User talk:Laddo/Archive/2014/1

Active discussions

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Application software

Hello. Not all software is application software. Why did you put utilities, file managers, and even free and proprietary software there? --AVRS (talk) 21:46, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

@AVRS: I kind of agree, but software (Q7397) is not about one entity, it is more the generic concept, opposing to hardware. Can you suggest any other entity that would be more generic than application software but not be simply "software"? It must somehow inherit from "creative work". LaddΩ chat ;) 21:50, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
@Laddo: What do you mean by "one entity"? If you mean non-executable stuff is software, then I guess you are mixing it up with something like "data"; if you mean it's not about a single program or project (and thus a file manager is not "a" software), then neither is "application software", I think. --AVRS (talk) 21:58, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
@AVRS: To me a software "entity" is executable machine code... en:Category:Software proposes three subclasses: application (Q166142), system software (Q676202) and programming tool (Q1077784). I could use these, instead of dumping everything in application software. A bit more trouble but it would make more sense in general. OK with you? - LaddΩ chat ;) 22:05, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
@Laddo: “To me a software "entity" is executable machine code...” I think I disagree with you there, as I want the "free software" item to be about computer programs that conform to either FSF's or Debian's criteria, so it can require the non-code stuff to be free. Also… I don't think you oppose "application software"'s being subclass of "software"? --AVRS (talk) 22:12, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
@AVRS: OK, OK :) software "entities" may include data and the like... Also toolkits and software libraries must fit somewhere. All of these do already inherit from software (Q7397), but I believe they should all do so through a limited number of intermediate "types", if there is no unique "box" for "software entities". LaddΩ chat ;) 22:30, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
@Laddo: Well, "human" is currently "part of" "humanity", but I'm afraid it would become too complex: you'd also need items for application software entities etc. I guess the word "project" wouldn't work here.
We already have a problem because the "genre" field of infoboxes is a kind of "instance of" or "subclass of" (Maybe it could be solved with qualifiers? Sorry if it has already been solved and I missed that.).
--AVRS (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @AVRS: I'll try to draw up a set of subclasses and revisit the items that I recently assigned to application (Q166142). Thanks - LaddΩ chat ;) 22:53, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

A relevant discussion: Wikidata:Project_chat#Is_it_an_instance_of_if_there_is_more_than_one_of_it.3F. --AVRS (talk) 19:40, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Coup de gueule

Désolé pour l'entrée en matière, mais quand je vois la pagaille que tu as mis sur certains éléments, je ne peux pas vraiment applaudir. Peux-tu me dire ce que tu as fait sur l'élément ethanol (Q153) ? Tu as supprimé plusieurs références et maintenant on se retrouve avec des références de moins bonne qualité, exemple la propriété PubChem CID (P662) ou alors la propriété EC number (P232) où tu mets un lien web qui n'aboutit à aucune page (dans ce dernier cas, mieux vaut utiliser le document du Journal officiel de l'EU (cf Property_talk:P232) au lieu d'un lien web vers un site qui, semble-t-il, n'autorise pas les liens directs vers ses pages). Si tu a utilisé un bot, il faudrait revoir le code avant de poursuivre et je ne peux que t'encourager avant de te lancer dans une importation de masse de donnée de discuter avec le projet chimie afin que l'on discute des meilleures sources à utiliser. Au plaisir de discuter de la suite à donner afin de mieux collaborer. Snipre (talk) 00:09, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

@Snipre: Whoa, du calme... J'ai n'ai modifié que ethanol (Q153), début décembre, manuellement et soigneusement, puisqu'il était candidat pour Wikidata talk:Showcase items (et peut-être un autre item de chimie?) Je ne vois vois pas de pagaille où que se soit:
Donc pas de bot, pas de suppression en vrac - précise quelles modifs tu trouves invalides, je regarde mes changements et n'y trouve rien de particulièrement mauvais... ??
LaddΩ chat ;) 03:52, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Adding both book (Q571) and work (Q386724) as instance of (P31)


just wanted to let you know that edits like this are unnecessary since book (Q571) is already a subclass of (P279) work (Q386724). --Shisma (talk) 17:24, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

@Shisma: Thanks for the info. I reproduced what's on Nineteen Eighty-Four (Q208460), which made sense - I remember some discussions mentioning that not all books were "creative"; my error, I did not check. LaddΩ chat ;) 23:01, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

Constraints for P1172

I see you improving constraints and documentation to Properties in my watchlist. Can you take a look at Geokod (P1172)? The code always have 7 numbers, the first two are always in the range 01 - 25. The items are always in P17:Q34 and have P132:Subclass of an Administrative unit. The set of kinds of Administrative units is limited in numbers, but I do not know exactly all of them. The source should always be p248:Q15829731. (If such constraints can be added of course.) -- Lavallen (talk) 19:37, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

@Lavallen: Done. I took the liberty of requiring located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) as well. I don't think there is a scheme to check sources (yet). Let me know if other changes are needed. LaddΩ chat ;) 13:15, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Thx! There are some exceptions from the "single value"-constraint, but that's normal. -- Lavallen (talk) 13:45, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
@Lavallen: Most constraint templates support an optional (and undocumented) argument |exceptions = that excludes specific items from violation reports, if you prefer it that way. LaddΩ chat ;) 13:56, 2 March 2014 (UTC)
Good. There are some third-level-municipalities that are located in two or more second-level-municipalities. Then each part of that third-level-municipality have it's own code. There is maybe also some exception to "Subclass of an Administrative unit", since I do not know if "market tows who isn't a municipality" can be considered an Administrative unit or not. -- Lavallen (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

range of belongs to administrative division of

Hi, I have doubts about this diff. A blason is not really located anywhere ... The purpose of this property was to state that an administrative division was a subdivision of another subdivison, so a blason is not relevant here. TomT0m (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Salut @TomT0m:, I must agree with you, located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) is not appropriate for that. However, the use of coat of arms (P237) to store its associated territory is no better, since the property is meant to point from a territory to its coat of arms, and not the other way around, see Property talk:P237. I was looking for a property similar to country (P17), but that I could use for country subdivisions, e.g. province of Canada (Q13218404) or West Java (Q3724)... but even such a property could not be used for all coats of arms, since the associated subject can be a person or an organization. Of course there is no property "associated to", but is there some kind of "symbol of" that you know about ? part of (P361) ? statement is subject of (P805) ? I don't want to resort to of (P642)... LaddΩ chat ;) 21:25, 18 March 2014 (UTC)


I discovered already yesterday that the string in Riksdagen person-ID (P1214) can be 12 digits long as an alternative to 13 digits. Can you solve that for me? -- Lavallen (talk) 06:55, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

@Lavallen: done LaddΩ chat ;) 10:02, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

List of properties

What's happened? You have deleted all :) I restore it. --ValterVB (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Constraints for P775?

Is ot possible to add contraints to P755 that tells that:

P131 should be connected to at least one items who have P132:Q193556 and to one item with P132:Q127448, this since I think we have to add both Province and Municipality to P131 in the items. -- Lavallen (talk) 11:05, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

@Lavallen: existing constraints do not allow constraining something like "P131=(P132=Qx)". However the API allows creating such a request. I added a section with predefined maintenance requests (the two cases that you requested) on the talk page of Swedish urban area code (P775), see here; in the future you may create more such requests. - LaddΩ chat ;) 15:54, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Wondering the difference between a production and a show in Internet Broadway Database

Hi there, I'm translating the property of IBDB series into Chinese. And I don't understand the difference between a show and a production, are those two different? In which way they distinguish one out of another? If you could explain to me, that would be very nice, thank you. --03:29, 21 April 2014 (UTC) -  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shangkuanlc (talk • contribs).

@Shangkuanlc: I do not know too much either: "production" has links like this: whereas "show" has links like this: I guess that: a "production" is a series of individual events held in one theatre by the same group of actors, while a "show" is a work of art that can be "produced" multiple times, at different theatres and by different groups of actors, with different organizations. - LaddΩ chat ;) 03:42, 21 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply, I agree with you. I will modify the translation accordingly. --Shangkuanlc (talk) 08:59, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Alvíss (Q1143134)

Hi! I have changed Alvíss (Q1143134) to have it same style as the other items. Please use Wikidata:Project chat#Norse_mythology for comments. Thanks in advance! Regards gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

@לערי ריינהארט: Better indeed, thanks! LaddΩ chat ;) 22:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)

Male vs. male animal

Beware, there is sex or gender (P21)=male (Q6581097) for humans but sex or gender (P21)=male organism (Q44148) for animal, important distinctions in some languages. See what happened to Hanoverhill Starbuck (Q15221508). Are there many more like that?

(traduit pour faciliter la communication:..) Attention il existe sex or gender (P21)=male (Q6581097) pour les humains mais sex or gender (P21)=male organism (Q44148) pour les animaux; la distinction est importante dans certaines langues. Vois ce qu'est advenu de Hanoverhill Starbuck (Q15221508). Y a-t-il d'autres cas comme celui-là? LaddΩ chat ;) 19:34, 26 April 2014 (UTC)
OK il n'y avait que 2 animaux sur les 84 items ayant la paire "mâle". J'ai corrigé le tout. - LaddΩ chat ;) 00:46, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Ok merci --PAC2 (talk) 08:33, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Property talk:P303

Hallo Laddo,

with Template:Constraint: is it possible to check, if all items with P303 = 0001 to 0099 are form pigeons (Q13099336)? This is one of nine ee-breed-groups.

Best regards, PigeonIP (talk) 09:26, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

@PigeonIP: For sure it is not possible with {{Constraint}}. I tried with Autolist but it does not yet support queries for substrings. Sorry - LaddΩ chat ;) 01:05, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
Its OK. Maybe later  ;) --PigeonIP (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
What did I wrong? [1] --PigeonIP (talk) 17:26, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
info: Columba livia domestica (Q204179) is used in nl.Infoboxes, fancy pigeon (Q5433715) in the English one and the ee-breed group is used in en-wp as well and shall be used in German Wikipedia . --PigeonIP (talk) 17:32, 20 May 2014 (UTC))
Hi @PigeonIP:, there are a few issues:
  1. Your main problem is that you indicated "instance" instead of "subclass" in {{Constraint:Type}} of Property talk:P303;
  2. Second problem: since fancy pigeon (Q5433715)      is subclass of (P279) Columba livia domestica (Q204179)      , all pigeons that are instance of (P31) any of these two items are of type Columba livia domestica (Q204179); the reverse is not true and would cause many violations all the time. For now, just constrain "subclass of Columba livia domestica (Q204179)".
  3. Third issue, unless you want to remove all statements "P31=pigeon breed (Q15623573)" from all breeds of pigeons, leave constraint pigeon breed (Q15623573) for now.
I will add automated lists and some maintenance requests. Adjust them as you prefer. LaddΩ chat ;) 01:48, 21 May 2014 (UTC)
Hallo Laddo,
thank you for the links. All instance of (P31) pigeon breed (Q15623573) shall know also be subclass of (P279) Columba livia domestica (Q204179).
pigeon breed (Q15623573) can be deleted. (merged with proper Category:Pigeon breeds (Q8273906) and Columba livia domestica (Q204179))
Thank you for your hand, PigeonIP (talk) 19:41, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
@PigeonIP: Hi, nice clean-up, good work. Some comments:
You made a good organization of those breeds, keep up the good work! LaddΩ chat ;) 22:45, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi, any reason to remove
⟨ specific pigeon breed ⟩ instance of (P31)   ⟨ pigeon breeds ⟩
on pigeon breeds items ? I'm in favor of such statements (as there may be subclasses of pigeons such as <pigeon of whatever interesting pigeon place> who might not be pigeon breeds. Or did I miss something ? TomT0m (talk) 17:23, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

@TomT0m: See User_talk:PigeonIP#Removing_"pigeon_breed" and my last edit at Property talk:P303. There are very different definitions of what a "breed" is. The "Helmet" in EE is breed group of fife or more Helmet-breeds. The US/AU and Canadians don't know these breeds so there "Helmet" is a breed... There are other exampels for this breed vs. breedgroup type of thing. Another: breed vs. marking. "Schalaster" is a marking of Silesin Croppers/Pouters (a breed) but with other breeding organisations the Schalaster Pouter is a breed itself... GerardM, the creator of the item "pigeon breed" said, "A pidgeon breed is recognised as being a specific description that a judge at an exhibition will look for when determining the quality of a specimen." - that is what a fancy pigeon is, not a breed of pigeon. A lot sporting pigeon breeds would not be a breed, cause they are not bread for show. Same goes for some utility/sqab pigeons. ... --PigeonIP (talk) 18:32, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

@PigeonIP: It's a POV and definition conflict. Create different classes of breeds like <Breed (Silesin Croppers/Pouters)> labelled Pigeon breed according to Silesin Croppers/Pouters. They could be subclasses of <Breed according to some breeding organisation>. I don't think the best way to solve such conflicts is to remove the informations. TomT0m (talk) 18:44, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
User:TomT0m, you had a look at Property talk:P303? --PigeonIP (talk) 18:46, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
And by the way: I did removed items with no information better than "is a domesticated pigeon". --PigeonIP (talk) 18:49, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Please be more careful

You incorrectly marked Touré Kunda (Q3535582) as a person. Please be more careful. Thanks for your work, in any case. JesseW (talk) 05:19, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

@JesseW: Good catch. I assign "human" types based on French categories, and I am very careful, but checking articles one by one would defeat the purpose of using Widar to do mass assignments - Touré Kunda (Q3535582) simply happens to have a name that looks like the name of a human. The good news is that it can be caught when someone will try to assign sex or gender (P21) to that "person" - I catch 3-4 items in that situation every time I play the Gender Wikidata Game... Instead of taking much time to write a long message to whoever does an error, you may simply go to the revision history of the defective item and use the "undo" link to remove the error; WD will send a notification to the author and it is as effective and much simpler than leaving a message on the talk page. Cheers - LaddΩ chat ;) 11:08, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
I thought you *did* the assignment using the Person Wikidata Game -- if it was done en masse, I can certainly see why it happened. Regarding leaving hand-written messages -- I'm old-fashioned, and like the personal touch. But it's nice to know about the automatic notification, too. JesseW (talk) 17:17, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

La ligne des 8-cylindres Bugatti

Salut Place Clichy, tu as récemment fusionné deux items dans Bugatti Type 30 (Q3646636), faisant je pense le contraire de ce que j'avais séparé plus tôt ce mois. As-tu bien revu les titres et sujets des articles avant leur fusion? Je pense que Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668) et Bugatti Type 30 (Q16041230) étaient justifiés, visant des modèles précis plutôt que toute la série de véhicules. Je croyais bien pourtant que les titres et descriptions françaises et anglaises étaient claires. Maintenant tout est entremêlé dans ce seul item; examine fr:Bugatti Type 30 et en:Bugatti 8-cylinder line, par exemple.

De plus le parent Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668) était attaché à toute une série d'items qui pointent maintenant vers un item supprimé: [2]... LaddΩ chat ;) 22:22, 31 July 2014 (UTC)

Tout d'abord, je pense qu'un lien interwiki ne signifie pas que deux articles sont exactement équivalents, mais qu'ils sont l'équivalent le plus proche dans une autre langue. Chaque projet organise ses articles comme il le souhaite, on ne peut pas garantir que des articles au périmètre exactement identique vont être créés. Je ne suis pas un spécialiste de Bugatti. Dans la mesure où seul en a un article unique sur la série des Bugatti 8 cylindres, il me parait légitime de lier cet article aux articles les plus proches. On peut toujours lier les item qui pointaient vers l'ancien Q17308668 à ce nouvel item. Par contre, il y avait 3 items différents pour la Type 30 (un avec fr/uk, un avec de/sv, un avec it), ce qui me semble injustifié. De même, une fusion du style de celle-ci me semble justifiée. Si tu le souhaites, le peux restaurer un item "série des 8 cylindres" différent de l'item "Type 30", mais à quels articles lier cet item? Que proposes-tu? Place Clichy (talk) 12:12, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
@Place Clichy: Je crois au contraire que Wikidata ne doit pas avoir d'items qui recoupent des articles "pas exactement équivalents": chaque item WD doit être un concept précis (Help:Items). Je pense que le rattachement d'articles qui ne se recoupent pas exactement dans un même item nuisent au modèle, sauf si les différences sont mineures. Pour le cas qui nous occupe, j'aimerais que tu restaures Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668), la classe parente de la ligne de ces modèles; l'article anglais doit certainement s'y rattacher, ainsi que l'allemand si mes souvenirs sont exacts, mais son historique devrait indiquer quels autres articles y étaient liés. Est-ce encore possible? LaddΩ chat ;) 12:57, 1 August 2014 (UTC)
J'ai restauré Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668), je te fais confiance pour y faire les modifications appropriées. Je maintiens qu'en ce qui concerne les interwiki, on lie vers l'équivalent le plus proche, cependant la différence entre "série des 8 cylindres" et "Type 30" m'a l'air suffisante pour justifier 2 items. L'idéal serait à présent de crééer un article français sur cette série des 8 cylindres pour le lier à l'article anglais, seul lié à se sujet si l'on se réfère au titre. Place Clichy (talk) 08:57, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
@Place Clichy: Ce sont finalement les wikis en, de & sv qui décrivent toute la ligne de voitures; je les ai rattachés à Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668). De mon côté je me limite au développement de Wikidata, il y a déjà suffisamment à faire :) Merci pour la restauration. LaddΩ chat ;) 12:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
Merci pour ces modifs, mais on ne m'enlèvera pas de l'esprit qu'il est très bizarre d'avoir fr:Bugatti Type 30 uk:Bugatti Type 30 d'un côté, et de:Bugatti Type 30 sv:Bugatti Type 30 de l'autre, d'autant plus qu'il n'y a aucun conflit d'interwiki potentiel entre les deux. En l'absence de renommage des articles, ça indique une forte présomption que tous ces articles parlent... de la même chose. Ces items ont déjà été fusionnés par le passé, et le seront à mon avis à nouveau à l'avenir par d'autres contributeurs. Pourquoi ne pas avoir un item intitulé "Type 30" qui couvre toute la série, à l'image de de et sv? Place Clichy (talk) 08:59, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
@Place Clichy: Salut, malheureusement on n'a pas le contrôle sur les titre et les contenus des articles des différentes WP. Certaines, comme fr et uk, ont créé des articles pour chaque modèle et si pour certaines "Type 30" représente la série, pour d'autres ce n'est qu'un modèle. La seule solution viable est d'avoir un item Wikidata pour chaque concept (donc un pour la série et un pour chaque modèle) et d'y lier les WP selon leur contenu. Et il faut bien que les labels WP se distinguent clairement, donc "Bugatti Type 30" pour l'item de la série est à proscrire selon moi. Si tu tiens à ce que les liens inter-langue WP interrelient les articles spécifiques même dans les wikis avec une série, on peut lier les raccourcis WP, comme je viens de le faire pour la wikipedia allemande du Bugatti Type 44 (Q2927703) (mais c'est un peu laborieux). Quant à éviter les fusions bien intentionnées, je ne peux que surveiller les items... en attendant que les WP allemande et suédoise se trouvent des titres d'article décrivant mieux leur contenus :) Je ne vois pas d'autre solution qui tienne la route. LaddΩ chat ;) 13:00, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

More careful merges

Salut Sisyph, I noticed that you made multiple merges of items that have similar names but that represented different concepts, even some that were referring to each other -- thus they refer to themselves after the merge (BTW such incorrect merges are automatically commented with "(Tag: self-referencing)", have a look at your own history of contributions...) If you want to do item merges, it is your responsibility to ensure consistency of statements on the resulting item. More specifically, you merged shooting of Kayla Rolland (Q17450149) into Kayla Rolland (Q3194404), bringing a merged item that was at the same time a person and a murder case - these are two different concepts, automation tools like the Reasonator could not use it. LaddΩ chat ;) 14:26, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Hello, I hesitated before merging these two articles. Finally I did it because :
Anyway, I take into account your correction and I will not modify it. I didn't know about Reasonator. Thanks for the link. --Sisyph 17:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
@Sisyph: WP articles quite commonly mix concepts, and it may be justified in an encyclopedic text, but it does render categorization and computerized handling fairly difficult - such as a murder being categorized in a "1993 birth" set. Since Wikidata is primarily meant to support foreign data queries, I believe it needs to keep concepts separate, as much as can be. Thanks for leaving items separate, anyhow. LaddΩ chat ;) 22:10, 17 August 2014 (UTC)


I'm a Korean user. because of beginner about Wiki, I am trying many this time. I don't understand my doing about Wiki. I ask your pardon. I'm so sorry, repeatedly.--Gardenmania (talk) 16:28, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

Manoir Boucher-De Niverville

Par rapport à ta modificaton de Boucher-De Niverville Manor (Q3286114)‎ ;J'ignorais qie les trègle typographique de l'anglais avait changer, il me semble le générique et le spécifique sont en majuscule en anglais. --Fralambert (talk) 18:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

@Fralambert: T'as bien raison, je me pensais en français faut croire ;) J'espère que tu es d'accord avec mes autres modifs sur ces deux items, ça me semblait approprié. LaddΩ chat ;) 00:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
En fait ça me faisait pensé plus à du suédois :p. À part instance of (P31) que j'ai changé, ça me semble correct. Il faut dire que c'est pas une notion courante en patrimoine, je ne l'ai vu qu'en France et en Wallonie sous le titre de «zone de protection» [3]. Je l'ai appliqué à Saint-Eustache Church (Q18145349). --Fralambert (talk) 01:15, 28 September 2014 (UTC)


Please specify the difference between motto text (P1451) and motto (P1546). May be it's duplicate? --Alexander Sigachov (talk) 11:44, 29 September 2014 (UTC)

@Александр Сигачёв: I clarified on the property talk page. Thanks for your interest. LaddΩ chat ;) 02:12, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you --Alexander Sigachov (talk) 09:25, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

P1080 and P1441

Please, do not add P:1080 with fictional works like in this. from narrative universe (P1080) should be used with fictional universes (see the constraints and the talk page). It's present in work (P1441) that should be used for indicate in which work the item appears. I corrected it but I would appreciate if you are more careful next time. Many thanks! --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 23:58, 28 October 2014 (UTC)

@Harmonia Amanda: Didn't know about present in work (P1441), thanks for letting me know! -- LaddΩ chat ;) 22:37, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Two unique properties

"So one person has two fathers". It happens that there are several sources with different relations. Especially for less popular mythological figures. --Infovarius (talk) 20:02, 8 November 2014 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Agree with you but not in this case, according to fr:Éole: it clearly distinguishes three mythical personas, and you were merging two of them. Your call, but according to that article they are
-- LaddΩ chat ;) 00:07, 9 November 2014 (UTC)


Hello Laddo. You have to undid my revision: . Why? Only person (Q215627) can be member of sports team (P54). Suoki is a mascot character (Q386208). Nurni (talk) 07:28, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

@Nurni: Hi, thanks for asking. I have two good reasons to revert your change:
a) you should never ever ever delete valuable information; if the form used to store that information is not correct (e.g. violates a constraint), fix the form but do not loose the information;
b) sports team mascots are typically assigned player numbers (like 0 or 00), often wear team uniforms and so on. They are not human (Q5) but they are person (Q215627), the same way as any fictional character (Q95074) is a person (Q215627). A "person" is more general than a "human", and the constraint does not require "humans", but more generally "persons".
The solution to resolve the constraint violation is to give mascot character (Q386208) the type person (Q215627). Since in some cases mascots can be objects, I will have to create a more general class to handle this case. Hold on. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 13:53, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Marine traffic

P1623 (P1623) and MarineTraffic Port ID (P1624) are ready. --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:58, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Short name?

Why do you add P743 (P743) to ship classes that should be applied to the lead ship of the class? Also, you do not add the qualifier language of work or name (P407). /ℇsquilo 09:43, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

@Esquilo: I did that after a long discussion at en:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships#Fall_back_on_Wikidata_for_Ship_class; to summarize, some WP contributors wanted to import just the short name of ship classes, re formatting issues. These short names could, in the future, be imported in WP Ship infoboxes using with {{#property:short name|of={{#property:ship class}}}} once Wikidata:Development_plan#Access_to_data_from_arbitrary_items is deployed (this syntax borrowed from mw:Wikibase/Notes/Inclusion syntax).
In many cases the "short name" of the ship class is not the name of a lead ship, e.g. C class ferry (Q1138200) or No.4-class submarine chaser (Q11602436). The requirement is to provide the short name of the ship class, not that of some ship.
I may add a language qualifier, but... please give me some details. For now, P743 (P743) is a string (same for all languages, right?) I wonder: if it becomes a monolingual string as proposed at Wikidata:Properties_for_deletion#Datatype_change:_short_name_.28P743.29, will it still be visible from the #property parser function if the target WP has a different language?
-- LaddΩ chat ;) 01:00, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
OK I just tested and enwp does successfully import French monolingual property values. Will add language qualifier, then. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 01:25, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Also, please use "XXX-class" or "XXX class" as shortname to avoid confusion with the lead ship.
@Esquilo: ?? such a change would defeat the purpose of using P743 (P743). See this excerpt from the WP discussion that I referred to above: "The class name may be the name of a ship in the class (often the lead ship), in which case the class name is italicized, or it may be named on some common theme, trees, flowers, Shakespeare plays, etc., in which case the class name is not italicized. (...) the string (...) should be "Benjamin Franklin-class submarine"." To achieve such formatting, the short name must exclude suffix "class" and the like. I fail to see how anyone could confuse a ship and a ship class because they have the same P743 (P743), unless the user manages to disregard all other properties of an item that he/she is retrieving data from. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 22:22, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I am glad to see that you have recognised that the class is not always named after the lead ship. I got the opposite impression from your edits. Regarding the language; Soviet/Russian ship classes are refered to by their project-name in many languages (like Project 1164 Atlant (Q1359363) is refered to as "Atlant-class" or "Project 1164 class"). Perhaps it is better to use NATO reporting name (P561) instead? /ℇsquilo 07:57, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I agree with the switch to monolingual type, which will allow supporting multiple designations for the same ship class, depending on language; while adding qualifiers, I tried to select the language that best fit those WPs that were actually linking to each item.
NATO reporting name (P561) seems to have a totally different scope, and I don't think it can be used as a substitute for the ship class short name. From the few items that I checked, it seems to provide the short name+class suffix that you suggested above (e.g. Kanin-class destroyer (Q1790239)==>"Kanin-class"). -- LaddΩ chat ;) 22:22, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

equivalent property (P1628)

Hi! I believe we should use equivalent property (P1628) to link to the URI of the equivalent property, not to a description of it. I've opened a new thread on its discussion page. Tpt (talk) 07:17, 4 December 2014 (UTC)


MediaWiki:Gadget-AuthorityControl.js and Property:P1630 supports protocol relative weblinks. Do you have problems with these URLs? (diff) --Fomafix (talk) 18:15, 25 December 2014 (UTC)

@Fomafix: Freebase ID (P646) was listed as a violation here, obviously because of the https?: in the {{Constraint:Format}} on Property_talk:P1630.
IMO, we should not allow both schemes; either we replace all "https?://" (including the pair of slashes) and adjust the constraint, or we stick to existing scheme. Supporting multiple formats complexifies any tool trying to use that property. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 19:21, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
The constraint rule can be easily extended. Are there problems with protocol relative links? Wikidata supports HTTP and HTTPS and Freebase supports HTTP and HTTPS. With protocol relative links you stay on the same protocol. --Fomafix (talk) 19:48, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
@Fomafix: Your call. This should be at least stated on Property_talk:P1630, and documentation be adjusted there. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 20:23, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
I fixed the constraint rules. --Fomafix (talk) 20:35, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Laddo/Archive/2014/1".