Wikidata:Project chat

(Redirected from Wikidata:Pump)
Latest comment: 2 hours ago by From Hill To Shore in topic Incorrect data

Wikidata project chat
A place to discuss any and all aspects of Wikidata: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual data items, technical issues, etc.

Please use {{Q}} or {{P}} the first time you mention an item or property, respectively.
Other places to find help

For realtime chat rooms about Wikidata, see Wikidata:IRC.
On this page, old discussions are archived after 7 days. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2024/05.

Birth after father's death edit

We need to change the calculation so that we do not get the error message unless the difference between death and birth is more than 9 months, perhaps 10. See George Francis Valentine Scott Douglas (Q75268023) RAN (talk) 11:54, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

People have used "exception to constraint" to get rid of these messages, but this doesn't scale. The next step people tend to use is adding "separator" but "object has role" is too ambiguous for this purpose, we would need a qualifier that is more or less single-purpose. Got any ideas? Make a new one maybe? Infrastruktur (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Just noticed "separator" only works for the single value constraint. :-( But it does seem like a good way to mark claims that are manually checked. @Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): Something similar for contemporary constraint might be a good idea. At least it's a solution that doesn't have complexity issues. Infrastruktur (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Infrastruktur: I don’t understand what you’re trying to do. What does this have to do with a “separator”? What are the date of birth / date being separated from? Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 10:18, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Forget about "separator" that was my mistake. I was interested in hearing if you thought it would be feasible to add a way to manually mark claims such as child (P40) with a qualifier basically telling the constraint checker that this claim have been manually checked so don't show an error message here. Basically doing what "exception to constraint" does except the exception info is moved to the claims themselves so it should be more scalable I guess. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:24, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I wouldn’t mind adding that, I think… should be relatively simple to implement in WBQC, at least. It’s not an ideal solution, but it’s not like we have any much better solutions lined up either (“constraint exceptions don’t scale” has been a known issue for a while, and the last proposal I dimly recall, which I think would’ve encoded exception lists as additional items, was probably worse). My main concern would be that people would object to these qualifiers, but maybe I’m being too paranoid there ^^ Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 09:35, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was thinking about how to encode the exception. If we use a single new qualifier "constraints manually checked" that would remove warnings for any and all constraints, which might be ok. Trying to encode information about individual exceptions in the predicate position strikes me as a bad idea, but they could be encoded in the object position if there was a URI prefix reserved for this purpose. The "wdno:" prefix encodes which property it pertains to, so likewise an "wdnoexception:" prefix could encode which property and exception it pertained to e.g. "?statement_node pq:P99999 ("constraint manually checked") wdnoexception:P40-Q25796498". Edit: Or maybe something like "?statement_node wdnoexception:P40 ("constraint manually checked") wd:Q25796498" would be better after all? It would add new things to the data model so it's not something that can be rushed. Edit 2: Or since we know which property from the claim itself, we could do without any new URI prefix at all which is actually way better, e.g. "?statement_node pq:P99999 ("constraint manually checked") wd:Q25796498". Infrastruktur (talk) 13:56, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I think any addition to the technical data model is a non-starter, to be honest – if we want this soon, we should just encode it using the normal data model and accept that it won’t be 100% precise. I was thinking we could reuse exception to constraint (P2303)subject type constraint (Q21503250) as a qualifier, and when it appears outside of a property constraint (P2302) statement, reinterpret it as “ignore all constraints of this constraint type in this statement” (i.e. in the main snak, qualifiers and references). Or create a new property, of course. (In theory, we could use a URL-valued property, where the value is the URI of a property constraint like http://www.wikidata.org/entity/statement/P31-A89E967D-82B7-4081-BAE3-BADF28B4E7E3; this would let us distinguish between multiple constraints on the same property with the same constraint type, but it would look ugly in the UI and also be much harder to edit.) Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 15:55, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I like your first suggestion. Would it be worth using exception to constraint (P2303) only for the main-snak, and make a similar property that is transitive (applies to qualifiers and references as well)? Infrastruktur (talk) 21:06, 15 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
We could also do that, sure. Would need a new property proposal, I guess ^^
(Also, disclaimer: right now I’m not sure who’s “responsible” for pushing this proposal forward, if we want to go ahead with it; I’m not sure if I should be doing it as a staff account – I see myself more in the role of implementing it once it’s been decided. But I’m also not sure how much more consensus we need, or if we think it’s enough if nobody objected to reinterpreting P2302 here.) Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
If you decide to move forward with this, ping me and I'll make the property proposal. On consensus: I suppose you could argue that this is not a new feature but a scalability improvement for an existing feature. Edit: The one thing I could see people possibly objecting to is visual clutter. But if that happens it could be solved by showing the qualifier visually by using an icon instead of writing out the statement in text. Infrastruktur (talk) 08:39, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
  • Perhaps we can do a search for all the children born within 10 months of the father's death and mark them all object_has_role=born after father's death (Q105083598) and rewrite the rule for the error message so that it is not triggered when object_has_role=born after father's death (Q105083598). I am not familiar with how the error message rules are coded to make the changes myself. Do we have an error message when a child is born after the mother's death, which would indicate that the child belongs to a different spouse of the husband? --RAN (talk) 18:16, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I suspect a general implementation of such a check (not limited to humans) would have a high complexity cost. It also trades false positives for false negatives. Infrastruktur (talk) 18:44, 11 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Notified participants of WikiProject property constraints

Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 09:36, 12 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) how costly would it be to implement the solution that RAN proposed? ChristianKl23:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I can’t really answer that question, as I don’t think it’s really an implementable proposal yet… the constraint is defined here, and it’s not really clear to me how you would encode not triggered when object_has_role=born after father's death (Q105083598) in the constraint parameters. Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 13:56, 22 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) We could have "expection to constraint given qualifier" and "expection to constraint given qualifier value" where in this example you would make do both "expection to constraint given qualifier ->object_has_role " and "expection to constraint given qualifier value -> born after father's death (Q105083598)". That would solve this problem and likely be also useable in other contexts. ChristianKl13:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
note that WD has a long extant contemporay constraint bug comparing dates accurate to the day and the year https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T349971 Vicarage (talk) 05:03, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Ability to revert batch edits appears broken edit

See Wikidata_talk:Edit_groups#Not_working?. Sdkbtalk 18:54, 17 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Umm, why isn't this causing alarm? Sdkbtalk 17:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Yes, I am sorry that I haven't been able to fix that yet. I have looked into the problem some weeks ago but did not have enough time to find out what the problem actually is. Superficially, it seems that the tasks queue (stored in redis) is behaving weirdly, with Celery (the tasks runner) not reliably picking up the tasks that are sent to it from Django (the web frontend). If anyone is interested in debugging this I would be very happy to give them access to the Toolforge project. The architecture of the tool is rather thoroughly documented, but I am well aware that that alone doesn't make co-maintainers rush to help. It's a fairly standard stack (even documented on Wikitech) but not one that's so widespread in Wikidata tools as far as I know. I have applied all dependency updates yesterday in the hope that it resolves itself but that was probably not enough. − Pintoch (talk) 07:51, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Pintoch: if you give me access I'll take a look. no promises I'll fix it though. User account is https://toolhub.wikimedia.org/search?author__term=BrokenSegue&ordering=-score&page=1&page_size=12 BrokenSegue (talk) 16:39, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@BrokenSegue: thanks a lot! You're in. − Pintoch (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@BrokenSegue, Sdkb: I've switched from one redis database to another and it seems like it improved things. I think the proper solution would be the proper prefixing of redis keys: https://github.com/Wikidata/editgroups/issues/89. − Pintoch (talk) 07:33, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

memory capacity (P2928) edit

So is this property about RAM capacity or storage capacity? It's not exactly being clear Trade (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you read the property proposal it's supposed to be a qualifier that's used with has part(s) (P527). It seems like some users have used it for different purposes which leads to bad data because sometimes people might mean RAM and otherwise storage. One solution would be to disallow the usage as main value and delete the uses that don't follow the data model that the property proposal suggests. ChristianKl02:03, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Would you be against renaming the property to something not deliberately vague?
If we want people to stop using the property to fr RAM capacity then we need a dedicated property that can be used instead Trade (talk) 16:01, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello, regarding Wikidata:Forum#Berlin,_w:Kategorie:Berlin_und_:n:Kategorie:Berlin:

In d:Q64 or d:Q1741 for example, the sitelinks to Wikinews link to Categories on Wikinews, instead of the related category objects d:Q4579913 or d:Q7214780.

Why are the Wikinews-Category-Sitelinks not connected to the Wikidata-Category-Objects? Is there a documentation for Wikinews-Sitelinks?

Also see

M2k~dewiki (talk) 11:42, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Wikinews/Sitelinks says "Summary: Wikinews categories (topics) correspond to Wikipedia articles and to similar items in other wikiprojects." and links to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2014/09#Wikinews_linking ChristianKl13:21, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
I am using an automatic translator in this discussion. I edit the Polish-language Wikinews. Recently there was a discussion (I couldn't find the link now) that most often Wikinews categories should not link to category-items. I am aiming for Wikinews-categories to be linked to topics on Wikidata.
Example: n:pl:Kategoria:Berlin
Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 21:41, 23 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Wikinews (mostly ru) wanted to be different, so some WN categories are linked to categories ando some to items. Its mess. JAn Dudík (talk) 18:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Are you proposing to change the rule? Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 21:22, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Marek Mazurkiewicz I would agree with change, but now I have few time and energy to argue with them. JAn Dudík (talk) 06:02, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

QuickStatements edit

I'm trying to figure out how to use QuickStatements to replace a value, and having a lot of trouble. For a trial run, I'm trying to replace an inaccurate coordinate value at Q21942340. Here's my input:

-Q21942340|P625|30°9'55"S, 153°14'5"E|S248|Geographic Names Server|S577|11 June 2018|S2326|11382401

Q21942340|P625|30°9'39.3804"S 153°13'37.182"°E|S854|https://maps.six.nsw.gov.au/

All I get is error messages which don't even say what the problem is. I tried putting all strings in quotes, but that didn't help. Please, what is wrong with my input? Cremastra (talk) 21:37, 25 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

QuickStatements is very particular about how its input is formatted, read more about it in its manual (example: Q3669835 TAB P625 TAB @43.26193/10.92708). Interestingly for coordinates it will only do exact matching, even if anything that rounds to the same number with four decimal places should be considered good enough for a match assuming the precision is 4 decimal places or better [1]. It might be simpler to ask it to remove the statement by giving it the statement ID instead. Infrastruktur (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks, but I fixed it manually and it took about thirty seconds. :) Cremastra (talk) 20:04, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

edit limit edit

Hello, I use several semi-automatic tools for editing and I regularly run into the edits per second limit. Are my only two solutions are to request administrator or bot status? For the first, I doubt that it would be granted to me for this request alone (there would also be the one for IP blocking exemption and flood flag, but I already have that). For the second, I don't want to create a new account to contribute. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:20, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

i believe those are the only options. BrokenSegue (talk) 15:34, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
No, neither of those are your options. The limit is there for a reason.
Administrators are in fact not rate limited since some admin functions would not work properly otherwise, but they should not run large automated batches beyond 90 edits per minute using the admin account (a rather informal agreement). Bots and non-admin users are limited to 90 edits per minute in order to avoid capacity issues. —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:35, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Simon Villeneuve: Some edit tools are a bit inefficient - for example QuickStatements can use more edits than necessary to make changes. So if you are doing that many edits you may want to create a custom tool that does a better job of consolidating several edits on an item into one, if that's an issue. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Nice one. I've noticed Wikibase-CLI tends to be overall faster on edits in general (noticeably so) even though I don't think it attempts to smoosh together edits either. Wikibase-CLI will allow you to create entire items in one go however which is a huge win if you do new item creations. It also pairs nicely with the jq tool for many tasks. Infrastruktur (talk) 19:39, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
the problem occur when I launch many tabs of authordisambiguator at once, as I've said to you here. Now, I understand here (and I should have known it) that we must respect the limit, whatever your status. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
What's your problem with seeking bot approval for this task? ChristianKl21:43, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Harvesting coordinates edit

Is there a tool that could collect coordinates from wikiarticles coordinates templates or infobox into coordinate location (P625) wikidata ? Bouzinac💬✒️💛 19:49, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure about tools, but far too often we have to revert overeager editors who import co-ordinates for human (Q5) items when they should be instead imported to the connected item at place of burial (P119). You will need to cleanse any gathered data to filter out co-ordinates that should be used on the connected location rather than directly imported to the Wikidata item related to the article. Any tool that makes the import directly must be used with caution. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
It was about railways stations, I believe the coordinates in the article would be the very coordinates of the station. But yes, massive import is cautionable for some other data, such as closures dates (it could have been a simple close date for works and then reopening for instance). They can be done with "Harvest templates" [which does not support coordinates].Bouzinac💬✒️💛 06:37, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Pywikibot's coordinate_import.py. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:17, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks Bouzinac💬✒️💛 13:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hello everyone I would like to be welcomed first of all edit

all in good I came I peace ❤🤞 41.114.141.166 23:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

If you want to be a part of the community, registering an account is a good first step. ChristianKl01:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Help: Image property not showing edit

Hey guys, I have a question to you about images. As i understand, when i create a new image property for an entry, and assign a Wikipedia Commons image to it, the picture is supposed to appear, like it does on this page: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q623099 However, on our page, you can't see the picture, only the image id: https://itidata.abtk.hu/wiki/Item:Q12650 Is this an error in the settings? What am i doing wrong? Thanks. Palapparon (talk) 11:47, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

I would expect that this isn't done by Wikibase by default but by some extension. It's not really a Wikidata question. ChristianKl23:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
So you are saying i don't have the correct extension installed? 2001:4C4C:182E:2B00:B1AB:69A2:CA4E:7A51 09:47, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Your coordinate location is also not showing a map — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:10, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

idrize supernatural edit

i an musican Idris shittu (talk) 15:04, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Good for you. However, we recommend that editors don't create items about themselves. If you are notable, another editor will create an item about you. I expect Q125638413 will be deleted soon. You will be better off creating a profile on social media sites rather than Wikidata. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:13, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

how do i add fulcrum or University of Michigan Press doi on Settlers of Unassigned Lands (Q60186754) edit

i want to add https://doi.org/10.3998/tfcp.13240728.0001.001 on Settlers of Unassigned Lands (Q60186754). there seems to be no identifier for fulcrum or michigan press. how do i add? Id,Ik'+(&sZP4^m (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

The vdo what I found, want to see more. 120.88.155.250 16:16, 27 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

i'm not sure i understand. what identifier? just a url? BrokenSegue (talk) 03:50, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Update Property url edit

Hello, I need your technical help
I'm trying to update the MarketScreener business leaders ID (P7845) property because the url has changed.
Old formatter URL : https://www.marketscreener.com/business-leaders/$1/biography/
New formatter URL : https://www.marketscreener.com/insider/$1
When I update the file, the new url is not taken into account.
How do I go about it?
Thanks  
WKPDA3 (talk) WKPDA3 (talk) 17:49, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

@WKPDA3: i updated it for you. it takes a few hours for the update to take effect. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:07, 28 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Vexing technical problem edit

I went to Special:Watchlist, saw an issue with Template:Watchlist summary/PP where "Transportation" was evidently invalid, so I removed it. Same problem at Wikidata:Property proposal. No clue how to resolve it and Wikidata:Property proposal/Transportation. Can someone help dumb old me? —Justin (koavf)TCM 07:29, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

It's because User:DeltaBot removed the parameter. I think it would be better to leave it as Transportation = 0. Let's ping the bot operator User:Pasleim — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:14, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Did not realise that Pasleim is inactive. Pinging MisterSynergy instead — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:37, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Fixed via Topic:Y3thcovjyke1fkgjMisterSynergy (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #625 edit

Zvuk artist ID edit

Please, add 784929 to Q292265 as a property 10524. I cannot because item is locked. --5.43.76.87; 18.10, 2024-04-29 (UTC)

  Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:38, 29 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

New Schema Validation Tool UI edit

Hello everyone, As part of my thesis project I've made a new UI mode for the Schema Validator used by Wikidata. The new UI represents validation reports as a table rather than a very long string, and replaces most links with hyperlinks with some of the text behind them. I just started hosting it yesterday on https://shex-validator.toolforge.org/packages/shex-webapp/doc/shex-simple-improved.html. I'm also looking for people willing to participate in evaluating the user experience and the ease of use of this new UI in a roughly 1 hour interview sometime in may. For more information, check out my user page. If you want to registed for the evaluation interviews, you can do so at https://datumprikker.nl/event/index/fuwv62b5tatqq4vr. M.alten.tue (talk) 11:00, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Pages that mis-identify edit

I'm new to the community and processing WikiData locally. One utility index I built goes from enwiki titles to WikiData items and back. Running this script over all of WikiData revealed 40 "Key conflicts": two WikiData pages that link to the same Wikipedia article.

One really odd type of key conflict is posed by pages like https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:EntityData/Q20203111.json which claims to be Q118874608; a perfect duplicate.

Can anyone shed light on this? The full list: https://pastebin.com/MunHZjWP AdamVcoding (talk) 16:23, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Nothing misindentifies here. The situation is easily understood by looking at the actual items in the Wikidata UI and looking at the item history.
Sitelinks sometimes get moved from one page to another and if your data is out-of-sync this means you won't end up at the same page in every case.
Q20203111 is a redirect and behaves like a redirect is supposed to act. ChristianKl17:04, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for elaborating Christian! Is there a mapping of redirects available?
In other words, where does the information (including the redirect notice) at https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q20203111&action=info live?
I made the assumption my version coincided with the live version on this weird subset, but mine still lists `"id": "Q20203111"`.
Nonetheless, I'll (locally) merge the pages with the same enwiki links like Q703702 (since the enwiki link has been removed) and Q125399268. AdamVcoding (talk) 17:57, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply
Did you read the page? It seems to me like the information on it is pretty straightforward.
As I said above, sometimes the claim is just moved from one page to another. While merging a redirect with the page toward which it's pointing makes sense it does not make sense when the link moves from item A to item B. ChristianKl23:43, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata disambiguation pages edit

We currently create Wikimedia disambiguation pages if a disambiguation page exists in Wikipedia. Do we ever create a Wikimedia disambiguation page at Wikidata even if none exists at Wikipedia? We have more people needing diasambiguation at Wikidata since our inclusion criteria is more generous. See for example: Jeremiah Creedon (Q125707529). Is there anything that can be added to help someone looking for the correct one to easily see which one is the one they are looking for without clicking on each link or hovering the cursor? RAN (talk) 18:56, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

The description field can be used for disambiguation on Wikidata. I believe that disambiguation items on Wikidata should only exist if there is a corresponding disambiguation page on one of the other Mediawiki projects (see guidelines). Dogfennydd (talk) 21:51, 30 April 2024 (UTC)Reply

Properties on Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) items edit

Is there a WikiProject guideline or past discussion that details what properties should be used with these items? There have been many recent batches that added country (P17) to thousands of list items (example: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q115767416&diff=2141785849&oldid=1986343405), and has part(s) (P527) is often used too. My understanding is that instance of (P31), is a list of (P360) and category related to list (P1754) are pretty much the only ones that should be used? Xezbeth (talk) 09:18, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I think P361 and P527 are correct in lists such as list of aircraft beginning with M (Q6605098) where a list is on multiple pages and the parts are sections of a list, or a list is composed of multiple lists; not sure about Gallery of the Royal Saxon milestones (Q1491902) where the parts are members of the list. Peter James (talk) 12:37, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Generally, Wikidata is quite open with different properties being used and I can't think of an example where I would say that only a few properties can be used. Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) itself does have a few properties for this type (P1963) statements which suggests that country (P17) is quite proper. ChristianKl23:50, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
The item is supposed to be specifically about the Wikipedia list and not what is actually being listed. How can a non-physical arbitrary list of stuff be physically in a given country? —Xezbeth (talk) 05:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Jack Hall/Sam Hall Q6112885 Q2216488 edit

In 2022, the enwp article Jack Hall (song) was moved to Jack Hall (highwayman), and the scope of the article changed from the song to the person it was about, as there was already an article about the song at Sam Hall (song) (the title of the song was originally "Jack Hall", but "Sam Hall" is now more frequent, and its common name; it's considered the same song by secondary sources, and has the same Roud Index folk song identifier).

But the Wikidata item Jack Hall (Q6112885) hasn't been changed, and so is still about the song. I was considering removing the enwp article on that item (and the link to Hall, John (d.17Dec1707) (DNB00) (Q19020924)), and merging it into Sam Hall (Q2216488), before creating a new item for the person, but wasn't sure what to do with the Freebase ID, and thought I'd check here first. Yodin (talk) 15:48, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Need to merge edit

Please merge Q123160974 into Q503592. According to Wikipedia links, both refer to the same topic. Massol1360 (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

It looks like one is about the brand and one is about the (defunct) company that used the brand, so I think they should probably stay separate. Perhaps the article links should be rationalised, though. M2Ys4U (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

English descriptions on Parliamentary and Assembly Constituencies of Tamil Nadu, India edit

Parliamentary Constituencies and Legislative Assembly Constituencies of Tamil Nadu (Q1445), India items descriptions are different from other Indian constituencies items. I feel that this does not follow the guidelines, Such descriptions allowed? Examples: Q4708203, Q3534197 (I also posted in Telegram Wikidata)Sriveenkat|talk/{PING ME} 02:05, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Changing P5715 to be an Identifier edit

At the moment, for any Entities in which P5715 is used, the URL displays in the main section of the page, not under the § Identifiers heading. Either the Property could be changed so that it is put into the proper section of the page, or the property form of the URL could be transformed into the form of an ID, in the format of P6262. In that case, https://huji.academia.edu/LeeMordechai would become huji:LeeMordechai, https://stanford.academia.edu/GracielaChichilnisky would become stanford:GracielaChichilnisky, etc.


Thoughts? BhamBoi (talk) 04:03, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

seems like it would make sense BrokenSegue (talk) 05:06, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
While it is possible to have IDs consisting of two parts, I think the reason why this is not done here is because the url formatters can't do anything fancy like constructing urls based on different parts of the ID. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:52, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
I believe Wikidata External ID redirector (Q108047563) has the ability to do that, but it's been some time since I've looked at that tool. But I would be cautious about making any breaking changes because the property is used by templates on other projects that could be broken. William Graham (talk) 15:42, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Feedback period about WMF Annual Plan for 2024-25 is open! edit

Hello everyone! The work of the Wikimedia Foundation is guided by its Annual Plan. We’ve now published the full draft Annual Plan on Meta. Please share your feedback and ideas!

This is really one of the best chances to influence how the Wikimedia Foundation works and what it chooses to focus on and prioritise, as the Annual Plan is the main guiding document for planning what to do. This is a high-level document, as it aims to find the key points for the entire organisation – this is to find the main direction, which will help the teams at the Wikimedia Foundation to find more tangible objectives.

These are the main goals:

You can read more about what this means in practice on Meta, where you can find both summaries of what the Wikimedia Foundation wants to achieve and links to more detailed pages.

You’re very welcome to share your thoughts on Meta or here, in your own language, and we’ll make sure they are passed on to the relevant parts of the Wikimedia Foundation and that your questions are answered. We can also set up meetings in your own language to further discuss the implication of the Annual Plan, if needed.

Thank you very much for your participation! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 10:23, 2 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Incorrect data edit

the data on Stephen Wombwell is incorrect 92.207.153.221 12:37, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

I am guessing from the edit history of your IP address that you mean Stephen Philip Henry Wombwell (Q76219282) rather than Stephen Frederick Wombwell (Q55587569). What data are you disputing? The previous edit from your IP to delete a statement in 2022 (without explanation) is not good practice. The statement will probably be restored unless there is a sound reason. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:25, 3 May 2024 (UTC)Reply
Stop the presses then! I'm gobsmacked, flabbergasted and dumbfounded that there be incorrectnesses found in Wikidata. I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive us for our inadequacies good sir. On the other hand... what are we talking about? Infrastruktur (talk)

Property proposal edit

Please, I propose that property Photopickly ID gets created and added to Q65275317 as a reference URL from Wayback Machine (qualifier): part for a qualifier of URL https://archive.is/eugr1 /Please, note that item's YouTube channel contains most-upper banner text similar to i.e. Photopickly so add that property to the item in question. I've just added Property:4576 (difference between revisions: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q65275317&diff=2143621493&oldid=2143612683 Special:Diff/2143612683/2143621493). Please; note that there is one music project present among or between other nine (7th by order) and it is not clearly visible what text is written there; I have just seen better, it is Amazon and is already present as first identifier item has.

Check: http://web.archive.org/web/20240503124935/https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC-TkhwZkQitPvJ0GV0IJeKA versus http://archive.is/kFhEK (a channel exists). --77.221.2.19; 13.52, 2024-05-03 (UTC)