Shortcut: WD:DEV

Wikidata:Contact the development team

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search





for permissions


for deletions


for deletion

for comment

and imports

a query


Development plan

Status updates

Development input

Contact the development team

Contact the development team

Wikidata development is ongoing. You can leave notes for the development team here, on #wikidata connect and on the mailing list or report bugs on Phabricator. (See the list of open bugs on Phabricator.)

Regarding the accounts of the Wikidata development team, we have decided on the following rules:

  • Wikidata developers can have clearly marked staff accounts (in the form "Fullname (WMDE)"), and these can receive admin and bureaucrat rights.
  • These staff accounts should be used only for development, testing, spam-fighting, and emergencies.
  • The private accounts of staff members do not get admin and bureaucrat rights by default. If staff members desire admin and bureaucrat rights for their private accounts, those should be gained going through the processes developed by the community.
  • Every staff member is free to use their private account just as everyone else, obviously. Especially if they want to work on content in Wikidata, this is the account they should be using, not their staff account.
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2016/10.

New items statistics

It would be interesting to know how new items are created, e.g. manually or by PetScan/QuickStatements/Bot.

Maybe this could help find ways to reduce Wikidata:Database reports/without claims by site.
--- Jura 10:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

  • @Lea Lacroix (WMDE): Would you investigate how this can be added? (I'm pinging Lea assuming she is meant to answers community requests here)
    --- Jura 11:31, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
This query gives you an overview over the last 30 days. --Pasleim (talk) 12:24, 9 October 2016 (UTC)
Tool/mode new pages % total per day
bot 132208 56.84 4407
Widar 41054 17.65 1368
manual 40765 17.53 1359
Widar by NIOSH 16569 7.12 552
Widar through bot 1621 0.7 54
WE-Framework gadget 311 0.13 10
redirect 46 0.02 2
wikishootme 5 0 0

Thanks. Looks good. I consolidated them above. Seems suitable for grafana.
--- Jura 12:56, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

If a ticket is filed and approved by @Lydia_Pintscher_(WMDE): then I would be more than happy to add this to grafana. Otherwise I can link to the code and you can have a crack at adding it! ·addshore· talk to me! 12:28, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
@Addshore: If it consists mainly in setting up the query, I can give it a try. With the above, Pasleim already did most of it. How does it work?
--- Jura 10:24, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

One site link per item limitation (again)

It seems that Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team/Archive/2016/07#One_site_link_per_item_limitation was archived before it received a response. I (and the other people involved?) would still like to know if any of the suggestions we made would be possible options. (@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): Pinging you since you were going to look into it) - Nikki (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

I am also interested. For wikis using multiple scripts permanent duplicated item (P2959) cannot be long term solution. Removing this limitation for some wikis seems to be only viable solution.--Jklamo (talk) 21:32, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
I do not remember if I proposed a disk partitioning (Q624167) of a wiki in that discussion, but I have done it in other places. One wiki could then have one sitelink-code for each partition in the wiki. I think it would work for wikis like Armenian Wikipedia, the Wikipedias who are merged with Wikisource and the Incubators. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 20:25, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Sorry it is taking me forever to get back on this topic :( So I think the suggestion to have several "sites" per wiki and split them by namespace is at least interesting. (I don't yet know if it'll be possible with the current changes we are making to how sites are configured.) Do we have an idea if this would solve the issue for most cases? For Commons at least it would still create the conflict of having a link to the topic and the category of the topic in the same item. They are semantically different concepts though and you can make different statements about them. Hmmmmm. It would help with multilingual wikis that split by namespace but cover the same topic. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 13:04, 19 October 2016 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): There are essentially three different usecases:
1. Commons (let's ignore that for once)
2. hywiki
3. A series of other wikis (see Property talk:P2959#Charts)
Solutions that work for one might not work for others. I don't think any of #2 and #3 differentiate by namespace. A solution for #2 could be to split the wiki into 2 (if this is fine with the relevant community).
--- Jura 10:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

merge.js and duplicate claims

This introduces a second P625 into the item. That is maybe not necessary, if the claims have no qualifiers? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:18, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

The coordinates are different though. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:22, 10 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, and both of them could be deleted since they both are incorrect. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:14, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
But this is not what merge stands for. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 14:02, 11 October 2016 (UTC)
Maybe not, but when do we need two P625 without qualifiers in an item? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

undedected edit conflict

This edit is strange. I removed a statement shortly after the same statement was edited by another user but I was not warned about that. Moreover, the edit summary is inconsistent with the actual edit. --Pasleim (talk) 16:48, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

And I am probably the other user. I saw that claim disappear when I edited something else in the page. But when I reloaded the page, it was back. Very strange... -- Innocent bystander (talk) 20:20, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
Strange indeed but I fear it is hard to tell now what was going on. As long as this was a one time thing I'd say we leave it and more on. If it happens regularly we should spend time on investigating. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Outdated SPARQL results

For almost all items in this query I updated lv description some time ago via quick statements, but they are not updated in SPARQL yet.

SELECT ?item ?itemDescription WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P17 wd:Q211 .
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q532 .
  optional {
    ?item schema:description ?itemDescription .
  	FILTER(lang(?itemDescription)="lv") .
    FILTER( REGEX(STR(?itemDescription), '^ciems .+ novad(a .+ pagast)?ā, Latvijā$') = false )

SPARQL query

--Edgars2007 (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

The query results are cached for a while. Can you check now? Is there still a problem? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:36, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, there is. --Edgars2007 (talk) 13:25, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

where do I go for up-to-date and complete api documentation?

I want to write a library for using the Wikidata api but I’m missing some documentation.

i have found the following sources:

the page om MediaWiki is not up-to-date and is missing the details that i need.

At the Wikidata api page I’m missing an explanation for a lot of the value parameters.

for example: wbsetreference needs a json object. but the only way of knowing what object is looking at the examples at the bottom. which don't have an example for time or quantity value.

and this continues on the other api module

so my question is documentation for all those small details.

--Wvdp (talk) 21:42, 13 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. The two things you linked are the best we have but it is on my todo list to put work into improving it. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:37, 17 October 2016 (UTC)


We are getting property proposal requests for "category for ..." properties because people want to categorise pages automatically. For example, Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/25#category_for_people_born_here, Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/44#category_for_recipients_of_this_award and currently Wikidata:Property proposal/Category for people deaths by this disease.

Adding properties like those is not a long term solution because there's a unlimited number of possible intersections. We have category combines topics (P971) which is a much better option but that requires finding an item which links to the one you currently have. It's a straightforward SPARQL query but I don't know if/how people can actually access that data.

Is there a way to do it right now? If not, is it going to be possible any time soon?

- Nikki (talk) 16:57, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

What are people actually trying to do with the data? --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:38, 17 October 2016 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): I think it's to populate categories like it:Categoria:Nati a Roma. For places of birth there is already a dedicate property: category for people born here (P1464). For cause of death, there isn't.
--- Jura 10:34, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Map markers hard to see

I find the default map markers (red dots) on query results like this rather indistinct and too small after zooming in. This applies particularly when the map is projected onto a screen during a demonstration. Is it possible to configure them differently, locally, or to change the default? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:00, 16 October 2016 (UTC)

@Lea Lacroix (WMDE): Please check with Jonas if he already has this on his radar and if not file a ticket. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 16:39, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Linking Wikipedia articles to items with no labels in the given language

I think it would be a massive improvement if you were given the option to set the label for an item when you link a Wikipedia article to it and it does not have a label in the language of the wikipedia. Something like an input box pre-filled with the article title and a checkbox that asks "Would you also like to set the label for the corresponding Wikidata item?" would be great. With the current system, we end up with very many Wikidata items needlessly lacking labels in many languages. --Njardarlogar (talk) 09:44, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

I've actually made similar suggestions twice before (1 2). Maybe I should create a task at Phabricator. --Njardarlogar (talk) 10:04, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello @Njardarlogar:, thanks for you suggestion. If you can create a Phabricator task, please do it, otherwise I can create it for you. We will consider it soon. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Task created. --Njardarlogar (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)