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 (tc) 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 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 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)

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

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 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. 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)


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, 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 in the beginning of next week. Jeblad (talk) 20:51, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
There are a few bugs in 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)


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

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:

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."

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* talk 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* talk 19:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


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." 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. Techman224Talk 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)


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("// 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)


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 (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
    $.ajax( {
called from line 308, column 2 in init() in
called via Function.prototype.apply() from line 12, column 1731 in <anonymous function: jQuery.Callbacks>(data) in
called from line 14, column 363 in <anonymous function: fireWith>(context, args) in
called from line 6, column 8 in <anonymous function: ready>(wait) in
called from line 2, column 179 in <anonymous function>() in
    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
    $.ajax( {
called from line 308, column 2 in init() in
called via Function.prototype.apply() from line 12, column 1731 in <anonymous function: jQuery.Callbacks>(data) in
called from line 14, column 363 in <anonymous function: fireWith>(context, args) in
called from line 6, column 8 in <anonymous function: ready>(wait) in
called from line 2, column 179 in <anonymous function>() in
    jQuery.ready();	Event thread: DOMContentLoaded	Q2101059:246


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. 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)

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)
  DoneReza1615 / T 19:15, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue with diffs

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 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?

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)

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?

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? Delsion23 (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. Delsion23 (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)


What are we doing with regards to catching vandalism? Some vandalism was caused at Q1444790 (see history) by IP: 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. Delsion23 (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 (tc) 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 (tc) 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 [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)

Opt out of global sysops (again)

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. Delsion23 (talk) 11:28, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
PS information is available on how to merge, and other things, at the FAQ. See question 22. Delsion23 (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. Delsion23 (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

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.

  •   SupportReza1615 / 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 2Reza1615 / T 08:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

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

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)
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)


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 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 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 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
  •   SupportReza1615 / 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

The link to the diff of my last edit, provided as Newer edit from the previous diff, 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 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)


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? Delsion23 (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 Delsion23 (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Issue pertaining to redirects

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)

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 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 ?


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 (talkcontribslogs) 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)

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 and cite it. --whym (talk) 13:32, 10 March 2013 (UTC)


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 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 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. Delsion23 (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. Delsion23 (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: with
- the French page:

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: with
- the French page:

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: with
- the French page:
--> 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:
- this English page: 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 (
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 (tc) 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: & 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* talk 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?

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* talk 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: . 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 "196844". 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 "", 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 "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 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, yet the URL produced by the more canonical identifier, 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)

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)

Captchas for new users and IPs

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* talk 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* talk 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 (tc) 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! Delsion23 (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 and for geologic timescales?

Example: Proterozoic

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

Editing left sidebar Language link (error)


I am trying to link the english page with the spanish version 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!


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)


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. Delsion23 (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 Delsion23 (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. 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.
  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. ...(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, 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)


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