About this board

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Abián/Archive 1 on 2016-07-09.

new statement for Q82486 (Encyclopedia of Life)

Jenniferhammock (talkcontribs)

Hello! I see you protected Q82486 a couple of yours ago. (Thank you) I work for the project and we have just added an OpenRefine reconciliation API. I'd like to add a statement to that effect. I just registered with wikidata, but I gather I would need to make quite a few edits in order to become autoconfirmed and gain edit access. A quick look at a few pages where my general knowledge might apply suggests that I don't have many immediately useful edits to make, and I don't really want to try spurious activity. Can you help me? Here is the content, if that helps:

property: API endpoint (P6269)

value: https://eol.org/api/reconciliation

qualifier: protocol (P2700) is OpenRefine reconciliation service API (Q64490175)

qualifier: described at URL (P973) is https://eol.org/docs/what-is-eol/data-services

If there's anything I can do myself, please advise. Thanks!


Abián (talkcontribs)

Hi Jen,

Congrats on such an interesting project! I have just applied the changes you suggest. Best of success, and don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of help with anything else.

Jenniferhammock (talkcontribs)

Yay! Thanks very much :)

Reply to "new statement for Q82486 (Encyclopedia of Life)"
2A02:587:B946:8D35:E0C4:9FE2:4C45:5BFD (talkcontribs)

Hola Abián,

Could you please update the Norwegian Bokmål label of Q13474373 to "wrestler" and description into "idrettsutøver som deltar i wrestling" (the page is locked)? Thanks a lot!

Reply to "Professional wrestler"
Marpapadaki (talkcontribs)


I am trying to add a qualifier in a statement using the commands of csv files

(the qualifier refers to the volume number of an article)

However, I get an error of "invalid snak data".

I passed the value of the volume, as 14, +14, "14" without success.

Could you help me, please?

Thank you in advance.

Abián (talkcontribs)

Hi, Marpapadaki. I would need more information to tell you what's wrong with your commands; however, note that you don't need, nor is it probably desirable, to use QuickStatements to edit a single entity or a small set of them. I would recommend using Wikidata's web interface directly.

Reply to "Quickstatements V2"
Summary by Abián

Done by MisterSynergy

LetsHelpOut (talkcontribs)


I noticed there was a huge amount of vandalism on page: Q102228988. I also see you have done a wonderful job of preventing it, but may I request you semi-protect it? It looks like the vandals have been going at it for 2 days straight.

MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

Hey Abián, so you claim that the WDCM dashboard provides us with a list of items which require semi-protection based on that 2019 page protection RfC. Can you help me to find it there?

Abián (talkcontribs)
MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

Okay thanks.

I made a script to compare currently implemented protections and that list. It looks that based on the RfC there are currently 23032 page protections missing and 57 page protections need to be removed because there are fewer than 500 uses.

We need an admin bot. It is not that difficult to implement in fact.

Abián (talkcontribs)

Thank you, MisterSynergy! I think we could request a Gerrit repository at mw:Gerrit/New repositories/Requests for the code, with the schema labs/tools/wikidata-<something> (labs/tools/wikidata-admin-bot? labs/tools/wikidata-sysop?). The repository would be independent of the bot that runs its code at a given time: once we have the code, any admin could take care of running it (for example, from Toolforge) with an account controlled by them and, when that admin is no longer active or available, another one could switch to running the same code with another account (I assume that sharing a bot account between admins with its corresponding password, recovery options, lack of transparency about who's acting under it, etc. would be a problem). What do you think?

MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

The code should definitely be public and properly licensed (MIT or CC0); I am in fact close to having actually working code and would be willing to share it. However, I don't think that we necessarily need to host it on Gerrit; github or bitbucket would also do, plus an onwiki copy in the userspace of the bot account (just in case).

The code could then be run via Toolforge indeed, where the tool account contents are by default readable by anyone with a Toolforge account. A scheduled job executed once a week would be easy to set up. The admin-bot account would need to have an approved task (via Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot) and a sysop flag (via Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator).

Responsibility-wise the bot operator is responsible, and if something goes wrong, a block for the admin-bot account should be sufficient. Maybe we can think about sharing access to the tool account with two or three admins, but it is up to the operator to decide this. Anyways, in case the operator disappears, another user (admin) can simply set up another instance with the published code which then also needs bot and admin approval as well as its separate Toolforge account.

So, yes. Roughly as you describe it.

Abián (talkcontribs)

Cool. :-) Creating a repository on Gerrit also creates a mirror repository on Github that stays in sync, so we wouldn't need to worry too much about that.

MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

Yes, but it seems a bit too bureaucratic for the job in my opinion. We are talking about a few hundred lines of code in one script at maximum. Code review is in my opinion not really necessary due to the simplicity of the job, and because the bot operator is responsible for the bot's actions anyways.

The script just needs to be published somewhere so it can be re-used by someone else in case the bot operator becomes unavailable.

MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)
MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

Hey Abián, I am still on it, and plan to propose a bot task in the next days.

One thing that I meanwhile found is that any use with Structured Data at Commons (SDC) is apparently not covered in the toplist.csv file, as these uses are not captured by the entityusage database tables that the WMDE script apparently uses. Are you aware of any efforts at WMDE to integrate SDC use in the evaluation? Do you have any idea how many more items would require protection then?

Abián (talkcontribs)

Hey, thanks for everything you're doing. I have no specific information about SDC, I'm sorry, but I can tell you that although WMDE is responsible for the development of the Wikibase Client (also used on Commons), it's the WMF that is responsible for SDC. We should be able to get some estimates with https://wcqs-beta.wmflabs.org/

MisterSynergy (talkcontribs)

WCQS is not going to help here due to the timeout limit. I guess one needs to download the full dump and evaluate this offline.

Reply to "page protection RfC"
MediaWiki message delivery (talkcontribs)

Hello Vunj909omq4ird1l,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

Reply to "We sent you an e-mail"

use of admin rights in differences of editorial view

Jura1 (talkcontribs)

Hi Abián,

What's your view on this? Should admins be able to use their admin access to edit protected pages when they have a difference of editorial views with other contributors?

Reply to "use of admin rights in differences of editorial view"
Taichi (talkcontribs)

Hola Abián espero que estés bien, ¿podrías borrar [[Q99297838]]? Esta entrada fue creada por un representante legal de la empresa que quiere introducir por la fuerza la compañía en los proyectos. El artículo fue borrado. Saludos.

Abián (talkcontribs)

Muy buenas, Taichi.

Vamos yendo, espero igualmente que todo te vaya bien por allá.

Ya he borrado el elemento, gracias por el aviso. Siéntete libre de volver a escribirme una posible próxima vez.

Reply to "Borrado de entrada"

User research, looking for volunteers

Merle von Wittich (WMDE) (talkcontribs)

Hi Abián,

for a current research project we are looking for active community members in Wikipedia, Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons who are interested in filling out a survey and participating in an interview. And I am contacting you, because we hope that you can give us some insights into Wikidata :) The aim of the research is to identify opportunities for participation and access for new volunteers in the Wikimedia projects. For this purpose we would like to learn from the experiences of the already active community members and find out success factors for participation in the projects. Participation includes filling out a preliminary survey, a self-study and an interview.

If you are interested in participating, simply fill out this survey. The participants in the interviews will be selected on the basis of the answers in order to be able to consider as many different perspectives as possible.

All selected interview partners will receive a book or photo voucher of 25 euros as a thank you.

Feel free to forward this call to other people you think might share interesting experiences about Commons. If you have any questions you can of course contact me or check the project page :) On the Project Page you can also find more information.

Regards --~~~~

Reply to "User research, looking for volunteers" (talkcontribs)
Reply to "MarioMiller90"