Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2017/09

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Contents

Gadget for Scholia

I have the Reasonator gadget activated, which puts a customised link to that tool on the left hand navigation of every item.

Please could we have a similar gadget for Scholia? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:20, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Do you want it to show up next to every item? Shouldn't it only show up next to items of the relevant types? I suspect that makes it a bit harder to write. − Pintoch (talk) 21:43, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I'm content with it being on every item. I've already raised tickets on Scholia's GitHub for improving handling of "no (relevant) data" items. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:41, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Opera merge

Telemaco (Telemaco (Q1393328)) is the same piece as Telemaco (Telemaco (Q3982867)) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:17, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

No, but no label (Q30611686) and Telemaco (Q1393328) are the same. I've merged them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:30, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Delete item Q39014724

Please delete item Q39014724, because it's unnecessary. Thank you! P.T.Đ (talk) 12:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Oh, I don't know that space. Thanks for your help! P.T.Đ (talk) 12:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Problem with Merge gadget ?

Hi, I tried to merged no label (Q28946545) and manganese(II) sulfate monohydrate (Q27159104) but this failed. Is there a problem with the merge gadget or is there a problem with the itmes ? Snipre (talk) 00:47, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

The latter: the first one is an instance of the class represented by the second one (ie. merges to items where one links to the second one are rejected). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:20, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Q27159104 now has no labels, in any language. Can someone remedy that, please? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:35, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
When I see the molecular formulas of both item, then it's 2 different chemical compounds. They might be related, but they aren't the same. (I restored the labels by restoring the latest version before Snipre started removing information.) Mbch331 (talk) 16:50, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
@Mbch331: perhaps it is good to study again your chemistry lectures:
Both compounds have the same molar mass, the same CAS number and the same InChIKey. For two different compounds, this is quite strange. But if you extend a little more you analysis, you will see that manganese(II) sulfate monohydrate (Q27159104) has a chemical formula which doesn't correspond to the InChI property, to the molar mass and the canonical SMILES. And finally, if you look for the real manganese sulfate, you will find manganese sulfate anhydrous (Q409393). So manganese(II) sulfate monohydrate (Q27159104) is a mixture of data representing manganese sulfate and manganese sulfate monohydrate, but as these two compounds have already a dedicated item, manganese(II) sulfate monohydrate (Q27159104) is a duplicate. So the merge is justified. Snipre (talk) 02:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Help Trying to query Panama Papers and Citizenship or Place of Birth

I want to show a Bubble Chart. Yet I keep getting Query is Malformed: Bad Aggregate. What to do??? Please help

SELECT (COUNT(DISTINCT ?person) AS ?count) ?country_of_citizenship ?country_of_citizenshipLabel WHERE {

 ?person wdt:P793 wd:Q23702848.
 SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
 OPTIONAL { ?person wdt:P27 ?country_of_citizenship. }

} GROUP BY ?country_of_citizenshipLabel — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:569:be14:200:c6d:75e7:273a:135a (talk) 17:03, 3 September 2017‎

You need to group by ?country_of_citizenship as well, since that’s also SELECTed without an aggregate function:
SELECT (COUNT(DISTINCT ?person) AS ?count) ?country_of_citizenship ?country_of_citizenshipLabel WHERE {

 ?person wdt:P793 wd:Q23702848.
 SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
 OPTIONAL { ?person wdt:P27 ?country_of_citizenship. }

}
GROUP BY ?country_of_citizenship ?country_of_citizenshipLabel
Try it! --TweetsFactsAndQueries (talk) 19:14, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Open Library links to Wikidata

I mentioned before that we are collaborating with Open Library, it is part of the Internet Archive. In a major (imho) development they now link to Wikidata from their author pages. Check out Emile Zola for instance. What this indicates is the collaboration that is happening, what it enables is for us to do even more. Remember Open Library has **many** free ebooks and it is one way to get our authors and readers to read. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC) PS A big thank you to Charles Horn & Mek Karpales (at OL)

Imports Module:Wikidata

Just in case it can interest other Wikipedias, we have recently streamlined fr:Module:Wikidata. I have seen that it has already been copied in several other languages, but it is rather complex to do as it has a lot of local dependencies. The module is now a bit simpler, with 3 less submodules, and better documented. en:Module:Wikidata and en:Module:WikidataIB are almost self-contained, and as such much easier to import, but they are also much less versatile. Other versions, like cs:Modul:Wikidata and and ru:Модуль:Wikidata also appear to have interesting features and may be useful to others. --Zolo (talk) 10:33, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Help

The English article en:Dreadnoughts (video game) should be linked to the French article fr:Dreadnoughts (jeu vidéo, 1992) about the same game from 1992. Instead the French article is linked to the English article en:Dreadnought (video game) about a game with a similar title that was released this year! Can someone fix this please, I do not know how to do merges. 2600:1700:E820:1BA0:F547:54CF:BB57:887D 13:58, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done --Pasleim (talk) 15:20, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #276

Definition of alternative ingredients in Material (P:18)

Is it possible to define in material P186 an alternative ingredients/ substitute? An example might be a table, which could be either made out of wood or metal or something different? best regards, --Scoid d (talk) 14:42, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

We need a qualifier for "typical" parts and materials from "possible" and "compatible". d1g (talk) 06:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
Other useful values might be "original/traditional", and "regional" (to be paired with "valid in place"). These would be very helpful for clothing and textiles which are often traditionally wool, silk, etc. but are now frequently synthetics or blends, or where different fibers are used in different places. - PKM (talk) 18:59, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Liangent-bot

Should bots be clearing items in order to add a link? [1]

If this kind of editing is permitted, then how do we check whether or not information was lost? The diff shows all data removed with the edit, and no matches. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:30, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Liangent: ^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:00, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Help needed converting Ordinance Survey National Grid references to coordinates for Wikidata import

Hi all

I'm helping import a list of British castles into Wikidata here, unfortunately the spreadsheet we have does no provide normal coordinates, only Survey National Grid references. My question is how do we convert these? We have over 1000 sites so manually will not be possible, here is a direct link to the spreadsheet if anyone knows how to do the conversions.

Thanks

--John Cummings (talk) 21:42, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

@John Cummings: Looks like there is a batch converter here that may let you paste in a column of grid references.
Alternatively there are certainly library subroutines in Python or Perl for this, that could be used as the basis for a script.
Note that we should probably have items with coordinates already for almost all of these, from previous imports of listed buildings / ancient monuments. But I'm sure it's well worth also having the coordinates from the spreadsheet if possible, to sanity check the possible matches. Jheald (talk) 22:30, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
Hi @Jheald:, thanks very much fr your help, luckily the online converter worked perfectly :) Thanks again, --John Cummings (talk) 07:36, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Same?

no label (Q21611695) and Pierre Viala (Q1448769)? --Magnus Manske (talk) 13:43, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, no label (Q21611695)'s National Library of Greece ID (P3348) link says "owl:sameAs http://viaf.org/viaf/77099628" which matches Pierre Viala (Q1448769)'s VIAF ID (P214). Merged. Syced (talk) 14:10, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

New notification on wikis when a page is connected to Wikidata

Hello all,

For your information, during the last months, we deployed a new notification type on the Wikimedia projects where the sitelinks are provided by Wikidata. When an editor creates a new page (Wikipedia article, Wikivoyage page, etc.) and this page is connected later to a Wikidata item, the creator of the page now receives a notification to inform him about that, with a message like “The page X has been connected to a Wikidata item” and a link to this item.

This will hopefully help people to be more aware of Wikidata and the support we provide to the other projects. This feature will be disable by default for existing editors, and enabled by default for new editors.

The deployment is now complete on all the Wikimedia wikis. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 14:11, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

Missing data in two queries

Thanks to User:Jezzaman42, who ash just started editing Wikidata, for highlighting issues with these two queries:

No date of death for John Smith (Q332377) in:

SELECT ?human ?humanLabel ?image ?dod ?pobLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?human wdt:P31 wd:Q5.
  ?human wdt:P39 wd:Q16707842.
  ?human wdt:P734 wd:Q1158446.
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P18 ?image.
    ?human wdt:P570 ?dod.
    ?human wdt:P19 ?pob.
  }
}
LIMIT 100

Try it!

Two blank rows, for Lord Charles Bentinck (Q128343) and William Bentinck, 4th Duke of Portland (Q128336), in:

SELECT ?human ?image ?dod ?pobLabel ?occupation ?occupationLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?human wdt:P31 wd:Q5.
  ?human wdt:P39 wd:Q16707842.
  ?human wdt:P39 wd:Q28841847.
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P18 ?image.
    ?human wdt:P570 ?dod.
    ?human wdt:P19 ?pob.
    ?human wdt:P106 ?occupation.
  }
}
LIMIT 1000

Try it!

Can anyone see why the specified items' data is not showing? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 08:42, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

You need to have each optional statement in a single OPTIONAL block, then it will work. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:46, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Like this?

SELECT ?human ?image ?dod ?pobLabel ?occupation ?occupationLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?human wdt:P31 wd:Q5.
  ?human wdt:P39 wd:Q16707842.
  ?human wdt:P39 wd:Q28841847.
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P18 ?image.
           }
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P570 ?dod.
           }
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P19 ?pob.
           }
  OPTIONAL {
    ?human wdt:P106 ?occupation.
           } 
}
LIMIT 1000

Try it!

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:31, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:47, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: - See Wikidata:SPARQL_tutorial#OPTIONAL - "Note: it’s very important to use separate OPTIONAL clauses here... an optional clause with multiple triples only matches when all those triples can be satisfied." I'd say this is an interesting SPARQL quirk - an apparent simplification that people would understandably try will likely not yield the desired results, yet it will also not fail. -- Fuzheado (talk) 11:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Program of the WikidataCon

Hello all,

The program of the WikidataCon is now published on-wiki. You will find there a lot of different formats, topics and speakers, during the two days of the conference.

More information will be added in the next weeks. If you think that any useful information is missing, feel free to let a comment on the talk page.

Thanks to all the speakers who committed to present something during the conference, and thanks to the program committee who selected and sorted all the submissions. Thanks to the 200 persons who registered for the conference and all the enthusiasm shared around the WikidataCon!

Note: the event is now complete, no more tickets available. The last tickets have been attributed to the first persons who registered on the waitlist. If some more seats get free because another attendee cancels participation, the next person on the waitlist will be informed.

If you have any question, feel free to reach me. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 13:41, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Importing locations from OpenStreetMap

Has somebody already checked/discussed is it legal and desirable to import coordinates from OpenStretMap to Wikidata? Wikidata:OpenStreetMap is not mentioning anything on this topic, but Wikidata:Coordinates tracking recommends importing coordinates from Wikipedias and English Wikipedia explicitly encourages to use locations from OSM in articles (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Obtaining_geographic_coordinates#OpenStreetMap).

Some discussion of situation is present at http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia#Importing_geodata_to_Wikipedia Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 14:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Ah, we are entering into a legal minefield here. OSM is licensed under the Open Database License (Q1224853) 1.0 license and you can extract or derive insubstantial portions of the OSM database without needing to relicense the extract/derivation under the same license (see the Substantial guidelines of the OSM Foundation. Take note that while you extracting 1 or a few coordinates and putting it into Wikidata is most definitely insubstantial, if too many people do the same thing and they all end up in the same database (Wikidata), it is no longer insubstantial and therefore has to be licensed under the ODbL, which violates the CC0 license of Wikidata. So, my safe answer (IANAL) is that you can't import coordinates from OSM into Wikidata. (I am both a Wikidata and OSM contributor.) —seav (talk) 03:18, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
ODbL has a simplified overview. You are free to:
  • Share: To copy, distribute and use the database.
  • Create: To produce works from the database.
  • Adapt: To modify, transform and build upon the database.
As long as you:
  • Attribute: You must attribute any public use of the database, or works produced from the database, in the manner specified in the ODbL. For any use or redistribution of the database, or works produced from it, you must make clear to others the license of the database and keep intact any notices on the original database.
  • Share-Alike: If you publicly use any adapted version of this database, or works produced from an adapted database, you must also offer that adapted database under the ODbL.
  • Keep open: If you redistribute the database, or an adapted version of it, then you may use technological measures that restrict the work (such as DRM) as long as you also redistribute a version without such measures.
Our data have no restrictions--they are CC-0 due to the particularities of databases. We don't have any restrictions on our data but OSM do, so we can't import their data en masse until one of us changes our license. (Tho, they can import our data freely.) Unfortunately, this is a really screwed-up side effect of unique database rights. If this were any other WMF project, this wouldn't be an issue. —Justin (koavf)TCM 05:16, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
@Seav: Can I copy your explanation to Wikidata:OpenStreetMap? It would be nice to have it documented rather than hidden in discussion of project Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:12, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
@Mateusz Konieczny:, sure. —seav (talk) 05:54, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Added to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:OpenStreetMap#Coordinates_in_Wikidata Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:29, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Manual of Style question regarding Chief Minister (Q1670755)

Hello,

I have a question regarding Wikidata pages. Basically Chief Minister (Q1670755) is a Wikidata item that exists already for "Chief Minister". But when discussing Chief Ministers of different entities, the format is different for each one. For example -

There's so many different formats here that having one decided will be good. Can someone suggest one format to change the others to?

Cheers, Soni (talk) 04:55, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

14th Annual Conference on Open Repositories 2019 Hamburg, 3rd - 6th June 2019

Uni Hamburg--Oursana (talk) 13:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

LinkedIn company profiles

We have LinkedIn personal profile URL (P2035), but no equivalent for company profiles on LinkedIn, like https://www.linkedin.com/company/kc-tmo. Various kludges are used to hold such URLs, with little consistency.

Should we:

  • modify the existing property, to be simply "LinkedIn profile URL"
  • create a companion "LinkedIn company profile URL" property
  • create an external-ID type property?

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

I would prefer to have two external-ID properties. One for companies and one for persons. ChristianKl (talk) 15:30, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Two external ID properties are not an option: we have a URL property for LinkedIn profiles for a reason - that being that there is no single pattern from which we could extract a formatter URL. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:22, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Before we can make progeress on this, we need more views. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:56, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

I just ran into this, with several companies that I found LinkedIn pages for. I suggest creating a new property proposal as an external ID for companies on LinkedIn, and leave the personal profile URL property alone. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:43, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata Missing Pictures (offline)

Traveling without Internet?

Still want to know what nearby Wikidata items need an image (P18)?

Download this KMZ into your GPS app!

Open source generator, developers welcome :-) Syced (talk) 14:05, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

@Syced: wouldn't work without modifications:
../database-of-embassies/tools/query-wikidata.sh d1g (talk) 19:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
d1g: Good catch! I added the dependency explanation to the README, thanks! Syced (talk) 03:25, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Week or month in year for periodic events

There is property day in year for periodic occurrence, but I cannot find any similar properties to represent weeks or months to indicate regular occurrences. Would they make logical properties to add? Pauljmackay (talk) 16:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment proper solution would be "duration" datatype instead of "week", "day" and similar properties. d1g (talk) 17:25, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Most or all days have separate items: May 5 (Q2550) July 4 (Q2698)
So question is if we need point in time (P585) for items.
I think usage of dates as items will expose complexity of date processing to end-users.
Or we should represent every "next .." "previous .." statement with date-items. d1g (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there any way to represent "1st Monday of September" currently? Pauljmackay (talk) 06:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
  • There is a property for months.
    --- Jura 10:01, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, I hadn't spotted that, have added it to day in year for periodic occurrence. Pauljmackay (talk) 06:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

New user script shows items in OSM relating to a Wikidata item

I have just become aware of the "Overpass" user script, which adds a map showing a feature tagged, in OpenStreetMap, with the ID of the current Wikidata item, if any. It's really useful, both for sanity-checking the tagging in OSM, but also for helping you to locate unfamiliar items, quickly. It's also good for noticing items which are not tagged in OSM, but probably should be; and I've just used it to fix some OSM features, like fast-food restaurants tagged "wikidata=Q38076" (that's McDonald's (Q38076)), when they should be tagged "brand:wikidata=Q38076".

It would be good to have this user script as a gadget.

Kudos to User:Mxn for providing the script. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:10, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

That script is awesome! Thanks for sharing. − Pintoch (talk) 18:13, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this script is great! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 12:38, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Why statues are events?

I wanted to use wikidata to check whatever given wikipedia article is about event. So battles like Battle of Grunwald (Q33570) should be categorized as events and statues like Statue of the dog Dżok (Q2480782) as not events.

I thought that proper check whatever something is an event (like Battle of Grunwald (Q33570)) is to check values of instance of (P31) - and follow all subclasses and check whatever one found event (Q1190554) (event).

So Q33570 has instance of (P31) with value battle (Q178561) and battle (Q178561) is subclass of event (Q1190554) - therefore Battle of Grunwald (Q33570) is an event.

But Statue of the dog Dżok (Q2480782) (statue, clearly not an event) has P31 Q179700 (statue, makes sense). Statue is subclass of Q1622217 (figurative art), (weird, I would say product of or something like that). Q1622217 is subclass of Q36649 (visual art) that is in turn subclass of Q735 (art), subclass of Q1914636 (activity) that is subclass of Q1190554 (event)!

What went wrong? I made mistake in how I check whatever something is an event? Statue should not be a subclass of Q1622217? Something else?

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 11:52, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

The subclass of (P279)  figurative art (Q1622217) statement was incorect and has been removed. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 13:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:51, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Mateusz Konieczny (talk)

Støen (Q39000000)

We now have Støen (Q39000000) about family name. --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 13:29, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

How to connect parent (Q7566) and offspring (Q239526) etc. and others?

User:Paweł Ziemian User:Jura1 (is this project family relationships?) User:Infovarius User:Melderick


Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Parenthood and others below.
There'd be some use of kinship item labels and properties for i18n on Commons, it would be fine to know there is a consensus on some scheme and it's stable. Thus some questions:

  1. Should parent (Q7566) and offspring (Q239526) etc. be connected with opposite of (P461)? Like parent (Q7566)opposite of (P461)  offspring (Q239526) and offspring (Q239526)opposite of (P461)  parent (Q7566)?
  2. Should this also be done for items with a gender betwethose of same gender? Like grandson (Q11921506)opposite of (P461)  grandfather (Q9238344)? (E.g. used by Tomáš Páv, 2016-01.) With qualifier criterion used (P1013): inverse function (Q191884)? (E.g. used by علاء الدين‎, 2016-08-22.) (BTW: Would raise single value constraint (Q19474404) either way.)
  3. Should brother (Q10861465) and sister (Q595094) etc. be connected with opposite of (P461)? Like brother (Q10861465)opposite of (P461)  sister (Q595094)? (Consensus?: e.g. used by 桂鷺淵, 2015-09, removed by Zolo, 2015-10-07, used again by Infovarius, 2015-10-09.)
  4. Should there be a qualifier with criterion used (P1013)?
    1. With gender binary (Q5530970) as value? Like brother (Q10861465)opposite of (P461)  sister (Q595094) / criterion used (P1013)gender binary (Q5530970)? (E.g. used by Robin van der Vliet, 2016-08-24.)
    2. Or with sex (Q290) as value? (E.g. used by علاء الدين‎, 2016-08-22.)
  5. stepfather (Q1282201)part of (P361)  stepparent (Q19822352) should be deleted I guess?

Thank you, --Marsupium (talk) 09:09, 5 September 2017 (UTC)

If you like to make use of family relationship properties for specific persons, you should use "child" (Property:P40), "mother", "father", "sibling", "spouse", etc. If none of these applies or can't be directly derived from these (e.g. grandfather/grandmother), then use "relative". Relative would have a qualifier "kinship type" whose item value would have label that describes the relationship. This relationship should match the one found in the source of that statement. .. at least ideally.
--- Jura 09:42, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
Those are general questions and arise also independently of the reuse on Commons. But if I want to process the Wikidata statement Pieter Pourbus (Q981558)child (P40)  Frans Pourbus the Elder (Q1445472) to an i18n version of "father of Frans Pourbus the Elder", I need to get from "child" to "father" somehow. I could use inverse of (P1696) here, but I can't do that any more for relative (P1038) and type of kinship (P1039). --Marsupium (talk) 10:55, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
parent (Q7566)opposite of (P461)  offspring (Q239526) and offspring (Q239526)opposite of (P461)  parent (Q7566) (criterion used (P1013)  causality (Q179289)) --Fractaler (talk) 11:01, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
To me grand parent feels more like the opposite of grand-child than brother the opposite of sister, but actually we could more accurately describe it as the date of official opening (P1619) (maybe we should have the equivalent of this property, but with item datatype ?).
I am not really clear how we could make use of this property in commons:Template:Kinship. I would think we have to hardcode every relationship like: if if (grand-parent and female) then label = grandmother end--Zolo (talk) 12:16, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
You then have to remember that we in some languages (like sv) do not have a word for "grandmother". We have one for "grandmother on the mothers side": "mormor" and another for "grandmother on the fathers side": "farmor". We have the same problem with "aunt", "uncle", "niece" etc. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:35, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
  • At some point, we attempted to do an abstract mapping of relationship items, e.g. here. inverse of (P1696) should generally work for your approach, but there are cases where it's not 1-1 and not necessarily identical in every languages. Even if we had a dedicated property, it's not guaranteed that the label gives you a good i18n version for the context. Some specific relationships might just read "relative" in other languages. It would be interesting to get this working. In general, it might not be needed for most uses: father (P22) should be on Q1445472 and could be used directly.
    --- Jura 10:01, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
I think kinship terms depend of relatively few parameters, but with quite a lot of different combinations that will not be the same for all languages.
Parameters that seem to have taken into accounts in some or all languages are:
  • sex or gender (P21)
  • the parent / child relation
  • date of birth (P569) (because the relative age of two people may matter, for example, Chinese routinely use a different term for older sister and younger sister)
  • spouse (P26) (that may need some subdivision, "spouse" is not the same as "concubine", and "in-wedlock" child might also be different from "illegitimate child")
You can combine that through multiple layer and get great-granddaughter of paternal great-grandfather's brother older than ego (though I am not sure many people actually use this kind of term). By way of subclasses, it is probably possible to model all that in Wikidata, but sounds a bit tricky. --Zolo (talk) 20:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
@Zolo: Thank you! The work is still in its infancy, very basic functionality working. sex or gender (P21), date of birth (P569) waiting for implementation eventually … --Marsupium (talk) 22:59, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

How to batch-add property to items if the property is not filled yet?

I have a list of 200 Wikidata items with each an address/phone/URL/coordinates.

I want to add the address to the item if the item does not already have an address?

How to do that in batch?

It seems that QuickStatements1 does not have this feature, and I can't find any documentation for QuickStatements2. Thanks! Syced (talk) 09:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── You can do this in QuickStatements, using P969. For example:

Q1234 [tab] P969 [tab] "1, High Street, Anytown, England At23 4TG"

Note that the quote marks are required for text values. If you wish to avoid adding addresses to the items that already have them, filter your list first, using some other tool, like Beacon. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

(I'm also interested in this question.) Beacon? Can't find this tool. --Anvilaquarius (talk) 15:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/beacon.php Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:26, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Andy Mabbett: While I often used QuickStatements1 to add properties, the important part of the question here is "if the item does not already have an address". BEACON's property list does not have located at street address (P969). But even if it had, are you suggesting I go through the result and search for my 200 QIDs one-by-one to see whether the property is set? Cheers! Syced (talk) 02:39, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
No, I'm suggesting you use one of the various available tools to find a list of relevant items with an address, and cross-match that with your list, using something lie a spreadsheet app. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:16, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Links to redirects

I'd like to discuss the policy of leaving links to redirects in place. TLDR is I think this policy is outdated and needs to be modified, more expanded argument is here: Help talk:Redirects#Links to redirects. Please comment there! Laboramus (talk) 20:58, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Any wikibase:geoPrecision users?

Hi!

Is anybody around here uses or knows somebody who uses wikibase:geoPrecision value in Wikidata RDF data? I would like to hear how it is used and for what purposes. I am interested in users of specifically this data point (not coordinates in general, though if it is used together with some other values, I'd be happy to hear about it).

The background for this is that I suspect the way it is presented now is useless and should be changed. However, I do not want to start any work on it before hearing from people that might be using it (I am not sure whether such people exist, but if they do, I'd very much like to hear from them). So please respond here, or on my user page, or on wikidata list, if you know any real use cases.

Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 20:37, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

I don't currently use it, but I assume it can be used to specify the initial zoom level for a map showing that coordinate. —seav (talk) 03:10, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
@Smalyshev (WMF): Your link is to something I do not fully understand. But our templates on svwiki uses the information in the precision parameter in the globe-coordinate datatype, but only for how the data is displayed on the screen. It is not used for such things as zoom-levels. It is rather P31/P279 that is used for that. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:05, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I presume by "geoPrecision" you mean the third parameter of GlobeCoordinateValue as described at mw:Wikibase/DataModel#Geographic locations. This has been discussed in two Phabricator tasks, 89218 and 119346. It has also been discussed in at least two threads: Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2015/07#Coordinates precision and mw:Talk:Wikibase/DataModel#Lack of geographic shape data type causing trouble. There seems to be no consensus about what this parameter means. Some want it to be the precision taken from the source (assuming the source expressed precision in degrees or a fraction thereof), converted to decimal degrees if necessary. Others want it to be a decimal number with one significant digit, so if the leftmost uncertain digit in an angle expressed (and stored) in decimal degrees is the hundreths digit, the precision would be 0.01. Others want the precision to correspond to the size of the thing being described, rather than the precision to which the point was measured. All this discussion has just been left hanging with no resolution for years. Jc3s5h (talk) 10:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
@Jc3s5h: I actually meant RDF representation of that value. As noted in discussion, having random numbers like 0.126454737464 as precisions does not seem to be very useful. So I wonder whether we can improve things there. Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 05:43, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
Mmmmm, we have used Småorter 2005 (Q25976776) as source here, and the precision in that document is 1 meter, and how much that is in degrees depends on where you are. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
I can't read Swedish, so I don't know if the precision is really 1 meter, or if they simply report the raw results of their calculations to the nearest meter, without even trying to round to a number of significant digits that reflects the actual precision of the measurements. Jc3s5h (talk) 12:56, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
@Jc3s5h: The source is in SWEREF 99TM without decimals. From what I can see, that is very close to 1 meter in most places. The smallest of these entities are 100x100 meters. I have not fully understood how and why Statistics Sweden has selected to pin these exact points. It is not based on a simple mid-point in these shape-files. It is possible that they have added the distribution of the population into the calculation. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:17, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────@ Smalyshev (WMF): you wrote "So I wonder whether we can improve things there." I think we would need to find a place to discuss this. Once a meaning is agreed to, changes would have to be made to the general data model, the JSON data model, and the RDF data model, to explain the clarified meaning. Then, changes would have to be made to the user interface to reflect the new understanding. For example, if your approach is agreed to, and a user uses the user interface to enter 73°20'13"N, 19°12'15"E and accepts the default precision of 1 arcsecond, the precision shouldn't be stored as 0.00027777777777778 as it is today, instead it should be stored as 0.0003. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:47, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Wait a minute Jc3s5h (talkcontribslogs) 0.0003 is far from an arcsecond?! What is the problem with 0.00027777777777778? I think our templates on svwiki looks for a something like a precison between 0.0002777 and 0.0002778 and interpret everything there as 1/3600. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:59, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
I can offer arguments to support 0.0003 but I'm not willing to do so in this thread. I want a place to discuss this that has some prospect of accomplishing something before I spend time and effort finding citations and links to suitable sources. As for templates that will be broken, anybody who writes software relying on poorly written documents such as our data models is bound to get burned. We should fix the data model before even more software gets written that will later have to be rewritten. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:32, 1 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jc3s5h: do you mean that 0.00027...7 and 0.00027...78 are cylindrical, not spherical? d1g (talk) 10:36, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
In Wikidata, and frequently in sources, the uncertainty of horizontal position is stated separately from the uncertainty in vertical position. Wikidata give a single value of uncertainty, measured in degrees, for both latitude and longitude. To a first approximation, one arcsecond of latitude will cover the same distance on the ground whether you're near the equator or one of the poles. But one arcsecond of longitude will cover the greatest distance at the equator (where it is about the same as an arcsecond of latitude). As you get closer and closer to one of the poles, the distance covered by the arcsecond of longitude becomes less and less until it becomes 0 at the pole.
So, roughly speaking, the area of uncertainty on the ground is similar to an ellipse, longer in the north-south direction than the east-west direction. If there were a modest change in elevation (a few hundred meters) the change in shape of the quasi-ellipse would be imperceptible. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:05, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jc3s5h: this calculator claims 111 km for Saint Petersburg - but this is huge. Is there any other variable other than "lat" and "datum"? d1g (talk) 13:16, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
That site requires input in decimal degrees. It infers the precision of the input based on how many digits are entered after the decimal point. In addition to the number of digits after the decimal, the main factor will be the latitude. If you round off to the nearest degree (60 for lat and 10 for long) you get 111 km for latitude error and 56 km for longitude error, which makes sense; a degree of longitude covers less ground at higher latitudes. Jc3s5h (talk) 14:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
aha, 1 meter with 5 zeros d1g (talk) 16:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

I think we need another optional field for "rounding method" Rounding and decimal places d1g (talk) 11:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

... for every of "lat uncertainty" and "lon uncertainty"? d1g (talk) 12:57, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
... for "lat" and "lon" d1g (talk) 16:01, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Uncertainties may arise due to combinations of the following sources:

1) the extent of a locality 2) GPS accuracy 3) unknown datum 4) imprecision in distance measurements 5) imprecision in coordinate measurements 6) map scale 7) imprecision in direction measurements

Film Awards

Hope you'll get the idea. Can anybody advise me the best way to connect all of these (for example) directly and visa versa:

1. There is Moscow International Film Festival (Q749235) (film festival), which has a lot of awards, such as Golden George (Q38842580). Can I show them somehow on Moscow International Film Festival (Q749235) page?

2. Is it ok to use winner (P1346) on award's page to show all it's winners? Though it is not an contest and so on, it is award...

3. There is film Life as a Fatal Sexually Transmitted Disease (Q4180239) which won the Golden George (Q38842580) at the 22nd Moscow International Film Festival (Q4053344). How can I show at the film's page, that it got this award on this festival (not only the year), and how can I show on festival's page all the winners of all it's awards in this year? -Stolbovsky (talk) 23:06, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

For (1), I suggested has parts of the class (P2670). see Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Movies#Festivals_and_its_award.28s.29.
(2): this isn't done. Wikidata only includes awards on awardees. Wikidata:WikiProject_Award#Structure has a suggested approach. Academy Awards are said to be quite complete.
(3): following the Academy Awards sample, you could try subject of the statement (P805).
Try the Academy Awards example queries. If data is available, you could do a Listeria list on the page for a specific year.
--- Jura 08:32, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Broken WDFIST documentation

I attempted to follow https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/WDFIST but any variation of proposed SPARQL query is not working. Even AROUND[625,39.907902,116.401703,15] example is not working and on testing gives errors - ("E0:ERROR: cannot parse SPARQL query AROUND[625,39.907902,116.401703,15]") see https://query.wikidata.org/#AROUND%5B625%2C39.907902%2C116.401703%2C15%5D

Any idea what went wrong?

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:00, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

That's the old WDQ (Wikidata Query) syntax, which has been discontinued. The equivalent SPARQL is this:
SELECT ?item WHERE {
SERVICE wikibase:around {
      ?item wdt:P625 ?item_location .
      bd:serviceParam wikibase:center "Point(116.401703 39.907902)"^^geo:wktLiteral .
      bd:serviceParam wikibase:radius "15" .
}}
I don't have any experience with this Sparql function, so maybe it can be improved, someone else might know. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:47, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Also: Note that for some stupid reason, latitude and longitude are need to be switched in the query, so that longitude comes before latitude. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:58, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, and thanks for fixing documentation! Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:43, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Unable to add P17 value

I am trying to edit https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2617805?uselang=en-US P17 Property. I can use "add value" and write "Ukraine" there, but I am unable to save this edit.

In Browser Console of my 55.0.2 (64-bit) Firefox I see:

This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.position". load.php:28:950 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.widget". load.php:39:794 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.ui.core". Please use "mediawiki.ui.button" or "oojs-ui" instead. load.php:10:432 This page is using the deprecated ResourceLoader module "jquery.tipsy". load.php:542:171 Your skin is incompatible with VisualEditor. See <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/Skin_requirements> for the requirements. load.php:448:666 Existing entitytermsforlanguagelistview DOM does not match configured languages load.php:746:914

I reset my preferences to defaults and removed modifications to my .js.

In https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q916281?uselang=en-US I am unable to even add P17 property itself...

Any idea what else I may try? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:07, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

The language code en-US is not enabled for adding labels/descriptions in Wikidata, just "en" should suffice for most usecases. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 01:14, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks! Hm, I wonder whatever someone reported this bug somewhere (I never set it manually, "en-US" was added automatically at some point) 07:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Constraint vios: conflict with exeptions

On IMDb ID (P345) we have property constraint (P2302) = conflicts-with constraint (Q21502838) with instance of (P31) = married couple (Q3046146) etc. Then many exeptions are following with exception to constraint (P2303). Wouldn't it be more comfortable to add just one type of exeption, f. e. two people (Q15618652). Do anyone have an idea how to realise sth. like that? Queryzo (talk) 08:54, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

  • I think that means you'd remove the constraint. Given the 500,000 uses of the property, the number of exceptions seems really small.
    Items for two persons often erroneously get imdb. At least, that's the impression I got at WikiProject Identical Twins.
    --- Jura 09:05, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Not allowed to add badges

Hi. I tried to add a badge of good article on the pt.wikivoyage article on the item São Leopoldo (Q688275), but the abuse filter didnt't allow me to do that. The promotion of the article to good was discussed here and the change was done by one of the sysops of that wiki. Could someone do it for me? Giovanni L. Zanchet (talk) 13:53, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

✓ Done. Why do not you guys use the Wikidata identificator in the listing template?--Ymblanter (talk) 14:03, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Should redirects (on respective language wikis) have their own Wikidata items?

Basically I was observing microeconomics (Q39072), which linked to the Hindi wikipedia article hi:सूक्ष्म_अर्थशास्त्र. However, this page was a redirect and linked to hi:व्यष्टि_अर्थशास्त्र, which was linked to the item no label (Q12453631).

I believe the correct way this should be handled is that no redirect pages (on respective language wikis) should have respective Wikidata items. Would that be a good way to handle things?

Soni (talk) 07:08, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Requests for comment/Allow the creation of links to redirects in Wikidata. There are more than one opinion about this. Many sitelinks to redirects are wrong here and should be removed. But some others are in my opinion very useful -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • As far as I know we all wait for an outstanding statement by @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) and the developers on the outcome of the linked RfC. Redirects as sitelinks were refused by the software until now, but this might change. (A hack allowed us to add them nevertheless, and AFAIK in some cases page moves in Wikipedia left a redirect as sitelink as well. I posted a statistical overview of cases by project on the RfC page.) Depending on future changes, we might want so sort those redirects anyway. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I think such a list already exists (a few bugs allow them to be created), but I'm not sure if people supporting redirects actually use it to clean up duplicates.
    --- Jura 09:57, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Jura Where can I find such a list? Or, how can I generate a similar list myself? Soni (talk) 02:21, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I would like to see redirect-sitelink in italic in the list of sitelinks in each item, like they already are in category-pages in each project. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:51, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
@Innocent bystander: You can use User:Matěj Suchánek/checkSitelinks.js that add an icon near each sitelink for disambiguation and redirect. Probably is possible to modify to have it always active or to show icon automatically only when there ire some disambiguation/redirect --ValterVB (talk) 07:16, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding labels

When I want to edit labels, descriptions and aliases, I am allowed to do so in English, Czech, Russian and Slovak. What shall I do if I want to add a label in some other language? --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 19:42, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

Edit your babel template on your user page. For just adding new languages without that: Lydia Pintscher "gave in" exactly one year ago, no development since then. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:04, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Sjoerd de Bruin: Well, I have German in my Babel box, the same level as Russian, but I still cannot edit German labels, although I can edit Russian ones. --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 20:44, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets
"labelLister: Show and edit labels, descriptions and aliases from other languages."
d1g (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
d1g This option is ticked so the fault must be somewhere else. I still cannot edit German labels. --Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 21:34, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
I believe I've seen a phabricator ticket about that before, but can't find it. Maybe Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) or Lea Lacroix (WMDE) will know if there's a ticket about this problem, otherwise a new one should be made. Mbch331 (talk) 06:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Sjoerd mentioned that one above. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:05, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Suggested elevation reference from GeoNames

Hello! What do you suggest as reference for elevation above sea level (P2044) retrieved from GeoNames?

  1. reference URL + publisher + retrieved + imported from (if known)
  2. or something as stated in (P248) GeoNames (Q830106) + GeoNames ID (P1566) number

I think about the first, but today I've discovered the second somewhere. Thanks! --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 10:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The second is prefered, according to Help:Sources#Databases. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 10:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I thought there were some concerns about using elevation values from Geonames.
    --- Jura 11:38, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
We should import at least SRTM or other better sources
https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/gis/elevation.html
http://www.ppgis.net/resources/dem-sources/
d1g (talk) 11:56, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
OK. Knowing that GeoNames provides multiple sources (as SRTM, etc.) how to specify the precise source (e.g. SRTM)? How do you consider this example? --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 12:37, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
SRTM is here, not in GeoNames
Decide version of SRTM and create a separate item: Help:Sources#Databases
SRTM is not a product of GeoNames. d1g (talk) 12:52, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
What do you want to say? (I know that SRTM and GTOP30 etc. are not "GeoNames products". But a lot of Wikidata elements are associated to a GeoNames ID and it's so simple to get the SRTM retrieving it from GeoNames (GeoNames says for most entries the source of the elevation, as SRTM, GTOP30, etc.).) --Valerio Bozzolan (talk) 13:01, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Who knows version used in GeoNames?
Is it SRTM version 4? Create a separate item, don't use Shuttle Radar Topography Mission (Q965136) d1g (talk) 13:26, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
IIRC that bot which creates the articles on Cebuano Wikipedia does use the SRTM data if there is no elevation stated in geonames - but it leads to patent nonsense when the coordinates are not 100% correct, especially for monadnock (Q1139493) hills. See e.g. Khao Phang (Q31609744), 217m as by bot vs. 638m as found on geological map. Should we set the elevation values from ceb/geonames/SRTM all in deprecated state with a reason for deprecation (P2241) to something like "unverified" to avoid our database be filled with nonsense? Ahoerstemeier (talk) 09:17, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Proposal

How to create a proposal for a business  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mdleleni (talk • contribs) at 20:45, 10 September 2017‎ (UTC).

@Mdleleni : Do you mean an item about a particular business, or a proposal for a property about businesses in general? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:08, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Draft strategy direction. Version #2

In 2017, we initiated a broad discussion to form a strategic direction that will unite and inspire Wikimedians. This direction will be the foundation on which we will build clear plans and set priorities. More than 80 communities and groups discussed and gave feedback[strategy 1][strategy 2][strategy 3]. We researched readers and consulted more than 150 experts[strategy 4]. We looked at future trends that will affect our mission, and gathered feedback from partners and donors.

A group of community volunteers and representatives from the strategy team synthesized this feedback into an early version of the strategic direction that the broader movement can review and discuss.

The second version of the direction is ready. Again, please read, share, and discuss on the talk page on Meta. Based on your feedback, the drafting group will refine and finalize the direction.

  1. Cycle 1 synthesis report
  2. Cycle 2 synthesis report
  3. Cycle 3 synthesis report
  4. New Voices synthesis report

SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 10:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Unable to follow Wikidata:Babel

It is a redirect that is not linking anywhere and I have no idea how it should be fixed Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:42, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Should it link to Wikidata:Userboxes#Babel? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:43, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Significant change: Snak hashes in API and HTML output formats

Hi all!

This is an announcement for a significant change to the Wikibase entity format, which went live the beginning of September. It potentially affects clients that process snaks.

Internally, Wikibase assigns a hash to each snak (which is just the hash function (Q183427) of an internal representation of the snak). Those hashes were previously emitted for snaks that appeared in qualifiers, but not for the main snak or reference snaks of a statement. With the change, the hashes are emitted for all snaks, regardless of where they appear. This means that a snak can now look like this:

{
    "snaktype": "value",
    "property": "P370",
    "hash": "682fdb448ef68669a1b728a5076836da9ac3ffae",
    "datavalue": {
        "value": "some text",
        "type": "string"
    },
    "datatype": "string"
}

The hashes are also added to the HTML output, as an additional class similar to the statement ID class on statements:

<div class="wikibase-statementview wikibase-statement-Q4115189$29acf9c6-450a-7612-d206-049f5fe58328">
  <!-- … -->
  <div class="wikibase-statementview-mainsnak">
    <div class="wikibase-snakview wikibase-snakview-682fdb448ef68669a1b728a5076836da9ac3ffae">
      <!-- … -->
    </div>
  </div>
</div>

The ultimate goal of this is to make any snak addressable in the DOM, which is necessary for checking constraints on qualifiers and references (T168532).

It should be noted that unlike statement IDs, snak hashes are not identifiers. They are not stable, and may change at any time with the internal format.

Relevant tickets:

Relevant patches:

Please let us know if you have any comments or objections. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 12:39, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #277

Wikidata description editing in the Wikipedia Android app

Wikidata description editing is a feature being rolled out on the Wikipedia app for Android. While this primarily impacts Wikidata, the change also addresses a concern about the mobile versions of Wikipedia. Now the mobile users will be able to directly edit the descriptions shown under the title of the page and in the search results from the Wikipedia app. We began by rolling out this feature months ago to a pilot group of Wikipedias in the beginning (Russian, Hebrew, and Catalan), then to all the others, and have seen very positive results including numerous quality contributions in the form of new and updated descriptions, and a low rate of vandalism. We are now ready for the last phase of rolling out this editing feature, which is to enable it for English in a few weeks.

As always, if you have any concerns, please reach out to us on wiki at the talk page for this project or by email at reading@wikimedia.org. Thanks!

Elitre (WMF) (talk) on behalf of DBrant (WMF), 13:32, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Hey there Marsupium, do you mean that, in the page you linked to, you would like to see only "edit summaries" which are problematic for any reasons? --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 13:36, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
  • No, I mean many of them are problematic and perhaps the Android app should display something (link to the guidlines/a short version) that advices the Android app users how to create descriptions that are not problematic. --Marsupium (talk) 13:42, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Marsupium: You seem satisfied, but I just captured and added some more "guidance" screenshots at the bottom of this ticket, if you're curious Jkatz (WMF) (talk) 22:01, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
  • @Elitre (WMF): Can you confirm whether the anti-vandalism volunteers on en-wiki are aware of this change? And are they confident they will be able to police it ? Jheald (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
    This change has been communicated at the English Wikipedia as well. Note that it still impacts Wikidata though. We could certainly extend an invitation to the Counter-Vandalism Unit when the change actually happens, but maybe Wikidata:WikiProject Counter-Vandalism would be a more appropriate place (I chose this more general village pump hoping it would suffice, just like for the rollouts to the other languages). Members of the team behind the change also keep a close eye and occasionally help out, as detailed at mw:Wikimedia_Apps/Short_descriptions/Research. --Elitre (WMF) (talk) 15:21, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Hi - I am an en-WP editor, and this is not acceptable. The description field needs to come out of the apps, just like it came out of the mobile view. This is unbelievable to me, after the RfC we had last March. Jytdog (talk) 05:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
When you say that it is not acceptable, you are right. It matters little what a single Wikipedia has an RfC about. What matters more is that there is agreement that the automated descriptions offer a much better result. Now if that what your RfC asks for, it becomes interesting. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Pending changes?

We all know that vandalism on Wikidata is a serious problem. Whereas we have some means to detect and revert vandalism, it still typically takes some time, sometimes hours and days, until it resides even in the most commonly used items. In particular, this (along with the absence of sources) prevents more broad usage of Wikidata directly on the projects. For example, in every discussion of the topic in the English Wikipedia typically a dozen or so established users show up expressing a viewpoint that Wikidata is unrelaible, which typically stops the discussion.

I looked today at Q801 which is, now surpsingly, vandalism prone. If the data from this item were imported directly to the projects, that would just facilitate propagation of vandalism, which would stay for hours there in highly visible articles. On the other hand, vandalism is not very frequent, and the semi-protection probably should not be applied to the item (semi-protection, for example, would also cut off moves on smaller projects from Wikidata, since the movers are typically not Wikidata-autoconfirmed).

I am not sure whether this has been discussed before, and I am not sure whether this is at all feasible, but if we would have pending changes mechanism, for instance similar to that of the English Wikipedia, when the changes by not-Wikidata-autocongirmed users go live (and are shown on the projects if they are used) only after being accepted by established users (either autoconfirmed, or we can make a new flag, which would be easy to get), it could solve this vandalism problem. These pending changes must be a rare exception rather than a norm, because otherwise we would not have capacity to deal with them, but at least it would address the problem.

What do others think about it?--Ymblanter (talk) 11:47, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

I don't know if pending changes is the best solution here, but we should start to test our options, because vandalism in Wikidata is worrying (hard to detect, stays long time, affects many wikis). Yesterday, there were 1,969 edits by anonymous editors. Can we approve that number of changes with current community? We could try. --Emijrp (talk) 12:20, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
To my opinion language barriers are a major reason why this could be complicated, in spite of a relatively low number of edits. A couple of months ago I tried to patrol all edits by not-autoconfirmed users on German labels, descriptions, and aliases over a prolonged time, but I stopped doing so because there was barely any severe vandalism to revert. However, I can’t patrol edits in most other languages, and whether there are enough active editors for all the languages to do that is beyond my knowledge.
Maybe we should advertise (again) which tools are available to filter the edit stream to review potentially malicious edits. Unfortunately, effective filtering can’t be done with the regular Wikidata web frontend itself, thus we need to rely on tools. There is also Wikidata:WikiProject Counter-Vandalism which could receive more attention. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:37, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
No, I do not think we can patrol 1969 edits in real time, but possibly only a small fraction need to be patrolled - those in the items corresponding to most visible Wikipedia artiles, or those which are used directly in the projects, or by some other definition. The language issues are a real problem, but in my prespective they are facilitated by introduction of pending changes. For example, if I see an edit in Persian, I just do not accept it and leave it in the queue until a Persian speaker shows up. Of course there could be vandalism in languages we reasonably can not expect reviewers in, but if I see a strange edit in say Hausa or Kalaallisut from an IP it is most likely vandalism.--Ymblanter (talk) 12:57, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
True that Wikidata needs editors in infrequent languages.
Mistakes or copying of vandalism without precise review is not specific to Wikidata.
Solution is to expose at least part of data from Wikidata, so that readers could help with mistakes.
Or at least remove incorrect statements - this is much easier.
No project with open edit functionality can guarantee absence of mistakes. d1g (talk) 13:24, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Previous discussion: Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2014/09#Proposal:_enable_FlaggedRevs_on_wikidata--GZWDer (talk) 14:35, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, just to make it clear that pending changes is not the same thing as flagged revisions, and I would be at this point definitely against flagged revisions, I believe we as community have no capacity of handling them.--Ymblanter (talk) 16:03, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Please note that the software needs to be adjusted to work together with Wikibase. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:07, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Is there any antivandalism bot running in Wikidata? Is anyone interested in developing one? I have some experience in antivandalism bots for Wikipedias, but Wikidata is a new territory. We could create a repository, and if a regular antivandalism bot isn't possible, some single-purpose scripts for blatant vandalism could help. Emijrp (talk) 17:54, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes Amir (talk) 09:33, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
One thing which could or would be useful is that local wikipedias could define per article basis which property changes would be visible in watchlist or in recent changes list. In practice this could implemented so that the infobox (or any other template) could flag which properties should be tracked. Most likely those important properties are those which values are visible in the article. --Zache (talk) 10:22, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

IMO pending changes is a wrong approach to a very valid problem. Vandalism is serious concern and we should tackle it but using a blind system only stops the instant gratification and damages more in long-term. Fighting vandalism needs to be more targeted and I have been working on it for a very long time. We have an anti-vandalism bot that reverts edits, we have tools like this that tracks deleted sitelinks or this one for changed descriptions. Also we are using ORES to let fast checks happen in Wikidata. For example this is useful when you haven't enabled new RC filters and if you have this is useful. I know it's not enough and I would welcome any feedback on making those better but let's move at this direction instead. Amir (talk) 10:16, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

@Ladsgroup:, you are right, but let me clarify my point. Currently, all Wikidata vandalism goes life. If a vandal comes, the results are visible immediately. This is by itself is not such a big problem, since people normally do not read Wikidata, but becomes a problem if vandalized data is directly shown on Wikipedia, which is widely read. All means you mention take time. Anti-vandal bots are reasonably fast; all logs are great but get handled on a scale of a day. Realistically, we will never have a capacity to ensure that vandalism is reverted within minutes with probability say 90%. It will always be hours or days. Therefore we need some means to not let vandal edits go live. I only know three of them: page protection, pending changes, and flagged revisions. I argued above why I would be against flagged revisions; page protection is installed on some of the pages most vulnerable to vandalism, however, in the situation when we have a lot of good-faith non-autoconfirmed users (basically everybody who edits on the projects and not here) we can not protect every page. I just do not see how we can handle the issue otherwise.--Ymblanter (talk) 14:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
roughly 2000 edits per day to review doesn't seem like that many - perhaps we could organize/recruit more people into anti-vandalism to do better on this? I have occasionally done some vandal reversion but it's not what I mostly spend my time on here, partly because the tools seem hard to use. Perhaps if we had some way for people to commit to watch recent changes suitably filtered we could get enough that it wouldn't be a big burden on any one person? If we can get 200 people involved, that's 10 per day they might need to patrol which doesn't seem like too much? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:28, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

I was watching many pages that were vandalized frequently, but I then gave up because it's impossible to follow all pages on your watchlist as it's getting full of edits made using widar and other automated tools, like mass-adding descriptions, which should be allowed only for bot accounts, not for normal users, so filtering them out would be easy, but that's just my opinion. Stryn (talk) 20:55, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Images of an artist's representative work

This is not OK. Is it? Should these edits be reverted on a regular basis? Strakhov (talk) 23:38, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

It's not OK I think. See also Wikidata:Property proposal/image of representative work for a related discussion. --Marsupium (talk) 01:39, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Not ok. For example on the Finnish Wikipedia the infoboxes are filled by data from Wikidata, and we don't want to see in person articles some paintings, but a photo of a person. Stryn (talk) 09:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks for your answers. I'll undo them, then. Strakhov (talk) 09:44, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Sorry for causing this problem, I've basically been harvesting infoboxes on plWikipedia using Harvest Templates tool. While doing it, I checked the P18 property descriptions in several languages that I more or less understand (Polish, English, German, French) and I haven't noticed any specific rule or indication, that only portraits should be used for people. But obviously, having now realised the problem this may be causing, I won't harvest P18 any more. Sorry again! (CC: @Jura1:). Powerek38 (talk) 09:54, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
No problem. There are infoboxes and infoboxes. For example, images in... Template:Infobox dam... are probably most of them OK enough. who is free from sin who throws the first stone. I won't. :) I just needed to know the current consensous on this matter. Strakhov (talk) 10:00, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I left a note on the user's talk page and asked them to use WDFIST for images.
    --- Jura 09:52, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
yes, i note some language wikipedias use representative works in the artist infobox, giving a false positive in the "no local image but image at wikidata" task. will need some global cleanup. (and a lot of artists lack an image). Slowking4 (talk) 18:02, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

How to tell a machine what an uncle (Q76557) is?

How to indicate that an uncle (Q76557) (of someone) is a brother (Q10861465) of a parent (Q7566) (of someone)? (question applies to other types of relations as well; it arose here.) --Marsupium (talk) 14:18, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

Level of indirection is 1 in Wikidata, you can achieve greater indirection using nameless items
< uncle (Q76557) View with Reasonator View with SQID > instance of (P31) View with SQID < brother (Q10861465) View with Reasonator View with SQID >
of (P642) View with SQID < item2 >
< item2 > instance of (P31) View with SQID < parent (Q7566) View with Reasonator View with SQID >
of (P642) View with SQID < human (Q5) View with Reasonator View with SQID >
d1g (talk) 20:07, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Actual properties can be different (not P31 and P642). d1g (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
I would offer a couple of examples that depict the relationship. It is much easier and the machines can learn from the examples.
< uncle (Q76557) View with Reasonator View with SQID > example of relationship search < person1 >
with respect to search < person 2 >
--Micru (talk) 07:26, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Examples may be useful, but I would be surprised by program or database query processing examples Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@Micru: Indeed I think it would be good to state it explicitly. Implicitly there are already plenty of examples that can be queried with Jura's query below. --Marsupium (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Maybe with queries? I tried to add a SPARQL version to the item. It doesn't quite work, but this does. As Wikidata SPARQL query equivalent (P3921) was made for lists/categories, maybe one for kinship is needed.
--- Jura 10:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jura1: I didn't know about Wikidata SPARQL query equivalent (P3921). Great property! unfortunately it only helps humans and machines that understand SPARQL. For the query the recursive (because using uncle (Q76557) itself) one:
SELECT ?subject ?subjectLabel ?nieceOrNephewClass ?nieceOrNephewClassLabel ?uncle ?uncleLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?subject p:P1038 ?statement.
  ?nieceOrNephewClass wdt:P279*/wdt:P279* wd:Q76477.
  ?statement pq:P1039 ?nieceOrNephewClass.
  ?statement ps:P1038 ?uncle.
}
Try it! and in the other direction
SELECT ?subject ?subjectLabel ?uncleClass ?uncleClassLabel ?nieceOrNephew ?nieceOrNephewLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?subject p:P1038 ?statement.
  ?uncleClass wdt:P279*/wdt:P279* wd:Q76557.
  ?statement pq:P1039 ?uncleClass.
  ?statement ps:P1038 ?nieceOrNephew.
}
Try it! could be integrated. However, I think it should be possible to describe kinship types with some system of item datatype properties so that Wikidata:Property proposal/kinship equivalent isn't needed, but can be derived. --Marsupium (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@D1gggg: Yes, I the properties were what I had in mind to ask about … --Marsupium (talk) 11:54, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@Marsupium: main property relative (P1038) and qualifier is type of kinship (P1039). d1g (talk) 15:35, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@D1gggg: ? On a P31:Q5 item, of course. This doesn't help anything to describe the item uncle (Q76557), does it? Above you've used instance of (P31) and of (P642) and said "Actual properties can be different" and indeed I think instance of (P31) and of (P642) don't suit here just as little as relative (P1038) and type of kinship (P1039). Am I wrong? --Marsupium (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
@Marsupium: we can create "person in question" or use character that may or may not be fictional (Q21070598)
In western counties relations are constant.
commons:File:CousinTree.svg d1g (talk) 17:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Q29581753

This item is shown directly in the English Wikipedia, en:Povl Riis. It was pointed out (in an overheated discussion, but this is irrelevant for my question) that it is shown incorrectly. Indeed, it is a part of the series (P:179, Q29411209) which is now called Wellcome Witnesses to Contemporary Medicine, but at the time this particular article was produced it was still called Wellcome Witnesses to Twentieth Century Medicine. Q29411209 shows both names with apparently correct qualifiers. The new name shows in Wikipedia whereas the old one should. Does anybody know how to fix it? Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:30, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

It seems to be a frequent problem surfacing in one way or the other. Depending the field, people create several items, repeat information with qualifiers, add named as (P1810) or make the retrieval code more complex.
--- Jura 11:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I would be happy with a more complex retrieval, but I have no idea how it could be realized.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Hide description and alias edits in my watchlist for some languages

Is there a way to hide description and alias edits in my watchlist for a list of languages? Right now, 99% of edits in my watchlist are description creation in arabic through Quickstatement. I don't understand this language so I can't review them, I can't hide them because user is not a bot and more important, I can't distinguish other edits which may need review... — Ayack (talk) 11:58, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

I think users should get bot flag when they perform such actions. d1g (talk) 13:25, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
One of the goals of the new filters for edit review (that'll be rolling out to watchlists soon) is to include a way to filter for users. But I do agree that people who do these kind of actions should get a bot/flood flag. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 14:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Add User:Yair rand/DiffLists.js to your Special:MyPage/common.js and use -ar in the description field. —MisterSynergy (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Sadly we don't have a policy which says that users making continuous edits using automatic tools should request a bot flag. So everyone can continue as of now, as long as their contributions are not counted as flooding. Stryn (talk) 14:17, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Use of properties - Where to discuss

Where can I discuss specific use of properties? Breg Pmt (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

@Pmt: Here, or at the properties' talk pages (depends on what you want to discuss, I guess). Jon Harald Søby (talk) 14:23, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks --Pmt (talk) 14:47, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

How to get Local Name instead of Label on Wikidata Query

Hello , I am newbie on Wikidata. Recently I was attend Wikidata Workshop at Chandigarh where Asaf was teached us Wikidata Query. On basis that I make new Query For retrieve Indian Person Which born after 1921 and whos article present on Hindi Wiki. Here is:

SELECT ?itemLabel ?bornLabel 
WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 .
  ?item wdt:P27 wd:Q668.
  ?item wdt:P569 ?born .
  FILTER EXISTS { ?wen schema:about ?item . ?wen schema:inLanguage "hi" }
  FILTER (?born >= "1921-01-01T00:00:00Z"^^xsd:dateTime) .
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "hi". }
}
ORDER BY ASC(?born)

Try it!

But in this Query have a problem that Some of article have different name from Label. So when I use this in AWB for adding Birth Year. Most of page be skip. So I want to know that Is this possible to get Local name of article instead of Wikidata Label. Thanks --Jayprakash12345 (talk) 19:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Change FILTER EXISTS { ?wen schema:about ?item . ?wen schema:inLanguage "hi" } to ?article schema:about ?item; schema:isPartOf <https://hi.wikipedia.org/>; schema:name ?title ., the relevant variable is ?title.
In the future, you can visit our dedicated page for questions on queries. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Matěj Suchánek Thanks Sir--Jayprakash12345 (talk) 19:44, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Is it a good idea to have property with massive amount of values?

Property:P398 in Q525 currently has limited number of values but it may easily grow into millions. If I understand Wikidata:Notability right, then there is nothing stopping anybody to generate millions of wikidata entries for asteroids and adding them as values.

It would make entry for sun nearly uneditable, it already lags on opening the page. Would it not be enough to add just parent astronomical body (Property:P397)? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 10:28, 11 September 2017 (UTC)

This is just one of the problems with reciprocal properties. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Any property with more than a thousand or so values (or any entity with more than a thousand statements) is going to cause trouble with the UI as things stand. We recently added tabular population (P4179) to push long datasets for population (P1082) values into Commons; something similar could be done here. Or, as noted, just relying on the property in the reverse direction seems fully sufficient to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:37, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Bots may convert such values into inverse claims, but we shouldn't prevent data entry if we have such properties. d1g (talk) 19:22, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Yeah, that is why I am surprised that such property exists. Has somebody tried nominating similar properties for deletion? It seems that maintaining this property is a waste of time as sooner or later Sun or Q321 will be uneditable. Also, having reciprocal property means more required maintenance for little benefit (after all, any normal use will of Wikidata data will involve database querries) Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:12, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
The only similar-ish property nominated at PfD that I can find is P150 (contains administrative territorial entity), which was kept simply because it was being used by the French and Czech Wikipedias. Unfortunately, it looks like P398 has the same issue: It's being used directly on six different Wikipedias, according to the ExternalUse template. I don't suppose there's any good way around this? --Yair rand (talk) 22:41, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Is there any chance delete wikidata property with external use template or is it automatic no? I thought about checking how this data is used (and is it really used) but all wikis mentioned in external use are quite exotic. And this one will be worse than P150, given that Sun alone has thousands or maybe millions of potential wikidata entries (and galaxies are even worse). This is not happening with administrative divisions - there are more stars in Milky Way (200G-400G) than people in the entire history of humanity (around 108G). Probably it will end with somebody adding thousands of entries and then migrating data to equivalent of tabular population (P4179) :( Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:12, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
One option could be to change P398:"long list of minor planets" to P398:Athen-asteroids, Apollo-asteroids, Main Belt asteroids, Plutions, etc, listing classes of minor planets and comets instead of each member.
Another option could be to change the purpose of P398 a little, to notable child astronomical bodies. P800 already work that way. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Properties for literature

Hi... I found the properties for literature items here Wikidata:List of properties/Works#Literature but I have a question. Im looking to get my school to donate the metadata for their special collection. Most of the items in this collection are only at my school or in a few other places and include works from the 16th century and before. I dont see a property to add this kind of information. It would be a lot easier to get this metadata if it can be noted the work is found in X special collection. In most of the works I look to get the metadata for, it is the only way to locate the item. Is this possible or is there some kind of policy against it?Thelmadatter (talk) 22:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Have you had a look atWikidata:WikiProject Books? Also to note that we do have collection (P195)  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:06, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Quite new to all of this. Didnt know there were Wikiprojects and the list of properties there is quite a bit more extensive. Thanks!Thelmadatter (talk) 00:10, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Can’t undo a redirect creation — anyone able to help?

I created a redirect at no label (Q34836264) by mistake, and now I am unable to undo this. It says: Undo failed; Invalid content data; Return to Wikidata:Main Page. Anyone able to help? I’d like to restore this version by User:Romaine. Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 22:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Same here logged in and out. Sorry! --Marsupium (talk) 22:32, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
I had the same problem trying to restore this. Got the same message, so definitely a new problem. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 03:55, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I can't do it either. I just created phab:T175887 for this. Mbch331 (talk) 05:36, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I encountered a similar problem yesterday (see IRC log, messages mentioning Ortano), but rollback on the last edits worked, and after that I was able to restore the old version again. --TweetsFactsAndQueries (talk) 10:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Thanks, this works. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I have the same problem with Acer floridanum (Q15287442). --Succu (talk) 13:02, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Madat Guliyev

Hello. Q39939331 and Q4151833 are same people. Can somebody merge them, please? --Drabdullayev17 (talk) 09:13, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

@Drabullayev17: ✓ Done Jon Harald Søby (talk) 09:58, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:22, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Brighty of the Grand Canyon (Q4967842)

Brighty of the Grand Canyon is the title of a novel published in 1953 and of a film published in 1967 that is based on the novel. The English wikipedia has an article that covers both; apparently so far no other Wikipedia has an article about any of the two. And there is one wikidata object that refers to the mentioned article. It is instance of book, the English description solely refers to the novel, and it has some more claims about the book. But it also has the claims director and cast member, and the publication date is 1967. Any idea how to deal with this? Do we need three wikidata objects for this (one for the film, one for the novel, and one for the article in enwp), connected with the has part/part of properties? --Senechthon (talk) 12:19, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Jane023 (talk) 12:21, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Agree Pmt (talk) 13:56, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Done with novel and film, but I don't know what to write as description and instance of to the wikidata object for the article. --Senechthon (talk) 15:24, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Looks good! Thanks for your work. Jane023 (talk) 17:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:21, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Merge undo broken?

I accidentally merged Ebberg (Q30792024), and now cannot restore the version before the merge - getting "Undo failed - Invalid content data". Is this a known bug? Ahoerstemeier (talk) 21:09, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes. Rollback works (did so), and there are already two sections on this page. —MisterSynergy (talk) 21:25, 18 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:26, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

Blacklisting of tinyurl

It has probably already been asked before, but could we unblacklist tinyurl outside of the main namespace ? This is really best path to query.wikidata.org queries. --Zolo (talk) 09:08, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

It is blacklisted globally through WMF, so to utilise that you would need to add it to Mediawiki:Spam-whitelist then write filters to prevent/mitigate/moderate its use. It would seem better to have a means to have shortcuts that are internally controlled and incorruptible.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:48, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
has been (https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T112715), but no progress whatsoever.--Jklamo (talk) 11:25, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
Yes please! − Pintoch (talk) 12:37, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
If the only reason to want to un-blacklist tinyURL is to allow us to link to query.wikidata.org queries, would it not be simpler if the Query service simply provided a different (un-blacklisted) stable URL for the results it generates? Wittylama (talk) 11:22, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
This is what we have been asking for. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Smalyshev (WMF): backend or frontend issue?  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:48, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
T44085 should solve it. I don't think I want to develop a parallel system to it, and WDQS setup as it is now is not particularly well-suited to it. I could use different system than tinyurl but I'm pretty sure they either are or would be banned for the same reason as tinyurl. So the real solution I think would be to get UrlShortener working. Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 16:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding statement/s to data item

"After the Paintings by George F. Watts" is a poem by Florence Earle Coates which is about a painter and two of his works—both of which are Wikidata items, along with the artist. What statement/s do I use to add the painter and his works to the WD poem item? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 18:12, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

inspired by (P941) is available. Jheald (talk) 18:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
main subject (P921) can be used in general, but you want something like depicts (P180), except "depicts" seems to be just for visual works. -- Fuzheado (talk) 18:33, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jheald, Fuzheado: Thank you both. I have opted to use main subject (P921). Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:28, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding a data item, the title of which is a redirect page to a work

I would like to add the poem "America" as a data item; however, at Wikisource, the title redirects to the work in which the poem is contained. How can the poem still be entered as a data item? Thanks, Londonjackbooks (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Yes, just create it as a new data item. There's no requirement for an item here to be linked to any other Wikimedia project.
You could sitelink the new item to the redirect at wikisource if you wanted -- but this is somewhat controversial, such links are still the subject of discussion even after three years (and you have to work around blocks in the software to create them).
But so long as an item has real-world significance, feel free to create it, regardless of whether or not there's an article anywhere else. Jheald (talk) 00:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Items mentioned in a creative work

I've been discussing off-wiki with another user about how to enrich the Wikidata item of a poem by connecting it to other works or to named people that it mentions. In parallel, I'm looking at how to describe topics that are mentioned in a work when they are not the main subject (P921) of the work. For example, it might be a significant fact about a letter that it mentions a particular person or creative work, even though the work is not the topic of the letter. cites (P2860) seems to be a candidate for describing relations between works (e.g. a song about a painting), although it seems to be used in Wikidata in its academic and legal senses, not yet for poetry. Is there another property we should be using? Do we need one? I searched for "mentions" or "subject" in the non-grammatical sense. MartinPoulter (talk) 19:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

"mentioned in" has been proposed at least five times, rejected every time (search the archives). Various similar but constricted properties include main subject (P921), characters (P674), and present in work (P1441). I think the consensus is that simple mentions don't merit inclusion. --Yair rand (talk) 23:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

SF Privately Owned Public Open Spaces (POPOS)

I want to import publicly available data from San Francisco about the city's Privately Owned Public Open Spaces (POPOS). This data includes name, address, date created, hours, and more. However, the dataset from the city is not always complete; i.e., "POPOS 1" may list "hours" as "9 to 5" but "POPOS 2" may list "hours" as blank -- an omission by the city staff.

Once it is imported to Wikidata, will users be able to manually fill in the hours that are missing from the city's data? Or is Wikidata only what is directly available from the source? Thanks.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Scottcarolsf (talk • contribs) at 22:53, 11 September 2017‎ (UTC).

  • What is the copyright status of this data? Is it maybe a work of a federal government? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:00, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
  • The data is city government data, publicly available for anyone to download, from the city of San Francisco. Scottcarolsf (talk) 14:26, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
  • data is PD in US per w:Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co. (assuming no creative expression in arrangement) -- and yes users will be able to edit the data, but they may have to have a reference. Slowking4 (talk) 17:35, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Thanks Slowking4 for the helpful info. Scottcarolsf (talk) 19:52, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
    • @Scottcarolsf: Is this the data set you were thinking of? [2] -- Fuzheado (talk) 19:02, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
    • @Fuzheado: Yes. As you can see, for example, the "Hours" section is not consistent and has some holes. Scottcarolsf (talk) 19:06, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
      • that is good, you have an online reference. you can archive at internet archive, and we can error correct here, and push back corrections to the database maintainer. Slowking4 (talk) 15:48, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Mass removing descriptions

How to mass remove descriptions from an item? no label (Q22260299) is not a disambiguation page. Gikü (talk) 22:51, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

It is not now, but it formerly was. This is a way to do it. Strakhov (talk) 23:07, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you Strakhov. Gikü (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
There is also a gadget for this: MediaWiki:Gadget-dataDrainer.js; for whatever reason not included in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets, but sysops and autopatrolled users can use it via Special:MyPage/common.js as in this edit. —MisterSynergy (talk) 23:14, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you MisterSynergy. This looks like a fun toy to have in the holster. Gikü (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Presumably QuickStatements 2 can also do it at scale. Jheald (talk) 00:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC) --- Ahh, but maybe not straightforwardly the multitude of languages. Jheald (talk) 00:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for the suggestion Jheald. Gikü (talk) 13:29, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Suggestion for a bot to label locations as instance of disputed territory (Q15239622)

Hi,

I ran a query that tried to find all human settlement (Q486972) that have multiple country (P17) values (excluding any countries that are no longer existing). After that, I filtered out all locations that already were instances of disputed territory (Q15239622). that The result was about 2500 items. (See Query 1). Then I figured out which of these countries shared the most common borders with each other (See Query 2). According to me, most/all of those locations should be marked as instances of 'disputed territory'.

An easy subset to check will be for all instances of this where one of the countries is state with limited recognition (Q15634554) (see Query 3). This is a list of 700 items. If one of the countries is not recognised, then the location can be safely marked as 'disputed territory'. (See a list of countries in Query 4).

How can we get a bot to get the obvious ones of them marked?

Cheers, Soni (talk) 05:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

How do you sort out areas that are located in two nations, without being truly disputed? Karesuando (Q137860) could be such a place, located at the Swedish/Finnish border. In this case we have one item about the Finnish village and one about the Swedish village, but I guess that is not always the case. Some areas could also be disputed, without having much noise about it, since such areas often are unpopulated, for example Hans Island (Q681389) at the Canada/Greenland border. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:17, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
  • Innocent bystander, agreed with both the statements. Which is why some of those must be handled on a case by case basis. But there are some cases that can be handled by a bot without issues. For example, everything inside South Ossetia-Alania (Q23427) will need the 'disputed territory' label, since South Ossetia itself is an state with limited recognition (Q15634554). Similarly for every location inside Crimean Peninsula (Q7835), it is safe to say that it is disputed territory. I would like a bot to handle the bulk of these uncontentious cases, and then the rest can be examined (semi)-manually. Soni (talk) 09:38, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
The level of "dispute" can also vary. Some tells Norway should be a part of Sweden, instead of being independent. But almost nobody takes such claims seriously. The status of Israel/Palestine have strong opinions on both sides, while the claims on Krim, Lugansk and South Ossetia are more or less only supported by pro-Russian minds. And even within the pro-Russians minds, the claims on Krim is probably stronger than those on Lugansk, the first even being written into Russian law. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Why is People's Republic of China (Q148) marked as state with limited recognition (Q15634554)

(Splitting into its own section, sorry for too many sections)

  • As a completely different sidenote, why is People's Republic of China (Q148) marked as state with limited recognition (Q15634554) (and no references)? I thought it would be more logical to not include that category since most countries do recognise China. If not, what is a good way to handle countries that are unrecognised by only a few other countries? Otherwise it will cause false alarm on a number of queries. (See Query 5 and Query 6 for a list).

Soni (talk) 06:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

States with limited recognition
@Soni: Q15634554 is « state with limited recognition : territory with de-facto sovereignty but lacking international acceptance ». People's Republic of China (Q148) is lacking the acceptance of 20 countries so it fits the definition, no? More or less (recognized is not exactly a binary concept). I don't really want to open this can of worms, so see en:List of states with limited recognition for more informations and references. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 12:02, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
  • I removed it. If someone thinks he has a source that supports the claim, please add a reference. ChristianKl (talk) 14:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

BREAKING CHANGE: wbcheckconstraints API output format

Hi all!

This is an announcement for a breaking change to the output format of the WikibaseQualityConstraints constraint checking API, to go live on . It affects all clients that use the wbcheckconstraints API action. (We are not aware of any such clients apart from the checkConstraints gadget, which has been adapted.)

We are soon going to check constraints not just on the main snak of a statement, but also on qualifiers and references (T168532). However, the current API output format of the wbcheckconstraints API action cannot accommodate any other constraint check results. To resolve this issue, we are introducing a new, more flexible output format for the API, which can contain constraint check results on all kinds of snaks and also leaves room for future expansion (e. g. for T168626). The new format is based on the Wikibase JSON format, and documented (along with the old format) on mw:Wikibase/API#wbcheckconstraints.

If you use the wbcheckconstraints API action in your tools, the safest option is to make them support both output formats for the transitional period. It’s easy to determine which format the API returned, because the new format contains the fixed key "claims" on the second level, which will never happen in the old format. You can see an example of this for the checkConstraints gadget in change I99379a96cd, specifically the new extractResultsForStatement function.

The new API output format is already enabled on the Wikidata constraints test system. You can test your tools or other code there.

Relevant tickets:

Relevant patches:

Please let us know if you have any comments or objections. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 11:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

USACM panel on algorithmic transparency and accountability

today the USACM had a panel on algorithmic transparency and accountability. while wikidata is very open, you might find some of the accountability and explanation items actionable.

here are the principles:

  1. Awareness
  2. Access and redress
  3. Explanation
  4. Deep Provenance
  5. Auditibility
  6. Validation and testing.

Slowking4 (talk) 16:25, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Improvements coming soon to Recent Changes

Rc-beta-tour-welcome-ltr.gif

Hello

Sorry to use English. Please help translate to your language! Thank you.

In short: starting on 26 September, New Filters for Edit Review (now in Beta) will become standard on Recent Changes. They provide an array of new tools and an improved interface. If you prefer the current page you will be able to opt out. Learn more about the New Filters.

What is this feature again?

This feature improves Special:RecentChanges and Special:RecentChangesLinked (and soon, Special:Watchlist – see below).

Based on a new design, it adds new features that ease vandalism tracking and support of newcomers:

  • Filtering - filter recent changes with easy-to-use and powerful filters combinations, including filtering by namespace or tagged edits.
  • Highlighting - add a colored background to the different changes you are monitoring. It helps quick identification of changes that matter to you.
  • Bookmarking to keep your favorite configurations of filters ready to be used.
  • Quality and Intent Filters - those filters use ORES predictions. They identify real vandalism or good faith intent contributions that need help. They are not available on all wikis.

You can know more about this project by visiting the quick tour help page.

Concerning RecentChanges

Starting on 26 September, New Filters for Edit Review will become standard on Recent Changes. We have decided to do this release because of a long and successful Beta test phase, positive feedback from various users and positive user testing.

Some features will remain as Beta features and will be added later. Learn more about those different features.

If your community has specific concerns about this deployment or internal discussion, it can request to have the deployment to their wikis delayed to October 1, if they have sensible, consistent with the project, actionable, realistic feedback to oppose (at the development team's appreciation).

You will also be able to opt-out this change in your preferences.

Concerning Watchlists

Starting on September 19, the Beta feature will have a new option. Watchlists will have all filters available now on the Beta Recent Changes improvements.

If you have already activated the Beta feature "New filters for edit review", you have no action to take. If you haven't activated the Beta feature "New filters for edit review" and you want to try the filters on Watchlists, please go to your Beta preferences on September 19.

How to be ready

Please share this announcement!

Do you use Gadgets that change things on your RecentChanges or Watchlist pages, or have you customized them with scripts or CSS? You may have to make some changes to your configuration. Despite the fact that we have tried to take most cases into consideration, some configurations may break. The Beta phase is a great opportunity to have a look at local scripts and gadgets: some of them may be replaced by native features from the Beta feature.

Please ping me if you have questions.

On behalf of the Global Collaboration team, Trizek (WMF) 15:27, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

We have Isle of Man (Q9676) but not bounding boxes

4 floats (2 coordinates?) could be reused in queries like this one d1g (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

The properties coordinate of northernmost point (P1332) ; coordinate of southernmost point (P1333) ; coordinate of easternmost point (P1334) ; coordinate of westernmost point (P1335) exist to record this, but it may have been hard to find the data to populate them.
At a country level there is often also a question of what to include -- just the mainland ? All the islands ? Overseas dependencies ? That may also add to why these properties are not very well populated. Jheald (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Subclasses of former entity (Q15893266)

I don't recall if this has been discussed in the past, but I would like to hear opinions about the creations of more specific subclasses of former entity (Q15893266). Today I came across former proto-state (Q39847223) (@Soni: ping to the creator of the new item), and I was wondering if it was really needed or if it could be more simple to just use end time (P582) or dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) as qualifiers of proto-state (Q23037160). Right now, I am leaning towards limiting those kind of items to cases where there is no much information, so when end time (P582)/dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) couldn't be used. A problem with that approach would be that some items would be using, for instance, state (Q7275) whereas others would be using former country (Q3024240), so maybe uniformisation would be needed. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 04:39, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

  • Please see thread above on why the item former proto-state (Q39847223) was created. Maybe it will be good to continue discussion on the same thread to discuss all similar entities.
I agree that there needs to be some sort of uniformisation in this entire "How to describe a nation/pseudo nation" process.
Soni (talk) 06:33, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Should Islamic State of Iraq (Q18206631) be listed as instance of former country (Q3024240)

Hi,

I was just trying out a few queries when I noticed that there are 24 items under (some) subclass of country (Q6256), which have an end time, but are not listed as former country (Q3024240). Most of these seem to be cases like Islamic State of Iraq (Q18206631), which are historical but also disputed. So my question is, should we add "former country" tag to it?

I was going to do it myself to all 24 of them, but had to confirm before making the changes.

Soni (talk) 04:36, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

P.S. This was the query I tried -

Soni (talk) 06:28, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I prefer to use state with limited recognition (Q15634554) or proto-state (Q23037160) with qualifier end time (P582). If you use former proto-state (Q39847223) or any other subclass of former entity (Q15893266) you only provide information about the situation today. This is very limited. People might want to know how the world was at a specific date in the past. If you only know that something stopped to exist but not the exact date, you can still use end time (P582) with unknown value. The problematic situation around former entity (Q15893266) and its subclasses were also discussed in scientific papers, see Q27036474. --Pasleim (talk) 09:34, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I agree that it's much better to use qualifier than to start instance of (P31) statements that start with "former". ChristianKl (talk) 16:13, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Access denied to database wikidatawiki

Hi, I tried to work wikidatawiki database, but get "Access denied for user '##'@'%' to database 'wikidatawiki'", how I can solve this? --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 14:38, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Shouldn't it have a "_p" suffix, ie. wikidatawiki_p? Anyway, you need to have a database access. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:13, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I don't think so, I can access to database "enwiki" normally in Toolforge without "_p" suffix . --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 11:37, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Do we have a limit on inferences?

@D1gggg: This user's editing behaviour has brought to my attention a potential problem. He has been changing a lot of definitions of items based on personal interpretation of sources, such as here or here, where the source doesn't mention nor define the item. I think that if a primary source doesn't specifically support an statement (like in here), then a secondary source is needed (some study mentioning that such statement can be inferred from a given primary source). But then, it got even worse: Here he changed the definition of sport (Q349) from a subclass of activity (Q1914636) to a subclass of human behaviour (Q3769299). According to him, sport seems to be a human behaviour without any backing references other than his own inference process. I've tried to explain to him why that is not the case to no avail. For me (and all the sources I could find), sport being an activity not a behaviour is just common sense, but not for him. This way of defining concepts could become a huge problem over time, so what is the limit of personal interpretation? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 02:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

It is nobody fault that you are woefully incompetent is social sciences.
Nobody should explain how criminal actions are "behaviour" too.
Distinction between purposeful actions and actions without will (Q364340) is difficult.
Or how they are "biological" "medical" processes as well.
@Andreasmperu: not able to source your edits, but blame me. Not a surprise. d1g (talk) 08:10, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I think @Andreasmperu: not able to perform splits himself?!
And because attitude of this person I should copy&paste oxford dictionary or wikitionary like a mad man:
The total income received from a given source.
Not a word about "money" or their equivalents at all.
Code of Hammurapi never used "money" "taxation" or "investment".
@Andreasmperu: "money" are unnecessary in definition of "revenue", true monetary systems were invented later.
And I noticed that @Andreasmperu: tends to make decisions solely based on languages he is able to speak.
I'm very doubtful what is actually stated in Code of Hammurapi based on 5 different translations.
I'm not sure if English is good (but French and possibly Russian) d1g (talk) 08:31, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

I do not know where I am going wrong in this

I have submitted following query to find out list of Indian actresses. But I am not able to get any results. Kindly guide me where I am going wrong. Thanks in advance. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 18:07, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel 
WHERE 
{
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5.
  ?item wdt:P106 wd:Q33999.
  ?item wdt:P21 wd:Q6581072.
  ?item wdt:P495 wd:Q668.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}
I got the answer. Thank you. I should have queried 'country of citizenship'. Thank you. -- Abhijeet Safai (talk) 18:08, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:20, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Item/Property suggestion shortcut on Mac

Ctrl (left) and command (right) keys on a MacBook.

I have just learned that to get the suggestion for the item and property on a query window we have to type CTRL+Space. I am using a mac and unable to get that. Initially, I was getting the spotlight. I have disabled the shortcut to open Spotlight. Still, I am unable to get that suggestion. Any help or suggestion is appreciated. --Jnanaranjan sahu (talk) 06:50, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

My Apple Keyboard has a control/ctrl button. What computer are you using? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:07, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jnanaranjan sahu: - I think you are getting Control and Command mixed up. They are two different buttons. On the Mac keyboard, Command is the large button next to the space bar, which brings up Spotlight search. The Control button is two buttons over, to the left of Command. Press that and space, and it will activate suggestions/fill for Wikidata Query. -- Fuzheado (talk) 12:15, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
@Fuzheado: @Sjoerddebruin: thank you for the reply. I use an apple computer. I have tried to use that control key at the first, but it failed so like other shortcuts I assumed that the command key should be used. But finally, I want to say that neither control key + space or command key + space is working. Anything I have to disable enable or do something?--Jnanaranjan sahu (talk) 06:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
I don't know about this, but for future reference: If you get spotlight when pressing ctrl-space on a Mac, that usually means that command-space is in use for keyboard layout switching and spotlight was therefor 'moved'. It's because command-space for keyboard switching predates the introduction of spotlight. TheDJ (talk) 21:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

The best feedback is leave information about codes generated after each keypress: http://keycode.info/ Ctrl - 17; Spacebar - 32. What else should be supported? d1g (talk) 17:00, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@D1gggg: On my macbook control key gives 17 and space gives 32. But I have no idea why that suggestion function is not working.--Jnanaranjan sahu (talk) 06:19, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

h index and other bibliometric data

I have recently started to created wikidata item of scientists, and I looked around a lot here and there for bibliometric archives and service. There was one service offered by scopus that was very interactive, and offered a lot of information. yesterday it restricted the access to his interface unless you pay. Now you can't have the h-index graph, the list to citing document or a direct link to the information related to a journal and so on... one of the service that it offered was "plummetrics" that allows to see the overall impact of publication on other academic publications, but also wikipedia articles (yes!), maybe mendeley archive and other websites. Scimago is great for journal ranks but it's powered by scopus so one day I fear that all this information will be on sale...

Currently only a few websites offer decent feedback on these data. Researchgate ask you to enroll, academia ask you to pay for almost everything, ISI web of knowledge offers you some information but I don't think they give you directly the h index, google scholar create some profiles but can't be accessed everywhere in the world plus they are evil and they want your data... so in the end a free open access or open source or similar concept is not there, am I right? So I have a general question here. I have read that someone is make a campaign to make the bibliometric information "open"... but I can't find it anymore.

I can accept that you pay for a in-depth service that tells you if the article is cited an a major newspaper and who searched for your profile, but I am really pissed off that standard bibliometric information are so difficult to get for free.

I am writing here because I'd like to know what can wikidata do. In theory in a future we could make an item for all the articles and also all the citation inside such articles, and all the author profiles (with a good coordination they can become similar to other services) and make some interface that interact with wikidata information just showing the bibliometric ones, easy to update or to investigate. Will the wikiplatform be able one day to offer to every scientist a free service that with a coordinated effort might be comparable in quality to those of these private conglomerates? Will we maybe spin off the bibliometric part from wikidata to get further in that direction?

Is anyone working on it? All these items of scientists are not used to a full potential if we don't find a way to attract scientist and offering a good bibliometric service is a good key, IMHO.--Alexmar983 (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Plus, the idea that private corporations basically control access to data that ca be used to evaluate research founded with public money is IMHO unacceptable. One day they'll offer you to buy visibility for your publication... if the future battle is quality, and that need reliable sources, we should really improve the quality of the bibliometric data we can offer to the general public and specifically to scientists.--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:05, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

These links may be of interest: https://tools.wmflabs.org/scholia/ and a paper describing Scholia http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1878/article-03.pdf .YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 15:08, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
I take a look, thx.--Alexmar983 (talk) 15:49, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Actually, ISI Web of Knowledge provides h-index directly.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
in any case not as easily as SCOPUS did with this interface. Some years we tried with a friend to get h index and it was not smooth (i did not check recently). BTW, SCOPUS still gives me a h index, but not a lot of other analyses related to the h index as in the past. It's important that the bibliometric data are not "property" of big conglomerates, or easy to access through them. One day they might ask you money to give visibility to your articles somehow. This initiative has potential to resonate with some manager I know.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Who is in charge? Where is the project here? I should follow this closer. The people of Wikicite for example? Thank you.--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:27, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
Without google here in China I could find only the Lyon declaration is generic, I cannot find the other initiative about bibliometric data and related data mining. But I'm sure I read something specific about that... No clue?--Alexmar983 (talk) 04:53, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
In the lasts months we added a lot of new items for papers but most of them don't have cites (P2860) filled. cites (P2860) has a bit of an chicken&egg problem. If we would add a property that would allow adding the citation as a string we might encourage people who add new items about papers to also add citation information.
Currently, we unfortunately don't have enough cites (P2860) claims to do a meaningful index of our own. If we however would have enough information it would be nice to have a Wikidata-based index for the influence on a paper. Having an index that reflects the impact a paper has on other papers that are open enough to have their meta data inside Wikidata would be nice. It would also in turn create an incentives for more data to get submitted to Wikidata. ChristianKl (talk) 07:50, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
My network is not strong enough to make a difference, but if we are going in that direction on the long term I can share the news everywhere...--Alexmar983 (talk) 09:45, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
@Alexmar983:The decision about whether we allow more string based properties for storying citation data is a policy decision where I don't think it takes a strong network. My last proposal of a string property to make importing of data easier was rejected, so I won't start one here but if you think that having more citation data in Wikidata is very important you could. ChristianKl (talk) 15:24, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
ChristianKl I am not sure where this is supposed to take place here on wikiplatform, do we have a centralized project fro this aspect? In any case, my network was referring to inform people outside wiki about the overall situation, not to boost things here, at least not thanks to them. Personally, I still think that merging everything in wikidata is sometimes confusing and does not help in reaching a good rate of workflow, but at the same time "independent" project might not take off so I accept the situation. At this point however I fell that you start to cover bibliometric data very well or it does not make any real difference. A very incomplete archive, oran archive that does not grow to fill a gap has no future, I understand that wikidata was incomplete for years and that did not affect its reputation, but there was a clear workflow behind supporting its growth. I'd like to feel something like that (or to help to go like that) in this case too.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

After two days SCOPUS put almost all its free "services" back... it looks only the link to plummetrics is now permanently removed, which is ok... I understand that combining bibliometric data with other sources is still a new thing, other services offer also social media monitoring (Clarivate analytics, maybe, does that) and that's precious metadata, I understand you sell me those. It's like when academia.edu promise you they 'll inform about the use of your articles on non-peer reviewed publication such as syllabi. Although, in the future, when the use of template improves on local wikipedia, we could maybe also provide a statistics about use of publications in wikipedia together with bibliometric data, but that's another story.

In any case, even if they changed their mind, in any moment these companies can make you suffer to get the basic data in a smooth way, that is a fact.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Q39936094

Is this item legit' ? (subpage of a project edit filter) ?

the 'old english' label makes me suspicious... --Hsarrazin (talk) 20:59, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

This happens when users on Wikipedia press "Add links" without JavaScript. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:05, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Living people

I have moved the draft BLP policy to Wikidata:Living people (draft) and created a new page at Wikidata:Living people, with a note about (and link to) the WMF's resolution on content about living people; a link to the aforesaid draft and to the RfC in which it was decided not to adopt the offered policy; and links to other WMF projects' polices.

Of course, the draft can still be worked on, and brought back to RfC for the community to approve or reject, when deemed appropriate. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:30, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

The basic problem has not been resolved and this cannot be found in this proposal. So it is imho a waste of time as it is pushing something that is not viable vis a vis our best practices. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 09:08, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
"This" is not a "proposal". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:40, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
If it is not even a proposal, what is the point? It does not add anything at this time. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:59, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
why don't you incorporate into the draft the concerns raised before? i would strike the second paragraph, until proven necessary. Slowking4 (talk) 17:47, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Given that it is a waste of time I would remove this. It is pushing a point of view that is ill considered by someone who has all the time in the world because he made a career out of doing the "Wikimedia thing". I do not have the luxury of time for this. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@GerardM: I hope you would "assume good faith". In fact what Andy did here (though it seems unnecessary to me, as the page already had a "DRAFT" notice) was to make the proposed LP policy page *less* conspicuous, to hide it a little, behind a more generic page that provides links on the status of LP policy in wikidata. If you read through the RFC that proposed to make an earlier version of that LP page a wikidata policy, Andy Mabbett was one of the first to vote *against* the proposal. So I think you are stating quite the opposite of the truth in claiming this is "pushing a point of view that is ill considered ...". Further, to respond to Slowking4, the proposed LP page (that is now labeled with (draft)) WAS edited after the RFC to try to reflect the concerns raised there. I won't urge people to spend their time on it if they don't have "the luxury of time" for it, but a few more points of view looking at it (and the history of edits) would probably be helpful. I think it is a reasonable policy as it stands right now. Feel free to add your thoughts on the talk page, or edit the draft if you see something obvious to change. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
i for one am weary of the constant "assume good faith" in response to negative feedback. i see little AGF in "repeated or egregrious incidents by a user may lead to blocks." it is the same old battleground gatekeeping, that has not and will not work. i see no mention of quality improvement of BLP data; apparently that is not a concern. but it's all good, let's engage in the rules-sclerosis that has brought editor decline to english. the grumblers can move on to more friendly wikis. Slowking4 (talk) 14:12, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
A policy that is unworkable is unreasonable. That has nothing to do with good faith. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 14:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@GerardM, Slowking4: I am trying to "assume good faith" on your parts here, but it sure looks like you did NOT read my reply. To be briefer: GerardM appeared to be accusing Andy Mabbett of "pushing" a policy, when in fact what Andy was trying to do was make it less visible, to hide it, not push it. That is the AGF issue I was pointing out. As to whether this proposed policy is "unworkable" or the warnings about penalties are unreasonable, both of you have previously commented on the talk page for the proposed policy, and yet neither of you have raised these specific issues there. That would be the place for a reasonable discussion and an attempt to come to consensus on this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:03, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: Making accusations of no assumed good faith IS an hostile act. When Andy pulls a Pallas Athena by not addressing vital arguments put forward in a previous attempt to a policy, it is manipulation by bandwidth. My proposal is straight forward, delete this goddess and address the issues first. Then we have a way of dealing with BLP that is workable. Andy has this motto: "talk to me" .. it is hard to talk with him. He is available only when it fits him. Thanks GerardM (talk) 05:52, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
@GerardM: "pulls a Pallas Athena"? "manipulation by bandwidth"? "Delete this goddess"? "address the issues first"? I really have no idea what you are talking about. If you think a page should be deleted, add the delete template to it. If you think issues should be addressed, how does one do that without expressing it via RFC or policy proposals or some other community consensus process? In any case, I don't think this is the place to discuss this further, but I'm happy to discuss with you in plain language on the talk page of the draft proposal or another appropriate place if you have something else in mind. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:19, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
pallas athena as in autochthonic (i see classics are not your forte) - these are 2 disputatious editors; your intervening in their dispute is biased. if you really want civility enforcement, then you need to do it in an unbiased manner. i look forward to your NPOV application of civility. Slowking4 (talk) 16:00, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

It would be amusing, were it not so troubling, to see people presuming to speak for my motivations without bothering to ask me what they are.

I was neither promoting nor hiding, nor indeed expressing any view whatsoever on, the draft policy. My aim was simply to give prominence to the WMF resolution, which does have current standing.

Furthermore, as I noted in my original post in this section, I was at pains to ensure that the draft policy remains easily accessible, by linking to it prominently from the original page. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:13, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

We have discussed the resolution at length and there is no reason to pull on a dead horse. As it is, it is completely unworkable and with the unrealistic Wikipedia attitude added prominence only muddles the waters. Only when we start to talk on how we can realistically improve quality including BLP quality will we make progress. As it is, Wikipedia has its own problems. Their current attempt at an RFC is only directed outward and makes demands on others while at the same time refusing to look at their own BLP performance. Together we can do better but this "daft" is only fanning the flames. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 13:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
User:Pigsonthewing, i appreciate your attempts to mediate here. however, notice how you were treated at the english drama board. from that discussion, i conclude, for them, it is not about a quality improvement process, but about maintaining power relationships about who controls content; it is not collaboration: it is dictation. seeking to import here, the same old adversive methods from english will not increase quality. the spectacle of reverting wikipedia data just because it was copied to wikidata and transcluded back would be funny, if it weren't so sad. rather let's talk about quality circles to improve wikidata, and a teahouse to respond to BLP issues, and drop the talk of blocks. you can already block editors for disruption. that is a policy i could support. Slowking4 (talk) 14:12, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
I hope you are wrong, but fear you may be right. I'm not aware that I have been "talking about blocks", though. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
None of which appears to have anything to do with the edit I made. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:55, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

male

Is there any way that Q6581097 (male human gender) can be at the top of the list when I type in "male" instead of Q44148 (male organism)? 50% of all biographies must have the gender chosen, so it should appear first. There must be much fewer male organisms like a bull or a steer. I know that the human gender is a subcategory of male organism. Are they sorted by Q-number or by the number of times used? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 00:00, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Have you ever tried to edit in another language than English? I am not saying that we do not have this kind of problem in other languages, but I guess they are less problematic. "My" label for male organisme is "hane" and the label for male human is "man". I can accidently mix these two with other items, but never with each other. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 05:34, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
The sorting there is indeed right now unfortunate because we have few criteria we can take into account for the scoring. Stas is currently working on moving this search to a different system that will be considerably more powerful. Then we can tweak things like this much better. This should happen within the next two months. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 10:56, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Q25513935

Swedish citizen + 18+ years old + sometime in the past lived in Sweden (Q25513935) what do you think about this item? --Bigbossfarin (talk) 12:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Community forums

In addition to on-wiki discussion pages, members of the Wikidata community use a number of other forums, such as mailing lists, and Facebook groups. I have created Wikidata:Community forums to list these.

Please feel free to expand and translate it; and can someone add the relevant IRC channel(s)? And add a link to it, from Wikidata:Community portal? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Military leader

I have chairperson (P488), officeholder (P1308) and corporate officer (P2828) available if I want to add the name of the commander of an Army. But first, is it ment that military formation should have a property who identifies the leader at a given time. And if so do anyone have any opinion what to use? Breg --Pmt (talk) 15:10, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Using commander of (P598) on the commander seems the best approach. I don't think there's a reciprocal property. Andrew Gray (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@ Andrew Gray: Thank you very much. I was not aware of that item. And then Mark A. Milley (Q6766465) as commander of (P598) Chief of Staff of the Army and with Paul J. Selva (Q16776319) as corporate officer (P2828) (person who holds a specific position) as Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But I do suspect that commander of (P598) will be to narrow for the purpose of lower position in an army organization. Breg --Pmt (talk) 17:59, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
sorry I hink the above came out wrong. Breg Pmt (talk) 18:05, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Mark A. Milley (Q6766465) with position held (P39):Chief of Staff of the United States Army (Q783785) or Paul J. Selva (Q16776319):position held (P39):Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (Q2916001) would be a better way to represent this - they hold those specific named positions. commander of (P598) is better for a generic commander of a specific unit - so Paul J. Selva (Q16776319):commander of (P598):United States Transportation Command (Q1499989). Andrew Gray (talk) 18:25, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
@ Andrew Gray: Yes. So I may conclude. What is needed is the resiprocal of commander of (P598) like Commander. Any guess if that will survive a property proposal? If the proposal will not be done, most likely officeholder (P1308) have to be used. Breg Pmt (talk) 18:36, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Places a language is spoken in?

I notice that entities about languages generally don't contain any information about where the language is spoken. Is this by design? Wikipedia and Wiktionary both currently categorise languages by where they are spoken, so why isn't this included in Wikidata? CodeCat (talk) 16:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi CodeCat the only reason explaining why it is not included is because nobody did it (it has been done for Northern Sami (Q33947) for example). If Wikipedia already stores this king of information, it could probably be imported. Note that there are some questions about that. For example, where English is spoken? The same for French? Ethnologue gives an answer for that (see English). If you are interested by this topic, we could start a discussion on the WikiProject Languages. Pamputt (talk) 17:46, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
Thank you for your explanation. If we want to include it, we'd probably want to make some sort of distinction between native and second-language speakers. We may also want to include where a language is currently spoken versus where it was formerly spoken. I'm still pretty new to Wikidata so I'll let someone else assess how to best do this and let them create the appropriate properties. CodeCat (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
@CodeCat: Re native vs second-language speakers, this is usually indicated by the qualifier applies to part (P518) first language (Q36870) / second language (Q125421). Re currently vs formerly spoken, use qualifier point in time (P585) to show time period. --Yair rand (talk) 21:42, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
Should be in Wikidata.
But I think number of speakers is each country is more useful: how many and where. d1g (talk) 17:48, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
We may not always have this information. For example, how many people spoke Gothic? We'll probably never even have an estimate of that. Wikipedia says it was spoken in Spain, Portugal, Italy, Romania, France, Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Russia and Ukraine at various times during its history. Of course we should include number of speakers if we have that information, but we should structure the data so that it's not required to know this and one can also say only that it was spoken in some place. CodeCat (talk) 17:55, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm working on disaster response and in this context interested in the reverse information — languages spoken in a given area — in order to facilitate choosing languages to work on/ contact translators about etc. in response to a given event. Having the "Places a language is spoken in" at hand would be very useful for that. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:20, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
Sounds to me like we need a new property that means "native language of residents" (better label?) that attaches to a place and can be qualified with the number of speakers where known. - PKM (talk) 20:23, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
I'm not sure how to combine that with Yair Rand's suggestion to indicate nativeness and time spoken with qualifiers, though. Would this be a possible use case for the "some value" type to indicate that there is a value, but we don't know it? CodeCat (talk) 22:13, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
@PKM: I agree that P17 and P131 are not intended for use in languages. --Infovarius (talk) 21:57, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Editathon at the Internet Archive

The Internet Archive holds an editathon next Saturday, September 23rd -- 10:30am to 5pm PT It will be at Internet Archive, 300 Funston San Francisco. It would be wonderful when Wikidata people find an opportunity to go.

Currently their Open Library data for authors links to Wikidata and VIAF. The publications, many of them are freely licensed or just free, typically have one or more references like ISBN-10 or a link to the Library of Congress. Their big challenge is to disambiguate and merge their data. Because of the available links to external sources this is largely a data job.

They are quite happy to share all their data with us. For us it is an opportunity because it is key of bringing the OL and IA content to our readers. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:52, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

radiation

The current entry for radiation (Q18335) describes it as "waves or particles propagating through space or through a medium, carrying energy". Here's the situation: Wikiversity description, "an action or process of throwing or sending out a traveling ray in a line, beam, or stream of small cross section" and Wiktionary definition, "The shooting forth of anything from a point or surface, like diverging rays of light". While Wikiversity and Wiktionary are in essential agreement, neither agrees with Q18335 which makes the word radiation synonymous with waves or particles. We've run into this before. Sometimes we go with specifics, which here might mean radiation is used as a synonym for waves or particles propagating and radiations is used for the action or process of throwing, sending or shooting anything. Thoughts? --Marshallsumter (talk) 00:46, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

(Speaking as a physics professor in real life). There are indeed two meanings of the world - radiation as electromagnetic waves (e.g. electromagnetic radiation or synchrotron radiation) for which the Wikidata definition is perfect, and radiation as process (A rasiates B, e.g. intensive radiation). I do not quite understand the definition of Wikiversity but Wiktionaty seems to me to describe the process. It could be of course situations when it is difficult to discriminate - for example, Cherenkov radiation are electromagnetic waves emitted by electrons moving faster than the speed of light - both process and object are important.--Ymblanter (talk) 17:23, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Art collections: inventory number (P217) with Qualifier collection (P195), or catalog code (P528) with Qualifier catalog (P972)

I have never used those properties, and the concept seems very similar. So which one to use for items about elements of art collections? Why so? Thanks for help, MisterSynergy (talk) 06:56, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

It is quite simple really. A catalogue in art terms, is a book written by an art historian and printed on paper, and a collection refers to a set of items (usually owned by an institution such as an art museum and assigned an inventory number, that may or may not be displayed for the items on show). See also this discussion: Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2017/Properties/1#inventory number (P217). Jane023 (talk) 08:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
I knew you were going to respond :-) Thanks a lot, very clear now after reading the property deletion request linked by you: inventory number (P217) with qualifier collection (P195) is what I am supposed to use in my project. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:35, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Good luck with your project! If you get stuck on how to model paintings, you can always look up a famous one. This one: The Night Watch (Q219831) has been moved from collection to collection and catalogued multiple times. Jane023 (talk) 08:56, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jane023: and @MisterSynergy: According to the above, is it then correct to put into inventory number (P217) The Night Watch (Q219831) as a Wikidata property example (P1855) like I have done? Breg --Pmt (talk) 10:14, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
No, in this case not. The painting is the property of the city of Amsterdam and is technically in both collections, though the location is in fact a purpose-built gallery, also located in Amsterdam within one of the two museums. An accession number is a different entity entirely and should not be used in this context at all. So to correct it, the second entry should be like the first. Such constructions are common in large national museums (e.g. Louvre or Tate). Jane023 (talk) 10:26, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jane023: By that you mean that there should be two entries one for Rjiksmuseum and one for Amsterdam museum, but with SA 7392 as inventory number (P217) or. Btw what is an accession number? If possible can you correct Wikidata property example (P1855) to indicate? Breg Pmt (talk) 11:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Done. Jane023 (talk) 11:53, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jane023: Thank you very much. I am learning Face-smile.svg, and hoping that I am not aking to much about details. Just for the sake of good order. What is the diffence between Revisjon per 17. sep. 2017 kl. 10:07 and 17. sep. 2017 kl. 11:50‎? Except from the references. Breg Pmt (talk) 12:14, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

I removed accession number (Q1417099). Jane023 (talk) 12:20, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
@Jane023: My apologies. I did not read your changes good enough. --Pmt (talk) 14:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Reparations Agreement between Israel and West Germany (Q660521)

I have added many properties and items in Reparations Agreement between Israel and West Germany (Q660521). I would like to have opinions on my editions. On this page or preferably on the items discussion page. Breg Pmt (talk) 01:28, 18 September 2017 (UTC)