Wikidata

Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2024/01

< Wikidata:Project chat‎ | Archive‎ | 2024
Latest comment: 7 months ago by CV213 in topic Signature


Wikidata weekly summary #608

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Welcome to 2023’s Final Weekly Summary!

A big thank you to everyone who contributed to the newsletter this year!👏🙏 As we step into 2024, we'd love to hear what changes you would like to see in the newsletter. Share your wishlist here: What changes would you like to see in the newsletter in 2024?"

  • Discussions
    • Open request for adminship: EPIC (RfP scheduled to end after 26 December 2023 20:34 UTC)
    • New requests for permissions/Bot: Balyozbot. Tasks:
  1. Import sitelinks, labels, descriptions from ku wikipedia pages which use the template w:ku:Template:Înterwîkî etîket û danasîn. (There are over 1800 articles that use this template waiting to be connected to Wikidata at the moment.)
  2. Add sitelinks to kuwiktionary / kuwikipedia categories / create an item for the category if necessary. I have been doing this manually for quite some time using Quickstatements but since I need to get permission for the first task, I will be handling them using a bot as well.
  • Press, articles, blog posts, videos
    • Blogs
    • Papers: Increasing Coverage and Precision of Textual Information in Multilingual Knowledge Graphs by (Conia et al, 2023) --> This paper introduces a novel task of automatic Knowledge Graph Enhancement (KGE) to bridge the gap in the quantity and quality of textual information between English and non-English languages in Wikidata. It presents M-NTA, an unsupervised approach that combines Machine Translation, Web Search, and Large Language Models to generate high-quality textual information, and studies its impact on Entity Linking, Knowledge Graph Completion, and Question Answering tasks.
    • Videos
      • Wikidata, Wikisource and Wiktionary: Wikisource for DH (WiSe 2023) --> The lecture "Fundamentals and application-oriented methods of the Digital Humanities" by Kay-Michael Würzner is designed as a series of lectures in which teachers in the "Digital Humanities" course present their fields of work and key topics and present them for discussion.
      • Empowering Open-Source Generative AI by Integrating the Wikidata knowledge graph --> Generative AI has changed the information ecosystem, and open-source knowledge graphs like Wikidata can become invaluable assets, propelling a myriad of applications forward. Jonathan Fraine & Lydia Pintscher present the practical integration of Wikidata's open-source, open-access knowledge graph to empower Generative AI applications. Harnessing the real-time updated, structured data encapsulated within Wikidata, they explore automated content creation, data augmentation, and semantic analysis, underpinning the generative paradigms. Through a blend of theoretical insights and real-world applications, they elucidate how to leverage Wikidata to elevate generative AI applications, breaking down existing data silos, and fostering a collaborative ecosystem within our global community of developers and contributors.
      • Wiki Indaba 2023 - African content on Wikidata --> Discussion with Alice Kibombo, Georges Fodouop and Jesse Asiedu-Akrofi, about Wikidata for African Librarians during the Wiki Indaba conference, that took place between 3-5 November 2023 in Agadir, Morocco.
      • No Time to Wait - S07E10 - ACMI // Wikidata - Paul Duchesne + Simon Loffler --> Report on recent residency program to extensively link together collection data from ACMI with Wikidata. This work has allowed the organisation to import vast quantities of data and media to enrich their own internet collection experience, as well enable writing information back to source and federating with other linked institutions.
      • Wiki(s)data #5: Wikidata Live editing (in Italian) --> The ontology of Wikidata: how to interact with it for a better quality, by Epìdosis
    • Notebooks
      • Map of K-Pop Idols --> An interactive map where each red dot represents a K-pop Idol (a singer or musician in South Korean Pop music) you are able to click on.
      • Disney as the Mega Corporation it is Today --> Disney has greatly evolved from the simple animation company that first debuted in 1923 with its signature Steamboat Willie animation. This analysis details some of the major acquisitions Disney has chosen to help expand its reach as a media and entertainment company.
      • The Gender-Equality Gap in STEM Awards --> A network graph and multiple data visualizations on UCLA's alumnni awards based on gender.
      • Exploring The Belichick Coaching Tree --> This analyses details the coaching tree of the prolific American Football coach Bill Belichick.
      • State of statues in the US --> Map of how many statues there are, who is depicted in the statues, their genders, and where the statues are concentrated.
      • An Analysis on Nepo Babies: Net Worths and Fame --> This work uses Wikidata to analyze the influence and success of children of famous actors (nepo babies) in the entertainment industry, and compares the careers and net worth of these children with their parents to understand the impact of nepotism on their success.
  • Tool of the week
    • Cersei - is a tool designed for importing or scraping data from various third-party sources, using source-specific Python code. It can use a "headless browser" to scrape complicated websites that rely on eg JavaScript to navigate. It can therefore access data sources that can not be accessed via eg Mix'n'match. The data from sources can be updated regularly, either for everything, or just changed entries (if the source has a "recent changes" equivalent).
    • Wikidata:Zotero/Cita - is a Wikidata addon for Zotero that adds citations (i.e., what other items an item cites) metadata support to this open source reference management software, using cites work (P2860) information available from Wikidata, and enabling users to easily contribute missing data.
  • Development
    • Due to the winter holidays, the development team is taking a break and no deployment is happening for Wikidata at the moment.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

What do we call a woman imitator here on Wikidata?

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Good evening, I'd like to ask for some help. I created the item for Joy Peters (Q124083520), and I wanted to add woman imitator or something like that as an occupation (as he is famous for that), but I cannot find anything similar, even though I am pretty sure there is such occupation item in existence. What is it called? 94.21.232.99 17:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Maybe drag queen (Q337084)? --Emu (talk) 19:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. Guess this is what I was looking for. Added it. 94.21.232.99 19:31, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

What happens here?

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Why is after the list some source code and another time the list? Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Vladimir Tatlin Carl Ha (talk) 18:22, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Carl Ha: You forgot the bottom part with {{Wikidata list end}}. See the manual at {{Wikidata list}}. Multichill (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
thank you! Carl Ha (talk) 07:54, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Political graveyard

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I need to find the specific link at Political graveyard for Albert D. Shimek (Q16066799). Can someone fix it for me? RAN (talk) 23:43, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

I think I was able to find one that works. -- William Graham (talk) 00:07, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Postimees topic ID and different language versions

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Tere! I have been adding in a few non-Estonian topic IDs with this property and was wondering how to get the property to resolve the url to the correct language version. For instance, on Hakunila (Q4556262), the Postimees ID only exists for Russian, but there is no topic ID for this place in Estonian or English on Postimees' website. Is there a way to get the url to point to the Russian version of Postimees when the language qualifier language of work or name (P407) is Russian (Q7737) (and when it is from the English version, to the English version of Postimees)? Or would this be better off being broken down into separate properties based on the language it is in? For the property proposal, I gave an example where each language version of Postimees has a separate topic ID for the same concept prison (Q40357):

But added to the item, they all point to the Estonian one, which is not correct for the other two languages. Any ideas? - Yupik (talk) 21:57, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

IUGS Geological Heritage Site

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

  Notified participants of WikiProject Geology

I am trying to add the first 100 IUGS Geological Heritage Sites on Geological Items in Wikidata, before the next 100 are announced in Aug 2024.

I have kept the format similar to the UNESCO World Heritage Sites, adding the Heritage listing in the heritage designation (P1435) property. (Please see the first few examples below)

Is the format suitable? Is there a better way to arrange this data? Should the values for criterion used (P1013) be new items specifically for IUGS criteria?

Examples:

Okavango Delta (Q650872)

Funafuti (Q34126)

Genbudō (Q11572293)

Barberton Greenstone Belt (Q25379514)

Namib (Q131377)

Wallacegromit1 (talk) 10:05, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

How to mark a film as not produced

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello. Sometimes, there are news for movies that are supposed to go into production and create huge buzz. But then, the project gets cancelled and is never produced. How to show that in wikidata. E.g. for the movie Goodbye, Ani! (Q79845214). That movie does not exist. Christian140 (talk) 15:10, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

instance of (P31) abandoned project (Q21514702) Vicarage (talk) 15:24, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Or more specific unfinished or abandoned film project (Q18011171). Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Solutions to inter-language linking?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hi! Now for ca. the third time I ran into the following problem: when there are different views towards an ontology in various places, e.g.

it becomes really hard to link a main article in one language to the main article in another language (or even all other languages). Any fix for such cases? J heisenberg (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

We have no perfect solution, but you might like to look at Template:Interwiki extra (Q21286810), Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2020/04#Interwiki_extra, phab:T320491, and Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects. Bovlb (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Tx, I'll take a look +1 2003:C2:CF38:E800:95D8:2705:850F:CA88 00:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Request for protection for Q18674739

Latest comment: 8 months ago8 comments2 people in discussion

event venue (Q18674739) was recently merged into entertainment centre (Q5380480) based on an incorrect string reconciliation (details). In the course of the merger process, the semi-protection to Q18674739 was transferred to the newer item. I restored Q18674739 (and documented my rationale for unmerging the item), but the item is no longer semi-protected. This item has been the subject of multiple ill-advised edits over time. The item was cleaned up by the WikiProject Cultural Venue in 2022 and has been maintained by members of this WikiProject ever since. Restoring some level of protection would make it much easier to maintain the item. Thanks! Fjjulien (talk) 15:39, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@Fjjulien Thanks. In addition to that, I think you should revert this batch of 2000 edits: https://editgroups.toolforge.org/b/KrBotResolvingRedirect/Q18674739_Q5380480/ Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 15:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál I'm a total novice in matters of unmergers. I unmerged the item based on the instructions in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Merge, but I stopped after step 1. Step 2 ("Go to the history page of the merged item and restore the revision just before the merge") failed because there was "nothing to restore". It appears to me as though requests to http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q18674739 or https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q18674739 now resolve to the right item, but I'll follow your recommendation (and the guidance of Help:Merge regarding KrBot). Fjjulien (talk) 16:49, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál When I click on "Undo entire group", I get the response "Not Found - The requested resource was not found on this server". Please advise if any further unmerging steps are needed. Fjjulien (talk) 16:53, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Maybe you were not logged in. I just started the undo procedure. It is required because all the links to Q18674739 were automatically changed to Q5380480 after the merge by a dedicated bot which fixes redirects. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 17:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál That's what I had just figured out. Thanks a lot for your assistance. And please note my request for deletion below. Fjjulien (talk) 17:23, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
For your information, I am proposing the deletion of "entertainment centre" (Q5380480) or else its merger with "recreation structure" (Q85661503), to ensure no further confusion arise from this item's ambiguous label and description. See Talk:Q5380480 for more information and discussion. Fjjulien (talk) 16:56, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll reply there,then. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:03, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Dedicated page for describing the property proposal process

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

See Wikidata_talk:Property_proposal#Dedicated_page_for_describing_the_property_proposal_process Lectrician1 (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Relations between courts of law

Latest comment: 8 months ago10 comments6 people in discussion

I'm looking for a way to indicate the relation between courts in the legal system of a country. For example, United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Q286918) hears appeals from a number of district courts including United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma (Q7889853). How do we model this? The best way I thought of so far is parent organization (P749) and has subsidiary (P355), but I'm not sure that's a good idea. Thank you in advance for your comments. Happy New Year! Powerek38 (talk) 14:28, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

Ping @Nw520 who modeled German and Austrian courts along the lines of Q480829parent organization (P749)Landgericht Darmstadt (Q1802826)criterion used (P1013)stages of appeal (Q110805980) --Emu (talk) 17:22, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
@Emu Isn't parent organization (P749) actually a subproperty of "part of", indicating that something is actually a certain part or subsidiary of a bigger organization? Which I don't think applies well to courts of appeal, or does it? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:59, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál Yes indeed, I’m not really convinced of this solution. A new property could be a good idea although many problems may arise (appeals are often very complicated). --Emu (talk) 11:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
I think we'd need a new property, parent organization (P749) doesn't feel right to me.
As a straw-man proposal: inferior courtjudgments appealed tosuperior court, qualified with some property to designate the area of law (Q1756157) (laws applied (P3014)?) as necessary, perhaps?
  Notified participants of WikiProject Law for their input. M2Ys4U (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
The only clean solution with the currently available properties which comes to my mind is instance of (P31) : appellate court (Q4959031) with qualifier relative to (P2210) specifying the subordinate courts. This may work in the meantime. However I can imagine that such a solution may be problematic in case there are hundreds of 'subordinate' courts. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:12, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia page for United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit uses terminology like "Appeals from" while those pages use terms like "Appeals to". If there's an established practice elsewhere already on wikimedia, then it makes sense for us to follow suit by making those into properties. I think this is preferred to "Inferior/superior court" because it won't necessarily be specific to courts, it could be applied to any organisation that uses some sorts of appeals process. For example, in New Zealand, when you disagree with a decision to decline your social welfare, you first appeal to the government department, then you appeal to an "appeal authority" that's run by a judge. Such a generalised property would have multiple uses like that. ElDubs (talk) 23:49, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good to me. I would support a "Appeals to" property unless someone comes up with a miraculous solution using the currently available properties. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:35, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, the property needs to be generic so that it applies to more than courts, those were just placeholders for items in my example. Dropping the "judgments" from the property name (so that it's just "appeals to" does make sense, though. M2Ys4U (talk) 12:12, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Shaping the Future of the Community Wishlist Survey

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello community,

Thank you for participating in the Community Wishlist Survey over the years.

We are also grateful for your feedback about the survey and your patience in waiting for a response.

We have reviewed your feedback and made preliminary decisions to share with you.

In summary, Community Tech would like to develop a new, continuous intake system for community technical requests that improves prioritization, resourcing, and communication around wishes. Until the new system is established, the Community Tech team will prioritize work from the recently audited backlog of wishes rather than run the survey in February 2024. We are also looking to involve more volunteer developers in the wishlist process, beginning with the first-ever community Wishathon in March 2024.

Please read the announcement in detail either on the Diff blog or MetaWiki, and give your feedback.

The new intake system will need your ideas and involvement, and we’ll reach out on this topic in the next few months.

We look forward to hearing from you.

–– STei (WMF) (talk) 17:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

How to link a Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) and a Wikimedia human name disambiguation page (Q22808320)

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

If I have two items, one of which is a Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) and the other of which is a Wikimedia human name disambiguation page (Q22808320) (for example John Hay (Q124129782) and John Hay (Q3181711)) — what is the correct way to link them together? Should I use different from (P1889) or said to be the same as (P460), or something else? Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:39, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Probably different from (P1889) but honestly not linking them at all would be acceptable. Or merging them in this case might make more sense since they are both human name disambigs. BrokenSegue (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
They can't be merged because they both link to different pages on enWS ... but perhaps most of the other interwiki links should be moved from one item to the other :D Beleg Tâl (talk) 17:47, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
One is disambiguation for things that are titled "John Hay" and the other disambiguates people named John Hay. The people disambiguation pages have a different syntax; and we have been in a conversation about this at en.WS. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:50, 4 January 2024 (UTC)


Fixing enwiki target blocked?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

At Q2722678, the enwiki link goes —a redirect. My edit to change the link to is getting blocked for trying to change badges, even though I think I'm certain I've done this before. Anyway, it needs to be fixed. Thanks! - Mebigrouxboy (talk) 01:11, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mebigrouxboy: While the issue with badges might be because in terms of edit count you are still a 'new' editor (that is, you have not been 'confirmed' yet), the issue I saw at save time was that another item already had a link to just 'Sovljak'; I have merged that other item into this one. Mahir256 (talk) 01:31, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
As you are an experienced Wikipedian in good standing on your home project, I have granted you "confirmed" status. Bovlb (talk) 02:20, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

TOP 50 user pageviews on wikidata (year 2023)

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion
     1	  33561062 Wikidata:Copyright
     2	  14231099 Q368215
     3	   8587404 Special:Search
     4	   8392114 Wikidata:Main_Page
     5	   5585516 Help:Sources
     6	   1262081 Q95
     7	   1106667 Q28561969
     8	    336794 Special:RecentChanges
     9	    307122 Special:Watchlist
    10	    276917 Q777
    11	    261035 Q110291032
    12	    246551 Q5296
    13	    235915 Property:P31
    14	    225951 Wikidata:Project_chat
    15	    179658 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/1
    16	    178337 Property:P143
    17	    167699 Q746747
    18	    165369 Wikidata:WikiProject_Movies/new_film_items/Indian_films
    19	    142197 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/2
    20	    136204 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/27
    21	    134367 Q22663
    22	    134251 Special:MyTalk
    23	    134102 Property:P180
    24	    130556 Property:P571
    25	    130237 Special:MyLanguage/help:contents
    26	    127855 Q121178528
    27	    127039 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/8
    28	    124488 Q328
    29	    113355 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/3
    30	    109193 Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions
    31	    108024 Q54862353
    32	    107063 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/24
    33	    106999 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/4
    34	    105815 Wikidata:Lists/List_of_biblical_characters
    35	    105282 Q129
    36	    104884 Q130
    37	    104321 Q128
    38	    103924 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/30
    39	    102302 Q127
    40	    101481 Q5
    41	    100519 Q105
    42	    100346 Q30
    43	     98283 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/25
    44	     96869 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/22
    45	     94793 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/28
    46	     93701 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/6
    47	     93236 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/7
    48	     91637 Q121445503
    49	     91513 Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/33
    50	     90818 Property:P248

Source: https://archive.org/details/2023-top_2k_user_pageviews Dušan Kreheľ (talk) 01:10, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

anyone know what the deal with App Store (Q368215) is? BrokenSegue (talk) 00:29, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Results from the pageviews tool: [1]. Weird.. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:53, 4 January 2024 (UTC)
Uncle Tim want a third of your moneys! That's what. Infrastruktur (talk) 13:50, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I add a new language to Wikidata entries

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I forgot how to add a new language for adding entries, I can't seem to find it in preferences. I am only set up for English and Spanish and I need French. RAN (talk) 19:38, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

You can activate labelLister in the Gadgets section of Special:Preferences. –FlyingAce✈hello 00:37, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

How to handle confusing edits by an IP address?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Special:Contributions/190.57.23.46 has edits to Spanish–Russian War (Q5887880) that seem wrong to me, but I don't know much of anything about that item. Should those be reverted? There's no way to ask the user what they intended, right? dseomn (talk) 23:35, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I've reverted and warned, since the contributions are vandalism. You can always try to reach out to IP users in their talk page; there is no guarantee that the same person that was editing earlier will see the message, but it's worth a try :) –FlyingAce✈hello 00:30, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation and for handling it! dseomn (talk) 03:00, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Introducing an Item Wizard?

Latest comment: 8 months ago7 comments7 people in discussion

I'm not sure if this has been discussed before. Similar to Upload Wizard on commons and Article Wizard on Wikipedia, I think we should create something similar which can be called ”Item Wizard“ to avoid less experienced users direcctly use the Special:NewItem interface (users can still be allowed to use the interface directly). This item wizard can have a few options:

  • I want to create an item for a Wikimedia page -> displays notability exclusion criteria -> check if the item already exists -> create item
  • I want to create an item for an entity that has an external identifiers -> search for identifiers within existing properties -> create item
  • I want to create an item about myself, my family, friends, or my company -> shows notability guideline -> users need to select one of the criteria, otherwise require users to post on an item requests page
  • ...
  • I'm an experienced user and want to create an item directly (they can definitely still access the Special:NewItem interface directly)

These are just some vague ideas. In the long term, I think we can replace the "Create a new Item" sidebar with this. We may need to open a RfC for this but I'd like to hear some thoughts first. 94rain talk 17:13, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

In principle, this seems like a good idea and may reduce some of the third thing you listed, where someone makes items about Joe Rando. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:46, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
It would also be great for some of the smaller sister-projects who do not have a working BOT which links and creates unconnected-items to WD and have to rely solely on volunteers to carry this workload. Ottawahitech (talk) 22:01, 6 January 2024 (UTC)
this would be a good idea BrokenSegue (talk) 21:11, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
This sounds great to me. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:00, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
This could be done with the help of Wikidata:Schemas, a little bit like Cradle is doing it. Newt713 (talk) 12:18, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Also see
M2k~dewiki (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Requirement on extending Derived Statements

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Recently I was fascinated, in the good way, by finding this:

north (Q659)opposite of (P461)west (Q679)criterion used (P1013)orthogonal direction to the left (Q22672535)

, which relates north and west via inspiringly defined orthogonal direction to the left (Q22672535). However when I click "show derived statements" on it, it shows no examples to be used. As I guess it is because orthogonal direction to the left (Q22672535) is as the value of a qualifier, not of a statement.

Do you think it is suitable to include such qualifier value in "derived statements"? or just add "derived qualifiers"? I wish such feature is supported. Thanks! JuguangXiao (talk) 07:59, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit warring

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

User:Zubryckiy has been conducting editing wars by changing Ukrainian letters for quite some time Г to Ґ №1, Г to Ґ №2 which does not correspond to Ukrainian spelling. It also makes destructive changes of a similar nature. I ask the administrators to take administrative action to stop such destructive actions. Thank you. Jphwra (talk) 20:58, 1 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jphwra Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:15, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikinews instance of (P31) = occurrence (Q1190554) or instance of (P31) = Wikinews article (Q17633526)

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

In the Polish-language cafe, several people have argued that Wikinews articles should be connected with an item describing the Wikinews article (Q17633526) (namely with a date of publication , authors, etc.) and not, as I would prefer, with an item describing the occurence itself (occurrence (Q1190554)) (with a date of an event, location of an event, cause and effect).

What is most difficult for me, some argue that depending on the rank/significance/importance of an described event some Wikinews articles should be described as occurences (for the more significant events) and others as articles from Wikinews (for the less significant events).

What should be the value of the property is this in the items with which Wikinews articles are linked?

a) P31= Q17633526
b) P31= Q1190554 (including, for example, Q2223653 or Q198
c) variously depending on the rank of the event

Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 21:14, 6 January 2024 (UTC)

"All Wikinews pages (news) have the property instance of (P31): Wikinews article (Q17633526)". (Wikidata:Wikinews/Development) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:23, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
"This is a draft" 89.76.208.203 13:36, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
True. Anyway, this seems to be the prevailing policy here. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 17:44, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

get API Key

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

how do I get a API Key Evildogecoin (talk) 00:04, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Why can't I add this Wikidata property (P1687) statement?

Latest comment: 8 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The Wikidata property (P1687) of marriage location (Q124222019) is place of marriage (P2842). But when I try to add that statement, I get this error:

"Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. Use place of marriage (P2842) as qualifier for spouse (P26) only: Sample at Q23#P26. If the spouse doesn't have an item yet, please make one. Don't use directly on items for statements."

It seems the constraints on place of marriage (P2842) are being applied, but that should not be! Those constraints apply to use of the property as a property, not as a statement value. Has there been some code change that broke this pretty basic distinction? Can someone else see if they get the same error? Swpb (talk) 17:41, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Nevermind, it's an abuse filter. Swpb (talk) 15:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
CC @Matěj Suchánek Bovlb (talk) 16:51, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Agreed, ready for archiving. Swpb (talk) 18:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Merge two items

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, the page Q21011405 refers to pig skin, and the page Q3695900 refers to pork rind. While technically the term pork rind is just in reference to its culinary uses and pig skin is the originating material (which can also used for other things), the only three links in the pork skin page all refer to the pork rind food item, not pig skin as a material, so I beliebve they could be merged. I tried to do the merge, but it gave me a conflict I don't know how to solve. Thank you, 2001:760:2C00:1725:0:0:0:7AB 15:14, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree they are the same. As you observed Q3695900 was focused on cuisine so maybe someone will undo my merge. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Well, they're not the same. Pig skin is used to make pork rinds, but pig skin can also be turned into a lot of different things that are not pork rinds such as the Vietnamese dish of shredded pork skin (bì heo or something similar, my Vietnamese sucks), pig skin (Q29559945), and pig skin is used in the making of tangbao (Q3275270) and 肉皮冻 too. These need to be unmerged and cleaned up. - Yupik (talk) 21:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
(To make things more confusing, afaik "pork rind" in the singular is a synonym for "pork skin", but also refers to pork rinds, aka the pork rind crisped up.) - Yupik (talk) 21:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Introducing an AI query/answer function (You've probably got it already)

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I'm not a dev so I don;t know the ins and outs, but I'm interested in AI. I was wondering if the Wikipedia/Wikidata is such that an Ai can quickly query it to answer questions related to the bodu of common knowledge contained herein e.g. What is a ...? Who is ....? How is etc. Kind of a "Jeopardy" like underlay metadata thing. Might make it easier for AI's to get to the optimum answer quicker? Just a thought 2001:8003:4432:E000:D81F:F1EE:E7D5:8529 01:33, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Electric connector

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I couldn't find any documents or information about different types of electrical connectors Dongluchp (talk) 02:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

How to indicate International Organization Affiliation (member of (P463))???

Latest comment: 8 months ago7 comments3 people in discussion

Hello Wikidata community! I have a question regarding the presentation of political party affiliations with international organizations. Specifically, I'm interested in indicating that the Republican Party (Q29468) is a member of the International Democracy Union (Q862603). Among properties such as object of statement has role (P3831), subject has role (P2868), applies to part (P518), and affiliation (P1416), which property should I use, and what is the correct value to indicate the affiliation of the Republican Party with the International Democrat Union? Your guidance on the appropriate property and the accurate value to represent this relationship would be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Johshh (talk) 05:31, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

@Johshh If this is a membership organization, why not use just member of (P463) on Republican Party (Q29468)? Or maybe I don't understand your issue. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, you are right. However, how do I express that it is an organization with the identifier political international (Q2716508), in contrast to its membership status with another entity represented by European political party (Q24649)? https://imgur.com/N0cruoE Johshh (talk) 13:27, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
For observer-type memberships, we have official observer status in organisation (P10624), so European Conservatives and Reformists Party (Q1577483) may be modelled using this specialized property. As for International Democracy Union (Q862603), it seems that the qualifiers you added do not specify the membership type of the Republican Party, but rather the union itself. If you agree with this evaluation, then no qualifier is needed there. political international (Q2716508) is already listed in the subject item - as an instance at International Democracy Union (Q862603). Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 17:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Okei thanks i did not know about official observer status in organisation (P10624).
Yes i was thinking of these qualifiers object of statement has role (P3831), subject has role (P2868), applies to part (P518), and affiliation (P1416) what of them is the best to indicate what type of membership it is, international organization or european party organization. I Think onaly 1 of these qualifiers should be used object of statement has role (P3831), subject has role (P2868), applies to part (P518), and affiliation (P1416) to indicate membership type.
So what of the object of statement has role (P3831), subject has role (P2868), applies to part (P518), and affiliation (P1416) should be used, can i use all of them for this purpose? Johshh (talk) 22:54, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
For the statement Republican Party (Q29468)member of (P463)International Democracy Union (Q862603) Republican Party (Q29468) is the subject and International Democracy Union (Q862603) is the object.
So to qualify the statement to show that International Democracy Union (Q862603) is a political international (Q2716508) in this context you'd use object of statement has role (P3831), although that's not really necessary because International Democracy Union (Q862603)'s item states directly that it is instance of (P31) political international (Q2716508) (and likewise European Conservatives and Reformists Party (Q1577483) states that it is instance of (P31) European political party (Q24649)).
applies to part (P518) is not relevant here at all (unless you want to say that only part of either organisation is involved in the membership relation). M2Ys4U (talk) 16:51, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
You provided a helpful response to my question. I appreciate your assistance. Thank you! Johshh (talk) 01:03, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Need a favor from someone physically located within the Russian Federation

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

There is a longstanding request for a property that has been put on hold: Wikidata:Property proposal/Moscow Cultural Heritage ID.

Bottom line is, I'm not entirely sure the site is inaccessible to foreign IPs because government sites might be a cyber attack target and so it stands to reason they might simply block all foreign access.

On the other hand if native russians are also not able to access this site, perhaps the proposal should be closed? Infrastruktur (talk) 16:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Infrastruktur,
I'm from Moscow, Russia, and I have access to the website. Michgrig (talk) 18:39, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
However, the site might have changed its structure because all links specified in examples open the main page. Michgrig (talk) 18:42, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. I marked the property ready. Infrastruktur (talk) 07:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Date of birth: a source for the year & a different source for the day/month

Latest comment: 8 months ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hi! I was just wondering if anyone knows the correct way to input a person's date of birth, in a situation where I have a source that states their age at a certain date (from which the year of birth can be deduced), and a separate source that gives the person's day & month of birth. (For one thing, I don't know if there's a way to signify that one reference is regarding the year part of the statement, and another is regarding the day and month.)

I'm aware of determination method (P459): age for a given year mentioned in source (Q21042816) (which would be the case for the year of birth), but I'm not sure how to combine this with the day and month to get a full value for the date of birth (P569) property. (As far as I can see, Help:Dates#Properties only mentions the use of this criterion in a case where the year of birth is all that can be determined - knowing me, though, I may be missing something really obvious!)

If I've worded anything poorly or there any questions about what I've said, please let me know. All the best :) A smart kitten (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Something like applies to part (P518)year of birth (Q21821348) should work for the references. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:54, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sjoerddebruin: Thank you for the response. Do you think I should use age for a given year mentioned in source (Q21042816) (or anything else) anywhere in the statement, or do you think something such as the following (as an example) would be correct?

date of birth
  1 January 1990 edit
2 references
inferred from Tweet
X post ID 1234567890
applies to part year of birth
stated in Tweet
X post ID 9876543210
add reference


add value

Best, A smart kitten (talk) 23:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I think this will be enough, be sure to add birthday (Q47223) to the other reference. I would also use type of reference (P3865) instead of inferred from (P3452) and add the general used stated in (P248) as well. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:11, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin Sorry to be a pain, but just to clarify -- do you mean something like type of reference (P3865)Tweet (Q56119332), stated in (P248)Tweet (Q56119332), X post ID (P5933)<post id>? I apologise if I'm misunderstanding you at all. (Also, in case you're interested, the item I was basing this example on - and the one behind my initial query - is SkyDoesMinecraft (Q104777492).) Best, A smart kitten (talk) 21:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
P3865 and P5933 should be enough, didn't know we had a tweet-property. And no worries! Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Poorly named item

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Greetings, this item carries the wrong name in various languages. "Photosphere" is a term of art in astronomy that refers to part of a star. I have no idea how it can be related to photography. This item refers to a particular type of panoramic photograph. It has nothing to do with a "photosphere" in English for certain, and I doubt in any language. Let's rename it to a sane and descriptive name. Elizium23 (talk) 17:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

@Thierry Caro, as the creator of this item in 2017 with its original, incorrect name. Elizium23 (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

historical events by location sorted by importance

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi I am looking for a query that can return historical events by a city sorted by importance. Can you help? Madsbrydegaard (talk) 19:02, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

ask at Wikidata:Request a query Vicarage (talk) 19:49, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Pre-loading most common properties

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Sorry if this has been asked before, but recently I have been creating a lot of Wikidata items on streets in the City of Westminster in London, every item has the same claims of P31/P17/P131/P17/P276/P7959/P281/P2789. Is there any way I could pre-load these claims to avoid the repetitive nature of adding them indivdually every time? No Swan So Fine (talk) 20:19, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Try QuickStatments, you can prepare lots of stuff in an editor and run a batch create. https://quickstatements.toolforge.org/#/ Vicarage (talk) 20:23, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Or check out OpenRefine. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:29, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Deprecating Wikidata item of this property (P1629)

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Property talk:P1629#Mark this property as deprecated Lectrician1 (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Doublette

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I accidentally created Q124291584, a doublette of Q96206079. Could someone delete it? 2A02:8109:B68C:B400:1835:6D78:6420:868E 16:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

  Merged

death and funeral of Pope John Paul II (Q1131707)

Latest comment: 8 months ago8 comments6 people in discussion

Could someone explain to me why adding Wikinews article (Q17633526) to items about events is necessary?--Trade (talk) 03:22, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

I think this was incorrectly merged from Pope John Paul II dies (Q17616613) last year by User:Τάρας στον Παρνασσό. I will restore the original version before merge. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:20, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Could someone please explain why the wikinews article should not be included here? Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 19:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
An event and a Wikinews article about that event are not the same thing and should not be merged or have interwiki links between them. -- William Graham (talk) 21:25, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
Why? Why is a wikipedia article treated as something fundamentally different than a wikinews article?
Are the event and the Wikipedia article about it the same?
How to link information about an event with the description of this event on Wikipedia and Wikinews? Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 23:38, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
One of problem with Wikinews is, that one event should have multiple news in one language, so is better to have separate item for wikinews news and for wikipedia article about it. You can use main subject (P921) for wikinews item and statement is subject of (P805) for wikipedia item. JAn Dudík (talk) 07:48, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Should I create a wikinews category (category:Death and funeral of Pope John Paul II) to connect an elementary event (Pope John Paul II dies (Q17616613)) with a general event (death and funeral of Pope John Paul II (Q1131707))? Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 21:24, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
Generally yes. 212.192.67.36 05:20, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

fall versus death from falling from height

Latest comment: 8 months ago7 comments3 people in discussion

If you see "What links here" at fall (Q11620540) you see the cause of death as "fall", but falling from height (Q11637534) was created to be the cause of death. How can the ~1K be automatically moved to the proper one? RAN (talk) 17:58, 7 January 2024 (UTC)

{{Autofix}}. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 17:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
The cause of death is not "death from falling from height" (consider: "his death was caused by death..."), it is "falling from height" (as in "his death was caused by falling from height"). I have changed the label to fix this grammatical mess, at least in English. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

When something profoundly changes in Belgium

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, when something changes profoundly (eg compare Q778264#P1621(Q778264#P1621) with https://visit.gent.be/sites/default/files/media/doc/2024-01/De%20Lijn%20tramnet%20met%20pendelbus.pdf ; should we change the current lines items or create new items replacing old lines items and move wiki interlinks to new items and deprecate old lines items ? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 09:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Whatever happens "deprecate" is the wrong term on Wikidata as this was the state of the object once in the past. You put an end date on stuffs, and change the "preferred statement" to "normal rank" for not so fresh but that once were information. Usually "deprecate" is for known mistake, think that were assumed to be true but actually never were. author  TomT0m / talk page 09:52, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Javascript to copy Q number

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion

On the top of a page, next to the Q number, could we have a "copy" button that copies the number to the clipboard? It's fiddly to copy the number at present, because double-clicking the number to highlight it will include the brackets. Marnanel (talk) 14:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

@Marnanel Something like this User:Abbe98/copy-qid.js? RVA2869 (talk) 15:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Ah, that is very useful! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 15:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
In Firefox, on Windows at least, double clicking does not highlight the parentheses. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:06, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #609

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • Open request for adminship: WikiBayer (RfP scheduled to end after 8 January 2024 12:01 UTC)
    • Closed request for adminship: EPIC (closed as successful). Welcome onboard \o/
    • New requests for permissions/Bot: HVSH-Bot . Task: Import data about politicians from the Q119949776, now only partially online available.
  • Events
    • Upcoming: The next Wikidata+Wikibase office hours will take place on Wednesday, 17:00 UTC, 17th January 2023 (18:00 Berlin time) in the Wikidata Telegram group. The Wikidata and Wikibase office hours are online events where the development team presents what they have been working on over the past quarter, and the community is welcome to ask questions and discuss important issues related to the development of Wikidata and Wikibase.
    • Ongoing: Weekly Lexeme Challenge #123: Ologist
  • Press, articles, blog posts, videos
    • Papers: Improving maintenance of community-based knowledge graphs. This paper by Nicolas Ferranti addresses the critical issue of data quality in open knowledge graphs, with a specific focus on Wikidata. It aims to formalize Wikidata's unique approaches to assess and resolve data inconsistencies, proposing a semi-automatic refinement pipeline to empower the Wikidata user community in maintaining and enhancing the reliability of this extensive collaborative knowledge graph.
    • Videos: WikidataCon 2023 Day 1.5 - The past and future of Wikidata. In this video Lydia Pintscher takes a moment to review the major events of Wikidata over the past few years. Then turns to look forward and predict what Wikidata's prospects will be over the next year.
  • Development
    • The development team is just returning from the winter holidays so there is no development update at the moment.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Wikidata weekly summary #610

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Discussions

  • Closed request for adminship: WikiBayer (closed as successful). Welcome onboard \o/
  • New requests for permissions/Bot: So9qBot 9. Task: Add DDO identifier to Danish lexemes.

Events

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week Map your list of created articles - a notebook display of geolocated articles on a map created by a user per chosen project and batch (featured/good article).

Other Noteworthy Stuff Wikimedia Indonesia and Wikimedia Deutschland ended their partnership within the project Software Collaboration for Wikidata prematurely. Read their joint statement here.

Newest properties and property proposals to review

Did you know?

Development

  • IP masking/temporary accounts: We are adjusting Wikibase to be prepared for the upcoming changes to no longer expose IP addresses for non-logged-in users (phab:T351968)
  • Dumps/lex. data: We’re adjusting how empty lists of Forms and Senses are represented in JSON dumps (phab:T305660)
  • Wikibase REST API:
    • We finished the work on making it possible to get all sitelinks of an Item (phab:T344041)
    • We are working on getting a sitelink for a given wiki (phab:T344039)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Weekly Tasks

Russian public officials data donation

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I am thinking about upload to wikidata some of the records from declarator.org database which I maintain. The resource is qualified by wikidata, i.e. there are some links from public officials records in wikidata to declarator.org. However, there is a bunch of personalities that we store informmation about but I do not see them in wikidata. It is quite natural, we have data on over 1 000 000 persons, a big part of which are relatively not public, specially at the global level.

While defining the scope of person of interest for suchh a data donation, I estimate the amount to import in some five digit records. Those will be persons that hold the postitions such as: member of regional parliament, member of regional governement, mayor of a major town (100k+ inhabintans), heads of state enterprises.

The data is get from official sources (asset and income declarations), that was collected and transcribed by the service team over the lasr 12 years.

What we could add to wikidata? In general case we have: - name, patronymic, family name - gender - some of positions held - region of activity - citezenship (all Russians) - spoken language (Russian as well)

Would like to have the feedback / questions from the community on this request.

Jvirblis (talk) 20:41, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

are there external links / sources that would help to establish these people's notability and act as references for the facts? you mention sources so those should be mentioned
also consider
  • employer
  • family
  • residence
  • place/date of birth
also you should really check / have some process for checking whether these people already have entries in wikidata (maybe using open refine?) to prevent the creation of duplicates BrokenSegue (talk) 22:06, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
Sources
I expect to filter by position field, searching for the personalities that get specific position, such as:
- member of regional parliament (a person that have a legislative power as a part of a relevant body)
- head of regional ministry
- mayor for major towns
the fact that the specific persons occupy those positions can be cross proofed by other sources:
- decision of electoral comission (While elected)
- decision of appointment (while appointed by head of region or similar authority).
However we do not keep such recordsm once a public disclosure on an official website inn a specific anticorrupption part are a proof for us thatsuch a person used to have a specific position.
Other fields
We've got quite limited amounnt of data from which you mentioned. Something on residence and employer, almost always nothing on fanily, place and date of birth (we do not enncounter anual collect of data on this persons).
Avoid duplicates
Our database is already linked to wikipedia and to wikidata for those persons who have articles in wikipedia. I expect to do a prior search for cases when a person have a wikidata id without a wikipedia page to avoid making a duplicated wikidata page, but till now I have not established the exact procedure Jvirblis (talk) 21:24, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your work! The website does feel trustworthy and it seems to contain a wealth of information. Not speaking Russian or being too familiar with its politics, I cannot verify this subjective impression. But assuming as much, the information is definitely welcome in Wikidata. There really aren't any limits to the amount of detail that would be welcome, with the exception of maybe, since "family" came up, of children, especially minors.
As to references, feel free to consider yourself an acceptable reference. Whenever possible, also list the source you used. Example:

Thank you for your work! The website does feel trustworthy and it seems to contain a wealth of information. Not speaking Russian or being too familiar with its politics, I cannot verify this subjective impression. But assuming as much, the information is definite welcome in Wikidata. There really aren't any limits to the amount of detail that would be welcome, with the exception of maybe, since "family" came up, of children, especially minors. As to references, feel free to consider yourself an acceptable reference. Declarator.org ID (P1883) was created almost ten years ago, and, as its constraints mention, it can be used in a reference section. Whenever possible, also list the source you used. Example for something that isn't available online:

vehicle normally used
  Bentley Arnage edit
point in time 2020


add value
Karl Oblique (talk) 18:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Who broke our property proposal tool and why?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

If I try to create a new Property Proposal (something I have done many, many times), I am switched, without notification or comment, to the visual editor. The page presented makes no sense.

If I manually switch back to the source editor, I am presented with a part-complete page, missing many of the parameters which used to be present, and a line of text saying "Please see the full list of parameters here: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Property_proposal/Proposal_preload&oldid=1784904695. The parameters listed above are mandatory."

Who decided on this mess? Why? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

The visual editor seems to provide more useful context for the fields and even offers drop-downs for some of them, seems better for new users to me. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 14:49, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
And yet my reason for asking was that an editor, new to the process, contacted me because they were completely at a loss as to ho to use it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:17, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

RfC about getting statements for inverse properties in clients wiki

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Currently we have to create inverse properties for Wikipedias and other project to have information in an info box or other template about entities that references the entity of our page.

We may want to avoid that in a certain number of cases to avoid redundancies on Wikipedia. There is a new RfC that opened a chat to get informations about what we would want to ask to the devteam to achieve that. Please comment if you are a client developer or a data manager tired of having to add inverse statements because of a constraint when this may be avoided. Inverse_property_access_for_wikis_:_a_lua_API_request_for_the_development_team author  TomT0m / talk page 11:02, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Problem with NDL Authority ID (P349)

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

The Web NDL Authorities-catalog has two different formats for links, the usual link for geographic objects, persons, companies, etc. has /ndlna/ but for topical terms they use /ndlsh/.

Celestial objects like Pluto (Q339) provide a dead link https://id.ndl.go.jp/auth/ndlna/00575612 the correct link is https://id.ndl.go.jp/auth/ndlsh/00575612 this is just one example.

I am not an wikidata-expert, but maybe there is a need to split P349 and create a second Property like "NDL Topical Term". --Wurgl (talk) 17:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I would support the creation of a new property. It doesn't look like the name authority and subject headings can be distinguished programmatically (i.e. the ID format doesn't have any prefixing that Wikidata External ID redirector (Q108047563) could use). I don't see any option besides a new property. And then someone could create a bot task to check and fix use of the wrong property. -- William Graham (talk) 20:22, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Hint for the bot-task: VIAF does not include topical terms, not from the LC-Authorities, not from DNB and not from NDL. So the solution is: If the NDL-Id can be found in https://viaf.org/viaf/data/viaf-20240101-links.txt.gz then it is a ndlna-type an no action is required. If it is not included, then it is either some wrong id (Does not start with a 0 (zero), I found a few where users filled in the VIAF- ore NTA-Id) or a ndlsh-type (or in very rare cases a very new one. But at least, the ndlna-types can be found very easy. --Wurgl (talk) 20:29, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Reboot proposal to deprecate Latindex property and create a new Latindex_2022_ID

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

In september 2022, I described a very big problem with the identifiers used by Latindex ID (P3127), which Latindex modified in 2022 without redirection nor validation mechanism. See Wikidata:Property_proposal/Latindex_2022_ID. The problem is still going, and my diagnostic of a large amount of bad identifiers is, to the best of my knowledge, still present, leading to a large amount of false links, but apparently valid.

So maybe you could read my proposal and share your opinion about a new property Latindex 2022 ID? GAllegre (talk) 22:01, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Twitter numeric user ID (P6552) not working?

Latest comment: 8 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Today I have not been able to find any twitter accounts by clicking Twitter numeric user ID (P6552) on people's WD pages. Does anyone know why? Ottawahitech (talk) 04:32, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ottawahitech: I'm not seeing any issues, so either it was a temporary glitch on Twitter's side or something on your side. — Huntster (t @ c) 06:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
Hmmmm... it is not temporary for me. I wonder if it has anything to do with being a signed-in member of Twitter. I noticed that since Twitter became X (Elon Musk took over) many accounts that were publicly viewable, now ask readers to sign in before the can see the pages.
Thanks for pinging me @Huntster Ottawahitech (talk) 22:33, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
For me the Twitter numeric ID links succeed when I'm logged into Twitter and fail when I am logged out. -- William Graham (talk) 03:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for responding @William Graham. I am assuming that this is true for all users of WD. I am not sure if this is something that is considered a hindrance to the mission of WD? In any event I have posted about this on thetalkpage of the property Ottawahitech (talk) 17:04, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Domain names as "English aliases"

Latest comment: 8 months ago28 comments6 people in discussion

Greetings, I have taken issue with a large-scale "quickstatements" batch job started by @Hearvox and he has already begun reverting me on this, so I take it to a larger audience.

Hearvox is adding bare domain names as "English aliases" to many items, including human persons. I object to this cluttering of the "aliases" field in this manner.

Hearvox claims that he's doing this for news agencies and so that they can be easily searched. I disagree: there is plenty of space for a proper URL in the official website fields, etc. There is no reason for Timothy M. Dolan (Q225823) who is a human and a bishop to be aliased as "cardinaldolan.org". Nobody anywhere calls this man "cardinaldolan.org"; that is not his name! Elizium23 (talk) 19:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you Vicarage (talk) 19:55, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I have not begun reverting you. I stopped my edits as soon as I saw your comments. Please retract that inaccurate statement. I stopped editing for now to await further discussion. Hearvox (talk) 20:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
You have indeed reverted me, several times, whether it is automatic or manual I do not know. The truth is that you've gone back specifically to items where I undid your edit and you reinstated that edit without discussion. Elizium23 (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I didn't even know you were reverting me until I finished my batches. A few were tests, which repeated edits. So some may have reverted your changes. I didn't know that at the time. (And do not appreciate your accusation). Hearvox (talk) 21:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I have no idea why you consider this an accusation; it's just a statement of fact that you reverted my edits several times. Elizium23 (talk) 21:20, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Adding domain name as alias improves both human and machine searches. Even if there's an 'official website' listed, a search for the domain name will return: "No match was found", unless the domain is an alias. See demo: https://misinfocon.com/turning-wikimedia-into-a-news-site-credibility-tool-422dbf28fdec Hearvox (talk) 20:13, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm working with 28K results from a SPARQL query for instances of 'news-media' or its subclasses. I've matched 9K with their domain names. I used the domain name to extract data external media databases for import into Wikidata: street address, valid URL, press association membership, year founded, year online, and more. Many news outlets already have their domain name as an alias, so I'm following existing Wikidata practice. But some of the results from the news-media query are news people, not news outlets. But because of the amount of items I'm working with, it'll might be hard to separate them out. I will, if required, tho. Hearvox (talk) 20:26, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
You argue past Wikidata practice, but if you look at the majority of items with official websites, they do not have a domain name as an alias. I think you're going against past practice of only selectively using a domain as a label or alias. -- William Graham (talk) 20:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
While the quick search doesn't find people based on the official website the full search you get when you press enter does. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I do not think humans should have URLs as an alias. Furthermore, I don't see why an external user of Wikidata can't use a SQARQL query on official website (P856) to try to match items, i.e. https://w.wiki/8qAG . That is a better practice than indiscriminately adding URLs as alias to every type of item. -- William Graham (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Perfect example, Wiliam. Your search for CNN took 59sec. and found 77 results, only one of which was the desired CNN. (Imagine searching for dozens of domains.)
Whereas check this alias search for "nytimes.com": https://w.wiki/8qAp took 1 second to return the one correct result. Whereas the same alias search for "cnn.com": https://w.wiki/8qAp had 0 results, because "cnn.com" is not an item's alias.
Domain names as alias for news-media improves both human and machine searches. Not having the domain name as alias cripples both human and machine searches. Hearvox (talk) 21:04, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Putting any facts in the alias field boosts visibility on this site, but that's not an argument for putting every fact in there. WD is a structured set of facts, and no-one should ever rely on a piece of information being in the alias field. Only organisations that promote their brand as synonymous with their domain name have a reason to have that in their alias, and still the official_website is the best record of the information. it makes sense for hotels.com, but not CNN. Vicarage (talk) 21:14, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
If this group decides domain names as alias for news media is appropriate but for humans is not — even if the human is a newsmaker, then I could rerun my 'news-media' query but eliminate all instances of 'human'. Perhaps that's a solution. Hearvox (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
It is a very curious query which has caught in its dragnet Catholic cardinals and many types of US legislators as "news-media". I do not understand how they fit in to such a query at all. Elizium23 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
You're absolutely right. That cardinal should NOT have been included in my 'news-media' results. I believe I may have merged results a few months ago that incorporated non-'news media' instances. I'm working my query now to get a better list. Thanks for finding this error. Hearvox (talk) 21:33, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Mystery solved: That Cardinal had been fact-checked by PolitiFact, so had a PolitiFact ID, so was part of my dataset of US news sources in Wikidata: which merged instances of 'news media' with items that had news-related Identifiers. Hearvox (talk) 15:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
An alias should be a valid name. An URL generally isn’t a valid name for a person (although I don’t want to rule out that some use an URL as a nickname). Hence, those aliases shouldn’t exist. Emu (talk) 22:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Paste "inquirer.com" in the the WD search field above. You'll instantly get the message: "No match was found." That's a likely search term since it's the domain name of the major Philadelphia Inquirer (Q600111) newspaper. It's in one of the papers 'official website' statements, yet WD auto-returns a "no match" message. However, were the domain an alias, that same search term would immediately autocomplete "The Philadelphia Inquirer (inquirer.com)" — associating the news outlet with its site in a way 'official website' doesn't.
Nor is 'official website' an efficient search for machines: An URL might be http or https and may or may not have www's. So the search would need to guess right or parse thru items' multiple website statements — an incredibly slow way to machine-search for, say, hundreds of news-media items. Compounding the problem is the majority of news outlets have either their old, now-incorrect http URLs or no website statement at all.
I'll be correcting that as part of a WikiCred project to add (US) news-site credibility data, from external media databases, into Wikidata. I used domain names to confirm their current, correct URL (via HTTP request headers). Domain names allowed me to matched thousands of news outlets with their WD QIDs. And to find thousands more not in WD, for which I'll create new items. I've extracted a wealth of data from external databases (press association membership, street address, your founded, year online, lots more), which, via those domain-name/QID connections, I'll be importing into WD.
Perhaps the crux of this issue is, other than alias, is that WD has no place to enter just an item's domain name: even though that's a crucial bit of data.
Real-life example: You have a US-state press-association membership list. You want to add 'member of' statements to the Wikidata items for those newspapers. You can't use the papers name to match listed members with their WD item labels (names for the same paper vary and often aren't unique: there's dozens of Daily Heralds). But domain name could give you an exact match, were it included in WD and efficiently query-able. Alas, t'aint.
Alias would make it so, but if this group's against it, I'll comply. I'm just not sure why you wouldn't want to:
  • Include this vital data in WD.
  • Make both human and machine searches far simpler.
  • Remove barriers for connecting WD with external databases.
But y'all WD masses work in mysterious ways, so I'll hold off on more alias-ing. — Hearvox (talk) 00:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
@Hearvox: I'm going to restate and reformulate my opposition to your previous QuickStatements batch to add domain names as aliases of news media items and any future edits to do similar.
  • From Help:Aliases
    The label on a Wikidata entry is the most common name that the entity would be known by to readers. All of the other common names that an entry might go by, including alternative names; acronyms and abbreviations; and alternative translations and transliterations, should be recorded as aliases.
    It is not evident to me that every new media organization or source is commonly referred to by their website's domain name. I am very skeptical of that idea. Furthermore, it does not seem like you have reviewed each of your 28k proposed edits and determined that for each item the domain name is a common name that the item goes by.
In addition to my top line concern that domain names are not acceptable aliases for many (or most) news media items, I have the following concerns:
  1. Your edits are in service of modifying a substantial number of Wikidata items into a form that is compatible with your personal project. Your project involves matching items in your project's database to Wikidata items. Your blog post indicates that you intend to use aliases as identifiers. However, there are clear ways of using existing structured data and APIs to query Wikidata and then process that data inside your own project without modifying items or using aliases as identifiers.
  2. You assert that existing Wikidata items are insufficient because it is not possible to put a domain name of a news source in the search box and have the search suggestions return a corresponding item. However, search suggestions are not the end all and be all of searching and a user would likely hit enter or the search item to review the full results. In your example of "inquirer.com", a search for that domain the full search results has the expected first result of The Philadelphia Inquirer (Q600111). I do not think there actually exists a population of Wikidata users that begin searching by domain name and upon not seeing a relevant search suggestion swiftly leaves Wikidata or aborts their search.
  3. This is the first large scale batch edit that you have conducted from your account. Your account has approximately 800 manual edits in main space in the 15 months following your first Wikidata edit. You did not seek feedback or consensus with Wikidata users before starting your edits. It is not clear to me you have an understanding of Wikidata policies.
  4. Even if there was consensus in making the edits you propose, the QuickStatements batch you created had large obvious errors and shortcomings that implies you are not proofing your batches/edits. This does not instill confidence that you would be able to improve your batches to not be faulty or disruptive.
I think you should revert your edits. After that you could start a new discussion or Wikidata:Requests for comment on the subject of when it is appropriate to use a domain name or URL as an item label or alias. And not make any further or similar updates until consensus is met. -- William Graham (talk) 03:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I think William is correct, all edits should be reverted, and the general principle discussed. News outlets are not a special case that requires deviation from current practice. Vicarage (talk) 04:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll be removing the domain-names alias from most of the 1K items in my batch-edit, except for the 120 that already had a domain name as an alias. Those I'll leave in place as that decision was made a Wikimedian before me.
In using alias to store domain name, I was following the examples I'd found in thousands of items. This query, for example, returned 10K unique news-related items of which 550 had a domain-name alias.
I've discussed this project with many Wikimedians, including the idea of alias being the best (and maybe only) place to add domain names. All were supportive… until now.
Note, I misspoke above: My dataset of 28K news-related US items includes not only about 24K instances of 'news media' (or a subclass) but also another 4K items with news-related Identifiers, like Google News or PolitiFact IDs — mostly orgs but some humans. The Cardinal, mentioned above, was in the latter batch as his Wikidata item had a PolitiFact ID. — Hearvox (talk) 15:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Done. Removed domain names from list of aliases in 879 WD items (via Wikibase-CLI). Left the remainder in place: Those domain-name aliases were added by editors before me, — Hearvox (talk) 17:02, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for doing that quickly and with good grace. Vicarage (talk) 17:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
As advised above, created an RFC: Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Domain_name_as_data. Thanks for everyone's help. — Hearvox (talk) 18:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
@Hearvox: I would suggest creating a new discussion section on Project chat (this page) briefly summarizing your RFC and inviting others to comment. That way there can be visibility for people who have not been following this discussion section. -- William Graham (talk) 18:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
@William Graham: Done, thanks again. — Hearvox (talk) 18:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

RFC: Domain name as data

I created a new RFC looking for a way to add domain name and domain-registration date to Wikidata items: Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Domain_name_as_data. Hoping those reading this chat page will add comments and insights to the RFC.

No domain-name property currently exists. (Also see the discussion above). — Hearvox (talk) 18:54, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Locked Wikidata items

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I've been trying to add some Anglo-Saxon city articles into Wikidata but they appear to locked from editing? What should I do? Rylesbourne (talk) 05:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rylesbourne: You may request confirmed flag at Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Other_rights#Confirmed.--GZWDer (talk) 06:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Or just do 11 more edits, it's not that hard. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:30, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Problematic entries

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I'm new here, so I don't know how to handle this:

Two similar models from the same series in an interwiki jungle. See w:de:Robotron Z 9001, Robotron KC 85/1, Robotron KC 87 for explaination. (CC: Stefan Kühn.) Drogosław (talk) 17:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Robotron KC 85/1 (Q12746842) is a computer from 1985. Robotron KC 87 (Q1423417) is the next version of this computer from 1987. So like Commodore 64 (Q99775) is the predecessor of Commodore 128 (Q1115919). KC85/1 and KC87 had so many things in common, that we have only one article in the german wikipedia. This article: w:de:Robotron Z 9001, Robotron KC 85/1, Robotron KC 87. What do you want handle? We can add follows (P155) or followed by (P156). --sk (talk) 13:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
@Stefan Kühn:: All the Wikipedia articles in Q1423417 are related to both (though only the German one mentions both in the title). It makes sanse to have a common article for them in an encyclopedia, but this leaves Q12746842 with only a single interwiki (to the Serbian Wikipedia which has two articles: one for KC 85/1 or Z 9001 and one for Robotron KC 87). Drogosław (talk) 21:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Yet another issue – Q1196607. Some entries refer to the printing element (the daisy wheel), some refer to a printer using this element and some refer to the printing technology using this element. Drogosław (talk) 21:17, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

television program (Q15416) shouldn't be a transitive subclass of legislation (Q49371), right?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

As of https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q18657604&diff=2053525045&oldid=2047897693 by SilviaASH, television program (Q15416) is now a transitive subclass of legislation (Q49371). The path is television program (Q15416), copyrighted (Q50423863), copyright law (Q67011165), intellectual property law (Q18657604), legislation (Q49371). Each of those subclass of (P279) statements looks fine to me individually, but the end result doesn't. Is this actually ok, or should one or more of those statements be changed? dseomn (talk) 01:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't make sense to say that copyrighted status is a subclass of copyright law. I lean toward changing copyrighted to be a fact of copyright law. -- William Graham (talk) 01:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
facet was used 2 levels up at creative work (Q17537576) Vicarage (talk) 07:22, 15 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #611

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

Discussions

  • New request for comments: Community request for the development team to access inverse properties on client wikis. (Summary: We currently cannot access inverse property values on Wikipedia. This can be a data management issue on Wikipedia as we must always ask ourself if we must introduce an inverse property for cases where we need them. So I think it’s useful to gather the usecases community would want and draft a request for an API to the devteam to do that.)

Events

  • Upcoming: The next Wikidata+Wikibase office hours will take place on Wednesday, 16:00 UTC on Wednesday, 17th January 2024 (18:00 Berlin time) in the Wikidata Telegram group. The Wikidata and Wikibase office hours are online events where the development team presents what they have been working on over the past quarter, and the community is welcome to ask questions and discuss important issues related to the development of Wikidata and Wikibase.
  • Past
    • Provenance Loves Wiki (PLW24), Jan 12th - 14th, research and data on the origin of artworks and cultural heritage and how Wikibase and Wikidata can support this.
    • WikiLovesWomen #SheSaid campaign wrapped up the 2023 campaign by visiting Kinshasha and Kisangani, where local Wikimedians improved quotes from women on FR Wikipedia and Wikidata.

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week

  • Brian M Sperlongano released US boundary QA checker, a quality assurance tool for finding issues with boundary data in the United States by using Wikidata, OpenStreetMap, and US Census Bureau data.
  • The Surrounding Ocean (available at vrandezo.github.io/TheSurroundingOcean) - is a tool that allows you to browse lexicographical data. You can use the tool to explore words and their meanings, translations, and synonyms. The tool is currently under development, and the developer, Danny, would appreciate feedback to fix any issues with the tool. More info: Wikidata:The Surrounding Ocean.

Other Noteworthy Stuff

Newest properties and property proposals to review

Did you know?

Development

  • IP masking: We are working on adjusting Wikibase to handle the upcoming introduction of IP masking, which will give editors who are not logged in a temporary account name instead of using their IP to attribute edits to (phab:T351968)
  • Lexicographical data: We are changing how empty Senses and Forms are represented in the dumps (phab:T305660)
  • mul language code: We are doing user testing for the current implementation to see if it is understandable for people.
  • Mismatch Finder: We are continuing the work on migrating it to the Codex design system.
  • REST API:
    • We improved the handling of lower-case statement IDs (phab:T354262)
    • We are working on getting a sitelink for a given wiki (phab:T344039)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Weekly Tasks

Help with Q1228895 and Q622425

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Are nightclubs and discothèques the same thing? I mean, items discothèque (Q1228895) and nightclub (Q622425) should be kept separated or merged? At least in the pt.WP and en.Wp they are considered the same. In the en.WP discothèque redirects to nightclub and in the pt.WP nightclub redirects to discothèque. Can someone give a look, pls? Kacamata (talk) 00:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems like you didn't check the sitelinks, there are way too much overlapping ones. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin Thanks. I was confused by the pt.WP and en.WP. Kacamata (talk) 17:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Death claims with no / low quality sources

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Gonzalo Lira (Q615045) can people please watch this page, there is a wave of russian propaganda claims of this person death, no other sources reporting it, but editors started adding this into wikidata. Talk:Q615045#Data from propaganda sources .

Also, IP editor 176.212.68.84 (обс. · журналы · блокировки · фильтры · whois)
is adding unsourced death claims to other pages as well - Q457756 - which I cannot check, some volunteer needed. Thanks! Manyareasexpert (talk) 17:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

The death date in Q615045 is now sourced to a new report headlined " Pro-Russian blogger Gonzalo Lira allegedly dies..." (my emphasis). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

The ICD-11 coding challenge

Latest comment: 8 months ago7 comments5 people in discussion

Hello data lovers! This may be of interest to Wikidata.

Over at the English Wikipedia, I've begun a challenge. The goal is to add an ICD-11 code to the Medical resources template of all medical articles. *HERE* is the main page of the challenge.

This is a mountain of work, so any help is appreciated. Positive suggestions are also welcome. Have a nice day! - Manifestation (talk) 18:03, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

@ Manifestation: are you familiar with ICD-11 ID (Foundation) (P7807) and ICD-11 ID (MMS) (P7329)? Might make more sense to add this information on wikidata than wikipedia. BrokenSegue (talk) 20:27, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue: Ok... but then how would the ICD codes be copied from the entries of Wikidata to the templates of Wikipedia? (I will admit, I know little about Wikidata.) - Manifestation (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
Templates in Wikipedia can be configured to automatically load data from their associated Wikidata items. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:47, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I've looked at a few medical entries here at Wikidata, and I see that User:Ske has added many ICD-11 Foundation/MMS codes to them. Ske, do you have an idea on how the migrate/synchronize ICD-11 codes between Wikidata and Wikipedia? Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 14:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
I agree that you will save a lot of your time by using wikidata. I would edit w:Template:Medical_resources to automatically import ICD11 codes from wikidata. Note that template doc say that ICD11 codes are already automatically pulled from Wikidata but I think it's not true.
You will have to add something like : {{wdib|ps=1|qid={{{QID|}}}|P7807|{{{ICD11|<noinclude>x</noinclude>}}}}}
I'm far to be an expert on template syntax, so I won't be able to help you more with this task.
For finding missing IC11 codes, one option is to use mix'n matches : I did it the first chapter of ICD11 : https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/catalog/3948
I used Wikidata:Tools/OpenRefine for the other chapters so it may be another option. Ske (talk) 17:13, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Entering the ICD-11 IDs on wikidata is probably the better option, not least because other wikis can profit form this as well. I see some drawbacks though:
a) An article often covers several codes or code ranges, and many ICD-11 entries can't be (usefully) connected to existing wikidata items. As an example: en:Tuberculosis is covered in the codes 1B10 to 1B1Z, which I've added to the article. The mix'n'match tool lists 15 entries containing the word tuberculosis on the first page alone, and there's maybe dozens in the whole classification, most of which could reasonably be assigned to Q12204 - Tuberculosis. If this is automatically pulled from wikidata, the template on en:Tuberculosis would end up an unreadable mess. If all the subcodes are assigned individual wikidata items, the template would lack relevant codes.
Maybe there could be a convention to only add "top level" codes to wikidata items, to add ranges, to parse for ranges when importing, or we'll just have to live with it and manually override it where necessary.
b) There's 17,000 codes within ICD-11, going through all of them individually seems like a herculean task. Mapping from ICD-11 to wikidata and not the other way around seems like a promising approach, but maybe one needs to go through the chapters manually and only add the more relevant codes to wikidata. MaligneRange (talk) 11:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Problème du brouillon enregistrer

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

j'aimerais juste avoir vos points des vues sur l'article que je venais d'enregistrer avant qu'elle soit publier , peut être qui y'as un truc à arranger Thor2024 (talk) 22:18, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I think this is in reference to Q124300383, deleted as empty. I have undeleted (for now) to allow the user to develop the item. Bovlb (talk) 22:23, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to globally ban Guido den Broeder

Latest comment: 8 months ago22 comments8 people in discussion

Hi, this is to let you all know that there is a proposal to ban User:Guido den Broeder at m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Guido den Broeder. You are receiving this notification as Guido den Broeder has made at least one edit to this wiki as per the m:Global bans policy. Best, --SHB2000 (talk) 06:00, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the notification; further discussion should take place in Meta, as linked above. –FlyingAce✈hello 16:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I have responded on nl:wikibooks. Please stop spamming pings. Guido den Broeder (talk) 16:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Notification is a requirement. Karl Oblique (talk) 17:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
@SHB2000: Thanks for posting this here. I will definitely try to find the time to follow this, even though I cannot participate in the discussion. As someone who has been blocked on 3 separate wikiland-wikis I have been going out of my way to be well-behaved, and try to choose carefully wikis to avoid. I understand that global locks (or is it global bans?) are automatic for individuals blocked on more than 3 wikis, I think?
Thanks in advance, Ottawahitech (talk) 22:48, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Nothing is automatic – that includes global locks. Stewards will use them at their own discretion, but locks are only used if the user is only disruptive. Bans are decided by the community, though. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
FYI "locks are only used if the user is only disruptive" is not true, and I complained it many times. GZWDer (talk) 06:08, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I find this discussion very confusing. So there are:
  • Globally locked users at a steward's discretion
  • Globally banned users by the community
  • and also Globally banned users by the foundation
?
If so how can one tell which is which?
@GZWDer, @SHB2000, @Karl Oblique @Guido den Broeder thanks for your contributions to this topic Ottawahitech (talk) 15:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
I have no idea what the procedure is with regard to global bans. It hasn't been explained to me. I don't know when a decision will be made, nor how. If it's just a matter of counting votes, than this case will open the floodgates. Global bans were never intended for such minor perceived transgressions. Guido den Broeder (talk) 17:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Guido, your actions aren't "minor perceived transgressions" as you seem to think. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:41, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
They are in comparison to previously globally banned users, and in fact compared to many users who haven't even been blocked once. Not to mention that none of it is true. Guido den Broeder (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
@SHB2000, the question for you is now, are you so eager to remove me, that you accept turning the WMF into one big battlefield to accomplish it, or would you accept a different solution. You can still withdraw you nomination. Guido den Broeder (talk) 23:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
Why would I ever withdraw that nomination? You STILL haven't changed your behaviour; what makes you think I'll withdraw that nomination now? SHB2000 (talk) 23:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm giving you the opportunity, the choice is yours. My behavior will not change, but we can agree to avoid each other. Guido den Broeder (talk) 23:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
If you admit to not changing your behaviour, then there's nothing to discuss here. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:48, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
My behavior will not change means, that:
  • I will continue to edit only in my own name;
  • I will remain focused on the same single topic, the only reason for my return in 2017 after giving up on Wikipedia in 2008. And no, that topic is not me.
Guido den Broeder (talk) 00:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
You didn't mention anything about your continued incivility and disregard for policies. No thanks, I'm keeping the nomination up. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:13, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I have no disregard for policies, and I have already apologized twice for my single case of incivility on Meta. Presenting a problem with a user on a user problem board is not uncivil. If you don't like to be on the receiving end of that, the simple solution is not to cause problems. For instance, stop following me around and telling lies about me, as you did on Commons, and you will have nothing to worry about. Maybe though it will satisfy you that after being stabbed in the back by Yann, I have no intention of ever helping to solve a difficult case again. There will also be no further uploads by me. Guido den Broeder (talk) 05:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Maybe this wouldn't be the case were you to a) stop accusing us [myself, Yann, Jeff G., Ikan Kekek, etc] of things we didn't do; b) admit every single wrongdoing of yours as mentioned by several users on m:Requests for comment/Global ban for Guido den Broeder. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:35, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Can we keep the comments there, not here. Vicarage (talk) 08:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I have not started a procedure against any of you, but merely stated some facts. Yann incorrectly accused me of vandalism, as noted also by administrator A.Savin. That is a fact. You falsely accuse me of evading a global lock. That is also a fact. Jeff G applied double jeopardy and failed to notify me when he started a second global lock request against me. That is a fact, too. I don't now why you mention Ikan Kekek.
As for myself, I am not guilty of any wrongdoing. There is no obligation for the accused to admit to things they didn't do.Guido den Broeder (talk) 16:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Yes, GZWDer is correct.

FYI "locks are only used if the user is only disruptive" is not true

Kk.urban (talk) 17:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata stance on AI upscaled images

Latest comment: 8 months ago4 comments4 people in discussion

I had a look to see if there was a policy document on this, but couldn't find one. I'm wondering what stance Wikidata takes on AI upscaled images, when a Commons user takes an old photograph or painting and asks an AI to increase the resolution or otherwise sharpen it up - possibly adding novel (and sometimes inaccurate) details that weren't present in the original.

Different Wikipedia projects seem to vary in their attitude on whether an AI-enhanced historical photograph or painting is preferable to the original. Does Wikidata take an official view on it? Belbury (talk) 11:11, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata policies on images has till now always been that we trust WikiCommons to have good policies about images and don't have separate rules. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
I think this is more about which image we prefer in statements. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:35, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I like upscaled images, so long as the AI used is specified. The good ones do not create artifacts, just make the image bigger and smooth the grain and strengthen borders. The bad ones add in eyes from a menu of eyes. So long as the AI used is specified we know the faults. It also seems like we are now using some AI processing to make larger thumbnails from our smaller images. --RAN (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Can we merge these items?

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Category:Wikipedia utility templates (Q7105605) (Category:Wikipedia utility templates) Category:Wikipedia utility templates (Q9876762) (Category:Utility templates)

I have looked at all the WMF sites that have sitelinks on both items: enwikipedia, scowikipedia, simplewikipedia, commons. In all these cases, the sitelink on the second item is just a redirect to the sitelink on the first item. The items are the same thing so can we merge them? Kk.urban (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

With no response for 24 hours, I will do the merge. Kk.urban (talk) 21:33, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Javascript and sRGB color hex triplet (P465)

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, anyone good enough to help debug that script (when multiples coulours, only one same colour applied) ? https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Teester/DisplayColourSwatches.js Thanks ! Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 08:15, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

I remembered Nikki has a fork of it, User:Nikki/DisplayColourSwatches.js, presumably with any issues fixed, the code certainly looks better. Infrastruktur (talk) 08:49, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Wonderful! Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 08:57, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

scholarly article (Q13442814) with sex or gender (P21)

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ13442814&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1&ns120=1

Why so many users, including experienced users, merge scholarly article (Q13442814) with humans? Midleading (talk) 11:42, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

appears to be confusion between articles about people and the very people they are about. most don't seem to be related to merges but i only fixed a few BrokenSegue (talk) 16:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I fixed a few. Query now returns zero results. Bovlb (talk) 17:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Solutions to inter-language linking?

Latest comment: 8 months ago14 comments7 people in discussion

Hi! Now for ca. the third time I ran into the following problem: when there are different views towards an ontology in various places, e.g.

it becomes really hard to link a main article in one language to the main article in another language (or even all other languages). Any fix for such cases? J heisenberg (talk) 21:06, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

We have no perfect solution, but you might like to look at Template:Interwiki extra (Q21286810), Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2020/04#Interwiki_extra, phab:T320491, and Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects. Bovlb (talk) 23:16, 2 January 2024 (UTC)
Tx, I'll take a look +1 2003:C2:CF38:E800:95D8:2705:850F:CA88 00:20, 3 January 2024 (UTC)
Tried it and it works only for admins? J heisenberg (talk) 04:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
It works if you follow the instructions as described in Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:21, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
When adding a "sitelink to redirect" or an "intentional sitelink to redirect" the following error message pops up:
Could not save due to an error.
The save has failed.
Warning: You are trying to add/remove badges to this item. At local Wikipedias adding or removing badges are done by consensus. Saving this edit was blocked and should be done only by administrators or trusted users. If you think you are correct, please contact an administrator.
J heisenberg (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
It seems like it's necessary to be autoconfirmed to to it. Given that you are an active EnWiki user I moved you to the confirmed user group.
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): would it be possible to allow nonconfirmed users to add the sitelink badges? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 10:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: I don't think that would be a good idea. We have seen some misuse in the past. --Lymantria (talk) 10:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lymantria Have we seen misuse in those badges or only the others? Maybe, it can be possible to add only the intentional sitelink badge but not the others? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: It's the others. --Lymantria (talk) 16:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Thank you! J heisenberg (talk) 00:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
Hmmm I wasn't aware that we are doing anything special there in the code. Is this potentially handled by an abuse filter? Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: Sorry, forgot to ping you. Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lydia: Yes, it is: Special:AbuseFilter/52.
I already asked the same question earlier if the filter should permit addition of the intentional sitelink to redirect (Q70894304) badge with a new link. If I understand it correctly, this is now mandatory when a redirected link is added, so in fact no non-confirmed user is able to do that now. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:30, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Informing you about the Mental Health Resource Center and inviting any comments you may have

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello all! I work in the Community Resilience and Sustainability team of the Wikimedia Foundation. The Mental Health Resource Center is a group of pages on Meta-wiki aimed at supporting the mental wellbeing of users in our community.

The Mental Health Resource Center launched in August 2023. The goal is to review the comments and suggestions to improve the Mental Health Resource Center each quarter. As there have not been many comments yet, I’d like to invite you to provide comments and resource suggestions as you are able to do so on the Mental Health Resource Center talk page. The hope is this resource expands over time to cover more languages and cultures. Thank you! Best, JKoerner (WMF) (talk) 21:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

I need help with positionholder template

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

At Talk:Q124288984 we have an unusual situation, the name of the title changed, but the early leaders were still numbered starting when the school had a different name and the title was different. So I get an error message, can anyone think of a solution? RAN (talk) 18:42, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Think the template should be fixed for this case then? However technically it isn't the same organisation and position. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

How to find out a user’s edits?

Latest comment: 8 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, I just wish to see a list of my edits on Wikidata. Where should I look at? Thanks! JuguangXiao (talk) 07:08, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/JuguangXiao RVA2869 (talk) 08:17, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks!   Done JuguangXiao (talk) 22:42, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Revibot I down?

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I noticed that the Wikidata weekly summary is no longer archived by Revibot I. The last archiving on this page was on 15 December 2024. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=2030285288 RVA2869 (talk) 08:37, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

wikipedia aim

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

what is the purpose of wikidata? 5.160.196.200 10:48, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

see Wikidata:Introduction for an introduction. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:11, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

Vote on the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

I am reaching out to you today to announce that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) Charter is now open. Community members may cast their vote and provide comments about the charter via SecurePoll now through 2 February 2024. Those of you who voiced your opinions during the development of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines will find this process familiar.

The current version of the U4C Charter is on Meta-wiki with translations available.

Read the charter, go vote and share this note with others in your community. I can confidently say the U4C Building Committee looks forward to your participation.

On behalf of the UCoC Project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 18:07, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

On the correct use of ranks for multiple statements with various degrees of precision

Latest comment: 8 months ago17 comments11 people in discussion

Hi all. Following a short discussion on Putnik's talk page, I'd like to have some more opinion on the correct use of ranks for less precise statements, e.g. a date stated with year vs day precision, or a place stated with country vs city. Currently, two approaches seems valid, but their existence doesn't seem compatible.

  1. Use the rank deprecated for the less precise statement : this is supported by Help:Deprecation, which record the use of item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519): Wikibase reason for deprecated rank as a valid reason for deprecating. Help:Ranking records the use of deprecated rank for "inaccurate statements", but whether this is meant for less precise statement I leave to native-English speakers to rule; the French translation doesn't record anything about precision. This query counts 20067 such uses.
  2. Use the rank preferred for the most precise statement : Help:Ranking doesn't explicitely list among the reasons for preferred rank the precision of the statement. However, this query counts 141145 uses of a preferred value with most precise value (Q71536040): reason for preferred rank based on level of detail, time precision (e.g. day instead of year), seven times as much as #1.

I'd like to have some more insight from the community on this and maybe update the help pages to make the correct use more explicit. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 19:34, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Option two please, the first one is misusage of the deprecated rank. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:39, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
I'm also a little confused that we have two ways to distinguish between values of different precision, but at the same time I see a deprecated value a more sustained option. 1) There is still an option where we need to have a split between preferred and normal rank by applies to part (P518), statement disputed by (P1310), etc. 2) I could be wrong, but from my POV we keep these values only because it is listed in external sources and in other case we don't need them at all, so in this case deprecated rank is a better alternative for deletion. Anyway, I'm not against another approach. —putnik 00:25, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Qualifiers make sense when read by humans on screen, but seem of little use in SPARQL queries when its too complicated to disentangle the caveats. Ensuring a single preferred rank is key for most uses. Other values should be deprecated only if regarded as wrong Vicarage (talk) 04:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
It’s very useful un SPARQL if you use the simple triples "wdq:" forms, which are very handy actually in a lot of cases. author  TomT0m / talk page 09:27, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
The problem with qualifiers is that people keep inventing their own local conventions. I was trying to get demonyms today (aka United Kingdom -> British) and I had to thin the file by hand, as there were so many micro-rules implemented in the qualifiers there. I could think of so many qualifiers for statements, reflecting their provenance, time interval, precision etc, and have no idea which were used in a broad query. Vicarage (talk) 09:39, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
Option 2, I agree with Sjoerddebruin; I think the use of item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519): Wikibase reason for deprecated rank with deprecated rank for less precise values is not compatible with the use of most precise value (Q71536040): reason for preferred rank based on level of detail, time precision (e.g. day instead of year) with preferred rank for more precise values; I would propose to convert the first one into the second one, thus 1) removing the option from Help:Deprecation; 2) convert the option into most precise value (Q71536040): reason for preferred rank based on level of detail, time precision (e.g. day instead of year) for its 20k occurrences through a bot; 3) delete item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519): Wikibase reason for deprecated rank (or keep it for historical purposes). I ping @BrokenSegue: for another opinion, since he ran Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/BorkedBot 5 (maybe it's still running periodically, I'm unsure) which spread significantly the use of most precise value (Q71536040): reason for preferred rank based on level of detail, time precision (e.g. day instead of year). --Epìdosis 09:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
the bot still runs. I'm unclear on what's being asked here. deprecating for less precision is definitely wrong. it was my impression that preferring for more prevision was right (hence the bot) BrokenSegue (talk) 18:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
It's very unfortunate that item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519) was included five years ago at Help:Deprecation and it should be removed from there. @Billinghurst FYI. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
No Vojtěch Dostál, what is unfortunate is that the initial use as a reason for deprecation has been subverted from its intent and purpose. There was nothing else that fitted that reason at the time it was introduced.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:50, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
Per this discussion, I removed item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519) from the list at Help:DeprecationVojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
  • I support the majority opinion and vote for marking the most precise statement rather than the less precise statement. It happened that I have the test case in hand (I have already shared it with putnik): in this version of Q1232419 we can see the less precise statement of the birth date twice, once marked as deprecated and once not; it happened because of this merging. Thus, if one of the statements is marked as deprecated because of being less precise, we could expect appearing of another (or even the same) less precise statement without this qualifier; on the contrary, if the most precise statement is marked as preferable, this will last notwithstanding of any additions. Андрей Романенко (talk) 13:44, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
    @Андрей Романенко: It doesn't work that way if there is three sets of data. For instance we can be deprecating a statement of year of birth of c. 1820 as less precise, and leaving as normal the year 1821, and making more precise for a statement for 3 July 1821. It is not a binary choice.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:55, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
    I see your point, it makes sense, but my main concern is to have the most precise statement marked as the most precise forever (or until proved otherwise) and be sure that exactly this meaning would be transcluded to other wiki projects. Андрей Романенко (talk) 21:20, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
    The whole discussion made me thought we were actually discouraging in every case the deprecating of values with less precision, so is there some agreement than in some cases it's tolerated and in others it isn't? --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 21:32, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
    That probably depends on your definition of “less precision”. There are cases where “less precision” is indistinguishable from “wrong” like using Budapest (Q1781) for events taking place before 1873. --Emu (talk) 22:01, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
    In cases like this I would deprecate with anachronism (Q189203), as there is a lack of overlap in the time-frame of the statements. By "less precision" I would mean, say, stating Hungary (Q28) (or any other Qids for the previous states) for an event who took place in Budapest (Q1781), which isn't uncommon for claims like place of birth. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 09:31, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #612

Latest comment: 8 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week. Translations are available.

Discussions

  • New request for comments: Domain name as data (Summary: How should Wikidata store the domain name associated with an item? There are many properties for URLs, but a domain name is a different value.)

Events

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week

  • Wikimedia Commons based streaming services by Magnus: WikiFlix for movies and the companion tool WikiVibes for audio.

Other Noteworthy Stuff

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • IP Masking: We are continuing to adapt Wikibase to the upcoming IP Masking feature. We worked on hiding warnings about IP addresses being saved when they don’t apply (phab:T353807, phab:T352006) and creating temporary accounts when editing (phab:T354730)
  • Wikibase REST API:
    • We continued working on the ability to get a sitelink for a given site (phab:T344039)
    • We started working on the ability to remove a sitelink for a given wiki (phab:T344685)
    • We worked on fixing a bug where the REST API PUT request does not handle statement on Items with lowercase statement IDs (phab:T352644)
  • mul language code: We did user testing to find any remaining issue before release

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Weekly Tasks

"William Robert" versus William (1) Robert (2)

Latest comment: 8 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

We have several double_given_names such as William Robert (Q60630696) as well as given_names William (Q12344159) and Robert (Q4927937). We have not standardized on a way to present given_name for a human. So we have some people doing it with double_given_names and other with two single given_names and assigning an ordinal. Some people add both and deprecate one or assign a promoted rank to the other. Some add one and delete the other. What should we standardize on? RAN (talk) 23:26, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

I think most people were given the name of William and Robert for example, not just because of the combination of both. If we apply this approach to people with 3, 4, or 6 given names we create a complicated structure on both Wikidata and Commons. I'm not sure if we want that. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
  • That implies that we can read the minds of parents and know why they named their children. It also is not complicated, since we already have over 1,000 double names as entries already. We only record up to triple given name (Q122069238).

Merging duplicates

Latest comment: 8 months ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hello! What is the procedure for merging duplicate items? Q505194 and Q25400539 both are about Reynard the Fox. Luke10.27 (talk) 06:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

@Luke10.27 In this case, they are not duplicates, as one is a literary cycle, and the other is an anthropomorphic fox.
Had they been duplicates, you could have followed Help:Merge. Bovlb (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Oh, that makes sense. Should the Wikipedia articles all be attached to one or the other? Right now, for example, w:Reynard the Fox and Reineke Fuchs don't show in each other's "In Other Languages" lists. Luke10.27 (talk) 06:38, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Generally, each Wikipedia article should be attached to one or other on a case-by-case basis.
There is a trick you can use on some client projects to make more Wikidata pages show up using Template:Interwiki extra (Q21286810). I wish there was a way we could make that work from our end. Bovlb (talk) 06:47, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
It seems that entry Q505194 is confused, as it contains articles about Reynard the Fox in general and the Old French version. Afaz (talk) 06:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

this items should be merged and I can't

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Q65088713 and Q3359129 are about the same object Can't be merged The error message is Conflicting descriptions for language en. MarcMF2 (talk) 19:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

If you want to merge and redirect using Special:MergeItems, then one item needs to be completely blank, with no descriptions or statements. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 20:06, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@MarcMF2, please try to enable the Merge gadget in your preferences. It does not require blanking any item. @Koavf, also FYI. Michgrig (talk) 20:23, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Obalky knih.cz as external identifier

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Greetings, Obálky knih (Q67311526) has been added to thousands of items under the property, described by source (P1343), but I feel that this gives it undue importance, and it stands alone in this section, rather than being properly classified as an "External Identifier".

Random example: John Berchmans (Q724169)

@Vojtěch Dostál has been responsible for adding this property. What would be a good process to transition this over? Elizium23 (talk) 08:52, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I've been asked this question numerous times in past but nobody has been able to identify a better way to model this. The ID itself (at the end of the URL) is in fact NL CR AUT ID (P691) but not all items having NL CR AUT ID (P691) also have an entry in Obálky knih (Q67311526). Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:55, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Estimated fatalities

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, in Q124276346 fatalities should be 50-100, which is an estimation. It is definitely different from 75 +/- 25. How can I set it? Bináris (talk) 21:00, 19 January 2024 (UTC)

I think that range you are seeing is the way we normally represent uncertain quantities - 50 is lower bound, 100 upper bound. However, if you want to be more precise somehow (?) there are qualifiers like lower limit (P5447) and upper limit (P5448) you could use. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:14, 22 January 2024 (UTC)
In physics it is the normal representation, but in everyday life (at least in Hungary) it is not. On the other hand, an estimated 50-100 can also be 49 or 101, thus 75 +/- 25 does not exactly mean the same uncertainity. Thank you, I will try. Bináris (talk) 23:06, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Require at least 3 support votes for property creation

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Wikidata talk:Property creators#Require at least 3 support votes for property creation Lectrician1 (talk) 15:59, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Properties ready for creation contains 60 entries

Latest comment: 7 months ago16 comments6 people in discussion

Hello, the Category:Properties ready for creation currently contains 60 entries M2k~dewiki (talk) 22:53, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

100 most recently created properties

18 September 2024

17 September 2024

16 September 2024

14 September 2024

12 September 2024

11 September 2024

10 September 2024

7 September 2024

6 September 2024

5 September 2024

2 September 2024

30 August 2024

29 August 2024

27 August 2024

24 August 2024

23 August 2024

Thank you for raising this. Since I am currently almost the only one of the 48 property creators (not sure why) who both reviews and creates properties I would say that having 60 proposals now marked as ready is perfectly normal. Only in the last 6 months I have created more than 230 properties (it is also easy to see from the last 100 properties created, see above) and I certainly not happy with this situation since I can't handle property creation here all by myself. If this continues to be the case, I would not be surprised that we will pass the milestone of more than 100 proposals marked as ready (by the way, in early September 2023, I managed to get proposals marked as ready down to zero, I'm not sure we can ever repeat something like that), so I need some help here. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 07:25, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello Kirilloparma, thanks a lot for your great work!
Since Wikidata:WikiProject Properties has more than 50 members and therefore can not be "pinged" (also see Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Properties), I also ping some of the most active users from Wikidata:Property creators/Statistics. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Jonathan Groß, Horcrux, AdamSeattle, Ederporto, Infrastruktur: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál, Mahir256, Esteban16, Trade, Luca.favorido: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lymantria, TiagoLubiana, VIGNERON, Vahurzpu, Gnoeee: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:52, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Pamputt, Ayack, Tinker, Eihel, GZWDer: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Midleading, DannyS712, Alexmar983, Thierry Caro, Multichill: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@99of9, Kristbaum: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:53, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Tinker Bell: for information. M2k~dewiki (talk) 21:55, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Hello, thanks for having warned about this.
I did what I could in these days and I created some ready properties, and other creators did the same. Now we arrived at the half of the initial list.
The backlog cannot and should not be further shortened in my opinion.
A lot of properties don't have enough support to be considered. The lack of consensus from the community (or the lack of interest) is symptom that a specific property is not so requested at the moment.
A lot of properties have only a support vote from a single user who writes everywhere the same sentence, and support every unsupported proposal. That doesn't even count in my opinion.
As a property proposer, I'm not bothered to wait for some weeks (but maybe it's only me). And I always try to sponsor my work in projects and with the other users to trigger the discussion on the proposal.
So in my opinion, we should do something to tackle this chronical problem (I agree). But also solve the problem of the backlog content itself.
And the creators should not create everything only for the sake of the empty backlog, but must ensure a quality work...
Thanks. Luca.favorido (talk) 05:41, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

I apologize for my reduced activity at the moment due to numerous deadlines. I have no calm to do this. In the past, I actively contributed to find candidates for the Property Creator flag, and I remain committed to do so in the future. I have also previously suggested on the Wikidata Telegram group to streamline the Property Creation process for cases involving authority control-related identifiers; however, there seems to be some apprehension, because some users think the proposal is about something else and I did not want to insist. Under the current guidelines, this type of bottleneck is structural, it will appear cyclically after a while and I try to encourage more users to take part in creating properties to minimize backlogs. I will find another candidate this year.--Alexmar983 (talk) 22:05, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

To User:M2k~dewiki (and everyone else): it has become fairly normal that we are severely understaffed in pretty much every field that requires elevated rights, and more work and jobs continue to pile up. Please consider running at WD:RfD (for property creator, or admin) and do whatever is necessary to keep this project in good shape. Every level of activity helps to shorten backlogs, and it is generally a good idea to distribute laborious tasks to many editors in order to relief pressure from the few ones who actively help the project in such roles. —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:24, 21 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello @MisterSynergy: there is a Request for comment from November 2022: Wikidata:Requests for comment/Create items for property proposals M2k~dewiki (talk) 22:34, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Sure but it does not go anywhere based on the lack of consensus, and has not been edited for more than a year. We need to work with the status quo, and that means that someone with elevated rights needs to spend some effort to get things done. —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:40, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
if property creation were faster I would do it more. What if we changed the process to where the creator is only responsible for creating and setting the label/description and the proposer is responsible for filling in the rest. If it isn't filled in then the property gets deleted BrokenSegue (talk) 00:00, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

[Breaking Change Announcement] Empty Senses / Forms Lists Presentation in Lexeme Dumps

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello,

This is a breaking change announcement relevant to those working with Lexeme dumps.

In Lexeme dumps, "senses" and "forms" values, when not empty, are shown as arrays. When these lists are empty, they are currently displayed as objects. For example, values with content are displayed in array format: "senses":[{"id":"L4-S1",...] but empty values are treated as objects: "senses":{}

However, empty lists should be presented as arrays as well: "senses":[]

In this change, empty lists of forms and senses will be switched from objects to arrays. This adjustment makes the dumps more consistent and matches the same way non-empty values are presented. We will roll this change out on February 8th.

We anticipate the impact of this change to be minimal and harmless for most use cases. Therefore, we haven't generated a test dump, as it would demand substantial resources and time. If you have any questions or concerns about this change, please don’t hesitate to reach out to us in this ticket (T305660).

Cheers, -Mohammed Abdulai (WMDE) (talk) 17:17, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata usage in Infoboxes of different Wikipedias

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello! (Maybe my issue has been raised before and also answered; but since i could not locate it please bear with it again!)
On Marathi Wikipedia we have been using template for Wikidata Infobox. This transcludes data from the respective Wikidata entry into the infobox on the article page of Mr Wiki. But some editors have brought to my notice that not all info that is visible on the article page through Desktop view is visible in Mobile view. can this issue be solved somehow? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 08:27, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems based on the Wikidata Infobox from Commons, that one does hide several fields on mobile. Be sure to check the source code of the template/module. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:48, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
Am illiterate on the coding front! Can anyone fix this? Or are images purposely hidden on mobile views? §§Dharmadhyaksha§§ {T/C} 06:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Disestablishments

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Which year do we mark Troms og Finnmark (Q52600648) (Troms og Finnmark, as well as Vestfold og Telemark and Viken) as being disestablished? 2023 or 2024? There is w:Category:2024 disestablishments in Norway, but commons:Category:2023 disestablishments in Norway. Kk.urban (talk) 22:32, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

This has been always the long-term discussion on what our statements describe: until or including that day. This hasn't been solved so far afaik. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:08, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Q1869897 and Q2324034 are a nightmare.

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I think it's mixing details between two people. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:38, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Jan Jakob Lodewijk ten Kate (Q1869897) ; Jan Jacob Lodewijk ten Kate (Q2324034). Edited for easy access. JuguangXiao (talk) 18:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Landing page for multiple formatter URL values

Latest comment: 7 months ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Note: You can read the proposed solution section first, if you prefer.

The problem / Use cases

Sometimes the primary URL isn't useful

The following claim exists:

which currently links to https://music.apple.com/artist/581279690 via formatter URL (P1630). However, if you access that page, you will find it empty and unhelpful. However, the claim was added to Wikidata because an alias for Apple Music artist ID (U.S. version) (P2850) is "Apple Books author ID". There is a useful page for this identifier available at https://books.apple.com/author/581279690 which uses an alternate value of formatter URL (P1630). However, alternate values of formatter URL (P1630) currently are not readily accessible or useable.

Sometimes there is no official URL

There is no official or primary URL for ISBN-13 (P212), so what should it link to? Right now, Special:BookSources is a custom solution which solves this problem for ISBN-13 (P212), but I want a generalized solution for any Wikidata property. For example, it would be great to have a link target for IRS Employer Identification Number (P1297). Many URLs are available, but no one value is clearly best.

Sometimes you want a URL with particular constraints

Perhaps there is already a good solution for this via some query mechanism. Let's say I know an object, a property, and some constraints on that property that I want, eg. For Netanel Miles-Yépez (Q101436426), I want the URL of Apple Music artist ID (U.S. version) (P2850) relevant to United States of America (Q30).

My solution would access this on a web page at url-formatter.toolforge/?q=Q101436426&p=P2850#P1001-Q30

Personally, I don't know how to produce this through queries at all, but even if it's possible, given the variety of possible constraints, producing a reliable query would likely be very difficult. The solution below will display all possible URLs and merely jump to (or even highlight) the requested value. If nothing matches, then no big deal, the user can pick the one they want manually.

The proposed solution

Sometimes identifier values have multiple URL targets. I would like a tool (probably on toolforge) which produces a page containing all the URLs produced by formatter URL (P1630) for a particular item

For example, I would like this URL: url-formatter.toolforge/?q=Q101436426&p=P2850 to produce a page like this:

I expect the tool will be the preferred-rank value for formatter URL (P1630) on some properties, but that choice should be made on a case-by-case basis for each property. Daask (talk) 17:57, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

who would be the consumer of this new website? readers? editors? tools? BrokenSegue (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
This sounds like a reasonable approach - maybe instead of something on toolforge this would be best done with a javascript gadget that places a link/flag next to identifiers that have multiple formatters, and when you click that these options pop up? It seems like something that needs to be integrated with the Wikidata UI, and js add-ons and gadgets are probably the best way to do that. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:54, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Dealing with bot errors, bot edit wars, and bot scope creep

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion

There is a discussion at Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard#Block_of_Frettiebot that could benefit from community input. Bovlb (talk) 17:17, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

DAB criteria for abbreviation

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I found two very similar instances of Wikidata-specific criterion related to disambiguation pages (Q56062113): short name, acronym, initialism, or abbreviation not unique (Q64699537) and short name, acronym, initialism, or abbreviation not unique (Q114334609). Is there any distinction of usage? @Moebeus, @Gymnicus, any ideas? Mzaki (talk) 11:37, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

the latter is broader narrower than the former, specific just to abbreviations? Not sure if it's something we need, but :) Moebeus (talk) 11:43, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
I had created the data object short name, acronym, initialism, or abbreviation not unique (Q114334609). This was also on the basis that I knew nothing about the data object short name, acronym, initialism, or abbreviation not unique (Q64699537). This is certainly also due to the fact that this data object only has an English label and English aliases. Now that I know about this data object, I no longer see it as necessary for the data object short name, acronym, initialism, or abbreviation not unique (Q114334609) to exist. For this reason I would lean towards a merge. --Gymnicus (talk) 22:08, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments, @Moebeus and @Gymnicus. I would like to merge them if no other comments are placed within a week. Mzaki (talk) 15:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Release date vs publication date vs inception

Latest comment: 7 months ago9 comments4 people in discussion

What's the difference between Q115668563, Q1361758 and Q3406134? Is release date even supposed to be used anywhere? Which of these should I use for "initial release date"? Aaron Liu (talk) 18:37, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Aaron Liu: for better comparing, I am giving this list:

--Estopedist1 (talk) 06:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

You also have start time (P580): time an entity begins to exist or a statement starts being valid and the more useful service entry (P729): date or point in time on which a piece or class of equipment entered operational service: which is used for equipment, or ships. Its a right muddle, with inception most often abused, as some view it as when the idea was first mooted, and others when it started being used. Vicarage (talk) 12:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
What should I use for software? Aaron Liu (talk) 14:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
See iOS 17 (Q118174932) as an example? It uses publication date (P577). JuguangXiao (talk) 18:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
I was asking about the date of initial release. Aaron Liu (talk) 19:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
If you mean like iOS (Q48493), still publication date (P577). Or you have specific software on your mind? JuguangXiao (talk) 23:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Huh, that makes sense. Thanks! Aaron Liu (talk) 23:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Estopedist1 Hmm. So release date is only for works like artwork and novels that can be completed? Aaron Liu (talk) 14:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Work in progress template

Latest comment: 7 months ago8 comments6 people in discussion

Is there “Work in progress” template? How to put on a item? 94.247.8.9 16:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

There isn't one for the item namespace. If you need to test out something, that's best done on one of the sandbox items: Q4115189, Q13406268, Q15397819. If you're unsure how to model something, have a look at a similar item and copy how it's done there. Infrastruktur (talk) 17:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
I don’t need to test nothing. I am very sure for the edits I want make but I need a lot of times, about 10 minutes. I asked for the template to alert that the edit work is in progress. Without template my edits will be reverted before I finish. --94.247.8.9 17:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
I suppose you could temporarily place {{Draft}} on the item's discussion page, but people might not see it. It might be best just to talk to anyone that happens to revert your edits. Infrastruktur (talk) 18:13, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
In my experience WD is so vast, and with so many fewer contributors, that you won't find someone breathing down your neck like you might on enwiki. Vicarage (talk) 19:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
If your edits get reverted then there must be something wrong with your edits. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Can you give any examples of changes that were reverted too quickly? Bovlb (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Another piece of advice.
Why do you need so much time to edit one item? Maybe it's better to prepare all of the required information and then populate the item quickly?
If you need to populate many items with identical data, consider using QuickStatements. Michgrig (talk) 19:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #613

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week. Translations are available.

Discussions

  • Closed request for adminship: ROBERTSHST requested adminship to be able to link protected Wikipedia pages to Wikidata. The request has been denied and closed.
  • New request for comments: Frettiebot block? - Bovlb has requested community input about the edit behaviour of this bot, with more discussion found on the Frettiebot Discussion page.

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week

Other Noteworthy Stuff

  • A job opening for a Data Scientist / Knowledge Engineer to use Wikidata as a foundational layer for an NSF-funded Prototype Open Knowledge Network.
  • The Wikidata Development team needs your feedback! We are currently evaluating a new feature for the Wikidata Query Service. Fancy sharing your thoughts? We would greatly appreciate it if you could complete this survey on Lamapoll. It should take you around 10–15 minutes. Your input means a lot to us. Thank you!

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • [Breaking Change] We are changing how empty Sense and Form lists are represented in dumps
  • Fixed the order of item/property suggestions on several occasions, primarily sex or gender (P21) (phab:T355697)
  • mul lanuage code: We are wrapping up the usability testing.
  • IP Masking: We continued the work on adapting Wikibase for the upcoming change to not show IP addresses for non-logged in users anymore.
  • Wikibase REST API:
    • We added the ability to add a sitelink to an Item or edit an existing one (phab:T342987)
    • We are fixing a bug where badges were missing in the API reponse for sitelinks (phab:T355293)


You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Weekly Tasks

Linking concrete items under a disambiguation page

Latest comment: 7 months ago16 comments5 people in discussion

Fact: Paddington tube station (Q28871588) refers to Paddington (Praed Street) tube station (Q3360320) and Paddington (Bishop's Road) tube station (Q29378866) .

Question: I want to like them in both direction. Is there any specific P for disambiguation page? Or I can just use has part(s) (P527) ? JuguangXiao (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't this is an current practice and I don't think we need to make it an practice, what would be the benefit? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Good question. The Benefit, for these and other London's same-name different-entity tube stations, will be, well... , building the relationship, which should be aware of. OR should I use different from (P1889) to connect these 2 concrete entities? - that someone has done that. JuguangXiao (talk) 18:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
different from is the only property that makes sense and doing that for disambig pages is usually not very helpful (since they are obviously different) BrokenSegue (talk) 20:50, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
First of all, I don't think Paddington tube station (Q28871588) should be a disambiguation page. It is a landmark that people can talk about where to meet. Technically there are 2 main entrances, with originally different lines, as these 2 items are. Internally all platforms are connected by passageways. I do not mean to merge these 2 separate items. I just mean to have an item to describe it as a whole making more sense.
Secondly, I don't get it by asking the benefit of disambiguation page, in WikiData as much as in Wikipedia. If it is useful in Wikipedia, why not in WikiData. If you don't think disambiguation page is useful, why creating an entry in WikiData?
Lastly, don't you think the real and notable concept is more worthy than Wiki disambiguation page? I saw a good number of items, disambig pages the most, created for Wikipedia sake, or pairs of concepts in one wikipedia page has Wikidata item, but the individual concepts has not. JuguangXiao (talk) 21:17, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
@ JuguangXiao: If it's more than a disambiguation page make a new item for that concept. But on enwiki it is unambiguously a disambig page so we have to keep it. Wikidata has multiple goals. One goal is to represent all knowledge (for this goal there is no need to represent disambiguation pages). Another goal is to be useful to the other sites. This goal requires us to have items for disambiguation pages so that interwiki links can work. There is little value in "different from" statements on disambiguation pages since it's obvious that a disambiguation page is different from a tube station. We don't just add "different from" statements between all non-identical items. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. This is clearer now to me. Any tutorial/guide to state these goals and thoughts that you mention? That will be greatly helpful for newbies like me. :) JuguangXiao (talk) 18:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Another way. Make Paddington tube station (Q28871588)instance of (P31)London Underground station (Q14562709), while still being a disambiguation page? JuguangXiao (talk) 21:32, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Please don't mix concepts, it's an disambiguation page. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:46, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
What is it for?? Just for Wikipedia disambiguation page's sake? JuguangXiao (talk) 05:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
It is the factual knowledge we should love and reflect and share. Paddington tube station is real as a whole and as one, now under the same operator Transport for London (Q682520) and same network London Underground (Q20075), even historically separate. As a local person, I perceive it this way. It is neither different types of things (people, places, tools) the same name refer to, nor the same type (tube station) but at different and faraway places in different countries. They are officially given the same name, but just be careful on different exits. JuguangXiao (talk) 05:52, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Think of it this way. Someone could write a book called "Paddington tube station" and, if notable, it may end up having an article at en:Paddington tube station (book). Then it would be perfectly correct to add an entry for that in the dab page en:Paddington tube station. And then you will see that using instance of (P31) or has part(s) (P527) to link them would be inappropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:14, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Make sense to me. Thanks! JuguangXiao (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Here you go: Paddington tube stations (Q124358096). I found 4 sitelinks to the general articles about tube stations called Paddington, so I moved them over — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Cool.   Done By the way, is item this newly made? And back to the initial topic, should this item NOT interconnect with the ambiguous page in any direction? JuguangXiao (talk) 18:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Cardamom

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hey guys, I believe that the entry for cardamom has been duplicated and doesn't allow languages to link to each other, e.g. arzwik to enwiki. Q14625808 and Q18360378 are basically the same topic, cardamom as a spice. --Esperfulmo (talk) 19:29, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

It seems that cardamom (Q14625808) refers to the culinary use as a spice, and cardamom (Q18360378) refers to the botanical species which produce such seeds. This distinction is not necessarily upheld in every project, but it can be, so the separation makes sense. Elizium23 (talk) 22:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
Elizium is right here. If you want interlanguage links, Wikidata:Sitelinks to redirects explains how you get them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)
Then, arzwiki needs to be linked with enwiki of the entry Q18360378. --Esperfulmo (talk) 19:27, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Problems with refining a template

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion
GLAM wikilink navigation
Wikimedia projects
project wikilink
commons commons:Commons:GLAM
meta meta:GLAM
outreach outreach:GLAM
wikidata Wikidata:GLAM
Wikipedia / language
language wikilink
ar w:ar:ويكيبيديا:جلام
be-tarask w:be-tarask:Вікіпэдыя:Праект:ГБАМ
ca w:ca:Viquipèdia:GLAM
ckb w:ckb:ویکیپیدیا:گلەم
cs w:cs:Wikipedie:WikiProjekt GLAM
da w:da:Wikipedia:GLAM
de w:de:Wikipedia:GLAM
en w:en:Wikipedia:GLAM
es w:es:Wikipedia:GLAM
et w:et:Vikipeedia:GLAM
fa w:fa:ویکی‌پدیا:گلم
fi w:fi:Wikipedia:GLAM
fr w:fr:Wikipédia:GLAM
he w:he:ויקיפדיה:מיזמי ויקיפדיה/גלאם
hi w:hi:विकीपीडिया:ग्लैम
hr w:hr:Wikipedija:OpenGLAM Croatia
hu w:hu:Wikipédia:GLAM
id w:id:Wikipedia:GLAM
it w:it:Progetto:GLAM
ja w:ja:プロジェクト:GLAM
kp w:ko:위키백과:GLAM
lv w:lv:Vikipēdija:GLAM
nl w:nl:Wikipedia:GLAM
no w:no:Wikipedia:Underprosjekter/GLAM
pl w:pl:Wikiprojekt:GLAM
pt w:pt:Wikipédia:GLAM
ru w:ru:Проект:GLAM
sh w:sh:Wikipedija:GLAM
sr w:sr:Википедија:ГЛАМ
sv w:sv:Wikipedia:Projekt GLAM
th w:th:วิกิพีเดีย:แกลม
tr w:tr:Vikipedi:GLAM
tt w:tt:Википедия:GLAM
uk w:uk:Вікіпедія:БоГеМА
Wikivoyage / language
language wikilink
en voy:en:Wikivoyage:GLAM
GLAM toolbox
equipment wikilink
GLAMify meta:User:Ijon/GLAMify
OpenRefine c:Commons:OpenRefine
Pattypan c:Commons:Pattypan
Resources/
Tools		 outreach:GLAM/Resources/Tools

I am seeking advice on refining a template to be used across projects. The basic code for this is {{User:Peaceray/sandbox/GLAM wikilink navigation}}. What it looks like is displayed at right.

I have two problems with this.

  • First, this queries Wikidata to obtain labels in a Wiki's language. One can find an example for how this works at w:fr:Utilisateur:Peaceray/sandbox/GLAM wikilien navigation. The problem is that for projects like Commons, Meta, Outreach, & Wikidata, when one changes one's language, the {{#invoke:wd|label|<Q#>}} does not recognize this. Is there a different module, template, or Lua code that I can use for this?
  • Second, here is one snippet of code. {{#if:{{#invoke:wd|label|Q102066}}|{{#invoke:wd|label|Q102066}}|navigation}}. What it currently does is:
    1. Checks to see if a value exists in a language.
    2. If it does exist, query again to get & use that value.
    3. If the value does not exist for that language, default to "navigation".
It seems to me that this is inefficient. I think it would be better simply to retrieve the value once, check for success or failure, use the value if successful, else use the default. I am not fluent in Lua (Q207316), so I would appreciate any suggestions.

If there is a better place to post this, please let me know. Thanks! Peaceray (talk) 22:11, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The use of ambiguous labels has made it unclear in Japanese what purpose this template serves. Is it perhaps a list of links related to the sea? Afaz (talk) 14:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
This template is meant to link to various Wikimedia projects for Wikidata:GLAM. It has nothing to do with the sea. Peaceray (talk) 15:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
If anyone has more appropriate terms that are broadly used across languages, I am open to your suggestions. Peaceray (talk) 17:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Differentiating between properties while documenting buildings

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I am working using/developing a data model to document archeological buildings (but could be applicable to all buildings) that currently differentiates:

I am seeking feedback on the effectiveness of this model and want to ensure properties are used in the correct way. Any feedback is appreciated! Ln3645 (talk) 02:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

You might also want to consider how to model if part or whole of a building is remodelled. I have a problem with forts, that they are often a collection of buildings, with some buildings completely demolished (but interesting in the historical record for the site), and other buildings half rebuilt. Heritage agencies will have records of all the bits. cultural heritage ensemble (Q1516079) can be used, but creating new WD items for all buildings at all stages gets messy. I tend to use has part(s) of the class (P2670) for some features, but specialist armament (P520) for its key one. Vicarage (talk) 09:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Interesting! There are many military structures associated with my project that I have not worked on yet and armament (P520) will become very helpful later on! Thank you!
I have been modeling complete buildings using instance of (P31) = insula (Q28228887) , ruins (Q109607) , cultural property (Q2065736) , and feature (Q814254) . I also use part of (P361) = Q# for entire archeological site. Some buildings are larger city blocks that have other specific buildings/houses inside and for these I use has part(s) (P527) . When qualifying properties for buildings I often use room number (P7532) = [string] to describe archeologically labeled room that do not have/need a Q#. I use applies to part (P518) to connect statements to rooms/buildings that are significant and have their own Q#. Ln3645 (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Be careful of ruins (Q109607) as an instance, state of conservation (P5816) is better. cultural property (Q2065736) is often redundant at building level as it appears well up the subclass tree for many things. Vicarage (talk) 23:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Assistance in creating a property proposal for a first-timer

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Hello Wikidata friends, I'm hoping to propose my first new prpoerty for Wikidata (woop), but I am utterly baffled by the instructions on the property proposal page, especially when I get to:

6.Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below by editing the two templates at the top of the page to add proposal details.
  • Where is the preload form that is meant to be below? (is that the empty bar in the creating the property subsection? I don't think so - that seems to be for property creation, not nomination)
  • What/where are the two templates at the top of the page? (I expect its obvious to people who do this all the time, but it is very opaque to me.)

I've been trying to follow the directions for a couple of weeks now (see this from Pigsonthewing - but I really can't work out what this final step 6 means. I wonder if it needs to broken down further for first-timers like me? If anyone can point me in the right direction, I would be really grateful. Many thanks Lajmmoore (talk) 08:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Lajmmoore Fill the desired name of the property in the box just over “Create request page”. Then click “Create request page”. Change to “Source editing” mode (pencil in the upper right corner). Then try to fill the template (not quite sure why the page talks about two templates to be honest) as good as you can. --Emu (talk) 08:40, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much @Emu - it's kind of you to help. It was that description and placement of the box that was confusing me - i though it was connected to the approval process - maybe it could move above the creating the property section and be renamed to "creating a proposal" or similar? I have been flummoxed for 3 weeks by it! That said, I've started a proposal, but since it's my first I expect there are things I have missed/misunderstood, if you could take a look at this smells of idea that would also kind! Lajmmoore (talk) 10:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@Lajmmoore Happy to help! I think you proposal looks fine, I contributed to the discussion. --Emu (talk) 11:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Architectural styles of universities

Latest comment: 7 months ago13 comments7 people in discussion

Some items for universities have architectural style (P149) defined. That was generating a constraint violation because universities weren't defined as pieces of architecture. college (Q189004)subclass of (P279)architectural ensemble (Q1497375) was added a while back, but Bk1949 recently (understandably) removed it, so the error has returned. What is the best way to remedy this situation? A few universities have dedicated items for their campus, but that's not at all the norm, and we commonly use other properties for them (like area (P2046) and located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)) that are technically referring to the campus. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 19:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The buildings should have their own item. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Exactly. --Emu (talk) 20:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin, @Emu, how would you feel about area (P2046), located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), and others? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
An organization like a university is a thing that only lives in our collective heads, it can’t have any physical measurements. located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) is tricky because we use it for all kinds of relationships, it’s almost as bad as of (P642). --Emu (talk) 23:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
If so then we need to differentiate item for the campus and the university itself? So there will be two items E.g. for University of Indonesia (Q534515), we will have the item for "the university idea" (containing inception, name, affiliation, rector, etc.) and for the campuses: University of Indonesia (Q534515) had two campus, the headquarter ones in Depok (Q10396) and in Central Jakarta (Q10109). Each had coordinate, located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), etc.? How do we connect between two of them, moreover, if each buildings need to have its own item, how do we connect them? HA (talk) 03:19, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Quite. Statements like Main building of the University of Vienna (Q19971231)occupant (P466)University of Vienna (Q165980) are an obvious option. --Emu (talk) 12:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Higher education {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
Many of the buildings here have a common look; there are other buildings that do not to be have obvious shared design elements. The entire university is a World Heritage site though so there are commitments to UNESCO to keep a certain style to things. Bluerasberry (talk) 16:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@Bluerasberry This statement should be moved to University of Virginia Historic District (Q49573372) where it belongs. A university is an organization, i. e. an abstract concept, it can’t have an architectural style. --Emu (talk) 22:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@Emu: I changed it! Good call and @Sdkb, Sjoerddebruin: that is a workable model in general. Universities do not get an architectural style in Wikidata, but the item for the university campus as a collection of buildings might. Bluerasberry (talk) 23:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Property indicating inclusion in external database?

Latest comment: 7 months ago4 comments2 people in discussion

I'm adding credibility data into news media (Q1193236) items. One credibility indicator is inclusion in a vetted database of legitimate news sources — like UNC's lists for Project Oasis and News Deserts.

But I can't find a property that indicates that inclusion well — member of (P463) isn't accurate because the above aren't lists of members. The closest one I, and other editors I asked, found is indexed in bibliographic review (P8875): "bibliographic review(s) and/or database(s) which index this academic journal". Might that work? — Hearvox (talk) 17:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

maybe described by source (P1343)? or described at URL (P973)? Also this sounds like a really cool project. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:38, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, @BrokenSegue. I like described by source (P1343) (aliases: "entry", "mentioned in", "found in") as a good prop for noting an item is in a database. For instance, Wilson Post (Q55671050) would get a P973 statement having a value of News Deserts: A Research Agenda for Addressing Disparities in the United States (Q121435088)†, with a reference URL (P854) for its listing in that database — its state at News Deserts database, and another P1343 statement referenced to its Project Oasis page. That make sense?
† Note: Rather than use the News Deserts research item as the value, I'll likely create a new item just for the UNC Newspaper Database — as an 'instance of' database (Q8513) — that came out of that research. — Hearvox (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)
sounds good BrokenSegue (talk) 18:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Question at Talk:Q5595144 (Grand Theatre, Swansea)

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I've posted a question at Talk:Q5595144#English-language Wikipedia name not in label section, but being unfamiliar with how things work here, I have no idea whether anybody's likely to notice, so posting this notice here. Fabrickator (talk) 04:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I've answered at Talk:Q5595144#English-language Wikipedia name not in label section. Best regards, Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 05:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC).

Last days to vote on the Charter for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee

Latest comment: 7 months ago1 comment1 person in discussion
You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki. Please help translate to your language

Hello all,

I am reaching out to you today to remind you that the voting period for the Universal Code of Conduct Coordinating Committee (U4C) charter will close on 2 February 2024. Community members may cast their vote and provide comments about the charter via SecurePoll. Those of you who voiced your opinions during the development of the UCoC Enforcement Guidelines will find this process familiar.

The current version of the U4C charter is on Meta-wiki with translations available.

Read the charter, go vote and share this note with others in your community. I can confidently say the U4C Building Committee looks forward to your participation.

On behalf of the UCoC Project team,

RamzyM (WMF) 16:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Signature

Latest comment: 7 months ago8 comments6 people in discussion

The placement of the property signature (P109) has recently changed (within the past month or so) to be above image (P18). Such that now, a person's signature is given greater visual priority than an image of the subject themselves (see Albert Einstein (Q937) or Richard Nixon (Q9588) for examples). I know it's trivial in the long run, as the ultimate purpose of Wikidata is feeding robots that will someday replace us all, but for the humans among us, it seems signatures shouldn't be given top billing. Where does one even go to request adjustments to the layout and order of properties? -Animalparty (talk) 20:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

MediaWiki talk:Wikibase-SortedProperties. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
Seems to be this edit by User:DannyS712. I agree that this is probably too prominent — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:16, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
I made the change based on an uncontested edit request, but have no objections of my own to it being reverted if another admin wants to do so --DannyS712 (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@DannyS712, Sjoerddebruin: the edit request, which asked for the creation of a section "Images (1)" seems to have missed that P109 is also an image. So, not a revert had to be done, but something to be moved, which Sjoerddebruin did. CV213 (talk) 18:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

Viking ring fortress

Latest comment: 7 months ago6 comments3 people in discussion

I've found a wrong VIAF id at Viking ring fortress (Q586552) and searched VIAF for the correct id, but it seems there isn't one. There is a VIAF id for Trelleborg (Q2303857) which is at least a better choice [2]. I think the right thing to do here is to have no VIAF at Viking ring fortress (Q586552) but I am just not sure :) and much apologize for not knowing things. Perhaps the idea here is that a VIAF link is better than no link? Sechinsic (talk) 16:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I've just removed the VIAF id. Sechinsic (talk) 17:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Sechinsic: it's very unlikely there is a VIAF for this sort of thing, so your removal was perfectly fine. VIAF IDs mostly exists for people, organizations, places, works and expression of works. In this case, the VIAF was probably added based on a wrong match with the label "Trelleborg" ; actually, its right place is on Trelleborg (Q26943) - where it was already. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)
@Jahl de Vautban @Sechinsic The ID was added based on QID Q586552 which was formerly stored in 146584240. Fortunately, this ID was removed in May 2022 and replaced with the correct ID Q50376602. If this was not the case, then it is very likely that the VIAF ID would get soon reimported again into Q586552, thus wasting your edit @Sechinsic. In future, if you don't check the source of the information, it is always better to DEPRECATE incorrect IDs rather then removing them, so that they don't get readded. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
@User:Vojtěch Dostál I didn't know about deprecations, but now I have found Help:Deprecation. Just at the top, it says about deprecations that they should be used in case of, well, deprecation, phrased in the article in two different ways. I am glad to know that, and appreciate your tip. In the case of Viking ring fortress (Q586552), the VIAF ID was just plain wrong. Sechinsic (talk) 14:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)
What do you mean by "the source of the information"? Sechinsic (talk) 14:33, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Indian Journal of Medical Research

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Are Indian Journal of Medical Research (Q6020786) and Indian Journal of Medical Research (Q96331146) the same thing? The ISSNs are different, but both resolve to journals with the same title. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

  • The journal was published as two parts with separate ISSNs for a few years (1989-1994) then published as one again; some of the identifiers link them such as the Scopus source IDs although they use separate identifiers for each. According to the Wikipedia article, the new ISSN was created when it was combined into one. Q96331146 is the original journal, and Q6020786 is the current one; the additional ISSNs and identifiers in Q6020786 are for Section A (Infectious Diseases, ISSN 0970-955X) and Section B (Biomedical Research other than Infectious Diseases, ISSN 0970-9568) - not sure if they should be combined or split but qualifiers are probably needed whether combined, split or left how they are now. I wouldn't usually split just for a different ISSN (many newspapers' ISSNs have changed) but I'm not sure here. Peter James (talk) 21:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Wrong occupation added by a bot

Latest comment: 7 months ago2 comments1 person in discussion

While searching for film producers, I saw that a bot has added the occupation film producer (Q3282637) for persons in the category Category:American producers (Q8003952), for example here and here. That is wrong, if anything it should be producer (Q47541952) or record producer (Q183945). It's done by a bot, so I assume this is done for a lot of pages. Has anyone an idea how to fix this? Difool (talk) 11:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

FWIW, I removed the occupations with QuickStatements and a query to generate statements for QuickStatements Difool (talk) 01:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2024/01&oldid=2072420913"