Wikidata:Contact the development team/Archive/2013/10

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

Special:ApiSandbox: Example with error

In Special:ApiSandbox examples for wbsetreference have an error in snaks: {"P39":[{"snaktype":"value","property":"P14","datavalue":{"type":"string","value":"wikipedia"}}} missing close square bracket to the end. How is possible correct them?

Will be fixed once this is merged :) ·addshore· talk to me! 10:43, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Subproperty relation

Back in July I asked the question:
In the Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/How_to_classify_items:_lots_of_specific_type_properties_or_a_few_generic_ones? RFC there was a suggestion that a 'subproperty' relation could be used to link property instance of (P31) with all of the specialised properties which could be seen as synonyms for this. This would mean that you could query 'P31 plus subproperties' and get all of these synonyms. This relation is apparently part of Semantic Mediawiki.

  1. Could this be developed as part of the stage 3 Query development?
  2. Is it a problem that we have properties such as P132 (P132) and vessel class (P289) instead of using instance of (P31) throughout? Does it make queries more difficult?
  3. Would a 'Subproperty' relation fix this problem?

Lydia responded to item 1. in August by saying this is not on the current plan but I never did get answers to 2. or 3.
Since then other discussions have looked at creating properties which are synonyms of other properties for various reasons that seem perfectly sensible. See here and here for instance. Before we create these properties it would be useful to get an answer to the above queries. By now there is presumably someone who is actually working on developing the code for queries who can answer these questions. Please? Filceolaire (talk) 11:33, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

  1. No this is unrelated for all I can tell at the moment. See meta:Wikidata/Development/Queries for the plan as it stands right now. Things might change as we progress of course and plan more details.
  2. As I said before this entirely depends on what you want to query for. One is better for more general queries the other one for more specific queries.
  3. Probably. But we'll definitely not get into subproperties before we have querying live and have some experience with how it's being used. After that I don't know yet. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:30, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Lydia.
This sounds like we may need to review/combine/split some properties once queries are in place but I understand you aren't in a position to give us any guidance on this yet. I suppose we will just carry on creating properties based on our best guess. Filceolaire (talk) 18:27, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes I fear this will have to be a bit of trial and error. I very much intend to have us roll out querying in small incremental steps so we can learn and iterate. (As much as that is possible...) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:56, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Undo error

Undo error (previously noted) is still not fixed. Just tried undo on same page but on different language ([1]) and get similar error (* A length constraint is triggered for language code "hi". * There is a constraint violation for description "विकिमीडिय..." for language code "hi".). --Jklamo (talk) 13:55, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes you need to shorten/remove the description in that language first. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:46, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikibase "No Direct Editing"

I'm trying to use the MWClient Python API to write a script that can edit and create new Wikidata pages. I'm currently testing with the site. However, upon attempting to save the edit, I'm getting the error: "Wikibase-no-direct-editing" and can't find much information on it. Would you be able to help out? Thank you! - Rupss (talk) 16:09, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

What request exactly are you making to the api? ·addshore· talk to me! 16:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC), 'test change') Rupss (talk) 16:54, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
What exactly does do? Can you link me to some code? If it is the same method you use to edit a regular wiki page then this will not work. You need to use a framework that supports the wikibase api! ·addshore· talk to me! 09:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Search suggestions not working

The dropdown menu which appears when I type something in the search field is not showing any suggestions (only the "containing ..." item). Does anyone knows the possible cause of it? Helder 18:15, 3 October 2013 (UTC)

Does this also happen when you try in another browser? Logged in and logged out? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:43, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
I tried the following:
  1. Open (I used both Google Chrome 30.0.1599.66 and Firefox 24.0), logged out
  2. Type (or copy/paste) e.g. "Special:BlankPage" in the search field
  3. The link to Special:BlankPage didn't appear (it does when I try the same at
Helder 10:37, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Aha! Yes. It only works for items and nothing outside the main namespace. It is on my list to have this fixed. The bug for it is bugzilla:46251 --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:40, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Links to Wikidata pages in items

Sorry if this has already been discussed, but are there any plans to allow links to Wikidata pages (Project, Template, and Category namespaces, not mainspace obviously) in items? I think that Wikidata itself could greatly benefit from this. The Anonymouse (talk) 21:27, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Specifically, links in the same way that Wikimedia Commons is being linked to. The Anonymouse (talk) 21:28, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
You might add this to WD:Paper cuts, though it's not exactly a pain point. :^)
But yes, I agree, this should be done! --Izno (talk) 22:59, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Tried to add that already but it got classed as not a paper cut. See Wikidata:Paper_cuts#Info_boxes. Filceolaire (talk) 23:11, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Well, the idea of "info boxes" was classified as not a paper cut. Your idea might actually be a paper cut. *shrug* Best to throw it on there and see what happens. --Izno (talk) 23:49, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Could you please list a few cases where this would be useful to have so we can evaluate? Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hearing from that some obvious things arises : Wikipedia projects and Wikidata projects on specific domains should be linked, as managing infoboxes, for a wikiproject, is highly connected with managing those datas in Wikidata. Wikiproject pages could even use metadatas of the Wikidata equivalent project, for, I don't know, manage a model number to notice the Wikidata model will deprecate some property and propagate this easily to all Wikipedias.TomT0m (talk) 09:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Here are some examples in the namespaces that I mentioned:
The Anonymouse (talk) 15:58, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Wikidata links use cases would be very similar to Commons links since Commons links to Wikipedia and Commons is multilingual. The Anonymouse (talk) 16:03, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the examples. This makes sense now. I need to find out how painful it would be to actually make it happen. I don't know at the moment. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:02, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Here's a related point: Currently at the bottom of every page is a whole section for "Wikimedia Commons page linked to this item", with associated largish box, and sometimes an odd "List of values is complete." row. Perhaps it would be better to just have a section for projects that only have one version: Meta-Wiki, Commons, Wikidata, Mediawiki, and possibly also Wikispecies. This would solve both the oddity of the single-item section, and what to do with the other projects. --Yair rand (talk) 13:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
This is the plan once we have more than one such project ;-) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, Commons should not be such a project. We need to be able to link an item to multiple Commons pages, not just one. The "List of values is complete" row looks especially silly on Q19880 (what about M-Z?), but there are many other problem cases. --Avenue (talk) 15:41, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
I think that this is more problem of Commons. There should be some main page called "London Underground stations". Also Wikivoyage and other projects allows only one interwiki link, so why should Commons be differently? Wikivoyage could also contain page "London Underground stations A-L", and then it and the Commons page should be merged. --Stryn (talk) 16:00, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
In general, I agree that both Commons and Wikidata may find ways to improve their systems now that Wikidata is live on Commons. However I hope our starting position is that Wikidata should be more ready to adapt to fit Commons than vice versa.
There are many galleries and categories on Commons that should share the same interwiki links. These seem most naturally handled by multiple Commons page links to a single Wikidata item. (See discussion at commons:Commons:Village pump#Wikidata is here!) Otherwise we'll have to rely on bots to keep interwiki links in sync. This can be done, but it's the sort of thing that I thought Wikidata was supposed to make obsolete.
I wouldn't object to having an index page at commons:London Underground stations that points to the subpages. But I don't think it's good if the reader of a subpage has to (realise that they have to) go to the index page to find interwiki links. These links should appear on the subpages too. (And yes, this doesn't just apply to Commons. Wikipedia has plenty of subdivided lists like en:List of closed railway stations in Britain: M-O. We shouldn't assume that every project will divide these up the same way, though.) But this is a minor issue for Commons compared to the gallery/category clashes. I only raised it as an example because someone mentioned the "List of values is complete" message, and this message seemed especially inappropriate to me there. --Avenue (talk) 01:38, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
It's a navigation problem that can be handled by template, for example a {{Underground|London undeground}} and {{Underground station}} with specific (Wikidat) models associated to an underground (or a town public transport network). TomT0m (talk) 17:36, 2 October 2013 (UTC)

Ok it seems we can make this happen. Can one of you please file a bug for it on Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:19, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

bugzilla:55570 The Anonymouse (talk) 16:57, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Open Library alternative via WikiData

I would be great to have a nice interface for entering bibliographic information about authors, books and editions. Currently we have all or almost needed properties listed on Wikidata:Books task force. What's missing is a user-friendly interface that would simplify entering this data. Basically something like Open Library Is there any plans for something like this? --DixonD (talk) 10:31, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

If someone wants to develop a gadget or similar please go ahead. It is not on the roadmap of the dev team for the forseeable future. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:56, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

‎Changed reference of claim

I changed the reference of a claim in Ambystoma leorae (Q2511165) via api. But my change was added as a new reference, not changed. Something went wrong in this case. I found this example by chance. Its one out of more than 40.000 similar api calls. --Succu (talk) 16:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi! What parameters did you pass to the api? Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 08:20, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
I called wbsetreference with something like statement=q2511165%24A0CFD57E-BCE8-4DD9-9BA1-EEE7C0DD35DC&snaks=%7b%22P248%22%3a%5b%7b%22snaktype%22%3a%22value%22%2c%22property%22%3a%22P248%22%2c%22datavalue%22%3a%7b%22value%22%3a%7b%22entity-type%22%3a%22item%22%2c%22numeric-id%22%3a15043677%7d%2c%22type%22%3a%22wikibase-entityid%22%7d%7d%5d%2c%22P627%22%3a%5b%7b%22snaktype%22%3a%22value%22%2c%22property%22%3a%22P627%22%2c%22datavalue%22%3a%7b%22value%22%3a%2259061%22%2c%22type%22%3a%22string%22%7d%7d%5d%2c%22P813%22%3a%5b%7b%22snaktype%22%3a%22value%22%2 --Succu (talk) 08:51, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
PS: Same call working as expected. --Succu (talk) 08:58, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
I checked all my changes of this kind and found 85 more issues. --Succu (talk) 14:28, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
Bugged >> Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 09:54, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

New API wbeditentity: Help

I have played a bit with new wbeditentity, very useful, but I have a problem when try to add also references. I have message "Remote server error: (500) Internal Server Error". Probably something is wrong in json format (I haven't found examples). So someone can check what is wrong? Thanks --ValterVB (talk) 21:34, 15 October 2013 (UTC) ps Tested on

   "claims": [
           "mainsnak": {
               "snaktype": "value",
               "property": "P11",
               "datavalue": {
                   "value": "Testo01",
                   "type": "string"
           "type": "statement",
           "rank": "normal",
           "references": [
                   "snaks": [
                           "snaktype": "value",
                           "property": "P17",
                           "datavalue": {
                               "value": {
                                   "entity-type": "item",
                                   "numeric-id": 144
                               "type": "wikibase-entityid"
I am going to try and thoroughly document this over the next few days, you are not the only person that is having issues. Also error 500 is indeed a bug somewhere. Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 14:34, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Okay documentation for another day! Below is an example of a format that works. As far as I can tell the only difference is the fact that references are grouped by property value. Potentially need a bug for this! Although claims can be entered either just as an array of claims or in a list by property value I don't know about the specifics of the references handling. Care to try grouping the reference in your request? Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 15:54, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Graet! It's work. Thanks a lot.   --ValterVB (talk) 19:06, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
Added a bug! Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 09:33, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Making main page redirects happen

Hello. Lots of external sites/wikis link to Main page and Main Page here. I can't create them with the fun import bug as that has been fixed - is there any other way of creating them? Thanks, Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

No there is no way to do this at the moment. I need to talk to one of the developers in the next days to see if this is possible to change and what the drawbacks would be. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:42, 7 October 2013 (UTC)
Ok it seems we can make this happen for the main page with a apache redirect rule. Can you please file a bug on for it? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Just as a sidenote, the import bug isn't fixed yet and thus it was possible to create the redirects. Vogone talk 10:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

This is a bad hack potentially breaking other things in the future. Let's _not_ do this please. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:54, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Vogone: Could you please revert this? Or someone else? This really shouldn't be done. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:14, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

merging items for Categories with items for the Category topic

The discussion at Wikidata:Requests for comment/Commons links has generated a proposal which is getting a lot of support: Merging items for Categories with items for the Category Main Topic. This would mean that each wikidata item could have two sitelinks to each wikiproject - one to a Category page and one to another page.

The arguments raised against this are mostly about the technical difficulties associated with doing this. Could someone in the development team have a look at this discussion and give us some guidance on the technical implications of making this change? Filceolaire (talk) 13:03, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

I'll have to discuss this with some of the developers when I am back from Brazil. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:18, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Filceolaire (talk) 16:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Missed incremental dumps

Hello, two dump sets are missed: and Is it possible to rerun dumping procedure to create missed files please? — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 12:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Can you please poke about this with an email to ? Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:17, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Windows XP och IE 8

A user on svwiki is complaining that she no longer can edit Wikidata with Windows XP och IE 8. Any explanation to this? -- Lavallen (talk) 10:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

It's a known problem. I hope Bugzilla:53533 will fix it. If it's not deployed yet? --Stryn (talk) 10:41, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Get data from Wikidata API

I use this link and receive the result is RONNY GAUCHO, but actually must be Ronaldinho. Please help! Alphama (talk) 07:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism in the English label. -- Lavallen (talk) 08:04, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Single click to exchange label and alias

An item can have one label and several aliases. Sometimes one of the aliases should become the new label and the previous label should become an alias. At the moment the workflow to exchange an alias and the label is like this:

  1. select the the text of the new label from the aliases.
  2. copy the selected text to clipboard.
  3. edit the label.
  4. paste the content of the clipboard (new label) at the beginning of the input box.
  5. select the text up to the end of the input box (old label).
  6. cut the selected text to clipboard.
  7. save the new label.
  8. edit aliases.
  9. paste the content of the clipboard into the new alias input box.
  10. click on the × of the old alias.
  11. save aliases.

In the history there are two edits.

It would be nice to have a special workflow for exchanging an alias and the label with one ore two clicks in one edit. --Fomafix (talk) 10:24, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Excellent idea, that's a real paper cut :) TomT0m (talk) 10:38, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Wrong interwiki links in Wikivoyage

I don't know if this is already reported: Interwikis at Wikivoyage are wrong, see voy:it:Template:Mappa di localizzazione/DEU. Wikipedia interwikis are shown as Wikivoyage links. NNW (talk) 21:44, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

They are still defined locally in that template and wrong. If you find other places where this happens and they are not defined wrong locally please let me know. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:32, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for not checking the template text. I'm obviously too used to already removed interwikis. NNW (talk) 12:41, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
That's a good thing I guess ;-) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:51, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Astronomical coordinate system

I like to know if geocoordinate datatype can be used also for astronomical objects (e.g. stars, galaxies...). There are some differences between "simple" geographic coordinates and celestial coordinate system:

  1. celestial coordinate systems need also an "epoch" ;
  2. The equatorial coordinate system expresses the right ascension (i.e. the longitude) in hours instead of in degrees (1h = 15 degrees).

It is possible to use the actual datatype or we need a new datatype only for astronomical objects? Thank you. --Paperoastro (talk) 15:56, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Also planets, comets etc needs an epoch! -- Lavallen (talk) 16:57, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, of course, you are right: for them I have just made a proposal. I'd like your suggestions ;-) --Paperoastro (talk) 12:49, 25 October 2013 (UTC)
I guess it would have been prefered to have a datatype for orbital elements (Q272626). Having eccentricity, inclination, semimajor axis etc in separate properties, does not look optional. These claims should do better in one single claim, just like latitude and longitude are in one single claim under the geocoord-datatype. -- Lavallen (talk) 09:06, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
out of cron. Your considerations gave me an idea: we can join all parameters with a new property of the type item with values, for example, elliptic orbit (Q2268240), or hyperbolic trajectory (Q2755058), and all the orbit parameters as qualifiers. What do you think about it? --Paperoastro (talk) 17:40, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
You can use the string datatype for complex coordinates: later in wikidata client you can extract the data in the appropriate way after defining a standard for data storage. Snipre (talk) 11:11, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Any datatype can be replaced with the string-datatype, but it invites to extensive misuse and misunderstanding. -- Lavallen (talk) 14:20, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
But you can't expect to have specific datatype for only one property. So you have to find a solution, perhaps not the best but a realistic solution. As this property is very specific perhaps a javascript can help to format the string. Snipre (talk) 15:31, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
True, but with 625,629 minor planets, 3,768 comets, 8 planets, an (to me) unknown number of exoplanets and artificial and natural satellites, it would be worth a lot. I do not recommend the DEV-team to prioritize this, but I think it would be worth a thought. -- Lavallen (talk) 16:43, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
If the developers consider a new datatype not necessary the most useful solution would be to extend the geographic coordinate datatype with a new globe, "celestial sphere" (or something similar). When people set this globe, the mask will ask "right ascension" and "declination" instead of latitude and longitude and will not ask altitude; "right ascension" (longitude) will be expressed in hours instead degrees. The epoch will be a qualifier. To the developers: is it feasible?
The idea of Snipre (string datatype) is the simplest, but not for checking: we can check the format (e.g. \d\d:\d\d:\d\d.\d\d) simply , but not the consistence of values (between -90 to 90 for degrees, 0 to 23 for hours, 0 to 59 for minutes and second). Furthermore in the future it may be possible to use geographic coordinates in queries: with string datatype it will not be very simple. --Paperoastro (talk) 17:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Can you please add this idea as a comment on bugzilla:54097? Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:52, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
  Done --Paperoastro (talk) 20:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Property ID is skipped while failing to create property

For example, I created testwikidata:P:P56, and tried to use the same label to create two new properties (Same datatype and other datatype), but both were failed. I created third property with different label testwikidata:P:P59, but the property ID is P59 but not P57. P57 and P58 were skipped. Why? And this thing happened in Wikidata too: P997 (P997), as well as P985 (P985), P987 (P987), P891 (P891), was skipped.--GZWDer (talk) 14:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

This is how Wikibase was designed, when you attempt to create a property or item, the failed attempt still produces an entry for the ID in the database. A developer could probably give a better response than what I did however. John F. Lewis (talk) 14:40, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Database error when deleting items too fast

Hi, when I'm deleting items too fast (many items within short timeframe), I get a database error.

A database query error has occurred. This may indicate a bug in the software.

Function: RecentChange::save

Error: 1213 Deadlock found when trying to get lock; try restarting transaction (
Should I report this at Bugzilla? --Stryn (talk) 08:10, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

How short a timeframe are we talking about roughly? Several items within a few seconds? Or within a few minutes? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:53, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Yesterday I deleted bit over 100 items within one minute. The same error came when I deleted 20 items in 5 seconds. I have never earlier seen this error message, though I deleted almost with the same speed 2 weeks earlier. --Stryn (talk) 11:12, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Woah that is quite a lot. Does deleting at this speed happen a lot? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:31, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Well, it's one of the purposes of the Flooder-usergroup. -- Lavallen (talk) 09:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Sure I can delete with lower speed, it's not a problem, just takes more time from me. --Stryn (talk) 09:47, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Were you using the flooder group at the time? The function here that is specifically struggling is RecentChange::save. If you are in the flooder group this will never get called as the deletion log will not be added to the RC table. Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 09:55, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Sure I used the flooder group (I don't want to flood the RC page). So then there is some bug? --Stryn (talk) 10:10, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Nah the solution can't be that you do your work slower than you'd like to do it ;-) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:15, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I wanted to try it again to make sure it still happens, and yes. Now I was going to delete 64 items. 5 of them didn't succeed because of the database error. Time between deletions was 13:15:09 - 13:15:28 (19 seconds). --Stryn (talk) 11:44, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
I guess the RecentChange::save function might also be used to remove the entries in the RC table for items that are deleted, I am guessing the items your are deleting have been changed in the last 30 days? If this is the case I think we just have more activity in Recent changes than has even been handled by mediawiki before? :O Adam Shorland (WMDE) / ·addshore· talk to me! 12:06, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes you're right, it's under 30 days when those items have been edited in the last time. Your conclusion sounds logical. --Stryn (talk) 12:35, 30 October 2013 (UTC)