Wikidata:Project chat

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

Shortcut: WD:PC
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.
Requests for deletions and mergers can be made here.

IRC channel: #wikidata connect
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at August.




for permissions

for deletions

for deletion

for comment



Edit directly from infocard / infobox[edit]

@Candalùa:, you asked for this! A new feature, developed by vlsergey and putnik at Wikimania 2014 Hackaton: edit wikidata properties directly from infoboxes, like in visual editors.

Adding such functionality to your local language is quite complicated. Find me or putnik at Wikimania. -- Vlsergey (talk) 19:41, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@vlsergey, putnik: - Looks really good. And it would finally do away with the duplicated (actually >270-plicated) updating of infoboxes. -Tobias1984 (talk) 20:05, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
that's really, really cool… since many, many infoboxes do not even display wikidata properties :D
but, would not that be the cause for trans-wiki edit-war if people do not agree on birth date of someone ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 06:23, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
The reception to this at the Wikidata meetup was quite enthusiastic as well! Wish more of you were there!--Jasper Deng (talk) 08:00, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
What are these "standard(!) Wikidata JavaScript" referred to in the figure description above? I just went over to the Russian Wikipedia and didn't see a way to do it. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 10:54, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
@Daniel Mietchen: there are some JavaScript developed by Wikidata team ('wikibase.formatters.getStore', 'wikibase.experts', 'wikibase.parsers') so they are pretty much used as UI for editing. Check the gadget "Включить возможность редактирования Викиданных из карточек" in settings, it is not enabled by default. -- Vlsergey (talk) 14:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Some problems vlsergey and putnik:

  1. there is no way to add an edit comment
  2. there is no way to add a reference
  3. there is no way to delete a wrong value
  4. you can overwrite the value of a referenced statement, so the reference becomes invalid

--Succu (talk) 09:59, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

  • @Succu: the forth is valid for any kind of editor, and i don't see reliable solution. Sometimes values have references, but need to be updated according to reference update -- i.e. it may be valid operation to update the value withot changing the reference. May be we need some kind of "freeze flag" on reference, meaning user should update it if value is changed. -- Vlsergey (talk) 08:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
    Regarding #4 I disagree Vlsergey. Your inline editing input box could be
    1. disabled
    2. add a new value (as done by your script)
    3. warn the user that he wants to overwrite a referenced value
    4. gives the user a possibility add a new value together with a changed reference
    --Succu (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


Hey all! We're almost ready for the new Main page to go live, and I would love your help deciding which of the following two banners should be featured. For those who missed the initial announcements about having a banner, please see Wikidata:Portal_Redesign/Banner for further details. We are aiming to have our decision by next week, so please submit your votes or feedback by August 20th 16:00 UTC. Cheers. -Thepwnco (talk) 21:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Banner #1

Wikidata nodes navy blue.png

Welcome to Wikidata,

the free knowledge base with 15,388,714 data items that anyone can edit

Introducing Wikidata

Project Chat

Community Portal



Banner #2

Wikidata nodes navy blue.png

Welcome to Wikidata,
the free knowledge base with 15,388,714 data items that anyone can edit

Introducing Wikidata

Project Chat

Community Portal


Only these two? I liked the variant currently used in the draft you posted here recently better, especially as the vertical sections are colored in the WMF colors, while the different tones of blue used here now confuse me (the banner #1 design is still better than #2, though). --YMS (talk) 09:00, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
PS: In all cases, the banners might have to be crafted more precisely in the end. I can't click my own like to "draft" in my previous post, as one of the divs overlaps with it. And in the draft itself, the banner does not cover the whole black box on the top, while the word "multilingual" is not completely inside the banner (all with Firefox 31.0 on Windows 7, if that matters). --YMS (talk) 09:05, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

User:YMS is correct, the div's height needs to be corrected to render stuff below it clickable. I've fixed it on here and made some suggestions on the banner page; perhaps we should keep feedback centralized over there. SweetNightmares (talk) 15:37, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Regarding the draft: It looks to code-y and Matrix-y and 1999-esque to attract users imho. SweetNightmares (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Banner#1 is much clearer, for separation of content from background. My only concern is that the anchor/links are using whitish-underlined text, which is very non-standard. Unclicked links should be the default blue, if at all possible.
    (sidenote: @Thepwnco: Are we meant to leave our feedback here, or at Wikidata talk:Portal Redesign/Banner, or elsewhere? The Newsletter just pointed to Wikidata:Portal Redesign/Banner#Candidates, and that doesn't even mention feedback! Someone should leave some pointers. ;) Quiddity (talk) 18:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Prefer #1 Zellfaze (talk) 20:31, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Issues with Dutch labels[edit]

Is there any way to fix things like this with a bot? A list would also be a option. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 23:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't have the time to write a bot but the list you can find here: User:Pasleim/sandbox. In total, there are 2091 Dutch terms with such characters and 861 terms in other languages. --Pasleim (talk) 23:38, 13 August 2014 (UTC)
I had the same problem on French labels - which is te best query to get all of these, please ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:07, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I'll do it later this week. I'm doing some cleanup anyway. Multichill (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguations ≠ Names[edit]

I feel that there is a big problem that should be solved early:

Many entities about disambiguation pages contain the statement: instance of (P31):given name (Q202444). This is wrong. The entity is about one or more wikipedia disambiguation pages and not the name.

For example Julia (Q225030) is a disambiguation and Julia (Q2737173) is a name. Entities about persons should point given name (P735) to the later and not the former.

It would save a lot of later trouble if we remove all instance of (P31):given name (Q202444) from all entities that also have instance of (P31):Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410).

If needed, entities about the names can be created. But we should not point other entities to disambiguations. In fact, disambiguations should not have any other statement, and other entities should not point to them. -geraki talk 08:38, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

These problem are resulting from Wikidata Game. But there is also one more related problem, sometimes there is a difference between wikis, when some wiki connected to one item has real article about given name (or surname) and another has just disambiguation or even some border case (disambiguation with one sentence about given name or surname. --Jklamo (talk) 08:52, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't believe it is from Wikidata Game but from:
  1. wikis that were categorizing disambiguations into categories about names. This was the case (for a short period) in el.wikipedia.
  2. users who want to put given name (P735) in some person. They point to the disambig and they put instance of (P31):given name (Q202444) on it, instead of creating another entity about the name.
  3. and of course wrong interwiki.
-geraki talk 08:57, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
There was problem in enwikipedia, where almost all articles about names have some {{disambig}} template (e.g. Amalie (Q4739413)) JAn Dudík (talk) 11:25, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Maybe the following could help us sort them out:

  • pages marked "disambiguation" in Wikipedia should only be linked to "disambiguation" items
  • disambiguation items shouldn't be used in statements
  • disambiguation items shouldn't include "instance of: given name"
  • items for first names should be created (for use in P735). They can include interwikis to articles about first names (but not disambiguation pages).

There is work to do .. --- Jura 03:34, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Also see on this (Wikidata tagging issue) and Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2014/05#What_statement_.28instance_of.29_to_use_for_anthroponymy_articles.3F. Basically the Wikidata game decided to treat name articles different from the English Wikipedia manual of style. --Bthfan (talk) 07:17, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
we have set index (Q15623926) for enwiki's set index articles. but i don't know if it is used by Magnus' game. Holger1959 (talk) 07:33, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I think this issue is a little more complicated than we're letting on. What happens if one Wikipedia separates the article about the name from the disambiguation page while another wiki puts them all in one? Where should the interwiki links be stored to make things clearer to users and readers? How do we connect the two items? Also, sometimes wikis have a disambiguation pages devoted to people with a certain given name, in addition to the general disambiguation page... Cbrown1023 talk 02:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, in some way the goals of Wikipedia and Wikidata conflict here. Wikidata needs an item to be exactly about one topic, some Wikipedia authors/articles use interlanguage links in a "see also in [another language]" way. I think we may need some way in Wikipedia/Wikidata to point to other items/article links in a "see also" way. Interlanguage links of those items would then be displayed under the normal language links on a Wikipedia page. --Bthfan (talk) 18:54, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
  • If one language mixes article elements into disambiguation pages, we should keep treating that as a disambiguation page. Otherwise articles in other languages keep getting mixed with disambiguation pages. Maybe we could find a way to link first name items from disambiguation items. That way languages that want to combine them, could do so. --- Jura 03:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia link[edit]

Was checking to see if a template documentation page on Wikipedia needed an update and came across one thing that may be of concern. In the w:Template:Sister project links/doc#Default display section resides:
However, voy (Wikivoyage) only displays by default if the entity type on Wikidata is "geographical feature".
That link is to Wikidata page Property:P107, which has been titled "(OBSOLETE) main type (GND) (P107) ", and is further described:
** Do not use ** Due to be deleted. Please use instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279)
I'm not sure if we should stay with the P107 page (probably not) or if there is a better link, such as Property:P31, or Property:P279, or perhaps even Geographical object ("geographical feature" on Wikipedia). Also, P107 is used within the template itself as {{#property:P107}}, and we may need a replacement for that, as well. Can you provide guidance in regard to the best link and function that we can use for this purpose? – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 20:21, 14 August 2014 (UTC) 21:46, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Update: I have asked these questions on the property P107 talk page and am providing this update to avoid a forked discussion. Joys! – Paine Ellsworth CLIMAX! 22:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

ISO-639 properties[edit]

Hi there. I want to add metadata from the ISO 639-1–3 standards. My first impression is we'd need these language properties:

Property Data Type Description Notes
ISO 639-1 code String identifier for a language defined in ISO 639-1. ✓ exists.
ISO 639-2 code String identifier for a language defined in ISO 639-2. ✓ exists.
ISO 639-3 code String identifier for a language defined in ISO 639-3. ✓ exists.
Wikimedia language code String language code as used by Wikimedia projects. ✓ exists.
number of speakers Quantity number of people who speak a language. ✓ exists; from Ethnologue.
part of Item subject is a part of that object. ✓ exists; used for the language family.
ISO 639-2/B code String bibliographic identifier for a language defined in ISO 639-2. ✘ doesn't exist yet.
ISO 639 scope String/Item? the language scope as defined by the ISO 639 standards. ✘ doesn't exist yet; see Scope of denotation for language identifiers. Valid values: individual, dialect, macrolanguage, collection, reserved, special.
ISO 639 type String/Item? the language type as defined by the ISO 639 standards. ✘ doesn't exist yet; see Types of individual languages. Valid values: living, extinct, ancient, history, constructed.

It looks like we'd need to create three new properties. So a few newbie questions:

  • Do we need a separate property for the ISO 639-2 bibliographic code, or should we just add both codes to the ISO 639-2 code property?
  • The ISO 639 scope and ISO 639 type properties are conceptually enumerated types. Should they be [a] string values, [b] Item values like ISO 639 macrolanguage, or [c] should each language use is instance of with a type and scope Item?

Thanks! —Pathoschild 22:17, 14 August 2014 (UTC)

Re b) I'd use item values, not strings. Re a) I do not know what the bibliograhic code is. Could you explain? --Denny (talk) 22:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Re bibliographic codes — when they introduced ISO 639-2, many applications had already been using an older list of language codes. Rather than break backwards compatibility, they decided that the 22 languages with a different older code would simply have two equivalent codes. This meant that before exchanging language data, applications had to first agree on which list they'd use (legacy ISO 639-2/B or standard ISO 639-2/T). This was pretty awkward and I don't know if any modern applications still use ISO 639-2/B codes, but they're still officially part of the standard. (See What are the differences between the terminology and bibliographic codes in the ISO 639-2 standard?) —Pathoschild 23:02, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
How about ISO 639-4 (retired) 639-5 (group codes) both compatible (i.e. not overlapping) with the ISO-639-2 and 3 codes?
How about ISO 639-6 four letter codes?
-- 21:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

How to store dates as given in a source ?[edit]

Is it possible to store as a string the way a source quotes a date, as well as storing it in a date object?

I was recently uploading some images from the British Library to Commons, and it was not unusual to find a creation date for the underlying object quoted as eg "mid 18th to early 19th century".

One might store this in a Wikidata Date type as eg 1780 / 1735 - 1835 -- but it would be nice to also have accessible what the original source actually said, as a string.

Is this currently possible, and/or should it be made possible? Jheald (talk) 13:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jheald: I just proposed it because we need it anyhow for the names printed on books and other sources: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#printed_as. It needs your support! :)--Micru (talk) 14:40, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald, Micru: printed as is in this particular case probably the wrong approach, as this artwork is not dated by contemporaries (in print or manuscript) but by later specialists (art historians, bibliographers) using e. g. stylistic or other evidence. There are conventions out there, on how to turn such dates into numbers. You might want to have a look at Help:Modeling/general/time#Modeling of uncertain dates. --HHill (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
@HHill: on Micru's proposal I suggested "in original source" as alternative wording for this qualifier, which might cover both use cases.
If anyone's interested the set I uploaded to Commons can be found here. Most of the dates were quite straightforward, but for a few the nested syntax of the Commons:Template:other date syntax got quite baroque, eg to express something like "between mid 17th century and early 18th century" can be achieved with
{{other date|between|{{other date|mid|{{other date|century|17}}}}|{{other date|early|{{other date|century|18}}}}}}
I did also quote the original source longform, in a separate field.
I made up my own central dates, just to get the category to sort into a nice order.
It is good to know that there is a manual for how I perhaps should have done it, but I hadn't known about it at the time.
Some curiosities:
  • "1769 and 1773" (for a page that contained two images pasted on it)
  • "1818 to circa 1830" (only the terminus is uncertain)
  • "1473-1483?" (ditto)
  • "1595 (1617 ?)" (said to be this, but actually might be that)
  • "Last quarter of the 15th century, before 1483"
  • "latter part of 3rd century" (does imply something different than "late 3rd C" ?)
Expanding the advice at Help:Modeling/general/time#Modeling of uncertain dates to cover more cases would be good (a detailed sub-page perhaps?) Also, it would be good to develop code snippets to automatically parse the full possible {{other date}} syntax.
But thanks for these really good pointers. Best, Jheald (talk) 08:57, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald: Why not to use quote (P387) in the references field? It seems more appropriate for what you want.--Micru (talk) 09:47, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
We also have earliest date (P1319), latest date (P1326), valid in period (P1264), and if you think a new one is necessary, you can propose it.--Micru (talk) 09:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Okay, quote (P387) sounds interesting. I must find out more about it. Remember I am very new here, and I still have a lot I am trying to learn about the Wikidata way of doing things.
Yes, I did know about the properties you've just listed. I just was citing these as some of the less straightforward cases from a real dataset, and wondered if there were already some good ways the community had developed to handle such cases. Jheald (talk) 13:43, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Time periods with uncertainty is a very interesting problem, especially when those time periods are different in countries that are otherwise in close proximity to each other. For example the medieval age and the romantic period in the Scandinavian countries.
The general problem has to do with uncertainty, error, limits, precision, truncation and datums, all of which lacks good solutions. Uncertainty has to do with your trust in the measurement, error has to do with the measured value and how that can be wrong, limits are bounds to valid values, precision has to do with the representation of numbers internally, truncation has to do with external representation, and datums are how you do the measurement. A carbon dating says 1234 BC but because you know the type of artifact you know it can't be more than 1000 BC. Datum is actually "BC" in this case. The error model of the equipment is most likely Gaussian and 3σ is lets say 300 year. That would put the artifact close to your 1000 BC limit, perhaps something within the limits [1000 950] BC. If you only want the century you will then round off to 1000BC. Oh, yes, and those numbers are according to your interpretation. And 2xyes, the model can be a lot more complex than this simple example and in other domains the numbers themselves can be complex.
What we should have is simple values that can be used for limits, and where a range with limits can be used as a value, and where each simple value can be assigned an error model, and we should use bignums internally and only round off when we export data. Jeblad (talk) 16:50, 17 August 2014 (UTC) (Sorry for the rant)
And I forgot context for the measurement, that is for example medieval time period in Norway vs. in Sweden, but that is when you must represent a value symbolically. You can for example have two items with a common class, or you can create a bag of all medieval time periods. Just to confuse you even more; periods in archeology, art, and politics isn't always the same. Well you get it right! ;) Jeblad (talk) 16:56, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Pinging @Random knowledge donator: because I am sure that he will have a couple of things to say about this :)
The thing is that here we are building aproximations, and not only that, but aproximations of aproximations, it is normal to lose some information on the conversion. I agree that the information loss should be as little as possible, but how much time do you want to spend reducing the information loss? I mean, at some time the law of diminishing returns kicks in, and all the effort invested modelling that approximation doesn't pay off as much as just leaving it at a "good enough" level. If someone wants perfection, then the most probable is that they will look for the original source, or for diverse sources, or for sources that we don't even list here. It is good to model some degree of uncertainty, but to become obsessed with it makes one less productive and the modelled information less useful.--Micru (talk) 18:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
It is simply wrong. You can remove the cruft and set it up with qualifiers (aka reified statements). That is how it must be done anyhow. Jeblad (talk) 19:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Problems between WikiProjects[edit]

I am trying to get:

  1. en:Wikipedia:Quebec Wikipedians' notice board to link with fr:Projet:Québec/Annonces
  2. en:Wikipedia talk:Quebec Wikipedians' notice board to link with fr:Discussion Projet:Québec

The first two are linked at WikiProject Quebec alerts and notifications (Q15868740), but the fr-link on the English Wikipedia takes you to the Projet:Québec WikiMag (even though neither of the links has anything to do with a newsletter). The en-link on the French Wikipedia works fine, however.

The second set is linked at (no label) (Q17480567), but the links don't show up on Wikipedia at all and the option to add/edit Wikidata appears to be locked on Wikipedia.

Can someone please help me? Fluidity between these projects in a place where 42.6% of the population is bilingual[1] is paramount (especially on its two most important pages). Thank you! SweetNightmares (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

@SweetNightmares: Hi there, hope I am understanding the problem looks like the fr-link on the English Wikipedia goes to the Projet:Québec WikiMag because the link to it is maintained in the actual wikitext of the English Wikipedia page (rather than via the sitelinks on the Wikidata item). There may be reasons behind this decision, but assuming it was ok to remove, it would be as simple as editing the English Wikipedia page and deleting "[[fr:Projet:Québec/Infolettre]]" from the wikitext. I'm afraid I'm not sure what the problem is with the second set. -Thepwnco (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
@SweetNightmares: me again - it appears that talk pages are never to be added as item pages on Wikidata (see this RFC for more information on this). I would suggest just maintaing the interlanguage links directly in the wikitext as done with the first set. Could you also please request a deletion for the item you created for the second set of pages (the talk pages)? -Thepwnco (talk) 20:28, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I see. I wasn't aware the interlanguage wikitext links still worked. I'll request those pages for deletion when I have some time later on today/tomorrow. Thanks for your help!! SweetNightmares (talk) 16:50, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

upcoming features and changes[edit]

Hey folks :)

We have quite a lot of changes lined up that are going to be deployed soon. Here's an overview of what's coming up. I hope we can stick to this but if there are any unforeseen issues we might have to delay some of it.

Tuesday August 19th
  • Wikinews will be able to manage its sitelinks via Wikidata
  • Wikidata will become its own client. This means you can for example add a sitelink to Wikidata:Help to the item for all main help pages. You will also be able to make use of the data in items on other pages in Wikidata with lua. (Arbitrary access will be enabled for Wikidata for this but when data in an item changes we will not be able to purge the page using the data yet.)
  • Sitelinks for projects with just one sitelink in the group (like Commons, Wikidata and in the future Meta for example) will be grouped together in one sitelink group.
  • Badges for good and featured articles can be stored on Wikidata right next to the sitelink. In a later roll-out we will make it possible to show them on the Wikipiedias and sister projects in the sidebar too. We will start with badges for featured and good articles. More can be added on request later. Thanks to Bene* and lazowik for this feature.
  • Redirects between items will be possible. When two items are merged one of them can then be turned into a redirect. This way our identifiers can be considered much more stable by 3rd parties for example. It will also make it unnecessary to delete duplicate items. This will hopefully reduce the workload of our admins considerably. For now redirects can only be created via the API.
  • We are introducing the new datatype monolingual text. This will allow you to make statements with a string and an associated language.

Please go and test these on and let me know if there are any issues.

Tuesday August 26th
  • The entity suggester will be able to suggest properties in qualifiers and references as well.
  • BREAKING CHANGE: We'll switch the internal serialization format to be the same as the one that is returned by the API. The xml dumps will also be adjusted then. If your tool relies on either the dumps or the internal serialization of an item page then it will likely need to be adjusted. (This is one of the remaining blockers for statements on properties and further progress on Commons support.)
  • We'll deploy the "in other projects" sidebar as a beta feature to Wikipedia, Wikisource and Wikiquote. This way you will see links in the sidebar of Wikipedia for example linking to Commons, Wikivoyage, Wikisource and so on. This can be configured per-wiki. Thanks to Tpt for this feature. (Wikipedias will get this 2 days later.)
  • We will make it possible to show badges from Wikidata in the sidebar on Wikipedia and co.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 18:12, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for this new features. I hope this will give new reasons for contributors to use WD. Just remain the quantity with unit datatype and the arbitrary access to another item to offer the full use in WP. Do you think these two features will be ready for end of the year ? Snipre (talk) 19:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm trying to find someone to work on units. (Any takers? Contact me!) Arbitrary access we will start this year. I hope we can also get at least an initial version out this year. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Great update! I cannot wait to see arbitrary access and units! --Micru (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I get “Lua error in mw.wikibase.lua at line 74: Access to arbitrary items has been disabled.” --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 22:11, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Where do you get this? What exactly were you trying to do? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
This is really exciting! @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): for the "in other projects", is Wikivoyage getting it too? --Rschen7754 02:23, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Wikivoyage already has its related sites thing. We'll need to figure out how to make that play together nicely. But I think in the long run we can replace that. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Good news! @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE):, does the change in internal serialization format affect the entity objects given to clients using mw.wikibase.getEntityObject in Lua modules? If so, you are likely to break fetching of Wikidata data in the Wikipedias. Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 05:11, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
No that should not be affected. The Lua part that will be affected is the usage on Lua here on Wikidata itself to fetch data from items in a hackish way. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Arbitrary access doesn't work on test2wiki Lua doesn't work on testwikidata Where can be tested these things? --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 09:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@JulesWinnfield-hu: arbitary access has been enabled on .--Snaevar (talk) 13:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@Snaevar, Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): I get the same error “Lua error in mw.wikibase.lua at line 74: Access to arbitrary items has been disabled.” there too. Wikidata related tests are on test2wiki. Could you please enable also on test2wiki? So far works nowhere. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 17:36, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
The features are not being enabled until Tuesday. John F. Lewis (talk) 17:38, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
@John F. Lewis, Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): Well, it's after Tuesday and nothing changed. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 08:41, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Have you tried to purge the page (?action=purge)? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:06, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Finally I've seen it here on Wikidata. Thank you. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 09:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Does anybody know if arbitrary access has been enabled on the test version of Commons? Or would it be best for the time being to use for templates for future use on Commons? Jheald (talk) 13:48, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
It is only enabled on - not on any other wiki yet. And it will only be enabled on next week. Sorry if that was unclear. So what you will be able to do is access the data of an item on another page on this wiki. You can of course use this to build some demos on --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:40, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Good news, even if I don't understand everything and consequences on everyday use of wd :D
as for redirections, that's a very good thing as merging of items and rfd is really getting overcrowded, even without "The Game". --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:14, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
I know I'm late but this is great! Thank you Lydia!! --AmaryllisGardener talk 00:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

How to use arbitrary access?[edit]

I'm a bit confused, is the inclusion syntax in meta still valid? meta:Wikidata/Notes/Inclusion_syntax. I'm trying this, but I get no output. I'm also unable to create content pages in ns0...--Micru (talk) 22:17, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Hmmm it seems the patch for the property parser function didn't make it in :( I should have noticed this and mentioned it... Sorry. Tracking of that part is at bugzilla:68029. So for now only Lua and we'll add the property parser function with one of the next deployments. The ticket is on the board for this sprint. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:29, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Multilingual text datatype[edit]

Is the multilingual text datatype still on schedule, or has it been canceled? Consequently, should we wait for it or work on a solution based on monolingual text datatype? --Shlomo (talk) 22:34, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

It's still scheduled :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Is number with units coming first, though? --Jakob (talk) 16:46, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't know yet. I'll try to have units first though. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Badge colours[edit]

Wouldn't it make more sense for Good Articles to have silver badges, and Featured Articles, gold ones? It Is Me Here t / c 23:42, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Agreed. --Jakob (talk) 00:01, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
We accidentally mixed them up in the config. Will be fixed. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:07, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): That's fixed since, like, 11 hours or so :D Lazowik (talk) 09:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lazowik: I can't see the fix (in Q77). --Ssola (talk) 16:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Ssola: Works for me. E.g. dewiki has good article and has silver icon. Maybe clear your browser's cache? Lazowik (talk) 23:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Finally working :) --Ssola (talk) 16:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Two badges for one sitelink[edit]

Now is possible to attach 2 badges to one sitelink, see [2]. Do it have some advantage or it's only bug? --KuboF (talk) 23:57, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

That's intended yeah. In the future we will have more badges and it might make sense for a sitelink to have several of them. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:08, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
But I suppose article should not be badged as "featured" and "good" in the same time. Maybe should exist some groups of badges, inside of which only one can be used. But, supposedly, it varies from wiki to wiki. --KuboF (talk) 15:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Monolingual text structure[edit]

Can somebody please help me with lua access to the monolingual text? Special:ListDatatypes suggests to use language and value; but while the datavalue.value.language works fine, datavalue.value.value doesn't. See [3], line 134.--Shlomo (talk) 11:50, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

✓ Done The access is not through value, but text. Can somebody correct it in the list? It's a "Special:" page and I don't know, how to change it.--Shlomo (talk) 13:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Whyyyyy????? At labels and descriptions is (language, value), at snak value is (text, language). Why are there two implementations? Why had to be implemented for the second time? --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 14:03, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Bug in the UI[edit]

Another problem with the monolingual text in the Wikidata UI: when trying to change an already existing statement, I get the field to change the text, but I can't change the language. I had to delete the statement and recreate it with the correct value.--Shlomo (talk) 19:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Can you please post a link to an item where you had this problem? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:40, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Q13222899.--Shlomo (talk) 19:58, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Hmmm I can: Did you click in the text box? Then another one should pop up where the language is shown. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 07:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
That's it. I didn't click the text box, since I wasn't going to change the text, only the language... With a click on the text box it works. Not very intuitive, though. A little bit like the old Snoozleberg game - try clicking everything, something should work...--Shlomo (talk) 09:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Heh yeah totally. My plan was to have a separate field for the language before the actual text. However the current code makes that very hard. We'll have to do some major refactoring first. Until then this hopefully works. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
As long as there's a project chat, where we can ask and get a quick answer, it's not so bad. And I'm aware that there are many other important tasks to do...--Shlomo (talk) 11:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


Hello to everyone! Is there a help page about the basics about adding article to Wikidata? It would be very helpful to have one so that I (and others) could give a link to page instead of telling it all the time the same thing to newbies. --Edgars2007 (talk) 12:28, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

We have an entire portal for this at Help:Contents linked from the main page. We also have tutorials at Wikidata:Tours. Delsion23 (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)



Is there an easy way to get all Freemasons (as categorized in wikipedias) and store the information on wikidata ?

I found member of (P463) but its general purpose is to link to a specific Lodge - is it right to use it with freemasonry (Q41726) ? or is there a hierarchy that allows to retrieve all people members of Lodges as "freemasons" ?

Thanks for any answer and/or solution ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 12:59, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Oversight Access Request[edit]

Hi, per the oversight policy, I have to make a neutral notification notifying the community of the open request. Please feel free to share your opinions on myself as an oversighter at the request here. Thanks, John F. Lewis (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

Dates by century are malformed in English[edit]

See Q2473148—they are formatted as "20. century", while "20th century" would be correct in English. I know English has a bunch of different ordinals, but "20. century" is pretty meaningless to the average English-speaker. Innotata (talk) 18:13, 16 August 2014 (UTC)

same in French - could be "20e siècle", "20ème siècle", "XXe siècle" (as roman figures are generally prefered in French), but not "20. century", which is English, nor "20. siècle", which is not a French abbreviation. Thanks --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:34, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

List of articles/Qs[edit]

Hi! I searched in the tools but couldn't find one. Is there some tool where I can give a (long) list of article titles (including red links) in some wikipedia and it will return the list with their corresponding Qs (where there is one)? --geraki talk 07:06, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Announce: WikiProject Structured Data for Commons[edit]

The aim of of the WikiProject Structured Data for Commons is:

WikiProject Structured Data for Commons-logo.svg
  • To develop templates that draw directly on Wikidata (and in future also on Commons Wikibase), that will act as drop-in replacements for templates currently in use on Commons.
  • To develop new templates that can bring new functionality to Commons filepages (eg "topics" listings)
  • To support the cataloguing of particularly idiosyncratic templates currently in use on Commons (eg institutional credit/backlink templates, and other source templates), and try to produce more generalised, standardised forms that can draw on Wikidata.
  • To work with other WikiProjects on Wikidata to understand, document and develop the data models on Wikidata, and make sure that they are sufficient to accommodate the needs of GLAM organisations and others currently or in future uploading or maintaining metadata on Commons.
  • To start to port existing such data that can be represented in structured form, and is appropriate to do so, from Commons to Wikidata
  • To examine the divide between what should be stored on Wikidata and what should be stored on the proposed Commons Wikibase.
  • To support, as a user-space community, the work of the staffers developing Commons Wikibase and other aspects of the Foundation initiative for Structured Data for Commons in any way we can.

Jheald (talk) 07:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

"In other projects" sidebar & Commons[edit]

The "In other projects" sidebar is due to go live in ten days.

In this thread at Commons, there is some concern that moving to a strict category-category and article-article interwiki links model will mean that "we are going to need to create hundreds of thousands of basically redundant galleries replicating categories just so that links will work? That seems insane".

Does anybody know whether the "In other projects" sidebar could also be encouraged to show a Commons category link, when Commons category (P373) is non-null; or a Commons gallery link, when Commons gallery (P935) is non-null. This would win a lot of friends on Commons.

Alternatively, can anybody suggest another solution that might help (probably best to the Commons thread, rather than here) ?

Thanks, Jheald (talk) 13:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

We just do in on the Russian Wikivoyage: the Commonscat link is taken from P373 and shown on the sidebar.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems it links the category but not the gallery, eg [4]; while the English version seems to be hard-coded.
It maybe the category is the one to be preferred, if both are available. But does anybody know what the code currently in beta is going to do, when it goes live? Jheald (talk) 13:41, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, we indeed show only the category. But I am pretty sure it would be possible to show both (if needed).--Ymblanter (talk) 13:48, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
I think in general on Commons that would make a lot of people very happy. Jheald (talk) 14:04, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Heads-up: Wikimedia Loves Monuments UK[edit]

As part of the WLM UK project, I am currently creating 6,539 items for "grade I" buildings. These

  • are notable by default
  • get an English label, instance of ("grade I building"), English Heritage list number (P1216), country:UK. Coordinates and administrative region to be amended.
  • not currently on Wikidata, to the best of my knowledge

As to the last point, 2,775 items are already marked as such, but there will be duplicate items created. This is rather unavoidable, given it's me and my bot against the world, and WLM starts in two weeks.

Note, there will be a lot more "grade II*" buildings to follow soon, in the same manner.

Thanks for your understanding. --Magnus Manske (talk) 13:15, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

It's great to hear that this important task is being done. Thank you. The work I and others are doing, to tag objects in OpenStreetMap with Wikidata IDs, will benefit greatly. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:44, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Jewish Encyclopedia ID[edit]

Regarding the new property Jewish Encyclopedia ID (Russian) (P1438)

[ Note -- This used to say "Jewish Encyclopedia ID (P1438)" Jheald (talk) 02:22, 19 August 2014 (UTC)]

In English, and certainly on en-wiki, "Jewish Encylopedia" typically refers to the English language encyclopedia originally published in New York between 1901 and 1906 by Funk and Wagnalls -- see en:Jewish Encylopedia

This is also available online. Many en-wiki articles are derived from it (and translated articles in other languages). For an index, see en:WP:JE. Jheald (talk) 14:49, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

  • feel free to correct english description :-) -- Vlsergey (talk) 16:33, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
There's no procedure for nominating the main property label itself for renaming, then? Jheald (talk) 21:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Go ahead and fix it. :-) -- Bene* talk 17:33, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm a newbie. I don't know how to fix it. Jheald (talk) 21:25, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald, just go to Jewish Encyclopedia ID (Russian) (P1438) and replace the label with something more descriptive. Just like you would edit an item. :-) Jon Harald Søby (talk) 23:17, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Like this, then diff ? Thanks! Jheald (talk) 02:19, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald, yeah, that's perfect. Thanks! Jon Harald Søby (talk) 21:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Natural language generation from semantic data[edit]

Natural language generation is about how you produce text from some available data. There are several subfields, some are closer to usable algorithms (and code) than other. Wikidata will make it possible to generate quite good text, perhaps better than most bots on Wikipedia. It is extremely important is that dynamically generated text will not be a frozen snapshot, like text produced by a bot, but will evolve over time as the semantic data itself changes.

Is there anyone with an interest in NLG on Wikidata, and if so is there anyone with actual knowledge about some of the subfields like Content determination, Document structuring, Aggregation, Lexical choice, Referring expression generation or Realisation? Jeblad (talk) 17:13, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jeblad: The only work I'm aware of in this field is Magnus' autodescription tool and his work on Wikidata:Reasonator. (hope it helps, I don't know anything in those fields). TomT0m (talk) 08:48, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

False message: List of values is complete.[edit]

Since the last months, in some cases, the section "Wikimedia Commons page linked to this item" displays a message "List of values is complete." and prevents from adding a link even when it contains 0 entries. I think, its a serious bug. --ŠJů (talk) 17:55, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

See bugzilla:69671. --ŠJů (talk) 18:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Replied at the bug. John F. Lewis (talk) 18:13, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

Resource type[edit]

Is there any plan for the moment to implement a resource type that takes an URI as its argument? Not the URL stuff, but a real URI and a resource that materialize properties from the referred resource. Jeblad (talk) 19:59, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

We will likely need a way to refer to URIs for Commons, yes. Details still need to be worked out. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:34, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

Export of property values[edit]

Is there any plan for publishing property values through Special:EntityData? That is when will Special:EntityData/Q1 include a reference to Q323? Jeblad (talk) 20:05, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

That really depends on how you access Special:EntityData and thereby what content is delivered to you. The RDF export is not complete yet. It does not contain statements. So I assume that is what you are looking at. We will add statements to it. It is not an immediate priority however. The tracking bug for it is at bugzilla:48143. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:36, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

ISO-format date: Precision parameter[edit]

An edit, changing precision value to 7 (century), makes the date 1815-08-15 look as 18. century instead of 19.century. How to fix it? Sealle (talk) 06:35, 18 August 2014 (UTC)


Hi. Can someone create a statistic generated by a bot: a list of 1000 most ”popular” items (with most interwiki links) with articles existent in most of wikipedias but not in one certain wikipedia. A better explanation by a real example: in my case i want to know which articles exists in most wikipedias, but does't exists in If someone can develope such a bot and generate and update monthly these statistics for all wikipedias — this can become a powerfull tool for developing small wikis by creating primarily most wanted articles. XXN (talk) 12:31, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

There are some lists like the one you want (but not the one you want, i.e. not for rowiki) on Wikidata:Database reports/Missing links, but they're rather outdated anyway (one year old now). And with the Terminator there is a tool which does what you want with basically live data, but it's not available for Romanian, too. Maybe User:Magnus Manske can help you with that. --YMS (talk) 12:46, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
See above. --Jklamo (talk) 14:53, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Done, should become live within 24h. --Magnus Manske (talk) 16:04, 18 August 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. XXN (talk) 19:47, 18 August 2014 (UTC)

"List of" "Person"[edit]

The "person" property is no longer used; it is effectively replaced by "human". When there is no "instance of" "human" yet, "person" still has a function. However, lists of persons are no longer relevant because the "persons" they listed are increasingly rare.

I want to remove all of them. When people care for it, they can identify "is a list of" "human" and add qualifiers so that the query function in Reasonator can show off what we know in Wikidata. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Humans are persons, so it cannot be wrong to use is a list of (P360) person (Q215627) for lists of humans, albeit is a list of (P360)human (Q5) would be more accurate. So I don't think you should just delete statements of is a list of (P360) person (Q215627). Why don't you change the value to human (Q5) instead, when all persons on the list are humans? Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
In the old usage, a person is NOT a human. They may include lists and characters from books. So in my honest opinion deletions is obviously the best option.
Yes, a person is not necessarily a human, but a human is always a person. Therefore lists of humans are also lists of persons. There is thus no reason to delete statements saying is a list of (P360) person (Q215627). Change "person" to "human" if you know that there are only humans on the list, but don't delete the statement. Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 23:26, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
We can query for "is a list of" "human", we cannot query for "is a list of" "person". IMHO your position is theoretical not practical. We do use "is a list of" "human" to query in Reasonator; there are hundreds of examples for that. The person list only gives you the same garbage. GerardM (talk) 07:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
GerardM, frankly, I don't understand your argument at all. Reasonator is not a part of Wikidata. It is a nice tool, but we shouldn't delete valid data because of limititaions in a tool. That would make no sense to me. Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Do you seriously think that any more of this "valid" data would be created today, do you seriously think that anybody will appreciate it in any other way than as an artifact ? The fact that Reasonator is not part of Wikidata is ... questionable. It is however not a limitation of Reasonator that it shows garbage, it is an artifact of "valid" data. GerardM (talk) 19:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
There are two different issues here, one is the issue of validity, and the other one is the issue of utility. "Person" is an abstract concept and as such it is open to interpretation. It is clear that "human" belongs to the person set, but how many other entities will find a diversity of opinions. OTOH, the class "human" is grounded on its real instances, both define each other so there is less room for confusion. Should users be able to look for "person" and find humans and everything else that might be considered a person? Yes, but to achieve that the software has to get much better at inferring relationships, and that it is still far away in the future. For now it should be enough with the link human-person (which already exists).
Regarding utility, there is no doubt that "human" is more frequently used in statements, so it is more useful to query for that value. However I agree with Dipsacus fullonum that if some items have been identified as "person", they won't show up in any list. So perhaps it is a good idea to review the items that have "instance of:person" and correct them if necessary before switching the lists to "human".--Micru (talk) 20:33, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Who is going to do this.. SERIOUSLY ? We have better things to do. GerardM (talk) 05:21, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@GerardM: I did it, seriously :) Now it is safe to change the lists to "human", because there are no "instance of:person" left, other than in the classes, where it belongs.--Micru (talk) 12:38, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Proposed update works-editions[edit]

See here: Help_talk:Sources#Proposed_update_works-editions.--Micru (talk) 08:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

pb with moving link[edit]

Hi, I removed srwiki link on Alania (Q200062), which is a disambiguation page, but could not link it on the proper item Ossetia (Q106955)

Message : The external client site did not provide page information - could someone help me, please ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:29, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

I've added it with no issues. 14:33, 19 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I really don't understand why it did not work. The page on be existed, but my input was rejected as if non-existant :( --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

DraggableSitelinks is now a gadget[edit]

Try it out! --Ricordisamoa 15:28, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ricordisamoa,
I never could use this tool... :( - I'm not very intuitive with that kind of tool :s

how do you do it ? do you click on "Add a source", then the property, then drag the site link ? or do you just drag the site link directly on the link to create the property ? or what ?

thanks for explanations :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

new features \o/[edit]

Hey folks :)

As announced last week we just deployed a number of new features. Those are:

  • Wikinews is now able to manage its sitelinks via Wikidata. Wikidata:Wikinews for questions/coordination/...
  • Wikidata is now also its own client. This means you can for example add a sitelink to Wikidata:Help to the item for all main help pages. You are able to make use of the data in items on other pages in Wikidata with Lua. (Arbitrary access has been enabled for Wikidata for this but when data in an item changes we will not be able to purge the page using the data yet.)
  • Sitelinks for projects with just one sitelink in the group (like Commons, Wikidata and in the future Meta for example) are now grouped together in one sitelink group.
  • Badges for good and featured articles can be stored on Wikidata right next to the sitelink. We have badges for featured and good articles. More can be added on request later. Thanks to Bene* and lazowik for this feature.
  • Redirects between items can be created. When two items are merged one of them can be turned into a redirect. This way our identifiers can be considered much more stable by 3rd parties for example. It also makes it unnecessary to delete duplicate items. This will reduce the workload of our admins considerably.
  • We have the new datatype monolingual text. This allows you to make statements with a string and an associated language.

Known issues/limitations:

  • Redirects can so far only be created via the API
  • Arbitrary access on Wikidata to the data on Wikidata itself is only possible via Lua. The parser function still needs to be adapted.
  • Badges can not yet be shown on the Wikipedias etc. This will follow next week.
  • Diffs for badges changes have a link to a wrong target (bugzilla:69758)

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

In "Pages on other sites linked to this item", I can't find the code for adding a link to Wikidata, only a link to "testwikidatawiki". 09:28, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Katie is working on a fix for that. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:54, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

General proposal for names[edit]

Don't continue the discussion here but use the RfC Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/How_to_deal_with_given_names_and_surnames. 16:00, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Conversation moved per request of anon.--Micru (talk) 12:41, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikinews linking[edit]

First part[edit]

Today Wikidata launched Wikinews sitelinking and some bots are doing it wrong. See the original proposal: "Wikinews categories correspond to Wikipedia articles and to similar items in other wikiprojects", and discussion. Wikinews category ("news by theme") should be linked to the basic item (for example, with Wikipedia article). --sasha (krassotkin) 11:47, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I never did get any response to my query as to why the proposal asserts that something must be done. Nor does it appear Brian McNeil's query does not appear to have received any reply either. I don't recall ever getting any response at Wikidata when I've invited discussion of why involvement with Wikidata would be a net advantage to Wikinews rather than a detriment. --Pi zero (talk) 12:02, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I can't find any reason behind this linking, I think n:en:Category:Greece should be linked to Category:Greece (Q4367791) not Greece (Q41) no matter what is inside of the categories. Redirects shouldn't be linked at all. Amir (talk) 12:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh... you think, but I work with it for several years. OK. In Wikipedia - article by topic, in Wikivoyage - guide by topic, on Commons - gallery by topic, ...etc..., in Wikinews - news by topic. The only difference, that topic in Wikinews technically organized as a category (or as a portal for similar topics, but that's another story). --sasha (krassotkin) 12:53, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
We traditionally associate articles of Wikipedia with categories of Wikinews. See "sister projects" in w:Barack Obama#External links for example. --sasha (krassotkin) 13:03, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree with sasha, Wikinews categories correspond to Wikipedia articles, on french wikinews we try for several months to name the Wikinews category with the name of the Wikipedia article. Wikinews categories have to be linked with Wikipedia articles and similar items. On french Wikipedia, the link between the article and the Wikinews category is already in place, example--Mattho69 (talk) 13:11, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm sensing a logical disconnect here (parties talking past each other). En.wn categories (those that have been updated to it) use a master template, {{Topic cat}}, that provides, amongst other things, prominent sister links to other (so far, English-language) projects. These are constructed by hand, and the mappings sometimes require deep thought. Often the Wikipedia link is to an article, but occasionally it'll be to a portal or some other space — I think we've got at least one that links into project space. Matches aren't always one-to-one; indeed, I've been wondering for some time whether we ought to have a way to provide multiple links to the same sister. (I consider hands-on work with our category hierarchy a crucial part of gaining understanding of it and perhaps how to improve it.)
I've observed that ontologies used by different Wikinewses may differ a great deal from each other (in abstracts; geocats tend to be mostly the same, though there may be nuances such as whether or not Croatia is a subcat of Ukraine). And I've observed that ontologies for en.wn are often quite different from those for en.wp; it concerns me that imposition of Enclyclopedic ontology on a news project could damage the news mindset. A strong incentive to make Wikinews categories correspond to Wikipedia articles might ultimately be a bad thing.
This is not really relevant in Wikidata as subcategory is a poor relationship beetween item. In Wikidata we link items with a lot of properties way more precisely defined. An event can be a part of a story instead of a member of the category. We use classes to sort item using instance of (P31) to say for example that a specific war battle is a member of the set of all war battle. If we want to be more specific we can create the class of all battles on the current Ukrainian War. This is what we do here, there is few overlap with a news site, except we can help and give datas to build a chronology of recent or less recint events if needed in a news. If an event has a Wikinews article about it, then it will have an item and Wikinewsists will ae able to store informations about that event, the sequince of events that lead to this one, the previous election on the same office, the winner … TomT0m (talk) 17:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Pi zero:
I agree Wikidata doesn't relate to deciding whether, say, Croatia should be a subcat of Ukraine. However, the choice of what is and is not an entity — which does not come up too much in geography — is an ontological issue that does matter. For example, I remember poking around other Wikinewses with an eye toward our category Freedom of speech, only to discover that just about every Wikinews I looked at handled it differently. It's been a while, but as I recall several of them had (for example) a category Censorship instead of Freedom of Speech. These are clearly not the same thing; yet, for project purposes it makes sense to cross-link them. On the surface this would appear to me a decision properly left in local hands, not something to farm out to Wikidata. --Pi zero (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Wikidata is sensitive, it requires a 1 topic/1 item mapping, so for edge cases it could need a minimum of manual work. The original plan of the devteam was to use old style interwikis in those cases. No real problem for you then (it is not excluded more advanced solutions will emerge, it coould be possible to infer relevant interwikis by exploring the items an item is linked to for example). The ultimate decision remains in the hand of local communities. TomT0m (talk)
There's also the major wiki tradition (so I perceive) of lovingly hand-crafted material. I remember a Wikipedia article I worked on that required a customized infobox because it had unique properties unlikely to make sense for any infobox for a class of articles; and I wonder if that work will ultimately be crushed under the Wikidata juggernaut. In the case of Wikinews, there's a famous/infamous case where Serbian Wikinews boosted their output with a bot to import and publish material from public domain outlets, such as Voice of America. The theory as I understand it was that these articles would "seed" the wiki, drawing in people who would become contributors. What actually happened was that the Serbian Wikinews contributor base, which had been on the rise, dropped. The number of articles published went up and up, but the resulting news archive doesn't attract readers (perhaps because there's no reason to read stuff that's available somewhere else anyway), whereas in contrast en.wn's archive is a major attraction. There seems to me to be a take-away lesson here that the wrong sort of automation can reduce contributor influx rather than increase it (I imagine the difference between tools that increase and decrease participation has to do with the user being in control). So it seems to me one ought to be skeptically cautious about claims of contributor increase from automation. --Pi zero (talk) 13:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Wikidata is a tool, it's up to community to decide whether or not to use it. But it's not magical and won't write article by itself. One can even think that people who loves to gather datas and build Wikitable by hand, and stops when someone made their work easier lost their time before and maybe are not fit to write news articles (if you ask a real journalist if he enjoys purely techical tasks he might curse  :) ) On the other hand the time not spent to build the table is won to gather better datas and write better texts. Maybe if people do not do that it is that they … can't ? Your question has no easy answer. My feeling is that for a journalist Open Data is an opportunity for fact checking and advanced data analysis. TomT0m (talk) 17:17, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
The example infobox I mention was a case of customization not because somebody "liked" to do stuff by hand, but because what the article called for could not be done well without customization. That is, the table produced was a better product than generic techniques could produce. It seems a bit naive to dismiss such things with "it's up to community to decide whether or not to use it"; such things have momentum (hence the juggernaut allusion), and my concern is that the momentum would preclude customization in those cases that call for it, thereby preventing users from improving an article when they want to. Which discourages participation.
I don't see how Wikidata makes his work any harder. It will still be possible to build a custom infobox, as painfully as before :) TomT0m (talk)
Your suggestion for possible use of Wikidata for news... I can think of difficulties, of course, but I'm particularly struck that it sounds like a very sophisticated use of Wikidata. Tbh, the only uses of Wikidata I've been seeing discussed concretely have been simplistic ones that I'm concerned would do damage by precluding various kinds of improvements. --Pi zero (talk) 18:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
See what it is possible to generate automatically and dinamically from Wikidata datas : with Reasonator. This is just the beginning. Note the chronology of its life with dated events in the bottom. @Pi zero:
Annyway, we will always need people to feed the database with datas, press agencies don't write Wikidatas statements using the API. Or write articles (although Natural language generation (Q1513879) (View with Reasonator) is actually used in some fields of journalism, to generate news about sport matches from the minutes for example). TomT0m (talk) 20:16, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry, too long text for quick undretanding. But it does not make sense, that some Wikinews categories are linked with categories and some with articles. There is category's main topic (P301) and topic's main category (P910) for makinq relations between article and category namespace. The same was result of RFC for Commons linking. JAn Dudík (talk) 12:37, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • That this specificity of Wikinews. There exactly categories are "main topics" - "newspapers" by topics. And there's nothing than news in the mainspace or another item except categories for linking with articles of Wikipedia (or other projects). --sasha (krassotkin) 13:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

See example Quotes about Russia (ru) - News about Russia (ru). But there it is category in Wikinews. --sasha (krassotkin) 13:57, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Specificity ow Wikinews? Yes, Wikiquote are almost similar to Wikipedia. But in Wikisource, there are authors and categories. For Wikibooks there are main categories too. Wikiversity - categories. And Wikisourse is linked category to category. Why is problem linking category to category, if this is only on external site and in wikinews article will be all interlanglinks to main namespace in other languages? JAn Dudík (talk) 18:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)


TL;DR: Some projects restrict use of mainspace for things such as news headlines, book titles, etc. They use categories to detail a topic (such as Biology). Some use both (i.e. Commons). It is necessary to link primary means (that be a category, an article, or both) of talking about topic properly, so that readers receive most relevant content when they use interproject links. --02:58, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

TL;DR: At Wikinews, As topics are not main content (Biology is not a news headline), interesting content on a topic is stored in a category. If you'd like interproject links to work by providing interesting, entertaining read on the article subject from the various Wikimedia projects, then n:category:biology needs to show up at w:biology. No end users read w:category:biology. --00:50, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

That's a lot of discussion above, but I think it diverged from the original query. The original query was "let's link n:Category:Biology with w:Biology, not w:Category:Biology". The response was that Wikidata tries to capture data and this might be in clash with this request. I would like to clarify why Wikinews uses categories and does not use mainspace articles the way majority of other Wikimedia projects do.

  • (edit conflict)Biology is not a news headline, even though it is a good article name at other Wikimedia projects. At Wikinews, it does not belong to mainspace.
  • There is no direct match between a Wikinews article and a Wikipedia article (unless the event meets notability guidelines) or a Wikibooks article (unless someone accidentally happens to write a wikibook about it) or a file (unless there is only one picture in the world about an event), although there may be a link to a Commons category. Trying to match interproject links to Wikinews's mainspace is almostmeaningless — they only overlap where a sister project talks about news (which is quite done a lot, but is rare compared to the amount of non-news content they have).
  • For news on a topic, Wikinews uses categories. An extension is used to put a list of fresh ones.
  • Interproject links serve the purpose of giving a user media on a given subject. This means encyclopedic article, books, quotes, pictures, and news. News on a given subject. This means a few. A category is best suited for this purpose.
  • Mainspace pages exist as redirects to categories. We don't need to use them. They only exist for local links to work, which is ugly and is a side-effect. (I hope to think about smarter wikilinking at some point.)
  • Is there more categories than such local redirects? (I'm sure it's not the other way round; I'll post here when I have numbers).
  • Some language editions of Wikinews don't take proper care to maintain such mainspace articles. They don't always exist, and don't always forward to correct place (such as to a Portal: instead of Category:; the former ones are a remnant of Wikipedia way of thinking or an experiment in some historical past).
  • Is it technically possible to attach Wikidata to a page which is a redirect?
Yes, but not deployed yet as of 2013.

Therefore I can only conclude that

  1. We could face the same issue with Commons. The only reason they don't put all stuff into categories is that they have content interesting to readers, different from what browsing a category can give.
  2. Wikiquote could face this problem, were they to dedicate a separate article for each quote (this would make it possible to browse translations of proverbs, for instance). Only a category would bring these together reasonably well. --00:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  3. Wiktionary could face this problem, were they to dedicate a separate article (or Wikidata item) for each word meaning. --00:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  4. At Wikinews, for a given subject, there's nothing else of interest other than browsing fresh members of a category. It's the closest match to a corresponding article subject on another wiki. (Exceptions exist where another project talks about a big event, i.e. 09/11 maybe, and Wikinews does not have a category on it.)
  5. We appear to need to link stuff to categories (Wikipedia's Biology, Category:Biology would all go to Wikinews's Category:Biology.)

--Gryllida 15:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Could we link topic categories to articles?[edit]

Maybe can we just create a property (Wikinews category) like Property:P373 to add Wikinews categories to Wikipedias articles ? Or maybe some script can link automatically the Wikipedia article to the Wikinews category using Property:P910 ? --Mattho69 (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
The first thought doesn't sound. The second thought sounds if this actually shows up at Wikipedia, Commons, etc articles properly — where can I find examples of property:p910? (I don't expect a script need for that. Hm. That'd be surprising, as I thought that people tell what links where, and it starts working server-side.) --Gryllida 15:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
For example Euromaidan (Q15224558) (View with Reasonator) uses topic's main category (P910) to be linked with Category:Euromaidan (Q15262078) (View with Reasonator) . So maybe when someone wants to link Wikipedia and Wikinews on this topic the link can be made automatically between the Wikipedia article and the Wikinews category. --Mattho69 (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Mattho69I don't know all this Wikidata stuff. Could you please link this specific article the way you described and show me what edits you did (and I will look what it says in sidebar too)? --Gryllida 23:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
For now it only possible to link the Wikidata item with the Wikidata category item, like this. But what I suggest is that this link can be used to link directly the Wikipedia article to the Wikinews category, but I don't know how. --Mattho69 (talk) 00:14, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
It would be nice to figure out. --Gryllida 00:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
  • @Mattho69 First, strict logical equivalent of "something by topic" in Wikinews is category and there is nothing else. Second, Wikinews is a multilingual project. --sasha (krassotkin) 16:57, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@krassotkin I know that (I'm synop on fr.wn) but people are linking Wikinews categories to Wikipedia categories and I try to find a solution for everyone. --Mattho69 (talk) 20:36, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
@Mattho69 I know. I write not only for you;-) Wikidata is logical project. We don't have to come up how to bypass logic. Let's go to link:-) --sasha (krassotkin) 06:42, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Preliminary conclusion[edit]

Dear Wikidata residents and those of you who are adding Wikinews things to Wikidata,

I am a Wikinews contributor (English and Russian) and I know the project structure. I analysed the discussion above and a discussion with sasha (krassotkin) at Russian Wikinews (n:ru:Викиновости:Форум/Общий). From these discussions, to me it looks like

  1. For some language editions of Wikinews, The task here is to link WP's Biology to WN's Category:Biology. This is what end users should end up visiting in the interproject links in sidebar, as it provides relevant content. All 3 participating people (me, sasha, and Mattho69 (french WN sysop) agree on this. (For some Wikinews, a main namespace article exists and is not a redirect. Regardless of how this problem is solved, they will work the "normal" way of linking.)
  2. At Wikidata, from what I could see, such task may be accomplished by
    1. linking to redirect (ugly, and also not implemented/supported at Wikidata atm);
    2. linking 'wp:biology' to 'wn:cat:biology' despite it being different namespace (which is fine with me and sasha; it provides relevant content), or
    3. using the 'topic's main category' object mentioned by Mattho69 earlier. doesn't appear to be implemented either.

Therefore we can only proceed by #2 at the moment, and may look into other options later if the software supports them sufficiently well. --Gryllida 13:54, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

kowikinews does not have redirect to category on ns 0 (main namespace), so kowikinews is okay with any resolution (note: kowikinews is really small wiki with less than 5 regular contributor.) by Revicomplaint? at 14:19, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Added to the above. (A wiki being small doesn't mean that things should be done wrongly, and I understand that in this instance there is absolutely no effect of this problem solution on this wiki.) --Gryllida 14:28, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
A second discussion is now also open on this page, but it is about interlanguage links (which are a separate topic from this). --Gryllida 14:32, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Related discussion: i think, the best way to link Wikidata and Wikinews is through the Category item from Mikani. --Gryllida 08:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

An unrelated question[edit]

How is Wikidata’s interproject links currently handling a "HI! america is both north america and south america, but this project has 1 article about it all, and another one has two. what to do??" sort of situations? I have, somewhat long time ago, seen some similar situation due to language issues. I imagine it could also come up in Wiktionary where each word has a few meanings (and hence a few interproject links — one for each meaning, for instance). --Gryllida 14:19, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Explaining item development, sources, etc[edit]

I have written a short essay with the hope of bringing clarity to sources and items in general: Wikidata:Lounge/Growing items. If some part needs more discussion or better explanation, please let me know.--Micru (talk) 13:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Report on differences between birth dates and Wikidata[edit]

Hello, I just started my bot to report on differences in birth dates that has been harvested from three Wikipedias [1] you can find it in here, The number in parentheses means number of wikis which agree on this birth date. Obviously as the number is bigger the more it seems to be correct. You can use this report on fixing wrong birth dates in your wiki.

[1]: English, German and Italian Wikipedia. I designed it to handle more reports but I couldn't find any big wiki that uses Person data template or similar template widely. If I'm wrong please inform me to implement them too. Best Amir (talk) 14:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

I've had a quick look only at User:Ladsgroup/Birth_date_report2/99: there are a few cases where all three wikipedias agree, but wikidata is off. I suggest to collect those separately, as they should be easier to fix. --Marcol-it (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you did not get the news; this is the first iteration. Let us FIRST work with it a bit and let experience guide us. GerardM (talk) 19:55, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Maybe you did not get the news, we're discussing a user conduct policy. I guess he did work a little be and reports his experience to build the second iteration. TomT0m (talk) 20:22, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Amir : three wrongs won't make a right… maybe these wikipedias have copied each other… ;)
I've encountered several French authors, for which Persondata gave a wrong date - date checked in France, with French sources (BNF & Sudoc, but also Leonore)… it would be interesting also to check the sources of the wp different values…
maybe, instead of guessing using the nb of pedias that give a certain value, we should try and find in other sources (like library Authority files, preferably the authoritative library in the person's country, which is likely to have access to the best sources — local newspapers, necrologies… what do you think ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 22:14, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
You're right, I didn't mean it's okay to blindly change dates in wikidata that are different than the three others, they surely need to be checked against reliable sources. about the outside source, If they are linked to Wikidata somehow it's possible to run the check and even correcting them automatically (if the outside database is a reliable source) the best thing I can recall is freebase but because it's not reliable doesn't matter we check it or not.Amir (talk) 22:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
@Hsarrazin: heuristic (Q201413) (View with Reasonator) has proven to be a really good way to know what to start with (compared to go randomly through a huge list). Of course it can point to potential mistakes, if we have a good heuristic, it does not change anything to the verification of a single date. We do not have THAT much manpower :) TomT0m (talk) 07:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
ok, I had understood it the other way round… several values on wikidata, some of them from some wikis, some from other wikis — I encountered the case several times… :)
is there a way to indicate items that have been corrected ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:41, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I guss if a date have been verified and sourced, if there is no sources for the other one they can be deleted. Rank the sourced one preferred also anyway. Maybe Ladsgroup can suggest a mechanism to exclude items from the list. TomT0m (talk) 13:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I can work on sources in Wikidata. You'll have the enhanced report soon. Amir (talk) 16:16, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

About the talk about the three wikipedia and when wikidata is off, I think the word "separately" is causing this. It's not separate, it's a part of it now we have the report and only thing we need to do is filtering most prioritized one to check sooner than others (specially when this report is really big). Maybe someone thinks when German is off and the other three agree is the most important one. Getting sub-reports depends on people and their preferences. I will make a list of what I'm asked :) Amir (talk) 22:36, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

User:Ladsgroup/Birth date report2.1 is report on 3 wikipedias against wikidata Amir (talk) 15:53, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

just tried to see the first list and Thomas Robert Malthus (Q13526) : the wrong birth value is indicated with "imported from enwiki" - but the value on enwiki is right (and I fetched it with Wikidata usefuls) - what's the origin of the pb ? the bot was wrong ? or enwiki was wrong on 2014-04-13 ? so, what do we do in these cases (when the cited source gives another value than the sourced one) : just erase the wrong value ? mark it as deprecated ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 22:06, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Please note that the English article en:Thomas Robert Malthus have different values for birth and death in the infobox and in the persondata template, so the bot was not wrong, it just not indicated from which template it harvested the data. Maybe the birth date report could be extended to also report conflicting values within the same Wikipedia. I am certain the Wikipedians would like such reports for their Wikipedias. Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 22:25, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes !! and, eventually, when wikipedias will use wikidata-fed templates on their boxes, that kind of contradictory values in the same article should disappear ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 07:13, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Report 2.1 is now colored, red means no source for the statement in Wikidata, yellow means source is P143 (probably Wikipedia), and otherwise it's green. I also published version Report 2.2 which is version 2.1 but imprecise dates are filtered out. And Report 2.3 which is version 2 with filtered out imprecise dates. i.e.

Version Colored? Wikidata against 3 WPs With imprecise dates?
Report 2 No No Yes
Report 2.1 Yes Yes Yes
Report 2.2 Yes Yes No
Report 2.3 Yes No No

I'm looking forward to your comments. Amir (talk) 06:18, 23 August 2014 (UTC)


Maybe is necessary to decide how to use redirect. Discussion here --ValterVB (talk) 15:32, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

My question is whether admins can start refusing deletion requests in favor of redirects.--Jasper Deng (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I think, Jasper Deng and ValterVB we should discuss this matter here and not over there. --Succu (talk) 19:20, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
How about this: a duplicate item (which has been merged) may be deleted when it is new enough (let's say less than a week), because it is unlikely to be used/linked/otherwise relied on by external users. In my opinion, we should ensure internally that no item references a duplicate by fixing claims etc, but we cannot ensure external users do that. I think it is up to those external users whether they want to update references they have stored or to resolve redirects dynamically by querying Wikidata. whym (talk) 03:07, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't see the usefulness of deleting even if the item is new. Everyono will have to handle redirects in their Wikidata code as of now, so it's useless to delete. TomT0m (talk) 07:51, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
What if someone creates mistakenly a duplicate item. Then we will just turn it to a redirect? --Stryn (talk) 13:59, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
Yes, one situation, one solution :) Unless there is a clear outcome not to. I guess the only risk is invalid revert of the merge, we should watch the item un-redirection carefully. TomT0m (talk) 19:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Badges for Wikivoyage[edit]

I started the discussion at the Wikivoyage Lounge at Meta, meta:Wikivoyage/Lounge#Badges, because this is in the first instance business of Wikivoyage communities, but I think it is fair also to leave a link here for those who are interested.--Ymblanter (talk) 09:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

"#sitelink-special" Section Title[edit]

Question reported from Italian Bar. Last section title of the sitelinks is "Pages on other sites linked to this item". I think to edit italian translation with: "Pages on other projects linked to this item", or "Pages on other Wikimedia projects linked to this item". No 'generic' sites are supposed to be added, just Wikimedia site! Do you agree and think to edit also English and international version? Thank you! --FRacco (talk) 11:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

I know the new interface will solve the problem, but till that time... --FRacco (talk) 11:30, 21 August 2014 (UTC)
+1, ofc not the most important thing right now :) --Stryn (talk) 13:56, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Letter petitioning WMF to reverse recent decisions[edit]

The Wikimedia Foundation recently created a new feature, "superprotect" status. The purpose is to prevent pages from being edited by elected administrators -- but permitting WMF staff to edit them. It has been put to use in only one case: to protect the deployment of the Media Viewer software on German Wikipedia, in defiance of a clear decision of that community to disable the feature by default, unless users decide to enable it.

If you oppose these actions, please add your name to this letter. If you know non-Wikimedians who support our vision for the free sharing of knowledge, and would like to add their names to the list, please ask them to sign an identical version of the letter on

-- JurgenNL (talk) 17:35, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Process ideas for software development[edit]


I am notifying you that a brainstorming session has been started on Meta to help the Wikimedia Foundation increase and better affect community participation in software development across all wiki projects. Basically, how can you be more involved in helping to create features on Wikimedia projects? We are inviting all interested users to voice their ideas on how communities can be more involved and informed in the product development process at the Wikimedia Foundation.

I and the rest of my team welcome you to participate. We hope to see you on Meta.

Kind regards, -- Rdicerb (WMF) talk 22:15, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

--This message was sent using MassMessage. Was there an error? Report it!

The new Main page is coming![edit]

Hi all,

This is an announcement to say that the new Wikidata Main page is almost ready to launch! Please have a look at Wikidata:Portal_Redesign/draft to see what it will look like and to leave any last-minute concerns before it goes live early next week. You can leave feedback by replying to this message or by editing a new section I've created specifically for the purpose: Wikidata_talk:Portal_Redesign/draft#Final_feedback_can_be_left_here

Layout and design changes
Please also see Wikidata:Portal_Redesign/Summary_of_Feedback for a summary of general feedback related to the Main page redesign. Some of the feedback has since been addressed and therefore the current draft will not reflect some of the comments.

We're going to launch with the black banner (as is featured currently on the draft page). A summary of the feedback related to the proposed banners which provides some context for this decision can be found at Wikidata:Portal_Redesign/Banner#Summary_of_all_feedback. Please keep in mind that the banner is not intended to be permanent. It can be changed at a later time and substituted with a new banner (or banners), as was stated from the beginning of the redesign process.

Featured content
You may notice that there is a new "Discover" section which is intended to showcase innovative applications and contributions from the Wikidata community. The Wikidata tempo-spatial display tool is slated to be the first featured content. Please note that this too is only temporary and that the section's content will be updated regularly as per discussions found on Wikidata:WikiProject_Interesting_Content. If you are interested in helping out with the task of collecting and coordinating featured content for the Main page, you are very much encouraged to join the WikiProject—or just to drop by to suggest content :)

Languages & translation
The new Main page will be translated using the Translate Extension (the <translate> tags will be added once the page is live). As you may notice on the draft page, the language links now take up a lot less space than they did previously, yet *hopefully* are still prominent enough that they communicate that Wikidata is a multilingual project. If you have concerns about this approach or better suggestions for how to handle the language lists, please leave a comment.

Cheers. -Thepwnco (talk) 22:29, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on this :) The main page looks like an improvement on the original. Delsion23 (talk) 18:22, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Translations of monolingual-text properties[edit]

Monolingual-text property motto (P1451) raised some questions about schemes to provide translations in languages other than the language associated to the property value. It seems necessary to provide translations from the original language in cases like:

  1. the "monolingual" language differs from the language that most users will seek: Canada's motto is Latin ( A Mari Usque Ad Mare) while its translations in the country's official languages are much more commonly used: D'un océan à l'autre (French) and From Sea to Sea (English);
  2. the "monolingual" language is non alphabetical (ᓄᓇᕗᑦ ᓴᙱᓂᕗᑦ for Nunavut).

I initially defined multiple instances of the property, using preferred ranking to highlight the "original language" version. Fralambert proposed to rather use a single property value, and use qualifiers for its translations, something like a "translation" property (another monolingual-text property?) for each translation deemed applicable. Does anyone know if such a qualifier already exists? Or propose other schemes?

Actually having to supply translations for monolingual-text properties somewhat defeats the purpose of the type. Can anyone shed some light of the rationale behind the creation of that type? I know earlier discussions touched this subject. LaddΩ chat ;) 23:20, 21 August 2014 (UTC)

@Laddo: related discussion in this RfC. We should extend its scope. Shortly, I guess labels of an item can be translations, where the original script of a Chinese name has to be a monolingual value. Maybe pin yin tranliterations also. But let's continue on the RfC. TomT0m (talk) 09:17, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
For those interested, it seems that the "multilingual" datatype was explicitly designed to provide translations for properties. A qualifier of multilingual type would fulfill this purpose on monolingual text properties. LaddΩ chat ;) 23:40, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Using badges for article quality and importance[edit]

In "Wikipedia Importence" and "Quality rating" section of Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/21, It's suggested to store quality and importance data via budges. I have created A-Class articles (Q17580678), B-Class articles (Q17580679), C-Class articles (Q17580680), Top-importance articles (Q17580682) (and will create the rest when consensus reached). Please comment before these being supported by software.--GZWDer (talk) 05:10, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Shouldn't we already have items for e.g. en:WP:GA? Can't we use those?--Jasper Deng (talk) 06:48, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
The only discussion about why don't we use those items I've seen here: Talk:Q17437796. --Stryn (talk) 07:43, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Doesn't the importance of an article depend on which WikiProject is rating it? Sometimes even the class of the article (below GA) varies depending on WikiProject standards. A top importance stub class for one may be a low importance start class for another. 07:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

Another breaking change in update[edit]

  • "Error: Unknown dependency: wikibase.parsers"

Guys, since some other people began to use your API, please, provide sufficient information during updates about such changes. -- Vlsergey (talk) 11:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

@Vlsergey: Excuse me what are you talking about ? This seriously lacks context :) Which API, which language (PHP lua ?), which code ? Public or private API ? and I guess you want to post on WD:DEVS. TomT0m (talk) 11:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Sorry about that. It is JavaScript module (i.e. module for ResourceLoader) that WAS available on client wikis as part of Wikidata Client extension. Currently all JavaScript gadgets that requires "wikibase.parsers" are failed to load (and also prevent other modules from loading... but i will fix that). -- Vlsergey (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi, breaking changes are always reports to wikidata-tech with advanced warning with regards to deployment. They are usually announced before even being merged really. It is recommened people subscribe to that list if they are running bots, maintaining modules, want to just keep to keep date with the technical changes etc. John F. Lewis (talk) 15:00, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

n: interwiki link import bot[edit]

Is there/will there be a bot for importing inter-language links between n: news items to Wikidata, where these already exist? I see there's been some discussion about how n: articles are hardly ever going to overlap with w: articles, but I don't really see why that's a problem; i.e. why Wikidata can't service n:'s inter-language links anyway, even if these do sit in Q-items largely disjoint from w:'s. I've done a few by hand (e.g. Actor and comic Robin Williams found dead at 63 (Q17582451)), but it would be nice for a bot to automate the process.

As a heads-up in case a bot hasn't been planned yet, such a bot would need editprotected rights at (I'm guessing all) Wikinews projects, since Wikinews articles get protected after a certain period of time. It Is Me Here t / c 12:03, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

En.wn certainly protects their archives. I think there are some that don't.
Note, en.wn is very wary of bots. The precedent-setting case was commons delinker, which routinely flagrantly violated en.wn archive policy/ I'm not sure we've got any bots with the admin flag, and it might be very difficult to convince the community to sysop a bot.
When Wikidata was discussed on en.wn, there was as I recall local opposition to using it on articles. --Pi zero (talk) 12:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Btw, I'd expect logical difficulties in using Wikidata for news article interwikis. Interwiki'd news articles are often not translations of each other, and when they're not translations of each other they're apt to be not quite the same story. One then has to make value judgements about whether they're close enough to warrant an interwiki. The premise of Wikidata as I understand it (and I don't feel comfortable that I altogether understand it) requires unique entities here that are mapped one-to-one onto entities on other projects, and I don't think that's a useful model for interwikis between news articles; in fact, I'd expect it to be more of a hinderance than a help. --Pi zero (talk) 12:38, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
@Pi zero: I have added a "subject heading" to Q17582451, that would be enough to later on automate its appearance in the corresponding Wikipedia article. By adding "instance of" you could also associate that to a query to show news about obituaries. There are many options for easing your work, it is just a matter of exploring which ones would be the most practical/feasible.--Micru (talk) 12:54, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Some questions:
  • Is this about interwiki migration from wiki markup to Wikidata? This is a process which is unambigious - it creates no links which didn't exist before. I understood that while migrating interwiki, no bots add links which did not exist before from people.
  • Should we migrate? To me it looks like that, even if the process remains manual like it should be, using Wikidata would be a benefit in terms of "I added ru interwiki to this en.wn article, and the ru.wn article already has it automatically and I do not have to add it by hand. Yay." sense.
  • Or is it about not migration, but about something enforcing indirect relationships ("en.wn → en.wp → ru.wp → ru.wn, therefore en.wn → ru.wn") after migration? Does such enforcement automatically happen after switch of interwiki to Wikidata? (It better not happen.)
I agree that linking news between languages should be a manual process and nothing should pick up indirect relationships like that. --Gryllida 15:01, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm not enwikinews editor, so I don't have anything to say, but for interwiki migration, I think a dedicated item for news and property for target item would be enough. (ps. kown does not protect article because it is archived.) by Revicomplaint? at 14:44, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
It's bad idea linking news through Q-items. Because the news does not have an equivalent in other projects. Further it can not be done with bots. We have a consensus on this issue in all language versions of Wikinews. --sasha (krassotkin) 15:30, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
I disagree. It could be on a dedicated Qid only for Wikinews item. by Revicomplaint? at 08:27, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
sasha (krassotkin)No, this discussion is about interlanguage links which only work within different language Wikinews; whether news has an equivalent in other project is irrelevant. --Gryllida 08:48, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Also see original proposal: Wikidata:Wikinews/Development#Interwiki links, and discussion. --sasha (krassotkin) 15:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)

NEW : Gadget labelLister, list headers of an item in all language[edit]

I've just launch a new beta version of labelLister that allow you to change several language at one go. You just need to click on a value, then edit it, then save your change.

To activate the beta mode, click on "Labels list" tab then click on "go to beta version".

Cordialy, --Jitrixis (talk) 14:59, 22 August 2014 (UTC)