the "Ministry for Foreign Affairs" that operates the embassy. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:18, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Is there a way to search for a specific value for a specific property?

Hi

Is there a way to search for a specific value for a specific property? I'm checking that all the Biosphere Reserves have been imported properly and I know a couple are missing, I have a couple that I suspect that are missing, is there a way to search by a value for a property? Specifically I would like to search for a value that is a URL of the Property UNESCO Biosphere URL.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 16:16, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

This is how to do it. --John Cummings (talk) 17:49, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Add more than one geographic coordinate for Q3440914

Hi. The above is an item page for a dam in Sri Lanka. As you know, there are dams that are built to store water, and there are dams that are built for both: generate power and store water. Victoria Dam (Q3440914) is a hydroelectric dam (the latter type). So, I'd like to add the following to the dam item page:

  1. Add all the statements that a dam item page would usually have
  2. Add two geographic coordinates statements: one for the location of the dam itself, and other for the location of the power station.
  3. Add a statement which says that this dam power/fuels the "Victoria Power Station" (new item page [power station] to be created).

Could someone help me with how I could add the below two statements to Q3440914, please? Or, is adding the second coordinate in the to-be-created "Victoria Power Station" item page the correct way to do this? If so, how do I do #3? Thanks in advance, Rehman 03:11, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

To make it even more complicated. The dam can in some languages be interpreted as the concrete-wall (or whatever building material) that prevents the water to flow away. Even dams made by non-humans are included here. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:36, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
The power station should have it's own item and the coordinates of it should only appear on that item. I suppose you could link the two with
⟨ Victoria Dam (Q3440914)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ has part(s) (P527) View with SQID ⟨ Victoria power station ⟩
but there is probably a better way. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 09:17, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Native language property (P103) and P1412

We have

which seems to be a little confusing and have redundancy. Why would we separate a first language from the other languages that a person knows? If we wish to identify a language primacy, then wouldn't it make more sense to have a qualifier label that could be added to the native language within P1413? When items are being added by users will generally type language and see what property appears, and for people it is not P103, it is always P1413. At a practical level, from my viewing, the native language is not highly used, so should we migrate to where the users are adding data, or are we going to be stuck in a system that it is not obvious, and not particularly useful, or used?  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:17, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I think you're assuming too much intentional action here. The one property is much older than the second, and could probably be deleted with the values replaced in the method you described. I imagine this just went under the radar, as opposed to being explicitly chosen at some stage. Ajraddatz (talk) 06:21, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
It's easier to determine P1412 than P103. Which is why the former is used.
The information can more easily be managed with two properties.
That suggestions don't work in an ideal way is a known issue. It's definitely not a reason to use another property, just because the most appropriate one doesn't get suggested.
--- Jura 07:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Jura1: that argument doesn't obviously make sense. You say it is easier under one property, and the users have clearly demonstrated that with the usage, then you argue that the status quo should be maintained without reasoning. The information would seem to be able to gathered under one property, and yet when it is brought for discussion it is pretty well dismissed by you. If you are declaring that there is the need for two, and that users need to be struggling through the system to achieve an unobvious goal, then please demonstrate that to the users.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
P1412 had been populated mostly by a French library catalog. It includes languages in which people published.
If you know the native language of one of these authors, you can add it to P103. If you want to add the native language of a person, just enter it with P103. No need to bother with qualifiers. (go to the item, type "native lang" then "en" etc.
--- Jura 09:16, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I can see the appeal of merging native language (P103) with languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) but I'm concerned that languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) is already too broad and vaguely defined. I couldn't tell you how many languages I speak or write (it could be anywhere from 1 to 50+ depending on what you want to count as speaking or writing a language). native language (P103) on the other hand has a much clearer meaning (I know what my native language is and, as much as I'd like to be natively multilingual, there is nothing I can do to change it :P). If we want native language (P103) to show up when someone searches for "language", that is easily done by adding an alias starting with "language". - Nikki (talk) 09:57, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I do not understand the problem. My native language is Dutch, I am fluent in English, I can manage in German a bit in French. It is relevant to ascertain if a given publication COULD be written by me. Boxing me only in Dutch is not helpful. Often a mother tongue is of political value. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 04:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #212

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Emergency phone numbers

I tried to add "112" as phone number (P1329) to 112 (Q1061257) but the edit filters didn't let me because of constraint violations. How should this be done? -- T.seppelt (talk) 09:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

click save twice.
--- Jura 09:24, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the abuse filter only warns, and a second attempt should be successful. But to me it looks like this filter's format seems to be way to restrictive regarding telephone numbers internationally. --YMS (talk) 09:27, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, most of the time, that's what's needed.
--- Jura 09:30, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I misread the filter on a first quick look. Special:AbuseFilter/85 allows phone numbers to be in one of the following formats: "+(7|[2-689]\d{1,2})[\- ][\d(][ ()\.\-\d]+" and "+1[\- ]\d{3}[\- ]\d{3}[\- ]\d{4}", so as soon as there is a correct language code, probably everything is fine. And having those is of course a good idea except for very specific things like exactly T.seppelt's example. --YMS (talk) 09:56, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The issue is that there not one area code for it. It's 112 across Europe and many different area codes.ChristianKl (talk) 12:50, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

A related (but not the same) issue is for telephone numbers that are national only, e.g. for Campaign Against Living Miserably (Q5027741) (a charity that only operates in the UK) - I believe the freephone number wont even connect when dialled from abroad (I don't know if the +44 800 format would work dialled from within the UK or not). Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 20:40, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

In cases like this I would recommend to add the national prefix anyway. After all it is an UK number, whether or not it can be reached from outside. --Srittau (talk) 22:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Members of parliament per constitutency

Hi!

I bring here an issue that affects Wikidata but the debate started in el:Project:Αγορά.

User:FocalPoint has created items like member of the Hellenic Parliament (Q24322738) as subclasses of member of the Hellenic Parliament (Q18915989) in order to use them in statements for position held (P39). For example:

⟨ Evangelos Diamantopoulos (Q12877312)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ position held (P39) View with SQID ⟨ member of the Hellenic Parliament (Q24322738)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩

It must be noted that the original position held is just "Member of the Hellenic Parliament" not "Member of Parliament from Kastoria". Per the Constitution of Greece, Article 51 "The Members of Parliament represent the Nation" not their electoral districts.


I have tried to explain that the most acceptable and useful approach is to use member of the Hellenic Parliament (Q18915989) with electoral district (P768) as a qualifier.

⟨ Evangelos Diamantopoulos (Q12877312)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ position held (P39) View with SQID ⟨ member of the Hellenic Parliament (Q18915989)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
electoral district (P768) View with SQID ⟨ electoral district of Kastoria (Q14623346)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩

FocalPoint has explained that his approach is useful in order to display meaningful information in the infoboxes in Wikipedia, that "Member of Parliament from Kastoria" is something used in everyday speech.

I have tried to explain that what should be done is modify the infobox and not manipulate the data and create entities that do not represent an existing and distinct position. Speaking about a "Member of Parliament from Kastoria" any human understands that it is actually a "Member of the Hellenic Parliament from the electoral district of Kastoria" and not a distinct position. Machines do not understand that and we should not use an approach different than we use for any other parliament in the world.

What do you think? -Geraki (talk) 09:27, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


Well, we sometimes have elections in only one (or a few) electoral districts at the time, or for only some of the seats in the parliament. The second chamber of the Swedish parliament was such an example. It used to be elections every year, one electoral district at the time. And the EU-elections in every nation can have very unique rules in every nation. In UK, there is not the same rules in the Irish electoral district as in the rest of the nation. We maybe have to accept that we have subclasses like "Member of the X parliament 20AB-20CD, representing political party EFG and electoral district HIJ". But my opinion si that we still have to add such things as "political party", "timeframe", "electoral district" as qualifiers to such statements as position held (P39):"Members of Hellenic Parliament from Kastoria, 2015-2019 representing Liberal party". I am not proposing that we always should use items like "Members of Hellenic Parliament from Kastoria, 2015-2019 representing Liberal party", but that we should allow them, since they already are essential in some cases. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


I would like to point out that all members of Parliament of Greece (as well as the members of Parliament of Cyprus, following the contributions of User:Xaris333 yesterday), have as position held (position held (P39)) their respective seats characterized by the electoral district as described in several sources in Greek bibliography. This is clearly reflected in many articles of elwiki where the first thing noted is that the person is the (I use Kastoria for example) "Kastoria member of Parliament". Of course each of these parliament seats have the respective category, which has been duly linked in all such items, see (Olympia Teligioridou (Q9850817)). As elwiki uses infoboxes using info from Wikidata, all such infoboxes now indicate not just the general "member of Parliament", but the specific "Kastoria (or other district) member of Parliament) (see for example el:Περικλής Ηλιάδης). Nevertheless, this structure can certainly coexist with the structure indicated above with the qualifiers. May I also note that if any "Kastoria member of Parliament" dies, he is not replaced by just anybody, but (if available) by another "Kastoria member of Parliament". So, the position does exist, very clearly and with real consequences. --FocalPoint (talk) 10:35, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I would also like to point out that we already have other items like: Q16707840, duly used in Joseph Hiley (Q6283995) and other MP's from the same constituency. I really cannot see any issue here. --FocalPoint (talk) 10:42, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Q16707840 was, I believe, an experiment. It's not an approach used for any other UK MPs that I'm aware of, and (to be honest) removing it at some point was on my to-do list. Andrew Gray (talk) 11:55, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

My point is that since we can add qualifiers for there is no reason to create a complex network of items that no script can read and use if the developer does not know all of these items. "Members of Hellenic Parliament from Kastoria, 2015-2019 representing Liberal party" would be just a mix of qualifiers for the original political position of just being a member of the parliament. That would mean that if the representative resign before elections or change political group without resigning you would need even more subclasses with repeating qualifiers.

Again, speaking about a "Member of Parliament from Kastoria" a human understands that it is actually a "Member of the Hellenic Parliament from the electoral district of Kastoria" and not a distinct position. Ther are no distinct political bodies to be distinct political positions.

If the infoboxes need to display electoral district then the infobox should be scripted to display the qualifier.

The existence of some examples is countered by thousands of counterexamples using the qualifier, and e.g.

⟨ Barack Obama (Q76)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ position held (P39) View with SQID ⟨ United States senator (Q13217683)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
electoral district (P768) View with SQID ⟨ Illinois (Q1204)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩

not "US senator for Illinois"

I have to note that you should stop for some time adding these statements (Special:Contributions/FocalPoint) ignoring the discussion. -Geraki (talk) 11:05, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Excellent! I have no objection to the use of qualifiers as indicated above. As long as people care enough to fill the data in, this is the most important, to enrich Wikidata. Unfortunately, the members of the Greek Parliament do not have any such qualifiers up to now, but I welcome anyone who might decide to work on this, in addition to any other work done up to now.

As I have already indicated, to the best of my knowledge, all members of Parliament of Greece and Cyprus have now the items under discussion. --FocalPoint (talk) 11:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

@Geraki: no script can read and use if the developer does not know all of these items => this is wrong. Usually there is a pattern :
⟨ member of greek parliament for whatever ⟩ subclass of (P279) View with SQID ⟨ member of greek parliament ⟩
and
⟨ member of greek parliements for whatever ⟩ electoral district (P768) View with SQID ⟨ whatever ⟩
that any reasonable script should be aware of. Or maybe
⟨ member of greek parliements for whatever ⟩ has quality Search ⟨ https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q23766486 ⟩
electoral district (P768) View with SQID ⟨ whatever ⟩
. A script that automatically adds labels can be coded from that.
Please also note that the of (P642) View with SQID qualifier is sometimes used instead of electoral district (P768) View with SQID.
author  TomT0m / talk page 11:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
My feeling is that "member of parliament for X" is an unusually precise position and we should probably avoid using it in favour of a different approach. (As a note, I compiled Wikidata:EveryPolitician to try and index the main political properties, and created most of them...).
There isn't a Wikidata-wide standard for defining constituencies, yet, but the most common is to use a qualifier on P39. (The alternative is P768, but this is less commonly used). I'd love to see a consistent worldwide approach to this. Andrew Gray (talk) 11:53, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
I would also like to see the use of something like represents (P1268) instead of "political party" as qualifier to these kinds of statements. You do not (everywhere) have to be member of the political party you represent. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:04, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

As there is a discussion here, I see no point in mass reverts by Special:Contributions/Spiros790. I am therefore asking User:Spiros790 to stop. --FocalPoint (talk) 13:28, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


"Member of the Hellenic Parliament" is the accurate and correct term. Items created by FocalPoint (such as Q24322738) are not valid for P39. Other than that I strongly recommend that massive changes like these should be discussed before implementation in order to avoid errors & time-consuming reverts. User FocalPoint should note that discussion takes place before mass changes and edits like his, which are now presented as accomplished facts. Reverts to previous acceptable situation should proceed until this is discussed properly and conclusively. Thank you. -- Spiros790 (talk) 13:34, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

My best practice

Hoi, I have added thousands and thousands of members of whatever. The format is that they are for instance "Member of the Kerala Legislative Assembly" and I add often manually a constituency for them. It would be silly to have an item for "Member of the Kerala Legislative Assembly for Chadayamangalam" because you would add 140 more items that are not fixed in size nor in time. They are merged, changed in size and whatever. That is best left to the constituency itself. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

This does not really solves the problem of merging or change of size because we have items for the administrative divisions themselves. Plus the search for absolute consistency is vain since we have some items that have articles specific to some chairs or specific to election results for a specific circonscription. What I think would work, and would allows us to use different model for flexibility while not make harder data extraction is WikiProject Reasoning. author  TomT0m / talk page 16:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
When a Wikipedia article does not fit in, tough. There are 280+ Wikipedias, we can not help their inconsistency. We do not need to accomodate a single article because it does not happily fit. Thanks GerardM (talk) 18:06, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
Some projects have an article about the "Nobel price", some have "Nobel Peace Price" and some even have an article about "2015 Nobel Peace Price". The solution in Tunisian National Dialogue Quartet (Q21078159) is Award:"Nobel Peace Price", time:"2015", article about:"2015 Nobel Peace Price". If you do not have an article about the Peace Price, but only about the Nobel Price that could cause some technical problems. And of course, we do not have items about every version of every price. We do not (yet) have an item for every electoral district in every city/municipality everywhere. In many cases, we do not even have articles about the "city/municipal councils".
We maybe in such cases have to add "Member of City counsil", of "City of Wheresburg", electoral districts:"Nothern suburbs", representing:"Revolutionary Conservative party", from:"2012" to:"2016"? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
In that case it's less work to create an item "Member of City counsil of Wheresburg" once and for all, maybe even less work to add an item for every elections , for example "Member of City counsil of Wheresburg 2012 - 2016". @GerardM: The only thing we need to do to support a mix of the models is to adapt our extraction queries, that should serve as references for our consumer. "If you want to extract our datas, just do a similar things than our query". The query in question, say if you want the elected of a year should be a mix of "you should check either the qualifier of the statement for the date, or if the value is any subclass of the city counceler of this country that have such a date in their statements and this city as mandate". This should make everyone happy and is not very complicated. author  TomT0m / talk page 19:20, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
We should consider the consequences of such a disastrous idea through the eyes of 280+ languages. Having as few as possible items is better. The notion of unlimited items will make Wikidata useless for most of them. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 01:22, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
I think it is essential to use items like "Member of Hellenic parliament" instead of "Member of national parliament". It is another kind of job of working in the Parliament of Greece than in the Parliament of any other nation. But I am not so sure about the differences between the "City counsil of Wheresburg" and its neighbour "City counsil of Theresburg". It is most likely more or less the same kind of job.
Using years to those who were elected to First Chamber (Q10501497) (first chamber of the Swedish parliament) could cause some confusion. 1/8 of the chamber was elected every year for a period of 8 years. The set of "member of the first chamber of the Swedish parliament 1939-1947" is then for some time coexisting with those elected for 1941-1949 and 1935-1943. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:22, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
@GerardM: The counterpart of this is that fewer items means less specific items, so in fine it's harder to write complex statements. This mean you always have to qualify them when you write a statement, and in complex statements that mixes dates such as "the parliements members that were elected on 2000 have voted that law in 2002" we risk a qualifier conflict. On the other hand using plain statements in a new item makes the information available for autolabels and minimize redundancy and the risks to get this kind of conflicts is zero. author  TomT0m / talk page 06:34, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
When you always use the same qualifiers it becomes easy. When someone was first elected on a date and ends his tenure at another date you will always be able to know who was in office on a given date. One person can have multiple statements when there is a break. It works well it is unambiguous. Having statements that are all over the place makes for queries that cannot be reused for a different parliament. Consequently your notion fails in the most obvious ways. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:11, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Historical maps properties

Please have a look at the historical map properties page I have been preparing over time. I think it would be time to review it together.

I addition to anything that may come up, I'd like to ask a few specific questions.

  1. Are we ready to start indexing historical maps in Wikidata, and would there be a notability threshold?
  2. Are bounding boxes declared anywhere in Wikidata? I find that the properties for that are not sufficient, but if there is a practice, it should be enough.
  3. I cannot find a property that would be used to define the date the map depicts. Is one used for any other media or should a new property be created?
  4. Is there a property for declaring the coordinate system of a map? I was not able to locate one.

Cheers, Susannaanas (talk) 06:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

I like the idea of a property for a depicts date. For historical paintings this would also be useful (e.g. paintings of naval battles commissioned a few years later etc). If you propose it I will endorse it. Jane023 (talk) 08:43, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
  1. We have a Wikidata:Notability policy, which will directly allow at least some I think. If it's unclear for your use case I think asking a specific question might get a better answer.
  2. Bounding boxes were discussed very recently in another context but I don't recall seeing the properties (Southwest coordinates and northeast coordinates) proposed just yet.
  3. We don't have a property for "depicts date" (the closest we have is set in period (P2408) but that is not quite right) but like Jane023, I will support one if you propose it (or I'll propose it myself if you prefer)
  4. We don't currently have this, but again I'd support if proposed. For the bounding box I think the coordinates would need to be converted to the ones used by Wikidata if different but I'm not an expert on this. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 12:16, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Better perhaps, for your naval battle example, to have "depicts -> (event item)", and put the date on the latter? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:34, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
Possibly, but a "depicts date" property would be useful for other examples. e.g. if I draw a map today depicting the Roman Empire (Q2277) as it was in AD 18 I'd want I think
⟨ Thryduulf's map ⟩ instance of (P31) View with SQID ⟨ map (Q4006)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
depicts (P180) View with SQID ⟨ Roman Empire (Q2277)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
publication date (P577) View with SQID ⟨ 2 June 2016 ⟩
depicts date Search ⟨ 23756 ⟩
. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 12:53, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the answers, sorry about the delay. I think I will propose the depicts date and the coordinate system (unless you have already beaten me to it!). I hope to catch up with the existing bounding box discussion if I find it! Cheers, Susannaanas (talk) 08:10, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Here's my first ever property proposal for depicted date! If you can think of more specific constraints or other necessary info, please add that! /Susannaanas (talk) 09:21, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
And the proposal for coordinate system aka spatial reference system is now up. @chippyy: @Aude: @Kolossos: The concepts coordinate system (Q11210), spatial reference system (Q161779) and geodetic reference system (Q1502887) and their instances are well mixed up. It would be great if knowledgeable people would look into them and the proposal if it wrong. /Susannaanas (talk) 11:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Currency symbols

Hello everyone,

the question is how the relation between United States dollar (Q4917) and $ should be expressed. To me P558 (P558) seems to be the closest property we have at the moment. Unfortunately a lot of currencies appear at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P558 because a currency cannot be converted into a SI base unit (Q223662). Should the constraints be changed or do we need a new property? -- T.seppelt (talk) 06:05, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

To answer the question T.Seepelt asked here. It is probably a better way to write the constraints here, other than add a lot of exceptions. But exceptions is probably doable in the meantime. We have many units that are unconvertible to SI-units. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:16, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
(On svwiki we have preferred to use ISO 4217 in our infoboxes instead of the unit.)`
The currency-units has one problem that most other units do not have. Sometimes they are written before the number and sometimes they are written after the number. Maybe we then have to include not only the symbol itself, but also the "pattern" it is written in. That probably demands a new property. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:01, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
We currently have currency symbol description (P489) which links to the item about the symbol (e.g. Euro (Q4916) → euro sign (Q18100); although P558 (P558) → €, Unicode character (P487) → €, defining formula (P2534) → \euro and 12 values for TeX string (P1993) are also used on Euro (Q4916)).
A "currency symbol position" property may be needed. I know of only three symbol positions leading (¤1.99), medial (1¤99) and trailing (1.99¤) and I know of no instance where the presence or absence of a space between the symbol and value matters, so an item value would seem doable, however some symbols e.g. € are used in multiple positions (generally how the symbol for the currency it replaced was used I suspect). There may of course be others I'm not aware of. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 11:08, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
It is possible to put qualifiers also to such a property, so different use of € is not a big problem. The median-version looks like a challenge to accomplish in the client. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:16, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Simply change, for example, euro sign (Q18100) to "instance of"="currency prefix" and likewise for those which are "currency suffix". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:01, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
This highly depends on the language. In German € is a suffix (z.B. 3,50 €). Therefore instance of (P31) is not the ideal solution because we would have to use qualifiers on these claims. We need another system. Maybe even a "currency symbol position" property... -- T.seppelt (talk) 15:16, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
It also depends on currency - e.g. $ when used for United States dollar (Q4917) is a prefix, when used for Canadian dollar (Q1104069) $ is a suffix in Quebec (Q176) and a prefix elsewhere. When cifrão (Q1091860) is used for Brazilian real (Q173117) it is a prefix, when used for Cape Verdean escudo (Q4591) it is a suffix for whole amounts and a decimal separator for fractional amounts. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 22:14, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

cent/penny-symbols

Discovered that we also have "cent"-symbols in some currencies. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:00, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Qualifier

Hello. 1986–87 Cypriot Fourth Division (Q17436662) was split into three groups. We have three winners winner (P1346), one for each group. And we have teams that were promoted (P2881) from each group and teams that were relegated (P2882) from each group. Which qualifier can I use to show for example that Libanos Kormakiti (Q18228530) was the winner of Nicosia-Keryneia Group? (I don't want to have 3 different Wikidata pages since in Wikipedia we used to have only one article with all the groups and not to separate articles, one for each group). Xaris333 (talk) 17:30, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xaris333: I guess a solution for more complex situation would be to be neutral in better/worse sport division and to have a unique "next league" property. We can know if the league is better ranked or not by knowing the relative rank of the league themselves. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:52, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
@TomT0m: The groups were parallel. They didn't have any relation between them... "Next league"? Like followed by (P156)? I can't use it.Xaris333 (talk) 18:21, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: That's why it's relevant. It works also if the leagues don't really have relations. I actually did not mean followed by (P156) but it might worth an examination, I meant something like "team that change league" instead of a pair of properties "promoted" qualified with the league. A qualifier on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1923 Search could also work and would minimize redundancy :
⟨ the league ⟩ participating team (P1923) View with SQID ⟨ some team that actually won ⟩
next league Search ⟨ the upper league ⟩
.
I don't understand why you don't want to create items, they absolutely don't have to be linked to an article. it's a recipe for headeachs, really. Plus another wikipedia might do another choice, and we don't want our model to be one wikipedia centric otherwise this will be a mess here sooner or later. author  TomT0m / talk page 19:19, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Even the Cyprus Football Association referred to 1986–87 Cypriot Fourth Division (Q17436662) as a single championship, not 3 separates. I don't think there will be a Wikipedia that will create 3 different articles, one per group. But, OK, it is the only solution right now. I am not going to use it... Xaris333 (talk) 19:33, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
Swedish Football Division 6 (Q7654676) has ~80 groups. The groups can be reorganized from one year to another! A change of groups inside this tier is considered a matter of convenience (shorter travel within the group), not a matter relegation/promotion. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:54, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Good luck to enter the results without the appropriate items :) @Xaris333: If nobody can help you with a good solution, I guess you'll have to go with it. If it's only a link problem, I guess it's related to WD:XLINK, you can add you usecase. In lua, you can make the infobox code generate the link to the appropriate article, for example. author  TomT0m / talk page 15:38, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

@TomT0m: I just wanted to ask. If there is not a solution, its OK. Thanks. Xaris333 (talk) 17:38, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I am sure this must have been discussed, and I would appreciate if someone could point me out to a discussion or update on the status. In P373 statements, Commons categories do not appear for me as active links (they appear as text). See Q7921517 as one of the example (the top statement).

  • Is this a bug or a feature?
  • Could it be that this has smth to do with my configuration (I am on Windows 7, last version of FF)?

Thanks--Ymblanter (talk) 07:26, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Sometimes they appear as links for me, sometimes just as text. In the example you supply, I do have a clickable link. I have no idea how the software (or ours) picks it out. I'd have thought it has something to do with loading times. Jared Preston (talk) 07:57, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
This problem has been going on for nearly a year now (see phab:T115794) and I haven't seen anything to suggest anyone is working on it. :( - Nikki (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
The JavaScript code is very glitchy and you sometimes need multiple reloads to have the links. (This also affects other JavaScript stuff on the page.) --Srittau (talk) 09:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

TED speaker challenge

From 6 June to 6 July we are holding a writing challenge about TED speakers. Everyone can participate by writing about people who have held a TED talk. In January TED made a data donation with metadata about 2000+ TED talks. For the overview list of the TED speakers in the competition, see here: Wikidata:TED/TED speakers. For an overview of all the TED talks that these people have held, see here: Wikidata:TED/Ted Talks. Often the talks have multi-lingual subtitles, but you can also access the subtitle transcriptions directly with a link to quote the talks for use in Wikipedia articles in other languages than English. More information about the challenge, the points, the prizes, and the sign-up is here: TED speakers challenge. Jane023 (talk) 13:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Just to add: in "writing about", we also include improving Wikidata items. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Relationship between `cellular response to vitamin D` and `vitamin D`

Currently Q14907166 has no statement that defines a relationship to Q175621. I would like to add one but at the moment I can't think of a Wikidata property that's applicable. ChristianKl (talk) 08:40, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I added a relationship one level higher at response to vitamin D (Q14599705), has cause (P828) vitamin D (Q175621). Does that seem right? --99of9 (talk) 06:14, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Please merge

Q42117 and Q23925151. I guess few weeks ago someone created Q23925151 and messed up the English interwiki connection to it. Might be worth following up to see if that user hasn't messed anything else. I don't know enough about wikidata-fu to trace that, however. --Piotrus (talk) 03:08, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Merged. --Edgars2007 (talk) 04:31, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Importing Wiki Loves Monuments lists into Wikidata

Dear all

I’m posting this to start a discussion on migrating the information in the Wiki Loves Monuments (WLM) database to Wikidata as part of the Connected Open Heritage project. There have been discussions about the work previously here and here.

Below we have outlined what we can see as the potential approaches and issues with each approach. We would very much appreciate your feedback including the following questions:

  • Which approach do you think would work and why?
  • Are there ways to mitigate or overcome the issues highlighted?
  • Are there any other approaches or issues that have been missed?
  • If the combination of the two approaches outlined is a good approach, what combination would work best? Would this depend on the country or could universal guidelines be used?

Approaches

Wiki Loves Monuments lists for different different countries are constructed in different ways:

  • Some countries use only official immovable heritage lists
  • Some countries add sites onto official national and regional registries e.g South Africa.
  • Some countries do not have official lists.

In addition some countries have lists with unclear documentations as to the source of the data and methodology used to select objects.

There appear to be three approaches to importing the WLM database into Wikidata taking the construction of existing databases into consideration:

  1. Import directly from the WLM database into Wikidata.
  2. Import from the reference sources used to created the WLM databases where known.
  3. A combination of the two approaches.

Issues

There seem to be a number of issues with each approach:

Importing directly from the WLM database into Wikidata

  • By importing straight from the WLM database rather than going back to the sources there might be no referenceable sources connected to the items created, potentially we will be creating up to 1,384,000 unreferenced items. However this could be solved (in the short term) by an "imported from Monument database", wlm-id:<id>, date:<date>" reference. This is not ideal but is essentially how importing from Wikipedia works today.
  • Even if the data is based on official lists there is no simple way of determining which changes have been made to the data since the time it was imported.
  • Whilst facts are not copyrightable there might be elements of the Wikipedia lists (and hence the monuments database) which are copyrightable. If so there is an issue in that the Wikidata license is more restrictive than that of Wikipedia.

Import from the reference sources used to created the WLM databases

  • Some WLM countries add sites onto official national and regional registries e.g South Africa and some countries do not have national registers.
  • Some of the original official documents/lists might be copyrighted. It is currently unclear what copyright restrictions might apply if we are looking at importing the WLM lists/Monument database vs. the original lists that the WLM lists are derived/ copied from?
  • This approach would not make use of the work that went into standardising the info from the various sources for the Monuments database.

Again we would very much like your feedback on this

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 15:43, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

Would it be possible to import the data from both sources, i.e. from the monuments database (corresponding to the data contained in the monuments lists mostly sitting on Wikipedia) and from an official source (where available)? – In a second step, identical double entries could be removed (keeping the one that is referenced to the official source). In a third step, differences in double entries could be dealt with (in some cases we may want to keep them as they are; in some cases we may want to report errors back to the maintainer of the official source; and in some cases we may have to correct the entry on Wikipedia). And in a fourth step, missing data could be added (in Switzerland, for example, the official source contains labels only in the official language of a given territory, while we should be able to generate lists in various languages; translation would most easily be done in a spreadsheet, translating all the monuments labels in one go in order to remain consistent across the lists). --Beat Estermann (talk) 13:34, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I assume you already read the past discussions on Wikidata-WLM, right? Nemo 14:04, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I have certainly followed some of them. But I'm not following the developments closely enough to judge whether one or the other point made a couple of years ago still holds given the actual development stage of Wikidata. - Are you referring to anything specific? --Beat Estermann (talk) 14:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, a search page of 81 emails stretching back five years isn't exactly enlightening. A ink to a specific post, or even better a statement here rather thank a link, would be much more helpful. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:32, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
I expect people to re-read past discussions before opening new ones on the same topic, but I understand that self-discipline is hard. --Nemo 06:29, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

I think Beat's option of importing in stages from multiple sources is preferable to create something new and more comprehensive than just the WLM database, with the process of de-duplication, and supplementation built in (We also need to refine some of the UK list to exclude the 500k grade 2 listed buildings as it's just too much for Wikidata). Additionally, referring someone to a massive database of emails isn't much help as it implies that this isn't a place to ask questions until you've trawled archived emails. Asking a question here might get you a better, up to date answer, and maybe a little assistance in executing your idea. Battleofalma (talk) 15:40, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Exclude Grade II? Sad face. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:42, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Perhaps not all, but 500k is too much, so there's got to be some sensible way of reducing that to a Wikidata acceptable number. We don't need all those Naval forts... Battleofalma (talk) 15:45, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
HashtagNotAllGrade2ListedBuildings Battleofalma (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
HashtagSomeMonumentsMatter? --Izno (talk) 15:49, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
If Wikidata cannot currently ingest 500,000 items for listed buildings in the UK then perhaps we can say 'yes but not yet'? John Cummings (talk) 15:51, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Currently we appear to have 2324 Grade II listed buildings, out of a possible 370,337.
@John Cummings: Am I right in thinking that an upload for the UK has already been done? Comparing the results of this query: tinyurl.com/j8kqqma with the numbers in brackets at Wikidata:WikiProject_UK_and_Ireland/monuments we seem to have a reasonably full set of scheduled monuments and Grade I and II* listed buildings, and apparently a somewhat over-supply of Scottish category A and category B listed structures. Jheald (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
How many Dutch streets do we have? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:01, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes I think a per country approach should be taken, and for the larger countries, a per state approach. Yes to the translation idea and I suggest using street address in native language, and for trees, parks, and other objects, the native title. Later languages that eventually create their own labels can always move the native names to an alias. Yes to the idea of importing referencing the old monumentsdatabase, but only for those regions that can't do it any other (better) way. Yes to the 500k GradeII dataset - I have seen some of these and think they are great. Who said this was too much? If there has been a RFC on this which lost, then let's just make sure all Grade II listed buildings with Wikipedia articles are at least properly referenced and part of the package. Let's do this the wikiway: start small and work from a working pilot per country. Jane023 (talk) 06:50, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Just for information, all the 45k monuments of France have already been imported from the database to Wikidata with references to the official Base Mérimée (Q809830) (by Gzen92 thanks again to him and with some help of Wikidata:WikiProject France/Monuments historiques). This could be an issue too: don't import on Wikidata what is already in Wikidata ;) Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:37, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

For the UK, all of the higher-grade listed buildings were added to Wikidata in 2014 with help from Magnus Manske, along with the official lists of Scheduled Ancient Monuments. We imported all the official lists for England (I, II* and Ancient Monuments), Scotland (A, B and Ancient Monuments), Wales (I, II* and Ancient Monuments) and Northern Ireland (A, B+). NI Ancient Monuments were I think not done. At that time we decided not to import the English grade II listings due to their numbers (over 500k) and the fact that the vast majority of grade II buildings will never be notable enough for a Wikipedia entry. We didn't use the old WLM lists, but went back and created new ones from the most recent official listings. So for the UK, the main need will be to import any changes to the official lists from 2014. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 10:02, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

When it comes to Spain, the WLM database is far from being complete. Heritage management competences have been devolved and it means different types of protection, code assignment and the like. Furthermore, the list hasn't been deeply reviewed or kept up-to-date. Many monuments do not have a specific code as such. Such importation could be feasible, but only after an extensive review and harmonization. --Discasto (talk) 10:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
@MichaelMaggs: is there a write up of what was done somewhere? Or maybe just how I could find all the monuments? I assume you mean Grade I and Grade II* have been added? (I could easily be wrong). Also can you tell me what the plan is to use the list? What the benefits you saw of doing this were? Will you use Wikidata as the directory for WLM this year? Any other info very welcome. Thanks John Cummings (talk) 12:31, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add all Grade II-listed buildings; it would help en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Public Art/London realise its goal of achieving complete coverage of public artworks in London. See this list of what's already on Wikidata. It needs a job lot of Grade II-listed sculptures in order to come anywhere near completion! Ham II (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

For information there is a Wikidata Wiki Loves Monuments campaign tool available. --John Cummings (talk) 15:54, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Wikimedia Italia too was thinking of importing its own list of buildings since last year, and that's why I suggested last year the creation of Wiki Loves Monuments ID (P2186). We could possibly coordinate, what do you think? --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 18:05, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Wiki Loves Monuments ID (P2186) feels like a good fallback for countries (or sometimes individual entries) which don't have unique ids. The same property could also be used as an import reference (similar to how Wikipedia imports are done today). In the long run the statements should carry references to the official lists but that might be done in a later stage (since not all official sources have been clearly documented).
@VIGNERON, MichaelMaggs: Existing datasets should of course not be imported again. The import would start with an inventory of the existing countries where such things should be picked up/documented. The intention is also to add Wikidata connections to the existing Monument database to make it clear when objects already exist.
(Disclaimer: I'm involved in the Connected Open Heritage project and the Monuments Database) /André Costa (WMSE) (talk) 12:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
@André Costa (WMSE): Do we have any ideas of how we should solve this for the Swedish archaeological sites? I mean, the database is here much larger than the items used in the lists you created. A ListeriaBot-based list can of course include much more than the lists you created, but these lists will still be insanely long in many parishes. And when it comes to the connection to articles, we have articles about archaeological sites like The stoneage settlement in Bjästamon (Q19803444) but that article includes several items in the fmis-dataset. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:09, 1 June 2016 (UTC)
Another reason to use the wlm database would be that mistakes in the original have been corrected (typographical, but also factual sometimes. Another reason to use the original source would be because the wlm database has not always been maintained, and it could be more up to date. But please don't underestimate the effort required to standardise the data to some extent! Effeietsanders (talk) 08:55, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

How to add labels in sign languages ?

I would like to promote a mechanism to define item labels in sign languages, that is short videos linked to each item (possibly), for the different sign languages in the world.

Context. FYI, the different sign languages have alpha-3 iso codes and are listed in the following Reasonator query [1]. Besides, they are not linked to the "matching" spoken languages, for example American Sign Language (asl) and British Sign Language (bsl) are different. These videos could be somewhat related to content of the wiktionary, but numerous items have specific signs without being language words, most notably famous people. For example, french former president Jacques Chirac (Q2105) has a (rather funny) specific sign in french SL : [2].

Actually, there is already a mean to record such labels : using property video (P10) + qualifier languages spoken, written or signed (P1412), as I tested on the item word (Q8171). Nevertheless, I think this is too generic and could possibly be mixed with other videos, not directly related to the item label, resulting in confusion. That's why I would like to propose a new specific property "Item label in sign language", with a type "video file" or "image file" (animated gif would be useful too, and even some still pictures in rare cases). The statement could be multivalued, with languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) as qualifier to add the specific sign language used.

I would like to emphasize that sign languages are world living languages, as spoken languages and should be treated as close as possible to "item labels", even if these have not been taken into account while designing canonical labels. I welcome all your comments on this. GAllegre (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Actual sign language labels will need to use SignWriting in order to be useful on projects like the American Sign Language Wikipedia, once those get launched. That's not to say that direct videos wouldn't also be useful, but they should be considered on the same order as audio pronunciation for spoken languages, in my opinion. --Yair rand (talk) 22:33, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
    • I do not quite agree with you on the need of SignWriting to be useful, as most sign languages educational programs heavily rely on videos, but you are right that my proposal should be related to the pronunciation property, which uses statements of the form pronunciation audio (P443) + qualifier language of work or name (P407). For the sake of consistency, I turn my proposal into : new specific property "Item label in sign language (video) " + qualifier language of work or name (P407) (and not P1412 anymore). GAllegre (talk) 23:11, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
      • GAllegre Do not take "languages spoken or written" to literally. I see no problem using that property together with a sign language. A person in a wheelchair walks to the post office even if (s)he has no legs, and a death person speaks his sign language, even if (s)he does it with hir whole body instead of only the mouth. But I agree that P407 works best as qualifier to your proposed property. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:31, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • As we had discussed, labels in ase are already possible. For other languages, you can request them per Help:Monolingual_text_languages#Requirements_for_a_new_language_code. To request a new property, use WD:PP.
    --- Jura 05:00, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Yes, we already discussed, and ASE labels, while interesting in their own, fullfill another need and are out of scope for my proposal. I do not need neither a new language code for standard labels. So, yes, I plan to request a new property. My effort here is to have a preliminary discussion to have the best proposal for an "official" request. Thanks nevertheless for your elements. GAllegre (talk) 07:50, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Thanks a lot for noticing this issue and for this solution proposal. Yes a big interest of Wikidata is to promote multilingualism, and by this way to promote accessibility (ex: qlabel . It's difficult to believe that this could work with Wikipedias in sign languages; no one is officially active and there is ~100 sign languages in alpha-3 iso; complexity; dependency; notability; a mess of reuse... Yes, item labels seems to be logically the best theoretical approcah. But as video is not a string, in practice not sure it would be easy to contribute (need a new interface) and reuse (dealing with request results in same channel string and videos, for same context of reuse; hmm). Il like the idea of using a specific property with language of work or name (P407) because it is coherent, usable, allows to contribute already in any sign language (very important point), corresponds to the current context of edition and could be a great way to encourage contribution; and by this way data could be easily used for those who would. Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 07:04, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I have relabelled languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) in English, to "languages spoken, written or signed". Please translate the addition of "signed". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:47, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

hi, on my talk, enjoy the reading.. --SurdusVII 12:57, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

I finally sent an official standard request : Wikidata:Property_proposal/Entity_label_in_sign_language_(video) GAllegre (talk) 17:46, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

I think I followed the guidelines to fill the request, but it's a single page, and it's not listed in Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic. As it's my first property request, can someone explain to me how to add it to the listing page ? Many thanks. GAllegre (talk) 07:31, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
You just need to transclude the individual page on the listing page - i.e. {{Wikidata:Property proposal/Entity label in sign language (video)}}. [3] (although preferably without the typo in the edit summary I made!). Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 10:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
FYI, my proposal has been re-categorized under "Term" and is now at Wikidata:Property_proposal/Term. GAllegre (talk) 07:56, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

George Duval

An article was created in the English Wikipedia, Georges Duval, but corresponded with the French page of that name, a dab page. [4] It should go to the French Georges Duval (dramaturge) [5]. Help? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:24, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

@Gerda Arendt: I've moved the sitelink to Q3102669 as requested. Just FYI, if you come across similar cases in the future, you may like to activate the gadget in your preferences: "Move: Adds a move tool to the sitelink edit toolbar to move a sitelink to another item." – that makes the whole thing a lot easier. Jared Preston (talk) 21:38, 8 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:40, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Imported from Tajik Wikipedia

I now have seen a number of country (P17)-statements sourced by "imported from:Tajik Wikipedia (Q2742472)". I think we have to review them all. Somebody handy with our tools who can provide us with a list? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Dirty query. --Edgars2007 (talk) 10:26, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
hmm... --XXN, 12:27, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
@XXN: Yes, it is that bot that has added many of these wrong statement. But it is not the bots fault here. There are wrong data in many infoboxes about airports on tgwiki. tgwiki is informed about the problem. We should not blame a single user here, the problem here is using Wikipedia as source. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:49, 9 June 2016 (UTC)
My strategy here is to go through the list Edgars2007 gave us, and I change the claim when I have to, and then simply remove the source. When I can confirm that it is correct (and in most cases it is), I change the source to "imported from:enwp" instead. It does not make the claim more reliable, but it removes it from Edgars2007's list. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:06, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

ArticlePlaceholder rolled out to next wikis

Screenshot ArticlePlaceholder June 2016

Hey folks :)

Just a quick heads-up that for the second round 3 more Wikipedias (Gujarati, Latvian, Nynorsk) requested the ArticlePlaceholder be enabled. We have done this last night. This means it is now live on the following Wikipedias:

If your Wikipedia would like to be included in the next round please start a discussion on-wiki and then let me know or file a ticket on Phabricator.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata activities at Wikimania

Hey folks :)

Wikimania is coming up and quite a few Wikidata things will happen there. I tried to summarize them all here: https://wikimania2016.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikidata. If you know of more please add them. Hope to see many of you at the meetup!

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:43, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Should p2802 be applied to items for fictitious vehicles?

Please see property talk:P2802#This property on items for fictitious subjects for a discussion about whether fleet or registration number (P2802) (which was created with fictitious vehicles as examples in the proposal) should be restricted to non-fictional vehicles only. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 21:55, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

AFAIK, any property can be used with fictional items. There was a discussion about this a long time ago. The two main reasons being that we don't want to have to create a large number of new properties for use with fictional items only, and secondly it is easy enough for users of the data to discard fictional items if they don't want them in whatever projects they're working on. Danrok (talk) 00:11, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
If a reminder to the contributor doesn't work, try WD:AN.
--- Jura 05:48, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional Wrestling

I've created a new Wikiproject for professional wrestling (Q131359): Wikidata:WikiProject_Professional_Wrestling. I've added some information about related properties and classes, and it can at least be a place to provide dthat sort of documentation, but it could also be a place to discuss how to represent information in Wikidata, and to suggest ways to improve the data we hold. Feel free to join in. Silverfish (talk) 23:26, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Imported data from a Wikipedia table

Hello. Is there a way (with a bot) to add the data of a row or column of a Wikipedia table to a Wikidata page as the values of a property? Xaris333 (talk) 12:04, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Anyone? Xaris333 (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Depends, technically is feasible, but we need more info --ValterVB (talk) 14:37, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

User:ValterVB, for example I want to add all the teams for column "Teams" of en:2015–16 La Liga#Stadiums and locations to 2015–16 La Liga (Q16621994) in property participant (P710). Xaris333 (talk) 15:16, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes is possible and is possible to do it also without a BOT but only with public tools. Is necessary to use a worksheet (for ex. LibreOffice), PetScan and quickstatements. It's long to explain but easy to do. You must use worksheet to extract the team from the table, use Petscan to extract item number of the team and use quick statement to add the team in wikidata. I did it for 2015–16 La Liga (Q16621994) --ValterVB (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:ValterVB, I will try it. If I will have problems, may I ask you in your talk page? Xaris333 (talk) 16:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Of course, you can. --ValterVB (talk) 16:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Using the inverse of P710 with bot

Hello. For example, I am using participant (P710) at 1993–94 Cypriot Fourth Division (Q17128990). I have added all the teams that were participated in the championship. Is there a way, with a bot, to add in all the Wikidata pages of the teams that are listed to property 710 at 1993–94 Cypriot Fourth Division (Q17128990) that they were participated (using participant in (P1344)) in 1993–94 Cypriot Fourth Division (Q17128990)? Xaris333 (talk) 12:36, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Anyone? Xaris333 (talk) 14:13, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Date of Wedding - Date of Divorce

In the list of properties, Data type Points in Time, there is no "Date of Wedding" and no "Date of Divorce". I cannot find any discussion, or policy on why these do not exist. Such "points in time" would have their pertinence in biographical items, since these events have legal implications on people. On the Wikipedia corresponding pages, in the biography infoboxes, these events are mentioned. --Duvillage (talk) 17:20, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

spouse (P26) qualified by start time (P580) and end time (P582). --Izno (talk) 18:51, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
One problem with that approach is that P582 does not tell if it was a legal divorce or if somebody died. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
True, but that's the way we do it these days. I don't see a need for marriage date regardless. --Izno (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes Izno, we do, but I think we can do better! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
And it is possible from P582 to tell whether it was death or divorce by inferring from the claim itself and his (non-)existant date of death. This of course is not immediately obvious, but it can be done where a user is interested. --Izno (talk) 19:02, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
We have end cause (P1534). --Edgars2007 (talk) 19:05, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
That looks like a good solution. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
@Duvillage: Use significant event (P793):
significant event (P793): divorce (Q93190)
point in time (P585): xx.xx.xxxx
has cause (P828): death (Q4)
or
significant event (P793): wedding (Q49836)
point in time (P585): xx.xx.xxxx
location (P276): yyyy
Snipre (talk) 19:09, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
That works, but it would be better to add that information inside the spouse (P26)-claim. That would demand less of our WP-modules. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: Wrong because a woman can become a spouse before the date of the wedding: you can have a civil mariage and a religious mariage. And you can be married without a wedding, unless the administrative signature is for you a wedding. Snipre (talk) 11:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
To me, the legal documents is the marriage. A wedding without legal ground is not a marriage to me, it is just a ceremony. Remember that I come from a nation where people live together for years before they get married. Details about the ceremony (location, guests, estimated costs, wedding officiant, civil and religious ceremony) maybe should be put in a wedding-item like wedding of Haakon, Crown Prince of Norway, and Mette-Marit Tjessem Høiby (Q130713)? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:26, 11 June 2016 (UTC) (Who was married in 2006 by a civil wedding officiant.)

Tool

Hello. I need a tool that can search in the Wikidata pages of a Wikipedia category to find which of them don't have a specific property as a statement. Is that possible? Xaris333 (talk) 14:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xaris333: You can do this with petscan. Multichill (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Multichill How? Xaris333 (talk) 15:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
If you're interested in only property, then go to tab "Wikidata", there is "Uses items/props". If you're interested in some more specific property:value combination, then you'll have to use SPARQL in "Other sources" tab. --Edgars2007 (talk) 15:32, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Edgars2007 For only property, I can add the property but how can I add the Wikipedia category? Xaris333 (talk) 15:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
At "Categories" tab. Take some time to go trough all options at PetScan to know, what it can do... It will be useful. --Edgars2007 (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Xaris333 (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Project for amusement parks, roller coasters and other rides?

I've browsed the projects for amusement parks, roller coasters and similar rides, but I cannot find anything related to that. Do you know if something like that already exists? If not, how to create a new project? //Mippzon (talk) 18:30, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mippzon: You can start a new project here: Wikidata:WikiProjects#Creating_a_WikiProject --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:33, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I've now created Wikidata:WikiProject Roller Coasters. Feel free to help out! :) //Mippzon (talk) 18:38, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

How to state the start of a publication?

Hi, It seems we need a new property or a modified property to state when a periodical started and stopped appearing. I see 3 possibilities.

  1. Create a new property;
  2. Use date of first performance (P1191) with a larger definition;
  3. Add a qualifier to publication date (P577).

Opinions?Yann (talk) 17:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Can't find the wikiproject ping, so you also could cross post here: Wikidata:WikiProject Periodicals. In my opinion a qualifier start-time/end-time on the subclass-of->publication statement would work too. --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:36, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Use inception (P571). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:58, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think this is OK. inception (P571) seems to be for organisations, not for works. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Never mind. I found that we can use "start time" and "end time" with publication date (P577). I just didn't find the qualifier names. Yann (talk) 21:14, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Could someone add that information to the talk page documentation? It would help, as I've failed to find this information in the past as well when I needed it. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Quick statements tools

I am using quick_statements.

I am writing

Q17422703 P393 [+-]1*

but nothing is happening.

Xaris333 (talk) 18:53, 11 June 2016 (UTC)


P393 has datatype "string", so the value would need to be formatted as "1"
--- Jura 19:03, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Many thanks! Xaris333 (talk) 19:19, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Looking for a great person to do the community communication around Wikidata

Hey everyone :)

Over the past 4 years - since the beginning of the development - I have been doing the community communications around Wikidata. The main objectives being that there is good communication between the editors, the development team and everyone else around Wikidata and that the project is a healthy and welcoming place. Since then Wikidata has grown massively and I have also taken on the product management for Wikidata. Both tasks are getting too big to be handled by one person while still giving editors and the development team the attention they deserve. Because of this I am now looking to hire someone who takes over the community communications part. I hope we can find an enthusiastic and knowledgeable person who can support you all.

The job add is here: https://wikimedia.de/wiki/Project_Manager_(m/f)_Community_Communication_Wikidata If you have any questions feel free to reach out to me. If you know someone who would be a good fit please do reach out to them and encourage them to apply.

PS: Don't worry. I'll still be around and available to you all but focusing more on the product management. Wikidata and you all are still very precious to me.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 07:50, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Not sure if this should be same person, but you might want to seek to appoint someone would see to make available an easy-to-use infobox to Wikipedia sites. This could help mid-sized and larger size wikis to complete their data with Wikidata and ensure that items are also more likely to be updated by these communities. Personally, I think many infobox solutions are either fairly complex or somewhat fragile.
    --- Jura 12:51, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

How to list all seasons of a championship in a Wikidata page

Hello. I want to list all the seasons of en:La Liga ( like 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574) ) in LaLiga (Q324867). What statement should I use? Maybe has part(s) (P527) Xaris333 (talk) 14:15, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

It would be "has instance" but it does not exists. You'll have to use a query. author  TomT0m / talk page 15:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m What do you mean I should use a query? Xaris333 (talk) 15:31, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: To get a list of all seasons in WIkidata, you can use the query 
select ?season where { ?season wdt:P279*/wdt:P31 Q324867 }
Try it!
. It does not return results atm, it seems, so the statements must be missing. There should be a statement from a season to its championship. author  TomT0m / talk page 15:50, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m but I want to add all the seasons in LaLiga (Q324867). I want to know if there is a property to do that or not. Xaris333 (talk) 15:53, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: What's your usecase ? There is no property to do that. And as we can enter the information in another way, what you want to do with this is important. Anyway there is no inverse of instance of (P31) and this won't happen probably, it's easier to say that a season is an instance of a championship in each championship that the converse ... ultimately we will be able to use query results natively, so if you want to include the results in an article this will be engouh. In the meanwhile you can use listeria bot if your wikipedia is OK with this. author  TomT0m / talk page 16:02, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m I just think is useful to have the Wikidata items of all the editions of a championship listed on the wikidata page of that championship. Just that. Xaris333 (talk) 16:10, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: It's more efficient to add {{Item documentation}} on the talkpage and to click on "list of instances" :) author  TomT0m / talk page 16:17, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

User:TomT0m what about has part(s) (P527)? Xaris333 (talk) 22:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xaris333: has part(s) (P527) is a generic property, explained a little bit in Help:BMP, used in other projects with a different meaning. It's not really appropriate here as the main use case for this property is physical objects that have physical parts, for example
⟨ Himalayas (Q5451)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ has part Search ⟨ https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q513 ⟩
. But here, "the ligua" is a kind of championship (the top association football championship in Spain), that is instantiated every year. Every instance has parts which are football matches. But the kind does not really have "parts", we can't really delimitate a beginning or an end to "the ligua" whereas every of its instance have a beginning and an ending that are predictable. There is a specific object that will have a beginning and an ending, it's the organisation around the competition. But the organisation is not a competition. A competition should have competitive parts, and orgganisation should have organisation parts, a whatever should have whatever parts. Actually it's an antipattern to have an instance that is also a part. We should have database reports to clean that up. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

User:TomT0m, OK I understand. One more question. In 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574) should I use subclass of (P279) of LaLiga (Q324867) or part of (P361) of LaLiga (Q324867)? Xaris333 (talk) 11:27, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xaris333: None, the correct answer was given ealier : instance of (P31). A specific championship is a competition, not a kind of competion, so subclass of is out of scope. Subclass of links kind of stuffs to kind of stuffs, never concrete stuffs to concrete stuffs or concrete stuffs to kind of stuffs. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:57, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574) instance of (P31) sports season of a sports club (Q1539532). How can I show that is a specific championship of a competition? Xaris333 (talk) 12:10, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: : . As any instance of a subclass is an instance of the parent class, by definition, this is enough. You don't have to repeat that it's a sport season in 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574)  View with Reasonator View with SQID. Plus an item can be instance of several classes, no problem with that. author  TomT0m / talk page 12:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m but LaLiga (Q324867) is not a sports season of a sports club (Q1539532). Is a association football league (Q15991303) or a national championship (Q3270632). 2014–15 La Liga (Q16600574) is a sports season of a sports club (Q1539532). Xaris333 (talk) 12:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: Please open association football league (Q15991303) :) It's both, and it can be both, what would be the problem ? author  TomT0m / talk page 12:32, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Description of sports season of a sports club (Q1539532): the activity of a sports club during the portion of one year in which regulated games of a sport are played as part of a league or other multi match tournament. Xaris333 (talk) 12:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict) ...which you added yesterday. But really - it isn't (or shouldn't be) sports season of a sports club (Q1539532). --Edgars2007 (talk) 12:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I am confuse... What should I use? Xaris333 (talk) 13:13, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Xaris333: If you stopped beat around the bush and come straight to the point, if by any luck there is one, what would it be ? author  TomT0m / talk page 13:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:TomT0m, User:Edgars2007 Οκ. So there is no statement to show that a championship season is a part of the parent competition and there is no statement to list all the championship season to the parent competition? And you are saying that there is no need for that. Xaris333 (talk) 13:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Instance of when it comes to roller coasters?

I'm having a bit of trouble when it comes to defining the instance of part of roller coasters. Some items, like New Texas Giant (Q1353100) states that it is an instance of (P31) steel roller coaster (Q2389789) and wooden roller coaster (Q973560), which in turn is subclass of (P279) to roller coaster (Q204832). What would be the best way of modelling this? Is it to say that all roller coasters are instance of (P31) of roller coaster (Q204832) and then have some kind of type property to define what type of coaster it is? Or is it the other way around, making each coaster an instance of that specific type of coaster, just as the example with New Texas Giant (Q1353100)? //Mippzon (talk) 21:35, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

New Texas Giant (Q1353100)instance of (P31)wooden roller coaster (Q973560) and wooden roller coaster (Q973560)subclass of (P279)roller coaster (Q204832) looks right to me. instance of (P31) is used for individual examples of things, subclass of (P279) is used for classes of things that have individual examples. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 22:00, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm having trouble understanding how it's both a steel and wooden roller coaster, which may be part of your problem. --Izno (talk) 22:54, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
From reading the en.wp article it seems to have been a wooden roller coaster that was rebuilt with steel track on the original wooden frame. The en.wp articles about wooden and steel rollercoasters strongly suggests that it is the track material that defines what type of coaster it is. If so I think this is best represented as
⟨ New Texas Giant (Q1353100)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ instance of (P31) View with SQID ⟨ wooden roller coaster (Q973560)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
start time (P580) View with SQID ⟨  1990 ⟩
end time (P582) View with SQID ⟨  2009 ⟩
. Thryduulf (talk) 00:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions and clarifications! I think it's a good approach! //Mippzon (talk) 07:42, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Not sure about it. It depends of how we define wooden roller coaster (Q973560)  View with Reasonator View with SQID : is it only wood or made of some wood ? A different approach could be to create a "mix wood/metal rollercoaster" and to reserve the wooden to those who are mostly wood ...
It depends if we want that wooden roller coaster (Q973560)  View with Reasonator View with SQID is disjoint with the equivalent for metal. author  TomT0m / talk page 12:46, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't know much about it, but the en.wp article explicitly says that wooden coasters can have steel supports, and that they often have a metal strip along the top of the rails, so I think that the terms "wooden rollercoaster" and "steel rollercoaster" are more standardised classifications based on the primary material used for the track than literal descriptions. I also don't see a problem with a disjoint union where an item used to be X but is now Y where there is no temporal overlap. Thryduulf (talk) 13:11, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Remove all items from a property

Hello. I know how to remove a property of a list of items with PetScan. But in the case of multiple values, only 1 will be deleted. How can I delete all values at once? Xaris333 (talk) 22:34, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, if you write simply "-Px", then it should remove all values. At least in Autolist it was like that. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:18, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Edgars2007 if I write "-Px" it may remove all the statements and not all the values of the one statement that I want. Xaris333 (talk) 11:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
You must rerun PetScan with the same values/dataset. --ValterVB (talk) 06:38, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! Xaris333 (talk) 11:29, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Constraint:Format

I need some help with the form constraints in Property talk:P2898. Allowed values are 'A' to 'Z' and 'AB', 'AC' and 'BD'. Stockholms city also need a "novalue". -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Simplified to ([A-Z]|A[BC]|BD). I don't think you can put "novalue" in this way. --Edgars2007 (talk) 07:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Probably you can add "Stockholms city" in "exceptions" of the Constraint template. --ValterVB (talk) 07:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Vegan product, Wikidata and negation ...

WikiProject Ontology has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

Hi people, just hearing a cooking radio program whose subject today is cooking without meat, naturally the word "vegan" and some definitions where used. I decided to see where Wikidata is on this issue, and ran on the item vegan product (Q7918273) which poses an ontology problem : negation.

How do we say that vegan products are products that did not involve animals at all ? Wanted to share my questions and thoughts here. It's not so easy to express something that is defined by the abscence of something ...

I think that part of the answer in disjoint union of (P2738) View with SQID : we can divide the product class goods (Q28877)  View with Reasonator View with SQID into vegan products and non vegan products, considering a product can't be both vegan and non vegan as it's impossible that a production has both involved animal work and did not, for simplification. Some corner cases but I guess the definition is good enough to treat them : if a bee has been involved in pollination of a flower, it does not mean the fruit is non vegan. So

⟨ product ⟩ disjoint union Search ⟨ values in qualifier ⟩
of (P642) View with SQID ⟨ vegan product ⟩
of (P642) View with SQID ⟨ non vegan product ⟩

.

I don't know however how to model the fact that an animal was involved in the production of non vegan products. Thoughts ? author  TomT0m / talk page 09:56, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Partly the same problems with my proposal here. I (sooner or later) have to describe that in election X, you are not allowed to have more than two year old unpaid municipal taxes, and you are not allowed to have municipal poverty aid, to be allowed to vote in the municipal election. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:35, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

I would not use the qualifier in goods (Q28877), but in food (Q2095), I suppose we are talking about food. The proposal of the qualifier disjoint union of (P2738) makes sense. --FocalPoint (talk) 11:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@FocalPoint: Nope, it's broader that just food according to the en/de description. But it lack a source for the definition. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, I can see that some sort of does not/must not/may not contain/include/have/consist of property is going to be needed at some point for things that are defined by the absence rather than presence of something. Relatedly, a couple of times I've come across situations where an "except" property would be very handy, e.g. I can see it as necessary for some Wikivoyage listings for the very common (in the UK) "no animals except guide dogs" restriction. Thryduulf (talk) 12:44, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

0.4% of the population of Finland

Some of you might have read the post by Markus Krötzsch at https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikidata/2016-June/008860.html

It appears that there are items for 0.4% of the population of Finland (Q33) (about 5.5 million).

It's probably a good thing, but I was wondering why that is so.

One of the hypothesis given was that they live longer.
--- Jura 16:06, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Two periods with start and end points

Hello.

Antonis Papadopoulos Stadium (Q268077) --> occupant (P466) --> Nea Salamis Famagusta FC (Q714581). It has two period that must show with start time (P580) and end time (P582). Its that the way it must look like? I think it is not give to the reader the idea of two separate periodw (1987-1991 and 1994-1995). Xaris333 (talk) 16:18, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Xaris333, I have fixed it from the initial version to that version. It has to be separate, otherwise it does not make sense. An ownership/rent cannot have two start dates. It is two separate periods. --FocalPoint (talk) 18:02, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Could some admin please extend MediaWiki:Gadget-ReasonatorTools.js or copy and adjust a similar gadget for SQID? The code is very simple, it should be: 

	mw.util.addPortletLink(
		'p-tb',
		'//tools.wmflabs.org/sqid/#/view?' + $.param( {
			id: entityId,
		} ),
		'SQID',
		't-sqid',
		'This Wikidata item in SQID'
	);

Thanks! --JakobVoss (talk) 18:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, please. I was just looking for such a link about an hour ago. --Srittau (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Properties for items of work and its volumes

There are item for multivolume encyclopedia (main work) and items for its each volume. In article items are claims published in (P1433) and part of (P361). Question: in article items which the claims with which the items to connect? published in (P1433) the encyclopedia and part of (P361) the volume, or part of (P361) the encyclopedia and published in (P1433) the volume?

I didn't find the definition for it in the rules. According Wikidata:WikiProject_Books#Qualifiers volume (P478) is qualifier for P1433, so set a item of volume in P1433 is incorrect? Also I find that bot owners does set in P1433 and P361 duplicate of the main work item, but volume items don't set at all. E.g.: EB-11 / Descartes, René (Q20635302), EB-9 / Hans Baldung Grün (Q20205006), René Descartes (Q20635301), in ~16 thousand items of "Otto" like Q23875310. --Vladis13 (talk) 00:28, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I use part of (P361) for multivolume encyclopedias. Example: Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 5th volume (Q14565655). --Kolja21 (talk) 07:07, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
No, the example for volume item, but question about article item. Discussion arose with colleague Sergey kudryavtsev. For example, here his changes for articles of ADB. --Vladis13 (talk) 23:14, 10 June 2016 (UTC)
It looks redundant to use both "published in" and "part of". I would leave only the most specific information, in this case "published in:Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie, 5th volume".--Micru (talk) 20:14, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Then can be problem. A script (template/tool/bot) need get from article item the name of encyclopeia, it in "published in", there are item of volume. But volumes of many works also have names, e.g. Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1969–1978), volume 4 (Q24439320) name "Т. 4 : Брасос — Веш". Then script instead name of work get name of volume, and create wrong bibliografy entry "Article // Т. 4 : Брасос — Веш" instead "Article // Great Soviet Encyclopedia". --Vladis13 (talk) 00:46, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Just are State Standard (w:GOST) s:ru:ГОСТ 7.1—2003 about formalization of sources, where in 6.2.4.1.1, 6.2.5.2, 6.2.7.2, 7.5.1.2, 7.5.3 defined term "volume title", also titles written on paper of volumes, and cite templates of wikipedia have the parameter for it. --Vladis13 (talk) 02:30, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

P1476 and property for articles titles in claims

There is a uncertainty about title (P1476) in claims described by source (P1343) or stated in (P248). According Wikidata:WikiProject Books#Qualifiers this property is not qualifier and not using in there, a article title set in other qualifier the section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958) or in chapter (P792).

But bot owners make many tens of thousands of items, there in this claims set the P1476 with value 'article title'. This breaks various templates/tools which make bibliography, because instead title of encyclopedia it gets title of article, and does not get title of article. Look discussion in techforum of ruwikipedia.

Perhaps for the certainty should be to clarify description of the properties P1476 and P958? And if for article title use P958 then could be make it 'monolingual' for definition of language and transliteration of titles? --Vladis13 (talk) 22:58, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

I didn't read the discussion in ruwiki, but the descriptions in English of both p1476 and p958 seem to be quite clear, maybe in Russian they are different? I don't see the need of making P958 monolingual, normally the qualifier refers to a specific edition, which is already in a given language.--Micru (talk) 20:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
In description of title (P1476) no words that it not qualifier and not for described by source (P1343) or stated in (P248). So, it use there that make errors. --Vladis13 (talk) 00:55, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Tool to plot query result on map

I'm looking for a tool to plot the result of a SPARQL query on a map in order to generate something like this. See here for the current version of my query. --Jobu0101 (talk) 20:52, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Try to add in you query #defaultView:Map in first row. --ValterVB (talk) 21:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Query.wikidata.org map
[6] --Atlasowa (talk) 21:07, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Football stadium

association football pitch (Q8524) and association football venue (Q1154710)

What should we use with instance of (P31)? Xaris333 (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

If it's a full stadium, "stadium" with the claim has part(s) (P527) soccer pitch. If it's not a full stadium, probably just 31 soccer pitch. --Izno (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Izno what is the difference between a full and not a full stadium? Xaris333 (talk) 16:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
The stands, I'd assume :). A pitch is a pitch, a stadium is just as much a structure for the spectators as it is for the sportspeople. – Máté (talk) 18:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
User:Máté So every association football venue (Q1154710) has a association football pitch (Q8524)? But not all association football pitch (Q8524) are part of a association football venue (Q1154710)? (I think my problem was due to the Greek translation of both item). Xaris333 (talk) 18:45, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, pretty much. – Máté (talk) 18:48, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Sounds like a good definition. I added has part(s) (P527) statements to association football venue (Q1154710). --Srittau (talk) 22:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Which countries in 1754?

Susannaanas (talk) 07:40, 29 March 2016 (UTC) Abbe98 (talk) 16:53, 29 March 2016 (UTC) Iberti (talk) 17:05, 29 March 2016 (UTC) Eetu Mäkelä (talk) 18:13, 29 March 2016 (UTC) Jura. Good idea! Interested in place names (mainly). Humphrey Southall (talk) 13:43, 11 April 2016 (UTC) Fralambert (talk) 22:36, 11 April 2016 (UTC) Rainer Simon (talk) 10:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC) Melderick (talk) 13:56, 7 June 2016 (UTC) Llywelyn2000 (talk) 16:47, 7 June 2016 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 10:36, 15 June 2016 (UTC) Capankajsmilyo (talk) 21:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC) Ainali (talk) 08:59, 24 November 2016 (UTC) Jheald (talk) 01:15, 17 February 2017 (UTC) B20180 (talk) 05:33, 27 July 2017 (UTC) Elinese (talk) 19:19, 23 March 2018 (UTC) Salgo60 (talk) 10:34, 13 April 2018 (UTC) PKM (talk) 01:31, 15 April 2018 (UTC) Tris T7 TT me Tris T7 (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Sp!ros (talk) 16:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC) Pollockc (talk) 18:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC) ChristianSW (talk) 14:10, 10 December 2020 (UTC) Stephen Gadd (talk) 10:31, 12 January 2022 (UTC) Iain Hallam (talk) 01:36, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject Historical Place @Llywelyn2000:

How should we query countries in the past?

  • w:List of state leaders in 1754 has lists of entities in this years. It's part of a series for other each year. How would we find the same on Wikidata?
  • The general idea might be to query for "P31=country" and look for start and end dates within a range. For most years, I think this is unlikely to give anything useful.
  • Maybe a list of applicable items should be included on 1754 (Q7623) ?

I'm interested in more suggestions.
--- Jura 10:33, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I would like to (again) rise the questions if such items as "Farfaraway during the Middle Ages" really should be regarded as countries? Swedish Empire (Q215443) has the statement: "instance of:former country", when I think it rather should have a statement like "instance of:aspect of history/of:Sweden/from:1611/to:1721". -- Innocent bystander (talk) 11:32, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Best Practices for Wikidata

If I remember correctly, a recent paper claimed that one of the problems with Wikidata is the inconsistency in the dataset. We often have discussions here and in other places, how a certain kind of item should be marked up. These discussions are great and very helpful, but their consensus then tends to vanish into the archive at some point, never to be seen again. We also have Wiki projects (I think) that are concerned with certain kinds of items, but these are hard to discover and not very homogeneous. So, whenever I am marking up an item I do it to the best of my knowledge, possibly referencing what a few other items.

I don't think this situation is great and I would like to change it. Therefore I recommend that we create a set of "best practices" documents, all collected in one place for easy reference. These can help to markup items in an unknown area, aid in homogenoufying (yay!) existing items, and aid as a general reference, so you don't forget claims. I made a proposal for the overview page at Wikidata:Best practices and an example of how a set of guidelines could look like at Wikidata:Best practices/Streets. Please ignore the Wiki code for now, this should be templatified (yay again!) if we agree that this is a good idea. Also, everything on those pages is up for experimentation. Don't like the layout, don't like the color, don't like the way subjects are distributed? Change it.

Please use the discussion pages of those pages for a detailed discussion of layout, and distribution, and keep the general discussion of such a feature here. --Srittau (talk) 14:13, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@Srittau: FYI I tried to create such a page here : Help:Modelling a few years ago. author  TomT0m / talk page 14:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
That's very good! I think the main problem is that that page is not linked very prominently, neither on Wikidata:MainPage, nor on Wikidata:Community portal. Such a reference page needs to be accessed quickly, in my opinion. Also, personally I would prefer to have the general explanation separate from the concrete modelling of specific types of items. And I prefer to have one page per item type, like in my proposal, to make it less overwhelming, to be able to link to it directly, and to enable more concentrated discussions on the talk page. --Srittau (talk) 14:31, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
It tends to duplicate what some WikiProjects are already doing.
--- Jura 14:43, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the idea is that the WikiProjects document their developed best practices on those pages. Currently, they are "locked away" (hard to find) for people that are not part of that WikiProject or do not know about it. --Srittau (talk) 15:20, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, Best Practice pages should link back to Wiki projects, if applicable. --Srittau (talk) 15:22, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Wikiprojects are not really reliable: which wikiproject can help to define the data structure for persons ? Snipre (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
@Srittau: Check that your pages/subpages structure allows the translation tool: if you want that people use this page you should provide it in different languages. Snipre (talk) 09:58, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #213

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Tiny datathon on lighthouses

We'll be arranging an event at the National Archives in Finland about lighthouses. For the purpose, I have been experimenting with Wikidata-driven infoboxes. However, it seems that some properties either do not exist, or may have been decided to be used through qualifiers. Here are some of my worries, how should I express them?

Thanks for your help! /Susannaanas (talk) 12:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not a subject expert though so I may be missing some things. Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 13:31, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, this got it going already!

  • I think a new property for vehicle range (P2073) could be created. I'll wait until after the event with this. I am also not a subject expert.
  • Light source / light - is different from source of energy (P618). I will be using that for electricity.
  • For light intensity I hope there will be suggestions.
  • I'll be using light characteristic (P1030), I will see if fogsignal and racon are included in that.
  • For marking, I will also see how it's used in WP to get an idea.

Cheers, Susannaanas (talk) 14:04, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Should I start by making a version of the IB template? And create a project? /Susannaanas (talk) 14:27, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Sounds good. The advantage we had with films is that most properties had datatype item. It might be harder with quantities - partial support/improved support for that was added to HarvestTemplates (and QuickStatements) just recently. Help:Import Template:Bio from itwiki might be another format. I had used it for a fairly simple (follow-up) import project. Not sure what works best to get people started.
      --- Jura 14:43, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

New project started, WikiProject Lighthouses!! Worked half-way Finnish and English properties for lighthouses!! Help check the project table and join mapping!! /Susannaanas (talk) 17:22, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Lighthouses vs islands

Most lighthouse articles (and Wikidata items) in my Finnish collection are combinations of lighthouses and natural formations they stand on. Before I start to do an immense bisecting operations, I ask what is the right thing to do. I presume the islands and lighthouses must be made separate entities.

  • How to decide how to relink the articles in different languages?
  • How should the infobox be created to read the correct data?

/ Susannaanas (talk) 16:39, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Is there an easy way to transfer population from Enwiki to here?

Im just wondering if there is an automated process than can tranasfer the data here. MechQuester (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

See WD:BOTREQ. There are also some tools like petscan, quick_statements, but I would advise to go to BOTREQ first, before you are familiar with Wikidata. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:17, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Also, is there a glossary of items such as P31:Q5? MechQuester (talk) 22:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
@MechQuester: Don't transfer the data from en:wp but find the original source for population data: 1) this is easier to import from one file than to extract data from infoboxes and 2) en:wp is not a source and a lot of wikipedians don't recognize wp imported data as reliable. So if you want to spend time in that contribution just be sure to spend it in useful work. Snipre (talk) 10:03, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
@Snipre:, oh hello. Thanks for responding. What format the file must be in? PDF? Excel? MechQuester (talk) 00:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
@MechQuester: The best is excel or txt but you have to check that with the bot operator who will do the data import. Snipre (talk) 12:19, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

subclass of (P279) human (Q5)

I just removed subclass of (P279) human (Q5) from all items that had instance of (P31) profession (Q28640) or ethnic group (Q41710) . From the remaining subclasses, I think many are invalid as well. What would you consider valid subclasses for human (Q5)? I lean towards only a very few like: living person, dead person, male, female, boy, girl, etc., but not anything involving professions, titles, ethnicity, etc. --Danmichaelo (talk) 21:25, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

The problem is mainly that items for specific persons should use P31=Q5, not P31=child or whatever.
--- Jura 09:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Agree, I could imagine "fictive/mythological human" to be a subclass of human. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 11:11, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Which would not be a good model for us given that we have fictional analog. --Izno (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I have not fully familiarized myself with the model for fiction, so you may have right. But I think it is a plausible model, nomatter if we use it or not. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, there may be some cases where a person was never an adult human... --Izno (talk) 11:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
So, why aren't nurses human? (Is there a pointer to that discussion?) --Denny (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Were I to argue the point, it's that any professional would be a subclass of "person" and not necessarily "human". --Izno (talk) 16:18, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
In how we use the word "person" in Swedish, a dead human is a person, an organisation/company is a person, the state is a person. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:33, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not sure. Basically I just found it strange to have nurse, say, being both a profession and a subclass of human at the same time. If someone has occupation (P106) nurse (Q186360) and the latter is subclass of human, does it have any reasoning implications, or is it unproblematic? And if nurse is a class (subclass of human), does that imply it should be ok to add instances of that class or not? Danmichaelo (talk) 20:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I do not think there is a problem with possible inference regarding that. --Denny (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Yesterday, I learned about a cat acting as a stockbroker (Q4182927) and in a StarTrek-novel some time ago I learned about a tree that acted as a physician (Q39631). -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:36, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Tama (Q1201902) was a house cat (Q146) and a station master (Q2962020). Thryduulf (talk)
OK, there are two arguments here which are independent:
1) nurse as a subclass of something agent-y, like human or a bit higher (so to also allow cats and others, if needed), instead of not being a subclass.
2) nurse as a subclass of human, specifically (as in my question). I won't necessarily defend that one.
I am more interested in argument 1: why should nurse not be a subclass of something agent-like? --Denny (talk) 17:48, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Bounding box

I was unable to locate previous discussions about how to declare a bounding box. The properties coordinates of southernmost point (P1333) etc. seem inappropriate since they declare a point lather than latitude or longitude. A set of 4 properties that declare only latitude or longitude with datatype (?) or 2 properties that declare for example Southwestern and Northeastern corner points as coordinates would be handy. /Susannaanas (talk) 09:22, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Use case for example:

⟨ A map ⟩ has geospatial coverage Search ⟨ - ⟩
southwestern corner Search ⟨ coordinate ⟩
northeastern corner Search ⟨ coordinate ⟩

/ Susannaanas (talk) 09:40, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I think we had lots of talk, but no action. So: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Place#Bounding_box
--- Jura 09:58, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

Property proposal tool: undocumented changes

I recently created a property proposal using the new tool, and the instructions say "Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below and add it in the appropriate section.". There is no mention of how that should be done; and no example. This is likely to be barrier to less-experienced contributors. Where is the documentation, and how should the required steps be explained? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:31, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

And if my addition at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work, for example, is correct then the template shows up at the end of the preceding section when that is edited. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:37, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I've restored the above, from the archive, as the issue persists. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:36, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Andy, feel free to edit Wikidata:Property_proposal/Header with whatever suggestion you have for improved wording. Is the issue on how to "add in the appropriate section"? Or do you feel something there should be more automated? If the functionality is the issue, there are ongoing discussions on the talk page of Wikidata:Property_proposal of how this should all work. From evidence at least other people don't seem to be having trouble with the new method of adding proposals. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:55, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I can't edit items

I cannot see the "Edit" button at the top of item pages, e.g. at the top of Q1434465 I only see "Read" and "View history". This is from a Chrome browser, either logged in or not. Obviously I can edit other articles, such as I am right now. I was able to edit at least two days ago, but something changed. Mwtoews (talk) 21:43, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mwtoews: Can you see any [edit] sections in the middle of the item? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mwtoews: For instance, I just edited that item. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:00, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh my gosh, I wasn't looking properly. I see the individual "Edit" buttons all over, for each section. For some reason I was expecting to see the "Edit" near the top, as it is on other Wikimedia projects. Problem solved YesY, sorry for the noise! Mwtoews (talk) 22:06, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mwtoews: No problem: this project is different. It uses a lot of scripts for interface and mw:Wikibase. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Creating new items

Is it OK to create wikidata for people who don't have pages on Wikipedia? Either for authors who may not meet the notability requirements as one example or notable people who just don't have a page yet. Gbawden (talk) 07:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Have you read our notability policy yet? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 07:42, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
If their book is already on Wikipedia, but no article for the author, then yes it is useful to create a data item for the author. If the author, or book, is not notable then in general you probably shouldn't create items for them. There may be some exceptions, for example, if the book is published in print by a publishing house, has an ISBN number, etc. then it may be useful to create items. Some highly-specialised non-fiction books are only printed in small runs. Obviously, we shouldn't be creating items just in the hope of promoting a friend's band, book, etc. Danrok (talk) 16:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Complex constraints, help wanted!

Help needed at Property talk:P856#Single value constraint! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:04, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

"Wikidata:Sample lua code" ?

I propose to start something like "Wikidata:Sample lua code" (similar to http://lua-users.org/wiki/SampleCode). An example for such a page would be the lua code I´m writing at the moment. It is code for machine translating labels written in latin script into names that have no Macedonian labels (the reason was I will sort names with lua function table.sort). I´m not sure if the code is good enough to show the machine translated names to the editors / readers in mkWiki (I don´t speak mk). At least a central page could help that Wikimedia lua hackers share sample code and maybe someone finds an improvement to the code listed on this page. Is there any interest in such a page? --Molarus 18:07, 14 June 2016 (UTC)

I was told that for machine translation a translation table for each language pair is needed, therefore I´ve choosen a solution without machine translation. But we could use such a code for example to translate text for the ArticlePlaceholder, by improving lua Module:AboutTopic. At least I think so, I have no experience with that module. Therefore such a sample code would still be worth writing on a sample list. By the way, I would like to have the ArticlePlaceholder installed at wikidata, because I don´t think that there are coders in those small wikipedias who could improve the lua module AboutTopic. --Molarus 21:10, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

HarvestTemplates for WikiProject Roller Coasters?

I'm trying to build up Wikidata:WikiProject Roller Coasters when I have the time to do so, and would highly appreciate any help I can get! I've noticed that other projects, such as Lighthouses and Movies, uses the HarvestTemplate tool and sets up tables for this on the project pages. Can anyone help me do so on the Roller Coaster project as well? Or point me to where I find more information on how to do it? //Mippzon (talk) 20:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Proposal: Add DiffLists.js as a gadget

See MediaWiki talk:Gadgets-definition#Proposal: Add DiffLists.js as a gadget. --Yair rand (talk) 21:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Need advice about tools

I need some advice about Wikidata tools. I recently wrote Commons:Module:Authority Control and am working on reconciling Commons Identifiers with Wikidata counterparts. To make job easier the module creates many maintenance categories (see c:Category:Authority control maintenance) and use color-coding to help figuring out which identifier is local and which come from Wikidata (see here. However when I discover that an identifier is missing from Wikidata and should be added. The adding process takes a long time and takes many clicks and typing info many little windows. I was looking for a way to make it easier. One idea I had was for my module to create link to Wikidata API and add a claim with a single click. Is it possible and did anybody tried before. Another idea I had was to use quick_statements. I wrote c:Module:Authority control/sandbox that can create a string that can be pasted to quick_statements window. But when I tried pasting "Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565" I got a message: "Processing Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565 (Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565)" but the Q1819051 did not change. Did I do something wrong or maybe the tool no longer works? Any better tool out there to add a claim with the minimum of operations? --Jarekt (talk) 04:23, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I had kind of such idea few months ago, but I abondened it. Few weeks ago I accidentally noticed, that you can pass string to Quick statements and decided to use that. In your example "500096804" should be with quotes. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh, now I looked at module (documentation)... You actually need to put tabs not spaces between values. "Example" with string passing to quick statements. IMHO, it isn't a good idea to show all those colors to "normal" users (also this string for passing to QS), but that is different story. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Edgars2007 Thanks for your help with Quick statements. I will try "" and make sure I have tabs between statements. I placed tabs there but they seemed to have been stripped at some stage and replaced with spaces, while being placed in the template c:Creator:Leonard Wintorowski, which I am using to test a sandbox version of Commons:Module:Authority Control/Sandbox. As for the use of color-coded identifiers, we are trying to minimize exposure of "normal" users to them. They mostly show up in pages that have both "Wikidata" parameter and local identifiers, which is a tiny minority of pages, as we have bots cleaning up the pages. If there are no conflicts the pages are clean up very quickly, and there are not that many mismatches and identifiers that have to be added to Wikidata. --Jarekt (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
By the way, this is working great now Commons:Module:Authority Control generates codes that can be used with quick_statements to transfer identifiers we have on Commons but not on Wikidata. Once a user manually verifies that identifier is valid and is related to the same person as wikidata item. See c:Category:Pages using authority control with parameters for description of the process. --Jarekt (talk) 13:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Humans without Q5

I tried to improve the report at Wikidata:Database reports/Humans without Q5.

The idea is that Harald V of Norway (Q57287) should have instance of (P31) = human (Q5) even if it may have other values in P31.

Currently it shows a series of items with the following issues:

etc.
--- Jura 10:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Quite a nice list. I see that many are about occupation (P106) and this seems to come from worker (Q327055) being a subclass of human (Q5).

Regarding some other issues:

By the way, do we have a gadget to easily move a claim from a property (instance of (P31)) to another (noble title (P97)) in the same item ? Melderick (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I do not think "bog body" is a good replacement for human (Q5). The articles around Luttra Woman (Q179281) discuss not only the dead body in the bog, but also what happened to her, how and when she lived and how she died. She became a "bog body" in 1943. She lived 3000 BC and was not a bog body then. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
please use Wikidata:Bybrunnen or another thread
  • @Esquilo, Väsk, Averater: mfl svennar! "Nordmän" (Norse) börjar dyka upp lite oväntade ställen. "Norse runestone" är en sådan (för att skilja dem från anglosaxiska runstenar) och härovan nämns en annan. Hur översätter man dethäringa så en vanlig svenne begrip? Jag vill minnas att vi översätter det lite olika beroende på sammanhang, så när det hamnar på lite udda platser så vet jag inte riktigt vad jag ska göra med det. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
    "Fornnordisk" borde väl fungera i de flesta sammanhang? Men jag tycker INTE att Q24451723 platsar som instance of (P31). Faktum är att jag inte ser någon vettig användning alls för den på rak arm. /ℇsquilo 18:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
    Detta är gansa långt utanför min expertis. Nordisk är det enda jag kommer på. Istället för Norse human förordar jag mer specifika indelningar men det kanske är självklart? Är nulevande svennar och norrmänn underkategorier till nordiska människor? --Averater (talk) 06:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    Please use Wikidata:Diskusjon and share the result here in English -- Jura 07:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Esquilo, Averater: Definitionen av "norse" (om jag förstått saken rätt) är väl 'förkristna skandinaver', särskilt vikingar? "För nordmännens vrede, bevara oss!". Diskussionen om huruvida P31:Norse human är lämplig eller inte gör sig nog bättre längre upp (eller längre ner). Jag gillar det inte alls, men det är som sagt en annan diskussion. "Nordisk runsten" kanske funkar, (med förhoppning att vi inte hittar en samisk, kvänsk eller finsk runsten) isht som de flesta bevarade runstenarna är kristna. Och norse som språk brukar vi väl översätta "fornnordiska"?
    @Jura1: The Swedish village pump was redirected to Project Chat, since it run out of users! (WD:Diskusjon is our rich neighbour in the west.) The alternative was to make it into a soft redirect to sv.wikipedia, and I would try to avoid that. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    I don't think English speakers agree to this redirect.
    --- Jura 07:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The Swedish chat didn't accomplish what it was intended to. The main contributor at Bybrunnen was MediaWiki message delivery. It is here at PC you will find most of the Swedish speaking users. The subject above was how we should treat the English word "Norse" in Swedish, since it, AFAIK, is translated differently depending on the circumstances. And it is difficult to add "circumstances" into the labels of an item. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
This is slightly irrelevant to this thread. Besides, it was started in English and at least you should be able to comment in English. If you couldn't, I'd understand that you comment in whatever language you can. For pages that are not language specific project chats you are free to comment in whatever language you wish, even if you could comment in English.
--- Jura 13:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Need advice about tools

I need some advice about Wikidata tools. I recently wrote Commons:Module:Authority Control and am working on reconciling Commons Identifiers with Wikidata counterparts. To make job easier the module creates many maintenance categories (see c:Category:Authority control maintenance) and use color-coding to help figuring out which identifier is local and which come from Wikidata (see here. However when I discover that an identifier is missing from Wikidata and should be added. The adding process takes a long time and takes many clicks and typing info many little windows. I was looking for a way to make it easier. One idea I had was for my module to create link to Wikidata API and add a claim with a single click. Is it possible and did anybody tried before. Another idea I had was to use quick_statements. I wrote c:Module:Authority control/sandbox that can create a string that can be pasted to quick_statements window. But when I tried pasting "Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565" I got a message: "Processing Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565 (Q1819051 P245 500096804 S143 Q565)" but the Q1819051 did not change. Did I do something wrong or maybe the tool no longer works? Any better tool out there to add a claim with the minimum of operations? --Jarekt (talk) 04:23, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I had kind of such idea few months ago, but I abondened it. Few weeks ago I accidentally noticed, that you can pass string to Quick statements and decided to use that. In your example "500096804" should be with quotes. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:21, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Oh, now I looked at module (documentation)... You actually need to put tabs not spaces between values. "Example" with string passing to quick statements. IMHO, it isn't a good idea to show all those colors to "normal" users (also this string for passing to QS), but that is different story. --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Edgars2007 Thanks for your help with Quick statements. I will try "" and make sure I have tabs between statements. I placed tabs there but they seemed to have been stripped at some stage and replaced with spaces, while being placed in the template c:Creator:Leonard Wintorowski, which I am using to test a sandbox version of Commons:Module:Authority Control/Sandbox. As for the use of color-coded identifiers, we are trying to minimize exposure of "normal" users to them. They mostly show up in pages that have both "Wikidata" parameter and local identifiers, which is a tiny minority of pages, as we have bots cleaning up the pages. If there are no conflicts the pages are clean up very quickly, and there are not that many mismatches and identifiers that have to be added to Wikidata. --Jarekt (talk) 16:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
By the way, this is working great now Commons:Module:Authority Control generates codes that can be used with quick_statements to transfer identifiers we have on Commons but not on Wikidata. Once a user manually verifies that identifier is valid and is related to the same person as wikidata item. See c:Category:Pages using authority control with parameters for description of the process. --Jarekt (talk) 13:37, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Database reports/Humans without Q5

I tried to improve the report at Wikidata:Database reports/Humans without Q5.

The idea is that Harald V of Norway (Q57287) should have instance of (P31) = human (Q5) even if it may have other values in P31.

Currently it shows a series of items with the following issues:

etc.
--- Jura 10:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Quite a nice list. I see that many are about occupation (P106) and this seems to come from worker (Q327055) being a subclass of human (Q5).

Regarding some other issues:

By the way, do we have a gadget to easily move a claim from a property (instance of (P31)) to another (noble title (P97)) in the same item ? Melderick (talk) 14:05, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I do not think "bog body" is a good replacement for human (Q5). The articles around Luttra Woman (Q179281) discuss not only the dead body in the bog, but also what happened to her, how and when she lived and how she died. She became a "bog body" in 1943. She lived 3000 BC and was not a bog body then. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 16:03, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
please use Wikidata:Bybrunnen or another thread
  • @Esquilo, Väsk, Averater: mfl svennar! "Nordmän" (Norse) börjar dyka upp lite oväntade ställen. "Norse runestone" är en sådan (för att skilja dem från anglosaxiska runstenar) och härovan nämns en annan. Hur översätter man dethäringa så en vanlig svenne begrip? Jag vill minnas att vi översätter det lite olika beroende på sammanhang, så när det hamnar på lite udda platser så vet jag inte riktigt vad jag ska göra med det. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
    "Fornnordisk" borde väl fungera i de flesta sammanhang? Men jag tycker INTE att Q24451723 platsar som instance of (P31). Faktum är att jag inte ser någon vettig användning alls för den på rak arm. /ℇsquilo 18:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
    Detta är gansa långt utanför min expertis. Nordisk är det enda jag kommer på. Istället för Norse human förordar jag mer specifika indelningar men det kanske är självklart? Är nulevande svennar och norrmänn underkategorier till nordiska människor? --Averater (talk) 06:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    Please use Wikidata:Diskusjon and share the result here in English -- Jura 07:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    @Esquilo, Averater: Definitionen av "norse" (om jag förstått saken rätt) är väl 'förkristna skandinaver', särskilt vikingar? "För nordmännens vrede, bevara oss!". Diskussionen om huruvida P31:Norse human är lämplig eller inte gör sig nog bättre längre upp (eller längre ner). Jag gillar det inte alls, men det är som sagt en annan diskussion. "Nordisk runsten" kanske funkar, (med förhoppning att vi inte hittar en samisk, kvänsk eller finsk runsten) isht som de flesta bevarade runstenarna är kristna. Och norse som språk brukar vi väl översätta "fornnordiska"?
    @Jura1: The Swedish village pump was redirected to Project Chat, since it run out of users! (WD:Diskusjon is our rich neighbour in the west.) The alternative was to make it into a soft redirect to sv.wikipedia, and I would try to avoid that. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:19, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
    I don't think English speakers agree to this redirect.
    --- Jura 07:21, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
The Swedish chat didn't accomplish what it was intended to. The main contributor at Bybrunnen was MediaWiki message delivery. It is here at PC you will find most of the Swedish speaking users. The subject above was how we should treat the English word "Norse" in Swedish, since it, AFAIK, is translated differently depending on the circumstances. And it is difficult to add "circumstances" into the labels of an item. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
This is slightly irrelevant to this thread. Besides, it was started in English and at least you should be able to comment in English. If you couldn't, I'd understand that you comment in whatever language you can. For pages that are not language specific project chats you are free to comment in whatever language you wish, even if you could comment in English.
--- Jura 13:52, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

P710 and P1923

Hello. I am using (a lot) participant (P710) to add the participated teams of a league season or a cup season (like 2014–15 Cypriot First Division (Q17001728). I didn't know about participating team (P1923). What should I use? If it is participating team (P1923), how can we correct it (easily) to the pages? Xaris333 (talk) 12:14, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Anyone? Xaris333 (talk) 14:12, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

@Xaris333: Maybe you can find a skilled bot-operator at Wikidata:Bot requests who can help you. I am not saying that this is a typical bot-job, but that this probably can be done by somebody who know how to edit by the help of the API. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm having a bit of trouble understanding if carousel (Q208322)  View with Reasonator View with SQID is the same as manège (attraction) (Q15124452)  View with Reasonator View with SQID and can be merged? Can someone else take a look and maybe explain the differences to me? :) //Mippzon (talk) 16:56, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

FRWP has both Manège and Carrousel, which suggests they're different (note the articles link to each other). Hmm. It seems that, in French at least, manege manège (attraction) (Q15124452)  View with Reasonator View with SQID is any kind of amusement ride which goes round in circles, while carrousel carousel (Q208322)  View with Reasonator View with SQID is specifically the ride with model animals on poles. Manege may also encompass things like swing ride (Q177002). I don't think English makes this distinction, and I'm not sure what other languages do. Andrew Gray (talk) 17:30, 12 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, in French, carroussel (Q208322) is a special manège (Q15124452). On the Wikipedia page of manège, it's written that carousel (Q208322), Teacups (Q2317127), Octopus (Q1127371), Ferris wheel (Q202570), Music Express (Q819232) and swing ride (Q177002) are different type of manège (attraction) (Q15124452). So, a manège is an amusement ride in a circular table which is rotatable. Tubezlob (🙋) 15:14, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! So this should probably mean that carousel (Q208322)  View with Reasonator View with SQID should be subclass of (P279) View with SQID to manège (attraction) (Q15124452)  View with Reasonator View with SQID? //Mippzon (talk) 07:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it's the definition on frwiki. Tubezlob (🙋) 08:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
When adding that subtype it makes sense to read English definitions to the term that allow people to be clear about what's meant with each concept. Otherwise English speakers might use carousel to refer to what the French call manège. It also worth to go through the list of terms on carousel (Q208322)  View with Reasonator View with SQID and see with of the Wikipedia pages actually describe manège (attraction) (Q15124452)  View with Reasonator View with SQID.ChristianKl (talk) 16:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Tool for property removal

Are there tools like Quick statements to remove certain values at certain properties? --Jobu0101 (talk) 21:37, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Autolist has that capability. Be sure of what you do. You may get into deep water easily. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:13, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
I think he more meant removing certain external-id/string values, because I simply don't believe, that Jobu0101 doesn't know about Autolist/PetScan capability ;) But I may be wrong. --Edgars2007 (talk) 10:34, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Probably he want delete more values from one property. Autolist or Petscan delete only one value for run. --ValterVB (talk) 17:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you. Sure I knew autolist but I didn't use it for a long time so I almost forgot about its capabilities. Deleting worked quite well ;). --Jobu0101 (talk) 18:25, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Need advice about Mix'n'match or other tools

I would like to use Mix'n'match or other tool to match all Commons Commons:Category:Creator templates to Wikidata articles. We do have Commons Creator page (P1472) property, (I do not know how many times it was used) but on Commons 20k creator templates have link to Wikidata. However we still do have 3k Creator templates that do not. I would like to either match them with Wikidata items, create items for them, or tag them somehow as not specific enough to be matched. I was reading about Mix'n'match tool but I am not sure if I can use it for the full C:Category:Creator templates list which is 87% matched or just for unmatched c:Category:Creator templates without Wikidata link. However it is unclear if Mix'n'match is the tool for this job, since I do not see it used for matching any other lists of Wikipedia/wikimedia pages with Wikidata. So maybe some other tool: Commons:Category:Institution templates have designated tool for matching (but not creating new wikidata pages), but I did not find anything for creator templates. I was also reading about PetScan. Any other tools I am missing? If Mix'n'match is the tool for this job can someone help me set it up?--Jarekt (talk) 14:14, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

It seems that PetScan doesn't necessarily recognize existing pages: https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=64151
Mix'n'match can be used for this. Unless you plan to start over, you can use just the pages that don't have items yet. To create a new catalog try here. Try to start the entry description with YOB-YOD as in other catalogs.
--- Jura 14:39, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Jura https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=64151 seems to be working for me. It simplifies searching for matches. Unfortunately, once I find a match it is cumbersome to add it to Creator and to Wikidata page. --Jarekt (talk) 15:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Jarekt: Normally, only items without a match should have the "x" pre-selected. I found at least one occurrence where this didn't work. Mix'n'match might do automated mismatches, but at least this limits the ones you need to check. Actual creations for unmatched ones should be easier. If you don't like the mix'n'match catalog, you can ask Magnus to delete it.
    --- Jura 15:43, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
PetScan is great I found some queries that can do some matches automatically, like https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?psid=64999 . --Jarekt (talk) 17:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

ORES live as a beta feature

Hey folks :)

Amir and other have worked hard over the past months to bring ORES to Wikidata. The goal is to use machine learning to make it easier to spot potentially bad edits. ORES is now available as a beta feature on Wikidata. Once you have enabled it you can see some edits in recent changes and watchlist will show up in a different color or have a little r in front of them. These edits are judged as potentially bad and should probably get more review. In your preferences you can adjust how harsh ORES should judge. You can also filter your watchlist/recent changes to only show potentially bad edits. Patrolled edits won't be shown as potentially bad.

This should be a huge step towards making it easier to find and fight vandalism on Wikidata.


Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:14, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Artifical inteligence? Exciting! @Ladsgroup: Is there any bulit-in way to provide feedback on ORES? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 17:57, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@Matěj Suchánek: Thanks. Depends on what kind of feedback you want to give. If you want to report a bug or make a feature request, phabricator is good enough. If you want provide data to make the system better, it can be done via WD:Edit labels but we don't have an active campaign right now. If you found false positives (things ORES should not report but it did) or false negative (things ORES should report but it did not), You can put them in Wikidata:ORES/Report mistakes and we will take a look at it. We also accept cookies if you liked the tool ;) Amir (talk) 20:50, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I meant feedback to the brain of the system. When I activated it and chose the lower threshold, I saw that there were many marked changes. I would say there are now more false positives than indeed bad changes. Maybe those thresholds should be adjusted. By the way, 'r' is short form of what? "review"? (Just because of translation.) Matěj Suchánek (talk) 21:03, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
What you want is called online learning. It can be in some AIs but not in most of them. We talked about this and we decided against it for now. Once it got deployed , it was mostly true positives, I think it's because now we have more patrollers to revert vandalism using this tool. Yes, "r" stands for "review". Amir (talk) 08:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Less UEFA European Football Championship data in Wikidata

Who wants to help filling this table? I was shocked to see that even such basic information is not in Wikidata yet. --Jobu0101 (talk) 22:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

I've added start and end dates to all of them now I think! //Mippzon (talk) 05:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. I'll add the number of participants now. --Jobu0101 (talk) 07:56, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done --Jobu0101 (talk) 08:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks to 109.190.71.85 the table is filled now. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:00, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Note that I added a column in the query below such that there is still data to be added to the UEFA European Football Championships. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:12, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

FIFA World Cups

Now we can play the same game with FIFA World Cups. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

FIFA World Cups and UEFA European Football Championships

One query with both. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mippzon: Thank you for your work. One little remark: We know the number participants, goals and matches exactly. There is no reason to add +-1. --Jobu0101 (talk) 14:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jobu0101: I've been thinking about that one, it's added automatically and I don't know how to get rid of it :( You know how? //Mippzon (talk) 14:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I also don't like that it comes automatically. Very often I have to correct myself when I'm not thinking about that "feature". You can get rid of it by wrinting "24+-0" instead of "24". --Jobu0101 (talk) 14:31, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks! I did not know that! //Mippzon (talk) 14:33, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Set unit in QuickStatements

Is there a way to set the unit in QuickStatements? See for example here. --Jobu0101 (talk) 08:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

No. --Edgars2007 (talk) 08:40, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Will this come in near future? Any plans? --Jobu0101 (talk) 08:45, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't know. Magnus said (last autumn, I think), that it is in his endless to-do-list. Also note, that for this particular property there is constraint for unit. --Edgars2007 (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for pointing out that number of participants (P1132) is a dimensionless quantity. --Jobu0101 (talk) 10:09, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Home team / away team

@Tubezlob, Edgars2007: How do we save in a match item like the Euro 2016 matches which team is the "home" team? Is there some appropriate qualifier property? I think it should be a qualifier used in participant (P710). --Jobu0101 (talk) 12:06, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Do we need a new qualifier for this? Or do we only need Wikidata items for home team and away team and can use an existing qualifier? --Jobu0101 (talk) 14:23, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
The first idea would be to use P31:(home/away team). But probably not the best one. --Edgars2007 (talk) 14:49, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Edgars2007: instance of (P31) as qualifier? --Jobu0101 (talk) 15:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Like here? --Jobu0101 (talk) 15:59, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes. But I had typo in my answer - instead of first the in second sentence there should be not (already fixed), so... --Edgars2007 (talk) 18:33, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jura1: What do you think? Is the use of instance of (P31) as qualifier okay? --Jobu0101 (talk) 19:38, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
My first thought was to use
⟨ football match ⟩ participant (P710) View with SQID ⟨ France (Q142)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
794 Search ⟨ 24633211 ⟩
, and I'm not sure I like instance of (P31) as a qualifier. Thryduulf (talk) 21:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Thryduulf: Thanks. I like P794 (P794) better than instance of (P31) as qualifier so I changed it: [8]. But instead of France (Q142) you should take France national association football team (Q47774). --Jobu0101 (talk) 21:34, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Obviously France national association football team (Q47774) is the appropriate item, cheers. I did just remember though that we now also have subject has role (P2868) available that could work instead of P794 (P794)? Thryduulf (talk) 23:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, Thryduulf's proposals are way much better :) --Edgars2007 (talk) 05:49, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
@Tubezlob, Edgars2007: Okay, I'm open for both: P794 (P794) and subject has role (P2868). What do you prefer? --Jobu0101 (talk) 06:10, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I personally from these two more like P794 (P794). subject has role (P2868) looks too "important". --Edgars2007 (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
How about series ordinal (P1545):1/2?
"has role/as home team" looks like it could be misinterpreted. France is probably according to the rules not the "home team" in all of their games in UEFA 2016, but the supporters and the arena are theirs, which "home team" could be misinterpreted as. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
But "home team" is the official term for it, isn't it? I think it is enough to point that out in the description of home team (Q24633211). --Jobu0101 (talk) 07:36, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, home/away team is pretty official. series ordinal (P1545) will create many questions for football fans, I think. --Edgars2007 (talk) 07:45, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
I know, but we non-football-fans will be confused about how Faroe Islands national football team (Q200688) could be "home team" in a game played in Helsingborg (Q25411), Sweden and how the French team can be away team in Paris. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:57, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
So then they would click on "home team" and read the description. I think it can be explained a little bit more verbose in the description. --Jobu0101 (talk) 08:05, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, the description could be better as the English is currently written by me who is not a football fan and so doesn't know all the intricacies. I don't think series ordinal (P1545) is correct as I would expect that to relate to the order of teams in a turn-based game where the order of play did not change during the match - not what I understand happens in most sports. Thryduulf (talk) 12:28, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
You are probably right. I do not know what a "home/away" team do in football, but I know it in hockey affects how changes of players are made during a match. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:17, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

@Innocent bystander, Jobu0101, Tubezlob, Edgars2007: and the others: Actually, some time ago I thought of a possible way to deal with matches. If you can take a look at it, it works with most of the team sports. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 21:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

user script to show Wikidata changes in article history

Hey folks :)

H4stings has created a user script to show Wikidata changes in the history of a Wikipedia article. (It should also work on the other sister projects.) https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T42358#2363346 The script is at https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utilisateur:H4stings/wef-history.js I'd love to hear your feedback on it so we can see if that is a direction we should explore further.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:11, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) for the announcement. YjM asks me to adapt the script to Czech Wikipedia and I realize that the script can not be just copy/pasted: there is at least a regular expression to adapt to each version of Wikipedia (the var "reH"), so that the script can "read" the time of each line of the Wikipedia history page and display Wikidata lines in between. But when it's done, it seems to work well. (for Czech Wikipedia it's here : cs:Wikipedista:H4stings/wef-history.js) --H4stings (talk) 21:39, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Is there a property where I can list it as "male" or "female"

Im looking at P31:Q5 that lists the imports as instance of human. Is there a property where i also can create a gender of male or male? MechQuester (talk) 15:01, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Is sex or gender (P21) what you're looking for? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:03, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Ah yes. I mean, when i use PetScan to copy some data on births, I am hoping that I would use something like P31:Q5 to enter in the command so that the "sex or gender" can be added. figured it out MechQuester (talk) 05:13, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata and maps

Currently https://query.wikidata.org/ offers a way to display maps. Which options currently exists to use coordinates from Wikidata to generate maps for Wikipedia?
--- Jura 09:26, 5 June 2016 (UTC)

Map
Map

37°48′5″N 122°23′56″W

Children of notable people

In the last three days, two anonymous users created several items about children of notable people and their fictional future careers (mostly copied from a website called Idea Wiki). I blocked the users, deleted the fictional items they created and removed all statements that seemed to be made-up. However, these children really do exist:

Now I am unsure whether to delete these items. On the one hand, these children are clearly not notable on their own. On the other hand, it may be useful to keep them for genealogical purposes. What do you think? Mushroom (talk) 12:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

I'd keep them. This allows you to list children of notable people. --Jobu0101 (talk) 12:47, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, that's my inclination as well. Does anyone have objections to keeping them? Mushroom (talk) 12:52, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
If people aren't notable on their own and their only claim to notability would be their relationship to a notable person, their entry should be deleted. If children could be included for genealogical purposes, there's no reason why we wouldn't do the same for parents. If being the parent of a notable person (i.e. a person listed on Wikidata) is grounds for notability, then once we add someone's parents, we could add their grandparents. Taking children into account again, we could then add all of this person's cousins. In this way, we could cover the entire human race. -- Irn (talk) 14:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm an inclusionist so I'm always inclined to keep items. I would love to have a family tree of the entire human race in Wikidata! :) However, in this case my inclusionist views clash with the fact that these children have a right to privacy, and there is no good reason to expose their personal data (even if they have already been published elsewhere). So upon further reflection and after reading your comment and Jura's below, I have deleted all the items. Mushroom (talk) 16:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I think deleting them items just four hours after creating this topic was too hasty. Remember that non-admins can't see deleted items. - Nikki (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
That is a pretty absurd argument. There is no reason why allowing children means we have to allow the entire human race. We can choose to draw the line wherever and however we want to. It's not all or nothing. - Nikki (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I see your point, but as I said above I am worried about the children's privacy. The items contained only basic data (name, gender, birth date, birthplace, parents) and previously some fictional information added by those vandals. If you want to see the children's names you can find them in the Wikipedia articles about their parents. I think the discussion should not be about these particular items but more generally about when to draw the line when it comes to children. In my opinion, even if their parents have publicly exposed information about them, they still have a right to privacy. Mushroom (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Agreed. I noticed that those with an IMDb ID only appeared once in a single episode of a reality show, so in the end I deleted them as well. Mushroom (talk) 16:46, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mushroom: I consider it bad form to delete items, while a discussion is ongoing. --Srittau (talk) 17:30, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I apologize for that, but as I stated above I was worried about the children's privacy. Mushroom (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
I haven't looked at all of them, but I think some of these are famous enough that having data about them could be useful. For example, an internet search for Sparrow Madden finds thousands of pages. I could totally imagine someone searching Wikipedia to find out more about who it is. The bigger Wikipedias mention the children in the articles about the parents, but smaller Wikipedias won't necessarily have much, if any, information about the parents. With a Wikidata item, we have the ability to provide information available on the larger Wikipedias in a lot more languages (via the Wikidata search results I see on some Wikipedias, ArticlePlaceholder, etc). - Nikki (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
As Nikki points out, we often have information about children of famous people on Wikipedias. Same for spouses and parents. In my opinion, these items are therefore notable for structural reasons, but usually should only get "basic" data (name, gender, birth and death date etc.) Also, notability for structural reasons is not transitive. --Srittau (talk) 17:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, but the only notability they have comes from their parents. These are not adult people who chose to have a public persona, nor do the items fulfill a true structural need (in a family tree they are terminal nodes). The items were also completely unsourced, so I don't see how they could meet our notability standards. Mushroom (talk) 18:10, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe they do, maybe they don't. But we have to be very careful regarding BLP for non-public persons, especially the young. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:19, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
If we can include people as "notable for structural reasons" with a non-transitive notability, then my concerns above become irrelevant. But this raises some more questions for me: how would we distinguish the two on Wikidata? How would we show that certain people's notability can be transferred while that of others can't? And how would we limit the information to basic data for certain people? -- Irn (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2016 (UTC)

Clearly allowed under (2) of the policy "clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity. The entity must be notable, in the sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available references" (which means that there has to be some piblicly reference describing their existence and data). --FocalPoint (talk) 16:30, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

language fallbacks on Wikipedia and co

Hey folks :)

With the rollout of the ArticlePlaceholder one issue became very apparent: language fallbacks for them are needed - especially on the small languages - because otherwise you'll see a lot of Qs and Ps... We should have made this possible a long time ago but now with the ArticlePlaceholder it became more urgent. So starting in the next days you will see more fallbacks happening in Lua and the property parser function on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects using Wikidata data. It will use the usual MediaWiki fallback. It might need a purge for some pages initially to actually show up. If you see any problems popping up with this please let me know about it.


Cheers Lydia – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk • contribs) at 15. 6. 2016, 19:47 (UTC).

Interesting. What if I want to keep data shown strictly in my language? Is there a setting for it, or do I have to look up labels from loaded entities? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:53, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Would you want it for a particular page only? Or for the whole Wikipedia? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
The latter. Ie. whether it's possible to handle that mw.wikibase.label() only returns strings in my language. If it's not and the function also returns for instance English labels, I would have to load a new entity mw.wikibase.getEntity().labels.cs.value which is expensive. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:18, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
We can add that but it doesn't currently exist. But if there is real demand for it we'll make it possible. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

I have created a task for it as I think this is not always correct behavior. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:56, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

How to set a language, not found on the list

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T138131

I'm attempting to edit the modern official name for Q210907, which is should read "Haida Gwaii (Haida)" using the Haida language. However, the drop-down language list does not allow this, nor is there anything related. How can I correctly set this language? Mwtoews (talk) 01:39, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mwtoews: At the moment, this is not possible. An admin needs to add hai (by the way, the correct name is "X̱aayda gwaay"). —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:04, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mwtoews, Koavf: actually a developer needs to add the language. Admins can't add languages. Mbch331 (talk) 06:46, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
@Mbch331, Koavf: Thanks for the feedback; I'll see how it goes with this ticket. There are stacks of other languages out there, I'm not sure if there is a better way to add these (if needed). Mwtoews (talk) 07:09, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
I don´t think adding another language is the solution. We need something like P1448 (official name) for unofficial languages, where the qualifier is an item of the language. --Molarus 07:13, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
I had a look and found that the ISO-639-2 is used extensively. It is not a very relevant standard anymore and, it is in two and this is not reflected. What I also found is that the ISO=639-3 that is currently the relevant standard is not properly developed. It provides the codes that enable access in Wikidata. ISO-639-2 does not. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:22, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Looking at https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T137115 , I'm wondering what a reasonable expectation for the timeframe of a new language configuration would be: @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE):} what do you think?
--- Jura 07:26, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Sorry I let this slide. I'll poke people next week. But With Wikimania coming up it might take a few more days. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:47, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, there is a way. You set "mis" as a langauge code (it means that a language code is missing) and then add a language as a qualifier. Look how it is done in Odin (Q43610). --Lingveno (talk) 06:35, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Q13780930 - generalisable?

I've just discovered that worldwide (Q13780930) has a description (in English and French) of "for use with Property:P291 (as a qualifier) to indicate a worldwide release. See Q1277009 for proper use." implies it should only be used as a qualifier for place of publication (P291).

At Pirelli (Q207770) I've used it as the value to operating area (P2541) (which was previously using the obviously incorrect Worldwide (Q22252068)) - is this correct? If so the label of worldwide (Q13780930) needs amending, if not is there an existing item that needs "world wide"/"worldwide" adding as an alias and/or pointing to in the description?

We do have internationality (Q1072012) but a very quick look at the en.wp page and I'm not sure that's correct. I'm already late so don't have time to do any more investigation or thinking right now. Thryduulf (talk) 10:11, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Header image on items

Hey, I wrote this user script which shows you a header image on an item page. It will only work on items like Berlin that have a statement with a commons image!

You can enable it by adding this script into your Special:MyPage/common.js: 

mw.loader.load( '//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jonas_Kress_(WMDE)/header_image.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' );

If you like it, I would turn it into a gadget. --Jonas Kress (WMDE) (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Could you put a link on the image to the Commons file page? Thank in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 15:26, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
Sure, I will do that --Jonas Kress (WMDE) (talk) 08:36, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Great! --Marsupium (talk) 15:49, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Done! Just click the image ... --Jonas Kress (WMDE) (talk) 09:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

That's great, @Jonas Kress (WMDE):, can you please make the picture showing on the top of the page. Mine is in the below of the page item --Beeyan (talk) 07:57, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand what you are meaning. Could you please provide a screenshot e.g. OK, now I think I know what your problem is. On small screens the sidebar jumps to the bottom and the image is in the sidebar, so it is somewhere in the middle of the screen. Not sure what a good solution would be. Any ideas? --Jonas Kress (WMDE) (talk) 09:18, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Yeah, on iPad its below the statements too. Queryzo (talk) 16:48, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

property suggester broken

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T138059

In case you're wondering why you're not getting any property suggestions while editing Wikidata: It's broken. The good news is that the Wikidata team is fixing it. Multichill (talk) 12:12, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Nikki: --Izno (talk) 13:16, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
It should be fixed tonight. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:45, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Angleren lezvov / Ին Ինգլիշ

Not sure right place to report, but in hywiki labels from WD, not translated into armenian, are shown in English. Bug or feature? Kareyac (talk) 19:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

I would say it's a new feature. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
After some changes in the local Module:Wikidata all labels (translated, English and Q-s), called from WD, became links to WD. Kareyac (talk) 15:32, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Instance of or subclass of ?

rector of the National University of San Marcos (Q6362261) is probably a subclass of: rector (Q212071)

Is it also an instance of: rector (Q212071) of (P642) National University of San Marcos (Q270145) ?
--- Jura 23:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Subclass seems right to me: every rector of the National University of San Marcos (Q6362261) is a rector (Q212071). Instance does not seem right. --Srittau (talk) 01:50, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
As the item includes a qualifier (of (P642) National University of San Marcos (Q270145)), does it make a difference?
--- Jura 04:52, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Nobody ever defined clearly what it would mean. I occasionaly used of (P642) View with SQID as qualifier of subclass of (P279) though, but with a totally different intent (for type of ship to be a subclass of
⟨ type of ship ⟩ subclass of (P279) View with SQID ⟨ class ⟩
of (P642) View with SQID ⟨ ship ⟩
for example. But here it's not the cas at all and it makes the difference beetween instance of and subclass of totally confusing, so no, I would not say it makes a difference.
My prefered way to model this would be a plain statement
⟨ rector of the National University of San Marcos (Q6362261)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ has characteristic (P1552) View with SQID ⟨ value in qualifier ⟩
the inverse of director / manager (P1037) [[Special:Search/Property:the inverse of director / manager (P1037)|Search]] ⟨ the university of san marco ⟩
The intended meaning is every instance of this class directed the university of sans marco. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:09, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I find the qualifier "of (P642) National University of San Marcos (Q270145)" an easy way to link Q270145, but overall, it tends to confuse the generally idea of P31. I wonder if we shouldn't avoid adding such qualifiers to P31 entirely. Most of the time there are actual properties for the same values.
--- Jura 15:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry what is wrong with rector and have qualifiers for begin and end date? The place someone is a rector of may also be a qualifier. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:09, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Merging question

Can vermin (Q1192197) be merged with vermin (Q14756139)? In my language they are both Schädlinge, but without your help I can't decide it.--Kopiersperre (talk) 10:06, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Hoi, approaching it from your language point of view is not a good one. There are 280 languages.. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:07, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
They are the same, comparing the google translate version of the ru.wp article with the en.wp article. I'll merge them. Thryduulf (talk) 09:27, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

help needed for a polish topic : legia warsavia

Legia Warsaw (Q193749)  View with Reasonator View with SQID Legia Warsaw (Q1812607)  View with Reasonator View with SQID (also Legia Warszawa (Q11753729)  View with Reasonator View with SQID) if there is any polish around, please help me sorting out this puzzle. Are the first two items duplicate ? They both appears as value in Paweł Janas (Q711084)  View with Reasonator View with SQID. I'm not sure because it seems that they don't have exactly the same name/aliases and one of them seems military related and not the other. The last one seem to be milk related which suggest legia warsavia have several meanings ... author  TomT0m / talk page 16:39, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

IMHO Q193749 is about association football club (created as branch of Q1812607, independent since April 25, 1989), Q1812607 is about sport club (with many thematic branches), Q11753729 is about motorcycle club (created as branch of Q1812607 in 1930s, joined to Wybrzeże Gdańsk (Q19562051) approx. in 1960 or 1961). - Kareyac (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
I cleaned them up a bit. Legia Warsaw (Q1812607)  View with Reasonator View with SQID has many parts including Legia Warsaw (Q193749)  View with Reasonator View with SQID and Legia Warszawa (Q11753729)  View with Reasonator View with SQID, but when we talk football it is Legia Warsaw (Q193749)  View with Reasonator View with SQID. --Jarekt (talk) 16:22, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Q24661955 - BLP issues

This item (Thomas Mair (Q24661955)) was originally set up with the label "murderer of Jo Cox" but has now been relabelled "Thomas Mair" (the person arrested for the murder) however the descriptions have not generally been updated and so label him a murderer rather than an alleged murderer (or similar). I've fixed the en and en-gb labels, but other languages including French and German need updating too but I don't have the language skills.

I've also had to revert the addition of the claim convicted of (P1399) [9] as he has not been convicted - the main trial hasn't even begun. So it would be good to get additional people watching the page. Thryduulf (talk) 09:37, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Changed the french description. --Melderick (talk) 09:51, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #214

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Marking Bond girls as Bond girls

== Active users == ValterVB LydiaPintscher Ermanon Mushroom Queryzo Danrok Rogi Mbch331 Jobu0101 putnik AmaryllisGardener Andreasmperu U+1F350 Bodhisattwa Shisma Wolverène Tris T7 Antoine2711 CptViraj ʂɤɲ Trivialist 2le2im-bdc Sotiale Wallacegromit1, mostly focus on media historiography and works from the Global South M2k~dewiki Rockpeterson Mathieu Kappler Sidohayder Spinster Gnoeee Ranjithsiji Ontogon Supaplex Carlinmack Haseeb Demadrend Jakeob9000 RealityBites Sriveenkat Keplersj dseomn Fuzheado BeLucky DaxServer PaperHuman

Notified participants of WikiProject Movies. I just found out that Bond girls aren't marked as Bond girls so far. So I thought about how we would do that. My first idea was [10]. Do you think we should do it this way? So instance of (P31)Bond girl (Q1649366) for the characters? --Jobu0101 (talk) 06:43, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Jobu0101: I'm OK with that if fictional human (Q15632617) is not removed. Only one quick think: If Bond girl (Q1649366) is instance of (P31)Wikimedia list article (Q13406463), we are marking every bond girl as Wikimedia list article (Q13406463)? Maybe another property could fit better? part of (P361)? --Escudero (talk) 09:13, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I stumbled upon that, too. You're right: part of (P361) is the better property. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:20, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think the label of Q1649366 should include "List of" nor the item use P31=list. Otherwise it can't be a subclass of characters.
--- Jura 10:19, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay. What instance is most appropriate for it? --Jobu0101 (talk) 11:47, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
If Q1649366 has subclass of (P279), it doesn't need P31.
--- Jura 12:24, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay, I removed it. --Jobu0101 (talk) 12:45, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
I don't think part of (P361) should be used in that way, otherwise it sets a precedent for having to make the same type of claim on millions of items. Danrok (talk) 16:09, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Danrok: Like where for example? --Jobu0101 (talk)
@Jobu0101: On the millions of items which are listed on Wikipedia lists. You can find the lists here. Danrok (talk) 17:27, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jobu0101: instance of (P31) = Bond girl (Q1649366) looks like the best way to make that claim. The hint is in the Wikipedia infobox, see Pussy Galore, and it says "Classification: Bond girl / Henchwoman". instance of (P31) is a classification-type property. Danrok (talk) 17:34, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

So this is the solution? --Jobu0101 (talk) 19:48, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Well, instance of (P31) = Bond girl (Q1649366) is obviously correct. I added it. --FocalPoint (talk) 07:33, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@FocalPoint: Which query did you use to find all Bond girls with a Wikidata item? --Jobu0101 (talk) 21:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Jobu0101, I found all the articles in en:Category:Bond girls. --FocalPoint (talk) 23:33, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

@FocalPoint: Thank you. Actually you meant en:Category:Bond girls. So that was only about those Bond girls who have an English article. There might be many other Bond girls, but it's a good starting point. --Jobu0101 (talk) 06:04, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Correct. I am just adding 29 more from the relevant category of the itwiki. --FocalPoint (talk) 15:43, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Looking for list article editors

Hey folks :)

We're starting concept work for automated list generation on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects based on queries to Wikidata. As a first step I'd like to get a better understanding of the current state of things. For this Jan (our UX person) and me would like to have a chat with a few editors from different Wikipedias and other Wikimedia projects who are maintaining list articles. If that is you or you know someone who fits please let me know.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:05, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): There are some ~45 members of en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Lists, and five equivalent projects on other Wikipedias. Some of them might be able to help. --Yair rand (talk) 20:29, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Hah! Thank you :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:35, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE):: you might want to speak to @Llywelyn2000: he uses Wikidata lists in smaller wikis to provide starters for new articles. This may be a better initial focus than "featured lists" as targeted by some of the WikiProjects mentioned. The later tend to include large amounts of unstructured content.
--- Jura 07:55, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

That would be nice! Contact through cy-wiki mail; in the meantime, take a look at some of the work listed on my main home page. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 08:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
It would probably be good to do some basic research of featured lists on en.WP also, for the rich number of formats and such. Most use some sort of table, but usually have some non-structured data in one of the cells, for which a query or a template or whatnot needs to account. --Izno (talk) 11:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks everyone! I'll be reaching out. We'll also do a review of list articles as Izno suggested. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:11, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

We did a lot of work on de:Portal:Film/Kinostarts 2015, a list whichs shows all films shown in german cinemas in 2015. All of the data comes from Wikidata, therefor we build a table design with templates, see de:Vorlage:Kinostarts-Zeile#Beispiele. To get an individual list (Listeriabot didnt fit it really) it was necessary to create de:Modul:Kinostarts. The update is done daily by Jobu0101 per script or bot. If this is interesting for, dont hesitate to ask. Queryzo (talk) 16:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes that does sound interesting. If you're willing to have a chat about it I'd love to. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:03, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
We are willing ;). @Queryzo: Thanks for mentioning our Kinostart project here. --Jobu0101 (talk) 17:31, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to draw your attention to en:List of public art in the City of Westminster, a featured list using this machine-readable template. It's long been my hope that the list's contents could be transferred to Wikidata, and that every single public artwork in London could eventually be covered in Wikipedia list articles using Wikidata. (With that done, we could move on to Paris, New York, etc.) In order to help this process along I set up the London Public Art Task Force. The works already on WD are in this list: en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Public Art/London/Wikidata – but there are hundreds more to add, as can be seen from the lists in this category, which are themselves far from complete. Ham II (talk) 19:18, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Request for a query

Could someone create a query with all awards where there is no 2015 winner and where the award has no enddate before 2015? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:27, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

[11]
--- Jura 08:05, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you .. I will use it in a blogpost :) Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)
Hoi, I found that I could not use it. The problem is that the award is used on a person or organisation. The end date is on the award itself. I do not register winners on the award.. Makes no sense to me to do so. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:07, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Is there an item in the results you think that shouldn't be there?
--- Jura 21:32, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually all of them because it is not the "winner" on the item I am interested in but the award received on the recipient. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:08, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Can you list one or two samples?
--- Jura 07:10, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
This is an Lange-Taylor Prize the problem is that the dates have not been added and the data is incomplete. There is one winner for 2015 but he has no Wikipedia article in English. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
There are currently six items with that award, but could you point me to a statement that should have led to the exclusion of this award in the query? --- Jura 15:54, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Actually, it doesn't appear in the results as the list is limited to 6000 awards with dates. It's part of about 3000 awards without any award dates.
--- Jura 16:12, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
I have blogged about this award.. . I have added the winner for 2015 and added a "point in time" so it now should be excluded. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:11, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
I doubt it appeared in the results before as none of the award statements had a date. -- Jura 12:44, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Property proposal TADIG Code

Since I am new to this property proposal process I am not sure if everything went ok. I selected proposal topic 'term' because the other ones seem to be even more unfitting. Then I clicked on the 'Create request page' page, filled out the form and submitted it such that this sub-page was created:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/TADIG_Code

Is this how it is supposed to work?

Should it also be added somehow to the one of the topic pages? For example:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Term

--Gms (talk) 06:40, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

I added your proposal to Wikidata:Property proposal/Organization. I think it fits better there as on Wikidata:Property_proposal/Term. --Pasleim (talk) 07:13, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Changing the number of an item

Hi, I have a hard time cancelling this diff : https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q2531343&diff=349548352&oldid=341916412 who ...just changed the meaning of an item and put hell of a mess. @Yelester: changing the number of a season series just for one wikipedia is definitely something that should not be done. You just have descriptions inconsistent beetween languages, a breaking of the assumption that the meaning of an item does never change, and an inconsistency beetween sitelinks and statements ... author  TomT0m / talk page 16:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

try Yelester's user page.
--- Jura 16:27, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi, I am sorry about that. When I was adding another languages links for this page I accidentally added season 10 links instead of season 9 links. When I realised, I tried to fix it but looks like I failed. Sorry again. --Yelester (talk) 16:45, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Fusion problems

Can someone fusion en:Category:Eurozone crisis (Q6402092) with de:Kategorie:Eurokrise(Q19474160) ? 92.76.121.75 01:23, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Can someone fusion en:Category:Eurozone (Q7130479) with de:Kategorie:Europäische Währungsunion (Q8950770) ? 92.76.121.75 01:26, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@92.76.121.75: Help:Objekte zusammenlegen —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:38, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

The German Wikipedia article Complexity has the English language link go to List_of_Championship_Gaming_Series_teams#Los_Angeles_Complexity, even though it's listed on Q289145 as Gaming CompLexity Gaming. Can somebody help me fix this?--Prisencolin (talk) 03:35, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

@Prisencolin: you need to remove it from https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=CompLexity&action=edit
--- Jura 06:40, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Someone complete the redirection, please

Happened to find an isolated without any description. Following the instruction in help page, I managed to move the only sitelink from the item to the more appropriate item, Now that instruction says me that I should also make a redirection. Unfortunately I don't know why but I could not complete the redirection. It keeps saying the emptied item is not empty, actually.

So, someone finish this redirection instead of me, please. Below is the item number information :

The ID to redirect from : [empty](Q15902000) The ID to redirect to : Grand Han Righteous Army (Q4106370)

Thanks. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 61.73.95.59 (talk • contribs) at 21. 6. 2016, 21:47‎ (UTC).

Looks like somebody has taken care of this. See Help:Merge for details on what to do. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
PLbot had the job done. Thanks. 61.73.95.59 22:48, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

P1619 date of official opening - but who opened it?

If a bridge was inaugurated a certain date officially by a certain person (e.g. the mayor or the king), what qualifier should I use? --213.114.235.112 01:03, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Use participant (P710) as qualifier. Snipre (talk) 09:11, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
We have a specific property for that - officially opened by (P542). Thryduulf (talk)

Database reports/Humans without Q5/person

Another new database report: Humans without Q5/person. It lists items that use instance of (P31)=person (Q215627), instead of instance of (P31)=human (Q5).
--- Jura 03:37, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Do you want to see statements like this?

Hey, I wrote a user script that adds a search button next to statements and if you click on it, it will goes to a SPARQL query and lists you items that have this statement as well. You can enable it by adding this script into your Special:MyPage/common.js: 

mw.loader.load( '//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ladsgroup/wdqs.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' );

If you like it, I would turn it into a gadget. Best Amir (talk) 14:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

This sounds incredibly useful. Thank you! Thryduulf (talk) 22:35, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
Love it! It could also show subclasses and instances? / Susannaanas (talk) 13:57, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
I was being unthoughtful. Not in the same place, but on the page, somewhere, related to the current item. / Susannaanas (talk) 13:59, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
I love it. Thank you! Mike Linksvayer (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Great, thanks! Adrian Heine (WMDE) (talk) 06:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
It is great to see the tools that I am using for years in Reasonator come to Wikidata proper.. There is still too much that I miss in Wikidata for it to be useful as my primary tool for Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:11, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
This is so cool! Here is a tweaked version from me that uses embedding and graph view:
mw.loader.load( '//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jonas_Kress_(WMDE)/wdqs.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' );
--Jonas Kress (WMDE) (talk) 13:10, 21 June 2016 (UTC)


Now, it's a gadget called EasyQuery! You can enable it in your preferences. Happy Wikimania Amir (talk) 10:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Water tower - capacity property?

I'm editing a water tower. It has 2000m³ capacity for storing water. How could I add this as a property? --Fringilla (talk) 00:44, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I'd use
⟨ water tower ⟩ volume as quantity (P2234) View with SQID ⟨  2000 cubic metre (Q25517) ⟩
applies to part (P518) View with SQID ⟨ water tank (Q6501028)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
. Thryduulf (talk) 08:22, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
or maybe
⟨ water tower ⟩ has part(s) (P527) View with SQID ⟨ water tank (Q6501028)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩
volume as quantity (P2234) View with SQID ⟨  2000 cubic metre (Q25517) ⟩
. Thryduulf (talk) 08:25, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Merging of Q24718261 and Q7018852

Would someone please merge Category:Abandoned military aircraft projects of the Soviet Union (Q24718261)  View with Reasonator View with SQID and Category:Abandoned military aircraft projects of the Soviet Union (Q7018852)  View with Reasonator View with SQID. Thank you. -- 93.73.36.17 06:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

✓ Done Lymantria (talk) 08:39, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Question about references for statements

I'm fairly new to Wikidata, having become more interested via some recent discussions on en-wiki. I've experimented with creating some items and statements, but I feel there are still quite a few things I don't fully understand. With that in mind, I have a question about how references are structured here. I just added three statements to Weird Tales (Q1136124), giving three of its editors. My reflex would be to add a reference by giving all the information I would give if citing that statement in en-wiki, but it appears I can't do that here. Is there a way to construct a multi-parameter statement, or a hierarchically structured statement, in such a way as to capture the key information needed for a citation? For the statement that Farnsworth Wright (Q280673) edited Weird Tales I would normally either use a short cite like "Ashley (2000), p. 42", along with a supporting reference like "Ashley, Mike (2000). The Time Machines: The Story of the Science-Fiction Pulp Magazines from the beginning to 1950. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. ISBN 0-85323-865-0", or else I'd combine the two into a single statement (presumably that make more sense here). If I add a string like "Ashley, Mike (2000). The Time Machines: The Story of the Science-Fiction Pulp Magazines from the beginning to 1950. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press. p. 42. ISBN 0-85323-865-0" as the reference, a lot of structure is lost. Is there a better way to capture this data? For example, an item that had statements "instance of: citation", "cites book: The Time Machines", "author: Mike Ashley", and so on, would contain the information, but that implies a template-like expectation for the citation object. How is this sort of thing handled now? Mike Christie (talk) 12:12, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

It's a link to another entity that you may need to create. So you'd cite the entity for The Time Machines, creating it if necessary and use a qualifier to indicate page number.

Brantgurga (talk) 12:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks; I'll give it a try this evening. Mike Christie (talk) 13:02, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Brantgurga, Mike Christie: Please have a look at Help:Sources. Snipre (talk) 15:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I followed the instructions there and have a question. Weird Tales (Q1136124) now has a statement that Farnsworth Wright was the editor, with a reference to the appropriate edition of the source book. The page number is a separate reference; is there a way to attach it to the source reference? If two references are added to a single statement then what I've done won't make it clear which page number goes with which source. Mike Christie (talk) 23:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

I fixed the reference in question. When you added the first reference, you can add as many properties as you want in the context of that single reference, so long as they all pertain to the one reference. --Izno (talk) 01:27, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks; that makes sense. Mike Christie (talk) 08:40, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Commons category renames

I renamed a category on Commons (c:Category:Sprint Nextel -> c:Category:Sprint Corporation), and in the Wikidata item Category:Sprint Corporation (Q8806728) site link was automatically updated. However the P373 item still points to the old category. Would it be feasible to update the P373 link automatically? Ghouston (talk) 00:33, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Deletion request: Italian Wikipedia article

This article on Italian Wikipedia does not help: sodium-calcium amphibole subgroup (Gruppo degli anfiboli sodico-calcici)

This article is more complete: sodium-calcium amphibole subgroup (Sottogruppo degli anfiboli di sodio-calcio)

Thanks --Chris.urs-o (talk) 05:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

@Chris.urs-o: We cannot help you with this. You need to inform it.WP of the issue. --Izno (talk) 11:19, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Q22916615

I believe this one should be a property. Geagea (talk) 08:35, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

A property proposal has been rejected --Pasleim (talk) 09:07, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Geagea (talk) 15:21, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Spam?

I'd like to report Q23976798 and Special:Contributions/Speechify. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 16:58, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Deleted. We aren't Yellow Pages (Q934552). --ValterVB (talk) 18:36, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Accessing Wikidata from Commons

Since March arbitrary access to Wikidata was enabled on Wikimedia Commons (thanks User:Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) and The Team) so now many of the Commons templates will rely more heavily on the Wikidata, and more information will be imported from Commons. We are about 60% done with converting all {{Authority control}} templates to use Wikidata identifiers. So here is the problem, Commons have many types of pages that might want to access Wikidata: Categories, Creator templates, Institution templates and gallery pages and Wikidata items have reliable links to them through properties, like: Commons category (P373), Commons Creator page (P1472), Commons Institution page (P1612) and Commons gallery (P935), while wikidata sitelinks are not predictable and might randomly connecting to one of those pages. Commons pages can detect sitelinks pointing to them, but I can not figure out how to detect properties that link to the current page. For example if I am at Commons:Category:Ilmari Aalto I need to be able to detect that Ilmari Aalto (Q4021419) links to me through Commons category (P373), but I do not know how. Am I missing something or that would be a new feature to request. At the moment we are setting up bots to add q-code to all templates on Commons pages that need them but it would be much simpler if we could just query which wikidata item links to current page through specific property. I asked about it on MediaWiki. but no answers. --Jarekt (talk) 13:57, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

If you add Commons:Category:Ilmari Aalto to Q21618449, you can do that. If Commons:Category:Ilmari Aalto had its own item, you could find Ilmari Aalto (Q4021419) from category's main topic (P301).
--- Jura 14:33, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Commons:Category:Ilmari Aalto is already linked from Q21618449 through P373. That is what I would like to be able to detect. Most of Commons categories do not have their own items and those that do serve only as redirects (through P301) to article items with properties. Commons categories that do have their own items do not have interlanguage links to wikipedia articles as is the norm on Commons. Many Commons categories use cross-namespace sitelinks to Wikidata article items, so their interlanguage links are correct, but you can not predict which type of item it is going to be (category or article). Most Commons categories do not use any sitelinks and rely on old fashioned interlangage links (like [[fi:Ilmari Aalto]] used by c:Category:Ilmari Aalto). Properties P373, P1472, P1612 and P935 seem much more widely used and their content is predictable. Also no Creator/Institution pages have their own items. --Jarekt (talk) 15:16, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Sounds like a lot of things to fix if you want it to get working.
--- Jura 15:36, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Personally, I'd create items for all creator templates and use a property (maybe P1423 or P921) on these to point to the item for the person. In the sample above, the Commons link should be defined on Q21618449. This combined, should avoid you having to store item numbers on categories or in creator templates.
--- Jura 17:45, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I think creating items for Creator/Institution pages would be more consistent with how we handle other projects. I would create new properties for linking back to the main items though, because that's how we handle other namespaces. - Nikki (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
I'm not aware of a way to detect properties pointing to the current page. It also sounds like something that should really be done using proper sitelinks. I know that Commons sitelinks are currently a mess and there are multiple pages which would all want data from the same item, but (as far as I know, someone please correct me if I'm wrong) it would be possible to make a Lua module which checks the statements on the page's linked item and uses certain statements (like category's main topic (P301)) to load the main item, even when the item is not directly linked to it (as long as the Wikidata item is... and if it's not, then it should be! :)). - Nikki (talk) 19:52, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Nikki LUA can handle redirects from category items to article items, so having separate items for categories, creator templates and institution templates would work. At the moment majority of Creator/Institution pages have links to wikidata items, but it would be better if we could just look them up instead of maintaining them both on Wikidata and Commons. Having ability to detect properties pointing to the current page would save us a need for a lot of extra pointless items on Wikidata whose only purpose would be to serve as redirect to the the main item. We do have 3.5M categories on Commons, and many will likely not have equivalent pages in category namespace on other projects. Also neither solution solves the problem that most commons categories traditionally have interlanguage links to wikipadia articles, although maybe I can add them by a LUA code. Any consistent solution would be better than the current Commons sitelinks mess. --Jarekt (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
With "6 edits / min" you will need more then a year to complete this task, but I see no way around adding Qnumbers as in {{Authority control|Wikidata=Q367627}} Maybe you have the same problem with files like "File:Paul Abadie a 2013.jpg" who will need a Qnumber too. I have no experience with that, but maybe a bot would be faster if the bot would use a Wikidata:Database download? I mean, commons has 30 mio pictures, you can´t do that at "6 edits / min". Molarus 00:42, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Ok so at the moment I see 3 ways of connecting Commons pages to Wikidata:
  • Currently used approach of every page having a items q-code. It is the simplest but require that you maintain those links: item that uses Commons category (P373) should verify that that the category it points to is pointing back to the same item. Same with items that use Commons Creator page (P1472) or Commons Institution page (P1612). It is especially tricky when you discover that wrong pages are linked together and you need to remove links in 2 places or else bot will restore it.
  • Allow new capability of being able to look up what which wikidata items point to you, so if some item uses Commons Creator page (P1472), than that category page should be able to retrieve the q-code of the item that links to it.
  • Start creating giant and rather useless structure of massive number of items for Commons categories, creator pages and institution pages, whose only purpose in life would be to redirect to article items. I like this option the least.
--Jarekt (talk) 02:52, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Maybe you want to focus first on Creator templates/items for people. The approach suggested above with a new version of Commons Creator page (P1472) using an item-datatype should be fairly easy to set up.
--- Jura 03:07, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
The items aren't useless if they're serving a purpose. :) We create items for lots of things like categories and templates on other projects even if they have no interwiki links, it's not a bad thing, it's how Wikidata works. Doing something different for Commons creates special inconsistent behaviour just for Commons. I would say that's worse than having a bunch of extra items. :)
There are other advantages too, for example, using proper sitelinks would let people use existing tools for Commons in the same way they can for other projects, e.g. to find items not linked to Wikidata (using Special:UnconnectedPages or several of Magnus's tools for example). I have no idea how Commons people do that right now (is it even possible?).
The sitelinks thing is quite controversial (it could be a discussion all of its own) and the lack of a solution that works for both Commons and Wikidata seems to be the main reason why Commons sitelinks are such a mess right now. It should be possible to fetch sitelinks from another item (@StevenJ81: you're doing something like that for the Ladino Wikipedia, aren't you?), perhaps something like that could work? If so, are there other things which would need changing to make it work as expected on Commons?
- Nikki (talk) 08:41, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
BTW, it seems to work with existing properties, sample at Q14252858.
--- Jura 10:26, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Nikki: I am, but the person to talk to is User:Innocent bystander, who actually wrote the code. But the way it works that the code effectively adds manual iw's to the page; its advantage is to do that by calling them from Wikidata. But adding manual iw links to pages doesn't work on projects like Meta, Wikidata or Commons, so the module won't work as it currently exists on those projects. Maybe Innocent bystander can help you figure out a way to do this. It's beyond my skills. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:33, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, by the help of arbitrary access, the module/template adds "old tradition interwiki" ([[xyz:Whatever]]) ínto the pages as a complement to the interwiki added by Wikibase client. The interwiki from the module is updated when the sitelinks on Wikidata are updated in related items. The sitelinks are available through LUA in the same way as the properties are. If I remember correctly, we have tested to add this on meta, but it didn't work by some reason. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:46, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: Yes, we tested it on meta. I think it didn't work because even in the old days (pre-Wikidata), you couldn't really add "old,traditional interwiki" links ([[xyz:Whatever]]) to meta and get anything useful. (What you get is a link in body text—the sort of thing you get in Wikipedia if you add [[ : xyz:Whatever]] to the body text. Try it at Meta on a user page if you want to see how it looks.) The new code would have to deliver whatever Wikidata naturally adds to pages on Commons through standard sitelinks in order to work the same way. StevenJ81 (talk) 15:31, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Nikki: I am relatively new to Wikidata (since until this March there was little use for it on Commons), while most of people on this forum are likely to have much more experience with proper ways to do things on Wikidata. Lets narrow the discussion to people, biological taxons and places for time being. For every person article out there that has some graphics Commons should have a category, we have 300k of them in c:Category:People by name and many are linked from wikidata by Commons category (P373). Similarly every place on earth or organism that has some graphics also have category on Commons. It sounds like the favorite approach is to have an article and category item for each one of them. Most would have article item already, but might be missing category item. Also, all sitelinks to Commons would follow the namespace categories linked with category items and article items not linked with anything unless we have a rare gallery page. Last December User:Jheald had excellent report on links between Commons categories and Wikidata with a lot of numbers and statistics. It sounds like back then Wikidata had 254k sitelinks from article items to Commons categories. Those would have to be removed and replaced with sitelinks from category items. However the main reason to have wikidata-article->commons-category sitelinks is so the commons category would have proper interlanguage/interwiki links everybody go used to in last decade, so before we start removing them from wikidata we need to have a plan on how to add interlanguage/interwiki links to commons categories that will point to wikipedia articles. The code Innocent bystander and StevenJ81 describes sounds exactly like what I wanted to write. Where can I find this module? --Jarekt (talk) 15:18, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jarekt: Module:Interwiki (Q20819069) -- Innocent bystander (talk) 15:20, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: Thank you that is exactly what I needed, I copied the code, simplified it (I think) and added category's main topic (P301) to said to be the same as (P460) so it works for the category pages. You can see it at c:Module:Interwiki. --Jarekt (talk) 20:36, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Are you sure this is what you want? As far as I understand the code, the module gets the entity in line 42 and uses this to improve the wikilinks (Changing wikilinks from WP:Categoriy:50 Cents to WP:50 Cents). As far as I have understood your problem, there are lots of category articles with no item, but this category has an item. Take for example Commons:Category:Ilmari Aalto which has no item: You are deleting in the code the link to fiWikipedia, add the module and in preview no wikilink to fiWiki is seen. Molarus 04:10, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
@Molarus: thank you for analyzing the LUA code. I do not see it often done and many bugs remain undiscovered for long time. I think the code is doing what I want. I would like to use it without providing the q-codes and in such auto-detect mode it only works for pages that have items on Wikidata (unless we allow my original request for pages to detect which item links to it with some specific property). In case of your example c:Category:Ilmari Aalto, which has no item the template does not changes anything. I added c:Template:Interwiki from wikidata, which calls c:Module:Interwiki and the page still displays interwiki link to fiWikipedia. --Jarekt (talk) 12:25, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
After I´ve done this: <!--[[fi:Ilmari Aalto]]--> the interwiki link is gone. OK, since lua can´t do the trick, maybe a solution with javascript on the toolserver that runs a Wikidata:SPARQL query service could help? This tool could show some data from WD on the category page. There are lots of Wikidata:Tools editors, maybe you can ask one of them? --Molarus 13:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Schema of properties and sitelinks connecting Wikidata and Commons

I want to provide some context here for those who may be very familiar with Wikidata and Wikipedia but not so familiar with Commons. Commons handles very different content than Wikipedia. The "gallery" pages (e.g. commons:Seattle) that you might expect to correspond to Wikipedia articles are few and far between, and often ill-maintained. Commons has far more categories than gallery pages, and far more categories than would be found in any of the Wikipedias. That's because, in general, where Wikipedia has an article, Commons has a category. (This makes sense because Commons is primarily a collection of media items.) If that category is a person (and in some other cases of collective authorship), Commons is also likely to have a Creator page.

Commons also has categories that would be insanely specific for a Wikipedia article, but are useful when classifying media, because we might have a great deal of media on something rather narrow. Thus we end up with a category like commons:Category:Plymouth Congregational Church, Seattle, Washington - Sanctuary or commons:Category:Georgetown PowerPlant Museum - hopper room. Obviously we would never write an article about one room of a building, but it is useful for categorizing a large body of media. - Jmabel (talk) 20:09, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

So now with a help of c:Module:Interwiki and c:Template:Interwiki from wikidata we can have customary interwiki links from Commons categories to Wikidata articles. Next stage would be to get help from Wikiata bots to clean up the mess with sitelinks to Commons. If we have consensus here, I would like to propose to create many category items for Commons categories and replace all cross-namespace sitelinks to Commons (is it still about 254k that were counted last December?). --Jarekt (talk) 03:51, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Not just bots. As I suggested many months ago on commons, you can select the group of autopatrolled (expert) users on commons with a decent activity on wikidata, and the group of wikidata users with decent number of upload (or edits) on commons and sent them a mass message with a link to a help page that describes the final "rules" on the issue (or other tools for image maintenance, the idea was proposed firstly to inform about tools such as wdlist or wikishootme). This way you create a soft but diffuse expertise to users who don't visit village pump pages, instead of a simple "vertical teaching.". I can prepare a targeted list for a mass message as soon as the guidelines or the working patterns are clear.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:44, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Speaking as someone with very little experience on Commons—and for whom our principal involvement with Wikidata is in creation of interwiki links—let me say that for people like me, the main thing is that for what we do nothing should change. If you start breaking that, or making things much more complicated, we'll have a problem. Otherwise, we should be good. StevenJ81 (talk) 12:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Happy to see a discussion about this happening. I'm currently at Wikimania sitting next to Lydia. Maybe other people are here too so we can have a chat in person? My 2 cents: Quite some time ago I wrote C:User:Multichill/Next generation categories. With Wikidata and arbitrary access on Commons this comes closer. What I would like to see on a category is that I just put a template on it and the template:

  • Fetches the sitelinks to the relevant Wikipedia articles
  • Generates an introduction in the languages relevant to me

Looks like the fetching of sitelinks is already done. See for example c:Category:Janskerk, Haarlem. Generation of short introductions based on description and label should be quite easy to add. Even nicer would be to have the introduction being based on the introduction of the Wikipedia article. Currently that is only possible by using a bot. Talking about bots. We currently have over a million items that have a Commons category (P373) link and are not instance of (P31) -> Wikimedia category (Q4167836). We could use that data to have a bot on Commons add templates to these categories so they link back to the right item and show the relevant information. c:Template:Interwiki from wikidata still seems to be a bit rough and no intro is generated. What should we do here? Commons has plenty of intersection categories like Commons:Category:Churches in Haarlem. Would be nice to make use of category combines topics (P971) or have the possibility to pass multiple Q numbers to the template. If we set this all up properly, I'm confident we can link most categories on Commons to the relevant Wikipedia articles. Multichill (talk) 13:11, 24 June 2016 (UTC)

Whereas what I would really like is to add a link at Wikidata and have that link (plus any sitelinks) show up on Commons almost immediately, like happens with pages on any other project. I don't want to have to edit Commons to create links and I definitely don't want to have to create links in multiple places. - Nikki (talk) 15:01, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Nikki, we are on the same page here. I would also like not to have to add q-codes to Commons the way we have to at the moment. The solution with mirror category and article items relies on keeping both items in perfect synch, so it does require edits in multiple places. so when someone renames category on commons than it has to be changed in both article and category item. But at least this synchronization is done within wikidata. --Jarekt (talk) 15:44, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Multichill, I think the time for the introduction will come, if we can generate Wikidata based Creator template with just a q-code we could add those to all people categories, etc. Similarly once we rewrite Creator, Institution, Artwork and Book templates to pull info from Wikidata, we can use them as well. For now I am trying to come up with a way to look-up q-codes without specifying them, like you had to do in c:Category:Janskerk, Haarlem. I know bots can copy them from Commons category (P373) to commons categories, but than someone needs to maintain them so they stay in synch. A better solution would be to be able to look up the q-codes, either by bots creating items for many commons categories, or by wikibase software change to allow looking up q-codes of items that links to you with specific property, the way you can look up q-code of item that links to you through a sitelink right now. I am not at Wikimania, but please see if people participating can discuss some of those options. The current mess of a sitelinks to Commons have to be fixed before they are usable, or they can be ignored if items can be looked up by property links. --Jarekt (talk) 15:35, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jarekt: Reminder that the script Wikidata:Tools/User_scripts#wdcat.js exists, which automatically displays a Wikidata article-item link on a Commons cat if possible. Is it the sort of thing you are looking for? Jheald (talk) 20:31, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes exactly, but something I can call from LUA. --Jarekt (talk) 20:37, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Here is example why embedding q-codes at Commons is bad: I added q-code Q1066592 to c:Creator:Charles de Moreau on January 22, 2013‎; on 30 December 2013 Q1066592 was deleted, but nobody removed it from the creator page. Same with c:Creator:Master of Bellaert linking to Q18516705. That is why I would rather find a way to all creator and institution templates to detect the item q-code instead of storing it. --Jarekt (talk) 03:45, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

FIFA World Cups and UEFA European Football Championships

Who wants to help filling this table? I wrote this already here nine days ago, but it's in the archive now. Some pings: @Mippzon, Tubezlob, Edgars2007, Adert: --Jobu0101 (talk) 15:59, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

I've done a few now :) More needed though. //Mippzon (talk) 16:36, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
@Jobu0101: All done now I think! //Mippzon (talk) 16:52, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mippzon: Thank you! That's great. The next step would be to enter the participants. Here are the Championships where some (currently all) are missing: [12]. --Jobu0101 (talk) 19:13, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Houston we have a problem :) UEFA Euro 2004 (Q102920) don't use participant (P710) but participating team (P1923) --ValterVB (talk) 20:18, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
Well. This property is barely used. Even the given example in Property talk:P1923, namely "2014 FIFA World Cup Final (Q15926885) → Argentina national football team (Q79800)", is not applied in 2014 FIFA World Cup Final (Q15926885). Instead property participant (P710) is used. But it seems that participating team (P1923) is the correct property. We will have to change a lot. --Jobu0101 (talk) 20:26, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
For learning purposes I could write some code lines in Python for that conversion. Not now, though (Python newbie has pretty large Python to-do-list :) ). --Edgars2007 (talk) 21:10, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Here is the updated query. I'm changing the property. --Jobu0101 (talk) 22:12, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Done. Thank you in particular ValterVB for entering all those teams. --Jobu0101 (talk) 06:50, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

Twice a human

There are currently 456 items that are instances of both human (Q5) and some subclass of human (Q5).[13] Some of these were just set by User:Jura1 yesterday (such as this and this). Is there really a need to be an instance of human (Q5) twice (or of any other class for that matter)?--Anders Feder (talk) 14:45, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Please see Wikidata:Project_chat#Database_reports.2FHumans_without_Q5.
--- Jura 14:48, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, but that doesn't really shed much light on my question: what is the need to be instances of human twice?--Anders Feder (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Unless they are legendary figures, there needs to be P31=Q5 on items for individuals, that's all. ethnic group (P172) might be a better fit for other information you try to add there.
--- Jura 15:00, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Where is this requirement and particularly its rationale written down?--Anders Feder (talk) 15:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
There are constraints on properties for people that required these to be an instance of Q5, not one of its subclasses. The main rationale is probably that the structure of the subclass tree is to much random and a clear way of identifying items for individuals is needed. If you look at the report mentioned in the previous thread, other than the vikings where you recently removed Q5 without any prior discussion, there are few exceptions compared 1,000,000+ of items for individuals.
--- Jura 15:18, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Did my change violate some policy that would have required prior discussion for the change? If so, where is it (if it indeed exists)? And which constraints specifically are limited to instances of Q5, but not one of its subclasses?--Anders Feder (talk) 15:26, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
This is a bit of an odd one - it's been well-accepted as long as I can remember that we use P31:Q5 for people and not P31:(subclasses), but I don't know if it's written down clearly anywhere. It probably should be - perhaps Help:Basic membership properties? Andrew Gray (talk) 12:50, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, is there any particular rationale behind it other than "that's what we've always done but don't really have any clue why"? If there isn't, perhaps that's why it isn't a policy?--Anders Feder (talk) 18:17, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
@Anders Feder: Do we really need policys for everything we do here? We could have created Wikidata with one single property with only one single datatype if we had preferred that. But that is not how we have choosed to do it. We have created occupation (P106) and ethnic group (P172) instead of using statements like. "instance of:male heterosexual italian blonde nurses born May 5, 1947". That solution is probably fully plausible, but that is not the model we have choosed to use. We have to be more or less consistent, for the data to be useful. So if your edits are different from everybody elses, your edits are probably not very helpful to the project. We could create a policy that forbids you to edit in that way. But since this project is very young and we still only have a working model for only a fraction of everything here, such a policy could potentially harm us. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
He asked about a rationale. Let me recall that it's totally not incompatible to have classes and properties. I gave suggestions on how to reconcile the two ways of doing : model the class male heterosexual italian blonde nurses born May 5, 1947 (Even if the example is bad as it's just an instance of slippery slope (Q876455)  View with Reasonator View with SQID) : use statements has quality Search to define what properties and maybe values the instances of that class have, the same way Reasonator uses the qualifers on "list of" statements ?
  • ⟨ male heterosexual italian blonde nurses born May 5, 1947 ⟩ has quality Search ⟨ values in qualifier ⟩
    sex Search ⟨ male ⟩
    nationality country Search ⟨ Italia ⟩
    ... Search ⟨ ... ⟩
Why not working on a template that implements a query that uses those statement "instance of <the class> or (has all statements with values compatible with the has quality statements of the class and its superclasses)"
Wikidata is a technical project, and if we can use technology to make people happily work together and help avoid hard conflicts, I really think we should do that. author  TomT0m / talk page 15:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
Most subclasses of Q5 are occupations/public positions and should not be used with P31 but with human properties such as occupation (P106) and position held (P39). And I am not sure they should be subclasses of Q5 anyway. --Melderick (talk) 09:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Español

Recently several items (e.g. Q24649028, Q24791791) have been created with labels and descriptions in a language with the code "Español", not "es". How does this happen and who wants to ind and remove them? --YMS (talk) 08:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't know how it happens but I've posted on Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team#.22Espa.C3.B1ol.22_being_used_as_a_language_code to let the developers know. [14] and [15] seem to work to find existing ones. - Nikki (talk) 14:08, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
There are also labels in "indonesia" and "Türkçe". The issue is tracked on phabricator since 2012.
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T39459
--Pasleim (talk) 14:38, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I suspect it being regression caused by fixing phab:T115792 which changed the input on Special:NewItem (so that it allows saving terms invalid languages). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:01, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I have created a new task for the issue @ T138725
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T138725
·addshore· talk to me! 15:32, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

(self-solved) Find a protected area that is in Q1206 or any subdivision thereof

I am looking to query all Nature Protected Areas (Naturschutzgebiete, Naturschutzgebiet (Q759421)) that are within (located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)) the german State of Saxony-Anhalt (Saxony-Anhalt (Q1206)), or any subdivision thereof.

My query 

#Naturschutzgebiete in Sachsen-Anhalt
SELECT ?nrLabel ?nrDescription ?website ?coord ?WDPA_id ?_image WHERE {
  ?nr (wdt:P31/wdt:P279*) wd:Q759421.
  ?nr wdt:P131 wd:Q1206.
  ?nr wdt:P625 ?coord.
  OPTIONAL { ?nr wdt:P856 ?website. }
  OPTIONAL { ?nr wdt:P809 ?WDPA_id. }
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "de". }
  OPTIONAL { ?nr wdt:P18 ?_image. }
}

, [16], runs fine, but it only finds direct children of Q1206. Now, there are Naturschutzgebiete which are not directly placed under the state, but under a subdivision of Q1206, for example "Fenn", Q16831344, is in Q7082 (Town of Stendal), which is in Q6057 (District of Stendal), which then is in Q1206 (State of Saxony-Anhalt).

How can I find those objects that are in Saxony-Anhalt (Q1206), when they are so only transitively? --Tbhgeo (talk) 12:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

OK, it's
?nr wdt:P131* wd:Q1206.

--Tbhgeo (talk) 13:08, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

@Tbhgeo: in addition, maybe you want to have a look at de:Benutzer:Holger1959/DE-ST. Holger1959 (talk) 18:24, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Need some help at Guidelines for external relationships

see Help:Statements/Guidelines for external relationships  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krauss (talk • contribs).

What's your goal with this page? To document existing relationships to help people adding statements from external sources so they will know the right wikidata properties to use? ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Copa América

Like FIFA World Cups and UEFA European Football Championships, only Copa América. See QUERY. Much to do here! --Jobu0101 (talk) 16:10, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #215

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Frivolous subclasses

Hoi, I have noticed that a lot of subclasses have been added that make Wikidata less useful particularly for the majority of the 300 languages that Wikidata supports. It is NOT a good idea to have subclasses like "APA award". I blogged about it. I think that all such items need to be removed. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 13:55, 26 June 2016 (UTC)

I'm not convinced. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 07:02, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
what part? That is will make the labelisation of Wikidata that much harder? Really? Or that there is a point to "APA award" because I do not see it at all. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:23, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
I think this is a matter for Wikidata:WikiProject_Ontology - there has been considerable discussion about the nature of classes in wikidata but this sounds like another perspective on the issue that would be useful. Can you take this discussion there? ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:39, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
This makes Wikidata easier to edit, for example to add an APA award you just have one statement to use. Plus the actual used labels still have to be translated, this just maybe add one label to translate compared to several awards. This is really not much work. Plus the statements on the class are self explanatory. It's totally possible to set up a bot that is coded to automatically add labels for those kind of classes : if the class is of the approriate (sub)type and has a statement like
⟨ subject ⟩ has quality Search ⟨ value ⟩
conferred by (P1027) View with SQID ⟨ some organisation ⟩
then add a label "some organisation award". The "instance of" award claim you added is semantically ambiguous : is award the object given in the ceremony ? Then it's certainly not a class. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:27, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Really, not much work? A bot could do the work? Really? Have you considered that you are talking about 300+ languages 300 times a bot that has to be programmed to follow the grammar rules that Wikidata does NOT support. You are so wrong. Such an item can be understood from statements and consequently it is not necessary at all. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 17:49, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
If it's so useless, what's the urge to translate it ? It appears anyway in just a few statements and will likely never make it up to the item that must be translated list like Terminator one. It has also a practical use when it's known that the person recieved an award from APA but the exact one is not known from this user. I see this kind of statements sometimes. There is also cases in which the organisation classifies its own awards into different types. Then those kind of items are needed to reflect that classification. If you want an example I can exhibit some - I think ACM awards are classified, for example, need to verify. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:59, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
You contradict yourself. APA award is just one of a class of items that we all need to lose. When you consider it to be of no value in most languages what is the point of having it in any language? Also when an award is only known by its provider, what prove do we have that it has been given? Really bad rubbish needs to be gotten rid off. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 01:11, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Adding missing data for Wikivoyage quickbar

Hello everyone,

All Wikivoyage articles with Template:Infobox country (Q14395495) are now using only data from Wikidata (except location maps). Please help with adding missing information to the Wikidata items connected to the pages in en:voy:Category:Quickbar with missing information. The required properties are:

Thank you, -- T.seppelt (talk) 12:54, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

I added a population size to Croatia (Q224). I noticed however that it was given at en:voy:Croatia as if it was the 2010 population size, while the given number is taken from the 2011 census. How come? Lymantria (talk) 14:10, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
I solved this problem. Thank you, -- T.seppelt (talk) 15:47, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
For a summary, see Wikidata:Wikivoyage/Lists/Quickbar.
--- Jura 04:07, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Gadget for adding instances

I would like to add "instance of: josei manga magazine (Q24826340)" to all articles in ja:Category:女性漫画雑誌. Is there a gadget I could use or do I have to do it manually? Thanks a lot for your help. --Shikeishu (talk) 17:22, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

You may use this tool (WiDaR authentication required). Kwj2772 (talk) 18:10, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a lot! ---Shikeishu (talk) 19:27, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Rounding when uncertainty over 10 is given

I recently added molar volume (P2807) to 2-methyloctane (Q2813823) with 547±17 cm³/mol as a value and the WD mechanism displays it as a 550±20 cm³/mol. It's not correct, it's just wrong. This value is not 530–570, but 530–564 – that's how it should be displayed. Is there any way to correct this? ∼Wostr (talk) 17:36, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

This is phab:T95425. As I understand it, the data is stored correctly and is only being displayed incorrectly, so once the ticket is fixed, the existing data should display properly. I don't think there's anything we can do until then though. - Nikki (talk) 21:00, 27 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for information. ∼Wostr (talk) 00:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

"subclass of" / "superclass of" v. "broader" / "narrower"

Some classification schemes (including LoC) use "broader" and "narrower" to classify related topics at broader & narrower levels of abstraction.

Others use "subclass" / "superclass" to indicate absoluet inclusion of a topic or concept within a parent or child topic.

Do we need both of these as WD properties? Should we convert all "broader"/"narrower" to "subclass" properties?

I'm currently working with a dataset that makes use of "broader" & "narrower" to capture its network of concept-relationships. Thanks! Sj (talk) 16:10, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

We use "subclass" to indicate that a class of elements is a subset of a more general one. To capture conceptual abstraction we however use instance of (P31) in the sense explained in Help:Classification and en:metaclass (semantic web). Broader/narrower may serve another purpose, maybe classify body of knowledges, but we're also discussing if they are subclasses of each other in an abstract level : a science is a set of practices and a set of knowledge, a more specific science is a subset of those practices and knowledge. A religion is a set of dogmas and a set of cults, a subreligion may add its own dogmas and practices. This kind of relationships can be expressed using "instance" and "subclass". author  TomT0m / talk page 16:38, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Weird, I couldn't find creation discussions for P2933 (P2933) and P2934 (P2934). -- LaddΩ chat ;) 16:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
@legoktm: anything to say about that creation ? author  TomT0m / talk page 17:03, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
I responded on WD:AN. Apologies for the drama. Legoktm (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
@Legoktm: Are you shitting me? We just had a very disruptive discussion regarding cites. --Izno (talk) 17:53, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Um, I honestly don't understand why you're so upset about this. Legoktm (talk) 00:00, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
That's because there is non, Laddo. --Izno (talk) 17:55, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Same situation with P2932 (P2932), regarding which Legoktm wrote here "Hacking on importing EWPHP data into Wikidata at Wikimania with sj. Going to skip the 7 day waiting period so we can work on modeling the data in a smaller environment before doing a large thing". Taking this to WD:AN. Discussion on this can be continued there. Let's focus here on whether "broader" and "narrower" have any merit to them, shall we? --Yair rand (talk) 18:00, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the pointers, I'll see how this works with subclass of (P279). Yes, a group of us were sitting down @ a hackathon and trying to map a page from an existing structured reference work into WD; sorry if this contributed to any property drama. I'll take comments on this subthread to the page Yair linked. Sj (talk) 21:23, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
+1. I think subclass of (P279) tends to work quite well for bodies of knowledge and religions and such. There still might be room for a separate "narrower" property, but I can't think of any examples where that would be necessary atm. --Yair rand (talk) 18:13, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
In the controlled vocabulary sense, "broader" and "narrower" refer to 3 different kinds of hierarchical relations: (1) generic (= subclass), (2) Instantial (= instance of), (3) partitive (= part of). The more specific terms should be used in wikidata - and we already have all of these, so there should be no need for new terms for this purpose. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:54, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
I most often run across "broader" and "narrower" in the sense of general scope of meaning. I feel these are often more flexible than "subclass". For example, scottish kilt is definitely a subclass of kilt; it is narrower than traditional scottish garb. I am less clear on whether it is a subclass of traditional scottish garb. Sj (talk) 21:23, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
if an instance of "traditional scottish garb" is a piece of clothing or otherwise a physical object of some sort, then the subclass relation is the right one. If "garb" instead is referring to a style of fashion, then "part of" probably makes more sense. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:05, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
 Support I'd support introduction of "broader" property as super-property of subclass of (P279), instance of (P31), and part of (P361) if some examples are provided. Better a more general such as "broader" than misuse of the more specific properties. -- JakobVoss (talk) 19:02, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Net worth estimations

I would like to hear your opinions about adding estimations from Forbes' The World's Billionaires (Q493078) and or sites like Q24043951 at net worth (P2218). IMHO it should not be possible to add properties like P2218 without giving any source.--Kopiersperre (talk) 09:00, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

This is in fact one of the issues in the recently opened RFC on verifiability. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:54, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Q25000000

Now we have this item.--GZWDer (talk) 17:30, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Great.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:10, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
Indeed. --Jobu0101 (talk) 20:30, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Fusion problems

Can someone fusion en:Category:Imaging (Q6176702) with de:Kategorie:Bildgebendes Verfahren (Q8907335) ? 88.70.213.241 21:24, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

See Help:Merge.
--- Jura 04:22, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I don't understand that Help. 92.76.115.96 11:09, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

What part? Please comment on its talk page on the parts that are unclear.
--- Jura 11:10, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

I tried it and it doesn't function, so maybe you can help and do it. 92.76.115.96 11:12, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Please comment on Help talk:Merge (or one of its translations) stating which steps you tried and where you failed. This will allow to improve the help page.
--- Jura 11:15, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

There comes the answer "The link dewiki:Kategorie:Bildgebendes Verfahren is already used by item Q8907335. You may remove it from Q8907335 if it does not belong there or merge the items if they are about the exact same topic." 92.76.115.96 11:16, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

100wikidatadays

Hey! There is a new cool project launched! #100wikidatadays is a personal challenge, in which a person aims at the creation or reconstruction of (at least) one template (e.g. infobox) which gets all or almost all its information from Wikidata in 100 days in a row. The general idea and the rules follow the idea of the 100wikidays. The idea was discussed at Wikimania 2016.

Feel free to join! --Lingveno (talk) 09:48, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

"Wiktionary" missing from Wikipedia's left panel's section "In other projects"?

I had a question on w:Talk:Main_Page and someone suggested I try at WikiData.

Copied here is (almost) the original post:

On Wikipedia's Main Page's leftmost side, between "Print/export" and "Languages", it has an "In other projects" section listing almost all of Wikipedia's sister projects, except for MediaWiki and Wiktionary. (However, those two are included at the bottom of Wikipedia's Main Page under "Wikipedia's sister projects", with all the others.)
I think I understand why MediaWiki is not listed on the left panel's "In other projects", but why is Wiktionary not listed there, even though it also has a "Main Page"?
Just curious, I'm not really suggesting any changes. Thank you:) Zeniff (talk) 07:56, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
I think those links are handled on Wikidata, so you could add it over there. -- [[User:Edokter]] {{talk}} 10:55, 24 June 2016 (UTC)


However, I haven't been able to find where or which talk page addresses this. Does anyone have any advice? Thank you:) Zeniff (talk) 02:32, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Maybe Wikidata:Wiktionary/Development?
--- Jura 03:57, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
@ZeniffMartineau: First off, MediaWiki is now listed in "Other projects" and its pages are included here. The problem with interwiki links in Wiktionary is what they mean: with other projects (e.g. Wikipedia) an interwiki link points readers to an article on the same idea in each target language. In Wiktionary, an interwiki link points to the same term but it would also be desirable to have interwiki links between definitions as well. So, for instance, if you are reading the entry at "wikt:en:book#English" you may want to read about the term "book" in Spanish at "wikt:es:book#Inglés" but you may also want to know about the idea of a book at "wikt:es:libro#Español". Does that make sense? How to handle that is under discussion now. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 03:58, 28 June 2016 (UTC)
So the issue applies even though to some users (ones like me who didn't know the situation) it "looks like" only a link from Wikipedia's Main Page to Wiktionary's Main Page? So, if I understand correctly, the way to do it is still under discussion, so that's why the link is not there, yet? And I think that means since the "sister projects" section at the bottom of Wikipedia only uses a template with wikilinks, and not Wikidata, that's why it can link to Wiktionary, I guess?
Also, I can see Mediawiki listed in "Other projects" on Wikidata's Main Page as you said, but I still can't see it listed in Wikipedia's same section.
Sorry if I misunderstood. Thank you for explaining:) Zeniff (talk) 21:07, 29 June 2016 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): On a somewhat related note, who's the linguist mentioned in this section of last week's summary and what issues did this linguist suggest we actually have to address in the proposal? None of the subpages and talk pages in Wikidata:Wiktionary seem to have been updated in the last month and so I'm not sure about the proposal's current state. Mahir256 (talk) 17:22, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

Temporary outage of adding statements

It was impossible to add any statements to items from 19:00± till 19:37 (both UTC) due to a bug that appeared after deployment of new software. More information on Phabricator, please check your bot runs for missing data. We are sorry for any inconvenience caused. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:46, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Use of Antarctic Treaty area (Q21590062) as a country (P17)

There are several hundred Wikidata items that have country (P17) set to Antarctic Treaty area (Q21590062), even though Antarctic Treaty area is not a country. Would anyone object if I remove these claims and replace them with continent (P30) Antarctica (Q51) instead? Kaldari (talk) 16:50, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

@Kaldari: See Property talk:P17#P17 in Antarctica why we started to use this item! All items with this statement is not on the continent of Antarctica here! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 17:35, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
OK, so it looks like people switched the country claim from various other countries to Antarctic Treaty area. While this fixes the NPOV issue, it introduces a factual inaccuracy, as Antarctic Treaty area isn't a country. Can't we just agree to not use any country claims for things in Antarctica (since there aren't any countries there)? This seems like a no-brainer. Kaldari (talk) 07:48, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
@Kaldari: Replacing P17:"Antarctic Treaty area" with P17:"novalue" is probably better than just removing it. Personally, I have no problems with using "Antarctic Treaty area" as a country. "Country" is a surprisingly difficult subject to define. Present day "England" and "Wales" are considered countries in the English language, but not always in any other language. Are both "The kingdom of Netherlands" and "Netherlands" countries? Are all of "The kingdom of Denmark", "Denmark" and "Rigsfællesskabet" countries? Was "Sweden-Norway" a country? Is "Stato della Città del Vaticano" a country? Was "Heiliges Römisches Reich Deutscher Nation" a country? Pinging Jura1 and Nikki who participated in the above linked discussion. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:29, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I still think (as I said before) that Antarctic Treaty area should not be used as a country and that if we really think we need a country statement, novalue would be the right thing to use. I think the other examples you list are completely different to the situation in Antarctica. Whether to use "Antarctic Treaty area" as a country is more like asking whether we should create "Convention on the High Seas area" or "Outer Space Treaty area" to use as the country for everything in international waters or outer space respectively. - Nikki (talk) 14:34, 26 June 2016 (UTC)
I agree that Antarctic Treaty area is definitely not a country. It has no autonomy, no government, no citizens. If Antarctic Treaty area were a country, Pacific Ocean (Q98) and Moon (Q405) would probably qualify as countries as well. It sounds like "no value" is the best solution. Kaldari (talk) 18:05, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

WiFi hotspots

Greetings from a noob!

I'm in a team creating an app which among other things, will guide users to WiFi hotspots - initially in South Africa, but potentially globally. It's a nonprofit (free as in beer as well as speech) project. As a longtime lurker on the Wikidata mailing list, I was the one to suggest using that as our repository but it means the rest of the team expects me to take the lead in this. We currently have, or have access to, a few local data sets. Looking around it seems like I'll be having quite a steep learning curve so I'm hoping for some guidance.

Thanks, Michael.Michaelgraaf (talk) 09:10, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Are you suggesting to put the data into Wikidata itself, or to create your own repository using your own copy of the software Wikidata uses? I'm not sure whether Wikidata itself would be the right place for this because a wifi hotspot would be unlikely to meet our notability requirements. Have you looked at OSM? They have tags for internet access (see osmwiki:Key:internet access) and it seems like a natural choice if your aim is to guide people to them. If you want to add the data to Wikidata itself or to OSM, note that you would need to make sure the data you have is available under a compatible license (Wikidata is CC0, OSM is ODbL). - Nikki (talk) 09:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

I was thinking of Wikidata itself. Yes, I am also looking at OSM, but am a noob there too. Not naive enough to be unaware of licensing issues though! Well I'll check that OSMwiki link, thanks.

Tutorial Wikidata Infoboxes

I finally started working on https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T76229 , the community wishlist task to create a very readable Wikidata infobox tutorial. I started with the page here (Wikidata:Infobox Tutorial) and would be grateful for any helpful comments or additions. If you have a lot of experience with this, I would also appreciate if you could report on the talk page what you think are best practices in Module and Infobox code layout. --Tobias1984 (talk) 08:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Mexican muralism

Greetings. It appears to me that these two items should be coordinated:

Mexican muralism (Q938864) https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q938864#sitelinks-wikipedia

Mexican muralism (Q15141204) https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15141204#sitelinks-wikipedia

It looks like ja ru uk should be taken from Q938864 and moved to Q15141204? I don't know how to do it. Then perhaps Q938864 should be named simply "Muralism". Y-barton (talk) 11:10, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Next office hour on July 8th

Hey folks :)

We'll do the next office hour for all things Wikidata on July 8th at 16:00 UTC. We'll meet in #wikimedia-office on freenode IRC. We'll talk about the last quarter, what's coming up and have time for discussion and questions. If there is a particular topic you'd like to discuss or present please let me know.


Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:53, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Error: Unrecognized value for parameter 'language'

I'm running into situations where it appears users have manually entered a language and included a label or description in that language, but when I try to edit it, I receive the above error. This has happened on Q208693 ("aln espaniol"), Q25160533 ("Kiswahili"), and Q25160188 ("enportugues"). Cheers, -- Irn (talk) 16:54, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

See above. --Edgars2007 (talk) 17:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Again: HSV and HSL

HSV and HSL are different color spaces. But they are a bit similar, so many languages describe them in single article (e.g. en:HSV and HSL). Looks like typical WD:Bonnie and Clyde, so theoretically there should be 3 items: one for "HSV", one for "HSL" and one for "HSV and HSL".

But currently there are only two wikidata items: one for "HSL" (ok!) and other for mix of "HSV and HSL" and "HSV". So, theoretically we should split the latter item into separate items for "HSV and HSL" and for "HSV". The problem is a bit harder than it looks because some of wikipedia articles in the item under question have confusing titles (e.g. German article seems to address both HSV and HSL -- and German wikipedia has no separate article for HSL -- but the article title is "HSV-Farbraum").

Another issue is that we'll break linkage. I.e. from languages that have single "HSV and HSL" article (e.g. English) there will be no links to 12 languages that have separate "HSV" and "HSL" articles (e.g. Russian).

So:

  1. should we go pedantic and split confusing Q376492 into separate "HSV and HSL" and "HSV" wikidata items (with breaking some linkage, e.g. there will be no link from English wikipedia to Russian wikipedia)...
  2. ... or should we leave it as is (non-ideal wikidata structure but more comfortable for wikipedia users)

?

Question is merely theoretical. I'm interested not in HSV/HSL problem itself, but in recipe of what to do in such cases. (I initially came from wikipedia to merge this, but was told that just merge is invalid solution, because wikidata is now smth more that tool for making interwikis. And now I see similar case, where items "HSV and HSL" and "HSV" are already merged. So, should we split, or better leave it as is?)

Sasha1024 (talk) 22:23, 29 June 2016 (UTC)

Regarding "tools for interwiki". Take a look at Module:Interwiki (Q20819069). It is used to get interwiki between Wikipedia-pages that do not share items at Wikidata. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:57, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
To make statements about "HSV" and "HSL", you'd need two items. To provide interwikis for articles that cover both, you need a third one.
--- Jura 10:04, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I understand this. But the question is: does wikidata community considers it reasonable to split wikidata items in such case, or better "not to touch it while it works as is"? Sasha1024 (talk) 12:55, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the unhelpful comments above (or at least I don't understand how Module:Interwiki (Q20819069) works, perhaps Sasha1024 can explain how to use it?) Anyway, yes, it is reasonable to split items in such cases as a wikidata item really should be about one thing that is the same across languages, not two different things depending on the language. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:39, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: It was I who proposed the Module:Interwiki above. In sv:Erik och Erik it is added by the help of sv:Template:Interwiki extra. The Swedish article about two kings therefor have interwiki both from Eric and Eric (Q15077597) and Eric the Pagan (Q1251277). In this example, the Swedish article has interwiki to cs:, es:, fi:, hu:, it:, lv:, nl:, no:, pl:, pt:, ru:, sh: and uk: even if the item about this pair of kings has sitelinks to only four languages. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:51, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, that's very nice. So to use it in this case, each wiki article in a given language that had "HSV and HSL" would need that template to link the wikidata ids for the "HSV" and "HSL" items? And conversely each wiki article in a language that was just "HSV" ought to add the "HSV and HSL" item via the same template? That seems a little clunky but I guess it could work. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:23, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
It is each projects decision to use it or not. The advantage compared with adding manual old style interwiki (ie: [[xyz:HSL]]) is that it does not confuses the bots who crawl over the wikis to find potential merges. It also updates automagically when new sitelinks are added or removed. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 15:46, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, en:Template:Interwiki_extra (based on en:Module:Interwiki) is really very useful template. Although, I'd prefer to have some special property in wikidata (i.e. that setting "secondary interwiki source" property of HSL and HSV (Q376492) to value HSL (Q14032191) would make every wikipedia article in the former to receive interwikis from both) -- in this case there will be no need to update every wikipedia article in some wikidata item (it would be just enough to assign wikidata property once). Another issue is that en:Template:Interwiki_extra and en:Module:Interwiki are not currently present in every wikipedia site. However, en:Template:Interwiki_extra and en:Module:Interwiki are really useful. Sasha1024 (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Innocent bystander, don't you know: are there some plans to implement such thing (I mean, reserved property as I described above) in wikidata? Or, maybe it already exists? Sasha1024 (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
Something like what you suggest has been proposed under WD:XLINK (which I now notice describes Innocent bystander's module!). See also a recent discussion and proposal for development. However I don't think there's been a proposal for a specific property for this purpose; I like that idea. It would need support from the development team to roll it out to all the different linked wikipedias but maybe that would be a good route to pursue? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:28, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith, Sasha1024: On svwiki, this template/module has mainly been used by a group of users who edits disambigs. There is no semantic relation between the disambig-items about "Freedom" and the disambig-item about "Frihet". But no property should probably connect those two items here at Wikidata. In the Swedish language, that connection makes some sense, otherwise not. The module, as I first wrote it, uses said to be the same as (P460) when no qid-parameter is added. The "has part"-property could probably be used in the same way here. Wikisource has a tradition of exceptions from the 1:1-rule for interwiki and has instead adopted a tree of "editions/edition of"-relations.
I now go on vacation for a few days, so I will probably not respond very quickly to new posts here until next week! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:17, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith:, yes, I'm sure it's good route to pursue (global linking). At least, this is one of features I want to see (I mean: in addition, not instead of en:Template:Interwiki_extra and other local linking features).
What I dislike about WD:XLINK (I read about it after last my post, but it didn't changed my opinion a lot): first, despite all automation, WD:XLINK is still local linking (i.e. it requires template to be used on specific sites); second, it tries to benefit from existing properties (subclass-of, etc), but IMHO no existing property should bring interwikis in 100% cases; third, there's something said about acyclicity in documentation, but in my vision both "HSV and HSL" can take secondary interwikis from "HSV", and "HSV" can take secondary interwikis "HSV and HSL". So, while WD:XLINK has its use cases, it's not what I wanted (my idea is (1) global (wikidata-level), (2) purely technical (not reusing semantic properties), (3) possibly cyclic (but not recursive)). Sasha1024 (talk) 20:48, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Through interwiki imports by bot from Wikipedia, some items got links to disambiguation pages and articles. Not really a big problem, but there are probably many such items.

While there is a tool to check sitelinks on such items one-by-one, I think we should find a way to attempt to remove articles from such items in bulk. How could this be done?
--- Jura 19:26, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2016/06&oldid=1102552427"