Wikidata:Bot requests

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

Bot requests
If you have a bot request, create a new section here and tell exactly what you want. You should discuss your request first and wait for the decision of the community. Please refer to previous discussion. If you want to request sitelink moves, see list of delinkers. For botflag requests, see Wikidata:Requests for permissions.
On this page, old discussions are archived after 2 days, if they are marked with {{Section resolved}}. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at August.


Remove obsolete imported from (P143)->Wikipedia-based sources[edit]

imported from (P143) is important to show from which Wikipedia a claim has been imported from. This allows to find the source of errors (e.g., Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations). Importing basic claims from Wikipedia is in turn important as an empty item has no information to identify itself. However, we all agree that Wikipedia is no "real" source to be used in Wikipedia and elsewhere again. Thus, all sources imported from (P143)->Wikipedia where the claim is referenced by any other third party source should be removed. Ideally, in soon future, no imported from (P143)->Wikipedia remain. This work should be performed continuously and, thus, by a bot living at Labs. Manual example edit: [1].  — Felix Reimann (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Emw (talk) 02:46, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
  • No. I think it is still useful to indicate where it came from. --  Docu  at 11:44, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Docu. --Ricordisamoa 00:11, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support It makes no sense to keep because it is an artifact of automated tasks - which bot was more active, such language is in front. Because the same statement can (and almost always) exist in multiple Wikipedias, emphasizing of particular language is not correct. --Infovarius (talk) 18:29, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Most of these „references“ are sensless or misleading or have now a „real“ source. --Succu (talk) 21:24, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I am not going to vote on this but I am going to say again here what I have already said on the project chat: Wikipedians are going to measure us by how many statements are sourced to Wikipedia. There are stats for exactly this here: The trust in our data is one of the biggest issues we face and "imported from Wikipedia" is one of the biggest obstacles in gaining more trust. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 21:36, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It should be clear where a fact is coming from, regardless of whether the source is reliable or is an "artifact" or otherwise (per en:WP:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT). The only way to indicate that is the use of the "source", and in fact that's the best place for that information to reside.

    OTOH, I would certainly agree that a bot that detects multiple sources for a claim, at least one of which is not imported from, then the imported from claim should be removed. --Izno (talk) 23:24, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

    I agree. --Yair rand (talk) 08:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
    Switch to support, because Felix was good enough to inform me that I apparently can't read. --Izno (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment One possibility to make everybody happy is to retain the historical information (which is useful for error correction among other things) but clearly distinguish it from real sources. Pichpich (talk) 18:50, 7 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose If it is meant to remove the source AND the claim the result will be an almost blank Wikidata. Also Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose if it is meant to remove only the source but leave the claim without source it is very difficult to find the source (if any) form that wikipedia. HenkvD (talk) 18:11, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
I misinterpreted the request. Agreed to remove P143 if an other valid source is present. HenkvD (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Emot If a bot removes P143, when they add a "real" source, I agree. But just remove them en masse, would harm the traceability of discovered errors. I think the bots have to show not only which project they take the information from, but also which page and version. A url-property can be used together with P143 for that purpose. -- Lavallen (talk) 19:14, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose --Kizar (talk) 12:04, 23 November 2013 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. --Yair rand (talk) 08:57, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Yair rand, Lavallen, Izno: this is exactly what I tried to propose: In case of multiple sources for one specific statement, where at least one of the sources is based on a source according to Help:Sources (i.e., with stated in (P248)), any additional imported from (P143) (i.e., pointing to where to statement came initially) should be removed. See my example: The statement had two sources, one based on P143, one based on P248 and thus, P143 can be safely removed in this case.  — Felix Reimann (talk) 09:59, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
    Oh, I'm dumb. Good call. I'll switch me-self. I'll ping HenkvD and Ricordisamoa as well, because they also may have misunderstood. --Izno (talk) 14:44, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
    I agree, that is what I tried to say above, but it was maybe Lost in Translation (Q107270). -- Lavallen (talk) 17:28, 11 February 2014 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Conditional support on a case-by-case basis, provided that the bot will be explicitly designed to replace imported from (P143) with Wikipedia-independent sources of which it can reasonably ensure the verifiability. There should be specifical tasks dealing with certain property sets (e.g. SuccuBot could do that for IUCN conservation status (P141)). --Ricordisamoa 00:58, 12 February 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. @Yair rand, Kizar: your oppose seems to be based on a misunderstanding of this proposal. Could you either elaborate your on your opinion or strike your oppose ? --Zolo (talk) 09:43, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose: Just like on Wikipedia, sometimes Wikidata references will end up being unreliable, or will end up being based on a URL that dies. There is no guarantee that a single non-imported from (P143) citation is going to perpetually remain better than a imported from (P143) citation. Having multiple sources, and knowing what Wikipedia articles had information originally (since Wikipedia is supposed to have sources), might help recover more sources later. --Closeapple (talk) 14:03, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg SupportWylve (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Add descriptions[edit]

In this days I'm working on item of Category. Someone ask to me to add descriptions also for other languages. So if user add in this table correct description and also if is necessary replace if already exist description, I can do it. I can use descriptions in MediaWiki:Gadget-autoEdit.js, but not all are correct (Wikipedia/Wikimedia) and there aren't indication about replace or not. --ValterVB (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't it just be the same text as in Wikimedia category page (Q4167836), Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) and Wikimedia template (Q11266439)? --тнояsтеn 20:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
I guess it would ideally be the same, but by default the label of Wikimedia category page (Q4167836) is equal to the sitelink, and in many languages we still have things like "Wikipedia:Disambiguation" instead of the more elegant "Wikipedia disambiguation page".
I think the auto-edit descriptions are ok except that in the "wikipedia" has been to to "wikimedia category" at some points and some languages have not yet been updated. --Zolo (talk) 22:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Shouldn't we then also update pages like Help:Description#Non-article_items and Help:Description/de?--Zuphilip (talk) 14:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Maybe objects with type Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) could be handled similarly? --Zuphilip (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

The French translations are wrong: Wikimedia must NOT be translated to Wikimédia (corrected in the table below). See w:fr:Wikimedia. -- Bjung (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

OK none oppose so I start to replace "Wikimédia" with "Wikimedia" --ValterVB (talk) 10:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it categoria di un progetto Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
fr page de catégorie d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Kategorie Y тнояsтеn
pt categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
pt-br categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
ru категория в проекте Викимедиa Y Infovarius (talk)
sv, da, nb, nn Wikimedia-kategori Y --October wind (talk)
nl Wikimedia-categorie Y --October wind (talk)
es categoría de Wikimedia Y --October wind (talk)
gl categoría de Wikimedia --October wind (talk)
en Wikimedia category --October wind (talk)
eo Vikimedia-kategorio לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro categorie pe paginile Wikimedia לערי ריינהארט (talk)
fi Wikimedia-luokka --October wind (talk)
cs kategorie Wikimedie Y --October wind (talk)
pl kategoria w projekcie Wikimedia --October wind (talk)

Next task:

Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it pagina di disambiguazione Y ValterVB (talk)
fr page d'homonymie d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Begriffsklärungsseite Y тнояsтеn
pt página de desambiguação de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
pt-br página de desambiguação de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
ru страница значений в проекте Викимедиа N Infovarius (talk) 10:01, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
sv grensida 20:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
eo apartigilo לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro pagină de dezambiguizare לערי ריינהארט (talk)
Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it template di un progetto Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
fr modèle d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Vorlage Y тнояsтеn
pt predefinição de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
pt-br predefinição de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
ru шаблон проекта Викимедиa Y Infovarius (talk)
eo Vikimedia-ŝablono לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro format pe paginile Wikimedia לערי ריינהארט (talk)

disambiguation pages with additional statements[edit]

Hi! re: Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) I noticed that more and more disambiguation pages contain additional statements. Please do not add the descriptions in this case. Please let us know what pages are affected (please let us know an url). לערי ריינהארט (talk) 08:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

disambiguation pages causing constraint violations[edit]

Hi! Archetype (Q346973) caused a constraint violation. See . I removed the relation see .
Please verify if "special:WhatLinksHere" links to a relevant Wikidata object ("Qxxxx") and generate a report on the identified pages. Thanks in advance! לערי ריינהארט (talk) 08:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

@לערי ריינהארט, ValterVB, Thgoiter, Zolo, Infovarius: Let's continue below in the section wrong category item descriptions. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

{{Section resolved|1=Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)}}

@Matěj_Suchánek I added new languages to the list but did not see any change since then.
I think that this task should be done on a regullary base. With a report if the disambuguations are "clean"
a) no additional statements to WD dis pages
c) no normal articles from WMF projects linked to WD dis pages
d) no WD items linking to WD dis pages
e) label should always start with capital letters
f) basic quality validations (as namespace consistency across linked WMF pages, no redirect pages and no anchors at WMF project links, etc.)
The bot run should be transparent. A report and to do list should be generated. לערי ריינהארט (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
@לערי ריינהארט: I missing your request, sorry, It was a "one shot" task, but naturally I can add "eo" and "ro" label description. I can replace existing label or not? --ValterVB (talk) 12:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks @ValterVB for the feedback. Please add the descriptions to the set of languages. During the last months I created hundred of new WD dis pages. Maybe you start from WLH from=16800000 .
Regards gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
@לערי ריינהארט: I can start from beginning, but is necessary that you say how do if already exist label: replace with new label or not? --ValterVB (talk) 13:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
Another thing: only disambiguation or disambiguation, template and category? --ValterVB (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
@ValterVB I think it is best to start with disambiguations.
Regarding labels I think that the WMF page labels have a higher priority (for disambiguation pages). To my understanding pipes should be removed.
For disambiguations pages without English labels and with labels in languages using LATN scripts I think it is wise to add the most appropriate label. Maybe we can use the "hierarchy" defined in the list of WMF projects sorted by the number of articles.
Adding descriptions for template and category can follow later. There I have seen many descriptions added manually . They sould be preserved.
Note: If WD develops to an ontology (consists of ontological object) labels would need to describe the items and may differ from the WMF articles (explaining some aspects of these items). Normally only humans can see the differences and can chose the proper label. לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
 ::@לערי ריינהארט: Sorry I mean descriptions not label: replace with new description or not? I don't add or change label. --ValterVB (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
@ValterVB Please replace the description(s) with the description texts from listed in the requirement in the main paragraph. These texts are up to date using Wikimedia and not Wikipedia. I have seen some English descriptions worded only as "disambiguation". לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

Create items for Wikipedia articles[edit]

Many Wikipedia articles are currently not linked to Wikidata, so new items should be created. Some of them may be duplicates, but that seems to be a small minority, and they are easier to spot if they are in Wikidata anyway. --Zolo (talk) 08:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

is there a specific Wikipedia where more items are missing then in other Wikipedias? --Bene* talk 14:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Some time ago many articles with sv:Template:Insjöfakta Sverige did not have any item here. -- Lavallen (talk) 15:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The English Wikipedia, obviously.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
@Zolo:: You stated: „Some of them may be duplicates, but that seems to be a small minority, and they are easier to spot if they are in Wikidata anyway“ (my emphasis). Is this knowledge or only a guess? How useful are new created items without a single (useable) statement? --Succu (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
For the languages I have checked in the topics I have browsed: more missing items in Chinese and English than in French and German.
@Succu: yes, this is only a guess based on a non-random experience. To state things more rigorously, I have seen rather many Wikipedia articles that did not have any link to Wikipedia, and almost all of those I checked could not be linked to any existing item. Once it is in Wikidata, an item gets a chance to get statements. Actually, what prompted me to make this request is user:Magnus Manske's new "Widar" tool that allows to add statements based on Wikipedia category but leaves out articles that are not in Wikipedia (of course in this case, another solution would be to add an option for creating items through the tool ;). --Zolo (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
Short-term, I can offer Swedish people on en.wp without Wikidata item. --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
A lot of new items were created just after the start of Wikidata, but afterwards we didn't setup anything to keep importing new articles.
I wrote added a bot to Pywikibot to make it easy to create new items. I do a query to find articles without an item and use this as input for the bot.
The bot doesn't touch an article if it's created to recently (default: 3 weeks) and if it has been edit recently (default: 7 days). This prevents new items from being created when people might be still working on it.
I'm thinking about setting up a shared account (on Toollabs) with this bot in it. It could work on every Wikipedia, but we should probably start with a smaller subset.
What do you think? Is this a good idea? Who wants to help to setup this bot and maintain it? Multichill (talk) 15:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
It's a good idea. I hope you find a bot co-maintainer. :) Wikidata would need a tenfold increase of bot runners it seems, too much work on the table! --Nemo 17:42, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
My bot is doing this taks for two months in for first twenty languages of Wikipedia and Wikisource and all langugaes of Wikiquote Amir (talk) 20:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
@Ladsgroup: I see that about 3000 pages from the French Wikiquote are still missing. Many of them correspond to anexisting Wikidata item. I think that if the title matches a Wikipedia sitelink it is safe to add them to the item. Could you see about it ? For added security, it could also check that the page is linked from the "wikiquote"or the "q" parameter of the "Autre project" template, but it may not be necessary as it may cause more false negatives than it would avoid false positives--Zolo (talk) 16:55, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: Hi, Can you give me some examples? Thank you Amir (talk) 11:06, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
@Ladsgroup:. The first four pages I get with the item creator tool for fr.wikiquote's category "Citations:Racine". The are wikiquote:fr:Architecture, wikiquote:fr:Crime, fr:wikiquote:Culture de l'Europe and wikiquote:fr:Empereur. They correspond to the fr.wikipedia article with the same title (fr:Architecture, fr:Crime, fr:Culture de l'Europe, fr:Empereur). They are all linked from Wikipedia using {{Autres projets|wikiquote=}} or {{Autres projets|q=}}, but actually it seems the fr.wikiquote page has virtually always the same title as the corresponding fr.wikipedia page. --Zolo (talk) 12:35, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: Oh I see it now. I usually use the way that the bot went through all of Wikiquote pages in certain namespace(s) and if it could get a correspondent article in Wikipedia, it adds it to the related item (after some obvious checks) but the way that my bot goes through a template in Wikipedia and adds the related pages in wikidata is a great idea. I will work on it today Amir (talk) 12:53, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

@Zolo: I started the bot, It'll finish in the next week and It already added your examples (I give them to the bot for test) and some other an example Amir (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Remove sources for categories, templates, portal, etc items[edit]

I think will be good idea to remove source for Property:P31 values of category, template, portal, etc. Of course will be good idea to check that all links are from particular namespace. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

This week end my bot will work on category to fix an old error, If no one oppose I can delete instance of (P31) source of instance of (P31) on categories. I can do it also for Template and Portal. --ValterVB (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)
Please not that I asked to delete source, not property value itself. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Of course I mean delete source of instance of (P31) :) --ValterVB (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Why do you think this would be a good idea?
First I get shouted at for not including the source and now you want to remove it? No, let's not do this. @ValterVB: please stop doing this. Multichill (talk) 11:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
@Multichill: For now I remove only a wrong source: example (my old error). If there isn't consensus, I don't delete source. --ValterVB (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Support deleting. We don't need sources for categories, templates and project pages etc. It is clear that they've been imported from Wikipedia, so what's the sense of adding a source to say this? --Stryn (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose, sources are useful to detect errors. for example, If a bot add p31=disambigion page to an item which is not linked to a disambigion page in enwiki, it's useful to detect this page in which language is a disambigion. And it's also useful to detect this problem (now cleaned).--GZWDer (talk) 12:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
We need dedicated check for disambiguation status in projects directly. Source will not help. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per GZWDer: Sources aren't just for verification of correct data; they help users track down the reasons for bad data. I have trouble understanding why someone would want to remove sources en masse, even if it's a trivial source. Removing wrong sources is OK; removing true sources is not OK. --Closeapple (talk) 03:04, 27 May 2014 (UTC)

Huge work: from invalid ID (P60) to instance of (P31)[edit]

Hi, while the decision concerning the deletion of invalid ID (P60) is pending (see this discussion), I open a request for a bot that copy P60 statements to P31.

More precisely, for every item with P60 property, the bot should copy the value in an instance of P31, with also the source. In some cases the statements was already copied, but not the source, that should be copied. Probably exist items with both properties but with different values! In this case I hope it is possible make a list to check manually (!!) the items. Note that the bot will check nearly 70000 items (see Database_reports/Popular_properties). Thank you very much! --Paperoastro (talk) 10:17, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Time2wait.svg On hold per PFD. --Ricordisamoa 00:10, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
@Paperoastro: a test edit. But... how long is the PFD going to last? --Ricordisamoa 22:34, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
It is ok, thanks Ricordisamoa! No one seems to want to close it, but, even if I'm strictly involved, in few days I will close it (I need to read once the discussion). --Paperoastro (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
@Ricordisamoa: I have just created the item unknown astronomical object (Q16945799). You can use it for some few cases when P60 is "unknown" or "no value". Thanks for your work! --Paperoastro (talk) 10:33, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
Why not to use "unknown" or "no value" directly? --Ricordisamoa 06:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Imho, because using directly P31 we lose the information that the item "is" (or should is) an astronomical object. --Paperoastro (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Why not use simply instance of (P31) astronomical object (Q6999)? --Infovarius (talk) 10:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
@Paperoastro: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/SamoaBot 45 --Ricordisamoa 06:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Updating category and template labels[edit]

Is there a bot operator whose bot would repeatedly process the following task?

When a category/template link is moved, the label should also be moved (i.e. deleted and recreated elsewhere). This isn't done often, though. I want the bot to (1) delete labels which are/should be placed elsewhere (regardless capitalisation of the first letter or the letter after the first colon) and (2) update labels of items which are linked with categories with changed titles. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:28, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

ping @Akkakk:, your bot is working on labels, could you please take a look on this? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
my bot don't watch recentchanges, but get items from the database. so it's more than just a small change to the code. i won't do that at the moment. (the code is published, so maybe someone else want to take this task)--Akkakk 17:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
My English is very interesting... I mean regular running bot, not watching RC. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Freebase identifiers[edit]

According to Wikidata:Database reports/Popular properties we currently have only about a million Freebase identifiers here (the next most common identifier is VIAF). It makes little sense to have this property half used; please import the remaining million items from [2] (CC0). --Nemo 14:31, 27 April 2014 (UTC)

Don't have sense to have freebase propriety is unuseful, don't is an ufficial source, don't is an Authorities --Rippitippi (talk) 23:40, 2 July 2014 (UTC)

Remove descriptions consisting of language names only[edit]

Based on Wikidata:Bot requests/Archive/2014/01#Remove English descriptions consisting of language names only. After three months, we expanded the filter a bit. Is it possible to run a bot again for all descriptions and aliases (for labels there's false positives)? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:50, 8 May 2014 (UTC)

ping @Bene*:, you had done this task. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Akkakk, your bot has been working on labels etc. recently. Could you please take a look on the task? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:48, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Rotten Tomatoes[edit]

For Rotten Tomatoes ID (P1258), there is Template:Rotten Tomatoes (Q5615409). ----- Jura 07:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

When running a bot for this, remember that sometimes Wikipedia articles contain Rotten Tomatoes references (or other database references) to different movies or people, besides the main topic of the article. --Closeapple (talk) 03:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)

Intel processors[edit]

Hello. Can some bot please read Intel's site and gather information from that database for the Wikidata? Its needed that it catches the name of the processors, create an item corresponding to each one and complete the item with the properties sockets supported (P1041), instruction set (P1068), manufacturer (P176) and number of processor cores (P1141).--MisterSanderson (talk) 15:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)

Why don't you write them to ask that they release that data via a dump/machine readable API under a free license (or rather CC-0)? Even better, they could add it themselves here on Wikidata, to save us some work. --Nemo 17:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
I could not find an appropiate e-mail adress at, so there is no way to contact them.--MisterSanderson (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
Try any of the first four in "Intel PR Departments" [3] (calling yourself an analyst) and [4], you'll be fine. --Nemo 15:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok, I sent them a message.--MisterSanderson (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
The contact was closed without response.--MisterSanderson (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
So the creation of the items needs to be made by Wikidata robots...--MisterSanderson (talk) 15:32, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Fix italian born lists[edit]

There is a number of items referencing itwiki with names like "Nati nel <number>". I suggest that the following be done:

  • merge with appropriate items if those exist
  • delete statement GND-type=person ✓ Done --Pasleim (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
  • add statement "it is a list" if absent. ✓ Done --Pasleim (talk) 21:42, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Manual example (no merge): [5],[6] GranD (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

The relevant categories to get all such lists are w:it:Liste di morti nell'anno‎ (deaths) and w:it:Liste di nati nell'anno‎ (births). --Nemo 15:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Estonian biographical dictionary[edit]

I see a lot of articles with w:et:Mall:ETBL lack properties on Wikidata. It's a tag for content from a biographical dictionary, so it seems safe to add instance of (P31) > human (Q5) to all of them. --Nemo 15:42, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Importing coordinates from Polish Wikipedia[edit]

I've noticed that geographical coordinates have already been imported to Wikidata from most language versions of Wikipedia, but I can hardly see any imported from my own home wiki, which is Polish Wikipedia. We've got really loads of articles with coordinates, so I think it would be really beneficial to bring it all to Wikidata. Thank you in advance. Powerek38 (talk) 08:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi Powerek38, I've been importing coordinates from several Wikipedia's. Maybe you could set up Wikidata:Coordinates tracking at the Polish Wikipedia? After that I'm more than happy to do the import. Multichill (talk) 09:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot Multichill, I'm not really a very technical user, so I've just set up a discussion in our coordinates wikiproject, so that my more able collegues can check if we can meet this requirement and how to do that. Feel free to join in if you have any hints, all members of that project understand English with no problems. Powerek38 (talk) 09:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
@Powerek38: Enabling it isn't that difficult. You just have to get pl:Moduł:Koordynaty modified like en:Module:Coordinates (example). It looks if the coordinates are displayed in the title and than looks for coordinate location (P625) to add the different tracker categories. I'll post this at the Polish Wikipedia too. Multichill (talk) 09:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Ok. The category is created and I'm now importing. You'll see a error message on the coordinates. That's already fixed in the code (see bugzilla:62105 ) and will probably be deployed soon(ish). Multichill (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your help on this, Multichill! Powerek38 (talk) 16:49, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

link enwiki article to items[edit]

See User:GZWDer/temp16. Note:

  1. There're some false positives in "Genus and other" section.
  2. There may be also some homonymous species in "Species" section.
  3. If there're more than one item after links, all such items should be merged too.

--GZWDer (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)

@GZWDer: how reliable are those data? --Ricordisamoa 00:49, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
@Ricordisamoa: This data is only from page title and labels/aliases. To be sure, please only link items with at least one sitelink whose page name is the same as page name in enwiki in "Species" section. "Genus and other" section should not be done for the time being.--GZWDer (talk) 08:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
I can handle the species section. But this has to wait until I could report all of my yesterdays merges. The rest is a little bit more problematic, but I have some ideas. --Succu (talk) 08:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
 Doing… the "Species" section. Skipping Q286251 since it matches "Coloborhynchus araripensis" and "Coloborhynchus clavirostris". --Ricordisamoa 12:17, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

P6 script?[edit]

moved from Wikidata:Project_chat#P6_script

While working on Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P6 I thought about a script to add P6 statements more easily to our items. A nice to have would be a list with basic information on heads of government and the position held plus a script that adds that information to existing items for teritorial entities as well as creates new items for persons if necessary.
A basic list could look like this:

Territorial entity;person;sex;citizenship;position;start;end
Q723796;Jean Claude Legoux;m;France;Q30185;2008;09.2011
Q723796;Jacky Furaux;m;France;Q30185;09.2011;

A script should add P6 statements to the item (Q723796) including start and end of term as qualifiers. Further it should create new items for the persons (if not already existing) and add statements like P31:Q5 (human), P21 (sex/gender), P27 (citizenship), P39 (position held) including the territorial entity as qualifier and links to the predecessor and succssor. Finally the script should remove the line from the list.
I could fill the list with the required information. Anybody, who could do the script? -- Pütz M. (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

The right place for this request is Bot requests. However, the problem I see is on the person, need the item becuse the name can be "ambiguos".--ValterVB (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
This is indeed a problem as people could have had more than one position held. Could we implement in the script a semi-automatic duplicates check? Meaning, that no action is done if the name exists as label or alias. Those names could be checked manually. -- Pütz M. (talk) 18:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
The problem is more complex. For ex. if person is John Richardson, what is the correct one in this list? And if the specific item isn't created, but exist another person with that name? Probably the risk of errors is too high. --ValterVB (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
This is not a specific bot problem. Also by manual editing a new item "John Richardson" could be created, although he might exist already.
In a case of possible duplicates (same label, same alias) I suggest that the bot takes no action, but leaves a notice in the list. Those cases could be checked manually. Like this we could minimize the risk of duplicates. -- Pütz M. (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Importing coordinates from Italian Wikipedia[edit]

I would like to ask if it possibile to import coords from itwiki (in particular @Multichill:). I think we already have the module and the category like Category:Coordinates not on Wikidata (Q15181099). Thanks! --AlessioMela (talk) 18:39, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Importing images from zh.wikipedia and de.wikipedia[edit]


there is a category on zh.wikipedia with about 8000 pages that have images, where wikidata does not have images [7] and a similar page on de.wikipedia with 1600 pages [8]. If these could be brought into Wikidata that would be great. This has been done before, see also my earlier request above about da.wikipedia images. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 19:14, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Replace values[edit]

Hi, I need a bot to remove any instances of member of political party (P102)  independent politician (Q327591) and replace it with member of political party (P102)  no value. This is to clean up the constraints page for member of political party (P102) and remove the classification of independent politician (Q327591) as an instance of a political party. Please refer to User talk:SPQRobin#Independent politicians for the rationale for this request. —Wylve (talk) 18:02, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Importing Commons Categories (P373)[edit]

Dutch Wikipedia has a nl:Categorie:Wikipedia:Commonscat zonder link op Wikidata (Commonscat without equivalent in Wikidata). From there the P373 statement could be filled. -- Pütz M. (talk) 23:13, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

In en:Category:Commons category without a link on Wikidata is even more. -- Pütz M. (talk) 23:28, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Add instance of (P31) from MusicBrainz Artist Type via MusicBrainz artist ID (P434)[edit]

We can leverage the existing links between Wikidata and MusicBrainz to populate instance of (P31) for the people and groups linked with MusicBrainz artist ID (P434). Specifically, the bot would add human (Q5) if the MusicBrainz Artist Type was "Person", and band (Q215380) if the Type was "Group". The reference would be imported from (P143) MusicBrainz (Q14005), as with the MusicBrainz identifiers. If User:Mineo is interested, this could be an additional task for User:MineoBot -- or someone else could take it on. JesseW (talk) 06:21, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

Insert categories from it.quote[edit]

Import from it.Wikiquote all the categories named Categoria:Luoghi... (except for those already connected, but they are very very few). Label should be "category of a Wikimedia project" (en) and "categoria di un progetto Wikimedia" (it). --Superchilum(talk to me!) 09:23, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done --ValterVB (talk) 20:14, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

bulk import Indonesian census data[edit]

Hi all. I made a fusion table from the 2010 Indonesian census measuring population of villages (where neighborhoods in big cities are also villages).

It's 77096 rows and structured data; is there a way for me to bulk upload this into WikiData?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ocky7 (talk • contribs). (Moved from Wikidata:Requests for comment/bulk import Indonesian census data--GZWDer (talk) 10:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC))

User:Michiel1972 might want to look into this. I remember him doing something like this on the Dutch Wikipedia. Take for example Kapuk (Q4201177), that links to nl:Kapuk (Cengkareng). That's a bot generated article with the same data from 2010. The matching is usually the hardest part, but looks like every village has a "Code desa". We should probably have a property for that (if we don't have that already). Than we can just import all the data from the Dutch Wikipedia and source it to the original pdf. Multichill (talk) 10:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)
I see that all site of "BADAN PUSAT STATISTIK" is copyrighted, so I think isn't possible to use the data. --ValterVB (talk) 18:31, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Items with inconsistent sitelinks[edit]

Hi, it would be great if someone could have a bot run over the items listed at the bottom of Wikidata:True duplicates. These items have at least one sitelink which another item also has (typically all of them are on another item). Because of the restriction that a sitelink can only be on a single item, these are invalid and the data stored in them is not usable by the pages that are linked.

A bot should go over all of these invalid items and merge them with the other item(s) that have these sitelinks (or just blank/ delete the items if they don't have any value compared to the other item containing the data).

I'll rerun the script which created that list today and publish the new data over the weekend, thus the list will be up to date again on Monday (or earlier). Cheers, Hoo man (talk) 08:50, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

A list like User:Byrial/Duplicates would be even more useful. Thanks, --Ricordisamoa 16:27, 17 July 2014 (UTC)
Sadly that's not possible with the current version of the script which we use to gather that list. The list on Wikidata:True duplicates has been updated now, btw. - Hoo man (talk) 13:30, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

copy names of humen[edit]

As the name of a humen is the same in every language, a bot should copy it to every language. Megascheli (talk) 15:31, 11 July 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there are several issues:
  • If the original name is written in Cyrillic and it got transcripted into English (for example), then we can't copy it to other languages based on Latin scripts, because the transcription is language dependant. (e.g. Q7747)
  • word order: there are languages with "first name last name" and others with "last name first name"
  • handling of middle names and nicknames can also be language dependent
In short, it should be possible to copy certain labels but a bot user has to be very careful by doing so. --Pasleim (talk) 00:12, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

Okey, maybe this can be done in languages were are no problems, such as German and English. Megascheli (talk) 12:17, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

No, German and English has different orthographic systems so as transliteration rules. --Infovarius (talk) 10:59, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Coordinates of headquarters move[edit]

This request to related to one of P625 constraint violations, precisely that item with instance of (P31) company (Q783794) should not have coordinate location (P625) as separate statement, but as qualifier of appropriate statement (mostly headquarters location (P159)). So the request is following:

I am doing this by hand, so bot can save my work. --Jklamo (talk) 11:09, 12 July 2014 (UTC)

UN security council resolutions : Wikisource links[edit]

UN security council resolutions are on Wikisource in English and French, and titles seem to match Wikidata labels (except for the uppercase in French). So when an item is a p31 of United Nations Security Council resolution (Q877358) the en.wikisource and fr.wikisource pages with corresponding titles can be added. Example : United Nations Security Council Resolution 233 (Q2573400), en:s:United Nations Security Council Resolution 233, fr:s:Résolution 233 du Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies--Zolo (talk) 10:19, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

@Ladsgroup: it might be similar to other tasks your bot has done, would you give it a look ?--Zolo (talk) 07:43, 28 July 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done Amir (talk) 13:03, 28 July 2014 (UTC)

Ecoregions and anatomy[edit]

Two tasks, that I hope are not very difficult:

import "id" as WWF ecoregion code (P1294)
from the "name" in the template get the corresponding item and link it with ecoregion (WWF) (P1425) (there can be more than one)

Thanks!--Micru (talk) 14:56, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

Changing "french actress" to "French actress"[edit]

Many descriptions don't use caps for "French". Sample: "french actress" for Q3369081. Others can be found with "Special:search/"french+actress", but I'm not sure how to select only lowercase "french" in descriptions. There is the same issue with other professions and nationalities. Could this be fixed by bot? --- Jura 08:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

US population[edit]

@ValterVB: a country with public domain public data, so we can try to use them. I do not know what the best source file is but at the county level, we have a fairly simple table with the years 2010-2013 here. --Zolo (talk) 15:10, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Zolo: Link don't work. --ValterVB (talk) 18:24, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@ValterVB:. Ouch, apparently, the table needs apparently to be generated from this URL:
Not very nice !
I finally found the same data on in a csv file
  • column I is the population at April 1 2010, from the 2010 census.
  • columns J, K, L and M are estimates for July 1 of 2010, July 1 2011, July 1 2012 and July 1 2013.
  • when the value of column E is "0" then the row is about a state, otherwise the row is about a county
  • when the row is about a county, the English sitelink should usually be equal to column G + ', ' + column F
There is a more detailed explanation here
--Zolo (talk) 20:29, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@ValterVB: Now I have work for this week end :) I add only census or also estimated? --ValterVB (talk) 20:45, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
I would add them all ! I do not know which one should have rank = "preferred" though, so I asked at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject United States#Population data in Wikidata. --Zolo (talk) 21:22, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: I'm ready, Can I add rank = "preferred" for Censusu 2010? For we haven't this problem, because with our lua module we can select more recent date or preferred date and other possibility --ValterVB (talk) 20:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
@ValterVB:. Thanks, I think you can. --Zolo (talk) 05:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Please remove the following images[edit]

Hi, I am adding images to Wikipedia and have found hundreds of mistakes in biographic images on Wikidata. Some images in particular keep coming back when they are obviously of no use to any page. They keep popping up in the image suggestions, when there is no actual image, and really slow down the adding of images from Wikidata to Wikipedia. Moreover, the people helping add images get the idea that Wikidata is low quality. I remove them when I find them, but there are more. Could someone please find and delete these images? Thank you, Taketa (talk) 09:40, 29 July 2014 (UTC)

  • No female portrait cs.svg [9]
  • Kardinalcoa.png [10][11][12][13]
  • Bishopcoa.png [14]
  • Kardinalpallium.png [15]
  • Med 1.png
  • Med 2.png [16]
  • Med 3.png [17][18][19]
  • Arc en ciel.png [20][21][22][23]
  • MaillotSuiza.PNG [24]
  • MaillotNoruega.PNG [25]
  • MaillotPolonia.PNG [26]
  • MaillotPortugal.PNG [27]
  • MaillotKaz.PNG [28]
  • MaillotItalia.PNG [29][30]
  • MaillotEEUU.PNG [31]
  • MaillotAustralia.PNG [32]
  • MaillotCroacia.PNG [33]
  • MaillotCanadá.PNG [34]
  • MaillotColombia.PNG [35]
  • MaillotEspaña.PNG [36][37][38]
  • MaillotEslovenia.PNG [39]
  • MaillotAlemania.PNG [40]
  • MaillotFra.PNG [41][42]
  • Flag of the Papal States.gif [43][44]
  • Flag of the United States.svg [45]
  • Flag of Bavaria (striped).svg [46]
  • Flag of Germany (3-2 aspect ratio).svg [47]
  • Flag of Austria-Hungary (1869-1918).svg [48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58][59][60][61][62][63]
  • Flag of Greece (1822-1978).svg [64]
  • Flag of Guadeloupe (local).svg [65][66]
  • Flag of the Kingdom of Yugoslavia.svg [67][68]
  • Flag of Hungary.svg [69]
  • Flag of France.svg [70]
  • Flag of SFR Yugoslavia.svg [71]
  • Flag of England.svg [72]
  • Flag of Cape Verde.svg [73]
  • Flag of Italy (1861-1946).svg [74]
  • Flag of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.svg [75]
  • Flag of Martinique.svg [76]
  • Flag of the German Empire.svg [77]
  • Flag of Armenian SSR.svg [78]
  • Flag of the NSDAP (1920–1945).svg [79]
  • 600px Giallo.png [80]
  • 600px Blu e Bianco2.png [81]
  • 600px Blu.png [82]
  • 600px Rosso e Bianco (strisce).png [83]
  • 600px Celeste e Bianco (Strisce).png [84]
  • 600px Nero e Bianco (Strisce).png [85]
  • 600px Nero e Bianco (V sul petto).png [86]
  • 600px Bianco e Verde (Bordato).png [87]
  • Rose-pink.jpg [88]
  • Blu e Giallo.svg [89]
  • Coat of arms of the Central African Republic-NEW.png [90]
  • Logo du Parti socialiste belge.png [91]
  • Grammy Award Icon.png [92]
  • Fish icon.svg [93][94][95]
Hi Taketa, thanks for spotting this. The bot that imports the images uses the image in the page properties. For the first entry in the list, that's [96]. Pinging User:MaxSem, maybe he has ideas on how to fix this upstream, otherwise the bots will just keep adding these images. Multichill (talk) 17:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)

English descriptions[edit]

Would it be possible to have a bot go through the items linked on User:Haplology/a_an_the and remove "a", "an", or "the" from the beginning of the descriptions to bring them in line with Help:Description? Cheers. Delsion23 (talk) 20:04, 1 August 2014 (UTC)

Move values, qualifiers and references from instance of (P31) to heritage status (P1435)[edit]

A new property, heritage status (P1435), has been created for heritage monuments. Therefore, items in the following list have to be moved from instance of (P31) to heritage status (P1435) with their qualifiers and references.

Thanks. — Ayack (talk) 19:07, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose to removing instance of (P31), I don't care about copying. Multichill (talk) 21:41, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
@Multichill: Could you explain why you are against this, please? Subject has already been discussed here. Thanks. — Ayack (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
@Ayack: instance of (P31) can be used for any item, as a universal Help:Classification tools. Anything can be classified as such. This is useful for tools like Reasonator who can search the nature of an item checking this property, and generic tools can show the associated subclass tree. By creating specific typing properties we break that and it's not a path I would like the project to take, it will make harder to build tools and we would have to write a lot of specific code to do things like we did with instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279). Plus in languages like OWL, a reference in the semantic web, there is strong liogical foundation for class definition, classes are defined by queries about the properties of an item (eg. the Woman class can be defined as the set of human beeings with female sex). This could prove very handy and make the whole powerful enough without the need for specific typing properties. TomT0m (talk) 16:54, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose per multichill and me. I'll add this is an opposite work comparing removing 60 search above. If we need a direction, it's not really handy to go one step in one direction and the other step in the other. To be a little bit more soft, I'll say we can use class definitions to link the new property to the already existing classes : We can define the monument historique inscrit (Q10387575) (View with Reasonator) class by an equivalent of the class expression this class is the class of all item who are monument with [the appropriate patrimonial status property values]. TomT0m (talk) 16:59, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m: This is not really comparable with invalid ID (P60). The primary p31 value for the Earth or the Sun should be something like rocky planet and yellow dwarf, so that "type of celestial object" is completely redundant with p31. Not so with heritage status (P1435). The most obvious, and most informative, p31 values for the Palace of Versailles and Notre-Dame-de-Paris should be something like palace and cathedral, certainly not "monument historique classé. Admittedly, we can make as many p31 statements per item as we like, but putting everything in p31 is not really convenient either. For instance, if the Palace of Versailles has only "monument historique" as a P31 value, it would not be returned in a query for items with missing p31, while really it would be better if it did.
On a more structural level, I do not know know what the best supercalss for "monument histirique" should be, but something like "protection status" seems much more useful than "building", and "protection status" would hardly be a fitting superclass for the Palace of Versailles. -Zolo (talk) 17:56, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: We're conflating several things: The <protection status> class, as a set of status, and probably the domain of the protection status property, and the set of all monuments with some status. OWL gives us a method to link the two : let the protected palace the class of all palaces with some protection status. By definition this class is a subclass of palaces. So we can easily define <cathédrale classée> as both a subclass of <cathédrale> and <monument classé> in OWL. This saves headeachs by not to have to make sometimes difficult and arbitrary classification choices, and with a good query engine, if you query all the cathedrals instances, it will return also the instances of the subclasses. This is totally expressable with a class expression in the OWL language and a solid foundation for any classification of real world objects. As I like to say, those kind of class expression makes the definitions of a class by property not redundant : we do not have to choose beetween putting an information on instance of (P31) or in a property, as the definition of classes can be made wrt. the other properties values. Conversely, to class a cathedral, some human can conveniently only put in in the class of <cathédrale classée>, which imply it probably have a statement about its conservation status. This is very flexible. TomT0m (talk) 19:12, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
Of course we could say that. By the same reasoning, we could also say that there is the architectural style as a set of architectural styles and the set of all monuments with some architectural style. It would follow that we should actually have "instance of gothic cathédrale classée". Should we really create, translate and maintain items about the 10000s possible combinations like this ? The type of building has nothing to do with the protection status. Packing them in a single statement, and then unpacking them for analytical purposes adds a layer of complexity, and of fragility (every error in the subclass tree has drastic consequences). If we say that "monument historique" is an instance of protection status there is really no difficult choice. Items like "cathédrale classée" would serve no purpose and could safely be deleted.
"Instance of cathédrale classée" has various issues. A tool autodescribing Notre-Dame de Paris should say it a "cathedral", perhaps a "gothic cathedral" but certainly not "it is a cathédrale classée". And if the p31 value is "cathédrale classée", that would be very difficult to do.
"Notre-Dame de Paris is an instance of cathédrale classée" has been true only since 1862. So "instance of cathedrale classée" would be wrong without temporal restrictions. A "since 1862" qualifier may correct for this, but then we would have no p31 value for Notre-Dame before 1862. And so we would need to add a new "instance of cathedral" statement to correct for this. And then that would start to be real messy. --Zolo (talk) 20:32, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m, Zolo: What about McAdam Railway Station (Q287207) who have four different heritage designations? Create a instance for a unique subject is kind of useless. --Fralambert (talk) 15:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
@Fralambert, Zolo: Because we have some combinations does not mean we should have them all. Moreother to state that an object is an instance of several class we do not have to create an item for the most specific class we could create, we can just add several instance of (P31) statements, which will get rid of the combinatorial explosion. It's possible that there should be limit, I don't thik that really strict guidelines are really something we should fighr for when wwe can easily handle some of these class that may be of interest for some reason. There is a lot of monuments, there is less monuments that organisms decided to declare of interest, which make them particulars. TomT0m (talk) 12:11, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m:. You were proposing values like "cathédrale classée". Of course we can have "p31: classée church + P31: cathedral". That clearly requires less items, but it still suffers from the same issues. Even 1 type of heritage status with 5 types of buildings for each country requires 1000 items. And maintaining that seems tedious and pointless. And it also may cause some problems similar to that of Commons "intersection category". If you know that castle (Q23413) has many subclasses, then you know that items that are marked as "instance of castle (Q23413)" could probably use a more specific p31 value, that would better the type of building. But if you have subclasses like "classé castle" that do not tell anything about the building itself, that becomes much more complicated.
Actually, between the two, I like better the solution consisiting in using only values corresponding to a real heritage status ("monument historique classé" rather than "cathédrale classée), but it is still affected by the issues mentionned above. Plus, if you accept my point that it is more useful to see "monument historique" as a subclass of "legal status" than a subclass of "building", then we would have to duplicate every heritage status item ("monument historique" for heritage status (P1435) and "monument historique building" for instance of (P31)).
Sure there are cases, were it would be nice to have info about the heritage status in p31, just like there are cases where it would be convient to have data about a person's profession in p31, but I think it is swamped by the drawbacks in terms of readability. Using p31 for the "type of building" (~form + function) is already tricky enough, better if we can avoid a new layer of complexity on the values. --Zolo (talk) 05:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: « Plus, if you accept my point that it is more useful to see "monument historique" as a subclass of "legal status" than a subclass of "building" » Not only I don't accept it, I think this is totally ill defined and not correct. Do we really have a set of particular status, who forms a class of legal status here ? Then monument historique classé is a class of legal status indeed, whose instances are particular legal status. But then the label is misleadinq : it is referring to monuments, not to legal statuses, which suggests its instances are monuments. A better label could then be "statut de monument historique classé". Actually the item about the class of monuments already exists, see monument historique (Q916475) (View with Reasonator) , note that the introduction sentince of the french article is « Un monument historique est, en France, un monument ou un objet recevant par arrêté un statut juridique destiné à le protéger » which is pretty much exactly what I'm trying to express. I think the «Legal status» property is something different, it is more close in essence to a set of laws applying to monuments (or people, …). Note that the «monument classé» class is higher level as it regroups monuments with several particular legal statuses.
But if you have subclasses like "classé castle" that do not tell anything about the building itself, that becomes much more complicated. I don't really see the problem here, someone may add a more specific statement about the nature of the building as there may be several instance of (P31) statements. The combinatorial explosion problem ruled out, I don't understand what problem there is, having a legal status property is absolutely not mutually exclusive, it might not have the same granularity of the general classification system. The problem I see with discriminating the classes we can create wrt. instance of (P31) and the classes if that it is very subjective and that you can use a lot of criteria to class building. Deciding that the castle cathedral axis is better than the building is better than the material they are made of axis as main criteria is not up to us. But what's for sure is that the classe/non classe axis is of general interest : the article preexists. But I think that classes, as a generic mechanism, needs more specific properties (like properties expressing the intended usage of a building or object, or the kind of material he is made of). This indeed can help to define classes of buildings. This needs a little bit of judgment to choose them but I'm against hard principles like intersected categories are evil, the monument historique (Q916475) (View with Reasonator) proves, although it is the intersection of building and object with a legal status, that it is a class of interest.
I realize my initial position was maybe a little hard : I'm for the introduction of the legal status property, I'm just not for the deletion of every and all of the classes. I wold add that it as several advantages : the whole class tree can be presented using templates like {{Classification}} or reasonator, which alloas to present in a concise way with a granularity someone may understand : you may not be am expert in legal statuses but know what a «monument classé» is, the hierarchical nature of classes allows to presnt the relevants information at several granularities in a concise way. Good choices for classes will allow us to be efficient into presenting informations about an item in a useful way both for experts and nonexpert, maybe it should be one of the principles who will guide us in item classification.
@Zolo: One more thought That jist occured to me, about combinatorial explosion and queries : I don't think queries will be of any help in the forseable dev plans: we will have to create an item per query. Which means queries will suffer the exact same problems with intersections and won't help keep the number of items down. Therefore, as both queries and classes are associated to a set of instances in one case and results in the other, they are conceptually very similar and two faces of the same coin. TomT0m (talk) 14:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m: But if you have subclasses like "classé castle" that do not tell anything about the building itself, that becomes much more complicated.. What I meant is that the most useful subclasses of castles are things that tell you what type of castle this is. motte-and-bailey castle (Q92062) is a type of castle (a castle built on a motte etc.). But "classé castle" is not really a type of castle - it is just a castle that is at the same time a monument historique classsé. Suppose an expert wants to add better p31 values for castles. The most obvious starting point would be to look for items that are instances of castle, but not instances of subclasses of castle. If something is "p31: classé castle", it will not appear in the list.
We could also get around this issue by using classes like: "castle by type" and "castle by protection level", but that requires a really well maintained class system, and I do not think we should count on that yet.
This question is not really the granularity level but rather: what sort of information do we expect to find in p31. We have separate properties for the architectural style, the material used, the protection status. If we are looking for information about that, we should rather use those properties. Repeating them in p31 has probably some benefits, but it also makes a lot of not-very-useful redundancy and makes the structure of the item harder to grasp.
What I seem to guess from meta:Wikidata/Queries is that it will (at some point) be possible to make queries based on several property-value cconstraints, but it may not be possible to do queries based on subclasses. This would make "intersection items" like "classé castle" unnecessary - and even harmful if this leads some user to remove the additional "instance of castle" that would be of use in other queries. --Zolo (talk) 15:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: I think you don't really understand really well the foundations of instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279). We can totally call a type of castle a castle of a certain architectural style of some time period, because experts, for some reason, usually treats those castles together. The solution to group the classes in metaclasses is a promising path : It could gives good foundations to our classes. If an expert built a classification of castles using some criteria, we can regroup the classes he created in a metaclass, and make the classes instances of this metaclass. He could have used any criteria to regroup the castles, he could build a class "medieval castles" because they are very different from post-medieval ones, yet the information is redundant with the year the castle was built. Yet he built a class of castles, and <medieval castle> will be a type of castle in his classification. I don't think it is especially hard to maintain if we find good classifications in litteratures. Good classifications are built with some criteria, this criteria might be informations we already have about castles with other properties. TomT0m (talk) 16:27, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m: i don't know what makes you think I don't understand the foundations of instance/subclass. By type of building, I just mean its purpose/architectural pattern, not anything ontological. That would be the "dénomination" parameter of Mérimée's monuments historiques database (if you don't mind terrible ergonomy, you can find it at -> vocabulaires -> type d'édifice -> liste hiérarchique).
I am not saying it is wrong to use p31 for protection status (depending on how the protection-status items are defined), just that it is not convenient. If we have two separate metaclasses "building by type" and "building by status", that may be manageable, but still much more complicated than using separate properties. --Zolo (talk) 16:55, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Zolo: It's because you seem to argue that instance of (P31) is mainly here to add information about the castle that is not present in the other properties. Actually it is quite the opposite : What defines the type of an item is exactly its properties, and we only have a fraction of its properties in the database, and we regroup in classes items with somehow similar properties. Actually I would not oppose having a purpose and architectural pattern properties. Then if we can class buildings (not castle suddenly :)) using their purpose and build patterns. Actually this would make explicit which criteria are relevant to class those objects, even if it is a combination of properties, which is actually very often the case. I think if we do not reason like that this defeats the purpose of having a unique main typing property and we can consider almost each properties as typing properties. The merimée database hierarchical classification of building is clearly a classification choice : The class building first by purpose, putting every building related to the army in the same class. I think it's a legitimate choice and I would support having such a class in Wikidata, which in turn could be marked as instance of <Mérimée building classification class>. But other organisms could class building using other criteria or other hierarchy and that would be another legitimate choice. Another more technical reason, classes are used to be the domain and range of properties. If we know that a certain type of building has always some property, and that it does not follow a natural community classification hierarchy, then it could be technically convenient to create the class to express easily constraints about the domain and ranges of the property for example. If, this does not fit in Mérimée classification, for example if a property apply to buildings in a certain area, then we would have to not follow it and put classes for some castles that absolutely do not follow this scheme. In short I don't think that what you are looking for here to state architectural patterns or purpose of a castle is instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279) at all. Those two properties are more synthetic way of giving information about their instances : if you know an item is a human, this is a lot of informations already. But classes can't solely gives information not countained in the properties of an item, whether or not Wikidata is powerful or complete enough to know them. TomT0m (talk) 18:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m:. I do not think the purpose of p31 is to put things that we do not know where to put, but rather that it should be only contains a few values that describe most relevantly and most durably what sort of thing the item is. Just like we use human (Q5) for humans, rather than the tons of other things that individuals are instances of.
I agree that we should try to define better critera for classifying buildings, but the way the "type of building" (church, castle...) mixes purpose and form of the building is rather tricky. I think most people would still call a disused church an instance of church, but inferrence wise, it would not be really compatible with church (Q16970) {use (P366)  Cult (Q756820)
@Zolo: It is compatible. It's easy to make the link. Let's define «a church» «a building that once has been used for cult». That should be possible using a well grounded classification systems like OWL classes defined by class expressions (although it does not uses qualifiers), informaly at least. I disagree with your instance of (P31) intended usage, it should be more powerful than that and should allow different POV expressions. Even more advanced classification than just those for which most people would agree on. Even maintenance classes like we have maintenance categories. The question is whether or not those two goals are compatibles and what to do if they are not. Maybe ranking is a partial answer. I think that commons cat are a reference: I think our classification system should allow to do everything commonscat achieves, but in a better defined way. I don't think queries are the ultimate answer to this as both an index-style information browsing and queries have their usefulness, and because good classifications ARE actually knowledge. And sourcable one sometimes. And queries can be hierarchically ordered, just like classes, by for example inclusion of their results. Just using arbitrary queries allows us not to make classification choices. But maybe it would be a lost opportunity to express valuable knowledge in a well thought and defined OWL-like way, and profit the associated toolset and community knowledge (dbpedia uses classes a lot for example). TomT0m (talk) 12:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m: to me "use" would be most naturally interpreted as current use (for instance, a disuses church should not appear on a map of cult facilities. There are certainly ways to solve this, but it would mean using somewhat more complicated solution that "some church instance of church; church: use: cult". Anyway, this is probably not the right place to discuss it. --Zolo (talk) 05:56, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Of course, it's a simple example. But an illustrative one actually : in different context what we refer to a church may differ, which makes not so simple a single value instance of guideline. But in Wikidata (temporal) qualifiers can be a real help to model things : let define a repurposed church a building who had a religious purpose but another usage nowdays.
@Zolo: I guess at that point we can only act the disagreement. I am totally on the same page with Nemo_bis on your initial discussions on the Wikiproject page, I think the issues you mentions about creating a lot of items are not valid. I think OWL class expressions are a really solid base for a generic constraint system ( a little bit too solid actually as we can't use it yet:) ). I can fear emerging tensions between those who understand well our generic classification system and can quickly add relevant classes to items without a lot of noise and quircks and those who will take a longer path with a lot of discussions and all, with imho no clear really outcome, the subclass hierarchy here seemed really fine to me, the objects are classes, and we can(ould)? query them as instances of some metaclass. Maybe what would be important is to make our constraint system more expressive, this would make Fralambert's argument less relevant (Pinging them ^^), is there a Ping project ? this could accelerate the decision, we are not really good at decision making, which is why I enjoy the quiet generic path :) TomT0m (talk) 09:29, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

@Zolo, Fralambert: A more expressive constraint system will be surely welcome. Like Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1435 not realy work like I like (I don't want the subclasses of the item, but the list of item itself. The main reason that I approve the cration of P1435 is that the number protection statuses is really diverse. If you look this document between the page 57 and 63, you can see all the possible result only for Canada. There is actually 5 differents protection statuses for the Federal and 13 for my province (Quebec). The other problem is the is not a international register (or at least a international codification like (WDPA id (P809) for protected area). To have something for see result like[17%3A39]%20AND%20CLAIM[1435] is to much to ask? --Fralambert (talk) 14:44, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

@TomT0m: Is heritage status (P1435) a subproperty of instance of (P31)? If so, does it matter much to use heritage status (P1435) instead of instance of (P31), but with the benefit of having specific constraints?--Micru (talk) 14:59, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

Micru, there are no subproperties of instance of (P31). Instance of has the semantics of rdf:type and subproperties of rdf:type are not valid in OWL 2 DL. Emw (talk) 15:24, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m, Emw:. I played around a bit with the data in the past few days. It is true that using p31 as catchall can be convenient. See Template:Is a that returns true if param 1 is an instance of param 2. Stil, and even though they are not standard, I think subproperties of p31 could bring the best of both worlds. --Zolo (talk) 09:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Move claims P527 to P1383[edit]

has part (P527), contains settlement (P1383)

Villages and settlements in Belgium and Netherlands (and maybe other countries) which are listed in P527 claims should be moved to a new, (better) property for this purpose (P1383). A bot should loop over all Dutch and Belgium municipalities and move P527 to P1383. Michiel1972 (talk) 13:18, 5 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't understand how this property is useful. did not has part (P527) plus instance of (P31) <locality> statements did a good job ? TomT0m (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
True. The new property P1383 was/is in my opinion not needed, see my comment Property_talk:P1383. However, it has been used already on many items. So what to do? Michiel1972 (talk) 16:54, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
The settlements are not parts of the municipality. I would use contains administrative territorial entity (P150), but it can't be used because of a constraint. I propose to use P1383 or merge P1383 with P150 and remove the constraint. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 17:25, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
I started a deletion request because I think P527 is valid. (Wikidata:Properties_for_deletion). Michiel1972 (talk) 11:40, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Move suicide from P509 to P1196[edit]

There are 2394 statements of cause of death (P509) = suicide (Q10737) which should be moved to manner of death (P1196) = suicide (Q10737). cause of death (P509) is for medical-related causes, whereas manner of death (P1196) is about the circumstances. @Emw: --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:14, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support. Emw (talk) 11:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
  • Shouldn't "car accident" also be moved from cause of death (P509) to manner of death (P1196)? It isn't a medical-related cause. The manner of death would be "car accident" and the cuase of death would be something like trauma (Q193078). In the same way "suicide" is the manner of death and the cause would maybe be "overdose" etc. "Cause of death = aviation accident" should also be moved. 09:31, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
@ Yes that is true. traffic accident (Q9687) is also not medical related. And aviation incident (Q744913), capital punishment (Q8454), firing squad (Q216169), plane crash (Q3002150) are also not medical. A small problem is that cs-wiki is now using p509 in one of their infoboxes and I am not sure if their infobox-code will grab the value from p1196 too. Tobias1984 (talk) 19:09, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
No, "car accident" is more appropriate for cause of death (P509) than manner of death (P1196). The two properties' descriptions address "car accident" specifically. The difference between cause of death and manner of death is not medical, per se -- it is a matter of scope. See Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/20#manner_of_death for background. Emw (talk) 02:29, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Scanning off service as Roman consul[edit]

Could a bot read off en:List of Roman consuls, la:Fasti consulum rei publicae, uk:Список магістратів-епонімів Римської республіки, en:List of Roman dictators etc., and, where the name listed has a blue link, add, as appropriate, position held (P39): Roman consul (Q40779), position held (P39): invalid ID (Q629712) (consul suffectus), or position held (P39): Roman dictator (Q236885) (dictator), with start and end dates? As an example, I did one here. N.B. some individuals (e.g. en:Lucius Papirius Cursor) held office more than once (cf. Grover Cleveland (Q35171)). It Is Me Here t / c 12:29, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Change statement value from Q864 to Q11281928 for the property property:P360[edit]

on this list :


Ju gatsu mikka (talk) 18:25, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Doing with Autolist2 --ValterVB (talk) 18:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Ju gatsu mikka (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)