Shortcut: WD:PC

Wikidata:Project chat

From Wikidata
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.
Please use {{Q}} or {{P}}, the first time you mention an item, or property, respectively.
Also see status updates to keep up-to-date on important things around Wikidata.
Requests for deletions can be made here.
Merging instructions can be found 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 2017/02.





for permissions


for deletions


for deletion

for comment

and imports

a query



Wikiproject Finnish elections[edit]

1. We are starting to prepare the import of the candidates for the Finnish municipal elections in the new Wikiproject Finnish Elections. While the import of the candidates is the main issue and needs to tackle several challenges, I would like to ask for your assistance in making sense of municipal council items in Wikidata. Currently there is municipal council in Finland (Q191893), which is a subclass of municipal council (Q701632), which is a subclass of city council (Q3154693). Any way that could be sorted out? – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 08:15, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this could be really difficult. One of the more difficult properties to agree around is office contested (P541). In many elections, you vote for the "seats in the city/municipal council". The mayor and other officies, are thereafter indirectly elected by the council. I do not know how it works in Suomi, but that is how it works here in Ruotsi. P541 is still often used for other things than these "seats".
One challenge I have notified is that we here in Ruotsi are not only voting for individual persons, but also for political parties. That is also difficult to describe. (The sum of all votes therefor exceeds the total # of votes.) And on local level, it is not unusual that persons that are not a member of a political party are representing a party. The lists of potential candidates are often endless, since people can vote on almost anything, including Donald Duck (Q6550) and "free alcohol and wider pavements". -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:58, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
Really happy that you answered! I am sure we are tackling much the same questions in Finland and Sverige. I am more or less confident that all the parts will fall into place well enough. I am hoping not to create unnecessary connectors, such as municipal council 2012–2017 in Helsinki, even though I already was tempted to. There are still unknown objects, such as constituency association (Q10712411) for elections (do they exist more globally?), no label (Q11902699) coalitions between constituency association (Q10712411), or electoral alliance (Q388602) between parties (should they be declared on a municipal or national level) who all establish candidate lists. I have not yet found an item for the list. In Finland, the votes are counted with D'Hondt method (Q337866), and the correlation between the votes and the elected persons is not direct. A key problem is which items should have instances for different years or municipalities etc. We plan to import all candidates if everything goes well. Votes cast on other than the candidates is an issue that we don't necessarily tackle. Any help regarding any of these question will be warmheartedly welcomed! Perhaps the best place will be the project page. Cheers, Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 14:56, 3 February 2017 (UTC)
I have planned to use office contested (P541) to express that the candidates are running for the council item rather than the individual representative item. If it poses no computational harm, I propose the scope of the object of the property be extended to cover a legislature as well. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 09:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Susannaanas: Can you give an example of what this would look like? --Oravrattas (talk) 20:57, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Oravrattas: I have created an example on the project page. It should already have the most important features, but generally everything is in the making. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2017 (UTC)
@Susannaanas:. Great, thanks! Based on this, I don't think that extending the scope of office contested (P541) to allow something like Helsinki City Council (Q4117101) is the right way to go. Instead I would suggest creating a separate "position" entity for "Member of the City Council of Helsinki" (or equivalent), similarly to how this is modelled for members of all national legislatures (see, for example, the list at Wikidata:EveryPolitician) --Oravrattas (talk) 09:48, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
@Oravrattas: Thanks! If you think that this would be the right way to go, I will then add the 311 items that this requires for Finland, plus the historical ones. I would also urgently need discussion on the candidacy in election -proposal. I wish you could spare a thought! – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 10:10, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
@Oravrattas:I am not very happy with this but I will follow this. I still need a linking property from the local municipal elections to the local city council. It seems arbitrary to link through the candidate/representative. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 08:51, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Susannaanas: I'm not sure I understand. The linking to the body is through the office, not through the candidate:
Note also that this is only needs to be set on the 'parent' concept rather than on each individual election, so in the UK is actually
and is only added to the individual election if it needs to be more specific — e.g. on United Kingdom general election, 2015 (Q3586935), office contested (P541) has a qualfier of parliamentary term (P2937): 56th United Kingdom Parliament (Q21084473) --Oravrattas (talk) 06:31, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@Oravrattas: Thanks for the answer, and sorry for being unclear. I should have said representative rather than candidate. I have created the following object, misusing the office contested (P541) property. When we locate a suitable property, we will replace this. I hope that these statements would not be removed until replacing ones can be written. I have also create related municipality and municipal council items, as well as the item for the elections nationally. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 14:40, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Susannaanas: I've tweaked that slightly to show one potential way you could do it, if you don't want to create a new Item for "Member of Alavus City Council" (though I suspect that creating such items will be better in the long term). --Oravrattas (talk) 12:09, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
@Oravrattas: I like that! The term showing up in the Finnish translation is not a correct one, so I will need to check if it's the right item, but if not I'll just change it. Thanks! – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 13:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

2. I am realizing that candidates are a property of the elections rather than vice-versa. If we have tens of thousands of candidates that model is not sustainable. Is there an existing model for defining it in reverse or should it be created? – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 16:11, 3 February 2017 (UTC)

I have reopened the proposal for an inverse property of candidate (P726), see candidacy in electionSusanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 09:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

3. I think an inverse property is also needed for number of representatives in an organization/legislature (P1410) to be able to sensibly list all the seats of a municipal council by party rather than list all the seats in all the municipal councils in the party item. If it exists, I would be happy if you let me know! – Cheers, Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 09:51, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

4. Which property to use for the candidate number? Is a new one needed? It would probably be a qualifier to the candidate (P726) / candidacy property. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

No I do not think you should merge constituency association (Q10712411) with anything. Au contraire, we should probably create more items like this.
What is a "candidate number"? It looks like you in Suomi have to nominate a candidate, and only "approved" candidates can get a valid vote?! (Here you can be elected without a nomination or even have approved it yourself. That has happened to Thomas Wassberg (Q195578) at least two times I think.)
The models for how the seats are distributed are often very complex. The model for Swedish elections, are in many cases not a clean version of any of these models, since constituencies and leveling seats make the math rather complex. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:10, 5 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, parties or constituency association (Q10712411) can nominate candidates, which results in candidate lists for each party / association / alliance in each municipality. The candidate has a number in this list. This is one modelling problem: Which property to use for the number, and should I also make an item for the candidate list(s)? If I use the number already as a qualifier for the candidacy then I have no more means to add the list as a qualifier to the number. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 14:42, 5 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for help and discussions! The hackathon at Yle was successful, with over 30 (data) journalists taking part and learning to use Wikidata. We will gather our observations on the project page as well as links to hackathon outcomes and future plans. The data import has still a lot of cleaning and fixing to do, and we hope to be well prepared for this years election data in April. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 14:26, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Query regarding the descriptions of famous CEO's[edit]

Hi all,

I was looking at the description of some of the famous CEO's like Marissa Mayer,Tim Cook etc. -> American business executive -> American business executive and engineer.

I guess it would be better to have specific description like CEO of Yahoo! for Marissa Mayer, CEO of Apple Inc for Tim Cook. However Sundar Pichai( has Google CEO as description. Can anyone please let me know why is there's disparity in description for different CEO's?

I guess it would be better to have consistent descriptions for all CEO's.

Thanks in advance.


Making Flow the default for new accounts[edit]

Given that this country prefers to use flow, as the recent poll suggests how about enabling flow as the default way for discussion on new user pages? ChristianKl (talk) 13:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Semi-OT: can you please link to “the recent poll” results? I’m curious about it … Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 13:49, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
meta:Collaboration/Flow_satisfaction_survey/Report#Overall_satisfaction_based_on_project_where_Flow_is_mainly_used --Pasleim (talk) 13:55, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Flow pages are much more clear. Btw, how can I change my user talk page to Flow?--Micru (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
You can just enable it in your Beta settings. (Different from other features there, enabling and disabling results in some actual edits being performed by some bot or service, so one should try to avoid toggling it on and off every second day.) --YMS (talk) 15:50, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose Please, no. Please leave this weak forum impersonation in the dustbin, where it belongs. Make this crap at maximum opt-in for those, who explicitly want it, not default for defenceless newbies. Sänger (talk) 16:56, 15 February 2017 (UTC) As long as there is no way to write on a proper, flexible talkpage besides a dumb Flow one, there should be none of these dumbed down pet project junk software extensions installed. Sänger (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I also oppose the move.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:42, 15 February 2017 (UTC)
Yikes. That was unnecessarily harsh. (Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose.) --Yair rand (talk) 02:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This extension with an uncertain future and that has significant flaws should not even be enabled on this wiki, in my opinion. --Rschen7754 02:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Stöder absolut inte Every present talk_page with Flow installed should instead have a mandatory Flow free alternative! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 09:32, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Current opt-in state is appropriate.--Jklamo (talk) 09:37, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose One problem with Flow is that it makes it harder than with a conventional talk page to follow the full sequence of interactions that the user has had. This may be a particularly bad negative for new users who may be just finding their feet here -- if one is thinking how to write or reply to them to help them up some next step of the learning curve here, one wants to be able to see as easily as possible the sequence of what advice they may have already have been given. As well as that, coming new to Wikidata is already quite a big step into the unfamiliar for experienced Wikipedians; adding on top of that what may well be an entirely new and unfamiliar talk system to them as well feels like putting an additional unnecessary obstacle in their way. Jheald (talk) 09:39, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
But at the same time Flow is more similar to other discussion forums on the internet, so it takes less time to pick up. Deryck Chan (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
  • The mechanism for the proposed change has not been mentioned, which makes it a little ahrder to assess. As users are able to turn it on if they wish, I don't see the need to force it. Also, how would users go through the reverse process? I don't see the case made for the change.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:48, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support We use Flow on the French-speaking project chat and there is no problem. I think instead that it is easier for new users. They should not have to learn wikicode. Tubezlob (🙋) 13:16, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
@Tubezlob:It's interesting how the French project chat is much more active than the German project chat even through German has more translated labels. Do you know whether this also was the case before you switched to flow? ChristianKl (talk) 13:13, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
ChristianKl - maybe they had to be more active in the chat, because the software was so complicated? Or they like to talk more? In the meantime, some German-speakers just went on working, e.g. translating labels. 19:14, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: I think that the answers are quicker than before with Flow, and that the project chat is a little bit more active. But maybe it is cultural too: the French have the worse level in English in Europe (24/24, Germany is 11/24, see that map).
By the way, this stat shows that they are more labels in French (8.1439870 Mil) that in German (6.8655780 Mil). Tubezlob (🙋) 10:29, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose it's a beta feature with a unknown prospect. --Succu (talk) 22:41, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose.--Arbnos (talk) 23:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support migration of discussion boards to Flow in general. Deryck Chan (talk) 18:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

NoBounds constraint for quantity-type properties[edit]

We have ~340 properties with quantity type. Can we have a new constraint template for this property type to indicate that a particular property typically should not or must not be used with bounds (i.e. amount only)? The concept of uncertainty does not apply for all quantities, thus bounds have been made optional recently. Right now we have plenty of bounds in our claims just because it was inevitable to add them, it might be useful to tidy them via covi pages. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:37, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

To push this once: who is working in the field of constraint definitions? Alternatively to a new constraint type, we could also use Complex Constraints with a somewhat simple SPARQL query such as this one for VAT-rate (P2855):
SELECT ?item { ?item p:P2855 [ psv:P2855 [ wikibase:quantityLowerBound ?lowerBound; wikibase:quantityUpperBound ?upperBound ] ] . }
Try it! I think it is important to distinguish between quantities for which there simply is no uncertainty (which are mostly not determined by physical measurements, VAT-rate (P2855) is an example) and properties with (possible) uncertainty and therefore bounds (which might be 0). We also distinguish between no value and concept of no-value in Wikibase (Q19798647) (or other similar NULL-like custom values). —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:35, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Order of presentation for a person[edit]

Hoi, I think that having won an award is more relevant than being nominated for an award. So I prefer it when the order is reversed and "award received" comes first. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:13, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

I agree. Maybe it makes sense to create a phabricator ticket? ChristianKl (talk) 21:15, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Ethnic communities and diasporas[edit]

Italian American (Q974693) and similar items are not really ethnic groups, so I've made this an instance of the newly-created ethnic community (Q28790362). On another level, I have also been developing Overseas Chinese (Q779191) and African diaspora (Q385967) as instances of diaspora (Q133004) items. What do folks think of this approach of distinguishing between ethnic groups, national/regional ethnic communities, and diasporas?--Pharos (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

@MechQuester, Billinghurst, TomT0m, Jc3s5h, Sjoerddebruin: Realizing now this is a bit of a sequel to Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2017/01#Irish-American - is it an instance of ethnic group?.--Pharos (talk) 18:55, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
There was another related discussion here at WD:PC (archived here). Let’s put it like that: we know that the situation about ethnic group items and property ethnic group (P172) is not good, but right now there is unfortunately nobody willing and/or capable to solve this problem. If you’d like to work in this field, I think nobody will complain. You also might find a suitable WikiProject at Wikidata:WikiProjects (or found a new one, to provide documentation of the results). —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
For wikidata to try to make sense of people's sense of community, self, ethnicity, ... is going to be a challenge as it is full of opinion, prejudice, history, ... In a world of air flights, refugees, asylum-seeking, immigration, one wonders whether it is an old world view if we are applying it to the now; though probably realistic for dealing with the old world. All I can say is good luck.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

For proposed data, I don't mind. In fact, itis good. In this world, I agree with billinghurst. There will be massively different opinions on what defines self-identity. MechQuester (talk) 18:34, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

I've made attempt to start a guideline at Wikidata:WikiProject Ethnicity, your input would be welcomed. I see this as more figuring out how to treat types of ethnicity in a meta way, rather than trying to categorize individuals.--Pharos (talk) 05:20, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Agreed. I will go out to help out. MechQuester (talk) 05:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Single value constraint[edit]

The property Thailand central administrative unit code (P1067) has as one of its constraints the single value constraint (Q19474404). However, what it actually would need is a constraint which checks that there is only one value in the highest used rank - there can be only one current id for each administrative subdivision, however there can be several old discontinued ids. For example, Mueang Bueng Kan (Q476000) has the current id 3801 and until 2011 had the id 4303, and as the constraint checks over all ranks this is listed as one of the constraint violations. Any ideas what to do, other than ignoring the violations or removing the constraint completely? Ahoerstemeier (talk) 17:46, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

+1. I can't offer a general solution, but I do agree that constraint checks (especially single value constraint (Q19474404)) should ignore deprecated statements. (Or at least that should be their default behaviour). I don't know how to fix the central constraint checker, but it should be easy enough to write a SPARQL query that only looks at the wdt: values. Jheald (talk) 23:34, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
For example, like this query. (Currently doesn't find any).
I think you can register a SPARQL query as a "complex constraint" Jheald (talk) 23:42, 16 February 2017 (UTC)
Deprecated statements really should always be ignored, as this is the way to include "false" statements. However, that'd not help in this case, as old values aren't deprecated, they are just outdated, thus having a end time and rank "normal", whereas the current value has highest rank. Thus there can be more than a single value in the lower ranks, as an example I added to Bung Khla (Q17616122) all old values. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 14:38, 17 February 2017 (UTC)
May be better to ping User:Ivan A. Krestinin? --Infovarius (talk) 10:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Germany has now a participant list[edit]

I created a participant list for WikiProject Germany following the example of Thierry Caro creating lists for the Anglophone countries.

I think it would be worthwhile if we have Wikiproject participant lists for most countries to be able to ping relevant people. Especially if you speak languages that aren't well represented, I encourage you to create a Wikiproject. ChristianKl (talk) 09:10, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, this would be helpful. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Property for annual rainfall[edit]

Hi, is there a property for the annual and average rainfall of a location? The closest I could find was precipitation height (P3036), but the description reads like it's meant for storms or weather events rather than locations. Icebob99 (talk) 14:32, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think we have a property for that. It would need to be proposed. ChristianKl (talk) 07:28, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Please see Wikidata:Property proposal/average yearly temperature. --abián 14:19, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

How to handle apocryphal people and biographies, similarly apocryphal events and their accounts[edit]

Through transcribing A biographical dictionary of eminent Scotsmen (Q19020079) it is evident that some of the articles are doubtful for actual people. I am looking for guidance how we should be dealing with the subjects of such articles. For people they should not be "human", as they did not exist, we could call them "fictional character" though that doesn't ring true to me either. As apocryphal works can be about people (apocryphal person), or events (apocryphal event), or we could amalgamate and have "apocryphal subject", "doubtful subject" or something someone else can think to cover this matter. Also, as these biographical materials given detail about the supposed person, how much do we see that we could or should have? Thanks for your thoughts.

The first set of biographical articles will be added when I finish the first volume (soon), and I feel that I need to have a "main subject" link to something, especially where some of these identified had the same issue in the DNB00.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:44, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

How about simply creating a new "apocryphal person" item? ChristianKl (talk) 07:17, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
definitely an option considered, though that would lead to people adding dates, and other classifying items, and that may not be the communities wish, hence why the issue is being mentioned.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:37, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
There is human who may be fictional (Q21070568), which may be what you need? It is already used for characters in the Bible for example.Koxinga (talk) 08:48, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. So different item, otherwise treat the same as a human.  — billinghurst sDrewth 09:42, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Ah. Duplicate of Koxinga's comment. Sorry. Jheald (talk) 12:38, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

@billinghurst: I have created a new item: apocryphal biographical entry (Q28801354), and made it a subclass of both fictitious entry (Q1417174) and human who may be fictional (Q21070568). Hopefully this can be of some use here!--Pharos (talk) 04:03, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

@Pharos: I am not certain that it is helpful. While I am happy to label the underlying person as apocryphal as that is the evidence from later analysis by scholars. The article itself is still a biographical article in a biographical work, and I do not see that it is our call to make a differentiation of a published work. Maybe, (and I am not convinced) we could qualify the item for "biographical article", putting something else is another matter, and not one that I wish to do.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@billinghurst: I'm confused, are you creating Wikidata items for every individual entry in the biographical dictionary, rather than an item for the dictionary or for the people themselves? Can you link an example?--Pharos (talk) 04:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I will be creating an item for each entry, as each entry is a subpage at enWS. This has been the practice for many biographical and encyclopaedic works for numbers of WSes. The work has its own item. Picking an existing biographical article at random as an example Church, Richard William (Q19037309).  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@billinghurst: Thanks for the information on Wikisource subpages, wasn't fully aware of that system. Wouldn't a questionable entry in that case just be an instance of fictitious entry (Q1417174) (in addition to being biographical article (Q19389637))?--Pharos (talk) 00:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Fictitious would be a deliberate act, that is a big call. That modern day sources, or lack of access to older sources, are unable to confirm a person's existence doesn't make an entry fictitious. Am I, a humble transcriber of other people's work, not an authority, able to make that judgement call? The article is the article as it was printed at that time, it is what it is. Maybe I could follow your process if we have a process to dispute any published article recorded within WD where it has been authoritatively proved wrong (sourcing required), or other interpretations have followed (sourcing required), it still is opinion/interpretation that you are putting on against an item, and that is not related to the item. It is a slippery slope to do that to articles. The person item is a different matter, that is an amalgam of information that has a chronology, and is able to show and represent disputative information.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

How many new users get auto-patrolled every month?[edit]

I'm thinking about the suggestion made by @Alexmar983: to manually give users auto-patrolled status along with a personalized human-written welcome message. Does anybody know how many people get this status every month? (To estimate the amount of work of giving the status along with a manual welcome message. ChristianKl (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

Per Wikidata:Requests for comment/Restructuring of the "minor" user rights, all and only autoconfirmed and confirmed users are autopatrolled. Autoconfirmed users are users registered for 4 days and had 50 edits. Admins may give any user confirmed flags if trusted.--GZWDer (talk) 18:48, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
the problem is that you are giving autopatrolled flag to people who simply have 99% (95%? 90%? i don't how how to crunch the number...) of the time simple "interlink" edits. Those people are sometimes unaware of the fact that wikidata has IDs, labels and so one. I have problems with long-term users that criticize me when I start to explain wikidata from its role of centralizations of links but that's the only aspect they usually know. When they start to make other changes (for example they try to understand how a local infobox connected to wikidata works) who is there to teach them? I am no stressing the "they can make a mistake" part. I also did a stupid mistake of a image few weeks ago and I corrected after few hours (and noone noticed BTW). I am sorry about the opportunity of learning from mistakes that is lost. They could do so much more if someone see them. They can understand that their work in ns0 somewhere else is on that item too. And once they understand they really care. One of the reason why I have been introducing wikidata with the image maintenance tools is mainly because it was something effective (it is a property like the other ones) and not so risky if you make a mistake (an improper image is not like a partially wrong data, it is much easier to spot). Still, many of the newbies I found despite being on a wikidata-centric platform (itwikipedia makes massive use of wikidata) and showing 100s edits here simply knew nothing. We are not a platform that should assign an autopatrolled right based on simple edit count, IMHO. --Alexmar983 (talk) 04:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
To know your numbers you are going to need to track Special:Statistics, and I don't know if you can (back)track when rights are allocated, something might show through the API.

To amend the autopatrol cut-over it take a consensus discussion here. I see that the previous change request for rights change is is phab:T58203. Presumably the defaults can be changed though it is not evident that any wikis for editing use anything but the defaults of time/no. of edits. I see that Commons restricts uploads to different parameters for autopatrols. Rather than automatic, you might prefer that administrators are able to assign the right, it is how we manage it at enWS. At enWS as we have raised the bar to edits, we patrol with a bot utilising pywikibot's; though having a traditional setup of namespaces, and use of Special:PrefixIndex gives us a good degree of control.  — billinghurst sDrewth 06:48, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

There are two distinct issues:
(1) Does our present system set people on autoconfirmed, who don't know Wikidata well enough for their edits not getting the patrol flag.
(2) Could we personally welcome users when we give them the autoconfirmed status in a way that's makes it more likely for the user to become are more active user of Wikidata.
I personally don't have a firm opinion on (1) but (2) seems promising to me. A personal greeting that informed by the edits the user made and that gives helpful suggestions could potentially increase our user engagement positively. Especially given that we have 2% of the users doing 98% of the edits, getting more engagement is very valuable. ChristianKl (talk) 21:31, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I made some tests with non it-N users not with images but with labels. I told them "look, you know language X. We don't have a lot people who knows X, when you add a link here what if you open the item and add the label X yourself?" Of course it is like the images... we really don't need labels and aliases as we need properties, but it is something easy, and they get the idea. So yes you can welcome users with only "interlink edits" and propose simple tasks. And see how they react to the proposal and than later give the autopatrolled. But in any case I strongly advice to put a much higher automatic threshold for the autopatrolled flag. I am sorry for the stress of patrollers but those people if they only edit connecting articles from local platform are not aware of what wikidata is. But the good news is... they can learn fast.--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:02, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
It sounds great that you do this. When it comes to changing the way the actual autopatrol flag works we likely need a request for comments to do it. It might be worth to have a Wikiproject for sharing best practices for greeting newcomers. How about starting a Wikiproject Welcome? @Lea_Lacroix_(WMDE): as Project Manager Community Communication for Wikidata. This topic might also be worth getting investigated by the WMDE UX team. ChristianKl (talk) 09:22, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for the idea, it's something I already thought about. I can definitely provide some help and support, also from the rest of the team, but it's better if the project is started by volunteers :) Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 09:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I do think translated labels are valuable. In small languages having translated labels means that the Article Placeholder tool can serve pages. ChristianKl (talk) 09:33, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment running a bot to add welcome messages is done on numbers of wikis, and as can be expected there are upsides and downsides to a process, one of the downsides is welcoming spammers, abusers and vandals. At enWS we do it manually though we fortunately only have to worry about one language, and it looks to be appreciated by users as we regularly get 'thanks' messages, or even personal messages. At metawiki it is done with a bot, and it is a multilingual message, no idea if the bot gets thanked. Adding welcomes takes a little time, though you can make it easy with either a gadget or use of m:TemplateScript. What sort of impression and sense of community are you wishing to achieve?  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:11, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
I don't think that a bot who posts a general message that's independent of the user gives the user a feeling of being welcomed. I personally feel annoyed when I get automated bot welcome messages from 50 different Wiki's most of whose languages I don't know. It might be very good to give different people different messages. A person who just adds interwiki links encouraging them to translate labels and tell them that it helps making the Article Placeholder work (if their language enables the feature) might be a lot better than a general message. On the other hand, if you have a user who adds data about football players it might be worthwhile to encourage them to register for the Wikiproject Football.
As far as language goes, we could have a list where new users who get a minimum of 50 edits get listed by the language of their account. ChristianKl (talk) 12:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, that's possible. I think if you want to target users you need a retro-patroller sensibility. You don't have to target them immediately. You make a list of users with more than X edits. If those edit are more than 99% ns0 probably their talk is empty, so you can use that fact as an easy filter. You can send a welcome message that sounds like "you worked a lot here. Would you like to know more?". Since we have many users you don't have to target them all together. You can start for example with those who are autopatrolled on another wiki, and send them a message even in their own language. For example there are 5000 autopatrolled users on zhwiki, how many of them are active on wikidata with more than 500 edits? let's say 3000. Good. how many of them have an empty talk here? 2000. Good. Now you can even select those who are recently active but sending a message to unactive users is no harm in this case. it might actually bring him/her back sometimes. So you select those 2000 talks and send a message that says "you are active here, would you like to know more? We need users who speak Chinese".
We can make a project for this types of campaigns. On itwikipedia I studied these processes for years but they never wanted a "community project"... in the end I did nothing than replicate the same style. User wikimetrics are known since years, BTW, it is not difficult to "tune" them. After you have promoted users to a more "active" level, than you can have a autopatrolled that is assigned manually, because you have created a "community" that is more robust and "real". You can wait for years or you can speed up with these tricks. It is mainly your choice.
But these are mainly practical details, my core message is that wikidata does not have a "patrolling problem" per se. These patrolling "bugs" that we see are a symptom IMHO. Blocking IPs for example is removing the symptom. The cause is at the community level. It is still unbalanced and not sufficiently interconnected. You need "catalysts" to improve the community network, and that is something to do before rethinking the patrolling. Targeted welcome message and simple tasks as example are a good thing. But we need volunteers. I (casually) became the "hub" for dozens of users here, you need a profile "like mine" for at least 10-12 language. And of course more hubs of this type (that is "proactive") for the same language too.
I was thinking to go to Vienna in May and discuss these issues around, I think it is time.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
@Alexmar983: I created ChristianKl (talk) 10:58, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Citing Oxford DNB[edit]

I'm struggling with sourcing statements to Oxford DNB online. If the person has an Oxford DNB number as an authority, I assume individual statements still need sources. What's the best practice here? Should those be "reference URL" to the online site, or "stated in" Oxford DNB, or what? I have a bunch I did wrong so I want to fix them correctly. Thanks! - PKM (talk) 22:18, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

  • I believe the preference is to give both. (Though I'm happy to be corrected). Jheald (talk) 23:04, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Help:Sources describes different source models, of which Database and Web Page are relevant here. One would typically choose the Database approach if there is a database (as in this case), but there is no obligation to do so. Mixed sources which fit both models are also possible, but somewhat expensive to add. —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:08, 18 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I read that and looked at some examples. It seems that "stated in" Oxford Biography Index should work. - PKM (talk) 03:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Please also add all the other information to each individual reference, as Help:Sources suggests. There are some gadgets available which help you to work in this field a little more efficiently (DuplicateReferences, CurrentDate, …) —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't see how to add qualifiers to a reference. Can you point me to an example of a reference to a database that is done in the manner recommended? - PKM (talk) 07:25, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Q24005810#P569. There are three different referenced values for the date of birth of this person. Two are referenced by three different databases (which therefore usse the database source model), and another one has a reference with the web page model. The order of the claims within each reference does not matter, it is just important that all important information is there within each reference individually.
If you were to retrieve data including a reference from Wikidata, e.g. in a Wikipedia module or template, you’d need to rely on the fact that all the important source information as defined by some standard (here: Help:Sources) is found in each reference. It was very difficult for Wikipedia to build a useful source if Wikidata just said “stated in: some database”, without giving a database ID, a retrieval date, and an external database entry title (the latter is relevant since there is not necessarily a 1:1 mapping between Wikidata items and external database entries). A simple “reference URL: some URL” would be not as bad, but still clearly below Wikipedia standard. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:47, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @MisterSynergy: Thank you, that is just what I needed. Now I know how to proceed! - PKM (talk) 20:13, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

Called to the bar[edit]

Do we have a property for "called to the bar"? The value would be a single date. - PKM (talk) 22:21, 18 February 2017 (UTC)

You could look in to using significant event (P793) with the value call to the bar (Q5021687) and date as a qualifier. Danrok (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Perfect, thank you. - PKM (talk) 03:01, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@PKM: I have usually been adding them as "member of" then adding the requisite Inn with a start date.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:35, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@billinghurst:Would "member of" an Inn of Court imply having been called to the bar rather than just studying there? This isn't my area of specialization, would love to know. That sounds like a good solution if so. - PKM (talk) 06:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@PKM: They were usually firstly students at an Inn, then members, before being called to the bar. It was/is a process where being called is the end of the 'apprenticeship' and qualified. Poke at some of the finished transcriptions in s:Men-at-the-Bar (1885) to see numbers of (historical) examples.  — billinghurst sDrewth 07:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
@billinghurst: Thanks, will do! - PKM (talk) 07:28, 19 February 2017 (UTC)


As user:JayWacker points out on the former's talk page, artificial light (Q138502) and lighting (Q210064) look very similar. However, links to different articles on the German, Spanish, Italian and other Wikipedias. Perhaps they need better English labels and descriptions? Can someone who speaks one or more of those languages please oblige? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:58, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

  • From German perspective: lighting (Q210064) seems to have a proper label (could also be illumination, but this is just another term for lighting according to the enwiki article and is already set as an alias); artificial light (Q138502) would probably be better described by artificial light. The dewiki article describes it as contrary to daylight (Q16491). —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:17, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
    • I've followed the lead of MisterSynergy, renamed one of the items to 'artificial light', and tried to add appropriate properties to distinguish them further.--Pharos (talk) 19:56, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
  • In what sense is artifcial light the opposite of daylight? Isn't the opposite of light darkness? ChristianKl (talk) 08:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Now I see your point—I did not watch these items. The concept of “opposites” does not have a clear definition which allows to contest a given opposite relation for correctness. The distinction between artificial light (Q138502) and daylight (Q16491) has basically a technical motivation, not a physical one; we can thus neglect that there might be other, technically not relevant parts of light in an another physical context (e.g. extraterrestrial radiation). But here both types complement to the total light (Q9128), while being in fact totally disjunct types of light. Yes, an opposite of (P461) relation seems appropriate to my opinion. —MisterSynergy (talk) 22:52, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

British History Online VCH ID[edit]

As can be seen at Wikidata:Property proposal/British History Online VCH ID, Andrew Gray, Charles Matthews, James Heald and I were recently involved in a cordial discussion about how best to represent topics mentioned in Victoria County History (Q7926668), for which I had proposed a property.

To my surprise, before we reached a conclusion, this was marked as ready and, shortly afterwards, British History Online VCH ID (P3628) was created.

Two points arise:

  1. Please can property creators and others be more mindful of ongoing discussions?
  2. What's the best solution regarding VCH? Please discuss at Property talk:P3628#Way forward

@YULdigitalpreservation, ArthurPSmith, ChristianKl: also. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:16, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry. The discussion looked to me like it reached it's conclusion. User:Jheald answered the open issues and nobody opposed the property in it's current form. ChristianKl (talk) 17:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)
Note I marked it as ready after reading JHeald's "Latest view" comment, it seemed the discussion had concluded. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:28, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Commons data file property[edit]

It seems to me that there is no property to link to the data files in Commons, the .tab JSON files and the .map GeoJSON files? If that is the case, I could propose a property for at least the map file. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 15:14, 19 February 2017 (UTC)

The corresponding datatype to link to the data namespace on Commons is not yet available. --Pasleim (talk) 14:35, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Pasleim: Is that datatype expected to be coming soon? Or would a property with datatype:string and a URL formatter be useful in the meantime? Jheald (talk) 21:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Based on the comments on phabricator:T57549 I guess the datatype will come soon. --Pasleim (talk) 22:40, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Items for school year & academic term were merged[edit]

Q1757373, which did have the English label "school year", has been redirected to academic term (Q915466), which has the English label "academic term". Given that there are (usually) three terms in a year, should they be de-merged, or were the English labels wrong?

@Infovarius: FYI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:55, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I think it should be de-merged. In German "Schuljahr" wouldn't be used for an university. ChristianKl (talk) 15:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #248[edit]

executive body (P208): "government" or "cabinet"?[edit]

The documentation for executive body (P208) (Property_talk:P208) gives as its example Israel (Q801)Cabinet of Israel (Q2578249). However, it also has an "Allowed values" constraint of executive branch (Q35798), and Cabinet of Israel (Q2578249) (as well as most other countries where the Cabinet, rather than the Government is set as the value) fails this check (Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P208#Value_type_Q35798), as the item is usually a subclass of cabinet (Q640506) (with individual Cabinets being instances of that), rather than a direct instance of cabinet (Q640506).

From what I can see, many of these countries don't have a separate item for the national government, distinct from the Cabinet, but some countries do: e.g. the UK has Government of the United Kingdom (Q6063) of which Cabinet of the United Kingdom (Q112014) is a part, and United States Cabinet (Q639738) is a part of Federal Government of the United States (Q48525).

Surveying how this is used generally isn't a lot of help — most countries don't have executive body (P208) set yet at all, and of those that do, there's a slight preference for the "cabinet" rather than the "government", but the numbers are small enough for it to be inconclusive:

SELECT DISTINCT ?country ?countryLabel ?body ?bodyLabel ?parentLabel
  ?country wdt:P31 wd:Q6256 .     # find instances of country
    ?country p:P208 ?statement .  # with a P208 (government) statement
    ?statement ps:P208 ?body .    # which we assign as ?body
    FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?statement pq:P582 ?end_date }  # with no P582 (end date) qualifier
    OPTIONAL { ?body wdt:P279 ?parent } # and set ?parent based on either subclass
    OPTIONAL { ?body wdt:P31 ?parent }  #                          or instance of
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" . }
ORDER BY ?countryLabel

Try it!

I'm assuming that it's generally a bad idea if the example given for a Property fails one of its primary constraints. Is the solution here to (a) change the constraint to allow a Cabinet (either exclusively, or in addition to a Government); (b) change how cabinets are modelled, so that they can be set here without this constraint failing; (c) make sure this is set to the Government item, not the Cabinet item in each country (creating the relevant items where needed); (d) something else entirely?

Or from another angle, which should we be saying?:

< United States of America (Q30) View with Reasonator See with SQID > executive body (P208) See with SQID < United States Cabinet (Q639738) View with Reasonator See with SQID >


< United States of America (Q30) View with Reasonator See with SQID > executive body (P208) See with SQID < Federal Government of the United States (Q48525) View with Reasonator See with SQID >

--Oravrattas (talk) 16:46, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

well it sounds like at least the subclass/instance modeling here is wrong. But I'm not sure what else I would recommend. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:10, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Oh, it looks like we have a mixture of terms in place, the synonym here needs to be removed. The body here is meant to be government and it is meant to exclude branch. Looking at what is around, a nice definition is
the executive (the Australian Government) is responsible for enacting and upholding the laws established by the legislature. Certain members of the legislature (called ministers) are also members of the executive, with special responsibilities for certain areas of the law.
and it separately mentions the legislature and the courts as the other two arms.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:42, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
as a slight aside, that definition is quite specific to the British/Australian-type system. Much of the world maintains a much stronger separation of powers, where a minister cannot also be a member of the legislature. --Oravrattas (talk) 09:55, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Henry Elsynge confusion[edit]

How should we proceed when most of the authority control records seem to be wrong? In the case of the British parliamentary historian Henry Elsynge (Q18730405) (father) and Henry Elsynge (Q15072637) (son), authorities seem to be following the 1889 Dictionary of National Biography in giving the son's dates as 1598-1654 and attributing a series of works on Parliament to him. The current online DNB gives dates of 1606-1656 for the son and explicitly says "The various parts of the treatise entitled The Manner of Holding Parliaments in England, or, Modus tenendi parliamentum apud Anglos, sometimes attributed to Elsynge, were in fact the work of his father and namesake." Even the 1768 edition of this work in Commons points out that attribution to the son is incorrect and it should be the father, and I have some recent scholarly papers that say the same.

I am happy to deprecate the old dates and the authorship with the more recent info, but do we need to do anything about the authority controls which seem to be associated with the wrong person?

For now I've written an article for EN:WP on the father and tagged the article on the son as disputed - if there's no disagreement I'll make the changes there, but I'd prefer to get WD sorted first. - PKM (talk)

@Andrew Gray, Charles Matthews, Jheald: FYI. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:22, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for raising this. Where the (old) DNB disagrees with the (new) ODNB on dates for a person, I think it is normally fine simply to override the DNB dates with the ODNB dates. For Wikipedia purposes that should do: the new article is more authoritative than the old one. There are probably "ignore all rules" exceptions, but I'm not aware of too many for dates. Identification of placenames is another matter: there I think the ODNB can introduce mistakes in disambiguation.
On authority control, it is certainly true that sources to be found on VIAF have not updated from (say) DNB dates to ODNB dates. For the purposes of telling authors apart it may not matter so much, so I suppose it is a low priority for librarians to go back and change things. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Tricky. With a record like BNF 12371523p, do we match on the basis of the dates, or on the basis of the works?
It depends how they think of their record, which is hard for us to know.
I think I would match on the basis of the dates, and email the data teams at BNF etc. Then the question is whether they will change the dates, ie essentially keep the works and change the person; or create a new record, and transfer the works.
They may well do the former, but I think we should do the latter -- ie treat their record as a record for a person, rather than the creator of some works.
Over here, we should probably also include a statement for Elsynge the Younger as author of The Manner of Holding Parliaments, but mark it deprecated, with qualifer "reason for deprecation" = "misidentification". Jheald (talk) 15:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
In cases of serious confusion it is probably best to remove identifiers here for the present. I have done something here. Charles Matthews (talk) 15:30, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
I tend to be a believer in leaving bad data in the system, but marked as such, rather than removing it totally; because if it is not there, sooner or later a human or a bot will only try and add it back again...
So if it were me, I think I would have left the BNF identifier in there, but with some value for "sourcing circumstances" to indicate that it may be based on a misidentification or a misconception.
But since Charles has taken this in hand, I'll leave it with whatever he's thought best. Jheald (talk) 16:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you all. I'll make the remaining WP changes shortly. - PKM (talk) 19:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Instance of "type of cheese"[edit]

blue cheese (Q746471) is a subclass of (P279) cheese (Q10943).

But it is also an instance of (P31) type of cheese (Q3546121). (English article: Types of cheese, French article is about types of cheese pastes, Italian article is about cheese classification)

Should I remove this second statement? It seems redundant and type of cheese (Q3546121) does not seem like a solid item to build upon. Thanks! Syced (talk) 03:27, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

No, there's no reason to remove valid data. Wikidata's philosophy is that it's okay if different people categories an item slightly differently and seeks to present both perspectives. ChristianKl (talk) 09:16, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
ChristianKl: I see, thanks for your feedback! Syced (talk) 08:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
type of cheese (Q3546121) is useful in order to distinguish eg the specific Edam (Q597473) from the general Dutch cheese (Q17315183) -- both are in the subclass tree of cheese (Q10943), but only one is a type of cheese. Jheald (talk) 18:44, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Jheald: Most items that link to type of cheese (Q3546121) are not specific varieties, but rather items like Spanish cheese (Q27038733) or industrial cheese (Q3088323). That contradicts your explanation, right? Cheers! Syced (talk) 08:00, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Hmmm. Maybe something to raise with fr:Projet:Fromage, which I think has been the most active effort in this area. Jheald (talk) 09:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Displayed name of Noongar language[edit]

Nys language label in Wikidata

If I expand "In more languages" for Wedge-tailed Eagle (Q752465), the Noongar language label is itself labelled as "nys", rather than in full (see screenshot, above). Where and how can this be fixed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

To add a new label language, the language has to be added to MediaWiki. How this is done is explained here. --Pasleim (talk) 13:33, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Even after creating an account there, I get a "You cannot post new threads to this discussion page because it has been protected from new threads, or you do not currently have permission to edit" message, on the page where it is suggested I raise my request. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:18, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
And now my account there has been "rejected", because "the quality of your translations did not meet the requirements". I, of course, made no translations, nor indeed any other edits. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Can anyone help get this fixed, please? And can anyone tell me why doing so is apparently dependent on an external project which is not open to such requests? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:48, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I think you were misdirected. Language names are copied from a separate project called CLDR. I have added the language to the list at phab:T151269 but that's where my abilities end. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
In [1] User:Thiemo Mättig (WMDE) stated that adding a language to MediaWiki and TranslateWiki is preferred over adding just the language name to wmgExtraLanguageNames. I strongly support this statement. There is no point in adding labels in a language if the language is not selectable as user interface language. --Pasleim (talk) 10:20, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
There are two different things: language support and having its name localized. Are you sure you are talking about the latter? I am not sure whether that correspnds with Thiemo said in phab:T151269#2821445. By the way, I can now see the language localized in English (Noongar) but not eg. in Czech (still "nys"). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 14:34, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

IDs made up by Wikipedia[edit]

I am planning to import to Wikidata the list of natural heritage items of Moldova (see list in Romanian). Unfortunately, the source of the list (Parliament of Moldova) did not provide a unique ID for each item, so we had to make them up on Wikipedia. Now for example the Orhei National Park (Q15838244) was assigned ID "MD-OR-pn-001", where MD stands for country code, OR for district code, pn for type of natural heritage item (parc național in this case). You get the idea.

The question is: what property do I use on Wikidata to import these IDs? --Gikü (talk) 18:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Gikü: What I strongly suggest is simply replace your IDs with Wikidata entry IDs. Take a look at list of monuments in Nigeria for reference. Yarl (talk) 18:20, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
@Yarl: Thank you. This is painfully unreadable though. I believe readability is important for unique IDs used in contests like Wiki Loves Earth. --Gikü (talk) 18:23, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
It seems reasonable enough to create a new property for them. Jheald (talk) 18:36, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
How about using catalog code (P528) along with the qualifier catalog (P972) "Wiki Loves Earth - Moldova"? ChristianKl (talk) 18:49, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


There is now a Community for Wikidata editors on Facebook. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Property proposal category for Sport[edit]

Currently we have a lot of sport related property proposals but no sections that's focused on sport. What do you think about adding one? ChristianKl (talk) 11:17, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Most sports property proposals are in fact authority control property proposals, thus there is already a specific section to file them into. However I would not object to having a separate section. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:05, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

How to link directly to the wikidata editor?[edit]

If I know the Q and the P I want to edit, is there any way to send a user to the edit box for that particular P in that Q?--Strainu (talk) 11:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Q2#P1589. A simple anchor does the job in principle, but sometimes Javascript loads slowly and moves the content further away after the browser already jumped to the anchor. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:07, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
That doesn't link to the editor, just the current property value, so it doesn't work if the property does not yet exist in the page.--Strainu (talk) 12:50, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
I don’t know of any other method. The editor view is invoked by Javascript and therefore not easily accessible like the editor view of Wikipedia is. —MisterSynergy (talk) 13:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. This seems like a good feature, I logged phab:T158851--Strainu (talk) 15:01, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Describing physical and geographical items with OpenStreetMap tags[edit]

As a regular contributor to the OSM project and deeply interested in Wikidata, i'm very curious to know how to better describe the more rigid English dependent and flat data model in OSM to the more language independent and hierarchal model of Wikidata. This doesn't sound like a very novel idea to create a relationship between the data models of the two largest open data projects of humanity, but i'm putting it out anyway since my searches did not find anything along these lines.

To start i'm listing a few simple examples of Wikidata items as OSM tags that would describe the same feature:

Some immediate uses in my mind of this is to autogenerate Wikipedia links for the OSM tag documentation and taginfo, make it easier to map on OSM with better feature preset names and allow querying Wikidata features using OSM tags via SPARQL. Being pretty new to Wikidata, i'm not sure if adding OSM tags as properties to Wikidata items is desirable, but it would be nice to get some feedback if this is an idea worth exploring. --Planemad (talk) 11:36, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

This sounds interesting indeed. Perhaps the simplest way to start is to add interwiki links to the OSM wiki? I'm not sure this is currently possible in Wikidata, but it would help establish some sort of connection, since the page names on the OSM wiki are structured so that they can be easily parsed. Once this is done, one could do quality checks, such as, if an OSM element has a wikidata or wikipedia key, does wikidata have an equivalent statement?-Strainu (talk) 11:59, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Are you aware of the properties OpenStreetMap tag or key (P1282) and OpenStreetMap Relation identifier (P402)? --Pasleim (talk) 12:21, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Excellent! OpenStreetMap tag or key (P1282) is exactly what I was looking for thanks. Going to have some fun with this :) --Planemad (talk) 14:14, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Blocked value oddity[edit]

I'm trying to add Quora topic ID (P3417), with the value "Advertorial", to Advertorial (Q380060).

However, that cause QuicktStatements to hang, and attempting to do so manually causes the "save" option to grey out. It would let me add "Advertoria".

Is the word "Advertorial" on some sort of blacklist? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:20, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

I was able to add it. Since I'm a sysop, this could indicate that some blacklist doesn't like the value. I checked SpamBlacklist and AbuseFilter, niether of them logged an action on that page. I don't know well the rest of anti-spam tools. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 17:19, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
I could reproduce Pigsonthewing observation with native label (P1705) instead of Quora topic ID (P3417). There seems to be a blacklist involved. Given that the problem is solved by you adding the value I see however no further need to investigate. ChristianKl (talk) 19:03, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Actually, I won't be able to sleep unless I find out what's going on. I made a test on Wikidata Sandbox (Q4115189), both via the interface and API, without problem. If you dare, please submit this form (action=wbcreateclaim) and come back with the response if negative. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:53, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Petscan: Wikidata + Sitelink - Template[edit]

Is there a way to produce a canned search on Petscan combining:

  • Wikidata item with P1367 (preferably only one P1367, but that's a detail)
  • Sitelink to en-wiki
  • No template Art UK bio on the en-wiki article

I've asked on the talk page for Petscan on meta, but then I thought here might get more visibility.

Thanks, Jheald (talk) 15:29, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Based on your post in Meta, take a look at "Combination" at "Other sources" tab. If you use Uses items/props at "Wikidata" tab, then you should put "wikidata NOT categories" in Combination field, if you're using sparql - "sparql NOT categories". Of course, Art UK bio goes to "Has any of these templates:" at Templates&links. --Edgars2007 (talk) 16:26, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @Edgars2007:. I couldn't get the Wikidata tab to give me anything -- it seemed to only work as a filter. But maybe I didn't know how to re-set PetScan to clear previous conditions. On the Sparql tab I can exclude categories, but can I exclude templates? (I suppose I could get the template to set a category, but I don't want people on en-wiki to complain about "more clutter".) I can indeed get the Art UK bio list from "Has any of these templates:" at Templates&links -- but I couldn't see how to exclude it. One resort would be to go via PagePile of course (or just do the excluding with a script on my own PC) -- but I was attracted by the idea of a Petscan URL that could just be put on a page, that anyone could click through on to get a live list, with no more required of them than that. Jheald (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

@Jheald: Petscan has to have a baseline list of articles on the scanned project to perform the filters/generators onto. So the scanned project is English Wikipedia, you have to configure a generator on it ('Has none of these templates' is not a generator, it is a carveout supposed to trim down a previously generated list). I'd go with Category:Painters with a depth of 3 (or 4 for good measure, but the greater the depth the slower the generation). Then I'd add 'Art UK bio' under 'Has none of these templates' in Templates and links tab and add P1367 in 'Uses items/props' in Wikidata tab. The 'Sitelink to en-wiki' part of the query is satisfied by having English Wikipedia as scanned project. Please try it out and let us know if it works for you. --Gikü (talk) 14:21, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Nice! That works, because its easy enough to compare the count for Sitelink + P1367 with Category + P1367 to make sure that all the P1367s have an appropriate category. I just need to do that once, then anyone can use that Petscan link (#769799) to find some untemplated artists. And with 5363 to go, that's quite enough to keep everybody busy. So, it's just exactly perfect. Thank you! Jheald (talk) 16:45, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Adequate SPARQL Tutorials/References[edit]

I'm interested to know more about SPARQL and its wiki-based applications, thats why I would like to ask for your opinions about recommendable books/tutorials that helps to understand and apply SPARQL for diverse issues in wiki-world. I've already watched some of the wikimedia foundation presentations/vedios but still feel the need of more deep understanding. This would help me to create some tools I'm thinking about and to encourage more people in the Arabic World to contribute in wikidata and to use its awesome possibilites. I'll be thankfull for any recommendations --Sky xe (talk) 16:03, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

If you need a query for a specific purpose but don't know how to write the query, go to and write what you need. ChristianKl (talk) 16:53, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
  • @Sky xe: A bit like The Matrix there's a limit to what you can be told -- you really have to try it for yourself! There is no substitute for setting yourself challenges of interesting queries you would like to make, and keeping a user page of how you achieved them.
It sounds like you've already seen Asaf's recent video introducing Wikidata, which touches on SPARQL. The next place to go is the portal at Wikidata:SPARQL query service/Wikidata Query Help, in particular the "gentle introduction" and the "beginner-friendly course" linked on the left. Each time there is an example, see how you can change in it to do something similar on data that is particularly interesting to you -- there really is no substitute for trying it out. It would also be a huge service to translate some of these into Arabic, or create your own, once you are more SPARQL confident.
You might also like to try Wikidata:SPARQL_query_service/queries, though frankly that page could use a lot of work (I think User:D1gggg may have it in his sights, so there may be hope) -- but its talk page is not a bad place to ask if there's anything you get stuck on. There are also some very good pages of example queries, both Wikidata:SPARQL_query_service/queries/examples, as well as various users' own pages eg, User:MartinPoulter/queries, User:TweetsFactsAndQueries/Problems. (I'm sure people can add more).
As for external resources, if you're anything like me you will find yourself googling things that will often lead back to the official reference spec at , or to questions answered at StackExchange etc.
In terms of books, there's an O'Reilly book Learning SPARQL by Bob DuCharme that is certainly readable, though obviously not containing anything specific to Wikidata -- I think I found that this could be a way to get more of the things that SPARQL could do into my head; but I think I find that once I have an idea that SPARQL can do something, I tend to reach for google first for more on how to do it. (Perhaps just that my keyboard tends to be nearer than my bookshelf!)
Hope this helps -- and have fun! For myself, I find it one of the most exciting things about Wikidata -- a real rush to be able to ask questions about almost anything in the world, all in the one data store. (Though sometimes it can be a challenge that either one has to find a way to work the query to get as much as one can within the permitted 30 seconds; or that our data is frustratingly not yet complete enough -- but of course that then just lays down the challenge to how to improve our data here!)
Hope you enjoy, all best Jheald (talk) 16:56, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Thank you a lot for your answers. I indeed watched some videos about SPARQL, including the online introduction by Asaf. It was great to have the chance to ask him and it was very helpful. And you @Jheald: have confirmed my feelings that there's no way but to learn it by trying. The notes and suggestions of all of you are appreciated, and it will help me coming forward and I will start investing more time in the wikidata & SPARQL work in the next months. I do notice the lack of data and that's also why I'm feeling the need to encourage more and more people to take part at the enrichment. I think, smart Games like those of Magnus Manske would make it more comfortable for people to do it. My part will be the creation of media (different videos) to show Arabic and English speaking people how awesome wikidata is and why it is important to be active. Im optimistic about the project :) --Sky xe (talk) 00:45, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

published in (P1433)[edit]

Is published in (P1433) suitable for cases when image of painting was published in different magazines, newspapers and books? Didn't get it clearly. For example, can I make statements that XXX painting was published in YYY book on page 12 and in ZZZ magazine, year 1913, #1, page12? --Stolbovsky (talk) 16:44, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

Data type query: Tracking links to archived datasets[edit]

There are a number of projects to archive datasets of public interest. Is there a related datatype on WD? Something for URL archiving, perhaps?

An archived dataset has some basic shared data:

  • Dataset title
  • Dataset description
  • URL for canonical source (possibly multiple, if there are a set of canonical mirrors)
  • Archives (multiple)
    • Archive URL
    • Archive name?
    • Date of last archive capture

Examples here's a list of datasets archived or flagged for rescue at datarefuge hackathons (fields: uuid createdAt significance recommended_approach file_types estimated_size url title harvest_method harvest_url bag_url ckan_url) and here's another variant of the schema for the EDGI government-data initiative in the US:

"Individual source or seed URL": "",
"UUID" : "E30FA3CA-C5CB-41D5-8608-0650D1B6F105",
"id_agency" : 2,
"id_subagency": ,
"Institution facilitating the data capture creation and packaging": "Penn Data Refuge",
"Date of capture": "2017-01-17",
"Federal agency data acquired from": "Department of Energy/U.S. Energy Information Administration",
"Name of resource": "Renewable and Alternative Fuels",
"File formats contained in package": ".pdf, .zip",
"Type(s) of content in package": "datasets, codebooks",
"Free text description of capture process": "Metadata was generated by viewing page and using spreadsheet descriptions where necessary, data was bulk downloaded from the page using wget -r on the seed URL and then bagged.",
"Name of package creator": "Mallick Hossain and Ben Goldman"

  • @Sj: We currently have 51 items marked as instance of (P31) data set (Q1172284) -- feel free to create "archived dataset" as a new subclass item of it if you like, for the new items to "instance of".
Here's a query for the properties currently used on them, that you could compare with the schema above:
There also may be additional properties that could be useful, eg full work available at (P953), content deliverer (P3274), archive URL (P1065), archive date (P2960), catalog code (P528), file format (P2701).
There's also external data available at (P1325), which can be used to link a subject to a collection of datasets. (Examples:
Probably a good idea to start a WikiProject page, and create a schema -- such as those at eg Wikidata:WikiProject_Video_games/Properties, Wikidata:WikiProject_Books/en, Wikidata:WikiProject_Periodicals, Wikidata:WikiProject_Websites, or any of the pages listed in Category:Properties_list_in_a_WikiProject.
There may be some properties missing, that could be created -- eg original URL, container file format, ... -- better to see what people think about creating a new property, than using one which is not quite right. Jheald (talk) 01:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Thanks @Jheald:. data set (Q1172284) looks like the right base type, I'll look into creating a WikiProject. It also seems that the raw data they're handling includes thousands of entries that might want to be clustered by significance / project-title before being put into wikidata, so they might use a CKAN repository for that. Do you know of examples of wikidata collections being synced with CKAN? Sj (talk) 07:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

External links[edit]

Hello. This is just to let you know that there is a new template called Template:External links that you can use to display a series of links that will tell your reader how often one given external URL is used on a few of the main Wikipedias. For instance, {{External links|}} will display the following line:
External use from Wikipedias: [de][en][es][fr][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][sv][zh].
I guess this will be useful on property proposals for external identifiers, as a way to quickly check whether the target website is already widely used on the different projects. It is already used on Wikidata:Property proposal/CEV ID, if you want to have a look. Feel free to add whatever you want, but don't overload this with any given language please. This is supposed to be short and efficient. Thierry Caro (talk) 05:16, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hovercards not working?[edit]

Hi all, I recently enabled hovecards beta feature. and all I see is preview error. It this feature working on wikidata or is it just me? Yarl (talk) 09:02, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Hello Yarl
That's a known issue (also the case for properties). I'll report your feedback to the developers.
Best, Trizek (WMF) (talk) 10:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Trizek (WMF): thanks, it's confusing for me, because I saw is was working on Asaf's presentation not so long time ago. Yarl (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Survey on newbie talk pages includes unecessary references[edit]

Can someone go after these messages and remove the ref tags? I did it here. Thx, Jane023 (talk) 10:42, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Property for *describing* a location?[edit]

In the official list of natural monuments and protected areas of Moldova, the exact location (beside the district) is described by text and only on several occasions do we know the coordinates. Take for example "Râpa Tartaul" / Tartaul valley. We do not know its coordinates, because the official source did not provide any. However, we know that the site is located in Cahul District (Q2128882), specifically "la 2 km nord de satul Tartaul de Salcie, pe versantul stâng al râului Salcia" / "2 km north of Tartaul de Salcie village, on the left side of riverbed of Salcia river". Is there any property to assign this text to? Like 'location description' or something?

Please note that 1) we have these descriptions in Romanian, Russian and Ukrainian; 2) pasting the text in the description field would not work, because the description allows up to 250 characters. --Gikü (talk) 11:50, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

We have directions (P2795) for such cases. --Pasleim (talk) 13:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Pasleim: That's exactly what I was searching for! So obliged! --Gikü (talk) 14:51, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
I'm confused. How is this is any way structured data? Are these literally text descriptions in particular languages? --Yair rand (talk) 19:55, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Yair rand: That's a good point, but see Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/49#P2795. --Gikü (talk) 13:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Daylight Savings Time[edit]

Hi, when I input statements about the time zone for a particular location, do I format it like I did in Q27568077? I made two statements for the time zone property, one for regular time and one for summertime offset. Is that okay? Icebob99 (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I think you should use the time zone item which already includes the summertime, I guess something like Central European Time (Q25989) in your case. Currently there is not much more information, but the wikipedia links are better and later on we can structure the information better (like the exact date of change of offset) without having to redo all the entries. Koxinga (talk) 21:44, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Just to be clear—I can take out the UTC+2:00 and leave just UTC+1:00 (Central European Time), and that would imply that the time zone recognizes DST, thus eliminating the need for the additional statement? I'm going to do that, correct me if I'm wrong. Icebob99 (talk) 01:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Agreement to add scientific names of taxons as labels[edit]

I have a long-standing request at Wikidata:Bot requests#‎Taxon labels for a bot to add scientific names of taxons as labels. user:Succu has objected to this, while recently, his bot is doing exactly that. When I pointed out this apparent ambiguity, he claimed that it is "is adding labels in a few languages where there is agreement to do so" (my emboldening).

I have now asked him three times for details of such agreement(s), but I have yet to receive a straight answer (he tells me "Simply follow the discussions", "I did often enough. So it's meanwhile a little bit boring", and "Again: follow the links in this thread. There is no need to repeat it again and again.").

Does anyone know whether these agreements exist, who made them, what was actually agreed to, and where they are recorded?

Aside from this, it seems ludicrous to be using a bot to add a label like "Drusus sharrensis" to the relevant item in languages like Bulgarian, Latin, and Russian, while at the same time objecting to anyone else doing so in in, say, Catalan, Dutch, English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, or other western-alphabet languages. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:26, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

This is discussed for the 5th (?) time now... --Succu (talk) 16:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
That is neither an answer, nor a discussion Succu. I find that it is a reasonable question to be asked, reasonable to have a clear explanation and this is a reasonable place for a discussion if one believes that one is being fobbed off, or non-answered. [Such declinations border on passive-aggressive behaviour.] So to help us all out, please can we have a clear and concise instruction on the addition of scientific names as labels in all the languages. I see it is happening for 80+ languages for family name, so it seems reasonable that it happens for taxonomic names. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I am not aware of any discussions on the subject, so for the that is the 1st one. So it seems to me that both Andy Mabbett and Succu agree that such edits are needed, I agree as well. So what is the issue? That Succu changed his mind without admitting it and now does not want to talk about it? As for adding scientific names to Cyrillic alphabet wikis: that seems to be correct if I do to ru:Оконные_мухи the scientific name uses Latin alphabet. --Jarekt (talk) 02:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Agree with Jarekt, billinghurst and Andy. Very sensible to add Latin scientific names of taxons as labels to cover all languages; long past time that we stop tolerating deliberately unhelpful snark and call it out for what it is - a form of bullying. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
ludicrous, fobbed of, passive-aggressive behaviour and bullying - Interesting „discussion“.
@Jarekt: The current agreement is Wikidata:Requests for comment/Automatic labelling. --Succu (talk) 11:20, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Yup, ludicrous, fobbed of, passive-aggressive behaviour and bullying seems to be the consensus. Had you posted the link instead of the snark, we would not be having this side-discussion. Please learn from it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:36, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
I read the RfC as being generally supportive. Can you point us at any objections to the proposal? --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
 ?!? Wikidata:Bot requests#‎Taxon labels. --Succu (talk) 11:41, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
That RfC was mentioned in the bot-request discussion only in response to my question "Can you show a policy requiring us to obtain consensus from external [WMF] projects before editing here?" (after Succu asked if I had "reached an agreement with svwiwki, cebwiki, warwiki, viwiki or nlwiki" to make the proposed edits in Wikidata). My response then - that's 28 March 2016 - was "Nothing in that May 2013 RfC stops this proposal from continuing; and no policy was created by it", to which Succu did not reply further. Even if that historic RfC were still - or ever - relevant, it shows no consensus either way regarding taxon labels in Russian; and Bulgarian and Latin labels are not mentioned at all. Indeed, the only consensus for oppose was a single voice asking for a temporary hiatus on doing so for Swedish, until other editors were consulted. Succu's reliance on the RfC is bogus. He has been stonewalling the request for a bot for almost a year. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:48, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
At earlier discussions that RfC was accepted as a starting point. Meanwhile some bot owners added labels in selected languages, e. g. User:BotNinja for bg and ru. I simply added this task to my weekly bot run. Have a look at this discussion started on 18 November 2015 where more concerns are expressed. Your recent conclusion from a diff It appears that Succu now agrees that adding scientific names of taxons as labels is a good thing. is not correct. I never agreed that mass adding labels the way you proposed is a good thing. The wording of some users here is not acceptable, especially the one that insinuates a personality disorder (passive–aggressive behavior (Q1153809)). --Succu (talk) 18:57, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Succu claimed "agreement" for adding labels in languages such as ru, bg & la. He refused my requests to cite such agreement, until in this discussion he cited them to an RfC where no such agreements exist. He now refers to "earlier discussions". Which ones? As for "Passive-aggressive behavior", it may be defined as "the indirect expression of hostility, such as through procrastination, stubbornness, sullen behavior, or deliberate or repeated failure to accomplish requested tasks for which one is (often explicitly) responsible". Others may judge the applicability of that, but it is distinct from "passive-aggressive personality disorder". By all means, though, Succu may take that matter to the administrator's noticeboard. But he should beware of boomerangs. To reiterate, the position of using a bot to add a label like "Drusus sharrensis" to the relevant item in languages like Bulgarian, Latin, and Russian, while at the same time objecting to anyone else doing so in in, say, Catalan, Dutch, English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, or other western-alphabet languages is ludicrous. It is also utterly untenable; and I note that Succu has made no plausible attempt to defend doing so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:39, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Hmm, one snippet of my statement has been taken out of context on how it was meant from local conversational English. Can we stop chewing on that bone? [If that could be easily excised from this conversation to bring it back to focus, I would do that.] I have apologised to Succu separately for how my comment was perceived. I am not about trying to win an argument with hostility or bullying behaviour.

I would like to see clear statements on what can be done, there is none as far as I can see, and it may be that it doesn't come from Andy or Succu, as this should be an agreed community position.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:36, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Succu has now given a substantially different, vague, and conflicting justification for his claim of "agreement", on the Bot Request page, and has indicated there that he is "not not willingly to answer in a thread full of insults" (presumably meaning this one). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

WikiProject Holocaust?[edit]

Does anyone knows about any efforts to integrate Holocaust data? We at the European Holocaust Research Infrastructure (Q21755493) project will be adding data on camps and ghettos, and are looking for collaboration.

All I can find is en:Wikipedia:WikiProject Jewish history --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:19, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

@Vladimir Alexiev: No, but please feel free to start something at Wikidata:WikiProject Holocaust. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:40, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Vladimir Alexiev: I can recommend you Wikidata + GLAM facebook group. Yarl (talk) 18:11, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

need input on list of endpoints for SPARQL federation[edit]

Hi everyone,

Currently Wikidata Query Service does not support federated queries. Stas has been working on making it possible to enable federated queries for a limited number of SPARQL endpoints. We have now opened a page to get suggestions and agreement on the first endpoints to support. Please add your comments and suggestions: Wikidata:SPARQL federation input

Cheers --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 17:50, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Ping everyone who participated in a discussion[edit]

When creating a property discussion we generally ping everyone who participated in the discussion. Currently that requires manually copy-pasting their name. Maybe it's possible to write a template like Template:Ping everyone that simply pings everybody who participated in the current discussion? ChristianKl (talk) 18:40, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

I don't think that is possible with the current software. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:47, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
It seems to me like can read the participants list out of a specific page and ping everyone. Why do you think pinging everybody who commented on another page would be harder? ChristianKl (talk) 21:21, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Personally I don't see the need to ping every person who commented. The proposer definitely should be ping. The other way could be to build a commented <!-- {{ping||||}} add your name if to be pinged at closure --> template with the proposal, so those who want to be pinged can add their name, and when you close the proposal then you uncomment the template and let it rip. People should be trained to assist themselves.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Quora blog post[edit]

Quora have just published a blog post about their collaboration with Wikidata, and the work I've been doing with them to make that happen. They are now displaying links to Wikidata items in their topic management pages - about 88K of them, so far. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:09, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations for getting Quora to link back to us. I'm now seeing the links to Quora in a better light. ChristianKl (talk) 19:23, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
Alright. Sounds good man. btw, glad to know the people on fb are onboard with it as well. MechQuester (talk) 19:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: a lovely succinct blog post that beautifully encapsulates use and benefits. Well done Andy, you are permitted to have a 30-second celebratory strut around your living room.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:22, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. Duly strutted ;-) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
This probably means tht's it's now a good time to create the Spanish Quora ID as well. ChristianKl (talk) 07:30, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Previous proposal was Wikidata:Property proposal/Quora topic ID (Spanish). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:59, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Vandalism in passive–aggressive behavior (Q1153809)[edit]

I just reverted some vandalism in this item (irrelevant offensive language in the description, and foreign-language aliases - though the latter may have been in good faith). I went to do what I would do in Wikipedia and warn the user, (though it was an IP, so this is of limited value) and tried to find a warning template. I hadn't realised that Wikidata doesn't appear to have Template space in the way other projects do. What is the recommended procedure when reverting vandalism? This is the first vandalism I have seen on Wikidata, but I haven't been round here much recently: is it a significant problem? --0ColinFine (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

For warning templates you can find them here --ValterVB (talk) 07:19, 24 February 2017 (UTC)


The interface isn't allowing corrections.

  • Q23986556 (TRAPPIST-1) has commonswiki CATEGORY:TRAPPIST-1

but this should be indicated at

since that is the category data page

I can't add the category to the category data page, nor can I remove it from the article data page

-- 07:46, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done I moved the sitelink. --Pasleim (talk) 09:19, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Please merge special item[edit]

Somebody may please merge item Battle at the Harzhorn (Q555463) with item battlefield at the Harzhorn (Q27243271) which both are the roman - germanic battle. Merge help section is nothing for wikidata new users. Thanks in advance!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pliojason1 (talk • contribs) at 12:56, 24 February 2017‎ (UTC).

 Not done

@Pliojason1: One is for the event, the other the location where it took place; these are distinct concepts. The difference is apparent from the English labels. Perhaps labels in another language are confusing, and need to be improved? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:30, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, apparently it's all about the labels, maybe I can edit those. The wikipedia articles (en) Battle at the Harzhorn and (de) Harzhornereignis have very much the same topic, differing in length only. - I finished relabeling right now. It should be clear now that both items describe the same article just with different spelling. Thanks again in advance for anybody merging these items!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pliojason1 (talk • contribs) at 15:11, 24 February 2017‎ (UTC).
No. I've undone your edits. These items are not about the same concept. They will not be merged. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:47, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
What the Wiki articles are about is irrelevant to whether we merge Wikidata items. ChristianKl (talk) 07:14, 25 February 2017 (UTC)


I tried to update Commons category (P373) in Infinite (Q50598) but the system does not allow me. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Update how? What value? What does it say? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:23, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
The present link is to a Category-redirect. I tried to update it. The message was written in Swedish, but I still do not understand what it says. I do not have the time now, to do the same in English, but feel free to try! -- Innocent bystander (talk) 20:50, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
✓ Done Matěj Suchánek (talk) 21:28, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
And you got no Error-messages? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
Nope. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata description editing in the Wikipedia Android app[edit]

Wikidata description editing is a new experiment being rolled out on the Wikipedia app for Android. While this primarily impacts Wikidata, the changes will show up on the mobile versions of Wikipedia in the form of descriptions under the title of the page and in the search results. This new feature has been in the Beta version of the app for two weeks (announcement for Beta version), and has produced encouraging results: For Russian and Hebrew Wikipedias, despite being exposed to a small number of users, there have been dozens of new descriptions added, and a very low rate of vandalism or low-quality contributions. For the Catalan Wikipedia, the data is not yet conclusive due to the relatively low rate of contributions. We are now preparing to roll out this functionality to the main (stable) version of the Wikipedia app. This will still be limited to the Hebrew, Russian, and Catalan Wikipedias, since we’d like to continue to test how users interact with this feature within the same initial group of communities. As always, if have any concerns, please reach out to us at Thanks! -Jkatz (WMF) 18:51, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Properties ready for creation[edit]

Category:Properties ready for creation has over 40 entries awaiting attention. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:49, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

As far as the "Blocker of (Biochemistry)" properties go, I'm not sure. I think this way of naming this parantheses is new and I don't know whether it's superior to "biochemical blocker of". ChristianKl (talk) 22:13, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

IP users[edit]

I formally request that entry-creation privileges be restricted to logged-in users, so as to slow down spam. DS (talk) 00:15, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Do you mean item creation, or statement adding? Or both? -- Ajraddatz (talk) 00:46, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
What's the rate of the spam? Icebob99 (talk) 16:28, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
yeah, i would like to see a metric, and better yet a time series of spam, in order to make an intelligent decision. Slowking4 (talk) 01:55, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
There looks to be 300 item creations from the 22 Feb to now. [2]. So call that 50-75 a day. I note that there is one specific user (talkcontribslogs) creating many for Cebu so is the concern that specific or is it others? If it is not that user, then we would be preventing those creations, if it is that user, then there are means to manage them. It seems that the problem needs a full explanation of what is trying to be prevented or achieved. An abuse fitler could manage it from whenever turned created and turned on, though if there are beneficial creations, how would you see us proceed?  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:45, 26 February 2017 (UTC)
thank you. that seems like an admin doing an ip block would be appropriate. this is a perennial issue, see also Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2017/02#Vandalism_out_of_control. Slowking4 (talk) 04:16, 26 February 2017 (UTC)


Hoi, we have a policy where the label of an item is irrelevant to its historic use. Consequently we have a situation where we are not able to provide the right label for a specific use. In the past we have combined all kinds of rulers that fit the same mould. I am going to do the same for "governors of Jamaica". As it is they represent the monarch who happens to be British. It makes even sense to include all the rulers of Jamaica.. some of those were Spanish. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:46, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Hovercards broken?[edit]

I'm using the beta feature Hovercards, but it does not display any information here on Wikidata when hovering over items. Is it broken? //Mippzon (talk) 09:06, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

I'm not using it, but get errors from MediaWiki:Gadget-PopupsFix.js in my browser's console since yesterday (though the gadget itself has not been changed recently). Guess that could be related, though I don't have time to investigate any further. --YMS (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
See also above. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:04, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Obtaining a user's preferred languages, for a templated query[edit]

Is there any good way that a template can get the list of a user's preferred languages, to include them at the top of the list for the wikibase:label service in a WDQS query?

Someone has suggested this Mediawiki API call is available (Special:ApiSandbox#action=query&format=json&meta=userinfo&uiprop=acceptlang), but can that be accessed from within a template, ie from Lua, rather than from Javascript ?

It seems we try to be very multilingual in our data, but it is hard to access it on-wiki in a multilingual way. Jheald (talk) 13:03, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Besides, when I run that call for myself, with "uselang=user", it only returns "en", not the other languages I have in my Babel that I can understand a little. Jheald (talk) 13:06, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
As far as I know, Scribunto has been limited, so it cannot access api today. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:46, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: Okay; but which call(s) would I use to obtain this information, even if Scribunto was working? Jheald (talk) 15:38, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Items with conflicting P31 statements[edit]

Hi, I found two separate items for mountain range, mountain range (Q46831) and mountain range (Q1437459). The first is for geologically related mountain ranges, the second is for non-geologically related mountain ranges. Here's a link to a query that lists all items with an instance of [Q1437459]. The first item in the query, [Q1262], has two instance of (P31) statements: one for each mountain range item. Does this imply that the Graian Alps are both geologically and non-geologically related? Is one statement flawed? Here's the query for all items which have P31 statements with both types of mountain ranges.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Icebob99 (talk • contribs) at 16:27, 25 February 2017‎ (UTC).

As mountain range (Q46831) is a subclass of mountain range (Q1437459), this is not really wrong, but in all the cases where both are defined, mountain range (Q1437459) is useless. If you read the Engish description, the idea of mountain range (Q1437459) is that the mountains are not necessarily geologically related, but they can still be. This is the more general case. However, I don't think the use of these two items is very consistent, especially as they have the same English label. If you are interested in this topic and would like to contribute, I started a few days ago a WikiProject_Mountains where we can define more precise rules on how to represent mountain related items.Koxinga (talk) 22:17, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Harmonising the categorisation of retail stores/shops[edit]

I'm interested in whether the categorisation of retail stores/shops can be made more consistent. There are these lists:

What I find a bit odd for English Wikipedia is there is no page for Shop. There is a redirect from "Retail shop" to Retail#Retail types by marketing strategy. Also the Wikidata Shop is defined as a subclass of point of sale (Q2516083) which is A) different to Point of sale (Q386147) and B) I think invalid because a PoS is not the same as a shop.

Can anyone give their thoughts on:

  • Would it be logical to harmonise the lists above?
  • Should there should be any "en" link from shop (Q213441)?
  • Should Shop be a subclass of Commercial building, rather than point of sale?

Pauljmackay (talk) 18:50, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

Catalog and Catalog code[edit]

Hoi, it is suggested that I use these properties to identify items that are part of a project. For me the combination would be First identify the Catalog and then an associated code. The code is of lesser importance. When I look at Chihuaha I find that the catalog shows as one of the statements.

This is exactly why we proposed a property that does show. A Catalog is a statement that is of no intrinsic value except to the project itself and it is therefore not really usable. So can we please decide that we either have properties for individual projects or mend the way Catalog and Catalog code works. NB it makes better sense to have the catalog first and the code as a qualifier. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 08:26, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata visualization interface generator[edit]

I have been interested in several different topics in Wikidata (administrative entities, awards, mountains, etc.), but I found that each time it was not easy to navigate through the existing data with the Wikidata interface. What are the subclasses or instance of a given class? What is the . Some interfaces have been developed, for artworks, timelines, etc. but they all cover very specific needs. I ended up doing (or at least starting, nothing was good enough to share) three different but similar interfaces:

  • When looking at administrative entities, what I wanted to see was a hierarchical tree of administrative entities using located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) to define the hierarchy, then a map of all sub entities of any selected entity (with the shapes coming from OpenStreetMap). I lost it, but the result was something like this
  • When looking at awards, what I wanted to see was a hierarchical tree using subclass of (P279) then for a given award a table of all winners by year. It gives something like this.
  • When looking at mountains, I wanted to visualize the hierarchy of mountain ranges, which is represented by instance of (P31), then the map of all mountains inside a given mountain range. Something like this.

However, I realize now that what would really be useful is a way to simplify the creation of such specialized interfaces. A kind of form where a user just has to specify a few parameters, maybe a few SPARQL queries to generate a full interface with a navigation tree, a table (similar to what Listeria can do) and/or a map. The most basic use cases would not require programming knowledge apart from the properties and entities ID to use to obtain a workable interface, and more advanced interfaces could use this as a basis before customizing the generated result.

In my opinion, this would greatly improve navigation in the data in Wikidata, as well as push for more consistent data model as problems in the hierarchy become much more visible.

Does it exist already? If it does not exist, would you be interested in such a tool? Koxinga (talk) 10:55, 26 February 2017 (UTC)