Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2021/04

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Interwiki links in data dumps

Hello! I'm currently doing some analysis of geographic coordinates on Wikidata. I can find all the geographic locations in the n-triples dump, but I can't find the interwiki links in order to cross-correlate these with the corresponding Wikipedia articles. Am I missing something, or is there another way I can easily get all the interwiki links from a dump, without performing a vast amount of analysis or querying the database API for a result set that will have several million rows? -- The Anome (talk) 13:08, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

@The Anome: This is what is generally available. --- Jura 13:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
That's a bit sad, and exactly what I was seeking to avoid. I was hoping for something like the interwiki links as a downloadable file in something rational like one of the RDF dialects, that would let me run a script (bunzip2, a little bit of grep and a few dozen lines of Python) for a few minutes and get all the results. -- The Anome (talk) 13:52, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Illusory. Scanning a full dump with a simple grep as filter (or just bzgrep) takes 7-8 hours on my i7-6700@3.4GHz. --SCIdude (talk) 14:12, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Here a script to extract sitelinks: bzcat latest-all.json.bz2 |grep '"site":"enwiki"' |wikibase-dump-filter --simplify 'keepRichValues=false' |jq '[.id,.sitelinks.enwiki,.claims.P31,.claims.P279]' -c >enwiki.ndjson --SCIdude (talk) 14:18, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Fantastic. Thank you. @SCIdude:, since the bzip2 decompression is the limiting factor here, have you tried lzcat, which can make use of multiple threads on your CPU even for files not created in pbzip2 format? -- The Anome (talk) 14:46, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
No, great idea, thanks! --SCIdude (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@SCIdude: Given the ratio in speed for the two programs, it should show near-linear speedup for up to about 20-30 cores. -- The Anome (talk) 14:49, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@The Anome: However, lzcat cannot decompress bzip2. Moreover the man page of pbzcat states: Files that were compressed using bzip2 will not see speedup since bzip2 packages the data into a single chunk that cannot be split between processors. So it would work if the dumps were compressed with pbzip2. File a ticket? --SCIdude (talk) 15:02, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@SCIdude: Well, it just worked for me on the 26 Gbyte dump latest-truthy.nt.bz2. As the man page says, "The lbzip2 utility employs multiple threads and an input-bound splitter even when decompressing .bz2 files created by standard bzip2." It took about an hour to lbzcat and grep on a 6-core machine, with grep only using 20% of one core. -- The Anome (talk) 15:27, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@The Anome: You wrote lzcat so I tried lzcat and it didn't work. I confirm it works with lbzcat. --SCIdude (talk) 16:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@The Anome: Maybe WDumper (Q83952948) can take create a partial dump for you. --- Jura 14:17, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Note he asked for tools to handle a local dump. --SCIdude (talk) 14:30, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Also, WDumper seems broken (see the job queue). --- Jura 17:40, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. SCIdude (talk) 09:19, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Following en.wikipedia page move

I am not confident on what to do here so maybe somebody can pick it up?

en:Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service has been moved to en:Hampshire & Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service following an official merger on 1 April 2021. What needs to happen here? Can someone do it please? --195.213.187.48 08:03, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Isn't this (the sitelink move in WD) usually automated? --SCIdude (talk) 08:24, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
It is not done. Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service is self evidently not the same thing as Hampshire & Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service. The correct course of action in this case would be to remove the sitelink from Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service (Q5646056) and create a new item for the new organisation with a sitelink to the changed wikipedia article. It should not need saying that no good whatsoever comes from linking a wikidata item to an artice the subject of which differs from the item definition. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
I have created Hampshire & Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service (Q106317911) and linked it to Hampshire Fire and Rescue Service (Q5646056) and Isle of Wight Fire and Rescue Service (Q6084130). Claims related to the old entities should be kept on their items. Claims about the new entity should be inserted on the new item. I think I have moved or copied the relevant claims to the new item but it is still sparse; editors are welcome to add other details, if known. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:18, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

External identifier not linking

The property P9395 (P9395) was recently created and links to a database. The formatter URL should be https://verifiedhandles.com/vhid/$1 and that is what's listed. However, in the examples section and on items the 11 digit string isn't linked it's just plain text.
For example, Donald Pettit (Q363250) has the VHID 10412241899, however instead of linking to that link its just a string. Does anyone know how to fix this? --Sputnik12 (talk) 12:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

On a couple of occasions I can vaguely recall of exactly this problem, the issue was merely latency in adding the links. I don't know what the mechanics are, but I'd be inclined to give it 24 hours to see if it sorts itself out. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
That's my experience as well: give it some time. Lymantria (talk) 14:22, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
I will, thanks! --Sputnik12 (talk) 14:44, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
@Sputnik12: The link in Donald Pettit (Q363250) now works. Nature is healing. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Templates "Clear" and "-"

Proposing to merge "Template:-" into "Template:Clear". Obvious useless redundance. They perform very same work Taylor 49 (talk) 14:39, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Except that "-" adds style="height: 1em". Otherwise  Support. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Bump. Taylor 49 (talk) 10:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Can this be considered as weak but sufficient consensus? Taylor 49 (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps it's safer to go case-by-case and see if it makes troubles. Because as I have pointed out, they are not really identical. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:30, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding an interwiki prefix for lexeme search

When adding interwiki prefix at Wikimedia (P6720), it occurred to me that we have several interwiki prefixes for third party dictionaries, but not really for Wikidata's lexemes.

Please see m:Talk:Interwiki_map#Wikidata_lexemes. This would allow to use lexemes:find and lexemes:define.

Maybe the search link could be improved.

This would be similar to googledefine:, acronym:, dico:, dict:, dictionary:. --- Jura 15:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC). Also: onelook:, drae:, dpd: --- Jura 11:52, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

I would support this, but I can't recall what needs to be done and where. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Constrain error

I'm getting a constraint error on Great Isaac Lighthouse (Q28376329), which says "Entities using the source of energy property should be subclasses of abstract object or concrete object (or of a subclass of them), but Great Isaac Lighthouse currently isn't."

However lighthouse (Q39715) is a subclass of building (Q41176) which is a subclass of architectural structure (Q811979) which is a subclass of concrete object (Q4406616). But perhaps the constraint checker does not follow this chain? MSGJ (talk) 09:31, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

According to examples and original proposal, source of energy (P618) is applicable to classes of objects (e. g. windmill (Q38720) -> wind (Q8094)), not specific instances, like a specific lighhouse. I also did not find any evidence that "Great Isaac Lighthouse" actually uses solar power as a source of energy. --Lockal (talk) 11:14, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
You can actually use powered by (P516) without getting a constraint violation, depending on what value you pick (solar panel (Q774583) works). P516 is a confusing property, though, and is generally used to specify the engine type of a vehicle. Ghouston (talk) 22:05, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. There seems to be some overlap with these properties, but on balance, perhaps source of energy (P618) seems more natural for this purpose. It is quite common for lighthouses to be solar powered, and I can't think of any specific reason why the property should be limited to subclasses rather than instances of things. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Feeling conflicted on adding data on perpetrators of attacks

There were two attacks in Indonesia (2021 Makassar cathedral bombing (Q106235302) and 2021 Mabes Polri shooting (Q106308826)) in the last several days. I was thinking of creating new items for the perpetrators (3 known in total) like that in 2021 Atlanta spa shootings (Q105982031) and use them for perpetrator (P8031) but also feeling unsure whether I should do that. Like wouldn't it give them more public attention than we should? I also just checked 2021 Boulder shooting (Q106122126) and it doesn't have the perpetrator as an item (at least for now). So aside of feeling conflicted and unsure I am also asking in terms of the data itself whether I should include them or not. In more famous items, Columbine High School massacre (Q473845) has P8031 while September 11 attacks (Q10806) uses participant (P710) for Al-Qaeda but doesn't have P8031 for the plane hijackers, despite them having Wikipedia articles. I would guess Al-Qaeda is enough but what about containing more information on the item? RXerself (talk) 16:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Nobody is obligated to create or add anything at wikidata at all. When it comes to very recent news (1 to 3 days ago), I think it would be a good idea to wait some more days. Wikidata:Living people & presumption of innocence (Q275462) Taylor 49 (talk) 19:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Well, I still want the data to be comprehensive but was unsure whether it's correct and wondering whether there is other editor who may think that it isn't correct (or perhaps related to a policy from WMF). So I look for existing examples in other items but still found different ways in adding the data. RXerself (talk) 18:52, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

suggestion for Q39057054

Perhaps an editor can add the new nl:BongaCams to BongaCams (Q39057054) (it's edit protected). --143.176.30.65 15:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Looks like it's been taken care of. --143.176.30.65 16:34, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposed project

i applied for a wikidata project. i will appreciate your advice and suggestions. the link is https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Project/Rapid/kid_keen_47/Publicly_Quoted_Companies_in_Nigeria_on_Wikidata --Kid Keen 47 (talk) 19:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

BOT task (TOC -> namespace)

  • Help:Contents (Q914807) -> Wikimedia help page (Q56005592)
  • Appendix:TOC (Q35243371) -> Wikimedia appendix namespace page (Q101043034)

Nothing should be "instance of" TOC/Index/Contents. A bot should change all "instance of" Help:Contents (Q914807) to Wikimedia help page (Q56005592) and all "instance of" Wikimedia appendix page (Q35243371) to Wikimedia appendix page (Q101043034). Taylor 49 (talk) 23:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

Generational suffix

@Quesotiotyo: Quesotiotyo is doing an amazing job of adding generational_suffix=Sr., I think we need it. However the constraint says it should only be used as a qualifier. See: David Reese Evans Sr. (Q106001809). I think we should allow it as a main value, it looks odd as a qualifier. Can we modify the constraints to allow it as a main value? --RAN (talk) 02:00, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

small cemeteries : Notability

following an OpenStreetMap proposal, I was wondering if it is acceptable to add small cemeteries in wikidata ? a OSM contributor believes that one should contribute to the proprietary "Find A Grave" database because the notoriety criteria would not be met Marc wik (talk) 21:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Cemeteries do not require a corresponding Find a Grave entry (nor any external identifier whatsoever for that matter) to be notable for Wikidata (see Criteria 2 and 3), but having external identifiers aids in clarifying and standardizing data across platforms. If a plot of land is verifiably recorded as a current or former cemetery in any credible print or electronic source, then it likely warrants a Wikidata item. Wikidata has a vastly lower notability threshold than any Wikipedia, and the lack of a Wikipedia article in any language is immaterial to Wikidata notability. -Animalparty (talk) 00:30, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Proposal writer here. Does a Find A Grave entry count as a valid source itself, despite being tertiary? My main concern is with small graveyards whose “readily available” documentation aside from its physical presence consists solely of a Find A Grave entry. —Sterling (talk) 02:27, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Given how we currently deal with such item, having either sources or an external ID like a Find A Grave ID is a way that the item doesn't end up in some worklists for items for deletion. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:19, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
coordinate location (P625): geocoordinates of the subject. For Earth, please note that only WGS84 coordinating system is supported at the moment, located in the administrative territorial entity (P131): the item is located on the territory of the following administrative entity. Use P276 for specifying locations that are non-administrative places and for items about events. Use P1382 if the item falls only partially into the administrative entity. will be nice to have. You can also create a small cemntary on Wikidata, and then create it on OSM and Fid a grave afterwards acc to requirements. The ID's will then be there. Pictures on commons will also do. Be bold. Pmt (talk) 16:08, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
  • @Marc wik: Adding the photos both here and at Findagrave would be amazing. You can also create an entry for each person that is in the cemetery here at Wikidata and link that Wikidata entry to their entry in Familysearch. --RAN (talk) 21:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Recent addition of languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) on multiple items

Recently Samatics (talk • contribs • logs) has added languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) to multiple items of human (Q5). The user has explained on their talk page that these insertions were based on citizenship or country of origin.[1] As far as I can tell, none of the recent additions have included any reference to support the information. Unfortunately, as may be expected from edits based on a generalisation (that all people with citizenship in a country speak the official language of that country) there have been some errors identified.[2] The user has now stopped this series of edits but I am concerned that the batches already processed will contain a number of errors. For example, there will be cases where some people in minority ethnic groups will have spoken their own ethnic language and not the language of the majority in the country. To resolve this I can see 3 potential options:

  1. Do nothing. We can assume the batches already processed will be fairly accurate based on the generalisation (my rough estimate of at least 90% correct). The proportion of items with errors will have their issues corrected over time and no specific action is required at the moment.
  2. Roll back the recent batch edits and remove all insertions of languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) by Samatics that are not supported by references. This will remove the erroneous entries but also the many entries where the generalisation is accurate.
  3. Retain the recent batches but add a based on heuristic (P887) claim to each entry to clearly indicate that the statement is based solely on country of citizenship (P27). The errors will be retained but the potential inaccuracy of the statement will be flagged up to all data users.

Are there any views on which option is best in this case or alternative options that should be considered? From Hill To Shore (talk) 01:09, 3 April 2021 (UTC)

Cant's edit Q842793

Hello, folks! I'm trying to update Q842793 with the new champion team, but it's semi-protected and can't edit it. --NaBUru38 (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

You can use {{Edit request}} on Talk:Q842793 — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 18:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Isn't that the parent page representing the league itself? Should you not be entering the champion on the page for the relevant season. You don't say which season's champion you want to enter, but if this year then the relevant page is at Q104762984

CanadianCodhead (talk) 14:19, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

P1969 (P1969)

Currently this property is for directors only. MovieMeter.nl has depricated the directors entries and replaced them by person entries. Now also actors can get an entry. However, it's not a 1:1 match.

For example take Paul Verhoeven (Q129079). He used to be

⟨ Paul Verhoeven (Q129079)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ P1969 Search ⟨ 10028 ⟩

. Which results in https://www.moviemeter.nl/director/10028, this now redirects to https://www.moviemeter.nl/personen/10491/paul-verhoeven (also available as https://www.moviemeter.nl/personen/10491/). Which is the best approach? Change the current property and let a bot change all entries on Wikidata or deprecate P1969 (P1969) and replace it with a new property? (So we get

⟨ Paul Verhoeven (Q129079)  View with Reasonator View with SQID ⟩ MovieMeter.nl person id Search ⟨ 10491 ⟩

?) Mbch331 (talk) 13:04, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

A new property would be best. Repurposing is rarely a good idea. (And we can keep the old one as well, you never know when one needs to look them up by the old ID.) – Máté (talk) 16:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Who owns Wikipedia (Q328#P127)

Q328#P127 has Wikimedia Foundation (Q180). There are similar claims on other items for language versions.

operator (P137) is also used with the same value. It seems to describe it better. --- Jura 13:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

owned by (P127)Wikimedia Foundation (Q180) seems fine to me. For a website ownership seems to come down to who owns the domain and the servers and such. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:45, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia is primarily seen as a content website ("encyclopedia") and people sometimes mistakenly assume that this is owned by WMF, where it clearly isn't. Currently, the claim has only an "imported from ruwiki" to support itself. I wonder how WMF present that. operator (P137) should cover the server part, I think. --- Jura 19:37, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

How are American Sign Language labels made?

The American Sign Language label for American Sign Language (Q14759) is "M528x523S14c02497x497S14c0a472x500S2e85e483x478 M525x535S2e748483x510S10011501x466S2e704510x500S10019476x475 M551x515S1dc50504x485S1dc58474x485S26512449x501S26506536x501". How is this determined, and is there a translator for it? I'd like to add some of these if it's easy. AntisocialRyan (talk) 14:52, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Please file a task at phab:tag/language_codes.--GZWDer (talk) 15:31, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
The language code is already available for labels, descriptions and aliases. But user wants to know how to get that string from a normal word. Mbch331 (talk) 16:31, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes that is what I'm looking for. I found this keyboard and it definitely gives me something similar, but I have no way of confirming it. Can I just type something, then copy it? AntisocialRyan (talk) 22:20, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
To view lexemes, User:Nikki/SignWriting.js can help. --- Jura 22:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

term length of office

Look at the error message for "term length of office" at President of the United States (Q11696), can anyone see what the problem is. it isn't recognizing the number. --RAN (talk) 06:55, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

I think it's the units, "years". I may have fixed it. Ghouston (talk) 07:32, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Property proposal : specific part

One of the curses of qualifiers can be not knowing whether the qualifier is being used to say something about the subject of a statement, or something about its object.

For example: if a statement has an applies to part (P518) qualifier -- can a machine be sure whether the part being identified is intended to be a part of the subject of the statement, or a part of its object ?

I'd therefore welcome input on Wikidata:Property_proposal/specific_part, intended to separate out uses where the part of the object is intended, and keep them distinct from applies to part (P518) which would then only be for parts of the subject.

The examples in the proposal so far are for some particular relations between territorial entities. But I'd love to know if there are some more general cases people can think of. Are there situations where applies to part (P518) is being (mis?)used to indicate a part of a statement object, rather part of a statement subject? Is this causing unclarity?

One example that did occur to me where this could be the case is applies to part (P518) qualifiers on based on (P144) / derivative work (P4969): is it the part of the original or the part of the derived work that the P518 is indicating?

Are there other cases people can think of? Jheald (talk) 21:09, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Se deben fucionar las páginas Turismo en Liberia y Turismo de Libera

Ambas páginas tratan sobre el mismo artículo. Una fue creada en inglés (turismo en Liberia (Q7829167)) y la otra en español (Turismo de Liberia (Q106453148)). Puede realizarse? Muchas gracias.

→ ← Merged by Aeveraal –Vahurzpu (talk) 18:19, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Merge request

Hello, wikidata community! Here are two wikidata item that I think maybe it is about the same thing.

Q217599 and Q3117359

some one is about the group and another is about the supermarket but the de facto is contributor use it mixed.

So how can we handle those two item and the confliction?

快乐的老鼠宝宝 (talk) 02:59, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

There are 2 items for three concepts: 1) a group of companies 2) a chain of supermarkets 3) a brand. I assume there's no great need for an item for the brand. As you say the usage is mixed up, and most references probably refer to the group of companies, but there are two articles on certain Wikipedias (ca, da, fr, sv) so they can't be merged. Ghouston (talk) 03:29, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct - Phase 2 consultations on Meta are starting!

Hello everyone! This message is to let you know that Phase 2 consultations on Meta about the Universal Code of Conduct will start next week.

These consultations will be an additional round to the ones we already had, with the explicit purpose of expanding the discussions beyond the communities (like ours) that have already been consulted. The results of our consultations will be published next week too.

Please, feel free to contribute additional thoughts in this meta consultation as well, if you'd like to. For further questions or questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sannita (WMF) (talk) 07:55, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #462

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
    • QRank is a tool providing a rank for Wikidata entities based on page view statistics from several Wikimedia projects.
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • The final version of the Wikibase Yearly Summary 2020 has been published.
    • Wikidata Lexeme Forms now supports additional Breton templates (Source)
    • User:Nikki/LexemeAddIPA.js userscript adds a link in the header for forms on lexeme pages which opens a dialog for adding IPA statements to forms that do not have any yet.
    • LexSAOB by User:So9q adds Svenska Akademiens ordbok (SAOB) identifiers to Swedish lexemes in Wikidata.
  • Development
    • We continued to make improvements to the Query builder. We worked on adding a footer to the Query Builder (phab:T268643) and showing all relevant columns in the query result (phab:T277646) as well as querying for dates (phab:T272697)
    • Fixed a bug where Item pages scrolls back to "In more languages" block after every change of DOM (phab:T277999, being deployed to Wikidata later this week)
    • Continued working on a new grafana graph to track editor numbers split by namespace (phab:T275999)
    • Finished a small tool to get the ORES quality score for a list of Items. Waiting for deployment to toolforge for broader use now.
    • Defined remaining work for redirect sitelink exceptions (phab:T278962)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Upcoming deletion of 5500+ non-existing villages on enwiki

w:en:Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Large batch deletion probably needed

If/when this mass deletion happens, some Wikidata items will fail Wikidata:Notability. Though most won't as silly bots have created translations on other Wikipedias. But for example Q4860061 (w:en:Bard Zard, Izeh) doesn't have any translations. For a list, please refer to w:en:User:Hog Farm/C46 population not reported or a further refined list based on Hog Farm's list.

Here's a list of corresponding Wikidata items of the articles on Hog Farm's list. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 04:52, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh boy, That's a mess. User:Jura1. Can you provide me with the list of these articles that got deleted in enwiki? I can try running the bot on them. Amir (talk) 14:18, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

  • @Ladsgroup: The deletion is upcoming, it hasn't happened yet. The articles listed in the third (242 articles) and fourth (5227 articles) section of the second list will most probably be mass-deleted. If you need a list of item numbers for that just ask. This list has item numbers but also includes the first two sections, though it may be a sane idea to change P31 on those as well as there may be some company towns, settlements that don't qualify as villages or locations that may have been a village in the past but aren't anymore. Calling them "village" is just the result of a mistranslation, so the statement should only be added back after a location has been verified to actually be a village.
After the mass-deletion some items (which don't have bot translations on other Wikipedias) will no longer have sitelinks and will most probably fail Wikidata:Notability. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 18:48, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
As they are all referenceable geographic locations, I think they should be fine at Wikidata, but I understand enwiki's problem. In addition to updating P31 and adding the reference, we could probably also add population (P1082). --- Jura 07:43, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
Agree. Keep them here if there is something visible at that location, but change "village" to a more true description. Taylor 49 (talk) 10:43, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1: As in, population 0 or population unknown? Not sure what that achieves?
@Taylor 49: The census takers noting the existence of a dairy farm or water pump is sufficient to pass Wikidata:Notability? "The entity must be notable, in the sense that it can be described using serious and publicly available references.", but all there is is a name, not even a proper description, though the name sometimes gives it away. (Chah-e items are most probably wells) This is just mass created stuff. Nobody is going to check maps for thousands of locations to try and identify possible dairy farms and water pumps and whatnot. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 19:13, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

The item for "abadi" seems to be hamlet (Q5084) (the interwiki links were there before Wikidata, it was not a merged item). For some that would be accurate, but others are villages, farms, or other places - I changed Mazraeh-ye Aqerk (Q17072354) (population 27; subject of a current deletion discussion in English Wikipedia) to instance of (P31):farm (Q131596) based on the name, GeoNames/GEOnet Names Server, and Google Maps in satellite view. Is there a separate item that can be used that would apply to all of these? If not, should the Persian sitelink for hamlet (Q5084) be moved to a new item? Peter James (talk) 09:47, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Peter James: See wikt:آبادی and wikt:آباد. Though 4nn1l2 could perhaps educate us better on the etymology. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 07:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
@Alexis Jazz, Peter James: I have already explained about hamlet and ābādī. Here are some highlights again:
  • Academic and reliable articles on ābādī and deh.
  • Ābādī is a very generic and vague term; it can refer to cities and towns, on one hand, and isolated farms (mazraʿa), on the other. Deh has a precise meaning, i.e., village. The Statistical Center of Iran uses the term ābādī in a narrower sense: 1) village; 2) farm; 3) site.
  • We don't differentiate between villages and hamlets. Villages are indeed different in Caspian lowlands (Gilan and Mazandaran, which have a Mediterranean climate) and may be called hamlets, but in the Iranian Plateau with an arid climate, villages are concentrated (as opposed to scattered). Ctrl+F "hamlet" here. 4nn1l2 (talk) 18:09, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Fixing linking for ODLIS ID (P9374)

I've just noticed that there is a problem (at least in my Firefox browser) with linking to ODLIS, and I'm not sure what is going on. If you click on an ODLIS link, the # in the address is getting changed to %23, and that results in a page that says "The resource you are looking for has been removed, had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable." For example, in barcode (Q856), if you click on the ODLIS ID b.aspx#barcode, the address that it is going to is supposed to be https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_b.aspx#barcode, but it goes to https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_b.aspx%23barcode, which results in a bad link. If you put https://products.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_b.aspx#barcode into a browser address box, it works just fine. Oddly enough, the links from the property examples above work just fine in Firefox. Does anyone know how to fix this? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@UWashPrincipalCataloger: The example ones don't work for me (in Firefox or Safari). The problem is caused by Wikidata's UI URL-encoding the ID's when putting them into these formatter URL's. You can bypass it by using the wikidata-externalid-url tool instead of the usual formatter - see Archives of Maryland Biographical Series ID (P6371) for an example. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:12, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: Thank you for the advice. I've tried formatting using the tool, but still isn't working. I'm sure it's just a problem with me understanding how to set the formatter. Could you take a look at what I have in P9374 and fix it? I'm not sure how to tell it to use # that is in the ID instead of %23. Thanks so much. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:17, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
@UWashPrincipalCataloger: I fixed it - it will take some time as usual for the formatter URL change to propagate to where it's displayed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: Thank you, you rock! UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:45, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

my sandbox isnt helpful, what are my options?

i have created my sandbox, however it is not similar to wikipedia and it has no default template similar to wikidata item. for example i want to add viaf id, i want to test whether my procedure is correct? Gi vi an (talk) 12:53, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gi vi an: With the data object Q16943273 there is a test data object, which is also used in the Wikidata tour. You can test your editing there. --Gymnicus (talk) 14:18, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
You can either use Wikidata Sandbox (Q4115189), Wikidata Sandbox 2 (Q13406268) and Wikidata Sandbox 3 (Q15397819) for testing or go to https://test.wikidata.org for larger tests. --Pasleim (talk) 16:37, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Clean up watchlist of bots

Hi, More than 95% of rows of the watchlist table is just watchlist of bots. It's because "watch pages and files I create" is turned on by default and bots that create items have them added to their. I doubt any user checks their bot's watchlist so I'm inclined to delete all of them for Wikidata but let me know if you object to this. Also, if your bot created lots of pages here and you're okay with the rows being deleted, please let me know here and I'll delete it sooner. I already deleted mine. See phab:T258098 for more info. Amir (talk) 10:21, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Bots with highest number of watchlist rows: 

+-------------------------+----------+
| user_name               | count(*) |
+-------------------------+----------+
| LargeDatasetBot         | 30541518 |
| QuickStatementsBot      |  9809404 |
| GZWDer (flood)          |  9728078 |
| EmausBot                |  3209390 |
| SuccuBot                |  2189588 |
| Mr.Ibrahembot           |  2004080 |
| Reinheitsgebot          |  1757288 |
| MicrobeBot              |  1751202 |
| GeneDBot                |  1528084 |
| Liangent-bot            |  1452586 |
| ProteinBoxBot           |  1274572 |
| Mr. Ibrahem             |  1109962 |
| BotMultichill           |   678458 |
| Pi bot                  |   647532 |
| NPImporterBot           |   564694 |
| AliciaFagervingWMSE-bot |   537376 |
| KrBot                   |   457228 |

Total number of watchlist rows is 105M rows Amir (talk) 14:25, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ladsgroup: haha, what a waste. I wouldn't mind at all if you empty out the watchlists for the bots I operate. I never intended to fill them, let alone look at it. But that doesn't change the setting for the bot. How about we make a simple python script for Pywikibot that loops over the wiki's configured and offers:
  1. To disable automatic watchlist additions
  2. To empty out the current watchlist
(Assuming both can be done through the api)
That way it's easy to also trim it down in the future. Multichill (talk) 17:14, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
In the web UI, there's Special:EditWatchlist/clear which should do the job (log in the bot account first!). Not sure what happens if millions of entries are being deleted in a single request, though. —MisterSynergy (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
User:MisterSynergy User:Multichill. It recently got disabled by default for bots everywhere (phab:T258108). The ones left from the past have not been cleaned up yet. Amir (talk) 20:52, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
  • The filling of the watchlist table might have been an unintended consequence from a configuration change made some time ago. Previously QS didn't add to the watchlist. --- Jura 19:11, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Note: Please don't clear your bot's watchlist yourself. Approve your bot and sysadmins do it. If you try, it'll fail and you will probably cause issues for the database. Amir (talk) 21:15, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

LargeDatasetBot is finished now. Took 5 hours Amir (talk) 03:21, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Complain to a user Emu

Hello, your service, I have a complaint against this user, where can I file my complaint?--MADdi0X (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks to a friend for guiding me. This user has slandered me because of a mistake that everyone has made. I ran a page to remove the candidate. Introduce.--MADdi0X (talk) 13:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
You have not been slandered. You have been advised to stop trying to get notable items deleted. Please heed the advice given to you; it is good advice. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:36, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
I think it might be wise to continue this discussion here: WD:AN#User:MADdi0X --Emu (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Create new value for property

I would like to add a new value for the property position played on team / speciality (P413), namely "centre" or "center", whichever you accept, as a position in w:floorball. I have searched thoroughly, and the only thing describing values is Help:Statements#Values, but then gives no info on how to create new values after suggesting so... I could just click on "centre" for one of the other sports, say ice hockey, as it's very similar, and then call it a day. But I wanted to be a good boy. I looked up the terminology for all things here. I even bothered with looking up the stupid ID number for the property to post here without posting it on the intended "article" so to not soil my history.

And I can't tell you how much I hate this site. The level of abstraction is insane. This is designed for aliens. I wouldn't mind if this was just some programmers' paradise that others didn't have to touch, but it is increasingly eating its way into other projects with the same wall-raising paradigm. It will spell the doom of the Wikimedia foundation. This is a different matter for another time, but I wanted to express my deep displeasement and concern while here. --Mango från yttre rymden (talk) 00:50, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mango från yttre rymden: thanks for the constructive feedback! yes, we're all aliens here and we should improve the documentation. you don't need to request the creation of a new value for that property. other items in the knowledge base are the values. if an item doesn't exist just make an item to represent the "center" position like center (Q222052) and then use it in a statement. actually here I made it for you center (Q106428802). if you want to tag other floorball positions make the items for them. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Check if the identifier is correct

If been adding instance of (P31) statements to entities with IMDb ID (P345) that didn't have it based on the info of the IMDb page, but in Q97276782 the type of the IMDb page is film (Q11424), while the other properties of the entity make it look more like television series (Q5398426). Can someone who understands Russian check if the identifier is correct? Thanks. -- Agabi10 (talk) 11:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

IMDB is partially wrong, this is tv series of length = ~50 minutes * 16 series. --Lockal (talk) 12:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for checking, it wouldn't be the first one I found where the person who added the identifier confused the identifier that should be added to the entity with one for a show or film with the same name. -- Agabi10 (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Agabi10 (talk) 12:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Occupation needed

The thingy here needs an occupation of the kind of sports manager, sports functionary, or something the like. Cheers, Oalexander (talk) 02:23, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Municipal finance data

Hello, I am a) researching the availability of municipal spending data in genereal and b) have access to spending data of more than 1,000 municipalities in Austria. While financial data is very specific, some numbers are of general interest (e. g. total expenditure). In Wikidata, several properties and items exist, but most of them with hardly any values, especially from municpialities. Yesterday I started with a first quickstatement batch import you can see here: https://quickstatements.toolforge.org/#/batch/51980 Regarding financial data, I identified the following properties to be relevant

  • Property:P2769 budget: assigned monetary amount for a project (for the estimated cost of a film, also commonly referred to as budget, use P2130) (this is what I used now, it seems more suitable than P2139)
  • Property:P2139 total revenue: income gained by an organization during a given time frame. Not to be confused with fiscal revenue
    • Property:P2770 source of income: source of income of an organization or person (does not seem suitable)
  • Property:P2402 total expenditure: amount of spending by this public or private entity, not to be confused with fiscal expenditure
  • Property:P3087 fiscal/tax revenue: fiscal revenue of a public entity (not for private entities)

also there, but maybe too specific:

  • Property:P2403 total assets: value of assets held by a private or public entity
  • Property:P2232 cash: the value of cash and securities held by a state government

In public finance data, it is important to distinguish between "current expenditure" and "capital investments". The former meaning the expenditure for regular operations, the latter meaning expenditure for special projects (like building a bridge for example). I could not find that yet in the Wikidata ontology, maybe I will propose a new property. Lets see.

My next steps will be to populate P2402 and maybe 3087 with data for the same set auf Austrian municipalities. --Krabina (talk) 07:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

  • Interesting idea. How many statements per year will there?
The budget data (planned budgets) are published once a year, usually at the end of a fiscal year, the administrations are planning the budget for the next fiscal year. First data for 2022 would usually be available in November or December 2021. But then there is also the actual spending data. This is being published now for 2020. But in my opinion most current (planned) budgets for the current year are more important to know for a general public than the actual speding for the last year. If we want to have both, it would be two times per years. --Krabina (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Do you plan to create items for the municipal administration (different from the item about the territorial entity)?
I did not consider this yet, interesting aspect. Are you aware of any international examples for this? Could be possible then to add more data about the administration, e. g. number of people employed etc. --Krabina (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
For countries and a few states, most economics data is now on separate items, e.g. economy of Austria (Q8085). Maybe something similar could be an option. Sample for a municipality in Austria: economy of Fohnsdorf (Q100699848).
There are few other alternatives, but I'm not entirely sure if they could work out easily. --- Jura 09:09, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for these pointers. This is interesting as we also have the sum of all spending data from all municipalities. This could be a relevant number for economy of Austria (Q8085).
Regarding economy of Fohnsdorf (Q100699848) this is also interesting, but what is the rationale in creating an item like the one for Fohnsdorf without any additional information in it? This is really more a stub in my opinion. --Krabina (talk) 16:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
You'd have to ask the creator of economy of Fohnsdorf (Q100699848) why, but you could use this or similar for municipal finance data.
France has items for some municipalities: [4].
Given that there will be dozens of quantity-datatype statements per year, I'd go for one or the other approach for these data.
Personally, I'd add primarily historic data as it requires less maintenance/updates, but I understand your idea. --- Jura 08:23, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
Adding separate items for each municipal authority is an interesting idea, but is is out of scope of my current work. I am trying to look for the best way of how to provide easy to use, basic public finance data that could be used in Wikipedia articles (where only the most current data is relevant) or for researchers (where historical data of course could be of value). If you are looking for data about a city, it seems to be very complicated to know that there is a separate entry for the city authority, especially since this is not a mainstream way to do this yet.--Krabina (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Another idea worth investigating would be in Wikidata not to try to push the actual data, but more a link to available spending data. Some cities might have it published on ther websites or own open data portals, some have it on separate spending platforms (like in my case). What do you think about this approach? --Krabina (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Info repeated

On Lina Medina (Q202307) there is number of children (P1971) repeated 2 times. I have attempted to remove one, but @Bencemac: have reverted the edit. How can I remove the extra number? --2001:B07:6442:8903:6DEC:5B02:6141:17AB 08:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

What's the problem with the current format? They're different values. Bencemac (talk) 08:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
The past problem is when you reverted the edit the number 2 is repeated 2 times, not 1 time for each numbers... --2001:B07:6442:8903:6DEC:5B02:6141:17AB 08:47, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
It's stupid to list number of children at any given point in time: obviously this will change with any parent bearing more than one child (excepting twins/multiple births). A myopic source reporting a single birth will be wrong the moment a sibling is born. The sensible option is to have (generally) only one value stating total lifetime number of children as indicated by sources. If reliable sources report different values, then different values may be added. -Animalparty (talk) 08:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
It looks like someone is trying to use number of children (P1971) to provide details of the first child at "1" and details of the second child at "2". A second entry should be recorded under child (P40) with unknown value. number of children (P1971) can then be either removed from the item or set with a single value of "2". From Hill To Shore (talk) 10:05, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
The property number of children doesn't exist to list the birthdate of multiple children (that's a constraint violation). If you want to add birthdates about children without creating items for them you can create unknown value Help entries in child (P40). ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 09:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

how do i search for website ? ex instagram

i recently discovered that we can link even to social media also. for few persons i am unable to find info. however i am coming across few unique websites within top 10 of search results. so how do i search that particular website? how do i search instagram website property and its related rules? Gi vi an (talk) 17:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gi vi an: Instagram username (P2003) is the property used for, well, Instagram usernames (see Q104163133#P2003 for an example). You might run into issues querying every Instagram username, but https://w.wiki/3Auw will give you 50 arbitrary ones of people. If you want to add more qualifications (for instance, only retrieving usernames for people with a certain occupation), you can add additional parts to the query; Wikidata:Request a query can help with that. There are also analogous properties like Twitter (X) username (P2002) for other social networks.
Hopefully this answers your question; I'm not 100% sure if I'm interpreting it correctly. Vahurzpu (talk) 03:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@Vahurzpu: probably, i have definitely given you wrong impression. i want to "search source website for the property" for "Instagram username". the issue for me is if i dont know name or property id of Instagram username(P2003), however i know hyperlink of website. in this case how do i search by hyperlink Instagram.com ? is source website for the property applicable to all? it is on twitter but not on instagram property page. Gi vi an (talk) 03:45, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@Gi vi an: Okay, I think I understand now. Ultimately, source website for the property (P1896) should probably just be filled in manually (I just added the one for Instagram). If you're trying to figure out the mapping manually, for a small number of sites, it's probably best to just use the search bar prefixed with "P:". If you're doing it automatically, you could test full URLs (assuming you have them) against the regular expressions in URL match pattern (P8966). This will help you to distinguish between, for instance, Instagram username (P2003) and Instagram location ID (P4173), both of which are hosted on the same domain. Vahurzpu (talk) 03:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
in other words, how do i search using "source website for the property" for any property? in this case, i have found instagram profile of a person in google or ddg search results. however i dont know the existence of instagram property. Gi vi an (talk) 04:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@Gi vi an: You can use a query like https://w.wiki/3B2w. The downside there is that it would have to be an exact match on the URL, and so you might have to try HTTP/HTTPS, www vs. no prefix, and trailing slash vs. not. Vahurzpu (talk) 18:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Automate ranking of statements changes

Hello, is there any tool to automate change of rankings ? I mean, if I know a certain set of items have statement A and statement B, and that I know A is more "true" than B, how could I automate upranking of statements A? I once asked the question and was told it was not possible. Still not possible ? --Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 22:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bouzinac: It's not possible with QuickStatements, but it can be done through the raw API. It looks like you can read in statement A with action=wbgetclaims, amend the rank property in the JSON based on whatever logic, then write the claim back with action=wbsetclaim. Vahurzpu (talk) 03:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, let's try a bot request here : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Bot_requests#request_to_uprank_current_existing_countries_%282021-04-10%29 --Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 19:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Formatter link broken for property P901 (FIPS 10-4 code)

The formatters for FIPS 10-4 (countries and regions) (P901) have been linking to the CIA's publication The World Factbook Online. The CIA recently overhauled that site and the URLs for countries are now completely different and not based on the FIPS 10-4 code. All of the items that have P901 have broken links. I'm not sure if there is a replacement site that the formatter can be aimed at. Should the formatters be deleted from the property? Or does someone know what they should be revised to? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 20:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Merge Error Question

I posted a question at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q106311079 about a merge error that I'm getting when trying to merge that item into another. I'm not sure if that is the correct place to post such a question, so I'm posting it here as well to try to get visibility for someone who is able to answer the question about why I'm getting a Merge Error. Apologizes if this is the incorrect place to post this. Thanks in advance. Charliefish (talk) 15:58, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

  • The error happened because at the time you were doing the merge both items had links to the English Wikipedia. Maybe we could change the error message to be more clear?
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/MediaWiki:Gadget-Merge.js seems to be the page that generates the error but it likely can only be edited by interface admins. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:41, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl: Looks like someone resolved this issue. Is the solution in the future to just post here when I get those errors? Or is there a better way for me to handle this myself (ie. removing the Wikipedia link from one of the items, then readding it (if necessary) after the merge is complete)? Charliefish (talk) 18:50, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
      • The problem here is that there are two Wikipedia links. A Wikidata item can only have one Wikipedia link so it's not possible to readd both links after merging. If one link is to a redirect and the other is to a proper Wikipedia article, then remove the link to the redirect and merge. If however both links are to proper Wikipedia articles you should not leave any of those Wikipedia articles without a linked Wikidata item. Sometimes that means moving the Wikipedia link to a more appropriate item. Other times it means asking in the Wikipedia for the articles to be merged when they are doublicates. If the Wikipedia doesn't merge their articles, we don't merge the items here on Wikidata. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
  • @Matěj Suchánek: it seems you are the author of the gadget so I ping you. I think it would be good if the translations for the merge errors would be on a page that can be edited by non-interface operators and the error be generally more clear to new users.
I added a section to Help:Merge to provide further information. It would be great if a link to it would be in the error message for the merge error. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Not really the author of it. Unfortunately, your request doesn't include which message is not clear and how it could be made clearer. Note that the message may also come from the server, not the gadget.
As for the inability to edit the translations, that's a general problem with most gadgets we use. Though it doesn't comply with the wiki-openness principle, there's currently no other standardized (and safe!) way (so I'm sticking to wikt:if it ain't broke, don't fix it). --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Mislead FA badges on ms (Q13983#sitelinks-wikipedia)

Q13983#sitelinks-wikipedia,I've checked article linked on mswiki, this article mislead as FA, it's just stub and not cite any sources --36.72.241.145 02:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

How to remove this FA badge? --36.72.241.145 03:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
I removed it, it's possible to click on the badge when editing sitelinks, but I don't think IP-addresses can do it. Ghouston (talk) 05:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
IPs and new users cannot. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Three identical items?

Three identical items for "White (disambiguation)":

They are not identical: White (Q225053) is for disambiguation pages titled "White" in any language, not other language translation of the word White (e.g. Blanco (Q414558) is "white" in Spanish, but it has its own item; disambiguation items are not dictionaries). Ditto for Balts (Q21294549). Q7058045 however seems to be a conflation of several words, and probably needs work disentangling sitelinks. -Animalparty (talk) 21:10, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for responding @Animalparty. I think i finally understand how this is supposed to work and I agree it needs work disentangling. So far I have only disentangled the Kurdish item. As far as Balts (Q21294549) is concerned: w:lv:Balts appears to be a proper disambiguation page of the term "white" in Latvian (according to google translate). It should therefore be Moved to White (Q225053) and the other deleted? Ottawahitech (talk) 18:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
No. All site links at White (Q225053) are called "White", "White (disambiguation)", or "White (disambiguation in local language)", regardless of the language of sitelink. If there was a disambiguation page in English Wikipedia called "Balts" or "Balts (disambiguation)", and/or a disambiguation page on French Wikipedia called "Balts (homonymie)", then they would be added as sitelinks to Balts (Q21294549), because the term being disambiguated is "Balts", not "White". Since Latvian Wikipedia has sitelinks to both "Valts" and "Balts" the Wikidata items should not be merged, because they are different terms with different spellings, even if they have the similar derivations and meaning. Since "White" on Lativian Wikipedia redirects to w:lv:Vaits, the Latvian redirect sitelink might plausibly be added to White (Q225053), because it is the same term spelled the same way. See Help:Sitelinks#Linking_to_Wikimedia_site_pages. I'm not quite sure exactly how non-Latin alphabets should be handled, but I don't think any of these three Wikidata items currently warrant merging. -Animalparty (talk) 22:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Q2610964

At Paul de Vos (Q2610964) a bicyclist and a artist are conflated. I don't want to lose the bicycle race data, can someone tease them apart? The QID is for the artist, so we need to migrate bicycle data to a new entry. --RAN (talk) 00:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I took a look at it. It looks like the bot that added the data caught the wrong data object, because the data actually belongs in the data object Paul Voß (Q701074) and that's where it is contained, except for a statement. But then I just added them and then I deleted the statements in the data object Paul de Vos (Q2610964). In addition, I will perhaps point out this error to the bot operator again. --Gymnicus (talk) 14:51, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
I inserted different from (P1889) for both articles. Hopefully that will prevent bots from confusing the two again, or at least flag up to bot operators that there are different targets to choose. From Hill To Shore (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

How detailed should you be with main subject (P921) on scholarly articles and similar items?

Adert AlienAnnie Aluxosm Arlo Barnes (talk) Cekli Cofcorpse Daniel Mietchen FabC Huntster Jura Josecurioso Kees08 Mu301 Rjelves Romain2boss Shisma Soumya-8974 Tris T7 Wallacegromit1 Wittylama (talk) Jck1337

Notified participants of WikiProject Space

My current hobby project has been on filling out the Scholia profile for the RIMFAX (Q42317746) View profile on Scholia experiment on the Mars 2020 Perseverance rover. All of the items related to it (should) have at least one main subject (P921) with the subject 'RIMFAX', but I'm wondering if they should have more, mainly because the curation page has a section that flags works that are only tagged with the one topic.

For example, should I also be tagging them with:

Any advice or editing of the items directly would be much appreciated, I'm watching them all. Thanks! Aluxosm (talk) 15:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Aluxosm, think of it in the context of the "5 Ws" and what the given article is about. The "what" is specifically "RIMFAX", and anything hierarchically higher can be assumed unless the article also has a specific focus on it. "Where", on the other hand, can be excluded from most article items because the article topic is primarily about the science or engineering rather than the application. However, Results from Field Testing the RIMFAX GPR on Svalbard (Q105886180) as an example might be a great item to include Svalbard (Q25231) (or, if possible, a more focused location if there is one) since the article pertains very specifically to RIMFAX at Svalbard. So, Jezero (Q914016) (or a more specific location) could certainly be a valid entry for articles dealing with the application of RIMFAX on Mars (since Mars is inferred by Jezero). For the other Ws, "who" probably won't play a big part for RIMFAX-related articles but may be useful in other items on the site, "when" and "why" are more intangible and I can't see them being used either, but don't hesitate to keep your mind open to the idea. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
In general, you should be as specific as possible whilst keeping it to what is actually the main subject. As long as the subjects that are added have a subclass of (P279) it's possible to query for more or less specific in that "tree". So in my opinion, you don't need the ground-penetrating radar (Q503560)  View with Reasonator View with SQIDView profile on Scholia. location (P276) is better if that is what is meant, but if the experiment is about the specific place, then it fits under main subject (P921) (it might also have both). When I look now, Mars (Q111) is inferred from Jezero (Q914016) (through both instance of (P31) and located on astronomical body (P376)). Ainali (talk) 20:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
I often use the qualifier of (P642) to bring out the geographic aspect of a subject. For example lake ecology (Q104923359) of (P642) Lake Washington (Q1323525) rather than two separate statements lake ecology (Q104923359) and Lake Washington (Q1323525). That is a more specific way to indicate a subject. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 21:53, 11 April 2021 (UTC)
@Huntster, Ainali, UWashPrincipalCataloger: Thank you all so much! This really clears up my thinking.
In regards to the "Mars not being inferred from Jezero" thing, I think I was tripped up by a Scholia quirk. The current property path for the published works query doesn't dive into topics of astronomical bodies, it only works if the main subject (P921) is a part of (P361), facet of (P1269), instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279) the topic:
  • ?work wdt:P921 / (wdt:P361+ | wdt:P1269+ | (wdt:P31* / wdt:P279*) ) wd:Q111 .
However, if you add a check for located on astronomical body (P376), then it works as I had expected and all of the articles related to places on Mars are returned:
  • ?work wdt:P921 / (wdt:P361+ | wdt:P1269+ | wdt:P376* | (wdt:P31* / wdt:P279*) ) wd:Q111 .
Another somewhat related Scholia thing I've been thinking about is the co-occurring topics map; the query fails because (I presume) it can only display a map of features on Earth (Q2). Not sure if there is even a solution for this one but it's an interesting issue that probably isn't run into much (
Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) Egon Willighagen (talk) 06:18, 26 November 2018 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 11:07, 6 December 2018 (UTC) Hogü-456 (talk) 21:14, 25 December 2018 (UTC) Ivanhercaz (Talk) 23:11, 5 February 2019 (UTC) Mlemusrojas (talk) 16:56, 7 May 2019 (UTC) --Alexmar983 (talk) 21:27, 19 May 2019 (UTC) Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:21, 4 June 2019 (UTC) Mazuritz (talk) 09:20, 18 September 2019 (UTC) Charles Tapley Hoyt (talk) 19:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC) Saethydd (talk) 15:47, 21 October 2019 (UTC) Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 14:03, 24 April 2020 (UTC) Csisc (talk) 17:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC) Bodhisattwa (talk) 06:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC) Matlin (talk) 14:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC) Jeannette Ho (talk) 05:58, 1 October 2020 (UTC) So9q (talk) 07:38, 31 January 2021 (UTC) Jonas kork (talk) 18:15, 24 February 2022 (UTC) Erfurth (talk) 21:20, 5 April 2022 (UTC) Maxime
Notified participants of WikiProject Scholia - hope that's okay). Thanks again! Aluxosm (talk) 12:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
I've actually just unintentionally "fixed" the issue with the co-occurring topics map; I added some locations on Earth as the main subject for a couple of the papers, so now the query works and the map is displayed. The original "issue" ("feature request" might be a better way of putting it) still stands though. It'd be cool to have another map for locations on a different astronomical body; for example, ground-penetrating radar (Q503560) View profile on Scholia could have maps for Earth, the Moon, Mars and other places where GPR's have been used. Might be a bit pie in the sky, but still an interesting thing to think about 🤓. Aluxosm (talk) 13:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

In general we can classify into superset, subset, and association properties. Here the start of a list:

Add sensible limit for when bot account is needed to Wikidata:Bots

see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:Bots#When_is_a_bot_account_needed

I liked the suggestion by @ArthurPSmith: on the page linked above: to do more than 10,000 edits in a practical amount of time you need to use a bot account

I therefore suggest we add that to Wikidata:Bots under a new section "Do I need a bot account?" right after the introduction:

"As a general rule the community has decided that if you want to do more than 10,000 edits without user interaction you need to use a bot account and ask for approval first."--So9q (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

  •  CommentPlease stop proposing barking mad new rules. Neither the thread you refer to, nor you, has articulated any benefit to anyone arising from this proposed rule. Nor is the rule anywhere near fit for purpose: 10k edits in what timescale? But, mainly, please just stop. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Please use less aggressive language. There's no need to use words like "barking" when speaking about what other users are doing. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:36, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Thanks for taking time to comment, I see you really want to join the discussion and contribute. Like ChristianKl I would prefer if you think twice before posting and keep a friendly tone. As an aside telling me to stop is not gonna work, please tell me instead what you would like me to do.
Why is the timescale relevant? I presume that bot-like non-interactive edits like my recent 5000 LexSAOB-edits go as fast as the script allows (heeding of course the maxlag=5 restriction of such tools). The reason we have bot accounts is that such edits done on an ordinary user account flood the RC and cannot easily be undone if I understood correctly. Requiring me to create a bot account for this "small" batch of 5000 edits might be killing birds with cannons or might not. Depends on the lay of the land here. I actually already created a bot account So9qBot but I did not use it this time. Now that we have a practical example, would you have preferred if I had used the bot account for these changes to 5000 Swedish lexemes?--So9q (talk) 04:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I was not proposing that as a community requirement, but as practical advice for somebody planning a lot of edits. Also note the details of that advice may have changed since changes have been made in edit rate limit rules here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith:Why not? What changes in edit rate limit rules are your referring to? Are these rules documented somewhere on-wiki? If not, could you help fix that?--So9q (talk) 04:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@So9q: I'm not sure whether or where the current edit rate limits are documented; I believe they are such that a regular user account doing 10,000 edits would take several hours at least, so anything significantly larger would be on the order of days of continuous editing load. There's a little discussion of it in Wikidata:User access levels but it does not list the current limits. I believe at some point there was a rate limit on regular users but not on bots; however, in the last year or so I believe a rate limit was imposed on bot users also; there were some posts in Project Chat about it. New and IP users have a much lower rate limit, which is mentioned on the User access levels page. I could easily be completely misunderstanding the situation though! ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I do think we need guidance here since lots of people run huge QS batch jobs without bot accounts which defeats the point of requiring bot review and moving such edits out of recent changes. That said I'm not sure this is the way to do this. Mostly I'm just grumpy that I bother getting bot approval and others just QS random things without it (and introduce errors all over). BrokenSegue (talk) 13:46, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
"others just QS random things without it (and introduce errors all over)" is a fairly mean and unevidenced description of the set of users who use Quickstatements. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:56, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: I didn't mean to imply it's the majority of such users but there's plenty of poorly thought out uses of QS. For example very few users of QS bother to add references. I can provide examples of bad uses if that would be helpful. But it is a fact that well intentioned bulk edits are being made that often hurt the data integrity of wikidata. BrokenSegue (talk) 17:59, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment This is not just only yet another "mad rule", this is technically incorrect. Bot is not a tool to make a lot of edits "in a practical amount of time". Quite the opposite, bots are second-class citizens, very impractical for ordinary use cases (and I consider Excel/Google Spreadsheets/OpenRefine and other human-controlled tools as an ordinary use case). --Lockal (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
@Lockal:What about QS? I have been active on Wikidata for a few years now, and I honestly still don't know when you want me to do a bot request and when to just go ahead and make thousands of automatic edits as I did lately using LexSAOB. If I understood correctly the reason for clear rules to shove mass edits -> bot accounts is that they can be undone as a whole. QS support editgroups and can also easily be undone on batch level if I understood correctly. My recent 5000 LexSAOB-edits cannot easily be undone on the other hand.--So9q (talk) 04:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@So9q: Bot flag and edit groups are orthogonal. You can easily modify LexSAOB script to support editgroups without bot permissions (see Wikidata:Edit groups/Adding a tool and edit_summary parameter). As an example, I enabled EditSum while editing a sandbox item and entered my very informative edit summary ([[:toollabs:editgroups/b/CB/deadbeef|details]]) as an edit description in browser -> and here is my edit now: https://editgroups.toolforge.org/b/CB/deadbeef/. As for quantities, there should be some sanity in edits, of course. In my opinion, bot flag "should be dependent on the context of the situation, and statements it is being used to add" (rephrasing glorious WT:RS). For example, inserting thousands of cross-validated authority identifiers from non-bot account -> everyone is happy without any discussion. Inserting thousands of people from "The Peerage" (without any extra identifier) - ughh... Also, there is a flooder flag, it is underrated. --Lockal (talk) 21:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Line numbering coming soon to all wikis

Example

From April 15, you can enable line numbering in some wikitext editors - for now in the template namespace, coming to more namespaces soon. This will make it easier to detect line breaks and to refer to a particular line in discussions. These numbers will be shown if you enable the syntax highlighting feature (CodeMirror extension), which is supported in the 2010 and 2017 wikitext editors.

More information can be found on this project page. Everyone is invited to test the feature, and to give feedback on this talk page.

-- Johanna Strodt (WMDE) 15:09, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #463

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
    • EditSum, a user script which allows to attach custom summary text to any label/statement/sitelink/etc. modification.
  • Development
    • Started research and collecting material for the work on improvements to the Lexeme UI and prepared the first interviews
    • Finishing up the work on the first version of the Query Builder. We still need to get the security review before we can deploy it properly. Current state can be tested on the test system.
    • Finalized the dashboard to see the number of (active/very active) editors split by namespace. See the graphs at the bottom of this dashboard.
    • Continued working on the remaining pieces needed to fully support editing statements on Senses of a Lexeme (phab:T199896)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Strange statement

Wikidata (Q2013) have "Rogerio da silva santana" in instance of (P31) statement. Why? --2001:B07:6442:8903:9DA4:471F:AF5A:CA34 14:24, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Label vandalism. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q33120876&action=historysubmit&type=revision&diff=1399508900&oldid=1366679073 --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:55, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Need weekly/daily data to import in Wikidata

Hello, I am currently developing a tool to update Wikidata https://github.com/LeMyst/WikibaseIntegrator, but I would need data that need to be updated weekly or daily, would anyone have an idea about this kind of data? It's mainly to test my code (under supervision). I currently test it on my own wikibase, but my data are only updated every ~3 months, and because of that the development of my code is slower. Thank you, Myst (talk) 09:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Every tennis player has three properties that could be updated weekly from the source: the ATP or WTA-websites. This is prize money (P2121), singles record (P564) and doubles record (P555) and maybe ranking (P1352) as well. Edoderoo (talk) 11:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata workshop at ISWC, October 2021, online

Dear colleagues,

The Wikidata workshop at ISWC goes into the second edition! Please find more information here: https://wikidataworkshop.github.io/2021/

Cheers, Ls1g (talk) 10:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

How to express nationality (Q231002) ?

On cs.wikisource we want to categorise via Wikidata authors according their nationality - so authors living in Germany and writing German are German authors, authors from France writting French are French authors etc. But there is problem with nationality (Q231002).

If we use ethnic group (P172) (czech name of this property is nationality), some people says there is no french ethnicity, there is no swiss ethnicity etc.

country of citizenship (P27) is too fragmented and problematic for many Czech authors - they were citizens of Austria-Hungary (Q28513) or Cisleithania (Q533534), but were Czechs (Q170217). (and vice versa e.g. for Polish authors).

There was proposal for cultural identity, but was rejected.

Is some useful way how to express that Jan Neruda (Q156321) and Václav Havel (Q36233) were Czechs (Q170217), Jack London (Q45765) and Thomas Jefferson (Q11812) were Americans (Q846570) or that Napoleon (Q517) and Paul Verlaine (Q755) were French (Q121842)? JAn Dudík (talk) 12:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

It's ok to make the proposal again, if you have a strong argument for it. Out of courtesy, link to the old proposal from the new one and ping people involved in discussion before. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
You didn’t say what is the problem with nationality (Q231002); I presume you mean the quality you’re trying to record is not at all a legal concept. What about nation (Q6266) and national identity (Q1880695)? —Michael Z. 00:13, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
@JAn Dudík: For me there are two ways in which it can be regulated. In your example of Jan Neruda (Q156321), one possibility is already being implemented. There you will find the statement Jan Neruda (Q156321)ethnic group (P172)Czechs (Q170217) and that means that although he has the nationality Austrian Empire (Q131964) he is actually Czech. This implementation can, however, be rated as controversial because the property ethnic group (P172) itself is controversial. The second possibility, which one can do, can be seen with several Germans. As an example I would take Ludwig van Beethoven. For its data object there is the statement Ludwig van Beethoven (Q255)country of citizenship (P27)Germany (Q183)reason for deprecated rank (P2241)anachronism (Q189203). Here you have to note that you put this statement on the disapproved rank. --Gymnicus (talk) 09:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
We never really tackled the nationalism problem. I recall extremely lengthy discussions going nowhere and everywhere. Just doing a property proposal will probably fail. I think last time I suggested making an overview of example cases of (historic) people who we want to link to current countries. For example Frans Hals (Q167654) is Dutch and Peter Paul Rubens (Q5599) is Flemish. Will need a significant effort to properly model this (if that's even possible). Multichill (talk) 17:12, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
I would recommend NOT to add any nationality. For example people living in Crimea Crimea (Q7835) ... are they now Russians, Ukrainians, or Crimeans, or something else? People living in the non-state Tibet, are they really Chinese? Drop it completely, this is the only solution. Taylor 49 (talk) 19:45, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
On the other side Czech nationality/ethnicity is non controversial for most "Czech" authors 100 years ago (which are on Wikisource). JAn Dudík (talk) 17:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree with Taylor 49 - nationality and ethnicity are ill-defined (not only for people whose parents came from different countries), citizenship may change over a person's lifetime. Best classify authors by the language(s) they write/wrote in and maybe by their birth country or birthplace, and by place(s) of residence. Don't use nationality at all, it only leads to fruitless arguments. --Schlosser67 (talk) 08:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
If we are concerned with authors, wouldn't native language (P103) and languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) be the relevant properties? Ghouston (talk) 21:27, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
No. languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) - some authors wrote their works in multiple languages. And native language (P103) - some authors have works in their second language. e.g. Karel Klostermann (Q84648) was from german family, wrote his works both in german and czech, but is considered as Czech author. JAn Dudík (talk) 17:44, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
I'd ask why Karel Klostermann (Q84648) is considered a Czech author. Is it because Czech is a "native language?" Native language may be hard to determine, but nationality/ethnicity is even harder. Presumably a person would generally have to know the language associated with a nationality/ethnicity to be considered a member of that nationality/ethnicity. I assume we are considering this concept to be completely independent of citizenship: of course it's possible to be a citizen of a country without knowing any of its languages. Ghouston (talk) 22:47, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
Also, is there anybody who has written books in Czech who wouldn't be considered a Czech author? Ghouston (talk) 23:06, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
There are Czech authors which wrote mainly German or Latin. And also there are Slovak authors (eg Ján Kollár (Q220550)), who wrote their works in Czech.
Karel Klostermann (Q84648) is Czech author, because sources (in WP article is book ISBN 80-200-0469-6) says it.
This question is not about ethnicity or nationality, but how to express, that author XY is considered as ZZan author. When sources says somebody is french author, I want to have property to write it even if his ethnicity was hotentote and his citizenship was French Third Republic (Q70802) or Canada (Q16). JAn Dudík (talk) 05:52, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
So the property would just be set according to what some source has claimed, and it's accepted that ethnicity/nationality has no real definition? I don't even know what my own ethnicity/nationality would be (except taking nationality as a synonym for citizenship). Ghouston (talk) 22:27, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Having a nationality property would provoke edit wars over tens of thousands of items for humans that live in disputed areas like Crimeria. Whether or not Taiwanese is a nationality is likely also very controversial and would likely lead to broad edit wars that potentially go over thousands of items as well. If a source says "John Smith was a Taiwanese author" the source isn't making any statement about whether or not Taiwanese is a nationality, so a source saying that "John Smith is a Czech author" also isn't making any statement about their nationality is a way that doesn't rely on subjective interpretation as long as the author isn't explicitely saying that they believe Czech to be a nationality.
While the desire to have a property is understandle previous discussions at property proposals repeatidly showed that our community thought that the problems outweigh the benefits of having such a property.
As far as ArthurPSmith suggestion of making a new property proposal, I don't think that's a matter of providing new arguments but a matter of actually addressing the problems and thinking through the various problematic edge cases. For a proposal to go anywhere it actually needs to provide answer about how we decide very problematic cases like whether or not Taiwanese is a nationality. Clear policy decisions about such a question in turn risk getting Wikidata censored when they go against government policy in certain regions. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 10:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Is Kim Kardashian a politician?

Kim Kardashian (Q186304) is (P106) a socialite (Q512314). So far, all good.

But is a socialite really a subclass of an aristocrat (Q2478141)?

If it is, then Kim Kardashian (and all other socialites) would not only be an aristocrat, but also a ruler (Q1097498) and a politician (Q82955).

Does that make sense?

(was not logged in before - now I am Cheeeeesus (talk) 12:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC))


You could ask the user who added it: [5]. --- Jura 12:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
This change has been online for almost two years. So I assume there is a consensus that it is okay? Cheeeeesus (talk) 12:14, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Okay, I asked the user. Not sure if they answer, their last answer is from 2019. If not, I'm going to reverse their edit, hope that's okay. Cheeeeesus (talk) 12:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata is by no means guaranteed to make sense, ever. -Animalparty (talk) 02:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't expect a guarantee. But, do you guys have some kind of QA system, like marking some nodes or triples as final, so they cannot be edited anymore without special privileges? I'm thinking of the core ontology of Wikidata, those basic facts that are not really disputed. How do you deal with someone removing the triple Q2 P1419 Q185969 and replacing it by Q2 P1419 Q238231? Is such a change detected and reversed automatically, or could it be online for months and even land in a monthly data dump? Cheeeeesus (talk) 07:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata QA system works through watchlists. Central items that many people care about are often on the watchlist of multiple people and if any of the people who have the item on their watchlist and who check their watchlist disagree with an edit they revert a change. That system works well in areas where there are enough people who care about the items and have the item on their watchlists and less well in areas where that isn't the case.
The amount of people who care about the core ontology of Wikidata unfortuantely isn't that big, so a lot of it's organization is far from final. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:27, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I see, thanks. Wouldn't it be great if some triples could be marked as final? Of course this would need some kind of process, e.g. a "Request for finalization" which can be granted by admins. Everything that is either a) true by definition (a woman is a human being), b) an undisputed scientific fact (the earth's shape is a geoid), or c) has been settled in an extensive discussion (of which I'm sure there are many examples), every triple that is in one of these categories is marked as final. No edit-reverse games anymore, and fewer dubious triples. Cheeeeesus (talk) 13:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Items update request

Please add:

Thanks in advance!!!

--2001:B07:6442:8903:5825:5ACA:9E09:78EB 16:15, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Did you see Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/03#Item_edit_request ? --- Jura 16:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1: I have added in Wikidata:Status_updates/Next#Other_Noteworthy_Stuff, but Mahir256 reverted my edit. Why? --2001:B07:6442:8903:18FD:91E9:BEDA:F82A 07:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
It was about the announcement of the Wikipedia edition. That was actually done, see Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/03#Wikidata_weekly_summary_#461.
Also, did you consider creating a user account to enable you to edit (semi-protected) Wikidata yourself? --- Jura 20:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Everything's added. I'm gonna go through the tayWP to find smth else that's unconnected. --Wolverène (talk) 07:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

P.S. tay:kin iniptnaq:無連接頁面, if anyone is interested. --Wolverène (talk) 07:59, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Wolverène: you missed Cuba :-) --2001:B07:6442:8903:18FD:91E9:BEDA:F82A 08:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Jura1 did it.:) --Wolverène (talk) 08:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
oh I hadn't seen, sorry... :-) --2001:B07:6442:8903:18FD:91E9:BEDA:F82A 08:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Dealing with spelling errors in taxonomic scientific names

Can someone please clarify before I do something wrong and have the edit police on my back exactly how errors in spelling of taxonomic scientific names are to be handled. For example Q2920014 is improperly spelled. The epithet should be 'erawan' as seen here https://wsc.nmbe.ch/species/11516

The 'erewan' spelling error has been commonly used, and for example is used on the various Wikipedia pages linked and has propagated around but is wrong. Is it acceptable to simply edit the name and label, or does a new entry with the right spelling need to be done ? CanadianCodhead (talk) 14:24, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

To avoid a revert war running down through the ages, possibly best to deprecate the incorrect value statement with a reason for deprecated rank (P2241) qualifier specifying the error - e.g. misspelling (Q1984758) - and create a new statement for the correct spelling. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:29, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
The best way to avoid an edit war would be to make sure to add a reference where the misspelling is specifically indicated/discussed/corrected as such (as the ICZN includes provisions that may cause a misspelling to become the correct spelling). Circeus (talk) 17:39, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Cho/CHO

Q450350 and Q5011249 need to be merged together. They are the Q-pages for the disambiguation page "Cho"/"CHO", where only one of the pair exists on each language Wikipedia. -- 67.70.27.246 06:41, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

That's not true given that EnWiki has pages for both. In general we also don't merge different disambiguation pages together. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 10:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: But you're not right either. In the English Wikipedia, there are no two disambiguation pages for Cho / CHO, but there is only one for Cho. The link saved in the data object CHO (Q5011249) is only a redirect. Nevertheless, I am also against merging the two data objects. --Gymnicus (talk) 13:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata:WikiProject Disambiguation pages/guidelines doesn't discuss it: what should happen in that case with disambiguation pages that have mixed capitalization, such as en:Cat (disambiguation): it's very common, and maybe there are situations where different languages have done it differently. Ghouston (talk) 23:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
All the various Wikipedias listed in these two Q-objects use mixed cases. If this were still in the old days with interwiki links placed on the pages themselves, then all these pages would be interlinked. However, now with Wikidata, this is no longer the case, seemingly making the case that one cannot access various Wikipedias properly in the cases of combined case disambiguation pages. -- 67.70.27.246 01:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
I wouldn't have any objection to merging the "Cho"/"CHO" items. The only difficulty is when a Wikipedia has 2 pages for disambiguations that differ only in case. I think the best procedure in that case would be to add as many sitelinks as possible to a "main" Wikidata item, and use additional items as required for the Wikipedias with multiple pages. Ghouston (talk) 02:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

(Another) Wikidata Browser Extension

I'm finishing up a browser extension I've been working on that allows you to view and edit wikidata information from wikipedia. Here's a short demo video showing off basic functionality.

I'm interested in seeing if there's other people potentially interested in using this, hearing more about it or collaborating. It's similar to Wikidata:Tools/Wikidata for Firefox but has different eventual goals, a different user experience (Q1047808) and intends to support all browsers. I've used it to make a bunch of edits and I find it pretty convenient. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

That looks great! I would love to give it a try, you could be simply reading Wikipedia articles and contributing at the same time. Nice work AntisocialRyan (talk) 02:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue: Is this available yet to try? AntisocialRyan (talk) 19:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@AntisocialRyan: ah sorry. It's currently awaiting approval by the chrome app store. No idea how long that will take. I could also distribute it for manual install though but there are still some known bugs/quirks. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue: Nice, can't wait! AntisocialRyan (talk) 22:23, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
It looks fantastic. I love the use of color to make it clear what is missing. Where can I read the code and try it out?--So9q (talk) 04:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
@So9q: It's currently awaiting approval by the chrome app store. The code is here though if you wanna try to build it. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Universal Code of Conduct consultation: the summary of Wikidata consultation is online

Hello everyone, just a quick note to inform you that the summary of the Wikidata consultation about the Universal Code of Conduct is online on Meta at m:Universal Code of Conduct/2021 consultations/Enforcement/Wikidata community.

If you have any comment, question, clarification or anything else, please let me know here or on the summary's talk page on Meta. Also, if you want to help me translate the summaries, that would be very much appreciated!

Thanks again for your help and support! Sannita (WMF) (talk) 13:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Correcting properties for "music of country" items

Currently, all data in such items are filled in inconsistently and do not follow a single scheme, like music of the Nordic countries (Q26302245), music of the United Kingdom (Q268673), music of Israel (Q3858). I would like to have a common scheme for marking such items.

1. Such articles should be filled with music by country or region (Q75054287). Should it be instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279)? How legitimate/correct is ever such a group item and should it not be covered by the music with the qualifier "country" or "of" instead?

2. Should such articles be referred to as music genre (Q188451)? This has a basis as they could be considered as meta-genres for regional smaller genres, and most of the current genre uses are referenced by RYM's regional genre tree.

3. Also, it seems that such items should have uniform names, such as "music of Australia", and not "Australian music", or the opposite. Which is preferable?

4. Are there supposed to be other parameters that will apply to all such items?

5. How preferable are the new categories, such as "music by nationality or ethnicity" (as many items refer to music of indigenous people instead of any particular country or region, like Tswana music (Q263524), Romani music (Q1268283), Pueblo music (Q7258480)) or "music by language" (same, we have "music of Spain (Q964987)", "Latin music (Q18345375)", "Category:Spanish-language music (Q6282163)", can't find the articles, not the categories, but I've definitely seen such). Or each of them should be covered by qualifiers - ethnic group and language?

Solidest (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, as there have been no answers so far. Yesterday I completely re-worked all the "music of place" items for European countries (+ some other regions). Here is the scheme I have been working on, which I would like to consolidate:
1. Each item dedicated to "music by country or region" should be filled as instance of (P31): music by country or region (Q75054287). A subclass of (P279) should be filled with parent geographical level, hierarchically like: neighborhood - city - region - country - group of countries - part of continent - continent - world music (Q205049) (aka regional music) or just music (Q638) for music of the Americas (Q6942344) (because of the specificity of the term world music (Q205049)).
2. All such articles should be marked as instance of (P31): music genre (Q188451), but only at the country level and above. The reason for this is a logical and ideal order for cataloguing such items. As well as the mentioned source RateYourMusic, which reproduces this categorization in the best way. For sub-regions within a country, there should be only just music by country or region (Q75054287), without "music genre". However, if there is an entry on RYM for such sub-region terms or any other source indicating that it is a genre, then it should also be marked also as "music genre".
3. All such entries should be named as "music of x".
4. It's probably worth to specify the country (Q6256) separately (or also as a classifier of music by country or region (Q75054287) if this really needed).
5. music by nationality or ethnicity is still preferable and I'll probably create it, which should be used with the ethnic group (Q41710) qualifier, and exist as a parallel category to "music by country or region". Whereas it seems to me that "music by language" is needless yet since it's mostly related to categories without articles.
6. Specifically, I would like to mention the difference between general "music of place" items and "traditional music of place"/"folk music of place". It's worth clarifying because "music of country" items often have descriptions like "overview of musical traditions of country", which may imply that such items dedicated to traditional music only, but this is incorrect. Almost always these are two different terms, which should have two different items, while they are often being incorrectly marked as one item. For example, correct use is music of Bulgaria (Q1003981) and Bulgarian folk music (Q12274232) or music of Romania (Q852210) and Romanian folk music (Q12736123). Generally, "music of country" = traditional music + classical music + modern genres. So in most cases, the items "music of country" should not have a subclass of (P279): traditional folk music (Q235858), except when the term itself only applies to traditional music (such as the music of a historic region that no longer exists).
7. Regional genres such as Belgian jazz (Q2473848), African heavy metal (Q17510016), etc should be marked as music genre (Q188451) and musical scene (Q28820001), and subclass of (P279): parent genre like jazz (Q8341) / heavy metal (Q38848) + music of place items like music of Belgium (Q2587471) / music of Africa (Q369820). It should not be marked as music by country or region (Q75054287).
Solidest (talk) 11:52, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Capitalized labels and descriptions

How do I get a list of all labels and descriptions that start with a capital letter in Bosnian? – Srđan (talk) 22:14, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Srđan. Here is an example query:
select * where {
  ?item rdfs:label ?label .
  filter (lang(?label) = "bs" && substr(?label, 1, 1) = ucase(substr(?label, 1, 1)))
} limit 10
Try it!
Best wishes. Toni 001 (talk) 07:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@Toni 001: Thanks! What about descriptions that are capitalized? How do I get a list of those? – Srđan (talk) 08:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
You would replace rdfs:label with schema:description. Unfortunately that query times out. A solution might be to focus on an area of interest by adding additional restrictions. In this example, we query for descriptions of people:
select * where {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 .
  ?item schema:description ?desc .
  filter (lang(?desc) = "bs" && substr(?desc, 1, 1) = ucase(substr(?desc, 1, 1)))
} limit 10
Try it!
Toni 001 (talk) 08:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@Srđan, Toni 001: SPARQL is not useful here; it is pretty inefficient for bulk string operations in general, and the 1-minute timeout limit makes it practically impossible to retrieve a reasonable amount of results. I would go with an SQL query as in quarry:query/40118 for descriptions only, where all ~419.000 results have been queried in 10–15 minutes. Relevant documentation is here. The query can be forked and modified by other users. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Wow, that is a lot more efficient. Thanks! – Srđan (talk) 10:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. Great to know that there is SQL access to some data. Toni 001 (talk) 06:54, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

P1876 says Q188924 is not a subclass of vehicle, but it is...

In Q201575 (D. João I), P1876 (vehicle) is throwing an error with Q188924 (galley), saying it is not a subclass of Q42889 (vehicle), but it is. Any idea of what is wrong there?-- Darwin Ahoy! 01:06, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jura1: What should be used there to state that the journey was made by galley, then?-- Darwin Ahoy! 13:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
The specific ship used, I believe. Like in first voyage of Christopher Columbus (Q3771259). If there is no item for it, not sure then. AntisocialRyan (talk) 14:07, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
The same problem happens on other items, like Aviogenex Flight 130 (Q16983329). Are they wrong, or should the constraint be relaxed to allow classes too? Ghouston (talk) 00:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1:I believe it can be solved by creating a new property "means of transportation".--MathTexLearner (talk) 11:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree, this property/qualifier seems to be missing.-- Darwin Ahoy! 23:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
There would be a lot of overlap between two properties like that. Which one should be used on Aviogenex Flight 130 (Q16983329)? Ghouston (talk) 02:40, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Twitch category ID (P4467)

Hi, there is a restriction on this property that it has to have a Internet Game Database game ID (P5794). But the categories for Art and Travel & Outdoors list many different things, and don't have game IDs. How can this restriction be modified? See art and travel for the errors. Thanks, --Funandtrvl (talk) 00:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

you can mark certain items as exempt from the restrictions. I added art (Q735) as an exception as an example. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:03, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

are both Marie Bracquemond (Q56865078) and Marie Bracquemond (Q273552)

Marie Bracquemond (Q56865078) contains about journal articles of Marie Bracquemond (Q273552). is this approach correct? if not, what is the right way to update journal articles on Marie Bracquemond (Q273552). Gi vi an (talk) 08:04, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

On the term structured data

Hello, Yesterday on a Wikidata Telegram group I shared my disappointment with the term "stuctured data". Since it did find some positive echoes there, I thought it might be interesting to have a wider opinion on the matter and this seemed to be a good place to start this opinion gathering.

So first, let's expose what is the criticism addressed to "structured data". Shortly "structured" is far too broad and fuzzy to give fine suggestion of what it is referring to. Standards like ASCII and Unicode structure digital data into encoded text. Most texts out there are structured according to some language. Texts published through a basic Mediawiki instance are structured with Wikicode and HTML. Articles on most Wikimedia projects are structured according to more or less explicit editorial line. On some Wiki, like Wiktionnairies, the Wikicode syntax conventionally structure a typology of lexicographical descriptions – though no technical mechanism enforce these policies. I think that it's enough to make the point of how ambiguous "structured data" is.

So secondly, what do we actually mean with structured data in the context of Wikidata? To keep it short, I would propose this definition: "explicitly encoded semantic relations".

Thirdly, here is a proposition of alternative term: cohesive data.

Finally, you are invited to respond to the pool What term do you find more appropriate for referring to data interconnected within a Wikibase instance?

Note that choices are voluntarily limited following an approach where "less choice is better". But alternative suggestions as well as any other form of gentle feedback is welcome.

Cheers, Psychoslave (talk) 06:31, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

You say <<Shortly "structured" is far too broad and fuzzy to give fine suggestion of what it is referring to>> without troubling to specify what you suppose structured data to refer to. That renders your thesis impenetrable. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello @Tagishsimon:. Here is proposed definition "explicitly encoded semantic relations". Does it let the thesis still impenetrable? Note that this was the point of the "secondly" paragraph. Psychoslave (talk) 14:54, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
what is the problem you are trying to solve? structured data has a meaning that does not apply to ASCII text and while marked up text has some structure (especially the infobox templates) few would call it structured. BrokenSegue (talk) 13:21, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
One problem is the ambiguity of the term. So one aim is to clear up misunderstandings. The first link I find when looking for "structured data" is SEC.gov | What Is Structured Data?. In particular it says "The granularity of these pieces can range from an individual data point, such as a number (e.g., revenues), date (e.g., the date of a transaction), or text (e.g., a name), to data that includes multiple individual data points (e.g., an entire section of narrative disclosure).". The granularity specified in this particular definition let very large place to interpretation, and clearly encompasses something like requiring an entire section from a Mediwiki article through an API call. If this is what is expected from a structured data source, then a Wikipedia article is clearly a structured data source. And a Wiktionnary edition that have conventions to use wikicode syntax for structuring all lexicographical articles is a structured data source with very fine granularity. So, the term lose all its purpose, since it fails to differentiate data sources powered by a bare Mediawiki instance and an other one using Wikibase to explicitly encode data interrelations.
A second problem is that it promote the false assumption that one should qualify "unstructured data" what doesn't fall under the definition of "structured data", whatever the definition given to this term. Searching for "structured data" will respond with many example of articles falling in this fallacy. So a second aim is to dispel the vilification of other form of data sources, although it is not assumed here that this kind of "incidental obloquy" is anything like a evil plot. That just happen to be a factual consequence.
Note that these are problem from my perspective. So an on an other level the answer to your question "what is the problem you are trying to solve?", is that I'm trying to figure out how widely this perspective is shared or not, thus the pool.
Cheer, Psychoslave (talk) 15:43, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
@Psychoslave: structured to unstructured data is a spectrum. People even use the term "semi-structured" for data that falls between. I don't think you will find people that would call wikipedia/wikitionary "structured data". It might be semi-structured in some places. Wikidata aspires to fully structure the data. I'm unaware of people vilifying unstructured data. It's a neutral term. I see no problem. Inventing a new term doesn't reduce ambiguity. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback, it will feed my reflections on the matter. Psychoslave (talk) 17:14, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
en:Structured data and en:Data structure are pretty standard terms in a computing context, I don't see the ambiguity you claim. The term is contrasted with en:Unstructured data - generally large blocks of text. I've never heard the term "cohesive data" - do you have a reference on that? ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:21, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Keith Hartley

In Q7001559, the identifiers refer to both a basketball player and an economist. However, I find no evidence saying they are the same person. 佛祖西来 (talk) 16:48, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

That's a common conflation coming from VIAF, imported by KrBot in 2015. Such items should be split on sight, so I'll split it. As originally this item was created for a basketball player, a new item for an economist should be created. --Lockal (talk) 08:20, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Creating a Wikipedia/Wikidata replica and keeping it in sync

Hello,

I am exploring the possibility of having a self-hosted Wikidata + Wikipedia replica hosted within our Intranet where users could query it via SPARQL. The intranet is not connected at all to the internet so the whole stack needs to be local.

How trivial is it to keep the replica in-sync with the "master" wikipedia and wikidata instances? I do not need the replica in synch in real-time. Daily or monthly extracts would be fine. Having to download, transfer and restore full dumps regularly to achieve an up-to-date replica is not feasible, I would need partial updates e.g. Daily or Monthly deltas.

What would be the full stack of servers/services required to host such as replica. Would it include such things as the SPARQL query builder found here: https://query.wikidata.org/ ?

Thank you for your time  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 185.45.52.143 (talk • contribs).

See mw:Wikidata_Query_Service/User_Manual#Standalone_service.--GZWDer (talk) 13:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Workshop: Scholarly citations in Zotero with the power of Wikidata

Hi, all! I'm developing Cita, a Wikidata addon that adds citations metadata support to the open source reference management software Zotero, with a WikiCite grant from the Wikimedia Foundation. On May 31st at 5PM UTC I will be hosting a presentation workshop where I will show how to visualize connections among items in a Zotero library, using information from Wikidata, and how missing citation data can be easily uploaded to Wikidata as well. Please find more information and the pre-registration form here. --Diegodlh (talk) 18:29, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Inga Sarri

I have added both death date and URL to the Wikidata fact box regarding recently deceased Swedish actress Inga Sarri, but the death date does not show in the Wikipedia format, only the death year. Can you help me?

https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inga_Sarri

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4977086 90.235.21.211 21:23, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

The sv template had the date hard coded. Have removed that and now all is well. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:28, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I remove a Wikidata item that is incorrect?

Wikidata says that a category on the Commons: "Shrine of Heer Ranjha, Jhang" is a "popular tragic romances of Punjab" when it is a shrine that is a Cultural heritage monument in Punjab, Pakistan? Apparently there is a written work/films etc. called "Heer Ranjha" but this wikidata item wrongly says this shrine is it. There is no category on the Commons regarding this written work that I know of. How do I get rid of this Wikidata and the linked enwiki article about the "popular tragic romances of Punjab" for the shrine? Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 22:52, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

Where exactly does wikidata say this? Could you point to the item please. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
If you look on the Commons category: "Shrine of Heer Ranjha, Jhang" it says it there. I tried to remove it from Wikidata, but I don't think I succeeded. I am really here My user page on Commons and can not figure out Wikidata. Thank you, Krok6kola (talk) 23:03, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
It is Wikidata Q3631228. Thanks, Krok6kola (talk) 23:06, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
@Krok6kola: That wikidata item and a new one I've added - shrine of Heer Ranjha (Q106567978) - now seem fine. Not sure why the Commons infobox has not sorted itself out on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Shrine_of_Heer_Ranjha,_Jhang . I suspect it is a caching issue & suggest that we worry about it in 24 hours time, if it has not sorted itself out. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:35, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Ah. Null edit rather than purge. All good now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:43, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Thank you, thank you, thank you! Krok6kola (talk) 00:50, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: I changed it from India to Pakistan. It is a Cultural heritage monument in Punjab, Pakistan. Hopefully I did it correctly. Thanks! Krok6kola (talk) 00:53, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Should these two items about the Derek Chauvin case be merged?

Q95753357 (2020 case against Derek Chauvin) and Q106559911 (State v. Chauvin)

I think they should be merged but I might be wrong because I'm not that experienced here. Lights and freedom (talk) 01:51, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Merged. thx. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:00, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

cfr. (Q28074850) ¿esta declaración tiene problemas potenciales?

Wikidata, w:en:Old Spanish Trail half dollar · He hecho: etiqueta, alias, descripción · https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q28074850. Pero al crear: una afirmación: relación (P2309): instancia o subclase de (Q30208840) ····· dice que: esta declaración tiene problemas potenciales. Pido ayuda aquí, por ello, para ver si alguien puede revisar mi edición (23:54 24 abr 2021‎ Pla y Grande Covián) y arrreglarla en su caso. Gracias. Debo de aprender más (wikidata). ¡Ciao!. --Pla y Grande Covián (talk) 01:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --- Jura 12:26, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Important negative statements about Wikidata entities

We have published the Wikinegata platform for browsing interesting negations about Wikidata entities. [Video overview].

  • Entity Summarization: The main function allows users to search for interesting negations about entities of their choice. In the figure, we learn that Einstein hasn't formally supervised any PhD students.
Entity Summarization
  • Question answering: Our platform offers a question answering function. One can search for entities using negative statements, where the entity is a variable. In the figure, we learn about people who have no academic degree.
Question Answering.

Why Wikinegata?

Like most major KBs, Wikidata is incomplete and therefore operates under the open world assumption (OWA) - statements not contained in Wikidata should be assumed to have an unknown truth. The OWA ignores however, that a significant part of interesting knowledge is negative, which cannot be readily expressed in this data model.

The platform is built upon the peer-based inference methodology: Given an entity 𝑒, compile a ranked list of interesting grounded negative and universally negative statements.

Grounded negative statement ¬(subject, predicate, object)

¬(Stephen Hawking, award, Nobel Prize in Physics) "Stephen Hawking has not won the Nobel Prize in Physics."

Universally negative statement (subject, predicate, ∅)

(Leonardo Dicaprio, spouse, ∅) "Leonardo Dicaprio has never been married."

Read more about Negative Knowledge in Open-world Wikidata at: https://wikiworkshop.org/2021/papers/Wiki_Workshop_2021_paper_3.pdf

Note: Since it is indeed a challenging problem, especially when it comes to absence due to KB incompletion vs. absence because of actual negation, we discuss is Section 5 of the paper the lessons we learned while developing the system as well as using it to find modelling issues in Wikidata.

but we can represent negative statements. we can add them as deprecated, no? BrokenSegue (talk) 14:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Interesting in principle, but maybe the samples can be improved.
Most popes and a few dead people have spouse (P26)=no value to express that they never married (except popes who did marry, obviously). We try to avoid adding that for living people though.
Template:Positive and negative lists a few related properties. --- Jura 14:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1: Why are you saying that "We try to avoid adding that for living people though"? Could you tell me when and where it has been discussed or decided please? Ayack (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I presume Jura is saying that because it is the case. Absence of discussion is not absence of observable consensus. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
Our datamodel suggests that QX PY QZ means that there's a point in time QX PY QZ is true. Correspondingly, QX PY no value means that there's no point in time where a the claim is true. For living people that means you would need to be able to look into the future to confidently assert QX spouse (P26) no value without qualifiers. A point in time (P585) qualifier would be needed to state that a particular time a person had no spouse. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
It would mean we should assert anyone with
  • Just noticed that some people had been deleting statements on popes and we hadn't actually completed (all of) them. Anyways, I restored a few. The avoidance of such statements on living people is more or less the outcome of the data format. Besides, there were some efforts to fill the information on deceased people only. --- Jura 18:34, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  • "The OWA ignores however, that a significant part of interesting knowledge is negative, which cannot be readily expressed in this data model" This seems like a strange sentiment. The knowledge can be expressed in our data model via features such as no value. Additionally, Wikidata is defacto incomplete and if you naively assume it to be complete you are making a lot of false claims. You could make an argument that deduces that for people like Albert Einstein we can assume all Phd students that exist to be in Wikidata and that all Nobel Prizes are in Wikidata but from what you tell us about your tool, it doesn't do any work about analysing how likely Wikidata is complete and thus a missing value is an indication of something not being the case. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  • @Sentiment: You are right about the no-values, my colleague slightly overgeneralized, apologies for that. For negating single statements I haven't seen a convincing solution yet though, Help:Deprecation as per its definitition, seems not intended for this case.
@Sophistication of the inference process: The explanation above isn't complete - the tool does not naively assume that the whole of Wikidata is complete, but only regions which are sufficiently populated among similar entities. So if a lot of entities similar to Hawking have won the Nobel Prize, it assumes that Nobel-prize-winning is notable enough to be complete also for Hawking. In contrast, few of the entities similar to Hawking have philately asserted as occupation, so we do not assume that this information on him is complete, hence would not negate it.
Ls1g (talk) 14:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Related discussion about unknown discovery of Mercury. --Infovarius (talk) 13:40, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Use of title (P1476) with biographical article (Q19389637) items?

Can I get some authoritative opinion on expectations ...

With a biographical article like Abauzit, Firmin in s:en:A Biographical Dictionary of Modern Rationalists (A Biographical Dictionary of Modern Rationalists (Q106552352)) would/should we be filling the WD item Abauzit, Firmin (Q106552372) with a title (P1476) even though the biographical section does not itself have a title, just some bolding.

What are the pros and cons of having that field filled? Also noting that we are going to have a whooooooooole lot of works at enWS that are not going to have that field filled. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:16, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

A benefit is to preserve the string "Abauit, Firmin" which might not survive as an item alias, and which might conceivably respond to some forms of search; similarly using title (P1476) makes that property useful in SPARQL queries, and arguably improves the graph compared to an item omitting P1476. Con is at best pedantic: "is it really the title". If we then look at the index, there's a sub-question of "Airy, Sir George B." or "Airy, Sir George B., K.C.B., D.C.L., LL.D., F.R.S.". Could add both and use a qualifier to specify article title versus index title. In general I'd advocate more is better. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Tagishsimon. I have some works where it should be reasonably easy to do that (modified our template approach to get cleaner fields), and will get them out of the way. Once I have done that I will fathom what to do with others. We will have some picking apart to do for some collaborative works, or where the bots have been at work in a less than clean way.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

ISBN-13 warning

Hi, I'm not sure why the ISBN-13 reference I added for the date of birth here has warning: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q558287 I got the ISBN-13 from Amazon and Google books, it looks correct.Tehonk (talk) 14:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tehonk: Did you click on the warning icon? When I do that I get an explanation: "The value for ISBN-13 (978-9759544010) should match “13 digits formatted in 5 groups separated by "-", where the 1st group must be "978" or "979". When the 1st group is "978", the 2nd group has 1 digit "0" to "5" or "7", or 3 digits starting by "6", or 2 digits starting by "8", or 2 to 5 digits starting by "9". The last 5th group is a single check digit.” " So some dashes that are expected are missing. I believe however there is a bot that will fix these automatically. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:24, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Yes, clicked but couldn't understand how to fix it, no need to be rude, anyway thanks for clarifying.Tehonk (talk) 20:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #464

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
    • User:So9q/Gadget-CreateNewEntity.js is a userscript to add a "create new item" link in the dropdown menu for when you want to * add an item to a property, but the item does not exist. (recently modified to support lexemes).
  • Development
    • Finished work on the support for editing statements on Senses on Lexemes via the API (phab:T199896)
    • Got all feature work done on the first version of the Query Builder. It is now awaiting security review.
    • Statements linking to deleted Lexemes now indicate this similar to statements linking to deleted Items (phab:T277089)
    • Fixing a bug with misaligned grammatical features after an OOUI update (phab:T278522)
    • Finished work on the small tools to get the number of constraints violations and ORES scores for a list of Items. Will publish soon.
    • Did interviews with a few people about how they work around lexicographical data
    • Selected focus languages for continued work on lexicographical data and Abstract Wikipedia together with Abstract Wikipedia team. The selected ones are Hausa, Igbo, Bengali, Malayalam and Dagbani. You can read more about it in the Abstract Wikipedia newsletter.
    • Gave input to WMF search platform team for a survey draft around the query service in order to better understand how to move forward with improvements

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


I want to highlight this: "Adding information through EntitySchemas to Wikidata Andra Waagmeester and Jose Labra" (titled as "CS520: 2021 Knowledge Graphs Seminar") is in my opinion is misleading in many aspects (maybe starting from 9:00). I wonder, is there any way to improve from our side (maybe add an onboarding screen to demonstrate what is correct and what is wrong when building Q5-related queries). --Lockal (talk) 07:43, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Catholic, Roman Catholic and Anglican ordinations

Hi, comrades. I've been adding data on Church of England bishops from the English Wikipedia. I have been using Q41463713, Q41463697 and Q40092973 for their ordination dates; but these have recently been changed to say (Catholic Church), and I think the intention seems to be ordinations in the Roman Catholic Church, under the Pope. Anglican churches (including the CofE) are catholic churches, and part of the Church Catholic, but not Roman Catholic. Should these be used for Anglican clergy? Or should they be reserved for RC clergy; in which case they should say (Roman Catholic) and should there be new ones for Anglican ordinations. Thanks DBD 10:03, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

@Cruzate1492:

Some help needed splitting an item

malice aforethought (Q567057) describes a concept of Common Law (premeditated crime) that has connections to concepts not found in Common Law and which do imho not fit. I can't judge all entries but the German, French and Spanish articles connected to it seem to be about a crime being committed out of treachery, which is not a definition for the English concept. I'm not really familiar with Wikidata but it seems to me, the English and the other entries need to be split in two different items. See w:Wikipedia:Reference_desk/Humanities#Legal_terms:_"malice_aforethought"_and_treacherous_behavior for more discussion on this. Can someone check this and take care of it if required? Regards SoWhy 12:56, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Category redirects

Should we delete all items from this category? Examples: Q106504823, Q8246453. P.S. I failed to generate the list (PetScan hangs, WDQS times out). --Infovarius (talk) 13:23, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Request to link several(1000+) pages

I run CrowleyBot on zhwikt, and imported some pages from enwikt. The page list is here. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 01:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@EdwardAlexanderCrowley: I'm not quite sure what you're requesting, and the page list you link doesn't make sense to me. However, please note that regular Wiktionary pages are not linked to Wikidata as sitelinks - see Wikidata:Wiktionary/Sitelinks for more details. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
That's module pages. All of them both appear on enwikt and zhwikt.
Also, Module:languages/data3/* are already linked on wikidata, so all Module subpages should be linked, too. EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 03:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
You may first use PetScan to create items for English modules, then use QuickStatements to add Chinese sitelinks.--GZWDer (talk) 21:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
I met errors using PetScan, but I found another way to do this, and is waiting for approval. Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/EdwardAlexanderCrowley (flood) EdwardAlexanderCrowley (talk) 03:50, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Toward an integration of structured lexicographical information derivative from Wiktionary

Hello everybody,

TL;DR ℹ️ This is a request for comments/suggestions for building a path of integration for structured data stemming from Wiktionary back into the Wiktionary through Wikidata as an auxiliary platform of request service.

There is now a French Wiktionary SPARQL endpoint available. More precisely, that is the SPARQL endpoint of the Dictionnaire des francophones (DDF), which is a derivative work mainly based on the French Wiktionary (aka Wiktionnaire).

It would be really great to be able to query this endpoint from the Wiktionary through Scribunto modules. One concrete example that lead to this wish, is that in Wiktionnaire we have glossaries, which are list of terms along their definitions, focused on some topic. For example there is a Glossaire grammatical. These are separated pages, and definitions proposed in such a page are at best loosely connected with the corresponding one in the term article in the main namespace. Comparatively, the same kind of page could be built almost automatically from some queries on the DDF SPARQL endpoint. That would diminish the human work required to create such a glossary and maintain more consistency in definition evolution.

So that hopefully give good ideas of the what and why. This discussion intends to focus more on the how we achieve that.

A first step will be, I guess to add the DDF endpoint in the Wikidata whitelist of its SPARQL federation input. But currently the process is stalled. So the very first step it seems will be to put that process back on its rails.

After that, the following steps are more unclear to me. All your input are welcome, and those giving input on bits for an operational plan will be especially appreciated. Cheers, Psychoslave (talk) 09:09, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Non-existed site link

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T280786

In Q4058121, the English Wikipedia article has been deleted in 2019. How is this possible that the Wikidata item still displays the sitelink?--Ymblanter (talk) 21:28, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ymblanter: Probably just a glitch. My understanding is that removal of the sitelink from Wikidata happens as part of deleting a page on a client project. I don't think there's any process that follows up to check that has happened correctly.
On a related note, I see the WPEN page was deleted primarily because its creator and primary contributor was blocked, and I see no direct discussion of the page's notability. This makes it a good candidate for undeletion if you wanted to pursue that. Bovlb (talk) 22:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
I asked an administrator to take a look at en:User talk:Ruslik0. Ghouston (talk) 00:31, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
@Bovlb: I didn't notice that you are an administrator there too, I guess you can already see the deleted article to answer my question. Ghouston (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks both of you. Yes, the subject is notable, though I did not have a look at the deleted article itself, whether there is any salvageavle material here. But my primary worry here was that some legitimate process resulted in this. I agree that it is likely a glitch.--Ymblanter (talk) 06:46, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
@Ghouston: Sounds like you already got the result you needed. Let me know if I can be of further assistance. Bovlb (talk) 04:58, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
I will like to know how often this happens so please ping me if you come across a similar case. I created this ticket so we can keep track of them and investigate if we're seeing other examples. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 13:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
I have a copy of the deleted article at en:User:Ghouston/Ilya Azar, it's probably good enough to request undeletion. Hmm, or moving back to the the original location, since it's a move, not a copy. Ghouston (talk) 04:35, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
I moved it back to en:Ilya Azar. Hopefully no enwiki policies have been violated. Ghouston (talk) 05:12, 20 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Interface administrator/Csisc

FYI--GZWDer (talk) 22:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Maria Antonietta

Devo porre una richiesta. Maria Antonietta, regina di Francia, ha adottato 4 figli, i cui nomi sono:Armand Gagne, Ernestine Lambriquet, Zoe e Jean Amilcar. Sono vissuti tutti poco, ma vorrei parlare in particolare di Ernestine. La giovane donna, di 13 anni, è stata adottata da Antonietta a 14 anni per fare da compagna di giochi alla primogenita Carolina. Si sposò poi con un nobile francese, da cui non ebbe figli, come pare, ma in realtà ebbe una figlia femmina, Louise Lambriquet, nata quando Ernestine ne aveva 38. Ernestine morì all'età di 44 anni, ma la figlia sopravvisse alla madre. La bella Louise sposò un nobile guerriero Tedesco, da cui ebbe due figlie:Marie e Ernestine, come la madre. Louise morì a 79 anni, e ebbe 9 nipoti. Due delle sue discendenti sono vive ancora adesso:Edvige Lambriquet e Louise Lambriquet, che sono gemelle e che hanno attualmente 22 anni. Le belle gemelle desiderano più di ogni altra cosa il trono francese, anche se la Francia attualmente è una Repubblica. Considerate giusto il carattere delle due gemelle? (Valentina Sara Lorena Vincenza Asburgo (talk) 18:05, 26 April 2021 (UTC))

If this is in any way related to Wikidata, please use Wikidata:Bar for discussions in Italian (and ideally provide links to the relevant Wikidata items/pages).--- Jura 16:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --- Jura 16:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Suggested Values

From April 29, it will be possible to suggest values for parameters in templates. Suggested values can be added to TemplateData and will then be shown as a drop-down list in VisualEditor. This allows template users to quickly select an appropriate value. This way, it prevents potential errors and reduces the effort needed to fill the template with values. It will still be possible to fill in values other than the suggested ones.

More information, including the supported parameter types and how to create suggested values: [1] [2]. Everyone is invited to test the feature, and to give feedback on this talk page.

Timur Vorkul (WMDE) 14:09, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Sitelink addition request (en español)

Vengo a decirle administrador que traté de enlazar la página en inglés de devil (Star Trek) con la pagina en español de Devil (Q101206419) pero no sé que me pasa. Puedes ayudarme. Está en el articulo Devil's Due (Q5267117) "Devil's Due" (Star Trek: The Next Generation) de Star Trek: The Next Generation donde dice Monster Devil. Thanks you. ( 152.206.236.96 20:14, 22 April 2021 (UTC)).

Use P2052 for orbital speed (Q200924)

The orbital speed (Q200924) is one of the most common characteristic for astronomic objects, but it has no property to inform it. Reading the description of speed (P2052), the example is "specifically" the avg_speed in en:Template:Infobox planet. However, no one astronomical object (Q6999) use this property. Trying to find a previous discussion about that -as there are no discussion entries in Property talk:P2052 - I found one relative discussion assuming that P2052 may use for this situation. So, why has not been use since now? Does somebody know another discussion against its use?. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 06:55, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, you can quite easily derive the speed based on other data. When I have created articles about astronomical object (Q6999), I have always calculated the speed (if I have used it at all). The databases does not have it. But speed can be good to use for such items as 2I/Borisov (Q67328765). But average speed is then maybe not the best data to add. 62 etc (talk) 08:20, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, @Sextvåetc:. I don't really know too much about astronomy, I'm just migrating articles with manual parameters infoboxes to a new WD access infobox. In this process I upload as much as possible info to WD. Are you suggest that I may ignore (not show) orbital average speed?. When you say "easily derive from other data", I assume that these should be shown; which ones are them ?. I appreciate any help you can give me. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 05:09, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
See en:Orbital mechanics. For the mean orbital speed, you can simply get a fair number by using the orbital distance and the orbital period and use your elementary school math. (v=s/t) The maximum and minimum speed in an elliptic orbit is a little more complicated, but fully doable as long as you know the orbital eccentricity (Q208474). 62 etc (talk) 07:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks a lot, @Sextvåetc: --Amadalvarez (talk) 08:47, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Outdated and incorrect titles in WD items and links to WP articles

Is there any way to add some kind of warning on WD items and links to WP articles that some language versions need to update its titles or they are just incorrect? I can't move articles or update titles in many languages due to lack of knowledge so If I update article on EPWP rest of them remains outdated and its missleading. Eurohunter (talk) 09:27, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

  • What kind of "outdated or incorrect" title to you have in mind? What need for "update" (or is it repurposing?) do you see? --- Jura 10:01, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: Whatever. Article at certain WP has wrong name (doesnt matter it's outdated or just wrong). I can't move article there for different reasons. Eurohunter (talk) 12:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
      • If it's just a problem at some Wikipedia, you need to contact them directly, e.g. article talk page, applicable maintenance template, their project chat or (English language) embassy page if there is one. --- Jura 12:28, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
        • @Jura1: Even on French Wikipedia I couldn't get help with title so I wouldn't bother of it + no one gonna do that and mess will remain a mess. There should be Wikidata tools to mark problem. Eurohunter (talk) 12:38, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
If this is about [7], I don't really see what could be the issue. The question for Wikidata is rather if the sitelink is on the correct item (currently Q624167) and French label of Q624167 is accurate (currently "partitionnement de disque"). There is no requirement for the French label to match the page name of the French article (without disambiguation). --- Jura 12:51, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Suggested qualifiers

How I can add suggested non-required qualifiers to property? I found way in the past but forgot. Eurohunter (talk) 12:45, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Cuban Army

I wish to put the allegiance (P945) field in Juan Rojas González (Q2878894), but for the Cuban army prior to the 1959 revolution (not Revolutionary Army (Q18601902)). Is there the corresponding element? --Metrónomo (talk) 15:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

  • In cases like this, it might very well be that there's no existing item and then it makes sense to create a new item. There's no reason to shy away from creating new items about entities like the Cuban army prior to 1959 when editing data about people. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:11, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Q7621806

There is confusion. In the German label it is classified as a Mexican enterprise, while other langauges put it as an Australian shipyard wich have Vietnamise and Fhilipine shipyards. I suspect the Mexican connection is a separate enterprise with the same name.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:07, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

There is a mention of 'Strategic Marine in Vung Tau' in this source [8] I used as part of my search for the builder of Q29311841.Smiley.toerist (talk) 22:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Revert all edits translating names of entities to Scots by user who doesn't speak Scots?

User:AmaryllisGardener famously made thousands of edits to Scots Wikipedia without speaking Scots. Today I noticed that he made 151,628 edits on Wikidata as well. It looks like it's mostly adding a Scots name and a link to Scots Wikipedia and I also saw translating templates. Scots Wikipedia chose to keep the articles created by this person so the links to Wikipedia articles can stay because at least that's true information, but I don't think that means Wikidata should keep the names of entities since this data has a chance of being laughably incorrect, right?

Apologies if this has already been discussed. I remember seeing it discussed on Wikipedia but not Wikidata. Akeosnhaoe (talk) 06:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

I believe @Andrew Gray:'s bot delabeled a bunch of items back in November. @Akeosnhaoe: Are you noticing anything else that should have been reverted but wasn't? Mahir256 (talk) 06:15, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't speak Scots so I don't know. Akeosnhaoe (talk) 07:09, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Akeosnhaoe, Mahir256: The bot was removing all Scots labels as and when the scowp sitelink is removed (or never existed, but had some trouble with the data for that), and synchronising existing labels with scowp article titles if they had been moved. Will poke the data again and do another batch run. Thanks for reminding me to pick this up again - I've been really busy offwiki in recent months and the Scots work dropped off the radar a bit, apologies. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: --- Jura 15:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Links to redirect articles - can they be allowed (hack)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T235420
Tracked in Phabricator
Task T278962

A few years ago there was a RFC on allowing Wikidata links to redirects, which was rejected. I think we should reconsider that decision. There is currently a big push on the English Wikipedia to delete many (possibly thousands) articles on borderline notable sportspeople who satisfy a en:WP:NSPORTS SNG notability requirement (attended an Olympic Games, played professional football, cricket etc) but who don't meet the en:WP:GNG. I am strongly against this, but it seems like it is a lost battle. All of these people definitely should retain their items on WikiData, for data analysis and other similar tasks/uses - and the main argument for deleting them is that we only have database like information on these people, which is appropriate for WikiData..

This week one of those articles that I was involved in was deleted (Peter Rumney (Q22280175). I recreated it as a redirect to the team's historical list of players, but found I couldn't recreate the Wikidata link so I went searching and found the RFC.

Two things stand out to me about that 2018 RFC. Firstly, the main argument was concerned with interwiki language links, not the inherent value of the wikidata - which I admit, isn't diminished that much without an article link, but I have used Petscan in the past to cross check between Wikipedia categories and Wikidata items. But also, back in 2018, I am not sure how common the use of redirect templates, like {{R from member}} or {{R from shortname}} were. Could it be possible to create a list of which of these redirect categorisation templates is valid for a Wikidata link (like member of group), and which don't (like spelling errors, capitalisation etc). Ping User:Lydia_Pintscher_(WMDE), who made some closing comments in that RFC. The-Pope (talk) 15:06, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Links to redirects are allowed, and actually we have specific badges sitelink to redirect (Q70893996) and intentional sitelink to redirect (Q70894304) to indicate redirect pages. However, the technical issue preventing creating links to redirects directly (phab:T54564) has not been resolved yet. The workaround is described at Help:Handling_sitelinks_overlapping_multiple_items#Redirects and Wikidata:Sitelinks_to_redirects#Workaround. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 16:18, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
We've been working on the solution in phab:T278962 and were ready to start coding but when I discussed it more with the developers last week we ran into a conceptual issue with that solution that I hadn't foreseen. I need to find a way around that now with the developers. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:17, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
You can add the link. Change the redirect to something else (invalid or nonsense is fine), add the link, revert yourself at -en- wikipedia. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

constraint

"value-type constraint

Values of parliamentary group statements should be instances of one of the following classes (or of one of their subclasses), but independent politician currently isn't:

  • parliamentary group
  • political party
  • political faction
  • parliamentary grouping
  • independent politician"

In both cases "independent politician" is link to independent politician (Q327591). So where is the problem?

Example, Q52991208#P39. Data Gamer play 23:42, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

I fixed the error. --Gymnicus (talk) 12:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! Data Gamer play 14:08, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:22, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

which Commons link constraint should be updated on Agnes Lawrence Pelton (Q4693071) for Commons Creator page (P1472)

after reading https://wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Property_constraints_portal/Commons_link i am bit confused. which one should i use: file or category? Gi vi an (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2021 (UTC

@Gi vi an: none, the value of this property should link to the Creator page. This is correct here and the confusing warning is a well known bug (see phab:T237920). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:56, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
 Resolved @VIGNERON: thank you for superfast clarification Gi vi an (talk) 13:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:18, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Ask for new Property : Equine Unique Life Number

Hello. Is this : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3551299 can be turned into a new property ? This is an unique number used to identify a horse. Sorry, I don't remember where I can ask for new properties. --Tsaag Valren (talk) 12:36, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tsaag Valren: Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control has the instructions and template to create a proposal. Vahurzpu (talk) 21:05, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Proposal here: Wikidata:Property proposal/Universal equine life number. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 22:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. VIGNERON (talk) 22:25, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Q45858212 (hematophage hematophagy in fr, ru, uk, pt, pl) should be merged with Q939099 (hematophagy in en and all the other languages)

I tried to merge them with: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:MergeItems

But it shows the following error:

> Failed to merge Items, please resolve any conflicts first.

> Error: Conflicting descriptions for language es.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by REDGPU (talk • contribs).

Not the same. Just look at the rest of both items, Q45858212 is actually about hematophages, i.e. any organism that eats blood (regularly), so the label is incorrect. Since you were the one who changed it I would ask you to be more careful with editing biology concepts, and read more. --SCIdude (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
They are the same, one lists hematophages within hematophagy page and the other one describes hematophagy within a short and incomplete list of hematophages, claiming to be a page about hematophages only. If you search for the word "hematophages" on Google, you'll be linked to Q939099 everywhere with no languages of Q45858212 available, even though they describe the same concept. And I would ask you to keep your suggestions that have nothing to do with this issue for yourself. --REDGPU (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Surely hematophage and hematophagy are different concepts, you now seem to agree. If you think the Wikipedia pages are linked with the wrong concept then just move the link to the right concept. --SCIdude (talk) 04:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
REDGPU, I understand your concern. The recommended solution for this case is to setup sitelinks to redirects. As for Google... Just let Google be Google, they are constrained with compromise solutions, but both concepts are known to Google[9][10]. Also, search is region/language dependent, so when I search for the word "hematophages" in ru-RU, I get "The Hematophages by Stephen Kozeniewski" book. --Lockal (talk) 07:48, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Merging of JustSportsStats.com into StatsCrew.com

Hello, please tell me if there's a better place to discuss this. Property Just Sports Stats player ID (P3566) is the identifier of an american or canadian football player on JustSportsStats.com, for instance Q4871372 . Recently, the website has been merged into another website, StatsCrew.com. Both existed previously, showing the same data for a given player but with a different presentation. For the moment all URLs that use justsportsstats.com are redirected to statscrew.com so the change is transparent for now. However, the redirect may disappear some day, and all existing Wikidata entries may become obsolete. New declarations should also use the correct URL. So what is the better thing to do, rename and modify the existing property (if it is even possible), or deprecate it and create a new one ?

Also, Statscrew.com has entries for football coaches as well as players, with a different identifier (for instance, p-paopajoe001 for Joe Paopao as a player, and c-paopajoe001 as a coach). So a second property should be created for that. --Cortomaltais (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Cause of death

Cause of death requires to have only a single value, but some people died due to a combination of various factors, such as influenza in combination with heart disease, and alike. How can this be set? --Jan Kameníček (talk) 08:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jan.Kamenicek: just set two. --Infovarius (talk) 19:23, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Example: Q298364 (bad?) Taylor 49 (talk) 19:31, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Jan is right. This needs a better solution. Creating warnings is not the preferred way to go. Taylor 49 (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Finite projective planes

(Also posted in the Mathematics WikiProject chat, but my question really is more a data issue. Apologies if cross-posting is frowned upon.)

I have a database with just over 10,000 finite projective planes (a type of non-Euclidean geometry) that I have compiled over several years, and I would like to move it into a more durable and usable format. It seems to me that this might be the right repository, but would like the assessment of more experienced users, and am definitely open to ideas on improving the ontology. For each plane in this set, we may have the following data elements:

  • Several descriptive elements: integers and moderate length strings, likely no more than 10,000 characters worth
  • Lines: a list of the lines of the plane in ASCII format, can be up to about 12MB, but vast majority of examples are less than 3MB. Enables creation of the plane.
  • Automorphism group: definitely need to record the order of the automorphism group, but would like to include generators as well (less than 1MB, typically)
  • Linear codes associated with plane: a set of pairs of integers, all known planes only have 1 element
  • Construction Method: a plane may be constructed from a variety of known techniques. Need to include the technique name (which would be its own data element), and any data used by that technique to construct this specific plane
  • Transform Method: a plane may be transformed into another plane from a variety of known techniques. Need to include technique name and (perhaps) data.
  • Description Method: "sporadic" ways in which this plane may been found...may be a computer search, or a one-off academic paper.
  • Substructures: some substructures such as ovals/hyperovals and configurations have are interesting solely as point-sets in a plane...they will have a stabilizer group and may have some other properties. Other substructures (e.g. unitals) have an existence outside the plane, but may or may not be interesting in that context.

I should note that my interest here is not in creating as many planes as possible (others are capably doing that), but rather to codify what is known about projective planes of relatively small order in a public, searchable fashion. So I guess I have a few questions:

  1. Is this sort of data set appropriate for WikiData?
  2. If so, what is the process for creating the ontological elements needed? I have an ontology in an SQL database, but am open to advice/alternatives.

Jeremydover, 18:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

It seems to me that if you can give a reference or heuristic for statements about notable planes, then all is fine. The only other problem I see is the string size of 10k, this cannot be imported into Wikidata, and you need an external database which you can link to. Maybe this info is already out there? --SCIdude (talk) 04:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Is the "lines" and "automorphism group" data a matrix? If yes it could be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons as mw:Help:Tabular_Data and then linked to the new Wikidata item using a new property which could be proposed with the "Tabular data" type. If on the other hand it's multiple column or row vectors of varying lengths, and order is important, I think you would have to create each column/row vector as mw:Help:Tabular_Data then map multiple of these to each Wikidata item using qualifier series ordinal (P1545) to specify the order. Do you have an example of the data that would be imported? --Dhx1 (talk) 06:36, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Scratch that, tabular data fields are limited to 400 characters and the overall tabular data pages are limited to 2MB. I think you're best hosting the data in files someplace else and then linking the data using described at URL (P973) (with file format (P2701) as a qualifier). --Dhx1 (talk) 11:19, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Wikidata isn't mainly a project to upload existing datasets to but has it's own linked data structure and to upload data to Wikidata it needs to be brought into Wikidata's ontology. Sometimes Wikidata misses properties and it makes sense to propose new ones but describing different data with the same ontology is core to what Wikidata is about.
Some data such as large files also don't belong to Wikidata and when the file format isn't supported by WikiCommons can't be integrated at all.
When it comes to websites that are actually about people uploading their datasets in a more durable way https://archive.org/details/datasets might be a good place to go. : Github is another place worth thinking about. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  • 1) Is it your original research, Jeremydover? If so, it's not a proper content for Wikidata. 2) According to your estimates I count totally ~100 Gb of data, which is rather a big amount for Wikidata to eat. 3) I suggest to build your own Wikibase instance (probably with some modifications in order to overcome size restrictions mentioned above) and to open in to public. If it get a good reputation then it would be sometime possible to connect from Wikidata by some federation. --Infovarius (talk) 19:49, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Thanks to all for your comments. Based on the information, I think most users are right that my dataset is not a great fit here. Jeremydover (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #465

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Development
    • wbeditentity now supports editing statements on Senses (phab:T199896)
    • We added syntax highlighting for viewing Entity Schema pages. There is not syntax highlighting for editing of Entity Schemas yet. (phab:T238831)
    • Improved the way Lua deals with redirects (phab:T238831)
    • Worked on making it possible to add a title to the top of a query visualization via a comment in the SPARQL code (phab:T225883)
    • Discussed how to get persistent storage of constraint violations unstuck as this is a prerequisite to making it easier to analyze and query constraint violations (phab:T214362)
    • Discussed a high-level plan for how to move forward with checking Wikidata's data against 3rd-party databases
    • Finished work on version 1 of the Query Builder. Not it is awaiting security review before we can deploy it.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Broken example over 8 Km elevation

Wikidata:SPARQL_query_service/queries/examples#Mountains_over_8000_meters_elevation is broken. It generates a large number of false positives (example: Q636706). The reason are imperialistic units (inch, foot, yard, ...). Proposed solution: strongly deprecate imperialistic units (here and alltogether on this wiki, and all other wikies, and elsewhere) and convert them by a bot to unit meter. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

That's not the way it's done, Taylor 49. Someone has written a report which does not make use of normalised values, and you, on the basis of a deficient report and, presumably, not apprehending the existence of normalised values, wish to deprecate the measurement system of the greater part of the world / world history. That's not going to happen. (Mind, Jura's solution is good, too.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:18, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
Jura's "solution" is useless, although maybe "formally correct". The "system of the greater part of the world" probably means USA only. Greatness is relative. Taylor 49 (talk) 17:44, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
So long as we're clear that your ridiculous proposed solution is based on your misunderstanding of the problem and your lack of awareness of the extant solution, then we're good. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:53, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
My solution is not ridiculous. It is the simplest and most efficient one. When comparing elevations of mountains, I prefer to see comparable numbers. You have not yet explained the alleged benefit with your "solution" with having every mountain measured with different units. The unit meter is well defined. Many of your imperialistic units are different in USA compared to UK, different on the sea compared to on land, different depending on the goods involved, etc. Until someone explains the benefits with that system for me, I will continue considering it ridiculous. There is no misunderstanding of the problem on my side. Taylor 49 (talk) 18:31, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
You still going, @Taylor 49:? It's like this - and, had you bothered to follow the link above (here it is again) and inform yourself, you would by now know this - when you enter a quantity value into wikidata in, say, feet, or miles, or kilometres, wikidata automatically creates a parallel value normalised to metres. It does the same thing for many quantity values - creates an SI unit base value. These are called 'normalised values'. This enables reporting against all items having quantity statements, based on the normalised values - metres, for instance - irrespective of the units used at the time of data input. Wikidata does not need to deprecate imperial or other non-metric units in order to enable users to be able to report across items using a consistent unit. It already offers this facility by dint of its normalised values. The mainly rhetorical question for you is, why are you trying to solve a problem which does not exist? And the answer is, I'm sorry to say, because you do not understand wikidata's data model. And that's fine, as far as it goes; it only becomes tedious when, despite being pointed at the information necessary to see the folly of your proposal, you continue with your performative ignorance. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
I see that the query has now been fixed to use normalized units (thanks @Jklamo!). Bovlb (talk) 22:35, 24 April 2021 (UTC)
I added a few more samples. I believe there is some didactic value in querying unitless best ranked values first. --- Jura 12:58, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Please stop making me look like a fool ("trying to solve a problem which does not exist", "continue with your performative ignorance", "folly of your proposal"). The example was severely broken. It is less relevant that meters reportedly are internally stored. They were invisible on Q636706. The correct query is more complicated than the previous broken one. My comments were based on what I saw, and nothing of it has been proven wrong. Taylor 49 (talk) 19:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)


As it has been proposed to normalize units by a bot, I quickly wanted to mention that we should not do that (irrespective or the origin of this discussion): Values should be entered in Wikidata exactly as given in a source. Normalization is then happening on the fly, say, in queries - assuming the appropriate use of normalized property values (which has been pointed out already). The reasons are:
  • Comparing a stated value with the source is easier.
  • There might be losses in precision during conversion. Therefore conversions should only be done when needed (say, for a query).
  • (In the unlikely event that humankind continues to invent new and imcompatible unit systems, bots would have to continue converting values to the latest units, thereby accumulating conversion errors.)
Toni 001 (talk) 04:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata items aren't updated on Wikipedia after using merge.js

I am experiencing a problem after merging items: The merge itself on Wikidata works perfectly fine but if I click on "Wikidata item" at Wikipedia, I still get to the redirected item. Because of that interwiki links in the "languages" section aren't shown as well. This has happened both on enwiki and on dewiki:

--PhiH (talk) 11:55, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Everything looks fine to me. Caching issue now cleared? --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:14, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
It works on en:Pulse code cab signaling now, on de:Eisenbahnunfall von Chureb it doesn't. I have never had a problem like that before, especially after multiple hours, but if everything looks fine to you, I guess it's just the cache. --PhiH (talk) 12:29, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

interwiki conflict Commons category (P373) on Marie Laurencin (Q233088)

i am trying to add Multilingual sites -> commonswiki -> Category:Marie Laurencin. but it shows interwiki conflict warning. i fully didnot understood how to report there. hence asking for help here. how should i resolve? Gi vi an (talk) 06:21, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

That's because the commons categorie is already associated with a different Wikidata item: Category:Marie Laurencin (Q59510182). Circeus (talk) 16:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Using required qualifiers in Property proposals

Can anyone show me how to add and mark a qualifier in the creation of a new property proposal. Pmt (talk) 18:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Separating articles

Hi, so after creating the article "Evdilsemedê Babek"[11] on English Wikipedia and thereafter connected it Abdussamed Babek (Q6419131), I noticed that this code is home to two different historical persons, with similar surnames. Can we separate the articles in Arabic and Persian Wikipedia from the rest? Thanks in advance. --Semsûrî (talk) 20:53, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with conflation

Kunigunde of Poland (Q3487816) is two people 150 years apart. --RAN (talk) 01:15, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

The later person was added by Gamaliel, possibly to the wrong item. I have moved those statements to Kunigunde of Austria (Q106601181). — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:18, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I suspect the other person is actually Kunigunde of Austria (Q237712), so Kunigunde of Austria (Q106601181) probably needs merging. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:29, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
I've checked the source material and, yes, I should have edited Q237712 instead. I will merge it with Q106601181. Gamaliel (talk) 12:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks! --RAN (talk) 06:12, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Data provenance

I was wondering where I can find information with regards to the data provenance. For example, what information is stored about edits of an item, and how complete is this? Does this tell us whether edits were made by bots or humans (without manual inspection), and can this edit by linked to a set of edits (perhaps a batch of statements was modified?)  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wsslr (talk • contribs) at 08:03, April 23, 2021‎ (UTC).

@Wsslr: All changes to any Wikidata entity or page are recorded - see the "View history" link on a page. If you follow the "Recent changes" link in the main menu you can see that there are filters for human vs bot edits and many other attributes. Many edits are also grouped for example with the EditGroups feature, or Quickstatements batches which can be traced via links in the edit summary. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:37, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
while true it would be nice if there were O(1) access to this kind of information. For example was the last edit to this statement by an IP? Or an admin? Or a bot? BrokenSegue (talk) 14:52, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

I see, thanks. Additionally, I believe a lot of data is imported from other sources. For instance, a common place of death (P20) entry is Theresienstadt (Q160175). I assume these are all imported from another dataset. Is there some way to link items back to their original source without having to crawl the edit history? Wsslr (talk) 09:17, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

question about various P279 uses

I have a question about some of the ways subclass of (P279) is used.

  1. Every polyhedron I've looked at -- cube (Q812880), tetrahedron (Q160003), octahedron (Q188884), dodecahedron (Q178296), etc. -- is directly or indirectly subclass of (P279)polyhedron (Q172937). I would have expected instance of (P31).
  2. Similarly, I've just noticed that gallon (Q178413) is subclass of (P279)unit of volume (Q1302471). Again, I would have expected instance of (P31).

I suppose the second one might make sense if things like gallon (US) (Q23925413) and gallon (UK) (Q23925410) were instance of (P31)gallon (Q178413), but they're not; they're both units of volume (Q1302471).

I know it can be hard to figure out what's an instance and what's a class, but can anyone offer any comments on these two examples? Thanks. —Scs (talk) 17:27, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

I think the consensus is to reserve P31 for real-world material objects. Both examples you give are not. --SCIdude (talk) 17:41, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
Almost. (A) cube - a concept - is a subclass of a polyhedron. The cube on my shelf is an instance of a polyhedron. A gallon is an instance of a unit of volume. The gallon of petrol in my can is an instance of a gallon. See also subclasses of unit of volume instances of unit of volume --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:47, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm afraid I can't agree with that "real-world material object" criterion at all! Neither metre (Q11573), green (Q3133), 1 (Q199), nor happiness (Q8) are objects in the real word, but they're all instance of (P31) their respective classes. —Scs (talk) 18:04, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
There is a qualitative difference between these cases. metre (Q11573), 1 (Q199) are both members of a countable set and P31 cannot be replaced with P279. They are clearly end-nodes in the graph. --SCIdude (talk) 04:30, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
  • About units: Every unit which has a unique conversion factor to another unit is an instance (directly or indirectly) of the class unit of measurement (Q47574). There are different gallons out there, that why gallon (Q178413) is a class of units, with an item for each distinct definition being a member (completely describing historic units is a huge task - therefore some such statements might still be missing).
  • About geometric figures: cube (Q812880) can be considered a class of cubes which have their position and orientation fixed.
Toni 001 (talk) 08:40, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for these answers, although I confess I'm still about as confused as when I started. When I'm not sure whether to use wdt:P31/wdt:P279* or wdt:P279*, I guess I'll just try both. —Scs (talk) 10:30, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunately, you're right, there are significant exceptions. So, at least for now, if I want a definitive list of all the X's of type Y in Wikidata, I can't make a confident prediction of whether the X's are going to be instances or classes. In general, to be on the safe side, I think I am going to have to run three queries involving
  1. wdt:P31/wdt:P279*
  2. wdt:P279*
  3. wdt:P31/wdt:P279* ∪ wdt:P279*
and then see which of the three seems to give the best results. (Today, to cite three examples of interest to me, I believe it's #1 for islands (Q23442), #2 for polyhedra (Q172937), and #3 for units (Q47574). And, yes, I know, ∪ isn't how you do unions in SPARQL. :-) ) —Scs (talk) 14:50, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

IP Masking Engagement

Hello Wikidata community,

This is about IP Masking Engagement on Wikidata.

The Anti-Harassment Tools team wants to engage the community on IP Masking. The point of the engagement is to understand how the project will impact editors. Also, we want to know which other tools you will need to be able to effectively govern the projects in absence of IPs.

Please read more on the IP Masking project here.

Let us know your thoughts.

STei (WMF) (talk) 12:05, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

New essay: of (P642) considered harmful

User:Lucas Werkmeister/P642 considered harmful is an essay I wrote, advising against the use of the qualifier of (P642). I invite you to read it and leave feedback on the talk page.

(Disclaimer: this is totally unrelated to my work at WMDE, which is why it’s posted under my private account.) Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 15:38, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

I basically agree that it is impossible for of (P642) to be machine interpretable. It is so very context sensitive. I would like to see a proposal to capture much of the value of of (P642) at the same time as removing it though. Or at the very least guidance on how to do the same thing without it. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:18, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
  • I tend to agree with the analysis, but come to the opposite conclusion: I find it mostly harmless. Obviously, if there is more specific property to do the same, that should be used. --- Jura 17:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for taking the time to describe what is wrong with this property. Whenever I saw this property being used I somehow felt reminded of some of last century's science fiction trying to imagine how artificial intelligence might sound and reason like; or like the (good faith) intent to store as much information as possible in an item - things that might be better represented by dedicated properties or in a Wikipedia article. Toni 001 (talk) 04:59, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
@Toni 001:, this may sound strange, but current usage is fully compatible even with modern AI development. The biggest working example is a Google Knowledge graph (there are few publicly available patents for those who are interested). For smart enough encoder there is no difference between sentence "seiyu is the word for voice actors in anime and Japanese films"/"Сэйю — японские актёры озвучивания"/etc., statement seiyū (Q622807)subclass of (P279)voice actor (Q2405480)of (P642)Japan (Q17) (as currently stated in seiyū (Q622807)), or any other ways to represent connection to Japan. "of" here is just an object in a latent space of human representation, which various people represent slightly different. So when "seiyū" occupation is added to any human, even without citizenship or birthplace statement it increases the Bayesian probability of person being related to Japan. Such implications also play an important role during automatic graph reconciliation (which may even form an avalanche effect, e. g. there were hundred of duplicate songs by dupe person -> person was marked as seiyū -> algo deduced that person is the same -> branches were merged). Therefore, even though "P642 considered harmful", there is some justification for using it until a better qualifier proposed. --Lockal (talk) 09:55, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for you explanation. I agree with the conclusion that we should strive to migrate current uses of "of" instead of simply deleting them. Toni 001 (talk) 05:27, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
I like the essay. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:02, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
We previously had a similar vague qualifier "as". We finally get rid of it (object has role (P3831) is created in this process). Simply we need to propose some other qualifier as replacement. BTW: Usage of P31 as qualifier is long deprecated but still common.--GZWDer (talk) 14:14, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
May be English-speakers are now happy, me not. I always fail to choose between object has role (P3831) and subject has role (P2868). --Infovarius (talk) 13:42, 20 April 2021 (UTC)
Very good write-up, but still lacks replacement suggestions for many P279 examples there. It raises the same issue as with "P31 as qualifier". It may sound like an easy thing to fix, but when you dip into (currently) 184k constraint violations, it gets tough. --Lockal (talk) 16:41, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

User talk:199.216.41.253

This user has vandalized some items (arbitrarily changing numbers, adding pin-up/porny images). I don't know how to do warnings on Wikidata. Could someone else warn this user? Thanks, Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

This belongs to WD:AN.--GZWDer (talk) 18:58, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
I don't think administrator action is required here at this point (?). Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:08, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Three weeks since last edit. I see no strong indication that there will be future vandalism from this IP. Nevertheless, I have left a warning as you requested. Bovlb (talk) 23:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Main page link not to main page in some language

I am currently using Sundanese as my interface language and the link for Wikidata:Main Page on the left of my screen and on the Wikidata logo both lead to the non-existing page Tepas ("main page" in Sundanese). How do we fix this so that it leads to the Main Page? I tried looking in translatewiki but didn't find any clue where to fix. RXerself (talk) 14:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Would a translator administrator sufficient also able to fix this? RXerself (talk) 18:14, 28 April 2021 (UTC) I just realized that it is in MediaWiki namespace so only administrators. RXerself (talk) 18:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata:Forsíða/is only exists because it so happens that "Forsíða" is an noun for "main page" both in Faroese and Icelandic. This naming is also used on commons.--Snaevar (talk) 17:03, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
  • That explains "Forsíða/is" instead of just "Forsíða", but the main difference is that they use a different layout. Other languages such as French use "Wikidata:Main Page" with content from a subpage (the default for French is "Accueil"; frwiki uses "Wikipédia:Accueil_principal"). Peter James (talk) 21:53, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

How to start without mistakes...

I have never created a new item. I have gathered certain data that I think is sufficient. I took the tour... but I wish somebody could walk me through the first one. Can I discuss step by step? Or is there a tour for that? Klarm768 (talk) 15:09, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Klarm768 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:NewItem to start, then add statements one at a time (tip: pressing "A" on your keyboard is a shortcut to add statements). The first statement you add should be instance of (P31), which will help in suggesting subsequent properties to add. If your item is a human, you can use the New Q5 tool to save time (you'll need to authorize QuickStatements beforehand). And don't worry about mistakes, items can always be edited afterwards. -Animalparty (talk) 18:58, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
And feel free to create the item and ask for feedback here afterwards. I'd be happy to help. Popperipopp (talk) 21:30, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Popperipopp I created a new Valentine Green (Q106645268) Then added some statements. When I tried to make publish to Wikisource Could not save due to an error. The save has failed. Site link enwikisource:Author:Valentine Green is already used by item Q87470610. Perhaps the items should be merged. Ask at d:Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts if you believe that they should not be merged. But what if it SHOULD be merged? Do I just leave that for somebody else? Am I done? I wanted to also enter some statements of parents & grandparent but could not discover statement for such. Klarm768 (talk) 06:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Somehow relevant... I also found this disambiguation entry that could probably be linked by somebody: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valentine_Green Klarm768 (talk) 06:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Klarm768: are they the same person? if so merge them yourself (you probably want the merge widget to do this). if they are not the same then you shouldn't link both to that wikisource item. if they are the same you probably should've edited the original item instead of making a new one. BrokenSegue (talk) 07:11, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue: Yes, they are the same person. I created enwikisource:Author:Valentine Green 6 August 2019‎. I cannot say who created its link to Wikidata. Yes, I should've known all the ways to make mistakes before I created my first Wikidata Item... I should've called it How to start without mistakes... I don't care to hear how I should've used "merge widget" the first time either. I would prefer explicit guidance... or at least a list of all the ways that merge can be done incorrectly. Klarm768 (talk) 07:52, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Klarm768: I told you how to fix the problem and what should have happened optimally. Nothing irreversibly bad has happened. You learned something and we move on. I'm not saying you should've used the merge widget. I said you should use it now to combine the redundant items. I cannot list all the ways something can be done wrong. I'm afraid there is no way to start without mistakes without someone sitting with you. BrokenSegue (talk) 08:08, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Klarm768: No worries! I went ahead and merged the two items. Should be good to go now. Popperipopp (talk) 09:23, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Popperipopp: Thanks. Is it possible to remove the little box from the label? " Valentine Green" so that it is discoverable with a wikidata search for Valentine Green? Klarm768 (talk) 09:35, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Help me find a hidden Q number

Look at the bottom of Wikidata:Database reports/items with P569 greater than P570 there is someone who died before they are born, but the Q number does not display. Any ideas how to find it. --RAN (talk) 03:16, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T267927
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): You can click "WDQS" link above the query and reexecute it. After that you can find that the problematic item is Q106476475. And it was deleted on 18.04.2021. So the question is why there are still 19 triples in Blazegraph? Probably nobody knows, there are dozens of similar reports in Phabricator. Such issues usually disappear after data reload (next reload is T267927). --Lockal (talk) 07:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

[Something] in [this country]

Hello, given this example, railway stations in Libya (Q18209808), shouldn't the subclass of (P279) be removed, replaced by instance of (P31)=Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) + is a list of (P360)=railway station (Q55488) ? --Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 06:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

probably yeah actually taking a look it isn't really a list article. I think it's debatable. BrokenSegue (talk) 07:12, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

is there any way to search at once for sitelinks

there are 8 wikimedia project links under sitelinks for each {{q}}. i would like to add as many as possible. is there any way to search all of them at once? probably any tool! Gi vi an (talk) 13:24, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

By & large: no. If an article or resource exists on a wikimedia property, but is not sitelinked to its appropriate wikidata item, then the link between the article and the item has not been established; and thus there is little or nothing for a tool to go on to establish such a link. I think you're looking for a magic wand; & for that reason will be disappointed. https://petscan.wmflabs.org/ is probably the best bet for this area of work, but it works on an individual wikimedia site basis, and in any event does not actually marry articles with no item, to their appropriate item, without user assistance. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:38, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Tagishsimon first i want to search, verify and confirm. at last i will update first at wikidata and then explore or learn how to add in another sister projects. i will look into it. thank u :) Gi vi an (talk) 14:06, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
i found https://global-search.toolforge.org bit useful. however, i am at loss about how to find namespace ID for other projects Gi vi an (talk) 14:31, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
Listed here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Namespace#built-in-namespaces and here: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Manual:Namespace_constants ... the namespace is always specified in the Information page for any page, such as https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=File:ISS061-E-148123_-_View_of_Earth.jpg&action=info found via the Page Information left-side menu link on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ISS061-E-148123_-_View_of_Earth.jpg . --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
 Resolved i have been trying or verifying various articles and mostly the results are good on global search with namespaces: 0,6,14. it takes time to understand or we will lost if the result is too large. thanks again for quick responses. Gi vi an (talk) 10:45, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

if 2 genuine single-value constraint contain on Find NZ Artists ID (P6792)

i have noticed and added second single-value constraint on Rita Angus (Q7336470); 17824, 328 it shows error: "single-value constraint" how to resolve this? Gi vi an (talk) 07:29, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gi vi an: I updated the constraint, so now you can add "named as" qualifiers ("Angus, Rita" and "Cook, Rita", accordingly) and it will fix the constraint violation. --Lockal (talk) 09:14, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
 Resolved @Lockal: thank you for fixing it. i have updated item also. i hope its correct. Gi vi an (talk) 10:38, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

PositionHolderHistory

Is anyone familiar with Template:PositionHolderHistory, I can't find how some interim mayors or governors appear in italics in lists. Does anyone know how it is done? Is there a specific word I need in "end cause"? --RAN (talk) 01:36, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): The P39 statement needs a qualifier "nature of statement": acting (Q4676846). Mahir256 (talk) 06:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

add new reference or overwrite on Mother and Child (Q27965517)

i noticed there are start and time for collection on website, after little bit of hesitation, i changed start time and added end time. should i create new reference for "end time" or change existing reference retrieved and reference url? Gi vi an (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Gi vi an: thanks for helping out! You seem to have mixed up two concepts: collection (P195) indicates that a work is held in a collection. For that we only have a source that this started in 2015.
Your source is about an exhibition that happens to include this recently acquired painting. For this you can use exhibition history (P608). I created the missing item and moved the statement. On Wikidata:WikiProject Visual arts/Item structure you can find (extended) documentation on how to model art. Multichill (talk) 16:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Multichill: i will look into docs. one more query: can we update location of exhibition (Scottish National Gallery Of Modern Art (Modern Two)) in exhibition history? or will it conflict with already updated location? Gi vi an (talk) 17:37, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Winner description/instructions

I cannot interpret the description on winner (P1346):

winner of an event or an award; on award items use P166/P1346 on the item for the awarded work instead; do not use for wars or battles

The items seem self-explanatory, but these instructions are incorrectly punctuated, unparseable into sentences, and appear backwards. Help! —Michael Z. 13:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Wiki project for time zones

Hi, I was wondering if it would be a good idea for me or someone else to make a wiki project dedicated to adding time zones to locations, human settlements, or anything a time zone maybe needed for. I wanted to know other peoples thoughts on this or if there’s a more general wiki project that already does this? Ianbambooman (talk) 19:51, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Is it not as easy to use the located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) hierarchy to establish time zone for an item? --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:57, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Time zones are terrifically complicated. A while back I completed the creation of entities for of all the IANA time zones (Q17272692), although I stopped short of applying them to millions of items. I basically agree with Tagishsimon. While it may be slightly harder for a would-be queryer to use located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), I believe it's vastly preferable for us to offload that work onto the queryer, rather than trying to keep every single other entity's explicit time-zone indication up-to-date, which would be a Herculean task. (If we decided we wanted every other entity to have an explicit time-zone indicator, I believe we'd want to set up a bot to maintain them all automatically, based on P131. There's also the tricky question of whether those explicit indicators should be to "ordinary" time zones, to pair of DST-qualified time zones, to potentially multiple time zones with valid in period (P1264) qualifiers, or to IANA time zones, which incorporate those other nuances.) —Scs (talk) 21:43, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I do have a "minimal" list of mappings between IANA time zones (Q17272692) and the largest coterminous administrative territorial entities (Q56061), which I really need to import some day. The idea would be that a queryer chases P131 until finding an enclosing entity that has a located in time zone (P421) property. —Scs (talk) 21:49, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
See also discussion at Property talk:P421, especially the "Named time zones or UTC, again" thread. —Scs (talk) 22:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Golfdata ID

Hi all. I have just started [13] in order to add the ID's for golfers on [14] to wikidata. But what else do i have t fill in now on this new page? Ernie (talk) 00:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ernie: you probably should go to Wikidata:Property_proposal and propose we make a new property for this database and then go about tagging existing golfers with it. you also should add information to Golfdata (Q106651262). A good start would be to add an instance of (P31) to it. Maybe website (Q35127) would be appropriate. BrokenSegue (talk) 00:34, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Changing the order of items in each property

I'd like to be able to change the order of items in each property. As for publication date, I would like the order of items to be automatically decided like properties. For example, Moribito: Guardian of the Spirit was published in Spain 8 years before it was in Vietnam, but its publication date in Vietnam goes above that in Spain in Wikidata and it's bothersome to delete items before adding them again. --YukaSylvie (talk) 08:24, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Tohaomg/rearrange_values.js which I think is loadable using mw.loader.load( '//www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User:Tohaomg/rearrange values.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript' ); presumably in your common.js. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:39, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! --YukaSylvie (talk) 01:02, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

Please don't rearrange statements like this. There is no point (order has no meaning in wikidata) and it crowds the page history. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:40, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

+1. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

wbeditentity now supports editing statements on Senses

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T199896

Hello all,

This announcement is relevant for people using the APIs to edit Lexemes, for example building tools on top of Wikidata.

We’re happy to let you know that a feature that was missing for a long time, the ability to edit statements on Senses from wbeditentity, has now been added. This means that adding or editing statements on Senses given a Lexeme ID or a Sense ID is possible, as well as creating new Senses with statements.

You can now use the 'claims' property within Sense objects in the JSON data passed to wbeditentity when editing or adding Senses, just like you would use it for other Entity types.

We hope that this improvement will allow the creation of more editing tools for Lexemes, as well as the support of Lexemes in existing tools.

If you encounter any issue or have questions, feel free to contact me or to add a comment on the Phabricator task. Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 14:14, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

Hooray! Thanks and good blessings to all. -Animalparty (talk) 03:23, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
FYI I have already updated moveClaim.js (and its fork) to support moves to/from senses. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:26, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikidata properties for tribes?

Right now there is an item for Ethnic group and for one for Family, but the first is very broad, and the second can be very narrow, I think maybe having the ability to link people to their tribes would be a good idea.*Treker (talk) 20:10, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

@*Treker: ethnic group (P172) is probably what you want, I believe tribes are currently listed as instances of ethnic group (Q41710), for example Shinnecock Nation (Q241285) (or are you looking for a less general grouping still? Do you have an example?). However, I've been wondering for a while if that class should be subdivided as at least Native American groups are more well-defined and organized than most "ethnic groups". ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:33, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: No as I said above I think ethnic group is too broad to be of help a lot of the time, and I agree fully with your comment on Native American peoples, they are primarily identified by their tribe and I think it's a big oversight that Wikidata has not yet introduced a property to for this, it would especially be helpful since people can identify and be of different ethnicities while still be part of the same tribe. For example you can be mixed native and white (Métis), or mixed native and black, or even an adopted memeber of a tribe.*Treker (talk) 13:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm unclear why, if located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) can cope with anything in the continuum parish, local authority, nation, sovereign state (to take the UK hierarchy), ethnic group (P172) cannot deal with ethnic groups defined at whatever level of granularity your sources support. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:10, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: I'm unsure of what you're saying. located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) is clearly a location property and has nothing to do with membership or belonging to a tribe. As far as I see it it's not nowhere good enough.*Treker (talk) 13:32, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
To use examples cited in this thread, if "Shinnnecock Indian" is an ethnic group, and "Shinnnecock Indian of mixed native and white ancestry" is a subclass of that group, why cannot "Shinnnecock Indian of mixed native and white ancestry" be considered a valid value for P172? Why is a new property required? --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Because in the United States a recognized tribe is like a citizenship, it's not just ethnicity or location.*Treker (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
" it's not just ethnicity or location", but it is ethnicity, and its subclasses are also ethnic groups, so the question goes unanswered. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:46, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ Just to clarify, because the discussion has failed to do so... Here we're talking about something halfway between ethnic group (P172) and country of citizenship (P27) for recognized native tribes in the U.S. because

Circeus (talk) 18:21, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: I'm having a hard time understand what your issue with my points are. Yes a tribe can also be an ethnic group, but that's not ensured and it's also not the only thing a tribe is.*Treker (talk) 21:20, 29 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you @ArthurPSmith:. I will prepare a proposal soon.*Treker (talk) 15:04, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps Māori iwi is also an example. Ghouston (talk) 04:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
Generally, as I understand it, when you are talking about groups defined by descent, the associated concepts are race, tribe, or family group, while if you are talking about culture, without regard to descent, it's ethnicity. They seem to be mixed up a lot in practice. Ghouston (talk) 04:52, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

FYI, if anyone is creating new items or properties: in Canada we don’t use tribe, and it may have negative connotations. What was commonly called an Indian band is more properly a First Nation, and Indians are called First Nations people. Although one might have more or less First-Nations ancestry, they are either legally a status Indian or not (but there might be different attangements in the province of British Columbia).

Métis doesn’t mean “half-First Nations” or whatever, but a member of a separate Indigenous group, the Métis Nation, which has its own culture and language, and is not organized in bands or tribes.

The third Indigenous group in Canada is the Inuit.

IMO, I think in general, more broadly than in an Indigenous-peoples context, the colonial-age idea of “ethnic group” might be giving way to concepts of nation, civic nation, or national identity. —Michael Z. 08:48, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Balearic Islands

There is a user who is editing the item Q5765 –Balearic Islands (Spain)– for days to modify the description in several languages ​​of "autonomous community of Spain" by "western Mediterranean archipelago"...

The Balearic Islands is an autonomous community of Spain as California is a state of the United States. It can only be justified on ideological and political grounds. This nationalist terminology has no justification. Removing the description in Catalan and Portuguese, saying that Spanish is not a native language in the region, or that English and German are Balearic languages ​​is totally out of place.

Specifically the user insists on preserving political and nationalist terms, I have corrected them and he insists that they be maintained. Imagine that the item Sicily is described as "central Mediterranean island" instead of "region of Italy". This case is exactly the same. There is an ideological (nationalist) motivation on the part of the user, and this cannot be allowed. It detracts from Wikidata's credibility.

I request to restore the correct edition. Lopezsuarez (talk) 19:29, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

If I'm understanding the edit history, you, Lopezsuarez, insist the label be "autonomous community of Spain" and FogueraC insists on "western Mediterranean archipelago". The geographical-based label seems neutral. The political-based label - yours - may not be - I don't know anything about the current or historic politics of the occupancy of the islands, but I presume there's a dispute. Your presumption that your take is the correct take is erroneous. The edit war you have been involved in detracts from wikidata's credibility far more than FogueraC's label. I suggest you should step away from this issue altogether, for the reason that you do not give the impression that you are working from a neutral point of view. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:52, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Spain Bovlb (talk) 22:30, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: Occupancy?! Dispute?! I really think you don't have much information about Spain. Spain is divided into 17 autonomous communities (regions) and 2 autonomous cities. One of them is the Balearic Islands. Describing the Balearic Islands as "an archipelago in the Western Mediterranean" is totally ridiculous and the intention is to omit any mention of Spain by a nationalist minority. How can it not be neutral to say that Asturias, Madrid, Aragon or the Balearic Islands are autonomous communities of Spain? Isn't it neutral to say that Hawaii is a state of the United States? Or is Occitania not a region of France? I honestly cannot understand your comment. Lopezsuarez (talk) 01:42, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: By the way, the description in Portuguese literally says that the Balearic Islands is an "Arquipélago do Mediterrâneo Oriental" (Eastern Mediterranean archipelago). Spain is not in the eastern Mediterranean area (Cyprus, Turkey, Syria, Lebanon, Israel and Egypt) but in the western area. It is tremendously frustrating that this error persists and that it cannot be corrected for the political reasons of a nationalist user. Lopezsuarez (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
You are not trying to correct an east/west error. You say <<Describing the Balearic Islands as "an archipelago in the Western Mediterranean" is totally ridiculous>> and yet en.wkipedia's lead paragraph says <<The Balearic Islands are an archipelago of islands in Spain in the western Mediterranean Sea, near the eastern coast of the Iberian Peninsula.>> Using a geographical rather than a political/possessional description is only non-neutral from a perspective that sees Spanish (rather than, for instance, Catalan) possession of the islands as their key attribute. Your assertion that an uncontroversial and, per en.wiki, used geographical disambiguator is ridiculous merely draws attention, once again, to your own strong - which is to say non-neutral - view of the matter. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:08, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
The item now is a conflation, an instance both of archipelago (Q33837) and autonomous community of Spain (Q10742) (and others), although autonomous community of Spain (Q10742) has been given higher rank (for no reason that I can see). It mostly has statements that apply to the administrative entity, such as inception (P571) and flag (P163). Ghouston (talk) 04:50, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
If it's to remain as a conflation, the description should probably be something like "archipelago and autonomous community of Spain". Ghouston (talk) 04:52, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
An alternative would be to split this item into the geographic entity (the archipelago) and the political entity (the autonomous community). Presumably the former has existed for considerably longer than the latter (and it may well, in future, outlast it). Bovlb (talk) 05:03, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Isn't that what we always should do? The region of Spain has a flag, was founded in historical time and have an administration. The region is made out of the humans living there. The islands are made out of rock. They were founded in pre-historic time and will most likely outlive the whole human race. 62 etc (talk) 05:38, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Two different, right. --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 06:28, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Split into two different elements, right: the political one (autonomous community of Spain) and the other archipielago. The first with a Property:P706 linking to the second. And each statement and sitelink should be careful checked to be at the right place. I guess there will be similar ambiguity problems doing this. But it's fair. Olea (talk) 07:45, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
Agree, this is probably what should have been done a while ago. Compare Solomon Islands (Q685) vs. Solomon Islands (Q148966). Circeus (talk) 14:21, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
possible I am misinterpreting this, but isn't the basic reason for there being 2 Solomon Islands entries that Solomon Islands the country is a subset of the archipelago. As the archipelago comprises a set of islands administered by multiple nations, one entry can not cover both concepts. This would not be the case for this situation. I'm unclear how splitting the Balearic islands into two concepts will remove or address the initial issue which is users not accepting Spanish administration of the islands. Won't it simply move the dispute to that page ? Unless the intent is to tell those users it must be accepted on the 'political' entity. CanadianCodhead (talk) 16:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
I agree that splitting the articles may not be very usefull in this case. For the instance of (P31) property, we could just add start time (P580) and end time (P582) as qualifiers of the political instances (province 1833-, region 1833-1982, autonomy 1982-). And for the descriptions, both the geographic definition and the political definition are correct, so I would just respect what each language community has preferred. For me there is no problem to have the political definition in Spanish and English, the geographical one in Catalan and Portuguese, and a mix of them in German and Dutch. --FogueraC (talk) 17:54, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
I think if an administrative entity changes significantly, it should be a new item. If the Balearic Islands ever becomes independent, a new item should be created for the new state, with a specific inception date. Autonomous Region of Bougainville (Q18826) is an example where this is more likely to happen: I suppose some people will be tempted just to change the label, but I'd say a new state should have a new item. Likewise, Autonomous Region of Bougainville (Q18826) can be distinguished from North Solomons (Q84103102), which probably takes the same territory, but had a different administrative status. I doubt that it's very controversial to say that the autonomous community of the Balearic Islands exists, even among people who would prefer that it didn't exist. Ghouston (talk) 22:30, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
In general, we can also make a distinction between administrative entities and the regions that they administrate (the area on a map). The latter has area, land use, buildings, population, the former has employees and typically an administrative hierarchy. We have, for example, Bristol City Council (Q16953796) has jurisidiction City of Bristol (Q21693433). We may also say Government of France (Q1450662) has jurisdiction France (Q142), but that doesn't really work the same way, since the former isn't the entire state, and the latter represents both the land area and the state. Ghouston (talk) 22:53, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

I think the issue is being distorted. No one is questioning what the Balearic Islands are. There is the same chance of this region becoming independent from Spain as Oklahoma from the United States (no chance). It's about not allowing self-serving definitions and policies on Wikidata. It would be unacceptable to define Hawaii as an "archipelago of the Pacific" (it is a state of the United States) or New Aquitaine as a "territory of Western Europe" (it is a region of France) or Calabria "area of ​ the south of the Italian peninsula" (it is a region of Italy). Therefore, it is unacceptable to define the Balearic Islands as a "Western Mediterranean archipelago". It is an autonomous community of Spain. Lopezsuarez (talk) 19:51, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

So we would never have separate items for Hawaiian Islands (Q192626), the archipelago, and Hawaii (Q782), the state? Ghouston (talk) 10:41, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Why it would be unacceptable to define Hawaii as an "archipelago of the Pacific"? In the same way that Himalayas (Q5451) is defined as a "mountain range in Asia", I don't see why it is "unacceptable" (for who? based on which sources?) to say that the Balearic Islands are basically an archipelago of the Mediterranian. For a person who does not understand about the administrative division of Spain (as we have seen previously in this thread) and that must understand what the concept is in a nutshell, there is no need to talk at all about "autonomous community" or any other political division. Inside the same element, this administrative status is only a recently and one of the historical labels: the Balearic Islands are also a province of Spain, not only an autonomous community. Why didn't you choose the concept province? Maybe for someone else this choice can be the unacceptable one, as well as the term "territory of the Catalan Countries" as if understood as a cultural or linguistical domain. While the administrative division is political and conflictive, I also consider that the rock formation known as archipelago and in a geographical context of the Mediterranian basin, is the main (less conflictive and more stable) definition. All this said, I am also in favour of splitting the element in not two, but three: one for the geography and the other ones for the administrative status (both province and autonomous community). --Xavier Dengra (talk) 17:54, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

The examples given by Ghouston and Jura are equivalent to our case. Therefore, changing my previous opinion, I'm in favour of splitting the element. --FogueraC (talk) 09:52, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

And why in the language used (P2936) appears English (Q1860) and German (Q188)? There is no point! --Willy31igd (talk) 10:51, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Just like the Solomon Islands example (as well as the Guernsey one), the Hawaiian islands archipelago contains islands not in the state of Hawaii (for example Midway Island etc). Thus a clear need for 2 items. The relevant comparison is cases where the geography and the political elements cover the same geography. For example, I can only find a single entry for Jamaica, Puerto Rico etc. Yet other examples such as Prince Edward Island etc seem to have 2. I am sure someone will get ultra pedantic and point out there are tiny little islets 20 meters offshore which are not part of the actual island etc.

There does need to be a consistent approach about if there is a need for one or two, or even more entries.

Still no one is really addressing the concern of the original poster about what they perceive to be ideologically driven vandalism and how to deal with it, regardless of what page it goes on. CanadianCodhead (talk) 14:32, 26 April 2021 (UTC)

"I can only find a single entry for Jamaica, Puerto Rico etc." - Jamaica (Q766) and Jamaica (Q27508031), Puerto Rico (Q1183) and Puerto Rico (Q2076337). Geographical entities and administrative entities are two things that are oftemtimes closely related and might even share the same borders/areas. For many works like Wikipedia it might make sense to describe them in the same article and mix information about both entities due to how intertwined some of the information is. But Wikidata is a database and from a database perspective they are different things that need to be modelled differently and might each have different values for properties and different external IDs. Therefore they should't be mixed together in one item. Wikidata isn't perfect and there are probably various cases where that hasn't happened yet, since it takes time, effort and preferrably detailed knowledge about the specific area to split them. --Kam Solusar (talk) 15:12, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
@CanadianCodhead: "no one is really addressing the ... ideologically driven vandalism" -This issue was previously discussed at Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard#Report_concerning_User:FogueraC, where the consensus appeared to be that it should be resolved as a content issue and not with edit warring or personal attacks, hence this thread. Lopezsuarez erred in commencing this thread with more personal attacks. Bovlb (talk) 16:18, 27 April 2021 (UTC)
I believe I'm seeing a weak consensus here that we should split this item into: a) a geographic entity for the archipelago; and b) one or more geopolitical entities for the various administrations that have ruled there. Bovlb (talk) 16:08, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Twitter (X) numeric user ID (P6552)

It's not explained how to obtain nummeric account ID (it's required qualifier for Twitter ID account) like in the case of Discord server numeric ID (P9345). Eurohunter (talk) 08:30, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

you can use https://codeofaninja.com/tools/find-twitter-id/ or just leave it and a bot will populate it later. BrokenSegue (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Quote "It's not explained"
where did you look? --- Jura 16:19, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: or you can use https://tweeterid.com/ or discussion good luck Gi vi an (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

duplicate values on Emmy Bridgwater (Q5373615), MutualArt artist ID (P6578) one of them The page you are looking for is not available or has moved.

clicking Emmy-Bridgwater/03069CD4161B4B35 will result in message "The page you are looking for is not available or has moved. Please check the URL or Search to find what you are looking for." where as clicking 03069CD4161B4B35 does not show any error. iam assuming adding "reason for deprecation" (The page you are looking for is not available or has moved.) on Emmy-Bridgwater/03069CD4161B4B35 is good instead of deleting. if i am correct please let me know Gi vi an (talk) 13:29, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't deprecate, just delete. The correct format of MutualArt artist ID (P6578) identifiers is just the alphanumeric string ("03069CD4161B4B35"), nothing else. You're getting an error message because it's a bad link. Sometimes people or bots add incorrect, or incorrectly formatted, external identifiers. Best to simply remove "Emmy-Bridgwater/03069CD4161B4B35". -Animalparty (talk) 14:15, 30 April 2021 (UTC)
 Resolved @Animalparty: thank you for super quick reply. deleted just now "Emmy-Bridgwater/03069CD4161B4B35". Gi vi an (talk) 17:09, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect merge

Hi, I realized that Delirios de amor (Q5801872) was a mix between the film (Q11424) and the television series (Q5398426). To fix it I created Delirios de amor (Q106584340) to move there the sitelinks and claims that are about the film (Q11424), that way Delirios de amor (Q5801872) would end up being only about the television series (Q5398426). While checking What Links Here to fix the invalid links I realized that Delirios de amor (Q32859788) is a redirect for Delirios de amor (Q5801872) and that originally it was an entity for the film (Q11424) which was incorrectly merged into Delirios de amor (Q5801872). What should I do now? Probably the best course of action would be restoring Delirios de amor (Q32859788) and merging Delirios de amor (Q106584340) into it, but I'm not sure if it's worth it, because it's been more than one year since the entities were incorrectly merged. -- Agabi10 (talk) 17:43, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

@Agabi10: Sorry about that bad merge. I restored the pre-merge version of the film item Delirios de amor (Q32859788) and merged to it your new Delirios de amor (Q106584340), in order to restore the more complete information and sources that were present in the older item. It should now be properly distinct from the TV series item, Delirios de amor (Q5801872), since you cleaned up film-related statements from it. Thanks and sorry again for my mistake. Lαδδo chat ;) 22:13, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

How to create a list of examples?

For example, I would like to create a list of English semordnilap words. The items are examples of such words. So, they are not exactly standalone items.

I assume the item representing such a list should be: instance of Wikimedia list article. What is the preferred statement for items representing examples of words? Usage example?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by D. Senkyr (talk • contribs) at 18:26, 10 April 2021 (UTC).

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/04&oldid=1421216711"