Wikidata

Wikidata:Contact the development team/Archive/2021/01

< Wikidata:Contact the development team‎ | Archive‎ | 2021
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

link does not work for Archive of Our Own tag (P8419)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T271126

When following the link provided by Archive of Our Own tag (P8419) spaces are replaced by "+" and the resulting url is wrong. (E.g. Archive of Our Own tag (P8419)Harry Potter leads to https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Harry+Potter instead of https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Harry%20Potter. Replacing Archive of Our Own tag (P8419)Harry Potter with Archive of Our Own tag (P8419)Harry%20Potter leads to https://archiveofourown.org/tags/Harry%2520Potter. Is there something that could be done about that? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this here Valentina.Anitnelav! I've created a ticket so that we can look into it. - Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 17:31, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Problem with Dart Europe thesis ids resolving to old website

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T271810

DART Europe have recently changed their website from darteurope.eu to darteurope.org.

I’m noticing that when I put a Dart Europe URL into Wikidata, even if it’s the .org URL it’s resolving to the .eu URL, and in some instances this is taking it to the wrong thesis. For example: https://www.dart-europe.org/full.php?id=1103849, when entered in Wikidata, then resolves to http://www.dart-europe.eu/full.php?id=1103849 which isn’t the correct thesis… See https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q104216741

I'm relatively new to Wikidata, so please let me know if this is the correct place to report or if I should post elsewhere. Thanks HelsKRW (talk) 10:01, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello HelsKRW! Sorry for the delayed response. This discussion was asked on the property talk page and we're going to have a look at it soon. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 18:06, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
@HelsKRW: I created a ticket. We're going to look into it. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 12:59, 12 January 2021 (UTC)

Connecting wiki base to an external SPARQL endpoint

We have a wiki base instance that we are managing and we would like to know how the entities updates are being done in the SPARQL endpoint of this instance, since we have an external SPARQL endpoint that we would like to be updated as well whenever an edit happens in the wiki base.

The way we see it right now is that whenever a change occurs, an RDF dump is queried on the entity being changed from the recent changes, then the SPARQL endpoint is updated based on this dump. So it is not clear for us how it is done exactly, and it would be nice if someone could provide us with a documentation or an explanation on how it's implemented so that we can link our endpoint to the wiki base using the same workflow.

Thanks in advance!

@185.130.139.27: Hi. Can you ask your question on the Wikibase Telegram group? In addition to the mailing lists ChristianKl pointed above, it's the best place to get in touch about Wikibase configuration issues. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 07:37, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks for your support I will be discussing this on the group.

Is the 400 Wikidata items per page limit a good idea?

We currently hae an ungoing discussion about adding lastnames and firstnames of authors in items for scientific publications. Given that we have tens of millions of items for scientific publications that's potentially a lot of data. One argument in favor is that it's not possible to load this data via the items of the authors when using a lot of {{CiteQ}} claims on a page. As far as Wikidata performance goes, I general idea is that especially long term storage and writes are more important then reading data. Is the 400 item limit a good idea? It worth noting that it also currently produces problems with property proposal lists in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Authority_control sometimes not listing all entries. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 10:18, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey Christian :) I'm trying to understand but I'm not sure what you're asking for. Is it input on how many statements to store on an Item? Is it about increasing a limit for Lua calls on other pages? Could you clarify? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:39, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Wikibase clients have a limit at 400 for "Number of Wikibase entities loaded" on each page. That limit can easily be reached by Wikipedia articles using the {{CiteQ}} template for many references. Wikipedia articles using e.g. Module:Cycling race can also come near or exceed the limit. For instance da:Lombardiet Rundt loads 327 Wikibase entities in order show all winners of Giro di Lombardia (Q34032) from 1905 to today. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 14:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): Currently, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic doesn't load all the proposals (see the bottom of the page) and I think it's also due to some limit like the 400 item limit. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 01:02, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Possibly the "Post-expand include size" limit? Explained in wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Template#Expand_limits --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:05, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

References displayed in one vertical line

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T259183

Hi, I initially put this message in the project chat but Matěj Suchánek suggested me to put it here.
I noticed a thing since a few months in Wikidata specially in taxa items:
I have a screen with 1920*1200 resolution, and I often work with two windows open at the same time and each taking half of the screen. The screenshot below (of Sternaspis sendalli (Q40696606)) show my issue, when I am in Wikidata with a window half the size of my screen and that the sidebar is open then some qualifiers en some references are displayed in one vertical line which is the width of a letter while it seems there is still some room. It's particularly annoying when the reference is a scholarly article with a long title. If I collapse sidebar then the reference resumes a normal aspect, as well as if I re-enlarge the window to the full size of the screen.

I also put a message there in case this has something to do with. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
@Christian Ferrer: This problem was reported to us before, but it seems to have suddenly disappeared for that user. I've updated the ticket with this new report, so we can look at it more closely. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 08:05, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Ok, thanks you for the info. Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:29, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Display of geographic coordinates in edit mode

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T272816

Hello, it seems there was a change in the way geographic coordinates are displayed in edit mode. They are now on the right side of the map on two lines while they were (if I remember right) at the bottom of it on one line. Is there a reason for this change? I find the previous display much more readable. Ayack (talk) 12:10, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Ayack:, let me try to understand the problem. This is what I see when I'm editing a statement with geocoordinates. (Chrome on desktop, no scripts enabled)
Is it what you see in your own interface? If not, maybe there's a script or gadget getting on the way? Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 12:54, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Lea Lacroix (WMDE):, what I'm seeing now is this on Firefox. There is no issue when not logged in. I tried to reproduce it without script nor gadget, but ?debug=true doesn't seem to work in Wikidata (edit links are not displayed). Ayack (talk) 13:39, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@Ayack: I looked at your JavaScript page to see if it's probably some script causing the issue but couldn't reproduce the same problem. I'm going to file a ticket so we can look at this problem. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 09:01, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Mohammed. Ayack (talk) 11:48, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Besides, it would be nice to manually modify the dot while zooming/scrolling inside the map and adjusting the coordinates (slightly falses coordinates could be corrected while looking closely at the map, for instance). --Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 14:43, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
@Bouzinac: Just to be clear, is this a suggestion for a feature request you would like us to consider? -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 21:52, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi there Mohammed Sadat (WMDE), well if WMF has budget/time/willingness to add features, well, yes :)--Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 21:56, 24 January 2021 (UTC)

2021 development plan + 2020 feedback

Hi, if I refer to last year's calendar, you should soon be putting the 2021 development plan online. On this occasion, would it be possible to have a look back at the achievements of 2020? Looking at the list of all the tasks that were planned, it is indeed difficult to see which ones were actually carried out.

Furthermore, would it be possible to consult the community on this plan, on the tasks themselves or their prioritization at least? As a contributor, there are some developments that I am looking forward to but that have not progressed for months (Citoid integration for example).

Thanks. Ayack (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ayack, and thanks for your suggestions! Indeed, the 2021 roadmap will soon be published.
We will have a look on how we can give an update on the developments of 2020. In the meantime, the archives of the office hour (next one taking place tomorrow) can give some insights on what we've been developing last year.
As for consulting the community on the plan, we want to do more efforts in this direction: as mentioned in this update on the support process, we would like to be more transparent about the priorities or tasks, to create more occasions for the community to highlight the tasks they find important, and we will consider the possibility to join the WMF community survey for the next years (this is not yet a promise: in order to make more space for community requests, we first need to achieve the current developments and various things that we committed on for a long time and are not done yet). Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 09:08, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
Merci Léa, but archives of the office hour don't give a better view of past developments. I find them even harder to analyze than development plan on roadmunk.
For my other point, your update seems promising. I'm looking forward to see how this is going to materialize. Thanks. Ayack (talk) 11:57, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Ping project error message "You tried to mention more than 50 users. All mentions above that limit were not sent."

When using {{Ping project}}, I got the above message. Despite the text, I think nobody got notified. Can we change it to a description of what actually happens, whatever that may be? (Here on Wikidata or elsewhere) --- Jura 15:00, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

If you try to ping more then 50 users at once, none gets pinged. That is due to MediaWiki's notification system and is nothing specific to Wikidata. The message comes from MediaWiki:Notification-header-mention-failure-too-many. It can be edited by interface administrators and administrators. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 04:05, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • I made an edit request for English. That doesn't solve it for all other languages though. --- Jura 10:01, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
    If a software behaves in a way but tells a different way, it should be fixed in the software, not locally. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
    • We can revert local changes once whatever needs to be done elsewhere is done. Do we have a planned date for such changes? Do we know for how long the message is plain wrong and misleading volunteers? If both are just a question of a couple of days, we can skip fixing it locally. --- Jura 10:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
  • There's also the more practical question. Why can't this limit be higher? It's a very useful feature to be able to ping projects in Wikidata. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:51, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
    Seems to be hardcoded, see phab:T108293. See also declined (!) phab:T200350, stating that "limit is there for good reasons" and "we recommend that the bot behind the template be modified to ping people in batches of 50".
    IHMO disadvantage of successful Wikiprojects is not good idea and the bot solution is overkill due to developed and working ping feature. Jklamo (talk) 15:55, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Not sure what that bot would be .. Is $wgEchoMaxMentionsCount something specific to Wikidata that can be changed? I don't think we need to change enwiki to increase it here. --- Jura 16:22, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
"25 notifications about mentions you made on [..]: 1 not sent, 24 sent."
Special:Notifications seems to show correctly 37+1.
I think there was similar discrepancy when I used Wikidata:WikiProject COVID-19/Participants (50 users). --- Jura 09:29, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
I think this is because the bell icon only shows the last 25 notifications (= 24+1) when clicked.
Anyway, this discussion is probably beyond the reach of the dedicated product manager (the procedure for reaching them is definitely known to all of us). --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:11, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): can we change this for Wikidata per @ChristianKl: suggestion above? I suppose you'd need to ok it as it's a Wikidata.org configuration setting. Would save us updating all those misleading messages. --- Jura 14:18, 9 January 2021 (UTC)
  • I think the limit is a good option. There were numerous situations in which pings were used to harass regular editors by a long-term vandals. There should be a technical solution to notify a specific group of users rather than increasing a limit that can be easily misused by vandals. Wostr (talk) 17:51, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Hey folks :) There are several question we need to answer to move things forward:

  • Is the current limit in place for technical reasons?
  • Is the current limit in place for social reasons? (Seems to be the case in order to fight harassment.) Are we willing to deviate from that here on Wikidata regardless?
  • Can a limit change be applied to Wikidata only or is this not possible?
  • What do we change the limit to?

Largely these need technical input from the WMF because Echo is their project. Mohammed has been trying to get that input but I guess over the holidays it's been a bit slow. We'll continue pushing. In the meantime I'd love input on the social aspect and the preferred limit from you. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:36, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

Apparently, the limit was lowered/raised to the current one, apparently not for technical reasons. I'm not aware of any requests of lowering it for Wikidata, so I'd assume it comes from enwiki (or elsewhere).
Maybe the mentioned config setting can be used. Shall we try 100? That should work for the larger WikiProject ping lists. @ChristianKl: what number did you have in mind? --- Jura 11:51, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
Among the Wikiprojects I checked it seems like at the moment Wikiproject Books is the largest with 117 participants. This means the limit should be at least 150 or 200. It would be worth understanding the cost of having the limit at 200 to make a good decision.
When it comes to reasoning about the cost, it's worth noting that one of the things that's currently most problematic at Wikidata is that we don't have enough discussions about data-modeling. The ability to ping Wikiprojects is very valuable for getting those discussions to happens and as such it's worth having a higher limit even if it takes a lot of processing power. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:48, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Hello! We got some input from WMF, and they clarified that the current limit exists because of social reasons to avoid spam. Because spam via project notifications happens they’re not very keen on increasing the limit. Also, it's not clear from their end whether increasing the limit just for Wikidata is actually possible -- they said this is something they’d have to look into, although they don't have the capacity to consider making any change in the near future. In the meantime, feel free to adapt the error message if needed. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 12:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
  • How about just trying to set the config param? If it works, it works .. If not, it's not really a problem either. Should just take 5 minutes. If enwiki problems arise here, we can adapt it again. --- Jura 14:17, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1: The WMF people we contacted were quite explicit about not having the capacity to make any technical inputs in the near future, and given that Echo is their project, it’s inappropriate to start to make configuration changes from our end. We also want to make sure that most of the Wikidata community agrees on the change and that increasing the number of pinged people doesn’t cause issues on the social side. Perhaps, if we have enough community interest around this and present that consensus to them then they might reconsider. Would you like to start a community-wide discussion about this? -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 14:14, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Development plan and Q97154089

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T44325

I just came across the duplicate item we discussed the other day and I was told it's in the development plan that this is eventually being fixed, but I didn't actually get an answer about the actual place where I could find that in the plan. Can this be clarified? --- Jura 09:41, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Jura! Thank you for bringing up the problem of the duplicate items once again. We are aware that it is an important issue and as you can see on this ticket, we're currently investigating it. We cannot give you the precise timeline to when it will be fixed but rest assured that the ticket is moving forward.
Concerning "the actual place where" you could find this issue on the roadmap -- The roadmap only reflects the high-level development goals that we've outlined for the year and not the specific details of each of the open tasks like you'd want to see. The development plan for 2021 will soon be published and announced to the community. Cheers! -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 17:34, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Can you quote the part of the 2020 plan you were referring to last year? It helps me (and possibly others) to better understand the plan and how it's meant to be read. --- Jura 12:34, 31 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team/Archive/2021/01&oldid=1366661044"