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 September.


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)
There are some language wikipedias which have separate articles about the name 'Julia' and the list of people with the name 'Julia'. There are cases where some wikipedias have articles which combine the two and label the result a 'disambiguation' page, often combined with wikipedia articles in other languages where they are not so labelled. In practical terms most of these 'given name' and 'family name' articles are 'class' items, grouping together a class of items which have a common characteristic (they all have the statement 'given name=>Julia' or 'named after=>Julia somebody'). They are not like disambiguation pages where the only common characteristic is a linguistic similarity.
  • Rename the item to the family name
  • delete the 'instance of=>disambiguation page' statement
  • add a 'subclass of=>given name' statement
Filceolaire (talk) 06
49, 27 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)
@Micru:. In any case, it seems that the parser function would only return results in Wikidata's default language (English). Alternatively, you can use {{Data}} that is localized {{data|property=P569|item=Q76}} -> .--Zolo (talk) 10:11, 31 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 [1]. 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)
WikiProjects on en.Wikipedia can have multiple different ratings for an article, because there are mutliple projects per article. --Izno (talk) 19:01, 24 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 [2], 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)
Apparently, no one can... :( --Shlomo (talk) 13:48, 28 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)

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)

It doesn't. Wikidata would have three items for that - America, North America, and South America. If the individual Wikipedias would want to link to anything else then the exact match, they can still do so locally. --Denny (talk) 16:54, 24 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)
This is an old discussion. I talked to Base after that. If he wants to join the current discussion better if we previously discuss it in Ukrainian or Russian (it's easier for me). --sasha (krassotkin) 09:49, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I might notice that the phrasing here is ambiguous. What is a "category item"? Wikinews does gather topics in categories. Base, please share your thoughts on the above. --Gryllida 03:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Items with issues[edit]

On labs I made a list of items that have cross namespace issues. The Wikinews sitelinks on these items should be moved to the corresponding category item. Multichill (talk) 19:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Of course not. It contradicts everything that is written above:
  • We need to link the relevant entity. But topics on Wikinews located in the space of categories. Historically.
  • There's nothing in the main space that could be linked with articles of Wikipedia on Wikinews (for example, as galleries on Commons).
  • Wikinews categories aren't the same that categories in other projects. This is such "tag cloud" or "news by topic".
  • Wikinews many years linked their categories with articles in Wikipedia through {{Sister project links}}.
  • And in this lies was our proposal to Wikidata: Wikidata:Wikinews/Development#Interproject links.
But, the opposite side has no arguments except "I don't like how it looks". --sasha (krassotkin) 20:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Some arguments against
I am afraid that this discussion is messed and spread on various pages - what about starting regullar RfC?
JAn Dudík (talk) 05:30, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
These are not arguments but simple questions and erroneous statements. They are caused by lack of knowledge of the specifics of Wikinews. All active editors of Wikinews know the answers. You had to ask before start of your bot. Also it is better to ask questions one by one. However,
  • Categories months, days, and so on Wikinews should be linked with the relevant articles of Wikipedia. See: w:August 2014. Now, not all editions of Wikipedia have an article/(list in main space) about day. But as far as I know, this is planned by some users in the future. If such object is not in Wikidata, it should be created.
  • There are no concepts "category's main topic" and "topic's main category" in Wikinews. Wikinews category is precisely topic now.
There are articles for every day in some projeyct which are Main topic of same-named Wikinews categorz. -- 14:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Can you give me an example? --sasha (krassotkin) 15:52, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
  • I am unaware of experienced editors Wikinews who fundamentally disagree with that. We can discuss and argue about the details, but not on principles.
  • About ontology. Now, category of Wikinews is the same "category of being" that Wikipedia article or topic in the main space in any other project. On the other hand, Category Wikinews, it's not the same "category of being" that category in other projects. This is what I wrote above. We must link equivalent entity. Therefore, your arbitrary linking incorrectly.
  • Linking news with article is absolutely wrong (from example RusAir Flight 9605 ( Q1762806)). These are completely different entities. In this case, news reports about only one or a few related events, but the article talks about its historical development. Some Wikinews editions have categories called "Topics of ". See for example n:ru:Сюжеты 2014 года (Topics of 2014) and as part of its n:ru:MH17 (Malaysia Airlines Flight 17). The last category is the equivalent of the relevant article, but every single news from this category is not.
I agree to move this discussion on a separate page but not now. We must summarize and act in concert. --sasha (krassotkin) 08:21, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

And what about this alternate solution:

  • Categories on Wikinews will have separate items
  • These items will be tagged as P31=Wikinews category
  • Connection between these items and other categories and articles will be wia special properties "Wikinews category Theme" and "Related Wikipedia category"

? -- 14:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

krassotkin You're moving categories from category items to non category items. That's not how it's done here. Please cease doing that. You first need to get consensus, not move stuff to force it. We already had a pretty long discussion about this when Commons so I don't think that will make it. Multichill (talk) 21:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

  • I do it because topics in Wikinews located in the space of categories now. There was a very different situation on Commons and Wikinews. I know about the discussion and wrote above what is the difference. Moreover, I knew about it before made my offer to Wikidata (read it please). Anyway it's not good to make categorical statements, but arguments are welcome. --sasha (krassotkin) 06:23, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
  • @Multichill: Wikinews is a project who wants to use Wikidata. Wikidata does not have rights to define how Wikinews shall link their pages to Wikidata ontology. If some Wikinews project would like to link their categories pages to Wikidata non-category items -- it their right. The decision shall be made in own project community, not by Wikidata community. Wikidata community can advise to link categories to categories. Wikidata community can present instruments to use category-to-category links in the most efficient way. But Wikidata community can not prescribe how other projects must link their pages. Wikidata is building it's own ontology -- okay, go on with it. Build it, improve it, link it with other projects. But other projects are not building ontology, neither prevents you from doing that -- they are just using interwikis to create interwiki and interprojects links. -- Vlsergey (talk) 13:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

in other projects sidebar[edit]

There we already included the block "in other projects sidebar" in Russian Wikinews (see "В других проектах" in left sidebar n:ru:Владимир Путин for example). And now anyone can understand why it's done - we link topics with topics. There's nothing for what Wikidata needed at this stage. And it's the only one way we will be able to query the properties from Wikidata to categories-topics in Wikinews in the future.

We must continue to develop. So we need these interproject links. If we will solve these problems with another way in the future, we can move all of the links with bots.

I propose to summarize the discussion. --sasha (krassotkin) 06:23, 2 September 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)

There are many article qualities that could get a badge, for instance looking at w:Talk:Roman_numerals:
  • rating
  • vital article level
  • wikiproject
  • other
TBH, it would be easier if instead of a fixed list, the input interface was a free input field with a fixed set of allowed values (as now happens when entering a sitelink), that way we could have several items for all those qualities without cluttering the selection list.--Micru (talk) 08:01, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Badges are for info about the individual article. Info about the multilingual item should go in statements. For me 'vital article level' and 'wikiproject' relate to the item and all the articles about that item, not just one article. Filceolaire (talk) 05:37, 28 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)

See this offer in another edition: Wikidata talk:Wikinews#instance of (P31). What do you think about? --sasha (krassotkin) 08:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Infobox classes[edit]

I want to do some tests about data-based infoboxes, and imported Module:Infobox from fr.wikipedia. However, as shown in Template:Infobox Human/Test instead of a nice, narrow, infobox, I get an ugly bar that takes up all the page's width. I think this is because Wikidata does not recognize the class used for the infobox div (infobox v3), but I do not know how to solve it. Does anyone know how it works ? Maybe we could import en.wikipedia infobox classes ? --Zolo (talk) 14:39, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

The CSS for infobox_v3 is missing, it should be copied from fr:MediaWiki:Common.css to MediaWiki:Common.css. Mushroom (talk) 15:08, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Ok thanks, maybe we should use the English css instead, they are likely to be better maintained, and seem simpler as they do not contain legacy codes like 'infobox v2' in Fr). Can I just import /* Infobox template style */ from or is there a risk that I break something ? --Zolo (talk) 15:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
I don't think it would break anything, but maybe bring it up on the talk page first. Mushroom (talk) 00:06, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Ok done. Actually it seems that we do not really need those CSS. With Lua, it may make as much sense to define the classes and styles directly in the infobox module.--Zolo (talk) 12:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Please, add the badge for quality articles[edit]

Those badges referes to «Quality Articles» project on ruwiki and several other projects. Color of the badge can be green or white (not silver). -- Vlsergey (talk) 00:39, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

@Vlsergey, Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): recommended article (Q17559452)--GZWDer (talk) 07:56, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, this may actually solve the Wikivoyage problem of three badges.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:49, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
If there is rough consensus on this here by Wednesday I will add it. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:25, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Support of course :) --Stryn (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Support! --putnik 17:51, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Hey :) I just wanted to file the bug to get quality article added. Is this the same as recommended article? We have quite some items in Category:Badge items now. Can someone get some overview of this and see what should be merged? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Yep, it's the same thing, though I don't know what's the "official English name" of this. You can rename it to "Quality article" if you think it means the same. Swedish name "rekommenderade artikeln" is roughly translated as "recommended article", that's why it was named for such. For the category question, I think there's nothing needed to merge. --Stryn (talk) 19:05, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Now we got the Wikivoyage consensus: meta:Wikivoyage/Lounge#Badges. In Wikivoyage, we have three grades of distinguished articles, which are star, guide, and usable articles. At this point, we can use FA badge for star, GA for guide, and we need to activate quality/recommended article for usable. @Lydia Pintscher:: what needs to be doe for that? To file a bug to activate the quality article badge, and another one to show the badges in Wikivoyage? Or otherwise we can show the badges using the mediawiki extension, but the third nadge needs to be activated anyhow.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:36, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
If you could file a but that'd be awesome. One is enough. Thanks! :) --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:14, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Filed the bug.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Wikidata query query building templates[edit]

Hi all, just an announcemnt, I started working on templates to build Wikidata queries : see {{WDQ}}

It's not complete yet, but here is a sample possible query (inspired from a discussion on

churches with a national patrimonial status

It refers to all the items who are both instances of Swiss cultural property of national significance (Q8274529) and church (Q16970). (@Zolo, Fralambert: you could be interested) TomT0m (talk) 19:00, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I don't know totally how it will resolve our diferrent about heritage status (P1435), but it is a excellent initiative! Note that I was trying of program with your template CLAIM[31:(Tree[2065736][][279])] and claim[17:16] AND CLAIM[31:(Tree[16970][][279])] (Al churches of Canada with a heritage status), and it not really work. --Fralambert (talk) 21:41, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
@Fralambert: Which code exactly ? Did you use the subtemplates or just tried the raw string ? I will have to do some string escaping to help the mediawiki parser. TomT0m (talk) 08:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
it said every software developer shall create it's own compiler and it's own XML-over-SQL abstraction. Sorry, but original looks better. -- Vlsergey (talk) 05:37, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
@Vlsergey: Any useful comment ? The main advantage I see is to be able to express higher level constructions like easily add a clause about all the instances of a class. The ability to indent is also a good thing for readability. TomT0m (talk) 08:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
@TomT0m: well, "just don't do it". Consider it as advice, since there is no way to prohibit you from doing anything like that. And may be I shouldn't. I believe there is a lot information in Internet why you shall not invent your own bicycle, your own compiler and your own XML-over-SQL (templates-over-WDQ). Couple of those things includes: much worse readability; less error-proof; requirement to know both WDQ and templates to build them; requirement to reconstruct in head templates-arguments tree and compare it (in user mind) with plain OR N-dimensional query structure. Use XPath for tree-selection, SQL-alike for tables selection, templates for, you know, for text formatting. Higher level constructions shall be added to WDQ itself, and indent can be done at WDQ as well. -- Vlsergey (talk) 20:14, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Not very convicing, a request assuming some meaning to relations of the database will nether be implemented in the SQL standard. You're saying every problem in computing is solvable by a better assembler language. TomT0m (talk) 09:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
"XPath for tree-selection, SQL-alike for tables selection, templates for, you know, for text formatting"... there is nothing about asembler. But I can include it as well: "use Java for enterprise, C for core services, C/assembler for drivers"... Every task has good instruments and bad instruments. There is no universal instrument and MediaWiki templates are not universal as well. Templates, due to their hierarchical structure are not good for representing database query. Regarding "meaning to relations of the database" -- knowing that some property can be considered as tree-based, single function on WDQ side (expanding single item to tree using some property, like TREE(Q123,P31) ) will be much more compact and powerfull. Also it can include additional parameters like "levels to search". As you can see, you don't need to know about Wikidata business logic to express quite complex queries. -- Vlsergey (talk) 10:02, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Templates, due to their hierarchical structure are not good for representing database query Let's have fun, don't a query made of subqueris do not have a hierarchical structure ? Enough Trolling for me. TomT0m (talk) 12:00, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles about a position/office conected with a list of its holders[edit]

I realized there's quite a mass in items about ministers and ministries. Yet the problem is not a plain mistake on Wikidata. Several times there are articles on Wikipedias about a position/office, which contains a brief information about the office and a complete list of it's holders. Some Wikipedias describe such articles as articles about the office (with added list of holders), some as a list (with added brief information about the office). When we connect into one item articles (even with corresponding content) from different Wikipedias with various approaches, we have a problem, how to describe the item: instance/subclass(?) of a list, of an organization or of a person? ("Instance of a disambiguation page", which also is often used, is definitely wrong, I suppose...) If we disconnect them and make them separate items (which would be correct from the ontological point of view), we'll brake the interwiki link between articles with the same content in many cases. A reasonable solution would be creating items about both the office (=ministry), the position (=minister) and the list of holders, but link the wikipedia articles preferably to one of them - except there are separate articles for single items on the wikipedia in question. Does anybody have some better solution (I hope somebody has one...)--Shlomo (talk) 13:47, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

@Shlomo: I guess your "reasonable solution" is a good start. Does this item match your specification : List of governors of Norrbotten County (Q6621850) ? LaddΩ chat ;) 22:25, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Well, not exectly. It has two different statements of instance of (P31), which shouldn't occure in one item. Actually, it's more like an example of what I described as a problem...--Shlomo (talk) 14:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
A 'list of mayors of Foo' is an article that lists and describes a certain class of people. The corresponding wikidata item should be named 'mayor of foo' (keep 'list of mayors of Foo' as an alias) and have the statement 'subclass of=>mayors'. Each mayor of foo should have the statement 'office held=>mayor of foo'. There should also be an item on the municipality of 'foo' but I don't see we need a separate item for the 'town council of the municipality of foo' though these are needed for ministries and where there is a bicameral legislature ('Senate of Michigan' and 'state house of Michigan' as well as state of 'Michigan'). Filceolaire (talk) 00:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
First, we can't have a statement 'subclass of=>mayors', just 'subclass of=>mayor' (I suppose that's what you intended.) Second, what do you suggest to do, if some wikipedia has one article about the position and another one, which is just a (commented) list of its holders (e.g. en:President of the United States vs. en:List of Presidents of the United States?) According to notability rules both of them qualify to an item on Wikidata... Third, I think it's tenable to have a list-article on wikipedia connected with a Wikidata item describing the position; but I think it's not tenable to have a Wikidata item classified (instance of (P31)) as both position and list of holders.--Shlomo (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

In the past it was decided to rename the items currently named "List of" and have them be about the subject at hand. Many many items were treated in this way. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 14:01, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Redundancy in statements due to qualifiers[edit]

We're starting to have a lot of redundancy in statements due to an excessive (?) use of qualifiers. An example: Mr. Gimlet is the president of Tramtaria. It is noted on Gimlet's personal item with the property position held (P39) and the value "President of Tramtaria" (or "list of presidents of Tramtaria", see discussion above, or just "president" with a qualifier of (P642) and a value Tramtaria). Anyway, the statement has qualifiers start date (P580), end date (P582) (novalue), succeeds (P1365), succeeded by (P1366) (novalue) and maybe some others. The same information will be noted in the Tramtaria's item by a head of state (P35) statement, with the same qualifiers. And once more in the "President of Tramtaria" item, as a officeholder (P1308) statement, again with the same qualifiers. All three statements should be ranked as preferred. Later a new president is elected in Tramtaria; all three items should be updated. A human user probably will change the statement one of the items (rank, end date (P582), succeeded by (P1366)), assuming the new data will appear everywhere. They won't, and probably not even a constraint check would show that there's some inconsistency in the database. --Shlomo (talk) 15:23, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Redundancy is very problematic as of now. Editors should not be required to change the same information/relation at multiple places in the database. The main problem, in my opinion, is the use of inverse properties, which promote data redundancy. This prevents statements from being updated efficiently and prevents references from being added to statements efficiently. I also propose that head of state (P35) and head of government (P6) use the position instead of the individuals holding those positions. The list of all people who have held or are currently holding the position can be fetched from the position held (P39) statements from each individual. As part of this model, properties like officeholder (P1308) and office held by head of government (P1313) should be deleted, as they introduce data redundancy. —Wylve (talk) 16:02, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Multiple difficulties here:
  • One difficulty is to broadcast the "recommended" data scheme;
  • Typically I've tried to put some usage info in the "description" field of property talk pages (see Property talk:P6 for example), but again the same info needs to be put in multiple property talk pages... We shall eventually be able to attach properties to properties themselves; a "usage" property might be created for all properties.
  • In the mean time, one possibility is to ensure that our showcase items present the recommended set of properties, but these items are not too well-known either. Possibly refer to those on the new Main Page? We should just make sure that the few "politician" showcase items, Nelson Mandela (Q8023), Barack Obama (Q76) and Mahatma Gandhi (Q1001), are well formatted, though.
  • Once WD can provide easy data queries, we can get rid of inverse properties.
LaddΩ chat ;) 22:40, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Reading a diff about dates[edit]

I'm having trouble reading this diff where a birth date in the Julian calendar was added. The information seems contradictory to me.

The first line in the diff says "+00000001635-04-25T00:00:00Z (Gregorian)". Then it says "ISO timestamp +00000001635-04-25T00:00:00Z" and ISO 8601 always uses Gregorian dates. But later in the diff, it says "property / date of birth: 25 April 1635 Julian / rank. And in the page itself it says "25 April 1635 Julian".

Another confusing factor is that if I click "edit" next to the date of birth, I am only given an opportunity to edit the date, not change the calendar. So can someone explain why the same date, April 25, 1635, is being described as both Julian and Gregorian? Jc3s5h (talk) 16:15, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

The first one you are seeing is what is stored internally. That is always gregorian iirc. We need to improve the diff view there. Do you or someone else have suggestions for how? The other data can't be edited yet in the user interface but will probably in the future. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
It seems to me that while it would be nice to improve the diff, it is more urgent to fix the display in the page. If the internal representation is "+00000001635-04-25T00:00:00Z (Gregorian)" and it is Gregorian (I think your right about that) then it is a falsehood for the page to state "25 April 1635 Julian".
If the diff is to be improved, perhaps it should be explained with a more complete phrase, such as "Prior to edit display preference was Gregorian calendar, after edit display preference is Julian calendar. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:04, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

A question about local badges marked with templates[edit]

So from tomorrow (28th on Wikipedia) it will be possible to get badges next to sitelinks via Wikidata, but how about the templates which are used to show local badges, e.g. on en-wiki they have {{Good article}}. Is it possible to get rid of those also and do it via Wikidata? Thanks! --Stryn (talk) 18:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

  • it is possible if you have an extension like "footer-header", that can check wikidata and show the template. But the problem here that a lot of such templates includes semi-manual categorization, so it likely not be moved to this scheme in next years. -- Vlsergey (talk) 06:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Also, who should add the badges in the future to Wikidata? Is there any bot to do so? I think that local projects are responsible for adding them. I just think about that how many of users know that badges are coming from Wikidata. --Stryn (talk) 04:57, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • Since badges is a free advertisement of the articles in foreign wikis, i believe all wikis will do it one or other way, for example using the same bot who moved good & featured articles templates all around. My bot can do it for ruwiki articles (import), for example. -- Vlsergey (talk) 06:26, 27 August 2014 (UTC)


As it is not always easy to read data dispered in various properties, I have created {{Timeline}} that .. creates a timeline about an item. I have tried to provide relatively good internationalization support and translations would be welcome. Unfortunately, at the moment, it is a bit unwieldy, but it can be done at Module:Timeline + Module:Daterange.

Example: Barack Obama (Q76):

until : lives at Capitol Hill
from to : studies at State Elementary School Menteng 01, Menteng
from to : studies at Punahou School, Honolulu
from to : studies at Occidental College, Los Angeles
from to : studies at Columbia University, New York City
from to : studies at Harvard Law School
from : spouse: Michelle Obama
from to : United States Senator
: Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album
from : President of the United States of America
from : lives at White House
: Nobel Peace Prize
: Presidential Medal of Distinction
--Zolo (talk) 19:55, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Nice! Did you know that mw:Extension:EasyTimeline is installed here? You could feed it to that. Multichill (talk) 20:36, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Looks good, but: I see dates in french, some statements in czech and some in english and values in czech. English is acceptable as fallback, but french dates are not very popular :-)JAn Dudík (talk) 06:41, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@Multichill: I did not know the extension, I'll try to see about it.
@JAn Dudík:, forgot to remove a test. Fixed now, and most translations from Commons:Template:Other date added. I do not know if they are the best possible though (for the French ones, I tweaked it a little bit so that it is more correct). --Zolo (talk) 07:51, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@Multichill: I had a quick try at Module talk:Timeline/Sandbox but I don't get why the text is garbled. On the whole, I am afraid the extension is not very convenient to use from a Lua module. --Zolo (talk) 21:19, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@Erik Zachte:: Any ideas? Multichill (talk) 21:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Pages loading time[edit]

Germany (Q183). Loading time (no debug mode, no gadgets, Windows 7, iCore i5 / 64 Gb, Firefox stable): 40 (forty) seconds. Also Firefox asked twice if I would like to stop JQuery JS execution. I believe this is inappropriate. Well, 1Mb per page (257991 in GZip) doesn't look nice neither. -- Vlsergey (talk) 21:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

  • It would be very nice if someone will also try to add "23 May 1949" as start date (P580) qualifier value to flag image (P41) of Germany (Q183). I can't do it not from Wikidata interface neither from gadgets via API. Suppose because of entity size. -- Vlsergey (talk) 04:05, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
    • Tried to open Germany (Q183) using Firefox, I didn't succeed even after denying 5 times that scripts were to be stopped. Lymantria (talk) 05:43, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
  • It is really amazing how poorly browsers perform with Wikidata or very long pages on Wikipedia. Just out of interest is this more a problem of Wikipedia or the browsers? I also tried opening a 10 mb Wikidata dump file recently and Gedit too has problems with that. Is that the point where one should go shopping for a server CPU with 12 cores? -Tobias1984 (talk) 12:16, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

what property to use to set location of a wikimedia-list item[edit]

What property should be used to indicate the location of a list item (e.g. 'list of castles in x', 'list of monuments in x'). In my opinion is in the administrative territorial entity (P131) can not be used because of the 'location' constraint (a list article is not a location). Alos is a list of (P360) is not really applicable, the topics are 'castle' and 'monument' within an area for the examples above. Any alternatives to set the location of a list? Michiel1972 (talk) 13:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Rename the wikidata item to "Castles in x" ('List of castles in x' can be an alias) and make it a subclass of "Castles in country y" (where x is in y). Each of the castles in the list can be 'instance of Castle in x'. Most list articles are best treated (and renamed) as 'subclass of' items. They often start with a paragraph about the topic anyway with the list following after. Filceolaire (talk) 00:09, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
That is a solution but means list items should not be treated as lists anymore (and thus is a list of (P360) should not be applied on these items). I do find that quite a drastic change. Any wikidata page where this is discussed previously? Michiel1972 (talk) 09:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Resonator quite well understands it if you use is a list of (P360) pointing to the instance type, and then use a qualifier to narrow the scope. See e.g. List of schools in Thailand (Q17060366). Ahoerstemeier (talk) 15:20, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

I opened a similar issue few days ago (#Wikipedia articles about a position/office conected with a list of its holders)...--Shlomo (talk) 13:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)


  • If somebody changes interwikis at Wikidata, would that change be visible to someone on any the affected local projects, either if an affected page were on their watchlist, or even if they were watching RecentChanges? Frankly, it's harrowing to think that such an important thing would not be locally visible.
  • If somebody looks at a page and sees something missing from its interwiki list, it should be trivially easy for them to add it. Without making a career out of figuring out a new project (Wikidata) and without being forced to use the POS VE interface.

If these are in fact both problems — and I'd be pleasantly surprised if they weren't — are there even any plans to fix them? (Frankly, if they are problems, they should have been fixed before rolling out Wikidata. Bitter comment half-supressed here about the WMF's lack of wisdom.) --Pi zero (talk) 14:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Both actually exist in the interface. The first point; on RecentChanges; there is a 'Show Wikidata' options among the 'Show Bots, 'Hide Anonymous Users' and 'Hide Minor Edit' options. The second point; is possible as on all pages as there is an 'edit links' button. Whether this still shows the pop up or just redirects to Wikidata now, I do not know but it exists. John F. Lewis (talk) 14:34, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm, as promised, pleasantly surprised. (Naturally atm showing the Wikidata stuff floods RC since everything's new, but that should settle down over time.) --Pi zero (talk) 14:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
@John F. Lewis: The option exists, but it still doesn't work when you check "Expand watchlist to show all changes, not just the most recent"... — Ayack (talk) 17:33, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Deletion vs redirect[edit]

This issue has been already discussed at several places but we did not come to any reasonable conclusions. Now, we have an option of redirecting item, and the RfD interface has been updated, so that one can choose both options of speedy deletion and speedy redirect. But we still lack the policy of what should/could be redirected. Possible answers would be:

  1. We do not need any policy; leave it to the discretion of the administrator;
  2. Delete everything;
  3. Redirect everything if there is an obvious target (for example, a merge leftover);
  4. Go to RfC and create some intermediate policy (example: redirect only items which correspond to the main name space of the projects, ad only if they are at least one week old; else delete).

Before rushing to RfC, I think it would be a good idea to see what are the community views. Note that we are NOT talking about including redirects to the item (storing Wikipedia redirects on Wikidata), this is an entirely different issue.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:57, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Delete if is a recently created item (24-48 hours) redirect for other cases. --ValterVB (talk) 19:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Agree with ValterVB. It is important that we have stable Qrefs and redirects are the way to do it. Filceolaire (talk) 00:00, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Empty bot created items should allways beeing deleted. They gain no knowledge. --Succu (talk) 21:09, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Succu:. Redirects shouuld only exist when the two items were about exactly the same thing. This is not about knowledge gain. The only purpose of redirects is that if an external users uses Wikidata ids, and two items are merged, we do not break his things. This may be useful regardless of who created the item in the first place, and I would say, even if it is a few hours ago. --Zolo (talk) 10:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I'm personally not willing to make use of the redirect feature unless it is implemented to the UI properly and the i18n is sufficiently completed. This is something we as end-users can really expect … Vogone (talk) 21:30, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Vogone. The feature is still under development and contains bugs. We should wait some time until it is ready for mass use. SPQRobin (talk) 21:49, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Vogone:. Redirect work for the end user in the sense that if the item is a redirect, we go directly to the page to which it redirects. And it is really not more difficult to make a merge than to request a deletion. And a deletion requestion is as easy to fullfill as a merge request, so I do not quite see what you mean. --Zolo (talk) 10:20, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
What part of my statement is unclear to you? There is no UI support available for an unknown reason and as you can see in the auto summaries developers didn't seem to care about proper MediaWiki messages at all. This means the feature is broken resp. not ready and I won't use it. Imagine they broke the ability to edit items through the UI. Would you also use the same argument and say it isn't harder to edit as there are gadgets/scripts to do so? Vogone (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Furthermore redirecting is sometimes troublesome, because the item that is supposed to become a redirect has to be completely empty, while the merge API not always completely empties the item. Merge.js treats it well, but the redirect options at WD:RFD (gadget for admins) and widar/the game do often fail to create the redirect. In those cases the game does mention this to the user, but the WD:RFD gadget does not. Apart from that, I am willing to create the redirects. This is however - as in most cases - not flawless, while use by everyone is expected. Lymantria (talk) 11:00, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Vogone, we had the choice of deploying it in the current state without a special page to create redirects or not. Given that admins being overworked because of all the deletion requests I opted for deploying it without the special page. It works perfectly fine for an initial useful version. As for the issue with the edit summary: this has nothing to do with not caring. It's an oversight that will be fixed with the next deployment. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): While I do understand the choice you made, as an admin who has carried out quite a couple of deletions I am worried about wrong merges. Up to a couple of days ago, most of these merges would result in a deletion request, that should be checked by an admin before to be carried out or reverted. But now we simply solve the admin workload by not monitoring the merges anymore? There have been wrong merges more than once, in particular by new users or overenthusiastic "gamers". There is no place where redirect-creatings are gathered. Moreover, having a list with item couples that shouldn't be merged is not useful anymore, as redirects do not turn red. I think that may turn into a major quality issue. Lymantria (talk) 13:10, 29 August 2014 (UTC) will give you a sense of what and how many redirects are created. whym (talk) 14:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we all agree that redirects are needed and useful. The issue you bring up however is valid of course. Do you have suggestions for how to improve that? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:04, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): The least would be that redirects are easily identifiable. For instance by there appearance as a link (green, like in categories in wikipedia?). Recently created redirects should be visable somewhere. It seems that edits are not caught by the editfilter (See Filter 50...) - but perhaps automatic labelling is possible like it is with widar. That might make it more easy to do some managing if necessary. Lymantria (talk) 14:25, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): Sorry for the probably too harsh part about not caring. I just notice more and more broken or missing MediaWiki messages on Wikibase, while other areas/extensions don't experience this problem as much as Wikidata, as the reviewers there seem to look at i18n more accurately. Thanks for deploying this feature at such a early stage though, the intention is clearly good and of course some testing in production always helps! Though, I believe, to come to Ymblanter's initial question, that we should not yet make redirects the "default", and first wait until everything in this regard is fully ready and functioning. Anyway, is a new special page really needed? I would have thought a simple checkbox at Special:MergeItems would do it as well. Regards, Vogone (talk) 17:12, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah a checkbox in Special:MergeItems could be better. What do others think? WRT translations being broken: Are there specific patters? If we're doing one thing wrong again and again then that's something I just need to know and bring up in the team. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 09:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
I think we should be more consistent in whether we are going to delete or redirect the duplicated item because from RFD archives, I see some admins deleting and some admins redirecting. Jianhui67 talkcontribs 13:26, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Removing badge[edit]

How can I remove the badge? For example in Wikidata Sandbox Q4115189 I added two badges, then only one, then the other one, but I can not remove it! --FRacco (talk) 19:11, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Edit -> click the badge > hold Ctrl and click the badge which is selected, and after this it's unselected. Then save your changes. --Stryn (talk) 19:28, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks! --FRacco (talk) 20:29, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
Wouldn't it be better to have checkboxes for adding/removing badges? --Glaisher (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Indeed it would... I saw a week-two-ago when Bene* and Lydia(?) talked about this, and they had a some reason why not... --Stryn (talk) 16:23, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I think we'll switch to checkboxes after all. It does seem to be the better solution. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

People who born and died in same day[edit]

Hello, My bot made a mistake and added 16 birth dates to P570 (death date). To get that information I wrote a script and get list of people who have same birth and death date (precision 11, means just birth dates like year-month-day) surprisingly 692 items has the same issue. I fixed my bot's mistakes but others need to be checked by hand because It didn't happen automatically. the list is here. Please check and fix them. Any suggestion or comment is welcome Amir (talk) 22:35, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Interesting. I checked one of them (Q677828 (Q677828)). The birthdate is sourced as stated in (P248) Integrated Authority File (Q36578). The source indeed states the birthdate as 1972-09-29 which really is the deathdate. I wonder if many of these items have the wrong data due to error in the sources. Regards, Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 06:52, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
very interesting. Thanks, maybe some were introduced through "The Game", as it accidentally happened to me once or twice, AFAIK... and I reported on Bitbucket for a fix to prevent it.
the list should be updated by people who correct items, since almost all those I checked were already corrected. --Hsarrazin (talk) 07:12, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
I've been through many of these and most of them are from various bots, and they mostly cite, so I assume that means that the bots got the (wrong) date from --Haplology (talk) 00:19, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
As noted earlier, WEF Framework seems to allow such additions. Here is a recent sample [3]. --- Jura 14:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

items from non-latin alphabet wikis (Russian, among many)[edit]

There is an enormous work of merging to do with pages from russian, japanese, chinese, etc. pedias, when they did not indicate the original name of people for european and american people...

In Russian, I happen to find some, through the Game, and merge them immediately, but is there a way to fetch those through categories on their original wiki ? it would be much easier, and systematic. Even better, would be the help of a Russian contributor, as my russian practice is quite rusty :)

If some Russian contributor, who understand English or French would help me, please contact on my discussion page --Hsarrazin (talk) 07:05, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

  • i believe first of all we need a monolingual property called "name in person native language". It is very wildly used both in infoboxes and in article text (in form "Вася Петров ((англ.) Vasya Petrov) ). It can be used for "game" and for direct manual compare as well. We can have some bot to select persons with the same names as well. -- Vlsergey (talk) 07:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • (also we can have simple "transliteration script, that will try to translate russian names into english-alike spelling, feel free to ask). --Vlsergey (talk) 07:19, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
@Vlsergey: We already have birth name (P513). — Ayack (talk) 12:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
@Ayack: birth name (P513) would not help for many artists whose real name is not famous. -Ash Crow (talk)
Don't limit such a property it to persons - for example towns, provinces and countries also have a native name. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 14:59, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
yes, in fact, it would be useful for places as much as for people, a property similar to discography (P358) for works :)
in the meantime, the name in aliases could at least allow to find dupes… a simple translitteration - the gadget already exists Vlsergey, and I activated it… and I can "pronounce" russian, as I've studied it for 10 years - would not be enough, as a name can be written in many ways in English - the exact spelling needs to be found to get dupes… moreover, I was thinking of French people, to begin with ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 20:02, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
  • @Hsarrazin:, where do you find candidates? I can help with finding actual dupes. --Infovarius (talk) 21:03, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Infovarius - generally I stumble on condidates in The Game (person or gender game) - the text says (in russian) that the person is from XXX country - and I then try to merge them with the item of the original country, when I can find the item ;
but, I would like to find a way, through categories, to do this systematically, as there are a lot of items about people from France, England, Germany, Italy, USA, etc. (in russian or other languages), that have no other link, just because the "original name" is not indicated clearly... - I'd like to "find" them in a first stage, and then try and indicate the "original name" of the person concerned… with the help of somebody more fluent in russian than I am :D
could you point me to a category "French people" on ruwiki ?
and the other way would be nice too, as we have a lot of russian authors on wikisource fr (officiers, diplomats), with the name written in strange spelling (19th cenury) - it would be nice to match them with their russian pages counterparts :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:16, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
@Infovarius: here is an example for linking fr page to Russian person : s:fr:Auteur:Constantin_Gorbounov - I'm pretty sure it is spelled "Горбунов" in russian - not many possibilities -, but have no idea about the given name, the signature was K., could be something else than Konstantin..., like Kyril, for instance ? I cannot find him in VIAF, nor here... Author of s:Une_Ophélie_tchérémisse, published in translation in Revue des Deux Mondes, in 1891. Could you help me place him, among Russian authors ?

The "Other projects sidebar" beta feature doesn't work on Wikipedia[edit]

@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE), Tpt: I've enabled the feature in my Preferences on Wikipedia (fr & en), but it doesn't work. All the users who tried it have the same issue (cf. this thread)... — Ayack (talk) 08:37, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah we're still working on issues with yesterday's deployment. This is one of them. I will post an announcement once I'm confident everything is working as it should. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:39, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
OK, thanks. — Ayack (talk) 08:42, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

new main page and new features/changes[edit]

Hey folks :)

We have a new main page: \o/ A huge thank you to Helen and everyone who helped her for creating it and pushing it forward. It was time to get a new one after two years!

And from the development side we have deployed last night:

We unfortunately had to delay suggestions for qualifiers and sources. That'll come next week then.

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 15:34, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Better footer for the main page. :) --Nouill (talk) 15:54, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): my bot tells me that API queries sometimes returns old serialization format. This error is "floating" and have ~1% chance to occur. Does internal serialization adopted on all servers? -- Vlsergey (talk) 15:46, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Urgh. Not impossible. Which API call are you using? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:01, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Are you using pywikidata or something else? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 11:38, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): I'm using my own bot framework, the operation that sometimes returns old format is query/revisions/content, when multiple revisions are specified. Very rare, but happens. Sadly, there is no HTTP header to log (like server name), so I can't provide additional information. -- Vlsergey (talk) 12:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Oh, this is using the core API to retrieve old revisions; it goes right past the wikibase API, and doesn't use the export interface either. It's possible (though slightly surprising) that this interface would serve raw blob from the database, without re-serializing them. I'll investigate. -- Daniel Kinzler (WMDE) (talk) 12:32, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
We found the problem... one of the api servers still had old config. We removed it from the api server pool and taking care of the problem. You should no longer get the old format now. Aude (talk) 14:19, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
@Aude, Daniel Kinzler (WMDE), Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): thank you! For the future: it would be also nice to add some API hostname or code as HTTP header -- so next time it would be easier to find this API server. -- Vlsergey (talk) 17:16, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
The server which is serving the content or API is already specified. For web requests; it can be found by viewing the pages source at the bottom under 'wgHostname'. For the API; there will be a '<api servedby="server"> tag. John F. Lewis (talk) 17:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
@John F. Lewis: "servedby" added only in case of error, usually it is not present ([4], [5]). -- Vlsergey (talk) 20:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
You can request jsonfm format which includes server information. That's how I eventually tracked down which server was the problem. The format wouldn't be very useful for a bot, though. Aude (talk) 09:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

KeyError: 'entity'[edit]

Hello, I'm operating a bot on ukwiki that used to 'translate' geographical objects' names using interwikis. A while ago I had to rewrite that part of the code to use wikidata instead and it worked perfectly well till recently (Aug 26, to be more precise). Now a standard library seem to have problems working with wikidata:

  File "/Users/thevolodymyr/pywikipedia_compat/", line 5076, in get
    self._getentity(*args, **kwargs)
  File "/Users/thevolodymyr/pywikipedia_compat/", line 5008, in _getentity
    if self._contents['entity'][0] == 'item':
KeyError: 'entity'

I had a quick search for pywikipedia updates and it looks like there are no recent patches addressing the issue. My guess is that some changes were introduced that affected properties of wikidata contents. If so, does anyone know whether it's gonna be fixed here locally or I have to look for pywikipedia updates? Thanks in advance for any help. Regards, Thevolodymyr (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2014 (UTC)

Yes this change is intended. pywikipedia will need to be adapted. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 05:56, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

This error is being tracked down in bugzilla:70069 Amir (talk) 11:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Thank you. Thevolodymyr (talk) 11:41, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Can Not Edit![edit]


I currently can't edit items for some reason on my account. I was just granted rollback earlier this week and don't know what can be causing such an issue. I can type translations and such however, I can not save them. For some reason, I can not access the Wikidata game either. Any help? Umafiy (talk) 01:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

@Umafiy: Hasn't been working for me today, either. I think it has something to do with a new update or something... Lydia? --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@AmaryllisGardener: My "edit" button works now. It was something weird with my global.js page. I fixed it now. But the Wikidata game still doesn't work. Anybody else having the same issues? Umafiy (talk) 02:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Umafiy: I'm still having the problem with editing... the game isn't working either. --AmaryllisGardener talk 03:11, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@AmaryllisGardener: I blanked my global.js page on meta and can edit fine now. I see you have twinkle globally installed. I installed the global twinkle a few days ago and when I tried to edit here, I couldn't. After I blanked my global.js page on meta, everything started to work fine. I don't know if this is a coincidence or an actual problem. --Umafiy (talk) 03:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Yeah I remember hearing Twinkle not playing nice with Wikidata. As for the game: toollabs seems to be having issues currently. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
The Game was down since yesterday... Magnus just restarted it :)--Hsarrazin (talk) 09:16, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): After emptying my global.js on meta, I can add sitelinks now but I still can't add labels. --AmaryllisGardener talk 12:56, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
UPDATE: Now the labels are working. --AmaryllisGardener talk 15:22, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
UPDATE The game seems to work as well! Yay! Umafiy (talk) 22:10, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
m:User_talk:PiRSquared17#Global_Twinkle I guess I'm partially to blame. I've known about this problem for months, and thought I had solved it. I think I just fixed it now. Sorry. πr2 (t • c) 04:24, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Query for people born in a certain year only showing a small number of matching items[edit]

For example, when I run a query in AutoList for everyone with a birth date = 1950 (no month or day defined), I only get 7 results (query is here). But if I run a query for everyone born on 1st Jan 1950 (query here), I get around 2500 extra results for people with a birth date = 1950 (e.g. Q80332). I've had a look through quite a few of the examples and can't find any differences between the items that do or do not show up in the first query (precision settings and calendar are the same, and 'before' and 'after' all seem to be set to 0). Any ideas what's special about the 7 items that do show up in the query for birth date = 1950? NavinoEvans (talk) 14:48, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

KrBot seems to have edited most of the 7 results shortly after someone added the year. The diff doesn't show any actual change by the edit. --- Jura 17:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Before KrBOt edit's date was +00000001950-00-00T00:00:00Z, now is +00000001950-01-01T00:00:00Z --ValterVB (talk) 18:59, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Well spotted - I had thought that +00000001950-01-01T00:00:00Z is actually the correct format, with Precision = 9 to indicate years accuracy (meaning KrBot was correcting the date) - is that right? or does it not matter whether month and day are set to 0 or 1 when the precision is years? Either way, it still doesn't actually explain why (for example) Q80332 doesn't come up as a result to the query but Q3506015 does, when their current dates are identical. NavinoEvans (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Ok, so this makes sense now. I think the database the query tool is using was just a little bit out of date (rarely the case!). My query for just "1950" was setting the month and day values to "0", which matches the older versions of the 7 items that were showing up (before they were fixed by KrBot). NavinoEvans (talk) 10:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Actually, I believe what you want is this. "1950" gets translated to "1950-00-00", which is "1950, year only". Set the second "1950" to a high month, in my example "1950-13"; that is the same as "1950-12-31", just shorter :-) --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:23, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


I just discovered Special:GoToLinkedPage. I was so happy that I shared information about it at a translation community based on English Wikipedia at en:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine/Translation Task Force#Managing links to various languages. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:08, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Contributions by date and time[edit]

Hoi, is it possible to view "my" contributions by date and time.. As far as I know I cannot. It would be really valuable checking related changes. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi. The easiest way to do this is to hack the offset= parameter in the URL. The long number is a date and time with seconds, but you can strip the seconds, minutes and hours if you want. Example. Hope that helps. --Thiemo Mättig (WMDE) 10:30, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

WDQ -- how to get text of commonslink ?[edit]

Quick question (I hope), perhaps @Magnus Manske: re WDQ:

What do I need to put in, to get it to give me the text of the Commons sitelinks for items returned ?

For example, I can send[commonswiki]%20AND%20CLAIM[31:4167836]&props=373

to get the value of Commons category (P373) for every category that has a sitelink to Commons (caution: returns 251,000 hits).

But how do I specify that I would like it to give me the actual Sitelink text ? Jheald (talk) 18:11, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

The sitelinks are not stored in WDQ, only the fact that one exists for an item. I'm keeping all information in RAM, so space is precious. The main purpose of WDQ is to give you items that match a query. You'll have to go to Wikidata proper (API or Labs DB) to get the sitelinks. Same for labels, aliases, descriptions, qualifiers, sources, etc. --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:17, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. @Multichill: Is that what you do for your User:Multichill/Cross namespace page? Jheald (talk) 22:41, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
That's just a quick and dirty database query to get items that link to different namespaces in Wikipedia. Multichill (talk) 20:41, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
@Multichill: Thanks very much for this. I'm travelling for the next couple of days, but then I think with luck it ought to be possible to adapt it to do exactly what I want -- without having to hit Wikidata individually for 250,000 separate queries! Thanks, Jheald (talk) 09:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


For some reason, I can't edit the item. I tried to add P31:Q5. --- Jura 11:43, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Neither do I. weird, neither through Widar, nor through UI. I think the item has to be deleted and recreated. Lymantria (talk) 12:22, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for checking. Sounds like a reasonable solution.--- Jura 13:37, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
I have deleted and restored and now work. @Magnus Manske: is possible that Widar have some problem to create Item? --ValterVB (talk) 14:01, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. It was part of a series. The others worked fine. --- Jura 14:11, 30 August 2014 (UTC)


There is no explanation of badges in the glossary or in any help-file! --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 13:12, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Titles with #[edit]

Sk!dbot created here an entry from a redirect. The result were a strange page for an award prize with GPS coordinates. I've fixed this one today.

We should create a tool to get the list of the pages with '#' to hunt such errors. --Dereckson (talk) 15:52, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

Done, see below. --Dereckson (talk) 21:50, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Redirects at target[edit]

Sorry to ask what may be a FAQ — Portals are semi-deprecated on en.wn, and I think some other Wikinewses, but perhaps not on all of them. If at some point in the future, many, or even all, of these portals are made redirects to the corresponding categories, what happens to the Wikidata-generated sister links to those portals? Especially considering that the corresponding category probably (by the time this is done) already has a set of sister links provided from Wikidata? --Pi zero (talk) 21:40, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

This is not theoretical, I see. en.wn portal Portal:Russia interwikis to ru.wn Портал:Россия, which is a redirect to Категория:Россия. When the portal was switched over to wikidata, Russian Wikinews was deprived of its proper interwiki. I corrected this error on en.wn, by restoring the locally specified interwiki, but presumably Russian Wikinews is still being unfairly cut out of interwikis from other portals on the list. This seems like a conceptual problem: Wikidata is building an ontology, but the purpose of interwiki links is not ontological, as such. --Pi zero (talk) 00:35, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
@Pi zero: Portals must be linked with portals (where exist). Now Russian Wikinews reduce the number of portals (gradually redirects to similar categories). Therefore wrong linking must be corrected - only remove interwiki links to redirects from portals to categories in Wikidata. Now everything looks correct: Portal:Russia (Q8252645). --sasha (krassotkin) 06:18, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@krassotkin: I don't understand what you mean. The situation may be correct for Wikidata, but it is wrong for the other sisters that are now being induced to provide inferior service to their readers in order to draw their interwikis from an ontology for which interwikis are apparently not the primary design concern.
  • The purpose of an interwiki, I maintain, is to help the reader by providing a convenient link to analogous pages in other languages. Therefore, for purposes of interwikis, there should be an interwiki from en.wn page Portal:Russia to ru.wn page Портал:Россия, and it would be counterproductive to omit this interwiki link. If you follow that link, it redirects to another page on ru.wn (Категория:Россия), but the correct thing to do is still to provide an interwiki to Портал:Россия.
  • The purpose of Wikidata, as best I can figure it, is to construct an ontology. The ontology seems to be philosophically motivated. When deciding what pages are and are not to be included in Wikidata item Q8252645, one therefore considers only what is appropriate for the ontology, not what is appropriate for interwiki linking of pages. And, in fact, it appears that the decision made on this point is one that may be appropriate for the ontology, but is wrong for purposes of interwiki linking of pages, and is (in its small way) damaging to ru.wn because it allows Wikidata ontological concerns to determine interwiki links.
--Pi zero (talk) 14:16, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I'll amplify this point. If ru.wn had chosen to provide no page Портал:Россия, then it would be correct to provide no interwiki to ru.wn from en.wn Portal:Russia. However, ru.wn has chosen to provide a redirect at that page, which is to say, ru.wn has decided that if someone is looking for Портал:Россия they should be sent to Категория:Россия. Therefore, if one respects the right of ru.wn to make this decision, interwikis to Портал:Россия should be provided. --Pi zero (talk) 14:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
No, at the notability policy (sub 1 first bullet) it is stated clearly that a sitelink should not point to a redirect. Lymantria (talk) 15:40, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Lymantria, you seem to be missing the point. That's a Wikidata policy, which presumably has been chosen for purposes of Wikidata's ontology. And that's fine, as long as Wikidata's ontology is only used as a local structure. However, the decision of whether to provide an interwiki absolute should not be based on what rules Wikidata chooses to use for its ontology. In this case, Wikidata's internal decision to exclude rediects is causing real harm to other projects by lowering the quality of their product. I see nothing wrong with Wikidata deciding its own internal policies; the problem here is that Wikidata is not simply deciding its own internal policies, it's damaging other projects by imposing its ontologically motivated policies on the properly non-ontological interwiki practices of other projects. I'm not sure how else to put this; it is inappropriate for decisions about interwikis on other sisters to be forced on them by unrelated philosophical concerns on Wikidata. --Pi zero (talk) 16:22, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Wikidata does not force other projects to refrain from local interwikilinks. Lymantria (talk) 16:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
That's an obvious technical truth. It's not a particularly practical truth, though. It's a bit like saying ordinary taxpayers are offered various advantages by a tax system that only a tax lawyer could figure out. How are these other projects to avail themselves of this supposed flexibility? Obviously, they'd do it using the organizational infrastructure that's inevitably going to be dismantled since Wikidata is supposedly now taking over its function. The difference between that previous infrastructure and Wikidata is that the purpose of the previous infrastructure was to provide helpful interwikis, whereas Wikidata apparently has some other purpose of its own. --Pi zero (talk) 17:39, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Pi zero: I understand your logic, but it's not completely accurate. Linking of portals (enwn) and categories (ruwn) is a kind of cheating readers. Because it's not the same in the general case. ru.wn saved redirect for referential integrity only (see at least the internal - Special:WhatLinksHere). --sasha (krassotkin) 19:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
There is a bugzilla bug to allow links to redirects and I believe the development team plan to fix this in the next month. In view of that I believe it is time to start a Wikidata:Requests for comment to propose the wikidata policy is changed so that sitelinks to redirects are allowed and to define the circumstances under which we should do this. Filceolaire (talk) 21:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
It would be cheating readers to not help them find the Russian analog to the page they're looking at. And we're not talking about linking portals and categories. The situation is technically symmetric and effectively asymmetric, but neither of those involves listing a category in Wikidata item Q8252645. If you're looking at en.wn Portal:Russia, its Russian interwiki directs you to, technically, ru.wn Portal:Russia; and effectively, rn.wn Category:Russia. However, if you're looking at ru.wn Portal:Russia, you don't (ordinarily) see it but instead you end up seeing ru.wn Category:Russia to which you were redirected. And when you're looking at ru.wn Category:Russia, its English interwiki directs you to en.wn Category:Russia (not to en.wn Portal:Russia). If you start at en.wn Portal:Russia, follow its Russian interwiki, and then from the page you end up at, follow its English interwiki, you end up at en.wn Category:Russia. I maintain there is nothing wrong with that; it's the behavior most useful for the reader, it's the behavior most beneficial to both projects, and Wikidata, in order to support it, would not have to corrupt Q8252645 by listing a category page. I'm entirely willing to concede that Wikidata might have a good reason, for its own objectives (which are unclear to me), to not be willing to list a redirect there; I simply maintain that while possibly right for the purpose of Wikidata, it is wrong for the purpose of interwikis, and the negative consequences of this mismatch, while they do not directly harm Wikidata, do harm the sister projects that use Wikidata for interwikis. I also don't claim to know all the answers about how to solve the problem; but I maintain that it is a problem.
As for the point about referential integrity, preserving interwikis is a case of referential integrity. If you're looking for ru.wn Portal:Russia, you should be led to their Category:Russia. If you're looking at en.wn Portal:Russia, and you look for a Russian interwiki, you are looking for ru.wn Portal:Russia, and as just stated, you should be led to their Category:Russia. En.wn may eventually choose to redirect its portals to categories (once we've upgraded the categories a bit more), and if we do that, the most appropriate thing for another project to do with its interwiki that used to link to our Portal:Russia will be to continue to link it to our Portal:Russia. To do otherwise would be penalize us, and penalize the reader, for our decision that the best way for us to improve our project is to redirect the portal to the category. --Pi zero (talk) 21:56, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
@Pi zero: I agree with you in the next. Wikidata should provide technical possibility to individual projects and their community to build own structures and links there. After reaching a consensus in a local community, we should raise the question and expect to solve it from Wikidata. It is the task of developers and community Wikidata think of how. Wikidata should solve problems, but not create new ones. We created our projects for many years. But now cometh the people who did not make any changes there and don't listen to our arguments. In particular I am extremely disappointed with the discussion above: #Wikinews linking. I'm not ready to discuss other issues until there is no summed result. I'm sorry. --sasha (krassotkin) 08:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
Indeed, one of the biggest problems we've had over the years at en.wn is people from en.wp coming over, not knowing anything about news and not bothering to learn, presumably on the assumption that since their project is bigger than ours they are qualified to tell us how to run our wiki. I did foresee that Wikidata would become another vector for those who don't know about news, and don't care to learn, to disrupt how news projects are run. Yet, here we are. --Pi zero (talk) 12:33, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Oversight access request[edit]

Per the requirements of the oversight policy, I would like to inform anyone here that there is an open request for oversight access for me at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Oversight/SPQRobin, starting now, lasting until 14 September. Any comments, opinions and questions are welcome. Thank you, SPQRobin (talk) 01:48, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Another report: On differences of Wikidata and freebase[edit]

Hello, Today I made another report when birth date differ between Wikidata and freebase that you can find them here. Coloring system is like old reports and Any comments are welcome. Amir (talk) 08:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

In the (admittedly very few) cases with differences I checked (now and in the past) freebase was either wrong or chose one of several possible dates. And many times the source given was Wikipedia (usually en). So, why bother? --HHill (talk) 10:07, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Now we check with Freebase, another resource is next.. Ultimately, we do it because we can. We derive value by doing exactly this; it raises the confidence in the quality of our data as well. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 13:55, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Huge diff size[edit]

Hi, Can someone explain to me how this edit leads to a diff size of +9118 (see history)? I wondered why adding simple things is so slow since a couple of days, but huge diff sizes like this one might explain that.... Lymantria (talk) 10:42, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team#Why_so_big_size_of_diff.3F. --Stryn (talk) 10:46, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Ah, thnks. Lymantria (talk) 11:15, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

breaking changes for gadgets[edit]

Hey folks,

We are working on re-vamping a lot of the underlying code for the user interface at the moment. These changes are the first major steps for the new user interface. They are necessary to allow editing all sitelinks or label/description/alsiases at once for example. Unfortunately some gadgets will need to be adapted to these changes. Specifically it is the introduction of sitelinkview and aliasview.

We are aware of the following gadgets that will need to be adapted but those might not be all:

  • MediaWiki:Gadget-DraggableSitelinks.js
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-KeyShortcuts.js
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-MainLangFirst.js
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-Move.js
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-Preview.js
  • MediaWiki:Gadget-SimpleTransliterate.js

The new code is live on for you to test your gadgets against. The changes will go live on on Tuesday. Sorry for the breaking change. I hope the new UI will be worth it for you though :)

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 12:30, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Lydia Pintscher (WMDE), does test.*.org exist for other sister projects? isn't linked in the list of sister projects at the top of the recent changes list, to my knowledge... --Gryllida 03:31, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I don't know if another sister project has a test system like this besides Wikipedia. I'm not sure which list you mean. Can you link? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 06:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Merging problem[edit]

[two items] does not work for Q7748104 and Q4772371, it gives a red error message: "Conflicting descriptions for language pl". Please explain the reason, and help me. --Tudor987 (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

I did it in an other way, but the question remains open. --Tudor987 (talk) 13:43, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Cleaning call: items with anchors in the label[edit]


I've generated a report with the Englis labels in the topic#subtopic form to fix errors introduced by bots.

Some of these 443 items only needs a label fix, other a split between two distinct topics.

Report URL: Items with anchors in the label

--Dereckson (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

P of Q[edit]

Q12280 (bridge) as a sample. To what class P does it appertain? And how I should search by myself? Say I need to make a CLAIM[all where P-something has value Q12280] --NeoLexx (talk) 15:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Classes are Qitems just like instances are Qitems.
bridge (Q12280) has statements that it is a subclass of thoroughfare (Q83620) and of architectural structure (Q811979) so those are the classes it appertains to.
Pitems are properties, not classes. Filceolaire (talk) 16:58, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for answering, but it doesn't really answer my question. As I said, I don't care about current Wikipedia — Wikidata relations, I am specifically interested for data queries to Wikidata directly, and they are basically build as "all items were this P is set to this Q". Say if want all wiki-notable Caucasian males, then it is gender=male and ethnic_group=Caucasian where keys are P and values are Q. And then CLAIM[21:6581097] AND CLAIM[172:7129609] (P21(gender)=Q6581097(male) and P172(ethnic group)=Q7129609(Caucasian race) and then voila.
So now irrespective to what P and Q really are (or meant to be initially), if I want to have the list of all bridges of some kind, I need to start with "where Pwhat? is Q12280 (bridge) and...". So how to find it and how to find any needed P overall? That remains my question, unless of course the database structure has changed recently and drastically comparing to the dump at wmflabs. --NeoLexx (talk) 18:45, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
instance of (P31) You cannot search. You have to know. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 19:10, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Great thank you! So is it correct to say that it is decided to set an "universal key" P31 (get me all instances of) for data queries? --NeoLexx (talk) 19:25, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
In general all items have P31 property. You can have a view of properties at Wikidata:List of properties. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 19:44, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, I see. Wikidata:List of properties/Generic is the most helpful for the moment. As a side note I see a contradiction there between the rightful suggestion to use more specific P rather than generic P31 and at the same time no way to identify that specific P from the current Q page (unless one knew it in advance). It should be propagated throughout somehow in the way male (Q6581097) is done, maybe. For my particular trouble I now see it in an extra semantic step comparing to mass databases. So instead of straight saying "give me all bridges/cities/males/... where (filters)" one needs to start with "give me all items where that property set to bridges/cities/males/... and where (filters)". Thank you again. --NeoLexx (talk) 20:29, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
P.S. Why currently so poor outcome sometimes? All wiki-notable Caucasian males gives whole 57 persons from all wikis across... All wiki-notable African American/Negroid homosexual males just one. wmflabs uses some light database dump just for testing or Wikidata is still so far from being filled? --NeoLexx (talk) 20:43, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Your problem may be that wikidata has have a lot of dificulty with defining "Ethnic" group. A person has to self identify and apparently only one person identifies himself as "Negroid" ethnicity. Not surprising as 'Negroid' is not an 'ethnic' group. If you are looking for 'race' then we don't have a property for that as it is a social category pretending to be a scientific category. In practice pretty much everyone in the USA (for instance) would be classified as 'mixed' race because the nearly all have ancestors from more than one of the traditional (black, white, red, yellow) races.
ethnic group (P172):African American ( Q49085) has nearly 8 thousand examples if that is any use to you but if 'Afro American' were to be a 'subclass' of some wider ethnic group then I would argue that it is a subclass of 'American' and not a 'subclass of:African'. An 'Afro American' is a type of 'American' not a type of 'African'. Just my opinion. Filceolaire (talk) 21:48, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
I am in a great doubt that Perry Watkins identified himself as a Negroid :-) And indeed it is said there African American. If you take a look at the request, it asks for "all males and (homosexual or gay) and (African American or Negroid)". And that gives only one person from wmflabs. And "all males and (homosexual or gay) and Caucasian" gives only 3 persons. So it must be something else to investigate yet.
As a side note I do not care any particularly about homosexuality or US ethnic questions, just a few complex and not so boring queries I constructed to teach myself the proposed query syntax. At the same time I deeply hope that we are not getting at the end a "politically correct database querying mechanics". The last thing the humanity needs is a politically correct robot with nug screens "The way you have tried to connect data is not acceptable for my electronic soul. Ask for something more salutary." :-) --NeoLexx (talk) 22:01, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Featured list badge[edit]

There's a featured list badge item Q17506997 which enabled as a badge I assume could replace en:Template:Link FL on quite a few wikis. Apparently some sort of community consensus is needed to enable this badge. So this here is a proposal to use a featured list badge. 17:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support, also there's already an item for this badge: featured list (Q17506997). --Stryn (talk) 18:33, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Dozens of wikis still have JavaScript code in their MediaWiki namespace (e.g. en:MediaWiki:Gadget-featured-articles-links.js) just because of en:Template:Link FL. It absolutely makes sense to replace this just like featured and good articles, so that the JavaScript can be dropped everywhere. --Entlinkt (talk) 18:51, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Amir (talk) 20:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Why not? --Jklamo (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Quantities with units[edit]

Unitless quantities was introduced some time ago. Somewhere I saw "not now" for adding units. Will it remain like that for long? Lots of properties are on hold, because they require units. -- Poul G (talk) 23:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

The question was already asked: this is in the pipeline, but nobody is working on it and the working plan of the development team is too full to develop this feature in a near future. They are looking for somebody who can handle that.
If I am waiting on that datatype too I prefer to wait some months before adding a new datatype in order to check that everything is ok for the monolingual datatype. Snipre (talk) 14:51, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Grants to improve your project[edit]

Apologies for English. Please help translate this message.

Greetings! The Individual Engagement Grants program is accepting proposals for funding new experiments from September 1st to 30th. Your idea could improve Wikimedia projects with a new tool or gadget, a better process to support community-building on your wiki, research on an important issue, or something else we haven't thought of yet. Whether you need $200 or $30,000 USD, Individual Engagement Grants can cover your own project development time in addition to hiring others to help you.

Classes for properties ?[edit]


For some times, I’m wondering : shouldn’t there be classes for properties ? (maybe « class » isn’t the most appropriate world) For instance :

Is it a good idea or just a fool’s thought ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 17:19, 2 September 2014 (UTC)