Dispenser

Welcome to Wikidata, Dispenser!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards! Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:36, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Warning

Please do not post the personal information of other users unless they have disclosed it on other Wikimedia sites. If you do this again, you will be blocked. --Rschen7754 07:20, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Unfortunately I have had to block you upon reviewing some of these other items on Wikimedians, because some of the information was particularly sensitive (a date of birth?). I have done this in order to protect the site and its editors.

To any admin reviewing this, I am okay with an unblock so long as Dispenser agrees to not continue posting the private information of other users without their consent. --Rschen7754 07:42, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

User:Rschen7754, that user posted his own Full Name and DoB on wiki and even helped to build his own statement. The WM-NYC president is notable as organizing edit-a-thons and speaking to the press. When sourcing information for a Wikimedian I look to see that they've either A) admit to being a Wikimedian or B) intended on creating an online identity. The complaining user intended did latter (Everything linked to twitter) then was "outed" by accepting a position at the WMF. Real name's on Twitter, linked from his blog, linked from his Github account, etc. Dispenser (talk) 12:02, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

And that's where things get problematic. It's possible to find the home address of a lot of Wikimedians on search sites like spokeo.com. Or find stuff that people posted when they were younger, but that they did not remember to remove at a later date, and that is now being used to violate their privacy. Classic w:doxing. --Rschen7754 17:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Which makes Wikimedia Foundation and WM-NYC demands for real names and Google+ worrying. But this is going off topic.  

The complaining individual was using the same handle on most websites (except Real Name websites) and cross linked them, prominently mentioned their Wikipedia activities (including WP Admin and WMF employment on their public LinkedIn profile). A Google/Bing search of their username reveals half the information on that page. They've had recent activity on nearly all the services. And continue using their real name with their Twitter and GitHub handles. He looks pretty open about it. Dispenser (talk) 19:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I think you are missing the point. Just because you can find this information by Googling doesn't mean everyone wants it on this site. At the least, it comes off as a bit stalkerish and should not be done without reliable sources confirming this information. Note that while you are allowed to use {{unblock}} to appeal, only requests that explicitly state that you will refrain from this will be considered.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:55, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by "the complaining individual" (and please don't attempt to clarify onwiki), because I made three separate requests to oversight, which were all granted. --Rschen7754 22:59, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: The initial person you contacted me about. If you need more hit me on IRC. Dispenser (talk) 23:11, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

That was only one of the three problematic revisions that had to be oversighted. --Rschen7754 23:14, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

@Rschen7754: irc:wikidata Dispenser (talk) 23:28, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

I've actually left IRC for the weekend, but I'm not sure that further discussion on IRC would (or should) influence the outcome of an unblock request. --Rschen7754 23:33, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Dispenser block log • ipblocklist • crossblock • luxo's • unblock • remove gblock • contribs: +/-

---

Request reason:

I haven't actually done anything wrong, here are the details behind the deleted/oversighted items:

1. Q23042259 is P:P488 of Q18559925, a chapter organization who runs Edit-a-thons covered by journalists including the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. The individual has been written about in the press (numerous, short, but with detail) and guest written in the Wikimedia Blog. Phone number (which I don't care for) was properly referenced to wikiconferenceusa.org a website owned by WM-DC (presumably jointly operated with WM-NYC), on a page he himself had edited. [Notability: 2 & 3]
    
2. Q23042207 and the cause for the block. Volunteered over IRC. All information was obtained on wiki or via his about.me page. The individual is age of majority (18) in his home country. Has a Creator template and category on Commons with 50,000 uploads. Top 1,000 enwiki editor. [Notability: weak 1 & weak 3; will be interesting to browse the Commons metadata]
    
3. Q23041578, what the hoopla is about. My goals was to learn what information each account provides, because these are really just external identifiers. For example, got a Google+ ID? call the API to get the YouTube channel ID, then playlists, then most liked uploaded video. Then extract the "social media" links from the YouTube profile.

   Its good to have a model before doing work. We can ask questions, find flaws, and resolve issues before committing to major work. An important constraint while constructing the model was a plausible programmatic method of identification. Looked to Q15136093 as a starting point, but need a new profile to complete the properties for. I conversed with Q23041578 for years and finally met in person at WikiConference in October 2015 and figured he'd be alright personally with me filling out his profile.

   I am omitting the detail of the linking for privacy. In short, this man is a connoisseur of social media and connects just about every account to another. And I was surprised to learn he was "very upset" after I messaged him with his profile. [Notability: weak 1, medium 2, medium 3; Has written PDFs on Commons, presented at Wikimania on video, and has category on Commons P935].

Intimidating behaviour/harassment: posting personal information about other users

Unblock reason:

Granted. I feel there was lack of intent to 'dox' here, at least with malicious intent. I would suggest Dispenser stays away from editing on Wikidata relating to Wikimedians so as not to scare people into blocking again. Q18016466, Q18618629 and Q19860629 should also be pointed out as similar items to those that have been referenced in the unblock request. A discussion on this topic, at a venue other than this talk page, may also make sense (involving notability and likely referencing, especially of real people, particularly Wikimedias). ·addshore· ^{talk to me!} 17:27, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

This template should be archived normally.

---

беларуская (тарашкевіца) | български | čeština | English | español | français | македонски | português | português do Brasil | русский | svenska | 中文 | +/−

I will not be reviewing this block request, but I do not see how #3 is not doxing. --Rschen7754 05:21, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

If I built the "social media cross-linker" tool you would revert and block every user? Privacy standards range from the German, "How dare you tell anyone my edit count", to the American Social Media Darling, "Please list every one of my accounts". Dispenser (talk) 12:19, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

It scares me that you think you're not doing something wrong. Linking this information in a public database on this way is a no-go for me. --Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 15:35, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

It'd be a pity if Dispenser were prevented from editing undefinitely, however I concur that (s)he has behaved lightly. Setting notability aside for a moment, it should be acknowledged that people can get rightly upset when their information is cross linked and published by someone else even if they look "pretty open about it". --Ricordisamoa 04:28, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

I have been asked to review this block and here are my thoughts: I definitely don't want to unblock someone who doesn't think tracking personal information about people who aren't even clearly in our notability criteria is doxxing. I could possibly change my mind about an indefinite block if Dispenser understood what (s)he did and would promise to never do it again (and even then I would be wary and suggest a several-months long block) but right now, my gut answer is "I really don't want Wikidata to be a doxxing site, let's block everyone who think it should be". --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 17:22, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Non-notability is disputable. I could create items of the 126 recorded talks at that Wikimania, add YouTube video ID (P1651) include video metadata such as description, date, run time, topics, link to the slides on Commons, and presenters (including recreating Q23041578 via Notability 3). This would be useful to the community as the video tracks are missing on Commons.

That would be more profiles and a larger impact. I wanted a few, diverse, and well developed profiles (which I'd inform the subjects about and answer their questions). I would've asked the community questions after leaving the profiles to sit for few days (so everyone would behave in a rational manor). I kept it aboveboard: Keep to the first 30 Google results, only keywords a computer could pick, stick to metadata (no clawing through posts to find), and make sure the information was intended to be public by the subject. For those and other reasons I don't believe it was doxxing (Clearly the problem was that I informed people </sarcasm>) Dispenser (talk) 04:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

embed URL template (P2720)

Hi Dispenser,

The above is created. Please make good use of it.
--- Jura 15:55, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Bloomberg and the Financial Instrument Global Identifier

You wrote over at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Bot_requests that we need a BBGID/FIGI property for important Bloomberg private companies. I myself didn't good example data for the proposal I created at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Financial_Instrument_Global_Identifier_(FIGI). Would you mind entering an example? ChristianKl (talk) 15:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

Unused property

This is a kind reminder that the following property was created more than six months ago: HowLongToBeat ID (P2816). As of today, this property is used on less than five items. As the proposer of this property you probably want to change the unfortunate situation by adding a few statements to items. --Pasleim (talk) 19:11, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

GIF

Hello, about [1]: gif file is given as example in video (P10) property documentation. Is the example wrong? Please synchronize format as a regular expression (P1793), Wikidata property example (P1855) on Property:P10, {{Constraint:Format}} on Property talk:P10 and items Q3924909, Q2913387, Q1128535. Its are inconsistence now. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 18:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The boundary for video is rather blurry. On Commons we have Animated PNGs, Animated SVGs, and Google's coming full circle in animating its WebM derived picture format. I'm going to draw it at formats with a video mime type. Dispenser (talk) 18:15, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Don't use imported from

Hi Dispenser, [2] this is not correct. Please have a look at Help:Sources#Different_types_of_sources. Can you please correct it before you start a new run? Multichill (talk) 20:42, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Multichill, could you please clarify on exactly what is not correct? I used what I've commonly seen from many items. Should I be using stated in (P248) instead of imported from Wikimedia project (P143)? Or that I'm using the reference section at all. Unfortunately, at the moment the way OpenRefine works I cannot change the reference format without it compounding the problems. —Dispenser (talk) 21:31, 1 July 2018 (UTC)

So imported from Wikimedia project (P143) is just from stuff imported from Wikipedia. Wikipedia isn't a real source so this helps us to keep track of this data so we can replace it with a real source.

Best way to source it is a combination of:

• stated in (P248) - where is it stated that this data is correct?
• reference URL (P854) / relevant property - to link to the source
• retrieved (P813) - When did we retrieve it? (source might change over time)

If you're used to adding references in the English Wikipedia, this might look familiar. See for example this edit. To be fair we haven't worked out the one standardized way of referencing things (several variants are used) and we still have a lot of imported from to be replaced.

Isn't @Pintoch: maintaining the OpenRefine software (or at least this part of it)? Would be nice to have it use the same sourcing format. I would do it like this. Improvement over that would be the to also include the publication data in the database (publication date (P577)) and the last update, I just discovered we have last update (P5017). Multichill (talk) 12:39, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Multichill, yes I do maintain OpenRefine. However OpenRefine is entirely agnostic as to the format of references - they are defined by the user. If you look at the tutorials (for example the basic one) you will see that the reference format is different each time. @Dispenser: I am not sure what you mean by I cannot change the reference format without it compounding the problems? Intuitively I would just undo the batches with problematic references (via EditGroups), change the reference format in the schema, and upload the batch again?

Like many newcomers I think, I find this distinction between stated in (P248) and imported from Wikimedia project (P143) slightly problematic - their English labels do not indicate that distinction at all, nor do their constraints. I think we should consider setting up a value type constraint on imported from Wikimedia project (P143) to enforce that. − Pintoch (talk) 15:18, 4 July 2018 (UTC)

Adding "video game" to instance of property expansion packs, DLC and mods

Hi Dispenser, are you using a tool to import from redump.org? I've noticed a few edits that add this.

For example:

• Age of Mythology: The Titans (Q1044761) (NOTE: I have already removed it from this entity) &
• The Elder Scrolls III: Bloodmoon (Q1393129)

These are both expansion packs, not standalone video games. Ideally the adding the "of" qualifier and linking the parent video game to the "expansion pack" section would be better. Are you able to modify the tool you use to change this behavior?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Maxxisti (talk • contribs) at 01:15, 11 July 2018‎ (UTC).

Unfortunately OpenRefine is crude with merging data into Wikidata, preferring to add duplicate values instead of merging if the qualifiers are different or skipping the statement. I try to filter out anything with conflicting values, but I can't save filters... so sometimes I forget :-( —Dispenser (talk) 02:20, 11 July 2018 (UTC)

Metacritic ID

Hi Dispenser, is there any specific reason why Metacritic ID (P1712) shouldn't be used for people or companies? Metacritic has entries for people just like other databases, and the property specifically refers to items about humans. I don't see any reason not to include those entries. --Kam Solusar (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

I looked into and explained it on the talk page, Property talk:P1712#Music, People, and Companies?. Its a derived from other sources and is not useful in the graph. —Dispenser (talk) 00:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)

Hoopla artist ID

Hi, I just proposed a property for individuals at Hoopla, and thought you might be interested based on your comments on Hoopla title ID (P5680). Trivialist (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me, but I dislike linking to these derived views. I will abstain from voting since many Wikidatans are trying to turn this project into a IMDbPro or LinkedIn and it would be unfair to single out your property. Dispenser (talk) 19:00, 19 May 2019 (UTC)