Logo of Wikidata

Welcome to Wikidata, MartinPoulter!

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! Jon Harald Søby (talk) 19:55, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Barra Head LighthouseEdit

Hello MartinPoulter, Can you look into Berneray (Q31120052) you created? It seems duplicate of Barra Head Lighthouse (Q3378173). Also, when I follow the Historic Scotland link among the external identifiers, what I find is not Barra Head lighthouse... Kind regards, Lymantria (talk) 10:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Lymantria: Thanks for bringing this to my attention. They are not duplicates because the new item is an ancient hillfort and the old item is a 19th century lighthouse. The hillfort is located in what is now the grounds of the lighthouse. The Historic Scotland link is clearly wrong, though, so I've removed it and will look into what happened in that upload. It may be an error in the source database. Thanks again, MartinPoulter (talk) 11:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


Hi Martin, I don't think it's a good idea to classify ancient vase shapes as subclass of "vase". Vase today has d different meaning than the archaeologicals use of the word. So in case of ancient vase shapes, it's always better to use "greek vases", "roman vases", "cypriot vaes" etc. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

@Marcus Cyron: Okay, understood. I can't remember the edit you're referring to, but feel free to revert it. I think the category tree for pots is a bit messed up, but I'll set out the problem and seek community advice before doing anything drastic. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 19:49, 19 September 2017 (UTC) PS. I think there ought to be a pathway from any vase (modern or ancient) to container (Q987767)
Looking again, I see I was just bringing about consistency with these (presently 10 items):
  ?item wdt:P279 wd:Q738680.
  ?item wdt:P279 wd:Q191851
Try it!

Feel free to change the category from "vase" to "container". MartinPoulter (talk) 19:54, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

The way is the italian word "vas". But the modern vase for flowers did come a different way. A way over bigger pots, made of marble and stone in the Renaissance. And these came from ancient "vases" - but not the one made of clay, but the marble ones. The ways can be complycated... ;). Maybe we must split the archaeological term "vase" from the narmal use. Marcus Cyron (talk) 19:56, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
Glad to have someone involved who knows about this stuff. It's not my topic, although I'm negotiating with some academics in Oxford about it. Take a look at the category tree and please be bold in improving it. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 20:08, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
@Marcus Cyron: While you're at it, can you take a look at skyphos (Q1136095) stamnos (Q1421582) and pelike (Q1539580)? They have subclass of (P279) vase shape (Q24012047), so I expect "vase shape" is wrong for the same reasons. MartinPoulter (talk) 20:50, 19 September 2017 (UTC)
I actually work in the whole field of ancient pottery. I will rework a lot. But this will need some time and will be not finished in a short time. I do it parallel here, on Commons, and at Wikipedia... Marcus Cyron (talk) 21:04, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Welcome to the Structured Commons focus group!Edit

Hello! Thank you very much for signing up to the community focus group for Structured Commons :-)

How to organize ourselves?

This focus group is new and experimental, and I welcome your tips and thoughts on how we can organize this in the most convenient and productive way. For now, I have posted a few separate topics on the focus group's talk page. Please add your questions there too! If we all add that page to our watchlist, that's probably a good way to stay up to date with current discussions. Steinsplitter has also initiated a brand new IRC channel specifically for Structured Commons: wikimedia-commons-sd (webchat) which we invite you to join. Please let me know if you have other ideas on how to work together.

Current updates

Warmly, your community liaison, SandraF (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery - 13:34, 25 October 2017 (UTC)

Structured Commons focus group update, Nov 21, 2017Edit

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the the community focus group for Structured Commons :-)

IRC office hour today, 21 November, 18.00 UTC
  • The IRC office hour about Structured Commons takes place at 18:00 UTC in wikimedia-office webchat. Amanda, Ramsey and I will give updates about the project, and you can ask us questions. The log will be published afterwards.
Tools update

Many important community tools for Commons and Wikidata will benefit from an update to structured data in the future. You can help indicate which tools will need attention:

Warmly, your community liaison SandraF (WMF) (talk) 16:26, 21 November 2017 (UTC)

Structured Commons focus group update, December 11, 2017Edit

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the community focus group for Structured Commons :-)

Later this week, a full newsletter will be distributed, but you are the first to receive an update on new requests for feedback.

Three requests for feedback
  1. We received many additions to the spreadsheet that collects important Commons and Wikidata tools. Thank you! Now, you can participate in a survey that helps us understand and prioritize which tools and functionalities are most important for the Wikimedia Commons and Wikidata communities. The survey runs until December 22. Here's some background.
  2. Help the team decide on better names for 'captions' and 'descriptions'. You can provide input until January 3, 2018.
  3. Help collect interesting Commons files, to prepare for the data modelling challenges ahead! Continuous input is welcome there.

Warmly, your community liaison SandraF (WMF) (talk)

Message sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) - 16:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Two Jenny's Lantern related queriesEdit

Two things to ask, about Jenny's Lantern (Q31111167) and Atlas of Hillforts ID (P4102), if I may. (And thanks for the hillfort data import & maps - most excellent).

1. There was an existing Defended settlement, Romano-British settlement and field system 100m south and east of Jenny's Lantern (Q17646017) which describes the hillfort and adjoining field system, and to which the National Heritage List for England number (P1216) properly belongs, given https://www.historicengland.org.uk/listing/the-list/list-entry/1008839 ... so I've made

and removed the National Heritage List for England number (P1216) from Jenny's Lantern (Q31111167). Does that work for you?

2. There's a constraint violation being reported in Jenny's Lantern (Q31111167) for Atlas of Hillforts ID (P4102): item requires statement constraint - An entity with Atlas of Hillforts ID should also have a statement instance of hillfort. Don't know if you want to worry about that. I'm flaky as to whether the constraint as specified in Atlas of Hillforts ID (P4102) should notice that a partial contour fort (Q31028314) is a subclass of hillfort (Q744099). thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:43, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: 1. Thanks for doing this. I think this is the ideal way to handle this. 2. The constraint should allow for subclasses, since most hillforts have instance of (P31) a subclass. I hadn't noticed this and I've raised a request on the talk page for Atlas of Hillforts ID (P4102). Thanks very much for bringing it to my attention. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:26, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Structured Commons - Design feedback request: Multilingual CaptionsEdit

Hello! You are receiving this message because you signed up for the the community focus group for Structured Data on Wikimedia Commons.

The Structured Data on Commons team has a new design feedback request up for Multilingual Captions support in the Upload Wizard. Visit the page for more information about the potential designs. Discussion and feedback is welcome there.

On a personal note, you'll see me posting many of these communications going forward for the Structured Data project, as SandraF transitions into working on the GLAM side of things for Structured Data on Commons full time. For the past six months she's been splitting time between the two roles (GLAM and Community Liaison). I'm looking forward to working with you all again. Thank you, happy editing. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 15:09, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - What gets stored where (Ontology)Edit


There is a new feedback request for Structured Data on Commons (link for messages posted to Commons: , regarding what metadata from a file gets stored where. Your participation is appreciated.

Happy editing to you. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:58, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Please slow downEdit

Hi, can you please slow down editing using quickstatements? You are causing noticeable dispatch lag. I'm aware that this is probably an issue with quickstatements, and we will contact its maintainer to get this fixed… but for now, please make sure you slow down or stop editing. Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 21:11, 13 March 2018 (UTC)

@Hoo man: Hi and thanks for contacting me. I didn't realise I was causing a problem. I have left a computer doing a batch Quickstatements upload overnight, so I don't have access to it now but it will stop in several hours' time. Can you recommend how many edits I should be making with the tool to avoid causing the problem? MartinPoulter (talk) 21:24, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
This is sad to hear, but for the sake of service availability I had to block you for now. I suggest to do no more than 10 edits a minute, especially with a non-bot account. Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 21:34, 13 March 2018 (UTC)
@Hoo man: Back at the computer now and I've stopped the Quickstatements task. Can you unblock me please? MartinPoulter (talk) 09:15, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
Ah, just seen that the block will expire in a few minutes anyway. No worries, MartinPoulter (talk) 09:17, 14 March 2018 (UTC)
I've unblocked you now anyway. Thanks for reacting so swiftly. Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 09:26, 14 March 2018 (UTC)

First structured licensing conversation on CommonsEdit


The first conversation about structured copyright and licensing for Structured Data on Commons has been posted, please come by and participate. The discussion will be open through the end of the month (March). Thank you. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:26, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 18:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Ashmolean MuseumEdit

Hi MartinPoulter, some of your recent painting imports started popping up in my reports. I created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Collection/Ashmolean Museum to get an overview (linked from the UK page). The first thing I noticed is that the inventory number (P217) is missing on every painting (that made this list grow quite a bit) and that most of them are missing creator (P170) (that made this list grow a lot). You seem to have added inventory number (P217) as qualifier of collection (P195). That's not the correct usage. You should add inventory number (P217) directly with collection (P195) and have collection (P195) directly without the inventory qualifier. See Q51236906 for an example of correct usage. Can you please correct this? Every item should have a creator (P170). If unknown, use anonymous (Q4233718). Could you please add the missing creators? You might want to bookmark Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure for future reference.

Do you also plan on importing the other paintings or are you waiting for the new https://www.ashmolean.org/collections-online? Multichill (talk) 21:13, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

@Multichill: Hi and thanks for this. I hadn't seen these lists or any guidance to suggest that my usage of inventory number (P217) wasn't correct. Can you point me to the consensus that establishes this? I don't see it on Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure which lists inventory number (P217) and collection (P195) without implying which should qualify the other. The import is ongoing so more data about creators and times will be added. At the moment this is just a pilot with the oriental collections, but I'm hoping to persuade the University of Oxford to support a larger project. Thanks again, MartinPoulter (talk) 10:26, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Just do it like this, inventory number (P217) currently has 93% coverage and would you think we created pages like Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Missing inventory number if we didn't want to get it to 100% coverage?
If you want to challenge this, go ahead (and fail), but please stick to the established practice in the meantime. Multichill (talk) 10:46, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
@Multichill: There's no need to be rude. I didn't say anything about challenging the practice: I just asked to be pointed to the consensus. I've been following what was established practice when I started, but that was a while ago. If it's changed, fine, but it's fair to ask if it's a community decision. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:28, 5 April 2018 (UTC) PS looking at the history of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Missing inventory number it seems one person created it: you. This isn't evidence of a consensus decision. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:30, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
Rude? Excuse me? You're confused with directness.
These lists were discussed at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_sum_of_all_paintings/Archive/2017#Hunting_for_missing_inventory_numbers.
A lot of things on Wikidata evolved in a certain way over time. Would be nice if you helped keeping the data consistent. Multichill (talk) 12:43, 5 April 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia surveyEdit

WMF Surveys, 01:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Multilingual captions testing is availableEdit


The early prototype for multilingual caption support is available for testing. More information on how to sign up to test is on Commons. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons IRC Office Hour, Tuesday 26 JuneEdit


There will be an IRC office hour for Structured Data on Tuesday, 26 June from 18:00-19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. You can find more details, as well as date and time conversion, at the IRC Office Hours page on Meta.

Thanks, I look forward to seeing you there if you can make it. -- Keegan (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

What properties does Commons need?Edit


Structured Commons will need properties to make statements about files. The development team is working on making the software ready to support properties; the question is, what properties does Commons need?

You can find more information and examples to help find properties in a workshop on Commons. Please participate and help fill in the list, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Possible Atlas of Hillforts 4302 snafuEdit

Martin - not sure if I should be laying a possible AoH snafu at your door, but iirc you imported AoH data and may either be interested or know who to pass this on to. In short there appear to be a couple of hillforts immediately to the East and West of Bewick Bridge in Northumberland. It is looking to me as if the AoC entry for the East hillfort points to the English Heritage listing for the West hillfort; that the West hillfort is missing from AoH entirely; and we have a a minor consequential cleanup to do on a wikidata item.

We have Bewick Bridge East (Q31112450) which points to HoC 4302.

HoC 4302 (and Q31112450) point to Historic England 1006433, a listing entitled "Site 1/2 mile (800m) W of Bewick Bridge".

Site 1/2 mile (800m) W of Bewick Bridge (Q17643130) also points to 1006433 - which seems appropriate.

In other news, we seem to have lots of hillfort item duplicates, based on the same P1216 value appearing on pairs of records - see, e.g. Magnus's Distributed Game. I'm slowly going through & merging some, linking others with part of / has part.

Quite understandable if all of the above is not of great interest, but I came across it & thought of you. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:42, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for this Tagishsimon. I haven't had time to have a look at this, but I will get round to it. Any errors in that data set are of interest. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 10:30, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - Depicts statements draft requirementsEdit


A slide presentation of the draft requirements for depicts statements on file pages is up on Commons. Please visit this page on Commons to review the slides and discuss the draft. Thank you, see you on the talk page. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:20, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data feedback - structured licensing and copyrightEdit

Mockups of structured licensing and copyright statements on file pages are posted. Please have a look over the examples and leave your feedback on the talk page. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data - copyright and licensing statementsEdit

I've posted a second round of designs for modeling copyright and licensing in structured data. These redesigns are based off the feedback received in the first round of designs, and the development team is looking for more discussion. These designs are extremely important for the Commons community to review, as they deal with how copyright and licensing is translated from templates into structured form. I look forward to seeing you over there. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Manuscripts, Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, and Didgital BodleianEdit

I've been modeling items in the BL's Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms exhibition, which includes some manuscripts of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Q212746). Today I worked on edition items for A-E texts of the ASC, plus a translation in Wikisource (all linked as "has edition" in Anglo-Saxon Chronicle (Q212746)) and for the compilation manuscripts that include them. The manuscripts are:

If you have any suggestions for improving these items, I'd love your comments. I've stayed away from "published in" for manuscript items. I also created Digital Bodleian (Q59661567) so I could cite it - any changes needed there? Thanks! - PKM (talk) 02:00, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

Multilingual captions beta testingEdit

The Structured Data on Commons team has begun beta testing of the first feature, multilingual file captions, and all community members are invited to test it out. Captions is based on designs discussed with the community[3][4] and the team is looking forward to hearing about testing. If all goes well during testing, captions will be turned on for Commons around the second week of January, 2019.

Multilingual captions are plain text fields that provide brief, easily translatable details of a file in a way that is easy to create, edit, and curate. Captions are added during the upload process using the UploadWizard, or they can be added directly on any file page on Commons. Adding captions in multiple languages is a simple process that requires only a few steps.

The details:

  • There is a help page available on how to use multilingual file captions.
  • Testing will take place on Beta Commons. If you don’t yet have an account set up there, you’ll need one.
  • Beta Commons is a testbed, and not configured exactly like the real Commons site, so expect to see some discrepancies with user interface (UI) elements like search.
  • Structured Data introduces the potential for many important page changes to happen at once, which could flood the recent changes list. Because of this, Enhanced Recent Changes is enabled as it currently is at Commons, but with some UI changes.
  • Feedback and commentary on the file caption functionality are welcome and encouraged on the discussion page for this post.
  • Some testing has already taken place and the team are aware of some issues. A list of known issues can be seen below.
  • If you discover a bug/issue that is not covered in the known issues, please file a ticket on Phabricator and tag it with the “Multimedia” tag. Use this link to file a new task already tagged with "Multimedia."

Known issues:


-- Keegan (WMF) (talk), for the Structured Data on Commons Team 20:43, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

Structured Data - file captions coming this week (January 2019)Edit

Hi all, following up on last month's announcement...

Multilingual file captions will be released this week, on either Wednesday, 9 November or Thursday, 10 November 2019. Captions are a feature to add short, translatable descriptions to files. Here's some links you might want to look follow before the release, if you haven't already:

  1. Read over the help page for using captions - I wrote the page on mediawiki.org because captions are available for any MediaWiki user, feel free to host/modify a copy of the page here on Commons.
  2. Test out using captions on Beta Commons.
  3. Leave feedback about the test on the captions test talk page, if you have anything you'd like to say prior to release.

Additionally, there will be an IRC office hour on Thursday, 10 January with the Structured Data team to talk about file captions, as well as anything else the community may be interested in. Date/time conversion, as well as a link to join, are on Meta.

Thanks for your time, I look forward to seeing those who can make it to the IRC office hour on Thursday. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:22, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - development update, March 2019Edit

This text is also posted on the Structured Data hub talk page. You can reply there with questions, comments, or concerns.

A development update for the current work by the Structured Data on Commons team:

After the release of multilingual file captions, work began on getting depicts and other statements ready for release. These were originally scheduled for release in February and into March, however there are currently two major blockers to finishing this work (T215642, T217157). We will know more next week about when depicts and statements can likely be ready for testing and then release; until then I've tentatively updated the release schedule.

Once the depicts feature is ready for testing, it will take place in two stages on TestCommons. The first is checking the very basics; is the design comfortable, how does the simple workflow of adding/editing/removing statements work, and building up help and process pages from there. The second part is a more detailed test of depicts and other statements, checking the edge-case examples of using the features, bugs that did not come up during simple testing, etc. Additionally we'll be looking with the community for bugs in interaction with bots, gadgets, and other scripts once the features are live on Commons. Please let me know if you're interesting in helping test and fix these bugs if they show up upon release, it is really hard to find them in a test environment or, in some cases, bugs won't show up in a testing environment at all.

One new thing is definitely coming within the next few weeks, pending testing: the ability to search for captions. This is done using the inlabel keyword in search strings, and will be the first step in helping users find content that is specifically structured data. I'll post a notice when that feature is live and ready for use.

Thanks, let me know if you have questions about these plans. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 21:34, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

146 Oxford Uni employees, with no UIDEdit

# No UID
select ?item ?itemLabel { 
  ?item wdt:P108 ?employer .
  filter not exists {
    ?item ?wdt [] .
    ?wdt ^wikibase:directClaim/wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q18614948
  service wikibase:label {bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en"}
} values (?employer) {(wd:Q34433)}
Try it!

Hope that's useful, Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:00, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Certainly is, both because I can gradually work on that list and because that's a very useful bit of SPARQL. Cheers Andy, MartinPoulter (talk) 10:56, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - early depicts testingEdit

The Structured Data on Commons development team has the very basic version of depicts statements available for early testing on Test-Commons. You can add very basic depicts statements to the file page by going into the new “Structured Data” tab located below the "Open in Media Viewer button." You can use the Latest Files link in the left side nav bar to select existing images, or use the UploadWizard to upload new ones to test with (although those images won’t actually show up on the site). The test site is not a fully functional replica of Commons, so there may be some overall problems in using the site, but you should be able to get a general idea of what using the feature is like.

Early next week I will call for broad, community-wide testing of the feature similar to what we did for Captions, with instructions for testing, known bugs, and a dedicated space to discuss the feature as well as a simple help page for using statements. Until then, you're welcome to post on the SDC talk page with what you might find while testing depicts.

Thanks in advance for trying it out, you'll be hearing more from me next week. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 22:00, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Capitalization of generic describing object referencesEdit

Hi, I don't see why Help:Label#Capitalization shouldn't apply here for glazed mosque tile (Q62415228). What do you think? I think a label like "glazed mosque tile (Ashmolean, EAX.2517)" would be better anyway. Thanks --Marsupium (talk) 12:59, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

@Marsupium: good point: you're right. It just seemed odd to me to use lower case when talking about a specific object rather than a class, but I'll follow that guidance and I've fixed the item. Thanks for all the great work you are doing with Ashmolean images and data. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:02, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply! I'm glad to hear you like my clean-up attempt. By the way: You think there is a chance to lobby the Ashmolean to put the images at http://collections.ashmolean.org/ under a free licence? And: I also saw you working on (Shahnameh) manuscripts. Would you be interested in helping to improve our ontology for illuminated manuscripts, detached folios etc.? It seems there is some mental work to do in that area. --Marsupium (talk) 13:31, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
I am encouraging all the Oxford University museums to be more open, but it has to be in baby steps and the Ashmolean is very protective of its copyright. I can't say much more at this stage. I would like to be involved in any ontology work relating to manuscripts, since a lot of the data I share relate to the Bodleian's or Ashmolean's manuscripts. Is there a project page I should be following? MartinPoulter (talk) 13:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
I see, I had a quite fruitless discussion about at least showing the code of Cambridge's http://www.medievalfrancophone.ac.uk/ some weeks ago, perhaps those millennia old institutions have some right to move slowly …
I think there isn't much that has been done so far, responsibility is somewhere between Wikidata:WikiProject Books and Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts I guess. I've a bunch of things to think about (how to give line number for e.g. Gutenberg Bible (Q158075)? what to use as instance of (P31) for exemplars? etc. pp.) One could open a page on one of the projects and maybe others will join and we can progress. --Marsupium (talk) 19:54, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Hi, do you think a new parameter "number of lines per page" would be the right way to express the number of lines per page in a manuscript or printed book etc.? E.g. Gutenberg Bible (Q158075) has 42 lines/p., Anatomy of the Human Body (Q64437769) has 27 lines/p. etc. Or do we (already) have a more property-parsimonious way to state that? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 00:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC), 01:05, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@Marsupium: I couldn't find an existing property and I think it would be useful to have a new one. For what it's worth, the Bodleian seems to mention this quantity in some entries of its medieval manuscripts database, e.g. "18 lines of text per page". MartinPoulter (talk) 10:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top collections missing creatorEdit

Could use some help with the UK paintings. Manual at the bottom. Multichill (talk) 08:37, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - testing qualifiers for depictsEdit

As you might have seen, testing is underway for adding qualifiers to depicts statements. If you have not left feedback already, the Structured Data on Commons development team is very interested in hearing about your experience using qualifiers on the file page and in the UploadWizard. To get started you can visit Test-Commons and chose a random file to test out, or upload your own file to try out the UploadWizard. Questions, comments, and concerns can be left on the Structured data talk page and the team will address them as best as they can. Thank you for your time. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your thank you! :)Edit

I've been thanked in total 2 times. You inspire me to use the thank you functionality more. Although I'm afraid I'll overuse it like people use the like button on social networks. Although even in such a case, these are still real edits that do some level of good so it may be good anyway :). Anyway thanks for you thanking me! :D Ελλίντερεστ (talk) 08:43, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Ελλίντερεστ: Let me take the chance to thank you in human language, rather than technology, for your contributions to Wikidata. Best wishes, MartinPoulter (talk) 10:47, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data on Commons - IRC office hours this week, 18 JulyEdit

The Structured Data team is hosting an IRC office hour this week on Thursday, 18 July, from 17:00-18:00 UTC. Joining information as well as date and time conversion is available on Meta. Potential topics for discussion are the testing of "other statements", properties that may need to be created for Commons on Wikidata soon, plans for the rest of SDC development, or whatever you might want to discuss. The development team looks forward to seeing you there. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:51, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - testing other statementsEdit

You can now test using other statements for structured data on the file page on Test-Commons. Some datatypes are not yet available, such a coordinates, but further support will be extended soon. You can find more information about testing on the SDC talk page. The team looks forward to your feedback. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 16:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - computer-aided taggingEdit

The development team is starting work on one of the last planned features for SDC v1.0, a lightweight tool to suggest depicts tags for images. I've published a project page for it, please have a look. I plan to share this page with everyone on Commons much more broadly in the coming days. The tool has been carefully designed to try to not increase any workload on Commons volunteers; for starters, it will be opt-in for auto-confirmed users only and will not generate any sort of backlog here on Commons. Additionally, the tool is highly privacy-minded for the contributors and publicly-minded for the third party being used, in this case Google. The implementation and usage notes contain more information about these and other potential concerns as a starting place. It's really important that the tool is implemented properly from the start, so feedback is welcome. Questions, comments, concerns are welcome on the talk page and I will get answers as quickly as possible as things come up. On the talk page you can also sign up to make sure you're a part of the feedback for designs and prototype testing. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:57, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - modeling dataEdit

As you may have seen, there are community discussions underway on how to best model structured data on Commons.

Direct links to pages created so far:

Please visit and participate in topics you might be interested in when you get some time. Thanks. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:39, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Structured Data - computer-aided tagging designsEdit

I've published a design consultation for the computer-aided tagging tool. Please look over the page and participate on the talk page. If you haven't read over the project page, it might be helpful to do so first. The tool will hopefully be ready by the end of this month (October 2019), so timely feedback is important. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:09, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Big city?Edit

This feels a lot like original research and quite arbitrary. Did you get consensus somewhere before you started putting it on a load of items? Multichill (talk) 19:40, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

@Multichill: See the Twitter thread. Since the definition states that the population is over 100,000 and the population in that case and the other cases is 100,000 the truth of the statement seems as uncontroversial as you can get. I don't see where the arbitrariness comes in. I personally don't think we should be using instance of -> big city at all: since we have the population data, lists of cities with population > 100,000 should be constructed by inference, not a dedicated label. But the fact is that we had this property in use, and it was used in a weirdly Eurocentric way which reflects badly on Wikidata, so I implemented a short-term solution. MartinPoulter (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I wouldn't call a Twitter thread consensus. We agree on the not using instance of -> big city at all so why did you add it? Just because someone complained on Twitter? Every edit should make Wikidata better and in that sense this edit shouldn't have been done. Responding to data quality issues by making it worse doesn't seem the right response to me. I'm seriously considering undoing your whole batch. Multichill (talk) 18:45, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
@Multichill: I never suggested the Twitter thread was consensus that applies here, I linked the Twitter thread to explain how the edits came about. It looks like you're giving up on your "original research and quite artbitrary" claim? If so, good. What's wrong with the edit you link? It's a city with more than 100,000 population, meeting the definition of big city. I dispute that the data quality issue is worse: you haven't been able to identify anything with the instance of -> big city property that is not a big city, so I think you need to spell out what you think the data quality issue is. I think it would be an improvement to remove all instance of -> big city properties, but all, not an arbitrary subset like you're proposing to do. Inconsistent application of the property, as in the situation before I made my edits, is a genuine data quality issue. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Knowledge Grapher toolEdit

Hi Martin, you may be interested in this new tool I've developed to help provide a user-friendly way to create Wikidata knowledge graphs - Knowledge Grapher. Will be interested in what you think, and for any feedback! -- Fuzheado (talk) 16:06, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Great stuff @Fuzheado:! I'd be delighted to see these knowledge graph snippets getting more use. Would be interesting to have an impressive example linked from the initial form, just as a way to give users a clear idea what the form does. I also wondered if inserting a Q number would get just that item or items connected to it: a future improvement could be to have a shorthand to specify all items with a given property, or all items connected by a property to one of the stated items, e.g. Q42 for just Douglas Adams, *Q42 for any item connected to DA by one property, Q42* for any item that DA is connected to by one property. But this is great! MartinPoulter (talk) 16:17, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Yes, I definitely want to provide some good examples on that page. In the meantime, here are some that I've created on the more complex side that may be worth looking at: User:Fuzheado/queries#Knowledge_graph_of_Hudson_River_School_artists_and_works. I too was pondering how to give people access to some of the more arcane parts of SPARQL with shorthand like you described. I'll have to think it over a bit more. I was also wondering whether it may make sense to have different "blocks" folks could simply fill in with raw SPARQL queries that return one column, as long as that column is simply Q numbers. I also have rudimentary support for Pagepile IDs, so you could simply supply a "pagepile:1234" to include a lot of Wikidata items at once, which I'll put in soon. Thanks for the feedback. -- Fuzheado (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media SearchEdit


The Structured Data team is working on an alternative, image-focused prototype for media search on Commons. The prototype uses categories, structured data as well as wikitext from Commons, and Wikidata to find its results. The development team would like your feedback on the prototype, as they are looking to work to further enhance the search experience on Commons. If you have a moment, please look over the project page set up on Commons to find a link to the prototype and leave your feedback on the talk page. Thanks for your time, I'll be posting message similar to this one to other pages on Commons. The team is looking forward to reading what you think. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:47, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media Sarch, new feedback roundEdit


I'm following up on a message from earlier in the year about the prototype development for Special:MediaSearch. Based on community feedback, the Structured Data team has developed some new features for Special:MediaSearch and are seeking another round of comments and discussions about the tool. Commons:Structured_data/Media_search is updated with details about the new features plus some other development information, and feedback is welcome on Commons talk:Structured_data/Media_search. Media Search works in any language, so the team would especially appreciate input around support for languages other than English. I look forward to reading about what you think. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 20:05, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media Sarch, new feedback roundEdit


I'm following up on a message from earlier in the year about the prototype development for Special:MediaSearch. Based on community feedback, the Structured Data team has developed some new features for Special:MediaSearch and are seeking another round of comments and discussions about the tool. Commons:Structured_data/Media_search is updated with details about the new features plus some other development information, and feedback is welcome on Commons talk:Structured_data/Media_search. Media Search works in any language, so the team would especially appreciate input around support for languages other than English. I look forward to reading about what you think. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 00:07, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Commons - Media Sarch, new feedback roundEdit


I'm following up on a message from earlier in the year about the prototype development for Special:MediaSearch. Based on community feedback, the Structured Data team has developed some new features for Special:MediaSearch and are seeking another round of comments and discussions about the tool. Commons:Structured_data/Media_search is updated with details about the new features plus some other development information, and feedback is welcome on Commons talk:Structured_data/Media_search. Media Search works in any language, so the team would especially appreciate input around support for languages other than English. I look forward to reading about what you think. -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 01:11, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

How to indicate colleges for people educated at Oxford/CambridgeEdit

You might be well placed to weigh in on a question asked here about what qualifier is best for indicating someone's college. T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 03:57, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Astrolabe Explorer?Edit

Hi Martin, I just got a question about an astrolabe photo I took ages ago, and was going to reply asking if they'd seen the Astrolabe Explorer - but it seems to be offline? [5] is a 404, and [6] says everything from that subdomain been withdrawn. It's on wayback but that won't update. Is it somewhere else now? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 07:48, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Hi Mike, great to be bumping into you on-wiki, and I was delighted by that DYK review. Yes, the subdomain didn't last long after I left Oxford, for info security / maintenance reasons, but I've kept the code and still intend to resurrect the work in the future. The Astrolabe Explorer was just a wrapper for a set of Wikidata queries which can be found at User:MartinPoulter/queries/collections#Astrolabes so that's where I'm referring people for now. Cheers, MartinPoulter (talk) 09:42, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
It's good to be seeing you here! The list of queries isn't really user friendly - not something I'd want to point an astrolabe expert to as an intro to the use of Wikidata! Is the code available at all? I have some webhosting and could help resurrect something simple. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 09:53, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Ah, if it's a non-Wikidatan, then yeah it's not ideal. I have the PHP code somewhere- have recently moved property so stuff is taking a while to find. MartinPoulter (talk) 10:35, 11 June 2021 (UTC)