Shortcut: WD:PC

Wikidata:Project chat

From Wikidata
(Redirected from Wikidata:PC)
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikidata project chat
Place used to discuss any and all aspects of Wikidata: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual data items, technical issues, etc.
Please take a look at the frequently asked questions to see if your question has already been answered.
Also see status updates to keep up-to-date on important things around Wikidata.
Requests for deletions and merges can be made here.

IRC channel: #wikidata connect
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2015/07.



Contents

Official website URL - http://www.wikidata.org or http://www.wikidata.org/ or https://www.wikidata.org/?[edit]

We have various forms for official website (P856) - e.g. for Oneworld (Q8787) we have http://www.oneworld.com without the ending slash, but for many others we have ending slashes. Also, some sites may redirect to https by default, while some may be http. This may lead to some confusion - e.g. for Oneworld (Q8787) primary sources tool proposes http://www.oneworld.com/ not realizing it's the same URL. Should we adopt some guidelines about how we represent official website URLs? --Laboramus (talk) 20:59, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support. We should have a guideline about it. It would be very useful for Primary Sources. Tpt (talk) 22:05, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Regardless we should prefer secure HTTP. But anything else really doesn't matter. I don't see a need for guidelines. --Izno (talk) 22:15, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
@Izno: The main use case I see for a guideline is for comparison and search. Currently if I want to get the entity that has as official website "http://foo.com", I should look for "http://foo.com", "http://foo.com/" and maybe even "https://foo.com" or "http://foo.com/index.html"... If we have a convention, I would have just to look for the normalized URL according to this convention. But, yes, what the convention is doesn't really matter. Tpt (talk) 16:23, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
From what I can see, the linksearch finds them all, no matter how you write them. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 16:47, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: Try looking for google.com - I don't see Google (Q95) in the results. And if you use wildcards, you get so many results it becomes useless. --Laboramus (talk) 08:15, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
That finds all partial matches too, e.g. see [1], so that doesn't solve the problem of determining whether or not two URLs are actually the same. - Nikki (talk) 18:00, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
If we could avoid listing http://www.wikidata.org/index.html or https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/ and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Main_Page ;) --- Jura 05:17, 14 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support, but (parts of) the guideline should apply to any URL, not just official website (P856) – for instance, many reference URL (P854) are also available in both HTTP and HTTPS, and we should have a guideline on which one is preferred. —DSGalaktos (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

query wikidata for some category[edit]

I know I can get an entity as json by querying the wikidata by this url: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:EntityData/Qxxxxxxx.json but can I get more than one entity in one query/url, for example getting all the entities of american actors or french presidents best reagrds, -- – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 165.50.248.106 (talk • contribs) at 21:02, 13 July 2015 (UTC).

In good time[edit]

well, I need, estem, do a project, which has several advantages, I'm here, because I want to be on wikipedia, so help with all kinds of articles in Spanish in English.

Creating a Cern Encyclopedia out of existing resources using MediaWiki[edit]

Hello all,

We are thinking about creating a Cern encyclopedia which should include all the Cern related people, the accelerators, experiments, accidents, institutes and so on. The data to cover those classes is scattered all around different resources and databases, such as the Cern document server(https://cds.cern.ch/) or the Cern Greybook Database (https://greybook.cern.ch/greybook/), but we would like to get use of Wikipedia and Wikidata as well. What we are aiming for is a central repository where we can store and structure the extracted data from the different resources. Then, we would like to display the data in our encyclopedia, so that there is the fulltext Wikipedia article of the item (if existing) on the top, followed by the statements of the structured data such as in Wikidata. The datasets should be published as Linked Open Data.

To give you an impression of how we think it should look like, here is a link to a quick mockup: http://6jhrh3.axshare.com The are two examples of items (People->Francis Farley and Accelerators->LHC)to look at, be aware that it's a rudimentary mockup with the only purpose to show how the items should be displayed.

We already did a short research and thought about using MediaWiki to build the encyclopedia and Wikibase, if that is a suitable approach for a central repository for our project? Or would there be other alternatives to consider such as Semantic MediaWiki especially for the aspect of Linked Open Data? Is there a way to transclude Wikipedia pages and display them in a third-party Wiki? We are in general pretty new to this topic and we would be really pleased to get some impressions and ideas for a possible approach for our project.

With our best thanks,

Filip Martinu MaFi (talk) 13:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Filip. I'm currently traveling but if you don't get answers I am happy to have a chat in August when I am back. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 19:28, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm certainly interested in helping with that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:35, 16 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm trying to set up a Wikidata instance for stuff related to companies (non notable ones) and jobs.
I'd very much like to benefit from the experience of setting up custom instances of Wikidata, along with an import system, a bot system and custom instances of the tools around Wikidata. I've followed the steps and have a somewhat running instance (both for this project and for experimenting for Open Food Facts), but that's a process that should be documented further.
Anyhow, I'd like to be kept in the loop if possible. --Teolemon (talk) 20:06, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): I'm very much looking forward to this!
@Daniel Mietchen: Thanks a lot, we will talk soon!
@Teolemon: Thanks for replying! What do you mean by you have a somewhat running instance, could you state that more precisely? MaFi (talk) 14:14, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
@Mafi9: I've installed MediaWiki, Wikibase on a server, I've created some job related properties, and I realize setting up an instance of Wikibase is not just about installing it, but setting up a complex ecosystem (bots, mass import, constraints, links to matching wikidata items…) . I'd be interested in shadowing the CERN as they go through the process and that we get most of the untold steps documented (or automated).--Teolemon (talk) 15:40, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Properties for local wikipedia needs[edit]

Since it is not yet possible to have local repository, is it possible to create properties for local needs of some wikipedia community? Say, if I want to link an item with a topic project in my wikipedia, could I create a property Property:WikiProject in XXwiki? I'll appreciate any other suggestions how to store pages metadata so they are available via MediaWiki API. --AS (talk) 11:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@AS: You can already create an item for a WikiProject here. You can link it to the project page on your Wiki, so if the item about a WikiProject has a page in your language, it covers your usecase. If the project is specific to your wiki, then it will have only this language link, otherwise the properties will also benefits similar wikiprojects on other wikis. But yes, it's possible to ask for properties to describe wikiprojects, I guess, but there is already properties to describe the topics of some items :) We for example have is a list of (P360) miga to describe lists items. author  TomT0m / talkpage 11:13, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@TomT0m: I mean exactly cases when properties are wiki-specific. I want to store 1) state of an article in my wiki (stub, complete etc.). 2) priority of an article within multiple projects (hign priority for Biology, low for LocalProject). --AS (talk) 12:05, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@AS: then you don't need properties but badges, you're at the wrong door. They are made for stuffs like article status, like feature and so on. author  TomT0m / talk page 12:10, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
@TomT0m: Ok, I've read about badges. They seem to have too limited usage (only as per-wiki boolean values). I'd like to have per-wiki values, but with power of properties (ability to add multiple values and set qualifiers). As I understand it is not possible with badges to set importance of an item for specific wikiproject. --AS (talk) 18:44, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Like Ceres (Q596) is considered of low importance for wikiproject Astronomy@xywiki, but high importance for wikiproject Asteroid belt@xywiki. No, that is not what badges were intended for. But your ideas looks interesting. My proposal: Set up a projectpage here at Wikidata, summon interested users and developers and see if you can find a solution! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:22, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
„Like Ceres (Q596) is considered of low importance for wikiproject Astronomy@xywiki, but high importance for wikiproject Asteroid belt@xywiki“ — exactly. --AS (talk) 10:07, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
@AS: You have categories on your WP to do that work so why you want to do it on WD ? I think this is waste time to find a solution for a problem which doesn't exist and will bother our time and the time of the dev team for nothing. Snipre (talk) 09:37, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Categories would be suitable for now (even without planned WD features for lists/reports), but a page info seem to be not available in Modules yet. --AS (talk) 10:07, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
@AS: I don't understnd your position: what you ask already exist on WP. See this talk page about methanol where two projects evaluated differently the priority [2] and here for a summary table (scroll down and look at the right side of the page). You just need to have a bot on your WP to handle that kind of system. No need of WD. Snipre (talk) 13:30, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
No. Statements on wikidata are (generally) about concepts, not about wikipedia articles.
Having said that there are still things that can probably be done. Identifying stubs can certainly be done with badges.
Identifying the importance of a concept is a property of the concept (or the associated wikidata item). Having different importance levels in different projects can be accommodated - a statement can have multiple values and a qualifier can identify which project that applies to. The problem is getting a consensus on importance between different languages. We have meta:Vital Articles - a list of 1000 articles every wikipedia should have - but beyond that I don't know if there is consensus on the rest of the topics in Wikidata. If there existed even one cross-language wikiproject working on a consensus for the importance of articles then I am sure you could get a property approved to support that cross-language project. but without that I don't think it would get approved - see my proposal from last year. Filceolaire (talk) 02:51, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok, I'll wait for support for local repositories. --AS (talk) 20:41, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Website user names[edit]

I'm unclear as to why we record things like Twitter user names as a sub-property of website account on (P553), rather than giving them a dedicated property. This, for instance, stops us using formatter URL (P1630). What's the reason for this? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know what the original reasons were, but in my opinion (as I expressed before) we should have on property for every (relevant) website… that's just easier to work with and it is consistent with other identifier properties. - Hoo man (talk) 14:38, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for bringing this up! I agree with Hoo that it should be split. The current property has quite a few issues, it's harder to use (both to enter the data and to use the data), we can't have formatter URLs or useful constraints and it's not really clear what counts as a username or even what counts as a website account (I recently saw someone add a link to a Wikipedia article by using "Wikipedia" as the website and the article name as the "username"...). I've spent some time recently looking into how the property is currently used since I'd been planning to propose splitting it up and well over 80% of the existing usages are for Twitter, so I think that would be a good place to start. - Nikki (talk) 15:51, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support, as long we have someone to do the job. Would make it possible to use better constraints. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:12, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support If we indeed split up and start with the biggest ones (I would say the big social media sites: Twitter, Facebook, Instagram), we can indeed try on making constraints and formatter URL's. Mbch331 (talk) 16:14, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support GerardM (talk) 05:45, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Since multiple people support this and nobody has anything against it so far, I went ahead and proposed a few new properties: Twitter username, Instagram username and Wikimedia username. If everything goes well with those, I'll write some more proposals for other sites (I would need more time to look into Facebook, Google+ and YouTube anyway because they have multiple identifers/names/URL formats that might be better represented as multiple properties). - Nikki (talk) 12:35, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I'd add Flickr, LinkedIn & GitHub to the mix. I suggest we need to keep website account on (P553), in the long term, for new sites and edge cases. Does anyone have a list of the sites currently included, and their numbers? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:38, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
I did a SPARQL query which you can see here, here, or here (hopefully one will be working :)). I don't know how old the data is though. - Nikki (talk) 21:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you. I dumped the data from one of them at User:Pigsonthewing/websites. As might be expected, there;s a long tail. We have a mix of WMF accounts (Wikipedia, Wikidata, Wikimedia Incubator, Wikiversity, Wikisource, Wikispecies, Finnish Wikipedia, etc.) totalling at least 82. We also have duplicates due to typos or different spellings/ capitalisation (Daum/ Daum Communications; Diaspora/ diaspora* (the former a mistake?); WordPress.com/ WordPress; and, inexplicably, Google scholar/ Google Scholar). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 00:19, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
"the former a mistake?" →‎ No. The current english Label of diaspora* (Q1973097) is "diaspora*" (sic). Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
But "former" refers to "Diaspora" not "diaspora*". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:39, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting question.svg Question Since website account on (P553) allow only items, how could it be duplicates and mispellings??? Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Added proposals for Facebook iD and YouTube user name - the second- and third- most used values. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:25, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Twitter username (P2002) and Instagram username (P2003) have been created. I've requested a bot to migrate the data. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:38, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Great work! I was actually recently at a hackathon and someone requested exactly this! ·addshore· talk to me! 12:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
On Property talk:P553 it says the Russian Wikisource is using website account on (P553) and we should let them know before making any big changes. Are there any Russian speakers around who could do that? - Nikki (talk) 18:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
@Ymblanter, Ivan A. Krestinin, Vlsergey: ^ Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
No, not me. The only russian-speaking project I edit is Wikivoyage.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:43, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Automated help with adding a statement[edit]

I'd like your opinion on an idea. I have proposed a new property for the entries in the Catalogus Professorum Halensis (Q20680681). I'd like to link the biographical entries with Wikidata items. I already have a list with all the identifiers (row A) and the names of the persons (row B), see here.

I wanted to check the names from row B against Wikidata, but this will take a lot of time with 1105 entries. Hence I thought we could try to put a script to the task. I don't speak any programming languages, but I admire the concept ;) But seriously, this is what I do. Maybe some of you have an idea how to turn it into a script an run it.

Or if that's not a good idea, I'd like your opinion on what to do instead.

Here's what I want to do:

  1. Open http://www.catalogus-professorum-halensis.de/[VALUE ROW 1,COLUMN A].html
  2. Open https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=[VALUE ROW 1,COLUMN B]&go=Go
    1. IF number of results = 1, open and check:
      1. IF instance of (P31) human (Q5) is true, add qualifier invalid IDen (P20xx) with statement "[VALUE ROW 1,COLUMN A]".
    2. IF number of results > 1, open all and check:
    3. IF the string "Halle" is somewhere on the page, add qualifier invalid IDen (P20xx) with statement "[VALUE ROW 1,COLUMN A]".
  3. Close all tabs, repeat:
  4. Open http://www.catalogus-professorum-halensis.de/[VALUE ROW 2,COLUMN A].html
  5. Open https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=[VALUE ROW 2,COLUMN B]&go=Go
    1. IF number of results = 1, open and check:
      1. IF instance of (P31) human (Q5) is true, add qualifier invalid IDen (P20xx) with statement "[VALUE ROW 2,COLUMN A]".
    2. IF number of results > 1, open all and check:
      1. IF the string "Halle" is somewhere on the page, add qualifier invalid IDen (P20xx) with statement "[VALUE ROW 2,COLUMN A]".
  6. Repeat 1103 times.

invalid IDen (P20xx) is just a placeholder for the property, which I proposed here: [3].

What do you think? Jonathan Groß (talk) 18:00, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

to me, this looks like a job for Mix'Match, by @Magnus Manske: :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 22:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
Ah, I see. But how does this work? Jonathan Groß (talk) 13:01, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
you should ask @Magnus Manske: - he will explain you, I can't, I only play mix'n'match afterwards ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 20:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Added here. Try "game mode" if you do this for the first time :-) Note that there won't be any change to Wikidata unless we have a property for this, or I do some one-off hack once all entries are matched. --Magnus Manske (talk) 21:38, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Great tool :) I'll play around with it. Just one question @Magnus Manske: What's the difference between "NoWD" and "N/A"? Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:43, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Also, the identifier "Arnoneidhartkarl" needs to be changed to "neidhartkarl". Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:45, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The tooltip over "NoWD" should be changed to "Mark this entry as not (yet) available on Wikidata", because as of now the tooltip for "NoWD" and "N/A" is the same. Jonathan Groß (talk) 11:46, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
That seems too long. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
In any case, the tooltip for "NoWD" and "N/A" should not be the same. That's confusing. Jonathan Groß (talk) 11:03, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
The identifier "Richardmatrinybenno" should be changed into "matrinybenno". Jonathan Groß (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The identifier "Wernernagelarno" should be changed to "nagelarno". Jonathan Groß (talk) 21:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Matching's done, big thanks to Magnus Manske for this great tool! It would be great if some of you voted on the property as well. Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:48, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

former country nonsense[edit]

An "empire" is an instance of a former country?

More such nonsense at: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Q3024240&from=33691&back=0

80.134.89.98 22:51, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Country can mean a lot of things. An empire is an instance of a 'sovereign state'. Pretty much the definition of a component 'country' of an empire is that they give up some sovereignty and they can't get it back without the agreement of the empire. Hope that helps. Filceolaire (talk) 20:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Another former country nonsense I just spotted only due to a bot adding the reverse property - capital (P36) set to administrative entities created long after the former country stopped to exist [4]. Was imported by a bot, but nevertheless nonsense. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 09:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Just put an enddate to it, and there is no problem. See Γκέτεμποργκ (Q25287). -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:36, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Property for Elevantion/Height (e.g. mountains) still missing![edit]

One of the most obvious Properties of geo-objects is still missing (but was often discussed last year). Why there is still no elevation Property (wikidata is >1 year old now) ? One artificial reason (from my point of view) for discussion was the possible unit. But even in english wikipedia the height is given in Meters (and feet in brackets). Meter is the international unit (SI = Système international d’unités). Even in US (the only country worldwide not officially using it) big organisations using it as their master system (e.g. Boing, Nasa). If still someone wants to use feet, he could scale it easy by himself. As it is an international project, we should use meters (which is understood and used worldwide). I think its time to add this property soon. The complicated details of different units could even be added later, if someone sees a later need for it. Thanks a lot.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aleks-ger (talk • contribs).

  • I've been working on stages in multi-staged cycle events (like the Tour de France, and many more). And altough we don't miss height, we do miss distance as a key property for a race or a stage. Same story, and same solution. The SI-system is the international standard and should anyhow be the international standard on this project, to my idea. Is there anyone that has an update on this? Edoderoo (talk) 07:22, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I believe there is a Phabricator ticket for that, but I think @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): will know more about this. Mbch331 (talk) 07:34, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
There was some design work left to do, but no one was available to do that. Since a few weeks, extra people are working on Wikidata again. I thought I've heard September or something as ETA. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:11, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Several actions were taken to solve the numeric datatype with unit. See here for the whole list of tasks related to this problem.
Main problems are the user interface to select units and the link between the user interface and the items representing the units in order to get the label in the appropriate language and if possible the symbol of the units. If you take the time to read the discussion about that topics, you will see that is not simple to built a tool which can work from the start.
No intermediate solution will be applied because all intermediate solutions imply some work to convert the data once the system is completely implemented and most of the time nobody is available at that moment to do that job.
There is no emergency after all the time we were waiting so no need to implement a temporary solution especially when the dev team is on the track to develop the feature. According to the progress done until now, something should be available in the next months. And there is enough work to be done in WD so don't shout for more things now: everybody wants to have a special feature for his activity in WD. Breath deeply and wait your turn in the queue. Snipre (talk) 09:44, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
  • If you need it for a short term project and you don't mind converting the property later, I'd suggest to use the current quantity datatype. --- Jura 09:48, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
NO, this an error: this will mean value conversion with lost of precision and discrepancies with original data. We have to provide the data like they were given in the sources and no conversion with approximated conversion factor should be done.
WD is not your toy which can be modified according to your own desires. This is a collaborative project so if you want something please discuss it and get a community agreement. Snipre (talk) 09:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I think you are just repeating what you just wrote above. Did you know that the word "collaborative" includes the word "work" --- Jura 10:04, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
We have already discussed this a number of times. The most recent time I can remember, Andy started a thread here. We agreed then, to wait for the developers, and I cannot see that anything has happend here in the short time since that discussion ended. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 11:15, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
The suggested usecases seem a bit easier to tackle and if there are additional persons interested in it, all the better. Besides, we learned that they wont fix the quantity datatype anytime soon (and the unit quantity datatype will have the same issues). Having some data already available that could be used for the new datatype is actually an advantage. Obviously, some always want to wait for perfection. --- Jura 11:26, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
This example ("Height above sea level in meters") definitly have some advantages that such properties like "area in km2" doesn't have. The number of places where "Height above sea level in feet/apples etc" are in use, are very rare. The only exception I can think about is US. If we can avoid that specific area, the transfer to the new property can be done without loss of precision and sources. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I agreed no such thing. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:17, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
No, but we failed to find a consensus to approve such properties then. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:20, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jura1: "and the unit quantity datatype will have the same issues". Please no opinion but facts: give us the reference where the dev team said that they won't fix the problem of the units soon ? They hired a new guy for working on the interface problem begining of summer and one of the tasks of that guy is to work on the unit interface. Read that comment from the dev team and tried to say again that the dev team won't solve that problem soon again. That's fact. Snipre (talk) 15:50, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I think it says that there, timestamped "13:52, 22 June 2015 (UTC)", but it might refer to something else. --- Jura 16:33, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jura1: By the way give us please the number of obsolete properties which are still in use. All these properties where declared obsolete after a common decision but why are they still there ?
(OBSOLETE) title (use P1476, "title") (P357), (OBSOLETE) inscription (use P1684) (P438), (OBSOLETE) birth name (use P1477) (P513) and (OBSOLETE) quote (use P1683) (P387) were created before the multilingual datatype and now are obsolete. Who is taking care about these properties now and is working to cure the items using them ? Is there any project ? I am not looking for the perfection I just want to avoid to repeat a well known scenario. Snipre (talk) 16:16, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
That's actually a good thing you bring this up. These made us realize that monolingual string is still incomplete and needed some post-implementation fine tuning (which hasn't been done). If we had waited for everything to be done before, we still wouldn't have any of these properties. Besides, having both can make people realize that there may be several properties they have to check in a defined order of priority. In any case, we know you wont be collaborating, as you wont be around to do the job ("most of the time nobody is available at that moment to do that job"). --- Jura 16:33, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Snipre:, is there an overview somewhere of what this new quantity with unit feature is supposed to look like. There are a number of aspects that might or might not be headed in the right direction. In the case of elevation, one might want to indicate that the tolerance on the quantity (upper and lower bound) are unknown (at least to the editor who added the data) which is a different concept from the quantity being exact. Also in the case of elevation, there are a number of different systems in which one might specify the elevation, such as height with respect to a particular geoid (,, etc.) or the height with respect to an ellipsoid such as WGS84 (which is the system required in Wikipedia location-related templates and several other widely used web standards). Elevations in the various systems can differ by 100 m. And our unresolved confusion with horizontal position suggests we should specify what the upper and lower bound mean; are they the upper and lower bound of the measurement of a particular point of interest, or are they the upper and lower bound of the object being described? Jc3s5h (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Jc3s5h:, all the discussions about the feature numeric values with unit are available on Phabricator. Please just take the time once to read all the tasks related to this datatype described on this page. You will have an idea about the problem related to the implementation of the units. There are currently some design problems to solve so no beta version exists now. Snipre (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

An Internet RFC which seems to be the latest web-centric specification for describing a location is interesting; it differs in many respects from WikiData. It also says " However, as defined above, altitudes are relative to the WGS-84 reference geoid rather than Earth's surface. Hence, an <altitude> value of 0 MUST NOT be mistaken to refer to "ground elevation" . [Boldface added.] Jc3s5h (talk) 14:24, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

We already have properties like determination method (P459) to solve some of those issues.
I live in a part of the world where the surface level of the sea is becoming lower every year. But that does not effect our measurements very often. A nearby lake is located 0 meters above sea level according the maps, but I have never seen it being flooded by salt water. And I guess that hasn't happend for the last 2-300 years. But it affects how people name things here. The lake is named "fjärd", something you normally only name sea waters. And the nearby church is located in what people name "the island", even if it was several hundreds of years since it was surrounded by waters. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:59, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
I live in a part of the world where all hieghts "above sea-level" are actually above a en:Ordnance datum agreed in the 1800's when the ordnance survey was carried out. Changes in sealevel will not affect the datum although we may need to update the correction factor to convert AOD hieghts to hieght above sea-level.

Facts[edit]

For the people who don't know what the dev team is doing on the topic of the numeric datatype with units, please follow this bug reports:

  • since 5.5.2015 the definition of the user interface is in discussions, see here
  • since 30.6.2015 the interface problem is under construction, see here

So please respect the work of the dev team and before judging their work take a moment to learn what they are doing. The dev team was working the last months on the arbitrary access which has a higher priority and now they put their effort on the units problem. The numeric datatype is quite complex with the units problem and the problem of the uncertainty. Only a global vision can solve all these problems so this needs time and a lot of discussions. Snipre (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

@Snipre:, you mention the units problem and uncertainty in the same sentence, and the Phabricator tasks mentioned make no mention of uncertainty. Is the vision to regard the uncertainty as another quantity, with its own unit, or is the vision to regard the statement about a particular property as a nominal value, upper bound, and lower bound, each with its own unit. In the case of locations, treating it as nominal value, upper bound, and lower bound means that for practical purposes, they must all be given in degrees. It eliminates the possibility of giving the nominal value in degrees and the uncertainty in meters, as is the practice of RFC 5870 and the National Geodetic Survey datasheets.
In terms of widespread discussion, no mention of this change has been made at mw:Wikibase/DataModel. Is that because all the changes will be specific to WikiData, and not to any other instance of Wikibase? If so, do we need a document comparable to mw:Wikibase/DataModel which will explain WikiData specific requirements for those who enter data, and allow those who read information retrieved from WikiData to understand it? Jc3s5h (talk) 18:08, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Uncertainty is far beyond the current problems of the numeric datatype. No model is discussed now so no answer is available. There are some bug reports about that topic. The best is to follow them and take part to the discussions. But be aware that the main discussions is about code implementation so quite technical and very generalized from application point of view.
For uncertainty description we should provide the value , upper and lower bound, if the uncertainty is percentage or absolute value and the statistical method used to describe the uncertainty. Snipre (talk) 10:10, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

In conclusion, we currently still have only the datatype for quantity. The development team continues work on a datatype for quantity with units. A role-out date hasn't been fixed. Not all problems of these datatypes are on the plan to be resolved in the medium term. The current development plan doesn't implement the "ideal" solution for elevation/altitude data. A compromise with the options available now or in the medium term might need to be found. Discussion about one of the other shouldn't be a judgment of the work of any of the participants. Discussion of the possibilities of the current options is encouraged. If there are specific new properties that should be considered, it might be worth creating specific property proposals. --- Jura 14:49, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

If somebody ....[edit]

... could write this page > [5] Thanks and have a good day all ! Mike Coppolano (talk) 07:45, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

@Mike Coppolano: What specifically are your requesting?--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:46, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
@Mike Coppolano: ✓ Done Et le résultat dans Reasonator : http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q2550070&lang=fr J'ai juste rajouté quelques déclarations, pas de sources. C'est pas encore possible de donner les dimensions. Next time, you'll do this yourself :) It seems jura1 did also help :) author  TomT0m / talk page 08:13, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you all. Best regards. Mike Coppolano (talk) 08:17, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

new items without statements[edit]

The number of items without a statement is going up. see the stats. I have a hard time understanding what the reason may be. It is counter intuitive... Who knows what is going on? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:52, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

You mean: https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/stats.php#t2_statements
Someone creating items, but not adding statements? --- Jura 07:58, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
I know a few days ago a bot was running (without botflag) and creating a lot of items with only a sitelink. No labels, no statements. Mbch331 (talk) 08:05, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, it did add labels, just not in English. Anyways, it stopped before having any impact on the chart.
Generally, it's User:‎GZWDer/User:GZWDer (flood) or User:Danrok who rely on other users adding statement. --- Jura 08:13, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
It didn't stop completely voluntarily. I blocked the account because of the lack of botflag. Mbch331 (talk) 08:24, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
So there are still many articles without items... OK then it is ok GerardM (talk) 09:23, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Personally I don't think it's a good idea to add statements to new items created from pages in a category. There're many false positive. It's better to add them later by adding statements to items from pages in a smaller category (and old items will also be covered).--GZWDer (talk) 09:26, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
The most important statement to new items are the ones that define them for what they are.. Categories are quite powerful for more statements once you know what they are.. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 15:29, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Search oddity (Unicode - emotion)[edit]

If I search for the Unicode character "☺" on en.Wikipedia, I am successfully redirected to en:Smiley, from which I can see that smiley (Q11241) has that character as an alias.

However, if I perform the same search in Wikidata, I get no results.

Why not? Is this a bug? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:13, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Works for me. --Succu (talk) 16:38, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Same here, no results to "". And aliases should show up in search results? --Stryn (talk) 19:54, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
What I noticed is that when I paste the smiley in the searchbar and do nothing, smiley (Q11241) shows up as a suggestion. If I press enter or click on the search icon, the search results are empty. And yes aliasses should give results (I typed in Bruce Jenner and got Caitlyn Jenner as a suggestion. In all fallback languages for me he/she is labelled as Caitlyn Jenner). Mbch331 (talk) 20:01, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Yep. But this sounds to me like the return of very old bug. Can not remember where and when I encounted this behavior first. --Succu (talk) 20:20, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Fusion problems[edit]

Can someone fusion en:Category:Deutsche Bank people (Q8375612) and deutsche de:Kategorie:Person (Deutsche Bank AG) (Q9070052) ? 88.71.61.245 21:50, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Can someone fusion en:Category:German Progress Party politicians and deutsche de:Kategorie:DFP-Mitglied (Q8923441) ? 88.71.61.245 22:16, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Both ✓ Done. Please could you next time link the QID's? That's a lot easier when merging. (They can be linked the same way as articles). Mbch331 (talk) 07:07, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Oversight/Sjoerddebruin[edit]

I've accepted a nomination for oversight access, here is a neutral notification as requested on that page. You can find the request here. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 15:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Why is Mount Everest not a υψηλότερο σημείο (P610) (highest point) of anything?[edit]

See title. --Ysangkok (talk) 17:32, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

Now it is! --Izno (talk) 17:49, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
The highest point (P610) of the Mount Everest (Q513) is Earth (Q2)? That seems wrong to me. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 17:50, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Now it's not! --Izno (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
That's an incorrect use of the property, Ysangkok. You are supposed to put υψηλότερο σημείο (P610) on the place item with the highest point, not on the point itself. Right now Earth (Q2) highest point (P610) Mount Everest (Q513). --Izno (talk) 17:53, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
@Izno: But what is "the point itself"? Mount Kilimanjaro (Q7296) has the highest point Kibo (Q1394606). The Q for Africa references this latter Q. If that is how it is supposed to be, then a lot of high points must be made to use the property correctly... Or can I use the mountain itself also? --Ysangkok (talk) 22:24, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
There is of course always doubts if an item should be regarded as a "point" or a larger "area". Most projects have an article about the massif of Kilimanjaro, but none of Kibo. "Kebnekaise southern peak" is the highest point of Sweden (Q34) but it has no item here, only for the whole mountain of Kebnekaise, who also have a second "nothern peak". -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
The answer to the initial question is at https://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?q=Q513&lang=en --- Jura 06:15, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes Innocent bystander Some things need to be "instance of:summit ( Q207326)" rather than "mountain". Joe Filceolaire (talk) 22:07, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Apsolut! @Filceolaire You can feel free to add a new item about Kebnekaise southern peak if you like.
BTW here we have a typical case when queries does not work. Yding Skovhøj (Q529888) is here higher than Møllehøj (Q689106). But since Yding Skovhøj is partly man made, it is not considered as the "highest point" in Denmark. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 06:37, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Plz delete duplicate of "National Book Store"[edit]

Plz delete this duplicate (Q17081424) of this original National Book Store (Q6971094) ("National Book Store"). Thanks. SomeRandomPasserby (talk) 17:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I've merged them, we don't delete (anymore). Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:00, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

News about Freebase migration[edit]

I have just push out today a lot of new things related to the Freebase to Wikidata migration project:

  • A new dump have been uploaded in the freebase-testing dataset with 3.4M new statements. It contains 1.4M statements about unemployment rate (P1198) and 0.75M about population (P1082) in the U.S. The data previously in freebase-testing have been move to freebase. I am not sure that all the data in this dataset are good. Feel free to ask me to remove too bad data.
  • A new dump containing 0.8M new ids (Discogs artist ID (P1953), IMDb identifier (P345)...) have been updated in the freebase-id dataset.
  • The number of statement in Primary Sources per property list have been updated.
  • I have created A page with the list of all not-mapped Freebase topic with more than 200 incoming links from mapped Freebase topic. It may be interesting to map them in order to be able to improve our mapping of some properties like occupation (P106).
  • I have created an other page to map Freebase types to Wikidata classes in order to create the instance of (P31) statements that may be missing in Wikidata. As the Freebase type system is very different to Wikidata class hierarchy I think that most Freebase types will remain unmapped but this mapping effort may help our classification.
  • I have created a beginning of a “new mode” for Primary Sources, allowing to display list of Primary Sources statement matching a given query. It only supports simple statements currently (i.e. without qualifiers and source) and don’t allow to do mass actions yet (but it is planned). It is accessible in the toolbar using the “Primary Sources list” link.

Tpt (talk) 00:09, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

The freebase-id dataset doesn't seem to be available in the UI.--Mineo (talk) 09:16, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I have by mistake uploaded the ids in the freebase-testing dataset. It is now fixed. Tpt (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Žalec[edit]

Hello, anyone can please fix interwiki for Žalec Municipality (Q15931)? There are two different articles en:Žalec and en:Municipality of Žalec with some inccorect interwiki links. Thank you --Elm (talk) 04:33, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Elm: I would move this to WD:IWC. Could you please give an example which links are wrong? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:45, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
That would be probably better, thanks. Sure, Žalec (Q631387): pl Gmina Žalec should be just pl Žalec and Žalec Municipality (Q15931) which is a instance of municipality has got some interwiki like fr Žalec which is about the city and not about the municipality. --Elm (talk) 19:13, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Semi-automatically extracting data from templates[edit]

A while back, a number of bots would go through some of the Wikipedias and import IMDb identifier (P345) from various templates on them, such as {{IMDb title}} on the English Wikipedia. Bots doing this (at least for enwiki) seems to have been idle for quite some time. The task produced a number of inconsistencies that had to be weeded out manually, which is why I guess they were stopped. Anyhow, I am not suggesting restarting them, but is it possible to request doing so for a listed subset of pages? If I wanted the IMDb identifier imported from, say, all the pages in en:Category:Films directed by George Archainbaud, how would I do this if not by hand? Gabbe (talk) 06:52, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Ask a bot and indicate the way to ship you the data. The best is to work with a bot and to analyze data before the importation. So a discussion about the filters to apply and the automatic corrections to perform should be done before any importation in WD. 141.6.11.24 07:12, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Two or one statements?[edit]

Does Österhagen och Bergliden (Q3471364) make sense? Or should I merge the two statements into one single, with four qualifiers? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I think a merge will make it more confusing. Deryck Chan (talk) 09:21, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
A merge doesn't seem correct to me. Not sure how other systems will handle that. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
When I made this, I thought of if somebody would ask: "what was 'Q3471364' 'an instance of' in '2003'". With a merge, I am not sure what the result would be. Now it's obvious that it wasn't a 'Q14839548'. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
Much better as two statements each with start and finish. It does leave the question as to what happened before 1995 and between 2001 and 2005 Maybe add some "part of" statements (I assume it was part of something else at those times?) or maybe a "replaced" statement. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 22:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
@Filceolaire: These kinds of entities are statistical. I am not sure "part of" makes any sense here, except for when they are amalgamated by the neighbour entity, but that was not the reason here. The most likely reason here was that the population was below 50 persons 1990 and 2000. When they no longer fulfill the requests Statistics Sweden demands of them, they cease to exist as a statistical entity. They of course survives as an human settlement (Q486972), when the population drops below 50 persons. Therefor, it could be a good idea to add P31:Q486972 to these entities. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:41, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Label lister[edit]

Regularly I find problematic labels in "other" languages, languages that I do not want to always see. Label lister is a gadget for this. It no longer works. It is quite an important tool and I find it sad that it has been broken for so long.. Given that there is no alternative for its function... what can be done, what is planned to remedy the current status quo? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 08:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

What doesn't work with the tool? I just tested Labellister (release version) and have no problems with it. I must say I prefer the Beta version, which works fine for me as well. Mbch331 (talk) 11:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
It's working here in Safari, Firefox and Chrome. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
I've actually had some problems upon trying to save changes in the beta version, but in the stable release-version, I only very, very rarely have a problem, which usually goes as soon as I've refreshed/purged the item. Jared Preston (talk) 08:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Could you describe those problems? We're trying to fix the bugs left in the beta version and put that one live. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
@GerardM: could you please describe this problem? Thanks. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:49, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Feature request[edit]

I just created a new feature request on Phabricator calling for a new section to be added to the "statements". This new section would show all the statements on other items, which use the current item as their object.

I also called for a new function in the wikibase-client to let the client access statements which use the current items as their object as well as the current functions which let the client access statements which have the current item as their subject.

This would be like having an automatic "inverse property" for every property with "item" datatype.

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea can log in to phabricator and support this support or follow this task. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 21:53, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

@Filceolaire: It's a good idea especially if it is also doable with a lua call :) It's what simple query was meant for, I don't know where the devteam is on this. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposal to create PNG thumbnails of static GIF images[edit]

The thumbnail of this gif is of really bad quality.
How a PNG thumb of this GIF would look like

There is a proposal at the Commons Village Pump requesting feedback about the thumbnails of static GIF images: It states that static GIF files should have their thumbnails created in PNG. The advantages of PNG over GIF would be visible especially with GIF images using an alpha channel. (compare the thumbnails on the side)

This change would affect all wikis, so if you support/oppose or want to give general feedback/concerns, please post them to the proposal page. Thank you. --McZusatz (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:08, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Creating a profile[edit]

Google knowledge graph is drawing data from wikidata profiles.

So how do I create a profile, please?

I have set up the preferences page, but where to from there?

thank you.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geoff Duffell (talk • contribs).

What makes you notable for a item on Wikidata? Just because you want a Google Knowledge graph isn't enough. Mbch331 (talk) 09:16, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
See our Freebase FAQ. - Nikki (talk) 09:38, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Coaches[edit]

The people, not the buses.

See for example José Mourinho. It seems wrong to me to say that he was "member of sports team" when he was coaching them (All of them, except the first three ones). Wouldn't it be better to have a property "coach of" or something like that ?

Pleclown (talk) 12:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Being a coach is a job right? employer (P108) could be used, with position held (P39) as qualifier. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:23, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
We do have a "coach of" property, but it is used on the item for the entity coached, not the person item of the coach him/herself. See head coach (P286). Jane023 (talk) 13:05, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jane023: I know the P286 property, but, as you say, it's used on the entity coached, and thus not reported on the person.
@Sjoerddebruin: This could work for a professionnal coach. But if the person is a volunteer, should we say he is "employed" ?
Pleclown (talk) 14:33, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes employed works, even though one may be employed as a coach at zero salary, that person is still responsible on behalf of the organisation (the team or the team's owner). Jane023 (talk) 15:50, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Pleclown; Or <position held (P39):coach ( Q41583) (of (P642):'team')> Joe Filceolaire (talk) 08:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
@Filceolaire:, coach (Q41583) is a profession (Q28640) not a position (Q4164871), which would lead to a constraint violation by using it as a value for position held (P39). To avoid that, occupation should remain coach (Q41583) (or better yet the appropriate subclass, like association football manager (Q628099)). Then, position held (P39) could be a qualifier used together with employer (P108), but only with values such as head coach (Q3246315), assistant coach (Q11703711) or caretaker manager (Q1050607), which are hierarchical positions in the coaching team (as in Tito Vilanova (Q222924)). The only disadvantage would be that employer (P108) only allows three qualifiers (so replaces (P1365) and replaced by (P1366) are out), whereas position held (P39) does allow them. So, another option would be to use position held (P39):head coach (Q3246315) with the qualifiers of (P642):'team', replaces (P1365) and replaced by (P1366). Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
@Andreasmperu: Yes. <position:head coach (of:team)(start time:?/?/20??)(end time:?/?/20??)> is better. It doesn't need to be a qualifier to the <occupation:coach> statement - these two statements can both exist side by side. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 21:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
The coach of the England national mens' football team (for example) is, presumably, employed by the Football Association, not the team. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:49, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

P442[edit]

This property is clearly an external identifier. It does not link to an external website but does that really matter ? Could we please make it that codes like this one show as an external identifier and not as a regular statement ? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:40, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Your comment would be easier to read if you would wikify "show" and "China administrative division code (P442)". --- Jura 18:29, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
There is no difference between external identifiers and string values except that the gadget AuthorityControl is adding a hyperlink if an external website is available. --Pasleim (talk) 21:02, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
I was wondering if with "show" he didn't mean Reasonator. --- Jura 05:20, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Somebody reading Arabic, please ?[edit]

On the arwiki, Aline Lahoud (Q258700) is indicated as deceased on 23-7-2015, which seems quite suspicious - in fact, it seems to be her aunt, whose name is the same.

If someone could correct it on arwiki, would be nice, because she appears on Wikidata:Database_reports/Recently_deceased_at_Wikipedia and if someone transfers the info, it will probably be a mess — Thanks :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 20:09, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

done --Pasleim (talk) 20:52, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks @Pasleim: :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Is there a place to save Wiktionary links?[edit]

In Wikidata, is there a place to save links to Wiktionary pages? I know there are place to save links to Commons, Wikisources, Wikinews. But how about Wiktionary? (I want to know this because in EnWP anatomy project, an interesting idea proposed. The idea that Latin or Greek anatomy terms linking to Wiktionary pages[6].) --Was a bee (talk) 06:09, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Not right now, no. Since Wiktionary is based around words rather than concepts, it's more complicated to do. The most recent proposal is at Wikidata:Wiktionary/Development/Proposals/2015-05. - Nikki (talk) 06:24, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Thank you @Nikki:. I understand, difference between words and concepts making that difficult. Very helpful advise. Thank you very much. --Was a bee (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Number of images per item[edit]

Hi all, I thought the consensus was one image only in the image field of an item, but I don't know why. Pls see this discussion here: Talk:Q2550070#Number_of_images. Does this have to do with consumer tech (like accessing the image field from an infobox?) or is this just Wikidata convention, or is there something more behind it? Thx, Jane023 (talk) 07:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Without the possibility to add a caption/description to the file, I see very little value of P18 at all. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:14, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I didn't expect that answer at all - what do you mean? I often add qualifiers to the P18 statement, such as "painting by so and so" or even collection where it came from etc. Jane023 (talk) 08:26, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Then I have missed your statements. All P18-statements I have seen, have been without such descriptions. Also the linked item missed such descriptions.
My personal opinion is that such things as pictures should be choosen by those who edits the article. Should you choose a picture of somebody dressed for football, when the articles infobox mainly is about the subjects career as a politician for example? You can add pictures of Arnold Schwarzenegger (Q2685) both as a Guvernor of California, and as an Actor and add descriptions that would make it possible for the software behind the infoboxes to choose the correct file, but it looks like a to farfetched solution to me. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:55, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
OK I think I see where you are going with this. The P18 is useful for Wikidatans who don't know who those people are and a quick check of the image helps. Also it is a quick shortcut to commons where the image can be checked for global use. I would definitely not advocate getting rid of P18, but I am just confused about whether there was any consensus about using it once. I know there is not constraint, but maybe there should be? Jane023 (talk) 10:16, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I am not proposing that we should "get rid of P18" either, but rather that it should be used with some thoughts, just like it sounds you already do. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
The caption is the description field on Wikimedia Commons. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I think the idea is that you have one image and you have one Commons category. That makes it easy to make infoboxes in 200 different languages with minimal human intervention but you still have the option to include other images if one language want to be more hands on. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 08:51, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
This was my understanding, but is it mentioned anywhere? Jane023 (talk) 10:52, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I suppose this will be different depending on the topic, but in most cases selection of an image here at Wikidata may well be crucial. If the writer of an article knows better, he can override this choice. A second image makes sense only if there is a property "second image". - Brya (talk) 09:44, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
@Brya, Pigsonthewing, Filceolaire, Jane023: I think we're other engeniering rules and trying to solve a nonexisting problem. There is nothing crutial here. The first image second image stuff is solvable using qualifiers. It's to data clients (Reasonator, Infoboxes, domain specific clients ...) to choose what they do with the datas. Reasonator handles pretty well several images for example. If a topic has only three of four images, like picture scan of oldbooks, we can be exhaustive on images with the statement, and I don't see how this could harm anything. I think we just should rely on common sense here, unless someone find a real problem. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:42, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
The whole purpose of the project is to be selective. Adding qualifiers may work, but it may not work. - Brya (talk) 10:49, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@Brya: I don't get you, the whole purpose of the project is to build a repository of structured datas. The question is "why would we have to set rules in this case". Beeing selective to be selective does not lead us anywhere. author  TomT0m / talk page 13:35, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea for an RfC. An ideal outcome seems to me like a differentiation by topics. We do not need )and do not want) to add all Commons images here, but for some subjects one image is clearly enough (and who chooses it? who can replace it?), and for others like buildings we may want to have several depicting different aspects.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:26, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Yes probably. Jane023 (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I think there is no consensus to have just one image at P18, but there is clear consensus to not use P18 as alternative to Commons gallery or Commons category. In some cases even six images may be appropriate (Třeboň Altarpiece (Q2428392) for example). At the moment for external use there is use only for one picture. --Jklamo (talk) 11:35, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
I disagree. In this specific case, the image should be the entire altarpiece, and it should be an instance of painting series and link with " has part" to each sub item that has the appropriate image. So total of 7 items, each with its own image. Jane023 (talk) 13:22, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
If there are several images, usually a qualifier should be added. For people, this would generally be point in time (P585). Generally, I suppose 1 picture per every couple of years should do. For 3D objects, it could make sense to have images from different perspectives. For 2D objects, 1 image should do. --- Jura 12:06, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
To strict rules could harm the usefulness the this property, I would think. But demanding useful qualifiers when more than one file is used could be a good rule of thumb. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

This discussion copied to Property_talk:P18#Number_of_images_per_item Suggest we continue the discussion there. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 22:10, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

It's rather confusing. One could think that people actually commented there. Besides, now we have twice the same text. Why don't you want to continue this discussion here? --- Jura 04:14, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I've deleted the copy of this discussion from that page. If anything, a pointer to this discussion is what should be posted there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:52, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

User page[edit]

When to Wikimedian's User page link to Wikidata. --Nakare✝ (talk) 09:39, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

What is the use of that? What knowledge can be learned from a userpage? Mbch331 (talk) 09:53, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
If you need interwiki, see Wikidata:Wiktionary/Development/Proposals/2015-05#Task 1: Wiktionary interwiki links. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:11, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
@นคเรศ:If the Wikimedian is notable, and has a Wikidata item, use website account on (P553) with a value of (say) Wikipedia (Q52) and a website username (P554) qualifier of the user name. See, for example, Jimmy Wales (Q181). However, note that there is currently a proposal to replace this method with a specific property. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:43, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Andy Mbch331 Adding user pages to wikidata seems (to me) to be the quickest and easiest way to create universal user pages that are internationalised and can easily be localised - basically by replacing most of the user templates with wikidata statements so the user page becomes a special Reasonator page and user talk pages become a Flow page. (yes this will need some new properties so people can list different types of achievements as well plus a property for some free text.) Joe Filceolaire (talk) 22:02, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
This is not a good idea: we are mixing too many things inside WD. At some point we will have to split the database into general data and wikipedia data. If WD becomes only a substructure of WP, we will be less attractive for external users of WD. Please at least create a new space for that kind of data. User data is not common knowledge. Snipre (talk) 22:45, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
All user pages? I think a lot of people would not accept generated user pages if it restricts what they can do with their page. It is already possible to have a global user page by making a user page on metawiki. I think it would be pretty cool if templates could be stored in a central place (e.g. also on metawiki) and reused by any project (in the same way that images on Commons can be used by any project without needing a local upload). I think the translate extension would make it possible to translate the templates. Something like that could make it possible to have a global (or local user page if you want) with translated templates that don't need to be duplicated across every project. I won't get my hopes up though, there are still thousands of user language templates still being used despite the introduction of the Babel extension years ago. Even Wikidata has some... - Nikki (talk) 22:57, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Bot operators needed[edit]

We seem to have quite a backlog at Wikidata:Bot requests. How an we recruit more bot operators?

Can we make a point of highlighting these requests, at hackathons? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:38, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Reducing requests[edit]

Propositions to reduce the number of pending requests:

  1. Create a template for request with all data needed for the bot action. People have to provide the details from the beginning in order to avoid too long discussions between the bot operators and the request person.
  2. All requests should be linked to a discussion on the wikiprojects pages or the project chat in order to have clear consensus about the need of request. If people take more time to discuss about their ideas, perhaps can we merge several requests into one.
  3. Too few persons know autolist: we should redirect more people to this tool when the request is simple. The template cited above should allow a clear identification of requests which can be performed by autolist. Snipre (talk) 22:59, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
[I've numbered your suggestions for ease of reference] Regarding #2, surely Botreq is the place where such consensus is determined? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:03, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Well, my bot can handle "ISBN conversions" or "Twitter and Instagram property migration". If one admin guy could create new accounts with bot flags for me for those approved tasks I can handle those. But my last experience of RfP/b is more than enough for me, don't want to visit this page ever again. -- Vlsergey (talk) 15:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Interwikis preferential treatment for English[edit]

I would need to know why when creating a new article in the spanish Wikipedia, which still does not exist in the English version, for example this, the link to the non existent english version appears in red. With this approach they would not have to appear in red non existent versions in all languages? (obviously illogical on the other side). Greetings Antur (talk) 02:05, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@Antur: Go to your settings and see if "Traducción de contenidos" is activated. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

ːːYes, it is. And this is that causes te red label?. --Antur (talk) 06:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC) ːːːThanks for your answer. It remains unclear for me the reason for this. Why not a red label for Tagalog?. --Antur (talk) 06:45, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Your interface language? --- Jura 06:51, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata discourages interwiki links[edit]

Looking at Zhuangzi (Q1074987) Zhuanhgzi, I see that this data item is only for the work as it exists in Chinese. The work as translated into English is a separate data item, and the French Wikisource translation is another data item.

Effectively, this means that Wikidata discourages interwiki links to and between Wikisource projects, because they will never be part of the same data item. Further, anyone seeking a translation of a work into another language must first come to Wikidata and surf the links even to find out if translations of a work in another language exist on Wikisource; it is not possible to do that from any Wikisource directly.

I thought the whole point of moving the links to Wikidata was to promote connections between projects, not to eliminate them. But perhaps I am wrong. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:19, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: There are other ways to create interwiki by the help of Wikidata. See s:sv:Bibeln 1917 where I have made some tests with the Bible (Q1845). The interwiki is created by the help of a Lua-module that follows edition(s) (P747) and edition or translation of (P629). The big advantage is that it makes possible to create intewiki to more than one page in every project. For example, that page have 13 links to enwikisource. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:49, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander:
This is very interesting, what template (and Lua-module) do you use ? it should be done for all wikisources, that often have a lot of translated texts :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 09:43, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@Hsarrazin: It's s:sv:Modul:Sandlåda/Innocent bystander 3 who today is included in s:sv:Mall:Titel, a template that can be found in almost every page on svsource. Observe that the module is not secured against loops in the P747/P629-hierarcy. It also needs support by the "interwiki-extra"-class in s:sv:MediaWiki:Common.js, otherwise you cannot have more than one interwiki in each page. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:11, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
BTW, another thing the code does: It makes it possible to have interwiki to the Text-namespaces in als/bar/frr/pflwikis. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:18, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@Hsarrazin: You'll also be interested into WD:XLINK, a project on how to solve and list such issues and techniques. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Linking from Wikia to Wikidata[edit]

How do I link from Wikia projects? The d:Q### does not work, but w:Foo works for Wikipedia. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:15, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Your Wikia project of interest has to add it to their mediawikiwiki:Interwiki map. Alternatively, you might request that the company as a whole add it to their global interwiki map, which I believe is in use on Wikia. --Izno (talk) 04:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Quality of Freebase and quality of Wikidata[edit]

It is news that yet again a lot of new data has been uploaded in the "primary sources tool". Tpt then suggests that he does not know about the quality of the Freebase data. To decide if this is of concern, it has to be seen in context. The context is Wikidata itself. I seriously doubt that Wikida quality is better where there is data. When there is no data, One-eye is king in the land of the blind anyway.

When data is available in the "primary sources tool", it is important to accomplish a few things.

  • match the data to existing Wikidata data
  • find what data fits the Wikidata structure and make it fit in the way we do things in Wikidata
  • compare the data and find the differences and keep what is good
  • add all missing data and attribute properly (this is currently NOT done)

When we compared data and decide on what is correct, we should be able to signal this. For all the combined data in Wikidata, we should look for corroboration by checking other sources that have data on the same subject.

Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
For coordinates (Wikidata:WikiProject Freebase/Coordinates), Wikidata and Freebase have approximatively the same proportions of errors. --Nouill (talk) 13:29, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Exactly my point... Will the missing data in Freebase be imported as requested? Thanks GerardM (talk) 09:09, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I have been mainly working in the past weeks on getting more data from Freebase. I agree that it would be nice to add good data automatically using a bot. Feel free to create a page listing "good" datasets currently in Primary Sources and to start a community discussion about adding them using a bot. If there is a consensus in favor of it I'm ready to write and run a bot to do such importation (in fact as Primary Sources have a nice API, anybody could do it). I plan also to extract quality annotations form Freebase (i.e. mostly facts that have been reviewed/not) in order to be able to highlight reviewed facts in Primary Sources and allow a bot to add them automatically if the community agrees. Tpt (talk) 20:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Adding property colour(s) for flowers[edit]

Is it possible to add a property colour(s) for flowers? Timboliu (talk) 14:58, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

@Timboliu: Can you give some examples, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:00, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
For instance en:Ranunculus. I would like to add the colour yellow to this flower, so it can show up when somebody is looking for yellow flowers. Timboliu (talk) 15:33, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
You mean like this? Mbch331 (talk) 16:26, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Not good; because Ranunculus flowers are yellow, but the plants are green. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@Timboliu: Thank you. In that case, we'd need a proposal for a new property, at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science. Ping me if you want to proceed, and need help or advice. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I remember this discussion was held before, and the conclusion was, that colour was not a generic qualification for flowers or plants in general. So why asking again for the same thing? Edoderoo (talk) 20:38, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Possibly because the OP doesn't have knowledge of everything we've ever discussed; and possibly because that's a dumb decision that needs to be rethought. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
This is going to get complicated very quickly. To begin with, describing the flower colour of Ranunculus as "yellow" is inaccurate. - Brya (talk) 18:25, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Flow[edit]

Hello, if you are an user of some of the other Wikimedia projects, you may have noticed that a new discussion system called Special:Flow is currently being deployed to replace the current one. It is still in beta and, while not yet ready for full scale deployment, it is currently possible to activate it on specific pages, provided that the project is okay with it as a global principle, and that the users of the page are ok too.

I think it would be a good idea that we authorize the following on Wikidata:

  • a user would be able to request the activation of Flow on their own talk page
  • active members of a wikiproject would be able to request the activation of Flow on the talk page of the wikiproject, after a discussion between them
  • we activate a it on a generic talk page like WD:Flow where users can test if it suits them.

That way, some voluntary testers would be able to get over any teething troubles that could arise with Flow, including the ones that could be specific to Wikidata, with minimal impact on users that are not eager to try it. What do you think of it? -Ash Crow (talk) 20:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Popcorndude (talk) 20:34, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Thibaut120094 (talk) 21:19, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support DSGalaktos (talk) 21:36, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose on anything but a specific test page. It would be too confusing for many editors to a find different system in use on one talk page but not another. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:39, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
I think any change will cause confusion to some people. It can also be very confusing when what you're used to suddenly vanishes, especially if you're having any issues with the thing which replaced it. Would it be better if Flow pages had a banner saying that it's a new system being tested with links to where people can find out more or report problems? That might be a good way to both indicate why the page is different from most talk pages and make it clear how to report any issues people find. - Nikki (talk) 01:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support I believe that in order to be able to have a smooth migration to flow, testing it on more than specific test pages is required in order to be able to find most important bugs and missing features. Tpt (talk) 04:35, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support. --Stryn (talk) 05:12, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Mbch331 (talk) 06:19, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support GerardM (talk) 09:10, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support totally agree with @Tpt: here. Seen Flow on test pages elsewhere... impossible to have an opinion on how it works :/ --Hsarrazin (talk) 10:55, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with Tpt, test pages are not the same as real usage. - Nikki (talk) 01:08, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support let's move on ! author  TomT0m / talk page 10:26, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #168[edit]

Honorary academic degrees[edit]

Does this make sense or is it preferred that honorary academic degrees be listed with award received (P166)? Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:51, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Many people are already noted by making it an award.. Please keep it that way. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:17, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
@GerardM: What do you mean, "keep it that way"? I'm not going to take away anybody's award. Jonathan Groß (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
It is an either or situation.. I do not think both are good. GerardM (talk) 07:54, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I still don't understand what you're saying. I was asking if an honorary academic degree should be included using academic degree (P512) or rather award received (P166). Are you telling me I shouldn't use both? Because that is self-evident. Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:09, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I would prefer it to be "award received" ... In the end it can be converted from one to the other ... Thanks, GerardM (talk) 17:39, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Okay, got it. Thanks! I think it's still a matter of opinion though ... Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:45, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Freebase migration: what should we do with unemployment rate (P1198) and population (P1082)[edit]

I have been able to map 1.4 million statements about unemployment rate (P1198) and 0.75M about population (P1082), mainly for US cities and upload them into Primary Sources. For unemployment rate (P1198) there is often the rate for each month since something like 20 years. See, for example, San Francisco (Q62). Do we want these data into Wikidata? If not, I can remove them (or hide them) in the Primary Sources tool. Tpt (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Assuming we actually want to include such data, the question is if we want to import it from the primary source (the US Census, and go through mapping it) or from Freebase (and use the mapping done by FB/Primary Sources tool/Tpt).
I'd import them as long as Freebase's source indication is imported as well (looking at Σαν Φρανσίσκο (Q62), this seems ok). --- Jura 07:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm a bit afraid we'll run into a scaling problem here (items getting too large). Maybe just put these on hold for a while and first focus on other sources? That way we can easily come back later to it. Multichill (talk) 18:23, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata Pseudo-Bacon Numbers[edit]

@GerardM: (and anyone else interested) I have made a live version of the program for calculating WDPBNs, which can be downloaded here. Enjoy! Popcorndude (talk) 23:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

It is code and I do not know how to use it.. Can you package it in a way that makes it usable to me? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I should have been more clear, it's an HTML file, so you just have to down load it and open it with a webbrowser. Popcorndude (talk) 13:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata linking[edit]

Hello! Could this be technically possible with some script or bot? The problem in short: we (Latvian Wikipedia) have quite much templates, categories and other non-article stuff, that isn't connected to Wikidata. As adding one by one is too slow and too boring, I was thinking of some kind of automatisation. Could I write such file:

"title in Latvian Wikipedia" (some kind of separator) "title in English Wikipedia"
"title in Latvian Wikipedia" (some kind of separator) "title in English Wikipedia"
...
"title in Latvian Wikipedia" (some kind of separator) "title in English Wikipedia"

And give to some bot or some script and it does the job (linking to Wikidata). OK, if needed I can make sure, that title in English Wikipedia really exists and is not a redirect and also title in Latvian Wikipedia isn't already connected to Wikidata. Or... We (lvwiki) put iw link in pages itself (in the old pre-Wikidata style: [[en:title]]) and some bot does the job. Yes, for me/us it would be faster (I think with AWB it could be done automatically). --Edgars2007 (talk) 11:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

In Ladino Wikipedia, I have many templates like this, and some are really obvious matches (Babel templates, for example). I'd love some help with this. StevenJ81 (talk) 12:28, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
To both, this is pretty routine. You should each make a (separate) request at WD:Bot requests. --Izno (talk) 16:21, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Pywikibot[edit]

Hello. Can anyone help me with pywikibot? I can't log in! Xaris333 (talk) 17:43, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi Xaris333 I'm sorry to hear that. Best way to get help is probably to go to #pywikibot on Freenode (webchat). Can you post the output of pwb.py login.py and pwb.py version.py? Multichill (talk) 18:19, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Multichill with pwb.py login.py the output is: ImportError: No module named requests Python module request is required. Try running 'pip install request'. Xaris333 (talk) 18:47, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Batch imports: don't truncate the label at the comma if what is after the comma is important[edit]

It appears various bots/users in the last few months have done a whole lot of imports from Wikisource. One project in particular I've noticed is thousands of biographical articles from the s:en:Dictionary_of_National_Biography,_1885-1900. Whenever these were imported, something (the tool used? some bit of code?) stripped anything after the first comma when creating the label, which means that now there are 125 new Wikidata items named simply "Jones" and 94 "Hamiltons" and 84 "Campbells"... etc.

Since the item is really for individual biographical article entries called things like "Jones, Christopher" and "Jones, David" and "Jones, Harry David," the information after the comma is quite important and should remain in the label as part of the work's title. But I don't know of a way to fix these thousands of items now, without manually typing the first names back in. Does anyone have any ideas?

I recognize that the information after a comma in a given title is often extraneous and not appropriate to include in a Wikidata label, but in cases like this it's vital to include. Certainly this feature (of stopping labels at the comma) can be tweaked when doing imports of this nature, yes? Could those of you doing these huge batch imports be more conscious of the type of data you're importing and extract better labels, so as to avoid significant work later? Sweet kate (talk) 18:46, 28 July 2015 (UTC)