Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2022/01

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Editing requests from a blocked user

This section has been moved to User:Gymnicus/Edit requests. Do not attempt to restore its contents to this page further. Mahir256 (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2022 (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. Mahir256 (talk) 22:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Russian district map

Hi. I am re-posting an question from the english wikipedia, since it is more likely that someone here knows the answer. en:Template:Moscow district OSM map creates a map which uses data from wikidata. On en:Metrogorodok_District Q2626887 the borders of the district are missing and without the red fill indicating where it is. It is supposed to look like on en:Maryino District Q1958176. Why does Metrogorodok have that issue?

I can see that the query from the template does get a list of districts and settlements in the Moscow area and the item for Metro is marked in said list, but I am not finding anything about how it renders, although I understand there is usually map files in the Data namespace on commons involved.--Snævar (talk) 12:18, 17 December 2021 (UTC)

I do not know the answer myself, but people might know it here.--Ymblanter (talk) 11:31, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Not sure if this is actually defined in Wikidata. Neither item has an OSM relation or a geoshape set.
At Wikipedia, maybe @underlying lk: who edited w:Template:Moscow district OSM map can help you. --- Jura 12:03, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Metrogorodok District is not just missing in the map in en:Metrogorodok_District, but on all maps using en:Template:Moscow district OSM map (it is not marked with green in any of the maps). Other districts are also missing in the all maps, e.g. Ostankinsky District (Q2704188). The SPARQL query in the template gives correct results as far as I can see. But I see a difference in the OSM relations. For most like Maryino District, the OSM relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/455222) consists of a single polygon and nothing else. The OSM relation for Metrogorodok District (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1319078) has two polygons, and the OSM relation for Ostankinsky District (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1250619) includes a node as label. I don't know if this is the reason that these OSM relations are not rendered in the maps, but I can guess it is the cause as it is the only difference that I can find. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 13:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
@Snævar: PS. The maps are not from the Data namespace on Commons as you suggest, but from OSM as stated in the name of the enwiki template. Wikidata doesn't point to the relevant OSM relations. It is the other way round, the relations is found because they have a wd tag pointing to the Wikidata items. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 13:35, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
The Openstreetmap relation for Q2626887 already had the Wikidata item; I now added this relation as a property to out item, let us see what happens.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:25, 24 December 2021 (UTC)
Map
Map should have shown Maryino, Metrogorodok and Ostankinsky Districts using query
Map
Map should have shown Maryino, Metrogorodok and Ostankinsky Districts using ids
It should make no difference to add OpenStreetMap relation ID (P402) as Kartographer looks for the wikidata tags in OSM. I made two mapframes here (one using a query, and one with the items directly in the code) which should show Maryino District (Q1958176), Metrogorodok District (Q2626887) and Ostankinsky District (Q2704188), but only the first is shown in both mapframes. You will also notice that the link you get when clicking on the district is a red link in the first mapframe. That is a known bug (phab:T185431). That some relations of type boundary are not rendered at all, is AFAIK not yet reported in phabicator. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 09:22, 25 December 2021 (UTC)
Shouldn't this work the other way round? Wikipedia > Wikidata > OSM and not Wikipedia > OSM > Wikidata. --- Jura 11:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1: I don't understand the question. Kartographer can use WDQS to select Wikidata IDs but it doesn't otherwise use Wikidata at all. The Wikidata IDs are either given explicit in mapframe and maplink tags on wiki pages or come from WDQS. They are only used to select the OSM relations which have the ID values in their Wikidata tags. The content of Wikidata items are not used by Kartographer. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:01, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation on wikidata

When here on Wikidata we handle disambiguation pages we should imho consider only full homography.

Take a look at Q232614: the element collects different disambiguation pages from different Wikipedia editions but on the assumption that there is an "underlying meaning", namely that of a historical region, Achaia. But when we handle ambiguity we scarcely refer to meaning: this is so much the case that we could imagine a ship named "Achaia", a firm named "Achaia", an asteroid named "Achaia", a genus named "Achaia" etc. All these instances have just a weak or null reference to the original historical region (the underlying meaning). A hypothetical firm named "Achaea" (an alias in our element) would be a completely different firm from the aformentioned firm named "Achaia".

All this reasoning imvho leads to these conclusions about elements collecting disambiguation pages:

  1. they should consider only one word (or sequence of letters), let's say "Achaia", putting together "Achaia (Begriffsklärung)" from de.wiki, "Achaia (disambiguation)" from en.wiki, "Achaia (disambigua)" from it.wiki etc.;
  2. they should not consider any underlying meaning, forcing together words that (being different) can not be ambiguous;
  3. they should not consider aliases, because when we handle ambiguity we essentially handle just empty words and not meanings.

Good examples of these principles are Q407494 ("rosso") and Q224402 ("red"), in which we do NOT find different words put together on the basis of the color as an underlying meaning. These words are ambiguous and for this precise reason are considered as sheer sequence of letters.

I'd appreciate your thoughts about this matter. :) I even summarized it on my userpage a long time ago. --Pequod76 (talk) 11:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

<< but on the assumption that there is an "underlying meaning", namely that of a historical region, Achaia >> seems to be your invention. What I see is a bunch of DAB pages hanging off an item that identifies them as DAB pages. Anything that follows in your discussion seems to fall if we remove this invented prop. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
In w:en:Achaea (ancient region) you can read that the ancient region was called either Achaea or Achaia. A province of the Roman Empire got its name (both names, actually) from the ancient region (see w:en:Achaia (Roman province)). The reason why Achaia and Achaea are considered aliases resides in this historical basis. The word Acaia, not ambiguous as lacking an h, is included in our element just because in gl.wiki this string of letters refers to the same historical region/roman province/modern Greek prefecture. In sh.wiki we have Aheja, which seems a completely different word, but has been included in Q232614 just because it happens to be the name of the same historical region in Serbo-Croatian. The only other reason why these aliases could have been put together is pure chance, but this appears highly unlikely to me. Is this what you mean by saying "hanging off"?
I suggest to look at Q615550 ("Herodotus"), in which the same bad method was followed (the underlying meaning being here the ancient historian). Or, let's say, Q412100 ("Alexander the Great"). These are imho clear examples of underlying meanings supporting the questionable choices made.
Hope I answered your doubts. --Pequod76 (talk) 12:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
I read in wd:DAB in a nutshell: Only link together the same strings (sequences of characters) – there are some exceptions to this rule. And these exceptions are listed here.
We also had this thread some 8 years ago, in which "primary meanings" and "forms" were discussed. My current thread does not depend on how fit is the Achaia's example. What I expressed is actually a guideline, but maybe an underrated and unacknowledged one. See also what discussed here and how almost nothing happened to Q744128, even though translations are not accepted exceptions to the nutshell. We can consider Achaia and Achaea mutual translations. We should do something about it all. --Pequod76 (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
New item creation for disambiguation is (or at least was) automatized for some wikis, so they no longer get mixed up with other stuff. This solves it for most applications.
Filceolaire died a few years ago, so it's unlikely he would work on it. There is an outline somewhere in phabricator how to automatize the reminder, but there doesn't seem much interest in it. If you want to work on it, feel free to. --- Jura 20:52, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
I think exactly like @Pequod76:, in the past I have done a lot of work on disambiguation items, I have splitted a lot of item, but every time it was a "war". I think that the rules are clear, we just have to want to follow them. --ValterVB (talk) 14:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Conscientious objection

conscientious objector (Q2930613) seems to conflate the act of objection with the actor, the objector. How should we unentangle them? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:20, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I think that is bad. I think that it should be clear to anyone that the two merged items were not the same because one had statements instance of (P31) activity (Q1914636) and practiced by (P3095) while the other had instance of (P31) occupation (Q12737077). When you have to remove a statement in order to be able to merge, the items should not be merged. I see that many of User:RJFF's edit are merges. Maybe they should checked for correctness. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 18:54, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Is some maintance robot sleeping?

Q2842655. I have added Dutch labels and relevant Dutch descriptions for the linked items Q27048978, Q5986435, Q5986589, Q5986603 and Q5986525. In Q2842655 the old version is still used: [2] and the other items dont show any Dutch labels (there are no english labels for these items). Changes in other items are updated correctly.Smiley.toerist (talk) 16:41, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

It's not v.clear to me what you mean, but the answer is probably, purge the page and all will be good. I've done so. Is all now good? (Refresh your browser's cache, too, pls.) --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Instance of: Commons gallery

Hello, is it standard practice to create items with instance of (P31) : Commons gallery (Q21167233)? We have about 3700 of those and many of them are not linked from anywhere. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

  • There are were a few bots/users who created them without any statements.
If the only reason they exist is a sitelink to a Commons gallery, it was probably an error.
There are several things that could be done: e.g. identify them and, merge or delete them. --- Jura 12:14, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
@Mike Peel:, who may be interested. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
In general these seem to be misplaced: they should either be merged into existing items or changed to a different instance of (P31) value (Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) might be relevant here, since some of the galleries seem analogous to lists). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:37, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
  • @Jura1: No plans, I focus on Commons categories, not galleries. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Mike Peel Thanks. I was just try to figure out what it means when you are writing what "should be done". Many date from soon 10 years ago. Clearly it isn't really work out for these. BTW Q21167233 is a subclass of lists. So, if you don't plan to work on them, would you miss them? --- Jura 15:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: It sounds like you mean to propose them for deletion, which wouldn't be the best way to handle them. Better to merge them in with existing items if you can do so, and discuss individual cases as needed. Or find someone who is more active with sitelinks to gallery items that you could support with working through them systematically. (like those who have created/edited these items.) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
      • @Mike Peel: if you would have few names to suggest, I'd be happy to do so. Otherwise, I guess I'd have to speak to myself primarily.
      Others I know of: the bots that created many, w/o approval, I think, are inactive. As for Nickpolk .. I suppose you remember.
      BTW merging will probably make a mess as some of the creations assumed that galleries at Commons have English pagenames.
      Maybe you have a few samples of those you think would benefit from saving?
      Maybe Vojtěch Dostál you are interested? --- Jura 23:27, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
      @Jura1 I'll have a look at them later and try to do something with at least some of them. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Can I add an exception for a property restriction?

Hi:

We have a property Guía Digital del Patrimonio Cultural de Andalucía ID (P3318) for heritage monuments. It requires item-requires-statement constraint (Q21503247) for coordinate location (P625), as all monuments are supposed to have coordinates. The problem here is for instances of archaeological site (Q839954) (or subclases): lots (most?) of the archaeological sites has not their coordinates published to avoid looting. I would like to set an exception for this case and avoid thousands of warnings. I've tried using exception to constraint (P2303) (change) but seems not to work (check here). Am I missing something? —Ismael Olea (talk) 11:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

@Olea: You can, however it is almost never needed and very unscalable. In this case, I would suggest adding the property with special "unknown value" as value (since these sites do have coordinates, they're just unpublished). See Help:Statements#Unknown_or_no_values if it's something you've not come across yet. SilentSpike (talk) 11:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
@SilentSpike I thought about using the «unknown value». My understanding is that statement would not be not really true: yes it's unknown for Wikidata but the data exists (in this case in the government dossiers). I would think appropriate for a disappeared ancient city, for example, which is unknown at the current human knowledge :-m —Ismael Olea (talk) 11:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
The UI string can be a little misleading. "Unknown value" is often better thought of as "some value" - there's no attached suggestion that the knowledge is actually unknown to all. The government may have the data, but if it's not published anywhere then it's unknown to Wikidata since there's no source (and our data reflects published sources, not absolute truth). SilentSpike (talk) 11:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Also just to explain for constraint exceptions: they're not scalable because they apply at instance level - which is why your change did not work (i.e. each site would need to be individually added as an exception). SilentSpike (talk) 11:14, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
(after edit conflict) I have reverted your change to the property as it isn't required. Instead, I have set coordinate location (P625) on Yacimiento Arqueológico Torrequebrada (Q97632604) to unknown value. From Hill To Shore (talk) 11:16, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
@SilentSpike thanks for the explanation :-) —Ismael Olea (talk) 11:23, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #501

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Events
    • Upcoming:
      • The next Wikidata+Wikibase office hours will take place on Wednesday, January 19th 2022 at 17:00 UTC (18:00 Berlin time) in the Wikidata Telegram group.
      • SPARQL queries live on Twitch and in French by Vigneron, January 4 at 19:00 CEST
    • Ongoing:
    • Past:
      • Wikibase live session (December 2021) - log
  • Tool of the week
    • Wikidata's Q item explorer: Show claims where the item is the subject of the statement but doesn't show statements where the item is the target value.
  • Development
    • Due to the winter holidays, no development has happened for Wikidata in the last two weeks.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Britannica no longer carries a biography

For Werner Groebli (Q54573727) his link no longer works but is still at the wayback machine, how do you normally handle this? --RAN (talk) 20:40, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Should I delete the Identifier for Britannica and swap in "described at url"? I wasn't aware that Britannica deleted some biographies. --RAN (talk) 19:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): I updated the page as I think should be done. In general we do not delete or deprecate data that used to be valid. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:48, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Spam from Iran

I monitor unpatrolled edits in Persian language (labels, descriptions) and noticed we have a massive firehose of spam from Iran. I have been basically deleting ~50 items each week and it's not slowing down. One of the people whom I deleted their item, protested (Topic:Wna6da2bev2s5axm) and put a link to some SEO and marketing tutorials that teach how to have a google knowledge panel. Like this. So it seems we are gonna need to deal with this for a while. I have a feeling that since the spam went unnoticed and stuck, people started to do this more often. We can also ask youtube to remove spam tutorials (maybe?). The sad part is that we have around 1000 items of Iranians who doesn't have a sitelink and likely are spam if anyone wants to take a look and delete (start from the newest IDs, the oldest are researches it seems): https://w.wiki/4d8s Amir (talk) 12:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you should stop being a policeman in this area and cease deleting items? It's hard to say ... certainly, your report includes subjects who appear to pass WD:N - Q4881023, for instance; or following your advice and choosing a high-numbered QID, Q110358377. Not having a sitelink is not a very good indicator that the item is spam. Not all spam subjects are non-notable. Not all corners of WD need such assiduous scouring that the baby is thrown out with the bathwater. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:01, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
of course I'm not saying any item that doesn't have a site link is not notable. Otherwise, I would have written a bot to delete them. Are you saying spamming is okay? Amir (talk) 13:23, 1 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm saying a sample of 2 of the set of items you have indicated are of concern, seem to be for subjects who are notable. That is to say, that which you are identifying as spam is not - on this small sample - spam. Spam which is not spam is fine. More broadly, I'm not seeing your Iranian spam torrent. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:33, 1 January 2022 (UTC)€
I just reviewed Amir's last ten deletions. While I would not have deleted any of them myself, they all fell well within common deletion practice. All of the items might have been notable, but none of them clearly indicated their notability: no site links, no substantial sources, some identifiers. (Because it's hard to examine incoming links on deleted items, I was unable to evaluate criterion 3 (structural need).) Bovlb (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I've noticed this trend as well whenever I patrol new items. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Me too. Lymantria (talk) 14:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Maybe @Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) wants to comment? --- Jura 00:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

An introduction to Observable for Wikidata users

Maybe you have seen in the weekly newsletter some of my Observable notebooks in the last months. Observable is an online platform which makes it easy to write notebooks in Javascript. I think it's a very powerful tool to explore Wikidata and go beyond simple SPARQL queries. So I've written an introduction for Wikidata users : https://observablehq.com/@pac02/an-introduction-to-observable-for-wikidata-users. I hope it's clear enough. Feel free to give some feedback and if you write your own notebooks, I'd be happy to see them. --PAC2 (talk) 20:09, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Capitalization of taxon common names in labels and aliases

Hi all, I've started a discussion at Help talk:Label about capitalization of taxon common names in labels and aliases. Please chime in! UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 02:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Merging

Hi Wikidata Team, can u please merge John Clarence Velasco to RENXE(Filipino singer-songwriter) they have the same identity. but do not remove any necesarry information.

[Note by Pelagic:] Previous post by Renxeees‎ 07:11, 28 December 2021‎ (UTC)

This appears to refer to
Hi, Renxeees, have a look at Help:Merge and have a try. Are you able to do it yourself? You might need to first remove the claims/statements that the two are siblings. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 14:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata sites

Description

Many sites that are items (like Q1) are divided into few "parts". Those parts are usually:

  • first part (without name), that includes: upper description and other names
  • next part, that includes: line In more languages and table below that line
  • part "Statements"
  • part "Identifiers"
  • (sometimes: other parts)
  • and the last part, with links to Wikipedia and other projects.

That last mentioned "part" - according to various Wikidata subpages - is named Sitelinks

Questions

(1) Currently, the name of last part (Sitelinks) *is not* visible - yet - it is possible to link to that part (example). What's the reason of that situation (that is *not* visible) and whether could it be fixed?
(2) Is there a way (or plan to be) to link directly to line In more languages?
(3) Is there a way (or plan to be) to link directly to first part? 149.156.172.74 09:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

I think you should open a phab ticket to get technical feedeback. --SCIdude (talk) 10:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Improvements to documentation and modelling between Q, P and L namespaces

I've had a few instances occur similar to [3] where an identifier I've created in the Q namespace has been deleted or proposed to be deleted because there is a corresponding property for the identifier in the P namespace. I think the justification has generally been a desire to avoid duplication of identifier items between Q and P namespaces. From what I have read of Help:Namespaces and Help:Properties, I don't think either page adequately explains the difference between Q and P namespaces and if and when the same concept should exist in both namespaces. Help:Properties states that properties in the P namespace cannot have Wikipedia links, despite there being hundreds of such identifiers with Wikipedia pages per en:Category:Identifiers. For these hundreds of pages, there would at least need to be a corresponding Q item for the identifier to at least handle language links between Wikipedia instances, and there would likely also be a property in the P namespace on Wikidata. Wikidata item of this property (P1629) would then be used to link to the property in the P namespace to the item in the Q namespace. An example of this scenario is NATO Stock Number (Q357602) / NATO Stock Number (P5581) where the Q item has Wikipedia pages in multiple languages explaining the identifier. There are also many non-identifier examples such as gender (Q48277) / sex or gender (P21).

This dilemma also exists between Q and L namespaces for example honorificabilitudinitatibus (Q954017) / honōrificābilitūdinitās (L619948) and property subject lexeme (P6254) is used to link these two such items in different namespaces together. subject lexeme (P6254) is used over 1000 times where a word may have a Wikipedia page and thus needs an item in the Q namespace to handle language links between Wikipedia instances.

I have a few proposals to try and resolve the issues surrounding namespaces:

For all options:

  • Update Help:Namespaces to provide the answer to why it was decided that items should exist in the P and L namespaces instead of the Q namespace and general guidance for when to model an item in each namespace. Currently this help page doesn't describe the L namespace and why it differs from the Q namespace.

OPTION 1

  • Update Help:Namespaces and Help:Items to state that duplication shall not occur between P, Q and L namespaces.
  • Allow Wikipedia links to be made to items in the P and L namespaces. Items such as NATO Stock Number (Q357602) and gender (Q48277) would be deleted and described instead within the P namespace under NATO Stock Number (P5581) and sex or gender (P21).
  • Evaluate existing set of properties used on Q namespace items which are values of Wikidata item of this property (P1629) to determine whether their data type could be changed from 'Item' to 'Property' or whether a new property may be required with a 'Property' data type.
  • Evaluate existing set of properties used on Q namespace items with values subclassed under lexeme (Q111352). Would these existing properties need to have their data type changed from 'Item' to 'Lexeme', 'Form' or 'Sense' or would new properties with these 'Lexeme', 'Form' and 'Sense' data types need to be created?
  • Allow Wikipedia templates to extract information from items in the P and L namespaces on Wikidata (if this is not currently easy to do).

OPTION 2

  • Update Help:Namespaces to state more clearly that some duplication may occur between P and Q and L and Q namespaces as Wikipedia pages existing for a concept necessitate an item in the Q namespace for language links between Wikipedia instances.
  • Update Help:Properties to state that each external identifier property should have a corresponding item in the Q namespace and this Q namespace item would have most of the statements applied (issued by (P2378), described by source (P1343), etc) leaving the item in the P namespace as principally having Wikidata-specific properties which are instances/subclasses of Wikidata property for properties (Q22582645) (e.g. property constraint (P2302), replacement property (P6824)). It is conceivable that an identifier with Wikipedia pages may have a Wikipedia template that draws in information from the item in the Q namespace e.g. subproperty of (P1647), type of unit for this property (P2876), etc. This information generally exists in Wikidata within the P namespace at present. The reason for attempting to move information from P to Q namespaces where it's not Wikidata-specific is that Wikipedia templates can then source data from the Q namespace when describing identifiers in Wikipedia.
  • Update Help:Items to mention namespaces and when and what to model in each namespace. State if and when an item should be created and modeled in the Q namespace, particularly in relation to lexemes. Address if, when and how of linking of Wiktionary pages to items in the Q namespace.
  • Wikidata item of this property (P1629) is often being used incorrectly to map an identifier property in the P namespace to a database or classification system within which the identifier exists (applicable 'stated in' value (P9073) should be used instead), or the organisation that issues the identifier (issued by (P2378) should be used instead). Wikidata item of this property (P1629), when used on identifier properties in the P namespace should always map to an item in the Q namespace that is a subclass of unique identifier (Q6545185). Resolve such issues (~9000 uses to check).

Your guidance and thoughts are welcomed on how to handle inter-namespace differences, and how documentation could be improved to make it clearer how to handle inter-namespace ambiguities, duplication, etc. --Dhx1 (talk) 11:38, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if the three namespaces are easily comparable. Maybe it's preferable to analyze relationships between Q and P separately from L and Q.
BTW, lexeme sense (P7018) should link Q to L. subject lexeme (P6254) helps primarily with Wikisource. --- Jura 12:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Auditing reasons for deprecation

Would anyone else be interested in auditing our current instances of Wikibase reason for deprecated rank (Q27949697). To my eye, many seem to be invalid/incompatible with the purpose of deprecation (e.g. obsolete (Q107356532)) and I think this is part of the reason deprecation is often incorrectly applied. Similarly, many are modelling real world concepts as a Wikidata reason for deprecation which does not make ontological sense (e.g. expired domain (Q1384499)). Perhaps we can set up a project or page somewhere to discuss and review the instances or even just the most used if there are many. --SilentSpike (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I hope reasons for deprecation are somehow anchored in the real world.
There are some that can make sense for some statements, but not for others. --- Jura 21:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Regarding real world: The issue is that the items often conflate the internal entity (a "Wikidata reason for deprecation"), with the real world entity that the reason for deprecation corresponds to. This is the same ontological confusion that resulted in the "reason for end cause" item being deleted (leading to my equivalent proposal Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2021/12/11#Q27949697). In the example I link above: an expired domain is a concept outside of Wikidata, presumably what the dewiki sitelink is describing - if the article is describing a Wikidata internal entity I'd be very surprised.
I agree that sometimes the use case makes sense for a certain statement domain, but sometimes there is no applicable domain (if strictly following the proper use of deprecated rank). In the example I link above, if the value was applicable in the past then by definition it is not deprecated. SilentSpike (talk) 23:39, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
As another example of a strictly invalid item: account deletion (Q89665509). If the account was deleted, then it existed in the past, so the statement should not be deprecated. It should have end time (P582). An equivalent item to this one was deleted in the past following this same logic.
Also, why would a Wikidata internal entity be a facet of (P1269) user account (Q3604202)? The item is conflating the real world concept - again the same ontological confusion. SilentSpike (talk) 23:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
I think you voice that point of view before, but it wasn't followed in the deletion discussion. There isn't really a difference between "account deletion" and "account deletion". Items can be used in multiple contexts .. which is the reason we have them in the first place. --- Jura 00:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Here's the previous deletion discussion Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2020/03/14#Q49776568 where a false reason for deprecation "account suspension" was deleted and replaced by account suspension (Q87406427).
I don't follow what you mean by "account deletion" and "account deletion", it doesn't sound like the point I'm making. I'm saying an item cannot be both a Wikidata internal entity (Q21281405) and a real world entity at the same time. Those should be two different items, otherwise I would expect the associated sitelinks to be describing the internal entity and the statements to not be modelling the real world entity.
The exact same logic was applied at Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2021/07/28#Q66593009 by ChristianKl. I'm not sure why the point was clear there, but not in this case.
As for account deletion (Q89665509), the more important point there is this: when would a statement ever be deprecated because of account deletion (following correct rank usage)? SilentSpike (talk) 11:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I think part of the problem is that in English (in the real world) “deprecated” often means “valid, but use is discouraged”, whereas on Wikidata, it means “claimed, but known to be incorrect”. What terms are used in other languages? Google Trans. and DeepL say Zurückweisungsgrund (from Q27949697) = “reason for rejection” / “rejection reason”. Should we say “Rejected Rank” instead of “Deprecated Rank”? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 14:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

The problem with deleting them is that someone would have to go through and clean them all (as-is they are useful because they indicate they probably shouldn't be deprecated in actuality). Maybe we should just mark them so warnings show if used. BrokenSegue (talk) 15:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Item documentation on talk page header

I finally realized after all these years and a stupid failed bot proposition to do that, that putting {{Item documentation}} on MediaWiki:Talkpageheader would automatically add it to all talk page item without adding them manually. Seems like a good idea, who’s up ? author  TomT0m / talk page 20:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Aye. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
I have launched a Request for comment last year (Wikidata:Requests for comment/How should we develop and deploy documentation for items ?) on this topic. MediaWiki:Talkpageheader could be an easy solution but there are some drawbacks. First, if the talk page doesn't exist, the Talkpageheader does not appear on the mobile interface (see https://m.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Q1951683 for an example). Moreover I also believe that editing the talk page is better than using the talkpageheader because it is more transparent and easier to understand for the users. But let's have the discussion. I guess @Jura1: may have an opinion. PAC2 (talk) 06:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Sorry I was wrong with my first argument. I guess it has been debugged in the last months. PAC2 (talk) 07:59, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
It may be more « transparent », whatever it means, but if it’s something that help solving a problem that is not really a problem it helps nobody. Most people does not know about « item documentation » in the first place so would not bother to put it in talk pages.
If someone notice, after this is done if…, he may ask here how this works. If the same one had nothing to notice between there is nothing on most talkpages, he has nothing to ask for in the first place. And if it is done, the someone does not really have to bother how to do the same of different talkpages. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
OK why not. This may be a good idea. PAC2 (talk) 19:11, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
If we do that, it would be relevant to include {{TP given name}}, {{TP family name}} and {{TP television series}} in {{Item documentation}}. PAC2 (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

How to automate the calculation of sums

I have a settlement Heidesiedlung (Q110399035) that consists of four streets Heidesiedlung, Badeteich I (Q110399053), Heidesiedlung, Badeteich II (Q110399060), Heidesiedlung, Badeteich III (Q110399070) and Heidesiedlung, Badeteich IV (Q110399104). The source tells the number of houses in each street. How can I compute the sum and put it into the item of the settlement? --Maincomb (talk) 10:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

If your source says that all houses in the settlement is in the four streets, and if it also says that all houses in the four streets are in settlement, I see no problem in just adding the numbers. Simple aritmetic usually isn't considered original research. But if the settlement has houses not in any of the streets, or any of the streets also has houses outside the settlement, you cannot do that. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, but I am not referring to the geographic aspect. I am looking for a technical solution to do this calculation automatically. --Maincomb (talk) 16:09, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence

Can someone help me make a wikidate for Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence. A Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence are focal points of competence and knowledge on European Union subjects. They gather the expertise and competences of high-level experts aiming to develop synergies between the various disciplines and resources in European studies.

https://erasmus-plus.ec.europa.eu/opportunities/organisations/jean-monnet-actions/jean-monnet-centres-of-excellence#:~:text=Jean%20Monnet%20Centres%20of%20Excellence%20are%20focal%20points%20of%20competence,and%20resources%20in%20European%20studies. Jhowie Nitnek 23:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

I'd think it should be a class, not an org., and have instance items for each Centre. You could then say «Hawke EU Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence» [4] instance of (P31) «Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence».
But in contrast I see Confucius Institute (Q834650)instance of (P31)nonprofit organization (Q163740) and Confucius Institute (Q834650)has part(s) (P527)University of Adelaide Confucius Institute (Q58423516). Do the Monnet and Confucius systems operate differently?
Maybe Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence programmeinstance of (P31)funding scheme (Q63790071), and «Jean Monnet Centres of Excellence programme» part of (P361) «Jean Monnet Actions»?
. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 15:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Mix'n'match

Does mix'n'match search items for IDs that have already been added, or is that something i have to add to the catalog manually before importing? --Infrastruktur (talk) 11:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

MxM has a sync function for that. You could also just skip these entries, especially if the catalog you are adding doesn't have more info than existing items.
To experiment, you could create a small subcatalog with 50 or so entries. --- Jura 12:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

Also, will the catalog urls update when i change the formatter url or do I have to do something? I'm aware of the 24-hour delay, but right now the mix'n'match simply says "botched formatter" for the catalog in question. I've tried searching the discussion forums and the source code. --Infrastruktur (talk) 20:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

@Infrastruktur: No, the formatter URL can be updated only by @Magnus Manske:; it doesn't update automatically nor it can be updated by Mix'n'match admins. --Epìdosis 21:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
This is also high on my Mix'n'match wishlist. See Topic:Wjnu1nb3neu1l3pl. SilentSpike (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

If that wasn't enough, also had some problems updating descriptions on an existing catalog of mine. Not sure what the difference between "update existing descriptions" and "update all descriptions" is either, surely it can't update nonexistent descriptions? It says "0" updated on the test run, and if I tick the add new entries box, the test-run indicates it wants to add the entries as new ones, which is obviously wrong. --Infrastruktur (talk) 07:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

@Infrastruktur: I and @Vojtěch Dostál: have recently experienced similar problems in updating descriptions, it's probably a bug. --Epìdosis 10:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Whoever did 'Automatic name/date matcher' and 'Auxiliary data matcher' on catalog 4990, this resulted in entries showing as fully matched but I checked and there are no corresponding edit on Wikidata. Another bug? Infrastruktur (talk) 08:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

No, this isn't a bug. Matches 'Automatic name/date matcher' and 'Auxiliary data matcher' are not added automatically to Wikidata, but should be added to Wikidata by a user using the synchronisation function that can be found in the "Action" menu (https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/?#/sync/4990 for your catalog). --Epìdosis 10:05, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Possible issues in Mix'n'match synchronisation

See this thread. --Epìdosis 11:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

English labels as labels for (all) other languages for scholarly articles (2)

Following Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/12#English_labels_as_labels_for_(all)_other_languages_for_scholarly_articles, I updated Help:Label#Labels_in_other_languages as follows:

"Given capacity constraints on Wikidata Query Service, English titles of scholarly articles should not be copied to other languages. Sample: Q356702 has the English label "Cantor's first uncountability proof". This should not be copied to any other language."

I suppose this could be improved. --- Jura 12:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

coordinate location (P625) for items that are not places

Can somone can explin why this tickets have coordinate location (P625)?

Looks like Candide (Q215894) at some point got mixed up with a french village by the same name after which a bot added the coordinate location (P625).==

Shipwreck

HMS Bounty (Q900379) Existed as a shipwreck (Q852190) and should therefore have a geocoordinate. Pmt (talk) 10:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
@Pmt: From a structured data petspective that doesn't make sense. An unqualified coordinate location (P625) should never be used on an item about a movable object or being. In this case, the item represents a ship that sailed around the world, so what do the co-ordinates of a fixed point on that journey mean? Should we add separate co-ordinate statements for the location of its launch and major ports visited? The coordinate location (P625) should either be held on a separate item about the wreck site or suitable qualifiers applied to limit the meaning of the statement. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
@From Hill To Shore: Upon this I can agree but I shall remind you of this query https://w.wiki/4cBD. I can not see any other way to structure the exact position of the wreck. Places of the journey, docks or slipways do have a geocooordinate of their own and is therefore covered. A decent property; position of [ship]wreck should be welcomed for the abt. 24000 items of shipwreck (Q852190).Pmt (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Per FHTS, P625 with an appropriate qualifier is amply sufficient; no new property required. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon: and@From Hill To Shore: So then I should for a ship who at the end wrecked use coordinate location (P625) with coordinate location (P625)applies to part (P518)start time (P580) the two last ones as qualifiers. Pmt (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
I think that the idea of using start time (P580) as qualifier is good, but I think that new property should be created. "Current location coordinate" for objects that not situated permanently. Geagea (talk) 07:55, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
If an item is about a shipwreck, P625 is appropriate. If the item is about the ship, it isn't .. --- Jura 11:07, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
@Jura1:, do you then say that Titanic (Q25173) who is both about a ship (Q11446) and shipwreck (Q852190) should be two separate items? One for the ship and one for the shipwreck Pmt (talk) 10:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
There are several ways to solve this. That would be one of them. Not sure what WP Ships prefers and what would be the best one.
Moving shipwreck (Q852190) from instance of (P31) to significant place (P7153) could be another, alternative or additional, option. It's probably better than significant event (P793) = shipwrecking (Q906512) only. --- Jura 11:25, 31 December 2021 (UTC)

Geographic coordinates for events

Tagishsimon, according to your logic we can cancel headquarters location (P159) and use qualifier.
In my opinion solution as used in P159 is correct. P625 need to be split. P625 in "coordinate location" should be coordinate for location. so we need coordinate location of events (battles for example) etc.
And, the mistakes should be fixed. Geagea (talk) 18:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Then a splitted coordinate location (P625): geocoordinates of the subject. For Earth, please note that only WGS84 coordinating system is supported at the moment could also be used as location for a shipwreck? Pmt (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
should be set - "evet location coordinate". Geagea (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)

Languages

Danish (Q9035) and Abaza (Q27567) are language (Q34770) so a property constraint (P2302) should be set? and the coordinate location (P625) not allowed to be used Pmt (talk) 19:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

First is should be defined what that means. location of language speakers?, origin of the language? place where the majority of the people speaking the language? What about languages that spoken in many places like English? I think it should be removed. Geagea (talk) 07:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Also, the correct way to deal with language is to add a geographic area which the language is spread and the same area will have the coordinates already. Geagea (talk) 13:21, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Coors of languages are the product of one unfortunate and undiscussed import. IMHO it makes no sense and should be deleted completely.--Jklamo (talk) 15:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
yeah coordinate makes no sense. remove them. BrokenSegue (talk) 15:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm not against the deletion, but I personally used to like this information. You could generate nice maps using Wikidata Query Service, with little red dots. I understand that a "point" would never represent the geographic area about a language, but it would give a rough location for a language during these visualisations. For languages like English, it would not mean anything, but for dialects like Balkar, it will give a useful information.--Joseph (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Two wikidata pages for apparently the person.

Should they be combined together and one page deleted?

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q103862122 and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q24284600

Thank you, --Ooligan (talk) 20:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)

No. One is about the person, the other is about an encyclopedia article (about a person) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:37, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
I see that now. Thanks for the prompt reply. Ooligan (talk) 23:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)
Q103862122 can be deleted as there is no linked Wikisource article. --- Jura 09:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Henrotin, Ellen Martin (06 July 1847–29 June 1922), woman's club leader and social reformer (Q103862122) is an encylopedia article and is being used to reference a statement on another item, so there is certainly no reason to delete it — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 09:22, 31 December 2021 (UTC)
It’s also stated to be published in a completely different encyclopaedia… Theknightwho (talk) 18:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge request

House of Lords (Q1127217) and Lordok háza (Q108802327) seem to be the same disambiguation page, but the latter is described as "disambiguation page on different languages". I'm not sure what this is supposed to imply or why these have been separated, and it just seems to make Wiki links less functional. Could these please be merged into House of Lords (Q1127217)? Theknightwho (talk) 19:01, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure if they should be merged or not, but as an aside there is no need to list every non-disambiguation item that shares the same name on the disambiguation item. It really doesn't help much, as bands, albums, etc. aren't likely to be confused with a disambiguation item. As a comparison, it would be trivia data clutter to add every single John Smith to John Smith (Q245903). Time and energy is better spent elsewhere. Wikidata items for Disambiguation pages don't need to function as internal disambiguation pages themselves, especially since items in different languages are unlikely to be ambiguous or found on the same list (Apple (Q227418) versus Manzana (Q1166457)). Common exceptions include surnames/given names (Smith (Q217465) and Smith (Q1158446), since various Wikipedias often have lists of persons with the name that function largely as disambiguation pages, and denoting differences may help harmonize sitelinks, relegating the structure and number of entries to respective sitelinks. -Animalparty (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)
Those are all fair points. I think in this case, there’s the fact that separate items prevents interwiki links, which is obviously something it would be best to avoid. Theknightwho (talk) 18:28, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

The Wikibase 2022 Release for MediaWiki 1.36 is now available!

We hereby announce that the Wikibase 2022 Release for MediaWiki 1.36 has been published https://releases.wikimedia.org/wikibase/1.36 and on Docker Hub.

Here are links to important documentation related to the release:

This new release is compatible with MediaWiki 1.36 and contains new Wikibase features:

This release also requires ElasticSearch to be in use in order to have case-insensitive search of items and properties in Wikibase.

If you have any questions feel free to leave a comment at Talk:Wikibase/FAQ.

-Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 08:50, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Next Wikidata Bug Triage Hour on January 13th

Hello all,

As we're starting a new calendar year, we will continue the Bug Triage Hour event format that we started in 2021. This online open meeting allows you to meet the product managers of Wikidata's development team to work together on improving the description of Phabricator tickets (Wikimedia's bugs and feature requests tracking system). By improving tickets together, we can make sure that they will be discovered, understood and worked on more efficiently.

The next session will take place on January 13th at 18:00 Central Europe Time (17:00 UTC/GMT), in this Jitsi room. This edition will be an open discussion without a specific theme: you can bring 1-2 Phabricator tickets that you really care about, and we will look at them together and see how we can add relevant information and triage them.

This meeting is not recorded, but we take collaborative notes on this document, where you can also find notes and links of previous sessions. To find interesting tickets, you can look at Wikidata's board on Phabricator for example.

We're looking forward to meeting you there! We are also eager to receive feedback on this event format and see how we could improve it, so if you have any request or suggestions (also for future themes), feel free to reach out to me. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 09:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Save the Date: Coolest Tool Award 2021: this Friday, 17:00 UTC


Hello all,

The ceremony of the 2021 Wikimedia Coolest Tool Award will take place virtually on Friday 14 January 2022, 17:00 UTC.

This award is highlighting software tools that have been nominated by contributors to the Wikimedia projects. The ceremony will be a nice moment to show appreciation to our tool developers and maybe discover new tools!

Read more about the livestream and the discussion channels.

Thanks for joining! andre (talk) -08:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Braille letters

All braille letters are represented with for example Braille pattern dots-1instance of (P31)Unicode character (Q29654788) wouldn't it be better to create someting more like Ainstance of (P31)Latin-script letter (Q19776628) but then for braille letters? If yes how would you handle the 256 patterns out there? Jhowie Nitnek 13:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

I would propose a property called "Braille character" that relates a character of a language with it's Braille pattern item. Currently it seems like depicted by (P1299) is used to express this relationship. A dedicated property would be nicer though. Lectrician1 (talk) 02:00, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Can you help me do it? I'm not that good in creating properties Jhowie Nitnek 12:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Business premises

I recently created Monmouth Coffee Company (Q110026688), then discovered that its first branch is in a listed building 27, Monmouth Street (Q27084349). Should these items be linked, and if so, how? TSventon (talk) 14:48, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Removing dead Microsoft Academic ID

As far as I know, Microsoft Academic has been a dead project for a long time. Now, its website is not accessible and redirects to microsoft.com

Many Wikidata entries, here I am referring to institutions/universities, have Microsoft Academic ID (Property:P6366) as an identifier. The reference for the ID is grid.ac

Not only Microsoft Academic ID leads to nowhere, grid.ac has also de-listed Microsoft Academic. In other words, both the ID and reference of Microsoft Academic IS are invalid now. See, for example, Stanford University.

Of course, some pages redirect Microsoft Academic ID to Wayback Machine, but since Microsoft Academic ID was JavaScript-based graphs, the Wayback Machine pages are useless.

Hence, I recommend removing Microsoft Academic ID from the entries, as this is useless. 589q (talk) 00:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

As a general rule of thumb, we never delete data that was once true. Identifiers have more uses than producing URIs (e.g. data consolidation). This should probably be a property deletion request if you truly want to propose it. SilentSpike (talk) 01:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
SilentSpike, I agree that an identifier may have uses beyond a link, but it is true if the identifier has a meaning without the corresponding weblink. The correct way, as you mentioned, is to delete the dead property. I just wanted to discuss the issue with the community here. 589q (talk) 05:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
I have commented on Properties for deletion - as there are dump of the whole Microsoft Academic Graph at some point, the data is still potentially useful.--GZWDer (talk) 14:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

How to relate a spirit and a medium and how to relate a spirit to the human person it is the spirit of

1. I'd appreciate any suggestions on what property/properties to use to relate a spirit with the medium that channeled it. For example: how do I relate Emmanuel (Q3891104) with Chico Xavier (Q561598)? Chico Xavier (Q561598) is a medium who channeled the spirit Emmanuel (Q3891104). Are there any existing properties that could be used to link these two items? Do we need something new? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 02:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

represented by (P1875) is almost there. Currently it refers to talent agent and electoral representative. We don't seem to have a property for proxy (in the sense of voting or auction representative). ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
Doh, proxy (P1393)? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 07:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't think so. Proxy is defined as "person authorized to act for another." It is typically used in a voting context. I don't think this accurately represents the relationship between medium and spirit. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 11:21, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
You mean that they claimed to channel the spirit, not actually channeling it, right? Ainali (talk) 19:27, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Well yes, of course. It all depends on your view of whether spirits and mediums really exist. Nevertheless there needs to be a way to link them when there is a claimed relationship. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:47, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

2. I'd also appreciate suggestions on how to relate a spirit to the real human being that they are supposedly the spirit of. For example, in the Library of Congress/NACO Authority File, we have the entities Presley, Elvis, 1935-1977 and Presley, Elvis, 1935-1977 (Spirit). And Garland, Judy and Garland, Judy (Spirit). Maybe we need a property for "spirit of"? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 11:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

Hoax Fasanenstraße - street in Wilmersdorf

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Globally banned users are not welcome to contribute here--Ymblanter (talk) 22:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Q109533397 - There is no such street in Berlin. There is a part of a street named the same - namely of Q319646 - which is located in Wilmersdorf. 78.55.62.189 23:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

  • in the summary it says: "curprev 16:22, 11 November 2021‎ M2k~dewiki talk contribs‎ 3,101 bytes +3,101‎ ‎Created a new Item: #quickstatements; #temporary_batch_1636647731264 Tag: quickstatements [2.0] (restore)" - mass creation? Maybe more hoax items? 78.55.62.189 23:03, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
    Please don’t use the wird “hoax” unless you are 100 % certain that malice was the reason for creation. This is not the case – on the contrary, M2k~dewiki has been a trusted user for a long time.
    I’m not really familiar with street modeling but it seems that the street is located in two different parts of Berlin. The street is therefore split in Commons and as a result in Wikidata. Nothing improper about that. Emu (talk) 23:31, 6 January 2022 (UTC)
    1. I can tell you, that every street in Berlin is located in different "parts of Berlin", depending on how "part" is defined.
    2. Regarding the use of the word "hoax", cf, https://www.bsi.bund.de/DE/Themen/Verbraucherinnen-und-Verbraucher/Cyber-Sicherheitslage/Methoden-der-Cyber-Kriminalitaet/Spam-Phishing-Co/Hoax-Falschmeldung/hoax-falschmeldung_node.html 'Hoax bedeutet im Englischen so viel wie "Zeitungsente" oder "schlechter Scherz".' Re 'This is not the case – on the contrary, M2k~dewiki has been a trusted user for a long time.' - what does that mean? Trusted by whom? A long time? Maybe too long? A lot of people have been trusted in by some people, any Ponzi scheme works like that.
    3. "Nothing improper about that." - nothing improper about the false claim? So, you knowingly support false claims in Wikidata? 77.13.233.80 20:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
Please read Wikidata:Assume good faith. We can put down the initial use of the word "hoax" as a misunderstanding due to translation. However, if you are going to start comparing users to the sellers of ponzi schemes, you are going to end up on the wrong end of a block very quickly. Please redact your comparison and stick to talking about the issue. From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
  1. "Please read Wikidata:Assume good faith." - What for?
  2. "However, if you are going to start comparing users to the sellers of ponzi schemes, you are going to end up on the wrong end of a block very quickly." - Why do you say so? I didn't do that. And why would people get blocked for "comparing" things? https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/comparison
  3. "Please redact your comparison" - Why should I "redact [my] comparison"? Which one? Can you quote it and tell me in which way you want me to redact it, if it exists at all?
  4. "and stick to talking about the issue" - What do you refer to as "the issue"? Not the Fasanstraße - since you yourself didn't say anything about it. - Or do you want others to do things that you yourself don't do? 77.13.233.80 20:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Fasanenstraße. --Succu (talk) 21:59, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Why do we have Commons category?

I was adding a category to an entry for a position. See Bishop of Härnösand (Q110466965) where I have added "Commons_category:Bishops of the Diocese of Härnösand" which has no actual link, so why do we have it? I also added "topic's main category Category:Bishops of Härnösand" which gives me an actual link to the category. I am sure others have asked before me, but I have never seen an answer. I apologize if others have already asked and it has been answered. --RAN (talk) 01:24, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

There has been a deletion debate about Commons category (P373) ongoing since September 2019. See Wikidata:Properties for deletion#Commons category (P373). It should probably be closed as no consensus and a new discussion started to see if a clearer consensus has arisen in the last 2 years (some of the commenters may no longer be here or their opinions may have changed). From Hill To Shore (talk) 01:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Difference between process (Q3249551) and activity (Q1914636)?

What's the difference? They seem to be the same things: a series of actions. Lectrician1 (talk) 13:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

At least in German, but also in other languages (e.g. Spanish, French) activity (Q1914636) involves a (human) agent. It is a series of actions (see instance of (P31)). This is not the case with process (Q3249551) - this may be any series of events. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:26, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
@Valentina.Anitnelav That's understandable why they would be that way. The only problem is that action (Q4026292)'s English description states, "something an agent can do or perform". I'm pretty sure an agent can be non-human.
The Spanish Wikipedia article for activity seems to describe the philosophical concept and says that activity can apply to any entity. Maybe the Spanish and French descriptions need to be revised then? Lectrician1 (talk) 14:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
@Lectrician1: You are right, you can attribute activity (Q1914636) to animals, too. Where do you read that the Spanish Wikipedia article says that activity can apply to any entity? The first sentence says "La actividad (del latín activitas, activas = actuar) es una faceta de la psicología." (my emphasis) - so it is described as an aspect of psychology and some level of mental capacity and intentionality seems to be needed on the agents side. It is at least dubious if every entity possesses this level of mental capacity and intentionality. process (Q3249551) refers to any series of events, activity (Q1914636) implies some level of intentionality on the part of the agent. One could think about making the latter a subclass of the former. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Splitting Q239

Would it make sense to split Q239 into the place and into the municipality? Jhowie Nitnek 17:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

You could ask the same question about any municipality or other administrative territorial entity. Why especially City of Brussels (Q239)? --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 18:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
@Dipsacus fullonum it was just a example tbh but a lot of places have them already split Jhowie Nitnek 20:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)
I would say so, yes. If they're two distinct things, then then they should be split (even if there's a lot of overlap). Theknightwho (talk) 19:39, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Broken functionality on older iOS

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T298001

Some time recently I lost the ability to edit properties and expand references using Safari on iOS 12 (iPad Air, can’t be upgraded past 12.x). The on-page affordances are missing. Editing labels and sitelinks is okay, presumably since those are links to special pages and not JavaScript. Affects logged-out as well as logged-in, tested in both Vector and Timeless skins. iOS 15 is okay, haven't tested 14 yet (and don't have access to 13). Any ideas? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 04:17, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

Aah, I found Phab:T298001. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 05:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)
Maybe Fixed now.--SD hehua (talk) 09:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Participation in community campaigns

There are various campaigns that provide some form of recognition for communities that are active in that campaign or made achievements towards a particular goal. Examples include Plastic Free Community (Q61861718) and Sustainable Palm Oil Community (Q110486730). However they may not be formally "awarded" by a 3rd party (so award received (P166) may not be appropriate). Are there any other properties that would be more suitable to record this? Or is using instance of (P31) enough? Pauljmackay (talk) 08:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Copyright status as a creator (P7763)

Is anyone using a bot to update copyright status as a creator (P7763) now that the year has changed? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:29, 1 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm counting on User:Hannolans to do that. Multichill (talk) 12:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
Ah yes, Will take care of it. For next year, a bot would be better (and for the longer term calculated fields).--Hannolans (talk) 12:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)
@Hannolans: Not sure if these edits are correct. On Wikipedia we replace things, but on Wikidata we usually add qualifiers. I would expect something like an end date on the old statement and the new statement with preferred rank with a start date. Can you please explain? Multichill (talk) 22:06, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, we could work with several statements and start and end dates, but as we also get statements for other jurisdictions (PD50, PD100, US, PD80 etc) so this would be very complex if we have both values (pd/c) for all jurisdictions at the same time while it is a binary value. I would see this as a dynamic property like the workflow with Commons compatible image available at URL (P4765). That property value is also not changed to athedepreciated rank, but removed if I remember correctly? --Hannolans (talk) 22:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

copyright status as a creator (P7763) in Israel

HannolansBot adding copyright status as a creator (P7763) to authors from Israel with countries with longer than 50 years pma (Q87048619). It is wrong. It should be countries with longer than 70 years pma (Q60845045). I understand that it based on based on heuristic (P887) but is kind of a mistake. The copyright status in Israel is 70 years pma or longer. There are other copyright laws in Israel about photographs taken in the Land of Israel until 2008- It's 50 years from creation and also work of the Israeli government (same, 50 years from creation) no matter who is the creator. So adding 50 years pma to work of authors from Israel is wrong. Geagea (talk) 12:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

@Geagea: why are you starting a new topic? Either:
  1. Continue in the existing topic (that's where I moved it now)
  2. Leave a note on the talk page of the operator of the bot
Starting a new topic here is a bit like the digital equivalent of talking behind someones back.
Hanno, can you have a look at this? Multichill (talk) 12:49, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
50 pma at least means that works of this person are copyrighted when published for legislations with 50, 70 as well as 100 pma (in practice all countries). We modelled copyright by grouping. Help:Copyrights#Items_linked_through_jurisdictie_(P1001)_qualifier --Hannolans (talk) 20:14, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Works of person in Israel are copyrighted when published for 70 years and not 50 years. You may want to look at Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Israel: "Standard: Life + 70 years". The law that reffers to author is 70 years pma in Israel. Adding 50 years pma for authors in Israel is incorrect.
Multichill, I didn't noticed that there is another topic about P7763 and I apologize if any harm was caused because of that or because I did not noticed user Hannolans about this. The conclusion using heuristic is wrong. Geagea (talk) 22:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
@Geagea: I am not sure if you have understood the intent of the modelling here. What the statement is intended to mean is "this person died less than 50 years ago, so their works are still in copyright in all jurisdictions that have copyright of life +50 years or more." That tells editors in jurisdictions with life +50 that they are not allowed to use these works; it also tells people in jurisdictions with life +70, +95 or +100 the same thing. If we instead used the statement of "this person died less than 50 years ago, so their works are still in copyright in all jurisdictions that have copyright of life +70 years or more," that would tell people in jurisdictions with life +70, life +95 or life +100 that they aren't allowed to use their works; however, for jurisdictions with life +50, we aren't giving them any indication of whether the work is in copyright in their jurisdiction or not. When it gets to 50 years since the person's death, the existing statement will be replaced with "this person died less than 70 years ago, so their works are still in copyright in all jurisdictions that have copyright of life +70 years or more." It is possible that you don't agree with this choice of modelling, but it is important to first understand the intent behind it so that there is no confusion in the discussion. From Hill To Shore (talk) 22:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
I am a long time admin in Commons and VRT team for a long time. And I am dealing with copyright issues of Israel mostly. I am siply saying that saying this person died less than 50 years ago, so their works are still in copyright in all jurisdictions that have copyright of life +50 years or more. for Israel is wrong. Geagea (talk) 22:56, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
The key point here is that it isn't wrong. Israel is a jurisdiction where copyright is protected for 50 years or more; it is also a country where copyright is protected for 70 years or more; it is not a country where copyright is protected for 90 years or more. All three statements are true. To use an analogy; I have a basket containing two apples and an orange; I can make the statement "this basket contains an apple," which is true, or I can make the statement, "this basket contains two apples," which is also true; I can't make the statement, "this basket contains three apples," as that is false. You may have a preference not to use the current statement but the current statement is not wrong. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:06, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
protected for 50 years or more - this part is wrong. Geagea (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
No it isn't. "50 years or more" means "not less than 50 years." The statement excludes anything below 50 and allows anything above 50 up to infinity. All the statement is saying is "In Israel copyright is protected for at least 50 years." If you are saying that is wrong, then everything in Israel becomes free of copyright before 50 years. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
So why 50? why not 30. Isn't it based on the Israeli law? what is the source to 50? Geagea (talk) 00:01, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Loves Folklore is back!

Please help translate to your language

You are humbly invited to participate in the Wiki Loves Folklore 2022 an international photography contest organized on Wikimedia Commons to document folklore and intangible cultural heritage from different regions, including, folk creative activities and many more. It is held every year from the 1st till the 28th of February.

You can help in enriching the folklore documentation on Commons from your region by taking photos, audios, videos, and submitting them in this commons contest.

You can also organize a local contest in your country and support us in translating the project pages to help us spread the word in your native language.

Feel free to contact us on our project Talk page if you need any assistance.

Kind regards,

Wiki loves Folklore International Team

--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Social media profiles for persons who never had them.

John Coltrane (Q7346) has properties like X numeric user ID (P6552) and YouTube channel ID (P2397), which are at best anachronistic. John Coltrane never had any social media accounts and to the extent that these are "his", they are just someone who is an heir to an estate with some legal ability to put his likeness on websites. I don't see any discussion of this at Wikidata:Property proposal/Person, but I'd like to propose that we not retroactively add Discord user names to Napoleon (Q517) or Reddit handles to Jesus (Q302) and instead only reserve these properties for when the person (or thing, etc.) actually had them at the time these things existed. Thoughts? —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:27, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

personally I don't mind such entries as long as the person who does operate the account is some kind of official representative of the person/entity. Nobody can claim to represent Napolean or Jesus but for many recent people there exists an "estate" which controls their likeness/appearances/etc. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Official website for deceased people can have similar problems.
Even for living people, either might be mostly written and published by other people. --- Jura 10:33, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Community Wishlist Survey 2022

The Community Wishlist Survey 2022 is now open!

This survey is the process where communities decide what the Community Tech team should work on over the next year. We encourage everyone to submit proposals until the deadline on 23 January, or comment on other proposals to help make them better. The communities will vote on the proposals between 28 January and 11 February.

The Community Tech team is focused on tools for experienced Wikimedia editors. You can write proposals in any language, and we will translate them for you. Thank you, and we look forward to seeing your proposals! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

I have the wrong mother and a false brother according to Wikipedia in item Maria Julia Bertotto

Hello, although I've managed to correct some wrong information about my father (José Pablo Feinmann) recently passed) and ourselves, I cannot find the way to eliminate my sister Verónica and me as being daughters of his SECOND spouse, whom by all means is not our mother, Maria Julia Bertotto in her own item, where there is also a Juan José Feinmann referred to as our brother but this is an unexisting person. I would like to submit documents regarding our birth, my real mother (and Dad's first wife), marriage and divorce from my dad. It's a very sensitive issue for us.

Thanks! – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vfeinmann (talk • contribs) at 23:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC).

Link provided to relevant item: José Pablo Feinmann (Q1418232). From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:02, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vfeinmann: I can't see any information in Wikidata about you, your sister or your "phantom" brother. Is it that you want to add your details to Wikidata to correct errors you have found in external sources? From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi From Hill to Shore! and thanks
in Wikipedia entry José Pablo Feinmann, we appear as Virginia and Verónica (his daughters) which we are indeed.
But in entry María Julia Bertotto (his widow), Virginia (me) and Verónica appear as her daughters, wich we are not, and there is a third son listed as Juan José Feinmann, who is not a real person.
Forgive me if I don´t understand completely the difference between Wikidata and Wikipedia (also English is not my native language).
I provide you with the links :)
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jos%C3%A9_Pablo_Feinmann
https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mar%C3%ADa_Julia_Bertotto Vfeinmann (talk) 00:33, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for providing the links. Do we have any eswiki volunteers here who could help out?
Hopefully someone familiar with the es Wikipedia can help you. However, one page that would be useful for you is es:Wikipedia:Biografías de personas vivas. From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
ah, ok! thanks a lot, I will go there! I can attach legal documents regarding my father and mother's wedding.
My dad passed away recently so it is only now that I see his/their entry in Wikipedia, and it affected me a lot.
Thank you for being so nice, Hill to Shore! Vfeinmann (talk) 01:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vfeinmann: Hi again. You asked at Property talk:P26 about the use of "Unknown value" on José Pablo Feinmann (Q1418232). I'll try to explain here but it is a little complicated. Wikidata entries are made up of a series of statements that link to related data. For example, we have Marta Hillers (Q66239), who was a human (Q5), female (Q6581072) with the names Marta (Q846741) and Hillers (Q37502480). What you inserted into José Pablo Feinmann (Q1418232) was a statement that his spouse (P26) was Marta (Q846741); this means he married a female given name (Q11879590) and not a human (Q5).
To fix this, we have two ways to proceed. The quick solution is to say spouse (P26) is "unknown value" and have a object named as (P1932) with the person's name ("unknown value" in Wikidata means either that we don't know the answer or that Wikidata has no entry for that person that we can use). The longer term solution is to create a new entry for Marta Zavattaro with similar details to Marta Hillers (Q66239). Once Marta Zavattaro has an entry, we can link to the new item instead of "unknown value."
The easiest way to get your mother's details recorded on Wikidata will be to create an entry on one of the genealogy websites that we link to (some of these are free services while others require payment; you only need to create an entry on one of them for us to reference the details here). The websites include FamilySearch (Q3066228), WikiTree (Q1074931), geni.com (Q2621214) and Find a Grave (Q63056). If you can create an entry for your mother at one of these websites, I will be happy to help you to create a new entry for her (if you have her details recorded on another genealogy website already, we may be able to use that instead). Please reply here or leave me a message at User talk:From Hill To Shore when you are ready to begin. From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi :) Yes, I was upset to see my mother as an unknown value, I am sorry. You explained everything just perfect. I had chosen a name as his wife. So, From Hill to Shore, I managed to put up our family tree together in WikiTree, actually it was a beautiful thing to do.
This is my mom's entry: https://www.wikitree.com/wiki/Zavattaro-3
and we're all also there, including my dad's second spouse, so I also had the chance to make it clear that my sister and I are not her daughters (which is also the problem in her Wikipedia item, Maria Julia Bertotto, and I couldn't change it) as well as this Juan Jose Feinmann that does not exist.
Maybe the WikiTree will do the trick! Thanks again for being so warm and attentive.
Virginia. Vfeinmann (talk) 09:44, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vfeinmann: Unfortunately, it appears that WikiTree will hide the details of your mother's entry for now, as it keeps information about living people private. However, I have used the basic details available to create Marta Zavattaro (Q110498794). If there are other websites, books or newspapers that mention your mother, we can add further details (Wikidata is based on published information). For your own entry, the news article says you are a writer. Is this page at Worldcat about you? If so, we can use that information to create your entry and link you to your parents. For your sister, we would need some other public information about her; if she doesn't have any newspaper articles or websites that mention her, we could create another "unknown value" entry to represent her on your parent's entries. From Hill To Shore (talk) 10:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
How wonderful, thank you so much! This article on my father's funeral (in one of the three most important argentine newspapers) says that my mother, first wife of José Pablo Feinmann from their University period, was there with us: https://www.pagina12.com.ar/390313-emotiva-despedida-a-jose-pablo-feinmann
Yes, I am a writer, yes, what you sent from Worldcat (I didn't know of that page) is my fictional books so far. I also have many online publications as I am a university teacher and translator as well. Maybe I can send you some?:
https://elgritodelsur.com.ar/2021/08/narrar-lo-imperdonable-convertir-herida-en-letra-abuso-infantil.html
https://www.infobae.com/cultura/2021/08/25/el-abuso-en-la-literatura-y-las-diferentes-formas-de-narrar-lo-imperdonable
https://www.pressreader.com/argentina/pagina-12/20210810/282041920190589
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4n1-uQAsWk8
(these are about my workshops and the iberoamerican book fair).
My sister is an illustrator and a graphic designer, and photographer. I came up with drawings she did for stories I published in newspapers, also a photography prize (2nd) she won at a national level. I hope it can keep her from the unknown value thing :)
https://www.gacetamercantil.com/notas/113739 (illustrations)
https://www.gacetamercantil.com/notas/67641 (illustrations)
https://www.cultura.gob.ar/conoce-las-fotos-ganadoras-del-concurso-banderas-en-tu-corazon-9383 (as a photographer)
http://www.pensamientopenal.com.ar/system/files/2016/03/doctrina43084.pdf (credited as a graphic designer, but then again she has a thousand books she is in like this as she works for publishing houses).
Can this also keep us from being credited as my father's second spouse's daughters? She is a terrible woman. And she is not our mother.
I have our births legal papers scanned but no way to attach them.
I hope I am not exhausting you, From Hill to Shore.
Thanks a lot again, really :)
Virginia. Vfeinmann (talk) 10:55, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vfeinmann: For Wikidata you now have entries for both your parents, you and your sister. This should help to correct the error over time as Wikidata information is used by Google and other search engines. However, you may still want to correct the error at the Spanish Wikipedia as that may take months or years for an editor to spot and fix the mistake on their own. I have managed to find a page on es Wikipedia where you can report the error on their page; es:Wikipedia:Informes de error. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes! My mom has already been included as his first wife in his own item. Regarding the item of his second wife, we're still there as her daughters along with this Juan José Feinmann that doesn't exist, but I will go to the es.wikipedia address you sent me and report it. I am already so glad to see my mom justly included. I will even send them some really beautiful and rare pictures. Thank you for being so sympathetic on this sensitive matter. All the best from Argentina
Vir. Vfeinmann (talk) 02:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
ah no, no! this has already been corrected too! we no longer appear as María Julia Bertotto's daughters in her own item either.
I am so grateuful for everything.
Hug! Vfeinmann (talk) 02:59, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Enquête over de verlanglijst van de gemeenschap 2022

De 2022 enquête over de verlanglijst van de gemeenschap is nu geopend!

De enquête is de manier waarmee gemeenschappen bepalen waar het Community Tech team volgend jaar aan moet gaan werken. We moedigen iedereen aan om voorstellen in te dienen voor de deadline op 23 januari, of om te reageren op andere voorstellen om ze te helpen verbeteren.

De gemeenschappen stemmen op de voorstellen tussen 28 januari en 11 februari.

Het Community Tech team is gefocussed op hulpmiddelen voor ervaren Wikimedia bewerkers. U kunt voorstellen in elke taal opstellen en wij vertalen deze. Bedankt en we kijken uit naar uw voorstellen! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 18:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

2021 at Wikidata in review: new dataset added, items improved, etc

For Wikidata:Status_updates/Next#Other_Noteworthy_Stuff, I try to compile a short summary or series of samples of:

  • datasets made available (or extended) at Wikidata in 2021 (newly added)
  • groups of items improved in 2021

As you may have noticed, new entities in 2021:

  • items Q104595000 (approx.) to Q110342868 → ca. 5 million additional items (to double-check, as we miss some QIDs)
  • properties P9003 to P10223 → ca. 1000 additional properties
  • lexemes L400170 (approx.) to L625164 → 120000 additional lexemes
  • statements: ..
  • identifiers: ..

Of the 5 million items, there are:

  • about 500000 taxons [5]

Please add here or directly at Wikidata:Status_updates/Next#Other_Noteworthy_Stuff --- Jura 19:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)

It's now at Wikidata:Status_updates/2022_01_10#Looking_back_at_2021.
I think it would still be worthwhile doing one on new or improved datasets/items, but if there isn't any interest in .. --- Jura 10:14, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #502

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
    • OneZoom "tree of life explorer" is an interactive map of the evolutionary links between all living things known to science using Wikidata.
  • Development
    • Getting the Wikidata:Mismatch Finder ready for release. Focusing on adding statistics.
    • Fixed an issue where statement editing was broken in some older browser (phab:T298001)
    • Made it so that grammatical features on a Form of a Lexeme can be ordered consistently across all Lexemes (phab:T232557)
    • Working on an issue where changes from Wikidata don't get sent to the other wikis for the initial adding of the sitelink to an Item (phab:T233520)

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

  • Looking back at 2021
    • Developments rolled out in 2021:
      • New updater for the Wikidata Query Service to help it keep up with the large number of edits on Wikidata
      • Query Builder to make it easier for people to create SPARQL queries without having to know SPARQL
      • Item Quality Evaluator to make it easy to find the highest and lowest quality Items in a topic area
      • Constraints Violations Checker is a small command-line tool that gives constraint violation statistics for a set of Items to make it easier to find the Items that need more work
      • Curious Facts finds anomalies in the data in Wikidata and offers them up for review and amusement
      • Wikidata Map to see the distribution of Wikidata's Items across the world and the connections between them
      • Current Events to make it easy to see what's currently a hot topic in the world and being edited a lot on Wikidata
    • New entities in 2021:
@Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) Just curious, is the PM opening a new one or does it fill one of the existing positions? --- Jura 21:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
It's a new opening. It's not filling-in an existing one. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 12:53, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Item = conflation

Could someone please check the edits of IP 50.60.174.177 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • logs • filter log • block user • block log • SUL (for IP: GUC))? The unknown user recreates strange items like Q2635280. --Kolja21 (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

The IP's edits related to Q2635280 seem to be correct. From what I can tell, you made an error in August 2021 by removing a conflation[6] and then overwriting the conflation with one of the conflated items.[7] Was there a particular reason for doing that as it seems an extremely unwise move. From Hill To Shore (talk) 07:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@Kolja21: Please don't use templates in talk page headers. Doing so breaks navigation to the thread from the page history and from watchlists. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:19, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon it works when clicking "reply" --- Jura 09:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
I see no 'reply' options on my watchlist nor in page histories, so I'm not sure what to make of your assertion. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon it's when the user comments and clicks "reply" and not "edit" (having the new tool enabled). --- Jura 22:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@Tagishsimon, Jura1: Not to divert the original topic here, but the problem being described is: phab:T69068 SilentSpike (talk) 22:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@From Hill To Shore: Q2635280 was created for Wollaton Hall. That's why I merged the item with Wollaton Hall (Q17528596). --Kolja21 (talk) 15:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
@Kolja21: The item was created in February 2014 with site links to articles about Wollaton Hall. On 17 August 2014 an ID was added for Camellia House, a separate listed building close to the hall.[8] The two concepts remained conflated until November 2014 when PKM began moving the site links to another item.[9] Between the end of 2014 and 2018, the item was effectively converted to represent Camellia House. In November 2019 a VIAF ID for the original concept of Wollaton Hall was added,[10] which restored the conflation. The conflation then continued again until February 2020, when the correct action was taken to split the conflated item into two "clean" items;[11] this is standard practise for dealing with conflations on Wikidata. In August 2021 you took the action to restore some of the conflated information to the conflated item.[12] It doesn't matter what an item started as; we are not a Wikipedia arguing about which topic has precedence on an article. Once a conflation has occurred it will start to corrupt references in other databases. If we catch the conflation quickly, we can remove the conflated information and keep the original item. However, in this case the conflation existed for years, so many external databases may be trying to link information on both Camellia House and Wollaton Hall. Our only option in this scenario is to separate the items and leave a reference for the external databases to find the replacement items. By restoring part of the conflated data to the item, you are just prolonging the corrupted data in the external databases. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:43, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
✓ Done Thanks. So it's no vandalism. "It doesn't matter what an item started as" means we should rename items in "cluster". Like VIAF. What started as Drew Fudenberg (Q1258707) - a human - is now "First National Bank of Lynn" (VIAF:59183378). I wouldn't call this wise but it's fun. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:57, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Special:Diff/155336446

Hi, why is this diff so large (1400+ bytes) comparing to its content (7 letters)? NguoiDungKhongDinhDanh 15:10, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

If the format changes, the text actually stored is updated only when one edits. Not sure how one could view the raw source though. --- Jura 16:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)

Infobox software does not retrieve latest software version by publication date correctly

Hello there,

was just now updating https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1304185 > software version identifier

When trying to call latest release at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:WackoWiki using 

{{Infobox software
| title = WackoWiki

...
| latest release version = {{#statements:software version identifier|from=Q1304185}}<ref>[https://wackowiki.org/doc/Download Download WackoWiki]. wackowiki.org. Retrieved 2020-02-14.</ref> / {{wikidata|qualifier|raw|edit|Q1304185|P348|P577}}
...

}}

it shows an older but not the latest version.


What I am doing wrong?

Thank you for hints and your help with this!

Greeting EoNy  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by EoNy (talk • contribs) at 16:55‎, 15 January 2022 (UTC).

@EoNy: I'm not an expert but I think it's because one of the older versions was marked as preferred. I undid that. See Help:Ranking. BrokenSegue (talk) 16:58, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue:Tx a million!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by EoNy (talk • contribs) at 17:01, 15 January 2022 (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) 11:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

I wonder about (Q4732856)

This refers to Allisonville, KS. As far as I can ascertain, no such place. Linked is Allisonville, Kansas at mg:wp, which gives Coordinates that point to Valentine, NE. As I usually shirk WD, I'll leave any clarification this might require to more qualified users. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 11:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Allisonville, Kansas (Q4732856) was originally created to link an English Wikipedia page, which has since been deleted as a hoax entry (en:Allisonville, Kansas). We have a different site link now from another Wikipedia, so this will need a bit more investigation. It may be that the hoax was copied to the other site. From Hill To Shore (talk) 12:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The mg wiki entry was created by a bot and only had two bot edits since then. Do we have any mg users here who can request deletion of the page at that site? We can then delete the item here. From Hill To Shore (talk) 12:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@G-41614: Thanks for pointing this out. I have now marked the item as possibly invalid entry requiring further references (Q35779580). There is not much more we can do here until someone deletes the mg article, as a bot will just recreate an item on Wikidata as long as there is a Wikipedia article. Even if the mg article is deleted though, it may be worth retaining the item as FactGrid (Q90405608) has also copied our error.[13] Hopefully FactGrid (Q90405608) will pick up on the change to our item and make a similar correction on their system. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:57, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Thnx for the reply. That seems to have done it as far as I'm immediately concerned, as the item does no longer show up in the SPARQL-query I worked with. Regards, --G-41614 (talk) 18:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

Cant add Item "Crypto Miner" Malware

Hi,

when i tried to add a new Item: Crypto Miner (A malwaretype, that mines cryptocurrencies on the victim host) I get an spam Error. What can I do?

User warning template for making a "protest edit"

I've been wondering if there should be an user warning template for making edits that seem like a part of a protest movement like this or like this. It might be seen like as an uncommon phenomenon there, and would fall under the basic usage of Uw-vandalism1, but I went ahead and have created the Uw-protestedit template which might have been created without proper consensus, and if it's not appropriate, it can be removed. --CrystalLemonade (talk) 21:14, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Need to turn an item for a Category into one for a disambiguation

Q18146181 is an item for a Commons category page commons:Category:Fort Meade that I recently changed into a disambiguation. I have the target categories on Commons correctly hooked up here on Wikidata, but I'm not sure whether I should now turn this item into an instance of Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410), replace it entirely, or what. I'd appreciate of someone who is more of a Wikidatan would sort this out.

I don't follow my Wikidata watchlist these days, so if you need my attention, please ping. - Jmabel (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

@Jmabel: I think it can be both a category and a disambiguation page at Wikidata. I added "Wikimedia disambiguation page" as a new property and left the category property as it was. De728631 (talk) 21:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, fine with me, I was just afraid of messing things up. - Jmabel (talk) 23:37, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@Jmabel @De728631 I am quite sure an item cannot be both a disambig page item and a category item. As the Commons category is a disambiguation page, you can merge the item into Fort Meade (Q439934). Instance Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) will suffice, we don't need a category item if the only category in it is a Commons category. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:46, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Actually there are lots of category items where the only category in it is a Commons category when it comes to ships. So I don't see why this one can't use that logic. De728631 (talk) 20:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@De728631 Strictly Wikidata:Notability-wise, this shouldn't be, except if there is a Commons gallery on the main item. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 21:02, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, then you need to code that into the bot that keeps creating category items like this one. De728631 (talk) 21:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Journal name change merge

On the 1st of January 2018, the Journal Paleoceanography changed its name to Paleoceanography and Paleoclimatology.[14] These are currently two separate entities:

Should they be merged even though they have different ISSN (P236) values? Aluxosm (talk) 17:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

I would say if the ISSN has changed to keep them separate, but use replaces (P1365)/replaced by (P1366) and said to be the same as (P460). Theknightwho (talk) 18:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith, Theknightwho: Thanks for the feedback. I've cleared them up a little more and added the statements you recommended but left them as separate entities. Cheers! Aluxosm (talk) 21:43, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
No problem. On a second look, I've added nature of statement (P5102) name change (Q84590041) as a qualifier to the "replaced"/"replaced by" and "said to be the same as" statements, just to make it extra obvious. Probably overkill, but there's no harm in it. Theknightwho (talk) 22:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
I think when journals have different titles and different ISSN and other identifiers, it makes most sense to keep the items distinct. It better preserves the integrity of data in citations using Template:Cite Q for instance, without needing more tortuous qualifiers like Journal of X object named as (P1932) Y Journal of Science. -Animalparty (talk) 01:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@Animalparty: Great point about the citations, I hadn't thought about that. Thanks for the redirect solution as well, it's perfect 👌. Aluxosm (talk) 15:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Formatter url for a new property apparently not working

Hi! Recently it was created Senators of Spain (1834-1923) ID (P10265). Their formatter url ends with ?id1=$1 but apparently Wikidata replace that with &id1=$1 (& instead of ?, at least according to my browser when moving the mouse cursor near these links), and then links do not work here in Wikidata when clicked (at least that's happening to me). In es.wikipedia this new property is already working fine. Is this usual ? strakhov (talk) 14:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

@Strakhov The formatter URL was changed from the & version to the ? version, and unfortunately Wikibase caches the formatter URL for a while. The edit to fix the URL was yesterday evening (UTC), and IIRC the formatter URL is cached for up to 24 hours, so the cache should hopefully expire within a few hours. (Individual pages with a P10265 statement may have to be purged from the parser cache after that, though.) Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
@Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): Thanks! strakhov (talk) 15:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Property:P10265#P1855 has working links now as far as I can tell. Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 10:52, 18 January 2022 (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. Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 17:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Merge of business (Q4830453) into "Handelsgewerbe" (Q1489930, specific German legal definition of a trading business)

The merge into the older item, which normally would be correct, in this case - probably accidentally - merged an item with about 200,000 instances and dozends of Wikilinks into an item derived from a German Wikipedia page, few properties and only one label (in German), which specifically refers to a German legal definition of "trading business", and which does not fit the large majority of former "business" instances.

Is there any chance to revert the merge and restore the old situation? Or what can we do otherwise?

MD Imtiaz Ahammad Kopiersperre Jklamo ArthurPSmith S.K. Givegivetake fnielsen rjlabs ChristianKl Vladimir Alexiev Parikan User:Cardinha00 MB-one User:Simonmarch User:Jneubert Mathieudu68 User:Kippelboy User:Datawiki30 User:PKM User:RollTide882071 Andber08 Sidpark SilentSpike Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) User:Johanricher User:Celead User:Finnusertop cdo256 Mathieu Kappler RShigapov User:So9q User:1-Byte pmt Rtnf econterms Dollarsign8 User:Izolight maiki c960657 User:Automotom applsdev Bubalina Fordaemdur DaxServer

Notified participants of WikiProject Companies @Heanor:

Cheers, Jneubert (talk) 14:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

Normally I would just revert the merge. However in this case it looks like the merge was reverted once and then repeated by User:Heanor.[15][16][17] Rather than start an edit war it would be useful to get Heanor's perspective first. @Yger: Would you like to comment as the person who reverted the merge? From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Hm, I did not know that it is possible to merge into the newer item. If I knew this, I would better have merged trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) into business (Q4830453) Heanor (talk) 14:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I just noted that a commonly used item disappeared, and made Swedish Wikipediarticle without corresponding WD object Yger (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
The original point is that business and Handelsgewerbe are not the same thing though and therefore the items shoudl not be merged. LydiaPintscher (talk) 14:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Heanor Merging the other way around would have been possible - however, I don't think it would have been correct: The German Wikipedia page, and also the German label "Handelsgewerbe" has a much narrower meaning than "business". This was reflected by the existence of a separate "German-only" item - in other languages appartently no similar legal constructs exist. So I would go back to the state before the merge - but I'm not sure if this is possible. Jneubert (talk) 15:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@Heanor: You haven't provided a reason why you merged these items, so I can only assume that you have made a mistake. Can you please provide an explanation or confirm that you are content for us to revert the merge? From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm ok with reverting the merge. I still think that we need to link something (redirect or page) in dewiki with business, but now I see that Handelsgewerbe is not the best choice for this. Heanor (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
So there seems to be consensus that a revert would be ok. Please, @From Hill To Shore, @LydiaPintscher, @Yger: Could somebody more knowledgeable about the inner working of merge-revert execute that in the correct way? I'm not sure how the previous P31 links can be restored. As about 200,000 items are concerned, I don't want to guess here. Jneubert (talk) 22:43, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@Jneubert: The first part is easy; trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) and business (Q4830453) have been separated and statements inserted to make it harder to merge them in future. While the items were merged, the removed item would have acted as a redirect to the merged item. If a merge is in place for long enough, a bot will replace the redirects with a link to the merged item. There are currently 113 pages that link to trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930); if you think there should be 200,000 links, we first need to identify what items they were. Once we have a list, we can get a bot or use an automated tool to restore the old instance of (P31). Do you have a list of the 200,000 items or is that number just from memory?
If we don't have a list, someone with access to an extract from Wikidata from December 2021 could run a query to find those 200,000 items. Unfortunately I have no experienve with queries, so someone else will need to advise on how that might work. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:51, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
Thank you, @From Hill To Shore! This looks good, business (Q4830453) has correctly 199279 instances. Maybe some of the 93 trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) instances are incorrect, if added during the time of the merge. I can take a look (or @Heanor, if you want to do some cleanup). Jneubert (talk) 01:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)
@From Hill To Shore Isn't there an edit group for the bot replacements that can just be reverted with one click? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
Perhaps, but first you would need to identify which bot was doing this. If a bot has been replacing the redirects, it will also have been replacing other redirects. A simple undo of the whole edit group would likely undo all the other replaced redirects as well. However, I am not convinced there is actually an issue here. business (Q4830453) has 202,822 linked pages, so the implication that 200,000 instance of (P31) of the more general business (Q4830453) really belong to the more specific trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) is clearly wrong. It is possible that none of the redirects were replaced and there were only ever around 100 items that linked to trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930). As a first step, someone needs to confirm there is a problem we need to fix before we waste too much time trying to fix a problem that isn't real. From Hill To Shore (talk) 11:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@From Hill To Shore: You mentioned a bot or automated tool for batch changeing wrong entries. I've identified 79 (of a total of 93) instances of trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) (query result), which were added during the merge was active and most probably were aimed at "business". Could you provide a hint on how to use/instruct the bot you mentioned? Jneubert (talk) 13:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@Jneubert: Some of those are German companies. How do you tell if trading business (Handelsgewerbe) (Q1489930) is the right item or not? Most/all of these instance of (P31) were added by an OpenRefine batch, so will likely have been planned before the merge took place. Is the timing of the edit your only reason to replace the instance of (P31) here? It looks like User:Hannolans made some/all of the edits identified, so it would be useful for them to confirm first which item is correct. From Hill To Shore (talk) 13:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
With my batch upload I meant business (Q4830453) but I think that item was merged with the German Legal term during the OpenRefine process before the upload. I can see if I can change them. --Hannolans (talk) 13:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I have reverted the batch and added business (Q4830453) instead to the uploaded medal campanies. So I think this iteration is done --Hannolans (talk) 14:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

hard to find info on editing item names

Despite searching the FAQs and the Help:Items and even some archives, i wasn't able to find any info on how to edit item names. Coming from Wikipedia, one would expect a command called Move in addition to the merge commands. I could of course make a new item and then merge the current item with the incorrect name into the new one, but it'd be good to first know if that workaround is the normal procedure or considered disruptive behavior.

Édouard Sandoz Q1287609 needs to be corrected to Edouard Sandoz without an accent according to the links in and at the end of the article https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edouard_Sandoz --Espoo (talk) 14:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

@Espoo: The guidance is at Help:Label. Here at Wikidata, items do not have a single name. We record all variations of a name for each concept or entity in all languages. Simply clicking "Edit" at the top of any item gives you access to the existing labels, descriptions and aliases in all recorded languages and gives you access to blank fields for any additional languages your account is set up to support. If you need access to more languages than the basic edit function gives you access to, there are various alternative tools available.
In terms of making this change, you would only delete the label for Édouard Sandoz if you are certain that no sources use the accent. If you are not sure, or you know that some sources do use the accent, you can create one version of the name in the main label field and another version of the name in the alias field. Which label becomes the main one and which becomes the alias is decided between editors. From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Photographers' Identities Catalog ID

The Photographers’ Identities Catalog (Q23892012) (PIC) seems to have been inaccessible for several months now (https://pic.nypl.org/), rendering Photographers’ Identities Catalog ID (P2750) currently unhelpful. Does anyone know if there are plans to reactivate, relaunch, or permanently abandon the PIC? Is there a Wikimedia liaison with the New York Public Library (Q219555) who might have insight? In many cases (maybe all?) it appears the PIC profiles can still be retrieved via Internet Archive (e.g. 9277 is dead while archive is viewable). Thanks, -Animalparty (talk) 05:21, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

  • What a shame, such a good resource, I thought it would be temporary. I wrote the webmaster listed at the NYPL website when it first went down, but never received a response. --RAN (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
    • I also sent a question and I received 3 dec 2021 this email: "NYPL's Digital team is actively working on a resolution to the outage of the PIC, but at this time we are not able to provide a timeline for when it may become available. Staff in the Photography Collection will let you know when the PIC is back up." --Hannolans (talk) 11:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Help me!!!!!!

Since a few days I'm trying to use data from Wikidata on my semantic MediaWiki, I'm trying to follow this guide. Please can you provide some help?

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:How_to_use_data_on_Wikimedia_projects#How_to_find_help_?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hyperreview (talk • contribs) at 21:32‎, 14 January 2022 (UTC).

That page only deals with Wikimedia projects. I don't think you are referring to any, as no Wikimedia projects use semantic MediaWiki, and I don't think it is possible. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Demographics

Do we have a way to document the demographics of a population? For example, the percent ethnicities of a country's population? Lectrician1 (talk) 15:03, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

See Wikidata:Property proposal/subpopulation 2.--GZWDer (talk) 15:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #503

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • Open request for adminship: MSGJ (RfP scheduled to end after 20 January 2022 17:45 UTC)
  • Development
    • Fixed an issue where making changes with sitelinks were not fully dispatched to the clients (phab:T233520)
    • Mismatch Finder: Improved the texts in the tool to be more understandable after testing
    • Mismatch Finder: added a way to get statistics about all the reviews that have been done in the tool and what is still awaiting review
    • Special:NewLexeme: kicked off the development work to improve the page in order to make it more understandable

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Talk to the Community Tech

Hello

We, the team working on the Community Wishlist Survey, would like to invite you to an online meeting with us. It will take place on 19 January (Wednesday), 18:00 UTC on Zoom, and will last an hour. This external system is not subject to the WMF Privacy Policy. Click here to join.

Agenda

  • Bring drafts of your proposals and talk to to a member of the Community Tech Team about your questions on how to improve the proposal

Format

The meeting will not be recorded or streamed. Notes without attribution will be taken and published on Meta-Wiki. The presentation (all points in the agenda except for the questions and answers) will be given in English.

We can answer questions asked in English, French, Polish, Spanish, and German. If you would like to ask questions in advance, add them on the Community Wishlist Survey talk page or send to sgrabarczuk@wikimedia.org.

Natalia Rodriguez (the Community Tech manager) will be hosting this meeting.

Invitation link

We hope to see you! SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 00:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Family names of people who moved around or who kept residences in more than one country

Hi can someone direct me to the surname policy on here which says surnames can only have one spelling? This issue occurs pretty often for Dutch names that are various sorted with "van" or not, but also applies to Russian emigrés with Cyrillic and Latin script names during their lifetimes for prolonged periods. Should surnames have international spellings (if multiple members did this) or do such individuals need multiple surnames to keep them connected to their family members? Thanks in advance. Jane023 (talk) 07:56, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Sorry - meant to include the property family name (P734) and mention this is also true for given names. Jane023 (talk) 08:02, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
It has been suggested to use valid in place (P3005) as qualifiers to each spelling per place (as opposed to series ordinal (P1545) for name changes over time) Jane023 (talk) 08:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes, language wouldn't work because many names are spelled the same across languages. A place could also be a specific castle or city I supppose, since some spellings are from publications that refer to estate sales. Jane023 (talk) 15:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Not sure how P734 or P3005 is suitable to map publications about estate sales. If it's not really clear how the name is used, you could just add is as string with name (P2561) (in addition to an alias). --- Jura 16:25, 9 January 2022 (UTC)
Yes of course you're right. And I myself get continually confused by family name (P734) and have to keep looking it up to refresh my memory. To reply to your last question, the valid in place (P3005) would only be useful as a qualifier in the case where you need to add more than one spelling of P734 due to location-specific references, and of course an estate sale from a castle would be a valid reference for a name spelling of the deceased. I do think a help page is needed for this stuff, because there are tons of "noble family" items imported from various Wikipedia projects and they all need accompanying "surname" items, though many still don't have them. Jane023 (talk) 08:16, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
It might be preferable to map primarily with family (P53). On its value you can list applicable P734. I'm still not really convinced by the proposed use of P3005. --- Jura 10:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't understand that property either! If you don't like the idea of P3005 as a qualifier, what do you propose using for people with more than one spelling of their given name or surname? Picking one randomly and using "named as" with reference for any other one? It seems a bit arbitrary and a link to a family member with the other spelling is less obvious. Jane023 (talk) 11:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
@Jane023 It's not so much whether I like it or not, but the qualifier seems to applicable when we know something about the extent of its validity. Neither aspect is generally available in casual references for names.
The main question here is what you really want to do:
  • (1) note different names used,
  • (2) retrieving all members of a family
  • (3) add P734/P735 based on (1)
  • (4) query people with similar names.
For these
Maybe it's easier to figure out by looking at one or the other samples you seem to have in mind. --- Jura 07:58, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Interesting, thanks for spelling all that out. Yes double names are a whole puzzle that I had forgotten about. Noting different names used is indeed the main goal I have in mind, since I am continuously searching for names based on art provenance records. Depending on the source, the name might be from an old catalog, which have often misspelled the name to make it easier to read for auction attendees (these become the main usage over time in museums), or from some other contemporary biographical details. So reviewing what you have written, it looks like you forgot the case where a name is commonly used today that the person may or may not have used in real life, since the recorded facts about the person might be second-hand quotes recorded by biographers posthumously from other sources. What I am doing is not new and multiple spellings of surnames for the same people/families is quite common the further back in time I go (say pre-1900). I am not sure what you mean by casual references - is this for living people? Or do you mean nicknames? I have occasionally added nicknames and I think there is a property for that too. Jane023 (talk) 08:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The samples weren't especially for double names. With "casual reference", I meant those that attest a name, but don't provide an explanation about the extent of its use.
As for names generally used today, I don't think we have fully worked out the qualifier to use. This should generally end up in the label, and, from there, in the "name in native language" and P735/P734-statements. Some qualification with "object has role" could be helpful.
I'd sum up uses by later generations in (1) as well. Normalizations are fairly common and Wikidata already provides ways to access them through name items. It could be interesting to build an interface around our names and dates to search for items about people. This would prepare us to scale up. Some websites have amazing functions and we will need them when we grow further.
On a side note, at least for some artists, Multichill's bot did a fairly good job in compiling various forms as aliases. --- Jura 11:38, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Best properties for the original caption of an image and the image reference

Disclaimer: indeed, this is mostly relevant to SDC data, but it's possible that some items might actually have their own items, so that's why I'm here, not at Commons.

For images which were published in books, there are often one or more pieces of associated data:

  • The original caption or title (e.g. "A Magical Duck")
  • Expanded description. E.g. "It is well known that, being made of wood, ducks are the same as witches, and thus we see here that the duck is, in fact, a witch and therefore magical.")
  • The original "citations", e.g. "After M. Python" or "sculpt. Cleese".
  • The figure number, e.g. "Fig. 42a" or "Plate XVII"

These do not feel not quite the same as title (P1476) or media legend (P2096), though perhaps they should just be somehow qualified?

What are the correct properties and/or qualifiers to use for data like this? Inductiveload (talk) 14:19, 12 January 2022 (UTC)

I don't know about adding long bodies of text, as that is both against the purpose of Wikidata and a potential risk of copyright infringement (the text has a separate copyright from the inage). However, shorter pieces of text included with the image can be recorded as an inscription. See Ground of the Calcutta Cricket Club, 15th Jan'y. 1861 (Q99231544) and File:Ground of Calcutta Cricket Club, 15th Jan'y 1861 - Percy Carpenter.png as an example. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:44, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Hmm, interesting. I think inscription (P1684) with a qualifier of object has role (P3831) → caption (Q18585177) or image identifier (Q110536979) probably would do well for most cases, then. As long as it still applies if the artwork doesn't actually include the caption itself, that is.
Re the copyright, this would mostly be used for images in books which are already at Commons, so the text should also be copyright-free. Mostly the expanded description is actually not that long, it's more that I wanted to stress that captions can and do have multiple separate parts. Inductiveload (talk) 16:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
+subtitle (P1680) --- Jura 11:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
@Jura1 right, but is the caption of an image really a "title" or "subtitle" in the first place? If I write a book about paintings, and I caption a reproduction of the Mona Lisa as "The most famous painting in the world", that's not really the "title", nor the subtitle, of the image. If it is indeed the correct way to model it, then that's fine, but it does not really seem there is a consistent, unambiguous schema for this data. Inductiveload (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
It seems appropriate at the mentioned sample: Q99231544 (which is not the painting Q99231394). --- Jura 11:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

How to bulk change a reference?

Hello,

The website for power plant operating licence (Turkey) (P8506)

that is reference 8 at https://tr.wikipedia.org/wiki/T%C3%BCrkiye%27deki_k%C3%B6m%C3%BCr_yak%C4%B1tl%C4%B1_enerji_santralleri_listesi

has moved from .org to .gov

so is now at

https://lisans.epdk.gov.tr/epvys-web/faces/pages/lisans/elektrikUretim/elektrikUretimOzetSorgula.xhtml

As there are over 50 items I am not going to change them manually. Is there a way to do in bulk please?

Chidgk1 (talk) 12:06, 14 January 2022 (UTC)

I would use take a look at Help:QuickStatements, which is probably what you are looking for. Due to the limitations of the tool (you can't edit statements/only swap out the reference), you will need to remove all of the current statements, and then replace them with identical ones that have the updated reference. Because of the potential for mistakes while learning how to use it, please practise using it first with https://test.wikidata.org/. There are instructions on how to do that on the linked page as well. Theknightwho (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't think this is a good strategy. Mind that you would need to move all existing qualifiers and other references over as well.
We do not have specific tools for such a task. It is possible with bot code, using the pywikibot framework for instance, but it is usually not worth to set this up for only 50 items. Unless you have the required script readily available, it would be quicker to make these changes manually. —MisterSynergy (talk) 01:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't think references should be edited in such a way. --- Jura 11:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Proposal: Styling Deprecated/Preferred Ranks

It's my feeling that the indicator for statement rank is too subtle especially for new users. It's especially tricky to notice ranks in huge long lists of statements. There's an open phabricator ticket about this but it has sit unfixed for years. There's actually a simple css change we could make to MediaWiki:Common.css to highlight the ranks for all users. I propose that while we wait for an upstream fix we adopt this change.

Discussion for this could happen at MediaWiki_talk:Common.css#Styling_Deprecated/Preferred_Ranks.

BrokenSegue (talk) 19:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)

I like the green for preferred rank, it is on by default? --RAN (talk) 03:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Different from - bot import

Hello all, there's about 97,000 cases of different from (P1889) pointing from "item1" to "item2" but not from "item2" to "item1". Can we assume that the property is truly symetric and I can import the corresponding statements to "item2"? Discussed 2 years ago on Property_talk:P1889#Suppress_constraint_on_symmetry by @Laddo, Billinghurst, Retired electrician, Infovarius: without a clear consensus. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

That I don't know, though I will say that it is truly annoying than having to go to a second page to add the same reverse entry, when it matters not a jot as reporting of duplicates is now noted, and inadvertent prevention of merging is controlled. So either have a bot, or make it so that the reverse entry is not required. Don't make unnecessary manual work for people.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Or someone make a tool that makes a reverse entry to do from the page.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Already did - User:Frettie/consistency check add.js. --Jklamo (talk) 15:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I'm afraid that the existing usage is so irregular that there's no real need to worry about constraint vio. It won't do much harm and fixing it won't make us all rich. Example: Messier 7 is different from M7 (disambig). Is this the intended and correct usage? I don't know. But loading the disambig page with scores of "different from" mirror links (Special:WhatLinksHere/Q180161) doesn't make much sense. Retired electrician (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
That said, I'm still confident that the real-life different from is not reciprocal. People mistakenly call lesser-known things with better-known names. In such cases the different from warning is relevant for the lesser entity - but not for the greater one. Retired electrician (talk) 15:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
I sometimes only add a single direction because I can't be bothered to add both. I would support a bot regularly making it symmetric but it's not super valuable. BrokenSegue (talk) 15:46, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
  • I mostly add it to prevent incorrect merges. For that to work, one statement is sufficient.
Also, one could argue that only Q27947481#P1889 and Q30502305#P1889 are needed.
Anyways, if you think it's important, feel free to do so. --- Jura 11:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Movement Strategy and Governance News – Issue 5

More languages • Please help translate to your language

Movement Strategy and Governance News
Issue 5, January 2022Read the full newsletter

Welcome to the fifth issue of Movement Strategy and Governance News (formerly known as Universal Code of Conduct News)! This revamped newsletter distributes relevant news and events about the Movement Charter, Universal Code of Conduct, Movement Strategy Implementation grants, Board elections and other relevant MSG topics.

This Newsletter will be distributed quarterly, while more frequent Updates will also be delivered weekly or bi-weekly to subscribers. Please remember to subscribe here if you would like to receive these updates.

  • Call for Feedback about the Board elections - We invite you to give your feedback on the upcoming WMF Board of Trustees election. This call for feedback went live on 10th January 2022 and will be concluded on 7th February 2022. (continue reading)
  • Universal Code of Conduct Ratification - In 2021, the WMF asked communities about how to enforce the Universal Code of Conduct policy text. The revised draft of the enforcement guidelines should be ready for community vote in March. (continue reading)
  • Movement Strategy Implementation Grants - As we continue to review several interesting proposals, we encourage and welcome more proposals and ideas that target a specific initiative from the Movement Strategy recommendations. (continue reading)
  • The New Direction for the Newsletter - As the UCoC Newsletter transitions into MSG Newsletter, join the facilitation team in envisioning and deciding on the new directions for this newsletter. (continue reading)
  • Diff Blogs - Check out the most recent publications about MSG on Wikimedia Diff. (continue reading)

--YKo (WMF) (talk) 07:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Does "has part" imply "always"?

As per title, does has part(s) (P527) imply "always"? I checked Help:Basic membership properties#part of (P361), but it doesn't really say. I thought it means "has this part always", but I got confused when I saw that street (Q79007) has parts sidewalk (Q177749), streetlight (Q503958) and pedestrian crossing (Q8010) (and also road (Q34442), but I assume that's completely wrong). I guess, I'm asking if these "parts" should be removed from street or not or if there is a qualifier or something for it? And consequently explained a bit better in the help page and property itself. I also wonder if I missed some sort of "strictness" rule that Wikidata has that would answer such question in general or if this is case-by-case. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 20:20, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

The problem here is the use of has part(s) (P527) instead of has part(s) of the class (P2670). Thierry Caro (talk) 18:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
I believe for abstract usage (yes for classes) has part(s) (P527) is fine but implies "usually" rather than "always". A human body (Q23852) "usually" has a human leg (Q6027402), but of course there are exceptions... ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)
I guess it just feels subjective. The vast majority of streets don't have sidewalks, crosswalks, or street lights. Why not add traffic sign (Q170285) or manhole (Q532998) or any number of things. This feels like it would be unmanagable if every object listed things that it may have rather than what it "normally" has. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 12:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
That's a good point. I think it's fair to remove these statements if it's something that is absent on "the vast majority of streets" - however that may be a bit context-dependent. The vast majority of streets in New York City do have sidewalks, crosswalks, and street lights. Urban streets probably greatly outnumber rural ones; on the other hand global south streets may be the most dominant category and I don't know what those typically look like. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:22, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: I would say that worldwide rural streets greatly outnumber urban streets. It's just hard to quantize from personal experience and I don't really know where to even begin looking for such surveys, let alone on a global scale. Anecdotally, I've been looking into some street data locally (Latvia) and I was surprised just how many named residential streets there are in random tiny villages. There are probably uncountable streets in places like India or Brazil. Places like NYC are very densely-populated, but they aren't geographically large. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 17:14, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
@Hellknowz I was actually talking about this recently in the Telegram. I was thinking about proposing a new property called "could have part" for this purpose. What do you think? Lectrician1 (talk) 01:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@Lectrician1: I don't have the Wikidata experience to comment on that. It sounds to me like it should be a qualifier for "has parts", something like "frequency of occurrence" or something? But that was my initial question too -- is that in the spirit of things on Wikidata? As with my example above, streets would end up with anything from crosswalks and sidewalks to manhole covers and curbs. Where would the line be drawn? —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK ∣ enWiki 11:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)
@Hellknowz Yes we have a property for it: nature of statement (P5102). The thing is, people don't always use it with has part(s) (P527) so we don't always know if something is conditional. If we had a dedicated property, we would know what is conditional and could require the usage of nature of statement (P5102).
As for where the line should be drawn, probably if 75% or more of all instances have it. Lectrician1 (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

The short answer to the top question is no. For alterpieces, it may have been dismantled during the protestant reformation and research into dendrochronological data reveals the left-wing/central panel/outer-wing relationships, causing a new item for the initial altarpiece which "has parts" of the surving stuff. That said, an altarpiece is a concrete thing, and a street is more of a concept. I am not convinced "has part" should be used for concepts - e.g. where do you draw the line for the bike lane, etc? Maybe the proper way to handle this is only at the individual street level, which means those "has parts" you are discussing need to be removed. Jane023 (talk) 11:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

  • This could be solved by having a new property that means "instances of X have parts of the class Y". Given that has part(s) of the class (P2670) is not meant to be used with classes, this would be an equivalent property that could be. It would make sense for this to be general, in the sense that not all instances of X have to have parts of the class Y (i.e. some instances have 0 parts of the class Y). This would be a straightforward solution to the question about streets and sidewalks/pavements above, for example. Theknightwho (talk) 17:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Official website as reference

How can I use official website link as automatic reference url?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by DustDFG (talk • contribs) at 15:27, 18 January 2022‎ (UTC).

Some mistakes and problem

Hello, I tried merge Q89114416 and Q722334 but I can't. I did damage and I don't know how to fix it  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by DustDFG (talk • contribs) at 15:27, 18 January 2022‎ (UTC).

It's fixed now. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
By the way, I'm not sure those are the exact same thing. For items you are certain about, it's usually best to merge them using the merge.js gadget. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Maybe, I tried to do it with it but I am not sure. I wanted to use Special:MergeItems but for it I needed to solve conflicts DustDFG (talk) 12:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Une déclaration d'identifiant apparait en vert

Quelqu'un sait pourquoi une déclaration identifiant IMDb apparait en vert sur Q108841249 et ce que cela signifie? Je n'ai jamais vu ça avant.

Someone know why a statement is turning green on Q108841249 and what it means? I never seen it before. ~~~~  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Noecmm (talk • contribs).

The coloring of preferred and deprecated statements is new and was only added to the standard CSS a few days ago. It should serve to ensure that users deal more with the possible ranges of statements and also recognize them. I cannot say why this statement has a preferred rank and I would also put the statement on a normal rank. --Gymnicus (talk) 12:59, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Protected item

Could someone please just mention Auguste de Lamarck (Q110470983) (his son) on Jean-Baptiste de Lamarck (Q82122)'s item?

Thanks in advance! 92.184.108.239 16:56, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Yes, certainly. Do you have a reference for that? Three sons are mentioned at en:Jean-Baptiste Lamarck but none are Auguste. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)
Actually this was done by User:Bovlb a week ago — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Call for Feedback about the Board of Trustees elections is now open

You can find this message translated into additional languages on Meta-wiki.
More languages • Please help translate to your language

The Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections is now open and will close on 7 February 2022.

With this Call for Feedback, the Movement Strategy and Governance team is taking a different approach. This approach incorporates community feedback from 2021. Instead of leading with proposals, the Call is framed around key questions from the Board of Trustees. The key questions came from the feedback about the 2021 Board of Trustees election. The intention is to inspire collective conversation and collaborative proposal development about these key questions.

There are two confirmed questions that will be asked during this Call for Feedback:

  1. What is the best way to ensure more diverse representation among elected candidates? The Board of Trustees noted the importance of selecting candidates who represent the full diversity of the Wikimedia movement. The current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Europe.
  2. What are the expectations for the candidates during the election? Board candidates have traditionally completed applications and answered community questions. How can an election provide appropriate insight into candidates while also appreciating candidates’ status as volunteers?

There is one additional question that may be presented during the Call about selection processes. This question is still under discussion, but the Board wanted to give insight into the confirmed questions as soon as possible. Hopefully if an additional question is going to be asked, it will be ready during the first week of the Call for Feedback.

Join the conversation.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance--YKo (WMF) (talk) 03:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

@YKo (WMF): Adding an edit summary when appending a new thread to any wiki talk page is a long-standing convention, YKo, as a courtesy to users. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:47, 13 January 2022 (UTC)
Got it. thanks.--YKo (WMF) (talk) 05:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Question about the Affiliates' role for the Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections

Hi All,

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Call for Feedback: Board of Trustees elections so far. The Movement Strategy and Governance team suggested another question was still under discussion. As of today, we announce the last key question:

How should affiliates participate in elections?

Affiliates are an important part of the Wikimedia movement. Two seats of the Board of Trustees due to be filled this year were filled in 2019 through the Affiliate-selected Board seats process. A change in the Bylaws removed the distinction between community and affiliate seats. This leaves the important question: How should affiliates be involved in the selection of new seats?

The question is broad in the sense that the answers may refer not just to the two seats mentioned, but also to other, Community- and Affiliate-selected seats. The Board is hoping to find an approach that will both engage the affiliates and give them actual agency, and also optimize the outcomes in terms of selecting people with top skills, experience, diversity, and wide community’s support.

The Board of Trustees is seeking feedback about this question especially, although not solely, from the affiliate community. Everyone is invited to share proposals and join the conversation in the Call for Feedback channels. In addition to collecting online feedback, the Movement Strategy and Governance team will organize several video calls with affiliate members to collect feedback. These calls will be at different times and include Trustees.

Due to the late addition of this third question, the Call will be extended until 16 February.

Join the conversation.

Best,

Movement Strategy and Governance--YKo (WMF) (talk) 05:19, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion about preserving deleted Wikipedia categories by transferring contents to Wikidata

You are invited to join the discussion at w:Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Preserve at Wikidata?. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:39, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Get data from the headline of a website

I would like to feed Wikidata with Offizielle Deutsche Charts album ID (P10262) of all the albums on the website offiziellecharts.de/album-details-$1 (examples).
Problem: The name of the interpret and album on the website is in header 1 (h1) and header 2 (h2) in the HTML source code (example) and I don't know how to crawl this data. Can somebody help? Greeetings Bigbossfarin (talk) 13:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

maybe ask at Wikidata:Bot_requests. BrokenSegue (talk) 14:37, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
@Bigbossfarin Have you tried https://webscraper.io/ ? I recommend its Chrome or Firefox plugin. They've got tutorial videos available. I can assist with that if you run into troubles. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 15:20, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
@Vojtěch Dostál: Thank you, with webscraper I managed to harvest all links going out from a website, but I didn't find a way to go through a sitemap counting from 1,2,3... upwards. There is a way to import a JSON sitemap, maybe this could work? Bigbossfarin (talk) 11:43, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
@Bigbossfarin You can specify the range in the sitemap URL itself like this: https://www.offiziellecharts.de/album-details-[1-492000]. It will likely take several days to go through this large database. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:14, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Lost in Translation

(Relocated from here) As an native German-speaker with moderate English-skills, I frequently fumble over translation problems, where a word in one language has two in the other. This becomes apparent, if you check the English topping lift (Q607634) finding its equivalent in the German "Toppnant", but also in the German "Dirk" (Q11694269). The reason is, that German differentiates between the main-sail boom and the spinnakerboom. Besides my limited English-skills, I'm no IT-crack either, so I don't know if there is a potential fix for this type of problem. However, it would be a significant improvement over the current situation for Interwiki-links. The problem is not limited to German-English translations. If you need more examples, I'd be willing to assist in the search. Yotwen (talk) 06:24, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Yotwen. This sounds to me like an editorial issue. Please discuss it with the community on the Project chat. -Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) (talk) 10:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
I still consider it a technical constraint, however… - so my question: How do I deal with the incomplete Wikipedia-links? Yotwen (talk) 10:29, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Not sure what exactly is missing. Maybe oldschool interwikilinks on client wiki pages might be the solution? —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
It's something that happens once in a while, even for trivial objects (try finding the item for "stairs").
For the items you mentioned, the German interwikis might be on the wrong items. This if Q607634 is for both and Q11694269 subclass for spis.
Descriptions (and labels) should describe the concept represented by the item and not try to define the label. [18] seems to add different definitions.
It's conceivable that (in my vocabulary) both items had the label "line" and would just have different descriptions and aliases (in English).
Also, for real word objects, it helps to add images to the items. --- Jura 11:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
It depends completely on how you look at it. Both items do the same thing: They hold one type of boom in the horizontal. So, I'm perfectly ok, if the English language uses one term for that concept. However, German uses two words. It's a bit foolish to argue with something such as "Language". It has no "inner logic" oder "opinion". It is as it is. You won't convice a Hungarian, that hùg (younger sister) and nővér (older sister) should not be two separate entries, just cause in English (or German) there is no single word for the concept. Hungarians even maltreat their language to find an exact equivalent for the English "Sister" (Lánytestvér) which translates into girl-sibling. So, now I've three potential entries that ought to link to one English (or German) entry. I suppose the IT-cracks call it a n:n-relation, instead of a 1:1-relation. After all, that is why I startet out with the techies. Yotwen (talk) 13:34, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Interwiki links are from concept to concept, not from word to word. --- Jura 13:43, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
Cool. That leaves one concept void and the other sometimes wrong. Yotwen (talk) 16:27, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
I think the error is here. --- Jura 16:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
As I said earlier, you can always add interwikilinks on the client wiki. In this case, on the page de:Dirk (Segeln) to en:Topping lift. It does not work in the other direction, since every page can only link to one page on another wiki. Technically you can also try to automate this with a template/module, but I think dewiki has still not adapted en:Template:Interwiki extra or something similar.
Interwikilinks based on a 1:1 correspondence used to be the goal before Wikidata existed. The old decentralized interwiki style did not really allow anyone to make this happen, though. However, it is important to realize that not much has changed with Wikidata conceptually, and the old way of adding interwikilinks still works. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)
The problem appears to be, that the logic of a "dictionary" as "a systematically arranged list of socialised linguistic forms compiled from the speech-habits of a given speech community and commented on by the author in such a way that the qualified reader understands the meaning" (Ladislav Zgusta in Manual of Lexicography, The Hague 1971) was attempted to be applied to a situation, where multiple linguistic forms and speech-habits collide and no speech community exists beyond the uneven 'common ground' of the English language. I have reason to believe that a native English-speaker cannot really comprehent the problem, unless s/he speaks at least one foreign language at an adequate level of fluency. However, the problem persists and will not go away, even if I shut up about it. Yotwen (talk) 09:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
The fact that Wikidata (and, indeed, Wikipedia) is not a dictionary and models concepts, not words, notwithstanding, surely it's making it more confused to assign the description "Line holding boom or spinnaker boom in the horizontal" to the "Dirk" item? If, as you say, the "Dirk" is for the spinnaker boom/pole only, this would be better without the "boom", I think? You could just label the "Dirk" item as "spinnaker topping lift" in English, make it a subclass of the generic "topping lift" (i.e. any line used to raise or support any boom), and describe it as "a line used to raise a spinnaker boom" (it's not necessarily true that the spinnaker pole has to be horizontal), then it's fairly clear, I think.
There are other kinds of topping lift too, in particular a "span topping lift" which is used to support the end of "derrick" (another confused concept, since it's conflating "derrick cranes", which look a bit like a gaff rig, and "oil derricks", which are more like electricity pylons and aren't usually controlled by lines). Inductiveload (talk) 11:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
And words, according to your comment, do not represent concepts? Yotwen (talk) 11:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
They may be used to represent concepts, but they are not, in themselves, the concepts. This is a classic example of a map–territory relation (Q1963130). Moreover, it is irrelevant to the concept whether a specific language has or does not have a specific word for something (not to mention the sometimes unclear line between a "word" and a "lexeme"), or uses another word to refer to an item, even if other languages have separate words.
A completely unrelated example: the Chinese "word" (which you may call a character, ideogram/logogram, grapheme, morpheme, or lexeme, depending on how you wish to view it) "羊" means both sheep (Q69301705) and goat (Q2934), whereas English has two words: "sheep" and "goat", and a much less common word "Caprini" to refer to the tribe (Q227936) (which is item Caprini (Q19806047), which does indeed have w:zh:羊 as the sitelink) that contains both goats and sheep, but not other members of Caprinae (Q189804). Now, you may say that it's simple: "羊" means "Caprini", but nearly all common usage of it, for example "羊肉" (lamb or mutton, not quite the same thing in English!) would indicate that it actually means just "sheep".
The point of a Wikidata item is to model the concept. If you want to model the actual words, then the thing you are looking for may be a WD:Lexeme. Inductiveload (talk) 12:13, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Fine with me. There are two concepts in the German language and only one in the English. Only one of those connects through correctly from German to English and vice versa. The other is lost in translation. But following your argument: Which one should we drop: Goat or Sheep? Yotwen (talk) 12:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
I don't know that anything has to be "dropped", it's rather that various interwikis are set on the wrong items.
w:en:Topping lift appears to match w:de:Dirk (Segeln), rather than w:de:Toppnant.
There is no English counterpart to w:de:Toppnant, because the article "spinnaker pole topping lift" (sometimes aka "uphaul") doesn't exist there. There is therefore no place to put a link to w:de:Toppnant on English Wikpedia, because w:en:Topping lift already has a German interwiki to the more general concept of "Dirk", commensurate with the generic scope demonstrated in the English Wikipedia lede: "a line which applies upward force on a boom on a sailboat.").
If you wish to "resolve" this issue completely such that there is a 1:1 en:de mapping between the two, the only thing to do is to write the appropriate article on English Wikipedia.
But, in general, it cannot be possible to make a completely uniform 1:1 matching between all Wikipedia articles, because not all Wikipedia articles have the same scope, and, due to differing Wikipedia policies and so on, never will. Inductiveload (talk) 13:08, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Indeed, this does mean that some Wikipedia articles in some languages may not get automatic sitelinks to the most appropriate pages in other languages. I'd be interested to know if there is a data-driven way to represent that (e.g. a way to provide a sitelink to w:en:topping lift from w:de:Toppnant) without having to rely on local interwikis like it's 2011 again. However, the highly variable nature of the problem because any article can match be a superset, identical, a subset of or completely disjoint but somehow still the closest relative to, any other article on another wiki, means that it probably should be done case-by-case rather than automatically.
The key issue is that Wikidata represents the concepts themselves, and doesn't specifically promise to represent any Wikipedia article. It just happens that most Wikipedia articles usually have a "best-fitting" Wikidata item that represented their main content.
As MisterSynergy said, the template w:en:Template:Interwiki extra appears to fill the need for "secondary concepts" on English Wikipedia, though the interwiki system still permits only a single outgoing interwiki (so, for example, there is simply no mechanism at all for w:en:Topping lift to get a link to both of w:de:Dirk (Segeln) and w:de:Toppnant). Inductiveload (talk) 13:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
By mingling the concept of the concept-dictionary with the concept of the thesaurus, we may be able to find our way outside the current box. However, I hadn't realized that I first must make the problem understood before starting to look for the technical solution. I considered the problem self-evident. Apparently, I was wrong. Yotwen (talk) 15:03, 12 January 2022 (UTC)
Interesting, Inductiveload explained it in much more detail.
@Yotwen will you fix the interwikis and descriptions accordingly? You can ask for help in German at Wikidata:Forum. --- Jura 11:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
Not sure where the articles at plwiki and ukwiki should go. Possibly these wikis have two articles on the same topic.
Please double-check.
Also, I found that at some point this was almost as it's now see [19] later merged by @В.Галушко: --- Jura 09:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Second opinion required on Nord Stream 2

An IP editor has been removing a statement at Nord Stream 2 (Q21644350). The statement is a Der Spiegel topic ID (P10234) that points to https://www.spiegel.de/thema/ostseepipeline/. The resulting page is a list of articles, which include several about Nord Stream 2 (Q21644350). I don't know the language, so I can't say if the statement is correct or not, but the presence of articles mentioning the same topic suggests it is at least a plausible statement that someone will try to restore later. I reverted the IP editor and set the statement as deprectated with reason for deprecated rank (P2241) possibly invalid entry requiring further references (Q35779580). The IP editor now seems intent on an edit war over this and continues to remove the statement whether it is active or deprecated. Can I get a second opinion on whether a deprecated statement is the correct solution here? From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Regardless of whether the topic ID is correct, the argumentative behavior of that IP and the range to which that IP belongs both suggest that the person behind it is the subject of the second community global ban and should be dealt with accordingly. Mahir256 (talk) 20:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
The topic term "Ostseepipeline" encompasses any pipeline through/in the Baltic Sea (Q545) so that statement would only be correct if accompanied with the qualifier mapping relation type (P4390) --> broad match (Q39894595). --SCIdude (talk) 09:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Roofs/covering

There seem to be no property to describe roofs over buildings and structures. I want to link a glass roof to Q110557989.Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

More details roof: HSE (Haags Startstation Erasmus) Den Haag = (is made of glass, not plastics)Smiley.toerist (talk) 13:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Possibly use has part(s) of the class (P2670) with a value of glass roof (Q93229981) --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:35, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Other roof values: https://w.wiki/4iu3 --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

Last two days for submitting proposals

Tomorrow is the last day for submitting proposals for the Community Wishlist Survey 2022.

Also, everyone is welcome to translate, promote, and discuss proposals. SGrabarczuk (WMF) (talk) 14:45, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

permission to wikidata test instance?

Hi, when I try to carry out a test edit with my not-yet-accepted bot to the Wikidata test instance: 

  wb create-entity item.json

I receive this error massage: 


   { permissiondenied: permissiondenied: You do not have the permissions needed to carry out this action.
   at requestError (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/wikibase-cli/node_modules/wikibase-edit/lib/request/parse_response_body.js:18:15)
   at module.exports (/usr/local/lib/node_modules/wikibase-cli/node_modules/wikibase-edit/lib/request/parse_response_body.js:11:33)
   at process._tickCallback (internal/process/next_tick.js:68:7)
   url: https://test.wikidata.org/w/api.php?action=wbeditentity&format=json
   response status: 200 }

[continues; this just the first part] What kind of permissions do I need? Thank you for helping me --Eva (talk) 18:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

The reason was the wrong specified bot password. When I created the bot password I missed to add "Create, edit, and move pages". Eva (talk) 19:25, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Why haven't new properties been created since Monday?

On January 17, the last Wikidata property was created, and no new properties have been created by admins and property creators since. Now 63 properties have already accumulated, which one way or another are waiting to be created. What is it connected with? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 05:55, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

  • It happens that some property creators mark them as ready, but don't take the necessary steps to create them. If you need one of these, you could ask them to proceed.
Also, from Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/2021/12 and Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/2021/11, it seems you requested multiple properties, but don't make much use of them.
You could use described at URL (P973) instead/in the meantime for others. If you need one that hasn't external-id datatype, you can ask meet on my talk page. --- Jura 09:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)

@MasterRus21thCentury: creating new properties is quite a long and complex process. I would say that it takes at least 30 mins even for an experienced editor, and unfortunately we do not have sufficient property creators or admins to reduce the backlog. If you are willing to help I would encourgae you to apply to be a property creator! I have a suggestion to improve the workflow, in some cases:

  • Property creator reviews proposal and creates a blank property.
  • Property proposer and other interested editors add labels, properties and relevant constraints to the property
  • Property creator returns (after a week?) to check everything has been done correctly.
  • Property can then start to be used. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 07:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

How do I add a label language to the description of an item?

Hi. I've tried several times to add a Swedish label to Wikidata:Willy Pedersen, but somehow this gadget is "hidden". Can anybody help? --BrianRasmussen (talk) 16:11, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

@BrianRasmussen: The default language fields are based on where the system thinks your IP is located. This is then modified by any languages you have recorded in the babel templates on your user page. If you need to add labels to other languages, I'd recommend using the labelLister gadget, which you can activate in your preferences screen. This allows you to enter labels on any language, so long as you know the language code (en for English, de for German). From Hill To Shore (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
You can also use Special:SetLabel if it's a one off thing in a language you don't want to always see. SilentSpike (talk) 17:29, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Stadtbahn station Siegburg

pre 1998

Before 1998, the tram passed underneath the railway and stopped before the railway station. (see de:Siegburger Bahn) The underground station and item Q63385206 did not exist before 1998. I did add Q2175765 to the SD of the picture, but this does not connect to the railway station Q316905. Is a separate item for the tram stop before the train station (pre 1998) necessary or is some other solution posible?Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:21, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Train stations and their tram stations can be connected using interchange station (P833), I believe. See Dornach Gare (Q110597507) for an example working with Gare de Mulhouse-Dornach (Q2253014). Thierry Caro (talk) 11:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #504

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Discussions
    • Closed request for adminship: MSGJ (Successful). Welcome onboard \o/
  • Tool of the week
    • Comparator compare the list of cited entities across two different wikipedia articles using Wikidata and SPARQL
  • Development
    • Enabling usage tracking specifically for statements on Waray, Armenian and Cebuano Wikipedias (phab:T296383, phab:T296382, phab:T296384)
    • Implementing basic version of mul language code and deploying it to Test Wikidata (phab:T297393)
    • Preparing an event centered on reusing Wikidata's data
    • Mismatch Finder: Been in touch with people who can potentially provide the first mismatches to load into the new tool for the launch. Finalized the statistics part.

You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.


Outdated external ID

Italian Senate of the Republic ID (P2549) links are no longer working. It seems like the Italian senate has switched to a simpler format (e.g. "22784" rather than "leg=15&id=22784" albeit with different endpoints). How does one go about adjusting to that change without breaking a bunch of external tools/scripts etc? A concrete example: Achille Totaro (Q3604430) is not available at http://www.senato.it/loc/link.asp?tipodoc=sattsen&leg=15&id=22784 but rather at https://dati.senato.it/senatore/22784 Popperipopp (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

@Popperipopp: It is usually discussed in the talk of the property, pinging the competent WikiProject(s); I did it. Let's continue there the discussion. Thanks, --Epìdosis 17:46, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

International link to Q207469

Moved from Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard

The international link to mobbing (Q207469) Japanese “モラルハラスメント” is linked to English “mobbing” which is not appropriate.

“モラルハラスメント”is originally French “ harcèlement moral” and does not mean mobbing.

The original phrase “ harcèlement moral” in Wikipedia is not linked to English “mobbing”.

Therefore, the Japanese Q207469 link should be detached from English “mobbing” and all other languages attached to English “mobbing” group.

 – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Shunsalta (talk • contribs) at 01:04, 21 January 2022‎ (UTC).

I haved moved the sitelink to moral harassment (Q105193565). — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
@Shunsalta: Do you have an equivalent article to "mobbing" in the Japanese Wikipedia? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Such separate article doesn't appears to exists, because bullying (いじめ) in Japan is identified as caused by group mentality, and so is most cases of bullying in Japan. So bullying are by default mobbing. Items listed under w:en:Bullying#Individual are usually not considered bullying in Japan but rather various form of harassment, for example power harassment (Q7236520) or alcohol harassment (Q17192139), according to my understanding. C933103 (talk) 14:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

On protection of items with wrong editions and description issues

Admins always protected the wrong version

This stems from the recent protection of a page granted after a request in the administrators' noticeboard by the user @Julian Aristiqui:.

This user and I have the same problem for the second time. Apparently he likes to edit the description of presidents in a way that expresses the number of order of the president (i.e. Biden, 46th president of the United States). The fact that the US and other countries have established their official order of presidents (Biden is the 46th, Trump was the 45th, etc) doesn't reflect in every country of the world.

In the last episode, the user Julian Aristiqui acted this way: in the item Q561837 he replaced the description "former president of Argentina" by "56th president of Argentina". The truth is, in Argentina there is no official order of presidents. Some count the dictators as presidents, some not, some count people who were president for 3 days, some not. It's not just Argentina, some countries with dictatorships doesn't count the dictators among the supposed list of recognized presidents. But that's not the point. When the user changed the description that was OK, because Mauricio Macri in fact is a former president of Argentina, by the wrong description "56th president of Argentina" (he wasn't the 56th, nor the 55th, nor the 54th, because there's not official counting in Argentina), I reverted it. We engaged in a sort of edit-war, so he didn't like my reversions, and requested protection, the protection was granted and the wrong description stands there.

As I said before, the same steps happened with Q6800406 some months ago. Then I tried to reach a consensus with him, but to me it seems he left the discussion (why he'd want to discuss anything, if it's his edition the one that is in use? -and that's my main concern about the right procedures). And the wrong description in that case still stands there.

So, I'm a bit confused of which would be the correct procedure on this. I really don't want that wrong information remains in the description.

I'm looking for community insights about the correct procedures, how to avoid the protection of items with wrong information, and on that issue of "number of order of presidents" as description in cases without solid references. —Frodar (talk) 18:34, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

@Frodar: admins just protect an article or an item to make the edit war stop. It's not an endorsement of that version.
Regarding the descriptions. I don't see any source supporting that Mauricio Macri (Q561837) is the 56th president of Argentina.
Take Joe Biden (Q6279) he has a position held (P39) statement with plenty of sources.
So the solution to this problem seems to be simple: user:Julian Aristiqui needs to add sources to back up these claims or don't change the description. Currently the description is unsourced. Multichill (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
I think I have already clarified the topic of the discussion, ¡I did not leave! @Frodar: I already answered you  [here], it seems that you are the one who does not want to listen, Always with the same. Here is one of my sources: [List of presidents of Argentina]
It is somewhat outdated because unfortunately the current president of Argentina is Alberto Fernández, but it is enough to support my version. Also I'm not the only one also another anonymous IP reverted the changes that Mr Frodar imposed. as I answered previously I also invoke Wikidata's policy that states the following on its official website: Wikidata official policy.
---Julian Aristiqui (talk) 12:20, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
That doesn't look like the most reliable source with all the advertisements. On es:Joe Biden I see the mention of 46th in the starting paragraph. On es:Mauricio Macri I don't think 56th is even mentioned at all. Looks like User:Ameisenigel really did protect the wrong version. Multichill (talk) 17:03, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
So I would like to suggest to restore the pre-edit war version former president of Argentina until we have a valid source for 56th president of Argentina, OK? --Ameisenigel (talk) 17:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, this is wearing me out a bit, I leave you with 2 more sources to support my statement: [List of presidents of Argentina][List of presidents of Argentina from Wikipedia] In my opinion undo my version to "Former president of Argentina" would be a breach of the regulations established by Wikidata. Also the other link I provided above as a source was just as valid, most websites have ads, they use that to make money I don't see a reasonable explanation for that.
---Julian Aristiqui (talk) 06:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
The first source provided is not reliable, and the last two provided doesn't even have a numbering of the presidents. Ameisenigel, of course I agree to the restoration. But as a gesture of goodwill and because in part I think I understand what is the point of the change that Julian Aristiqui sought to make with his edition, I also offer the alternative of changing the description to president of Argentina from 2015 to 2019, which would be the exact equivalent of the current description in Spanish and is the short description in the English Wikipedia article of Macri.
@Julian Aristiqui: what I wanted you to see in the past is that not all countries have an official numbering of presidents. In the case of Argentina you can look the issue was mentioned in both English Wikipedia and Spanish Wikipedia as far as almost 12 years ago. And I wish to take this opportunity to say that the descriptions without verifiability allow me to revert the changes on Q6800406 made some months ago on the same grounds that in the Macri item.—Frodar (talk) 17:35, 23 January 2022 (UTC)
@Frodar: I do not completely agree but I see that for now it is the only way (president of Argentina from 2015 to 2019) to resolve the dispute and reach a consensus, just understand me dude, I want the information available in all Wikimedia projects to be as accurate as possible, following the corresponding guidelines.
---Julian Aristiqui (talk) 23:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)
I have removed the protection, since it seems to be no longer needed, so you can change the description per consensus. Thank you for the constructive discussion. --Ameisenigel (talk) 14:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Adding claim an qualifier at the same time using Wikibase-CLI?

Hello! Using Wikibase-CLI I can add a claim to an item: 

  wb edit-entitiy {'id': 'Q223813', 'claims': {'P242': {'value': 'Q223817', 'references': [{'P149': 'Q223807'}]}}}

And afterwards it works to add a qualifier: 

  wb aq 'Q223813$8D9789BF-BA6E-4870-9687-F3079F1FBD69' P551 '21'

Is there a way to add both at the same time? I tried this but it does not work out: 

  wb edit-entity {'id': 'Q223813', 'claims': {'P242': {'value': 'Q223817', 'qualifier': [{'P95657': 'Gabriella Rustici'}, {'P551': '21'}], 'references': [{'P149': 'Q223807'}]}}}

If I need to do it in two steps, as shown above, I have to retrieve the guid in between, which would mean additional effort. Thank you! --Eva (talk) 09:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

The solution is:'{"id": "Q223813", "claims": {"P242": {"value": "Q223817", "qualifiers": {"P95657": "Gabriella Rustici", "P551": "21"}, "references": [{"P149": "Q223807"}]}}}' Eva (talk) 12:47, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Ps.: The Q-IDs and Property-IDs refer to Wikidata test instance.

Hello

I need help for school i, i need "NATURVITENSKAPELIGE METODER HVA VET VI?" please hjelp me  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.19.187.104 (talk • contribs) at 09:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC).

Hello, maybe you can start here: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitenskapelig_metode From the Wikipedia record you can go to other websites or check referenced literature. --Eva (talk) 09:49, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Misgenerated data Q12609074

Misgenerated data Q12609074

The original data is Q31177228.

Duplicate Q12609074 data was created. Takuyakoz (talk) 11:08, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I am a little wary here as you have removed a lot of data before claiming they are the same item.[20] I'd advise that we get another Korean reader to review the changes before merging the items. It is possible that these are two separate concepts that have been pruned to the point of appearing to be the same. From Hill To Shore (talk) 11:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

What is the formal definition with regards to P621?

Obviously a number of objects are in contact with the atmosphere all the time, but since the property time of object orbit decay (P621) is tied to a specific time that needs to be clarified. I kind of expect this to mean a point in time that means a deorbiting and landing that does not exceed one full orbit around the planet in question, but I would rather like to hear what a person who knows his stuff thinks. —Infrastruktur (talk) 20:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Adert AlienAnnie Aluxosm Arlo Barnes (talk) Cekli Cofcorpse Daniel Mietchen FabC Huntster Jura Josecurioso Kees08 Mu301 Rjelves Romain2boss Shisma Soumya-8974 Tris T7 Wallacegromit1 Wittylama (talk) Jck1337

Notified participants of WikiProject Space —Infrastruktur (talk) 14:01, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I think the property P621 should be used for spacecraft that did not survive reentry like STS-107 and myriads of space junks. Soumya-8974 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I see it as the point in time when the decaying trajectory of an uncontrolled object becomes such that the object won't complete another orbit. I don't think it matters wether or not it eventually survives reentry.
It shouldn't be used in cases where de-orbit burns are involved because those trajectory changes are not caused by orbital decay. josecurioso ❯❯❯ Tell me! 14:48, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
The only time I use this property with "refine date" for a specific time is when a source specifically provides that data and calls it "reentry" or "decay". Speaking broadly, I suppose this would be the point in time that the spacecraft or object passes the entry interface (NASA definition: 400,000 ft or 121 km) on a trajectory that precludes a stable orbit. Aka, the object is at that point committed to atmospheric entry.
I would suggest, though, that "spacecraft" be removed from the name of this property, since objects that aren't spacecraft also experience decay and entry. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:22, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Interesting. That's not too far from the Karman line, although I understand the ISS at ~400 km has to boost its orbit at regular intervals too, so that's hardly a stable orbit either. Do you happen to know how fast an object usually takes to disintegrate or hit the surface once it passes the entry interface? It might be relevant for a new property description. Infrastruktur (talk) 22:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
I changed the property's description based on the input. This is just a suggestion, feel free to adjust it. Infrastruktur (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

no connection...

the german language link just leads to the wikipedia main page??--Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 15:40, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mr.Lovecraft: If you want an answer, you will first need to explain your question. What link are you talking about? From Hill To Shore (talk) 18:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
User:From Hill To Shore The Link to the German Wikidata main page... At the left side you know English, Deutsch, Español, Italiano. And if you click at German it doesn´t leads you to the Wikidata main paige but to the Wikipedia main paige... Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 11:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Mr.Lovecraft: It is absolutely correct that if you click on the link you described, you will be redirected to the start page of the German-language Wikipedia. If you look at the title of the section, it says "In Wikipedia". If you want to see the German language homepage of Wikidata, then you have to set German as the default language. --Gymnicus (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments requested: Is "Wikidata Query Service" the correct name?

We have a tool that I think everyone calls "Wikidata Query Service". It is fundamental to the Wikidata experience. See it at

Its documentation page calls it the SPARQL Query Service. See

Proposal: Change name of the Wikidata documentation page to "Wikidata Query Service".

Here are past discussions.

This page is the center of a lot of links, and would need community support to change.

  1.  Support Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:26, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  2. The service seems like it should have the name "Wikidata" in it to distinguish it from other wikibase instances' (or anyone elses') SPARQL query service. Is "Wikidata SPARQL Query Service" too long? Otherwise "Wikidata Query Service" seems right (especially if we're considering eventually changing query languages). BrokenSegue (talk) 16:17, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  3. Are we still talking about this? Just do it :) — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 16:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  4.  Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 17:23, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
  5.  Support --Soylacarli (talk) 19:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia language links at en:ITHF table hockey

Hi, I edit at English Wikipedia and have come across a problem. The article "ITHF table hockey" links to a number of other articles using ITHF table hockey (Q1659267). However, it seems that all except English and Russian are for the more general "Table hockey", and should use table hockey (Q17145887). What is the procedure to edit these interlinking items? Thanks. 162.208.168.92 17:18, 26 January 2022 (UTC)

you can just move the sitelinks from the more specific item to the more general item. click the edit button in the sidebar. delete them from ITHF table hockey (Q1659267) and add them to table hockey (Q17145887). BrokenSegue (talk) 18:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
This message appears when attempting to delete the item:
Could not remove due to an error.
The save has failed.
Your action has triggered the Abuse Filter	Warning: The action you are about to take will remove a sitelink from this item. Sitelinks should only be removed if the page in question has been deleted, or if that link is being moved into another item. If you are trying to do neither of these, please do not submit this edit again.
162.208.168.92 19:32, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Looks like you fell into an abuse filter designed to stop vandalism. I'm sorry. The edit you are doing seems correct though. Do you have an account to edit from? Otherwise if you list the edits you want to make here I can make it for you. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Ah I see, I wasn't logged in. It would appear that you can't make this edit while anon. Thank you! 162 etc. (talk) 20:06, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
From the warning text, I assume that you can make edit uninlogged if you try again. The last statement implies that: "If you are trying to do neither of these, please do not submit this edit again." --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

List of presidents of the Royal Society

Can someone peak at Talk:Q55713110 and see where the sorting and inconsistency errors are coming from. I am getting sleepy and can't find the error in replaced and replaced by, or why the list is not sorting at ordinal 17. Thank you in advance. --RAN (talk) 06:23, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

I think PositionHolderHIstory is getting its sort wrong; I've pinged its author - this /seems/ to cure it: https://w.wiki/4kSo . --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

De jure / de facto

I tried to see what where the current practices about « de jure / de facto » conflicting claims for countries after someone raised the issue on how to deal with this kind of conflicts with Russian conflicts and there is many qualifiers used with value de jure/de facto … this is a mess.

A complete list :

subject has role (P2868) View with SQID of (P642) View with SQID applies to part (P518) View with SQID nature of statement (P5102) View with SQID determination method (P459) View with SQID valid in period (P1264) View with SQID sourcing circumstances (P1480) View with SQID object has role (P3831) View with SQID has cause (P828) View with SQID criterion used (P1013) View with SQID valid in place (P3005) View with SQID statement is subject of (P805) View with SQID item of property constraint (P2305) View with SQID expression of (P6524) View with SQID

(some in these are not used in items, but legitimately for example in lexemes statement)

This seems that this reflect a lack of guidelines / norms in Wikidata, both with a complete lack of clarity of how to use the different qualifiers. Some might be redundant and/or catch all qualifiers it’s not really clear when or why we should or should not use them.

Should we think on a RfC about this ? author  TomT0m / talk page 12:30, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Additionally, if a WikiProject has some clear guidelines on this and the appropriate scope I’m interested about the information. A right place/entry point to document that could be Help:Modelling.
@TomT0m: Were you aware of this RFC (still considered open)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith I have it in my watch list so the answer is somehow yes, but I forgot everything about it. Looks like RfCs are still a very hard and inefficient process on Wikidata :/ author  TomT0m / talk page 18:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Use

Since i heard from it for the very fist time the most important question to me, how do i use it... Just copy and paste or can different data be linked to an article ??--Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 15:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

@Mr.Lovecraft: If you want an answer, you will first need to explain your question. What are you wanting to use? From Hill To Shore (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)
Well, how do i use wikidata when I´m writing an article. Lets say i want to add the date of birth to a certain persons article how does it work...? Mr.Lovecraft (talk) 11:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
@Mr.Lovecraft: It is complicated but I will try to summarise it. As you are probably aware, Wikimedia has hundreds of projects in various languages. One of the jobs of Wikidata is to act as a central hub to connect those projects together. Another job of Wikidata is to collect information in short statements that can be easily translated into any language or even be read by computer.
Each Wikimedia project decides how much interaction they have with Wikidata. Some projects automatically copy the data in Wikidata into the related pages on their projects. Other projects don't allow automatic copying but just connect their pages to Wikidata.
Using your example, if you add a date of birth here at Wikidata, it could be copied across automatically to an infobox on Wikimedia Commons or an arabic language Wikipedia. The information wouldn't be copied automatically to English Wikipedia but an editor may see the statement you inserted here (together with any references you added) and decide to insert it manually to the English Wikipedia article. From Hill To Shore (talk) 15:23, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Problematic ontologic inclusions

I am currently removing some problematic "is subclass of" relations. For example, many behavior-related subjects are marked as subclasses of biological process (Q2996394), which leads to, for example, politics and Islam and a beard being instances of biological processes:

  • A beard is an instance of a sexual dimorphism, which is a subclass of a genetic variability, which was until now marked as a subclass of a biological process.
  • Politics and Islam are both instances of behavior, and if behavior is a subclass of biological process, then politics and Islam would be biological processes.

In my opinion these inclusions are blatant rubbish, although I can see why people would think they are indeed biological processes. Behavior and genetic variability are **based on** biological processes, but

  • if you wanted to know more about politics, you would not ask a biologist, so politics is not something the academic topic of biology is concerned with.
  • genetic variability is indeed a biological topic, but it is not a process, but the result of a process.

Another example would be selection (Q39971877), which is marked as an engineering process, which is not true for all sorts of selections. If selection were an engineering process, then so would elections be, as elections are selections.

And not every construction is an engineering process, because a building is a construction, but a finished one, so a building is not a process.

If you disagree, please discuss with me.

Cheeeeesus (talk) 16:43, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I agree. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 19:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
Agree as well. Problem is that the term 'variability' (a measure) is not differentiated from 'variation' (a process), even in official ontologies, e.g. http://purl.obolibrary.org/obo/IDOMAL_0000114. The best way to proceed, IMHO, would be to contact the ontology author and work with them, so that we have a reference for changes here. --SCIdude (talk) 16:59, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Preferred rank for a single image

Now that we color code preferred_rank and deprecated_rank, I have noticed that many single images are marked preferred_rank, is that done for a current particular reason or is it a remnant or somewhere in the entry history when there were two images, that I am just not seeing? --RAN (talk) 08:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Could you give an example? It is hard to comment on the cause without investigating. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:54, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
  • The latest one I removed was with this edit, its maybe the 5th one I have come across since the color change. I just want to check before I remove preferred_rank, in case it was needed for some reason, like being needed to appear in a template, or to appear in a table. --RAN (talk) 18:41, 29 January 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! I just wanted to make sure. I wouldn't have noticed it but the color changes make it obvious. --RAN (talk) 01:18, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): I think the most common reason for a preferred rank for an image is so that the various instances of Template:Wikidata Infobox (Q47517487) use that image over others. That's how I use it when there is an existing image for an item, but I think another image is more recent and I want that image to appear on Commons Wikidata Infobox. I prefer not to delete existing images when adding a new one and setting it as preferred will accomplish the same thing. --William Graham (talk) 03:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Save the date: Data Reuse Days on March 14-24

Hello all,

I'm very excited to share with you the upcoming event that we are organizing: Data Reuse Days, a series of online sessions that will take place from March 14th to 24th.

During this event, we would like to highlight some great projects and applications that are powered by Wikidata's data, and discuss with their creators about the workflows they use, but also the challenges they may have encountered on the way, how they interact with the Wikidata editors, and how we could find ways to give back to the project and improve the data quality together.

We also want to present various tools that allow people to retrieve, query, analyze and display data from Wikidata, and we want to use this event as an opportunity to get more people onboard with using Wikidata's data, inside or outside the Wikimedia projects.

Building on the previous events we tried with this format (30 Lexic-o-days and Data Quality Days), this event is taking place online, with a very flexible program, where speakers and facilitators can schedule a session at any time during the ten days of the event. The sessions can be presentations, workshops, lightning talks, discussions, live-coding, editathons, and most of them will take place on the open videocall platform Jitsi.

The schedule is still under construction, and will evolve until a few days before the start of the event: you can already check the scheduled sessions on this page, and we will add more on the way. If you are interested in presenting something during the Data Reuse Days, you can make a proposal directly on the talk page, or reach out to me directly, so we can discuss the details together. We are especially looking for proposals presenting tools and workflows to build an application using Wikidata's data, examples of use of Wikidata's data on other Wikimedia projects, as well as discussions about data reuse or data quality.

If you have any questions or suggestions for the event, or if you would like to help, feel free to reach out to me. I will certainly give you updates closer to the event when the schedule will be populated.

Cheers, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 08:48, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

How long does it take for an image in a wikidata infobox to change?

Just wondering since I’ve changed some (including an instance of vandalism) and they’re taking forever to show up on Commons. Dronebogus (talk) 01:06, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #505

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
  • Tool of the week
    • Basque version of Wordle using Wikidata's lexicographic data. Check it out!
  • Other Noteworthy Stuff
    • WDQS scaling update for Jan 2022 available here. We will be trying to do monthly updates starting this month.
  • Development
    • Continuing work on adding the mul language code for labels, descriptions and aliases. (phab:T297393)
    • Enabled statement usage tracking for Cebuano, Armenian and Warai Warai to ensure fine-grained notifications about edits on Wikidata on those Wikipedias (phab:T296383, phab:T296382, phab:T296384)
    • Continuing work on fixing a bug where Wikidata changes do not get sent to Wikipedia and co for the first sitelink adding leading to missing information in the page_props table (phab:T233520)
    • Continuing work on making sure the Wikidata search box works with the new Vector skin improvements (phab:T296202)
    • Mismatch Finder: Debugging some issues with the first files we got with mismatches that we can load into the Mismatch Finder


You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here. If you want to help, you can also have a look at the tasks needing a volunteer.

Given names and family names

Is there a page in Wikidata which are listed all given names and family names? --2001:B07:6442:8903:85C9:9D39:6AE3:385D 15:47, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

  • You can get lists from the query service, for example for given names:
select ?item ?itemLabel where {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q202444 .
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}
Try it!
ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:45, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
I think most given name items use male given name (Q12308941) or female given name (Q11879590) instead. —Xezbeth (talk) 19:05, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Subscribe to the This Month in Education newsletter - learn from others and share your stories

Dear community members,

Greetings from the EWOC Newsletter team and the education team at Wikimedia Foundation. We are very excited to share that we on tenth years of Education Newsletter (This Month in Education) invite you to join us by subscribing to the newsletter on your talk page or by sharing your activities in the upcoming newsletters. The Wikimedia Education newsletter is a monthly newsletter that collects articles written by community members using Wikimedia projects in education around the world, and it is published by the EWOC Newsletter team in collaboration with the Education team. These stories can bring you new ideas to try, valuable insights about the success and challenges of our community members in running education programs in their context.

If your affiliate/language project is developing its own education initiatives, please remember to take advantage of this newsletter to publish your stories with the wider movement that shares your passion for education. You can submit newsletter articles in your own language or submit bilingual articles for the education newsletter. For the month of January the deadline to submit articles is on the 20th January. We look forward to reading your stories.

Older versions of this newsletter can be found in the complete archive.

More information about the newsletter can be found at Education/Newsletter/About.

For more information, please contact spatnaik@wikimedia.org.

For the team: User:ZI Jony, 10:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2022/01&oldid=1574516109"