Wikidata:Project chat

Wikidata project chat

Place used to discuss any and all aspects of Wikidata: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual data items, technical issues, etc.
Please take a look at the frequently asked questions to see if your question has already been answered.
Please use {{Q}} or {{P}}, the first time you mention an item, or property, respectively.
Requests for deletions can be made here. Merging instructions can be found here.
IRC channel: #wikidata ^connect
Wikidata Telegram group

Start a new discussion

Edit

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 2020/05.

Project chat	Lexicographical data	Administrators' noticeboard	Development team
Translators' noticeboard	Request a query	Requests for deletions	Requests for comment
Bot requests	Requests for permissions	Property proposal	Properties for deletion
Partnerships and imports	Interwiki conflicts	Bureaucrats' noticeboard	Requests for checkuser

Please, Merge[edit]

Please, merge United States (Q232865) and Estados Unidos (Q29406895). 217.117.125.72 19:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

And Q41700. 217.117.125.72 19:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Those are not supposed to be merged. Disambiguation sites get only merged when they are disambiguations for the same string. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Some are, others are not; Q41700 has names in different languages. It wouldn't be possible to merge all as frwiki and dewiki have sitelinks at Q232865 and Q41700, and svwiki has sitelinks at Q29406895 and Q41700. Peter James (talk) 21:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

There are items that don't follow our general policy, but what I wrote above is still our general consensus. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:47, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Per Wikidata:WikiProject Disambiguation pages, its guideline page and talk page. Ghouston (talk) 00:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Currently, the description of Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) is type of page in the Wikimedia system. We likely should update it in a way that makes this issue clear, so that the information about how it's used is easier to discover. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 07:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ghouston, ChristianKl: So far, I also shouldn't merge Meiguo (Q11608888) with one of two items mentioned above here? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:28, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226:Yes, the images shouldn't be merged. If someone wants sitelinks between them they can create redirects on the Wiki's. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 07:54, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

@ChristianKl: Well, foreign languages redirects to disambiguation pages aren't allowed on zhwiki as per policy: zh:Wikipedia:重定向#非中文重定向問題 (this policy allows such redirects to be created on zhwiki if and only if: 1. the language of redirect (or its culture) has clear and definite relations to the target **article**, e.g. company/work/person/local name of non-Chinese speaking places; 2. there are reasonable hopes that Chinese-speaking users will usually use this foreign name to describe the target **article**, e.g. in professional literature works, commonly seen foreign person names in Latin script; 3. redirect titles are same as or very similar to which Wikidata items' labels are, which as I asked locally, also only applies to foreign languages **articles**; 4. if foreign Wikipedias already have such redirects to that foreign languages **articles** of same Wikidata item, e.g. zh:苹果 shares with en:Apple, and as en:Malus domestica redirects to enwiki Apple, it's allowed to create zh:Malus domestica to zhwiki 苹果; 5. special cases: timezones, CAS Registry Number (P231) of chemicals, Emojis (follow [1]) and/or airports' ICAO airport code (P239). As far as I believe, all of those cases can't be applied to disambiguation pages). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I have no problem with zhwiki having such a policy. If zhwiki doesn't want someone who types "United States" into their box to be redirect to the relevant disambiguation page, they are free to not allow those redirects. It just means that they also won't get Wikilinks given our policy. It also still possible for anyone who still wants to link to them to manually create the links. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Government information resources[edit]

Looking for some interesting ideas on teaching about government information resources.

Expressing a predicative relation ... the case of "banned in"[edit]

basic semantic triple model

I am very confused about the resistance I have encountered to creating a property called "banned in". Does anybody have further examples of encountering resistance to using "properties" to express "predicates"?

I have created an item of the style "Ban of X from Y" based on the workaround suggested by the person opposed to the property creation. Unfortunately, I cannot see how this will meaningfully capture the predicative relation. It's been a week since I've made the proposal now. Are there any ontology experts out there who can help me understand why we should not be using a property to express this relationship, or who could show me how the workaround with its unresolved triple in the item label would actually work as well as standard practice in ontology? Many thanks! SashiRolls (talk) 14:46, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Still following the example of the person who proposed Ban of X from Y, I created Ban of involuntary servitude (Q94993180). I then was able to generate a list of countries in which slavery was banned by adding the statement instance of (P31) Ban of involuntary servitude (Q94993180) to

While this workaround would not be my preferred way of expressing the relationship, it does have the advantage of working.

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?placeLabel

WHERE {

?item wdt:instance of (P31) wd:Ban of involuntary servitude (Q94993180)

?item wdt:applies to jurisdiction (P1001) ?place

}

My work was reverted with the claim "this is not the way we use P31" (whose aliases include: "is", "is an example of", "is a specific"). No alternate solution or discussion was provided on any of the talk pages associated with the items in an effort at building consensus. I'm very disappointed that a working solution was removed, even if the solution may not be the final one chosen. I cannot see how it does any harm to leave examples of working solutions, until other working solutions are found. Ideas on other ways to approach the problem of Wikidata's apparent inability to list the dates when involuntary servitude was banned from countries?

Perhaps @ChristianKl: could explain his haste to remove these four statements that increased Wikidata's ability to answer the question? SashiRolls (talk) 17:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata has a property proposal process to have create standardized ways to model relationships. Circumventing that process by abusing properties outside of what they are for leads to inconsistent data. Having a bunch of inconsistent data makes it hard for users to interact with Wikidata's data. Acting with "haste" reduces the amount of mess that gets created by inconsistent modeling. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:43, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

I mean you no ill will, Christian. Saying that the 13th amendment of the US Constitution (is / is an example of / is a specific) ban of involuntary servitude is fairly clearly not by any stretch of the imagination an abuse of properties. (Perhaps instead you meant to say "misuse", and intended to explain why you thought it was a misuse?) It allows for a joint table to be constructed and populated by foreign keys. I have left one example for discussion in the consensus building process: https://w.wiki/RaN. Please don't circumvent consensus-building again by deleting the single example. If & when another solution is chosen, we can delete the use of P31 you object to (did you explain why?)... should it be decided to create a property to characterize this relation, instead. Until that time, nothing should prevent people from studying the question. SashiRolls (talk)

For a query to provide a good answer to a question the domain of the question has to be expressed in a standardized way. At Wikidata we made a decision to require the property creation process instead of simply allowing users to create properties because we consider such standardization to be important when it comes to expressing relationships we don't already express.

The proper word for using a feature to circumvent a policy is abuse and not misuse. "use (something) to bad effect or for a bad purpose". Circumventing policy is a bad purpose. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 06:35, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Could you look up the proper word for accusing others of bad faith, Christian?

Has WikiData adopted the Five Pillars (cf. #4) or is it still a wild Wild West? SashiRolls (talk) 09:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I can't speak for others, but I have been discouraged from replying to your initial query due to the way in which you communicate. It does not come across as in good faith. That's not an accusation, but just some feedback that you may wish to word things in a way which isn't easily misinterpreted as standoffish (that is, assuming you are communicating in good faith). --SilentSpike (talk) 10:20, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

How about focusing on the issue, then? I looked into the related dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) which gave me a type constraint violation when I applied it to slavery (Q8463). (I removed it because I did not wish to introduce errors.) SashiRolls (talk) 10:37, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I have summed up the user experience of trying to create a property to tame the "chaotic and non-standardized methods" currently in use to classify prohibitions and bans on a separate page. instance of prohibition, qualified by of (e.g. night baking, death, caffeinated alcoholic beverages, ...) seems popular. SashiRolls (talk) 22:22, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Zero date year[edit]

There must not be zero year, as in WikiData there is some hybrid time format, that is not compatible with ISO 8601, that uses astronomical year numbering, such as year = 0 means 1 BCE, year = 1 means 2 BCE and so on. Perhaps such a system was rejected so that there were no errors with a shift of 1 year, it is ok. But if you enter 0-1-1 system accept it as "1 jan 0" which is wrong.

I tried to make a regexp format constraint for a date - (?!\+0000)[+-]\d{4}-[01]\d-[0123]\dT00:00:00Z, but «Properties with constraint „format constraint“ need to have values of type „String“ or „Monolingual text“.». The "range" constraint can not be accepted to, as it is intended to check if a value is in an interval, and not vice versa. Perhaps the easiest way is to tighten up a module that recognizes date entries and prevent dates with a zero year from being entered. More broadly this problem can be solved by adding "OR" and "AND" constraints, that must be used with other constraints inside.Carn (talk) 16:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Which module or script uses MediaWiki:Wikibase-validator-malformed-value? Carn (talk) 16:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
And if you know what to do with it, you may want to clean up a mess I made in Wikidata property with datatype 'time' (Q18636219) Carn (talk) 16:31, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Also 31 February 0 is ok (not). #time function at least show "31.02.2020" as valid date 2 March 2020 Carn (talk) 16:40, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Remember that Wikidata is about what the sources say, not about the true date. February 31 is used on gravestones, also there might be sources using the year 0. --Denny (talk) 18:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

I think there will not be very many of such cases, as well as there is few records of people whose age exceeds 150 years. There is exception to constraint (P2303) for this.Carn (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

@Denny: Wikidata time system is very messed up. It can't record in the time string how people state a date if they state it as "circa 2019" the way it could if it would simply implement ISO 8601-2:2019. This likely leads to lot more incorrect copies of data then an inability to record the 31 February. Yes, you can add qualifiers but plenty of people don't use them and they also get stripped away when a user wants a truthy value.

February 31 should violate a constraint but the constraint likely shouldn't be set to be mandatory. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Maybe Help:Dates#Years_BC has some info, you are interested in. --- Jura 19:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, but phrase "Year 0 Gregorian is invalid in the database would not be exported" is not fully true:

["mainsnak"] = {
      ["datatype"] = "time",
      ["datavalue"] = {
        ["type"] = "time",
        ["value"] = {
          ["after"] = 0,
          ["before"] = 0,
          ["calendarmodel"] = "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1985727",
          ["precision"] = 11,
          ["time"] = "+0000-03-02T00:00:00Z",
          ["timezone"] = 0,
        },
      }

It can be imported by lua in infocards, for example, which may cause another wave of indignation "let's get rid of WikiData in our Wikipedia sections" Carn (talk) 21:47, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject property constraints - i don't see how to do it in Module:Constraints, i see that it collects the parameters and sends them to SPARQL, which I do not understand, so i must ask - is it easy to make the property "reverted constraint" that will give a warning in case the constraint placed in it will NOT triggered?Carn (talk) 14:48, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Sounds like something that needs Wikidata:Contact the development team if you find it worthwhile. --- Jura 17:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
- As date is stored as string (although not recognized this way) - we can change how the module handles format constraint (Q21502404) on line number 116 local cFormatapplicable = {"math","commonsMedia","string","external-id","url","monolingualtext","tabular-data","geo-shape","musical-notation"} on local cFormatapplicable = {"math","commonsMedia","string","external-id","url","monolingualtext","tabular-data","geo-shape","musical-notation","time"}. Is it possible?Carn (talk) 19:04, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

What about decade 0 ? I mean, an event in the decade year 1 to year 9 ? Example : return from Egypt (Q7317265) which is said to be somewhere between 4 BC and 3 BC. Bouzinac (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

ICTV virus ID (P1076) is using an obsolete identifier?[edit]

w:Template_talk:Taxonbar#ICTV_links_not_working reports that links provided by Property_talk:P1076 aren't working — the mirror site isn't providing data. Looking at the current ICTV spreadsheet, there is now a Taxon History URL column with a taxnode_id component, that will link to the current instance of the history for the virus. Older values seem to work. Could P1076 be changed to use taxnode_id and link to the master site ie https://talk.ictvonline.org/taxonomy/p/taxonomy-history?taxnode_id=19931949 , assuming uploading the necessary data from the spreadsheet can be easily done. RDBrown (talk) 06:04, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

I de-activated the formatter url. If a new ID is available, it should use a different property. --- Jura 06:20, 19 May 2020 (UTC)
@RDBrown: you are interested, you could propose it at Wikidata:Property proposal. --- Jura 15:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- I've started a proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/ICTV taxnode ID. DferDaisy (talk) 17:42, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Deprecated rank[edit]

I'm in a curious edit war with User:MovieFex concerning the use of deprecated ranks at A Tale of the Wind (Q3801138). Most sources give the French title of this movie as the original title, nevertheless there is one source that gives the Dutch one as the original title. I deprecated the Dutch title according to Help:Ranking#Deprecated_rank and reason for deprecation (P2241) cannot be confirmed by other sources (Q25895909). MovieFex insists on deleting it instead of deprecating it, but I think it is useful to keep this statement deprecated (it is not obvious that the Dutch title should not be the original title) and this is actually what deprecated ranks are for - to mark statements that are known to contain errors. Maybe there are other opinions about this. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Here you got more examples of deprecated statements: [2] ; [3] ; [4] ; [5] and so on. What do you mean, should they all be restored? You missinterprete "to mark statements that are known to contain errors". Thank you for your help filling constraint valuation sites because you've got a "NEW" idea. These sites are full of "NEW" ideas and ignorance. I do a lot of work in maintaining these sites and I feel so wonderful that users give me that work because I don't know anything to do preferable. May be you give it a chance and a few days (may be weeks) working on these sites, too. Perhaps it does change your mind of those "special ideas". -- MovieFex (talk) 13:33, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Well, I do work on constraint violation reports. But these seem to be false positives. They should not trigger a constraint violation. Maybe there is some technical problem. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I see the benefit of including an incorrect, but referenced statement with deprecated rank to ensure that it wont be added by error as a correct statement. Deprecated statements are generally ignored for constraint checks. --- Jura 13:37, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: This is wrong and this would also make no sense, as you can see in the examples above given. All were listed at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P345. If I give a wrong e.g. IMDb-ID to a person which is wrong, what should be a reason to deprecate and hold it? -- MovieFex (talk) 13:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

At Q16154029#P345, I left the imdb id to avoid that it gets re-added. --- Jura 13:59, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen some of those examples and I didn't delete it. But from time to time I try to correct them on IMDb by de-mixing. This process takes time and I have to be in the mood for it. In the last few weeks I have worked very hard in maintaining P345, many corrections here and on IMDb. But after every update there is a new flood of errors, made by bots and scriptwriters. The mechanism of detecting errors is important and necessary and no false positive. Nevertheless, a wrong entry hasn't to be hold at all to grow up wikidata as a big rubbish dump. -- MovieFex (talk) 14:43, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

It looks like part of the confusion here is caused by the timing of the bot updates. This edit shows that Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P345 was "updated" from a dataset of 2020-05-14 to a dataset of 2020-05-10. I'm not sure why that is but the bot restoring 7 day old data will probably be inserting some false positives.

Taking a further look at the history shows that Deltabot and KrBot2 are edit warring over about 500k of text entries. @Pasleim, Ivan A. Krestinin: Can you please take a look at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P345 and work out what is causing your bots to conflict? From Hill To Shore (talk) 21:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

@From Hill To Shore: This is something different. Deltabot imports less of information. KrBot2 needs 5 days to process the data as Ivan pointed out here and his updates are made in about ~ 3000 !!! sites of constraint valuations. This lasts minimum one half day untill he has finished. By the way, there is no need to fill these sites intentionally by playing around. I told V.A. that title (P1476) has a single value and there is no need to create an exception with tricky maneuvers. When seen that the maintenance pages grow and grow one have to pull in one direction and don't give bad examples to imitators and unknowing users. -- MovieFex (talk) 22:57, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

The bots are clearly in conflict; the reversions are too consistent. I'll let the bot owners clarify what is going on.

"By the way, there is no need to fill these sites intentionally by playing around." I have no idea what you are trying to say here. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

There's a difference between an incorrect value due to an editor simply making a mistake (which should generally be deleted) and a value that is known to be incorrect, but which is stated in a reputable source. In the latter case Wikidata should store that information (this is a database of claims, not of facts), but it can be marked as deprecated. --Oravrattas (talk) 14:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

It's not really reputable if it errs. --- Jura 15:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

No. Everyone errs at times, if they are doing anything non-trivial. It's important to mark if there is particular apparently erroneous information in a generally reliable source (UNESCO report, NY Times, El País (Spain), Britannica, OCLC, etc.) - Jmabel (talk) 19:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think we should measure sources differently if we assess their errors than we do in other cases. Reminds me of some odd habit in one Wikipedia where they mention a reference in the edit summary when adding a fact they think needs a reference, but for some reason they don't think reference meets their standard of their Wikipedia. --- Jura 20:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Certainly should be deprecated rather than deleted if even one source we would normally consider citeable gives the value. - Jmabel (talk) 14:45, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Deprecated Rank and constraint violations[edit]

MovieFex insists on deleting this deprecated statement as he thinks it triggers a constraint violation (see discussion on his talk page (User_talk:MovieFex#Deprecated_ranks_and_constraint_reports). Maybe somebody else can make it believable to him that deprecated statements are excluded from constraint checks. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

I insist on it because title (P1476) has a single value and VA's edit does not follow the guidelines Wikidata:WikiProject Movies/Properties of monolingual text.

By the way according to the Dutch movie database moviemeter.nl the original title is French and there is also no loss of information because it is given as alternative label and is linked under described at URL (P973), too. -- MovieFex (talk) 13:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Nobody (here) claims that the Dutch title is the original title. It is about deprecating or deleting that claim. To deprecate a claim means to mark it as erroneous, not that it is true. There is one source that gives the Dutch title as the original title, which is not that farfetched as one of the production countries ~~and the original language~~ is Dutch. As other sources don't back up that claim I deprecated that statement with reason for deprecation (P2241) cannot be confirmed by other sources (Q25895909). This all conforms to the guidelines given at Help:Ranking, especially Help:Ranking#Deprecated_rank.

To deprecate the statement is also in accordance with the guidelines given at Help:Property_constraints_portal/Single_value, especially Help:Property_constraints_portal/Single_value#Possible_actions. To deprecate the wrong statement is given as a possible action.

There is a loss of information when deleting a deprecated statement. You can look up the information being lost at Help:Ranking#Deprecated_rank. There you find reasons why deprecating is better than deleting.

I don't see why deprecating a statement should be in conflict with any guideline about the use of monolingual text. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 14:30, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Change the constraint to single best value, problem solved. The deprecated statement seems correct. --SilentSpike (talk) 18:10, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Question about collection of plans for a building[edit]

I am creating or editing pages for my institution's archival collections. Most of them will have a statement P485, archives for, under the person I'm editing. I'm now looking at a collection of plans for a building. P1963, properties for this type, under Q41176, Building, doesn't list either archives or plans. How do I indicate this, or what should I propose? I've only been editing Wikidata for a few weeks.Librarianlois (talk) 15:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

You mean you add reference URLs to Wikidata person items' P485 claims. If I understand correctly you now want to indicate that a certain person's collection (or whole archive) consists of building plans. If so I would look for a property that can make statements about a person's work, like notable work (P800) or occupation (P106), and put as value architectural plan (Q47597). But this is not my field! --SCIdude (talk) 17:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I want to add a link to the collection of plans under the entry for the specific building, but haven't found a way to do that. Librarianlois (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

I think Librarianlois is saying that she wants to add a link to a building item, indicating an archival object which contains architectural plans or drawings for the building, in the same way that someone would add a link to a person item, to link to an archival object containing their papers. Mary Mark Ockerbloom (talk) 18:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

described at URL (P973)? --SCIdude (talk) 07:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Which topics would like to see Wikidata Tours for?[edit]

Hi all

As you may know Wikidata:Tours are a really great way to learn about aspects of Wikidata, however there are a small number of tours and until now no clear way to create them. Navino Evans and myself have created a comprehensive guide on how to create Wikidata Tours with a space to collaborate with others to build tours and to suggest tours you'd like to see. We hope that increasing the number of tours available for new users will be able to learn how to contribute more easily and add data more consistently making queries more reliable.

Please take a look and:

Suggest tours you would like to see available, this can be anything from technical aspect of Wikidata, how to create a specific kind of item e.g a person, museum etc or a specific task e.g add a date of birth.
Share existing guidance on different aspects of Wikidata that could be turned into a tour.
Start writing new tours.
If you know Javascript you can help transform a tour draft from a page of text into a working tour.

Thanks very much

--John Cummings (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

I think it could be beneficial to newer editors to provide a tour on creating literary source items (i.e. creating the work level item and edition level item and linking them, to use the edition as a reference). It can be a confusing concept to encounter for the first time and I didn't fully grasp the distinction until I understood certain properties can only apply to edition level items (e.g. an ISBN or a publisher). --SilentSpike}} (talk) 10:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

Nevermind, I see suggestions should be made in the table on the page linked! --SilentSpike (talk) 10:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

@SilentSpike: thanks very much for the suggestion, I'd be happy to work with you to put together a tour on this, I don't understand the topic well at all so if you could create a draft I can edit and make into the tour format (there's a proforma for a tour linked to from the design and write sections of the instructions). --John Cummings (talk) 15:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Grants:Project/Maximilianklein/WHO[edit]

In some item page history I found user:VIAFbot, last edits 2016, looked at the operators contributions and found that the last were in 2017 - except for a few edits in 2020 leading to m:Grants:Project/Maximilianklein/WHO - no, has nothing to do with the WHO. Hardware limitations in Wikidata, SPARQL timeouts, QS slow, etc. ... and then non-Wikidatians try to get some money for programming. 50 USD/h. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 00:58, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

This is a proposal to get a grant to build an analysis using Wikidata data, with its primary focus being on supporting other projects such as Wikipedia. It will help answer questions those projects have been trying to understand for years. This is a good thing. I am not sure why you think that this will mean resources are taken away from the Query Service; it won't. Andrew Gray (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello @MrProperLawAndOrder, ChristianKl: I confirm what Andrew Gray says: the scope of the project is to study biographical content in Wikimedia projects, not Wikidata items. The main idea of the project is to provide statistics, with a user-friendly interface, without the need for its users to know how to write (or rewrite) SPARQL queries, or to rely on someone who knows. I also replied to some of your concerns in the discussion page of the grant, like explaining that some features this tool would provide don't exist in WDQS. On a technical note, I would like to mention that this tool would mainly rely on Wikidata dumps, not WDQS.

About the name WHO, I will just copy-paste the answer that I already gave a few days ago in the discussion page of the grant: This name is temporary and was chosen before the pandemic, as some sort of pun like "Who is in Wikimedia projects?". We still don't have decided on a definitive name, but we are looking for a friendly name (not an acronym) which is easy to remember (not like Denelezh).

About non-Wikidatians: I'm not sure how you define who is and who is not a true™ Wikidatan. For instance, is someone without a proper Wikidata user page or who never went to a WikidataCon, a real™ Wikidatan? Anyway, as already stated, the scope of this project is to study biographical content in all Wikimedia projects, not only Wikidata items. And there are several ways to be a Wikimedian: direct edits in Wikimedia projects for sure, but also organizing events, developing tools that are useful for the community, conducting studies...

Envlh (talk) 09:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Envlh:, you wrote "I confirm what Andrew Gray says: the scope of the project is to study biographical content in Wikimedia projects " ... but he wrote "This is a proposal to get a grant to build an analysis using Wikidata data, with its primary focus being on supporting other projects such as Wikipedia." - that's not matching. He didn't restrict to "biographical content", nor did he expand to "study ... content in Wikimedia projects". MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 18:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@MrProperLawAndOrder: I am not sure if it is a language issue but you are coming across as a pedant here. Envlh confirmed Andrew Gray's point and then provided more detail. To insist that both statements have to directly align is a waste of everyone's time. From Hill To Shore (talk) 19:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@From Hill To Shore: No he didn't, and your claim about how I come across and introducing it with "language issue" is going in the direction of a personal attack. I pointed out that B claimed to confirm what A said, but A didn't say it. And no, what I quoted from B was not provided as being more detail, but connected with ":". Maybe it is a language issue indeed. How do you interpret ":" as used in the first sentence? And I didn't insist they align, so your "is a waste of everyone's time" apart of being a personal attack is not even based in any real event. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 19:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@MrProperLawAndOrder: I mentioned language issue as from previous interactions on this talk page you have misunderstood other comments that I have made.[6] I am giving you the benefit of the doubt that English may not be your first language. This is actually the reverse of a personal attack as I am assuming good faith that you are misinterpreting the comments that have been made. Misunderstandings are a common occurence on a multi-lingual project. If English is your first language then I think you are perhaps expecting too much precision in a discussion; someone makes a point and another person expands on it. From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Essentially it re-builds a Query Service II that can break independently of Query Service I. This can be a good thing. OTH resources allocated to Query Service I are already somewhat limited, so allocating some of the foundation's resources to rebuild another one, isn't necessarily helping to improve it for #1. --- Jura 18:12, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

@Andrew Gray: How can money spent on that grant also be spent on the general purpose WDQS? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 18:35, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand what is being asked for here. The pot of "money for grants" is not the same as "money that is going to be spent on WDQS". The grant money is not otherwise going to go to WDQS. WDQS is not losing out because of this. Andrew Gray (talk) 18:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Flag popped up[edit]

At The Student Life (Q7767104), a flag popped up since a bot moved Location to Headquarters location, but the item (a newspaper) also has Collection. How do I address the flag? Sdkb (talk) 07:42, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Would archives at (P485) be a better property to use? Ghouston (talk) 11:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ghouston: I switched to that, and used a more accurate archives location, but removing Collection caused another issue to pop up: the item still has inventory number (P217), and that throws up an exclamation point when it doesn't also have Collection. Sdkb (talk) 04:03, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

You can make inventory number (P217) a qualifier of the archives at (P485) statement. Ghouston (talk) 05:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Old PubMed interface[edit]

How do I add https://pmlegacy.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/ as the old interface for PubMed (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q180686)? I couldn't work out what qualifier to use. Fences and windows (talk) 16:07, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Issues[edit]

When I try to add data at Q94718933, I receive the message: "Could not save due to an error. The save has failed." which tends to be a typical issue I get when I try to connect articles. In this case, I'm trying to add the article Mîrektiya Kilîsê on Kurdish wikipedia (.ku) but it won't work. I would appreciate some help. --Semsûrî (talk) 20:32, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Semsûrî: That kuwiki article is already linked to Q6974214, that's why you receive the error message. Please confirm whether those items should be merged. Esteban16 (talk) 20:42, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, same topic so a merge is needed. Thanks. --Semsûrî (talk) 20:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

@Semsûrî: I just performed the merge, but in the future you can do it yourself by following the instructions at Help:Merge Vahurzpu (talk) 22:02, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

Microsoft Store product ID (P5885)[edit]

The PlayStation Store are split into three properties, one for North America, one for Europe and one for Japan. Should the same be done with this property?--Trade (talk) 01:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Trade: Good time to ask about iTunes ID. Eurohunter (talk) 05:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

If the identifier scheme is different, I don't think they should be combined in one property. If it's the same scheme and the difference merely reflects current marketing decisions by Microsoft, I'm not sure why this should impact Wikidata. What type of trade does it involve? --- Jura 10:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The Microsoft Store has not language specific IDs and thus there's no reason to have multiple properties. with the ID's in the example I have no trouble opening https://www.microsoft.com/de-de/p/xbox-one-s-all-digital-edition/8ps0m24j508z . When you look at PlayStation Story IDs for Grand Theft Auto V (Q17452) you find UP1004-CUSA00419_00-GTAVDIGITALDOWNL and JP0230-CUSA00880_00-GTAVDIGITALDOWNL. While the last part of the ID is the same, the rest of the ID isn't and is also not the same for all store entries. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Tool for reciprocal statements[edit]

is there a tool/gadget that would make it easy (easier) to add a reciprocal statement to another Q-id? For example when I add different from (P1889) to a WD item, obviously I want to also add that statement to the item this statement differs from. Or when I add an owners to a plantation, i want to add that same plantation as a property to the item of the owner. Or the relationships of spouses or unmaried partners, family members. You get it and you probably experienced the same annoyance ;). Does anyone know of a tool/gadget to make these edits less tedious? Ecritures (talk) 01:28, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

There is consistency_check_add.js but I don't recommend it because it adds claims even if they already exist, duplicating them. --SCIdude (talk) 06:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

There is also bots that do take care of that, for exemple, Deltabot do it for books, and likely others. --Misc (talk) 07:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Does consistency_check_add even work anymore? It used to work fine for me, then declined to maybe 50%, now doesn't seem to work at all. -Animalparty (talk) 17:26, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Automatic addition had bugs, so I disabled it. The on-demand triggers should still work. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Deletions of in use items because they do "not meet notability policy"[edit]

uses Q90739444

WikiProject sum of all paintings, strives to "get an item for every notable painting", and hundreds of thousands of paintings on Commons rely on data pulled from Wikidata. We encourage people to update the metadata about artworks on Wikidata instead of on Commons. That is why I found it quite troubling that some pages on Commons were broken because items on Wikidata were deleted due to lack of notability. More specifically I noticed pages searching for Q92121816 and Q90739444, which were deleted by User:Pasleim. I had to look up Wikidata:Notability policy again and it is unclear if they meet the policy. Those paintings do not have "valid sitelinks" (very few paintings do) so we have to rely on case #2 with "clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity" provision. For a painting to be notable, it must be possible to "described [it] using serious and publicly available references". In case of those 2 items, it is possible to describe them using references, like this one for Q90739444, but whoever created the item did quite a sloppy job and did not add any references or sources. So here is the problem, We can not be deleting items used by other projects to store metadata about distinct objects, even if those items do not meet our notability criteria. On Commons we have policy that if image is used on any project than it is "in scope" and will be hosted on Commons (assuming it also has valid license) I think we need something like this here that if item is used by other project to store metadada than it is in Scope. --Jarekt (talk) 03:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

We need to avoid circular policies. If Commons has the policy that each image is in scope which is used on any project, and Wikidata would have the policy that items for images on Commons are notable, then vandals just need to create both image and item at the same time and thus they are notable both projects. The above mentioned items were deleted because they were created by a globally blocked user. Such actions need to be possible independent of any Commons usage. --Pasleim (talk) 06:42, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I noticed it too and started Topic:Vmw7njupwlcqez67. Pasleim messed this up and should undelete it instead of trying to talk themselves out of this, that will only make things worse. Just restore the incorrectly deleted items. Multichill (talk) 08:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Multichill: You have also reverted edits by the blocked user [7]. Do you prefer that I restore all items created by them and then revert their edits afterwards? What is your opinion about edits like this? Is it okay that users can create new items on Wikidata, even if their are known to create hoaxes and blatant wrong statements for years and across many projects? --Pasleim (talk) 09:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

The standing of the user does not have anything to do on notability of the items they create. The items were sloppily created, but we still need them and they should be improved not deleted. Is there a policy that makes items created by banned users not notable? --Jarekt (talk) 12:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata has currently no way to check the use of items at Wikimedia Commons. As long as this isn't possible, Commons contributors need to be aware of that and moderate their use of otherwise unused items. Commons developers are aware of the problem. --- Jura 12:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Sloppy creations and sloppy deletions. The baby has been thrown out with the bathwater. Assuming the question asked by Jarekt is not rhetorical: No such policy exists. I see that undeletions slowly have started. Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Giambattista Pittoni needs checking when that is done.

@Jura: your remark doesn't make sense in this context because the items linked to Commons using image (P18). Multichill (talk) 12:32, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Good point. I withdraw it. The question seems to be if blocked users can continue to edit or not.--- Jura 12:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Disallowing a user from editing is the whole point why a user get blocked. If a user manages to evade a block, it is obvious that edits must be reverted and page creations deleted. English Wikipedia has a policy for this [8] but such a policy is unnecessary as it is common sense that block evasions are not tolerated. --Pasleim (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Pasleim, I am not aware of any policy allowing deletion of otherwise fine items because one of the contributors is banned. Q90739444 had 4 contributors (including Multichill), why are you deleting their contributions? It is a waste of time for other contributors to help with an item which is than deleted to make some banned user fell bad. If you need to delete someone's contributions than it is fine, just replace them with your own. --Jarekt (talk) 00:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I deleted only items where the banned user was the main contributor. I would say, on average 90% of the edits were made by the banned user, 9% by bots and 1% by other users. Q90739444 has one edit by BotMultichillT. Item with a greater contribution from other users I did not delete. --Pasleim (talk) 04:38, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Speaking as a Commons admin, there is really a fundamental choice here. As Jarekt says in his initial remarks, we on Commons have been encouraged to update the metadata about artworks on Wikidata instead of on Commons. If Wikidata does not consider Commons' usage a sufficient criterion to keep an item, then we on Commons should stop doing that. There is already a lot of skepticism about Wikidata (and even more about structured data for Common) from a lot of Commons users. If you want to address that skepticism, you pretty much have to accept Commons as a legitimate client whose needs must be met. If you don't want to, then please stop suggesting that Commons lean more and more on Wikidata and Wikibase. - Jmabel (talk) 17:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Is there any Wiki project that doesn't have something against WD?--Trade (talk) 17:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Also on Commons, edits by the here mentioned globally blocked user were reverted on grand scale [9]. --Pasleim (talk) 17:53, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata does indeed consider Commons' data usage usually as a sufficient for notability, but there are simply cases where Commons does a poor job as well. As this should not be a rant about the Commons project and I think that both projects should drastically improve collaboration with each other, I am not going to list the details here again. Yet, sometimes a deletion seems appropriate regardless of linked Commons data; content of a problematic user, such as in this case, could in fact be such a situation.
That said, once someone offers to review and verify the deleted items, I think they should be undeleted and improved. The concept of notability in Wikidata refers to a technical form that items should have (basically being identifiable and verifiable, based on serious sources), rather than being a measure for admissibility based on intrinsic properties of the described subject. With that in mind, one can understand more easily why quite a lot of items qualify for deletion, although the described entities would certainly be admissible if only a proper item was created. —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:12, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I

Strong oppose mass revert or deletion of edits by (whether locally or globally, whether by admins, community, or WMF) blocked/locked/banned users (they may be discussed in their own merits, as if they are made by normal users), for the following reasons:

Wikidata data may be in use by various projects (including those the users are not blocked, and non-WMF ones) and deleting them defeats the propose.
Protection, blocks, etc. should be trected as technical measure to improve the data quality. If the quality is OK there is no need to delete or revert them. This also applies to edits that can be improved latter.

In Commons there is strong consensus not to delete any contribution of blocked users. In Chinese Wikipedia (potentially positive) contributions of blocked or even WMF banned users are not removed at all, and the community treats deletion of contribution of banned as killing every child born in violation of single-child policy (Q221719). Note only WMF is obliged to WMF bans; nobody else are required to revert edits by banned users.--GZWDer (talk) 18:28, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

I can't see the Wikidata items, did they display the image in the image field? --RAN (talk) 01:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

RAN yes they dis have image (P18) statements. --Jarekt (talk) 20:50, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Pasleim, The deletions of items because they were edited by undesirable users, is not one of the allowed deletion rationales stated in Wikidata:Deletion_policy#Deletion_of_items. We still need those items. Do we undelete, create new ones from scratch, or should we delete statements by offending party and recreate them? How do you want to proceed? Keeping the original item ID would allow less changes on Commons, but I am OK with creation of new items and redirecting.--Jarekt (talk) 21:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Just undelete them, every item should be kept/deleted on their own merit, not who created them. --RAN (talk) 21:18, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I can offer to create new items by bot, if for the paintings external sources exist. Not only with focus on Pittoni, but generally for all missing paintings. --Pasleim (talk) 11:59, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Pasleim: The items should be undeleted and then improved.--GZWDer (talk) 12:42, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Help to reduce the duplication of village items [edit]

I am currently working on village data sets of Karnataka. While working on this I am facing the following issue

I have created item for all the villages in Raichur district, but for some of the item already exists from Vietnamese Wikipedia, but this is not visible in open refine as the label are not in English Wikipedia as I reconcile with the English Wikipedia, but if I reconcile with Vietnamese Wikipedia I will not be able to match the items already existing because of the English Wiki. Due to this the chance of duplication is very high. I request someone to help me and guide me on how to go ahead with this.--Ananth subray (talk) 07:34, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

For example Basapur village 1 2

This is quite possible that I do not understand the issue, but can not you just merge the two items? I know we have a large duplication rate, in part because Geonames was used, and this database has a lot of duplication, thus manually merging is annoying, but we have to deal with this somehow.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

There are really two possible approaches:

if the quality of the viwiki items is low, one could simply ignore them. It's a common problem with cebwiki and similar items.
An alternative could be to set English labels for all these items and then check them.

--- Jura 12:22, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me like the first step would be to add names to existing items. You for example could add an English name for all villages in Raichur district (or maybe even the whole of India) where the item currently doesn't have an English name but has the same name in all the languages with latin alphabet it has currently. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Cannot change Q210499[edit]

Q210499 has as its Japanese link ja:電子掲示板. This is however incorrect. It should be ja:草の根BBS actually, and ja:電子掲示板 in English is en:textboard. I receive error:

Could not save due to an error. The save has failed.

It is true that the literal translation of 電子掲示板 is "electronic bulletin board". But that's not how the term is used in Japan. It's used to refer to sites like en:2channel, not old 1980's style dial-in BBS. For proof, please see ja:電子掲示板#日本語のインターネット掲示板. It is also occasionally used in a sense similar to "forum", but this is not the default meaning, and if the possibility for confusion exists, you have to explain that you mean specifically a forum by writing e.g. 非匿名掲示板. Another source would be this Yahoo! News article[10], which contains the statement インターネット社会、日本の社会文化は匿名文化なの, meaning, roughly, "Japanese internet culture is anonymous." Which is true, anonymous textboards are dominant in Japan, unlike overseas where en:4chan et cetera are the fringe and Facebook groups the norm. Psiĥedelisto (talk) 09:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Info Affected items: bulletin board system (Q210499), Q11618061 and textboard (Q3519361). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:57, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Language[edit]

Hello. When you use properties like name in native language (P1559) you have to add the language. I am using Wikidata in Greek. I have noticed that a language is wrong in Greek. Where can I ask to correct the language? Xaris333 (talk) 09:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Xaris333: Hello! what do you mean by "wrong language". Can you give an example? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Vojtěch Dostál: the name of the language. Macedonian (Q9296). Now the language is written as "Μακεδονικά" but the proper word in Greek language is "Σλαβομακεδονικά". I don't ask about an agreement here, if my opinion is correct or not (don't discuss that here please). I am just asking where can someone can ask to correct a language. Xaris333 (talk) 13:47, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

You probably mean "Where can I change the Greek label of item Q9296" :-). The answer is - you click on "Edit" at the top of item Q9296 and go the the table just below it. There, you can find the Greek label for the item is and change it there. And yes, please discuss such change beforehand. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:50, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

@Vojtěch Dostál: Of course not. I know how to change a label. The label of Macedonian (Q9296) is correct. The label of Macedonian (Q9296) is different with the Greek word of the language when you used properties like name in native language (P1559) where you must add the language. Xaris333 (talk) 14:11, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

It comes from CLDR. You may have to have it changed there, alternatively a request in Phabricator (cldr extension) could be a way to override it. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! Xaris333 (talk) 11:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Property as a qualifier[edit]

Hello. I have requested the update of number of representatives in an organization/legislature (P1410) to allow to be used as a qualifier. Please read the talk page of the property. Xaris333 (talk) 09:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Ontology of anatomy[edit]

I opened a discussion on Wikiproject Anatomy about how our ontology regarding anatomy should be structured. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Since when are WMF projects doing OR? Are there no existing ontologies? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 01:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Percussion page in Wikipedia is using an incorrect word even when the citation is using the correct word: tympanitic.[edit]

Term is tympanitic not tympanic when describing normal percussion of the abdomen. The source cited - University of California also uses tympanitic, not tympanic when describing percussion over stomach or intestines of the abdomen. (See your citation 4) https://meded.ucsd.edu/clinicalmed/abdomen.html Several non-academic Google sites have copied the incorrect substitution of tympanic for tympanitic here which confuses nursing and medical trainees. Tympanic membrane refers to the ear drum. Tympanitic refers to the resonant sound produced when a medical examiner is percussing the abdomen over structures that contain air (stomach, intestines). - Margaret Mulligan MD, Salus University, email: mmulligan@salus.edu – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 100.11.33.65 (talk • contribs) at 19:03, 24 May 2020‎ (UTC).

en:Percussion is a redirect to en:Percussion instrument, so I have no idea what article you are talking about and cannot copy your comment to the appropriate place. In any case, this issue would better be brought up on the talk page of the relevant article. - Jmabel (talk) 21:05, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

It's en:Percussion (medicine), and I've edited it accordingly. That's how it was originally until somebody "fixed" it [11]; it's possible that both variants are in use. Ghouston (talk) 05:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

How to sort a page's list of links[edit]

I think the initial version of my question might not have been clearly worded. I want to know if it's possible to change the sorting of the pages listed on the What Links Here page. By default they are sorted by ID, but I would like to sort them by the amount of incoming links each page has. 2602:306:C541:CC60:4116:2BFD:ABB0:A970 02:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Automated finding references: new data and a distributed game[edit]

Hello all,

As previously announced, the Wikidata development team is working on ways to automatically extract references from external websites, so editors can check them and add them on Items. On this feedback loop page, we presented our first batch of references and collected many useful comments.

Following up on the topic, we improved our data batch based on your feedback. On top of that, we created a distributed Wikidata game called Reference hunt!. With this game, you get a suggestion of an Item and a reference based on structured data from an external website. You can accept the reference if it is good (it will then be added on Wikidata), reject the reference if it is not fitting, or pass if you are not sure.

Feel free to try the game and give us feedback on this talk page! We will also track the edits made by the game with the tag reference-game and monitor the results (how many times people click on accept or reject on a suggested reference) to analyze the overall quality of the data batch.

Cheers, Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 11:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

I think it would make sense to show the user some context for the claim. Maybe the sentence in which the "extracted data" appears. Without context it's hard to say whether the extraction worked well.

In addition it would be great to only show users references in languages that the user can understand. My abilities to read Korean are very limited. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback. Since the extraction happens using "hidden" markup in the source code of the website, it is tricky to show the exact context. But we can do some more. Unfortunately, it is not possible at the moment to only show users references in languages that they know, it's best to skip these references and let them be handled by someone who speaks the language. Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 10:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for this game. It is quite cool how you could collect the data for this game. As ChristianKl suggested, providing some context for a claim would improve the game a lot. For example, if the extracted data is a date, I'll have first to open the source URL to check whether the date is a date of birth, date of death or some other date. --Pasleim (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Or worse, many users won't open the URL and think that the tool got the interference right even when it hasn't. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T253839

Pasleim, ChristianKl: we're taking this into account. Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 12:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ladsgroup: This tool created duplicated reference on Eduard Einstein (Q118253). Please check.--GZWDer (talk) 19:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

@GZWDer:Thanks for your feedback. This has now been resolved and it should not happen anymore. Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 12:42, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Pretty cool, but so far not very game-like. Do you have a game designer consultant who's working on adding encouragement and rewards and fun surprises? Especially important because properly verifying the references is slow -- there is pretty much no way around reading the source page carefully in 95% of the ones I've done so far. I have some suggestions:

In order to properly manage the data, you should have two yes/nos for "is it reliable source" and "does it support the claim" rather than combining them. If a significant number of players thought the reference source was not reliable, you can take it off your list. And if a certain source is getting lots of "does not support," you can re-evaluate how you extract data from that source.
At some point in the future, you could check if the user has Babel set up and only give them references in languages which they said their ability was at least level 2. And when they log in, ask them if they have Babel and if not, have a link to how to do it. If they don't have it show them any language.
If you're only hunting references for claims that currently have no references, can you also hunt for ones where the only reference is "imported from Wikimedia project"? I know that might be tricky. Levana Taylor (talk) 14:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Dates in Middle Ages[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T207705

Recently I was informed about some dificulties in describing dates. There is a case when the day and month is known with high probability, but year is uncertain. For example let see Richeza of Poland, Queen of Castile (Q80692). Her date of death (P570) should to be split in two parts. The first is June 16 (Q2653), which can be assigned with sourcing circumstances (P1480) set to probably (Q56644435). The second part is 1185 (Q19729), and its sourcing circumstances (P1480) can be set to circa (Q5727902). Handling the second part with date of death (P570) is easy. But the first with day only portion is not. I found refine date (P4241), but this is qualifier and it cannot have its own sourcing circumstances (P1480). Is this case ever possible to describe using Wikidata schema? I need property similar to significant event (P793) but with value of point in time with respect to recurrent timeframe (Q14795564). This property would be suplemental to the main date property. Paweł Ziemian (talk) 12:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Relevant ticket added above. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #417[edit]

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.

This is the Wikidata summary of the week before 2020-05-25.

Discussions
- Open requests for Oversight: Kostas20142, Esteban16

Events
- Past: WikidataLab XXXIII: Wiki-Education and Data Literacy with Shani Evenstein on May 21st. The training in English was organized by Wiki Movement Brazil User Group. (replay)
- Past: Wikipedia Weekly Network - LIVE Wikidata editing #6 (YouTube)
- Past: Art+Feminism virtual Wikidata editathon by Global Open Initiative on May 19. (Video) Part 1, Part 2
- Upcoming: Wikidata Wochenende, event dedicated to the German-speaking Wikidata community, will take place fully remote on June 12-14. If you're interested, don't forget to register. We're looking for speakers to give introductions to Wikidata & tools.
- Upcoming #vBIB20 (Q94495218) the first fully remote German library conference: May 26-28. Metadata about all presentations are already stored in Wikidata: Query. Some sessions and presentations are related to Wikidata or other Wikiprojects:
- Upcoming: Online Wikidata editathon in Swedish #14, May 31

Press, articles, blog posts, videos
- The Missing Path: Diagnosing Incompleteness in Linked Data ("We describe our iterative design process and evaluation with Wikidata contributors")
- EURECOM at the SemStats 2019 Challenge ("we study the coverage of [the official database of French enterprises] in Wikidata")
- Enriching Knowledge Bases with Interesting Negative Statements ("we argue for the importance of negative information on knowledge bases, and present two methods to mine it")
- Video: Editing Wikidata: File Candidates tool and World heritage of Visby - Youtube, Facebook

Tool of the week
- If you're looking for even more tools, the Tools Directory indexes over 130 Wikidata tools.

Other Noteworthy Stuff
- New tool: Structured Search, a tool allowing you to search through Wikimedia Commons using structured data, is now live. This tool by Hay Kranen was demoed at Wikimedia Hackathon 2020.
- New tool: script by Tohaomg to easily rearrange the order of values for statements in Wikidata (to be added to your common.js page)
- New documentation page: Wikidata:How to create Wikidata Tours
- Teaching notes for introducing people to Wikidataː d:User:Einebillion/Teaching notes
- The Wikidata development team created a distributed Wikidata game called Reference hunt!. With this game, you get a suggestion of an Item and a reference based on structured data from an external website. Try it and leave us feedback.
- Gabriel, an intern at the Google Summer of Code is developing a tool to assist users in verifying (structured) data of media on commons. If you want to help, feel free to fill out this questionnaire.

Did you know?

Development
- Federated properties: Linking to the source wiki immediately after saving a statement (phab:T251776)
- Properly display federated properties on a local item's Revision History page (phab:T249836)
- Documentation for federated properties (phab:T252991, phab:T252861)
- Last steps of getting the distributed game "Reference hunt" ready
- Wikidata Bridge: more work on error messages
- Track errors people encounter when using the Bridge (phab:T252683)

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.

Monthly Tasks
- Add labels, in your own language(s), for the new properties listed above.
- Comment on property proposals: all open proposals
- Contribute to a Showcase item.
- Help translate or proofread the interface and documentation pages, in your own language!
- Help merge identical items across Wikimedia projects.
- Help write the next summary!

Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) 15:16, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Editing via quickstatements without batch id link[edit]

Two ways of using QS:

"run in background": edits have a linked batch id "batch #34562 [...] Tag: QuickStatements [1.5]" [12], easy to track, easier to review, one can even see upcoming edits when looking at the batch page
some other way: edits only have "#quickstatements [...] Tag: QuickStatements [1.5]" [13], hard to track and to review, one cannot see what and how many are upcoming. If an error is found, it is hard to find other edits made via the same method / in the same round

Is there any policy on how to edit? Why does QS allow mass editing without batch id? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 18:25, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

As frontend batch is not stored in database, they are only identified by the time batch is created. You may however see all such batches here.--GZWDer (talk) 19:29, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

GZWDer, thank you. First column is labeled UID and the values are clickable. Why are these clickable IDs not mentioned in the edit history and linked from there? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 01:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@GZWDer: just found a reason: Waiting for several minutes QS refused to start, it said "Running" but nothing was edited. Running via browser instead of "in background" works. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 21:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

This is because of background QuickStatements is proceeded by a seperate worker (backend process) which is currently not working. @Magnus Manske:.--GZWDer (talk) 22:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

xtools privacy error, chrome[edit]

Hey all, i see privacy error when i want check articles i created via my chrome browser. What is wrong? Its cookies stuff? --Ruwaym (talk) 19:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Ruwaym: Most likely. I checked the page and didn't see any error. Esteban16 (talk) 02:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Do we have a qualifier for named after that specifies the language used?[edit]

It feels like it would be useful for terms that have different names in different languages to specify to which language the property named after (P138) refers. Do we have an existing way to store this information? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

In Sunday (Q132) it tries to do so, but the qualifier may be ambigous as it may refers to either the source language or target language.--GZWDer (talk) 00:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Sunday is named after mister Q177053 in Spanish? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 01:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

That looks like an error. Domingo (Sunday) translates into English as "Lord" or "master" rather than "mister." It would probably be more accurate to link it to Dominus (Q1283380). I am not a Spanish speaker though, so this is more of an educated guess. From Hill To Shore (talk) 07:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

There is applies to name (P5168). --- Jura 09:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that seems to be the best one. I added a suggestion constraint for named after (P138), as it would be good if applies to name (P5168) would be used in the general case. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:21, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- In most cases, I don't think it's needed.
  Obviously, sometimes, it's also worth specifying to which label/name of the value it applies (see Wikidata:Property proposal/applies to name of object). --- Jura 09:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

It seems to me that it becomes important once an item gets names in many different languages. Whenever I see an item where the "named after" has no corresponding to any of the languages Wikipedia shows me it feels strange. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

In slouch hat (Q3750832) I've used "named after" as a qualifier on individual names along with "valid in place" and "valid in period" where I have references to support those statements. - PKM (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

I added it mostly to geographic places, but yes, on classes, it's crucial. If more detail needs to be provided, lexemes would generally be more suitable.--- Jura 09:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I really like applies to name (P5168) and I think we should really start using it more in named after (P138) statements.Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 21:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

The item Sunday (Q132) is an interesting example and at this I thought about synonyms. I think that this name for the day has a religious background in the languages where currently the item for Mister Q177053 is used. For God there are many different names. I would choose named after god. But I dont know what is the correct item for it. I think it is God in Christianity (Q825). In German the best translation, to understand the meaning from the Spanish domingo is Tag des Herrn, so in English something like the Lords day. What do you think is the best item to use here. Is the best item from the mentioned word or the item with the same meaning the right one in the section to show after what something is named. --Hogü-456 (talk) 21:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Item for Blood and lymph[edit]

blood and lymph (Q29225829) seems to link to an Italian wikiversity article about blood and lymph. While a title that combines two subjects might be appropriate for Wikiversity it feels strange for Wikidata as an item. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Is it worth creating instance_of:Wikiversity article? Are there more? --RAN (talk) 01:33, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
I don't think this is specific to Wikiversity. Some Wikipedia articles aren't ideal either. "Ideal" per our view obviously ;) --- Jura 09:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

GZWDer added Wikimedia page relating two or more distinct concepts (Q37152856) and I think it solves the issue at hand decently. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- I thought we were using that mostly for items that combine things with the same name. --- Jura 09:50, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Changed the usage of has part (P527) to main subject (P921) as per guidelines. See Help:Modelling/Wikipedia_and_Wikimedia_concepts#Compound_Wikipedia_articles and Q37152856#P1963. --SilentSpike (talk) 10:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Human item - WorldCat Identities ID[edit]

Q6771432#identifiers WorldCat Identities ID is listed before Library of Congress authority ID. Why? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 01:23, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Technically, because it's listed earlier at MediaWiki:Wikibase-SortedProperties. It's in the VIAF members section, which has been sorted ~~alphabetically by English label~~ I don't know where the labels come from, but Worldcat is under "I" as "Identities - WorldCat Identities ID". Ghouston (talk) 06:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

@Ghouston: thank you. Not listed at http://viaf.org/ where many members are shown. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 07:14, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Why can't I add link?[edit]

I was trying add b:en:HyperText Markup Language/Lists into Q81957734, but it said just "Error occured" when saving. Could you tell me why it won't let me add? --Semi-Brace (talk) 11:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

That page was added into another property, kindless error message was made me confused. :p --Semi-Brace (talk) 11:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Contemporary constraint[edit]

At Q17410937#P22 it violated contemporary constraint maybe because the child is born 4 months after its father died. Can someone fix it? Hddty (talk) 11:41, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Done, as yet another exception on the constraint. Ghouston (talk) 06:22, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Can't the constraint be changed to allow for fathers who might die up to 9-10 months before the birth of the child? Piecesofuk (talk) 07:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Some qualifier on Q17410937#P22 could be helpful to indicate it. --- Jura 09:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Item update request[edit]

Please open Francis (Q450675) and add Club Atlético San Lorenzo de Almagro (Q218282) as supported sports team (P6758). Thanks!!! --151.49.97.155 18:36, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

What's the source for the claim? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:54, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl: http://www.rainews.it/dl/rainews/media/papa-francesco-tifoso-spera-foto-gallery-san-lorenzo-campione-455aec3a-d2e4-442c-98af-8f425702a9e8.html#foto-1 . For your knowledge, Rai is the main broadcaster in Italy, but I don’t think that a source is necessary. All people know this claim. --151.49.97.155 19:20, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

IDs authors[edit]

Hi,

I just noticed that Albert Mathiez (Q1343174) Treccani's Enciclopedia Italiana ID (P4223) was signed: see Q1343174#P4223. What do you think about this use case? For me it sounds useful, but I'm not sure this is the right method to fill the IDs authors.

Thanks, Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC).

Notified participants of WikiProject Source MetaData. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject Italy. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:56, 26 May 2020 (UTC).

Notified participants of WikiProject Wikipedia Sources. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 11:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC).

@Nomen ad hoc: In my opinion it is the correct way to indicate the author of an encyclopedia article; it is used, along with author name string (P2093) (when the author still hasn't an item), not only with Treccani's Enciclopedia Italiana ID (P4223), but also with Treccani's Dizionario biografico degli italiani ID (P1986), Catholic Encyclopedia ID (P3241), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy ID (P3123) and other similar IDs. --Epìdosis 08:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Nomen ad hoc, Epìdosis: the standard way is to create an item for the biographical article, isn't it? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

... Even for the online-only encyclopedias and directories? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC).

@MrProperLawAndOrder: Creating an item only when there is a page on Wikisource for the encyclopedia-article, otherwise the standard is this. --Epìdosis 21:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Epìdosis, Nomen ad hoc: there is no evidence the person was the author of the id. If no item is created, then use described by to refer to the article and use the id there. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@MrProperLawAndOrder: Why "there is no evidence the person was the author of the id"? --Epìdosis 21:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Scholarly articles with titels in square brackets[edit]

Currently are large number of scholary articles exist, where the item label is [wrapped in square brackets]:

SELECT ?article (LANG(?label) AS ?lang) ?label WHERE {
  ?article wdt:P31 wd:Q13442814;
    rdfs:label ?label.
  FILTER((STRSTARTS(?label, "[")) && (STRENDS(?label, "]")))
}
LIMIT 10000

Try it!

Following the DOI links this may be some kind of semantic for article titles translated to English. In my opinion Wikidata is able to model multilingual titles (maybe use native label (P1705) or language of work or name (P407)?) and the square brackets can be removed. Sometimes labels like [no title], [kein Titel] or [Not Available] are also used, which should also be removed.

Since lots of these items seem to created by @Daniel_Mietchen: would it be possible to remove the square brackets beforehand in the future? --Haansn08 (talk) 02:06, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Actually the square brackets have a meaning. If they are dropped, the information needs to be stored otherwise.

"no title" is being fixed (I hope). --- Jura 09:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Could you clarify how the information should be stored if I were to remove the brackets? --Haansn08 (talk) 22:58, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Haansn08: It probably comes from https://www.nlm.nih.gov/bsd/licensee/elements_descriptions.html#articletitle: "<ArticleTitle> is always in English; those titles originally published in a non-English language and translated for <ArticleTitle> are enclosed in square brackets... <VernacularTitle> is used for articles published in non-English languages and contains the original, untranslated title.". So @Daniel_Mietchen: the brackets should be stripped, and <VernacularTitle> should be saved in "original title". In addition to the fake titles shown above, another one is [In Process Citation] --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 06:59, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
see User:Research_Bot/issues#non-English_article. --- Jura 07:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Since the actual title and language is not known, would it be ok to add language of work or name (P407) non-English (Q66724591) to all matching items and remove the square brackets from the labels? --Haansn08 (talk) 07:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I'd do so (from labels, not the title statement). --- Jura 08:23, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Applicablity of RfP voting eligibility[edit]

I have striken Nnadigoodluck's vote at Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Oversight/Kostas20142 as this user does not have 100 local non-automated edits. In two recently closed RfCU requests the user Operator873 is also ineligibile to vote. Does community agree with this? On the other hand as CU and OS requires 25 supports having this requirement may let CU and OS requests a (very little) bit more difficult to succeed.--GZWDer (talk) 07:27, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Given that we have the 100 local non-automated edits for admins I see no reason why we shouldn't have the same limit for CheckUsers and Oversighters and Support adding it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Maybe the number should be over the past year. --- Jura 09:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
I thought that numerical requirements were unnecessary back then, and still do, but I suppose it is current policy and should be respected for RfCUs. -- Ajraddatz (talk) 23:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Special:FewestRevisions to be disabled[edit]

Hello all,

We need to disable the page Special:FewestRevisions because it is extremely resource intensive and causing a huge number of errors in the database (see phab:T238199 and comments for more details).

We had a look at the number of page views and noticed that the page is not often used (phab:T245818), thus we hope that disabling it won’t cause any trouble. However, if you are using this page, please let us know as soon as possible, and tell us more about how and why you are currently using the page, so we can suggest another workflow that would allow you to do it another way. For example, this Quarry query is producing the same result as the special page.

Thanks a lot for your understanding, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 07:47, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

SELECT (COUNT(*) as ?count) { ?item wikibase:statements 0 ; wikibase:sitelinks 1 }

Try it!

np. At Wikidata, Query server can do something similar instead (e.g. 1.6 million with the above, most frequent sitelinks: [14]). --- Jura 09:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

suggestededit-add 1.0[edit]

What is this 'feature' and can it be disabled? Or at least add a captcha to it or something. Most edits on my watchlist that come from this 'feature' are jokes, vandalisms or other incorrect edits that have to be reverted (adding a full stop at the end of the description, changing the first letter to the uppercase etc.). Wostr (talk) 08:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Johan_(WMF): It's users making edits via the Wikipedia Android app: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Suggestededit-add_1.0 ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:42, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

It has been no less than a disaster for Persian. Sometimes vandalisms sticking in wikidata and being shown to users for years Amir (talk) 10:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Thinking about this, it seems especially troubling that the edits with captialize the description and the full stop not being in a good description are allowed by the Android App. I think I explicitely told the developers back then that those edits are not up to our descriptions. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I'll write up a short report for the team with the latest quotes and interactions from the community around this. Ping me with any statistics, examples etc you want them to be specifically aware of. The quality filter that was built into this has not at all worked as well as we hoped. Amir, if you've got anything specific – statistics or just a short developer-friendly description of the Persian issue – I'll make sure to pass it along. /Johan (WMF) (talk) 23:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

We only allow users who have previously made 3+ good (i.e., not reverted) – reverted how? I think there are at least three options to do this: undo, restore and rollback. Does it work with every option other than manual revert or only with rollback? Wostr (talk) 09:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Item fix request[edit]

Please open Karolina (Q1734206) and change "Karolina" to "Karolina (name)" on English Wikipedia entries. Thank you!!! --2001:B07:6442:8903:752A:823B:CFB6:9FF2 10:37, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

child no value[edit]

Why having "child=no value" e.g. [15]? For a claim child=XYZ one can do research and add a source, but how would one verify "no value" and add a source for it? I asked the claim creator at the talk page for his source or to make transparent that is was OR, he replied but didn't gave a source yet.

Disclosure: I oppose OR.

MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 15:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Basically you are claiming that it's impossible to reduce that a person from which we know that they have 0 children (a sourced claim) has actually no child. How about focusing on actually putting effort into understanding claims before you challenge them? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:25, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I agree but I don't see why you need to be quite so rude about it. BrokenSegue (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

I'm annoyed, because it reflects repeat behavior by the OP to enter discussions and complain that people (three times against me) should behave differently without investigating the issues that are at stake and instead trying to press people to classify decisions along lines that are irrelevant for Wikidata policy. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

It is certainly possible to verify that certain people are childless. - Jmabel (talk) 20:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
@Jmabel, BrokenSegue: it wasn't said that the person is childless, but it was said "no value". And if it is possible to find a source, why did the claim creator not provide it on request? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 21:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

In our data model "No value" means that no value exists and a person is childless, you might want to learn about how Wikidata works. Help:Statements even makes that easy and gives an example for child:

Unknown or no values

There are times when an item has either no value or an unknown value for a given property. Depending on the property, these data values still provide important information about an item and should still be recorded in Wikidata. For example, we could say that Elizabeth I of England (Q7207) had no value for the child (P40) property, which is quite different than not recording anything at all.)

There's no duty to provide a source just because someone tries to harrass you and wants you to do work for them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:20, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@ChristianKl: stop your claims about intentions of others. If you cannot prove them, and the claims have a negative connotation, they are just personal attacks. The community opposes personal attacks. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 22:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes @MrProperLawAndOrder: seems annoying and unfamiliar with wikidata but people should try to remain calm in the face of it. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:38, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@BrokenSegue: Re "seems annoying and unfamiliar with wikidata" - I see no evidence that asking the question made when starting this section could lead to "seems annoying and unfamiliar with wikidata". I work on human data, and the claim child="no value" is something I have not seen before, despite having seen hundreds of pages. Of course it can exist in large quantities in WD, but it has not been applied to every human that has no child. So, I asked for the source at the talk, user did not provide it, so I went here. But if you are less "annoying and unfamiliar" than me, please share, in which cases such statement should be made to further the goals of the WMF in sharing knowledge to world. Thousands of humans can receive it. And last but not least, explain the difference from simply stating "number of children = 0" via Property:P1971. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 23:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

For your information: Child: No value is used 301 times. This query will show them:

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel
WHERE {
  ?item a wdno:P40.
  ?item wikibase:statements []. # Only entities have this...
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

Try it! --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 11:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Dipsacus fullonum, thank you! Very helpful. I made sure each occurrence also has "number of children = 0" (https://w.wiki/S8x = 0) and this is now used 481 times:

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel
{
  ?item wdt:P1971 ?noc.
  FILTER(?noc = 0).
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

Try it! } MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Bots going wild - Reinheitsgebot - MnM - Magnus Manske adding hundreds of wrong claims on human items[edit]

Maybe they also add millions of correct claims, but what does the community think about hundreds of edits like [16] caused by MnM, Reinheitsgebot both operated by Magnus Manske. Here the name "James Roberts" was the same on both items, but there are also cases like

Erwin Bartke (Q10274182) world war II U-boat commander != Erwin II. +1193 https://www.deutsche-biographie.de/136099033.html [17]

the firstnames match and the string "II" is for the person that died 1193 part of the name, for the other it is part of the description "world war II U-boat commander" - WWII took place more than 7 centuries after the other person died. Matching seems to be poorly designed.

Requests to at least deactivate certain highly trouble some MnM catalogs receive no response even after 12 days. Topic:Vme7nczx4t8iduvd MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 17:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Afaik, all matches in MnM need to be verified by a human. If people do not verify and say "yes, that's the same", the problem is not with the bots or the tools, so this is weird to point at a issue with the tool creator (and not very constructive either). As for maintenance of MnM, I do agree it would be better to not depend on 1 volunteer, but I do think that would requires a lot of efforts infra side, and as someone whose job is exactly that, I know this take lots of time, and free time is a usually a luxury for sysadmins. --Misc (talk) 18:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Misc: Those examples show the limits of tools like Reinheitsgebot. There was an interest to have such tools at the begining to import data. Now data curation is more important and bots should focus on importations of curated data only and avoid to destroy the work of curation done directly in the items without using tools. Snipre (talk) 18:39, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Snipre:, I do not follow you, how is adding item destroying anything ? Again, if people are matching things that shouldn't have been matched, the problem is people, not the tools. And if you still think the tools are bad and should be improved, that's a free software, the code is on https://bitbucket.org/magnusmanske/mixnmatch/ . Markus is a volunteer like lots of us are (or should be). And as someone said "Talk is cheap, show me the code". --Misc (talk) 19:42, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Misc: the point of this section is about bots going wild. No human is checking, Reinheitsgebot is just acting on what MnM says and I see no evidence Magnus is fixing his mass insertions of errors into WD. Last but not least, you claim tool creators have no responsibility for what is done with them: Tabacco industry claims this too. But why are WMF resources used for operating tools of mass disruption? Isn't there a policy by WMF that requires that hosted tools operate according to the goals of the foundation? MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 22:04, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@MrProperLawAndOrder:, as far as I know, a human has to validate the matching before anything get pushed. I do not think comparing people dying by cancer to wrong edit made by a tool is a valid compraison, nor up to the standard of discussion we want here. Antagonizing people is not really productive. --Misc (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Misc: "as far as I know, a human has to validate the matching before anything get pushed" the edit summary doesn't reveal that, and I see no proof that there is really a human behind each match in MnM. The Erwin example doesn't look like a human error. I didn't mention people dying, but someone here said tool creators are not responsible for how the tools are used, without giving a source for that claim. I just wanted to highlight how questionable that claim seemed to. Sorry, if the method left a feeling of antagonizing and I regret to have done it. It was by no means meant to equate the whole situations. As I wrote in the intro, the tools may have added millions of correct claims. Re "valid comparison": One can compare anything with anything, comparing is not equating, and if one aspect is equal it doesn't mean all aspects are equal. Nevertheless I prefer I wouldn't have done it. Please accept my apologies. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 10:45, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

I would add that errors in any process (even human driven) are inevitable and so it's important to consider whether the contribution is net-positive. It also seems the errors you are pointing out are somewhat old so it's a bit late to do anything about it other than to try to fix the errors that get through. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:49, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@BrokenSegue: what does age change about the process of fixing? If they are "old" by whatever definition, isn't it worse the creator didn't fix them? And the report wasn't only about the past, since MnM and Reinheitsgebot are still active, and Magnus Manske still not acting on the catalog deactivation request. There is nothing net positive about that specific catalog. DtBio re-uses GND IDs and the preferred value for these can change. No indication MnM can deprecate IDs. For DtBio it is easier just to directly compare lists of GND IDs. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 21:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

At Wikidata_talk:Bots#Unattributed_proxy_edits there was a discussion about whether bots that proxy edits for users should (be required to) identify the user, with Reinheitsgebot as one example. Bovlb (talk) 14:06, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Hold on, hold on, hold on. The Erwin diff you give looks like it was all done by Reinheitsgebot, but you have collapsed two edits together; I am sure this is a simple mistake, but it has the result of being very misleading.

The first edit was by a human, in a batch, mistakenly adding Deutsche Biographie ID (P7902) to the wrong item. (Fair enough - we all make errors. Even Homer nods). Reinheitsgebot saw this, and one week later added CERL Thesaurus ID (P1871) because that value was linked from the P7902 data. The bot did nothing wrong here. There was a human error, it (reasonably) assumed the human-error edit was correct, and made some edits based on it. Andrew Gray (talk) 16:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Andrew Gray, human marked in bold, but the edit wasn't even fully human, the value was coming from MnM (tool by Magnus)[18]. Where is the proof that "Reinheitsgebot saw this, and one week later added CERL Thesaurus ID (P1871) because that value was linked from the P7902 data."? The edit summary for Reinheitsgebot says "Created claim: CERL Thesaurus ID (P1871): cnp01149900, #quickstatements; invoked by Mix'n'match:add_person_dates" no reference to the edit of the other user. Both wrong edits coming from MnM, two properties (DtBio and CERL) and two catalogs (1619, 1640). Reinheitsgebot has shown to insert DtBio + CERL errors into an article on its own, the human-MnM-based edit not necessary for this:

Markus Ebner (Q119378):

DtBio pnd133528537 was removed https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q119378&diff=1121111897&oldid=1114578553
Reinheitsgebot adds CERL https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q119378&diff=1126950518&oldid=1121112021
Reinheitsgebot adds DtBio again as 133528537 (no pnd, format in property was changed) https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q119378&diff=1134298424&oldid=1126950518

MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 02:34, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Item update request[edit]

Please open Francis (Q450675) and add Club Atlético San Lorenzo de Almagro (Q218282) as supported sports team (P6758), source is http://www.rainews.it/dl/rainews/media/papa-francesco-tifoso-spera-foto-gallery-san-lorenzo-campione-455aec3a-d2e4-442c-98af-8f425702a9e8.html#foto-1 . Thanks!!! --151.49.97.155 18:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Done Vahurzpu (talk) 21:26, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Unremovable incorrect "Wikimedia disambiguation page"[edit]

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6027853 - how it can be fixed? cMateusz Konieczny (talk) 18:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@Mateusz Konieczny: Could you be more specific about what is wrong and what you want to do? - Jmabel (talk) 20:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
Resolved For some reason https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q6027853&diff=1191762153&oldid=1191709810 succeded where I failed. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:16, 27 May 2020 (UTC)
- Items shouldn't be repurposed. I moved the non-disambiguation page sitelinks to industrial complex (Q95641153). --Shinnin (talk) 22:28, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Could not save due to an error. Malformed input[edit]

Could not save due to an error.
Malformed input: Neujalis, Juozas

I could only add "Juozas Neujalis" [19], but that is not what the source says. MrProperLawAndOrder (talk) 19:25, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

sometimes when wikidata is overloaded it just emits errors randomly. seems to accept the change now. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

@MrProperLawAndOrder, BrokenSegue: You should remove leading and trailing spaces and invisible characters. See phab:T47925.--GZWDer (talk) 22:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Bug[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T253526

There is a bug with wikidata at the moment on at least Wikipedia. When an article is not attached to Wikidata, there is no "add links" button available, so if you want to link a new article you have to do it manually. Not sure what could be causing it. I'll also refer you to the Simple English Wikipedia talk where we have briefly discussed the issue there. ImprovedWikiImprovment (talk) 20:46, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Perceptions of Wikidata reuse -- Research invite and eliciting feedback & suggestions[edit]

I'd like to talk to Wikidata editors about their knowledge of how Wikidata is used on other wikis and outside of the Wikimedia community. Furthermore, I'm interested in understanding how newcomers learn about Wikidata's policies and guidelines. I plan to recruit participants using project chat page and sending individual invitations to editors via user talk page. The detail of research could be found here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Perception_on_rules,_values_and_motivation_structure_of_Wikidata_contributors

Feel free to give suggestions and comments! If you would like to participate (it's an approximately 30 minutes interview), you could leave message on my user talk page or fill in a questionnaire to set up an interview. Thanks! Chuankaz (talk) 21:05, 27 May 2020 (UTC)

Namespaces of wikidata.org ... where to place a certain page?[edit]

As I am not too familiar with Wikidata I'd like to ask how to name, respectively where to place a certain page. meta:User:Manfred Werner (WMAT)/Baustelle is a collection of quiries displayed with the help of Integraality. The tables were created for the recent Museum Day Wikidata competition and I would like to keep them available at a place where they are found - I thought of putting a link at Wikidata:WikiProject_Museums#Example_Queries. But where should I put the page itself on Wikidata? --Manfred Werner (WMAT) (talk) 12:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
PS: In case you noticed - the page with the collected tables does not work as intended yet. I'm working on it. When finished I'd still like to make it available here. --Manfred Werner (WMAT) (talk) 13:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

There are similar pages under other WikiProjects here, so a subpage of Wikidata:WikiProject_Museums would make sense to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Can I link all my user pages on wikipedias by creating an item here?[edit]

Chinese, English, Russian, Arabic -- Herobrine303 (talk) 13:20, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

No, use old-style interwiki. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 14:41, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

unrelated Talk pages in "What links here"[edit]

Hello, can someone please give an explanation of why all these unrelated talk pages appear in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere/Q22272508? --SCIdude (talk) 15:43, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@SCIdude: People added {{Item documentation}} to a bunch of talk pages, which in part displays a concept tree. It's hard to notice, but click "expand" in the lower right-hand corner of the box to see where it's linked. If you're just looking for links from items, you can filter it to just the main namespace. Vahurzpu (talk) 16:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. Wouldn't the generation of this be a (unnecessary) resource hog? --SCIdude (talk) 17:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge gadget issues?[edit]

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T253912

Are other people seeing the merge gadget? It disappeared for me with no apparent cause earlier this afternoon. There weren't any relevant deployments in that window, per wikitech:Deployments. I want to make sure it's not just me before I file a bug report. Vahurzpu (talk) 18:10, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I see the merge gadget.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Merge gadget is missing on my browser as well. English Wikipedia seems to be having some current sidebar issues too (all the sidebar links jumbled up over the logo, tab display problems). Hopefully a short-lived glitch. -Animalparty (talk) 19:31, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Ha! I just came here with the same complaint! I wasted 20 minutes looking through my preferences, thinking I must have accidentally turned it off. --RAN (talk) 19:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Can someone merge Q95689708 and Q95690079 for me. --RAN (talk) 20:01, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

@Vahurzpu, Animalparty, Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): I reported this problem on Phabricator as phab:T253912. It affects only the Vector skin, if you change your skin (e.g. to Monobook) your merge gadget will be back — NickK (talk) 20:22, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, According to the Phabricator, must be fine now.--Ymblanter (talk) 07:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Adding a place[edit]

Hi, I would like to know how I can add a place that is not on wikapedia. It is a youth facility that is no longer in operation. I've been doing a lot of research and have every bit of information from beginning to end and beyond. If someone could please help me in this quest, I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks! – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ofarrell2020 (talk • contribs) at 23:57, 28 May 2020‎ (UTC).

@Ofarrell2020:} As long as you have solid citations, sure. - Jmabel (talk) 01:05, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

@jmabel, are you able to help me to get the history of this facility on wikipedia?

just click the "create a new item" button to create a new item. you might want to read the tutorials and information on what kinds of things are permitted to have entries. People will likely help you figure out how to do things but typing in the information and linking sources to the information will be left to you. Also, making an entry here and on Wikipedia are different things and have different rules/procedures. BrokenSegue (talk) 05:47, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Youtube user ID[edit]

I am not sure how to enter a Youtube user ID. There is no suitable property, only the (unused) qualifier Q65028018. --RolandUnger (talk) 04:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

I do not know if there was already a property proposal. --RolandUnger (talk) 04:45, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

what do you mean by user id? plenty of pages have channel ids. is there not a 1 to 1 relationship there? BrokenSegue (talk) 05:44, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Apr	MAY	Jun
	29
2019	2020	2021

Wikidata:Project chat

Please, Merge[edit]

Government information resources[edit]

Expressing a predicative relation ... the case of "banned in"[edit]

Zero date year[edit]

ICTV virus ID (P1076) is using an obsolete identifier?[edit]

Deprecated rank[edit]

Deprecated Rank and constraint violations[edit]

Question about collection of plans for a building[edit]

Which topics would like to see Wikidata Tours for?[edit]

Grants:Project/Maximilianklein/WHO[edit]

Flag popped up[edit]

Old PubMed interface[edit]

Issues[edit]

Microsoft Store product ID (P5885)[edit]

Tool for reciprocal statements[edit]

Deletions of in use items because they do "not meet notability policy"[edit]

Help to reduce the duplication of village items [edit]

Cannot change Q210499[edit]

Language[edit]

Property as a qualifier[edit]

Ontology of anatomy[edit]

Percussion page in Wikipedia is using an incorrect word even when the citation is using the correct word: tympanitic.[edit]

How to sort a page's list of links[edit]

Automated finding references: new data and a distributed game[edit]

Dates in Middle Ages[edit]

Wikidata weekly summary #417[edit]

Editing via quickstatements without batch id link[edit]

xtools privacy error, chrome[edit]

Do we have a qualifier for named after that specifies the language used?[edit]

Item for Blood and lymph[edit]

Human item - WorldCat Identities ID[edit]

Why can't I add link?[edit]

Contemporary constraint[edit]

Item update request[edit]

IDs authors[edit]

Scholarly articles with titels in square brackets[edit]

Applicablity of RfP voting eligibility[edit]

Special:FewestRevisions to be disabled[edit]

suggestededit-add 1.0[edit]

Item fix request[edit]

child no value[edit]

Bots going wild - Reinheitsgebot - MnM - Magnus Manske adding hundreds of wrong claims on human items[edit]

Item update request[edit]

Unremovable incorrect "Wikimedia disambiguation page"[edit]

Could not save due to an error. Malformed input[edit]

Bug[edit]

Perceptions of Wikidata reuse -- Research invite and eliciting feedback & suggestions[edit]

Namespaces of wikidata.org ... where to place a certain page?[edit]

Can I link all my user pages on wikipedias by creating an item here?[edit]

unrelated Talk pages in "What links here"[edit]

Merge gadget issues?[edit]

Adding a place[edit]

Youtube user ID[edit]

Navigation menu

Personal tools

Namespaces

Variants

Views

More

Search

Navigation

In other projects

Print/export

Tools

In Wikipedia