Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2013/03

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

Highlighting "updated since my last visit"

Do we really need it green and bold? Is green not sufficient? (Pls disregard if the gadget is standard).--Ymblanter (talk) 03:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Abuse filter 8

Are you sure this filter works correctly at the moment? To me it currently seems to be triggered every time an unregistered user tries to edit an English description. Regards --Iste (D) 17:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Unless I'm mistaken, it would block edits like "hungarian historian from the 12th century"? Does this filter make sense? Jeblad (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

No, I do not think that this filter works correctly. I am going to explain why. Just by reading the conditions of this filter I can tell that it matches changes where country names or language names are added to english descriptions, sitelinks, aliases or labels. This does not match the name of the filter "Non-constructive descriptions", e.g. it does not only match descriptions. Also, IMO language names and country names can not be considered "non-constructive".--Snaevar (talk) 19:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Beside your concerns about the actual purpose of the filter, there seems to be a mistake in the regex or a software bug. By now, it also prevents edits like this one, which is definitely not what the filter was intended to do. That is why I've turned it off now. The actual goal was to prevent such edits, where only a language name is typed into the English description line. Regards --Iste (D) 20:08, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I'm not great at RegEx, but isn't there something we can just put at the end of the strings it checks for so that it only flags edits that add lines consisting just of language names, as opposed to simply containing them? I've already had to revert 5 such edits since this filter was turned off. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

For the time being, I've re-enabled the tagging portion of the filter, to make it easier to spot these edits when patrolling Special:RecentChanges. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:25, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I've also changed MediaWiki:Tag-possible non-constructive description to "adding language as description", since that's what this filter is actually checking for. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:29, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• I've fixed what I saw as a regex error - two consecutive pipes (||), which would mean (by my logic) that "" would also be tested as a regex, leading to no filtering.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

As I said before, AbuseFilter is difficult and has a lot of options for people to make a screw up. I believe all filters should go through a review and we should avoid private filters, and also avoid filters that only targets what can be called ordinary editing. Toying around with AbuseFilters just to make some kind of editing visible, and thereby flagging ordinary edits as "abuse" is in my opinion very bad. Jeblad (talk) 02:46, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, we're getting way more of these edits than we used to, so I'm turning the warning portion back on. I've tried to make MediaWiki:abusefilter-warning-8 a bit more helpful, though. Improvements welcome. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 13:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Why do we block edits like Special:AbuseLog/4155? Did you know that you can make it so that it only matches if text only contains the language name (and nothing else)? You can add ^ to the beginning of the regex and $ to the end. Otherwise, it matches stuff like "Italian scientist" and "French politician" -- what's the point of having it match these. when we can only match edits that contain the language name and nothing else? πr² (t • c) 04:41, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Mea culpa

Sorry guys. Apparently the large "screw up and you might get desysopped" warning failed to convince me to thoroughly check my work. Who would've thought a simple dangling | would cause so much trouble. If y'all want to create our own version of en:WP:STOCKS, I suppose I have no one to blame but myself. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 23:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

We use an alternative method of torture here. Sven Manguard Wha? 00:02, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Property Occupation

For the property Occupation it's necessary to create a lot of item without link. I have imported from it.wiki a list of occupation accepted in italian Infobox Bio. Just now people add wrong item (for example singing instead singer) because don't exist correct item. So we can create Item without link? I also asked in Wikidata talk:Notability. Second problem in some language occupation is different if is a male or a female, so maybe is necessary to have a redirect in Wkidata (ex. actor/actress)? --ValterVB (talk) 20:55, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

• I think picture is more complicated. Similar sex-dependent variants exist in Slavic languages, but set of male/female variants may be not same as in Italian. Additionally there may be other cultural differences, like astronaut/cosmonaut. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:18, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

  Is there some guideline or practice about it? See for instance Wikidata:Property_proposal#aunt_.2F_Tante_.2F_tant: why do we have grandparent but then aunt+uncle and brother+sister? What if the uncle identifies as female, or if a language doesn't have a way to translate one of these terms in a unique way? --Nemo 15:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

• Good questions which we must solve. --Stryn (talk) 07:04, 22 February 2013 (UTC)
• Is there really any point in this property ? If you want to say that someone is a surgeon doing hand surgery, I would rather have something like "education: MD in surgery" (or whatever it is called) and "field of work: hand surgery". Adding an occupation property sounds redundant, and, as has been said, it raises problems of because of missing items, and because of grammatical agreement. --Zolo (talk) 08:59, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

  "Occupation" means "field of work", I don't understand your point. Sure, using the names for the jobs/fields rather than the names for the people with that job/in that field is a way to do it. --Nemo 15:45, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

  There is a separate "field of work" property (Property:P101), but thinking about it, I am not sure it always works "feld of work: cooking" may not really be equivalent to "occupaion = cook". --Zolo (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

  No, but if you specify what area of the field (kitchen), it may be. :p I was speaking of "field of work" as a concept, like you; the property list doesn't clarify what are the differences and the example seems to use "field of work" as a way to specify a subset of "occupation" (physicist->quantum physicist or whatever the English name; but done as physicist->quantum field theory). Currently those properties are used only 500 and 50 times respectively, so it's good to re-evaluate them against concrete use-cases like the it.wiki import. --Nemo 07:20, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  [general comment, not a reply] I see no insurmountable problem with creating new, dedicated items. 1) The update to the notability policy will allow this. 2) Why cannot the newly created items reflect an "or" concept when it is necessary to differentiate nouns by gender in some languages? E.g. English label: writer; Italian label: scrittore/scrittrice (alias: scrittrice); etc. Another point is that nothing forces us to use items for things like occupation; strings could also be used. I do believe there is a case for using items since the multi-language component is built into them and they will be better maintained than a multi-language string could ever be (a string could not be re-used in the style of a template, so far as I know). What internationalization problems remain under the scenario I've proposed? (I will help with item creation for the it.wp import for occupations if there is agreement.) Espeso (talk) 07:53, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Actually I also thought that "field of work" could be made more specific that "occupation", but I see that en:Template:Infobox scientist tends to be used with very general words like "mathematics". I suppose they have good reasons for it, though I dont know what they are. Apparently, strings will not have any translation memory. Creating items for various professions would solve internationalization problems, but I am not quite sure it makes sense to have an item for "researcher in quantum physics" if there is no word for it. --Zolo (talk) 08:08, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Right, basic occupation categories should be enough. I think "field of work" supplements this well actually, so you can have "occupation=physicist"/"field of work=particle physics" or "occupation=writer"/"field of work=fiction", "historian/medieval history" and such. Espeso (talk) 08:18, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  "Field of work" seems a rather confusing property indeed, it can be both more specific or more general: it's probably better not to touch it. There's also some confusion with #"is a(n)" versus "occupation", I see. It seems to me that Espeso's solution is ok: everyone can help check it by going through User:ValterVB/Sandbox (even checking a row or two, adding existing item if any and aliases where needed, helps). --Nemo 09:57, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Here is another example: The Well-Tempered Clavier has Johann Sebastian Bach as its composer. But "composer" in portuguese would be "compositor" for men and "compositora" for women, so for now it is used "compositor(a)". Ideally, there should be some "{{GENDER:...}} trick" or some feature which would detect that the value of Property:P21 and change the text to "compositor" (for Bach, which is male) or "compositora" (for Chiquinha Gonzaga, which is female). Helder 22:31, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The gender problem affects other properties too, even with English labels, for example Catherine the Great is listed as Emperor of All Russia rather than Empress. /Ch1902 (talk) 10:16, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I think we will need qualifiers to link the display name to an alias according to gender. Danrok (talk) 10:47, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

"Item by title" search and "Create a new item" disagree

According to the item by title search, there is no item for site enwiki and page USS M-1 (SS-47). However, when I try to create a new item , I'm told "Could not create a new page. It already exists." What's going on here? —Naddy (talk) 20:09, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Sounds like this one: Paul_Dalglish, so try again. I don't know why it don't let do it always. --Stryn (talk) 20:18, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Weird. I just tried and created q5571118. Legoktm (talk) 20:19, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

It happens to me a lot. In my experience, it's just because someone else created an item just when you pressed "Save", so the ID for the item you would have created already exists. So it has nothing to do with the article already being assigned to an item. It always work if you press "Save" a second time (or maybe a third if you're unlucky). Jon Harald Søby (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The red error message on attempting to create a non-duplicate item has happened to me dozens of times. Pressing "Create" a second time then works fine. FAQ material? Espeso (talk) 06:26, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, it didn't work the second or third time when I tried it before bringing the issue up here. —Naddy (talk) 11:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Happens to me maybe two in five attempts. I just click "Create" again, without changing any of the four input items, and it has (so far) always gone through on second attempt. --Redrose64 (talk; at English Wikipedia) 13:10, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

search - status update

Hey :)

I know search is still painful so wanted to give you a short status update: We've rebuilt the search index today. This will hopefully help some. In addition we've made preparations to run a script on the database that should fix an additional bunch of problems. I hope we can run that one in the next days. We've also made progress towards using Solr for the search but there are still some ugly issues to fix. Sorry for the headache this is causing. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:42, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Selecting items

When entering text to select items (e.g. for statements), it might be easier if the lookup function wouldn't be case-sensitive. --  Docu  at 16:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes that's one of the things we're working on that'll hopefully happen soon. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Order of "statements" and duplicates

I was just wondering if we had any aim to logically order the statements rather than just list them in the order they were added. It would be useful to have a standard structure so anyone passing by didn't need to search to see if the particular statement they wanted to add already existed. Moreover, it appears that the software allows "statements" to be added which already exist (both the "statement" and the contents), does anyone know if this will be resolved (e.g. by a "can't save" style error message?) The Rambling Man (talk) 18:09, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

As for your second question, that is bugzilla:44763. Legoktm (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, what about the ordering? The Rambling Man (talk) 18:25, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

The statements are an unordered set, that is there are no such thing as a logical order. That does not mean its impossible to sort them somehow, but a sort order will not be right for everyone. A sort order could be according to the set language and the property labels, possibly by using fallbacks for the property labels if none is defined. Or property ids. Or some other randomly chosen sort order. Right now it is insertion order, but it isn't very difficult to add specific ordering if it is important. Perhaps something for a volunteer?

Identical statements can be added and this is a feature. Assume for example that a person is mother to two twins you know nothing about, then you can create links to them but give them the content "some value". Both entries will exist in the item for the mother, even if no data is known about the twins themselves. It could be interesting to identify similar entries, but it should not be forbidden to enter similar or even identical entries. Jeblad (talk) 21:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Okay, but what I mean is that you can add the same property twice, so you can have two "mother" fields. I know you could (and should be able to) have one "mother" field with two entries (however that works), but what I'm saying is that it seems possible to add "mother" more than once. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:37, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Some properties are one-to-one, some many-to-one, others one-to-many or many-to-many. Unless you make this part of the definition of every property, (and write software to make use of it!) there's no way to manage this automatically. --ColinFine (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Yeah, you can add one property twice, but when you save, it just adds the value/item to where the property was first added. There won't be two separate fields for one property. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

I can think of three logical sorting orders that could be put in place now: (1) numerical by Property ID, (2) alphabetical by property name (in user's language), and (3) order they were added (status quo). Of these three, the current one makes the least sense, as it is truly random. I would prefer option 2 myself, seeing as option 1 is also a bit random, since the properties are also added randomly, but even with 1 you would get a sense of where to expect a certain property to appear in the list. But option 2 is by far my favourite. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Would someone be willing to hack on a Javascript that ordered statements alphabetically? Or better yet with some user variables that allowed alpha sort, property # sort, and/or took an array of property names that the user wanted to see first (emphasize) or last (de-emphasize)? For example, I want to de-emphasize "entity type" (putting it in a group that sorts last, then alphabetically). I don't believe that an endless number of user scripts can replace site-wide UI improvements, but I also understand that we can't have everything at once. ;) The size of a single statement on the screen also seems excessive to me. Has anyone tinkered with a CSS restyling that would get rid of all that padding around everything? Thanks, Espeso (talk) 00:38, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 44678

The current plan for this is bugzilla:44678. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

May I add a request? I would like the statements to be in a table format and sortable by the user, like the example below.

Property	Value	Qualifier	Soucre property	Source value
child	Child1		Imported from	English Wikipedia
			Additional source	Italian Wikipedia
	Child2		Imported from	English Wikipedia
birthdate	1-1-1900	Some qualifier

A standard sort order is still advisable. I would suggest by Property / Value / Qualifier etc. HenkvD (talk) 19:37, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I hope Wikidata isn't going to allow any dates except those well-formatted as Q50101 dates! —Sladen (talk) 17:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

That seems like a good idea. --Izno (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Property number, or property name? I personally agree in principle with the request in general, as well. --Izno (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Open mapping theorem

I'm trying to resolve a problem noted in Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts between Q944297 and Q967972, both about things called the "open mapping theorem". There are two open mapping theorems; Q967972 is or should be the one about functions from and to the complex numbers, while Q944297 is or should be about functions on Banach spaces, as their en links show. Unfortunately, the de link in Q944297 is in the wrong place: it points to the complex number theorem (de:Offenheitssatz, which should be on Q967972) instead of the Banach space one (de:Satz über die offene Abbildung). Every time I try to change anything in these two items (the interwikis or even their titles and descriptions) I get an orange box saying "An error occurred while trying to perform [action] and because of this, your changes could not be completed." Obviously, I can edit elsewhere (e.g. I just edited my user page) so I suspect this must be some issue with these particular items, but the error message gives me no clue what's wrong. Any idea how to unstick this? —David Eppstein (talk) 23:50, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Does that orange box not have a "Details>" button? Every time I've had that it has, and the details have usually told me that the item I'm creating already exists (despite my having failed to find it in a search previously). I am guessing that you might have to disconnect the wrong item from the Wikipedia page before trying to connect the right one. --ColinFine (talk) 00:10, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Well now I can't check because it's working again. Thanks for the tip, anyway — I'll look for that the next time something like this happens. —David Eppstein (talk) 02:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Ok, next question: some Wikipedias (e.g. fa and sr) have only one article on both theorems. For now I'm putting them in their own item, Q4455057, an item that used to be redundant with Q944297 (containing the Russian article on this topic). Is that the correct solution? —David Eppstein (talk) 03:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

There are many ways of handling interwiki conflicts, but this one looks pretty legitimate to me.--Ymblanter (talk) 04:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

That's one of the ways to fix the problem, but a better way might be to see if you can find users on those 'pedias to unmerge the topics so that links can be set up nicely.

In another case, such as is common with video games (and DE in particular...), the series and the main video game are located in the same article. I have typically thought to link the merged articles to the video game interwiki links rather than the series links. --Izno (talk) 21:42, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I need to stop the embedded fonts

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45507

Hi, I couldn't find a way to stop the embedded fonts to be used on WikiData.   On Wiktionary, it was used for Arabic script, but I could stop it from the preferences, but where to stop it here? I couldn't find the option to stop it here. Arabic text is rendered with a very bad font against my will and I hate it. My default fonts just render Arabic perfectly, why force us to see in that embedded ugly illegible font without any way to stop it? Thanks. (An example) Even after making a custom CSS, User:Mahmudmasri/vector.css, I wasn't able to stop the Amiri embedded font :( --Mahmudmasri (talk) 10:47, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Click the language icon at the very top of the page, and click "display settings" at the bottom. Then turn off the "download font when needed" box. This, that and the other (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. It needs to be off by default. Arabic displays perfectly with ordinary fonts. If it's not broken, it shouldn't be fixed. Additionally that font displays Arabic characters folded on each other. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 12:51, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

See https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=45507 and my followup questions what is requested. Thanks! --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links for non-existent articles

Over at en.wp there are discussions about how to link non-existent articles on the English Wikipedia to existing articles in other languages. Is there a way that Wikidata can note that en.wp doesn't have an article on en:Lăpuș Mountains but ro:Munții Lăpușului and hu:Lápos-hegység articles exist in Romanian and Hungarian? The idea is to allow speakers of those languages to use them as a base for an English article and also to note the location the English Wikipedia wants its article on the topic. The relevant discussions on en are at en:Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Redlinks that still point to other languages and en:Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#R4 proposal. Thryduulf (talk) 17:12, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Just set the English title - if there is no existing article then that could be a suggestion for a new article. Noq (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Will that mark the English page differently to the others so that we don't mislead people into thinking we have content when we don't? Thryduulf (talk) 19:49, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

This brings to a question I've been meaning to ask myself, is there a way of extracting a list of WikiData items with (say) 6 or more langlinks but no ENWIKI langlink? Presume a suitably large value of 6 so that the list is 1000 items or less. Or, put another way, 1000 items with the most langlinks that lack an EN langlink --Joe Decker (talk) 18:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Like this? (There are less of 1000 articles, for performance reason I think) --β₁₆ - (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

It is possible to rewamp Special:ItemDisambiguation and add it to en:Mediawiki:Noarticletext. Jeblad (talk) 19:01, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh spiffy! (the list I meant, but probably both.) --Joe Decker (talk) 21:21, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

• A possible mechanism:

1. Wikidata item X gets a new title "XXX" added for y.wp, where there is no article
2. User visits y:XXX and is presented with an automatic page saying "There is no article, but we think that the following pages may cover the same thing in other languages - German de:XXX, French de:XXX, etc. Or you can create one! Press edit."
3. However, This is not an onwiki page - no page is created, no edits are made, and the link remains red.

What we'd need for this is a) something in MediaWiki that could do a lookup against the Wikidata database to say "does current pagename match any name recorded for y.wp?"; b) code to generate this "holding page" when a redlink is visited.

Thoughts? The above is pretty rough, but I think it would work as a structure. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:26, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

That is the sort of thing I was thinking of, certainly the user-facing parts. I don't know enough about the workings of MediaWiki to authoritatively comment on the other part, but to an inexpert eye it looks good. Thryduulf (talk) 01:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

As I said on enwiki, the solution is already there and it doesn't need to involve Wikidata. Templates such as (en) {{link-interwiki}} or (fr) {{lien}} provide editors flexibility in selecting a preferred translation source for a red-linked article inline. Bouchecl (talk) 13:42, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

• True, but the issue with having the use place templates to distinguish when a redlink's necessary target article can be found on a different language's Wikipedia is:

1. It requires the editor to know what the title of that article is on that foreign language Wikipedia
2. It requires the editor to have knowledge of how to place these templates
3. If the editors will not place these templates, it will require a bot to place these templates everywhere the corresponding redlink exists, and require the bot to constantly interface with Wikidata to find these redlinks whenever they show up

Honestly, the better idea that could be more streamlined, and more efficient, is to have this functionality somehow included in the functionality of Wikidata. This way, whenever a redlink exists with a specific name on any version of Wikipedia, the articles corresponding foreign language Wikipedia links will show up next to the article. In other words, the redlinks would have the same functionality as they would with the templates if the functionality was built into Wikidata, essentially removing the need for the templates all together. Also, the solution of integrating Wikidata to do this task of directing users to foreign language articles when the reader/editor runs across a redlink would resolve this issue across all version of Wikipedia, not just the English version. Steel1943 (talk) 02:33, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Entity types

Is there a list of what items go under each main entity type? For instance, I'm wondering if a newspaper is creative work or an organization – and I'm sure many other questions will come up. It would be nice if we had a detailed explanation of what each type refers to. -- Ypnypn (talk) 03:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Some info is on the diskussionpage of the property. --Goldzahn (talk) 13:43, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Please use "property" if possible. We have a bunch of "types" in the system and we should try to keep them separate. We even have types for types, and I think we need to make this simpler and less confusing for the users. 93.220.73.160 14:34, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

The six Property:P107 types should be clarified at Wikidata:Phase 2. The reference is the GND ontology. I interpret newspaper as corporate body, but I'm a little bit buffled.

(The original name of property P107 was "Main type of item". Now it is "Entity type", which is bad. There are three types of entities: Items, properties and queries. Please vote at Property talk:P107 for a name.)Mange01 (talk) 18:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Infoboxes task force: References: Entitätencodierung: Vergaberichtlinien - Kurzliste (in German). I don't know if the list is translated yet. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Occupation

So I added occupation:physician to Q233985. I would like to add "biochemist" as well (see en.wp article), but no such item exists. What is the proper procedure here? --Magnus Manske (talk) 16:33, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Why can't you use Q2919046? Legoktm (talk) 16:35, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. It didn't show up when I typed "biochemist", but it did as "Biochemist" :-( Added, but the question remains in principle: Would it be OK to add a new item? It's not on the notable list I made up, but it would clearly serve a structural purpose, no? --Magnus Manske (talk) 16:38, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I think it would be ok to create a new item purely for structural purposes via the new notability guideline. Though I guess it would also be worth creating a new article on Wikipedia about the occupation as well :P Legoktm (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

There have been added already some occupations like Egyptologist (Q5406272) without Wikipedia article. We should add "occupation" to WD:N#Default notability criteria. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

missing page bug in API

Hello, When My bot runs this the site returns this: """ {"entities":{"-1":{"site":"fawiki","title":"\u067e\u0631\u0648\u062a\u06a9\u0644 (\u0627\u0628\u0647\u0627\u0645 \u0632\u062f\u0627\u06cc\u06cc)","missing":""}},"success":1} """ but the item is created and exists in Q5573013.Amir (talk) 19:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Verified your result and I get the same one on Wikidata.org, but using my own dev-repo I get the expected result. It seems like this should work with the latest fixes, as it is (or should be) a zwnj in there (that is a "\u200c"). Hopefully they will be on Wikidata.org in the beginning of next week. Jeblad (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

There are a few bugs in wikidata.org that creates problems during save but also when someone is requesting data as in this case. In this case it is a to harsh normalization of strings from the URL, the title part of the URL, and it will happen due to replacement of some spacers and control chars with a normal space character. We should have detected and changed this earlier, but no one here knew that this kind of formatting was actually part of normal written text in some languages. I suspect that this isn't the last problem we encounter in the field of internationalization/localization. Anyhow, lets see if this works as expected sometimes next week! Jeblad (talk) 21:09, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

There have been several problems with Persian/fa language (a while ago you could not add fawiki sitelinks using the normal interface). Perhaps this is linked somehow. I don't really know. This, that and the other (talk) 10:50, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Derived quantity property

Hi, I'm thinking about how to relate a derived unit to a measured physical quantity (Property:P111) using a 'derived quantity' property. For a derived unit such as 'kilometre per hour' (Q180154), it'd be good express something like 'derived from distance (in kilometres) with respect to time (in hours)'. What is the best way to formulate this relationship in terms of Wikidata properties? --OldakQuill (talk) 14:39, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Do we really need to define the whole definition of a quantity through properties ? By now we have a poperty to define that km/h is a speed and km/h by its denomination expresses alerady the derivation of both quantities used for its calculation. Just a repetition. Snipre (talk) 14:54, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Kilometer per hour, in its name, does express its derivation, but there are other units which do not have this property. Molar, for example, does not express its derivation in its name (one mole of solute per liter of solution). Using extant properties, we could express that Molar is a measure of concentration, but its derivation does not follow from this. --OldakQuill (talk) 15:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Pywikipedia and Wikidata

We are going to need a lot of clever bots to fill Wikidata. To make that possible Pywikipedia should (properly) implement Wikidata. That way bot authors don't have to worry or care about the inner workings of the Wikidata api, they just talk to the framework. For the people who are interested in this, I just posted this message to the Pywikipedia list. Multichill (talk) 15:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Google

I don't know if it's coincidence or not, but I'm noticing that article subjects that have well-linked items here seem to have gotten a boost in Google's search results? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:08, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links to Munich–Salzburg railway

The Dutch (nl) link to w:en:Munich–Salzburg railway should be to w:nl:Spoorlijn München - Rosenheim (not w:nl:Spoorlijn Rosenheim - Salzburg, which should be linked to w:en:Rosenheim–Salzburg railway), but I can't edit it because of the existence of Q3103060.--Grahamec (talk) 00:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done: I deleted Q3103060, updated Q466328, and created Q5873973. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  00:59, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.--Grahamec (talk) 01:02, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links to Mühldorf–Freilassing railway

While trying to understand this new system I created Q5589673. I can now see I should have edited Q802803 (although I'm not sure how I could have found it because searching for "Bahnstrecke Mühldorf–Freilassing" does not turn up anything.--Grahamec (talk) 01:13, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I've nominated the item at WD:RFD. For future reference, you can easily request item deletion by going to "Preferences (Gadgets)" and checking RequestDeletion. FallingGravity (talk) 04:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

 Deleted — Hazard-SJ  ✈  04:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Upload of verified data from external sources

Imagine that we get high quality upload from external sources, for example census bureaus. The data is correct as far as their source material says. Those data are then uploaded to Wikidata, and we can give a source for the data as they come from a specific bureau. Now, the problem is what to do with the data because here they will be unprotected and anybody can change them. If they are changed then the license with at least some of census bureaus says the contract is broken, and that mean we can keep on using the data but not give the census bureau as a source for them. The person that changed them will then be the sole source for the new data. The same thing can happen with a lot of different data. It is a kind of conditional license, "you are free to reuse the data as long as you don't corrupt the data and if you do then don't say we are the source". What shall we do in those cases? I'm tempted to say that we must try to verify that the data in fact is what they published, and if not then we can't claim them as source. That means we can't allow anyone to change such material. That could be a problem.

A slightly simpler approach is used by Statistics Norway in their copyright notice. They say "Permission is granted on the proviso that reference is made to the source from which the material is obtained (Source: Statistics Norway). The source must be quoted in direct connection with each table and diagram that is used." Basically we are on safe ground if we give a source for the data. Still if the data is falsified then we're out on a limbo, it follows from Norwegian law, and we must find some solution to non-constructive changes.

So how do we handle this? Originally there was a discussion about locking down statements or parts of a statement, but that is a bit harsh. What if we could say that some data/quote/cite must actually be identified in the data source? Are there any other way to maintain quality in Wikidata? Jeblad (talk) 19:31, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:General disclaimer#No contract; limited license seems appropriate. --Izno (talk) 22:06, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Its a quality issue more than a license issue. Jeblad (talk) 22:13, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

It is partly a quality issue, in that claim values shouldn't usually be changed without also changing the source (even for an obvious typo, say.) But I think it is also a licensing issue, because we generally would not be informing people of the license the data was made available under by its producer. This means that even good faith edits could create licensing problems, and external re-users of the data could easily end up unknowingly violating the original license. --Avenue (talk) 11:52, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Not really a solution, but I think it would be nice to have an easy way to track changes in claim values that are not accompanied by a change in the source. Even in the case of good-faith edits, it seems likely that it will often break the original claim-source relationship. --Zolo (talk) 22:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhpas the solution is to protect some statements from edition for all users and to allow edition to only a group of contributors like sysops or bots. That kind of data will be added and updated through the help of bots so no need of edition rights for all contributors. Snipre (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

If that is technically feasible, I would certainly support that. --Zolo (talk) 08:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Localized links to items

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45682

It is possible to get localized names for links to items right now (and also properties and other later on) but that means rewriting all the links. We already do that on special pages like RecentChanges, it is simply a matter of commenting out a test, but if we do that for all links it could have some unexpected effects. For example the text the link is part of might not be suitable for the labels then rendered, and that could produce really weird results. It will also be a bit counter intuitive for sporadic users how to create those links, that is the label is used as a title of the page but the identificator must still be used to create a link to the page.
An other solution that might be better is to create some kind of alternate linking, much like whats done with files. We could create a link like [[Label:Q1]] or [[Item:Q1]] which then render the same as [[Q1|Universe]] and with the description as a flyover. We could also use a parser function to do the same, something like {{label:Q1}} or {{item:Q1}}, that would be somewhat simpler code-wise.
So what do you think would be the simplest way to do this for the editors at Wikidata? Or should we leave it as it is now? Jeblad (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the simplest way is to do {{#label:P21}} or something, for both items and properties. This would keep current links intact but allows for moving forward. I would also like to use this so Wikidata:Database reports/Popular properties isn't hardcoded to english :) Legoktm (talk) 22:55, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

We could have {{Q}} and {{P}}, so that {{P|27}} that would return localized label + link. Regardless of how it is technically implemented, it may be the simplest syntax for the end user, as it is concise and uses similar format for both items and properties (as opposed to the "Qxx" "P:Pxx" distinction). --Zolo (talk) 09:40, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

in my opinion it should show

• for items: [[Q123]] it shows example (in user language) but for [[:Q123]] it shows Q123
• for properties:[[Property:P123]] it shows example(P123) (in user language) but for [[:Property:P123]] it shows Property:P123

▬ Reza1615 / T 10:29, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwikis for the Wikipedia namespace

There are a few pages (or more) that are around the Wikipedia namespace like Q4039395 (Wikipedia:Administrators), Q5460604 (Wikipedia:Vital articles), Q4063328 (Wikipedia:WikiProject Check Wikipedia), etc.

Should essays like Wikipedia:Deny recognition, Wikipedia:Don't stuff beans up your nose, Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade, and others also get their own entries? iXavier (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, unless those pages contain an interwiki conflict. Let me check.

• "Wikipedia:Deny Recognition" is fine, altrough the english one is missing a link to jv and ko.
• "Wikipedia:Don't stuff beans up your nose" is fine, althrough the english one is missing a link to pt.
• "Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade" has an interwiki conflict. Do not make an entry for it on wikidata.--Snaevar (talk) 12:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Search for properties

If items have Property:entity type=person and Property:sex=female or Property:sex=male, shouldn't we able able to find these items with:

• Special:Search/person female
• Special:Search/person male

Neither search link currently gives any results. Possibly this is already somewhere in the pipeline? -- --  Docu  at 07:46, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought Special:Search/Q215627 Q43445 might work, but it doesn't work either. (Q215627 = person, Q43445 = female)

Special:Search/P21 P107 or Special:Search/Property:P21 Property:P107 don't work either. (Property:P21 = entity type, Property:P107 = sex) -- --  Docu  at 08:03, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems that it will be in "query" namespace (see Wikidata:Glossary#Query). -- --  Docu  at 08:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

"I accept these terms for my future edits. Do not show this message again."

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45645

Why this message appears every time again when I close my browser and I want edit again? It's irritating to click every time "I accept these terms for my future edits. Do not show this message again.". Is it possible to hide this message in my own css file? --Stryn (talk) 15:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Try this code:

.tipsy-nw {
    display: none !important;
}

However it should also be possible to set this in the preferences. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 15:30, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I've never seen this message, where does it show? --Nemo 15:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

It appears when you're going to edit something, like label. You can see the message below of the save button. And it requires that JavaScript is turned on, I think. --Stryn (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the code, and I agree that it could be better solution. --Stryn (talk) 15:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, nobody have had the time to add it to the preferences. The idea was to click it away and then it should stay hidden until it ss changed somehow. Jeblad (talk) 19:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

There's a preferences API now, so it should be a relatively straightforward change. Upload Wizard handles the licensing tutorial in this manner (persistent pref).--Eloquence (talk) 22:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't use this code. It also hides some warning messages and so on. We really need a preferences solution. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 19:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Bug

I can't save " book by French journalist and political activist Thierry Meyssan" as a description at Q3202834 no matter how many times I press save. I always get the error "Edit not allowed: Your edit has not been saved yet, as you might have tried to enter a label, description or alias in a different language than English, or to add a language link using the "description" field. To add a language link, please go to the bottom of the page and click "add". Type in the language in the first box, and the title of the article in the second. If you would like to test how Wikidata works, please use Q4115189, the Wikidata Sandbox. If you really intended to contribute in English, you can confirm this edit by pressing "save". Thank you for your understanding." 83.70.217.140 22:08, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

That's not a bug. Your edit tripped filter 8 of the AbuseFilter, which is intended to only warn people for descriptions like "Turkey" and "Nederlands" and not to disallow edits. I don't really know why it won't let you save the edit. Maybe someone else knows the answer. --Wiki13 _talk 22:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

This filter tags and logs constructive edits as abuse and that is simply wrong no matter how useful someone think that is. The filter number 8 is also wrong, it hasn't been fixed and still wrongly tags edits. [1] [2] [3] Yes it is possible to rewrite the filter to do something more sane in this case, no it does not fix the most serious issue with filter no 8 – filters should NOT tag good faith constructive edits. This is in my opinion misuse of AbuseFilter and should be not done. Jeblad (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

A few comments here:

1. Actually, it does sound like there's a bug here. Specifically, IP 83.70 says that they can't save the edit no matter how many times they press "save". However, the "warn" feature in the AbuseFilter is supposed to allow editors to confirm their edits.
2. I support the use of the AbuseFilter for the purpose of warning editors who try to add languages in the description field, presumably thinking it will automatically add a sitelink or something. It's not vandalism per se, but it's annoying as hell, and takes up a good amount of our time on Recent Changes Patrol.... However, the issue here is that the filter should only be looking for edits that just add a language name, and nothing else. I'm not RegEx-savvy enough to know how to do that myself, but I believe PiRSquared has proposed a solution higher up on this page; if somebody more knowledgeable could look at that, that'd be great.
3. Oh, also, since it seems that our editing interface isn't as intuitive as we thought it was (what with all the sitelink removals and additions of languages as descriptions), I plan on proposing some changes to some of the MediaWiki messages that users see when editing items... if I don't post anything on it within the next day or so, somebody come yell at me and remind me to do it.

— PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 06:59, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there a way to write a regex so that the filter only recognize one word? I mean that if there is more than one word than the filter does not match. Techman224^Talk 21:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I was suggesting as well. See PiRSquared17's suggestion at #Abuse filter 8. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 21:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Q5992940

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45223

I can't add the Wikipedia articles for this (the title of the film is ?, so the formatting seems to be screwing up). I've tried both ? (film) and %3F (film) in the linked article field, and neither works.Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

It already exists: Q4646750. --Stryn (talk) 16:24, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• Well, then something must be broken. I tried clicking the edit links button on the English page and got nothing, which is why I thought the page hadn't been created yet.Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:29, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, for future reference, how can such pages be added manually? Or was that just because the articles had already been linked? Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:31, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

For future reference, every time you come across a page title with an questionmark, go to Special:ItemByTitle to search for the item. If it does not exist, you will be given a link to create an item and you should follow that link. Once bugzilla:45223 is fixed you will no longer need to manually add the link in this manner.--Snaevar (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• I'm aware of that now. My question was related to links to the particular items from a label. Let's say in 2014 there is a new film entitled ? and I want to create the WD page for it. For adding the items, would I use any special workarounds?Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Once you are on Wikidata you don´t need any special workaround.--Snaevar (talk) 17:44, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• So the initial error I reported was because the articles in question had already been linked. Thank you. – Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:53, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Crisco 1492: Sometimes you won't see the "Edit Links" on WP until the Wikipedia page is purged. --Joe Decker (talk) 17:56, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• Thanks, I noticed that (with Raden Eddy Martadinata, for example). Snaevar's given a good reason for why following the "edit links" button didn't show the correct data page. – Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:21, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Links from Wikipedia to Wikidata

I know it's not a problem of Wikidata, but I don't know where expose the problem. In Wikipedia articles with Wikidata item but without interwiki links is hard to add a new interwiki link fron other language. I.E. if I want to translate this article to Spanish, I have to go to this page and find the English article and add the interwiki link for the Spanish version.

I propose that also in the Wikipedia article without interwikis appears the "Edit links" link instead of "(none)". You can see the "Edit links" at the bottom of language links (in articles with interwikis i.e). This will make life easier for many people. --Kizar (talk) 12:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

This has been worked on and is nearly ready to be deployed but it needs some more polishing. Hope to have it out there soon. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:11, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

@Kizar: For now you can try User:Yair rand/WikidataInfo.js. Add this:

// [[d:User:Yair rand/WikidataInfo.js]]
importScriptURI("//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Yair rand/WikidataInfo.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript");

to your common.js (at Wikipedia). You will have link to connected item or link to create one if none is connected. --18:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC), Utar (talk)

Recursion

Can it be made so you can't add to aliases and to values of properties the same items as the label of the current item? Or is that recursion needed somewhere? --18:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC), reposted 16:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC), Utar (talk)

The use case for this that occurs to me is where you are editting the alias and the label to swop the values. Filceolaire (talk) 23:56, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

You can easily go around with AB-AC-BC-BA scheme. But yes, current AB-BB-BA scheme is one step faster. --09:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC), Utar (talk)

A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects

I was doing a few edits through Wikidata today, and I realized an issue that needs to be resolved after doing literally only two edits. In the few days I have been working this project, I have run across a few issues while performing edits, specifically issues that involve article moves and redirects on Wikipedia. I'll use one of my edits as an example to show my point:

I was creating an entry on Wikidata for en:Admiralty M-class destroyer on Q5941498. I was able to add en:Admiralty M-class destroyer to this entry since it existed on no other Wikidata entry. However, after going back to en:Admiralty M-class destroyer, I noticed that the article was recently moved from en:Admiralty M class destroyer. When I realized this, I tried to edit my English entry on Q5941498 from en:Admiralty M-class destroyer to en:Admiralty M class destroyer ... only to find that I could not since en:Admiralty M class destroyer was already on Q359276. My end resolution was to blank Q5941498 from having any entries and change en:Admiralty M class destroyer to en:Admiralty M-class destroyer on Q359276. Within those edits, there's an issue...

I'm not sure how this issue can be solved to prevent something like this happening in the future, but I do have some ideas...

1. There needs to be the creation of some sort of bot that can do a certain function. The bot could be programmed to scan for any moves that have recently happened, and then scan Wikidata to see if any of the article's redirects, including the redirect created during the move, are entries on any WikiData entry. After the bot discovers that the article found on Wikidata is now a redirect, it could edit that Wikidata entry and change it to the primary article name.
2. There could be some sort of functionality for Wikidata to know when an entry a user is trying to input is a redirect of an existing entry in Wikidata. Even just a prompt for the user could suffice, but if not, the complete inability to create that entry at all due to redundant data would be an option as well. Or, on the other hand, if a user tries to input a redirect of an existing article that has no entry in Wikidata, the user could then be notified to enter the main article instead of the redirect. I can see this being rather helpful, especially involving redirects that are acronyms; an acronym like YAA could be redirected to one article one day, then another editor will change it the next day, citing a more notable target.

• I noticed that immediately after I finished writing this, I stated the wrong problem (since redirects cannot have their own entries on Wikidata if their target article is already on a Wikidata entry). The problem that I am actually running across involves a situation where on Wikipedia "1" has two articles "Apple" and "Orange", and Wikipedia "2" has an article for "Apple" but a redirect for "Orange" with the target for "Orange" directing towards another article already entered in Wikidata. In a case like this, "Orange" for "Wikpedia 2" would not be able to be put on the same entry in Wikidata as the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 1" (or entered at all, for that matter) since it is a redirect to another target. This presents an issue that needs to be discussed. Steel1943 (talk) 23:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure how much of this is feasible, especially since there are some cases where a redirect like "Apple" could reasonably redirect to the article "Orange", but it seems like there needs to be some sort of way to reduce/restrict the amount of redirects listed in Wikidata. Steel1943 (talk) 09:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC) Please look above for the issue I meant to present. Steel1943 (talk) 23:31, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Steel1943, what you describe under 2. is already in place that means if you try to create an link tp a redirect it will create an link to the target instead if this link does not exist on wikidata already. So it is not possible to create links to redirects they only happen if the page on wikipedia is moved afterwards. I think they are working on a solution like you decribe in 1. but I am not sure how it looks like and if it is rolling out on the 6th together with some other long needed features.--Saehrimnir (talk) 14:38, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

BetaBot (RFP) now updates the sitelinks for pages that have been moved recently. See also my request. —Naddy (talk) 15:07, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

How fast is your bot? I guess right now it is still working on the backlog but once its up to date how long after a move will your bot have fixed it.--Saehrimnir (talk) 16:19, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

That's Beta16's bot, and it is only working on current moves (within a day or so). Just check its contributions log. —Naddy (talk) 21:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• I noticed that immediately after I finished writing this, I stated the wrong problem (since redirects cannot have their own entries on Wikidata if their target article is already on a Wikidata entry). The problem that I am actually running across involves a situation where on Wikipedia "1" has two articles "Apple" and "Orange", and Wikipedia "2" has an article for "Apple" but a redirect for "Orange" with the target for "Orange" directing towards another article already entered in Wikidata. In a case like this, "Orange" for "Wikpedia 2" would not be able to be put on the same entry in Wikidata as the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 1" (or entered at all, for that matter) since it is a redirect to another target. This presents an issue that needs to be discussed. Steel1943 (talk) 23:27, 3 March 2013 (UTC) This text is also listed above in bold. Steel1943 (talk) 23:31, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

• I've relisted the conversation regarding my second concern at Wikidata:Project chat#Issue pertaining to redirects; I did this due to not thinking that I explained the issue clearly, and the fact that I was starting to clutter up this conversation with all of my strikethroughs. Anyways, thanks to all who answered my 1st concern.. Steel1943 (talk) 02:34, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

BetaBot runs twice a day (every 12 hours), but this may change in the future, and fixes the last pages moved. --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe for one run we can have it check the last week or two? Legoktm (talk) 09:12, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

OK for the last two weeks...I start this evening (UTC) --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:36, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

tooltip "Hebrew 2012" - not a good idea

The tooltip "Hebrew 2012" is not a good idea, we are editing blindly. we can not see what we are editing. I have no idea if this tooltip exist also in others languages. but in Hebrew it is realy makes the editing difficult. Hanay (talk) 14:51, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I think you must provide more context to the problem. Jeblad (talk) 03:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I think Hanay is referring to an issue with ULS's input settings box. In certain cases it covers the text box that the user is attempting to type in. --Yair rand (talk) 03:22, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

As Yair wrote. It is very difficult to edit with it. It is always covers the text box Hanay (talk) 16:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue with trying to update Q816717

On this entry, for the "fa" Wikipedia, I was trying to add the entry "فرودگاه بین‌المللی بینظیر بوتو", but ran across an error that I do not understand when trying to add that link. The error reads "The specified article could not be found on the corresponding site." with the details reading "The external client site did not provide page information.". However, I can confirm that pages does exist here, but for some reason, these errors keep appearing. I'm not sure what is happening. Steel1943 (talk) 01:37, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I did a test and got the same error. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:08, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I got the same problem, but it worked when I used the "Import interwiki" gadget, so it is added now. I have no idea what caused that, though… Jon Harald Søby (talk) 03:33, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

That situation was rather strange. Thanks for fixing the issue. Steel1943 (talk) 03:54, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

We fixed a bug with this. It should go live with the deployment in 2 days. Let me know please if you're still seeing such issues afterwards. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Explanation: The article title contains a zero-width non-joiner character (U+200C), which is currently stripped from the sitelink field. —Naddy (talk) 12:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with search?

Why this search [4] give 0 result. Search does not work with Cyrillic letters? ShinePhantom (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

No, and never did. Try "Item by title" option from the menu.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:51, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The question should be: what's right with search? (Nothing.) You should never use it, as Ymblanter says. --Nemo 08:07, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

link from arabic version to english version for an article

i have created an article in arabic. and i don't know how to make a link to the article in other languauges. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.45.249.137 (talk • contribs).

• Go to the item page and add an arabic link at the bottom of the list.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Languages in en

I don't see "Languages" in the side bar in English (but German). My problem? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

at the top of the page near your user name you can change language▬ Reza1615 / T 11:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW, this panel at the top of the page has a strange first section "Common languages" which includes odd things as Alemannisch, corsu or euskara but not German ! (I edit from France and the main wiki of my unified account is :fr, I suppose it is taken into account). Who decided this strange choice of "common languages" ? Is this choice linked to my IP, to my default preferences ? Can I modify it ? Touriste (talk) 12:46, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

It should be your IP. I just checked: I am right now editing from Tokyo, and my "common languages" are Japanese and Korean. When I edit from home, I get other choices.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:26, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, for French browsers, they decided to offer a choice of "regional" French languages that very few people speak. I left a message a while ago at mw:Talk:Universal Language Selector

I was not clear. If I am in the English Wikipedia, I miss all links to an article in the other languages, regardless of them being on Wikidata or in the article. - If I am in the German Wikipedia, I see them. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Strange. I just clicked en:Special:Random a couple of times, and found myself at en:Krishna Raja Sagara. Addbot's already removed the in-text links, but I still see the links on the "languages" list, just like I should... so the client's working fine for me, at the very least. Perhaps it was a brief glitch, or maybe you just had bad luck in the articles you tried it on? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 07:04, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Strange. I rather think I clicked some button inadvertently in my preferences, but where? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

On Phase II going live

In the last weekly summary, Lydia mentioned that Phase II can go live on the Hungarian, the Hebrew, and the Italian Wikipedias already late March. (I assume that the English Wikipedia is expected to follow soon afterwards). Are there any discussions foing on in the corresponding projects? Phase II is different from Phase I in that there will be a lot of controversies. From my experience on the English Wikipedia, already introducing Phase I met considerable difficulties, but in the end everybody seemed to get it, since it functions pretty much in the same way as before, and to all questions where there was a community decision we answered that no community decision is needed. Now, for Phase II a community decision is needed. Are we prepared for that?--Ymblanter (talk) 08:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I've been thinking about this for a while. With Phase I, this could be implemented within minutes. For phase 2 that's not the case, especially as infoboxes have to be recoded. --Rschen7754 08:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

And to start with, we need community consensus that the infoboxes should be recoded (remember the controversy of Wikiproject:Music), and even if we get one, they have to conform with the Wikidata Properties, which is kind of not always trivial. (For instance, unless I missed smth, there are no properties at all for physical geography). It sounds to me like a Wikipedia RFC followed by a Wikipedia + Wikidata Project or Task Force.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:18, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I've asked on their village pumps, yes. Once it is turned on nothing changes until someone goes and changes existing infoboxes. It'll not happen immediately. Preparations are welcome of course. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be wise to find a way to make sure that we only replace infoboxes that will contain the same information, possibly with updated values, and not change to inferior ones. We should possibly help the communities with that, but we should definitely not force them to change. We provide the information and infrastructure, we should not enforce anyone to use it. Jeblad (talk) 12:09, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

In what sense is phase II live on the Wikipedia side? To my understanding, this would require Wikidata client extension with support for inclusion syntax. What features of the client software are deployed at Hungarian Wikipedia, and at the test client? The {{#property: }} code does not work at any of them.

I am curious on if any phase 2 bot jobs have been carried out. For example attempts to aggregate infobox data or category data from the Wikipedias, or from external sources, to Wikidata. Where should that be presented?Mange01 (talk) 12:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Look at this list: Wikidata:Database reports/Popular properties I think, it is obvious that some bots had been aktiv. --Goldzahn (talk) 12:53, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Phase 2 is not live on any Wikipedia yet. It'll nto be before the end of the month. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:24, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

When will it be activated on the client of the demo? It is not even activated there yet. HenkvD (talk) 18:52, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The code is not there yet, which is why it is not on the demo system yet :) This will change in the next few weeks. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:39, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW: I think we need to explain Wikpedia editors the major difference between Wikidata phase 1 and phase 2. In phase 1 an item was the same as a lemma (Wikipedia article). With phase 2 the item has become independent. An item should be about one clearly defined subject, while Wikipedia articles often mix two persons (famous brothers), a building and the organization who owns it, a book and a film etc. Unfortunately an editor of Wikipedia can't see the difference. He has only one link to Wikidata and some strange lang links in the source code. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't get that. Wikidata:Notability still prohibits the creation of items without Wikipedia sitelinks. And the Wikibase software prohibits several items to share the same sitelink (interwiki link).

I thought that the major difference was that phase 2 was about properties and references. Mange01 (talk) 00:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

@Mange: Yes and no. Of course you're right that phase 2 is about properties, but using properties changes the meaning of "item". In phase 1 we don't need to care about the subject as long as if it fits more or less to the Wikipedia article. Now, with phase 2, an item stands for itself. It should not have contradictory properties. We have to separate "climber" (occupation) from the activity "climbing". In Wikipedia both have the same article. (WD:N allows already to add places without sitelink and I guess occupations will follow.) --Kolja21 (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

@Kolja. Ok. Now non-article pages are allowed, and your vision is to step by step allow more items, but not everything?

A suggestion: Allow redirected pages as items. Many subjects do not have their own article, but a section in an article, and a subject title is quite often redirected to that section. Of course, interwiki between redirected subject will be invisible to the Wikipedia reader with the current user interface, but may be useful anyway, for example for machine-translation of list articles, etc. Actually, before Wikidata, it happened that I added interwiki links to redirected pages, making it possible for readers to find interwiki in one direction (from the language where the subject is a real article, but not the other way around.)

I am happy if we delay text datatypes as long as possible, because it will cause problems. Text values are barely "strucutred data", since they are not linkable, and hardly searchable, meaning it is difficult to follow the reverse link. Consequently it is difficult to machine translate them without a lot of manual work. It will be tempting to use text datatypes for properties where Wikidata items are missing, but instead we should try to find ways to extend the allowed items a little bit. Mange01 (talk) 17:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• For the English Wikipedia, I opened the thread here: en:Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikidata Phase II coming. Please participate, and please be proactive on your home projects.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Please talk to me before starting such discussions. I have a few things to do to make sure there are no misunderstanding and we're telling editors what's actually going to happen and don't cause more confusion than necessary. Thanks! --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:51, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Question regarding values

I was curious ... if a value on here (Q or P) gets deleted, does it get recycled when another user needs to create a new entry, or does is it never created again? It seems like recycling some of the values would make sense on here (as opposed to a Wikipedia article name since it would make no sense to write an article titled "Hello", a recently deleted article, about the primary topic "Raspberry".) Steel1943 (talk) 06:44, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

They are not recycled; new ones are created. If we chose to recycle links, the URLs would be unstable, since an item may be about one entity now, then recycled to be about another entity later. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  06:48, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for the clarification about that. Steel1943 (talk) 07:01, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue regarding template articles

I'm note sure if this has been addressed yet, so I apologize if this is repeated information:

On pages in the Template namespaces on the respective Wikipedias, the interwiki links are sometimes found somewhere on the template itself in a set of <noinclude> tags, or sometimes, the interwiki links are found on the "Template:Name/doc" file. I'm bringing this up since I have only added Wikidata entries regarding two articles in the "Template" namespace on the English Wikipedia, and I am thinking that the interwiki links on the "/doc" files are getting overlooked. Just wanted to point this out; if a bot is eventually programmed to get these interwiki links from articles in the Template namespace, they would need to check the "/doc" file as well. Steel1943 (talk) 08:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue with trying to update Q6252807

I'm trying to add ja:Template:Infobox Dungeons & Dragons module to Q6252807, but have run across the same situation as mentioned in my discussion above. Per the conversation, the resolution to this bug has yet to be deployed? Steel1943 (talk) 09:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:43, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

2 questions

Renaming articles

Can anyone tell me how Wikidata processes renamed articles? I'm talking about the following: there is an article that is linked with other languages via interwiki. What's happening when the article is renamed? The question arose from the situation happened several days ago: I translated a Ru-WP article and had to edit the corresponding Wikidata page manually. --Michgrig (talk) 10:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Either just do it manually here, or wait till a bot gets to it (in the same way, as the interwiki bots were working before Wikidata).--Ymblanter (talk) 10:40, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I thought the problem might be that Wikidata has not been activated in all of the languages yet. Do you mean that bots already search for renamed articles in all wikis? --Michgrig (talk) 11:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

    I am pretty sure they do, but we are in the transition period, so that I am not sure how many bots there are and how often they run. May be one of the interwiki bot owners can comment.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:34, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

    My bot updates the last pages moved from 4 March and it checks all wikis. I'm trying to update also the last two weeks, but it takes a long time. For the previous period, I think I can't do anything :( --β₁₆ - (talk) 13:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Search of cyrillic and extended Latin fragments

Is it a common knowledge that the search of cyrillic fragments does not work? The search of fragments with extended Latin characters does not work either (for example, yesterday I tried to find "Cuorgnè" and failed to do so, though the page exists). --Michgrig (talk) 10:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• Basically, the search does not work at all, see #What's wrong with search? above.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Oops, I haven't seen the Phantom's topic. Actually, I haven't come across any problems when searching for fragments with common Latin letters. Maybe I've just tried not long enough :) --Michgrig (talk) 11:30, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

    Judging from the traffic at the Requests for Deletion page, people do run into problems with creating dupes in Latin letters. But, again, we have means to find an item not using search.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

    • • OK, I'm sure you know better. Thanks for your answers. --Michgrig (talk) 12:02, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

how can i add my language in a page

how can i add my language in a page

• If you mean add a description or a label in your language, choose your language in the menu that appears at the top of the screen, and then happy editing !
• If you mean: add a link to the Wikipedia in your language, you should find a "add" button at the end of the page.

Cheers--Zolo (talk) 11:20, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Next deployment

Is there a time published somewhere for the the wikidata (interwiki) deployment on the remaining wikipedias? Is it during the morning or evening (UTC) of 6 March? --Njardarlogar (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

It's between 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. PST, during the MediaWiki general deployment window. By the way, all sceduled deployments to WMF wikis are listed on Wikitech:Deployments.--Snaevar (talk) 19:42, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. 19:00-21:00 UTC it is, so in the evening. --Njardarlogar (talk) 19:53, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Tutorial on working with interwikis

Is there any tutorial on how to correctly work with interwikis stored in WD and how bots will operate after WD are enabled in all Wikipedias? If not, can someone tell me the proper sequences of actions so that I can create such a tutorial (at least for ru-wiki)?

I'm interested in the following cases when I create an article (for example, in ru-wp):

1. There is an article in en/de/...-wp. What should I do? Should I go to WD and search for the article here? Can I specify the link to another language article in the old way?
2. There is no article in another language. Will there be any bot that creates WD pages automatically? Can the Wikipedia interface be changed so that an article with no interwiki has a clickable link to the Wikidata's CreateItem page?

Probably there are other cases that I missed --Michgrig (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

• As a starting point, you may want to check en:WP:WDATA. Specifically, for the first question, the best way is to go directly to Wikidata (one does not need to search, there will be a direct link), but I also assume that bots will be still running and collecting links in the old way. For the second question, I do not know but I think the answer is yes: A bot will eventually create the article.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:12, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Many thanks for the link. I've just translated the main procedures. --Michgrig (talk) 22:25, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Given the way search currently works, I frequently go to Wikipedia to find Wikidata entries. Especially for search terms with many hits, it's hard to find the relevant one .. and likely the first on google.

Obviously, once it improves, Wikidata may be the starting point. --  Docu  at 21:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

And yes, the interface should be changed as suggested. -- Ypnypn (talk) 23:52, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Entity type and astronomic object

I have a doubt concerning the entity type of astronomic objects: are they geographical features or terms? In this document (Entitätencodierung: Vergaberichtlinien - Kurzliste.) there is an indication of Extraterrestrika in geographical section. In the Infoboxes task force/places page there is an indication of extraterrestrial territory: are they only craters, mountains, etc. of satellites and planets, or also satellites and planets itself, stars, galaxies and so on? --Paperoastro (talk) 14:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Good question. Let's take two examples: Mond (moon) and Alphonsus <Mondkrater> (Q1339467), both are type "gix" (Extraterrestrika = places). --Kolja21 (talk) 23:24, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

"Geographic feature", I would say; that encompasses both "political" (countries, cities) and "physical" (continents, rivers) features. Our rules for mountains should apply easily to asteroids or stars - they are physical objects and have a defined place. Andrew Gray (talk) 09:58, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your answers! :) Following your examples, I have just tried with Andromedagalaxie (Andromeda Galaxy): it is type "gix", too. So, discussions, Property proposals, and list of properties should be moved from terms sections to the respective Geographical feature one... --Paperoastro (talk) 15:31, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia data as a trend sensing and emergence monitoring tool?

I'm working on projects around social change. Currently tracking what emerges in these fields and helping people 'discover' what is happening at the edges. I shared some ideas on this a while ago here.

My goal is to get people who are confronted with change or who believe change is necessary but don't quite know where to start to navigate the alternatives starting with what may seem the most familiar to them or close to what they already know in a field of possibilities, to progressively uncover the unknown and get a bigger picture view of what is happening...

I've mapped out for the moment an example of some observed trends/solutions on an Exploring the alternatives pearltree.

I would like to push this further in two directions -basically a query applied to a list of wikipages to render some linked data:

• First, get a graph of the interlinks between these pages [a finite list of wikipedia or other type of 'living' crowdsourced encyclopedic data] to uncover 'likely' paths between concepts or solutions.
• Then, enrich this graph with links to other concept/solution pages to/from these pages, to have real time access to what is emerging and how these fields are evolving (at least at the wikipedia level).

Is there anything in store or in preparation to help do this? Or any idea of how / where I could find some help?

Thanks -Helene

I guess you should talk to the people at the RENDER project in Wikimedia Deutschland. They have a tool to produce the graphs, but I think its intended use is slightly off comparing to your problem formulation. Jeblad (talk) 10:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you it seems indeed very relevant, and they might be following the 'formation' of knowledge... Thx - Helene

"Wikipedia disambiguation page" as description or property

I just removed the disambiguation page en:Andrea Dotti from the item Q536106 (which concerns the psychiatrist) and added it to Q581588 along with French and Italian disambiguation pages. At the same time I removed the (English) description "Wikipedia disambiguation page" from Q536106 and added it to Q581588. By chance I had a look at the revision history of Q536106 and noticed that a bot had added the same description in other languages as well through this edit. Wouldn't it make more sense if "Wikipedia disambiguation page" was added as a statement/property instead of as a description? In this way (if I have understood correctly) this information would automatically be added/removed in all languages when changed. As the situation is now, I am sure a lot of incorrect descriptions will be left in other languages as in the example above. --Wikijens (talk) 13:00, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I now noticed Q4167410. Is this what should be used for disambiguation pages (in addition to the description)? --Wikijens (talk) 13:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

That depends on how the users are to find the item they would like to link to from the new page they created. The method will be this information should show up there. If it is the search function only the description shows up there at the moment. But as you can see from the post above this problem needs to be still solved in any case because right now searching does work slightly worse than not at all. But if it is possible to use properties for that search/linking suggestions that would be an good option.--Saehrimnir (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Wikijens, Q4167410 is correct, see: Wikidata:Infoboxes task force and Property:P107. --Kolja21 (talk) 13:32, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I will start adding this. But there is still the problem with the descriptions. Is there a way to change/clear descriptions in multiple languages at once or do I have to change language settings and clear them one by one? Or will bots take care of this in time? --Wikijens (talk) 13:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Last check Phase I

Just to check: Will the deployment Phase I take place today 18:00 UTC (in 4.5 hours) as planned? The experience shows we are likely to get a huge influx of users, some of whom are lost and need guidance, and some just do some cleanup work which needs admin attention, so that would be good if many of us were present here at the time.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:26, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Just asked on IRC, Lydia was at lunch but Denny said that it will probably not be on time and will start during the European evening and go into the night. Legoktm (talk) 13:39, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I personally will still be around till late European evening but not during the night. Will catch up tomorrow.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:46, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Should we may be run a central banner sending to help pages?--Ymblanter (talk) 13:47, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Central as in MediaWiki:Sitenotice here? Probably, why not. As in m:CentralNotice? I doubt so, that needs more planning for translations and so on. --Nemo 18:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I meant the local MediaWiki:Sitenotice--Ymblanter (talk) 18:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Sitenotices should be localizable. Until now it is protected against translation. --Michawiki (talk) 19:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Seems to be live now on most wikis. --Njardarlogar (talk) 21:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

We're still testing. I'll post a message here when things are clear. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:02, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Is it possible to highlight the "Edit links" link? It doesn't contrast with the language links. --Michawiki (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I see the "Edit Links" link is indented now. So it contrasts with the interlanguage links better. --Michawiki (talk) 23:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

adding items again not working

Related to my post a few days (weeks?) ago, the possibility to add new language to an existing item (not tested to create a new item) isn't working again in Opera 12.14 (latest), 64 bit on Win7. Dragonfly (Opera's developer tool) gives:

Uncaught exception: TypeError: Cannot convert 'mw.util' to object
Error thrown at line 246, column 2 in check() in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-RequestDeletion.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&9381114:
    $.ajax( {
called from line 308, column 2 in init() in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-RequestDeletion.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&9381114:
    check();
called via Function.prototype.apply() from line 12, column 1731 in <anonymous function: jQuery.Callbacks>(data) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    if(list[firingIndex].apply(data[0],data[1])
called from line 14, column 363 in <anonymous function: fireWith>(context, args) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    fire(args);
called from line 6, column 8 in <anonymous function: ready>(wait) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    readyList.resolveWith(document,[jQuery]);
called from line 2, column 179 in <anonymous function>() in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    jQuery.ready();	Event thread: DOMContentLoaded	Q2101059:246
		Uncaught exception: TypeError: Cannot convert 'mw.util' to object
Error thrown at line 246, column 2 in check() in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-RequestDeletion.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&9381114:
    $.ajax( {
called from line 308, column 2 in init() in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=MediaWiki:Gadget-RequestDeletion.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&9381114:
    check();
called via Function.prototype.apply() from line 12, column 1731 in <anonymous function: jQuery.Callbacks>(data) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    if(list[firingIndex].apply(data[0],data[1])
called from line 14, column 363 in <anonymous function: fireWith>(context, args) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    fire(args);
called from line 6, column 8 in <anonymous function: ready>(wait) in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    readyList.resolveWith(document,[jQuery]);
called from line 2, column 179 in <anonymous function>() in https://bits.wikimedia.org/www.wikidata.org/load.php?debug=false&lang=en&modules=jquery%2Cmediawiki%2CSpinner%7Cjquery.triggerQueueCallback%2CloadingSpinner%2CmwEmbedUtil%7Cmw.MwEmbedSupport&only=scripts&skin=monobook&version=20130218T165645Z:
    jQuery.ready();	Event thread: DOMContentLoaded	Q2101059:246

Regards,

Mabdul (talk) 14:01, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Clear your browser cache and try again. Jeblad (talk) 18:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC) (Actually Opera isn't supported but it sort of works)

Thanks. resolved. But why isn't Opera supported? It is even the market leader in some countries... (and very popular on mobiles! (And yes I know that they were sadly switching to WebKit.) Mabdul (talk) 22:22, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

term already in use

Hi. I am trying to correct an interwiki link but when I edit the entry I get the message:

Edit not allowed: Site link dewiki:Flößerhaken already used by item Q1434788.

Hoe do I find what item Q1434788 is? Thanks. 70.16.105.75 14:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

• Just click on it. It is exactly what you want to add.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I've placed it in Q783275 as that seems to be the item you were looking for. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 20:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

How to combine two entries?

Like Q4629045 and Q2646435. -Koppapa (talk) 18:55, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Delete sitelink, label and description from more recent item, insert sitelink, label and description in less recent item. Then ask to delete the more recent item in WD:RFD. For now is the only procedure to merge two item. --ValterVB (talk) 19:14, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done▬ Reza1615 / T 19:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue with diffs

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45821

Certain diffs will show up, but others will not. I'll use Q48493 (iOS) as an example.

The issue might be when I try to view the latest diff. This edit is not the latest and I can view it, but the latest revision (by me) can't be seen as a diff.

Also, my edit above did not leave an edit summary behind, which should happen when editing the mainspace or property space.

What's in the edit? I added a claim where the developer is Apple Inc.

:/ iXavier (talk) 00:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

This is actually happening only when the latest revision is mine. I can't view it then, but I can view other revisions that are the latest. iXavier (talk) 02:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Not adding Persian link

Tried adding this [5] Persian link to Q6415351. However got an error saying "The specified article could not be found on the corresponding site. Details: The external client site did not provide page information." --AxG (talk) 18:28, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

• I have the same problem and do not really understand what is going on.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

This should be fixed in a few hours with the next deployment here. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 18:53, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that is alredy linked in Q8754. The strange thing is that on wiki the name of the page is "انتخابات ریاست‌جمهوری ونزوئلا (۲۰۱۲)" but if you use google translate like here you can see that isn't correct. So copy and paste from Wikipedia don't work, but if you use google translate version it's OK. --ValterVB (talk) 19:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I found a simple trick :) at the first make a redirect from Space to ZWNJ in fa.wiki after that wikidata will accept your link! for example after this you can add this link! also yesterday I run bot to make these redirects but your article made today so Bot didn't make that redirects▬ Reza1615 / T 19:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

@ValterVB: google doesn't use ZWNJ also in chrome's search it converts to Space! so words without ZWNJ doesn't have Bug in wikidata.▬ Reza1615 / T 19:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Reza1615 -- Meisam (talk) 06:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Be-x-old interwikis

It was not long time ago I wrote here about the problem with adding be-x-old interwikis. Looks like problem still exists, for categories at least: be-x-old:Катэгорыя:Кнігі XX стагодзьдзя was added to the other Wikipedias by bots, but not to Wikidata (I added it manually). --Taravyvan Adijene (talk) 04:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

When my bot clears sitelinks from Wikipedia's, it also imports back into Wikidata. It's currently stopped but I'll have it running again in a day or two. Legoktm (talk) 09:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

There was a problem about langcodes like yours but it's solved now and I'm running my bot to import articles from your wiki Q6457592, Do you want me to import categories too? you can send me a list of articles (or anything) and I'll import it12:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Importing from be-x-old wiki started today, so could it be that bot reads interwikis from article and imports all of them without the be-x-old article itself? --Taravyvan Adijene (talk) 13:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Caching and/or overload problem?

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45839

If I go to Q2393031 and click on the nl-wiki article or the ko-wiki article the interwikis are not showing there; also not after using CTRL-F5 to refresh the page. For example the eo-wiki article there is no problem. If I then go to the history of the nl-wiki article and compare two old revisions the interwikis sometimes do show up. Is that a caching problem and/or is this the result of Wikidata servers being overloaded now because there are so many projects added about 12 hours ago? - Robotje (talk) 07:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• Same on the English Wikipedia, see en:Binary acid--Ymblanter (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
  • It works for me for en:Binary acid. But I can reproduce the previous problem. I've filed it as bugzilla:45839. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

String values

Now as we got the option of adding the string value to the properties, we can in principle add lenghts, masses etc. However, we have the known problem of a unit conversion (US against the rest of the world). On the English Wikipedia, this problem is solved by using en:Template:Convert in the templates. Is there any chance we can do the same here sometime, or should we just plan two properties for each item? (In the latter case, we can create them now; in the former case, it is better to wait).--Ymblanter (talk) 07:48, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Ideally, I'd think unit conversion should be done, but if it's not possible, I might think we should use the international system of units (meters, kilograms) if we had to use only a single property. Note however that string is not the ideal datatype here, in my opinion, because this would be quantitative data better stored using a numerical value.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, a valid point, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Special types that allow conversion are planned in the software itself. It'll still take some time though. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Be careful string doesn't mean numeric value. So right now don't use string to add numeric statements. Snipre (talk) 12:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

botrun for sources?

Hey,
Lydia wrotes in german Wikipedia, that it is consens putting Wikipediaarticles as a source into the items via bot. Where is discussion about that? What is the sence behind (I can not see...). Conny (talk) 09:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC).

I think there is no decision just discussions in the Project chat. Nobody explains how we will correct the imported data later when the reference structure will be available so at the end we will have in wikipedia articles data based on wikipedia articles as reference until somebody takes the time to correct the reference on wikidata. Snipre (talk) 10:50, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

How to edit

How to edit this wiki? I tried almost 10 times but couldn't do anything. Can anyone help me?--Pratyya Ghosh (talk) 10:47, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• What do you want to do?--Ymblanter (talk) 10:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering you at your talk page. I want know know how to edit here like other wikis. The big problem is when I click the edit button it opens but It doesn't save. Also I can't add an article which exists. What is the problem?--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 10:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

ːSee this article Kajol. There are 40 entries. When I try to edit one entry it opens. But it doesn't give me any option to save.--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 11:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

What, specifically, are you trying to add? Are you adding a new language? Or changing the name of one of the language links? Del_♉sion23 (talk) 11:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

In this article I was testing. But in Vidya Balan I wanted to add bn. It exists in bn. But I couldn't. What's the problem?--Pratyya ^(Hello!) 11:15, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

You click "add" at the bottom. Then in the left box type "bn", then in the right box put "বিদ্যা বালান", then click save. I have just added it in. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 11:17, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Distinguished articles

Is something planned to mark articles as, say , "Article de qualité" in the link towards the French interwiki ?--Dfeldmann (talk) 10:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, it is already answered in the FAQ--Dfeldmann (talk) 11:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Pages without language links

Just thinking about what will happen to special page Pages without language links on Wikipedias? Does it know if the language links are on Wikidata? --Stryn (talk) 12:38, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, IMHO: a request to the API returns all langlinks, even if they're not physically present on the page. --Ricordisamoa 12:54, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

If the page is on Wikidata, it knows what the language links are (and if there are any).--Ymblanter (talk) 13:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there also a Wikidata equivalent to this special page? The special page on Wikipedias is cached and also limited to very few entries, but with Wikidata, it should be rather easy to list all items that have only one Wikipedia linked to them. If there could be some filtering e.g. on attributes, this would probably be a powerful tool. --YMS (talk) 15:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a page "UnconnectedPages" (Perhaps it should be called "WithoutSitelinks") in the works, but it is a bit more difficult than first expected. It will list the pages that is not connected to an item and it will also print out a count of existing langlinks (if the sitelinks are not listed as langlinks which they are for the moment). — Jeblad 17:12, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

What are we doing with regards to catching vandalism? Some vandalism was caused at Q1444790 (see history) by IP:84.13.61.130 and it was only chance that led to me finding it and fixing it. It may have been a good faith mistake edit, but it still needed fixing. I feel that the facility to make an edit summary would be very useful for the project as a whole in understanding the reasons why someone is removing, adding or migrating links and properties. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 13:22, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Indeed, I think in the same way. Maybe you want to go ahead and file a bug? Cheers, Vogone talk 15:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Willing to help?

Add your username, IRC nick (if you use IRC), and list of wikis where you're an admin on m:Template:Wikidata/Ambassadors if you'd like to. πr² (t • c) 14:21, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

What is this list for O_o Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

See here. :-P Vogone talk 14:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Legoktm wanted to import w:Wikipedia:WDATA and its translations to Meta, and mark it for translation. It's basically a version of w:Wikipedia_talk:Wikidata/Wikidatans generalised for any languages/wikis. πr² (t • c) 14:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Strange link from Dutch Wikipedia 'Geoniem' to English Wikipedia 'Geonym'

How come the Dutch Wikipedia article for Geoniem provides a link to an English Wikipedia article for Geonym when there is no such article in the English Wikipedia? Nor is there an article for Geonym in either the Oxford English Dictionary or Merriam-Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary.

Please also note that the German cognate Geonym means ‘a pseudonym consisting of a geographic name or allusion (e.g. Stendhal after the place name Stendal)’ and is by no means a synonym of Dutch Geoniem which refers to any ‘word that is derived from a geographic name.’ LiliCharlie (talk) 14:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I removed en-wiki link per Wikidata:Notability/Exclusion criteria. --Stryn (talk) 14:58, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

En suédois, s'il vous plait.

In the Watchlist on Wikipedia I can now see the text: "Language link added/removed: etc" in edits made here on this project. The Swedish translation has a minor flaw: "Språklänken lades till/togs bort: etc". I would prefer "Språklänk lades till/togs bort: etc". Where can this be changed? -- Lavallen (block) 17:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• The most straightforward is probably to ask the bot owner.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I fixed those on translatewiki.net: [6], [7], [8]. --Stryn (talk) 17:44, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Tack, Stryn! In this case it was MediaWiki-designed editcomments who change depending on the local settings, not user-created editcomments. I see userdesigned edit-comments too, but they do not change with the settings. -- Lavallen (block) 18:01, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Bots rule

Really clever. A bot made the entry Q1530197. This entry is wrong, because the corresponding articles already exist here. I wanted to correct it, but I am told by the software, that I can't do it, because an entry for "Glee/Diskografie" already exists. Nothing more, nothing less. There is no hint what I can do, no help how to remove the wrong entry or merge the entries, nothing whatsoever. Doubtless a Wikidata insider will know immediately what to do. I don't. Others won't either. If you don't want to keep Wikidata to experts and bots, you should do something about it. I can't really believe, that Wikidata was implemented in en: and de: with such a serious bug. Don't count on my help, I have better things to do than "learn" Wikidata. Bye -- HvW (talk) 11:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It needed to be removed from Q1530197 before it could be placed into Q2572642. I have now moved the de language link to the correct place and requested the deletion of the incorrect item. It is not a bug. Wikidata does not allow for a language link to be present in 2 different items. In order for it to be added to the correct one, it has to be removed from the incorrect one. As that item is now empty, it can be deleted. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 11:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

PS information is available on how to merge, and other things, at the FAQ. See question 22. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 11:32, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

And why does it not say so in the entry mask? Is just tells me: No, you can't do it. Do you really think that this little bit of info at "question 22" hidden on some subpage (in the English FAQs only!) is sufficient? Anyway, merging ist a basic function that should be possible with two or three clicks. Before it is implemented on all the big Wikpedias. -- HvW (talk) 13:18, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

If you are able to translate the FAQ into any other languages, please do. I am (unfortunately) monolingual and cannot translate. The lack of a link to the FAQ or instructions on how to merge in the edit mask is indeed a problem. Thanks for bringing it up. Hopefully people that can make that improvement see this discussion and implement it. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 13:30, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

@HvW, as you know, this is a wiki. It is not, nor will it ever be, "complete" or "perfect". If you see anything that can be improved, you are welcome to do so if you know how, if not, you are free to suggest it here. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:31, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

New Interwiki python bot

I developed a python bot (User:Reza1615/BOT) you can use it for wikidata and your locale wikis (after achieving bot flag).It adds or updates items also has possibility to removing old_interwikis from pages in locale wiki. it is simple code because I'm not computer engineer :)

I had many edits by this code (Special:Contributions/Rezabot and fa:Special:Contributions/Rezabot) I hope it helps you.▬ Reza1615 / T 14:04, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I might have to look into it. I often maintain interwiki links on Commons. Commons is one of those weird sites that supports interwiki links from Commons to Wikipedia, but Wikipedias do not support links to Commons. Now that all Wikipedias support Wikidata based interwikis, Commons seem the be the only site that uses old style interwikis to wikipedias. --Jarekt (talk) 21:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation page items

I've seen there are also items for disambiguation pages. My question is, on what base do we create these items, i. e., how can we tell which pages deal with the same item? For example we have Q241775, which is a compilation of disambiguation pages with titles meaning "beast" ("Bête", "Bestia") etc., except for de:Beast, a disambiguation page for things being called "Beast", not "Bestie", which would be the German equivalent.

I think there won't be a proper system if we link such pseudo-equivalent disambiguation pages like "beast"—"Bestia" etc. In my opinion, the only reasonable solution would be to link disambiguation pages having exactly the same title (apart from the "(disambiguation)" part, of course). --Kronf (talk) 07:45, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

IMO all articles on a one item have to be the same title. E.g. English disambiguation site "Yellow" should be Yellow in other wikis too, not translated name. Of course here may be some exceptions. As you wrote, "beast"—"Bestia" is not linked correctly. --Stryn (talk) 07:55, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Why? :-O Thus you expect something from disambiguation pages that we don't expect from all other articles. This excludes majority of disambiguation pages from linking and forces to keep a dual system as disambig. pages must have old-style interwikis. What is the reason? Bináris (talk) 08:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what is the reason to link Beast and Bestia/Bèstia or Bête to the same item, because they don't contain the same things. Some wikis could contains both, "bestia" and "beast". --Stryn (talk) 08:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I reflected to yellow. How many languages have this word without translation? Bináris (talk) 08:40, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

12: Q298597. E.g. this link was wrong so I moved it to this item: Q1497670. --Stryn (talk) 08:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

(Edit confl.) Why "old-style"? I don't oppose Wikidata entries being created for disambiguation pages. But of course they will be different from other items, as disambig. pages are different from articles. They don't deal with an item/concept, but a name. So the only property they share among language versions can be there exact name.

Let me give another example: Q1698752 in its current state is complete nonsense. Have a look at de:Ahlen (Begriffsklärung), featuring places and persons called "Ahlen". It is linked to en:Alain, which may list some of the same places the German page does, but of course the featured persons are completely different ones. --Kronf (talk) 08:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

Logically, you are right: what you say is clear according to data view. On the other side, currently disambiguation pages are crosslinked wikiwide, and if we don't incorporate them into Wikidata, a dual system will remain with interwiki links in these pages, and we have to maintain both classical and Wikidata-aware interwiki bots for a long time. How could we dissolve this problem? Bináris (talk) 08:48, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I still don't see what you mean by not incorporating them, that's not what I think of. There will be no proper, reasonable interwiki system between them as long as we link "yellow (disambig.)" to "gelb (Begriffskl.)", no matter if we do this via Wikidata or direct interwiki links. --Kronf (talk) 09:01, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I absolutely agree this interwikis between translations should be removed. The question is do we create an Item for each disambiguated word like gelb or Bestie to prevent mislinkings although they are unlikely to have ever disambiguations in other languages?--Saehrimnir (talk) 09:47, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

We had a discussion about this in the german forum a few weeks ago [9]. The salient points were: (I am totally biased btw)

• translations should not be allowed
• transcriptions (creating the same pronunciation with a different script) should be allowed
• how to handle differences in single letters (e.g. "c" for "k") and lower case vs. upper case was not decided
• we need global rules

--Sixsi6ma (talk) 11:35, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

+1. This sounds reasonable. --Kolja21 (talk) 18:20, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll read that. --Kronf (talk) 11:39, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree those things. About lower case vs. upper case, I think that we can't do any rules for it. One example is ANN and Ann. En-wiki has both versions, so we need two different items. --Stryn (talk) 11:42, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

The question in the Ann <-> ANN case is, would we seperate them also if every language had only one of those disamb.pages?

• If not, what happens when one language gets the additional page? Would we seperate the old item then? And who is going to do that, especially if it had much more interwikilinks.
• If yes, would we also create an item for ann, aNn,... right after such a page gets created (in this case not so likely)?

--Sixsi6ma (talk) 13:43, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

I completely agree with Kronfː ambiguity is about names, I mean letters in a row, no matter what the meaning is. Now that wData is running, we do need international rules. Just another exampleː if you have "Red (disambiguation)", in this disamb page you will list words maybe related with the color, but also items with NO relation with the color (sayː the meaning). For instance, "Red (famous dog)", "Red (enterprise)", ... Againː in Italian mare means sea. Will you interlink "itːMare (disambigua)" with "enːSea (disambiguation)"?? It would be an absurd choice. And what to do with "enːMare (disambiguation)"? Will you interlink with "itːVacca (disambigua)"??? (the english word mare means vacca in Italian). That's why we should run to the way illustrated by Kronf. Any other sub-issue is just a sub-issue compared to this main issue. --Pequod76 (talk) 13:42, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

The problem with only allowing pages with the same spelling is that we will end up with a lot of orphan pages with no (or few) sitelinks. Having said that I agree that only allowing the transliterations and banning translations is the most logical and rational system for arranging these sitelinks. Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

For the Ann <-> ANN case, you can read fr:Wikipédia:Sondage/Fusion des pages d'homonymies. After this poll, I (with fr:Projet:Fusion des pages d'homonymie) had merge on wp:fr hundred (may be less) pages. --Nouill (talk) 19:29, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Dear Filceolaire, I can understand your remarks. I've voted but maybe it's early for voting. Maybe what we need is to comment a list of cases and grab some guidelines out of it. In my opinion, a single different letter is a remarkable difference. --Pequod76 (talk) 13:19, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

I think we should add a guideline which says "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible". I also want to inform you that my bot is adding descriptions to items about disambiguationpages and therefore check every link if it is a disambiguationpages and add conflicts where not all pages are disambiguationpages on User:Sk!dbot/disambiguation page conflict. There are many links where in one language the page is about only a name and in another it is "real" disambiguation with the name and other links. This is also a problem we should discuss. --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

I still do not know what to do with disambig pages which are split by spelling in some wikipedias (en:Ann vs en:ANN, en:Arc vs en:ARC) but not split in others (fr:ANN, es:Arc). Are we going to impose the same split decisions in all wikipedias? I think not. Are there going to be three different wikidata items: (1) pages about "ARC" as all-uppercase initialism, (2) pages about "Arc" as word (not necessarily the English one, there are two Arc rivers in France), and (3) pages that contain both? --Jmk (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

No there should be only two items not three ARC Q296474 and Arc Q398045 with es:Arc being under the latter and de:ARC under the former (although there is a rule in place in Germany which would make the title Arc because it exist as both Word and Acronym). The links from es:Arc to the Languages in Q296474 which are not in Q398045 are then done via local interwikilinks which is not elegant but much less ambiguous than it was before. The Question that remains is do we keep it one item if only one Spelling exists in any Language meaning that someone has to shuffle up to number of wikipedias/2 around once it exists in the two variants within one language? Do we set a certain Threshold say 50 were it is separated automatically per rule? --Saehrimnir (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Two items, you say. What then is the exact distinction? Is it based on the spelling of the page title (uppercase titles to Q296474, lowercase titles to Q398045)? Or is it based on the contents? Where do we link a disambig page whose contents include both acronyms and words, such as place names and surnames? es:Arc contains both, so does de:ARC. By contents they are clearly about the same thing ("various things spelt Arc or ARC"), yet they are not linked together if title case is the thing that matters. --Jmk (talk) 09:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

We have two new properties "surname" (Property:P153) and "given name" (Property:P152), that allow a lot of funny combinations. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:38, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Survey for generating rules regarding items with disambiguation pages

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Approved ones

1. Special characters can be added/removed (e.g. Circumflex, Grave,...)
2. Transcriptions (creating the same pronunciation with a different script)

Rejected ones

1. Different letters with the same pronunciation (e.g. "c" for "k")
2. Translations

No consensus

1. There should not be any rules (60% of support)

— ΛΧΣ²¹ 22:29, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

---

Items with disambiguation pages should only contain links with the exact same title as the label of the item (the phrase "disambiguation page" or an equivalent is allowed).

Which of the following exceptions should be allowed as well? (as long as a page with the exact same titel does not exist):

1. Different letters with the same pronunciation (e.g. "c" for "k")

 Oppose --Sixsi6ma (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --Saehrimnir (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --Pequod76 (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose except disambiguation pages about people name. --Stryn (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:10, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support as long as there are not two pages in one language see my proposed guideline above: "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible" --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose, per above mainly. IMO they should be on separate articles, as they are often different. Per case basis I suppose. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:16, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose per above. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

2. Special characters can be added/removed (e.g. Circumflex, Grave,...)

 Support --Sixsi6ma (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --Saehrimnir (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --Pequod76 (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --Stryn (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support as long as there are not two pages in one language see my proposed guideline above: "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible" --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

 SupportMojirian (talk) 13:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:17, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:40, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

3. Transcriptions (creating the same pronunciation with a different script)

 Oppose --Sixsi6ma (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --Saehrimnir (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support --Pequod76 (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support, if I understand what this means --Stryn (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support as long as there are not two pages in one language see my proposed guideline above: "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible" --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support (but I'm not sure if I understand) --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Assuming this would mean, e.g., that en:Shalom (disambiguation) can be linked to he:שלום (פירושונים), then yes,  Support. Obviously there will be some differences between the item in the native language and the transcribed item, but, in the spirit of Stryn's line of reasoning, I don't think they're substantive enough to warrant separate items. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:31, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

4. Translations

 Oppose --Sixsi6ma (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --Saehrimnir (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --Pequod76 (talk) 13:07, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose, I hate them. --Stryn (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support as long as there are not two pages in one language see my proposed guideline above: "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible" --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose, because some translations have different articles than the local language version or a different purpose. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:18, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose It'd be nice if we could have some sort of "see also" field on items for cases like this, but these create a LOT of interwiki conflicts, and it seems to me the best solution is to create new items for new names. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:39, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose — ΛΧΣ²¹ 19:41, 28 February 2013 (UTC)

5. There should not be any rules

 Oppose --Sixsi6ma (talk) 16:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support There shouldn't be rules but there should be guidelines. This is too complicated an issue to have hard rules to be applied everywhere. Filceolaire (talk) 17:27, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --Saehrimnir (talk) 03:31, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose, if not rules, then at least guidelines. --Stryn (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support. Usually I hate when the people say “rules are crap, ignore them”. But now it is not yet the time to create a set of strict rules. There should be only best practices for now. A year passed, most mistaken links were cleansed, and then we’ll establish rules for dab pages. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 17:10, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support see my proposed guideline above: "Keep the count of different items as high as necessary, as low as possible" --Sk!d (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support - there should be rough guidelines only. Disambiguation pages on the Wikipedias started linking to each other the way they did for valid reasons. Who are we to reinvent that? There's no harm in it; in cases where there is a problem, move the sitelinks. A random example of why hard rules will create problems: I just visited the Japanese disambiguation page for the word "Love" in English, and it is highly relevant to English disambiguation, as many of the entries use the English character set, even if the page title doesn't. Espeso (talk) 04:59, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:59, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support. There should be guidelines, not rules. Seven years of running an iw bot tells me so. - Soulkeeper (talk) 15:25, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 Support - because common sense should always be the main determinant with anything on Wikidata. Ajraddatz (Talk) 19:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Extra Question

Should Disambiguation Items have any properties

•  Oppose --Saehrimnir (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2013 (UTC) Per definition they can not have any properties, because the do not correspond to a single thing. If we make such a rule we could have a bot which looks through them periodically and deletes the properties.
•  Neutral - some disambiguations have only geographical localities (Q407718), some only names (Q729388), but in another language it might be different JAn Dudík (talk) 08:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose --Stryn (talk) 08:55, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Neutral they should only have Property:P107 (Q4167410). --Sixsi6ma (talk) 11:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Most disambiguation should not have properties, but some need them, because they are special disambiguation pages about ships or last names or churches or towns with the same name. And it helps to see if all the interwiki links are about the same. Carsrac (talk) 20:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Inclusion of non-article pages

In Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inclusion of non-article pages they didn't discuss about these namespaces and now we have unclear situation (i.e. here)

• Talk pages (Article_talk ,user_talk ,wikipedia_talk,file_talk,Mediawiki_talk,template_talk,help_talk,category_talk, portal_talk and other namespaces' talk)
• Spicial
• mediawiki
• file
• in some wikis list or wikiproject or other namespace are exits but they are not active for most of languages (except book namespace)

in my opinion we shouldn't import these namespaces to wikidata.

•  Support▬ Reza1615 / T 15:05, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
• Unneeded discussion because these pages do not contain any relevant information for Wikidata (Interwikilinks etc.). Regards, Vogone talk 15:10, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Spicial:Recentchanges has interwiki now we should disable User_talk:Yair_rand/WikidataInfo.js on these pages and User:Yair_rand asked to have a discussion about it (here) also if we have complete rules it will helpful for future and bot's importing for none-Interwiki pages will be clear▬ Reza1615 / T 15:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Oppose for file (useless) and talk pages (all), but support for MediaWiki pages. Also support for Special namespace only if the software can use interwiki from wikidata. --β₁₆ - (talk) 16:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually file is not useless. Certain file pages have interwikis because they are used on multiple projects due to fair use constraints. Legoktm (talk) 10:05, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links from Talk pages, Special pages, mediawiki pages and file pages should IMO not be included on Wikidata. However, I do think that some other namespaces, that exsist only on individual wikipedias, like the Anexo namespace on es.wikipedia should be included.--Snaevar (talk) 20:50, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support. --Stryn (talk) 13:11, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

No include of talk pages, special pages and mediawiki which have no standard interwiki today. Yes to include namespaces 102, 104 etc (Anexo, list, WIkiProject etc.), which should have standard interwiki today. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:06, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Please leave comment on the Inclusion of non-article pages 2 ▬ Reza1615 / T 08:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Something wrong with searching items containing namespace eq. to someProjectName?

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 44968

So I go to Special:ItemByTitle, type site:'enwiki' or 'nlwiki', page:'Wikipedia:Wikidata' and get no result. If I select site: 'skwiki', page:'Wikipédia:Wikiúdaje' it finds right item. --AS (talk) 01:23, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes this is a known bug where the "wikipedia" namespace conflicts with the "wikipedia" interwiki prefix. Legoktm (talk) 02:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

This bug have alyeady notified in Bugzilla bugzilla:44536. But you can use a gadget that yes works with "Wikipedia", go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets → SitelinkCheck: --Vivaelcelta (talk) 07:54, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

If you find something right that is still left in the search engine, please let me know so we can break it! =) Jeblad (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

This bug is still present. — Jeblad 10:50, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Phase 1 live on all remaining Wikipedias and bugfixes/new feature here

Heya :)

We've just finished the deployment of phase 1 on all 282 remaining Wikipedia. Wohooooo! Blog post for that is here.

We have also deployed new code here including a lot of bugfixes, localization updates and a new data type: string. It is supposed to mainly be used for things like ISBN and similar identifiers. Some of the other bugfixes/changes you might care about:

• improved diff view
• fixed issue with ZWNJ (bugzilla:45111)
• improved the item view to better handle deleted properties

Please let me know if there are any questions or problems. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:49, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Great! One question about the new data type: If we use "String" for the ISBN or GND (Property:P227) should the linking come later (with a new data type) or should the linking be left to the infoboxes? --Kolja21 (talk) 02:23, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

For those two linking in the infobox is probably the way to go. There will be a URI type later too though for other things. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I have a question too. At meta:Wikidata/Notes/Inclusion_syntax there is a lot of text about qualifiers. Is it possible to add the qualifier after creating a property and adding the value? --Goldzahn (talk) 03:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Once the code is all in place this should be no problem. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

thanks. --Goldzahn (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Another question about the string data type: will it allow some soft or hard input validation? Many ids have a predefined format to which all or most of them conform. --  Docu  at 06:24, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

This isn't planned in the software itself at the moment. Bots and Wikidata:Database reports are the way to go for that. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, done: Wikidata_talk:Database_reports#Validation_of_string_values. --  Docu  at 20:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Auto-edit summaries seems to have disappeared since the update. --  Docu  at 06:41, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Oo Will look into it. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I've filed this as bugzilla:45840. We'll look into it asap. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:47, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45840

Thanks. --  Docu  at 20:35, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks to everyone who worked to bring this over to all wikipedias. The only issue we've so far encountered at elwiki is that the Wikidata interwikis are slow to appear on the wikipedia after the link has been added here on Wikidata. An example is Ικσκίλε another el:Τία Χελεμπάουτ and another el:Σφηκιάρης. Other than that, users seem to be adopting fine, and some have started adding the links for their new articles here on Wikidata. We'll be striving in the following weeks to set up basic help infrastructure, translate interface, etc - Badseed (talk) 22:37, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Great to hear! Thanks for the update. About links being slow to appear: When you purge the page they should show up immediately. It's planned to do this automatically when we add the way to add links directly from the Wikipedias without having to come here. I hope this is ready soon. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:43, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Removing language links

Hi all! I haven't followed every bit of the project here, so the question is probably redundant. What is the best procedure for removing the current language links? It is of course possible to do it automatically by using a bot, but does this guarantee that nothing will be disrupted? -- Edinwiki (talk) 10:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you now talking about removing links from Wikipedia articles? It is done by bot, which also checks that the links are ok. It is best to wait for the bot and then clean up if not all links have been removed.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

namespace in different wikis

Please help to separating these namespaces to related subsections to have list of namespaces which are unique. this list will be useful for this.

I separated some of them by Google translation but some languages are not there!▬ Reza1615 / T 10:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

RFC - Opt out of Global sysops

A request for comment regarding the opting out of global sysops has been opened. I invite all the community to participate in this sensitive matter. The RFC page is: Wikidata:Requests for comment/Opting out of Global sysops. Thanks. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 14:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Can I create items for categories

 Resolved I see some categories left in wikipedias without an entry in Wikidata, and still connected to that old interwikilinks on their respective pages.(e.g., w:Category:Indian_film_actors. Can I create items for them. Thanks···Vanischenu「mc|Talk」

Yes, feel free to add categories also. --Stryn (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

See also Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inclusion of non-article pages and Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inclusion of non-article pages 2. Helder 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Really helpful answers···Vanischenu「mc|Talk」 18:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Items with a single entry in it

 Resolved Can we create items for articles present only in a single language at present (like w:Russell T. Osguthorpe) Thank you···Vanischenu「mc|Talk」 17:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, every articles. No matter if there is not any interwiki links. --Stryn (talk) 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again :) ···Vanischenu「mc|Talk」 18:02, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Manually adding sources

I'd be happy to start sourcing things to wikipedias when I add claims. For example I just added a claim to Q75596 that I found in the French wiki article. Yet I don't seem to be able to add that as a source in the pull down window? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd also really like to know how this works. Amphicoelias (talk) 00:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Can these thingies be made into links?

Hi! As a brand spanking new Wikidata user, it would be intuitive, if these thingies were links:

Palosirkka (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I see your point to linking to Help:Label, Help:Description and Help:Aliases. For new users it's not maybe so easy to find help pages. --Stryn (talk) 20:52, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, thanks, that's what I'm looking for. Palosirkka (talk) 21:07, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Help

Hi. I´m from Spanish Wikipedia, so I´m new in this (as most of us). I wanted to add no:Offentlig forsvarer to Q6528049, wich means the same; but it says that no:Forsvarer is already used in Q512345. Offentlig forsvarer means public defender and forsvarer means defender. Anyway, the point is that they are two different items but the system says that Forsvarer is already linked, so that I´m not able to link Offentlig forsvarer (¿?). How I can fix this? Thanks Albertojuanse (talk) 17:20, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

You can't add redirect pages to Wikidata. --Stryn (talk) 17:35, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Does it mean that a reader won't have ever access to no:Wiki translation anymore? Albertojuanse (talk) 17:57, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I mean, even this article is redirected, it has got its own meaning. Probably it is redirected because anyone has make a specific article yet. Albertojuanse (talk) 20:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Its a basic premise; one item on Wikidata is associated with one set of Wikipedia articles that describes one real world entity. If one or more Wikipedias mungs together several entities in one article and we link to it then it is this "mungs togeter" -thingy we describe, and not the individual tings in the heap. That means we link to disambiguation pages, but we do not link from individual items in Wikipedia to those pages. Said very simply, we link to articles on Wikipedia, not to sections and not to redirects. It seems like it could be possible to link to specially marked redirects, that is redirect that has a special meaning, but I think it is better to write a real article. — Jeblad 20:46, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Issues adding a translation in Bulgarian to an article

Hi everyone,

I just translated an article about CMOS Image Sensors in Bulgarian and I would like to put a language link to the English version of the article. However whenever I try to do this I am encountering an error: "The specified article could not be found on the corresponding site.". Clicking on details provides "The external client site did not provide page information." However I can verify that the page exists, and I can open it here.

My assumptions are that there is some sort of character encoding conflict. Can anyone provide me with some help on coping with this issue. Thanks.

Regards, Deyan Levski  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Didolevski (talk • contribs).

Bulgarian article is already here: Q210745. --Stryn (talk) 18:42, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Stryn (talk) !  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Didolevski (talk • contribs).

A small peek on whats going on during these kinds of errors. When you try to add a sitelink it is generated a request from Wikidata and to the actual version of Wikipedia. Sometimes things fail during normalization so the request fails to find the article with the correct title. That can happen because we do something wrong in our code, or something goes wrong in the general Mediawiki code, or because something is overloaded. Wikidata can even be throttled because it is overly aggressive in its request to the Wikipedia site. When any of those things happen we end up with a "The external client site did not provide page information." Perhaps we should rethink the lookup so we avoid this error. — Jeblad 20:55, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, that's weird. I can see the language link Q210745, however when I open the real page here, the link to the Bulgarian version does not appear. Does anyone have an idea what could it be?

I have purged the page and now it does show up. If you see this happening still in say 5 days please let me know. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Autopatrollers as patrollers?

Autopatrollers have the ability to patrol edits. Is it supposed to be like that? --Njardarlogar (talk) 11:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I would think so. It would be impossible (it already is) for just admins to be patrolling edits. Legoktm (talk) 11:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

There was an early discussion (like the second or the third day of the project) which came to that conclusion.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:42, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Link FA template not working properly on all wikis post-interwiki link removal

Not sure if here or m: is the right place to post this, but anyway, if you compare the current (post-interwiki link-removal) versions of e.g. es:Thiruvananthapuram and hif:Thiruvananthapuram, you should be able to see (in edit mode, anyway), that only in the former, and not in the latter, article, does the Link FA template work correctly, now that the article's language links are being provided by Wikidata. Do you have any advice as to what the issue may be here? It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 12:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

If it is in edit mode then this sounds like bugzilla:45838. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:25, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

No, no, that's not what I mean. I'm saying that the es: article (in Read mode) correctly displays the stars induced by Link FA, whereas the hif: article doesn't, despite the code for them being present – as can be seen by hitting Edit in the hif: article. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 13:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, the "Link FA" template does need code in the MediaWiki:Common.js and there is none in hif:MediaWiki:Common.js.--Snaevar (talk) 13:50, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Use of Glossary Entries

What is the use of entries like Translations:Wikidata:Glossary/15/en, JSON, which is apparently not linked to from anywhere ? Abbreviations and explanations are already provided by Wikipedia and translations are provided by the items here (see Q2063) and by Wiktionary. Wikidata:Glossary did not help with this question. -- Juergen 91.52.169.199 14:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Unable to add a reference

Hello, I'm trying to add "fr, lucidité" to Q1743823, but I get the error :

Edit not allowed: Le lien du site frwiki:Lucidité est déjà utilisé par l'objet Q3265229.

And that's right, but it seems like a doublet. How do you merge "articles"? It would improve UX if the error message would provide information/link to an help page which explains what to do in such a case. -Psychoslave (talk) 14:06, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Did it for you: First removed it from Q3265229, then added it to Q1743823, and at last, asked Q3265229 to be deleted. -- Juergen 91.52.169.199 14:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Limiting importing subpages to wikidata

Most of subpages are useless for wikidata and they will not have any interwiki so we should exclude none-interwiki subpages:

• main namespace (article): some times users makes test pages for articles in the articles subpage in the main namespace.these subpages shouldn't have item in wikidata.
• wikipedia and help namespaces: subpages like Archive pages or request pages or discussions will not have interwiki.in my opinion for wikipedia and help namespace we should import subpages that they have at least one interwiki.
• tempate namespace: document pages (template subpages which are documentation) are not independent pages and if that template has interwiki the document will use template's interwiki. like en:Template:Coord/doc it shouldn't have item in wikidata but the other subpages can have item in wikidata
• other namespaces which are allowed to have item if their subpages have interwiki that subpages can have item in wikidata otherwise they should remove from wikidata
•  Support▬ Reza1615 / T 14:57, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

As far as I know there is no subpages in the mainspace unless a project has requested its configuration. I think we could go with a general "Subpages are not independent pages and as a general rule only the top page should have sitelinks." And pleas, more discussion and consensus building and less voting! ;) — Jeblad 15:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

we can not say general rul please look on en:Template:Coord/dms2dec it has interwiki! ▬ Reza1615 / T 15:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Link to next edit not working in Q1743823

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45821
Resolved fixed

The link to the diff of my last edit http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1743823&diff=next&oldid=3814381, provided as Newer edit from the previous diff http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1743823&diff=3814381&oldid=2426409, shows: The database did not find the text of a page that it should have found, named "Q1743823" (revision#: 3814381) ... you may have found a bug in the software ... The revision numbers seem to be correct according to the Revision history of "Lucidity" (Q1743823).
Is that really a bug in the software ? -- Juergen 91.52.169.199 15:06, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes it is a bug. — Jeblad 15:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Fixed by Aude and merged by Jeblad. Thanks guys! — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)}

Q5150429

This item was added by a bot on 23 February. No clue to it appears on the en:wiki page; I wasn't able to find it here by searching for the title; and now that I've added a Latin interwiki, no sign of it appears on the Latin page either. Something wrong? Andrew Dalby (talk) 18:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You can check that everything is OK by editing the page and then previewing it. It often takes a while before the IW appears locally. --Njardarlogar (talk) 18:14, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You mean that you can't see iw-links on en-wiki article or on la-wiki article? ?action=purge helped. --Stryn (talk) 18:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly, I couldn't see any links on either article. I can now. I hadn't encountered a delay of this kind before, but no remaining problem. Thanks. Andrew Dalby (talk) 18:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Moscow in Tartar Wikipedia

I've found item Q3887755 which has a solitary Tartar link to an article which appears to be about Moscow. However, in the Moscow item at Q649 there is already a Tartar language link which also seems to be about Moscow (and more detailed). Are these two articles on the same topic in Tartar Wikipedia that need merging/redirecting or is there a subtle difference? Del_♉sion23 (talk) 18:21, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

As you can see here there was already a redirect, but in the other direction. Thus, I redirected Mäskäw to Мәскәү now. Regards, Vogone talk 18:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Great stuff, thanks very much for the help Del_♉sion23 (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue pertaining to redirects

• Please read this note before commenting in this section. I have moved this entire conversation to Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects due to this discussion getting close to being archived, and I want this question answered/resolved. Steel1943 (talk) 01:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

During the edits I have been doing on Wikidata, I realized that there is an issue that needs to be resolved. I'll use one of my edits as an example to show my point:

I was attempting to add to Q2049076, the English version on this entry being en:2011 Pan American Games. I was trying to add the following entries to this Wikidata entry: bcl:2011 Pan Amerikanong Karawat and et:2011 Pan-Ameerika mängud. However, these two entries being added run across a conflict with Wikidata entry Q230186, the English version on this entry being en:Pan American Games. Upon investigating the Bikol Central (bcn) and eesti (et) articles I was trying to add to the same Wikidata entry as en:2011 Pan American Games, I found that these two pages are redirects to their corresponding articles on the Wikidata entry with en:Pan American Games listed, preventing from being added to Wikidata.

The problem that I am running across involves this situation where Wikipedia "1" has two articles, "Apple" and "Orange", and Wikipedia "2" has an article, "Apple", but "Orange" as a redirect with its target being "Apple" or "Pear" (a redirect towards "Apple" as a section redirect being the most common). In a case like this, "Orange" for "Wikpedia 2" would not be able to be put on the same entry in Wikidata as the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 1" (or entered at all, for that matter) since it is a redirect to another target ("Apple" or "Pear"). This problem occurs most often in this situation when "Wikipedia 1" has a complete article for the topic "Orange", but "Wikipedia 2" has an article ("Apple" or "Pear") with "Orange" as a section redirect towards the article, preventing the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 2" from being added to Wikidata at all if its target ("Apple" or "Pear") is listed on a Wikidata entry. It seems like there needs to be some sort of way to allow certain exceptions for redirects to be listed in Wikidata, especially in cases like this. Steel1943 (talk) 02:27, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

To redirect to a section inside an other article that is about something else will break the basic premise for Wikidata, the articles main topic will not be about the same. The number of cases where this rather minor situation occur is so small that it is an error in most cases. Last summer Denny did an analysis to check if this was a big problem, and it doesn't seems to be overwhelming. His results is available in Ratio of language links to full text in Wikipedias [10]. I've inspecting some of them and so far I have not found any serious problems, but I tend to agree that in some cases it would solve some of the problems if we could link to a specially marked redirect. The best example is the Bonnie and Clyde problem, many Wikipedias have an article of the pair but not so many have biographies about each of the persons. Jeblad (talk) 03:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

You seem to be missing my point. I'm not stating that there should be section redirects hardcoded into Wikidata. I'm referring to cases such as my example above, where if one were to look up "Orange" on "Wikipedia 2", it would redirect the user to "Apple#Orange", since the text in the redirect is "#REDIRECT[[Apple#Orange]]". In no way am I saying that there should be hardcoded section redirects in Wikidata. I'm saying that "Orange" in "Wikipedia 2" should be allowed to be listed on the same Wikidata list as the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 1", whether the "Orange" in "Wikipedia 2" is a redirect to "Apple" (#REDIRECT[[Apple]]) or "Apple#Orange" (#REDIRECT[[Apple#Orange]]). I'm stating that in this case, "Orange" from "Wikipedia 2" should be allowed to be added to Wikidata, not "Apple#Orange". In fact, for the sake of my point, please disregard the fact that I ever mentioned "sections" in this discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 03:57, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I strongly support Steel1943. As long that an article and a redirect towards this article have not exactly the same topic -and that happens very often- it would be a very good thing to allow the redirect to be used to be listed in Wikidata. If you don't like this feature, you would be free not to use it ; but I see no serious reason to prevent users who wish to interlink redirects to do that. To dig a bit more in the interesting example given by Jeblad, open w:de:Clyde Barrow, which is a redirect : it contains three interwiki links, linking it to three articles such as w:pt:Clyde Barrow which are themselves added to Q3320282. The use of Wikidata on the four wikis concerned by these redirects would destroy this piece of information. What is the positive side of this destruction ? I can't see any. Touriste (talk) 05:44, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the "positiv" side of this "feature" is to prevent people to link to redirects in the case were they meant the real article thus unnecessarily increasing the serverload every time that interwikilink is called. But this could be solved easyly by prompting the user " foo is a redirect to bar do you really wan to attach foo to this item". But there might be also some other pandora boxes opened by allowing redirects like loops and redicets changed to totaly different subjects. @Jeblad i don't know if it is really that seldom. I am working right now on Wikidata:Wiki_import_task_force/dewiki and most of them are such cases. --Saehrimnir (talk) 16:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I would also support this (as I have before), and I've stated as such before. Saehrimnir's idea of "do you really want to do this?" seems like a good way to make sure it's not "abused" in some fashion. It would really help clean up lists of characters articles topics that commonly have redirects from topics which are covered on other wikis but not on the wikis with the lists. --Izno (talk) 16:51, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I doubt the single page constraint will be removed as it is a prerequisite to make the implicit lookup of items to work. Jeblad (talk) 17:08, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

And that's precisely how this helps. I can add en:Draenor (or en:Outland (Warcraft)) to Q850277. It helps navigation for other wikis, if not the wiki which has the redirect article. --Izno (talk) 17:40, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Support. Allowing sitelinks to redirect pages (even if they are redirects to sections) would get around the problem we have at the moment where a Wikipedia page has sections on different entities which are notable enough to be added to this page but not notable enough to each have their own pages. As time passes some of these entities may get promoted . Some related entities may get demoted, with a section added on this page and their own page converted to a redirect. Meanwhile a similar process happens on other languages so these pages on different languages are never synchronised. This happens a lot with minor characters in works of fiction though I have come across it on a little scottish island with two castles which has two pages on de:wp but where en:wp makes them share a page.

Even if no language wp gives these entities separate pages it is still worth having separate pages on wikidata for each entity, all linked via redirects to the shared wp page because that lets us create statements on wikidata about each of the entities. If the only page on wikidata links to "minor characters in foo" then the wikidata page is about the wikipedia page, not about the characters, and there are not very many statements we can make about that page.

The same will happen if we have a table comparing software features (for instance - the same applies to all tables, family trees, data visualisations). Stage 3 of wikidata is about creating these tables from data on wikidata but this will only work if each entity has it's own set of statements on wikidata and that will only happen if the criteria for wikidata pages are loosened a bit. This is already happening a bit. The criteria now permit wikidata pages to be created for any geographical administrative region and for any species, even if they don't yet have wikipedia pages.

I am going to start a new section with a proposal for how the criteria should be changed to allow a limited number of redirects. Filceolaire (talk) 01:09, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• Please read this note before commenting in this section. I have moved this entire conversation to Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects due to this discussion getting close to being archived, and I want this question answered/resolved. Steel1943 (talk) 01:12, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Allow sitelinks to redirects where the item already has it's own wikidata page

Where an item has it's own page on some wikipedias and on wikidata but is on a page shared with other entities in other wikipedias, with a redirect from a page named for the entity, then the wikidata page can have a sitelink to the redirect page.

This situation often occurs on pages listing "Minor characters in Foo" where the minor characters in some TV show, book or movie (i.e. not notable enough to have their own page) share a page while major characters have their own page. It can happen that different language WPs disagree on which characters are major and which are minor. This can also change over time as the notability requirements are tweaked. This can mean some characters on the shared "Minor characters in Foo" page have their own wikidata page and others don't. Allowing links to redirect pages on these wikidata pages as well as the links to "Minor characters in Foo" shared pages from their wikidata page will give us a lot of useful links. Filceolaire (talk) 08:20, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

It would also help with Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2013/03#Property_Occupation: most of the 500+ authorised occupations in the it.wiki person data template are actually redirects, and Wikidata lacks most of them. We'd create the items nonetheless with the new notability criteria, but it would be easier if they existed. --Nemo 08:39, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

But none of these links would work in the reverse direction. It is not clear that this would actually be useful. —Naddy (talk) 12:07, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Technically, they could work in reverse. In this example, the redirect will be named "Foo." If the user were to look up "Foo", which then will direct the editor to the article "Bar", in "Bar", directly under the article's title, there will be in small text the phrase "Redirected from Foo". The editor could then click on "Foo" to go to the hard copy of the redirect text (and templates) listed in the "Foo" article, and then see the list of interwiki redirects on the side, just like they are now. Steel1943 (talk) 01:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, I started a related discussion on the "Requests for Comment" section at Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects ... since this seems to be a redundant topic that has yet to be resolved. Steel1943 (talk) 01:26, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Are there plans for interactions between wikidata and wiktionaries ?

Hello,

First, congratulation for all the already achieved great work on the wikidata project.

Now I would be interested to know more about future development, especially on interactions with wiktionaries.

I think wikidata could help to improve wiktionaries drastically, by unifying not only interlangs links, but also definitions and translations.

More accurately what I mean is that currently you often have, attached to one wiki article you have usually several definitions for each language where the word is used. But often when I seek a non-french word in the french wiktionary, looking at the native wiktionary will bring more definition than what you can find on the french article.

I saw that on the english wiktionary, the interface added a "quick add" feature, which ask user to fill translation for each meaning. That's great and I wish it would be added in all chapters. And I think that we could add even more "hey, what about translating just this little thing" feature across all dictionary by centralizing entries, so that each "word" is associated with one or several meaning by language. Then all meanings could be redistributed to all wiktionnaries, even when no translation is available for a given meaning in the local chapter. In this cas we could have an information box that would say "this word have an other meaning which wasn't yet translated in ${local_language}, if you one of the language in which a translation is available, please help us to improve the wiktionary".

What do think about such a project, could it work with wikidata? --Psychoslave (talk) 14:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Wiktionary; feel free to add your ideas/comments. FallingGravity (talk) 19:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Bot request: sandbox cleaning

Hi, I operate WillieBot (talk • contribs • logs) on other wikis. I'd like to deploy sandbox cleaning to this wiki with this script. Mono (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Another request for this task was already declined. I don't think that the community has changed her opinion on this. Regards, Vogone talk 01:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Plants/Animals etc labels

The labels for plants, animals are now the common name in English, but I thing it is better, and easier to locate an item if the label is the scientific classification (eg. Binomial name, genus etc) because it is used by far more people and actually these the way that species are classified in taxonomy. --C messier (talk) 14:30, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

According to our guidelines, the common name is used as the label when available, but if the common name is the label the binomial nomenclature name must be used as an alias. By having it as an alias, it's easy to find for all purposes. Sven Manguard Wha? 18:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

This will be the job of the property "taxon name" (see: Wikidata:Property proposal). Wikidata has started already, but the major functions like the datatype StringValue are not working jet. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:00, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The scientific name is now Property:P225 (string), taxon rank is Property:P105 (item), and closest parent taxon is Property:P171 (item). - Soulkeeper (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Delay deployment of Phase 2 till we have sources

Now that deployment of phase 1 is complete we are looking forward to deployment of phase 2. At the moment there is a problem with Phase 2 however - we don't seem to be able to add sources for the data.

I think we should delay the deployment of phase 2 until sources work. I think we should also delay the large scale importation of data from Wikipedias into Wikidata until we can record which wikipedia the data came from. Filceolaire (talk) 07:59, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

• I agree with that.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:05, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Source property Property:P143 is already used for large scale imports, and mentions the wikipedia where it comes from. Or am I missing something? HenkvD (talk) 08:40, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I do not mean Wikipedia here. At least in major Wikipedias, data are sources to reliable sources, and this is what we should have here.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

But the problem is to be sure that wikipedia haves the sources: I am not sure that bot responsibles check that all imported data from wikipedia articles have references. I'm quite sure that at the end we will have wikipedia articles with data using for references wikipedia articles. Snipre (talk) 10:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I came so often across false/incorrect info in infoboxes on the English Wikipedia that I do not really want it to be transferred here without any safeguards.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:52, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Try to explain that to persons doing the importation of data from wikipedias: they assume that wikipedia articles are reliable and as we can do the import now we have to do instead of waiting the reference structure to perform large scale imports: according to them the check of the reliability of data has to performed in wikidata and not before the addition of the statement in wikidata database. Snipre (talk) 11:16, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

As long as the statement specifies which wikipedia the claim came from then the various projects on the various wikipedias have the information they need to decide whether or not the sources are adequate for their requirements. That is acceptable to me. Filceolaire (talk) 16:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Only barely acceptable I think, until a better solution is implemented. It isn't ideal to be forcing readers and editors to make sense of an article written in some other language (which would be necessary if the claim's source is cited in the article, not its infobox, for instance). And what if the source cited changes on the Wikipedia after that statement is added here? --Avenue (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

In order to use data from Wikidata back in Wikipedia (as phase 2 is supposed to be about?), especially in biographies of living people, that data is going to need to have a source that is considered reliable by the Wikipedia into which the data is re-exported. At least in the English Wikipedia, other Wikipedias are not reliable sources. So unless actual published non-Wikipedia sources are included when we import it, this data will be unusable. Better to wait until we can get it right than to make a big mess of unusable data that can only be fixed up and exported piecemeal. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure how phase 2 will be (has been?) implemented on the client (Wikipedia) side, but would it be possible to limit deployment to some of the properties storing bibliographic pointers such as VIAF and GND? I think they are self-evident and normally don't require sources. Like interlanguage links, they should be useful for editors and readers on any Wikipedia, while editors would have to do duplicated work when doing manually. I think it could be a nice midpoint between interlanguage links and infoboxes. --whym (talk) 11:55, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Or we could even mass-import the data from http://viaf.org/viaf/data/ and cite it. --whym (talk) 13:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Inscription

Trying to add Inscription (en) to Q1640824, I get the error message Edit not allowed: Site link [[enwiki:Epigraphy]] already used by item [[Q181260]]. Yes, that's true, but Q181260, Epigraphy, is not the same as Inscription and that item's content does not contain Inscription already, as long as I can see. What did I do wrong ? -- Juergen 91.52.169.199 14:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

en:Inscription is a redirect to en:Epigraphy, so for Wikidata purposes these are the same and it is already in use by Q181260. —Naddy (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, does this mean that we cannot note in Wikidata the fact that the German translation of Inscription is Inschrift and not, as the enwiki-redirect suggests, Epigraphik ? -- Juergen 91.52.169.199 23:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia/Wikidata is not a dictionary. Sometimes different Wikipedias organize information differently, so a hard choice has to be made how to match up the interwiki links. —Naddy (talk) 13:29, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

How to handle item values whose name can change with context?

The problem came up with football clubs which change name occasionally. For example, the Hungarian club FC Ferencváros was called FC Kinizsi for a while. There was no change apart from the name, so it would not make sense to create separate items. On the other hand, it would look nicer if the infoboxes could display the right name - if someone was a player for the club in 1950, it should show Kinizsi, but for someone who played there in 1960, it should show Ferencváros. Is there a good way to handle this? Is it maybe possible to use some special qualifier ("at the time called") to override the name? --Tgr (talk) 14:47, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I would say its should be a property for an official name (our label is a kind of "mostly known under this name") and then that name could have a qualifier. — Jeblad 15:17, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The team wikidata page should have multiple official name statements each with a qualifier (from date=#####)(to date=#####).

The player wikidata page will have a statement with a link to the team item with a similar qualifier listing when the player played for the team.

How that gets untangled into a player infobox is another issue, especially where there is an overlap with a team name change. Filceolaire (talk) 15:13, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed new tags to help description cleanup

Not sure where the best place is to propose a new tag. I would like to suggest that there be a tag for "excessively long description" to be used if the description is over twelve words. Another tag I would suggest is for "descriptions beginning with an initial article". This would help people to tidy up descriptions to fit the proposed guidelines at Help:Description. Thanks. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 22:46, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but only in a limited number of languages. Word count is not an useful criteria for bad descriptions in all languages. In chinese for example, one could say a lot more with fewer characters.--Snaevar (talk) 18:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

That is true. As an example, it would definitely be a good idea for English. It would be used to identify unnecessarily long descriptions such as this. Of course the tag would only be an indicator and discretion is needed to tell if the description is really too long. This is also the case with the "possible vandalism" tag. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 18:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

IW-Links on main page

Hi friends, how and where can I define the iw-links of the project mainpage? The links shown on the main page of frrwiki have been changed an do not match the selection we had defined in this template. --Murma174 (talk) 09:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Add {{Noexternallanglinks}} to the template. --Stryn (talk) 09:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Works. Thank you so much! --Murma174 (talk) 10:26, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Help please Linking a page

Hi, could someone PLEASE help me as I have tried to link the following 2 pages for the best part of X hours, with no success:

- the English page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_(Cocteau_Twins_album) with

- the French page: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cocteau_Twins.

No idea if I am doing something wrong (the previous ones I did today worked) or if there is a bug. The same goes for trying to link

- this English page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_over_Heels_(Cocteau_Twins_album) with

- the French page: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_Over_Heels_(album_des_Cocteau_Twins).

Thank you for your help (and Thank you for trying to save my sanity). Ludopedia (talk) 12:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

The two first should not be linked as they treat separate topics, while the last two were already linked with this edit. --Njardarlogar (talk) 12:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Njardarlogar. You are right my mistake for not giving the right information. My apologies, I have tried to link them for a long time and lost my concentration. Coming back to the first two, they are of the same subject, this is what it should read:

- the English page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_(Cocteau_Twins_album) with

- the French page: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_(album_des_Cocteau_Twins)

--> those 2 seem to be working now.

As for the last two, when you open the French page and look at the left column where the languages appear the English article does not appear, so both don' seem linked. I tried 2 different computers (wondering if there could be such thing as a cache issue) to no avail. It is not working:

- the French page: http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_Over_Heels_(album_des_Cocteau_Twins)

- this English page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_over_Heels_(Cocteau_Twins_album) with

--> Are you able to check if this is working from your end ? Thank you so much for your help. (Can this be explained by some lag in the system?). Ludopedia (talk) 13:00, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

They are all linked for me. Try adding ?action=purge to the end of the URL; e.g. try clicking here (http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head_Over_Heels_(album_des_Cocteau_Twins)?action=purge).

Lydia Pintscher says above that they plan to fix this lag by having the Wikipedia page purge itself after the link is added. --Njardarlogar (talk) 13:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, yes, yes. I do thank you so much. I did what you said and it is all working. (I have waited for 4 hours for this result). THANKS Ludopedia (talk) 13:34, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Linking to redirects

I have added a couple of proposals to the RFC about linking to redirects. Any comments? Filceolaire (talk) 15:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably the most asked question around here...

Hi. I would like to know what can I do to copy and paste the code for interwikis from one wiki to another as I did before, it was easier than now and much more faster. Is there a way? Thanks in advance for the answer, Mel 23 (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

There are no copy-pasting of links, you find the correct item and adds a sitelink to the article at Wikipedia. — Jeblad 16:49, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

By "interwikis" do you mean "Langlinks" - the old system on wikipedias - or "Sitelinks" the new system on Wikidata?

By "wiki" do you mean the various Wikipedias or do you mean Wikidata?

Make the changes to the site links in Wikidata and wait a few hours for them to be automagically added to all the wikipedias. Filceolaire (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You don't have to fill them all in if you don't want to. There are bots that can take care of that. Reach Out to the Truth (talk) 17:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

If you are creating a new article in a language that already has an article on other languages, then you would come here after the article is created and add the new language to the item here. Then the bots would know that new language exists and could do their thing to update all languages. Copy/paste is fast when making a new article, but this will make sure all languages link to the new article. Should take less than 5 minutes. --Tbennert (talk) 18:04, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

That's what I was looking for, Tbennert, thank you very much :) Mel 23 (talk) 18:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

For other questions like this, you can see m:Wikidata/Help. πr² (t • c) 18:44, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

There are no bots involved, Wikipedia takes the language links directly from Wikidata. They are no longer present in the wikitext there. -- Duesentrieb (talk) 21:51, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Q2>Q10 ?

look: http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AllPages&from=Q1&to=Q1000010 & http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:AllPages&from=Q1&to=Q2 tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 18:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Of course: Q1 - Q2 includes Q23456 as well as Q12345. Special:AllPages looks for the characters and not for the numbers. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 18:16, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes Special:Allpages is a bit weird when it comes to what it lists. — Jeblad 18:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there an alternative: A list sorted by numbers? --Kolja21 (talk) 22:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't think so… We could perhaps fix SpecialAllpages, but then we would have to create some kind of sort order that works for items. — Jeblad 03:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The Spaghetti Incident?

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45223
Resolved fixed

When I click on either the German or English Wikipedia of this article ([11]) to 'edit links', it tells me that there isn't yet an wikidata item ("Item by sitelink"). However, there is one as you can see here: [[12]]. Even the en and de links from Wikidata back to Wikipedia works well, so I don't understand why the other direction didn't work? Why isn't this correct linked together and how can I fix this? --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:09, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

It's because of the ? in the title. This is already fixed, so wait for the next release. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 19:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. --Nightwish62 (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Spell checking: Wikidata

Funny stuff, the Wikidata spell checking didn't know itself :D --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:10, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Any spell-checking functionality is provided by your browser or operating system. You might be able to add Wikidata to your spell checker's dictionary. Reach Out to the Truth (talk) 19:22, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You're right, sorry about that. Saw the keyboard icon on the bottom right of this textbox which is from Wikidata and so I thought the spell checking is coming from it. But yes, when I rightclick a misspelled word there comes a context menu from the Internet Explorer. I've updated to IE10 last week and that's the first time I notice the spell checking. Thanks. Now we've to force Microsoft to include Wikidata to their dictionary, as it already contains Wikipedia which I certain never added by myself. --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:33, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Most browsers use open dictionaries so I guess Wikidata will be listed in a few months like Wikipedia. — Jeblad 03:23, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Multiple identical statements for an item

Having multiple identical statements for an item makes no sense, and the software should not allow it. For example, in Q79, the property "official language" has the value "Arabic" twice (unless someone corrects it in the meantime :) ). Silver hr (talk) 19:36, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Deleted :) True, it makes no sense... but now it's unfortunately possible. --Stryn (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

It might make sense for it to be possible once we have qualifiers. For example, someone could have held a position twice, which could be expressed by two statements with the same value but different qualifiers. --Yair rand (talk) 20:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

But since a statement can contain multiple values, I think there should only be one statement per property per item. -- Ypnypn (talk) 20:30, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

No, a statement only has one value (plus, in the future, any number of qualifiers and sources). There can however be multiple statements about the same property of an item. -- Duesentrieb (talk) 21:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

But statements with different qualifiers that are otherwise the same would not be identical. Silver hr (talk) 02:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, this is key. I recently added the same "property:award" value three times to an artist who had received it three times (a certain Grammy award). Qualifiers will hopefully allow us to explain more. Espeso (talk) 02:17, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I have noticed that this may happen when two properties are merged. So administrators, please be aware of this issue. Mange01 (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

New properties

Is it possible to view recent added properties? Or to order [[13]] by date/time? --Nightwish62 (talk) 20:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Isn't highest property number always newest? I don't think deleted property numbers are reused. The history of wd:list of properties (which is manually updated= also gives an indication of the date. Mange01 (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

As the table is divided by topic, I can't order by Property-ID. You're right about the site history, but it's not guarantee that there is an summary text. Even so, it's painful as I'm not only looking for the last added properties but for the last x since my last visit on Wikidata. I'm just interested for new properties I can use. --Nightwish62 (talk) 20:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

A workaround: I add the next two properties that will be created to my watch list. (You can mark empty pages for being watched.) --Kolja21 (talk) 22:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Uh, I got it: http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ANewPages&namespace=120&tagfilter=&username= . I wonder why I didn't get this idea earlier. --Nightwish62 (talk) 23:11, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Accessing content in various languages

Will it on e.g. English Wikipedia be possible to embed content Wikidata content written in French? Specifically, I'm interested to find out weather properties for taxon names, and properties called "latin motto" along with "translation of latin motto", are needed, or if it will be possible to embed the official Latin-language content from Wikipedia? (in that case, only one property for motto would be needed, as one could have "imported" the latin translation as well) - Ssolbergj (talk) 22:36, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you mean properties like "taxon name" (Property:P225)? It's string type = identical in all languages. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:29, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Thanks. Although I still think this property is redundant and goes against wikidata's objective of streamlining, if it is possible to access Latin translations on the various language editions of Wikipedia. The same goes for the motto properties that undoubtedly soon will be created, as I mentioned. - Ssolbergj (talk) 03:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by "latin motto". Is this the same as the latin taxon name? If not then what is it? Filceolaire (talk) 14:19, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

For example, en:Template:Infobox university has "latin_name". Similarly, some infoboxes have "latin_motto", i.e. the original motto of the institution, as written in latin. The question is whether it will be possible to extract this from the latin-language content of wikidata, to e.g. English-language Wikipedia? - Ssolbergj (talk) 15:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposal: Allow string (and may be other future types) properties to be displayed with formatting defined by a template

John Lennon has a statement VIAF identifier = "196844" I would like it to be displayed as "196844" or as "". I think the best way to achieve that would be to create template:P214 which would be responsible for formatting, displaying, linking, etc. of all strings attached to that property. The output of the template would not be visible to other projects using wikidata. I am a novice at Wikidata so excuse me if I am proposing at the wrong place, or if the issue was already discussed to death or if there are other already build in solutions for formatting property strings. --Jarekt (talk) 04:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I disagree. That should be handled by whoever displays the data (Wikipedias). Legoktm (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

This is definitely something that should be handled by individual Wikipedias, not here. Reach Out to the Truth (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree it should be done here too in one way or the other. Maybe not necessarily as a link to one single site, but similar to links like ISBN:123123 on Wikipedia. Otherwise they couldn't easily be checked. --  Docu  at 05:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

+1. Wikidata should not be left to bots (though they do great work). With more than ten or twenty properties we need a reading help with links and grouping of properties. (The taxon name for example should be place close to "also known as".) --Kolja21 (talk) 06:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Wiki-style templates may not be practical here, but it seems that Javascript can do a lot. If would sure be useful if a tool could add an external link in some string-type properties. --Zolo (talk) 06:54, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I think we need some kind of property type that can be used together with the interwiki prefixes. Those should include viaf-identifiers. All the available entries for this project is found on Special:Interwiki, and for eample viaf can be accessed as viaf:71378383. — Jeblad 11:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Ricordisamoa/AuthorityControl.js (instructions) --Ricordisamoa 11:44, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Ricordisamoa, your script does what I wanted to do. --Jarekt (talk) 13:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

+1. Tested it with Opera: perfect! --Kolja21 (talk) 00:30, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

On a related note, Jarekt, when I created the LCCN property and listed it on WD:P, you changed the example I provided to include formatting of the string identifier that apparently is "handy" for Wikipedia template parsing (or something). I could not find any evidence that the LCCN identifier actually includes that formatting. As others have alluded to, the Wikidata string properties for identifiers should not include any formatting that is not canonical. So for the LCCN example, I believe the example should read "n79022935" source and not "n/79/22935". I would appreciate it if someone else would review this example and adjust the example if they agree both with the facts and the approach. Espeso (talk) 16:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, in fact the ids should not be separated, otherwise the automatic link won't work. --Ricordisamoa 16:26, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Every Template:Authority control template that uses LCCN requires two "/". See Commons:Template:Authority control, and all Template:Authority control templates, so all numbers copied from any wikipedia or commons will be formatted that way. See en:Template:Authority control/LCCN for how that code is converted to a proper link. I do not know how it all started and I am not a big fan of that format, but we seem to be stuck with it. --Jarekt (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

But the retrieval mechanism should take care of reformatting this data. If templates can't do it without hacks (seems odd), surely Lua can. Espeso (talk) 20:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

As far as I can tell templates do not need it. It is work to convert it to this format, often manually as instructed here and at all other wikipedias, and it is work to convert it back (by template) but that is what all templates use. I guess the first use of that format can be seen here on German wikipedia. We could take the string as displayed but we would have to be very specific in the field documentation, and bot approval, so 147k LCCN numbers from De Wikipedia and tens of thousands from all other wikipedias are not copied "as is". Can we restrict string to only some characters? --Jarekt (talk) 20:49, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

I would say that an identifier should only contain strings in a format that is acceptable for that identifier. How that is solved, and reformatted, on Wikipedia should not be reflected in the identifier as used here. That said I have no idea what is correct here. — Jeblad 21:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

The LCCN is hard to use, since it has been developed in the pre-digital era and consists of three parts. Take for example Governor William F. Packer, who has got the LCCN "nr00001027". On some web pages you can use this number, on other not. If you want to use it on all web pages, you have to split it into its component parts: "nr" is a code (origin of the data set), "00" stands for the year 2000 and "1027" is the id, that the item has received in that year. The second "00" is used as filling of vacancies; it tries to make the number machine-readable but it's not part of the original LCCN and therefore doesn't work in all cases. That's why the templates uses the format "nr/00/1027". (See: de:Hilfe:Normdaten#LCCN.) --Kolja21 (talk) 00:12, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

You are claiming that the identifier used by LC is "not part of the original LCCN"? And I don't understand what you mean by "doesn't work in all cases" -- cases of what, and similarly, I don't understand your reference to "all web pages". Such cases surely cannot have preference over the apparently canonical use of an identifier by the agency responsible for it. On this page, de:Vorlage:Normdaten, there is a template example that takes the parameter "LCCN=nr/99/30530" only to produce the valid URL "http://lccn.loc.gov/nr99030530", which uses the value that should obviously be stored in a Wikidata property ("nr99030530"). The point remains, if certain other websites wish to reformat or otherwise uniquely parse the identifier, fine, let them take care of the reformatting on their end, which appears to be entirely rule-driven (algorithmic). Espeso (talk) 06:15, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not a native English speaker. If you don't understand me, just take a few hours and read the discussions of last summer, than you will understand why the editors of Wikipedia have gone this difficult way instead of copy & past. I don't say we have to go the same way in Wikidata. It might be that the web sites (services etc.) of LoC and OCLC have improved, but last year (even if you doubt) the copy & past numbers were not reliable. --Kolja21 (talk) 06:40, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Note: "The LCCN numbering system has been in use since 1898", so it's obvious why the added zeros are not part of the original LCCN and caused problems. (Also to mix numbers and letters is not ideal for automation and might have been a possible source of errors.) --Kolja21 (talk) 07:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ According to www.loc.gov "LCCNs have three components: prefix, year, and serial number. The prefix is optional; if present, it has one to three lowercase alphabetic characters. (Prefixes are maintained in a controlled list.) The year is two or four digits. (For 2000 and earlier the year is two digits, for 2001 and later, four digits.) The serial number (after normalization) is six digits. A normalized LCCN is a character string eight to twelve characters in length." Than the site lists the algorithmic rules on how to normalize various forms of LCCNs. Current library of congress site uses normalized LCCN on their website, see en:Template:Authority control/LCCN. However WORLDCAT database which is also using LCCN is using a different form, see en:Template:Authority control/WORLDCAT-LCCN. That is why last time it was discussed community decided on keeping LCCN number as a triplet of codes (separated by "/" ) normalize it on the fly to access www.loc.gov and assemble it in other combinations to access other sites that use LCCN as a key. That does not mean that we need to decide the same. --Jarekt (talk) 16:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Just a quick note: the main concern seems to be linking to Worldcat. I picked the first transclusion of en:Template:Authority control/WORLDCAT-LCCN, which is Abraham Lincoln. The URL produced by the template is http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79-6779, yet the URL produced by the more canonical identifier, http://www.worldcat.org/identities/lccn-n79006779 also works. I won't belabor the point any more, but it would be nice to seem some support, even in the abstract, for the rather obvious concept that a canonical identifier should not be stored in some other format. Cheers, Espeso (talk) 23:46, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

You forget to mention the >200.000 LCCNs we have added to Wikipedia in the n/79/22935-format. I don't care for Worldcat "Identities" since they are unreliable. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

See also discussion at Property_talk:P244. --Jarekt (talk) 13:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Translation reminder for system messages

Time for some nag'ing again! There are several extensions that needs translations if Wikidata shall be localized properly. Check out if any of the extensions listed below needs translation into your language, that is change from qqq and to the language(s) you usually translate into. You should usually not change the qqq messages, thos only describe what the messages do. What you should do is to translate into your own native language. Be careful, use a spellchecker if possible, and check the glossary! There are also statistics available so you can verify the progress. — Jeblad 16:32, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikibase

• mw:Extension:Wikibase (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:Wikibase client (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:Wikibase lib (stats|qqq)

DataValues

• mw:Extension:DataValues (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:DataTypes (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:ValueFormatters (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:ValueParsers (stats|qqq)
• mw:Extension:ValueValidators (stats|qqq)

Diff

• mw:Extension:Diff (stats|qqq)

Babel

• mw:Extension:Babel (stats|qqq)

AbuseFilter

• mw:Extension:AbuseFilter (stats|qqq)

AntiSpoof

• mw:Extension:AntiSpoof (stats|qqq)

Ask

• mw:Extension:Ask (stats|qqq)

UniversalLanguageSelector

• mw:Extension:UniversalLanguageSelector (stats|qqq)

Thanks Jeblad, I made Wikidata:Translation reminder which help users to check their own language also after archiving this section ! :) ▬ Reza1615 / T 15:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Number of values total

As the main site counts 6 millions items already, I'm wondering it's also possible to retrieve the number of total values (without sources) are recorded? --Nightwish62 (talk) 16:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not possible on the live system unfortunately but Denny did an analysis of the database dump for 28th of Feb. At that time we had about 600.000 statements. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:32, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

See also Wikidata:Statistics. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:04, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Two pages of the same content

Hello people, how can I merge Q321090 with Q6453094 (German Brazilian)? There is no way to make a redirect? -- Andrevruas (talk) 23:20, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

AFAIU, you have to manually move the wiki links, and then list the empty item on Wikidata:Requests for deletion. - Soulkeeper (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

We should really have some tools to support merging, but its not very often someone need that kind of functionality. — Jeblad 03:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at WD:Tools#move.js ;-) --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 17:54, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Format of LCCN identifier property

The issue is format of [[Library of Congress Control Number. We have lively discussion above on the subject. Than it continues on Property talk:P244. I am writing here to invite new people to discuss and vote on the format at Property talk:P244. Lets not discuss it here, since we do not need a 3-rd place. --Jarekt (talk) 15:27, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Strange autocorrections

Whenever I try to type o and e in succession, for example in the word "do es", it instead creates an ö. Same with a a (å) and a e (ä). I'm guessing this is a setting for Swedish language, but it should be removed. It makes it impossible for me to type talk page messages without putting in spaces where they shouldn't be and if I would like to type å, ä and ö I'll just do that on my keyboard... This only happens on project pages and talk pages, not in data entries. /Grillo (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

You need to disable input method. Try to type ctrl + m. --Stryn (talk) 12:53, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, but why is this available as an option, especially when it's so hard to find how to turn it off? It must be local for WD, as it doesn't happen anywhere else. /Grillo (talk) 12:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

We use the IME, which is part of ULS, and it is somewhat buggy. Its primary purpose is to write characters from other languages than those supported by your own keyboard. If the characters are on your keyboard, then don't turn it on. — Jeblad 18:30, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I didn't know that it was turned on, and I didn't even know the functionality existed. How was I supposed to know? It doesn't say anywhere. I just know realized that there's a small keyboard icon in the lower right. That's not very user friendly... It's easy to hit ctrl-m by mistake. /Grillo (talk) 01:08, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

to know about wiki

i am first using wiki...can u help me?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thestranger2050 (talk • contribs).

yes --Jarekt (talk) 18:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see Help:Contents or ask a specific question. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 19:31, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

IE 8 browser problem

Using IE 8 I don't see the [[Edit]]-buttons. No problems with FF 19. Is there a workaround for IE 8? --Murma174 (talk) 19:17, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

One of the developers have a picture of IE8 that he stabs each morning, I can poke him about it tomorrow. — Jeblad 03:26, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Question moved further down this page. --Murma174 (talk) 08:46, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

How to add interwikis to new articles in local wikipedia

Hello! I'm eu:Theklan, and admin of the Basque wikipedia. I have been creating some articles and I usully insert the english interwiki so bots to the inclusion of other interwikis. What is the regular procedure now? thanks! Theklan

Hi! You have to:

• find the corresponding name of the page in English or in another language;
• do a search with this and find the correct item;
• go to the 'Sitelinks' section and add one at the bottom, selecting the site language and the page title;
• eventually remove interwiki links from the page in your language: they are unuseful now.

Note: if the article in your language doesn't have other language versions, or if they don't have associated a Wikidata entry, you have to create one.

--Ricordisamoa 00:13, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

For similar questions, see m:Wikidata/Help. πr² (t • c) 02:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

And how long does it take in order to get the interwikis in our Wikipedia? -Theklan (talk) 10:09, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The automated purge of the pages in Wikipedia is not ready yet, it is part of the change propagation. If you do a manual purge it is available as soon as the values are entered in the item. — Jeblad 10:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Dataset of interwiki pairs ?

Hi wikidatians,

I'am wikipedian and also a PhD student in Lexical Linguistics. For a paper project I'am looking for a way to get the list of all artciles from a wikipedia (done!) and theirs interwiki matchesin a target languages (when available). Something like, for French > English:

[fr:Italie] = [en:Italy]

[fr:Espagne] = [en:Spain]

[fr:Cramelo] = [en:] //no english article

...

This dataset will include about 1.4 millions entries for all French articles ! I already got the list of all French articles from a wikipedia database dump. But is there a direction/page/project to find/query their matching interwiki values ? Thanks by advance 00:23, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

You can use one of the database dumps, get the titles, and then use the api module wbgetentities to get the sitelinks for those site specific titles. Should be something like this, note the sites and titles. You can build parallel lists of sites and titles but don't go above 50 entries, the api will start truncating the lists hard at 50. I'm not sure if database dumps are available for Wikidata yet, and if so if it is simple to get to the sitelinks without parsing the content. — Jeblad 10:35, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I'am digging in this direction, thanks ! Yug (talk) 12:20, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I saw Wikidata:Database download a few days ago. --Goldzahn (talk) 15:00, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Q2617781 and Q5036224 are the same

Q2617781 and Q5036224 are the same, what to do? I can't find what to do with this situation. Goudsbloem (talk) 10:45, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I've merged the two items. It is covered by Help:FAQ question 21, but it is difficult to find. There really should be a Wikidata:Merge or Help:Merge for editors to find easy instructions on how to do this. Thanks for pointing out the problem! Del_♉sion23 (talk) 11:24, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I really hope we do get a merge function soon. I believe there is consensus now that splitting Property:P46 and Property:P6 was a big mistake, but the two properties are so well populated now that I've shied away from trying to do anything about it. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

First observations: Redirects, WD operations in edit log, ordering of language links

Hello there,

Today, I first interacted with wikidata, in the form of interwiki links. I do have a few observations:

• Up until now there were interwiki bots, which given one language interwiki added the others. With Wikidata they probably became obsolete. In order to allow a coordinated phase-out of these bots,it would be great to leave one iw link on the page, no matter what the adoption of WD is in a project.
• Depending on the "project culture", articles for plants and animals live at either the "common name" in the language, or the taxonomical name. Usually, the one not used should redirect to the other. Rather than forcing all projects to use the same policy, WD should be able to cope with the situation; one option would be to permit redirects.
• Regarding redirects: At Simple English Wikipedia we recently had a problem with WD relating to a deletion policy (keeping QD and regular deletion in the same place or not). Again, being able to cope with redirects would be helpful.
• Moving interwikis to Wikidata, and adding languages from Wikidata should leave a trace in the edit log of the corresponding article. It currently doesn't.
• Since the language links come from a DB tooo, ordering them arbitrarily (as in: Languages alphabetical, vs. "Related languages together") should not be too much of a problem; it should be possible to create a few such profiles; which would then be selectable on a per-user basis.

All the best,overall, great work. --Eptalon (talk) 15:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Special pages

In connection with this: are special pages out of scope, or did I miss something important? I am not even sure how they could have been connected by interwiki links.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Recent changes item has been deleted 2-3 times before, but always somebody create it again. Maybe better to wait until this RFC ends. --Stryn (talk) 16:21, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Langlinks can be added through system messages. I don't think we should add them as items because they don't describe external entities. — Jeblad 23:17, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Labeling of hurricane items

I've been working on organization and standardization of hurricane-related items lately, and I'm wondering if it would be appropriate to change labels, say, from "Hurricane Dog (1950)" to "Hurricane Dog" if the description is redundant (i.e., "Category 5 Atlantic hurricane in 1950") — note that many hurricane names have been used more than once as they have been cycled (e.g., there was a storm named "Irene" in 1959, 1971, 1981, 1999, 2005, and 2011). Secondly, would it be appropriate to take similar action on, say, "Newfoundland Hurricane of 1775" which has a description of "Atlantic hurricane in 1775" so the label is "Newfoundland Hurricane"? Thanks. Hurricanefan24 (talk) 20:03, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

See Help:Label#Disambiguation which says that disambuators &ndash like (1950) – are not to be included in the label. -- Ypnypn (talk) 00:46, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Phase II is live; please use the project chat to discuss any issues

'Phase II' should be linked somewhere where is explained what 'Phase II' exactly means. --Nightwish62 (talk) 22:52, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done. FYI, WD:AN is the general place to request MediaWiki message changes. Thanks! — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 02:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing with Opera Mobile

I can't edit any items with Opera Mobile on Android 4.0. This is, editing actually is possible, but "Save" link stays greyed out and not clickable. I also can't close that licence popup, and at the bottom of the page there is another, permanent popup (empty, white background, rounded corners, shadow, dark closing 'X') that I can't close. Is this a known issue? Can I do something about this? --YMS (talk) 09:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, never mind. It's working now. --YMS (talk) 10:29, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

No, still not okay. I can edit site links and properties now, but if I want to edit a label or description, "save" link still is greyed out until I also edit a site link. So the workflow to edit a label with Opera Mobile is: Press "edit" on label, change label, press "edit" and "cancel" on a site link, press "save" on label. Am I really the only one with this problem?

Adding hatnotes to WP langlink pages that look like WD project pages?

Would it be possible to add a <noinclude>-type notice to e.g. Q4580256 saying something like: "This is the Item page for administrators' noticeboards on Wikipedias. For Wikidata's own administrators' noticeboard, see Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard"? If I am anything to go by, Wikipedians looking for Wikidata project coordination pages will quite often stumble across Wikipedia coordination page item pages first. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 16:20, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

The items don't have anything like normal wiki markup. — Jeblad 19:57, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

My point is that if you type in "Administrators' Noticeboard" and search for it, you are quite likely to click on the WP project page's item page from the results list, rather than the WD project page, which is what you would probably have been looking for. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 14:31, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure but you would not expect to find any project pages if you search in the main namespace at en:wikipedia so why would you here. And even then the problem is obviously more the missing description if it would say 'wikipedia project page then everything should be fine. --Saehrimnir (talk) 16:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Right; I'm suggesting it mainly as a time-saving measure for editors who have ended up in the wrong place. Even Wikipedia does that: see e.g. w:Bureaucrat. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 11:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

James Gleason in film not listed

Gleason also was in a film called Suicide Fleet in 1931. Please list.

Why don't you do it yourself? That is after all the purpose of a Wiki. Palosirkka (talk) 10:42, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Use of Property:P155/156 for geologic timescale?

Can I use http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P155 and http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P156 for geologic timescales?

Example: Proterozoic

--Grondilu (talk) 13:25, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Editing left sidebar Language link (error)

Hello!

I am trying to link the english page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantana_%28artist%29 with the spanish version http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lantana_%28cantante%29 but I get the following error message:

"An error occurred while trying to perform save and because of this, your changes could not be completed. -- Edit not allowed: Site link eswiki:Lantana (cantante) already used by item Q5969959. --"

Any ideas? Thank you very much!

Cheers!

Hello. As the error message told: "Site link eswiki:Lantana (cantante) already used by item Q5969959", es-wiki link was already on item Q5969959. One link can't be in two items. I moved en-wiki link from Q6487521 to Q5969959, so now the both articles are on the same item. --Stryn (talk) 18:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of P222 & P224

Hi, there is a deletionrequest of two properties at the moment. There are currently only 3 people discussing, I think it would be nice to have more opinions to the topic. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 13:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion notification and watchlists

This raises a general issue with watchlists - if a property is up for deletion, that situation only seems to be visible on WD:RFD. There's nothing on the property itself that would indicate it is subject to deletion. Perhaps a practice such as Wikipedia's xFD tagging is needed, or some other mechanism that would allow RFDs to be flagged on watchlists. That may help encourage involvement at WD:RFD. Dl2000 (talk) 03:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a good point. As a somewhat low-tech solution, I just threw up some relevant discussion links on MediaWiki:Watchlist-details. Do people like this as a way of keeping track of major discussions? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 08:22, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

This works only if everybody use English language. Others (including me) can't see those messages. --Stryn (talk) 17:20, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Watchlist-details/fi... Of course, this skirts the yet-to-be-addressed issue that with multiple project chats, you don't really know what discussion is going on in a language you don't speak. But we'll cross that bridge when we come to it. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 05:53, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Help:Merge

I have created the beginnings of a page to give people instructions on how to be able to merge items. It is located at Help:Merge It is a question that has come up multiple times and so it would be good to have a place to direct people for help. Please feel free to be bold and make any changes you believe are necessary. Also, please feel free to translate it into another language to help as many people as possible. Constructive criticism is welcome. Thanks. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 21:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Marking for translation should be done when it will be finished or almost finished. Otherwise translators will have to do a lot of upgrades if source text will be hight edited after marking. --Base (talk) 21:35, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

That's fine. I'll cross through that bit for now. Cheers Del_♉sion23 (talk) 21:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Quality control

I'm seeing a fair number of items that are not very good in my opinion, but I'm not sure how to proceed because I don't know if there are any quality control policies and procedures in place. Specifically the things I am seeing:

1. 1. Item is created by an import bot.
   2. The only linked article is deleted so another bot deletes the sitelink for the item.
   3. We are left with an empty item that should probably be deleted, and should have been by the bot that deleted the sitelink. Pretty straightforward case for bots. Example (until it's deleted): Q6762624.
3. User creates an item with a label identical to an existing item. Sometimes the label languages are the same, sometimes they're different (e.g. existing item en:foo, someone creates a new item with the label ja:foo). The new item is usually empty. Pretty bottable too I'd say, but what it also really needs is automatic checking.
4. User creates an item with only a label. No description, no link. Or only a description. Why is this even allowed? I don't see much point in it.
5. User creates an english label or description for an item in non-Latin script (or the converse). Most of these are probably mistakes due to users not being aware that the language of the labels and descriptions they edit is the one which their interface is in. However, I've seen it enough times that I think some kind of protection against it is needed - making more explicit and obvious to contributors that items have content in multiple languages and which language they're editing in, and even refusing to accept content in non-Latin script as english (and the converse). Also, existing cases should be fairly bottable.
6. ...(There could be more but I can't think of any right now.)

Anyways, I'm kind of bummed-out by this influx of bad content and thus not particularly motivated to fight it manually. I guess what I'm looking for is more tools (whether policy or technological) to address this with a mind towards addressing the cause where possible, not just the effects.

Silver hr (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you about the necessity to "force people" to add description and label when they create a new item. But for bots it is more difficult. Snipre (talk) 00:27, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Some answers. — Jeblad 11:05, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

1. It is discussed whether an empty item should be autodeleted, but it is not made any final decision. I think the status says it should not be autodeleted but listed on some special page for later deletion. The problem is mainly that sporadic vandalism should not imply deletion of an item, actually we can only autodelete something if it is cleared out by an admin. In addition we have the situation that no sitelinks does not imply that the item is empty.
2. Automatic detection of similar items linking to different articles in different language editions of Wikipedia is not an easy task, its not even easy to make automated tests. If there is some information in the item it is possible to start searches for similar items, but with only a single link it is quite difficult. The only way to do it is to do cluster analysis on the actual external site and see if that compares to another item. One of the bots actually do that, but for the purpose of spitting out sitelinks that doesn't belong in a group.
3. Labels can be generated from sitelinks, description can't.
4. AbuseFilter issue, but could be better supported I guess. (Seems like this is not supported at all, but I have not tested but this is part of something that is known to fail - that is named entities in PCRE)

Thanks for your input.

1. I agree that sporadic vandalism should not lead to deleting an item. However, can a WP article ever be deleted as a result of vandalism? AFAIK, it takes an admin to delete an article. The example I gave I believe mostly happens with new articles that fulfill some of the criteria for deletion (advertisement, non-notable, nonsense, ...) so I think it's a pretty safe bet that their corresponding items can be autodeleted when the articles are deleted. But even auto-flagging in some way for admin review would be better than just leaving them.
2. Note that I said new items with identical labels to existing items. I think those would be easy -- I imagine ajax calls while the user is typing that display the results of searching through labels and very noticeably asking the user something like "Are you SURE this isn't what you're looking for?". I think existing search already works something like that.
3. Sitelinks are fine. I was mainly saying that items with only a description (no sitelink, no label) seem pointless to me. Ditto for labels. The minimum for new items should really be a label and a description, or a sitelink.
4. Filtering is good, though as I mentioned, another useful approach would be changing the interface to make more noticeable the fact that labels etc. come in multiple languages and which language version the user is viewing/editing. A lot of people seem to fail to notice this (see also a few posts below).

Silver hr (talk) 17:04, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Auto deletions might be exploited:

• Someone creates a nonsense article in one Wikipedia and marks it for speedy deletion
• At the same time they add this article to the linked articles of an entity and remove all other links
• With some bad luck the speedy deletion and auto deletion of the entity happens before the vandalism in wikidata gets reverted

There may be special cases where auto deletion is save, but we have to be really careful. Secular mind (talk) 19:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

That's good thinking. However, in step 2 it requires adding the nonsense article to an existing entity. If instead this were a newly-created entity, I think deletion in this case would be safe. Silver hr (talk) 14:29, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Why do people add random languages to [en] description??

What on earth makes people do this?

Perhaps the text of the link from the various Wikipedias leading to Wikidata is somehow funny? Palosirkka (talk) 14:14, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I think, the problem is that by default, the Wikidata interface language is English. Hence, a person just comes from a non-English langage and starts filling labels and other fields. She thinks that she populates data in her language but in fact it is in English. --Michgrig (talk) 14:19, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

And the default language is English because translations aren't ready? Palosirkka (talk) 14:26, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think so. --Michgrig (talk) 14:28, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

So why don't Wikidata links from other languages lead to their language of Wikidata? -- Ypnypn (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps because, instead of doing so, the wikidata devs initially preferred to link fake language subdomains, but that solution was bugged so now we're using only wikidata.org, and for the future I've no idea. It's possible that some UniversalLanguageSelector features were disabled too. --Nemo 18:54, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The system is very unusable especially for multilanguage users. The user must to choose only one language and cannot see and edit labels in whatever other language and cannot simply switch the language. --ŠJů (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

It's easy for registered users, because they can add babel to their user page, and then user can edit those labels and descriptions, which (s)he added to user page. Also gadget "labellister" is useful. --Stryn (talk) 15:11, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The interface is actually quite scary if you switch from English to a language where properties and most items don't have any names in that language.

Maybe we should make sure that at least properties have translations. --  Docu  at 18:59, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Another odd thing is that if one starts out with "?uselang=nonenglish" in the URL, the interface and content changes to another language. If one then tries to go and edit labels for properties (or items used there), the language switch again and one could end up editing the wrong label. --  Docu  at 22:36, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Almost all if not all of such edits are from no description to funny description, in other words, if there is already a description, people seem to leave it alone. So all we have to do is make sure there is a desc to begin with! :) Palosirkka (talk) 08:45, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Lua

I´m interested in Lua (the new programming language for Wikicode) and Wikidata. Is there something to read on this topic? --Goldzahn (talk) 00:00, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

You can read about LUA here. For testing LUA modules use Test2 Wikipedia, please. LUA is already implemented there. Regards, Vogone talk 00:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

It's "Lua". No full caps :) Legoktm (talk) 07:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

@Vogone: FWIW, the extension (Scribunto) seems like deployed on Wikidata, too, so one should be able to test here. --whym (talk) 10:42, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

We don't have a write-up of Lua use for Wikidata. I'll see what I can do to get this done soon. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:33, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Kia Pregio listed twice

I expanded the English language article on the Kia Pregio, and when I tried to update the links from Q486966 it seems that a separate entry for the English language Pregio has already been created at Q6403656. How does one go about fixing this? Thanks, Mr.choppers (talk) 06:51, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

You just remove the sitelinks from one, and stick them into the other (which I did for you :)) Legoktm (talk) 06:52, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

That's what I figured, being a noob in these parts I figured I'd check first. How does the other page get deleted? Does one request it or does it happen automatically once it's empty? Thanks. Mr.choppers (talk) 07:24, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

You can request it at WD:RFD. I just deleted it myself in this case though. Legoktm (talk) 07:25, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see Help:Merge for further information on how to merge items :) Del_♉sion23 (talk) 09:44, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Q6455822

Can anybody add de:L’Oraille to this item, please? (it is not possible to edit with IE8) --193.18.240.18 07:57, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Done.--85.70.56.231 08:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. --193.18.240.18 08:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

 Resolved

Page protection

The page about Pope Francis is currently protected, but there is no way to know the reason why the page was protected, other than searching it in the history. There is no template in "view source". This needs to be amended.--85.70.56.231 07:59, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

For the record, the item is semi-protected, autoconfirmed users still can edit it.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:31, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Sure, but the template "semi-protected" should still be there.--85.70.56.231 10:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The page is not wikitext and because of that there will be no template. — Jeblad 10:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Population

Hi! I'm sorry, I'm not following all news from Wikidata. Is it possible to add such data as population right now? Is it (or at least will it be) possible to have population, for instance, for different years? --DixonD (talk) 08:46, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

No, not yet. You can join the discussion at Wikidata:Property proposal--Ymblanter (talk) 09:47, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The data type that you need for that isn't available yet. As Ymblanter said the property proposal page is a good place to get prepared for when it will be available. It will be possible to have population data for different years and mark them as such. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:35, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, good. We have a lot of templates in Ukrainian Wikipedia for demographics like uk:Шаблон:Демографія/FRA/Dessenheim. So once we have corresponding data in Wikidata, we will be able to substitute all those templates with a single, Lua-based template. Wikidata together with Lua may give us really powerful ways to present data. --DixonD (talk) 14:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

List of user warning templates

Would it be possible to have a list somewhere of all the different user warning templates (such as Template:Uw-vandalism1). The page could also be used to explain when they should and should not be used. I'm thinking of something along the lines of en:Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace, though of course we have fewer templates. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 12:32, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

The easiest way would be to create a category.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:05, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Good idea. One already exists at Category:User warning templates, so that's a start :) Cheers. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 13:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Misspelling

• Q1984758 vs. Q5153654

Q1984758, from the languages I can read, refers to misspellings in general, in a language-unspecific way. This is except w:zh:錯別字, which refers to the Chinese-language phenomenon of writing the wrong homophonous word, rather than spelling a word wrong (because the concept of "spelling" doesn't exist in Chinese). I'm not sure whether that should be split into a separate item.

w:zh-yue:串錯字 (英文), which describes the phenomenon of misspellings in particular to the English language, used to belong to Q1984758. I deleted that from Q1984758 and moved it to Q5153654 (Commonly misspelled words [in English]).

Am I doing the right thing? Deryck Chan (talk) 13:09, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Q787319 not working right

On the article's English page, the French and Netherlands links are not showing up. On the article French and Netherlands pages, the English link isn't showing up. What is going on? Bgwhite (talk) 16:48, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Just needed to purge the pages. Legoktm (talk) 16:50, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Strg+F5 --Goldzahn (talk) 18:06, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

6,000,000 or 5,820,395 ?

At the Wikidata:Main_Page it is written the free knowledge base with 5,820,395 items that anyone can edit and in the news part it is written March 3, 2013: The six-millionth item is created

which one is correct?▬ Reza1615 / T 21:31, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Both can be correct if "The six-millionth item is created" includes deleted items. Regards, Vogone talk 21:35, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

I got the point :)▬ Reza1615 / T 21:44, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Hm .., do that many get deleted? --  Docu  at 15:40, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Looking at the Q-numbers that get skipped on Special:NewPages, it seems that Q6672443 never existed. --  Docu  at 15:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Yep, many Qs didn't exist at any time. (e. g. Q6 and Q7) Regards, Vogone talk 15:55, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Why not? Steak (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, the difference between those numbers (6,000,000 and 5,820,395) are not just deletions, but also, every time an user visits Special:CreateItem, one item number is consumed, regardless of whether the user does click the "Create" button or not.--Snaevar (talk) 17:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe that page should be on https://www.wikidata.org/robots.txt --  Docu  at 18:45, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a good idea, if I properly understand how robots.txt works. Should we file a bug on that or something? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 16:30, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I left a note at Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team#robots.txt. Apparently Steak's view isn't shared. --  Docu  at 19:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Severe editing bug - cannot add/edit links

Two language links are missing, see Talk:Q410112, but I cannot add them.

I can edit the label, but link adding does not work. I click on [add] and nothing happens. Note that the links are weird, under "List of pages linked to this item"

• [edit] links to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q410112
• [add] links to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q410112

But that makes no sense, since I am already on that page. More useful, but inconsistent with the capitalization of the Q/q are

• https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:SetLabel/q410112/en
• https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:SetDescription/q410112/en
• https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:SetAliases/q410112/en

I also had a problem at Q131083, but another user did succeed, what I could not do:

• https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q131083&diff=11660015&oldid=11643636

Aleksandr Krymsky (talk) 22:43, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Does your browser have Javascript disabled? That seems to be required to operate the edit links and such. If you have a plugin like NoScript, its whitelist may need to be updated to allow wikidata.org. Dl2000 (talk) 03:09, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Me too – using Internet Explorer 8.0 on Windows XP Prof 2002 + SP3 and having no access to edit/add options, see File:Wikidata no edit CiaPan 2013-03.png (however successfully edited before with IE 9.0 on Windows 7 Ultimate SP1). --CiaPan (talk) 09:34, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

This is a known bug affecting IE8. --Kip (talk) 10:36, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. So I'll have to keep from editing Wikidata from this machine. --CiaPan (talk) 01:09, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Limits on number of specific statements for the same item

I think that we might want to put either a limit on number of some types of statements, or have a way of marking the preferred statement. For example someone might have gender defined as "male" (with a reference, I hope) and a second statement defining gender as "female" (with a reference). I think it is technically possible with the current software. Shall we allow two seemingly conflicting statements, or limit number of gender statements to one? If we keep two than it might be good to mark one of them as the primary for templates that can only deal with one. Some statements might be fine to have multiple copies, like occupation or doctoral student, but others like Library of Congress Control Number should be unique. We might want to have a picture of a kitten but we do not want 500 of them, even if hey are all cute. Shall we add column "number of instances" to the tables at Wikidata:List of properties to define for which statements it is OK to have multiples (and roughly how many)? I apologize if this was already discussed somewhere else. --Jarekt (talk) 13:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

A concurrent proposal would be to introduce tables of content - there are some items already which are difficult to scroll to the bottom.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

The current plan is to allow certain values to be marked as preferred, deprecated and so on. See meta:Wikidata/Notes/Data model primer#Ranks for a bit more on this topic. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:51, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

A bot can do that check. Snipre (talk) 15:10, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Lydia, thanks for "ranks" link. That answers most of my question. I still think that some statements should have a single value, (Library of Congress Control Number comes to mind), but we can probably make it with enforcement by bots or queries instead of software. --Jarekt (talk) 17:30, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

As far as I understand Wikidata will not do any validation or even support validation. This is a Wiki. Technically you could add property gender with any item. It is up to the community to give guidelines and check the correctness. HenkvD (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Where did you read something like that? Doing no validation would be very silly in my opinion. Also the idea to let the work doing bots. I think input validation is the most important and best way. Not only to ensure valid data, but also to indicate an editor of his misbehavior, whatever it was delieberately or not. Bot didn't work in realtime. --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a subsystem that can support some kind of value validation, but validation against a well-defined ontology will not be supported. At least that is the situation now. And yes, you can add a statement about any property to any item, including gender to a car. — Jeblad 10:43, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

@Nigtwosh62: I read it at this blog, explaining some of the design decisions for Wikidata. HenkvD (talk) 19:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

We shouldn't be too hasty to completely rule out apparently conflicting statements. Someone might have been brought up as a male, but identified as female after a certain age, e.g. Renée Richards. Then two gender statements, with appropriate qualifiers (once they're supported), could be reasonable. Identifiers like the Library of Congress Control Number might seem more clear-cut, but even there mistakes might happen, and could usefully be recorded. Running validation checks seems sensible though. --Avenue (talk) 00:16, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I thought of the same example for a valid entry of a person with conflicting gender. Luckily we will be able to mark one as preferred with "ranks". --Jarekt (talk) 16:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Q278039: Police actions / Révolution nationale indonésienne

Hello, at Q278039 I think there are two overlapping, but not the same topics; that of the 'Révolution nationale indonésienne' and of the more specific Dutch military intervention, dubbed "Politionele acties". The latter is part of the former, but the revolution is larger then just that Dutch miltary intervention. Several wikis have distinct articles on the topics. Only I dont really now how to undo this interweaveness... -- Stratoprutser (talk) 22:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

See also w:Politionele acties & w:Indonesian National Revolution.

Seems to be an interwiki conflict. You could file it here but don't expect it to get solved, usually the only real solution is in changing the articles. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 19:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

الحاج أحمد تومسون

The correct spelling of my name in Arabic is: الحاج أحمد تومسون This is because the second letter in my surname is a soft 'h' ~ so 'th' is pronounced 't' ~ and as Arabic is phonetic, 'thomson' is spelt as it is pronounced. I tried to correct this ~ but it would not let me!

Are you referring to this item, Q224368? Del_♉sion23 (talk) 22:56, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Archibald prize

please let it be known in the table of artists that KERRIE LESTER entered 16 times and was hung 16 times

Are you referring to this item, Q425596? Del_♉sion23 (talk) 22:55, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Talk pages

Why not to create a template for users' talk pages to show that those users always answer on their own talk pages, and to advice other users to reply on their own, too?

I already have one (english/italian), and also Ymblanter and Stryn. --Ricordisamoa 22:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Please comment!? --Ricordisamoa 16:17, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Please!? --Ricordisamoa 07:54, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

just do it :)--Svebert (talk) 08:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

A glitch?

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45821
Resolved fixed

I was pointed out to the following problem: If I go here and click on the "newer edit", I get an error message though the editing history seems to be intact. Any ideas anybody what that could be? Thanks in advance.--Ymblanter (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

BTW, the same happens if you open the next diff on that page and click "Older edit" and for other diffs on that page. --Michgrig (talk) 07:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

This is a well known bug. Legoktm (talk) 07:35, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, good to know.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:48, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Replace the search box at the top?

Heya folks :) We've put work into replacing the search box at the top of the page with the entity selector that you use to select properties and items when adding statements to items. It does the following:

• autocomplete on labels and aliases for items in the main namespace
• when you enter a valid pagename outside the main namespace it will take you there - it will not autocomplete on these
• when you enter something that isn't covered by the above two you will be sent to the regular search result page (that by default only searches in the main namespace)

Do you want this to go live with the next deployment (planned for 20th)?

Some more updates on search: We've finished the script that fixes at least one part of the search in that it will be case-insensitive after the script is run. We're currently looking for someone in the ops team to run it. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:56, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Could we get a trial to have an idea? I do not object it going live with the next deployment. it is just this development can cause questions we might be unable to answer?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:05, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry. Of course. It is running on the test system. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:11, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I see, thanks. I am certainly fine with the feature going live.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds great IMO. I support that we replace the current search box, it's so bad. --Stryn (talk) 14:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

It would be nice if we could see the description and item-number too, like the interface for adding a statement. Also, why can't it do autocomplete for pages outside of the mainspace? πr² (t • c) 14:23, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

We can try to get these in later but this is the current state. Question is do you want it as it is now or should it wait basically. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I actually use the normal search box for cleaning up certain areas; it is particularly useful for fictional series, as many games, books, and films are usually very similar in name and can thus be cleaned up (merging, deletion, "disambiguation", etc.). Is that use case accounted for? --Izno (talk) 14:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism policy

I've started a draft policy on vandalism here. Any suggestions/improvements are welcome. Thanks!

Jakob ^{Megaphone, Telescope} 15:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Someone add P155 & P156 in Era

Like Q75507, Q83222 etc, Property:P156 should be used in "next work", should it be used in "next era"? tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 16:07, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I did. What other property would you suggest?--Grondilu (talk) 11:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

No, current one is fine. tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 03:58, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Section question

Sorry if this has come up before, but what is the general advice for articles in different language spaces, which are not directly equivalent, but which are linked because a subsection covers the same topic. This comes up a lot, but one specific article is en:Noah's Ark (Hong Kong), the interwiki is to zh:馬灣公園 which is actually an article on en:Ma Wan Park.--23:15, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

You should split up the items if necessary (create a second one). So you should link zh:馬灣公園 and en:Ma Wan Park in an item and create another item for en:Noah's Ark (Hong Kong). If you realy want to link from en:Noah's Ark (Hong Kong) to the zh-page you have to do it the traditional way by adding [[zh:馬灣公園]] on the bottom of the wikipedia-page. --User:Sk!d

This was just an example, its an occurence that occurs in multiple articles, sometimes the setion is a single paragraph and it is not always desirable to create new articles for every section. Thought about this overnight, at present the system links articles on the same topic. In future will it be possible give identities to individual sections and map these to articles or vice versa.--KTo288 (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

[Newbie] Can't edit

Hello,

I'm quite old in the Wikipedia project, but new to Wikidata. I intended to edit Q1441585 to add en:A-frame, but see no [Edit] link. I can't edit the sandbox either, which is more surprising.

I looked at the FAQ but didn't see anything pertinent.

Can someone guide me?

Cdang (talk) 15:38, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

What browser are you using? Have a look at #Edit interface glitch if it's Internet Explorer 7 or 8. --YMS (talk) 15:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hi!

There is no edit-tab, but you can edit the fields directly on the page.

Unless you don't have babel-templates on your user-page, you should see one field with the entry “ferme“ and one empty field. The empty field is used to describe the item. You can also add aliases and statements. See for instance Q2225 which has the statement “is-a lepton“. Also the electron has a description in french.

So you could add a description to Q1441585--Svebert (talk) 15:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

It's IE7. I'll see if I can install FireFox (I'm not at home).

Thanks and regards.

Cdang (talk) 16:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, now I'm at home with Firefox 3.6.28 (outdated, but my MacOS X 10.4 is too old for an update). I managed to edit the title and the description, but when I try to save the english name for the List of pages linked to this item, I get a :::: Edit not allowed: * Your edit was patched into the latest version. * Site link enwiki:A-frame already used by item Q4646985.

I guess I have to report to Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts?

Cdang (talk) 22:48, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Patrol related question

Hi! Uhm, why does this article not show a red exclamation mark despite it has not been patrolled? Palosirkka (talk) 20:02, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The edit was reverted by an autopatrolled user, so the exclamation mark doesn't show up anymore. Regards --Iste (D) 20:06, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, ok. I got the impression here that you need to be rollbacker for the mark to disappear without manually patrolling it. Thanks for the reply. Palosirkka (talk) 20:12, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki links remaining on wikipedia after split of wikidata page

On en:Platelayer (Q741583), I removed the links to other languages, which I moved to Q7063944 because they have a different meaning than the article in en.wiki. Why are the interwiki links still there in the en.wiki article? Bogdangiusca (talk) 20:07, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

The wiki page is probably in your browser's cache. Palosirkka (talk) 20:10, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

No, it's not in my browser's cache, it's probably in Wikipedia's cache or something. I tried on a different browser (and checked with a http debugging tool (fiddler) just to be sure that this is what transmited) and when I am logged on with my username, I see them, but not if I'm not logged in. It must be a bug in the caching system. Bogdangiusca (talk) 20:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

It is probable that it will go away. I haven't seen a problem with most pages. A purge usually fixes the problem, if you're concerned. --Izno (talk) 21:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

#property on test client

I just discovered that with the last refresh of the test system the #property on test client is activated. Only Items seem to work, not Strings or Images. The {{#property:xxxxx}} returns the value from the demo reposatory. For example ({{#property:test}}) on Helium on the client returns successful because that is the value I set on Helium on the repository. HenkvD (talk) 22:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Edit interface glitch

In Internet Explorer 7 (have not checked other browsers yet), I get something saying [[object Object]] in the place where [edit] usually is for the title and description fields when logged out or logged in and looking at any page. Additionally, none of the other editing interface buttons even show up. The computer I'm using is a surpremely basic one running Windows 7 SP1 (not my regular computer). Curiously, before I get [[object Object]] I briefly see all the proper edit buttons. Is this a glitch or am I just using an unsupported browser? This is also Sven Manguard 02:15, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly the same problem with IE8 (XP SP3), as mentioned above. --Murma174 (talk) 08:41, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Try to purge the cache in your browser, perhaps it will work as it should. We do try to make IE8 work, but as one of the developers says "IE7 should die!" — Jeblad 10:29, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I got the same behavior (IE8). Works fine in Chrome (same computer)

It is obviously a problem with javascript (in wikibase.ui.entityViewInit.js there is a function that removes the edit links on page load, and replaces them with other edit links, not sure why)

Anyway, I looked at the java console, it says "Can not create abstract Snak of no specific type", then it stops. --Kip (talk) 10:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure, but it might be related to the DontEnum bug in IE6-8, in particular when using ".prototype". --Kip (talk) 13:07, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

The bugzilla link: [14] --Kip (talk) 10:37, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

My IE8 doesnt show "edit" button too. Next, there isnt "add" button in blank row, where it should be. Its some kinda stupid, that you need to switch to another browser to add interwiki links just to find that they doesnt show anyway. Very poor from Wiki. Submixster (talk) 20:22, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I found I have IE8. I don't know what's that "purge the cache" etc...I fear I have to wait still Wikidata will be accessible for simple people like me. --Forstbirdo (talk) 08:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I found I have IE8. I don't know what's that "purge the cache" etc...I fear I have to wait still Wikidata will be accessible for simple people like me. --Forstbirdo (talk) 08:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Daspoort tonnel

I Created this page in an effort to link the en:Daspoort tunnel with the af:Daspoorttonnel but I made a hash of it. Can someone please erase my attempt and correctly links these pages. Thanks a lot Hansjoseph (talk) 16:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I moved af-link to Q5226819. --Stryn (talk) 16:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Stryn. Regards Hansjoseph (talk) 13:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Stadion FC Solothurn (Q6863974)

I created this item 4 days ago in Wikidata and linked it to the right Wikipedia page. However, the Wikipedia page didn't link back to the Wikidata item. Is it normal it tooks that long or did I make something wrong? --Nightwish62 (talk) 17:57, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Right now the software does not show anything on a Wikipedia article unless there is more than one sitelink on the entry. In your case there is not. I believe a future update will have an "edit links" option on the Wikipedia page regardless, which will show you it's connected. Hope that answers your question. Espeso (talk) 18:27, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh yes, I see the point. However, I think it's really necessary remove this 'at-least-two-articles-limit'. Even more: The link to Wikidata should be much more prominent, without someone have to scroll down all languages. Thank you. --Nightwish62 (talk) 18:49, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

There's a script that adds a link to Wikidata to each Wikipedia page, even if no WD item is created for the page (in this case, the link allows you to create an item). To use this script, add

// User:Yair rand/WikidataInfo.js
mw.loader.load("//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Yair rand/WikidataInfo.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript");

to your common.js file in Wikipedia. --Michgrig (talk) 19:45, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Works fine. Thank you. However, hope something similar would implement for all users. --Nightwish62 (talk) 21:18, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

My sysop colleagues in Ru-Wiki told me in a chat that it was not a good idea to enable this gadget for all users so I did not start a discussion on Wiki pages. --Michgrig (talk) 07:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I was not talking about activating this gadget for all users. I think this should be implemented in the Wikimedia-code itself. Like the pencil at the bottom of the interwiki language links. Sure there should be first a discussion where we could place the new link at the pages. And it's okay to left the pencil icon also there are a new one I was talking about. But as Wikidata is more than this phase I interwiki links, the access to Wikidata should be not bound to the interwiki links and more prominent, in my opinion. --Nightwish62 (talk) 10:23, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Awfully stupid question

moved from Wikidata:Diskutejo#Awfully_stupid_question. --Stryn (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

What do I have to do in order to add (for ekzemple) the eo-link “Erni Krusten” to the page http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3743714  ? I don’t see how to edit the page : there is nowhere a button for editing ??? --Forstbirdo (talk) 19:58, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

You can't edit item pages like on Wikipedia. On the bottom of the page you can see "add", and clicking it you can add the link. --Stryn (talk) 19:59, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I am very sorry, but I really can't see any "add". --Forstbirdo (talk) 20:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

In this picture is "add" on the bottom of the page". You really can't see it? What is your internet browser? --Stryn (talk) 21:03, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

First, thank you for helping. I indeed don't see those "add" and "edit" like on your picture. What do you mean by "internet browser" ? Something like "Google" ? Please give me some names of those possible "internet browsers". --Forstbirdo (talk) 21:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Like Google Chrome, Mozilla Firefox and Internet Explorer. If you're using Internet Explorer (version 7 or 8?) it might be the problem. PS. here is also English project chat where many other people can see your problems better, and maybe help you also. :) --Stryn (talk) 21:47, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Near the blue E with the yellow circle I see "Google - Windows Internet Explorer", so I supose my browser is "Internet Explorer". I don't know how to find the version of it. --Forstbirdo (talk) 22:09, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it's IE. I think that this one is related to #Edit_interface_glitch. --Stryn (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I found I have IE8. I don't know what's that "purge the cache" etc...I fear I have to wait still Wikidata will be accessible for simple people like me. --Forstbirdo (talk) 08:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I entered with "Firefox" en there appeared the miraculous "edit" kaj "add". After a whole week of annoyance I succeeded to edit ! The links did not yet appear in the eo-page ("Erni Krusten") of destination, but I suppose they will soon ? --Forstbirdo (talk) 11:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

They appears there after purging the Wikipedia-page (typing ?action=purge after the url). I purged it, so now you can see the links on eo-page. There (somewhere) is just problems with purge, so now we need to do this manually, until this is fixed. --Stryn (talk) 12:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you so much ! --Forstbirdo (talk) 13:07, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

False links

Hello, please what is to do when a page (Q3132628) contains two items which concern two different persons ? The Henry Bertrand on en.wikipedia is not the same than Henry Bertrand on fr.wikipedia. Must I make a request for deletion of Q3132628 ? Regards, Kertraon (talk) 00:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

A deletion request shouldn't be necessary. Just create a new item for one of these Bertrands and move the link over there. Also, you might want to put in labels so future editors can tell them apart. FallingGravity (talk) 02:51, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, I guess you mean "descriptions", not "labels". Other than that, I agree. --  Docu  at 03:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

That works too. ;-) FallingGravity (talk) 05:57, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Kertraon, I fixed this. Please view Q7411555 to see how the two articles were split. Espeso (talk) 03:48, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

All right, thank you all for your answers and for the split. Regards, Kertraon (talk) 13:36, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

AntiVandalism tool

I am very proud to announce the first 'stable' version of DataLiveRC: it's an experimental anti-vandal tool; it isn't capable of making a live rollback yet, but it helps viewing potentially non-constructive edits. --Ricordisamoa 12:26, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Firefox

I'm editing in Firefox 19 on Windows 8 and am no longer able to edit in the usual way, I am instead directed to Special pages away from the item. I'm wondering whether this is a glitch or whether it's just my computer. The main problem is that I can no longer add lang links. IE works fine. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 12:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you have JavaScript enabled? And check if you have an extension which could have blocked scripts. --Ricordisamoa 13:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Odd, but I cleared all cookies and internet history and that seems to have fixed it. Thanks. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 13:06, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Merging of 2 Q-numbers

Q6437639 and Q2450715 should be merged in one of these two or in a new Q-number (after deletion of ...). They refer both to the originally Dutch philosophical journal with an English written pendant/equivalent. However, it should NOT be confused with the German political journal. --Dartelaar (talk) 15:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

 nominated Q6437639 for deletion. In the future, please report this conflicts here; or, simply, move the sitelinks by your own and nominate it for deletion. --Ricordisamoa 15:21, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed canvassing policy

As it seems every fifth RFP or so these days involves a canvassing incident, I've written a very very very rough draft of a canvassing policy at Wikidata:Canvassing. Bold improvements welcome. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 02:45, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Probably need something about what to do when it happens... --Rschen7754 02:50, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

(I hate edit conflicts)Unfortunately, any such policy has some very subjective elements to it (what's a neutral forum?). I think that the ultimate solution would be to empower our bureaucrats (when we get some) to put more weight on what is being said rather than the number of people supporting and opposing. Canvassed votes can still bring in valid points to a discussion, but what we have now isn't adding anything to them.

That page is simply a definition of canvassing. What do you think should be done about canvassed votes? It's one thing to explain what something is, but another to explain that it is wrong and what action would be taken in those cases. Ajraddatz (Talk) 02:53, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Well canvassing cases tend to handle themselves well enough. This is more to deal with the issue of users saying "well we don't have a canvassing policy" and/or saying "but I didn't say to vote for me. It's relevant to the local community because we need more {{{language}}}-speaking admins." Also, since canvassing cases are more often in good faith than not (i.e., something like en:WP:EEML is the exception, rather than the rule; most of the time people are just trying to do what they think is the right thing), it's helpful to deter users preëmptively. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 03:02, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons is a similar community drawn from users that often come from other projects, with different policies. We have very few policies and most of the time it is fine. Canvasing is activity where I have very hard time to figure out where to draw the line, and by following discussions on Commons seems like many experienced and well meaning users struggle with. For example RFA can a vote be announced on Project chat forum in English? How about in other languages like here. Can it be announced on neutral chat forum on home wikis where there are most users familiar with persons work? Off wiki discussion forums? It is hard to know where to draw the line. I have seen a case where flood of very negative votes (with little substance) from first time Commons users coming from home wiki so overwhelmed discussion on otherwise very strong candidate that he/she withdrew. For me canvasing definitely crosses the line if it goes off project, but it is OK on main chat forum, but there is a lot in between. --Jarekt (talk) 12:37, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

But is there a difference between announcing it on a particular language forum? Then we'll get people saying Support because they speak _ and we need more _ language admins. --Rschen7754 05:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Introduction to wikidata

Is there anywhere a description of how and what wikidata is and does that is readable text? I have viewed the "introduction" page and it doesn't really give an overview of what it is about. I have viewed the glossary and it is too self referenceing to be readable. I expect what I want is an explanation of what the data is using some examples. I've read that it will be able to support data for places and their population over time. So I presume (from some of what I have read) that there will be a page (a Q page?) referring to a place (eg London might be Q123). On that page would I then have a statement that says (HOW???) "London is in England"? I am guessing that would be a "statement". But I would expect a statement to be a property and a value, eg property = "is in" (P987) value = "England" (Q31415). But all I see is things like "GND entity $4" "is a $4" "GND value $4" - which appears so much gibberish.

Is there any introductory introduction? -- SGBailey (talk) 23:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Does meta:Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer help?--Svebert (talk) 23:29, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

This does help. This is the sort of thing I was looking for. (I appear to have posted this question twice. I was under the impression that this forst post had failed... sorry) -- SGBailey (talk) 23:12, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The Q1234-Pages hold an item. An item can have properties like P:P31 or P:P100.--Svebert (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Caching question

On the English Wikipedia Wikidata helpdesk, I got the question (wikipedia:en:Wikipedia talk:Wikidata#Wikidata not picked up by WP sites in other languages) whether the interwiki links can show up immediately after their addition to Wikidata without the need to purge the browser cache. I suspect the answer is no, but may be someone more technically advanced that myself can answer this. Thanks in advance.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

The lag is currently way too big indeed and we are working on reducing it. We'll add more so called dispatcher jobs that are responsible for taking edits here to the Wikipedias. That will hopefully improve the situation. We're also investigating if there are other things causing the lag. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:10, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Lydia for you response.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata introduction

Deleting erroneous second post caused by apparent rejection of first post. -- SGBailey (talk) 23:15, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Nikon F

There is Russian article with the same content, but Ukrainian is dedicated to Bayonet Nikon F. Runner1616 (talk) 19:31, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Edittoken

What are the argument to pass in the url in order to get an edit token ? According to that doc we just need the action, the output format and gettoken. Is it true ? because i can't get anything with that query. Snipre (talk) 19:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Use an edit token, we stopped using the item token. An edit token can be requested through an API call api.php?action=tokens&type=edit or by a JS call mw.user.tokens.get("editToken"). You must use the API call if you are on a page were the JS call fails. — Jeblad 22:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

API

I used to get a set of interwiki in wikipedia article by parsing the source or doing api-query. Now it's getting impossible. How to do it within Wikidata? Infovarius (talk) 11:50, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

[15] 178.237.94.235 17:13, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You can get them by requesting sitelinks in the props like this for sitelinks for Oslo. — Jeblad 23:17, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Jeblad! And I suppose, api-help in Wikidata was copied from other projects and so it is outdated and not everywhere appropriate. Infovarius (talk) 08:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Live in Italy

Q2153853 is same article as Q3835384. --Marek Koudelka (talk) 17:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done Merged and deleted. Thanks. --ValterVB (talk) 17:43, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Also Q2153893 and Q3986569 + Q3939726 and Q3503858 --Marek Koudelka (talk) 17:47, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done --ValterVB (talk) 18:28, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

But don't put them here, please! --Ricordisamoa 20:11, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Marek, in the future, please either post them at Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts or Wikidata:Requests for deletion. Thanks! --Izno (talk) 21:35, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. --Marek Koudelka (talk) 15:23, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

List of bots by function and availability

Could we create a list of bots by function (Wikidata:Bots by function) and whether the script is published somewhere? That would make it simpler for those who would help out by running bots. Such a list should also list who is actually running the bot, who developed the bot, and the current state of the code. I would also prefer links to code repositories if possible, not just "the tarball is there" or "posted on that wikipage". — Jeblad 23:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Would be a great idea.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:32, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This would be really good. At the moment e.g. I have like to extract a specific template from a wikipedia article. Using regular expression this seems straight forward. But if there are nested templates this approach doesn't work because only a part of the outer tempalte is extracted:

{{mytemplate|a=b|c=d|...|e={{nestedtemplate|aa=bb|...|cc=dd}}

Now what? I am pretty sure that I am not the only person having such troubles and that other people already solved such “standard” issues. Thus it would be really great to share such code-sniplets.--Svebert (talk) 14:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Tenasserim Pine

Why it is not Working for the German article? I added the German link on Wikidata for Tenasserim Pine, but I do not see the interwikis in the German article. --IKAl (talk) 09:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I purged the page, and now it's there. Problem solved. --IKAl (talk) 09:08, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Two Qs, same article

Please unite Q879865 and Q377254. Both are disambugiations of Bjørndalen. Thanks --Si! SWamP (talk) 17:46, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done. --Stryn (talk) 17:48, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Found Wikidata:Interwiki_conflicts and wrote there. --Si! SWamP (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

There are also instructions on how to merge items at Help:Merge. Cheers! Del_♉sion23 (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

It was not a real conflict, it was just duplicated entry, so I merged those items. --Stryn (talk) 17:54, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Statement p21 (sex) should not use q43445 (female) as value

In various languages Q43445 (female) is used to describe animal only. Therefore it is extremely inappropriate to use q43445 (female) as a value for statement p21 (sex). I do believe Wikidata has no intention of describing any living person using terminology that solely applies to animal.--lavixcanvas M T C 08:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Please see Property talk:P21, there is already a discussion in process. Legoktm (talk) 08:42, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I don´t understand why it is such a big problem. If the local translation of Q43445 is wrong, than delete the interlanguage link and add the correct interlanguage link. I did this with the item "company" a few days ago, wich was translated to a historic german word. --Goldzahn (talk) 09:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

But the correct word is often interlinked with man/woman. Yes, we can add more correct label, but the article will be named with word menaning animal's gender. JAn Dudík (talk) 09:13, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I don´t understand. They yust need an local article in the local Wikipedia whith the correct meaning and interlink this article with Q43445. It has nothing to do with the label. --Goldzahn (talk) 09:21, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

In Finnish language en:Female has always been w:fi:Naaras and will be naaras in future too. We can't rename things what are already correct. In Finnish naaras is btw only used for animals, not for living person. --Stryn (talk) 09:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

When the actual translations of q43445 have different meanings in different languages, than it has to split up in separate items. --Fomafix (talk) 09:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Would Q467 be less controversial? Concerning Q43445, there is also a similar problem in Russian.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:59, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

According to previous discussions, it seems that other languages have this problem (French, Chinese, Finnish, Czech) use Q467 to desribe female human beings. But Q467 has other problems. For instance, "woman" is not used to describe children in English. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

At Property talk:P21 the suomi word "naispuolinen" is proposed. someone could create an article "naispuolinen" in fi:WP, add this article into Q43445 and than redirect fi:"naispuolinen" to fi:naaras (en:woman, q467). I seems that user lavixcanvas is chinese. Maybe he/she could do something similar. --Goldzahn (talk) 10:23, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Trying to take stock of the situation (correct me if I am wrong):

• All languages have a word for "man" and "woman" (that usually apply to adults) or for "boy" and "girl" (that usually apply to children).
• In many languages, using "male" and "female" for humans sounds weird , but clearly, from a biological point of view, humans are animals so that seems scientifically correct.

We have at least two possibilities:

• Use a different word for humans and animals. Ideally, the word for humans should apply equally well to grown-up and children.
• Use "male" and "females" for both humans and other animals (well known horses, pandas, whatever). Linguistically weird but structurally clean.--Zolo (talk) 10:19, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be good to allow us to use the property for non-human animals, and any other individual entity that can be said to have a physical gender (fictional characters?). Also, humans are animals, so why can't we use "female animal" to describe these items? Unless you think we should use "female", "male" for non-human animals, and "woman"/"man" for people. πr² (t • c) 12:43, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the easiest way is to make two new items (which won't have any associated WP articles) for gender. There's no need to use only existing WP articles as property values. – Ypnypn (talk) 14:56, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

WD:N. You should change that first. That said, I do not think there will be support for change. --Izno (talk) 15:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

WD:N has already been changed that items without WP articles can be created now. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The label (inaccurately, "title") of the male/female items for a given language can be changed. What is the difficulty with simply changing ("correcting") the label text in the language of concern to read in a way that is appropriate to the language? Espeso (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem is that famous animals also need a property to describe their genders. If we change the label, it won't be suitable for animals. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 15:36, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps this property should be for humans only? Danrok (talk) 15:48, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

+ 1. It's a translation question, that concerns both, items and properties. If in one language "female" is only used to describe animals it should not be mixed with item Q43445 ("female": humans and animals). --Kolja21 (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not that simple. For example, although the Chinese translation of Q43445 usually describe animals, it can also describe humans in biological contexts (because humans are also animals). It's the exact translation of "female", but using it to describe humans in daily life would be offensive and impolite (but correct). --Stevenliuyi (talk) 19:49, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly this is data were the scientific side should work. When used in wikipedia it then would connect the values "female", age ="32" and "human" to display Women in the Infobox. And "male", age ="3" and "human" to display boy.--Saehrimnir (talk) 23:05, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think you fully understand the problem. Using the term for animal female to refer to a woman is considered sexist, somewhat less sexist than calling her a bitch. Nikola (talk) 06:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

OK yes I am to much scientist to understand this problem but I see it now and agree that we have to find a non offensive solution, but we should only change it for women and not for men.--Saehrimnir (talk) 15:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

For men, it is actually a praise to be called a "male" ;) Nikola (talk) 05:17, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Serbian has this problem also. I solved it by setting the label of Q43445 to "female sex" (ženski pol) so perhaps this could be applied as intermediate solution to other languages too.

In addition, in a Serbian data set, it is common for sex to use the adjective "female" (ženski) and not the noun. Perhaps in future a new property should be made, say, "property label", that would be displayed in the items instead of the label if it exists. Nikola (talk) 06:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

We will probably bump into this problem several places where some cultures and languages makes distinctions that does not exist in other languages. In those cases some of the languages might be given a coarser description than what is optimum for them, and others might be given a to fine one. In this case I don't really see any problem if we use specific properties for human gender. Jeblad (talk) 08:58, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Would it be possible to use the symbols ♂ and ♀? Are they understandable in all cultures and neutral towards human/animal and grown up/child? --Wikijens (talk) 10:26, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

A possible problem is that, if you try to get a list of all females, you won't get women.

Another possible problem is that now in English "sex: woman" will be odd. Nikola (talk) 11:17, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

If we create special items, only designed for this propertty, and only for humans, there should be acceptable words. In every country there are sometimes documents to fill where you have to say whether you are a male or a female. There has to be words for that. --Zolo (talk) 11:22, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea to create a new item only for humans. Perhaps we can define the new item and other relative items as following:

• Q43445 -> female animals (include humans scientifically)
• Q467 -> female humans (adults)
• Q3031 -> female humans (children)
• Qxxx (new item) -> female humans (adults and children)

The new item will be used for this porperty.--Stevenliuyi (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

There seems to be wide consensus on that, so unless there is new objection, I will create two new items tomorrow (we also need males for some languages, not just females). And I will make a bot request to update the already numerous items that use this property. --Zolo (talk) 13:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I have created Q6581072 and Q6581097, that are described as specifically designed for P21. In French we have to use an adjective as label, which would be very odd in mainstream items. However, it may be better to have a more normal item that is not bound to a particular property. In that case, I can rephtase the French version, not so elegant, but still acceptable. --Zolo (talk) 09:33, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

While I don't have any objections to having specific items for this use on Wikidata (like the ones you created), I think it will be considerably easier to just switch places between Q44148/Q6581097 and Q43445/Q6581072 than to have a bot change half a million items to accomodate this change. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the new property is already rather widely used. It would indeed be quicker to exchange the meaning of the two items. But "item recycling" is probably not a good habit to take and have a bot change things does not seem very difficult, just a bit long. --Zolo (talk) 10:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Just a quick note, if someone could let me know when this discussion ends, and I'll have my bot go around fixing all the current uses. I'm holding off tagging 600k articles from dewiki and 500k from itwiki until this gets resolved. Thanks, Legoktm (talk) 15:56, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Chnging AbuseFilter to only tag other values as "unexpected". When the community figure out the actual items use some constraints can be reinserted. John Erling Blad (WMDE) (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Concepts like 'female' are cultural constructs and while they are not completely arbitrary there is some room for variations. Obviously the French, Chinese, Czech speakers and others do not share the exact variant of the English speaker. While the Wikipedia articles listed in Q43445 probably overlap to a large degree, there is some aspect of en:female which is not part of fr:femelle — being a person of female sex. Conversely this aspect is part of fr:femme but not in its entirety of en:woman.

I agree with the proposal below, as it captures this aspect as a separate entity Q6581072 in wikidata. We probably will need links to all the relevant pages in the different Wikipedias for this to be useful. I would be surprised if this remains the only instance where some aspect of concepts has to be represented separately. Secular mind (talk) 19:12, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposals

There seems to be some consensus, but as it conserns so many items, I suggest a quick vote on this

1) use Q6581072 and Q6581097 in sex property for human females and males

•  Support, "male" and "female" is really confusing for many new users whose language is not English --Zolo (talk) 16:53, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support --Stevenliuyi (talk) 11:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

2) describe Q6581072 and Q6581097 as specifically designed for sex property

As it has been suggest for a long time, without any opposition, I have changed the recommended values in P:P21. --Zolo (talk) 08:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Administrative divisions of Poland

Hi! I started working on organization of data about administrative units of Poland. But I'm a bit confused what statements I have to define and how. I have several questions:

1. should I use is a(n) or type of administrative division in order to state a fact that Opole Voivodeship is a voivodeship?
2. should I use Q5639312 or Q150093 as the value of the property mentioned above?
3. is this correct?

More questions may follow. --DixonD (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I know next to nothing about the administrative units of Poland, but my initial thoughts are that we should:

1. use the more specific Property:P132; and
2. use the more specific Q150093 (voivodeships of Poland).
3. In that diff, "type of administrative division" = "first-level administrative country division" seems needlessly vague. I'd use "Q150093 (voivodeships of Poland)" as the value (again, because this is more specific). The "instance of" statement seems redundant to me, but not incorrect. Wouldn't the GND main type be "place", not "term"? --Avenue (talk) 13:01, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

A voivodeship is the first-level administrative division in Poland. And I would say that it is a term, and not a place (but the specific voivodeship should be a place). At least I saw the same for U.S. state. --DixonD (talk) 20:33, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

You're right. I was confused - please ignore everything I wrote for point 3 above. --Avenue (talk) 01:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

When something seems broken…

Try to clear out your browser cache. That means not reload, not even reload with some magic key combo, but go into the tools menu or preferences or wherever and delete whatever is in the cache relating to Wikidata.org. Very often that will make your browser work again. — Jeblad 23:05, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

You see, I am not convinced that it's the browser cache. Surely CTRL+F5 already tells the browser (Firefox in my case) to let go of anything cached and force-reload the page. That doesn't work. And I don't remember this being a problem with any other website. It sounds like Wikipedia's instructions are shifting the blame on the browser, when perhaps things could/should be improved on the server side. 49.135.104.68 10:11, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with blame, it is about what the browser knows about when and how to load and cache code and data. — Jeblad 13:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Again, CTRL+F5 is defined in Firefox as "Reload (override cache)". That means that from a client perspective that should be identical to loading that page without prior history of ever seeing it. So either it's a bug in Firefox (and apparently other browsers) or this undesired behaviour (can we agree it's undesirable? people keep complaining/asking about it) depends on the way the server-side is implemented. 118.236.203.49 22:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Page moves

Hello,

I notice from WP:Wikidata that users have to manually update Wikidata when moving an article.

I think it would be nice to automate this, or at least add an optional checkbox when renaming/moving an article. Are there any plans for this?

Thanks. 49.135.104.68 09:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

strong support - requiring the editor to do this when a page is moved is just an extra job, which the editor might omit or do wrongly, thus damaging the integrity of the system. I can't see any downside to doing it automatically. SamuelTheGhost (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

very strong support. --Michgrig (talk) 12:45, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

The plan is to have a checkbox if the user is logged in, and if it is checked let the user update the repo on page moves by automating the necessary actions. We need a valid user to do the page move, that is why we don't automate the page moves. It is also possible to use the article id instead of the page name, that would be somewhat more solid than the present solution. — Jeblad 13:11, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

"We need a valid user to do the page move, that is why we don't automate the page moves." - eh? Why would you limit the checkbox to auto-confirmed users? Makes no sense to me. Any user who is trusted to move articles should have the option (turned on by default) to reflect the move in Wikidata. 118.236.203.49 23:02, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

It would make sense though that if the user or IP is blocked on Wikidata, they shouldn't be able to do it.--Jasper Deng (talk) 04:15, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

OK that makes sense (show an error instead of the checkbox), but I would see this as a nice-to-have rather than a blocker for this development. 118.236.203.49 05:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Harvesting infoboxes: Where to store mappings?

Hi everyone, at the moment I'm playing around a bit with harvesting infoboxes. For example what I'm doing right now:

• Work on en:Template:Infobox royalty
• Get all the pages that use this template and loop over them
• For each page (example en:Philip I, Duke of Pomerania):
  • Get the wikidata page here (Q477325)
  • Set a claim for Property:P107 (entity type) to Q215627 (person)
  • If "mother" is found in the template, grab the linking page and set Property:P25 to that page (Q118320)
  • If "father" is found in the template, grab the linking page and set Property:P22 to that page (Q314810)

(it includes some error checking, but left that out for the sake of simplicity)

This is currently all hardcoded. This works alright for a proof-of-concept, but of course doesn't scale at all. My idea was to create some sort of shared repository for these mappings. This should probably be on this wiki. That way we can all work together on adding and improving these mappings.

The way we coud implement it:

• Template:Infobox mappings is the base (don't really care about the base name, we can bikeshed over that)
• A subpage per language gets attached and after that the template name. So in this example it would be Template:Infobox mappings/en/Template:Infobox royalty (easy to parse)
• The template contains mappings like "mother = Property:P25" and "father = Property:P22"

This will only work for a subset where we have on key in the template pointing to a page at first. This is already a lot of data so it should keep us busy for quite some time.

So two questions:

1. Do you like the idea of maintaining mappings on this wiki?
2. Do you like the suggested structure?

Multichill (talk) 11:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

That general approach seems reasonable to me. In addition to (or perhaps instead of) classifying the corresponding Wikidata items of harvested Person infoboxes with 'main type (GND)' (Property:P107), it would be good to classify them with 'instance of' (Property:P31) 'person' (Q215627). The same would make sense for all other harvested infoboxes that represent instances. For infoboxes that represent classes (e.g. like the infobox for the organism zebrafish), 'subclass of' (Property:P279) would be appropriate instead of P31. Emw (talk) 13:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

For me it's easier to make a bot for this task! (SamoaBot is waiting for this) --Ricordisamoa 13:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

If you mean bots should set up these mappings, I disagree. Bots could be useful to populate the database once the mappings are specified, yes, and I think that is what Multichill is already doing (see e.g. [16]).

I do like the idea of maintaining mappings on the wiki, and I share Emw's preference for P31/P279 over P107 (especially considering how the GND's definitions clash with the items currently used as P107's values). More generally, I'm concerned about imports of infobox contents from Wikipedias that don't also import their sources. I think bots should at least record which Wikipedia they sourced the data from (say using imported from, e.g. [17]). --Avenue (talk) 13:25, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hello Multichill, P107 works good and is easy to use. The other properties are still under discussion. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:38, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

This is not about making mappings with a bot nor is it about what properties to use exactly. It's about humans maintaining mappings in a central location so bots can use that to ingest data.

I agree that it's nice to have a source for a claim, but a general link like Q328 is completely useless IMHO. It should like to the exact revision. Besides that, I don't think Wikipedia should ever in the source field, because it still doesn't tell you anything about the validity of the statement. Multichill (talk) 15:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Nice doesn't seem strong enough. Some people have suggested sources should be compulsory. I wouldn't go that far, but I think if someone objects to (or removes) an unsourced statement, it should usually be removed (or remain absent) until a source is provided.

I agree a general link like Q328 isn't great, but it's better than not knowing which of the hundreds of Wikipedias the claim came from (or whether it's a fresh import or invention). At some point, I hope we'll work on filling in the original external sources for these claims, and having some information about where the claims came from will be much better than having none. Of course, if we do maintain mappings centrally, that could also help knowledgeable editors track down the original source, but that seems a lot less transparent. --Avenue (talk) 01:08, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

DBpedia community has developed mappings to scrape hundreds of templates. Perhaps we can reuse them or just import the infobox parameters from DBpedia database? Emijrp (talk) 21:16, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Hmm, that sounds like a really good plan. Do you happen to have an example of what their mappings look like? Multichill (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

just in case somebody needs it: I wrote some general functions in python to parse templates. These function parse wiki-text and saves the pairs (parameter-name, parameter-value) in a python-dictionary. All in all this are 200 lines of code. Would it be nice to have some general code repository for stuff like this?

Wiki-data will be much more about “bots“ than wikipedia.--Svebert (talk) 22:24, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Info about DBpedia mappings is here. And some bits about querying the database, for example this one (it takes some seconds to execute). I don't know SPARQL (just the very basics), but those who has some experience can use DBpedia as a parsed Wikipedia infoboxes dataset, and import stuff to Wikidata. Obviously it can contain vandalism and so, but I guess the risk are minor. Emijrp (talk) 10:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

How about this; use the Wikidata page about each infobox, e.g. "Template:Infobox royalty", to store the mappings using one dedicated string property (to be made). To keep it simple we'd delimit the three pieces of information that need to be recorded: language, infobox parameter, and corresponding property value. I set up an example using an existing string property on Infobox Royalty; we have "en|mother|p25" and "en|father|p22" and so on. If someone wants to do the same for the Japanese template, they add "ja|母親|p25", etc. Espeso (talk) 22:39, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

While I think using the pages for the templates is a good idea, I would personally prefer a seperate page. That way there's a lot more flexibility in format. I think we could make mappings a sub-group of the infobox taskforce, and then save mappings there. Not only will mappings make it easier for bot operators, it will also tell us what properties still need to be made, so a lot of people will appreciate the effort. --Bravefoot (talk) 14:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Special:MyLanguage is annoying in zh

My default language is zh-tw, but in Wikidata, zh-tw and zh-hant is completely separate. I drew a table to explain the relationship between the various Chinese:

zh	zh-hant	zh-tw
		zh-hk
		zh-mo
	zh-hans	zh-cn
		zh-sg
		zh-my

Like this. but if I use Special:MyLanguage, if a page has a zh-hant version no zh-tw version, it will appear en version not zh-hant. It is inconvenient. tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 16:15, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

The fallback system is still unavailable. I have a bot which can add labels in all Chinese variants, I will request for botflag in few days. Hope that will help. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 21:27, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

How to get item-id from wikipedia-article name

Hi!

There is too much on this page, i dont know where to look.

Manually I get the Q-Number if I click in any wikipedia onto the ”Edit links” link and than I am led to the appropriate wikidata page and can read the Q-number. But how can I get this with the API?--Svebert (talk) 20:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Take a look at a request for prefixed identifier for Oslo. — Jeblad 21:00, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

than you! This works like I expected :-)--Svebert (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Joining of pages

Pages Q3045055 and Q3892981 treat the same topic and should be one single page. Is this a task for the adminstrators of Wikidata ? --Forstbirdo (talk) 21:22, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I merged those items. This task is not for administrators, everyone can do it. You can see Help:Merge to how to do it. --Stryn (talk) 21:26, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping and informing ! --Forstbirdo (talk) 21:52, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Creating a bot, a tutorial

Hi. I have started this page to share tips, code and examples of bots. Wikidata rely on bots so much, so I would like to see a strong community sharing code to avoid reinvent the wheel. Help is needed, I have developed many bots for Wikipedia but none for Wikidata, and some stuff is different. You can start sections for other frameworks, and complete or add new examples. Thanks. Emijrp (talk) 21:23, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Interesting but this is focusing on python bots only. Can be good to extend a little or to find a good compromise with other documentation in order to give the general rules which are independent of the programming langage. Just for example I'm trying to develop a bot based on Matlab (no comment please ;-) and your page doesn't give me a lot of information. Snipre (talk) 12:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Of course. The page is intended to be split into frameworks for every programming language (by now the most complete section is about pywikipediabot but the DotNetWikiBot is drafted). You can add examples for MatLab inside the API section. Also, if you create your own MatLabWiki framework, you can start an own section. Regards. Emijrp (talk) 13:04, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Request for comment at Property:P131

I'm concerned that this property is being mis-applied, across a range of items, by another editor. Please comment at Property_talk:P131#How_is_this_to_be_used.3F. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Ability to include links to redirects or anchors (aka "list management")

(thanks to User:Ash_Crow for translation)

Notability criteria are very different between different language versions of Wikipedia, and there are many lists that are often different in scope between languages. Before Wikidata, interwiki were defined on the anchored redirects to list items : eg. on the French Wikipedia you had a "Character A" article containing a redirect to Characters of SomeFictionUniverse#Character A and an interwiki to en:Character A which was in turn a redirect to the broader list SomeFictionUniverse (universe)#Character A. As the two lists don't have the same scope, they had no interwiki but the list items had. It is really practical in fiction universes wikiprojects, as most Wikipedia versions consider theses items as not matching the notability criterias individually but that there is enough to say on the said subject to put it in a list.

Real example, for the "nandorin" language of JRR Tolkien's Middle-earth. On sl:, there is an article sl:Nandorščina, which led to the creation of Q7474061 on Wikidata. But right now we can not include any interwiki links because they are on lists of various ranges (on fr:, "fr:nandorin" is a redirect to a subsection of the article about Middle-Earth languages, on en: it is a redirect to a section of the article about the Nandor people, etc.).

The same applies to several topics related to Middle-earth : characters have lists by race, kingdom, family or role depending on the languages versions of Wikipedia ; rivers in geographical lists related to the region, or in a list of rivers (ex : Legolin has a dedicated article on no:, is in the full list of Middle-earth rivers on en: and on the lists of rivers in Beleriand on fr:,…).

All the examples are taken from the Middle-earth wikiproject but the issue is the same for all Wikipedia (or at last a large part of it.) Do you think it will be possible to include, in Wikidata entries, interwiki links to anchors and/or to redirects pages of Wikipedia ? If so, when, and if not, what would be the alternatives ? --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 23:35, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects, a current RFC. Anchors would not be good to include, because they obviously break Wikidata for phase 2 and 3. Redirects are, however, a different story, and in some cases would probably be beneficial. --Izno (talk) 00:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Changing or creating claims via PWB

you can change or create a claim via Pywikipediabot. there is a manual mw:Manual:Pywikipediabot/Wikidata#Changing or creating claims/statements and you can add references too. Amir (talk) 01:05, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there a structure for the references ? Like for a book some defined parameters like title, author, publisher,... ? Because without a structure it will be impossible to retrieve the information in the infoboxes. Perhaps we have to discuss about minimal parameters for the different types of references before people use that kind of new possibility. Snipre (talk) 08:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Something like data.editclaim(property, value ,refs={("ref1","author=;title=;year=;publisher=;ISBN=;publication place="),("ref2","url=;website=;date=")})

Snipre (talk) 08:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Refereneces in WD are not like in WP for example see Russia on WD Q159 Amir (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting us know about changes to mw:Manual:Pywikipediabot/Wikidata#Changing or creating claims/statements. I was waiting for that. --Jarekt (talk) 19:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Q3879887

Can anybody add de:Nuraghe Mannu to Q3879887 please? It is not possible with IE8. --193.18.240.18 12:47, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done. --Stryn (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you! --193.18.240.18 13:03, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Q7268568 and Q7265977

Items Q7268568 and Q7265977 have been created to describe areas which used to be municipalities, in order to add them to the property "is a(n)". However, there are no such articles on Wikipedia to link to. I deleted them for not passing the notability criteria, but have now restored them after a message on my talk page. Can the items be an exception in the same way as "male" and "female" are (they have no language links), or should we wait for Phase II to progress further? Personally, I think that we could add the item for "municipality" and then add a qualifier to say what dates it existed. That way we don't need a different item for current and former municipalities (or indeed other entities like "footballer" or President"). I would like to see other people's opinion first though. Thanks. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 09:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Original message: "Dear Delusion23, I noticed that you have just deleted these two items, which I had only just created and already used on over 50 pages. Of course you are completely right that they did not YET meet the notability policy, but a quick message on my talk pages would have been appreciated. I was still in the proces of creation and trying to figure out how to properly make these items. Anyway, maybe you can help me with this. Let's take q7265977 as an example: this item is supposed to be a "former municipality". There are lists and categories of former municipalities on Wikipedia, but no articles. Former municipalities are discussed in the articles about municipalities. This is fine for Wikipedia, but as far as Wikidata is concerned a _former_ municipality is distinctly different than a present municipality. So: how to go about this. Do I really need to create an unnecessary Wikipedia article to be able to create a proper entity type here on Wikidata or is there another way to do this? Thanks in advance for your help. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 02:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)"

Dear Delusion23, giving this some more thought, I am not very happy with these two 'former' items that I created. I agree with you that, worst case, we would need to create a 'former' version of every entity, and that is probably not really workable.

Maybe the solution could be to create a property called was a(n) or has been a(n). I see the following benefits:

• distinction between 'former' and 'current' status can clearly be made
• connection to the entity stays intact ("is a" - "President" and "was a" - "President" both have the value "President", linking both statements to the relevant Wikipedia articles)
• we don't need to create a lot of extra values
• no exceptions needed to the rule that a value needs at least 1 Wikipedia link

I'm looking forward to hear what you think of this. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 13:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

and what do you do with things that was a municipalty until 1800, then from 1800-1900 they were not and from 1900-now they are again? It is just a fictive example. I suggest to be more specific and implement a property like ”administrative division” together with a qualifier to denote the time period. If an item is still a administrative division of this or that kind, then just leave out the qualifier.--Svebert (talk) 15:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Svebert, thanks for your response. I'd says that in the example you give the municipality would both get the statement "is a" "municipality" AND "was a" "municipality", since both statements are valid. Adding the timeperiod is a good thing, but this may not always be available for all "former" things, so I don't think it is sufficient to indicate "former"-ness (is that a word?). Furthermore, "is a" "municipality" is wrong for a former municipality that is not a municipality anymore, regardless whether a period is added as an extra statement or not, so we have to come up with an alternative that is a valid statement. We either have to replace the "is a" part or the "municipality" (or both). Adding another statement cannot fix this imho. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 16:04, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I just wanted to point out, that even the “was-a“ property could be time-dependent. The statement xyz “was-a“ vwx from (1234-4567) is equivalent to the statement xyz “is-a“ vwx from (1234-4567) or is my english this bad ;)

If the timeperiod is not relevant, than I still think that some qualifier to the is-a statement to obtain the logical expression “was-a“ is much better than inventing this redundant property “was-a“. Something like xyz “is-a“ vwx (past) where the brackets denote a “special“ qualifier. I don't know what kind of qualifiers are possible but i think this one should be a very basic one and should be implemented if not.--Svebert (talk) 16:26, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

There are no good way to add temporal qualifiers, so it is up for discussion how to do this… — Jeblad 19:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Svebert, I fully agree with you that a "was a" property can be time-dependent. And I am very much in favour of being able to add timeperiods (there could be more than 1!) to statements, as this only enhances the information. But I disagree with you that "is a" "xyz" "from (1234-4567)" would be equivalent to "was a" "xyz" "from (1234-4567)". I am no native Englisch speaker, but the sentence "Bill Clinton is (a) President from 1993 until 2001" imo is bad English and should read "Bill Clinton was (a) President from 1993 until 2001". But "Bill Clinton is a former President. He was this from 1993 until 2001" is also correct. This does add a special qualifier ("former") which indicates. Do you feel that "is a" "former" "President" is preferable over "was a" "President"? If so, why? NormanB (talk) 20:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I am neither a native english speaker. But i still disagree: WikiData is not a tool to form grammatical correct sentences but a database and there we only need logical relations. If any item is-a for a certain time period my logic tells me depending on the time-period and checking the current date, if the item still „is“ or now „was“. No need for “was-a“ property.--Svebert (talk) 21:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with the argument Svebert made very succinctly. It would be a duplication that is unneeded. Del_♉sion23 (talk) 21:14, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Purely logical then: yearnumber + 1 = 2000 was true while yearnumer was 1999, but is no longer true now. Stating that it still is true is logically false. NormanB (talk) 21:17, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Svebert, I am a database architect in real life, so I think I know how to store data in databases :-) I fully agree with you that we need logically correct statements, and exactly for this reason I argue that "is a" is in itself not sufficient. Please don't get me wrong, I am not saying that "was a" is absolutely needed. There are other ways of coding the same logic, with which I would be perfectly happy.

Let me summarize the options I have heard so far:

Option	Item	Property	Extra qualifier	Value	Extra qualifier	Sentence	Comment
a.	Bill Clinton	is a(n)		Head of state		Bill Clinton is a Head of state	this is logically false, so "is a" by itself is insufficient
b.	Bill Clinton	is a(n)		Head of state	from 1993 until 2001	Bill Clinton is a Head of state from 1993 until 2001	this is logically false and adding a temporal qualifier is not possible according to Jeblad
c.	Bill Clinton	is a(n)		former Head of state		Bill Clinton is a former Head of state	this is true, but this method would require a very large number of new items
d.	Bill Clinton	is a(n)	former	Head of state		Bill Clinton is a former Head of state	this is true. Is such a extra qualifier possible?
e.	Bill Clinton	was a(n)		Head of state		Bill Clinton was a Head of state	this is true, requires creation of 1 new property

Because options a. and b. are logically false and option c. seems unpractical, I am looking for another way of coding the same logic truth. I would be happy with option d., but I don't know if this is technically possible. Option e. is technically possible and currently seems to me the easiest method, but maybe there are other options? NormanB (talk) 21:34, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Delusion23, Svebert and Jeblad, I came across this page, which seems the right place to come to a decission on whether or not "was a(n)" is a Property Wikidata needs or not. So I have taken the bold step to create a proposal for the creation of Propery "was a(n)" with reference to the discussion we had here so far. I hope you agree with me that this is a good step to broaden the discussion and to get people involved that have dealt with the creation of Properties in the past. I propose to continue our discussion there. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 22:51, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear NormanB, for a person working with db, is it normal to perform to queries in order to get the whole list of american presidents ? First a query for the former using the "was a" property and for the actual which is using th "is a" property. Snipre (talk) 07:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

@Jeblad "There are no good way to add temporal qualifiers, so it is up for discussion how to do this… — Jeblad 19:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)". Please give the reason for that argument. It is possible to have 2 qualifiers, a startDate and a endDate, perhaps it won't be possible to have a date type item for the qualifiers but with a string we can do a lot of things. Snipre (talk) 07:37, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Snipre, to get the list of all (former and current) Heads of State only one simply query would be required, not two. In SQL this could look something like this: "SELECT name FROM table WHERE (P = 'P31' AND Q = 'Q48352') OR (P = 'P9999' AND Q = 'Q48352')". As I don't know the exact table- and fieldnames, this SQL-code is of course not actually executable, but I hope it demonstrates the simplicity of the required query. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 10:19, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Addition: when we assume that a new property "was a" is not introduced, but in stead a qualifier which has as allowed values 'former', 'future' and ' ' (empty string, meaning 'current'), the query would look like this: "SELECT name FROM table WHERE P = 'P31' AND Q = 'Q48352' AND QF in ('former', ' ')". As you see, the query would be slightly different, but equally simple or complex. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 10:34, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Svebert, please allow me to get back the question whether a timeperiod could be used as a sufficient qualifier to indicate that the subject once was something, but is no longer. As I indicated above, I believe option b to be an invalid statement, but when we would change the property "is a(n)" into "is/was a(n)", it would become valid; please see option e. below. However, if the timeperiod is ommited (see option f), for example because it is unknown, it becomes unclear whether Bill Clinton still is a Head of state or not. As it is to be expected that is a number of cases the "former" status is known, but the corresponding timeperiod is not, I think that options e. and f. are no sufficient substitute for option d. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 10:59, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Option	Item	Property	Extra qualifier	Value	Extra qualifier	Sentence	Comment
e.	Bill Clinton	is/was a(n)		Head of state	from 1993 until 2001	Bill Clinton is/was a Head of state from 1993 until 2001	this is logically true
f.	Bill Clinton	is/was a(n)		Head of state		Bill Clinton is/was a Head of state	this is logically true, but without the timeperiod, it is unclear whether Bill Clinton still is Head of state.

Wikidata model

1. I don't understand why you have two “extra qualifier” columns. As I understood the WikiData data model (see picture), the qualifiers belong to a certain claim and you may have as many qualifiers per claim as you like. So I am not sure how to read your table. Do you assign a qualifier to an item??? I hope not.
2. The name of is-a has changed to instance-of. Thus you will see more clearly that it does not make sense to build grammatical sentences from the pure labels of the properties.
3. It is true that now it is impossible to add any qualifiers but in some weeks or month there will be qualifiers with certain types and the type time-period will be among them.--Svebert (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Dear Svebert, in response to your points:

1. I used two "Extra qualifier" columns, because I needed two in this example. The qualifiers are assigned to the property, not to the value. I placed the qualifiers in this order in the table for no other reason than readability: to correspond with the sentences.
2. In database design is "verbalization" is not as uncommon as you may think. See for example here or here. Fields in a database have meaning and preferably this meaning is distinctly clear. Regarding the renaming to "instance of": the sentence will simply become "Bill Clinton 'is an instance of' Head of State" or "Bill Clinton 'was an instance of' Head of State". The meaning of these two sentences remains distinctly different and hence it is essential that both situations can be coded distinctly.
3. I fully agree and are very happy about that. I also am in favour of using qualifiers in stead of other methods to code the same logical truth. I would prefer however not to wait, since it is currently unclear when qualifiers become available. You talk about weeks of months, but I haven't been able to find a planning to support this. If you have been able to find such a planning, please let me know. Meanwhile I would like be next best option, provided it can easily be replaced (by bots) by qualifiers when they become available. It if for this reason that I have proposed to create "was a(n)" for the time being. Given the change of "is a(n)" to "instance of", I'd be happy to change the proposal to "former instance of". Is this something you could support? Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 00:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I generally support the was a property as a interim property, since I think historical data are important information which should not get lost on Wikidata. Nevertheless the property should be defined and used in a way, that it is easily possible to migrate the property to Property:P31 as soon as qualifiers are available. For this we should think about qualifiers which would be applicable for this purpose right now. As already mentioned by NormanB there are several ways to use the "historical qualifiers", e.g. by using time ranges or by adding a "former" qualifier. If we would use time range qualifiers to indicate a historical value, we would run into problems when migrating the was a property to qualifiers, since we don't have these time values right now (or at least not bound to the property in Wikidata). So maybe we should extend this discussion to the way we plan to use the qualifiers, to have a migration strategy. --Faux (talk) 11:42, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Bot requests

It looks like we need more attention there, especially for the three newest ones.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:16, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

We currently have several bot requests with no votes at all, but also no questions or all questions answered. We need to find some way to procees, the bot owners are waiting, and I am not sure I want to approve bots without a single support. The tasks sound pretty much reasonable.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:27, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Impossible to write on an item

Hello!

For a reason I do not understand, I cannot make any edit on Q2817217 (neither addition, change or deletion). I only get a basic error message without any real explanation (my interface is in French): « Une erreur est survenue lors de l'enregistrement, en conséquence, vos modifications n'ont pas pu être prises en compte. »

I tried to change sl:Anderson (priimek) into sl:Andersson, and to add ca:Andersson, fr:Andersson and it:Andersson which I previously removed from Q491431.

What can be the cause of this behaviour? How to proceed? Place Clichy (talk) 13:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Please check if it is this problem and if this is the case report the wrong link here. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 15:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Geolocalisation

Is it foreseen to have the possibility to attach longitude and latitude to an item ? 195.169.141.54 13:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but later, not at this moment.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:17, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Capitalization

Hello. I just read Help:Label and discovered that labels should begin with lowercase letters (except with proper nouns, etc.). I totally agree with this guideline. However, since labels have been created automatically from Wikipedia article names, they are often wrong, ie. Q515 (my language is Catalan, so label is "Ciutat" when it should be "ciutat"). Is there any way to bulk correct this? How was it done in English? Thank you.--Arnaugir (talk) 19:52, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You can try out LowercaseDescription.js ;) --Ricordisamoa 20:01, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I tried to install it in User:Arnaugir/common.js but it seems it doesn't work. anyway I was rather thinking about a bot, for example.--Arnaugir (talk) 22:07, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Simply copy importScript("User:Ricordisamoa/LowercaseDescription.js"); in your common.js --Ricordisamoa 22:16, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I added it and don't see any change to the UI. Where is the option supposed to be? I am using Mono. Update, oops I was thinking of labels, not descriptions. But either way I don't see a UI change. Would you add lower-casing of first position for the label to this script too? That is just as common. Espeso (talk) 02:01, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Just FYI: In English, proper adjectives as well as proper nouns are capitalized. So the English title for ciutat should be Catalan (capitalized). StevenJ81 (talk) 17:45, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, I think you didn't understand properly (or I didn't explain myself well enough :)) "ciutat" means "city", so it should begin with lower case. I know "Catalan" is uppercase, as opposite as in Catalan, since we say "català" (lowercase). But with "ciutat" - "city" it's no the case.

Anyway my concert hasn't been answered yet. But it is probably a minor issue compared to other many things that have to be done here.--Arnaugir (talk) 12:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

No, I'm sorry. I don't speak Spanish (i.e., Castilian), but even I should have noticed that ciutat is cognate to ciudad. I wanted to make the general point anyway, but my apologies for any misunderstanding. StevenJ81 (talk) 21:18, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Q7500000

Looks like we hit this number of items in the last couple of hours. (The actual number is lower since smth like 150K have been deleted, but I guess tonight we will be passing it as well).--Ymblanter (talk) 23:12, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Onwards and upwards :) Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:30, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Does anyone know how many are left and which languages got completed? --Sixsi6ma (talk) 10:42, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Wikidata_migration/Progress more of an upper limit.--Livermorium (talk) 20:12, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

suggested completions when editing properties

I've been editing random items to experiment with the basic interface. Maybe I'm doing it wrong but I feel like the suggested completions interface is, well, bad. For instance, if I choose "main type (GND)" as the property and then type in "event", there's no reason for the pop-up list to include Q3291944 which, until I changed it recently, had no description and therefore was simply listed as "event" in the pop-up list. "Main type (GND)" is supposed to take one of six values so wouldn't it be simpler to have a pop-up list with these six possibilities? Property "sex" should be handled the same way and to a certain extent this would make sense for "country of citizenship" where suggested completions could at least exclude rodents, paintings and cricket clubs. Also I'm not sure how the pop-up list is ordered but it's not user-friendly. For instance, if you type "Paris" you would expect to have Q90 (Paris=capital of France) at the top of the list. But it's not. It is waaaaaay down in the list (you have to expand the pop-up list twice to see it). As long as Wikidata is run by bots, this doesn't matter but if we want to get human participation, things like these need to be fixed quickly.

On a related topic, I noticed that edits where I screwed up are tagged (which is good) but I'm not notified. From a practical point of view, it means that I'm likely to continue making the same mistakes when a simple warning would make me correct the mistake and avoid it in the future. But it also reinforces my impression that humans are not entirely welcome. Pichpich (talk) 23:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

• You're not the first user who complains about this topic. I would also prefer to have a reduced set of values for properties like sex and to see Berlin (Q64) and Paris (Q90) at the top of the list. But unfortunately this blog entry shows that the developers don't want to solve these problems. * *Nevertheless there is an easy solution for the sex property. Just add this tool to your common.js

  importScript("User:Ricordisamoa/SetGender.js");// [[User:Ricordisamoa/SetGender.js]]

  The problem with the most probable value can only be solved by learning the number and type e.g. Q64 instead of Berlin.

• --MSchnitzler2000 (talk) 23:53, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

  That blog post is quite depressing. Usability by the average editor should be a priority but currently, that's not the case. We still haven't fixed the search yet we're padding ourselves on the back for having an unsearchable database of over 7 million items! I'm afraid we're creating a project that will be run by bots and database nerds. (I have nothing but love for database nerds) The reality is that non tech-savvy editors don't stand a chance around here and frankly, they have no reason to feel welcome. Pichpich (talk) 01:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• Please consider using instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) when classifying subjects. These are the best candidates for having sets of properties suggested for a given item once one adds them to a property. For example, a tool could likely be developed that suggests a set of properties (place of birth, date of birth, sex, occupation, nationality, etc.) once a user adds 'instance of' with the value 'person' for a given item about a person. The same applies for adding 'subclass of' and items like organisms, where properties like 'species', 'habitat', 'conservation status', 'discovered by', could be suggested upon assigning a subclass. Emw (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

  And also check Wikidata useful by Magnus Manske. --Ricordisamoa 00:19, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm still in a pissy mood about all this but I'll concede that Wikidata useful is truly very useful and is a nice substitute for features that should be implemented sitewise in some form. Pichpich (talk) 02:36, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• Side note: GND type actually takes 7 values, including disambiguation. --Izno (talk) 02:24, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

  But of course that's wrong. It can take any value (hurray for liberty) but your edit will be tagged as nonsense if you go outside these 7 values. You will not be notified. Pichpich (talk) 02:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

  Only wrong in the sense that you're not limited to the 7 values. 7 values are the ones recognized. :P --Izno (talk) 02:38, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• The emerging consensus is that main type (GND) (P107) should indeed be restricted to the 6 (+ 1) defined classes. I've made the case on the P107 talk page that one of the types -- "term" -- should be avoided because it has no value as a classification. The instance of and subclass of properties address the issue you cite with P107, along with several other issues. Any time that P107 has the value person, place, organization or event, it would be good to at least also (or, perhaps better, only) apply P31. 02:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

The user interface will not be hardcoded for any specific setup of any specific property, nor will there be developed any specific ontology. That does not mean that the community can't do that if they so wishes. In my opinion it is better to develop a working hint-mechanism than trying to figure out valid bounds for a property. The first one can be learned from available data, while the second one depends on someone to define a fixed ontology. — Jeblad 10:59, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Working with uncontrolled vocabularies like P31 and P279 might have some advantages (and might even be the next big thing), but unilaterally use only this way and destroy the traditional ways of working, can't be a good solution. P107 (GND main types) is the most popular property since it's easy to use and it's a great help for first orientation. (BTW: P107 is needed anyway since it's used in Wikipedia and Commons templates.) There's a talk on WD:N if it would be useful to have separate items for GND main types. --Kolja21 (talk) 16:53, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Can you give examples of "the traditional ways of working", without good examples I don't think it is possible to change the present position on use of controlled vocabularies. — Jeblad 17:41, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

One purpose of Wikidata was to help with the infoboxes, that's what I meant with "tradition way". --Kolja21 (talk) 19:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

capitalization of labels and pop-up lists for values

Labels should start with a lowercase but it's not always the case. However, the list of possibilities that pops up when entering a value filters by capitalization. Here's an example (which is how I noticed). If for the property "occupation" you want the value "ambassador" but start typing "Ambassado" you will not see Q121998 (the item for a diplomatic envoy) in the pop-up list because the value you typed in starts with a capital A. Conversely, if Q121998 has a label that is incorrectly capitalized (as it was before I corrected it a few minutes ago) then it won't appear in the pop-up list when you, correctly, start typing in "ambassado". There's no reason for the pop-up list to be case sensitive in this way and it's very unfriendly to non-bot editors. Pichpich (talk) 19:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Bots

So, we have millions of items and hundreds of properties. How is the schedule of deployment of the Wikidata Bot Army that will flood the items with facts? --NaBUru38 (talk) 20:21, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Feel free to join in! =) — Jeblad 21:44, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Translation

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45894

Is that really normal that when translating new part of text, it will not come to the page like in this edit? Only last time translated text will be added, what is weird... At least edit summary is really wrong... This was not first time when this happened. --Stryn (talk) 21:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

hm ive noticed smth strange too. In both meta and here. Try to edit translated unit again, and again press save button. --Base (talk) 22:03, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot

This page is going to be really inactive if you don't contribute and bots wont work if you don't give them permission. Amir (talk) 05:42, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Property proposals are getting really messy

To be honsest not all, but the “generic“ properties. As properties are not resticted to any item it is really complicated to overlook if any property is redundant to any other property. But this not-restiction is a “feature“ of wikidata (see [18]). It is a valid concept, because it does not restrict anything by hard-coding. I see it like this: The software-developer shirk off the most “complicated“ part of building a database to us - the wikidata community -

If one looks at very specific properties like Property:P78, Property:P36, Property:P177 or Property:P202 I don't see any major conflict or confusion potential but for the generic ones like GND-type, is-a, generalized-by and the proposal part of I get really sweaty hands because I don't know if or if not these properties are conflicting each other. How do we deal with them? How can we decide which generic ones are needed and which are not, if we don't even know where the road of wikidata will lead us? I am very confused ;-) --Svebert (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Let's try - it's wiki! :) If we found some property A is redundant and duplicate to B, bots will help us to change A->B :) --Infovarius (talk) 18:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Software

Hi, how should software be tagged? I've mostly seen entity type = creative work – is this right? Wikidata:List of properties lists it under terms->products. Whereas Property proposal lists them under Creative Works. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 01:33, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

• Software is a term for GND entity type. --Izno (talk) 01:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
• If you're using main type (GND) (P107), then I'd go with 'work' for both software itself and different subclasses of software like operating system and Firefox 4. If you prefer properties like subclass of (P279), then I'd go with 'software subclass of work', and 'operating system subclass of software', and 'Firefox 4 subclass of Firefox'. There's a good example classification of software available at http://theswo.sourceforge.net/, if you're interested. The 'subclass of' could be applied on Wikidata to all of the terms classified there, and we'd have a decent classification of a lot of software done! (In the download, the classifications are in swo_merged.owl, which can be explored with a regular text editor easily enough.) Emw (talk) 03:08, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

So again, two people two opinions for the GND… -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Hum Hain Mairvi Film

Hum Hain Mairvi Film Directed By Bilal Khan cast nasir khan hum hain mairvi film is create in maira sharif pindi gheb attock rawalpindi

WTF is this? --Michgrig (talk) 10:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Over-auto-completion

I don't know if it is just me, but I find the auto-completion feature extremely unhelpful. I'm not talking (as others have) about the list of options, but where it actually auto-completes your entry wrongly whilst you are still try to type it in, without any options being offered.

This happens all over the interface, but the worst current problem is in the 'Item by sitelink' dialog when entering the site field. As soon as I enter 'e' (for en or english) it auto-completes the field to (bizarrely) 'Alemannisch (als)'. As I'm still typing unless I'm careful I then end up searching for a link on the non-existent sites 'Alemannisch (als)n' or even 'Alemannisch (als)nglish'. The only way I've found to get around this is to let it happen, then use the backspace key to delete the spurious characters.

I'm using Chrome on a Windows XP box and using the default preferences. Is there anything I can do to stop this happening?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 10:50, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Why do you type "English" as whole? Type "en" and press Tab. It works for me (Chrome, Windows 7 and XP) --Michgrig (talk) 10:56, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Just tried that. This time I got 'žemaitėška (bat-smg)n'. :-(. Actually I don't think the tab did anything. I'd already got 'žemaitėška (bat-smg)' as soon as I'd typed the 'e' of 'en'. -- Chris j wood (talk) 11:00, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Incidentally, I'm using version '25.0.1364.172 m' of Chrome, which it tells me is up to date. -- Chris j wood (talk)

I agree with Chris j wood on this, as I do get an similar annoyance when I type "is" (for icelandic). The workaround I use is to type both of the letters in a timeframe that is less than one second. If I do exceed that one second, then the autocompletion kicks in.

In my opinion, this annoyance could be avoided if the autocompleation would start when the second letter has been typed in.--Snaevar (talk) 11:22, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, probably I haven't come across this because I type quite quickly. And two letters can be typed very quickly indeed. --Michgrig (talk) 11:35, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

See here: bugzilla:43906 and here: bugzilla:43907 --Sixsi6ma (talk) 12:51, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think either of those bugs apply to the symptoms I'm describing. The first (43906) seems to be just about case changes. And the second (43907) describes behaviour that is debatable but common to other auto-completion schemes such as Google's. If Google shipped an autocomplete as egregiously broken as what I'm seeing, it would be all over the tech press in 10 minutes.

I admit that despite having worked in the IT business all my life, I am still a one finger typist, but I think I can normally type 'en' in less than one second. However experimentation does seem to show that this is timing related, but perhaps something nearer half a second rather than one second. Not exactly going to meet any decent accessibility criteria, is it?. -- Chris j wood (talk) 13:24, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Just played with Google address bar autocomplete. The difference is that with Google's autocomplete, if I type 'e' it does autocomplete (in my case to 'Expedia.com') but if I keep typing and what I type doesn't match its suggestion, it changes its suggestion. So when I add the 'n' it changes to 'en.wikipedia.com'. By contrast, once the Wikidata's autocompleter has made a suggestion, it doesn't change it. Anything further you type just gets added to the end of the suggestion. -- Chris j wood (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

API and undo

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 46352

Got a question the other night about undo operations through the action=edit module. This access is currently blocked, also for undo operations, because this will create a mess of our structured data. If it is really necessary to have an undo operation for items through the API, then add comments to the bug about how and why we should add it. We must probably write a new API module to be able to do this. — Jeblad 11:19, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:List of properties

Could Wikidata:List of properties have page on other languages on Wikipedia? Some bot could update every page with correspondent data for name, description, data type, etc. If such data in NULL value, it should stay empty, so somebody could know what is translated, and what is not. --Милан Јелисавчић (talk) 11:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Ask for translation setup to one Wikidata:Translation administrators Snipre (talk) 13:11, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Acacia caffra

I'm trying to add the English article to the list, but cannot save. JMK (talk) 14:02, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Now noticed there are two pages that should be merged. JMK (talk) 14:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

For the information about how to merge, see Help:Merge --Michgrig (talk) 18:29, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Custom value, unknown value and no value

To the left of the text entry fields for property values there is a small gear icon. Clicking on that revels a menu that have entries for custom value, unknown value and no value. The first one is the default and comes with the text entry fields. The second can be used when there is a value but it is unknown. Lets say you know that some person has five children, but you don't know the name of the first one. The third entry in the menu is no value, and it is for those cases where there is no value at all. For example to say that a person has no children at all. — Jeblad 11:12, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks. Btw, I suggest renaming "custom value" to something that doesn't sound quite as "non-default" and "customized". How about just "value"? (I contemplated suggesting "default value" or "ordinary value", but both these options have potentially misleading ambiguity, just like "custom value".) - Soulkeeper (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

"Known value" perhaps? Silver hr (talk) 19:04, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Not sure if is very important to changecustom value, but I would definitely change unknown value. In my opinion they could be called known value (the value is known and should be filled in), some value (it is not really unknown, it is just impossible to fill inn) and no value (the value does not apply). — Jeblad 02:34, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Invalidating statements

We need a formal way to invalidate statements, or moving them to deprecated, as they might onl y be valid within some timeframe or given that some internal or external relation can be established or verified. If we are going to syndicate data from external sources they need some way to say that the data is valid or not. This partly ties in with validating sources, but also how to process temporal qualifiers. Others might disagree on the importance of this. — Jeblad 03:36, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Are there features in Semantic Web standards from the W3C like RDFS or OWL that would facilitate this? If so, could we use those? If not, how could we eventually export this to those languages? I agree that this feature is important. Emw (talk) 04:07, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Some ideas:

• if there is one statement with a complete reference and all qualifiers, all other statements for the same property which are not complete (i.e. have not a complete reference and/or not all qualifiers) is deprecated.
• if there is one statement with an external reference and another which is "imported from" one wkipedia as reference, the second is deprecated.
• to compare quality between different sources I propose that task forces define according to their expertise what are good references. Snipre (talk) 06:37, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Mark entitys to be fictional

Sherlock Holmes and the Doctor as well as many other people/things should me marked as fictional. --Shisma (talk) 14:08, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You can use Property:P31 is a ... For further details on Property:P107 (GND main tpye aka entity type), see: Wikidata:Infoboxes task force. --Kolja21 (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

So I gave Sherlock Holmes the Property:P31 of fictional character. is this correct? --Shisma (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it is correct but it may be a good idea to be able to mark an entity as fictional regardless of whether it is a character, a land, an object or whatnot. The simplest solution would probably be a "is fictional" property with boolean datatype, but that is not yet avaiable. --Zolo (talk) 14:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree --Shisma (talk) 15:41, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

There is another property which is awaiting for the Boolean DataType. Please help me supporting this proposal. --Ricordisamoa 16:12, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

I edited a couple of items which are fictional and does it as mentioned above with the "is a(n): fictional character / fictional land". But I'm also not quite happy with that. Summarizing the discussion above, I see three possibilities:

• A new entity typ 'fictional', independed of the subtype (fictional charachter, fictional location, fictional language, fictional object)
• A new property 'fictional' of type boolean
• Using property "is a(n)" with value 'fictional ...'

At moment I'm not sure for myself what I'm prefering. However, I think it's very important to make quickly a decision how to handle this consistent. Otherwise we wouldn't have a proper database which we could use later for querying. --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

We also need to account for cases, like many characters from legends and various mythologies, where experts aren't sure whether these persons/places/events/etc. actually existed or are purely fictional (or something in between). --91.67.140.3 15:09, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I have one more suggestion that would allow for a more fine-grained information, let's call it "fictionality". It might link to items such as "fictional", "biblical" (mentioned only in the Bible and related documents), "legendary", "real" while "is a" property would remain the same: "person", "place" etc. Nikola (talk) 15:24, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Amsterdam + Wikimania hackathon + Wikimania

Heya folks :)

Some of the Wikidata team will be at the MediaWiki hackathon in Amsterdam in late May. It'd be great to see some of you attend and join us in hacking on Wikidata. If you're coming please let me know in advance so we can better prepare in advance.

We'll also attend the hackathon right before Wikimania in Hong Kong in early August. The same applies as for the hackathon in Amsterdam.

For Wikimania itself: Anyone wants to join me for a Wikidata talk/workshop/...? Other ideas? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

How to access descriptions in other languages?

If someone adds a description to a WikiData item, that I consider to be wrong, how do I remove it? For example in this edit a lot of descriptions saying "tennis tournament" (in different languages) are added to a WD item about a cycling race. But when I go to Q3313977 I see only the English description (as a header) and the Dutch description (my native language, listed under "In other languages"). How can I access descriptions in other languages? - FakirNL (talk) 22:57, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

There are two ways that I know of:

• Use the babel extension for more than one language (e.g., I see Spanish and Swedish, as well as English, as a result of the babel boxes on my user page). You might be able to switch the position of the headers and description pages as a result of adding en-1 to your babel (i.e. move the Dutch description into the correct header).
• Use the "labellister" gadget in preferences. This requires Javascript.

--Izno (talk) 23:23, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

If you log in and create a Babel box you will get an "In other languages" -box above the statements. That box has links to the other languages and makes it easy to jump between them. It is also possible to edit the labels and descriptions for the languages in the other-box. — Jeblad 02:21, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I used labellister and it seems to work. - FakirNL (talk) 13:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Babel is a shortcut way of adding language categories to your user page. But if you don't want to add extra Babel boxes, you can simply add yourself to the user category by adding [[Category:User xx]] to your user page. I do that for variants of English; it feels a little odd to put en-5|en-gb-4|en-ca-4|simple-4 in Babel. StevenJ81 (talk) 13:46, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

And also, if you want to be able to list all lables you need you put over 200 languages in your Babelbox. - FakirNL (talk) 13:58, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

There should be a easy way to select "all languages". In Commons this is in preferences. In Wikidata it should be similar.--Pere prlpz (talk) 23:18, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

removing Help:Aliases/de‎ from translation extension

This page is already translated into German and has its own name Help:Alternativnamen, and the German speaking editors have agreed to have their own rules so it can be replaced by a redirect.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 14:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

While a translation you can set a visible title of page per translating a very first unit. It is possible to redirect Help:Alternativnamen to Help:Aliases/de and users will see a title Help:Alternativnamen. As far as I know it is impossible to remove one translation from the extention. --Base (talk) 15:40, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not in favor of having separate rules for different languages. I think they should be the same unless there are very clear reasons to make them different. Being allowed to dump all redirects in the aliases doesn't seem as a valid reason to me. — Jeblad 20:29, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

As in Help_talk:Aliases#Delete translation tool from this page: Each language has its own characteristics. I think the rules for labels, descriptions and aliases, unlike other guidelines, should be specific to each language, although similar. --β₁₆ - (talk) 22:28, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I think we should take the pluralistic approach and limit global rules to cases where those are necessary. Separated jurisdictions have several advantages. The rules can be more precise, the implimentation and changing process is easier and you are not at risk to stifle minorities, like not so english literate wikipedias, which wikidata is lacking right now. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 22:43, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Wassilko von Serecki

Hallo! Die Links pl, ro, ru, uk gehören zu Nikolaus von Wassilko auf de! The links pl, ro, ru, uk belong to Nikolaus von Wassilko on de!--Sacha47 (talk) 18:15, 21. März 2013 (CET)

 Done. I moved links about Nikolaus von Wassilko to Q114838 and the DE article about the family to a new page Q7904281. P.S. Note how I give links here in Wikidata. The page addresses here contain not names but Q#### numbers. --Michgrig (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Important: Double subjects

How should we deal with 'double' items (e.g. Wright brothers or Cyril and Methodius)?
How could we add 'double claims' (such as the pending birthdate, etc.)?
Shouldn't we create separate items for these cases?
And so, how we could assign sitelinks? --Ricordisamoa 01:00, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I propose to allow redirects to be added as sitelinks, to 'split' double pages into single ones, and create redirects on each wiki. --Ricordisamoa 01:09, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects‎ a current RfC. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 01:21, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Breinstein Remote Propeller Specialist Project

Yes.I would like to discuss my MIT licensed software project to the Wikidata Project Staff. A multi-core microcontroller 3D robotics schematic software applications and up to date circuit projects for educational commercial Prop(Propeller) 1/II programming virtual environments.

Hello. I have deleted the legal document you pasted here because it (itself) apparently was copyrighted 2007. Do you have anything that Wikidata, as a project, should know of? If so, please elaborate. Thanks.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Changing upper/lower case letters

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 46451

Hi,

I am trying to edit the entry for da: (Danish Wikipedia) for Q181982 and Q186198. I try to change for word "Halvkugle" to "halvkugle" with lower case letter "h". But each time I try to save the changes, the letter h is automatically changed back to the original H. How do I make that change? Byrial (talk) 06:09, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I am not sure why you were not able to make the change yourself, but it has been fixed. Kind regards, NormanB (talk) 07:02, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Byrial (talk) 07:38, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

I have the problem again. da:Built To Spill was moved to da:Built to Spill, but I cannot update Q1003115. When I change "T" to "t" the save buttom is disabled and enter key will only disable the edit. Byrial (talk) 15:49, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Happens to me too, if I wait too long (just 1 sec). So need to be very fast, I see, or otherwise save button will go disabled. Another way is to delete the link first, and add it again. --Stryn (talk) 15:59, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: Yet another case: In Q1018491 I cannot change "Bye bye bluebird" to "Bye Bye Bluebird" for the da: entry. Byrial (talk) 15:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

I've filed this as bugzilla:46451. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:15, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Recent Changes

Shouldn't we have undo buttons right on the recent changes page like in WP?Jakob ^{Megaphone, Telescope} 01:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you referring to rollback? If so, please see Wikidata:Rollbackers. πr² (t • c) 03:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

What I actually mean is, when I'm reverting vandalism on Recent Changes, I have to go to the diff before I can undo the edit, when it seems more reasonable to display it on the Recent Changes page, since it's usually pretty easy to tell what an editor is doing thanks to automatic edit summaries.Jakob ^{Megaphone, Telescope} 12:25, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly this is done by the rollback permission. You'll get a rollback button next to each line in the recent changes page, the watchlist and the last edit of an edit history. --Faux (talk) 12:46, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Some page history parameter not work

I have seen this bug for some time. Parameters diff=prev and diff=next in history feature do not work properly, especially on Q pages. It makes inconvenience to browse difference of revisions back and forth. I have to go back to the history list and select new choices everytime. --Octahedron80 (talk) 07:56, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes this is a known problem that is fixed with the last roll-out. Unfortunately this had to be rolled back to an older version because of a bug unrelated to Wikidata. I hope we will get the newer version again very soon. Then this problem will also be gone. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:40, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Q642979

This item seems to be a little wrong, the English article which the item is named after is about one of the churches in Lalibela, most of the articles on the other Wikipedias (not all) are about all the 12 churches. So Q642979 should be divided into one item for all the churches (the whole complex) and one item for the church Bete Giyorgis. Regards LZ6387 (talk) 07:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I created Q7971367 for Bete Giyorgis and left Q642979 for the whole complex of churches. I also tried to move as many interlanguage links for Bete Giyorgis as possible over to the new one, but since I don't know all of the languages, I probably missed a few. Thanks for letting us know! The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 08:52, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't you use Google Translate? I do, and in many cases it helps determine what an article in an unknown langiage is about. --Michgrig (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes I do, and it works most of the time. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 09:28, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Q3257809

Not sure what happened in this item, but it seems to be a mix of templates and articles about the colour purple. I guess some template in a wikipedia-version didn't have "noinclude" or something and that iw-s were transfered to articles. I don't have the energy to sort it out myself, but just wanted to report it. Maybe it should just be deleted and recreated later? Sorry if this is the wrong page to report such things. --Wikijens (talk) 08:38, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems like some people intentionally linked the item with templates ([history]). Might these be unauthorized bots? I'll try to sort out the mess... --Faux (talk) 09:01, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Is it even intended to create Wikidata items for Wikipedia templates? I cannot even see the Edit links link on e.g. w:Template:Infobox_color and I cannot find anything about this in the notability guidelines. --Faux (talk) 09:10, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

All pages except user pages and special pages can have Wikidata items. See Wikidata:Notability for more info. The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 09:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Faux. It seems that you have sorted out the links. Is there a quick way to remove all the wrong labels/descriptions as well? I tried to undo the edit you refer to, but that would only remove one label (ka). --Wikijens (talk) 09:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

At first I also tried to work with the undo feature, but it only undoes some changes, not all of them. In the end I manually removed all templates an created a a new item to put the templates into. --Faux (talk) 09:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I removed the labels manually as well. I think it should be ok now. --Wikijens (talk) 09:57, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Great. Seems good now. I think the labels for the new template item will be generated automatically by a bot. --Faux (talk) 10:31, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Suggestion for "Entities without label" special page

I have a suggestion for the Special:EntitiesWithoutLabel special page: What about adding a second input field to specify a language which needs to be set, so list pages. For instance, I want to find all pages without a label in German, but have at least a label in English, since I know English and I could translate the title. I tried to use the page to translate some missing German labels, but most of the results only have labels in languages I don't speak, so it's no real use for me and I think others might have the same problem. --Faux (talk) 11:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

This was part of the last roll-out that had to be reverted. It'll be there once this is redeployed. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:55, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, great! Thank's for the information. --Faux (talk) 12:02, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

English

What's happening with the property "is a". I can't edit or remove the property. And, when I was trying, I made a mistake that I can't revert. Please, someone help me in this. - Sarilho1 (talk) 13:41, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? Your first edit and second edit, so you already changed it back as it was. --Stryn (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

additional text for Special:ItemByTitle

Would an admin kindly grab the text from MediaWiki:Search-summary then customise the text for MediaWiki:Itembytitle-summary. Thanks  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

P31 proposal

Please see Property_talk:P31#Proposal:_establish_rdf:type_as_the_basis_for_this_property. Any input there would be appreciated. Emw (talk) 03:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Random item

What's wrong with "Random item" on the Sidebar? It's not changed to another language even when we change the language.  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 08:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

See #MediaWiki:Special-newitem/zh above --Michgrig (talk) 08:43, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh.. I see. I'll be waiting. :)  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 08:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Request of comment

Please have a look at the discussion Wikidata:Requests for comment/Several datatypes for the same property and feel free to add comments. Snipre (talk) 10:24, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Q7314455

Look the first item in Wikidata:Wiki import task force/zhwiki: zh:2010年中華民國直轄市市長暨市議員選舉 & zh:2010年中華民國直轄市公職人員選舉 to en:Republic of China municipal elections, 2010. I've fixed it for several days, but it wasn't removed by MerlBot. What's wrong with it? tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 10:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

What is an item ?

As people enter data we have to answer different questions. One of them is what is an item ? An unique object clearly identified by a set of parameters or a general concept ?

For example I take a book like the CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics. Right now we have one item about that book. But in reality we have several editions (~100) with different editors and ISBN numbers so it is impossible to put all that information in the same item. Do we want to create an item for each edition with the corresponding ISBN and editor data ?

More complex case: a book published by different publishers in several editions. Do we have to create an item for each edition and each publisher ? Same problem for sotfwares, musics, films which can be reused by several different persons at different periods.

We reach here the need of a clearer definition of what is an item. Snipre (talk) 12:01, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure that it is possible to define an item, at the most general level, but just some thoughts for this special case nonetheless.

• Every Wikipedia article should have a corresponding Wikidata item. It seems to make sense to have the same item for en:On the Origin of Species and fr:De l'Origine des espèces.
• It would be nice if we could use Wikidata items to make citations simpler on Wikipedia. That would be simpler to do if we have items for each edition, and actually there is a discussion about that on Wikidata talk:Notability#Books. If we do things this way, I think the item with Wikipedia sitelinks should only contain info about the first edition (or, perhaps, only info about the text itself, with details about the first edition going to a separate item) -Zolo (talk) 12:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Special-newitem/zh

This message has been translated into Chinese already, but I don't know why it still appears as English on the sidebar.

首页
社区专页
互助客栈
Create a new item
按标题查找项目
最近更改
随机项目
帮助
资助

--Makecat (talk) 02:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Confirming for https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat?uselang=zh . https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat?uselang=qqx does not show the technical ID though. Hmm. --AKlapper (WMF) (talk) 07:34, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The same is with Russian, with both Create a new item and Random item --Michgrig (talk) 07:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

On Indonesian only for Random item but for MediaWiki:Special-newitem/id it's fine. Weird.  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 08:56, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Seems that every MediaWiki messages which are translated locally on Wikidata works correctly (e.g. I can see "random item" as "satunnainen kohde" because it's locally translated here: MediaWiki:Randompage/fi). But also in Finnish language "Create a new item" is "Create a new item", because it's not locally translated: MediaWiki:Special-newitem/fi. Don't know what is wrong, and why only locally translated messages works. --Stryn (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

How about this, Sir? http://prntscr.com/xgdv8 It's locally translated.  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 09:08, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

It was not, but now it is per request on message's talk page. --Stryn (talk) 09:12, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Great! Thanks a lot, Sir.  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 09:19, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Some of these MediaWiki messages are working now (even if no local translation exist). However e.g. MediaWiki:Blocklogtext has overwritten the text in MediaWiki:Blocklogtext/fi (see Special:Log/block), so something is still wrong. --Stryn (talk) 17:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

ItemByTitle also has this problem. --Makecat (talk) 05:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Bengali watchlist problem

Some problem in Bengali (Wikidata bengali version) watchlist -Plz, See this photo or here (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Watchlist?uselang=bn) . How can i fix it ? --Leemon →^talk 14:52, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I see you did quite some changes on translatewiki for /bn messages. Is there any #expr in your changes on translatewiki? The error is an #expr error (in English: MediaWiki:Pfunc expr unrecognised punctuation/en) but strange that it does not display the /bn version. HenkvD (talk) 16:20, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I have fixed it, it was an error with the template {{Display}}, which is used in MediaWiki:Watchlist-details. It used the parser function {{#time:}}, which outputs with Indian numerals in system messages (such as MediaWiki:Watchlist-details). By prepending xn (this change) to the time function, it will output in ASCII regardless of what language it is used in. And voilà, it works. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 20:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Creation Of More User Friendly Options

From a user standpoint, simply using WikiData can be confusing. I understand that WikiData isn't for everyone, but it seems a little bland. I would like to help out but I do not know where to start.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by ‎204.108.237.194 (talk • contribs).

See Help:Editing. Don't konw what you are looking for but on Sitelinks (Interwiki links) there is a Question and Answer on en:Wikipedia:Wikidata#Interlanguage links (Phase 1). HenkvD (talk) 15:51, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

What he's looking for is an interface that is newbie-friendly but sadly, this doesn't seem to be a priority. It's very nice to get bots generating millions of items in a few days but eventually Wikidata will have to rely on humans for maintenance and I'm afraid we've already lost 204.108.237.194. Pichpich (talk) 03:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

How does the database work?

I'm an IT worker with average knowledge in databases. So I'm interessted to understand wikidata better. When I'm thinking of a database, I mean:

- One or multiple tables - Each table with one or more columns and rows which contains the data

I already edited several items in wikidata and all I see is a statement based connection between two items/objects. There are millions of link possibilities. Though it doesn't would make sense, I could make a statement like 'item: elephant, property: ticker symbol, value: Justin Biber'. So I'm confused how the wikidata database would handle the whole thing. To be honest I doesn't read the complete site of Wikidata Data Model. However, the part I read doesn't explain how data is saved in the database itself. The word 'table' doesn't even appear, neither on this site, nor on Wikidata:Glossary.

Does every single item have his own table, or does every property have his own table?

Could someone explain me please how the database is working or where I can find more information. By the way: Which database software is used anyway?

Thanks --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:28, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Ask the development team: Wikidata:Contact the development team. Snipre (talk) 20:53, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

The underlying software of Wikidata is Open Source, have a look at mw:Extension:Wikibase. --Faux (talk) 23:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. However, it doesn't answer me which database software is really used. Found the following text on the page: Requirements: [...] And one of the following: MySQL or MariaDB 5 or later, SQLite 3 or later, PostgreSQL 9 or later. So it seems to me the wikibase of wikidata itself is also using one of them? --Nightwish62 (talk) 23:39, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Items are saved as a JSON structure on a single page, which is then referencing properties (kind of data declarations) that is also saved on pages the same way. Between these there are links nearly like on ordinary wikipages. Litteral data is stored in the JSON on the item pages themselves. Items is like the subject in a linked data triple, while the the predicate is sort of the statement, and the actual data or object is saved as literal data in the JSON or linked to the actual data. Each item does not have their own table, but items do rely on existing infrastructure in Mediawiki to make the whole system work. For more on how data is stored, see m:Wikidata/Data model. And no, there is no key-value store or other NoSQL solutions involved for the moment, even if there are some talks about using Lucene for some searches. — Jeblad 00:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

diff buglet?

Check out this diff, then the individual revisions it relates to. The revisions appear identical. --Joe Decker (talk) 19:32, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not a bug. What you did in that diff was to add labels for lots of languages that have that article, but those labels are only visible if you have set your interface to that language, or indicated your knowledge of the languages using the Babel extension (like I have on my userpage). You should still be able to see the difference by comparing [19] to [20]. (Note that if you use the labelLister gadget, it uses the labels from the current revision of the page, regardless of whether or not you are viewing an old revision.) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 20:22, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Ahhh, cool, I've learned something. Thanks! --Joe Decker (talk) 05:28, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Nested properties for creative works

Please move that kind of information on Wikidata:Infoboxes task force/works where it can be discussed without any problem with archives splitting. Snipre (talk) 10:06, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Moved to Wikidata:Infoboxes task force/works#Nested properties for creative works. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:10, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Bot task request

Moved to Wikidata:Bot requests#Bot task request.--Snaevar (talk) 09:48, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Names of Swiss Cantons

A question, which may have broader ramifications. Should our items on Swiss cantons be called xyz (eg. Bern or Thurgau) or Canton of xyz (eg. Canton of Bern or Canton of Thurgau).

The Wikidata help states the following on the subject of disambiguation:

Labels may be ambiguous. An item's label should reflect common English usage. In many cases, this will either be the English Wikipedia title or a variation of that title. When an article title includes disambiguation in it, either by placing it after a comma or by placing it in parenthesis, the disambiguation should be left out. Disambiguation information should instead be placed in the description field. Therefore the English Wikipedia article for London, Ontario has the label London and the description "city in Ontario, Canada" on Wikidata.

so my original take was that they should be plain xyz leaving the description to take care of ambiguities (eg. the Bern the city v Bern the canton).

However my changes got reverted, and everything changed to Canton of xyz. I can live with this, as arguably this is a common usage. But then the Canton of got taken off those cantons where this is not ambiguous, but left on where it is ambiguous. So we had Canton of Bern, but just Thurgau.

This reflects Wikipedia practice, but Wikipedia isn't Wikidata (or, more importantly, have descriptions). If Canton of is only present where the name is ambiguous, then it is clearly a disambiguator, and shouldn't be there in the Wikidata item name. If we want Canton of in the name, it should be there in both names. For now, I've made it there in all names, but I think it worth a discussion on what the correct answer is. -- Chris j wood (talk) 15:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

It should always be Canton of xyz, regardless of xyz being ambiguous or not. Canton of is there in the common usage, except in cases where it is clear that is about cantons (e.g. “The most populous canton of Switzerland is Zurich.”). --Leyo 15:40, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Better use Canton of... because there is often a city with the sams name as the canton. Snipre (talk) 16:55, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not really a matter of disambiguation. Bern is the city, the canton of Bern is a canton. In many cases, I think the city even governed its canton. Aargau or Thurgau are just cantons. So "Canton of Aargau" is the same as "Aargau". --  Docu  at 18:27, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I know but from an international point of view that helps a lot. So if you need more, on official document from the canton of Valais (I'm living there) we find "Canton of Valais*. And for Canton of Jura the correct name is "Republic and canton of Jura". Snipre (talk) 18:56, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

It could suggest that it's about the government only, not the region as such. I don't think we would change "Pennsylvania" to "State of Pennsylvania" either. --  Docu  at 18:59, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

That's the offical name of the political entity representing each canton. If you take the swiss constitution (1rst article) the list of canton is using canton of X too. We have other names for the governement or the parlment. If you want to distinguish between political and historical entities you can find for some cases a difference but from what I know, there only one problem of that kind in switzerland. Snipre (talk) 19:44, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

In my opinion, 99% of users looking for the canton of Valais in the property would just type "Valais" and not "Canton of Valais", so for me it looks like "Valais" with the description "Swiss canton" and aliases "Wallis" and "Canton of Valais" is the best solution. (Just in case, I lived in Switzerland for several years).--Ymblanter (talk) 19:48, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it is relevant what users are likely to type. Users are always lazy. :-) --Leyo 19:59, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

If they want to know the offical name, they can always go to Wikipedia article in one click. We are not Wikipedia, and we do not have to write precise and official names (otherwise I guess the item on Switzerland would have the title "Confederatia Helvetica"). We are here to provide links in the most convenient (but still correct) manner. I find "Valais" way more convenient that "Canton of Valais".--Ymblanter (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

"Users can always go to the Wikipedia article to look up x" is not a very good argument, because, taken to its logical conclusion, it would negate the need for Wikidata altogether. I'm not too happy with Wikidata's policy that item labels should have the most common or widely-known name because I don't see a way how one could determine that objectively. Therefore I would prefer that item labels contain the official name wherever the respective item actually has an official name (and other names as aliases). Barring that, we should at the very least have an "official name" property. Silver hr (talk) 16:39, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The same issue arises with "Arrondissement of ABC" and "Department of ABC" in France, and "Province of ABC/ABC Province" in other countries around the world. Although labels aren't very important since it's the item that counts, a cohesive guideline on it would still be helpful and would make it easier to me be editing at cross-purposes. I would personally lead towards just "Valais" rather than "Canton of Valais". This is much easier to keep homogeneous, as we don't need to worry about if Country X's second division should be a county, state, province, duchy or what, and whether it should be "Départment" or "Department", or what, we just use "Valais". Or in the UK, should we have "County of Yorkshire" to distinguish from the constituency, and if so, should we also have "County of Cornwall", even though there is no constituency called that? Suddenly we are freed from needing or wanting to keep several hundred items with consistent titles, in every language. It's the same as not having disambiguating brackets such as "Joe Bloggs (football player)", "Jupiter (planet)" or full names of things like "Russian Federation". Wikipedia has a need to disambiguate titles, as their database is keyed on page names, but we don't have that problem, and labels shouldn't be containing extraneous information, they just need the salient part ("Valais"), and the description does the rest, backed up by claims if appropriate. Inductiveload (talk) 01:51, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if arrondissements are directly comparable, as I doubt there are any arrondissements that are not named "arrondissement of ABC", but just "XYZ".

In any case, at least for English, Wikipedia has already fairly consistent and stable article names for Swiss cantons. A simple solution we be go with these. --  Docu  at 12:05, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

• The naming of cantons of Switzerland in the English Wikipedia is fairly inconsistent. Canton of is left out for all cases, where XYZ is not used by another canton. Hence, it is no option to use the article names. --Leyo 21:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I'm not quite sure what you mean with "XYZ is not used by another canton". --  Docu  at 03:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
    • It should read “XYZ is not used by another article”. Sorry for that. --Leyo 23:56, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
• A sample for "XYZ" in my previous comment is "Basel-Landschaft": it's not named "Canton of Liestal" (ABC being the capital). Aargau is similar. As such cantons of Switzerland is fairly consistent and limits names to salient parts.
  "Canton of Basel-Landschaft" would be somewhat redundant or clumsy, as there is no "Canton of Liestal" and as "Canton of Basel-Landschaft" would refer to "Basel-Landschaft". For cantons named after its capital, using "Canton of ABC" is actually common usage.
  Thus, I think we should keep the namings used at cantons of Switzerland. (Yes, there is one exception that would need fixing). --  Docu  at 03:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Geneva, Basel-Stadt, Zug, and Schaffhausen are in essence "city-states" (that is: the resp. city makes up most of the area of the Canton. Others, like Jura, Vaud or Valais are not named after their capital (which is Délémont, Lausanne, and Sion, respectively). So, there is probably no way around keeping two pieces of information.--Eptalon (talk) 15:43, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Editting appears to be impossible

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 44228

In the last weeks I have 2 or 3 times done an edit here. At the moment I want to do again some corrective editting, but in my screen there don't appear any buttons to do editting (on those interwiki pages), not even on those pages where I have done edits in the last few weeks. I have checked my user preferences but I didn't see any strange settings. Can somebody help me in solving this issue? Bob.v.R (talk) 02:03, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I looked at the items you edited, they work for me, maybe Javascript is not working on your Computer. What Browser are you using and which version of it? --Sixsi6ma (talk) 03:42, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, if Javascript is not working, or not installed, then users can always use Special:SetAliases, Special:SetLabel and Special:SetDescription.--Snaevar (talk) 09:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

These previous edits were done from my iPad. So, it is possible from my iPad but not from my pc, which uses IE8.

In the meantime it's now more clear to me what correction should be done. If a more experienced user reads this, could you please do this? The items Q519593 and Q1771613, the semi-open game in chess, should be merged. Regards, Bob.v.R (talk) 13:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. In the meantime I discovered that Q1517916 and Q1771619 should be merged. These articles describe the closed game (starting with 1. d4 d5). Regards, Bob.v.R (talk) 14:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

There are known bugs with IE8. My laptop broke the other day and I had to use a public PC, and found I couldn't edit mainspace at all. I believe this has been reported on bugzilla... I'll throw up a tracking number if I can find one. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 21:17, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposal regarding P107 and P31

Please see Wikidata_talk:Property_proposal#Proposal:_use_GND_main_type_.28P107.29_classifications_as_initial_classifications_for_P31; comments welcome. Emw (talk) 20:45, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Sock puppetry

I have started Wikidata:Requests for comment/Sock puppetry to gauge whether we should adapt this as site-wide policy regarding sockpuppetry. Everyone feel free to comment how you wish. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 00:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Fallback items for language links?

As the discussions at Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts show, the slighty different, and yet similar, topics of articles in different Wikipedias can lead to problems with the language link connections between the Wikipedias. I wonder if it is possible, and a good an idea to have "fallback items for language links".

Examples:

1. Articles linked to Q223 (Greenland, largest island on Earth) could use Q4148644 (Greenland, autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark) as fallback if Q233 do not provide any article for a specific language. That way more than about 15 Wikipedias can have links to e.g. the English article about Greenland.
2. Also the other way: Q4148644 could use Q223 as fallback for language links. That way the English article about Greenland could more than about 15 language links without writing them explicit in the article.
3. Articles linked to Q2186 (Romulus, one of the twin brothers of Rome's foundation myth) could use Q2197 (Romulus and Remus, twin brothers and central characters of Rome's foundation myth) as fallback for languages which don't have separate articles about Romulus. The articles about both twins should contain the wanted information about each of them when no separate articles are available.

Is it a feasible idea? Byrial (talk) 22:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

.. and Q1 as fallback for everything else? ;)

Currently there are not too many ways to express relationships between different items, e.g. there should be a way to link Q2186 and Q2197. --  Docu  at 07:02, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I would say that it is not feasible. As I have been told, interwiki links are used to link between the same subject. In my opinion, we should rather clean up the interwikis so only articles about the same subject are linked, rather than linking similar subjects, like Byrial proposes here.--Snaevar (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

In Wikidata:Requests for comment/A need for a resolution regarding article moves and redirects I argue for using redirects in the local language Wikipedias to keep track of the articles which contain information on entities with no individual article. It would be possible to use the same technique in this case by adding redirects. I admit that there is the risk of the proliferation of redirects, but it has the distinct advantage of being close to the community of editors who are best suited to handle this issue with tools they already know.

A fallback entity has the issue, that the answer may be different for different languages. In one language the most elaborate description of Romulus might be subsection in the article of Rome, while in another language a subsection in Roman mythology would be a better target. Secular mind (talk) 11:52, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Similar articles are a very much larger set than same articles. In the specific example Q223 (Greenland, largest island on Earth) and Q4148644 (Greenland, autonomous country within the Kingdom of Denmark) is two very different articles, one is about geography and one is about an administrative region. Those two should have separate articles. The same type of error is in many articles about states, counties, municipalities and a whole bunch of other articles where a geographic and administrative region overlap. — Jeblad 12:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I disagree that there should be separate article in the Wikipedias when a geographic and administrative region overlap. And it seems that so do most the Wipipedias, as only one Wikipedia (ru:) has separate articles for Q223 and Q4148644. As a reader of a Wikipedia I would consider it waste of my time if I had to read two articles to learn about a region, especially if the two articles have a major overlap.

But it really isn't that interessting to discuss what the Wikipedias should or shouldn't do. It is better to discuss how to accommodate with the fact that many Wikipedias do not have separate articles in these cases. I still think fallback items for language links might be a possibility. Secular mind's objections are correct, but why not both allow redirects and fallback items. That way a Wikipedia could have redirects to override the generel fallback if necessary. Byrial (talk) 09:08, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, often separate articles would be unhelpful. Anyway it's the Wikipedias' decision about how to handle that, not ours.

How exactly would you see fallback links working? I wouldn't be in favour of them appearing just like any other interwiki link. And I suspect there'd be situations where more than one related subject could be a useful fallback. Could an interwiki suggestions page, showing various interwiki links closely linked to the current page's topic, be a sensible approach? --Avenue (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Avenue, that sounds as an excellent idea. Byrial (talk) 16:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

What to do with lists?

What shall we do with lists? Currently they seem to be here primarily to collect interwikis like disambiguation pages and items for non-article namespace.

We could create a property "this is a list of" [item] and forget about them? A property would make it easier to filter them in most other tasks. --  Docu  at 12:24, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• I like the idea. Another useful property would be the converse of Property:P301 which has the ambiguous title main article in category. P301 means X is a category whose main article is [item]. A very meaningful property for lists would be X is the main article of [item] (where [item] is a category). Pichpich (talk) 13:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Please suggest other property for this purpose. Property:P301 was intended as replacement of w:en:Cat main or its counterparts on other projects. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Yes, I know what Property 301 is (and I also think it's title is ambiguous) and I'm suggesting creating the reciprocal property. I've just realized that there's already a proposal for this at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic. Pichpich (talk) 14:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  • I added one at Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#list_of. --  Docu  at 21:31, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• Can someone remind me why we need Wikidata items for Wikipedia list pages? Isn't one of the main purposes of Wikidata to enable ad-hoc creation of such pages, in which case they would be rendered obsolete and not warrant a Wikidata item? To my understanding the need for Wikidata items for lists is temporary at best, until there is a way to better way to link to lists. Emw (talk) 14:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  If Wikidata ends up being anything like the various other extensions out there (SMW, DPL, etc.), it will be unable to go into the detail of many of en.wikipedia's featured lists. That's even if phase 3 can handle the server load; I know that both SMW and DPL start making servers cry on even medium loads above 50k pages (and corresponding popularity). --Izno (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  (ec, reply to Emw) At the very least, we need them because interwiki links are handled through Wikidata. We also need them because it will take years before Wikidata is sufficiently bug-free, complete, reliable and user-friendly to even contemplate replacing list articles by ad hoc generated lists. Even if we believe in the promise of Wikidata, it's not realistic to expect that it will be able to generate en:List of actors nominated for Academy Awards for foreign language performances through database queries. And while it's reasonable to hope that Wikidata will one day be able to generate a list of 1930s jazz standards, it's quite obvious that it will never come close to generating an article as complete and useful as en:List of 1930s jazz standards. Pichpich (talk) 14:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Wikidata will not create list pages on the clients, it will provide lists for use on those pages. A list page on a client would need an item and a query to work. — Jeblad 18:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  • • Hmm, well if Wikidata won't ever be able to create thorough lists and replace those now being created by hand across a range of wikis, as some are suggesting, what's the point of all this, exactly? To improve infoboxes on smaller language wikipedias? Phase three was kinda the point, imo. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
      • "What's the point of all this exactly?" is a pretty good question but I'm absolutely confident that the answer is not it will make list articles obsolete and new and better lists will be maintained automatically". Sure, it will work great for a few examples (such as the very modest ones given in the phase 3 FAQ) but I think it's obvious that it won't work for all list articles and even for most list articles. If you really hope otherwise, I think you're setting yourself up for bitter disappointment. 23:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
        • I think the distinction between lists and other articles is overblown. Many articles contain lists, without being "list articles". The data in lists often appears in infoboxes, in article text, and in other lists, making a central data repository useful for lists too. For example, when a new population estimate for a region becomes available, it will be better to change the figure once in Wikidata and have each list or article using it update automatically, than to have to go around manually changing it in all the different places it appears (i.e. articles and lists in various Wikipedias). Maybe some lists (whether standalone or within larger articles) will be created directly from Wikidata, but its applications to lists go well beyond that. --Avenue (talk) 13:35, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

A page specific edit notice for Wikidata:Property_proposal

It would be really helpful if there was the ability at Wikidata:Property proposal for there to be a page specific edit notice to preload an empty version of Template:Property documentation at a new section. You can see something similar in place for Commons Creator: namespace. We also use it extensively at English Wikisource where we have pages headed with namespace specific templates, eg. [21]. I am no expert with them, however I et them up at Wikisource (after stealing from Commons), happy to assist if needed, just ping me.  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Or if you just want to keep it simple, how about a link for add new section that has ?action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Property documentation/preload  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:46, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Auto summary when creating property claim

Before some days when i creating some property claims then auto summury added just like (‎Created a claim: p140) (please see here) but today i observed that no auto summury added with my such property claims edits (1, 2, 3 etc). How it happened? or tell me how i add manually edit summury? --संतोष दहिवळ (talk) 14:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I've filed bugzilla:46537. I am not sure what is going on but we will investigate. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks Lydia Pintscher for quick response. --संतोष दहिवळ (talk) 14:25, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Not sure, but I think that #MediaWiki:Special-newitem.2Fzh is related to this (i.e. only locally translated MediaWiki messages works, not those which are translated on translatewik, btw some of those works also now). This is also weird that when we go to local language main page, tab's name is "Main page", but when we go to other language main page like Latvian main page, then tab's name is as it should (=local tab name). --Stryn (talk) 15:20, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Special:ItemByTitle changes "_" with " " in "site"

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 46466
Resolved fixed

Since this evening I cannot search for pages in be_x_oldwiki - MediaWiki somehow changes "be_x_oldwiki" to "be x oldwiki". I can't even go from Wikipedia's "edit links" to Wikidata page, because it uses ItemByTitle as well. Is it a wmf12 update consequence? Wizardist (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I've filed it as bugzilla:46466. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:16, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Wizardist (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

How will vandalism be handled here?

It seems to me that the usual watch/recent changes mechanism is totally inadequate to handle vandalism at Wikidata. There's already far more pages than the English Wikipedia has articles; and even though the English Wikipedia is the most active, most articles are under-watched. On top of that, here are at Wikidata there's the problem of vandalism across many languages, most of which has a small editing community. Vandalism could go a long time in one of these languages unnoticed.

It's also true that the non-encyclopedia projects seem to attract less vandalism. That's good but it seems to me that Wikidata is ripe for a very nefarious cracker to wreak havoc. Are there any discussions about protecting the integrity of the database from vandals/hackers above and beyond the usual page-watch/revert mechanisms I could read? Is anybody else under the same impression? Jason Quinn (talk) 06:49, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sure this would be a technical nightmare but theoretically, a decent solution would be to show changes to editors who watch the corresponding Wikipedia page. For example, I watch "List of Ambassadors of France to Poland" on en.wiki and the corresponding page (Liste des ambassadeurs de France en Pologne) on fr.wiki so I would see any change to Q3183468 whenever I check my en.wiki watchlist and whenever I check my fr.wiki watchlist. Pichpich (talk) 21:13, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism will become a real problem with some datatypes and some items, and there seems to be no working countermeasure except publishing the changes in the client wikipedias were it has impact and can be seen. The biggest problem is when there are no wikipedia were it has impact (that is visibility) and the effect of the unwanted edit still has a positive effect in some other way. Basically link and keyword spamming for visibility on search engines. Its going to be crazy. — Jeblad 00:44, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Ah the promise of the semantic web: more efficient tools for spamming! But seriously, has there been any discussion on the technical feasibility of publishing changes in the client wikipedias? Pichpich (talk) 02:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

This is already happening (though it is still taking too long to show up there. We have taken some steps to speed it up already but are working on more. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That's a very interesting idea, Pichpich. Jason Quinn (talk) 05:33, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Page protection, at this time, is our best mechanism for protecting highly sensitive items and properties. Pichpich's proposed solution above is supposed to be available, as indicated by the availability of a "Show Wikidata" option in preferences on the English Wikipedia (haven't tested other languages), but it currently does not work (perhaps Jeblad can say why). In the future, we might want to implement a pending changes system, though that would be rather controversial and is a discussion on its own. There have been multiple cases of serious vandalism that were fortunately spotted by admins quickly enough, but eventually our current system may not be enough.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:38, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I regularly watch the list of non-patrolled recent changes with the new editor removing sitelink tag, which seems to cover the biggest group of vandalism currently. Most of those changes can be easily identified as vandalism, just by visiting the removed pages and comparing (translated) article titles, images, weblinks, and references, even if you don't understand that language. But I am wondering, how we even would be able to identify vandalism for non-sitelink values, like numbers or stings. Since there is no option for an editor to write an edit summary, we just see the changed value, but if you don't have knowledge of the article or don't speak that language, you might not be able to distinguish valid edits from vandalism. --Faux (talk) 09:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Tip: I've made DataLiveRC to help figthing vandalism (at the moment it only works for the "new editor removing sitelink" tag) --Ricordisamoa 09:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I can only see an empty page. Even the history shows "blanked the page" as last entry. --Faux (talk) 20:20, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I also just see empty page. Jason Quinn (talk) 06:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I think he meant DataLiveRC.js. --Silvonen (talk) 12:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I share your concern, Jason. I got my new rollback permission today, and when I started watching the 500 latest IP contribs, my first impression was that there is more vandalism than the current community can handle. Do we have any tool to at least speed up the warning process? (On fiwiki, we have ready-made buttons on the edit page.) --Silvonen (talk) 18:40, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

You can try userwarn.js made by User:Bene*. --Stryn (talk) 19:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Also, it would be useful to automatically report a vandal after the fourth warning. Perhaps a good start would be to add the appropriate page to do so in the RecentChanges' header (right now, there are only "Requests for permissions", "Requests for comment", "Requests for deletions" and "Protected edit requests"). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 06:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem is, that most vandal actions are taken by unregistered users and it's quite problematic to assume, that several unrelated vandal actions are done by the same user behind the IP. --Faux (talk) 20:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

When a book has several editions

In this case the original book (published in 1954) does not seem to have an ISBN number (ref). The many newer editions have. How do we then make a statement for either ISBN (P236) or ISBN-13 (P212)? --Kristian Vangen 11:26, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You can't. If you want to add edition number and corresponding ISBN you have to create an item for each edition. There is no decision until now about the creation of item with that accurateness. These properties are mainly used in reference purpose. Snipre (talk) 11:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

There is a related discussion at Wikidata talk:Notability#Books --Stevenliuyi (talk) 12:12, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

But this is concerning more than only books: softwares, film,... ahve the same problem. Snipre (talk) 12:33, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I think this can be solved in future with qualifiers like year. References should then also use that qualifier. Or maybe we should use ISBN numbers as a reference. HenkvD (talk) 16:42, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You want to put place of publication, publisher, date of publication and ISBN in one statement with qualifiers ? Snipre (talk) 19:00, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

You should actually be able to model this pretty well now with the latest update of the code-base that includes multi-line sources. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 23:31, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I tried to meke an overview of options how to implement sources/ references, but it is unclear how this will tunr out on the clients (=Wikipedia's). Feel free to add or change or comment these options. HenkvD (talk) 19:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Option 1
As described by the Wikidata development team

Item	Property	Value	Source	Value	Comment
Item1	P1	Value1	Book ISBN Edition Year Page	Book1 ISBN1 Edition1 2001 1
			Book ISBN Edition Year Page	Book2 ISBN2 Edition2 2002 2
Book1					Items without properties
Book2

Option 2
An Item for each ISBN number (as in German wikipedia)

Item	Property	Value	Source	Value	Comment
Item1	P1	Value1	ISBN Page	ISBN1 1	Page is different for each soucre
			ISBN Page	ISBN2 2
ISBN1	Book Edition Year	Book1 Edition1 2001
ISBN2	Book Edition Year	Book2 Edition2 2002
Book1					Items without properties
Book2

Option 3
Using qualifiers

Item	Property	Value	Source	Value	Qualifier	Comment
Item1	P1	Value1	Book	Book1	ISBN1, Edition1, 2001, pag 1	Qualifier is language dependend (pag / Pág / etc)
			Book	Book2	ISBN2, Edition2, 2002, pag 2
Book1						Items without properties
Book2

Option 4
Allow mixing of a few of the options above.

Prevent creation of properties

Summary of votes:

Pro*: Nightwish62, EugeneZelenko, Jon Harald Søby, Pichpich, Ricordisamoa, Izno, Faux, Snaevar, Shawn in Montreal, ΛΧΣ, Macadamia1472

Contra: Emw, Ljubinka, Zolo, Jasper Deng

(*) Just about the question if there should be a restriction at all, not about the question who exactly should be able to create properties.

If any name is sorted wrong, please correct it. --Nightwish62 (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I suggest that only users with special rights have the possibility to create properties. What I notice at moment:

• Every user can create properties without stick to the rules like that the property has to be discussed beforehand and this discussion has to be archived and also to be copied to the property discussion site
• Unwanted or faulty properties took a long time till day are deleted again
• Meanwhile, motivated editors start to use this property. If the property is later deleted, all their work was for nothing

Here are an example of property which request for deletion is more than two weeks ago.

And here another example of a property which (as far as I know) didn't have aproved by a discussion beforehand and also didn't have further information on his discussion site. In addition, this property has the wrong datatype in my opinion as the most motto or slogan didn't have their own item. Better would be string or Monolingual or something like this.

To prevent such mistakes, we should only give skilled editors the right to create new properties. Anyone the same opinion here?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nightwish62 (talk • contribs).

• I definitely support your suggestion. Otherwise there will no guarantee that property is properly discussed. I also observe several days ago how ~ 40 properties were created as test or vandalism and were deleted couple of hours later. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:34, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
• I agree. I think this should be limited to administrators (it could, of course, be another existing group or a new group, but I think having a separate group just for this would complicate things – the simplest solution is to limit it to admins). Jon Harald Søby (talk) 15:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Admin group is okay for me too. Let it put this way: Since there should ever be a disscusion beforehand, nobody can 'ad hoc' create a property and immediately start using this new property in statements. So there is no disadvantage only administrator do this job. --Nightwish62 (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

• I basically support this or some other solution that makes sure that no property is created without proper discussion. Pichpich (talk) 15:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support some restrictions but  Oppose only to admins: most of the currently used properties have been proposed by normal users. --Ricordisamoa 16:01, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Their proposition does not necessarily require that they need to be admins. Only approved proposals need to be created, and I don't see a reason why that should not be restricted to the admin user set. --Izno (talk) 16:07, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Support special privileges but I think this privileges should not be limited to admins. Maybe we could limit it to autopatrollers, or something like that. --Faux (talk) 16:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Probably Jon Harald Søby and Izno could have a COI ;-) --Ricordisamoa 16:12, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Support special privileges, limited to autopatrollers or autoconfirmed users or rollbackers or confirmed users or autoconfirmed users. It does not really matter to me which one of those user groups get that right.--Snaevar (talk) 16:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  I could personally live with any recognized and trusted users being able to create properties. In other words, what Snaevar says. --Izno (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose I don't see sufficient evidence that the administrative burden of deleting drive-by properties is high enough to warrant restricting this feature to a certain class of users, nor that it's higher than the administrative burden that this would introduce. I also don't see compelling evidence that drive-by property creation followed by massive user uptake, which is later all deleted, actually occurs in any substantial degree. Emw (talk) 16:37, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  But it occurs in some degree, which is wasted work for everyone as laid out in the proposal. --Izno (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps, but that doesn't address my point. Emw (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Emw. Don't forget that Wikidata is a wiki. Ljubinka (discussion) 17:18, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Sorry but do you accept the need of request for deletion of to receive the bot flag ? And wiki doesn't mean that you can do what you want. Snipre (talk) 17:53, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  An open wiki means that there is no preventive control unless necessary. Users can do what they want with the content, and if they do bad things they will be reverted and blocked. Same goes with properties, except if creating a bad property were proved to be really disruptive. It is not. Ljubinka (discussion) 18:00, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  It's a wiki which is a database. It's unlikely in my mind that someone should be creating properties willy-nilly. --Izno (talk) 17:58, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Noone is asserting that properties should be created willy-nilly. Emw (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment Seems to me like creating a property and the dicussing it, or discussing it and then creating it, is more or less the same. I can't see what this proposal really solves, but it is clear that it will make it difficult to make valid examples especially on the clients. On the other hand we need some way to weed out bummers, but a discussion about that would need good examples. — Jeblad 18:15, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  The difference between

  A) creating a property and then discussing it and

  B) discussing a property and then creating it

  is, of course, that contributors can register and explain opposition to proposed properties, and thus prevent many ill-fitted properties, with approach B but not approach A. To my understanding the proposal under discussion is that there should be a restriction on who can create properties, not that properties should be created before they are discussed. Emw (talk) 19:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Yes, you're right Emw. ----Nightwish62 (talk) 20:08, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose. Up to now, I have not seen any problem caused by inexperienced editors creating properties. Ill conceived properties do not cause major disruption, and there is no indication that admins necessarily know what properties are relevant. I am an admin and I have most probably created properties that will need to be deleted. And that do not matter much: there is no indication that merging properties will be a major maintenance drag, especially compared to the additional bureaucracy and rigidity that the implementation of this proposal may create. That said, I am all for a warning banner on Special:NewProperty: "hey you are creating a property, are you sure you know what you are doing ? Do you know the guidelines, have you discussed it ? That would not dissuade vandals, but it may make good-faith newbies think twice, and that is what is important. --Zolo (talk)
•  Oppose per Jeblad, in favor of the enactment of more specific policy regarding the creation of properties. Definitely not something I think should be tied to sysops.--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:23, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
• Yes it's really true. There will be an additional administrator burden (as far we didn't create a new permission specially for the creation of properties). But that's the job of an administrator. To be an admin isn't just a privilege, it's responsibility. If an admin isn't sure or doesn't dare to make a decision about a property proposal, nobody forces him to do so.

  "first create then discuss and first discuss then create is the same". As mentioned: not for me. In worst case everyone used the property for statements already has worked for nothing. --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:09, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  I also see that problem, but I'd like to get a non-technical solution to it by changing the process itself.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:10, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Support I too have seen cases where problematic properties have been created with no or insufficient consensus. And we're stuck with a situation where properties cannot yet be merged. (as one example, I point again to the creation of needless duplication in properties for heads of government at different levels, both now well-populated, with no apparent interest in resolving this). Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:36, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

  Does a bot for merging properties really not yet exist? The functionality seems straightforward to implement and very useful: given a deprecated property A that should be merged into property B, for each item that links to deprecated property A and not B, delete that statement and replace it with a link to property B; if the item links to both A and B, then just delete the statement for property A.

  Could you give a specific example of such a property? Emw (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment Couldn't you do something simple with an abuse filter? Even put in place a polite pause message without certain rights? It is in a namespace, so it should be fairly easy to do with regard to a creation event.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:43, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

  That would also work for me, though it would an abuse of the abuse filter I feel. --Izno (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Support, either for admins or for a new type of users, whatever that might be. I agree that we must have discussion before creating anew property, and although enforcing this might be a bit of an overreaction, its better to prevent than to address latter. If an abuse filter could work, I'd support that too. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 17:03, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment I already voted for support, but I want to add an additional comment since some people argue, that we are getting too restrictive for an open Wiki: According to the property creation policy, a discussion of some days is required before creating a property. Most people who want to create a property will register during this period anyway, or somebody else will create the property (after some supports in the discussion). So I think we won't become more restrictive when introducing this enforcement, than we are right know. In my opinion we only change the enforcement of this rule from a reactive enforcement (people who find a un-discussed property will remove/discuss it) to a preventative enforcement. --Faux (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment I've been listed as in favour of restricting it to admins but I want to stress that my main point is that there should be some mechanism that ensures that properties aren't created in a chaotic way. If there's a good mechanism that allows a wider group of trusted users to create them, I'd prefer that to the admins-only proposal. Pichpich (talk) 20:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Comment Could the proponents of this restriction give some examples of properties that were created in a drive-by, then taken up by a significant number of items in a way that's caused substantial administrative burden and disruption? The cited examples are barely used: Property:P222 (lake frozen) is used in 8 items and Property:P346 (motto) in 0 items. Emw (talk) 04:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

  Well, see this. Dogatv created a bunch of unuseful and empty properties. --Ricordisamoa 04:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

That issue was noted at 2:23 and resolved by 2:28. All of Dogatv's drive-by properties were deleted in one fell swoop at 2:26: see Special:Log/Moe_Epsilon. There almost certainly wasn't any notable adoption of those properties by users. This was dealt with promptly and virtually effortlessly; I don't consider it to be evidence of a problem. Emw (talk) 04:45, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I have filed a RFC on this. --Ricordisamoa 04:40, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Literature-only movements?

Is there any reason why Property:P135 needs to apply only to literary movements? As en:Art movement summarizes, we have them in visual arts. And certainly in film, as well, with such as examples as the recent en:Dogme 95 movement. And no doubt elsewhere. Can we change the label and description to make it a general property for all arts movements? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:36, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Seconded. It's good to have properties with a reasonably large scope and in this case I don't see any downside to the proposed change. Pichpich (talk) 20:24, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Great, yes, this seems like a no-brainer since the related Property:P136 for Genre is under the general Wikidata:List_of_properties#Works_.2F_Werke_.2F_.C5.92uvres section. I think it was just an oversight. I'm copying this discussion to the Property talk page, rewording it and moving it up in the Property list to the general works section. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:00, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

songs

Hello, My bot wants to work on musical works (songs/singles/albums etc.) but i don't have any example to work on it so, Add every statement you can to Love the way you lie or fix you (or every song you like but tell me) Amir (talk) 04:11, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

new code deployed

Heya folks :)

We have deployed new features and bugfixes here. Here are the major ones you probably care about:

• Multi-line references. This should make references much more useful. You can now have one reference with for example values for each of the properties "book", "author", "page" to describe one source.
• The search box was replaced. Give it a try!
• Fixed the prev/next links in diff view (bugzilla:45821)

In addition we have added code to better be able to debug why it takes so long for changes to propagate to the Wikipedias. This will hopefully give us the needed information to speed this up considerably. We have also just added a second cron job on the server for this which might improve things already.

Please let me know if you have any questions or see any issues that might be related to this deployment. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Urgh it seems someone forgot to mark the search box change as non-experimental so it isn't enabled yet :/ Will be done next week then. Sorry. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:44, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Diff views fixed, yay! --Izno (talk) 19:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The ability to only list properties without labels in a language have also be added. Example: properties without label in French. Tpt (talk) 20:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Also yay! --Izno (talk) 20:10, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Was there an intentional change on unlabeled items to fill out the labels? The form no longer stretches to the edit link. There may be other changes made which I'm not immediately cognizant of from memory. --Izno (talk) 20:14, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not sure. I will ask tomorrow. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 20:18, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

The appearance seems to have reverted to what it was previously. It may have been a piece of Javascript I installed today (and quickly uninstalled). Let me know. --Izno (talk) 23:25, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

I asked and this should not have changed. If it still is there after the redeployment (hopefully happening soon) please take a screenshot and let me know which browser and version you are using. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:04, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Unrelated to Wikidata but all the wikis had to be reverted back to wmf11 because of a bug that makes it impossible to move pages: https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=46397 Developers are looking into it and hopefully we can be back on wmf12 soon. Katie Filbert (WMDE) (talk) 07:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I figured out the problem: my work computer is on Fx 11.0 on Windows 7. I'll live with the issue at work. --Izno (talk) 15:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: We are now back on the new codebase including multi-line references and fixed prev/next. \o/ --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 22:12, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Why can't I...

Can so help me, why I couldn't put a label to Q317263 Q242738, on 19 March, but now sddenly do...)? And why can't I add en:Trad, fr:Trad and ja:トラッド to Q2447670? Thanks! --Trofobi (talk) 11:31, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Suddenly it works... But I would be happy for an explanation - there was only the error message "An error occurred while trying to perform save and because of this, your changes could not be completed." without info.. --Trofobi (talk) 11:39, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I get messages like this fairly frequently. Refreshing the page then redoing the edit usually works for me. --Avenue (talk) 13:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! So it's not only me... Yeah, the whole Wikidata-interlanguagelinkproject is still quite buggy... login-logout / empty cache / refresh as standard procedures necessary... is this a Microsoft project?? *eg* For ex.: Yesterday I fixed "Trad" what had been split on 2 items Q2447670+Q3536368 - although identical lemmas, and even today it is not shown in the WPs correct:

• http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trad all correct (after I put the iw-links in the WP article)
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trad de link missing
• http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trad de link missing
• http://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/トラッド de link missing

Do you get it displayed right? Or like above? --Trofobi (talk) 11:20, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Write ?action=purge at the end of the link to a Wikipedia article, and you'll get the page purged. After that, you see all of the interwikis. In some Wikipedias there's a special gadget that displays the UTC clock in the top-right corner. The clock also purges the current page --Michgrig (talk) 11:30, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Items, Strings and Images and Strings #property on test client

With the last refresh of the test system the #property on test client is activated not only for Items but now also for Strings and Images. The {{#property:xxxxx}} returns the value from the demo reposatory. For example ({{#property:test}}) on Helium on the client returns successful because that is the value I set on Helium on the repository. Likewise {{#property:Chemical symbol}} returns He and {{#property:Image}} returns Helium discharge tube.jpg I also update the Template:Infobox element and created a Q-number on the reposatory for the template with some test data. HenkvD (talk) 15:05, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks you for setting up some examples! As an fyi: this is scheduled to go live on test2.wikipedia.org in a few hours and on the first few Wikipedias on Wednesday. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:11, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Ok something to keep in mind: in this first deployment on test2 properties will need to be addressed by their ID - by label will hopefully be in the deployment after that. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:33, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Which will be the firsts wikipedia? --β₁₆ - (talk) 09:43, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

it, he, hu, ru, tr, uk, uz, hr, bs, sr, sh --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

OK, thanks! :) --β₁₆ - (talk) 16:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Item pages only partly editable

This morning, I noticed that most item pages that I visited do not allow me to edit the "In other languages" section, nor to add new interwiki links. All of this worked fine last night. Some of the pages that brought up the problem: Q2003977, Q8304850, Q6062913, Q6244602. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 09:09, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Same here -- the problem appeared suddenly about an hour ago, and seems to affect every item I browse. In addition to what Daniel said, I can't edit or add properties, and they're not even displaying properly (codes instead of labels) -- it looks like this. --Vesihiisi (talk) 09:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

It seems there are some issues in the interaction with ULS. We are investigating. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:03, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

It should be fixed again now. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it works again, at least for me. Thanks. -- Daniel Mietchen - WiR/OS (talk) 10:33, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Please check your bug reports every now and then

Hey :)

If you have filed a bug report for Wikidata on http://bugs.wikimedia.org at some point or I did it for you please take a minute to check if they're still valid. That'd be a great help. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:28, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Multiline sources

Apparently, they are now deployed for real. It may be time to start thinking about sources for real. I have started two threads at Wikidata talk:Sources  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Zolo (talk • contribs) at 14:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC).

Disambiguation pages with the same names in multiple languages

What do I do with these? For example, I've got Vulkano, Vulcan, Vulkan, and Vulcan.

This is a pretty typical problem when a language takes a loanword from English and then has two disambiguation pages which cover the same thing, differentiating only by the fact one is about the English loneword and the other the native language word. Thoughts/advice? --Izno (talk) 02:22, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages are not about a "thing" they are about a phrase or better one specific series of letters without a defined meaning, the different meanings of this one phrase are listed in the page, not the item. That is why Vulcan and Vulkan are and should be different items, see here for more information. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 08:33, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

And that's why I separated Q38 and Q14. Unfortunately, the problem is when a word in one language translates into the same "ambiguous" word as another item in a different language. See e.g. the edit you made which ended up deleting the ru link which translates as 'vulcan'. And now that disambiguation page does not have an item here. --Izno (talk) 13:06, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

And on top of this, for languages using non-Latin alphabet, the disambiguation by spelling can be different from the disambiguation by pronouncation, for instance in Russian both Renaud and Renault would be spelled as Рено, which creates problems to find proper interlanguage links.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:16, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, but the problem, One-article-in-one-language-treats-two-articles-in-an-other-language is not limited to Disambiguation Pages. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 15:09, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

In case of the russian Вулкан (значения) it's obvious that it should not be linked to Q384315, since the russian Disambiguation Page Vulcan itself exists, even if Вулкан is a transcription of Vulcan. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't disagree with you, I just don't like the feeling that we're leaving pages behind. Even so, if the word translates as "Vulcan", what do I use as a description? I can't use the same description as the Q384 link... --Izno (talk) 20:23, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Oh, itemless pages are not left behind, they get picked up by a bot sooner or later. Descriptions for DisAmb pages are always the same for one language, I think for russian pages it is "страница значений". If you want to create the item for the now itemless page Вулкан (значения), the labels would have to be "Вулкан" in all latin and cyrillic script languages, since the latin transcription of "Вулкан" has its own item. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 22:22, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Are you sure that having label "Вулкан" in all latin languages is good? :) You do want to create separate items for each spelling of disambiguation... But I would like to have links from Вулкан to Vulkan and Vulcan because they have nearly the same content. Infovarius (talk) 22:03, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes I am. You can not have links from Вулкан to Vulcan, because the Russian language has articles for both and you can not link two articles of one language to one item nor can you link one article to two items nor can you link two items together, not only wouldn't it make sense it is technically impossible. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 01:51, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

It definitely makes sense! If you have in one language only one word for "rain" whereas in the other two clearly separated names "heavy rain" and "drizzle", would you link one article and have the other one go into nirvana?SimsKoarl (talk) 18:25, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Are we talking about article pages or disambiguation pages? --Sixsi6ma (talk) 20:37, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Monuments database

Hi everyone, for several years I've been working on the monuments database. It's a structured dataset about monuments (historic buildings) containing over 1 million items from over 35 countries in over 20 different languages. The contents is updated on a daily basis using templates at the different Wikipedia's. It's used as the basis for several tools used in Wiki Loves Monuments. I consider the monuments database a step in the evolution to more structured data. Over time I think every item in the monuments database will get an entry here and the database in it's current form will cease to exist. So how to model the data here? I'll take Rijksmonument and the list of Bloemendaal (en & nl) as the example:

• municipality -> Property:P131 can be used for the municipality and the province
• description -> An item can contain a description. We do loose links in the description I'm afraid
• type_obj -> Building or archeology. Not sure yet
• org_function -> for example "house". Not sure if we have a property for that yet
• build -> wait for the time object
• architect -> Property:P84
• address -> still under discussion afaik
• lat & lon -> waiting for that object
• objno -> the unique identifier for the Rijksmonument. This is the primary key. Create a new property for that with type String?
• image -> Property:P18

Besides that we have some other things:

• Each item probably has Country set to the Netherlands
• A lot of Rijksmonuments have articles, that's easy, it gets harder when multiple Rijksmonuments share one article. Rijksmonuments do have the concept of a complex. That needs to be modeled.

I took a shot at this one. What do you think? How should we approach this? Multichill (talk) 16:16, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi Multichill, I've fixed the link to the database in your post. --Faux (talk) 16:21, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Hi, nice job, just three points for now:

"Main use" is being discussed at Wikidata:Property_proposal#Main_use

We should certainly have properties for "Riksmonument ID" and the like, and also add a relevant external link to User:Ricordisamoa/AuthorityControl.js.

If we want to keep, say, the description from the Dutch monument register. We could probably have a "Monument register" string property, and hopefully soon add the URL in the source. But I do not know about copyright issues here. --Zolo (talk) 16:43, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

@Faux, thanks for the com com com fix ;-)

Main use might be of interest, but it's different than org_function. Say for example something build and listed as a church, but now being used as an residential building. The original function should be "Church"

Ok. Proposed it at Wikidata:Property proposal/Place#Rijksmonument identifier / Rijksmonumentnummer.

I don't think we need to keep the original description. Multichill (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it would be possible "function" in a "main use" statement, with a qualifier like "original use", or "listed as". It may happen that a monuments usage changes several times over history, and that may be clearer to have the full timeline in one property. Uf the function is of special interest for the Rijksmonument status, I think it should also be present as a qualifier of the "is a Rijksmonument statement."

Description: oh you mean we loose wikilinks that may be present in your database ? Yes we apparently loose that. --Zolo (talk) 17:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Notability#Default notability criteria now allows creation of items even if there is no Wikipedia article for a monument. However, we still need to identify these items easily to avoid automatic deletions like the one of Q8154962. One way to do that could be to add "instance of: cultural property (q2065736)" to each. --  Docu  at 19:50, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Created the property. Multichill (talk) 21:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

new search box and testing of data inclusion on test2.wikipedia.org

Heya folks!

We've deployed new code here. This includes replacement of the search box. I hope you like this better than the previous one :)

http://test2.wikipedia.org now also has the ability to include data from Wikidata. It'd be awesome if you'd give it a try to make sure there are no major issues before we roll this out on the first few Wikipedias on Wednesday. There are two ways to include data:

• The first one is by adding a parser function like {{#property:p123}} to the Wikipedia article. This will then get the value that is associated with property p123 on the connected Wikidata item. We're working on making it possible to use the property's label (instead of p123 in this example) and more. See meta:Wikidata/Notes/Inclusion syntax for that.
• The second one is via Lua and supposed to be used for more complicated things that can't be done with the parser function. The documentation for that is here. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:07, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

So the Roadmap should be updated also. --Nightwish62 (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I tested it with Infobox Country and used it on for instance a new article Germany or an existing article Belgium. Works as expected. GOOD JOB. HenkvD (talk) 19:24, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Articles in descriptions

It appears that the vast majority of users are unaware of the guidelines for descriptions (no capitalization/articles at beginning, no period at end, etc.). I have created Template:No-articles-description as a sort of user notice/warning, but is there any other way to let users know about this? Or perhaps, get a bot to remove these articles from descriptions? I welcome any input. FrigidNinja 01:09, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what can be done, honestly. There are the help pages and the notice when editing the page already. The warning is a good idea, though. Ajraddatz (Talk) 01:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure what notice you mean, but that gives me an idea. If it's technically possible, it would be helpful to have a notice pop up (sort of like the original "release edit under Creative Commons" notice) when a user begins a description with an article, requiring them to confirm their edit. This would allow for special cases where the description should begin with "a" or "the" (I can't think of any right now, but it's possible). FrigidNinja 01:40, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

There's a problem with Q187819 (dash)

English is one of the few languages grouping the different types of dashes into one article. Q187819 links this article to en dash on some language wikis lacking a general article for dash, leaving em dash, etc. unlinked (German doesn't even have a general word for dash to begin with). So it seems the item should be split up. 23PowerZ (talk) 02:05, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Special:Translate didn't accept the last translation?

Like Wikidata:Introduction/zh-hant, I've translated all parts of the page, but why the Chinese version of the last paragraph did not appear? And why I can't set the state to "published"? tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 13:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

It has delayed for 10 minute to accept the translation. But I still can't change the state to published. tntchn ^{Comment · Contribs} 13:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed vandalism policy

I've proposed a new policy/guideline for Wikidata. It can be found at Wikidata:Vandalism. It would be great if anyone could comment. Thanks,

Jakob ^{Megaphone, Telescope} 15:17, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

bidirectional properties

Wouldn't it be better to make the properties bidirectional in nature. For example, if for Q212776 (1812 Overture) the statement is made that Q7315 (Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky) is the composer (Property:P86) of this work, wouldn't it make sense to automatically add the inferred statement to Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky that 1812 Overture "was composed by" him. Thus, basically Property:P86 (and the other properties) not only have the unidirectional meaning of "composer" but the bidirectional of "composer ↔ was composed by". The advantage would be a higher degree of semantic links between the items.

Also, this approach would decrease the amount of missing statements: For example currently there are the properties Property:P155 (preceded by) and Property:P156 (followed by), but the main issue of this explicit approach to achieve a bidirectionality is that every author must always keep in mind if he uses the "preceded by" property, he must also use the "followed by" property for the target item, and vice versa. Also users would need to know which properties are the inverse properties of other properties. With implicitly bidirectional properties this would not be the case. --Mps (talk) 21:33, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with you. It's the same thing for father/mother and child, brother, sister and shares borders with. Blackpen (talk)

 Support, too, but not sure if and how this can be technically implemented. There are already some programs for consistency check, though. --Ricordisamoa 20:37, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

 Comment I believe a part of the supposed functions of User:ImplicatorBot is to automatically add those inverse relations. See also Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/ImplicatorBot. --whym (talk) 03:34, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes the way this is supposed to go forward is with bots like this one. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the point of Mps's request is that the software extension(s) running Wikidata should do this, not individual properties on separate pages. A bot doing it frankly almost defeats the purpose of Wikidata (in that we should record data, information, and relations in one place and one place only). --Izno (talk) 13:33, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support I really think the software should handle this. With bots doing this you will always have inconsistencies. Blackpen (talk) 21:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

 CommentNot all properties are invertible. Some are mutual (eg 'is a relative of') and some are in reciprocal pairs (eg 'is a parent of'/'is a child of'). But many more appear to be in reciprocal pairs, but are not. For example 'is a son of' has 'is a parent of' as its converse; but the latter has a different property 'is a child of' as its converse. I am sure a system could be made to handle this; but it might be complicated to define the relations between properties adequately for this purpose. --ColinFine (talk) 23:03, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

The trick here is in defining properties right. In your example, the property 'is a son of' is not a good property because it entails two pieces of information: 'is a child of' and 'child is male'. The proper place to state that the child is male would be in the child's item. So basically 'is a son of' should not be stated, it should be inferred. Silver hr (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support - Maybe not all properties should be bidirectional, but having the possibility to make a property bidirectional is a must IMO. This should be supported at the lowest level possible. - Soulkeeper (talk) 15:05, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support Per above. A bidirectional property ("is a parent of") can have a separate label for the reverse direction ("is a child of"), which I think is even better than having property pairs marked as inverses of each other, but even the latter would be good. Silver hr (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support On principle and on practice. Good idea. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 22:32, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support: But there should be a “override“ button, just in case.--Svebert (talk) 22:42, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support: but maybe we shoud add a propertys property saying "it's invertible" :-) Anyway, agree to the override button. Let's do either invertible by default or the other way around, but let's do it. Aubrey (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

 Comment The system as it is now is in its nature unidirectional, which is quite natural for a linked data system. That said a whole bunch of properties are reflective and would exist in pairs, that is they would seem to be bidirectional. One way to achieve this in the current code would be to allow claims for properties and let additional code access this information and then build linkage accordingly or even enforce additional constraints. I would perhaps say that we should not be to concerned about reflective properties in particular but more on what happens when someone edits a statement with a property that has some additional constraints, or in particular has a specially crafted claim that fires up an additional handler or dialog box before, after or as a replacement for the ordinary edit action. The handler could be written in Lua and it could fire up a JS dialog if necessary. A bidirectional property would then simply be a handler for a hook run after normal editing. The system would still be unidirectional in nature, but the handler would make sure that additional linkage is taken care of. There is one thing that is important, and that is to add reflective properties would bring us outside the primary goal of the current system – replacement of infoboxes on Wikipedia. Note that this is my opinion on how to handle this kind of properties and that others might disagree. — Jeblad 03:20, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

I've seen this feature requested in a few places, and generally there are all kinds of feature requests for the Wikidata software all over the site; the answer, if there is one, always being that it's outside of the current scope of the project. So I was wondering, is there a central place where we can propose and discuss new core features for a potential Phase 4 (and beyond)? Silver hr (talk) 14:14, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support, though I think it would be best to first implement built-in Wikidata support for basic features like 'type' and 'subclass'. 'Type' and 'subclass of' are both properties of RDFS, whereas the ability to specify properties as symmetric, reflexive and transitive (and not) are features of the OWL W3C recommendation for the Semantic Web. Since OWL is built upon RDFS, it seems like it would make sense to implement essential features from RDFS first. Emw (talk) 03:59, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support, very necessary. --Nightwish62 (talk) 18:29, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support saves time and energy. structure should be prepared as bidirectional property will be multidirectional in future. eg. relationships between family members. -- Nizil Shah (talk) 20:49, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

 Comment Even while preparing ImplicatorBot, I ask myself why we have bidirectional properties at all. If F is the father of C, why does that have to be stated twice? "Father"/"mother" could be scrapped entirely, or "child" (I'd prefer "child" to stay, as it is simpler; the gender of the parents will tell us which it is). "Foreign properties" could list the missing connections on pages and in the API. --Magnus Manske (talk) 21:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support, but I have a  Comment. The bot must be prepared to also remove properties. Image that I put that X is son of Y, but in reality is son of Z. The bot puts that Y is father of X. Someone erase the error. The bot must be prepared to in a period of 24 hours (to avoid vandalism) to erase that Y is father of X and correct if needed. (I hope I was clear) - Sarilho1 (talk) 21:29, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Well, that's more for the bot discussion page, but the bot will not run continuously; I'll start it occasionally by hand, or once a week by cronjob once it runs smoothly. If it makes an edit based on a wrong entry, and this is discovered and both connections are removed, it will not touch either item the next time around. --Magnus Manske (talk) 21:46, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Manual and bot edits to items

It's exciting to see bots gradually adding statements on a range of items, before our very eyes. For editors like myself who have been helping to manually add claims to items, are we speeding the process up of populating items in any way? Probably not, right? For ex., I see Dexbot is now working through hiphop. If an editor in this subject area had added certain statements, would the bot just rewrite what's already there? Hope I've phrased this correctly. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:40, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

There are properties (like P131, located in) where it is probably more sensical to let bots do the bulk of the job before we do some manual polish. I do not know how exactly how they work, and much of it is customisable, but in any case they can be much faster than humans. However there are some properties like P180 (depicts) or P279 (subclass of), where bots can probably handle only a small part of the job. I would guess we should concentrate manual efforts there.--Zolo (talk) 22:03, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Identification of Wikidata item

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 46229

Currently, in Wikipedia in any language, you can only see the existence of a Wikidata item if there are interwikis. However, it is possible that this item exists, without interwikis. I suggest that the "Edit links" appears when the item exists.

If what I say is not understood, see:

• el:Αρχαία Βοιωτία (Ancient Viotia)
• and item Q187570

Since the item exists, why shouldn't we have the "Edit links" in el:Αρχαία Βοιωτία ? --FocalPoint (talk) 19:09, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

There's a good javascript tool for this. See Wikidata:Tools#Display_Wikidata_Info_on_Wikipedia. Pichpich (talk) 19:15, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

This is on the todo-list for one of the next deployments. I unfortunately can't find the corresponding bug report at the moment. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:16, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

I think that the dialog box is a GoodThing™ but in the future when this do every linkage locally on the client we need an additional link somewhere in the client that points to the item on Wikidata. Perhaps this link should be in the toolbox, some kind of "Link to item" entry in the box. — Jeblad 12:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Names of languages

Has anyone thought about displaying names of languages not as they call themselves but in the language selected by the user in Preferences? It is quite difficult to know all of the language codes, and it is next to impossible to type languages whose names use special characters or even hieroglyphs --Michgrig (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 User:Ricordisamoa/SitenamesInUserLanguage.js --Ricordisamoa 10:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd make it a gadget... --Ricordisamoa 10:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. Yeah, I agree that it should be a gadget, and the enabled-by-default one. --Michgrig (talk) 11:08, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Oops. Your gadget is good, but it is only for viewing language names on item pages. But I was talking about editing, when adding sitelinks. --Michgrig (talk) 11:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I'll work on it. Thanks. --Ricordisamoa 08:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it is necessary to use local scripts to write the language name, it should be possible to use the language codes. The reason why we use the autonym form of the language names are to make it possible for people using those scripts to actually read the language name, and at the same time avoid that the servers explodes and go down in flames. Each language object is rather large, and when we have several hundred of them we simply run out of memory. That is rather bad. So we simply use the autonyms like on Wikipedia. — Jeblad 11:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

item descriptions in watchlist

Currently, items appearing in a watchlist are listed with their entity ID. The latter information is pretty useless unless one is able to memorize hundreds of 7-digit numbers. I recently added descriptions for all items whose label is Joe Johnson. Item labels don't carry disambiguators so the description is what allows one to tell which Joe Johnson is associated to a particular item. So I would propose that we stop showing entity IDs in the watchlists and provide the description instead. Pichpich (talk) 13:54, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd support that, if technically feasible, since descriptions have replaced disambiguators here. It would also underscore the need to write short descriptions, which isn't always the case, even though that's what guidelines call for. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:06, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I like the implied feedback mechanism. "You don't like that 30 word description messing up your watchlist? Well you wrote it, you idiot!" Pichpich (talk) 15:02, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

What about hiding the description behind a tooltip so that it's only visible when hoovering your mouse over the item? --Faux (talk) 18:57, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 Support Faux's idea. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 19:19, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

 Oppose the tooltip idea: the whole point is that I want to see immediately what items have been affected. Hovering will be available through navigationpopups eventually. Pichpich (talk) 20:27, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Note that navigationpopups is a gadget and not part of production code. — Jeblad 11:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Language variants

I would like to know, how the different language variants in Wikidata are intended to be used. For example the English and German languages, have several variants which exist as completely separate languages here in Wikidata: e.g. British English, Canadian English, Austrian German, Swiss German, ... Maybe other languages also have variants on Wikidata. Right now, only a very small amount of items has a label in e.g. Austrian German. I was thinking to write a script which imports the German labels to Austrian German (since 90% of the terms are the same and only some differences exist, which need to be changed manually). Sombody suggested that it would be better, if someone chooses the Austrian German "language" and there is no label available for a term, the German one is shown instead. Is there a rule how these language variants should be used? Maybe someone who was involved in the Wikidata planning phase can explain if there exist any plans in the integration or usage of these language variants. --Faux (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Currently, if there is not a defined label (etc) for an item in Canadian English, the English one is displayed instead as the "fallback language". I'm not sure if this happens with the variants of German though, since they might also just show the English label. Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:18, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The languages de_AT/de_CH and de are handled like completely different languages, like es vs. en. But I cannot even see this working in the English variants: en_GB has no label, but en has one. --Faux (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

In those cases, the label is displayed when the item is linked too (and in the rc, etc), but when viewing the page it shows that a description in the actual selected language hasn't been selected yet. Or, that's how it should be working... Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I've been wondering about this, too. In almost all cases, having separate EN-CA, EN-GB, EN-US, etc labels is just going to cause confusion and mean that errors (especially in titles and alternate names) persist for prolonged periods. I can see the justification for some cases, but we're imposing a very large overhead for a relatively small benefit. Andrew Gray (talk) 14:22, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree, there isn't much need for the variants of English especially. It's especially funny that the only recognized variants are British and Canadian English, with en being American English... Ajraddatz (Talk) 14:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

The big question is, where these variant labels should be shown, since there are no separate Wikipedias for British English and American English (same in German). --Faux (talk) 14:32, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

There are only one global lanuage fallback for now, and that is English (en). It would be nice to have alternate fallbacks, but without additional code its not possible for now as it also messes with the message fallbacks. — Jeblad 11:14, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Language links not showing up at Uk-wiki

Despite the uk: language link being listed at Q8127143, I cannot see any language links at uk:Шаблон:Lang-gd. Any ideas on how to fix this? Thanks. It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 19:06, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Help:FAQ, question 26. --Michgrig (talk) 19:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

At present the delay is about 22 hours, but there are some work that hopefully drives the delay down. — Jeblad 11:02, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Deletion of "type of" properties

I have made a proposal to merge most "type of" properties into "instance of". It is easier to make those changes while Wikidata is not yet much used in Wikipedias. Please give your opinion at WD:RFD#"Type of" properties --Zolo (talk) 15:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

And for unrelated reason, I proposed the deletion P:P107 too, as it has been so strongly criticized. --Zolo (talk) 16:46, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Queries

Denny wrote down how we're planning to support queries at meta:Wikidata/Development/Queries. Your feedback is appreciated there. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:33, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Sitelinks vs labels

Hello, it was recently suggested on my talk page that I should update labels when I update a sitelink for a moved page. I see the benefits of this, but does anyone have any objections or possible errors from this? Thanks. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  03:23, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

It depends on the move. If we move Usher (singer) to Usher (musician), I see no reason to update the label; but if we move Annona muricata to Soursop, then we should update it. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 03:57, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

in some languages like Farsi we should have also parenthesis in labels see Wikidata:Bot_requests#Farsi_LabelsYamaha5 (talk) 14:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I was more specifically referring to letting the "new label" = "new sitelink" of "old label" = "old sitelink", not to determine what label to use like stripping off a part of the title etc. — Hazard-SJ  ✈  22:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

RFBOT

Hi guys, I think we need a bot to quickly import Authority Control data from Wikipedia, and I feel that SamoaBot is ready.

He it has proved to be reliable enough, while importing VIAF, LCCN, GND and NDL from de.wiki, en.wiki, it.wiki and ja.wiki.

So, please, review my request. Thanks.

Regards, Ricordisamoa 00:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Centro sociale autogestito

I'm not sure about the interwikis of

• http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q8536775 (Social Center)
• http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q8570536 (Centro sociale autogestito)

WP.en has en:Self-managed social centers in Italy and en:Social center. -- Xofc (talk) 05:42, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Two properties for the same label

I have some problems with the property "editor": this property is a "item" datatype. But for referencing purpose I don't want to create an item for one person which doesn't have any wikipedia article and won't be used more than once in Wikidata. Could it be possible to create a new property called editor with a "string" datatype ? Perhaps with label editor (string). Snipre (talk) 21:48, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

No because this would not be localized properly. Ljubinka (discussion) 15:25, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry can you give a little more explanantions: if we have a property editor (item) and editor (string) what is the technical problem ? Snipre (talk) 20:18, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You can not enter different strings as you can enter different labels. This might not look like a big problem between latin languages but it is between languages of different scripts. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 11:06, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe not the right place for asking this, but why did person not make it on the list of default notability criteria? --Faux (talk) 12:53, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

@--Sixsi6ma I don't see why: when you create a new item you have to enter a description and a label and this is done in all scripts. This no difference between entering a string as a string or entering a string as label for an item. Snipre (talk) 18:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The difference is that the label of an item belongs to one language only, a string is the same for all languages. Strings should only be used as data type for international phrases like ISBN-Numbers, airport codes, country codes, etc. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 21:29, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

But your argumentation indicates that you will translate everything. But do we need to translate a book title, an article newspaper or the name of sombedody which don't have any translation ? If somebody uses a reference written in Chinese and only in Chinese better to have only the Chinese data because other translations are not useful. I can understand for the translation problem for statement but not for references because for reference you have to put the exact information with the translation if you want but first the original informations. Snipre (talk) 10:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

This has nothing to do with translation, but you need to be able to enter a transcription of the name of the "editor", so people of languages of foreign scripts are able to pronounce it, to create the same property with an other data type does not work. I still dont understand why you don't want to create an item for the "editor" and have a clean solution, you can call for a vote to add "person" to the default notability criteria, if you are afraid the item might get deleted. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 12:35, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

I am not afraid : my rials were deleted. Actually criteria define that all item without sitelink are deleted. Snipre (talk) 15:15, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't know to which criteria you refer to, but the WD:N clearly state that there are exceptions for several types of items. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 10:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

selfrevert

Is there a possibility that we can automatically patrol edits which get self reverted? Mabdul (talk) 14:43, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Reverted by the same user who made them? --Ricordisamoa 14:50, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Exactly. SO if user a (or IP a) make an edit and reverts a few minutes on its own, so why should we need to patrol that edit? Mabdul (talk) 15:07, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

A good idea, except the software doesn't know that the IP reverted himself. I would just suggest ignoring these. --Izno (talk) 15:11, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it's better to file a bug on MediaWiki... however, I could make a script to automatically get patrolled these edits by someone... --Ricordisamoa 15:16, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

@Izno: The user right autoreviewrestore for FlaggedRevs already exists. Thus, I think it would be also possible for our system if a bug was filed. Regards, Vogone talk 15:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

FR isn't installed here, and I don't see a compelling need to install that here for this itty-bitty thing. --Izno (talk) 21:47, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think Vogone meant we should install FR here, but that there should be a userright like autopatrolrestore. However, such a right would differ from Mabdul's proposal, because autoreviewrestore automatically marks all rollbacks performed by users who have this right as checked (currently only GR, GS and stewards have it AFAIK, so that their vandalism reverts are autoreviewed on FR wikis where they don't have local reviewer permissions). What we want here is having self-reverts autopatrolled by every user and IP (not reverts of changes by another user), but not only those which are performed using rollback. So in my opinion we don't need a new userright to solve the problem Mabdul was getting at. Instead we should file a bug to request a change to the patrol extension, so that self-reverts of every user and IP are autopatrolled. Regards --Iste (D) 23:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

You didn't understand me correctly. I meant that I doubt there are occuring many problems for the developers if we let them create a user right like Mabdul has purposed as a quite similar user right (but as you already mentioned for rollback + FR only) already exists. And in my opinion any revert to an already checked revision should be patrolled, if it is the last checked revision. Regards, Vogone talk 00:47, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your clarification :) So we share the opinion that self-reverts should always be autopatrolled. I don't understand why a userright is needed for this purpose. To me a new userright would only make sense if we wanted to restrict autopatrolling self-reverts to certain user groups. Regards --Iste (D) 10:22, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

How do you plan to patrol the edits then, if not with a user permission? By bot? Anyway, user permissions can theoretically also be assigned to [all] contributors, including unregistered users. Regards, Vogone talk 13:40, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

vital js tools for move and delete for local wikis

We need live tool to update move and delete links in wikidata now it is done by bot with delay and it cause some problems for local wiki's users also now it is possible after move admins delete old link from local wiki and bots in wiki data removes the links and movebot can not update the links in wikidata so pages becomes none-interwiki! In my opinion we should have a tool to update wikidata when user moved or deleted a page from local wiki and it works automaticaly. it can be inside mediawiki with the move or delete action Yamaha5 (talk) 09:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Work in progress. --Ricordisamoa 09:29, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Removing other language label/desc from appearing on page

I'm trying to remove the de and zh-tw input boxes from appearing when I visit an entry page with the little language icon on the top of the vector bar, though I can't figure out how. Does anyone know how to do so? Thanks :) Hurricanefan24 (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

They're there because of the babel box on your userpage. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:23, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

No suggestions of non-main namespace pages in search

If I type into this upper-left (Vector, uselang=ru) field Special:Ne, the spincircle is shown but it doesn't suggest neither Special:NewProperty nor anything else. Main namespace pages are, well, suggested by their names (e.g. Spec brings me to Spec Ops etc.). Should anything be done to it? Ignatus (talk) 14:20, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I've filed bugzilla:46638 for that yesterday. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Wasn't that already in the original bug for this feature? The search must change if it looks like it is directed to another namespace than the mainspace (itemspace), in those cases it should use the old style search. It must also respect the aliases for those namespaces. — Jeblad 18:45, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Sister projects links and data

See also Wikidata:Wikimedia Commons.

Wikidata and Commons

Hi everyone, I was thinking how Wikidata/wikibase and Commons could play together. Some things crossed my mind and some are already in this list:

• Language links and Commonscat templates. At the moment we have bots add interwiki links to Wikipedia (example) and at Wikipedia we add a "Commonscat" template. That could probably somehow be replaced with Wikidata. How to deal with the namespaces is going to be a fun challenge (link to "Haarlem" or "Category:Haarlem" on Wikipedia and galleries/categories with the same name). Same applies for other projects like wikispecies.
• Use WikiData information for the category intro. If we have the link, we might as well fetch that information instead of copy and pasting it
• All information in creator and institution templates should be fetched from here. These should just be nicely formatted reference containers. this is madness.

The previous points use wikibase as an external source, but what if we have it installed on Commons too:

• Information template, license tags, categories can be seen as a poor mans implementation of claims. Could be implemented in Wikibase and these templates just server as a presentation layer
• I wrote this some time ago. If we would be able to move away from categories to claims to sort out our images I think we'll come a long way (and probably encounter new challenges on the way). At least the first and third point already seem to be addressed in wikibase.
• We need a lot of work done on the user interface side and the search engine side to make this possible and usable.

Looking forward to it ;-) Multichill (talk) 11:01, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

• Yeah, I made a similar cas on commons:User talk:Kozuch/Wikidata. A lot of work, and a lot of consensus-seeking ahead. --Zolo (talk) 12:21, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Maybe this would be a possibility to finally merge galleries and categories on the Commons. I think it can't be so difficult to program a feature that for any given title always shows a gallery (if one exists), and, if a category of the name exists, show all images in the category that are not yet displayed in the (structured) gallery, in a bulk section underneath. Add a feature to add images in subcategories to the current view, and there you have a good and usable Commons interface, finally. It would make Wikidata interwiki intergration so much easier, and would be better for any user, I think. Is that so hard? --FA2010 (talk) 09:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

 CommentGalleries and categories do different things galleries are photo-articles; and at their best require editorial input to best present images, both in a structural way to create a narrative, and aesthetically to choose the best images and to lead and draw the eye.--KTo288 (talk) 23:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

 Comment Little problem, that same category on commons is often linked both from article and from category.JAn Dudík (talk) 09:38, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

•  Comment - I think the above ideas by Multichill (talk • contribs • logs) are simply excellent and should be carried out soon! :) Cirt (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
•  Support I assume that many templates on Commons will be fetching much of its data from wikidata. I do not know if content of all commons creator templates can be moved here, due to possibly different notability standards. But I assume we can have a parameter to tell the template to fetch all the data from here. Same with Multilingual location templates. --Jarekt (talk) 04:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)
• Interproject links are IMHO the highest priority. We also have m:Template:InterProject and most importantly w:fr:Modèle:Autres projets and its equivalent in a dozen languages (all projects). This only requires the ability to link non-Wikipedia pages, which should be easy enough. --Nemo 08:38, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support Awesome idea. This proposal has my support and I would participate in any community discussions to develop it. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:10, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

In the mean time

The old way of adding interwikis to Commons was a click and clone exercise of interwikis from wikipedia to the appropriate Commons page, until bots or whatever takeover its now a pain to add interwikis. Commons discussion Commons:Village_pump/Archive/2013/03#Inter-Wikipedia_links.--23:04, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Updated with link to archive. Discussion seems dead, users try to content themselves with workarounds. commons:Commons:Wikidata was created but is inactive. --Nemo 14:00, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

You could create a Lua template which queries the interwiki links via Wikidata API, and generates the iw wikicode. --Tgr (talk) 13:47, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons

See also Wikidata:Property_proposal#Commonscat_link

Hello! Why aren't we adding links to Wikimedia Commons as well in a particular item? Adding galleries or categories present on Commons would be good. (I am not a frequent editor here. If this has been discussed already or is already being implemented, please direct me to that discussion venue or tell me how to add it.) §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 07:19, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

It's been asked several times. --Rschen7754 07:28, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

hi; i'm one of the other people who has asked this... (my section appears to have been archived now) SO, what exactly IS being done? & is there a place where there's an ongoing conversation for this topic? :) Lx 121 (talk) 15:02, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Please see the /FAQ. --Rschen7754 19:23, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Aah okay! Its fine. But now in the properties when we enter image, we can only enter "File" and not a "Category" from Commons. If at least that was made possible, wouldn't that be good? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 05:27, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

It seems a bit odd to have file links, but no category links. File listings here seem too granular. Entities here can generally related to Commons categories. -- --  Docu  at 05:07, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

• Inter-Wikipedia links: new discussion at Commons. --Nemo 04:40, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
• Good news (?) for Commons, bad for all the others: «Personally, I regard Wiktionary as the third priority, following Wikipedia and Commons».[22] --Nemo 14:30, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Usage of this Wikidata project for sister links as well as language links???

See also Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team/Archive/2013/03#Interwikis_on_Wiktionary_etc.

Usage of this Wikidata project for sister links as well as language links???

1. First off, I just wanted to say this is a great project, and many thanks to all who are contributing to it!
2. Second, I think it'd be a great idea to utilize this powerful tool for sister links to sister websites as maintained on pages, in addition to language link maintenance.
3. For example, Wikidata could be used to check for a similarly-named category or gallery page at Wikimedia Commons, author pages at Wikisource, and existing similar pages at Wikiquote and Wikinews.
4. What do people think about this?

Thank you for your time, and thanks again for all you're doing here, Cirt (talk) 03:45, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

"Links to sister projects are not possible yet but likely in the future. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:25, 30 October 2012 (UTC)", - WD:Project chat/Archive/2012/10#Two questions: Deleting a dataset, and "other projects". --Yair rand (talk) 04:04, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, it is in the FAQ. --Rschen7754 04:35, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Oh, wow, that is so awesome, thanks so much for this info. Is there any idea on a timeframe for that? Cirt (talk) 04:47, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately no real time-frame yet. It'll not happen before the end of the first year of Wikidata development (ends at the end of March) but is one of the things we'd like to work on during the rest of the year. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:38, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

I saw this statement many times but never understood why this is so hard, are there previous discussions or summaries somewhere? --Nemo 08:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

It's not just about being hard. There are other things which are very important to actually making Wikidata useful for the Wikipedias. This is things like more data types or the actual syntax to include data in infoboxes. All of this still needs work. I understand that the sister projects are important for all of you and they are for the dev team as well. But no-one is served with two half-working parts. Let's finish one and then get to the next. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:24, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I commented on a similar proposal by Multichill (talk • contribs • logs), above on this page, this seems like a really great idea! Cirt (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

See also bugzilla:708 about interproject links. Helder 19:30, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

As the creator of the bugzilla:708 (9 years ago), I strongly support its resolution through Wikidata. I hope it will be before the 10th birthday of that bug ! ;) Anthere (talk)

I do support too! TED (talk) 15:08, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

Books task force started

Here is the link: Wikidata:Books task force. This task force aims to be the intersection between: book infoboxes task force (Wikipedia), book template in Commons, book info used in Wikisource. --Micru (talk) 19:57, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

And yesterday m:Grants:IEG/Elaborate_Wikisource_strategic_vision was approved, I hope this will help a bit. --Nemo 20:23, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Interface proposal for Wikidata, Sister Projects and Wikipedia

I made this presentation showing a possible way of integrating Wikidata with the several sister projects and Wikipedia. If you like the method, an RfC could be started on Meta to ask for comments from all sites.--Micru (talk) 21:43, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Good, though it can be improved. I was thinking of something similar these days (also inspired from Reasonator) and I'll post a proposal soon. --Ricordisamoa 21:59, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Good proposal Micru! I like it very much! --Viscontino ^talk 22:06, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry but I think the look of this interface proposal « Unity interfaces » is a false good idea. First, there is already a lot of tabs (maybe too many according to the newbies ; plus, some projects have add some tabs, eg. the english wiktionary and all the wikisources). Then, what about about multiple interproject links ? (for a book article on Wikipedia there could be more than one text on Wikisource, eg. The Bible ; on some case like the french article about Romeo & Juliet there should be the possibility to link to two wikisources for the french version and the original english version).

Why not simply put the interproject link on the right above the interwikilinks ? (which is already done on some projects like the Italian Wikipedia or the French Wikisource).

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:40, 20 March 2013 (UTC)

Realistically, though, the interface proposal would depend on what sort of interface is chosen for the simplest and first thing that will perhaps get done, i.e. adding to Wikidata the sitelinks to Commons just for the sake of handling interlanguage links to Wikipedia on Commons (not the other way round). I've not yet understood why this needs an interface, but Wikidata team repeated it several times so it looks like it's our biggest roadblock. It would be useful to identify what sort of problems/concerns need to be addressed by the community. --Nemo 11:07, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikisource links

How i can add a Wikisource link, e.g. s:ru:Ганс Христиан Андерсен in Q5673? -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 09:37, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

You can't. Currently it's possible to add only Wikipedia links. --Stryn (talk) 09:48, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I consider it as basic functionality... -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 10:09, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Support for other projects is something that is planned for the future. Right now the focus is on Wikipedias. Legoktm (talk) 10:11, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Until a future Phase IV there will only be sitelinks for Wikipedia. Jeblad (talk) 10:18, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's good idea to postpone this functionality for so long. Wikisource links are often used in book and author infoboxes. May be one-to-multiple links need much more efforts to implement, but regular one-to-one links to Wikisource, Wikiquote, etc. seem just clone of existing functionality. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:57, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

Infobox content is in the statements being added in phase 2 - just now. This seems to be the appropriate place to add wikisource links too, and Commons Cat links as well; once the devs add these as data types (or even plain URL data type). Filceolaire (talk) 14:07, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Sergey :) I work alot on Wikisource, mainly on Old French dictionaries. My feeling is that Wikisource has to be the main source for other wikimedia projects. We have thousands of dictionaries, in all languages, in which each entry can have its own URL on wikisource. It would be wonderful to share those URLs here on wikidata ! Off-topic : wikidata should be a wiki, meaning, people should have the freedom to add data inside new sections, like on wikipedia... (genium ✉) 01:05, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

I think it is just wrong to wait months for enabling a feature which would allow a project like Wikisource to exploit Wikidata and express a lot of its potential storing its metadata here. I really just don't understand why Sister projects are left behind when there are (apparently) no technical impediments for doing so. We could probably have cross-link between sister projects right now (aren't they just specia interlinks?) and probably even Wikisource or Commons links. Can't we find a way to push these kind of features also for Sister projects? --Aubrey (talk) 22:40, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Commons category?

I'm playing around a bit to see how fields from infoboxes match with Wikidata (for example Q4248045). I'm wondering how to link to Commons. Commons support is still very far away. Maybe just create a String property "Commons category" with the name of the category? This would be a temporary solution, but really powerful for Commons. Any opinions on this? Multichill (talk) 17:26, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic#Commons category. Multichill (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Created the property and I'm currently adding it. Multichill (talk) 16:18, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

New template

I hereby propose to move User:Ricordisamoa/Datatype to Template:Datatype: we need this to easily i13ize datatypes' names and provide a link to the definition (for example in Wikidata:Books task force#Book properties). If there's consensus, I'll do the move by myself. --Ricordisamoa 23:42, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

P.S. you can see a preview in my sandbox. --Ricordisamoa 23:45, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That can be useful, but I would prefer links to Wikidata rather than meta. --Zolo (talk) 10:12, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, I don't find an equivalent glossary here on WD; however, we could think of that later. I think that this template would be very useful. --Ricordisamoa 11:26, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

There are a page Wikidata:Glossary and a special page Special:ListDatatypes. The datatypes can change and should be according to whats available. The entries on the special page can be overridden in the messages, on Translatewiki or locally. Localizing datatypes names should usually be done by messages and not by templates, but it could be places where some kind of template is necessary. — Jeblad 12:20, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Actually, the template does use system messages! --Ricordisamoa 06:06, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Help

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 45933

I don't know if is it a bug but I can't remove a property male from Hadrian. I don't know how to report as a bug, so if you could help me... - Sarilho1 (talk) 15:24, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

It's definitely a bug. And the reason when I tried to delete it was: "* A length constraint is triggered for language code "mr". * There is {{PLURAL:1|a constraint|constraints}} violation for {{PLURAL:1|description|descriptions}} "हा इ.स. ११७ त..." for {{PLURAL:1|language code|language codes}} "mr"." So after I deleted "mr" desctiption, it was possible to delete duplicate statement. --Stryn (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! There is another that don't let me change a property (Property:P21 after add a label. It says that there is a edition conflict that should happen. - Sarilho1 (talk) 15:47, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

I also notice that Legobot seems to be going through items re-adding "male" where male already exists (judging by the diffs). Is this related, somehow? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:18, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

The bug is tracked in bugzilla. The "male" thing is unrelated. I dont have time to look for the description at the moment, but what it does is change from the general item for male in a biological sense to an item specially designed for humans (in some languages, the former was considered really weird, or even offensive). --Zolo (talk) 16:58, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Phase 2 live on the first 11 Wikipedias

Heya folks :)

Data inclusion from Wikidata is now now possible on the first 11 Wikipedias. Wohoooooooo! This blog post has more details.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 18:55, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

that's cool but it has a problem for properties which has more that 2 cases. e.g. it:google when I add [[]] it shows Larry Page, Sergey Brin which is red link!Yamaha5 (talk) 19:39, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes it doesn't deal well with multiple values yet. That should be in the next deployment though. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Will this ever be enabled on Meta-Wiki? Can we get the label of some arbitrary item translated into an arbitrary language code? m:Meta:Babel#Country_name_translation πr² (t • c) 19:58, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Just so I'm clear: is there something on that it:google page that wasn't there before, courtesy of phase two? I'm looking through the history and I don't see anything different. I'd love to see an example of phase two manifesting itself on some article... Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

In Phase II, nothing would come automatically, like interwiki links came in Phase I. The community needs to decide what feature it wants to use and implement them in their projects. It is just these features became technically available today.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:20, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Well, I'm sure people will continue to post updates here as phase two-related content begins to appear. I think it will be very motivational; I know it would be, for me. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 20:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

@Shawn in Montreal: Just a little example. it:Torino: flag, coat of arm, head of local government and administrative unit in infobox are provided from Wikidata --ValterVB (talk) 21:33, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey, there it is, thanks. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 23:25, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Is there any way yet to query claim's source ? I cannot find that documented anywhere. --Zolo (talk) 22:11, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

References is part of a Claim and will be listed as part of the Entity by wbgetentities or wbgetclaims if it exists. Note that is is not source but Reference. See for example ethanol (api). — Jeblad 11:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• How can I get the property P in article A for subject B? Infovarius (talk) 18:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Global templates

I am glad wikidata is proceeding nicely. My question is are we going towards global templates? If so, wouldn't it be better for smaller wikipedias to wait until they are implemented. The reason is simply that smaller wikipedias simply copy templates from larger wikipedias at first and adapt content and description to their needs. Later, new fields may are added or bugs fixed in the original templates on the larger wikipedias, but smaller wikipedias lack the man power to keep synchronizing the same templates, so they become stale, uglier and obsolete over time. Pepsi Lite (talk) 04:24, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

That is outside the scope of Wikidata (at least at the moment). --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Why an Exception on User pages?

I am a Dutch user who has multiple user pages in multiple languages. So I have a spider web of interwiki links between all those pages, so that I can always jump from one language to the other, f.i. to see if something has been changed on my watch lists. But if I added a new language, I always had to update all other ones - You know, that's just the problem that Wikidata has solved now. It is much easier to have the administration centralised. So I entered the Wikidata interwikis and it worked fine... Until a couple of minutes later, when it was reverted. The reason (which I didn't know) was that there has been a poll that excepted this option for user pages. It was only a small poll with 10 contributions, and I'm not impressed by the arguments that were made for this exception.

• The first argument was: 'It is planned to move to universal user pages' Well, those plans are pretty immature. And as soon as that universal profile will be introduced, I think it will be easier to convert Wikidata-linked UP's to a universal UP than converting spider web linked UP's to a universal UP.
• The second group of arguments actually isn't an argument at all: "I don't see any reason, why they should be added here." Well, that is not a vote against; only a neutral: You don't have to connect your UP's if you don't want, but why not grant other people the opportunity to work efficiently?

Of course I can live with an old fashioned spider network between my UP's, but it takes more memory space, makes more work to maintain and it will be a strange exception to the general rule that we want to eradicate the old interwikilinks. My opinion is supported by other users on the Dutch Village pump, so that's why I reopen this discussion here.
I like to see realistic arguments; not votes. Erik Wannee (talk) 09:55, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

You might also want to look at Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inclusion of non-article pages 2 Legoktm (talk) 10:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanx for the tip. But it says that there can only be discussed about rules which are not discussed in Wikidata:Requests for comment/Inclusion of non-article pages. (And that page is closed.) So I don't know if I'm allowed to enter this item there. Erik Wannee (talk) 10:12, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

When the new global user pages are rolled out the data can be deleted. In the mean time why not use wikidata for all interwiki's? I dont see any drawbacks, and only advantages. Zanaq (talk) 10:13, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree. The arguments presented "against" are rather weak, and we're including everything else here. I see no valid argument to exclude them now that we are in phase two. Perhaps we need to start another RFC on the topic? (which will hopefully have more participants than the last one, which had very few) ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan on enwiki! 15:49, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Strong oppose - Wikidata is a knowledge base, and userpages are not part of that. I should note that this discussion appears to be asking for support for this proposal, from a separate community.--Jasper Deng (talk) 16:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
  • WikiData serves the other communities, not the other way round. Argument not at all convincing: it can be a part of it if we decide it is. Zanaq (talk) 19:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

  Mhm … can the local user namespace be deleted then as "out of scope"? ;-) Greetings, Vogone talk 17:00, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

  • • The local userspace is relevant to this wiki's community's editors in their capacity as editors here, and local userpages are limited to the local userspace. The mainspace, which is for content, is not for userpages (userpages do not contain info that would benefit from being centralized here).--Jasper Deng (talk) 22:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Oppose as Jasper Deng said it shouldn't cover user pagesYamaha5 (talk) 17:03, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
  • I have not heard any valid reason. Zanaq (talk) 19:21, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Indeed, no valid reason is given any time. With the same reasoning you should remove all user pages and all discussion pages, as they aren't part of the knowledge database, too. Erik Wannee (talk) 21:57, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
    • Perhaps the generic rule "Do not create Wikidata items for user pages" could be changed to a rule for bots: "Do not automatically create Wikidata items for user pages". So Wikidata won't be flooded with millions of user page items of which the very most have no use at all, while users that have advantages from creating a Wikidata item for their user page still can one. --YMS (talk) 22:11, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
      • +1--Livermorium (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
      • This would be a fair compromise for those who seem to be hellbent on ever allowing any userpage data under any but the most extreme circumstances (if a Wikipedian happens to be notable, which is generally unlikely). If established editors who have a lot of userpages were allowed to create them, it would make things much more simple in the long run, rather than having to go from userpage to userpage and update the list of interwiki links. And as others mentioned, Wikidata is here to serve the other projects, not the other way around. Having userpage interwiki links here isn't going to "pollute" the data as some are implying. It will just be more data. That's all that is here is interwiki links, so having more of them is hardly going to cause all the doom and gloom some here are preaching. It's likely most people won't even know Wikidata is here. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan on enwiki! 04:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
• We may want to make an exception for Simple English Wikipedia - all WikiProjects are in userspace there. --Rschen7754 23:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• We've been allowing Simple Wiki user pages for WikiProjects for a while at least, or at least I've been keeping them when I see them. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 00:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

• You told me there weren't any exceptions. It would seem there are. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan on enwiki! 04:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Strong oppose You might do a service to a few users, but allowing userpages would disservice the entire site and flood it with user pages needlessly. At that, it would create whole new conversations about who and how many data items per person. If I have six accounts (one normal account, one account for public editing and four bots), am I allowed six data items? If a user creates sockpuppets, is discovered, and has a wikidata items about each sockpuppet, do we keep them? What if there are users with different usernames cross-project and a user of the same name wants an item (i.e User:X from en.wiki created an item, but User:X who is not a single user login also wants an item.)? How do we solve a conflict where Wikidata won't allow for items and labels of the same name? If someone creates an en.wiki account, makes one (userpage) edit, and comes to Wikidata to create an item, should they be allowed to have an item? I could probably keep going.. In short, it opens cans of worms not explored yet for a new wiki, and I am firmly against main namespace content about users of Wikipedia at all unless they are notable. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 00:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Strong oppose Pages for content are unique, and all their counterparts on the rest of the wikis have a clear, closest-ever relationship one another (i.e. they are the same topic but in a different language). This does not happen to user pages. We can have 10 users on 10 different wikipedias sharing a username, but being totally different persons. So, making an item for each one is out of Wikidata's scope (which is, grouping interwiki links for the exact same thing); and making a single item for all those userpages will create confusion. So, only users with a completely globalized SUL will be able to meet Wikidata's core purpose, because there won't be a single interwiki link pointing to a user page that belongs to a different user. This is only the main issue. More issues can be, as pointed above, these: more than 70 million users are registered in the 714 wikis, which is way more than the number of articles we currently have. So, we'll entirely flood the website with millions of links and items that will end up being useless. They cannot be included in phase two because they are outside of the common design of that, and outside as well of phase three. By now, it will make way more harm than good to have userpages allowed. Maybe later, when all the content pages, which are our priority, are done, archived and organized, then we could add userpages. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 01:05, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Thank you both (Moe Epsilon & ΛΧΣ) for explaining. Zanaq (talk) 07:48, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Strong oppose as above. --Stryn (talk) 08:41, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Oppose another million pages to check for vandalism? I think that bot to update link for user page can do the work --ValterVB (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

•  Strong support
  • "Wikidata is a knowledge base'" -> we allow Category:Wikipedians interested in photography as item and also Template:User page as item. As well as many other templates, categories, etc that aren't purely knowledge. Also interwiki's aren't knowledge at all, it are only connections between articles. (If we really would follow the idea that Wikidata is for pure knowledge only, we should delete all interwiki's. Of course we do not do such.) User pages are pages that are meant to inform other users about Wikipedia-related aspects of working on projects and aren't that much different from the category and template I put here as example.
  • "The local userspace is relevant to this wiki's community's editors in their capacity as editors here, and local userpages are limited to the local userspace. The mainspace, which is for content, is not for userpages (userpages do not contain info that would benefit from being centralized here)." -> Not true. Many many many times I have seen users from different wiki's visiting my user page and talk page because of the interwiki's. They contain navigational information for users. Also the argument that articles in the article namespace would benefit from being centralized on Wikidata is weak. Interwikilinks on Wikidata make maintenance easier as it needs to be done on only one place.
  • "another million pages to check for vandalism" - overestimating seems to me a form of framing. Also with the proposal of not using bots for this, I don't think we'll reach that amount.
  • Indeed we should not have a bot adding user pages, but if an individual user would like to have a Wikidata entry it is perfectly fine to allow such. In 2005 (and several times in the years after) on nl-wiki it was suggested that we should get a project to store our interwikilinks. Wikidata became that long wished project and was enabled to contain interwikilinks together with much more information. But please let us not forget that interwiki's are an important part of this project, and there are also interwiki's between some user pages. Romaine (talk) 08:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Move-Gadget

Hi folks, I was asked to make my script move.js a gadget. So, I wanted to get your opinion to this suggestion before performing this action.

The script adds a move link to the edit tools when editing a sitelink. It looks like [­save|remove|move|cancel] Please also report any bugs you know. --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 16:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

• Since it was me who asked this, I  strongly support :). As for bugs, during the last couple of days, the script does not work very well: a) it does not move a link if it is going to be the first one in the target item, and b) it moves other links but the pop-up window does not disappear (one needs to click Close). --Michgrig (talk) 16:40, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Both bugs are fixed. The second was already fixed before I posted this ;-) --Bene* ^t_a^l_k 17:38, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support‍‍‍ Yamaha5 (talk) 16:59, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
• Support seems useful Vogone talk 17:06, 28 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support‍‍‍ Great idea! — ΛΧΣ²¹ 00:51, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
•  Support as a useful tool. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan on enwiki! 04:53, 29 March 2013 (UTC)
• Cool gadget, but sometimes it doesn't finish (links are lost): Q895683 -? Q4330598. --Infovarius (talk) 19:46, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Integration of data from Wiktionary to Wikidata

Property inclusion is live on several wikis and I see some issues with it concerning grammar. Having first good data for country subdivisions in Poland, this particular example of property inclusion comes to my mind (the sentence taken from en:Sucha County): "Sucha County is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in Lesser Poland Voivodeship" can be written as "Sucha County is a unit of territorial administration and local government (powiat) in {{#property:p131}}". This will work perfectly fine in some languages like English, but not in Ukrainian, for example, because "Lesser Poland Voivodeship" has to be in the locative case in this sentence. So the suggestion is to include information from Wiktionary somehow so that we can construct proper sentences using data from Wikidata. --DixonD (talk) 15:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I'm understanding what 'locative case' exactly means (I'm non-native English). However, I've just an idea and if I'm right the problem could also exist in English. Normally someone is born IN #somewhere# (e.g. a cityname like 'New York'. But if #somewhere# isn't a location, but a building, they say someone is born AT #buildingname# (e.g. he is born at memorial hospital). Do I understand the problem right? However, I thought Wikidata is just for infoboxes and lists, not to make whole sentence. Therefore it shouldn't be a problem? --Nightwish62 (talk) 17:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Display property of Items on Wikipedia clients

Images and Strings are quite useful on the client Wikipedia's. Items still need some work. {{#Property:P36}}(Capitol) of Germany returns Berlin (as Label). You could of course add [[ ]] to them but that is not correct. It should be [[Sitelink|Label]] or [[Sitelink]] if Sitelink equals Label.

Currently	Sitelink exists	No Sitelink exists
Label exists	Label
No Label exsists	Q12345
How it should be	Sitelink exists	No Sitelink exists
Label exists	[[Sitelink|Label]]	Label
No Label exsists	[[Sitelink]]	(Blank)

Is there a solution to this before en.wikipedia can use Wikidata? HenkvD (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Not in favor of putting to many formatting features on the side of wikidata: wikidata provides data and wikipedia is responsible of the format. Lua templates can increase the posibilities of formatting because it will be too difficult to maintain thr needs of different wikipedias. Snipre (talk) 19:13, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please help me with a Lua template for this example on http://test2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germany How Do I get the sitelink? HenkvD (talk) 19:38, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

Please help!!! I tried myself at http://test2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Module:Wikidata_item but does not work yet. HenkvD (talk) 11:32, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Do you know en:Wikipedia:Lua? --Goldzahn (talk) 13:30, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I've written on test2 a small module that do a beginning of formatting of statements. What do you think about it? Feel free to improve it!

@HenkvD I've solve your issue in my code. You should read the content of the formatEntityId and getEntityIdFromValue functions. Tpt (talk) 15:11, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. it even works with multiple items (with outputAll=true). For further testing I moved the module to the demo client. I think I get an error if no sitelink exists. See Helim on the demo client. HenkvD (talk) 16:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I think we should keep testing it on test2 because it's a more known environment for people and a place with the same configuration as the wikipedias.

The error in Helim on the demo client is an error in wikibase, I've submitted a patch to fix it. Tpt (talk) 18:07, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

The problem with test2 is that it is hard to find proper testing situations, like an Item without an English label. On the Demo you can construct these yourself. On Test2 that is not possible as the repository is the live wikidata. HenkvD (talk) 19:20, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

There should be more or less complete claims for at least a subset of items before we start to use the property values on Wikipedia. Otherwise users at those client sites can be really upset about missing values and failing templates. It is possible to code smart templates that switch between values from Wkidata and Wikipedia, but that would be very confusing for users on Wikipedia. — Jeblad 15:20, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Those smart templates are called Template:Wikidata, see for example http://test2.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Wikidata HenkvD (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Quick question

Would "Hurricane Sandy" and "2012 Atlantic hurricane season" be better suited as a "term" or "event"? Hurricanefan24 (talk) 21:18, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

I'd consider them events, but judging from your username, you have a conflict of interest :) FrigidNinja 02:14, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Don't use P:P107 but instead P:P31/P:P279 without vague "term" :) Infovarius (talk) 10:17, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Well of course you can use P107. It's the most popular and easy to use property. Wikidata:Infoboxes_task_force is based on it. "Hurricane Sandy" is - like de:Hurrikan Andrew - type s (called "term"). --Kolja21 (talk) 15:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm also pro "term", at least for "Hurricane Sandy". Not that sure for the season. --Nightwish62 (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

RFC about items about software

There are some open questions about statements in items about software, so I created a RFC: Wikidata:Requests for comment/Softwarestatements – Please take time to comment or add additional points. -- Thanks MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 00:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Suicide and Property:P157

Please see Property_talk:P157#Why_not_suicide.3F. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:56, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Could the following be added to the FAQ?

The "edit links" does not appear at the end of the language links

• try adding ?action=purge to the end of the browser web address for the page missing the link and press "enter". It will force a purge and works with any of the Wikipedia languages. You can also use any other method available to you to purge the cache of the page you are having trouble with.

Note I have found a lot of pages that do not display the edit link the above process has worked for me every time if the page is currently linked to a wikidata page

One sure way that works for me to determine if a page is linked to a wikidata page is to edit the page in question and look at how many interwiki links are at the end of the page. If there are move language links on the side of the article than at the bottom of the page, then that page is linked to a wikidata page and a purge should bring up the link. If the the links at the side of the page and at the bottom of the article are the same, then it is likely that the page has not been linked to a Wikidata page. Dbiel (talk) 04:49, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Problem with article moving when only capitalization changes

Tracked in Bugzilla
Bug 46451

In Russian Wikipedia, we came across the following problem. An article is moved but the only difference is replacing an upper-case letter with a lower-case one (for example, Q38152: the article Аляскинский Кли-Кай was renamed into ru:Аляскинский кли-кай; several days ago I encountered the same situation with Q2622887).

The problem with Wikidata is that it does not seem to accept such a change. In the latter example, even when I removed the old sitelink and then added the new one, the sitelink was displayed with the old capitalization. In the former example, Ghuron had to change the link to some other irrelevant article and then to change the link back to the renamed article.

Can anyone comment on this? --Michgrig (talk) 08:09, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

This is filed as bugzilla:46451. For now I fear only removing and adding works. Sorry. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

This is about automatic updating of sitelinks on repo after page moves on the client, although only whats visible in the clients. We should have some kind of automatic tracking and updating of such changes, but it has some weird additional problems. Oldest bug is 36729. — Jeblad 22:08, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

new UserInfo.js

I am proud to announce You the new and improved version of en:User:PleaseStand/userinfo.js.

Almost completely rewritten (with extensive use of jQuery, 5077 vs. 12799 bytes), it also includes new features, such as a colored icon beside the user's name to show the probable status of the user at the moment (active, uncertain, and inactive).

Please try it and comment. --Ricordisamoa 09:07, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Great! Thank you very much. Now it work on wiki with not same format with timezone UTC.  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 07:41, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Whooop! Female? :lol:  Ę-oиė  >>>  ™ 08:32, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks,  fixed now. --Ricordisamoa 08:38, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Moreover, I started i18n, using standard MediaWiki messages ("months", "seconds", "ago"); later, for deeper l18n, we can use ScriptTranslator. --Ricordisamoa 08:42, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Gadget/Script bug

This is a rather strange issue that I've been experiencing. It seems that my gadgets and scripts have been failing for no apparent reason. Just now I noticed that my "Import Statements" link has disappeared, even though, looking at my common.js page, the import of the script is still there. Similarly, I have the "Authority control" gadget enabled, but my link for that has recently disappeared as well. Any insights? FrigidNinja 16:59, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

"Warn user" has also just disappeared. FrigidNinja 17:03, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

I think I saw something like that happening a few days ago in my script. The reason was, that the developers changed the name of an desktop element the tool uses. I had to find the new name and after changing the name in the script the tool was working again. --Goldzahn (talk) 18:35, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Removal of items?

How do I remove Q8912239? I wouldn't have believed, but some bot must have established that file beforehand though only one language entry existed. Now that one is stalled, sorry.--Tinne (talk) 20:41, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

That is not a big deal, generally you make a request here and an admin will delete it, but in this case I already did it. --Sixsi6ma (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

Python Scrapper / Crawler

I'am writing down a python 2.7 and BeautifulSoup-based scraper / crawler to get data from Wikidata's xml. Is there existing scrapers / crawler with publicly available code I'am unaware of ? And if not, where should I post my code so other users may enjoy it as well ? (Wikidata:Scraper ?)Yug (talk) 14:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, try Pywikipediabot. Legoktm (talk) 15:13, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

How to relate time?

We were discussing on irc how to relate units of time. See for example Q2439 or Q728784. The instance of is pretty straightforward, but how to related January 2004 -> 2004 -> 2000s -> 21st century -> 3rd millennium? I now used subclass of, but that feels a bit forced. Any ideas? Multichill (talk) 17:08, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Use part of (P361), e.g. 1980 part of 1980s. I don't think it makes sense to say that 1980 is a subclass of the 1980s. Emw (talk) 17:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Yes, that clears it up. So, we have:

• Instance of: January/.../December, year, decade, century and millennium.
• part of: The one level above (month -> year, year -> decade, etc)
• preceded by: Previous item of the same unit
• followed by: Next item of the same unit

We should probably document this somewhere.... Multichill (talk) 19:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Alias glitch?

See //www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q9036605&diff=17684070&oldid=17630162&diffonly=1. I removed an alias, though WD said I added one. Could this be looked into please? Thanks. Hurricanefan24 (talk) 18:37, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Happened for me too lately: [23] and [24]. --Stryn (talk) 19:14, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Please review Wikidata:Property proposal/Rejected

I've created a new page which lists rejected properties (at moment only those of Archive #4, rest will follow soon). As I'm non native English speaker it will have tons of faults and therefore it would be nice someone could review it. Thanks. --Nightwish62 (talk) 19:39, 31 March 2013 (UTC)