Dear colleague,
In 2019 you had apparently protected an item on Wikidata ([https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=protect&user=&page=Q861259]) for an indefinite time. Since this item is not special, this must have been a typo. Would you be so kind as to revert the protection. All I am trying to do is to add the English article, :en:Support (art)
Thank you in advance!
Hi Votpuske! I've just added the link you suggest.
The reason for the semi-protection is that painting support (Q861259) is one of the most used Wikidata Items and there are more than 175,000 links on Wikidata pointing to it, so any small act of vandalism or mistake on this Item could have a considerable impact. However, this status only affects you temporarily as a user who is still starting to contribute to Wikidata. As soon as you make some more contributions here and there (a total of 50 atomic changes), the system will automatically let you edit all semi-protected entities.
Please don't hesitate to let me know if you run into this or any other inconvenience again. Thank you for your message!
This message has been sent because you are administrator in this project. If you voted, Thank you and please ignore this message 🙂
Hello Wrs8ivky4s8l2lk1,
The Ratification vote of Universal Code of Conduct Enforcement Guidelinein currently taking place until March 21. If you didn't vote yet, please take a few minutes to participate the ratification vote! Your voice is important.
Best, —YKo (WMF) via
Hello dear Wikidata administrators
I have two accounts with the following usernames: 1- @arian_aboutalebi is an Extended confirmed users account created in Persian Wikipedia 2- @zaghmarz1 which was created 8 years ago (2014) but I forgot my password by February 2022 . In February, dear @ladsgroup admin blocked me due to spam behavior
A few days before I was blocked, I remembered my @zaghmarz1 account password and decided to continue with this account. And in a few days I made 112 edits to update and upgrade the information in Wikidata. Please see 112 edits for me and then tell me which version was wrong? Even if, for example, one of the 112 edits is an error, 111 useful edits have been made, and I think blocking this is not the right thing to do, and we should consider a large number of good and useful edits. Only in one of the editions did I send a message to the esteemed administrator of @bovlb and request that he add the mzn Wikipedia page of Mr. Jamal Aboutalebi ( Iranian politician and environmentalist ) to his item a few days after its creation. Is this spam behavior or requesting to add a resource to a page in Wikidata !? Please help me unblock Please read what I said on the page below and then respond if possible. Thank you for your attention
Hi!
You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.
When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.
Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.
If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.
We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.
Thank you. /Johan (WMF)
18:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I was looking at the complex constraint you added on doctoral advisor (P184) to ensure the lifetimes overlapped. I note that your query has some false positives because of deprecated dates, e.g. for Philipp Müller (Q109091)'s advisor Christoph Meurer (Q93844540). What do you think about changing it to this query?
SELECT DISTINCT ?item {
{ SELECT ?item WHERE {
?item wdt:P184 ?item2; p:P569 ?birth1_statement .
?birth1_statement psv:P569 ?birth1_node .
?birth1_node wikibase:timeValue ?birth1; wikibase:timePrecision "11"^^xsd:integer .
?item2 p:P570 ?death2_statement .
?death2_statement psv:P570 ?death2_node .
?death2_node wikibase:timeValue ?death2; wikibase:timePrecision "11"^^xsd:integer .
FILTER (?birth1 > ?death2)
FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?birth1_statement wikibase:rank wikibase:DeprecatedRank }
FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?death2_statement wikibase:rank wikibase:DeprecatedRank }
} }
UNION
{ SELECT ?item WHERE {
?item wdt:P184 ?item2; p:P570 ?death1_statement .
?death1_statement psv:P570 ?death1_node .
?death1_node wikibase:timeValue ?death1; wikibase:timePrecision "11"^^xsd:integer .
?item2 p:P569 ?birth2_statement .
?birth2_statement psv:P569 ?birth2_node .
?birth2_node wikibase:timeValue ?birth2; wikibase:timePrecision "11"^^xsd:integer .
FILTER (?birth2 > ?death1)
FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?birth2_statement wikibase:rank wikibase:DeprecatedRank }
FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?death1_statement wikibase:rank wikibase:DeprecatedRank }
} }
}Hi Bovlb! Thank you for noticing this. We may consider this complex constraint obsolete because of the contemporary constraint, which does consider those ranks (but there are other precision-related issues affecting it). Anyway, the complex constraint doesn't hurt, and the changes you propose seem to me clearly positive, so by all means, feel free to change it, and thanks a lot for the improvement!
Hello! I see you protected Q82486 a couple of yours ago. (Thank you) I work for the project and we have just added an OpenRefine reconciliation API. I'd like to add a statement to that effect. I just registered with wikidata, but I gather I would need to make quite a few edits in order to become autoconfirmed and gain edit access. A quick look at a few pages where my general knowledge might apply suggests that I don't have many immediately useful edits to make, and I don't really want to try spurious activity. Can you help me? Here is the content, if that helps:
property: API endpoint (P6269)
value: https://eol.org/api/reconciliation
qualifier: protocol (P2700) is OpenRefine reconciliation service API (Q64490175)
qualifier: described at URL (P973) is https://eol.org/docs/what-is-eol/data-services
If there's anything I can do myself, please advise. Thanks!
Jen
Hi Jen,
Congrats on such an interesting project! I have just applied the changes you suggest. Best of success, and don't hesitate to let me know if I can be of help with anything else.
Hola Abián,
Could you please update the Norwegian Bokmål label of Q13474373 to "wrestler" and description into "idrettsutøver som deltar i wrestling" (the page is locked)? Thanks a lot!
Hi,
I am trying to add a qualifier in a statement using the commands of csv files
(the qualifier refers to the volume number of an article)
However, I get an error of "invalid snak data".
I passed the value of the volume, as 14, +14, "14" without success.
Could you help me, please?
Thank you in advance.
Hi, Marpapadaki. I would need more information to tell you what's wrong with your commands; however, note that you don't need, nor is it probably desirable, to use QuickStatements to edit a single entity or a small set of them. I would recommend using Wikidata's web interface directly.
Done by MisterSynergy
Hello,
I noticed there was a huge amount of vandalism on page: Q102228988. I also see you have done a wonderful job of preventing it, but may I request you semi-protect it? It looks like the vandals have been going at it for 2 days straight.
Hey Abián, so you claim that the WDCM dashboard provides us with a list of items which require semi-protection based on that 2019 page protection RfC. Can you help me to find it there?
Okay thanks.
I made a script to compare currently implemented protections and that list. It looks that based on the RfC there are currently 23032 page protections missing and 57 page protections need to be removed because there are fewer than 500 uses.
We need an admin bot. It is not that difficult to implement in fact.
Thank you, MisterSynergy! I think we could request a Gerrit repository at mw:Gerrit/New repositories/Requests for the code, with the schema labs/tools/wikidata-<something> (labs/tools/wikidata-admin-bot? labs/tools/wikidata-sysop?). The repository would be independent of the bot that runs its code at a given time: once we have the code, any admin could take care of running it (for example, from Toolforge) with an account controlled by them and, when that admin is no longer active or available, another one could switch to running the same code with another account (I assume that sharing a bot account between admins with its corresponding password, recovery options, lack of transparency about who's acting under it, etc. would be a problem). What do you think?
The code should definitely be public and properly licensed (MIT or CC0); I am in fact close to having actually working code and would be willing to share it. However, I don't think that we necessarily need to host it on Gerrit; github or bitbucket would also do, plus an onwiki copy in the userspace of the bot account (just in case).
The code could then be run via Toolforge indeed, where the tool account contents are by default readable by anyone with a Toolforge account. A scheduled job executed once a week would be easy to set up. The admin-bot account would need to have an approved task (via Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot) and a sysop flag (via Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator).
Responsibility-wise the bot operator is responsible, and if something goes wrong, a block for the admin-bot account should be sufficient. Maybe we can think about sharing access to the tool account with two or three admins, but it is up to the operator to decide this. Anyways, in case the operator disappears, another user (admin) can simply set up another instance with the published code which then also needs bot and admin approval as well as its separate Toolforge account.
So, yes. Roughly as you describe it.
Cool. :-) Creating a repository on Gerrit also creates a mirror repository on Github that stays in sync, so we wouldn't need to worry too much about that.
Yes, but it seems a bit too bureaucratic for the job in my opinion. We are talking about a few hundred lines of code in one script at maximum. Code review is in my opinion not really necessary due to the simplicity of the job, and because the bot operator is responsible for the bot's actions anyways.
The script just needs to be published somewhere so it can be re-used by someone else in case the bot operator becomes unavailable.
FYI: I can now protect and unprotect with a script, see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Log?type=protect&user=MisterSynergy&page=&wpdate=2020-09-30&tagfilter=&subtype=&limit=2.
Hey Abián, I am still on it, and plan to propose a bot task in the next days.
One thing that I meanwhile found is that any use with Structured Data at Commons (SDC) is apparently not covered in the toplist.csv file, as these uses are not captured by the entityusage database tables that the WMDE script apparently uses. Are you aware of any efforts at WMDE to integrate SDC use in the evaluation? Do you have any idea how many more items would require protection then?
Hey, thanks for everything you're doing. I have no specific information about SDC, I'm sorry, but I can tell you that although WMDE is responsible for the development of the Wikibase Client (also used on Commons), it's the WMF that is responsible for SDC. We should be able to get some estimates with https://wcqs-beta.wmflabs.org/…
WCQS is not going to help here due to the timeout limit. I guess one needs to download the full dump and evaluate this offline.