Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2019/06

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Contents

Count of Chinchón

Hello, I usually work on Wikipedia, but I am not familiar with Wikidata. I am trying to link the English and Spanish version of an article, but I get an error on both of them, saying another element is using the link. Can someone help me understand? These are the two languages for the same content: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Count_of_Chinch%C3%B3n https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condado_de_Chinch%C3%B3n Thank you --Megustalastrufas (talk) 13:58, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@Megustalastrufas: I didn't read thoroughly, but it looks like there's an item for both the territory (County of Chinchón (Q5176754)) and the head of county title (Count of Chinchón (Q59386869)). The English article looks like it discusses the title and is correctly associated with that item. I can't read Spanish so will leave that one in your hands. --SilentSpike (talk) 16:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Looks like we've ended up with two items for that. English and Russian are using Count of Chinchón (Q59386869); Spanish, Catalan, and German are using County of Chinchón (Q5176754). These should be merged. - Jmabel (talk) 17:02, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • thanks, that is correct. I have tried merging, but I get Error#1. In spanish "Condado" describes both the Title (Conde) and the Territory (Condado) as they were indistinguishable, and the "Conde" page is redirected to "Condado". I have tried to link the "Count" to the "Conde" but it won't let me either.Megustalastrufas (talk) 17:09, 1 June 2019 (UTC) and @SilentSpike: see above, I noticed your intermediate edit.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 17:12, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, I've restored it with this. I'm not convinced the items should be merged. While "Condado" may describe both concepts, wikidata requires two items for two different entities (a physically defined territory vs a title). --SilentSpike (talk) 17:22, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I see your point. What about linking "Count" to "Conde", which at the moment redirects to "Condado"? I have tried it but got an error.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 17:34, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
  • The other problem is that there is no "County" page in English, the "Count" describes the title and the dominion. I am going to create a redirect page, of that's ok.--Megustalastrufas (talk) 17:39, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I think I have solved it, Thanks!!--Megustalastrufas (talk) 18:08, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:57, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Merge two data sets

Hello there people who can hopefully help me!
I'm working on open movies by the Blender Foundation. I noticed that there are two entries for their latest shortfilm "Spring" (Q62770443 and Q63242924). Is there an easy way to merge them or do you have to copy the information by hand one by one?
Thanks for the information --D-Kuru (talk) 14:18, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

@D-Kuru: If you check out the gadgets page you can enable a merge script which adds the option under "More" at the top right of the item page. --SilentSpike (talk) 16:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the info! --D-Kuru (talk) 08:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
✓ Done --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:40, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
I actually was hoping that I could merge it myself so that I know how the tool works. But at least they are merged. --D-Kuru (talk) 08:27, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
This section was archived on a request by: Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:57, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

maths projects

I was assigned to make a design a mathematical project at school and I need help  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

This section was archived on a request by: Try w:Wikipedia:Reference desk/Mathematics. --- Jura 23:43, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Ranks

Are there ranks which shows pages with most number of labels, descriptions and other names? Eurohunter (talk) 13:38, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@Eurohunter: User:Pasleim/Language_statistics_for_items I hope this is what you need. Kpjas (talk) 13:57, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Kpjas: I mean rank for Wikidata items. Eurohunter (talk) 20:32, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: Not sure if User:Pasleim/Sitelink statistics helps you or not. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:16, 29 May 2019 (UTC)
@Liuxinyu970226: I'm looking for list which will show me that Donald Trump item has 105 interwiki and it's 15th article with most interwiki or article Japan has 100 descriptions and it's 37th article with most descrptions. Eurohunter (talk) 08:52, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

The new metadata tags that connect Wiki Commons to Wikidata when you upload

How do I edit them, where are they stored? Is their a guide online with FAQs? --RAN (talk) 22:21, 30 May 2019 (UTC)

See video. Wikicommon is an en:Wikibase installation that can access all wikidata objects. Next step I guess will be
  • use depict on part of a picture
  • get a en:SPARQL query interface -> you can ask for all paintings with a person that is als mentioned by a source xxxx see tests we have done on Wikidata tweet
-Salgo60 (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Everything has been documented on Commons. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:55, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Finding items with no statements

Just wondering if there's a way to find items with no or few statements as I'm interested in improving such cases (or even just items with no instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279)). --SilentSpike (talk) 17:04, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

SilentSpike: Thanks for offering to help. Items without statements are usually deleted as they don't contain data. There is a tool that displays those items, but it's currently deactivated. There is also the tool Label, no instance of, that shows items that have a label with a certain pattern, but no 'instance of' statement. Esteban16 (talk) 23:37, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

40 EASD Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes : Munich, Germany, 5-9 September 2004 (Q56836084) too big ?

40 EASD Annual Meeting of the European Association for the Study of Diabetes : Munich, Germany, 5-9 September 2004 (Q56836084) seems to be too big for the WD interface and Quickstatements. They hardly can handle. The problem apparently is the sheer number of author strings (that is: almost 5500). FYI if your web browser or QS abruptly stalls. Kpjas (talk) 09:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

This is not so much an article as essentially conference proceedings published as a special issue of the journal. Were it not for the somewhat baffling editorial choice of publishing it as a single-"article" issue, it would not have an item (or the item would be an even for the conference itself). Circeus (talk) 12:29, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

I know how this sounds but ...

I am doing a search for "Röven", looking for a place in central Sweden. But in the result-list, I get a lot of results related to "Roven". They are not at all interesting to me, since Ö and O are not closer related to each other in Swedish than B and F are in a random language. Imagine looking for "Berlin" and you get Ferlin (Q36913698) as the top result. That is how life can be for us who search for things with non-ascii-letter. Wikidata can do better! Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 17:53, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

For what it's worth, if you include the quotation marks - so search for "Röven" rather than Roven - it seems to restrict the results to the Ö character, rather than including O. So it's possible to get around the search problem this way. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
BTW: The word "röven" in Swedish means nothing else than "the ass". About the search feature, I get angry again and again due to searching engines trying to "help" me by aggressively replacing the string I intend to search by something else totally useless for me. Am I the only idiot not appreciating such "help"? Taylor 49 (talk) 21:59, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, and we have an item about a Swedish lake with this name. This stand up comedian has made a thing about a populated place in Hälsingland with this name. I am trying to find this place. I am not familiar with the ethomology of this word. But if there really is a populated place with this name, I doubt it has anything to do with "the ass". That could be true about the lake, but not very likely about the populated place. I see "Röven" mainly being used about "the ass" in southern Sweden. Not so much up here in the north. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 06:50, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
There is even a village called Fucking, unfortunately not located in Scandinavia. BTW, I added some description to the ass (Röven). Taylor 49 (talk) 19:55, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

P1420 Taxon Synonym constraint

Just working with this, I realize there should probably be a constraint, or at least warning that prevents you from setting a taxon name to be a synonym of itself, which is currently allowed. I can't think of a use case for a name to be its own synonym.--CanadianCodhead (talk) 18:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

I proposed this to be a general constraint. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:03, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposal to merge Q6477998 and Q6182656 "high-use-high-risk"

Q6477998 and Q6182656 ... seems to be same thing with 2 names. Taylor 49 (talk) 21:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

We can't merge anything with two pagelinks to the same project, and it seems many WPs have both a "high risk" and "high use" template, so we'll always need seperate items. English and many other big projects just use one template, but see eg af:Sjabloon:Hoë gebruik and af:Sjabloon:Hoë risiko; vi:Bản mẫu:Sử dụng nhiều & vi:Bản mẫu:Nguy hiểm cao. Andrew Gray (talk) 22:00, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
@Andrew Gray: To see is not the same as to understand. I can't inspect "af" or "vi". I dislike the fact that many wikies have only one "high-use-high-risk" warning template linked randomly to one of the items above. Is there an other way to fix this mess? What about brewing a new item "high-use-high-risk" and switching some wikies to it? Taylor 49 (talk) 20:01, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Help

Are there admin online ? Hveard1ryder is a vandal to block ASAP !!!! OT38 (talk) 20:55, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

This section was archived on a request by: --Roy17 (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Query performance is a thing again

Hoi, the lag of the Query service is truly bad. I have no jobs running, I have jobs waiting to be run. What is happening, what is the plan? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

The lag is now an hour.. GerardM (talk) 10:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
And it was so great for several weeks, I thought the problems had been fixed! I'm not running any updates at all right now - in fact Quickstatements batches are basically frozen (only 1 running job rather than the usual 16). No idea what could be causing this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 11:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
User:Edoderoobot is editing at a rate of 250+ edits per minute. It started doing that around the same time the Query Service lag started going up. (Pinging bot-owner @Edoderoo:). --Shinnin (talk) 12:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Well, there has been a big update from Magnus but inherently nothing has changed. What is the plan? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 11:41, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
You can add [1] to your dashboards to see where problems come from... --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
There is nothing I can do. My question is "what is the plan" with over 5 hours of lag, it has never been this bad. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 19:57, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
The plan is to integrate the WDQS lag into the maxlag parameter. That would slow down all (bot policy compliant) bots and batch editing tools once certain thresholds are passed, without requiring bot or tool maintainers to change their code. Details in phab:T221774. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:02, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
That is not a plan that is a restriction. It is easy to see that more edits are wanting to be done than the current infrastructure allows for. What is the plan? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 00:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
It may be a restrictive plan, but it nevertheless is a plan. It is actually "the plan" to my knowledge, as I don't know of any other efforts to mitigate the problem. You may not like it, and I do not like it as well as a standalone solution, but this is where we are. I also think we cannot expect WMF/WMDE to provide unlimited edit capabilities. (Btw. I am not involved in finding a solution to the problem.) —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:16, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Hoi, unlimited edit capabilities is as important as the current "unlimited query capabilities". My point is very much that a bit of transparancey is in order. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:11, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Tapissier etc.

The two senses of tapissier, tapicero (English “upholsterer” and “tapestry weaver”) were tangled together. I think they are sorted now, but if you can check languages you know other than English and French to be sure, and disambiguate where necessary, that would help. These are upholsterer (Q23754740) and Q21820569. I am especially uncertain about non-Latin alphabets here. Thanks! - PKM (talk) 06:28, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #367

A proposal for WikiJournals to become a new sister project

Over the last few years, the WikiJournal User Group has been building and testing a set of peer reviewed academic journals on a mediawiki platform. The main types of articles are:

  • Existing Wikipedia articles submitted for external review and feedback (example)
  • From-scratch articles that, after review, are imported to Wikipedia (example)
  • Original research articles that are not imported to Wikipedia (example)

Proposal: WikiJournals as a new sister project

From a Wikipedian point of view, this is a complementary system to Featured article review, but bridging the gap with external experts, implementing established scholarly practices, and generating citable, doi-linked publications.

Please take a look and support/oppose/comment! T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 03:52, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

One possible element relevant to wikidata (other than the obvious wikidata integration possibilities) could be peer review of sets of wikidata properties. For example getting external peer review of whether the Drug interactions (P769) property set is up to date, and what references should support any additions. T.Shafee(evo&evo) (talk) 23:57, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
Agree - I think we need to be better communicate and care of quality see some thoughts about sources T222142 - Salgo60 (talk) 12:47, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

scientific journal (Q5633421) - subject and/or field of work

  1. What is the correct/recommended usage of field of work (P101) and main subject (P921) for scientific journals?
  2. What are the sources for the above-mentioned properties that can be used in references for these statements ?

John Vandenberg (talk) 09:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC) Aubrey (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Micru (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC) DarTar (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC) Randykitty (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC) Maximilianklein (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC) Mvolz (talk) 08:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy 22:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC) Mattsenate (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC) author  TomT0m / talk page JakobVoss (talk) 14:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC) Mahdimoqri (talk) 08:04, 5 April 2018 (UTC) Jsamwrites Dig.log Sic19 (talk) 22:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Nomen ad hoc Pete F (talk) 99of9 Mfchris84 (talk) 09:02, 26 November 2018 (UTC) Runner1928 (talk) 17:22, 1 December 2018 (UTC) Wittylama (talk) 09:55, 22 December 2018 (UTC) Jneubert (talk) 07:30, 22 February 2019 (UTC) --Juandev (talk) 20:28, 27 April 2019 (UTC) VIGNERON (talk) Uomovariabile (talk to me) 08:46, 24 June 2019 (UTC) SilentSpike (talk) Ecritures (talk) Tfrancart (talk) Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Periodicals Mattsenate (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Mitar (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Mvolz (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Merrilee (talk) 13:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Pharos (talk) 14:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
DarTar (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
HLHJ (talk) 09:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Micru (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
JakobVoss (talk) 12:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 09:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Abecker (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Mike Linksvayer (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Kopiersperre (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan Dugan (talk) 21:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hfordsa (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Runner1928 (talk) 03:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Pete F (talk)
econterms (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Sj (talk)
author  TomT0m / talk page
guillom (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
·addshore· talk to me! 17:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Ainali (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Shani Evenstein (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Skim (talk) 07:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
PKM (talk) 23:19, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Ocaasi (talk) 22:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Trilotat Trilotat (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
NAH
Iwan.Aucamp
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Source MetaData

Kpjas (talk) 08:36, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@Kpjas: For medical articles there are MeSH terms. MeSH terms get applied by professional human reviewers to the articles. For every other field of study we have no sources, and any wiki editor can apply tags. Probably in the future, 5-10 years?, the source of this information will be machine learning algorithms.
"Field of work" is broad, like "chemistry", "medicine" "anthropology". Main subject should typically be 1-5 terms which are like Library of Congress Subject Headings (Q1823134).
This is all new. We do not have documentation on a process. Blue Rasberry (talk) 11:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@Bluerasberry: thank you for your comment. I really meant scientific journals but scientific articles are also very much in the area of my interest. As for scientific articles I'd look into keywords that form a part of PMID abstracts (XML format is readily machine readable, main subject can be inferred). Kpjas (talk) 11:48, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I never really considered this. I think I'd tend to do for field of work (P101) for journals, but main subject (P921) for articles (I was already doing the later, though not the former). The question is really how specific one should get with field of work (P101), I think. Take Taxon (Q2003024), Frontiers in Plant Science (Q27723840), The Plant Cell (Q3988745) and Phytoneuron (Q15314455); they are all indubitably botanical journals, but are interested in very different things! Circeus (talk) 00:05, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Obviously false statement, with reference

Speaking of Dave Van Ronk (Q1173376): we have several good sources that agree about his death date, but we also cite one that gives a date 10 days later. I just added one that should settle the matter for any reasonable person: a New York Times obituary that predates the later date.

May I assume that in the circumstances we should deprecate the obviously false date? - Jmabel (talk) 04:06, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

I'd say so, a typical use of deprecation. Ghouston (talk) 04:52, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
with qualifier reason for deprecation (P2241) = error in referenced source or sources (Q29998666) Jheald (talk) 17:24, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
+1. Keeping the incorrect data flagged as deprecated helps prevent other editors from "correcting" back to the incorrect value. See Jane Austen (Q36322) date of death (P570) for reference. ElanHR (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Quickstatements batches have completely frozen

I'm not entirely sure what's happened, but please be aware Quickstatements "batch" option is currently not functional - no batches are running. You can queue up a batch of updates, but it will have to wait until whatever the problem is gets cleared up. See the "last batches" page for details - nothing in "Running" state has actually done anything for about 3 hours now. @Magnus Manske: anything you can tell us? ArthurPSmith (talk) 11:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Looks like Magnus has brought it down for a security fix? At least from this tweet. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:09, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Magnus did a security update to his software, it had nothing to do with performance. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 10:35, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Magnus posted on his blog what the problem was: Bad credentials, and the solution. Things are (mostly) back to normal - I think the queue is still shorter than it was a couple of weeks back, but things are at least running and starting to catch up. Thanks Magnus for keeping this running! ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:35, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
    • The problem seems to have returned with a vengeance...what happened on 4 June at 23:09 UTC? Mahir256 (talk) 04:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Q361593 and Q3349703

Should police officer (Beamter) (Q361593) and police officer (Q3349703) be merged? --RAN (talk) 23:10, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

They should probably both be merged into police officer (Q384593)... Scs (talk) 01:17, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
The second one cannot. it's a problem because english uses "officer" as the gender neutral for a policeman/woman, but police officer (Q3349703) refers to literal, actual officers i.e. rank lieutenant and higher. I have changed its english description accordingly (it is not ambiguous in French). That police officer (Beamter) (Q361593) also has a different de: link than police officer (Q384593) hints that it may be in a similar situation, but I cannot tell whether it should be merged with police officer (Q3349703) as I speak neither German nor Lithuanian. Circeus (talk) 02:02, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Even more confusing, there is police officer (Q384593) and the last three digits are the same with police officer (Beamter) (Q361593). If it is actually proven that these should all exist, each of these should have a different from (P1889) statement to inform folks these should be distinct. -- Fuzheado (talk) 04:13, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
As explained police officer (Q3349703) is completely different from the 2 other items. For police officer (Beamter) (Q361593) and police officer (Q384593), the difference is due to the difference in German language, but this difference is not clear for me. We need a German speaker to explain the difference between these 2 definitions:
  • Der Begriff Polizist ist ein Oberbegriff für bestimmte Amtsträger
  • Der Begriff Polizeibeamter ist ein Oberbegriff für bestimmte, bei den Polizeien tätige Amtsträger
Snipre (talk) 07:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
"Polizeibeamter" is a policeman that's a "Beamter". There's an item Beamter (Q16258947) for that concept. There are a lot of legal consequences of a person having the status of being "Beamter" that don't exist the same way in other countries. ChristianKl❫ 11:28, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: Thank you for your comment, but I think this doesn't help to understand the difference. First thing to define is the relation between Polizist and Polizeibeamter: are all Polizeibeamter Polizist or the inverse ? Then is the Beamter definition only specific to Germany ? Because this is a general term used in Switzerland and in Austria, and from what I know all police officers (Polizist) in Switzerland are de facto Beamter. But even if the difference exists in Germany, then the german definitions should be more clear than what is currently available in the german articles. Snipre (talk) 12:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I think "polizist" is the broad class of law enforcement (it's essentially a list article right now on de:), and Polizeibeamter is a very specific subclass, much like is the case with the French "officier de police" in contrast to regular "policier". I think the interwiki for polizist should go to the "most popular" item and a new one be created for the specific status of polizeibeamter.
De: is usually less granular than most wikis, so it's kind of a surprise to run into this situation. Circeus (talk) 23:51, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Austria has a similar system of government and also has "Beamte". The interwiki-links shouldn't point to Polizeibeamter from the article about policemen in other countries. Polizeibeamter should be an item that subclasses Polizist and also subclasses Beamter (Q16258947). In practice most of the police in Germany are Polizeibeamter but there are cases where at the municipal level you have people who are police but not Polizeibeamter. ChristianKl❫ 17:49, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Q59310699

Why is it not allowed to have a label in another language then Hungarian for Q59310699? My edits get reverted over, and over, and over, again. Edoderoo (talk) 05:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Seems like you and User:Tacsipacsi are in some sort of edit war. Did the two of you discuss among each other? Lymantria (talk) 05:37, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@Edoderoo, Lymantria: Sorry for not discussing earlier. The problem with your edit was that the label was in English (probably you just copied the English label). I’m not sure to which extent should toponyms be translated, but a Dutch label should certainly not use English (except where English is an official language, of course, but Hungary not not a such country). “Göncz Árpád városközpont”, “Göncz Árpád-buurt” and “Árpád Göncz-buurt” are all acceptable for me as a Dutch label, so thank you for choosing one of them. (I would have corrected it right away if I’ve spoken Dutch, but sadly I speak only English and German, which is usually enough to understand Dutch, but not enough to make sure I don’t write anything that doesn’t make sense in Dutch.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 11:18, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

citing a Wikidata item in es.wikipedia.org

Is it feasible to cite a Wikidata item in es.wikipedia.org? If yes, how?

Two years ago I started trying to translate the French or English language Wikipedia on Julia Cagé into Spanish. I quit, because I could not master the citation template in Spanish. I've had the impression that I should be able to create a Wikidata item in one language and use that in any language. Sadly, I cannot figure out how to do that. I just created a Spanish-language Wikipedia article on her, but it's currently only a stub.

Thanks, DavidMCEddy (talk) 03:34, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@DavidMCEddy: What do you mean by "cite a Wikidata item" ? Wikidata is not a source so you can't cite an item of WD as source, but if the statements in the item are sourced then you can extract the references from the item using the appropriate lua code.
Each Wikipedia develops different codes in lua to perform data extraction from WD and to generate the appropriate display. I don't know if WP:es was doing that job, so the best is to look at the Spanish template used to extract data from WD (see here). My Spanish is not very good but from the template, I don't see any way to extract references from WD, so better ask a development of the template in order to perform that work. WP:fr or WP:en were doing a great job for extracting data from WD, this can be used as example, see here and here.
Last thing, most wikipedias don't allow the use of data from WD in text (only in tables or infoboxes). So if you intend to use data from WD in the main text of the article, be sure this is fulfilling the requirement of WP:es. Snipre (talk) 07:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm pretty they want to use a wikidata item to fill-in a template of the Template:Citation/core (Q6925574) family, not use the item itself as the source of the statement or copy a reference that's used on WD. Circeus (talk) 23:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
In en.wikipedia.org, I routinely use something like {{cite Q|Q64357187}}, which expands into a standard citation. I had the impression that Wikidata was developed in part to make it easier for people to cite the same source in different language versions of Wikimedia projects.
My mother tongue is English, but I have multiple Spanish-language publications (which I wrote originally in Spanish). However, I've not been very active in Spanish-language Wikimedia projects, partly because I'd need to learn a completely different citation template. This is an obstacle to me doing more in Spanish-language Wikimedia projects, and I would expect it would be a similar obstacle for others. DavidMCEddy (talk) 03:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
@DavidMCEddy: WD proposes data, but this is the role of each wikipedia to developp the tools to extract and put in form the data in their articles. For WP:es, the only solution is to ask that wikipedia to developp their template to better allow the data use from WD. But here we reach the choice of each WP to use or not WD: for example, WP:fr bans the use of Q numbers directly in the wikicode, so your template {{cite Q|Q64357187}} is not available in WP:fr. Snipre (talk) 01:28, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Removal of data or other vandalism

Does anybody have a tutorial on how to revert a bunch of specific items but not others on a page? From this I tell my experience of seeing edits which remove version history data from the Minecraft data item. I'd like to only revert the data items which are related to version history data and not touch anything else. Is there any guide or tutorial which can help me do that in an easy or relatively easy way? Thank you! Ελλίντερεστ (talk) 10:48, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for taking action! I will proceed with preserving all verifiable version (P348) data I can process for the Minecraft (Q49740) item starting now Ελλίντερεστ (talk) 02:10, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Changing constraint on Title

Since we now have "suggestion" constraints. I'd like to apply this to the single-value constraint on title (P1476), which specifically states that it's a non-mandatory constraint. Since this is so widely used, I want to confirm that there are no objections to adding suggestion constraint (Q62026391) as constraint status (P2316) on the single-value constraint for title (P1476). - PKM (talk) 21:51, 25 May 2019 (UTC)

@PKM: Agree! For my sake we could even delete that constraint. --Marsupium (talk) 17:41, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
+1 - PKM (talk) 20:07, 1 June 2019 (UTC)
Changed to "suggestion constraint" per no opposition. - PKM (talk) 18:34, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Internal representation of periodic occurences

The way "day in year for periodic occurrence (P837)" is serialized in the dumps is problematic. At least in some occasion, e.g. "France (Q142), public holiday (P832), Christmas (Q19809)", the periodic occurrence is stored as a timestamp in which the year and the day fields are reversed, without any clear flagging of this exception nor how to handle it.

{
	"mainsnak":{
		"snaktype":"value",
		"property":"P832",
		"datavalue":{
			"value":{
				"entity-type":"item",
				"numeric-id":19809,
				"id":"Q19809"
			},
			"type":"wikibase-entityid"
		},
		"datatype":"wikibase-item"
	},
	"type":"statement",
	"qualifiers":{
		"P585":[
			{
				"snaktype":"value",
				"property":"P585",
				"hash":"687bc21d27ddf303b1c579d1c3c7dabf0cb217a5",
				"datavalue":{
					"value":{
						"time":"+0025-12-01T00:00:00Z",
						"timezone":0,
						"before":0,
						"after":0,
						"precision":10,
						"calendarmodel":"http:\/\/www.wikidata.org\/entity\/Q1985727"
					},
					"type":"time"
				},
				"datatype":"time"
			}
		]},
	"qualifiers-order":["P585"],
	"id":"q142$d891b18b-4dc9-cfb5-7c1d-a0d770cab590",
	"rank":"normal"
}

 – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jleblay (talk • contribs) at 02:45, June 3, 2019‎ (UTC).

Really? Our dumps translate day in year for periodic occurrence (P837) qualifiers into mangled point in time (P585) values? That seems wrong! ArthurPSmith (talk) 10:25, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
That's because this use of point in time (P585) is incorrect. The year must always be specified, otherwise the day is interpreted as year during addition. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:51, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
  • "fixed" the incorrect export ;) --- Jura 11:43, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

How to see which pages on a Wiki reference a particular item?

Is there a way to see which pages on a particular Wiki reference a particular item ?

For example, c:Template:label is increasingly widely used on image description pages on Commons to take a Q-number and provide an internationalised label, by drawing on the label for that Q-number on Wikidata.

But suppose we now wish to split the item on Wikidata -- for example, suppose we take an item like Cunninghame (Q3007561), and now wish to distinguish between the historical and the more recent territorial entities (which have different boundaries), splitting the two concepts into two different items, whereas previously the same Q-number has been used for both.

Is there an easy way to find out which pages on Commons refer to this item, to make sure that they can be updated to refer to the correct item, once the existing item is split? (Also, indeed, is there an easy way to determine whether any pages on Commons refer to a particular item, or draw from it?)

Nothing appears on the Wikidata item (there is nothing like eg at the bottom of Commons file pages, where there is a list of how the file is used globally). "What links here" just gives Wikidata pages that link to the item, not pages from other projects. Searching for "Q3007561" in the search box on Commons returns nothing relevant.

This information is held within the system somewhere, I think, because if the label on Q3007561 is changed, the system successfully propagates that change to relevant Commons pages. But is there any call or tool to allow editors to easily discover the dependence? Jheald (talk) 10:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Start with "page information" on Wikidata. There click on one of the wikis ..
There is currently a gap on Commons in regards to the new mediaentities: c:Commons_talk:Structured_data#Usage_not_visible_?. --- Jura 10:57, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
I had no idea that that was there. Thanks Jura, that's incredibly useful. Agree that it's a big concern if SDC statements aren't included. Jheald (talk) 11:36, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Earthquake damage

How (if at all) can one indicate that Alaska-Yukon-Pacific Exposition Auditorium (Q60639542) was damaged beyond repair by 1965 Olympia earthquake (Q4571985)? I presume some use of significant event (P793), but I can't fine an appropriate value. - Jmabel (talk) 05:21, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Anything wrong with cause of destruction (P770)? A has cause (P828) qualifier to dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) is also possible. Circeus (talk) 12:17, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
That will probably do.
For the future: what about if something was damaged by an earthquake, but not destroyed? - Jmabel (talk) 16:32, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus, Jmabel: The talk's page of significant event (P793) provides a list of cases. For destruction, the model is significant event (P793): destruction (Q17781833) with cause of destruction (P770) and point in time (P585) as qualifiers. Snipre (talk) 19:46, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
Then feel free to edit what I did following Circeus' instructions. - Jmabel (talk) 22:53, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jmabel: I let you add a source. Snipre (talk) 13:26, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Snipre: What on earth do you mean you let me add a source? - Jmabel (talk) 15:48, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jmabel: You created the statement defining the source of the destruction of that building as being an earthquake, I just modified the data structure. Usually when someone creates a statement, to respect the verifiability principle, a source has to be added. Snipre (talk) 18:37, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Snipre: But the way you've rearranged it seems to me to make a claim that is not true. The earthquake didn't destroy the building on 29 April 1965; as I said above, it damaged it beyond repair, causing it to be destroyed (demolished) later, by normal means of demolition. So I believe the date you have ascribed for destruction (the date of the earthquake) is wrong. That is why I didn't model it that way. The earthquake caused the destruction, but the earthquake didn't destroy it. - Jmabel (talk) 23:06, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
That's practically always the case though, buildings "destroyed" by an earthquake are generally finished off by demolition. Perhaps in theory they could have been repaired instead, but it wasn't worth it. I once edited the description on c:Category:Buildings destroyed by earthquake to say such. I think it's fair to say that buildings demolished following an earthquake (or fire) were destroyed by the earthquake, since the earthquake was the main cause of the destruction. Ghouston (talk) 02:06, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
You could also say that after the earthquake, the former building was now a ruin, and the ruin was subsequently demolished and cleared away. "Ruin" meaning the remains of a destroyed building. Ghouston (talk) 02:13, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
A well-known example of a building destroyed by fire is Grenfell Tower (Q30275013). It has yet to be demolished. Somebody has changed the item to be instance of ruins (Q109607), but then you have to wonder if having dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) set to the date of the fire is consistent. Ghouston (talk) 23:46, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

Adding food ingredient (Q25403900) to plants, animals (e.g. to the species or to polyphyletic group of organisms known by one particular common name (Q55983715))?

We are working on a research project at the University of Graz where we are dealing with cooking recipes from the Middle Ages. And my question would be if it would be ok to add instance of (P31) food ingredient (Q25403900) to taxons like Cyprinus carpio (Q81110) (carp) or even a genus of plants like Trillium (Q475629) (Birthroot)? Because there are thousands of edible plants and animals that we find in our recipes and want to indicate that they are or were used as a food ingredient. I am aware that for the popular food ingredients a differentiation was made between the species of the plant or animal and the food used from it (e.g. garlic (Q21546392) and Allium sativum (Q23400) (species "garlic")). So the other option I was thinking about was to create new items for all these foods. However, in fact in most cases we can't distinguish what was eaten from a carp = Cyprinus carpio (Q81110), so this could easily lead to redundancy. Any opinion very much appreciated! Steinerc1 (talk) 08:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC) Sebleouf
Teolemon
Vladimir Alexiev
Ash_Crow
AVRS
d1g
Dhx1
Tris T7 TT me

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Food Tobias1984 (talk) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; * *Andy's edits TypingAway (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Tinm (talk) Tubezlob Vincnet41 Netha Hussain Fractaler Tris T7 TT me

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Biology 99of9
Achim Raschka (talk)
Andrawaag (talk)
Brya (talk)
CanadianCodhead (talk)
Circeus
Dan Koehl (talk)
Daniel Mietchen (talk)
Enwebb
Faendalimas
FelixReimann (talk)
Infomuse (talk)
Infovarius (talk)
Jean-Marc Vanel
Joel Sachs
Josve05a (talk)
Klortho (talk)
Lymantria (talk)
MPF
Manojk
MargaretRDonald
Mellis (talk)
Michael Goodyear
Mr. Fulano (talk)
Nis Jørgensen
PEAK99
Peter Coxhead
PhiLiP
Andy Mabbett (talk)
Plantdrew
Prot D
pvmoutside
RaboKarbakian
Rod Page
Strobilomyces (talk)
Tinm
Tom.Reding
TomT0m
Tommy Kronkvist (talk)
Tris T7 TT me
Tubezlob
William Avery
大诺史
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Taxonomy

On which sources do you based linking recipe (Q219239) to a certain taxon (Q16521), Steinerc1? --Succu (talk) 21:15, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
We are actually not using recipe (Q219239) at all. I am just talking about any plant or animal species/genus as a instance of (P31) food ingredient (Q25403900) in addition to being an instance of (P31) taxon (Q16521). Steinerc1 (talk) 09:03, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I would propose making an item for the food ingredient with its "food name" and then linking it to its taxon with natural product of taxon (P1582) amd this taxon is source of (P1672). This is what I have done with some Medieval dyes, for example weld (Q63400101). - PKM (talk) 19:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
You could also use use (P366) = "food" on the taxon, but I don't think that is as elegant. The properties of a taxon are not the same as the properties of a food ingredient, so adding <instance of> "food ingredient" to the taxon just seems problematical to me. - PKM (talk) 19:34, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

complete and updated list of head of government (P6) for Austrian and German municipalities needed

I got a request from outside WD to provide a list of all mayors of Austrian and German municipalities. Is there a way to provide this information in a complete and (after elections) quickly updated manner through WD? Can this information be extracted from infoboxes in the German WP and be exported to WD, without requiring an extra object for each person who acts as mayor? As text only? Can this information be completed with the gender of the mayor?

Or would it be easier to extract this information from local infoboxes?

At the moment only persons with own objects can be used as value for head of government (P6).

@Jean-Frédéric, Chrispac.Mondtal:, Jean-Frédéric can you help? best regards --Herzi Pinki (talk) 20:24, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Ideally items should be created. In practice, Set them as "no value" statements and put the names in a stated as (P1932) qualifier. Circeus (talk) 06:00, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Tried this in Hinterbrühl (Q664735). In Austria we have more than 2000 municipalities, 13 of them have a mayor in WD. Municipalities do exist since 1848 and historizing mayor will yield a lot more persons, that do not have a WD item. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 08:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus, Herzi Pinki: If you do this please use unknown value Help, not no value Help! --Marsupium (talk) 13:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
@Herzi Pinki: interesting approach to add all mayors from Austrian (and German) municipalities. As Circeus mentioned ideally we should have items for all mayors, so we had the possibility to add detailed information. Unfortunately for Austria it is not easy to parse public information about mayors. (Also opendata.gv.at only knows a list of mayors in Tyrol (data.gv.at). In the following query i added also your "no value" example for Austrian municipalities:
SELECT ?Gemeinde_in__sterreich ?Gemeinde_in__sterreichLabel ?Gem_in_LandLabel ?burgamasta ?burgamastaLabel WHERE {
  VALUES ?Gem_in_Land {
    wd:Q667509
  }
  {
    ?Gemeinde_in__sterreich wdt:P31 ?Gem_in_Land;
      p:P6 ?HoG.
    ?HoG rdf:type wdno:P6;
      pq:P1932 ?burgamasta.
  }
  UNION
  {
    ?Gemeinde_in__sterreich wdt:P31 ?Gem_in_Land;
      p:P6 ?HoG.
    ?HoG ps:P6 ?burgamasta.
    OPTIONAL { ?HoG pq:P580 ?startzeitpunkt. }    FILTER(NOT EXISTS { ?HoG pq:P582 ?endzeitpunkt. })
  }
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}
ORDER BY (?burgamastaLabel)
Try it!
It isn't really hard to parse the mayor string from the appropriate infobox on German Wikipedia, we also could parse the according political party, so we get a second useful qualifier for the head of government (P6) statement. But to get a list of all _current_ mayors it should be necessary to know how to model the P6-statement correct. The best way would be having correct start time (P580) and end time (P582) qualifier (as i used it in my query above), so only the current mayor has not the endtime qualifier. On June 12, we have our second WikidataWednesday meeting at WMAT - maybe we could disscus there something about parsing and modeling this data @Jean-Frédéric:.

Merge or keep apart?

Q51458441 and The complete science of fly fishing and spinning (Q51458436) are two scans of the same book. Is the object the scan or the book? If we keep them apart we have to change the "instance of" to a scan, or something similar. Note: I just changed it to instance of:version, edition, or translation from instance of:publication. --RAN (talk) 13:25, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): They are scans of two different copies of the same book, so one approach would be to mark each of the items as being for a distinct copy of the book, with relevant location and collection information etc, with each individual copy then being an exemplar of (P1574) the edition. That also keeps the BHL, IA, and DOI identifiers apart, rather than merging everything together into a single item, which then would require qualifiers to identify which ID belonged to which scan which was of which copy. The OpenLibrary ID probably primarily belongs on the item for the edition; it might or might not be appropriate to repeat it on items for individual copies (not sure). Jheald (talk) 17:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ), Jheald:These exist only because two unmerged scans exist elsewhere at Internet Archive and BHL. We should not repeat this duplication.
Merge them and either A) mark one BHL ID as duplicate (via reason for deprecation (P2241)) or B) apply to BHL bibliography ID (P4327) the same trick that Internet Archive ID (P724) has: its single value constraint has P195 (P195) as a separator (P4155).
What a brilliant workaround! Some BHL dupes cannot be merged even by BHL b/c they are external links, so this is a great possible solution! Circeus (talk) 20:33, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
Wait, BHL bibliography ID (P4327) doesn't even have single value constraint (Q19474404)? huh... Circeus (talk) 20:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus: These are two different image-sets, each scanned from a different copy of the book. This is not uncommon. The different image-sets may have different qualities -- one may have a higher resolution; one may have had its saturation thresholded or ramped right up to turn it into black and white; one copy may be stained, or faded, or discoloured.
When there are two scan-families in the wild like this, it is useful to keep track of both -- each may have some aspects which are useful to some people, and not useful to others. Jheald (talk) 21:31, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
They are "different image sets"... is supposed to be an argument in the favor of what? I mean, I can list BHL items with multiple image sets of the same work from different collections all day! Besides, we are keeping track of both. I mean, I'm not arguing against listing both BHL ids on the merged item here!
I do not know the exact reason why the exact BHL items here are separate (BHL does have errors from time to time, and items that cannot be merged for technical rather than semantic reasons), and I do not care, nor see why we should. All that matters to me is whether these items are indeed two copies of the same actual work (and not editions or distinct versions). As far as I'm aware, BHL tries to keep equivalent scans together. In my opinion, we have no business, interest, or practical reason to perpetuate errors in other people's metadata that we can fix (I regularly have to fix incorrect titles for journal articles). As such, I will not condone keeping two scans as independent items if they are not actually different editions or versions of the work in question.
This isn't even a difficult case (I could have merged and cleaned it in 10 minutes). You want one that was actually hard to figure out? Look at Flore Lyonnaise ou description des plantes qui poussent dans les environs de Lyon et sur le Mont Pilat (Q29202517) Circeus (talk) 00:31, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
ETA: the very fact that BHL bibliography ID (P4327) does not have a single value constraint (Q19474404) seems to indicate an acknowledgement of BHL's shortcomings and that it's entirely possible that some of them will end up on the same wd: item. Circeus (talk) 04:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
There is no indication that two different individuals of this book edition are scanned. Thus I merged them. --Succu (talk) 21:05, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
BTW: There is a 2nd ed. (= The complete science of fly fishing and spinning (Q51458438) that needs some connectivity. --Succu (talk) 21:10, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

New item for redirects

de:Ferkeln and en:Piglet (animal) both cover juvenile hogs, and both are redirects to the article on the species. Is it worth creating an item for them if I'm unaware of any non-redirect entries? Note that these are different from Q23015 (en:suckling pig), which covers piglets as human food. Nyttend (talk) 22:33, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

It's de:Ferkel what is similar to calf (Q2935). Create a new item. --Succu (talk) 20:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Are Roasted suckling pig (Q43839105) and suckling pig (Q23015) about the same topic? --Succu (talk) 20:46, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
I don,t think so. One is a specific dish, the other (at least as I understand it) is about the meat itself. Circeus (talk) 22:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Property constraint declaration error

Was just looking through a bunch of constraint stuff and came across Property_talk:P39. Notice the error:

"constraint “mandatory qualifier constraint (Q21510856)” declaration error: “Too many qualifiers property (P2306)”."

The only way I know to fix this would be to add multiple of the same constraint with one for each mandatory qualifier. However, I believe that would change the intention in this case as it makes them all mandatory rather than making it mandatory to have one of the list (an AND relation rather than an OR). Is there some way the constraint itself can be updated to support that or is this just a bad constraint setup? --SilentSpike (talk) 09:47, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

problem with listeria and Q64255035

Hi,

I cannot see what is the problem that prevents Q64255035 to appear in Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top 100 painters/Paul Cézanne/Paintings, when updating.

Can someone help me please ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 20:24, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

It's in there now, under 1904s. Maybe caching or some other technical issue, since the item was recently created. Ghouston (talk) 00:51, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Hsarrazin: that list at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top 100 painters seems to be an old proof of concept version of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top creators by number of Wikipedia articles. Mont Sainte-Victoire Seen from Les Lauves (Q64255035) shows up at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Paul Cézanne. Not sure what the point is of creating a duplicate list at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top 100 painters/Paul Cézanne/Paintings. Multichill (talk) 20:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@Multichill:, 3 points here,
  1. the picture did not appear either, at the time of my question, on Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Paul Cézanne, and I did not understand why, as items created before and after it, appeared much sooner on the list (and SPARQL queries). It seems the enormous lag we sufferd on sunday was the cause of the problem :)
  2. I do not now Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top creators by number of Wikipedia articles. What is it ?
  3. I did not know, at the time I created Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top 100 painters/Paul Cézanne/Paintings, that there already was Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator/Paul Cézanne... and the project officially presents the list of Top 100 painters on the main page of the projects, and incites to create pages that do not exist yet... - moreover, the properties listed in columns are not all the same, and I needed some properties to check what data were missing (and P31 to check watercolor, etc.)
maybe a little cleaning of the structure of the project would be necessary (maybe with redirections, to avoid people creating multiple pages about the same artists ;)
thanks anyhow...initial problem solved by time :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@Hsarrazin: the stupid translation junk kept us from doing a proper overhaul of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings. That page is a mess and completely outdated. We have tons of reports in Category:WikiProject sum of all paintings that are not linked from the main page at the moment. I cleaned up most of Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Top 100 painters. Not sure if it's worth keeping in this state. Multichill (talk) 11:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Listeria has two delays: it obviously lags when query server lags. Also query server caches the result if you re-run the same query in short delays. --- Jura 12:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Finding Wikidata elements from list

I have a list of about 1,000 different names, know I want to find out which names registered as Wikidata elements. How do I make a query to perform this? --Cavernia (talk) 11:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Probably use Wikidata:Tools/OpenRefine --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm not a developer and I hoped there was a way doing this without having to install a lot of software. I don't need to wash the data, I just want to locate the elements that match the exact syntax of the names on the list. --Cavernia (talk) 15:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Understood. You can use a report like this - https://w.wiki/4iM - although I'm not sure how many items you can get into the VALUES statement before you get a timeout. OpenRefine is an app, does need installing, but it's not hugely onerous, and no more difficult to operate than a spreadsheet. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:59, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, it works fine! --Cavernia (talk) 08:24, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Limitation of IP adress or range ?

Hi,

We are giving a formation to ~25 librarians in Quebec about the query tool. We have problems with the requests and I think it's because there is a limitation for the number of requests you can ask from a single IP adress or range. Ours adress are 142.137.47.232, 142.137.43.235, 142.137.191.59, etc..
Do there is that kind of limitation and, if so, can someone can kill this limitation for about 3 hours please ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:29, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Some bureaucrat should grant you account creator or you can find some contact on m:Mass account creation#Requesting temporary lift of IP cap. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Hi,
The problem isn't the account creation but the requests done at these IP adress. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 18:32, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah, I see it's about the query tool. Meanwhile I found mw:Wikidata Query Service/Implementation#Usage constraints where these limits are documented but it doesn't mention a possibility to bypass. Perhaps some sysop on chat would help. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 18:54, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
@Simon Villeneuve: those limits are very liberal and I never managed to hit them while giving SPARQL workshops so I'm quite curious how you managed to hit them. What are you doing? Multichill (talk) 13:04, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
@Multichill:Hi,
It was only an hypothesis. Usually, I've no problem to run this query, but yesterday, it timed out when about 6-10 peoples in the room attempt to run it at the same time. When they stop to request, it runed easily.
But I can see now that it time out again today. So problably that my hypothesis is wrong. I don't understand why sometimes it work and sometimes don't. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 14:28, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Timeout isn't the same as IP usage limitations. Obviously, if multiple people try to re-run the same query multiple times you might hit such limitations. There is a general problem with queries getting more likely to time-out, see Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team#Increase_Wikidata_Query_Service_timeout. Maybe @Lydia Pintscher (WMDE): can help us sort it out.
    In general, you might not want to use a demo query with two or more "*" in it .. it's just highly likely to time out. BTW, if you run an identical query twice, the second time you just get the cached response. --- Jura 14:40, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Old Freebase Entry not transfered to Wikidata

Hello,

I got an old Freebase Entry that is not transferred from Freebase to Wikidata. How it is possible to merge them ?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Olleck93 (talk • contribs) at 8 June 2019‎ 13:15 (UTC) (UTC).

Metadata and reference unification for Economics and possibly other projects

Mcnabber091 (talk) 00:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) 10:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC) Note 1 PAC2 (talk) 09:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC) Rjlabs (talk) 20:30, 14 March 2017 (UTC) Datawiki30 (talk) 11:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC) Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC) Sidpark (talk) 09:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Economics

I believe that we need create metadata template and ensure that all statements have minimal set of informations about sources/additional informations common for all things listed at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Economics#Properties. At this moment i can see that stated in (P248) and reference URL (P854) are very common. nominal GDP (P2131) is more verbose and contain also retrieved (P813) and license (P275) Alternatively, like @Yair rand: proposed we could create separated item for every source (eg for nominal GDP (P2131) item for files from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD would be created) and use it as metadata storage.

What qualifiers are especially important? Should stated in (P248) point to eg World Bank database (Q21540096) or be more precise and point to item created for stuff from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?

After discussion we would create documentation similar to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Open#Organisations_or_projects  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 813gan (talk • contribs) at 9 May 2019‎, 00:02 (UTC).

Mcnabber091 (talk) 00:29, 18 June 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) 10:23, 8 November 2015 (UTC) Note 1 PAC2 (talk) 09:29, 26 September 2016 (UTC) Rjlabs (talk) 20:30, 14 March 2017 (UTC) Datawiki30 (talk) 11:55, 2 September 2018 (UTC) Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC) Sidpark (talk) 09:31, 2 December 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Economics @813gan, Yair rand:.--Roy17 (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Which property for different versions of story?

Aubrey
Viswaprabha (talk)
Micru
Tpt
EugeneZelenko
User:Jarekt
Maximilianklein (talk)
Don-kun
VIGNERON (talk)
Jane023 (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Alexander Doria (talk)
Ruud 23:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Kolja21
arashtitan
Jayanta Nath
Yann (talk)
John Vandenberg (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
JakobVoss
Danmichaelo (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Ravi (talk)
Mvolz (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Hsarrazin (talk) 07:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Accurimbono
Mushroom
PKM (talk) 19:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Revi 16:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Almondega (talk) 00:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
maxlath
Jura to help sort out issues with other projects
Epìdosis
Skim (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Marchitelli (talk) 12:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
BrillLyle (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Alexmar983 (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Chiara (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Thibaut120094 (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Ivanhercaz | Discusión Plume pen w.png 15:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
User:Jc3s5h
PatHadley (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Erica (ohmyerica) (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Timmy_Finnegan
Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 05:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Sam Wilson 09:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Sic19 (talk) 22:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Andreasmperu
MartinPoulter (talk) 09:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
ThelmadatterThelmadatter (talk) 01:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Zeroth (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Emeritus
Ankry
Beat Estermann (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Shilonite - specialize in cataloging Jewish & Hebrew books
Elena moz
Oa01 (talk) 10:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Maria zaos (talk) 11:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Wikidelo (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Mfchris84 (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Mlemusrojas (talk) 3:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
salgo60 Salgo60 (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Dick Bos (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Marco Chemello (BEIC) (talk) 07:26, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
Harshrathod50
 徵國單  (討論 🀄) (方孔錢 💴) 14:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Alicia Fagerving (WMSE)
Louize5 (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Viztor (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
RaymondYee (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Merrilee (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Kcoyle (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
JohnMarkOckerbloom (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Tris T7 TT me
Helmoony (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Naunc1
Shooke (talk) 19:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
DarwIn (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I am Davidzdh. 16:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Juandev (talk) 10:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Buccalon (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
MJLTalk 16:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Rosiestep (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Dcflyer (talk) 12:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Susanna Giaccai (talk) 05:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Asaf Bartov (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Msuicat (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
SilentSpike (talk) 15:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
TheFireBender (talk) 12:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Jumtist (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
Irønie
Openly
DrLibraryCat (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2019 (UTC) ShawnMichael100 (talk) 20:04, 25 November 2019 (UTC) Lmbarrier (talk) 19:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Books When working on Wikisource, there are many cases, where some story/concept (e.g. from ancient Greece) was used by different authors, or opposite case - one author wrote more almost similar stories.

e.g.

Original story Q53870472 writen by Aesop (Q43423) - The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q1211051), translated to many languages
Variations from different authors, many of them also translated to different languages
Other poems inspired by story
Films inspired by story
Other work inspired

For inspired works there is property inspired by (P941), for editions there is edition or translation of (P629). But how to connect related versions? I found said to be the same as (P460), different from (P1889), see also (P1659), based on (P144) or broader concept (P4900), but none of them seems to be the one I am looking for. And sometimes there is problematic to say which concept was the first (e.g. almost similar we can find in China, Persia, Greece...)

I think, there hould be some property like "related" for connecting different but similar works. JAn Dudík (talk) 09:27, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

In this case, one can reasonably trace back to aesop in one way or another via (IMO) based on (P144) (which is the only "related to" property that is even remotely relevant here). We don't and will never have a "vaguely related to this other work" property (aside from facet of (P1269), and that's completely different in approach, obviously) because that wouldn't even be useful here anyway. I mean... you still need to put each of these items as "vaguely related to" something and, well, doesn't that just literally take you back to square one?
I wouldn't use edition or translation of (P629) unless it explicitly intends to translate one of the earliest versions purporting to be Aesop's (and even then, those should probably be attributed to their respective author, like Babrius). If you want to go broader than that, it's Aarne–Thompson–Uther Tale Type Index (P2540) or bust, I'm afraid (for this one, it's ATU 280A, in case you were wondering). Circeus (talk) 09:55, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
See for example Cinderella (Q11841): There are different written versions (Cendrillon (Q2944224) by Perrault, The Cat Cinderella (Q3822509) by Basile, Aschenputtel (Q27075957) by the brothers Grimm), each connected to the story via manifestation of (P1557) (Cendrillon (Q2944224) manifestation of (P1557) Cinderella (Q11841)) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
As I understand it, @JAn Dudík: basically wants to link back even further back than Q53870472 (i.e. to nonwestern versions too). Whether that item, currently linked to a commons category and with nothing else to it, should be independent, is also in question IMO. Actually looking at the property page for manifestation of (P1557) tells me it has no business being involved anywhere in fairy tales. Circeus (talk) 21:51, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps we need a new property ”variant of” that doesn’t imply a parent/child relationship? - PKM (talk) 01:00, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
The use of manifestation of (P1557) for fairy tales is documented at Wikidata:WikiProject_Narration and Help:Modelling/Arts#Fiction - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I didn't know about manifestation of (P1557), I can look (but this name is horrible).
But I want to know how to connect The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q3207418) with The Grasshopper & The Ants (Q28859348). Or how to connect various translations of Book of Genesis (Q9184) in one language with other books about Genesis. (@Shlomo:) JAn Dudík (talk) 16:04, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
As already stated by Circeus: The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q3207418) and The Grasshopper & The Ants (Q28859348) seem to be direct adaptations of The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q1211051) (Aesop). You can just add the statement based on (P144) The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q1211051) to both of them and connect them indirectly via The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q1211051).
My proposal was related to your last sentence ("And sometimes there is problematic to say which concept was the first"). It seemed to me that you were referring to cases where different works share the same literary theme (Q42109240) without being directly based on each other (or where this is not known). This may be the case with fixed versions of folk tales (see the Cinderella example above) or legends, etc. Here you can link from the fixed versions to the literary theme (Q42109240) (folk tale/legend/...) via manifestation of (P1557) and connect them indirectly. (One could think about creating a new property along the lines of "uses literary theme")
I don't think that a direct link between The Ant and the Grasshopper (Q3207418) and The Grasshopper & The Ants (Q28859348) is needed. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Digital Visualisation and Maps - Scottish Witches Project

Hi all, I am working as a Data Visualisation intern working with historical data related to Scottish Witches with the University of Edinburgh. The plan is to produce interactive maps and other visual aids such as timelines of events which can help visualise the data in different ways.

These are some maps which have previously been produced related to this dataset:

  • Map of places of residence for accused witches colourcoded by gender: Map1
  • Places of residence for accused witches with a layer for social class: Map2

I am wanting to produce maps that are similar with locational points but have more data and different layers. I also was not sure what would be the best platform to produce these maps such as wikidata itself or ArcGIS?

I wondered if there is anyone that would be able to give advice to help with producing maps or have experience working with historical data in a similar manner? Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks, --Emmacarroll3 (talk) 11:51, 6 June 2019 (UTC)

  • There seem to be plenty of items about Scottish witches on Wikidata, but - beyond a location - they currently lack more information, notably any date. Consequently, one can't do much of a timeline. Possibly you know that they are all in a given timeframe, so it might not be much of an issue. If you have some dates for them, you might want to add it.
What people sometimes get wrong when doing analysis with Wikidata is that a dataset on a random topic isn't necessarily exhaustive nor representative. Maybe this isn't an issue here.
If you can get some dates, you might be able to retrieve additional information about the people around the incidents or actually involved in them. General information about famine, religion, population in the time could be interesting too, but more data might need to be added first, before it can be visualized. --- Jura 22:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Andromeda and the Sea Monster, and Leda and the Swan

Andromeda and the Sea Monster, and Leda and the Swan, by Massimiliano Soldani

Hi, These sculptures were designed as pendants. The museum presents them together. Should we have one or two items for these? Regards, Yann (talk) 12:14, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

  • How about 3? --- Jura 14:15, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • (ec) Three items. One each for the individual works, which are part of (P361) an item for the pair, to support e.g. links to the Getty object number. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:17, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • … and connecting the two single ones with pendant of (P1639). --Marsupium (talk) 19:01, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

2019 FIFA Women's World Cup

Is there a way to query participants of the 2019 FIFA Women's World Cup Q4630361? note P1344 - "participant of" is not added to any of the football players. Slowking4 (talk) 03:15, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

You... kind of answered your question there? Circeus (talk) 04:02, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
i gave you the ontology, but without data entry, the query will not give reasonable results. Slowking4 (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I actually just added definitions for these categories last night (Category:2019 FIFA Women's World Cup players (Q63673661), Category:2011 FIFA Women's World Cup players (Q8200147), etc.) so I think category membership would be a good place to start if you just need a list. I believe @Ghuron: has a script to generate the associated quickstatements to apply these facts to the child Wikidata items but I'm not sure what their workflow/prioritization is. ElanHR (talk) 18:24, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Lists that aren't lists

list of Egypt in the Middle Ages (Q1779501) is a case of an item that is tagged as a "Wikimedia list article" when it's not. Many useful statements are removed because they don't apply to lists. Is there any way bots can confirm that articles are actually lists before making these changes? Even if one interwiki link in one language is a list, the linked articles may not be, and these are really hard to disentangle. It's rarely just a case of reverting on one earlier version (though this particular example may be). - PKM (talk) 21:28, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

@PKM: Wikidata is... a wiki. If the problem is the instance-of statement... why don't you just... change the instance-of statement? Is there an edit war over that statement I'm not seeing in the edit history?! Circeus (talk) 21:57, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus: That’s the easy part. It’s undoing all of the “list article” descriptions added by bot that's a nuisance, since some of them replaced perfectly useful descriptions. And it’s not all done in one pass, so there’s not just one edit to undo. I often find there are perfectly good new labels intermixed with the bot descriptions, so it becomes a forensic process on “view history”. And one really should look at all the sitelinks in case there are legitimate list articles that need a separate item. Finicky and tedious, not actually difficult. - PKM (talk) 22:50, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
FWIW, I checked all articles except for the r-t-l languages and the only (mild) outlier I found, as mentioned, was ru:. Circeus (talk) 23:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
When P31 is wrong for some sitelinks, I think the solution is to move the sitelink to an appropriate item, not to re-purpose the item. --- Jura 23:39, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
I can live with that as a best practice. Less work, I suspect.
  • Weirdly, "list article" is marked as imported from Swedish... but that item didn't have a Swedish interwiki at the time (and never has done, as far as I can see). I wonder if it was initially an error? Andrew Gray (talk) 09:06, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Yes, I think the bot that added it is known to have had problems back then. --- Jura 11:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
      • I have created a new item Egypt in the Middle Ages (Q64495056) and moved all of the sitelinks except RU to the new item. The RU article should probably be Wikimedia timeline article (Q18340550) rather than List. - PKM (talk) 18:54, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
        • It seems unfortunate to break the sitelinks between the Russian page and the others just because it has a marginally different format (given the topic is the same). It would be different if there was a Wiki that had both an article and a timeline. Ghouston (talk) 00:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
          • It seems unfortunate for Russian Wikipedia to have different content and still want sitelinks to other wikis through Wikidata. --- Jura 07:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
            • Agreed. RU article moved as well. At this point the list item has no sitelinks, so I think I should remove statements that refer to it, remove its “list” P31, and merge it into the new item. Any better plan? - PKM (talk) 18:54, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Property creation

I would like to proceed with the data import for swMATH work ID however the property has not been created. I was asking for help on IRC #wikidata several times but I didn't see any response. Where else can I get help with the property creation? --Physikerwelt (talk) 05:34, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

@Physikerwelt: I've just created it: swMATH work ID (P6830). I let you complete the property. Ayack (talk) 06:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Property extension

What is correct property for Q1454723 for person item? It also should work with Property:P1595 which should be similar to Property:P1399. Eurohunter (talk) 07:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

has effect (P1542)? It does seem odd there's no proper parallel for charge (P1595) Circeus (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Primär källa (Q112754) vandalism

I was talking with a friend and we were trying to figure out Greek words for various expressions related to primary sources and looking for primary sources and in this search we stumbled upon this item. Looking at it now, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5369651 was what that item was an instance of and then somebody(207.160.227.118) put that the item is a subclass of League of Legends https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q223341. Maybe there is more vandalism there? If you are interested take a look, I don't have so much time on this right now, we were looking for the Greek version of reliable sources. Ελλίντερεστ (talk) 12:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Start/end time

What parameter I can use to indicate certain period (one year) instead of add the same year to start/end time property? Eurohunter (talk) 17:10, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Just use the same year with start time (P580) and end time (P582) if the value isn't know with better precision. Maybe add qualifiers like earliest date (P1319) and/or latest date (P1326) or others if apropiate. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 18:12, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
@Dipsacus fullonum: Thanks Eurohunter (talk) 19:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Are there a way to block specific users and bots from my watchlist?

Normally i don't mind bots and people using QuickStatement but having my watchlist cluttered with hundreds of Added [x] label' is pretty annoying. --Trade (talk) 23:39, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

Now, it should be possible with watchlist filters, but I have never done this myself.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:42, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
If this about QuickStatements, see Help_talk:QuickStatements#Hide quickstatements from watchlist. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

Make Wikidata Q id more visible and make it shine. We should encourage usage in external sources of the Wikidata ID. But how?

Today external identifiers are exploding in Wikidata (+3900) and also MixAndMatch (+1200). Another approach is that external sources start using Wikidata Q numbers in their data ––> this will grow even faster and the "classification" will be better as the Wikidata objects will help them see possibilities is my guess.

To succeed with that the Qnumber needs to be more visible in Wikipedia articles is my thought. I suggested yesterday that the sv:Wikidata Q number should be seen in the Authority template together with VIAF/GND etc. but I guess there are better solutions. Lesson learned yesterday when started to connect SVT Open archive (P6817) that is Swedish old TV shows I realized rather soon that it would be much better quality if they started to think Wikidata objects when classifying. So I think this is a win win. Any thoughts? Salgo60 (talk) 07:44, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

It's not the Wikidata community that you need to persuade but those of each separate Wikipedia.
That said, what currently appears in the sidebar of (for example) each en.Wikipedia article as "Wikidata item" could instead render as, say, "Wikidata item (Q1138080)". For that you should raise a ticket on Phabricator. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:47, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I have also long thought that "Wikidata item" could be made more prominent in that sidebar by moving into the "other projects" section -- with a second link if we have not just an item but also a whole substantive wiki page here. Jheald (talk) 11:55, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
About moving the Wikidata item link out of toolbox, see this task (it's been stalled for years because of an issue that could occur when a Wikidata page would be already linked in other projects, eg. c:Help:Contents), and this task where the Basque community used a script to move the link to other projects. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 12:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Number of subscribers property

Property:P3744 is often used for number of subscribers in social media. What is the point of it if it changes probably in every hour? Eurohunter (talk) 13:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

That's what timestamps are for. Or the precision function. Why, do you think anyone would think it sane to update it hourly? Circeus (talk) 16:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus: Yes but how do you want to source it? It's probably impossible to verify if until you manualy save copy of the profile in Wayback Archive at the time. Eurohunter (talk) 16:39, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I agree this property is of debatable interest for these reasons. I guess in rare cases people might be notable only because of their number of subscribers on some platform and in that case it might be useful to document the order of magnitude, but in other cases I do not see the point. − Pintoch (talk) 09:18, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • number of subscribers (P3744) wasn't initially designed as a qualifier. I don't think its use as such is optimal, but we haven't really come up with a better solution in previous discussion. A possible solution could be more specific qualifiers, e.g. "number of subscribers in 2017", "number of subscribers in 2018", etc. --- Jura 10:20, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #368

Property:P406 (soundtrack album)

This property is for film/video game/book but what is the other way to indicate film/video game/book which soundtrack album apply to on soundtrack album item? Eurohunter (talk) 09:50, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

  • "based on"? --- Jura 10:28, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, based on (P144) looks the best bet. Jheald (talk) 11:37, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jura1: @Jheald: Thanks. Eurohunter (talk) 12:12, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Commons link should exist

Commons Creator page (P1472) of Su Shi (Q36020) has this warning, but the link does exist.--Roy17 (talk) 17:26, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

No, there is no Commons link in Su Shi (Q36020). c:Category:Su Shi cannot be added because it is linked to Category:Su Shi (Q30745776). --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 11:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Valid sources

Ursula Vernon (Q7901282) is a writer/artist that I am familiar with. The birthplace (P19) listed for her is incorrect (Pittsboro is her current residence, not her birthplace), but there is no reliable source stating her actual birthplace. What would be the best course of action to get this info corrected? Sario528 (talk) 17:31, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Based on your explanation and given that the statement has a reference, I set it to deprecated rank. --- Jura 17:38, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

citation needed constraint (Q54554025)

How I can indicate exact qualifier need source in certain items? I mean there is a lot of qualifers which need to be sourced in Hardwell (Q923731). For example genre (P136), occupation (P106), record label (P264), place of birth (P19) date of birth (P569). The only way to do it is to add citation needed constraint (Q54554025) to these properties? Then citation needed constraint (Q54554025) should be really common. Eurohunter (talk) 18:23, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

No, you're misunderstanding both the level of referencing that is reasonably expected on Wikidata and the purpose of the constraint. None of those call for anything remotely as drastic as citation needed constraint (Q54554025), which is intending to be used on property to mark those properties that inherently should be sourced (usually b/c of likelihood of controversy), such as religion (P140) and sexual orientation (P91). Circeus (talk) 18:41, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@Circeus: Only very obvious things could be left unsourced but for me it's obvious we need references otherwise all data of 57 millions elements is unreliable and useless full of false data. Eurohunter (talk) 18:49, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Summary article

How to indicate that certain article is not applicable for certain item but is a "unofficial" summary article to desribe for example two soundtracks released to game? It can't use "instance of: album soundtracK". Eurohunter (talk) 09:46, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

Instance of Wikimedia page outside the main knowledge tree (Q17379835). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:49, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: I mean article instead of Wikipedia page. Something what is not officlal series/group like "organisations in Europe". Eurohunter (talk) 11:00, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't know what kind of "article" you mean. Please give an example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:17, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: Q17089282 Eurohunter (talk) 22:22, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Instance of = Wikipedia article covering multiple topics with links to the different soundtrack albums covered in the article using main subject is one way of doing it. Moebeus (talk) 13:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@Moebeus: Thanks Eurohunter (talk) 19:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Q64350339

I am doubtful about the statement “Follows” on Q64350339, because iPadOS don’t have older version, this is the first version... --151.95.23.253 18:17, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Time zones for Ireland are backwards, sort of

Currently at Ireland (Q27) we've got:

located in time zone (P421) UTC±00:00 (Q6574) valid in period (P1264) standard time (Q1777301)
located in time zone (P421) UTC+01:00 (Q6655) valid in period (P1264) daylight saving time (Q36669)

But this is, strictly speaking, wrong. In Ireland, UTC+1:00 is Ireland Standard Time (IST), while UTC±0:00 is of course just GMT. That is, Irish Standard Time is what the Irish observe in the summer, and then in the wintertime they set their clocks back by an hour, to GMT. (See the Wikipedia articles on Time in the Republic of Ireland and Daylight saving time.)

The situation is more or less the opposite of Daylight Saving Time. It really can't be modeled properly by any properties or qualifiers involving daylight saving time (Q36669).

I think there's a pretty straightforward way to fix this. I propose creating a new entity "alternative civil time". "Alternative civil time" would be a subclass of civil time (Q849275), just as Q1777301 and Q36669 currently are. I propose adjusting daylight saving time (Q36669) so that it's a subclass -- the obvious and only subclass -- of "alternative civil time". With the exception of Ireland, no current uses of Q36669 would change. But now we could better model Ireland as

located in time zone (P421) UTC+01:00 (Q6655) valid in period (P1264) standard time (Q1777301)
located in time zone (P421) UTC±00:00 (Q6574) valid in period (P1264) alternative civil time

Ireland Standard Time (U+1:00) is now the one that's associated with standard time (Q1777301), as it should be. Scs (talk) 14:13, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

Does anyone use the term "alternative civil time" of have you just coined it? The en.wiki article refers to GMT. Is there some reason why this would not do? --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:46, 3 June 2019 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: The term is my invention.
If by "Is there some reason why this would not do?" you mean, "wouldn't 'GMT' do instead of this hypothetical 'alternative civil time'?", no, it wouldn't. The hypothetical new entity would go after P1264. GMT, in this eample, essentially comes before it. Scs (talk) 01:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think you should be using standard time (Q1777301) for the time in summer. If people consider it worth doing, maybe you could make an item for "Irish standard time" (as a subclass of DST). --- Jura 12:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
It is very, very difficult for anyone (not just Wikidata) to model time in Ireland properly. There is a very widespread and deeply-entrenched (and mostly justified) assumption that there are at most two types of time, anywhere in the world:
  • Standard Time, that applies either year-round or during the winter
  • Daylight Saving or Summer Time, that applies during the summer, and is one hour ahead of Standard Time
But in Ireland, according to Irish law, Irish Standard Time applies during the summer, and there's another kind of time (which happens to be called GMT) which applies during the winter, and is one hour behind. So if you try to force this into the "standard, or DST" model, you end up with "standard time = GMT" and "DST = Irish Standard Time", which is just plain weird.
There have been huge debates over this question on the mailing list for the tzdb project (Q187176); see for example here and here. The current tzdb position, I think, is that IST is Ireland's Standard Time in the summer, and that it observes "negative DST" in the winter.
I'm not at all sure how best to handle this in Wikidata, and after further thought, I'm not planning on changing anything right away. —Scs (talk) 19:19, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't see a problem with calling daylight savings time "Standard Time" and standard time "Winter Time". It's just a naming question. What would be a problem is using the item for standard time sometimes for one thing and sometimes for the opposite.
    What might be worth doing is storing the dates one changes to the other as well as the years it applies (or had applied). Maybe it's already being done somehow .. --- Jura 14:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Another possibility for Ireland, without inventing any new entities, is to say that it observes Greenwich Mean Time (Q30192) during period (P1264) winter time (Q10860882). I just now discovered Q10860882, which maps to w:Winter time (clock lag), which explicitly describes what Ireland's doing now (and a few others have done historically), as a sort of "negative daylight saving time".
Storing the dates the rules change is done for a few locations; trying to track the dates that DST switchovers occur is probably too much work and not reasonable. I've been struggling for months with how time zones ought to be systematically represented on Wikidata. See Property talk:P421 (and especially @SamB:'s comment there that "Timezones are REALLY REALLY fiddly" and that we maybe ought to just let the tz database (Q187176) handle them). —Scs (talk) 14:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
A similar need to depart from the text of the law when describing daylight saving time occurs in the US. The relevant law only refers to standard time, and says " the standard time of each zone established by sections 261 to 264 of this title, as modified by section 265 of this title, shall be advanced one hour and such time as so advanced shall for the purposes of such sections 261 to 264, as so modified, be the standard time of such zone during such period...." Using the terms "standard time" and "daylight saving time" as is common practice does not mirror the law. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:56, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Dozens of V&A item ID (P3929) properties added to wrong items

Here's a case where Mix'n'Match has gone badly wrong. Take a look at what Wikidata thinks is in P195 (P195) Victoria and Albert Museum (Q213322):

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?itemDescription WHERE {
?item wdt:P195 wd:Q213322.
 SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

Try it!

The museum has a photograph of Edna Best (Q445510) but the V&A item ID (P3929) ID has been added to the actress herself, not an item for the photograph. The museum has posters and designs for Shakespeare plays such as Twelfth Night (Q221211), but the IDs have been attached to the plays themselves. The ID for a specific capital (Q193893) has been added to the concept of capital (Q193893). The Theatre Royal, Drury Lane (Q1756626) is not in the collection: a watercolor painting (Q18761202) of it is. There are dozens of these.

The situation has been complicated by the fact that Krbot has added P195 (P195) Victoria and Albert Museum (Q213322) statements to items that have the V&A item ID (P3929) property. That's a helpful thing to do in theory, but it means that the wrongly-tagged items acquire additional false statements. I won't get time to fix this all myself, and I've notified the owner of Krbot, but this needs wider attention; both on the wrongly-tagged items and the careless use of Mix'n'Match. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Things like that occasionally happen. If you want to help clean-up, have a look at Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P3929. You could use PetScan or QuickStatement to remove the problematic statements. --- Jura 12:37, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
    • @MartinPoulter: ran into that one too some time ago. Only used on 173 items. I would remove all usage and ask Magnus to flush the database so you can start over again. All the errors were made by one user who left Wikidata some time ago. Multichill (talk) 17:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
      • Agree with this course of action. I ran into a lot of these and tried to clean up my share, but it was largely one person's misunderstanding of how to match correctly. -- Fuzheado (talk) 00:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
      • @MartinPoulter: Perhaps you could ask for turning on "high-quality automatching" to reduce junky matches. Magnus has implemented this for other catalogs when I requested to take them down from MnM. --Marsupium (talk) 01:13, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
        • There are lots of these for fashion items, including Philadelphia Museum of Art, MoMA, and MFA Boston. Maybe we should turn on high quality matching for all museum collections? - PKM (talk) 18:07, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Mixed language labels for artworks

Hi @Yann:,

You are performing mass changes to artwork titles that depart from long-standing best practices. Can you please pause and discuss them?

Your Quickstatements are changing labels in English to a hybrid of another language and English. Example: Self-Portrait in a Casquette -> Portrait de l'artiste à la casquette (Self-Portrait in a Casquette) link

Our best practice is to split these out to their respective languages, and add an English alias with the foreign language text to aid in discoverability. Example link

Thanks. -- Fuzheado (talk) 18:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up Andrew. I noticed this too and completely agree. Multichill (talk) 10:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Best way to represent complex contemporaneous constraint?

JakobVoss (talk) ClaudiaMuellerBirn (talk) Criscod (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Pintoch (talk) Ettorerizza (talk) Ls1g (talk) Pasleim (talk) Hjfocs (talk) 17:24, 21 January 2019 (UTC) PKM (talk) 2le2im-bdc (talk) 20:30, 24 January 2019 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 16:37, 21 March 2019 (UTC) ElanHR (talk) User:Epìdosis (talk) Tris T7 TT me UJung (talk) 11:43, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Envlh (talk)


Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Data Quality --Micru (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) TomT0m (talk) Genewiki123 (talk) Emw (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC) —Ruud 16:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Emitraka (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Bovlb (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC) --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC) --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC) --Lechatpito (talk) --Andrawaag (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC) --ChristianKl (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) --Cmungall Cmungall (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Cord Wiljes (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC) DavRosen (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC) PKM (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Fractaler (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Andreasmperu

Diana de la Iglesia Jsamwrites (talk) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Ptolusque (.-- .. -.- ..) 01:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Gamaliel (talk) --Horcrux92 (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) Bamyers99 (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC) Malore (talk) Wurstbruch (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC) Dcflyer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC) Ettorerizza (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC) Ninokeys (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC) Buccalon (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC) Jneubert (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC) Yair rand (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC) Tris T7 (talk) ElanHR (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC) linuxo Gq86 Gabrielaltay Liamjamesperritt (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC) ZI Jony Ivanhercaz (Talk) 11:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Gaurav (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Meejies (talk) 04:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC) SilentSpike (talk) Tfrancart (talk) Luis.ramos.pst.ag TiagoLubiana (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC)


Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Ontology

I am trying to express (in as general of a way as possible) the constraint that people cannot have an occupation (P106) or position held (P39) prior to the inception of the stated occupation (Q12737077)/position (Q4164871). Violations would indicate a quality issue with either the date of death (P570) of the start time (P580) for the occupation (P106) or possibly the inception (P571).

Motivating examples:

For positions I think the most straightforward way to simply use inception (P571) of the positions of interest.

For example:

< President of the United States (Q11696) View with Reasonator View with SQID > inception (P571) View with SQID < 30 April 1787 >

For occupations however I'm wondering if there's a better way of modeling this. Essentially I'm trying to represent the fact that "a real person cannot have a profession before the the required technology has been invented or the stated first instance for the field of work". My question comes down to what would be the best way to model these relationships between occupation (Q12737077)/field of work (Q627436) and the required technology?

One way I've seen the relationship between occupation (Q12737077) and occupational fields modeled with with practiced by (P3095) and field of this occupation (P425) but was wondering if there was a better way to look at these.

Cheers, ElanHR (talk) 06:59, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

John Paul II (Q989)

Please add P3909 and write "Amen". Source is https://www.repubblica.it/2005/d/sezioni/esteri/papa7/crogiornata/crogiornata.html --2001:B07:6442:8903:9CFD:B7CF:BFDE:9D41 14:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Import global warming potential (P2565) from a PDF table

In order to add global warming potential (P2565) to items, the GWP 100-year (line Total) would need to be extracted from Table 8.SM.16. Is anyone skilled to do so? --Leyo 23:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)

@Leyo (talkcontribslogs): Just converted it to a CSV through a combination of Tabula and custom code in pandas (Q15967387). It's available at User:Vahurzpu/sandbox/GWP 100 year data. Just go to the edit tab and copy the contents into a text file or straight into OpenRefine (Q5583871). Vahurzpu (talk) 05:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I am preparing a list for the mass import at de:Benutzer:Leyo/GWP. Unfortunately, manually assigning the names to Wikidata items is quite time-consuming. --Leyo 09:06, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
@Leyo: Matching names to Wikidata items is precisely something OpenRefine should help you with - please give it a try! We have plenty of tutorials available. − Pintoch (talk) 21:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Well, that did not help that much, unfortunately. --Leyo 23:31, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

OCLC control number (P243)

Why is bot removing OCLC control number (P243) here? How I can add [3]? Eurohunter (talk) 07:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

This property is designed for works only, as you may have seen before adjusting the type constraint. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:42, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin: So how I can add this id? Eurohunter (talk) 12:55, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The url contains Library of Congress authority ID (P244), where the given website is listed as third-party formatter URL. The bot summary also gives the same indication. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 12:58, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@Sjoerddebruin: Yes but there is no explanation what to do, how to achieve it. Eurohunter (talk) 20:08, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

iTunes artist ID

This property recognise only American iTunes. What to do to recognise all iTunes versions? Eurohunter (talk) 00:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)

I read that iTunes is going to be terminated soon~, so I don't know if they will use those id's anymore. Stryn (talk) 17:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Stryn: Really? What about Apple Music? It use the same id's. Eurohunter (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

schema again

I know Wikidata's schema is fluid and not always concisely documented. But is there any attempt to systematically list, for each "type" entity E2 that some other entity E1 can be an instance of (P31), what statements each E1 ideally should (and should not) always contain? Like: every human (Q5) should have a date of birth (P569) and a country of citizenship (P27), every city (Q515) should have a coordinate location (P625) and a time zone (P421) and be located in an administrative territorial entity (P131), every book (Q571) should have an author (P50) and a publisher (P123), etc. (And I know it's always more complicated, and there are always exceptions, but you get the idea.) —Scs (talk) 14:15, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Scs: Please check out Wikidata:WikiProject ShEx - shape expressions are live now, but how they are to be used is perhaps a bit up in the air still, but I think that's what you're looking for. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Sigh. I suppose that's the right answer. I was hoping for something (a) simpler (like a simple list or table) and (b) that exists already. (Yes, I know, ShEx is live, but just barely.) But, anyway, thanks. —Scs (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

geographic place names

I'm trying to generate a list of all known "place names"; in other words, any geographical point that has been given a name, such as:

a river, a lake, pond, mountain, hill, creek, city, township, county, etc.

Can that be done?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Giacomogiammatteo (talk • contribs) at 13 June 2019‎ 00:22 (UTC) (UTC).

You'd have better luck just using Geonames. Circeus (talk) 12:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Giacomogiammatteo: I'd say yes, but you will face several challenges:
  • Obviously you will have to decide exactly which geographical features you're interested in.
  • Many features are notoriously hard to define. Where do you draw the line between mountains and hills? Islands, islets, and rocks? Cities, towns, and villages?
  • Wikidata doesn't define what you might think of as a single "type" for each entity it describes. Instead, each entity is an instance of one or more classes, and each class is described by its own entity. (For example, mountain is Q8502 and hill is Q54050.)
  • Often what you think of as an item's type isn't actually one of the item's listed instance of types. For example, you might think Boston (Q100) is a city, but Wikidata lists it as a big city (Q1549591) and a city of the United States (Q1093829). But these classes are all interconnected, in an obvious enough way: we say that one class can be a subclass of another class. For example, both big city and city of the United States are subclasses of city (Q515).
  • Therefore, when it comes time to write a query to list all the things, you usually don't want to say "give me everything which is an instance of city (Q515)." You usually want to say "give me everything which is an instance of city (Q515), or is an instance of something that is a subclass of city (Q515), or is an instance of something that is a subclass of a subclass of city (Q515)", etc.
  • Wikidata is multilingual, and not all entities have labels (names) in English (or in any given language).
  • Finally, of course, the world is a very big place, and Wikidata tries to describe all of it, so you're going to get a lot of names back.
At any rate, putting this all together, here is an example to get you started. One way to fetch data from Wikidata is with ``queries`` written in a query language called SPARQL. We're going to find all the entities which are instance of "continent". That instance of relationship is what wikidata calls "property P31", and "continent" is Q5107. So here's what a typical SPARQL query looks like:
SELECT ?id ?idLabel WHERE {
	?id wdt:P31 wd:Q5107
	SERVICE wikibase:label {
	    bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" .
   }
}
Try it!
Here I have not followed my earlier advice, in that this query lists only entities that are exactly instances of Q5107 continent. To additionally list entities that are instances of things which are subclasses or sub-subclasses of continent, I would have used the notation wdt:P31/wdt:P279* instead of wdt:P31, and I would have gotten back not just the familiar continents, but also supercontinents like Afro-Eurasia (Q27527) and paleocontinents like East Gondwana (Q2606411). (As you might have guessed, Wikidata property P279 is subclass of.)
But as I said, for just about anything other than continents and countries, simple queries like this to try to list "all islands" or "all rivers" are probably going to return an overwhelming amount of data. (The queries are likely to overwhelm not just you, but also the Wikidata query service.) I don't know how to limit the results to say "just give me the first 100" or "give me the biggest 100".
You can read much more about Wikidata queries at the Wikidata Query Service User_Manual, at a list of example queries, or (my favorite) the Wikidata:SPARQL tutorial. —Scs (talk) 13:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

MicrobeBot updates

Hi!

I am looking at what is causing current load spike in the Query Service, and one of the things seems to be MicrobeBot: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/MicrobeBot - which seems to clock at 44 edits per minute, and most edits as far as I can see are updates for "retrieved" dates in various references. I would like to ask whether these updates are really necessary in this volume? Each of these items is not small (checking random one, its RDF dump is 200K), and right now each update loads the whole data set for the item (yes, we know it can be optimized, we're working on it, but it's the case so far), and if the only thing updated is the retrieved data in references, I wonder if this update is necessary at all, and if it is, can it be executed at a slower pace? Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 21:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

@Smalyshev (WMF): Thanks for raizing this issue. I already saw the note on the mailing list and as a precaution suspended all our bots for review and to update our user agent headers as requested on the Wikidata email list the email. We do submit user agent headers, but there is room for improvement which we are implementing now. However, as you say, it is the update of the timestamp that is causing disruption. W.r.t. the retrieved field. The Wikidata integrator does have the "fast run" mode that prevents edits like the ones you just mentioned - i.e. only edit an item if there is a difference in the values. However, periodically we do run a the bots where for all statements the retrieved reference is updated to show its up-to-dateness. If this is causing havoc, which it seems to do, we should definitely review this procedure again. Do you have any suggestion, would it help if I drastically limit the number of edits per minute? Or does the size of the RDF remains the issue? Apologies for the inconvenience we might have caused, we are working towards a less disruptive solution. --Andrawaag (talk) 22:05, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
With slower edits, that definitely would be much less of an issue. Given that this is not main data but just an update of the recency of data retrieval, it's not a huge deal if some items wait for a while with their updates, so reducing the rate by 10x or even more sounds possible for me and it would probably create much smaller load and would distribute it over time. Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 22:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
The Wikidata Bot policy says that "bots should respect maxlag and should follow the API etiquette guidelines." If they do that, they would not disturb the project as I understand it. BTW, I also cannot see a need to update a 6 months old retrieved date just so show "up-to-dateness". If something was an instance of protein 6 months ago, I think it is safe to assume that it also is that today. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 06:46, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
We have indeed decided to change our update-all procedure from once every 3 months to once annually. Having said that there are cases, where checking for "up-to-dateness", is needed more than annually. Some resources, especially in the biomedical sciences, are updated more frequently than once every 6 months. However, with the release of the EntitySchema extension, we can now link the timestamp ("schema:dateModified "2019-06-13T11:17:07Z"^^xsd: dateTime;") to an EntitySchema that is being affected by our bots. So we might even be able to adapt our bots in such a way that these full updates are not at all necessary. --Andrawaag (talk) 08:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment on the maxlag parameter: it originally measured the lag of the database replicas, which was for a long time the most important bottleneck during editing. In past years, however, we experienced another bottleneck,which was the dispatching of edits to connected Wikipedia articles. At some point the dispatch lag was factored in into the maxlag parameter, which changed it to something like a "server load parameter" without being renamed. Bot operators and bot framework maintainers did not have to change anything, but in times of high "server load" their batches automatically stopped until load was fine again. This year, the most important bottleneck are the updates on the Query Servers, which are not yet part of the maxlag parameter (there is phab:T221774 underway to change this).
Thus, respecting maxlag is formally enough according to the bot policy, but it does not necessarily mean that the servers are able to cope with the load in every respect. As a bot operator, it is these days worth to have a look at the respective WDQS lag chart and stop editing in times of high lags. In general, the "server load parameter" (maxlag parameter) only considers known bottlenecks which are considered in the maxlag value; as "server load" is anything but a simple measure, there will always be space for high server loads that are not reflected by maxlag.
Another aspect is the type of items one plans to edit. Items with many sitelinks generate a lot of dispatch load (not that much of a problem any longer), and large items with many statements generate a lot of WDQS update lag; reason is that with each edit, the entire item is re-loaded to the Query Servers and that is a more expensive operation for large items with many triples. In order not to bring the servers to the limit with a bot job on items with special characteristics (such as on average "many sitelinks", "many statements"), it is thus sometimes advisable to reduce edit rates beyond what is required by policies. Custom request headers with email contacts are also useful, as the server operators could easily reach out to bot operators in case there is some unusual high load created by their task. Administrators would otherwise not hesitate to block bots that create extraordinarily high load; not because there is a violation of policies, but more because of project protection. --MisterSynergy (talk) 14:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Is there any benefit for this? Wikidata isn't meant to a real-time source, but one that collects data incrementally. Besides, the updates seem to break everything else on Wikidata. --- Jura 14:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Stated in with page number ?

Hi, is there a possibility to add the page of the work in which the information is stated when using Property:P248 (stated in) ? For example, here I added the elevation of a village and sourced it but i'd also like to add the page of the source.--Kimdime (talk) 09:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Kimdime: certainly it’s possible, that’s what page(s) (P304) is for :) note that the data type is “string”, not “quantity”, so you can put page numbers like “2-5” or “iv” if necessary. --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 10:44, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Change item

I hope this is the right place; if not: please move this to were it belongs!

Please, can anyone move the dutch article VFF National Super League from WIKIDATA item

Vanuatu Premia Divisen (Q384073) to WIKIDATA item VFF National Super League (Q17632439). Thanks for the help. Pucky (talk) 09:58, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Done. Edit the old site-links, copy article name to clipboard, then delete the site-link with the bin-icon. Then go to the new/other item, and edit/add the site-link as usual. Edoderoo (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Inception date ranges across century boundaries

What's your best solution for recording an inception date range that crosses a century boundary (for example, 1250-1325)?

I hate every workaround for this problem that I have come up with. - PKM (talk) 01:56, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

What about: "inception (P571) 2. millennium", with qualifiers "earliest date (P1319) 1250", "latest date (P1326) 1325". --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 05:13, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
If you do go with the above solution (which isn't ideal, but I am not sure I can think of anything better), do enter it as something like "1300 - precision - millenium", rather than just "2nd millennium" directly, to give it a chance of sorting more-or-less correctly in queries. It's a shame we can't define a precision tighter than millenium, but looser than century -- or alternatively, that "1300 - precision - century" doesn't render as "1200s / 1300s", with only spot values between 1325 and 1375 with precision century rendering as "14th century". Jheald (talk) 11:49, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, as indicated. Only if the range crosses the era border unknown value Help has to be used. --Marsupium (talk) 02:03, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
I found one yesterday that crossed a millennium boundary (800-1200). <sigh> - PKM (talk) 18:02, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, all! I'm using "1300 - precision - millenium" as suggested (i would not have thought of that. - PKM (talk) 19:28, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@PKM, Dipsacus fullonum, Marsupium: I've raised the question at WD:DEV of whether it would be straightforward to make say "1330 - precision - century" render as "13th century", but "1300 - precision - century" render as "1200s / 1300s". If the dev team think this could be done without too much trouble, then an RfC on this could be worth taking forward. Jheald (talk) 12:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for asking there! --Marsupium (talk) 12:35, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
"1330 - precision - century" should be "14th century", not "13th century". - Jmabel (talk) 15:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jmabel: You're quite right. I can't have been properly awake this morning. Now fixed in my comment at WD:DEV.
For the avoidance of doubt: currently if you enter "13th century" that gets recorded as '1300 - precision - century', and displayed as "13. century".
If you enter '1301 - precision - century', that gets displayed as "14. century".
I'd like to suggest that anything between '1275 - precision - century' and '1325 - precision - century' gets displayed as "13th-14th century"; and that "13th century" defaults to getting recorded as '1250 - precision - century'. Jheald (talk) 20:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

User:DeltaBot

Bot is removing valid FA badges. I'm unable to stop him. @Pasleim: Eurohunter (talk) 13:38, 13 June 2019 (UTC)

Bot blocked for five minutes, I hope this will cancel all running jobs. I think the problem is that DeltaBot uses Petscan for data evaluation, and there was a problem with Petscan earlier this day. Pasleim is inactive since April 3. --MisterSynergy (talk) 14:16, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: Can you somehow cancel these edits? Eurohunter (talk) 19:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
No, I have no other options than you have. If I understand the DeltaBot code correctly, it should re-add the badges at some time. Unfortunately I have no idea how often that job is run. I have written an email to Pasleim, but he did not reply yet. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Reference in different langauges

How to add reference avaiable in two languages under different urls? Schould I add two titles and urls to one reference or add two separate rferences? Eurohunter (talk) 08:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

I think you should add two references to one property. If the reference is a URL, it is of type "reference URL". If you need the same reference as a source for multiple properties, you indeed have to repeat the process of adding them. You can not combine a reference like you an do on Wikipedia. Edoderoo (talk) 09:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Edoderoo: I know but I mean just the case where source is avaiable in two or more languages and has also different urls for certain language. Did you meant that? Eurohunter (talk) 11:09, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Why does it matter that you specifically list both urls? Circeus (talk) 12:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
If source is avaiable in few languages information about it should be provided. Eurohunter (talk) 12:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I usually use two “reference URL” statements, on for each language, since the URLs will include the language specification. - PKM (talk) 19:03, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

No start time/end time

How to indicate that something has ended but start time/end time is unknown? Eurohunter (talk) 21:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

end time (P582):unknown value (example. This will mean it shows up as finished but without a known date. Andrew Gray (talk) 21:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Andrew Gray: Thanks Eurohunter (talk) 21:30, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: you could also use latest date (P1326) to encode the idea of the latest possible end date being now (or possibly some earlier point, depending on context) Vahurzpu (talk) 21:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Deletion request about 50 birthdays via OTRS

In ticket:2019060410009251, Wikimedia Trust and Safety informed us CRIStin (Q4579753) asks us to delete ~50 birthdays which were imported via CRISTin's API (these information are not accessible through their API). You can find the affected articles here. I believe this case is bigger than OTRS agents could handle and I would appreciate the opinion of the community. Thanks in advance! Bencemac (talk) 06:36, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Notifying Danmichaelo who made this import. − Pintoch (talk) 18:14, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
I am not sure I understand. Is this information publicly accessible in reliable sources? If not, it should be deleted.--Ymblanter (talk) 18:17, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Sorry for the misunderstanding. They are not available via API anymore, so CRISTin asks us to delete them. Bencemac (talk) 18:29, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
Sounds perfectly reasonable. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:54, 5 June 2019 (UTC)
When information was available under a free license and it has been copied, it retained its free license. It is NOT reasonable to expect us to remove such information when the information is no longer available under a free license. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
It looks like they are purging birth dates of living people to comply with the EU privacy law, General Data Protection Regulation. Norway is not a member of the EU but as a member of the European Economic Area and the European Free Trade Association, they comply with EU regulations. I suspect we will be seeing more of this. I agree with the assessment that the license is irrevocable and since the Wikidata servers are domiciled in the United States, we only have to comply with US privacy law. It is very difficult to properly disambiguate people without having proper full birth dates. Truncating the birth date down to the year is a bad option. Someone should do a search to see how many living people have the same name and the same birth year to show how much confusion we would face. Wikidata is a source of information for people writing obituaries. --RAN (talk) 13:20, 6 June 2019 (UTC)
we lost that battle. you would not want to lose a court fight again; the German court does not care where the servers are. see also [4] and Wikidata:Living people. Slowking4 (talk) 03:24, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
As far as GDPR goes, it allows as a "Lawful basis for processing" (e) To perform a task in the public interest or in official authority.
While I'm no lawyer (and we might ask the Wikimedia legal team on that) it seems to me like the task that Wikidata performs about disambiguating people is one that's in the public interest and thus doesn't necessarily require consent. ChristianKl❫ 07:40, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
maybe you need to revise this sentence: "Instead of striving to provide all possible information about living persons we strive to provide only information in whose veracity we have a high confidence and which doesn't violate a person's reasonable expectations of privacy." or a European court will order you. Slowking4 (talk) 13:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: "public interest" is not appropriate here; as I understand it, that requirement is generally interpreted to mean "doing something the law says needs to be done". Which I don't think we could really claim is the case here.
As far as GDPR & Wikidata goes, we fall firmly into "legitimate interest" - to use the UK ICO's phrasing, "where you use people’s data in ways they would reasonably expect and which have a minimal privacy impact". It's reasonable for us to keep basic biographical data on people for the work we are doing, and as that information is already public, there is clearly minimal privacy impact. Where that data has since been withdrawn and is no longer public, this seems like a less legitimate justification.
I would also add: where someone has explicitly indicated they don't want some information public, it seems perfectly reasonable for us to respect that whatever the law says. I don't see what we gain by doing otherwise. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
It's worth noting that date of birth (P569) is currently tagged as property that may violate privacy (Q44601380) which requires that "statements should generally not be supplied unless they can be considered widespread public knowledge or openly supplied by the individual themselves". As long as we take our LP policy serious we have to either remove that status from the property as I suggested or delete the data. ChristianKl❫ 08:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
I wonder if they are ok if we keep the year or the decade? --- Jura 11:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for the notification. I don't have much to add here. The information was public when I sourced it from Cristin, but now it seems like they have removed it. Other authority registries still seem to include birth dates, and I don't know why Cristin landed on hiding them. One reason could be that the system includes many young researchers who are not really public figures. In my import, however, I only included professors. If we cannot show birth dates for these, it's a real pity. Agree with Andrew Gray that we should generally respect requests from individuals to have it removed though. Danmichaelo (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
(Or, many other authority registries include birth years at least. Exact dates are less common.) Danmichaelo (talk) 21:52, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
Why do we follow EU laws on info removal and not Chinese laws on info removal, when US laws apply to our servers domiciled in the United States? --RAN (talk) 14:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
We have a living people policy too. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:25, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
An additional query, WHY do they want these dates removed? What kind of people are they. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 16:15, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Less than (elevation above sea level)

Hi, I have an information given by my source as Elevation : less than 25 m. Could I render this information using elevation above sea level (Property:P2044) ? Something which would give me a result looking like Elevation : <25 m.--Kimdime (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Kako da ne. How yes no. You can edit 25 with an uncertainty / higher/lower limit. It could be for example 25, with an upper limit of 25 and lower limit of 10. Edoderoo (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
EdoderooYeah but my info is more vague, it just, literally, says "less than 25 m"--Kimdime (talk) 12:46, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
@Kimdime: I was going to suggest elevation above sea level (P2044) unknown value Help / maximum value 25 m, but apparently we don’t have quantity equivalents of earliest date (P1319)/latest date (P1326) yet? (minimum value (P2313)/maximum value (P2312) are only for constraint definitions, as far as I understand.) --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 17:07, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
One of the allowed values for qualifier sourcing circumstances (P1480) is less than (Q52834024). --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 05:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

depicts (P180) for non visual depiction

Apparently some think that P180 should also be used for non-visual depiction. In the property proposal this was initially included, but the subsequent discussion on property talk and, AFAIK, here on project chat, this was generally rejected. The property samples reflect that, but we don't have too many constraints in place to avoid that and, despite countless correct uses (> 150000), we need to clean up some misguide uses. Imagine a news conference by Sarah Huckebe about some country and we end up with an item about that conference with 20-30 "depicts" statements about various words uttered in that conference.

I think proposals for a "mentions" property were usually rejected.

So the plan is:

  • delete statements that already violate current constraints
  • clean up other constraints
  • add "main subject" where appropriate
  • add more constraints

--- Jura 14:24, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

There is no discussion at the property talk that rejects the use of depicts (P180) for non-visual depictions. Property_talk:P180#Ambiguous deals with the question if depicts (P180) and main subject (P921) should be merged. Only the initial sentence suggests that the depicts (P180) should be reserved for visual depictions, which was not approved (at least not explicitly) by the other participants in this discussion. The discussion closed with the proposal by Kolja21 to review the use again later, which is a good idea and which may be done now.
In my opinion some of the uses may be moved to new properties. I already proposed literary motif which should deal with some cases, if approved. Apart from this depicts (P180) on non-visual works is also used for things "depicted" (described) in a written work without being it's main topic. One thing that comes to mind are events that are described as relevant elements of the plot - Defense of the Polish Post Office in Danzig (Q564388) is a relevant event in the plot of The Tin Drum (Q899334), but it is certainly not it's main topic and it is not only mentioned. One could think about a property <describes event> to cover those cases, but I'm not sure if this is actually needed.
The current use in press statements like Press conference of the President of the French Republic at the Europan Council (Q63494178) may be debatable as this tends towards the "mentions"-use. I think Léna can explain the intention behind this use. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:17, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • There have been a series of subsequent discussion here, about the use of depicts and the creation of a general "mentions" property. I don't think it concluded that the use such as on Q63494178 is desirable. If needed, maybe someone would want to dig up these discussions. The proposal Wikidata:Property_proposal/literary motif might cover any residual uses. --- Jura 17:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

"Imagine a news conference by Sarah Huckebe about some country and we end up with an item about that conference with 20-30 "depicts" statements about various words uttered in that conference" Why would this be more problematic than a portrait painting with dozen of "depicts" statements about the various flowers in the bouquet hold by the person in the portrait ? Léna (talk) 15:22, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Search general doesn't work by visuals without them being described. Contrary to full text indexing by search engines: we don't need to re-invent it at Wikidata nor is it its purpose. --- Jura 17:02, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

It's not about "words", it's about concepts. The plain text research does not understand synonyms paraphrases, so information would be missed. Also, concepts have properties, such as coordinates : you can't generate a map with text indexing. As often with wikidata, the interest in having "so much" information is lost when you only look at an item, it is the queries that make them look relevant. I think it makes more sens to keep depicts (P180) for visual and textual works instead of creating another property. We have to remember that Wikidata is still very young and that with less than 60 million items we barely touched the surface on how much data there is. When we'll have enough data to answer questions such as "show me a timeline of the depiction of Cold War (Q8683) medium by medium, it would be easier to not have to include several properties into the query. Léna (talk) 18:53, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

  • Feel free to request a property for whatever scope you think is useful. Just don't misuse existing properties for whatever the plan may be. --- Jura 20:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think that Lénas use of depicts (P180) for speeches is a misuse overall. depicts (P180) may be ill-defined for written works which mostly has a negative impact on it's expressiveness in this area. But to use it for persons, places, events or objects described in a written work (without being it's main topic) seems reasonable to me (this use is actually explicitly mentioned in some of it's descriptions, like the Czech one) and I would still defend this use (unless other properties like characters (P674), narrative location (P840), set in period (P2408), cites work (P2860) can be used). A literary work may describe a building at length, or aspects of an event, and this may be notable.
If the use of depicts (P180) is inappropriate (as the concept/place/person/... is rather only mentioned and not really described) may be discussed and decided on a case by case basis. To have an example: Press conference of the President of the French Republic at the Europan Council (Q63494178) lists via depicts (P180) Belgium (Q31), France (Q142) and Belgium–France relations (Q2366721). Let's say Belgium (Q31) and France (Q142) are only mentioned as part of the description of Belgium–France relations (Q2366721) (I don't know this speech so this is only a guess). In this case it would be probably better to delete depicts (P180):Belgium (Q31)/France (Q142) and just keep Belgium–France relations (Q2366721). Queries for points in a speech and their association with geographical places would become a bit more complex - in the case of Belgium–France relations (Q2366721) one would need to utilise the path wdt:P17/wdt:P625 - but it would still be possible.- Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

[undent] Seems to me like historical events and the like shown in a literary work could indeed be dealt with depicts (P180), though a "narrative event setting" or something along those lines (to go along with narrative location (P840)) is certainly a tempting proposal.

That news conference item, though... oh dear, depicts (P180) is most definitely not an appropriate property to list all the things that are covered in it. To deal with that would definitely require a new one. Circeus (talk) 11:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Diamond (shape)

We don't seem to have a "diamond" as a subclass of shape (Q207961) (or it doesn't have "diamond" as an alias). Can someone familiar with our polygon ontology tell me how to describe it? I assume it's a subclass of quadrilateral (Q36810). - PKM (talk) 20:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

rhombus (Q41159). —Scs (talk) 21:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
regular octahedron (Q12557050). --Succu (talk) 21:38, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, rhombus (Q41159) is what I need. - PKM (talk) 18:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

shortcuts for starting items / importing data?

Are there more efficient ways of creating new items without going through the incredibly meticulous steps of adding each basic property manually? (e.g. "instance of: human", "occupation: biologist", "birth date", "death date" etc. etc. etc.) For instance, it would be great if I could enter a DOI or ISBN to automatically create an item for a journal article or book, or a VIAF ID to start an item about a person. Or quickly create an item based on a newly created Wikipedia article and categories therein. (User:Emijrpbot previously did this, but has been inactive for some time). I don't know anything about coding or scripts, so if there are existing tools or processes for the layperson, that would be much appreciated. Thanks -Animalparty (talk) 16:43, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Animalparty: In the case of journal articles and books you can use SourceMD, though I don't know of tools for other categories of items you listed. Vahurzpu (talk) 17:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@Animalparty: take a look at Cradle. You still have to add the data, but you can do it all in one pass. - PKM (talk) 21:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@Vahurzpu: thanks for that and PKM Thanks for pointing out Cradle. It's a a shame I still have to add all the data manually. There are countless detailed databases already spanning the internet. Yet it appears in most cases I still must re-invent the wheel here in the Wiki of Data. So far BnF To Wikidata seems like the only practical tool for humans, but not all notable authors are cataloged in the French National Library. -Animalparty (talk) 02:57, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Poor Google search results

Try googling Hon Kwok Jordan Centre site:wikidata.org, you wont find Hon Kwok Jordan Centre (Q29291170) which was created and given the English label in 2017.--Roy17 (talk) 22:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Basing on my experience it's ratcher common Google problem not only applies to Wikidata. Eurohunter (talk) 22:37, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Full text in-wiki search is usually more effective in my experience. Not perfect, but more effective (long as you can avoid having 200+ journal articles get in the way @.@) Circeus (talk) 12:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
I forgot to mention, that if you tried googling this ("Hon Kwok Jordan Centre" "wikidata"), it could only find c:Category:Yau Tsim Mong District because that page mentions "wikidata" and uses a file whose name contains "Hon Kwok Jordan Centre". If such brief mentions could be found by google, why couldnt the actual wikidata item? (Well after I posted this thread google now finds the item and this thread itself.) So I think there's something wrong or that could be improved about SEO of wikidata.--Roy17 (talk) 00:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
It's a mostly empty item. So why would you want anyone but Wikidata contributors to find it ;) --- Jura 10:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jura1: I have to link Commons cats to a wiki article, or an wikidata item. The most convenient way to do this is to select the name, right click and Google search. The first results dont work? I add a keyword wikipedia and search again. Still doesnt work? Change wikipedia to wikidata. To open this homepage and try to get the item from wikidata's in-built search engine is usually fruitless because god knows if the item has correct labels. Google can do fuzzy but not wikidata. (Hon Kwok Jordan Center gives you nothing within wikidata.) I am not really a wikidata user, but I have no choice but to cope with this mess.--Roy17 (talk) 19:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Why would you call it a "mess"? Google relies on Wikidata, so you can't really expect it to work before it's defined here. --- Jura 12:11, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jura1: in this case, the English label had been defined in April 2017. It's a mess because all the bugs and the user-unfriendly UI etc. make everybody spend extra time on simple tasks. Yet this community often take these problems lightly.--Roy17 (talk) 18:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

WDQS update record

Hoi, at this time the lag is over 10 hours. A record. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Also tools like PetScan seem to be slow as he-double-hockey-sticks. Edoderoo (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
Please see Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Edoderoobot edit rate. --Succu (talk) 21:53, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

Literacy rate - does it have a property?

I'm currently updating Norwegian infoboxes to get data from Wikidata, but I can't find any property for (national, regional aso.) literacy rates for individual country/region entries. Is there such a thing? Asav (talk) 06:42, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

I'm not able to find any. Stryn (talk) 06:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
I tried to enter a proposal (Wikidata:Property proposal/Place), but I think I may have done something wrong. The actual proposal page is here. Would you mind taking a look? It would be much appreciated.
PS.: It should have a qualifier point in time (P585) as well. Asav (talk) 10:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
The proposal needs a bit of work, but it's mostly there. (Those property proposal telplates are kind of tricky. I fixed one problem already. I can help you with the examples.) —Scs (talk) 11:12, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Great! Thanks a bundle! And, yes, they are pretty convoluted. Asav (talk) 11:25, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Japanese literacy

My Japanese literacy is nil, but if someone can confirm that W:ja:リテラシー is about literacy (Q8236), we can merge literacy (Q24892987). —Scs (talk) 11:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

literacy (Q8236) seems to already have a Japanese sitelink - w:ja:識字 - so they can't be merged. Looking at the crosslinks in the article, I would hazard a guess that リテラシー might be about the broader concept of "literacies" - it links out to eg/ digital literacy, computer literacy, etc - and 識字 is about "traditional" literacy, reading and writing. We have items on various different "literacies" (eg Financial literacy (Q1416374)) but they're not tied together in any way yet. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah. Fair enough. (And I should have been able to find w:ja:識字. Duh.) —Scs (talk) 12:34, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

SBN author ID (P396)

I can't get it to work at Basshunter (Q383541). Eurohunter (talk) 21:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Property proposal: "Authoritative country ISO 2 letter code for Nagoya Protocol regulations"

I would like to add the property "Authoritative country ISO-2-letter-code for Nagoya Protocol regulations" (data type: string, domain: country Q6256) to all country items on Wikidata. Afterwards, I would add the statements to all countries, for example "UK" as a value for the newly created property for Jersey Q2280052. It would be handy to create all these statements using the quick_statement tool instead of a bot, but I am unsure. Before I can use the quick_statement tool, the propert needs to be added to all country items.

AddNPBot (talk) 08:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)AddNPBot 12th June 2019

I don't know how the Nagoya Protocol (Q1963613) specifically uses ISO 2 letter codes, so I might be missing something, but I would certainly hope that our existing property ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code (P297) is accurate and authoritative enough for any use! I can't imagine needing a new property which is somehow "more authoritative" for just this one purpose. —Scs (talk) 14:00, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It might be that they don't use ISO codes correctly. --- Jura 10:30, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
You are correct, the ISO 3166-1 alpha-2 code (P297) is existent for all countries, however, I am not addressing the ISO code of the item itself, but the ISO 2 Code for the authoritative country that takes care of Nagoya Protocol matters. For example: Norway "NO" for Svalbard Svalbard (Q25231), "UK" for Jersey Jersey (Q785) and Guernsey Guernsey (Q25230). That way one could be able to parse the database and get the ISO 2 Code of the country that actually manages Nagoya Protocol (Q1963613) regulations for that item. Wikidata stores some items which are entire countries but also items that are part of countries. The official Nagoya Protocol (Q1963613) signatories list, however, only consists of whole countries, it does not list external territories (like Svalbard, Jersey, etc). Therefore, it would be beneficial to create a link between these smaller territories to the actual authoritative country. I hope I am making sense. -AddNPBot (talk) 11:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Scoped item by country

Hello, I’m trying to make a scoped version of hotel rating (Q2976556): while Q2976556 represents hotel rating in general I’m trying to make a sub-item that represents hotel rating in France (hotel rating in France (Q64685494)) and in Italy. I tried setting subclass of (P279) but it gives me a warning saying Q2976556 itself is missing a P279 entry (same warning with instance of (P31)). The reason of this is I want to fix the WP interlinks: in WP:fr the page describes the French hotel rating system rather than the concept of hotel rating itself. Same issue in WP:it where the page describes the Italian system. How can I do that? Thanks in advance! -- Okhjon (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

hotel rating (Q2976556) seems to represent hotel rating systems in general, of which many seem to exist, so it should be a subclass of classification system (Q5962346), not an instance. Then a specific hotel rating system can be an instance of that. hotel rating in France (Q64685494) should have some information about how the rating system operates, e.g., which organisation administers it and probably a URL. Ghouston (talk) 10:38, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you, I just did that. -- Okhjon (talk) 12:11, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Display problem on P118

If this is a known problem or has a cause that I am unaware of, apologies for posting.

I've noticed multiple instances where the label being displayed on P118 is incorrect for some values. For example on this page: Dario Vidošić (Q361040) under the league section, the 1st value is Liga mx, however the link is to Liga Bancomer MX (Q82595).

If you click it, it goes to Q82595 which is the German Bundesliga (which is correct), nowhere on that page is Liga Mx an alias. If you edit or go to the page and come back it will revert to the proper label.

This is the 5th or 6th time I have seen this for the German Bundesliga, I've also seen it on other teams (New England Patriots is one I have seen it on) -- 13:25, 17 June 2019 CanadianCodhead

I'm not sure if this is an actual issue, because I'm looking at the article right now and it seems to display correctly? Circeus (talk) 16:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The display corrects as soon as you edit or add an item on the page. I cant figure out if I can embed a photo here or not, but assuming no one updates the page in the interim, here is another page showing the problem : Q107365

Wikidata weekly summary #369

Cenomani

Cisalpine Gauls (Q3253132), Aluerci Cenomani (Q859382), and Cenomani (Q1254768) need to be sorted out. There are two peoples named "Cenomani", one in Cisalpine Gaul and one in Gallia Celtica, and there seems to be a lot of Wikipedia articles connected to the wrong items. I'm not very Wikidata savvy; if someone could help merging/moving items that would be great. Julia (talk) 03:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

I've done some work on this, but more is needed. Most of the articles state that the Cisapline Cenomani "separated" from the Cenomani in Gaul (EN wiki questions this based on 1911 EB). Anyway I've separate out "Cisalpine Gauls" from "Cenomani (Gallia Cisalpina)", so you'll see a name change and some migrated site links. More to come... - PKM (talk) 23:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@Julia: I think this is sorted for now. I've followed FR Wikipedia (and the Pleiades database) in calling these Aluerci Cenomani (Q859382) (in Gallia Celtica) and Cenomani (Q1254768) (in Cisalpine Gaul) in English. Most Wikis have one article that covers both groups, and I have linked those to Aluerci Cenomani (Q859382) as the "parent" tribe (again following FR Wikipedia, which has recent sources). Articles specifically about the Cisalpine group are linked to Cenomani (Q1254768). Let me know if this looks better to you, or if I've missed anything. - PKM (talk) (Edited to add Pleiades database.)
PKM Everything looks in order; thanks for the help. Julia (talk) 02:45, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Is something wrong with my merge, or are just the servers rather slow?

Yesterday, I used the merge gadget for merging Q64682095 (with two wikipedia sitelinks) into Q9910661 (with four). As many things yesterday, I had to wait longer than usual for responses, but it seemed to work (when I looked at the wikidata items). However, the interwikilinking didn't work for the sites linked to. Today, I've checked through all six sites, and at the moment three of the old Q9910661 sites display all five other sites, but the last one (w:uk:Категорія:Європейські омбудсмени) only display the other three old Q9910661 sites, and the two old Q64682095 sites (w:en:Category:Ombudsmen in the European Union and w:sv:Kategori:Europaombudsmän) only display each others.

Did I do something wrong, or is something the matter with the gadget; or is this just an unusually slow adjustment of the database to the changes? (Waiting a couple of minutes is normal; this isn't.) JoergenB (talk) 14:14, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

@JoergenB: Hi, I purged the affected pages, and the problem should be fixed now. You did nothing wrong. Sometimes Wikipedia pages need to be purged or otherwise changes won't show up. --Shinnin (talk) 15:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@Shinnin: Thanks! I should learn a little about purging, I guess. (I suppose the purged pages were the sitelink targets, not the wikidata items, which appeared quite OK.) JoergenB (talk) 19:45, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Need a merge

Probably not the right place, but the last time it goes (very) quick this way, so....

The item Q1905167 with [nl:Nederlands softbalteam (mannen)] + [hr: Nizozemska softbolska reprezentacija] should be merged with item Netherlands men's national softball team (Q16238071) with [en:Netherlands men's national softball team]. Again, thanks for do so! Kind regards, Pucky (talk) 09:20, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Done; thanks. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:42, 22 June 2019 (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. merged --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:42, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

La fin prématurée et le regroupement des hôpitaux en France ?

Ces temps ci,beaucoup de services ferment dans les hôpitaux.Serais ce la fin de certains hôpitaux et l'augmentation du taux de chômage?Exemple:l'hôpital de Boscamnant ferme très probablement dans trois ans car le patrons crée des embrouilles entres les médecins.Trois sur cinq médecins ont démissionné .Les employés sont peu à peu commencés à être transférés sur Jonzac.

procedural side question

Is it appropriate to move a question like this to Wikidata:Bistro? —Scs (talk) 22:23, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

It's not even at all wikidata related whatsoever. It's just rambling about the French healthcare system. Circeus (talk) 03:38, 23 June 2019 (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. Circeus (talk) 18:54, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Raise echo limit to make ping project work again for bigger projects

Hi everyone, I propose to raise the configured limit ($wgEchoMaxMentionsCount ) for {{Ping project}} from 50 to 100 on this project. That way the ping works again for the bigger projects. Any objections? Multichill (talk) 19:53, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

I support this, just because the paintings project seems to have broken the ping barrier. Jane023 (talk) 23:55, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
Likewise, the Books project passed the limit long ago. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:37, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support, but this has been rejected on technical grounds before - I think there’s a Phabricator ticket. - PKM (talk) 18:56, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
I feel like any project that's grown so large should just be having its discussions on the Wikiproject talk page. I'm not sure there's as much use for mass-pings for such large projects. --Yair rand (talk) 18:57, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
I support the mass-pings. If a discussion about a property happens at the property page it's easier to find then when it happens at the Wikiprojects talk page for further users of the property. Property proposal are another area where we want the discussion to happpen at a place besides the Wikiproject talk page. ChristianKl❫ 15:38, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

German (formal)

Why there is formal version only of few languages? Anyway why there is formal version of certain languages while we use here formal version instead of common language? Why PLbot is removing German (formal) but he is not removing for example Spanish (formal)? @Pasleim: Eurohunter (talk) 22:16, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

@Matěj Suchánek: Your bot just removed few formal versoins. Do you know something about it? Eurohunter (talk) 08:52, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
As Jura said. The answer probably is that es-formal occurred recently. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I think "formal" is meant for the GUI, not for labels/descriptions. --- Jura 09:05, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: What you mean? What is function of it? Eurohunter (talk) 11:16, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
      • For the user interface, you can choose "es-x-formal" in Special:Preferences. This ends up being available for labels/descriptions, but shouldn't actually be used. It's somewhat obscure how language codes are defined on Wikidata .. --- Jura 11:27, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
        • @Jura1: What is this language then? Is .es version informal? Eurohunter (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Bots are perpetuating stupid spelling error on Q20880935

On VII. De español y morisca, albino (Q20880935), as far as I can figure out what happened, bots have carefully preserved a stupid spelling error and introduced it into a new project ("Morsica"[sic]). As was discussed on Wikimedia Commons when these files were first uploaded, the so-called experts at LACMA had very little idea what they were doing when they attempted to translate the titles of Casta paintings from Spanish into English (that's why I renamed the main image files to File:VII. De espanol y morisca, albino (Casta painting) LACMA M.2011.20.1 (1 of 6).jpg, File:X. De espanol y torna atras, tente en el aire (Casta painting) LACMA M.2011.20.3 (1 of 6).jpg, and File:IX. De espanol y albina, torna atras (Casta painting) LACMA M.2011.20.2 (1 of 5).jpg) but now it seems that all the LACMA errors and translation infelicities are to be preserved into the indefinite future by bots... AnonMoos (talk) 15:18, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Long as the bots leave title (P1476) alone, it should be fine? I mean, I thought the item "names" were mostly for convenience and the actual data was in the statements? Circeus (talk) 17:03, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
I'd really like to get rid of the semi-incompetent LACMA attempted translations into English completely, but I have no idea whether I'll be getting into an edit war with bots if I attempt to change the relevant nodes... AnonMoos (talk) 00:50, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
If a bot does something you believe to be wrong, the general idea is to go to the talk page of the bot and raise the issue on that venue. You can also ping the people responsible for the bot. ChristianKl❫ 11:22, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
There are at least two bots on the history of that page; I have no real idea which one is responsible for which aspects of the page's current state, or whether they'll come back if I attempt to change things. What they do is probably beneficial most of the time, but in the particular unusual case of these three particular paintings, they're restoring to prominence errors and awkward strained unfortunate translations which I previously attempted to minimize on Commons.... AnonMoos (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
if you do not like the LACMA spelling errors, maybe you need to talk to them. edit warring about file names or item names is a waste of your time. (they could be in italian, as a lot of the Louvre images are). these are intermediate back of the house signifiers that no one will see; rather, readers will see the image and the text of the article, and the metadata. Slowking4 (talk) 12:26, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
The Casta paintings are about the Spanish colonial empire, so of course their original titles are in Spanish. "Morsica" is an Italian surname, and is not a meaningful word in the Spanish language. In any case "Morsica" and "morisca" are both simultaneously present in Q20880935, which creates a glaring discrepancy -- and if you go to File:VII. From Spaniard and Morsica, Albino (De espanol y morisca, albino) LACMA M.2011.20.1 (5 of 6).jpg you can read the word "morisca" yourself.
Spanish colonial "casta" classifications are a highly-specialized niche subject. The LACMA people could have a far greater fluent command of the Spanish language and a far greater general knowledge of art history than I do, but when they applied such general background knowledge to the highly specific special area of casta classifications, they made a botch of it... AnonMoos (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
And when people go to the image description page commons:File:VII. De espanol y morisca, albino (Casta painting) LACMA M.2011.20.1 (1 of 6).jpg they'll see the nonsense word "Morsica" in kind of a large font size (in my browser) directly below the summary heading, so it is not an esoteric Wikidata-only thing. AnonMoos (talk) 14:14, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

SourceMD jobs that are on hold

Hoi, we have a situation regarding performance and when asked it is said that jobs that add to / change the database are very much needed, all changes will find their way into the database. That said, admins have put SourceMD jobs on hold. SourceMD jobs run serially, only one job at a time, they are well behaved, Magnus has done a lot of work recently to make it perform even better. So I am OK when admins put a job on hold, I am not OK when they do not release the jobs afterward. My jobs run for a purpose, I comment on the jobs that I run on twitter and elsewhere.

My point is that well behaved jobs may be put on hold but when the situation permits they have to be released. At this time the database has room for these jobs. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:08, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

MetroLyrics ID (P2624)

MetroLyrics ID (P2624) generates error if linked to correct artist page. Format [a-z0-9-']+-lyrics-[a-z0-9-]+ should be for lyrics id and [a-z0-9-']+-lyrics for lyrics id. It seems that two formats can't be added there. Eurohunter (talk) 16:03, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Category:Jan Matejko Academy of Fine Arts faculty

Category:Jan Matejko Academy of Fine Arts faculty Q25209935 is identical with articles listed in Q14330581, and therefore should be merged into it. Francesco 13 (talk) 20:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:00, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Mobile view improvements

For items with a usual number of statements (e.g. < 30, except identifiers), I think the mobile view is much like an infobox. It's more compact than the desktop view, possibly because the sitelinks are at the end.

One thing I find odd is that all references are displayed by default (which isn't the case for the desktop view). This isn't much of an issue if it says reference (0) or a reference that is limited to a source or page, but people seem to get carried away. Maybe the mobile view shouldn't display references by default either.

When starting from mobile view on Wikipedia, there seems no way to get to Wikidata. Do I keep missing it or should that be added? --- Jura 18:06, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


For the above, I created the following tickets in phabricator:

Please comment there. --- Jura 11:32, 18 June 2019 (UTC)


  • Interesting find: apparently, it's thought that only advanced Wikipedia contributors (who log-in to edit) should be able to navigate to Wikidata on mobile.
Personally, I don't think it's particularly useful to edit Wikidata on mobile, but it should be possible to view its pages without log-in. Even more so actually.
The discussion in phab:T226009 could probably benefit from more Wikidata user input. --- Jura 07:11, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Wikimedia Toolforge Recoin

Wikimedia Toolforge Recoin doesn't works? Eurohunter (talk) 20:33, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

https://tools.wmflabs.org/recoin/getmissingattributes.php?lang=en&subject=Q15074414&n=10
https://tools.wmflabs.org/recoin/getmissingattributes_id.php?lang=en&subject=Q15074414&n=10
See Wikidata talk:Recoin#Outage. --Jklamo (talk) 12:18, 19 June 2019 (UTC) :see

wb_terms migration to start this week

Hello all,

This is a quick update regarding the beginning migration of wb_terms table replacement solution.

We are about to start migrating property terms this week. The original planned date was 19th of June. Due to WMF US Staff holiday, there will be no deployments today. Therefore, we are going to switch the migration on (write both stage) of property terms one day later than planned, on Thursday the 20th of June. All other dates regarding migration remain the same for the moment.

You can find more information regarding those dates and how to prepare for them in this task, and we have dedicated a board to receive and help with any questions from tool builders that need to update their tools accordingly.

Thanks, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 08:43, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Municipal building

Q25550691 and Q543654 relate both to a municipal building?--Susanna Giaccai (talk) 13:04, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Seems city hall (Q543654) is intended to be the subclass of seat of local government (Q25550691) specifically to towns and cities, whereas the umbrella class is for all municipalities. But at least the German Wikipedia article linked to the umbrella class is wrong, as it only refers to the municipality offices in Switzerland. So a bit of a mess to clear this one up. And if you like more confusion - in Thailand there's a local government which is not a municipality, but covering a whole province, but its not the province administration itself. So the current English description does not include this special cases, and I guess there may be further in other countries. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 16:45, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
Indeed. In Sweden (and Swedish), I would say that "rådhus" used to be a kind of municipal building in larger cities which also included the local court. If I remember correctly, the mayor was not only the highest offical in the city, but also in the local court. In Sweden today, we have "Stadshus", "Kommunhus", "Landstingsstadshus". Also the counties and regions have administrativ buildings, but I cannot recall their names now. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 17:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Template:Graph:Pie chart broken?

Since yesterday, graphs are longer showing with this template. Can someone solve the issue please? Thanks. Ayack (talk) 13:37, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Looks to be linked with WDQS query service troubleshoot [Graph:Lines having the same trouble]. Yurik (talkcontribslogs) has been aware of this and asked for patience. Bouzinac (talk) 13:43, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Aviation Safety Network accident ID and IWM memorial ID

For Property:P1755 and Property:P3038 should I change the restrictions to allow the IDs to be added to people or should it stay only when we have an entry on the accident? https://www.iwm.org.uk/memorials/item/memorial/57382 For most early aviation accidents with one or two seat planes we only have entries for the people involved, not an entry for the accident. The same for the war memorial, should I allow it for people, instead of an entry on the memorial itself? See the person at Edward Hotchkiss (Q64676328) for one example. --RAN (talk) 14:21, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

My feeling is that we should only use the IDs for the event/memorial, not the person. If we don't have the event/memorial, that's okay; we don't need to represent absolutely everything within Wikidata. But mixing them up, when the identifier is very much for the "thing" and not the person it's connected to, is going to get confusing. Andrew Gray (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Gadget curation

Is there interest in a project about gadget and tool management? there has been some discussion about which gadgets should be on by default, and which are breaking. we need a process to evaluate, migrate, and maintain gadgets and tools. and some FYI's for new editor on boarding, with tutorials for gadgets. Slowking4 (talk) 13:20, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Having a Wikiproject for them would make sense. ChristianKl❫ 07:46, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I'm interested. - PKM (talk) 20:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

w:Family tree of the Greek gods

Currently the links to non-English language pages in the article w:Family tree of the Greek gods are embedded on the page, could someone who knows what they are doing please add them to WikiData and remove them from the page? -- PBS (talk) 10:48, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

I removed those interwiki links which duplicated Wikidata or went not existing pages. I left he:אלים אולימפיים pointing to the Hebrew article for Twelve Olympians (Q101609) which seems to include a family tree of the Greek gods. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 20:51, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Is there a property for public transport to a place?

Many articles on Wikipedia, such as en:Madison Square Garden and en:Museu do Ipiranga, list all public transport available near a place. I was wondering if we can list all metro stations and bus lines using Wikidata. Thanks! Tetizeraz (talk) 19:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

This sounds interesting and useful, but it might require a certain amount of work developing or refining a transit-related infrastructure within Wikidata at all, in order to hook up to.
There's a ton of transit-related data already curated in the various Wikipedias (most metro and intercity rail lines, most stations), but I'm not aware of any systematic attempt to model it in Wikidata yet. (But if I'm missing something, someone let me know!)
Are you thinking of rail transport, or also buses, ferries, airports, etc.?
I suppose as a start we could do something similar to the existing property for located in or next to body of water (P206). —Scs (talk) 22:23, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
We do have place served by transport hub (P931), which links a transport hub to the place it serves, but basically you're asking for a property that points in the other direction, from the place back to the transport hub. —Scs (talk) 11:48, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Stylized name

How to add stylized name ("stylized as")? For example "BassHunter" would be stylised name for Basshunter or "myspace" for Myspace. Eurohunter (talk) 10:51, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

The official name (P1448) should point to the name in the preferred spelling. If you want to explicitely store that something is a stylised name you might use a construction with object has role (P3831) stylised name. Apart of that stated as (P1932) can be used in many cases to specify how a given source writes a name. ChristianKl❫ 07:16, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: I did as you told and created stylised name (Q64732482). Thanks. Eurohunter (talk) 07:00, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

List of headers (beta) Couldn't resolve language abreviation

When beta will end? It's broken for months or maybe even years. It is very basic feature and how it can be left like that? It should be fixed long time ago. What we can do? Eurohunter (talk) 15:49, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (olo) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (abs) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (ady) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (aeb-latn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (atj) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (awa) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (ban) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (bgn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (btm) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (bto) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (din) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (dty) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (es-419) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (gcr) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (gom) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (kea) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (kjp) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (krl) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (mni) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (mnw) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (nys) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (sdh) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (ses) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (shn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (shy-latn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (sje) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (skr) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (smj) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (smn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (sms) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (tay) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (uz-latn) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (ady-cyrl) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (aeb) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (ase) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (gom-deva) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (nod) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (skr-arab) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (uz-cyrl) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (zgh) sent by the database
  • ✘ Error :
  • Couldn't resolve language abreviation (zh-my) sent by the database

Eurohunter (talk) 15:49, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

If you complain about a bug, you could start by writing a decent bug report that says how the bug you are concerned about can be reproduced. The ideal place for a bug report would be phabricator. ChristianKl❫ 12:02, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
I read that last as "only people with technical sophistication and serious involvement in the project should report bugs." Have I misunderstood? - Jmabel (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
No, I see no reason for nontechnical people to report bugs on Phabricator. You don't need to be a developer to describe exactly what you did to generate an error message. ChristianKl❫ 16:12, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: Where is this "List of headers" feature that's not working? It sounds interesting, but I've never heard of it. —Scs (talk) 22:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
He is talking about the labelLister gadget. --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:27, 19 June 2019 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: Can you describe why you feel the current labelLister gadget doesn't work for your purposes and why you consider having the List of headers version to be so important? ChristianKl❫ 10:27, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: It's impossible to add these languages with List of headers so that's big problem. Eurohunter (talk) 12:21, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
As long as the gadget is in beta, the only big problem about it is the "beta" flag. Issues can be reported at MediaWiki talk:Gadget-labelLister.js/beta.js. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:03, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Multiple languages

I have noticed it is possible to add "mul" code to title to achive multiple languages (Q20923490). Is there way to achieve "Two languages" and list them yet? Eurohunter (talk) 18:56, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

Subsequent question: As I understand it "mul" should be used if the text is written in more than one language like: "His last words were 'Mehr Licht!'" What about cases like Aydın (Q27229572), a family name existing in more than one language, at least in Turkish and Azerbaijani. Currently the tag of native label (P1705) is only "tr", I've used "zxx" in such cases. What is the recommended solution? Ping @Jura1 , Harmonia Amanda as biggest human users of the property and editor here. Thanks in advance --Marsupium (talk) 17:01, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

For names, if the same exact string is used for several languages (which is nearly all cases for Latin-script, since you'll have immigrants and regional languages), then the code should be "mul" and all relevant languages listed in language of work or name (P407). --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 17:05, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! So like this and this!? I've tried to clarifiy this in Help:Monolingual text languages#Special language codes – perhaps not the best words, any improvement is welcome! --Marsupium (talk) 18:57, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Glossary of topics on how to structure data

Excuse me if this was asked before, or if this is a silly question. Do we have a page or dedicated WikiProject where volunteers could host the most accepted way to structure data (properties, values, qualifiers, etc) for a given subject item? For example (basing on facts shown in the respective infoboxes), the most accepted way to store building data for buildings (floors, height etc), book data (publisher, date, pages, etc), a power station (capacity, fuel, commission date, etc), a disease, a company, a sports club, TV channel, and so on. A place where volunteers can refer when unsure of what information the item should ideally have, and how it should look like... Rehman 12:41, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

@Rehman: I think the Wikidata:Showcase items are more or less what you’re looking for? --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 15:07, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Also Help:Modeling and the pages it links to directly and indirectly. - Jmabel (talk) 16:10, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
We should perhaps make a real effort to increase the number of showcase items available --SilentSpike (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks, Lucas, Jmabel, SilentSpike. Help:Modelling/Other domains is close, and Wikidata:Showcase items may not be practical in my personal opinion. To create a fully or near-fully completed item such as those shown in the Showcase, would take a lot of effort and time, something that would almost surely discourage volunteers as certain information is easily available on one item but not the other - making the task of filling one perfectly quite a challenge.
I was thinking of table like this or this, arranged in a similar fashion like those mentioned in Showcase items, but instead linking or uncollapsing to show the table. Interested volunteers from various WikiProjects/interest areas could then simply add their topics/items, outlining what information a completed item should ideally have.
Thoughts? Rehman 03:17, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps you'll be interested in Wikidata:WikiProject ShEx? --Stevenliuyi (talk) 07:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Improving accessibility along the lines you are thinking is something I've been interested in for a while (even if just to have a handy reference for myself). The ShEx project does capture that kind of information, though not in an easily accessible way as of yet. --SilentSpike (talk) 10:15, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
I agree. While it does seem interesting, I don't see how ShEx can help in my problem, at least not in an average volunteer-friendly way. Rehman 14:59, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
How about a Listeria list of model item (P5869)? I'd like to see "model items" used more widely and made more available to new editors. - PKM (talk) 18:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Common.css clean up

Hey, With introduction of TemplateStyles, there is no need to put CSS of all templates like Navbox in Mediawiki:Common.css anymore, You can simply put them in a page like Template:Navbox/styles.css and inject those into DOM when needed (that makes lots of sense for templates with limited usage because Common.css is loaded on *every* page). So I started a big clean up of the common.css page and now 8 kilobyte is removed from there, with minification and gzip compression that's around one kilobyte less in every request which adds up to around 4 Terabyte of data every month (not to mention CPU usage in our infra to minify and compress the given CSS).

If you see any template misbehaving, let me know. It might be caused by this cleanup. Amir (talk) 18:52, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Ranks mass editing

Since QuickStatements and OpenRefine don't support ranks editing, is there a way to do it without writing a bot? Thanks. Ayack (talk) 15:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Who is ranks, and why do you want to edit him? But I think you need a tool like PetScan to do such a job. Edoderoo (talk) 16:48, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Is this a real question? If so I'm talking about these ranks. Elsewhere, sorry but I don't understand the joke...
How do you change ranks in Petscan? You can only add or remove statement for what I see. Ayack (talk) 18:42, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Petscan cannot edit ranks. To the best of my knowledge, you need bot code for "mass editing" of ranks. If you don't have such code by yourself, you could try to request a task at Wikidata:Bot requests. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:34, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Depending on the task you might seek User:PreferentialBot's assistance. --Marsupium (talk) 20:23, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy, Marsupium: Thanks for you answers. I'll try User:PreferentialBot. Ayack (talk) 06:28, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Mask and Wig (Q3297279)

This entry is for a historic building; but the enwiki and frwiki articles it links to are both about the club which the building houses. I suspect the right way to proceed is to create a new Item for the club, and attache those two articles to it instead; but it's a while since I created a Wikidata item, and I think things have changed a bit. --ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

I think you're correct. It's commonplace to conflate the structure and the occupying organisation/business, but they are & should be distinct entities. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:56, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

date of birth (Q2389905)

Could this item be (semi)protected ? The English label is being repeatedly changed by anons to some particular date of birth ? -- Kpjas (talk) 07:11, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

✓ Done. I noticed that all the ip's seem to be from India. Any idea why this is happening? Multichill (talk) 09:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It seems to happen since it was included as "criterion used" in some "different from"-statements. --- Jura 10:00, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Proposal

Hello! There are statements for work period (start) (P2031) but no any statment for work period (end) (P2032) in some items aboud died people. As a result Wikidata exports to different Wikipedia projects wrong information that dead people are still active in there profession. For example, Ayn Rand (Q132524) (died in 1982) is still active in French Wikipedia, F. Scott Fitzgerald (Q93354) (died in 1940) is still active in Spanish and Ukrainian Wikipedia, Joseph Conrad (Q82925) (died in 1924) in Russian. As soon as work period (end) (P2032) is not the same date of death (P570) it shouldn't be fixed by bot. So my proposal is just to make Property constraint for items with statements: instance of (P31) - human (Q5), date of death (P570), work period (start) (P2031) and have no statement for work period (end) (P2032). There are over 5.000 such items as we found out in Russsian project chat so if somebody will join to me for adding this statement I'll be glad. P.S. I beg Yuor pardon for my English. --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 21:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I don't think the French and the Spanish infoboxes imply that they are still active. Maybe the Russian one just needs to be phrased differently. --- Jura 21:20, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    • See the difference in Jean Cocteau (Q83158) in French Wikipedia (I corrected the item). The same for Spanish Wikipedia. --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 21:40, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
    • Just compare infoboxes about Ayn Rand and Jean Cocteau in French Wikipedia. They both import information from Wikdata. --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 21:45, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
      • I don't think "John Doe (1901-1999, active from 1950)" is problematic. It's the Russian infobox that makes this into "John Doe (1901-1999, active 1950-present)". Depending on the their field of activity/age at death, people maybe active till death, but the end of activity could be years before. If actual dob/dod are known, maybe you don't even want to display that. --- Jura 23:14, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  • We fixed it in Russian Wikipedia (although I still don't think that situation in French, Spanish, Russian is normall). So we can discuss the problem without any association with Russian Wikipedia. But there are still problems in Ukrainian Wikipedia (example F. Scott Fitzgerald (Q93354)), Catalan (example Joseph Conrad (Q82925)), Azerbaijani, Belarusian (example Ayn Rand (Q132524)) and some others. The reason of problem is incomplete of Wikidata database about work period (end) (P2032) for dead people I still suppose if we make property constraint for work period (start) (P2031) (if a person is dead) it will both help to solve problems in different Wikipedias and complete Wikidata items by necesssary statements.--Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 20:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

License data for files on Commons

Hello all. Currently there is a property license (P275) that is mostly used by softwares. I understand that there are some structured data for Commons files at the moment. Would it be possible to develop a bot to migrate license information to WikiData? -Mys 721tx (talk) 13:55, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

If the property can already be entered to images, and we have a clear translation from the current license templates to the corresponding Q-id's on Wikidata, such a bot-script should be possible indeed. Edoderoo (talk) 05:58, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
License are attached to a file stored on Commons. They shouldn't be imported to Wikidata because items are mainly about the work (painting for example), and not the digital representation of it (the photo). Ayack (talk) 10:53, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Right now, there is some cross-over functionality between Commons and WikiData. So nothing will be imported to WikiData, but something will be made machine-readable on Commons. Technically that is possible, but I'm not sure if anything else than P180 can already be added to Commons. But I believe this would be a great next property to be added to Commons. Edoderoo (talk) 21:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Very complex to model correctly. For the same image, this can vary from country to country, and we want to model the rationale, not just the [purported] license. There has been quite a bit of discussion of this on Commons; it's not a simple issue. - Jmabel (talk) 01:07, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
you could model multiple licenses, for the derivative, especially for sculptures. Slowking4 (talk) 19:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

How to express possession?

We have owned by (P127). But how to express possession? For example Portrait of a Young Man (Q2422889) was stolen and then in possession of Hans Frank (Q60087) and Adolf Hitler (Q352), but we wouldn't say they owned it after having stolen it. How should we state that information? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 18:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

private collection (Q768717) qualified with the collector? - PKM (talk) 18:45, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Hm, one can probably speak of a collection in the example above. I meant to ask more generally where this doesn't work I think. Another example would be the ship MV Danica White (Q6719433) which was in possession of pirates while they didn't own it and we probably can't say it was in their private collection (Q768717). --Marsupium (talk) 21:19, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
One option is operator (P137). --Shinnin (talk) 21:24, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Hm, yes, this works in many other cases and still this is different. --Marsupium (talk) 00:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
How about 'held by'? This could apply to many situations. Abductive (talk) 00:13, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Problem with value type constraint

I added the statement Q64778853 carries (P2505) footpath (Q3352369) for a footbridge, but it gives a value type constraint: "Values of carries statements should be instances of one of the following classes (or of one of their subclasses), but footpath currently isn't:

  • thoroughfare
  • watercourse
  • transport line"

footpath (Q3352369) is a subclass of road (Q34442) which is a subclass of thoroughfare (Q83620), but I suppose it want an instance of footpath rather than the class. Is it necessary to create an item for "the footpath carried by the bridge Høllingers Bro" to statisfy the constraint? I would feel it was a little foolish as the item wouldn't have any new information. What do you say? --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 23:41, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

This is because the relation (P2309) is instance of (Q21503252), switching it over to instance or subclass of (Q30208840) should generate the behavior you were expecting (after however long it takes for such a change to propagate). See Help:Property_constraints_portal/Value_type for the details. Circeus (talk) 03:44, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

name in kana (P1814)

Shouldn't there be properties for other alphabets too or different variations like for names in Lithuanian or Azerbaijani? Eurohunter (talk) 07:48, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

This is not meant for western names, but for transcription of Japanese name (basically en:Furigana) Circeus (talk) 18:48, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Q6227624

Can someone look at John Crichton, 4th Earl Erne (Q6227624). The property Property:P2015 requires that a person be listed as a "member of parliament" and we have him listed as "Member of the 22nd Parliament of the United Kingdom" which is a subclass of "member of parliament". Can someone adjust the restrictions to allow the proper subclass? --RAN (talk) 01:27, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

I've experimentally added a complex constraint and removed the simple constraint for the P39 value in Property talk:P2015 ... either there's some bot latency before it gets picked up, or it's a fail. we'll see. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! --RAN (talk) 13:01, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Film poster

At https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2709440 I added the image File:Poster for Jules Massenet's La Navarraise with Emma Calvé in the rôle of Anita.jpg. It complains that the value should be "film poster" not "image".

This is not a film poster, it's a poster for a theatrical performance. The check is clearly wrong; calling it a film poster would be misleading. If the value was changed from "film poster" to "poster" it would be accurate, but this sort of auto-correct, "The value for image (Poster for Jules Massenet's La Navarraise with Emma Calvé in the rôle of Anita.jpg) should match “please use P3383 ("film poster") instead” (regex: (?i)((?!\b(poster)).)*)." - is just bad programming, if there's no checks it's a film.

And why use something specific like "film poster" anyway? A more generic term would be far, far more useful. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:44, 24 June 2019 (UTC)


Wikidata weekly summary #370

reCh is not working

Sad news; reCh is down and Pasleim is away. Can we fix the gadget somehow? Bencemac (talk) 12:50, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

One of the queries the tool makes needs to be migrated to the newly introduced actor table (here in line 46); technically this is a relatively simple fix. However, this needs either Pasleim's interaction, or we need to adopt or usurp his tool according to this wikitech policy. I have tried to contact Pasleim via wikimail regarding another issue a few days ago, but he did not reply yet. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer MisterSynergy! I hope we will see Pasleim soon. My biggest problem is that I cannot patrol label/description edits in Hungarian without reCh. Is there any alternative? Bencemac (talk) 07:16, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
You could try User:Yair rand/DiffLists.js. Once added to your common.js, you have additional filter options for terms and languages in the Wikidata UI, including Special:RecentChanges. This is in my opinion not as comfortable as reCh for partolling, but it is something... :-) WD:CVN lists some more CVN-related tools, but I am not sure whether any of them is helpful for you. --MisterSynergy (talk) 07:30, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
@Bencemac: The Wikidata vandalism dashboard tool can also show you unpatrolled Hungarian label/description/alias edits. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 10:47, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you! Not that comfortable as reCh was, but better than nothing. Bencemac (talk) 18:35, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

@Bencemac: The tool is back. --Pasleim (talk) 11:52, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

@Pasleim: Best news of the day! Face-smile.svg If I do not ask too much, could you fix this as well? Thank you very much! Bencemac (talk) 19:05, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Non-notable spouses of notable people

Hi!

I am seeing some weird modeling for recording spouses of notable people who are not notable by themselves and do not have Wikidata entry. I've seen putting first name item or last name item as spouse (P26) (clearly wrong), putting "no value" (also wrong), or "unknown value" (slightly more right but still not completely since it is not really unknown). Also for recording the name of the spouse properties like author name string (P2093) or married name (P2562) are used as qualifiers, which also seems wrong and also non-translatable. Examples: Alexander Gordon (Q1961223) and Nana Kiknadze (Q4220426), probably many more. So, I wonder what to do here?

  1. Remove bad data and leave the spouse name unrecorded
  2. Create an item for the spouse, even if no good sources exist for anything but name, for example, and they by themselves are not notable
  3. Create a property that is specifically for recording spouse names
  4. Use some existing property that I missed but actually works for spouses (unfortunately, values can not be multi-lingual...)
  5. Use one of the properties mentioned above is just fine and I am misunderstanding their meaning - e.g. maybe married name (P2562) is ok and I am misunderstanding it
  6. Some other ideas?

Laboramus (talk) 23:42, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I thought we were doing #2. --- Jura 00:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I think #2 i best option, it takes just slightly longer than filling in a text string that would contain the spouses name in a new field. --RAN (talk) 01:24, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • 2 seems correct to me, aren't they by definition notable for wikidata as per criteria 3 --SilentSpike (talk) 09:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Maybe I should note that I use #2 for people who died some time ago and there is some interest in doing so given their family relations. I doubt there is much benefit in doing the same for living people (it might even appear a bit "odd"), especially for people who are hardly known beyond a publication of some paper.
    I don't know the two sample people mentioned by Laboramus, but, as start and end dates are unknown, it doesn't look like information worth including. For living people, I'd tend to proceed per #1. --- Jura 09:56, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • As somebody who tends to use the "unknown value" option: Creating an item for the spouse (if still living) is in my opinion a bad idea for privacy reasons (even if the creator only includes the name and no other personal information: who is going to watch potentially thousands of items for non-notable spouses for unsourced additions of personal information?). I also dislike the removal of "unknown value" statements at it is at least notable that the person is or was married, maybe even how often and from when till when. I agree that "unknown" is not completely true, but I still consider a person of that only the name and the fact that she is married to x is known as relatively unknown. I generally agree with the way it is modelled at Alexander Gordon (Q1961223) (apart from some missing references), but to record the name I tend to use name (P2561) (there is also stated as (P1932)).
For the cases with first/last name as the value: I agree that these statements should be deleted or converted. Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:29, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
@Valentina.Anitnelav: As you say, <unknown value> is not true. Please stop putting untrue data into wikidata. It's really a very wrong thing to do, for the obvious reason that it is not true. Whatever your privacy concerns, it is not acceptable to assuage them by damaging wikidata. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:49, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: It's common practice to use <somevalue> with qualifier stated as (P1932) to record somebody or something which is known but doesn't have a Wikidata item -- eg a creator of a work, a publisher, etc. It allows full data from the extraction to be included here, with the ability to return and create items at a later time.
The error is using the name <unknown value> for <somevalue>. Jheald (talk) 10:54, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: To quote from meta:Wikidata/Data_model_update#Value,_no_value,_some_value:_"snaks"_in_Wikibase (draft):
"Unknown means that the property has some value, but we could not say which one, as in "Pope Linus most certainly had a date of birth, but it is unknown to us." We should read this claim as "Pope Linus most certainly had some date of birth". We normally use this to make information more complete in cases where we don't have all the details, not to provide details on what somebody else knows or doesn't know. For example, one could also use "unknown" in a situation where we know the exact value but cannot enter it for some reason (technical, legal, social, ...). In any case, this should not be confused with the notion that it is unknown whether an item has a value for a specific property, for instance, if a person had children or not.
Since "unknown" and "none" are no real values, we now have three different kind of "basic pieces of information" that we use to build claims: property-value pairs, properties that have "no value", and properties that have "some value". In the data model, these things are called snaks (the word that was invented as an internal term for an auxiliary data structure that most users will never encounter). The three types of snak in Wikibase are: value snaks, no-value snaks, and some-value snaks. Each snak has a property, but only value snaks have a specific value. In the structures we have met so far, snaks occur in three places: as the main snak of a statement ("place of birth: Cambridge"), as qualifiers, and in references. Indeed, each reference is essentially a list of snaks." (my emphasis)
I agree with Jheald that "unknown value" may not be the best name for this (there is actually a shift in this passage from "unknown value" to "some value"). --Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:11, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
In most cases 2# is the way to go and it's backed by the structural need notability provision of our policy.
I do believe that "unknown value" is true. If I only know a name of a person then I don't necessarily know which person is meant. It's only "family relation+name" that allows the direct identification of a person in many cases. ChristianKl❫ 10:29, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Search for changes to a specific language

Is there any way that I can search for changes to a specific language? There is an anonymous user (or more, I don't know) who recently has been adding discriptions and labels in my language, but most of them are misspelled or mistranslated. Their IP address always changes so I can't keep track of all of their edits.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.191.56.212 (talk • contribs) at 15:07, June 24, 2019‎ (UTC).

The Wikidata Vandalism Dashboard can be used to patrol label/description/alias sitelink changes in one or more languages. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 09:32, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Merging request

Q21476612 ("Vetulani") is identical with Q7923845, and therefore should be merged into it. Francesco 13 (talk) 23:58, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Not quite. One is an item for the family name. The other an item for disambiguation pages on language wikis. It is the case that the en.wiki link was on the wrong item; now moved. --Tagishsimon (talk) 00:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • It wasn't.
BTW, we already had this on Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2019/05#Request_for_merging_to_objects. --- Jura 10:34, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps you'd explain the essential distinction that eludes me, @Jura1:. https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetulani is a list of links to people with the surname Vetulani. https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetulani is a list of links to people with the surname Vetulani. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vetulani is a list of links to people with the surname Vetulani. You insist that one of these should be on a different item than the other two. Why? --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:40, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
enwiki puts disambiguation pages into w:Category:All disambiguation pages. This one isn't in there. I don't second-guess their editorial choices. --- Jura 10:45, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
I see. Commendably passive of you. I've changed the en page per the editorial guideline found at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Surnames and moved the en link back to the DAB item. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:01, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
It's mainly a question of scalability, available tools and respecting enwiki's editorial choices. We frequently get complaints here about them .. --- Jura 11:08, 25 June 2019 (UTC)

Edit frequency limits

I'm running a training workshop tomorrow that will involve Wikidata editing. Last time I did this, there was a problem with edits being rejected because everyone editing at once exceeded a limit on edit frequency. Is it possible to request this limit be lifted for certain IP addresses? (CDC's IP addresses appear to all begin with 198.246.) Thanks! John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 03:00, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

@John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): Can you make that request at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Other_rights#IPBE ? ChristianKl❫ 07:17, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
That won't help as IP block exemption (IPBE) does something else.
Wikidata does currently not have rate limits defined beyond the ones which are valid for all projects. That means that IPs and newbie accounts (not "autoconfirmed" or "confirmed") can make 8 edits per minute, and, here I am not exactly sure, multiple newbie accounts using the same IP address could potentially be sharing a single 8/min quota.
@John P. Sadowski (NIOSH): I suggest to do the following:
  • Before the workshop starts, make some tests whether relevant IPs or IP ranges are blocked. Special:BlockList for local blocks and meta:Special:GlobalBlockList for global blocks might help here. In the unlikely case that there are blocks in place, show up at the admin noticeboard before the workshop starts.
  • Users at your workshop should be using individual accounts. If they create accounts during the workshop, there is no possibility to become autoconfirmed (requires 4 days + 50 edits). As soon as all accounts are created, list them at WD:AN and ask for "confirmed" rights for all of these accounts. That should remove the "newbie" status from them. If you announce a time when this roughly will happen, an admin might perhaps be waiting for you.
Confirmed or autoconfirmed users can make 90 edits per minute, which should be enough for all activities you are planning (admin and bot accounts are unlimited, as far as I know, but that does not matter here). As far as I understand (a bit speculative again), each account has its own 90/min quota even if they are editing via the same IP. --MisterSynergy (talk) 08:51, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: Thanks, requesting confirmed status seems to be the right solution. The previous event had about 30 people in attendance and they were making individual edits, and I'm pretty sure none of them were individually making more than 8 edits/minute, so it appears the quota is pooled by IP address. John P. Sadowski (NIOSH) (talk) 01:52, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Multilanguage label

Hi, all. I have an idea to add new feature: language-independent (or multiple-language) label. We have many items which have such labels but they are spread now across all languages, as labels or more often as aliases. I am talking about persons (which have original names), names themselves, creative works, some scientific stuff like chemical elements and even articles. Now it is tradition to add such labels in all possible languages (random example) which is overkilling in my opinion. I know we have title (P1476)/native label (P1705), name in native language (P1559)/birth name (P1477) but I am talking about label which can help in suggestions and search. Introducing such label we might replace labels in many languages with one ("Wikidata-way", isn't it?). --Infovarius (talk) 20:51, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Sounds like it could be a good solution. Latin script languages could default to a mul-Latn label just like en-GB defaults to en. --Marsupium (talk) 00:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Have a mul-Latn language tag sounds like a great idea. ChristianKl❫ 11:18, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Need help solving dispute on item A.C. Cesena (Q6664) and Cesena F.C. (Q16848949)

Long story short. A.C. Cesena S.p.A. is a company and football club that folded in 2018. In football world there is many kind of "re-foundation", for example, applied to Italian Football Federation and to be the official successor. In that case, Parma F.C., Parma Calcio shared the same Q entry despite having different EU VAT number (P3608) as different legal person.

However, for A.C. Cesena case. It was some investor bought another club "A.S.D. Romagna Centro" and renamed to RC Cesena and then Cesena F.C., claiming as the successor without officially sanctioned by the Italian Football Federation. As well as individual wiki had different treatment to have one single umbrella article or currently en:A.S.D. Romagna Centro Cesena and en:A.C. Cesena.

Similar case also observed in Vicenza Calcio, despite the club and company also folded. It is officially the new club acquired the assets of the old club, as well as keeping three Q entries L.R. Vicenza Virtus (Q56542463), Vicenza Calcio (Q8643) and Bassano Virtus 55 S.T. (Q2312334), which in en-wiki had two articles which en:L.R. Vicenza Virtus is an umbrella article for "L.R. Vicenza Virtus" and "Vicenza" (by branding sense) while en:Bassano Virtus 55 S.T. was for "Bassano Virtus 55 S.T." before it was renamed to "L.R. Vicenza Virtus" by legal person sense. However, nl:L.R. Vicenza Virtus is an umbrella article for "L.R. Vicenza Virtus" and "Bassano Virtus 55 S.T.", and then nl:Vicenza Calcio is another dedicated article.

Since usually one Q only have one unique Bloomberg company ID (P3377) and EU VAT number (P3608), please advise the MoS of wikidata, should "A.C. Cesena" and illegitimate successor "Cesena F.C." shared the same Q entry or keep the two separate? Matthew hk (talk) 15:18, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

They should be kept separate, given that they existed simultaneously, then one became defunct and the other was renamed to something similar. Also, they have separate articles on some Wikipedias. Ghouston (talk) 22:23, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Should i go ahead to add back the it-wiki article back to Cesena F.C. (Q16848949)? What should i do when someone else remove it again without discussion? Matthew hk (talk) 00:20, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
it:AC Cesena seems to be OK, it says "Klubas įkurtas 1940 m. Yra žaidę Serie A pirmenybėse. 2018 m. vasarą paskelbta, kad komanda išformuojama." which according to Google Translate corresponds to A.C. Cesena (Q6664). But is itwiki really lacking an article for Cesena F.C. (Q16848949)? It probably should have one. Also, the Italian label on A.C. Cesena (Q6664) could be updated to say it's a defunct club. Ghouston (talk) 02:54, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Ah, the other article is it:Cesena Football Club which isn't linked to Wikidata anymore. This really needs to be sorted out on the Italian Wikipedia, I think. Ghouston (talk) 03:28, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
That article claims that the current team is the result of some kind of merger, which would probably be best served on Wikidata by creating a third item, which succeeds the other two. If there's controversy about whether the claimed merger is valid, that should be sorted out first. Ghouston (talk) 03:39, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
Cesena F.C. (Q16848949) (Romagna Centro Cesena aka Cesena FC) was intended for the merged club. Yes, may be foundation year should changed to 2018 and created the third item "A.S.D. Romagna Centro" for another "defunct" club due to merger. Matthew hk (talk) 10:56, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

Flixbus/Flixmobility (Q15712258) Flixtrain (Q55499626)

The company 'Flixbus' GMBH has been renamed 'Flixmobility' GMBH in may 2016. However the trademark Flixbus is still in use even as the new one for railservices Flixtrain. How does Wikidata handle an official rename and the trademark use of the old name? Bloomberg website Only in the German Wikipedia are the 3 terms (Flixbus, Flixtrain and Flixmobility) used correctly. I will shorly be renaming the Dutch article and rewriting it with separate chapters for bus and rail. As in the German version. 'Flixbus' and 'Flixtrain' wil link to the separate chapters. Flixtrain (Q55499626) correctly links to the Flixtrain chapter in the German article FLixmobility.Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:46, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Some websites for the rail part: https://www.railjournal.com/passenger/main-line/flixtrain-to-launch-german-open-access-services-this-month/ https://www.railjournal.com/in_depth/flixtrain-shakes-up-german-long-distance-market https://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/flixtrain-seeks-to-enter-french-passenger-market.html Smiley.toerist (talk) 12:57, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

I don't know that we have a consensus best practice. In your case (one item for both Flixbus GMBH and Flixmobility), I would use official name (P1448) to record the two official names with start/end dates, add name change (Q2343619) as a significant event, and make a new item "Flixbus" <instance of> trademark (or brand), <owned by> Flixbus GMBH/Flixmobility. - PKM (talk) 19:05, 26 June 2019 (UTC)
Separate item for brand/tradename and separate item for company.--Jklamo (talk) 11:30, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

any Russian-speaking programmers here?

I want to merge repeat until (Q30278326) into do while loop (Q3242594). But the Russian-language descriptions conflict. Can anyone confirm that they're more or less equivalent, pick the best one, and delete the other one? Thanks. —Scs (talk) 02:53, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to me. repeat until (Q30278326) has a statement that it is a part of Pascal (Q81571). I made it more clear with subclass of (P279). --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:26, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
You need to find Azerbaijani speaker to find out concept of this article: is it part of Pascal description or just generic programming construct in as series of Wikipedia articles. EugeneZelenko (talk) 13:51, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
These are different forms of cycle construction, Scs, why do you want to merge them? They have different condition of exit. --Infovarius (talk) 14:50, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
repeat until is pascal form of do while, or "цикл с постусловием" (as it should be labeled in Russian). So there can be do while (C operator) and Do Loop While (VB operator), if they suit WD concept. Or repeat until must be deleted instead. --Igel B TyMaHe (talk) 08:56, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Yeah these look different, maybe should not be merged at all. Laboramus (talk) 23:47, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
Short answer: No, they probably don't deserve merging after all.
Longer answer: I was looking into our taxonomy of programming language constructs (that is, the individual syntactic elements that make up programming languages), and I was discovering that we don't have a very well refined taxonomy there yet.
We don't have instance entities for each construct in each programming language. (That is, we don't have entities for C if/else statement or Fortran computed goto or Haskell function. Nor do I particularly think we should.)
We don't even have a complete taxonomy of class entities for the various common types of programming language constructs, entities that the hypothetical C if/else statement entity could be instances of. We do have some class-like entities, like loop (Q8868615) and declaration (Q1183659) and goto (Q750997). But we're missing others -- there's no entity for if statement at all (the closest we've got is control flow (Q868299)), nor for the superclass programming language construct.
But we do have do while loop (Q3242594) which might be thought of (and is!) a subclass of loop (Q8868615). And then we come to repeat until (Q30278326). It appears to be specifically about Pascal's repeat until loop, which is (or would be) an instance of do while loop (Q3242594).
So if repeat until (Q30278326) were about a generic construct (as opposed to the Pascal-specific construct it is), it would be just another name for do while loop (Q3242594), which is why I was thinking it needed merging. But it's not about a generic construct, so it can stay -- but it's odd, because it's the only example I've found so far of an entity about a specific construct in a specific language.
[Side note: It may well be that the reason that we "don't have a very well refined taxonomy" is that there isn't a good, single taxonomy that would apply to all programming languages. Me, I imagine there's one, but the one in my head might be too heavily influenced by my favorite programming language, might not be a good match for others.]
Anyway, that's my story. Comments on the larger question of a "taxonomy of programming language constructs" welcome. —Scs (talk) 13:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

Geographical object and public library

I do have a constraint on Bergen Open Library (Q64827152) the public library (Q28564) for visitors per year (P1174), Entities using the visitors per year property should be instances of geographical object or exhibition (or of a subclass of them), but Q64827152 currently isn't How can i have this constraint lifted. Pmt (talk) 04:41, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Is Bergen Open Library (Q64827152) a virtual, web only library? (Perhaps an "official website" property should be added at the item.) I think visitors on a website have a quite different significance, and should be catched in a different (new?) property.
Or is Bergen Open Library (Q64827152) identical with Bergen Public Library (Q4891541) - then the items should be merged. --Jneubert (talk) 08:40, 27 June 2019 (UTC)
The label in Bokmål for Bergen Open Library (Q64827152) is the same as for Bergen Public Library (Q4891541). Soemtimes we have two items, one for the building and one about the organisation. I do not know the intentions here. Bergens Offentlige Bibliotek as organisation has branches in at least six different places. (talk) 14:35, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jneubert: This is about a physical public liberary containing books for lending out books as you can see by checking out public library (Q28564) having instance of (P31) public library (Q28564). And Bergen Open Library (Q64827152) is about the building constructed by architects and built by builders. The physical building is subclass of (P279), library building (Q856584) and can/do not have geographical object (Q618123) as a constraint raises. Hoping this is claryfying. @Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra The branches is a part of Q, Q64827152: i think and why should a building contain a Virtual web only Library? My question is striktly on lifting a constraint on Bergen Open Library (Q64827152). Mvh Pmt (talk) 10:17, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

EasyQuery kaput?

Is EasyQuery dead? I'm not seeing it on any items I look at. (cf. preferences / gadgets / easyQuery) --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:14, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Me too. Tubezlob (🙋) 16:25, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
It isn't really dead. The icons just aren't visible but you can still click them (or click where you expect them). I have reported this to Phabricator. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

spouse

spouse (P26). We can use end cause (P1534) -> divorce (Q93190). What about if the end cause is the death of the spouse of the person? Xaris333 (talk) 22:50, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

death of spouse (Q24037741) --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:53, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Thank you. If I also want to add the information to the spouse that is death? Xaris333 (talk) 23:08, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Based on the result from this query I would suggest death (Q4). --Larske (talk) 23:44, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
death (Q4) or dying (Q267505)? Xaris333 (talk) 00:09, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Discourage bot descriptions hard-coded in the database in favor of dynamically generated ones?

[Moved here from Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Edoderoobot edit rate as it does not require admin attention. --Marsupium (talk) 09:54, 25 June 2019 (UTC)]

Is anybody aware of a previous discussion about

I feel hard-coded standard descriptions are very bad design. --Marsupium (talk) 16:28, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

The design currently is: users edit a manual description in their language and after that the description is shown in the mobile app and the description is shown in the search results on xx-wiki. The AutoDesc.js is not doing that, is it? Edoderoo (talk) 16:58, 21 June 2019 (UTC)
@Edoderoo: Yes, I think you are right that, at the moment, hard-coded descriptions are the only working ones in most contexts. I'm curious if there has been any discussion to change that, that's why I was asking. --Marsupium (talk) 19:29, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
To be honest, I'm more concerned about the silly datamodel of Wikipedia. I understand how the design flaws are there for historical reasons, but especially the missing link red links to Wikidata (read: red links link to a title, and no one knows what will appear under that title later on) are a serious source for errors. Edoderoo (talk) 19:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Agree, this seems to be another independent problem tho. Just a note: There is en:Template:Interlanguage link#Link to Reasonator and Wikidata which you probably know anyway, and it's not much used I think. --Marsupium (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
It is hard for a template to know if a subject is notable enough for an article. Where I am active, those are the only red links accepted. But I wonder another thing. If I see an article being deleted on xx-wiki. Can I in any simple way see which item it used to be connected to? Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 06:34, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
Given that descriptions are shown when people search for items, generating all those description the way Magnus does in Resonater on-the-fly might be two expensive. We would likely need a system that caches the generated descriptions and that sounds like a bigger project. We would also need a way to edit the rules based on which the automatically generated description would be generated. It would be nice to have that, but it requires significant development resources that might be spend more effectively elsewhere. ChristianKl❫ 13:26, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Maybe we could have some types of items where Wikibase sets/displays/generates the description. This works nicely for lexemes. Given the current software, I think every items needs a description at least in English. I used to be much more in favor of autogenerated descriptions. I think the Edoderoobot approach is preferable over trying to write all of them manually. --- Jura 14:11, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • This was discussed as early as the London Wikimania and at that time there were no arguments that convincingly explained why we need fixed descriptions. The one argument that was considered important that in a dump a description was available for standards sake. It has ever since been the best argument I have heard. The notion that automated descriptions can be cached even saved.. Ah well. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 14:46, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
    • It's just not being developed. Try to select a Wikidata item that has several others with the same label, but no description on Commons, Query Server or Wikivoyage and you will notice how it's (not) working. --- Jura 14:52, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Just discovered w:Wikipedia:Short_description (no comment) --- Jura 03:26, 26 June 2019 (UTC)

Regarding Query Service

Hello Everyone,

I need a list of people who are born in 1995 and belongs to Punjab.

Can anyone help me, i tried to make a query but failed... --Jagseer S Sidhu (talk) 15:18, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

What makes a person belong to Punjab? Note that WD:Request a query is a dedicated help desk for such a question. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Punjab is a state in India. Thanks for help.. --Jagseer S Sidhu (talk) 03:01, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
@Jagseer S Sidhu: Matěj sees a problem with the word "belong" in your question: are you talking about people who were born there (place of birth (P19))? who lived there (residence (P551))? where they worked work location (P937)? where they were educated (educated at (P69))? something else? This would help us craft a response to your question on WD:Request a query. Mahir256 (talk) 03:09, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Exactly. I did put an emphasis on the word belong. If I didn't know what that meant, I could look it up on, surprisingly, Wikidata. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 06:53, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

residence and studies

residence (P551). Example: the hometown of a person is in France. For 3 years he was studying in England. During that 3 years he was going to France when he has holidays from university. After his graduation, he returned to his hometown and stayed there. Are we going to use England with P551? I am asking because he was there only for studies. Xaris333 (talk) 21:48, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

In my opinion, adding residence England is redundant and excessive data clutter (true but trivial), better expressed by listing the English school attended and dates. -Animalparty (talk) 22:16, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Yes, I have done this with educated at (P69). The question in about residence (P551). Xaris333 (talk) 22:40, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Use appropriate qualifiers - start & end date. People are normally considered resident wherever they're studying. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:43, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
At least in the U.S., undergraduate students at a college or university away from home usually have a choice as to whether they legally change their residence or not. Not sure if this matters to Wikidata; also, in most cases it would be difficult to determine. - Jmabel (talk) 10:17, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Membership in a military unit

Is there a way to designate membership or service of a person in a military unit, such as a brigade (Q102356), division (Q169534)?

Some related properties are employer (P108), military branch (P241), commander of (P598), and allegiance (P945), but none of them is quite right:

I looked at items about several notable soldiers (Alexander Matrosov (Q468094), Nikolai Gastello (Q2997156), and Q16629269 and couldn't find anything like that. I was surprised somewhat, given that there are a lot of Wikipedians who love military history, and it's quite easy to find references for membership in units.

If there is no appropriate property, does it make sense to add one? --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 08:50, 22 June 2019 (UTC)

member of (P463)? --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:53, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
I've done a few with member of (P463) as a qualifier of military branch (P241). It doesn't seem popular:
SELECT ?person
WHERE {
  ?person p:P241 ?s.
  ?s pq:P463 ?unit.
}
Try it! . Ghouston (talk) 10:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
I wasn't suggesting Member Of as a qualifier - sorry, should have been clearer. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:34, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Here are the results of a query to find the most common property used to connect items with occupation (P106) = some instance or subclass of warrior (Q1250916) with items in subclasses of armed organization (Q17149090):
Looking at some of the top results:
Hope this helps, Jheald (talk) 11:32, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
member of (P463) indeed looks like the closest thing, but it's also not perfect. It's a membership in an organization, and a military unit is not quite the same as a club or a youth movement. --Amir E. Aharoni (talk) 11:49, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
It's more of an employment relationship, but the unit isn't the employer, in the way that a university department probably wouldn't be an employer. I suppose that's why it seemed logical to me to make the unit a qualifier of the main relationship. Ghouston (talk) 12:39, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
Looking at the talkpage, it seems I suggested using member of (P463) for this back in 2014, and had completely forgotten about it! Ooops :-) I think either this or a dedicated property would be a reasonable approach. I am not keen on the qualifier-to-P241 approach because this could potentially change a lot over time, and things might get complicated with multiple sets of qualifiers. In some countries/contexts, you might also get people from different P241s in the same unit, which would make searching for a list a bit confusing. Andrew Gray (talk) 13:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • There is also the related concept of "served on a particular ship" for sailors; we seem to have member of the crew of (P5096) which could be used for this, although it's mostly used for space missions at the moment. Andrew Gray (talk) 13:31, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I have been using "member of (P463)" but I am not against creating "member of military unit" to match member of the crew of (P5096) which I use for Navy officials. --RAN (talk) 13:04, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
    • member of the crew of (P5096) is just a shortcut so that we can link a person to a ship without needing to create an item like "crew of RMS Titanic". Military units generally already have items, so there doesn't seem to be anything to be gained. Ghouston (talk) 22:30, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
      • I will say, a new property, "member of military unit" KCVelaga (talk) 22:08, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Same place?

This data and this data seems to be about the same city in Brazil. However, it seems that there are duplicate articles at the sv.wiki and the ceb.wiki. What do you people think?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by SirEdimon (talk • contribs) at 22. 6. 2019, 01:33‎ (UTC).

A distinction is being drawn between the municipality (Q996763), and the main settlement/town within the municipality (Q22015573). None of the three language wikis I looked at (en, de, pl) seem to apprehend the distinction, but it seems reasonable from a) looking at openstreetmap - there's a town within a much larger rural area and b) support from geonames for the two as distinct entities, one nested within the other. Ceb (and maybe sv) seem mainly to be bot-written distillations of geonames and operate at a higher level of granularity than many of us are comfortable with; but discomfort is probably good for us. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:22, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
There are mixed feeling about these on svwiki. We have two articles in Sweden, but that is because the municipality today (almost) always is much much larger than the populated place naming the municipality. Some users think we should follow the same principle about non-Swedish sites as we do to Swedish. Most users agree about the principle as such. But what should we fill the articles with? In Sweden we have good statistics about the populated places. But outside the Nordic countries, it is hard for us to find such statistics. And be aware! Geonames is a terrible source for verifing that there is a place with a specific name. They are (fairly) good at administrative entities as municipalities, but awful on populated places. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 08:02, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
  • I linked the two. Can we find more localities within the 1408km²-municipality? --- Jura 12:03, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
That makes no sense. Here, in Brazil, the city and the municipality are the same entity. Check this date from the IBGE (Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics): [5].--SirEdimon (talk) 03:06, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps these two pieces of data should be merged.--SirEdimon (talk) 03:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
That makes fine sense. A municipality is an administrative unit covering an area of land. A settlement is a continuous group of houses which often covers a lesser area than a municipality, but in some cases may cross a municipality border. A merging would be wrong. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 06:51, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
@SirEdimon: Also in Sweden, a city is a subclass of a municipality so it is almost the same thing. But as @Dipsacus fullonum: describes, a Settlement is not the same thing as a municipality. A settlement may have a school, but it does not legally own or run the school since it is not a juridical person like the municipality is. The city/municipality is an organisation who (often) serve a well defined geographic area. A settlement is not an organisation or person, but always a geographic area, which sometimes is well defined but often has fuzzy borders. What makes it confusing, is that settlements who do not are organisations, sometimes are named "city" or "town" without being an organisation or person. In English they sometimes call such things an "unincorporated city/town", but that does not describe a typical Swedish settlement since, as far as I know, all areas in the Nordic countries are incorporated in a municipality with the exception of a military base in Denmark. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 07:43, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
I think it's similar in many countries, certainly in Australia, the UK and the Netherlands you can have several towns administered by the same local government. In these cases, it's obvious that the towns and the administrative area are different entities. It's more confusing when they overlap to a large extent, as for the urban area of a city, e.g., Amsterdam (Q727) vs Amsterdam (Q9899). Using either type of thing to identify locations can be problematic, since town boundaries are not always well-defined, and can change with new construction. Administrative areas are prone to boundary changes and amalgamations. Ghouston (talk) 10:56, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
Conversely, in the U.S.: I'm wondering about how this model works for, say, Ruston (Q1507715) and Tacoma (Q199797). Ruston is an enclave in Tacoma; unless there is a sign on the street you are on, you'd never know when you are passing from one to the other. For all intents and purposes they are a single urban area, but years ago Ruston was an ASARCO (Q4654057) company town, and it was never letally integrated into Tacoma. - Jmabel (talk) 18:04, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
We used to have different laws for different types of municipalies here. There were rural municipalities, with limited services and also less taxes. A city had more services and higher taxes. A rural municipality could have a lower tier municipality within itself. Those could give complementary services, like city planning, fire fighting etc. Today all municipalities have to provide the same kind of services. To make it cheaper, municipalities often cooperates. Firefighting in my municipality is for example provided in cooperation with two neighbour municipalities. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 19:49, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
So, we should just let it be as it is?SirEdimon (talk) 18:04, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
We should, yes. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:19, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
So, Thank you to everybody who came here to answer this topic.SirEdimon (talk) 04:48, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

conferred by

conferred by (P1027). "person or organization who awards a prize to or bestows an honor upon a recipient". When is used as a qualifier with award received (P166): This property is about the person who has the right to award the prize or the person who give (to a ceremony for example) the prize? For example, a president of a country has the right to award a person with a government medal. But in the ceremony the person who give the medal is the Minister of Foreign Affairs, on behalf of the President. Xaris333 (talk) 00:06, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

Standard usage is by indicating the orgainisation who decided to confer it on someone.. Who gives it at an award ceremony is a completely different thing. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 04:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
@GerardM: So, Knight Grand Cross of the Order of Pius IX‎ (Q23306205) conferred by (P1027) pope (Q19546). We are not adding the specific name of the pope. Or Order of Friendship (Q791135) conferred by (P1027) President of Russia (Q218295). We are not adding the specific president. Xaris333 (talk) 15:10, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

How are cultural institutions modelled on Wikidata?

Dear all

The current GLAMs mapped in Wikidata we can find

I'm working on the FindingGLAMs project to help map cultural institutions on Wikidata, we plan to add a great deal more detail about cultural institutions (galleries, libraries, archives and museums) to Wikidata. One of the things we are noticing about the existing data about GLAMs in Wikidata is that is modelled in several different ways making it difficult to find and build upon. Often countries are mapped differently from each other because different people are importing national databases of institutions. Our first step is to understand the ways in which cultural heritage data is currently modelled, we would really appreciate your help in doing this. Our goal is to get a better insight into the work the community has been doing with GLAM institution items, and the pros and cons of the different approaches. As we are going to work with large amounts of data, we want our work to be as beneficial to the community as possible. So far we have discovered the following ways of modelling cultural heritage institutions:

  1. The institution as a location, the legal entity and the building are modelled in the same item. This appears to be the most common way to model GLAMS on Wikidata, the way Wikipedia handles it (there aren't often separate articles for the building and the legal entity) and the way visualisation tools like Monumental search for items. E.g National Library of Sweden (Q953058)
  2. The institution is split into at least two different items, one for the legal entity (the organisation) and at least one for the building. British Museum (Q6373) and British Museum (Q41778642)
  3. Inserting coordinates as a qualifier of headquarters location instead of P625 statements. E.g Q15735372

We can of course have a conversation of how GLAMs should be modelled but at the moment we just want to map how things have been modelled.

Thanks very much

P.s if you know of any datasets of cultural institutions we could import during the project please add them to this page

John Cummings (talk) 11:03, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

The third example is a good example of incorrect usage of headquarters location (P159). It should be a specific location, not some town or municipality. The British Museum example shows how it should be done. Unfortunately someone ran a stupid bot some time ago so this error is all over the place.
I usually apply the practice of pragmatic disambiguation: In case of a museum that means you start with one item that's about the museum as the organisation and the building it's in. This works fine most of the time. At some point when adding more data, it doesn't work any more and you split up the item. You already mentioned British Museum, another good example is Rijksmuseum (Q190804) and Rijksmuseum (Q25861166).
For historic buildings ("monuments") the per country approach worked well. I would do that here too. Multichill (talk) 11:56, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Splitting up an item may be tricky, at least if it has a lot of statements and/or a lot of other items refer to it. I think it would be safer to pick one initially, presumably an item about the museum as an organisation, and add the other later if needed. Ghouston (talk) 12:38, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
@Multichill: That makes me think the Swedish translation of headquarters location (P159) is poorly translated. The Swedish word "Säte" (Seat) is in legal text not the location where the organisation has its activities. It is more applied to the administrative supervision and legal trial. I know a case where a taxi-company had all its activity in and around Stockholm. But according to the companys document, its seat was located in Örebro. The consequence was that the company didn't have to follow the special rules taxi drivers and taxi companies in Stockholm have to follow. And the legal trial of its activities could not be made by the disctict courts in Stockholm. @Esquilo: for consultation. I have also heard cases where companies have choosen to have their seat in "wrong" county, since it sometimes differ which VAT you have to pay. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 13:11, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Companies having their seat in the most convenient location is not uncommon. Most european online cassinos have their seat in Malta for example. /ℇsquilo 14:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
@Esquilo: But the legal base is then not always the same as the place for the physical headquarter. That is maybe why we should change the Swedish label of that property? I am personally member of the board in a housing cooperative (Q562166). I cannot say that we have any headquarter at all. But as all Swedish companies we have a seat and that is the municipality where we have our property. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 16:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Any example where the legal base is different from physical headquarter? Anyhow, headquarters location (P159) is not only used for companies that have a legal base. It is also used for government agencies, military formations etc. The bottom line, as I see it, is that organisations should never have the properties coordinate location (P625) or location (P276). headquarters location (P159) should be used instead and the label should reflect this use. /ℇsquilo 17:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
You could take any Swedish example. You may write whateverl location you like in your statues. What is noted in the registry at Bolagsverket is always the municipality. If you write "Fittja" in the statues, Bolagsverket notes "Botkyrka". Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 18:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
The headquarters of an organization is a place where the top-level decisions are made. For a company, it could presumably be the office of the chief executive or some such. Atlassian (Q757307), for example, has its headquarters in Sydney, but its top level holding company is in the UK. Ghouston (talk) 01:30, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Neither "Museum as an organisation" nor "Museum as a building" are really the right default concept. There's a museum in Hobart called the John Elliott Classics Museum [6] which is operated by the University of Tasmania and which has an exhibition room within a larger building. So this museum obviously isn't a building, and doesn't appear to be an organisation either. The default concept should probably be "Museum as a collection of physical objects", or something like that. Ghouston (talk) 01:40, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
The title of this section, the description of museum (Q33506), and en:Museum, all describe a museum as an "institution". Unfortunately, Wikidata has institution (Q178706) as a subclass of organization (Q43229), so that doesn't help. Ghouston (talk) 05:26, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
I don't know if it's important for your known and decission, but the rule we followed in cawiki is "the museum is an organitzation" when a location (P276) = "building item". All informations related to the building (historical or not) are separated of properties about the museum organitzation (manager, president, budget, etc.), collections, visitors services, etc. Our infobox joint both content. Ex.:Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya (Q861252) -->> museum in cawiki. Amadalvarez (talk) 07:52, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Hey guys, as a general remark, the world isn't black and white so don't try to model it like that. What works for your country/culture might not work for mine so please be aware of this and be pragmatic. Concepts like "always" and "never" generally don't apply if you have a wide scope. Multichill (talk) 09:53, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Taking museums as institutions, even if some aren't, may be a reasonable compromise, to save needing to create items for museums as collections as well as museums as organisations. Although, some organisations may run multiple museums, or combined museums and art galleries, or they may be municipal governments that run museums. We do end up with crazy things in Wikidata, like Epic Games Store (Q59510068) (an Internet site for buying computer games) is apparently a artificial physical object (Q8205328) and a artificial geographic entity (Q27096235). That can be discovered by following the subclasses online store (Q24649023), shop (Q213441), retail location (Q49416455), human-made landform (Q35145743). This is what happens when you have statements that aren't quite true in all cases. Ghouston (talk) 10:58, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Perhaps all museums are institutions, but not all institutions are organisations in a formal sense. Ghouston (talk) 11:00, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

located in the administrative territorial entity

located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) Reading the English description and "Also known as", I realized is always about the present. But is a property that we can use also for past. For example,

Q57334#P19 was born in Kato Dikomo (Q56266888). The statement has qualifiers located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) -> British Cyprus (Q15240466) and country (P17) -> British Empire (Q8680) which are correct because Cyprus Republic was created at 1960. But,

Q2112764#P19 was born in Pera Pedi (Q7166856). The statement has qualifiers located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) -> Limassol District (Q59150) which is the administrative territorial entity where the place is located now (after 1960).

Both person were born before 1960.

Which is the correct structure? Xaris333 (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I thought we stopped doing either of these. P131 (with start and end dates) should be on the value used in P19, not as a qualifier of P19. --- Jura 12:42, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
As Jura1. For cases when two entities did not coexist, you have located in present-day administrative territorial entity (P3842). It can for example be used to describe where a former settlement or administrative entity is located today. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Jura1: So, we don't give the information in person's item about the country of the place of birth? Xaris333 (talk) 13:12, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

@Xaris333: No! You should instead put into Kato Dikomo (Q56266888) that it until 1960 was in British Empire (Q8680). But I agree that this is a little trickier to dechiffer for a template on Wikipedia. Sextvå.tvånoll.ettsjunoll.sjufyra (talk) 13:18, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
Possible the second example's qualifier should have user located in present-day administrative territorial entity (P3842) -> Limassol District (Q59150) to link the birthplace to Limassol District. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:24, 29 June 2019 (UTC)


Sometimes Wikidata are so confusing. We need specific rules people. Everyone is adding the statements the way he think... Xaris333 (talk) 16:27, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I think it's just that nobody wants to cleanup after the bot that first added the P131. --- Jura 10:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

I think we need manuals. We have to agree for example, about the statements in human's item. How to add them, what cases we have. We need something that the user can read and follow. Now, everyone do what ever he/she thinks. And sometimes, other users copy wrong things because they think are the correct one. Xaris333 (talk) 19:12, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Representation of Visa Policies

I'd like to start a discussion on Wikidata doing a better job of representing visa policies (visa policy (Q16725895)). I've written up a somewhat lengthy description of the problem and potential solutions that might fit better as a RFC, but I don't think is quite ready for that. Should I just post the entire thing here, or link to a sandbox page somewhere, or...? --Tga.D (talk) 22:30, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

You can keep a draft at your user space. I have for example draft at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:ChristianKl/Draft:Principles_for_Property_Proposals and then post a link to your draft here on the project chat. ChristianKl❫ 09:07, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
Perfect, thank you! --Tga.D (talk) 00:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

I've posted the draft here: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Tga.D/Draft:Visa_Policy_Representation

To start the discussion, I'll point out some observations I made while writing it. Of the three representations, the third ("edges are statements with the property of the relevant country, and values of their visa policy") seems to me to be the worst. Going through the process for creating 200 new properties, then changing those properties to keep up with current events, seems like far too much of a burden. Which of the first two options is better depends on what is more important: simplicity of representation, or avoiding tens of thousands of new items that aren't very visible. The first option was by far the easiest query to write (though it's possible that's only because I don't know SPARQL well enough), and is the only representation that only needs to store each edge once. On the other hand, if I'm new(er) to Wikidata, and I open the page for a country's visa requirements and see it mostly blank, it's going to be very hard for me to know what I should be looking for instead (it's only through lots of variously worded searches and queries that I've convinced myself such a representation doesn't already exist). Whether that's a correct analysis, and if so, which of these is a better fit for Wikidata, I'm hoping someone else can answer. --Tga.D (talk) 00:29, 3 July 2019 (UTC)

How should old values of external identifiers be handled?

I have a small disagreement with User:MovieFex about how to handle cases where both current as well as outdated values for an external ID property exist. In this case, there were two IMDb ID (P345) for the movie Dos Cataluñas (Q57415096) (one was added via a merge). So IMDb at some point had two entries for the same movie, then later turned one into a redirect. I set the rank of the outdated/redirected ID to deprecated and added the qualifier reason for deprecation (P2241) redirect (Q45403344). MovieFex on ther other hand argues that there's no value in keeping such IDs and removed them. My understanding was, that this is what ranks are for - to mark such outdated values as deprecated. This way, Wikipedia and users querying our data still get the current ID as usual, while a query using the old ID still returns the corresponding item (like when people try to reconcile external databases, which might have stored an outdated IMDb ID, to Wikidata). I think it's especially a problem with external IDs that don't have a real ID and where we only store the URL slugs which aren't always 100% stable. So what's the community consensus in such cases? Keep or remove?

Additionally, there seems to be some issue with constraint violations. IMDb ID (P345) has a single value constraint (Q19474404), so when you add two IDs, it shows the constraint violation on the item itself and it's added via bot to the property's constraint violations page. But when you set the rank of one of the values to deprecated, it no longer shows a constraint violation - which I think is the way it's supposed to work. Yet in this case, the item wasn't removed from the property's constraint violation page with the next update. So it was still listed as an error that needed fixing, whhich prompted MovieFex to remove the deprecated value. Doesn't the bot that updates these pages check for ranks in such cases? --Kam Solusar (talk) 16:39, 29 June 2019 (UTC)

  • I think the default approach is to set the current one with preferred rank and leave the other one with normal rank, at least when it's not an identifier that has some other problems (e.g. conflation).
There are a few rare ones where we remove redirecting values, but I don't think it should be applied to additional identifiers where it's not currently being done on an automated basis. --- Jura 16:57, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
I haven't found the guideline to read up on this. Anyone that can help me find it? Is this a rule for any data connected to an item? Regardless if it was once true, but now obsolete, or if it was always a mistake? It is not the most obvious way of replacing data, so the guidelines should be made clear for new contributors. Jagulin (talk) 17:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Help:Ranking. --- Jura 17:35, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
Thanks! Linked from Help:Statements and also covered by Wikidata:Tours/Ranks (not listed in Wikidata:Tours) and Help:Deprecation + Help:Conflation_of_two_persons (both rarely linked). I guess I missed it because it didn't seem to be a central concept. Reading provided documentation I still think it's not central and will most likely not be found consistently used. Was this concept invented before Qualifiers? reason for deprecation (P2241) should be able to stand by itself, rather than using a separate "depreciated" flag. "preferred" as in "current" should in most cases have qualifiers ("end date" etc.) to solve the problem. Yes, it's a more complicated query, but since I doubt Ranking is used consistently the query still needs to handle that. Or there should be a bot flagging Rank based on these Qualifiers and no human involvement. In case of bot confusion, sourced Qualifiers should be added to the item. Has there been discussion/consensus about manual Ranking recently? I think I read that "rank" should be set according to consensus, I would expect a discussion entry on the talk page for any item having non-normal ranked statements.
To answer my previous question: Info that was once accurate but since cancelled (e.g. ID or Awards) are to be deprecated. Info that was once reported as true, but is widely regarded as false (e.g. fake census) should be deprecated or disputed. Proper info that was once reported, even if value now changed (e.g. old census) is "normal" but would need a time stamp. All of this handles "2nd party info". Mistakes made while editing WD (e.g. typos) and erroneous 1st party info (e.g. with no source mentioned) I think can be replaced directly. Structural info (e.g. "instance of") seems to be changed regularly without ranking old structure. -- Jagulin (talk) 08:55, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
On the original question, I think Kam Solusar made a good choice. With both ID being still functional (due to redirect), it could be argued that they are both "normal". Marking one depreciated is however a good signal to others which ID to abandon. The WD merge wasn't an error without source, so ID should not merely be removed. Deleting it causes loss of information, but it's probably not a massive loss and it can be added back if found relevant again.
Did anyone look into the claimed warning? Single value constraint does indicate that deprecation should clear it. I just flagged one of the ImdbID of Begunah (Q45233788) with deprecated (in this case it was a clearly incorrect value without source, so IMHO rather have it removed) and the warning was cleared on the Q-page. Let's see if it's also cleared on the property's constraint violations page. Note that it's currently not enough to set reason for deprecation (P2241) alone, it requires to have the Ranking flagged too. -- Jagulin (talk) 08:55, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • At Wikidata, a redirecting QID is meant to be equivalent to the ID it's redirecting to. In any case, Ranking is central to Wikidata, but Wikidata:Tours isn't a central document. --- Jura 09:14, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • @Kam Solusar: Marking the redirected ID as deprecated and adding the reason for deprecation as you did is what I would recommend, and what I have done in other cases. It is useful for Wikidata to retain the obsolete ID because other data sources may have recorded that old ID, and if the source dataset at some point stops redirecting, then Wikidata provides an alternative point of reference on what the old ID meant. The constraint violation reports are often severely out of date; I'm not sure if they are checking for deprecation or not, but it may just take a few weeks to clear. If they still don't clear up with deprecation then there may be an issue that should be raised in Phabricator. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks, that was also my line of thought. Especially since we also have quite a few other properties for movie/tv databases that also store IMDb IDs. --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2019 (UTC)

So since nobody here is argueing otherwise, it seems to be consensus that ranks are the way to go in these cases. That leaves only the problem with the listing in the constraint violations reports. In this case, the rank of the duplicate ID was set to deprecated in February, but it was still listed as a violation for several months afterwards. I'm not sure how these reports are generated, so I'm pinging User:Ivan A. Krestinin, the operator of KrBot2 that updates the violation report for IMDb ID (P345). Could you take a look into this? --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:24, 7 July 2019 (UTC)