Active discussions

Changed value of "shared border with"Edit

Changed value of "shared border with" from Kingdom of Denmark to Denmark since the former includes Greenland, etc. but the latter is the geographical country bordering Germany. Likewise for changing Kingdom of the Netherlands to the Netherlands. Jefft0 (talk) 06:16, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

Changed en label from "Germany" to "Federal Republic of Germany"Edit

If this item is going to be used for pre-reunification FRG, then using the label "Germany" could result in certain statements being very confusing, so I've changed the label to "Federal Republic of Germany", with "Germany" as an alias. --Yair rand (talk) 21:59, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

The statement doesn't make sense "if used ... preFRG ... in certain statements being confusing." which to me becomes more confusing. I don't see how is it different from half a hundred other countries that have changed names, joined, split ... If there are clarification and changes to be made it would seem better to do it with eyes wide open and with an holistic approach. Generally, apart from the geographic, the stuff around "country of origin" and "country of citizenship" have predominantly just said Germany. If that is not what you are getting at, then I will hark back to my opening statement.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 4 December 2013 (UTC)


Please replace "Nemačka" with "Njemačka" for if you can, because it's not possible at the moment for me. Shameful. --Orijentolog (talk) 15:13, 24 December 2013 (UTC)

Undid revision 112831860Edit

Hello Infovarius,

You deleted my posts around the property "owner" in the item belonging to Germany Deutschland (Q183). I think there is a good reason for that. Could you please explain it to me. In my opinion the federal republic of germany is simply the owner of the Railway company "Deutsche Bahn". It. is the same with the other companies I listed. My sources confirm that even the Federal Ministry of Finance considers, the companies are the property of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Therefore it is a true statement to say: the Federal Republic of Germany is the Owner of such companies.

Thanks for the reply and your work that you invest here.

Regards, DavidMar86hdf

I’m not Infovarius, but I would have made these changes as well. The reason is simple: The "owner" property goes the other way around :) that is to say, your statements implied that the Deutsche Bahn was the owner of Germany. That is obviously wrong (unless you subscribe to some obscure conspiracy theory :D ). Correctly, Deutsche Bahn should have an "owner" statement with Germany. The same goes for the other statements. --DSGalaktos (talk) 18:06, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for your Answer. This makes sense. Unfortunately something is wrong with the whole Item here. I think some claims are missing (see below in this discussion). --DavidMar86hdf (talk) 20:42, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Some claims are missingEdit

Do I have a problem with my Browser, or is it correct that some claims disappeared. For example I cannot find the claim for our Head of State. Can somebody verify that.

Thank you in advance, --DavidMar86hdf (talk) 20:35, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Head of State shows up for me, although my browser froze for a few seconds. --DSGalaktos (talk) 22:52, 16 March 2014 (UTC)

Thank you, for your answer. The Browser-Freece also occurs to me. Do you can see the claim concerning the "Bundesländer". I cannot. --DavidMar86hdf (talk) 17:09, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Problems solved. I only have such displaying problems with Firefox.

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 17:26, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


Hello all together,

I'm the only one who had problems with timeout on this page (object) to struggle?

I can not enter any new items. I constantly get timeout messages. And reloading the page does not solve the problem.

Editing the other items smoothly.

Thanks in advance for advice and help

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 13:46, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

See bugzilla:71519. Legoktm (talk) 22:12, 5 October 2014 (UTC)

Temporary protection to an old revisionEdit

Hello Wikidata people,

There is currently a set of severe bugs (bugzilla:71519 being the most sallient) which cause recent revisions of this item to cause crashes in Mediawiki and prevents editing of pages and items linking to this one, breaks watchlists, as well as cause serious operational impact on the site. Because of this, we have temporarily reverted to an old version of the item that is known to not cause the issue, and superprotected the page against accidental edits. This is only a temporary measure, and as soon as the bug is fixed or a workaround is found, we'll (of course) restore editing to the item.

It's possible that slightly more recent revisions of the item would also be correct; if there is we might be able to test if that revision is safe and revert to it – but if it's reasonable to wait for a few days until the issue is corrected, it would be the safest course of action. MPelletier (WMF) (talk) 22:21, 5 October 2014 (UTC)


This is two items about membership in WTO. One is unnecessary. 18:09, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Set a featured linkEdit

Hello. I'm a galician user. I have tried to set a link in galician article Alemaña because it's an featured article in this language. I realize that the wikidata page is protected. Could an administrator set a link to make recognition to this article?. Thanks.--Breogan2008 (Talkpage) 13:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Even admins can't do that at the moment since the page is superprotectedTM, see the page history. --Stryn (talk) 16:17, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
@AKlapper (WMF): can u... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:34, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: I guess that I cannot, whatever the question is. :) Superprotection has a reason in this case, see bugzilla:71519. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 15:09, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Now it's at phab:T73519, but the {{Tracked}}... --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:15, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
Is this fine now? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:54, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

postponed editsEdit

  • in section p31 there is a link to the deleted item Q15775598. In case the protection is removed, please do not forget to remove this link.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 02:51, 21 November 2014 (UTC)


Hey :)

We have just removed the protection again from this item after making considerable performance improvements \o/ However we're still not good enough. So please go easy and don't add too much additional information to this item for now. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:11, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

Hello Lydia,

may you can give a short statement on what you mean by "don't add too much additional information to this item for now." There are enough good reasons why this Item became so big. Good old Germany will proof how efficient Wikidata can work. I can imagine that it is not very easy to handle it (seen technically) But what is "additional information"?

Regards, David

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Take it slowly and see how loading time goes. If it becomes bad stop. That's all :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:55, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your answer. I hope, the developers will find suitable solutions for items with "big data" (WD was made for it) This Item is a showcase. It has to be possible to store and show over a 150 diplomatic relations, dozens of Memberships in International Organizations and various Milestones in Nation's history. Because these are important relations that defines national states.

There is a lot more to add. It is clear to me that there are technical, personal and financial limitations to the project. We have to make the best of it. It was really new to me that a middle-range-country like Germany can cause such a trouble over months in WD? Maybe nobody thought that someone would uses WD the way it should be ? :)

Regards, David --DavidMar86hdf (talk) 23:19, 6 February 2015 (UTC)

Precision of population statementsEdit

@DavidMar86hdf: May I ask why you removed the ±500 from some population statements? The source gives the numbers “in 1000“, so I assume that’s the precision of the measurement (I certainly don’t believe that the population of Germany was always an exact multiple of 1000). —DSGalaktos (talk) 18:05, 22 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, thank you for your comment. Now I know why these numbers are there.

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 18:22, 23 March 2015 (UTC)

Predecessor of "Germany"Edit

hello everybody,

as predecessors for this data object the Holy Roman Empire and West Germany was added. This is not entirely wrong. But it is not really correct anyway. The Federal Republic of Germany did include the new (eastern) states. Since 1949 we have the same construct "FRG". the reunification did not changed that. But it is clear that the reunified Germany is not the same as West Germany. Legally speaking, nothing has changed. Boundaries, population and the economy have changed. what should be the source, the perspective for this problem?

Germany as a unified state was built since 1871. The Holy Roman Empire was never a state in the modern sense. "Germany" is an ambiguous term. Does it mean a unified territorial area (1871)? Does it mean a homogenous cultural region (Middle Ages) Or it means the current definition, which is Germany (1990)

The same could also be noted for the United Kingdom and France. Here it could be even more difficult.

What is your opnion on that?

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

My opinion is that "Germany" here should mean the Federal Republic of Germany, as of 1949, so that it refers to an uninterrupted consistent legal entity. So "West Germany" refers to a historical period, not a predecessor state. --Yair rand (talk) 07:24, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Hi Yair rand,

Thanks for your comment. I suppose you define "France" (as a data object) as the French Fifth Republic. Right? If so, are the other french republics are predecessor states? And is it a good idea to name an uninterrupted consistent legal entity as "Germany", "France" or "Spain"?

--DavidMar86hdf (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

benannt nachEdit

Bayern; Sprache des Werks oder des Namens: Niedersorbisch. Das ist nicht korrekt, oder? Conny (talk) 16:42, 20 October 2016 (UTC).

Beschreibung in DeutschEdit

Die deutsche Beschreibung sollte geändert werden. Aktuell lautet sie: "Staat in Mitteleuropa (seit 1949)"

Der Artikel bezieht sich jedoch nicht nur auf die Bundesrepublik Deutschland (vgl. Abschnitt "Geschichte" oder "Gründung" im Infokasten jeweils des deutschsprachigen Artikel). Außerdem ist die heutige Bundesrepublik Rechtsnachfolger des vorherigen Deutschen Reichs. Deshalb bitte "(seit 1949)" streichen.--Asperatus (talk) 10:21, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Circular statement deletedEdit

There was a statement that Q183 was a country (P17) of Q183. I removed this, as the statement is circular. --WiseWoman (talk) 11:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

  • What were you trying to "fix"? Please restore, it's standard for countries. --- Jura 11:28, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
There is already a statement: Germany instance-of country. What on earth can you do with Germany is-country Germany that would only lead to an infinite chain if you keep applying this. --WiseWoman (talk) 19:09, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Germany not showing up in results of Country sorted by PopulationEdit

When I use the showcase query [1] (Countries sorted by population) Germany does not appear. I thought the circular definition was a problem, but it's not. Germany is listed as an instance of a country, and it has a population (well, many populations, but one is defined as preferred). Any idea why German (and other countries) are not showing up here? At least France, Spain, Italy, Poland, Luxemburg, and Belgium are missing, too. Other European countries are in the list. Any ideas? --WiseWoman (talk) 11:29, 14 April 2019 (UTC) (P.S. and why are the tinyurls to the results blacklisted?)

?country wdt:P31 wd:Q6256 looks as bestrank P31 statements, thus the value country (Q6256) is not visible this way as it has Normal Rank and there is another Preferred Rank statement for P31. Replace wdt:P31 by p:P31/ps:P31 and it should work. —MisterSynergy (talk) 16:36, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that works. It's a bit around the corner, logic wise. Where can I see the preferred rank? I don't see anything in [2].  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by WiseWoman (talk • contribs) at 13:44, 15 April 2019‎ (UTC).
You need to look on the item page Q183 directly. For each statement, you see the ranking indicators as described in Help:Ranking. If you want to, you could also add some CSS code to your common.css which highlights statements with preferred or deprecated rank with a custom background color (just copy the last six lines from User:MisterSynergy/common.css). Normal rank statements, which are the vast majority of Wikidata statements, would still be displayed with default style. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:27, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
Return to "Q183" page.