Василиса▶ Я жду вашего обращения. Что Вы хотите узнать?
Wikidata:Project chat - Wikidata Shortcuts : WD:PC, WD:CHAT, WD:?Wikidata:Project chatFrom Wikidata
Wikidata project chat
A place to discuss any and all aspects of Wikidata: the project itself, policy and proposals, individual data items, technical issues, etc.

Please use {{ Q }} or {{ P }} the first time you mention an item or property, respectively.
Other places to find help

Other places to connect

Afrikaans العربية беларуская беларуская (тарашкевіца)‎ български Banjar ����� brezhoneg bosanski català کوردی čeština словѣньскъ / ⰔⰎⰑⰂⰡⰐⰠⰔⰍⰟ dansk Deutsch Zazaki dolnoserbski Ελληνικά English Esperanto español eesti فارسی suomi føroyskt français Nordfriisk galego Alemannisch ������� עברית ������ hrvatski hornjoserbsce magyar հայերեն Bahasa Indonesia interlingua Ilokano íslenska italiano 日本語 Jawa ქართული қазақша ����� 한국어 kurdî Latina lietuvių latviešu Malagasy Minangkabau македонски ������ ����� Bahasa Melayu Mirandés مازِرونی Nedersaksies ������ Nederlands norsk bokmål norsk nynorsk occitan ����� polski português Runa Simi română русский Scots davvisámegiella srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски ����� Simple English slovenčina slovenščina shqip српски / srpski svenska ślůnski ����� ������ ��� Tagalog Türkçe українська اردو oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча Tiếng Việt Yorùbá 中文 Edit
On this page, old discussions are archived after 7 days. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index . The current archive is located at 2020/12 .
Filing cabinet icon.svg
SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{ Section resolved |1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose oldest comment is older than 7 days.
ContentsMerge[ edit ]

Main article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/180-degree_rule Shall be linked with it: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Achsensprung_(Film)  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by ( talk  •  contribs ) at 13:56, 10 November 2020‎ (UTC).

Member of[ edit ]

For a mason do we say member_of= masonic lodge (Q1454597) or say member_of= freemasonry (Q41726) or say member_of= freemason (Q23305046) ? If the exact lodge has an entry I use that, as here: Special:WhatLinksHere/Q64966925 . -- RAN ( talk ) 18:23, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

If the information of the exact lodge is available I would create an item for it and use it. member_of= freemasonry (Q41726) looks better to me then member_of= masonic lodge (Q1454597) . ChristianKl ❫ 18:29, 20 November 2020 (UTC) Shouldn't the value of member of (P463) be an actual organization? Not convinced that the changed from "instance of" to "instance or subclass of" for the type constraint was a good idea [1] . --- Jura 11:38, 22 November 2020 (UTC) The exact lodge is the only one that fits exactly, do you think we need to create something new that fits "member_of=" better, or can we modify one to be a better match? We need something to let people know someone was a mason, all the other fraternal organizations have an exact match such as "member_of=Phi_Bet_Kappa" or "member_of=Schiners" or "member_of=International_Order_of_Odd_Fellows" or "member_of=Benevolent and Protective Order of Elks". Currently we are split among the various choices I mentioned above. -- RAN ( talk ) 00:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC) While Phi Beta Kappa or the IOOF are each a single organization, the Masons are not. Most lodges are affiliated and recognize one another, but there are definitely exceptions (e.g. Continental Freemasonry). - 01:55, 24 November 2020 (UTC)~I was of the understanding that the lodges do form an organization together, if that's not how Masons work then I agree that individual lodges should only be used. ChristianKl ❫ 14:07, 24 November 2020 (UTC) As I say, most do, some don't. I don't know my way around this in detail; someone else probably does and could weigh in with a better explanation. A good example is that the Order of the Eastern Star accepts women as equal members (and always has), which the F&AM still don't allow. - Jmabel ( talk ) 21:03, 24 November 2020 (UTC)Modelling individual lodges (even if we can reliably work that out) sounds like it could get very complicated - there are (were?) thousands of them, and presumably a lot will only ever have one person linked in Wikidata. 21:49, 24 November 2020 (UTC) I don't see any problem with thousands of item for Masonic lodges. Even when in the beginning there's only a link to one person, as Wikipedia grows the amount of links will go and the information that two people were in the same Masonic lodge is very interesting information that previously wasn't documented. ChristianKl ❫ 13:51, 1 December 2020 (UTC)I think the problem is that an obituary may only mention that a person was a "mason" and we need some way to show that, so we can aggregate all the masons in a single search, perhaps someone may want to compare membership numbers in various fraternal organizations. Currently we have a mix of the examples I gave in my initial question. Even if only temporary, we need to harmonize on one. I agree "member of=individual lodge" is best for the future, if someone wants to tackle adding them all. -- RAN ( talk ) 22:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Query always timing out[ edit ]

Hi folks - I've been using this query for a few years, and suddenly in the last few days it's timing out every time I try it:

Non-fiction writers (&subclasses) with labels in Spanish-but-not-English

Are other people having trouble getting queries to run? Or any suggestions for optimizing this one?

Thanks - Kenirwin ( talk ) 16:21, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Try something like https://w.wiki/nWc --- Jura 17:03, 21 November 2020 (UTC) Thanks @ Jura1 : -- can you tell me anything about what you did here or if there's any documentation on getting the queries to run better? It looks like you took out the part about being an instance of a person, but I'm not sure what else is happening here. Thanks! - Kenirwin ( talk ) 20:56, 23 November 2020 (UTC) @ Kenirwin : It looks like the human clause is still there at the end. It looks like the big practical difference is the ORDER BY clause is removed. The problem is that you have to pull all the entries in order to order them, so the LIMIT 10 isn't helping. Also, he used the wdt: prefixes rather than trying to pull out full statements as you did. On the query services page, you can find a link to "list of prefixes" to get to the documentation. Lastly he used the hint:Query which you can read about here . Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 11:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Using sex or gender (P21) in Lexemes, pronunciation audio: I get "Potential issues"(constraints?)[ edit ]

While editing the Lexeme for English: "frog" I added to a pronunciation audio file that the gender/sex is female. I get the impression that Property P21 isn't supposed to be used in Lexemes or it needs an update in constraints? LotsofTheories ( talk ) 08:03, 22 November 2020 (UTC)

Use voice type (P412) .-- GZWDer ( talk ) 08:50, 22 November 2020 (UTC) There's a citation needed constraint here. I'm a bass (Q27911) . Should I add to my user page I'm a bass? In Sweden I once visited a choir and they told me I'm "2nd bass"(guessing the translation) or "andra bas"(Swedish). Does this help in creating a reference for my voice type? LotsofTheories ( talk ) 11:23, 22 November 2020 (UTC)Given that there seems no justification for the citation needed contraint I removed it. ChristianKl ❫ 17:37, 22 November 2020 (UTC)@GZWDer the pronunciation audio (P443) doesn't have voice type (P412) in allowed qualifiers constraint (Q21510851) . Should voice type be added as an allowed qualifier to pronunciation audio? LotsofTheories ( talk ) 06:03, 27 November 2020 (UTC)I realized now that on the talk page for pronunciation audio (P443) there's an example about Lviv (Q36036) which happens to have voice type in it. I guess I might try to add it. If I can't edit it for some reason please add it if you can. LotsofTheories ( talk ) 06:40, 27 November 2020 (UTC)Need Help With Authority Control[ edit ]

Hello out there in Wikidata land! I'm very new to WD and know almost nothing about Authority Control. While I've tried to learn as I go, I must admit to failure. I added the Authority Control template to the "Rocky Kramer" Wikipedia article and then did my best to update each of the data inputs on the corresponding WD page. That resulted in nothing propagating on the article, so I asked at the WP Help Desk, where I was told I hadn't inserted identifiers. I tried looking up identifiers and only became further confused. Someone at the WP Help Desk gave me some WD usernames to ping and one directed me to this chat. Therefore, I humbly ask if there's anyone who can help me get the Authority Control working for this article? Thanks much. -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 09:44, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Identifiers are the ID properties found, for example, at Q42#P214 and below. Rocky Kramer (Q100744874) lacks any of these. Find some values and appropriate properties for your musician and, if they are included in the IDs which the wikipedia template pulls through, then all will be happy. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 10:08, 26 November 2020 (UTC) That's where I get lost. First, where do I find the identifiers and once I have them, where do I insert them to make the Authority Control populate? I'm assuming I enter the Identifiers on the WD page and they will automatically propagate to the article? I apologize for being so ignorant when it comes to Authority Control, but it just seems complicated to me. Thank you for your help! -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 10:51, 26 November 2020 (UTC)P.S., I mean where do I find them for a musician? -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 10:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC) @ Warriorboy85 : For a musician, probably places like discogs https://www.discogs.com/artist/7596392-Rocky-Kramer or musicbrainz https://musicbrainz.org/artist/f55827bb-4224-4db8-bf72-0a19a3f106ef/works ... for these two the value 7596392 would be added with Discogs artist ID (P1953) and f55827bb-4224-4db8-bf72-0a19a3f106ef would be the value for MusicBrainz artist ID (P434) . If you look at the property items, you'll see use examples which hint at which bit of the URL you need. To get ideas for other IDs, look at items for other musicians; does Rocky have an entry at the same places they do? Does that help? -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 10:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)@ Tagishsimon : Sorry for the delay getting back to you. I went to sleep. Yes, that's very helpful. I have now looked at both Discogs and Musicbainz and I believe I'm starting to catch on. However, now that I have those two identifiers, where do I add them in Rocky's WD page? I see lots of places I can add numbers as references, but I don't see anything listed for either Musicbainz or Discogs. Should I add them as new categories? -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 16:40, 26 November 2020 (UTC) @ Warriorboy85 : Right at the bottom of the Rocky Wd page, a link saying "add statement". Click that. THe cursor will focus on the property cell os a statement box. Enter part of the 'Discogs artist ID' string into that, and chose the property from the list it provides. Then tab thru to the central cell and add the value. Hit publish. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 16:45, 26 November 2020 (UTC)@ Tagishsimon : Okay, now that really helped me understand a lot! I can't thank you enough. I've added those numbers and now have a basic idea of what I'm looking for. I'll look at other musicians to find the types of identifiers that might be out there. I really appreciate your help. This WP and WD community is exceptionally helpful and I appreciate and value it greatly. Happy Thanksgiving! -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 17:13, 26 November 2020 (UTC)@ Tagishsimon : Well, I got Rocky's ISNI and ORCID numbers posted and they now show along with his MBA number. Although I added his Discogs number and it took the number, it isn't showing. He also has a BMI Repertoire at [ Kramer BMI ] I have attempted to input his CAE/IPI # and even tried listing individual songs by their ISWC numbers, but the exclamation point keeps coming up saying there is missing information. Any idea what I am doing wrong? Thanks again. -- Warriorboy85 ( talk ) 20:37, 26 November 2020 (UTC) The authority control template on Wikidata decides which of the external IDs it wants to show on Wikipedia. Without having looked into the issue my first hypothesis would be that Wikipedians don't like to include the Discogs number. If there are other Wikipedia pages that do show the Discogs number but the Discogs number isn't shown here, it would make sense to point to those examples here. Otherwise, I would just expect that this is a content decision on Wikipedia's end. ChristianKl ❫ 12:11, 30 November 2020 (UTC)List of Q-items by number of statements[ edit ]

Hi, for Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data#Semi-automated_import_of_missing_lexemes_based_on_the_Q-items_with_most_statements I would like a list of Q-items (optionally that has a label in Esperanto) sorted by the number of statements. Is that possible without having to download the dump? If someone has access to a database where this information is available I would be very happy to receive a list of the first 50.000 items or so.-- So9q ( talk ) 10:59, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Here's what I came up with, because how can you not invest time in a request that includes the phrase "optionally has a label in Esperanto"): Query This is rather not what you asked for, unfortunately. I couldn't find an existing list. Absent that, the straightforward query (as above without the line that includes "P31") is certain to time out, because it involves reading all of the data.I am not entirely convinced that list would be helpful for your purposes, though. Intuitively, I believe a list by count of statements will include (1) countries, (2) movies (lots of actors etc.), and (3) other artefacts. Every paper coming out of the Large Hadron Collider has every single project participant as a co-author, for example. If that is reflected in our data, the list would be dominated by [Y particle flux in plasma conjunction is tri-symetric under Gedfeller conditionality]. There may also just be items with proper names at the top of such a list, because these are the same in any language and therefore have lots of (auto-generated) labels.In the query above, I limited the list to instances of subclasses of human activity, which allows it to complete within the 60s we get. The chosen class(es) additionally restrict it to items that would seem to be meaningful for your purposes. You would vary that restriction to look at other promising segments. -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 12:48, 26 November 2020 (UTC) Oh, thanks for pointing out my flawed strategy :) You are completely right that most statements is not suitable for my needs it seems. I really like your query as it seems to count the labels instead. I will try to use that and maybe a list with statistically most often used words in Esperanto which seems to be exactly what I want.

@ So9q : I was playing around with a tool doing things with the wikidata dumps and used your question as a test. I've put the data I came up with on my userpage . This includes the top 3500 items or so, with repetitive items omitted. Japanese surnames figure prominently, as does unicode. Top billing goes to a research paper, however. Clicking it may kill your browser. -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 21:31, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Thanks Mattias, that was an interesting list. The labels seems to be counted as a statement in your list, but they are not when searching on Wikidata using the searchbox. What would be the result if you ignored labels in the count of statements?-- So9q ( talk ) 05:51, 30 November 2020 (UTC) I didn't think to record that data unfortunately. The research papers, countries, and "other" items (the sun, for example) on that list "score" mostly for "real" statements. -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 13:12, 30 November 2020 (UTC)"merge" of two erroneous items to a new item?[ edit ]

The items Premil Petrović (Q53110639) and Premil Petrović (Q95770358) seem to refer to the same musical conductor, actually Premil Petrović according to his premilpetrovic.com website. (The c-cedilla usually takes the c-acute form when at the end of slavic language words).

As a neophyte, can I request someone else merge these/ sort this out please? Scarabocchio ( talk ) 12:54, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

done -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 13:34, 26 November 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! That looks like a merge into one of the existing entries plus an edit on the label? (I should have tried that). Scarabocchio ( talk ) 14:16, 26 November 2020 (UTC) Yes... The merge function should be in the top-right corner, possibly under "more". It will automatically merge into the item with the lower ID, and throw an error if there are specific indicators that the items are not, in fact, duplicates (such as "different from" statements). After that, I straightened out the labels per your explanation and also added the website you mentioned. I tend to also check for duplication of data and remove excessive "imported from / XY Wikipedia" references, but there's no specific process prescribed here.As always: start with just a few (thousand). And, if nobody comes screaming, assume you're doing ok. Like childcare, basically. -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 20:01, 26 November 2020 (UTC) We do have https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Help:Merge that describes merging in more detail. One thing that's worth noting is that the merge function is only available if the gadget is activated. ChristianKl ❫ 23:19, 26 November 2020 (UTC) Thanks, both. I think that I will be spending more and more time here, so need to master the basic operations. Scarabocchio ( talk ) 20:31, 27 November 2020 (UTC) Great. Merging items is indeed one of them. So, in general, I think it's preferable to help users find Help:Merge than merge them directly for them.Thanks to that, we recently revised it and collapsed some sections users sometimes got lost with .. if there are other parts that need clarification, don't hesitate to mention them. --- Jura 17:37, 28 November 2020 (UTC)I enabled the gadget following the links above, and have just merged my first pair of items (to Sanna Gibbs (Q64682995) ) .. very smooth, very clear, no problems! Scarabocchio ( talk ) 18:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC)Comment about mass import[ edit ]

Hi, last week B.Zsolt did a mass edit on some railway stations, importing some data. I saw that he edited the item about the railway station in my small city adding toilets . I think that he imported mass data from OSM without checking whether statements are valid (toilets are always closed). Moreover, I don't think he can import data from OSM as license are incompatible. As soon as I checked that edit, I wrote in the user page of the user but he ignored my request, so I write here. -- ★  → A ir on 90 08:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

I do not think we can mass-import OSM data-- Ymblanter ( talk ) 20:57, 27 November 2020 (UTC)You can only import data from OSM if every single contributor of an object has stated that their contribution is released as CC0. ATM very few do this and there is no simple way of machine-checking if the user released as CC0 in the profile which means that it is practically nearly impossible to import anything you did not create yourself that has version 1 (no other contributors). Most objects have version >1 and multiple contributors. I tried as a test to import hospitals from Chad in WD from OSM and asked all contributors of a few items for permission. Unfortunately few answered, so I deem it impossible to use OSM data in WD in practice because of license incompatibility.-- So9q ( talk ) 06:16, 30 November 2020 (UTC)US senator statements clean-up needed[ edit ]

There are dozens of subclasses listed with has part (P527) at United States senator (Q4416090) . Would someone kindly delete these malformed statements?

Also, the still existing malformed and unused items like Q98082299 should be listed for deletion. --- Jura 19:38, 27 November 2020 (UTC)

Not sure why you reverted my move to the relevant section , but you seem to be starting a topic about the same thing. You're seem to be leaving out why you are not doing this yourself. Maybe because the deletion request got half done by user:Wiki13 and half not done by user:MisterSynergy ? Just starting a new topic out of the blue sure looks fishy. Multichill ( talk ) 10:05, 28 November 2020 (UTC) This is about the item United States senator (Q4416090) .The other section is about electoral districts called "class A Montana" and similar. (There is also one about general elections in the US).I have been asked not to clean up such stuff myself, but post it to the forum. So here it is. --- Jura 10:16, 28 November 2020 (UTC) I have deleted the remaining ones as another data model has meanwhile been chosen and implemented. — MisterSynergy ( talk ) 12:42, 28 November 2020 (UTC) Thanks. As long as they are subclasses, the P527 statements are wrong in any datamodel.Can you also delete the two remaining statements: e.g. United States senator (Q4416090) has part (P527) Majority Leader of the United States Senate (Q28530268) ? --- Jura 12:48, 28 November 2020 (UTC)Consistency of dates between point in time and temporal processes[ edit ]

Hello, it might have already been discussed. But I'd have a question : is there a way to tell that a instance of (P31) (eg historical event (Q13418847) is about a point in time and therefore instances of that P31 should be having a simple point in time (P585) . In the contrary, if a instance of (P31) (eg any temporary exhibition (Q29023906) ) is about a temporal process (it has commenced and it has ended or shall be ended == 2 dates) and therefore should get both start time (P580) + end time (P582)  ? Would property "timeframe of that element" = point in time (Q186408) OR time interval (Q186081) "do the job? Bouzinac ���� ✒️ ���� 11:14, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

Two cats for one thing[ edit ]

Hi all. Item Q9032983 and item Q7696450 are about the same issue: Category:Universities in Turkey/Universities of Turkey/Turkish universities or whatever name you like. Look at the WP links and you will see that some language WPs use one of these items and the others the other one, although the contents in the respective languages are the same. I could not merge them. Probably some WP has links to both? I do not know. For some reason I feel myself not so good today; therefore help of colleagues would be most welcome. Thanks in advance. -- E4024 ( talk ) 17:18, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

They're not the same things, at least according to their EN labels - universities, versus universities and colleges. Greek has sitelinks for both, calling one a category of universities, and another a category of higher educational institutes. Were someone to wish to improve the situation, they would have to work out sitelink by sitelink what was found on each langauge wiki, and variously redistribute sitelinks and possibly create new items. Merging is unlikely to figure in the solution. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 17:28, 28 November 2020 (UTC)EN labels? I just added EN label to one item that I saw there orphan as it was. Now am I the one who created a "differentiation" between the two? :) I had just opened a cat for Universities of Turkey in CA:WP and went to make the WD link and saw one item without any EN label and linked it. I also thought I should write a label there. Oh my! -- E4024 ( talk ) 17:57, 28 November 2020 (UTC)Need help removing aliases[ edit ]

Is there any automated tool that can remove aliases in bulk? I ran an OpenRefine job that accidentally added the item ID of several items as an alias (e.g. it added "Q151521" as an alias to Texas A&M Aggies (Q151521) ). QuickStatements apparently doesn't support using "-Aen" as a header to remove an alias, so I'm at a loss as to how I might remove these bad aliases. Any suggestions would be much appreciated. Thanks, Iago Qnsi ( talk ) 20:06, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

I have a pywikibot script which can do this. All I need is a list that maps the aliases to remove to QIDs and the language code of the alias to be removed (any txt based format and formatting possible). If you can provide such a list, I could feed my script with it and remove the aliases. — MisterSynergy ( talk ) 21:41, 28 November 2020 (UTC) @ MisterSynergy : Oh thank you! Here's a CSV of the IDs and aliases: https://pastebin.com/98WifNWW . Not all of those aliases actually exist -- my batch upload only affected a few hundred of the 922 instances of university and college sports club (Q2367225) that exist on Wikidata. Thanks, Iago Qnsi ( talk ) 23:09, 28 November 2020 (UTC) ✓  Done — MisterSynergy ( talk ) 23:34, 28 November 2020 (UTC)Inverse of academic degree (P512) [ edit ]

Q item academic degree held by (Q66499315) currently claims it is the inverse property label item (Q65932995) of academic degree (P512) . If that was the case, it should be a P item, not a Q item. Am I correct? Should this be changed? Mateussf ( talk ) 20:44, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

You are not correct. Properties may get an inverse property label item associated with them, whether or not there is an inverse property. This is one of the 'not' cases. All is good; we do not really have a use for the inverse property, but a user might well wish to reach for the label. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 22:33, 28 November 2020 (UTC) I don't fully understand the concept but I appreciate the answer and the attention, and I'm glad I didn't do anything wrong before asking. Thanks! Mateussf ( talk ) 01:46, 29 November 2020 (UTC) I made an item about the gadget. Maybe that helps: relateditems (Q102435390) . --- Jura 05:44, 29 November 2020 (UTC)Agriculture[ edit ]

We haven’t focused much energy on building out our coverage of agriculture. There are lots of opportunities for merges, multilingual labels, external ids, etc. in the areas of agricultural tools and processes. Is anyone interested in a formal WikiProject:Agriculture? If not, I’ll putter along. - PKM ( talk ) 22:01, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

@ PKM : I looked at the profession tree from farmer (Q131512) last year - some discussion at Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2019/05#Farmers_and_agriculturers? . But I didn't manage to do much with the underlying field itself, and I found there was a lot of cross-language complexity to tease out (eg in some "farming" can primarily indicate arable, in others pastoral+arable). Definitely worth looking at. Andrew Gray ( talk ) 14:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ Andrew Gray : Thanks for that link. We had a longish conversation on Commons Telegram recently about classifying types of hoes - this is an area with lots of overlapping sets across languages and cultures. (I notice Getty AAT has at least one term that is specifically Spanish-Chile.) I think we’d need a large team of participants to really make headway. - PKM ( talk ) 21:30, 29 November 2020 (UTC)Cleaning up old model for US Senate data[ edit ]

As suggested here by @ MisterSynergy :, I plan on removing position held (P39) United States senator (Q4416090) which do not supply a term . The only information contained in such statements not contained in those which do supply a parliamentary term (P2937) was spotty and occasionally inaccurate. The statements which do supply a parliamentary term (P2937) contain the complete historical record (excluding the results of the most recent election). Still to do is to supply elected in (P2715) but that is pending an organization of election in the United States (Q279283) which should distinguish between scheduled general elections and unscheduled elections in a rational way and perhaps have a clear model to indicate midterm elections. I'll probably do this work at the end of next week if there are no objections. Regards, Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 03:21, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ Tagishsimon : @ Oravrattas : @ Andrew Gray :

So you want to delete the information about the current senators?Can you provide us with a sample edit? How do you make sure that other data is complete?As this provides us with a way of querying the current composition of the senate (e.g. position holder with a start date, but no end date), I don't think it's a good idea to delete these statements before you fixed the other statements (deleting fictive dates, as previously mentioned).To sum it up: No data should be deleted before we can check the same information is available otherwise. --- Jura 05:29, 29 November 2020 (UTC) current members . Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 10:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC)@ Gettinwikiwidit : Looks good, but I have also been wondering about end dates. Sitting senators in the current term all have their end dates set to 3 January 2021 (except two no-P582, oddly), and presumably once we index the next term, they would get 2021-23 dates. However, there's a widespread convention to indicate positions which are currently held by setting start time (P580) but not end time (P582) qualifiers, even if a future end date can be predicted with some confidence. A lot of queries use this as shorthand ("presence of a P582 = not current") in much the same way that a birthdate but no deathdate is used to infer "person is alive". So I'd agree with dropping P582 qualifiers on the current members, which will make a traditional-assumptions query like this one predictably return sitting members with new-style data. (If we do have a need to use predicted end dates, we can pick that up easily enough by querying the end date of the term itself.)Otherwise, definitely happy to remove all the "old-style" single statements. And then I think we'll have a pretty much consistent dataset, give or take a bit of error correction - congratulations! Andrew Gray ( talk ) 14:36, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ Andrew Gray : I'm agnostic about end time (P582) s . I think it's always up to the person generating the query to be careful in interpreting the data since anyone can edit the data set. When the full data set was generated they all had an end time (P582) . When I first started looking at the data in the old model it was also inconsistent and I had to figure out how to deal with future end dates. Deleting them now just means they will need to be added again in a couple of months. If someone leaves early the end time (P582) will have to be edited either way. As long as the future date can reasonably be assured I think supplying it is a defensible position. I think leaving them out is also defensible. Further, I don't own this data. I'm not sure who's job it will be to add the end date in the future. That person is free to remove them now to make work for themselves in the future. Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 21:56, 29 November 2020 (UTC) It is yet more making it up as you go along, Gwwi. There are not distinct districts. 'end date' != 'anticipated end date'. Your caveat reporter point is absolutely the case if the content of statements bears little resemblance to the plain intent of the properties. -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 22:17, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ Tagishsimon : It's not clear what value is added by turning this into a trading of insults. It's a fact that this is a volunteer effort. With that comes realities that need to dealt with. From a process stand point it's not clear that future dates will ever be added. Having them there when they're reasonably predictable means it's more likely to *remain* accurate in the future. My guess is that people jumping on all the "popular pages" will hand edit them to keep them up-to-date but the rest will be left to rot. No future dates are ever realized. If it were really a problem they could simply make it impossible to supply them. Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 22:27, 29 November 2020 (UTC)Not for nothing, but harassing people contributing data makes it even less likely that they'll put in the effort to maintain it which further makes the case for having them there. Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 22:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC)@ Gettinwikiwidit : Personally, I would say the benefits of consistency here probably outweigh the minor hassle of having to update it in a few weeks (especially since we'll have do do a batch of edits then anyway to get all the new members in place, so closing off the older ones isn't much extra work). I'm happy to put a note in the calendar and take responsibility for sorting that out in January. Andrew Gray ( talk ) 23:05, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ Andrew Gray : From a process standpoint this seems like unnecessary busy work for the reasons outlined above, but as I say, I'm agnostic on the topic. Feel free to remove them now and add them back in later. In any event this has no bearing on the topic at hand of removing the old, inconsistent and occasionally inaccurate claims. Gettinwikiwidit ( talk ) 23:32, 29 November 2020 (UTC) Sure - I'll run this tomorrow if it won't cause any problems for you. (didn't want to blunder in and do it if it would complicate the ongoing work!) No objection to removing the older data, as noted. Andrew Gray ( talk ) 23:35, 29 November 2020 (UTC)As suggested, I've now removed the end time (P582) values for sitting Senators which were set as 3 January 2021. This query confirms a simple question for "Senators with a known start time but no P582" returns 100 distinct people as expected - most are matching both the new and old statements, but it also works with only the new-style ones using parliamentary term (P2937) . Andrew Gray ( talk ) 19:39, 30 November 2020 (UTC)New badges for templates and modules[ edit ] synced copy (Q102439252) master version (Q92244942)

Some templates and modules are developed in one wiki (Wikipedia) and re-used in other wikis. I think it could be interesting to note this on sitelinks of items with badges .

Sample: Module:Biblio is a copy from fr:Module:Biblio . Badges on sitelinks at Q102438737 could indicate it. --- Jura 08:51, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Villagepump-url/sv [ edit ]

Could someone recreate MediaWiki:Villagepump-url/sv with the text Wikidata:Bybrunnen and MediaWiki:Villagepump/sv with the text Bybrunnen as they have been re-established? -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 09:53, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

As far as I can see the page isn't protected. Is there anything stopping you from this? ChristianKl ❫ 13:16, 29 November 2020 (UTC)@ ChristianKl : That's strange, regardless, I can't create them. -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 13:59, 29 November 2020 (UTC) I have no undeleted it. Is that enough? ChristianKl ❫ 14:04, 29 November 2020 (UTC) @ ChristianKl :Thank you, it was also MediaWiki:Villagepump/sv as stated above. -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 14:05, 29 November 2020 (UTC)@ ChristianKl : Any problems? -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 14:25, 29 November 2020 (UTC) I undeleted that as well. ChristianKl ❫ 21:45, 29 November 2020 (UTC) Thank you very much! :D On another note that's really not that pressing, is that the page's content language could be changed on Wikidata:Bybrunnen to Swedish. But I'm not too sure what that does so no stress. -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 04:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC) I did change the language to Swedish. ChristianKl ❫ 12:02, 30 November 2020 (UTC) Thanks alot! -- Sabelöga ( talk ) 08:16, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Linking a redirect?[ edit ]

I noticed that Four Seasons Total Landscaping (Q101248727) was successfully linked to Wikipedia, even though the page on Wikipedia is a redirect to Four Seasons Total Landscaping press conference (Q101424698) . I'd like to do the same for some other pages, such as Ruth Chandler Williamson Gallery (Q18325652) and w:Ruth Chandler Williamson Gallery , but the documentation at w:Template:Wikidata redirect is lacking and I can't escape the error message it keeps giving me when I try to make the connection. Help? {{u| Sdkb }} talk 21:13, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

At the moment work on the ticket that allows easy creation is stalled (@ Mohammed_Sadat_(WMDE) : might provide information on when this changes). In the meantime you have to deactivate the redirect on the Wikipedia page shortly then set the redirect in Wikidata (at a time where the Wikipedia page is not a redirect) afterwards you can reedit the Wikipedia page to turn it into a redirect. ChristianKl ❫ 21:49, 29 November 2020 (UTC)Are these two the same[ edit ] Natural History of New York (Q51508328)

Natural History of New York (Q51508328) and Natural History of New York (Q51431792) or are they different printings of the same set, or is one the set and one an individual volume? -- RAN ( talk ) 23:12, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Good question. Where we have different scans of (some of) the same text, with different BHL identifiers and Internet Archive links, I think there's a choice. They could be bundled together, as a single item for the edition of the book (or for the periodical), with qualifiers (eg collection (P195) ) to indicate different copies on different statements. Or you could regard the items as for individual copies (or individual sets of copies), and have a third item for the edition, that these two would each be exemplars of. I'll be interested to see what the balance of preferences is, among the community. Jheald ( talk ) 12:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Example of the first approach: internet archive IDs on Animate creation; popular edition of "Our living world" a natural history (Q51401008) or Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Q21385585) Example of the second approach: On the laws and practice of horse racing, etc., etc (Q51425849) and On the laws and practice of horse racing (Q51514189) both with exemplar of (P1574) = On the laws and practice of horse racing (1866 edition) (Q53738443) . Jheald ( talk ) 12:28, 30 November 2020 (UTC)I will let it be until we come up with a standardized way of handling them. I harmonized the titles so that they will be easier to recognize in the future. -- RAN ( talk ) 19:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Q12142126 seems to cover two unrelated topics[ edit ] Q12142126

Q12142126 covers both en:Hillpark, Auckland a suburb in New Zealand, and also the Politburo of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Ukraine . I've removed the latter link, but then realised there's lots of metadata in the item for both. Rather than do any further damage to the Wikidata item, I'm posting here to ask someone to sort it out. The article on the suburb does not appear damaged by the link now that I've removed the link, but the article on the Politburo is pulling location and a picture which is irrelevant to it. I have no understanding of Ukrainian language,- Gadfium ( talk ) 02:55, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Looking at the history of the qid, it seems that it is supposed to be for the politburo and for some reason was merged with the suburb qid a few days ago.- Gadfium ( talk ) 02:58, 30 November 2020 (UTC) I reverted Q12142126 and Hillpark (Q28180683) , hopefully that's enough. Ghouston ( talk ) 05:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Likewise for User:Wemyang 's other merge, which isn't any better. Ghouston ( talk ) 05:19, 30 November 2020 (UTC) pronunciation variety (P5237) for "Computer Generated"/ speech synthesis (Q16346) English?[ edit ]

I stumbled upon this item all your base are belong to us (Q54) and found that the spoken text audio (P989) missed having pronunciation variety (P5237) . I didn't manage to find any "computer generated English" or "speech synthesis English" dialect/accent in Wikidata so I just added the general English (Q1860) . Did I do the right thing? Does anybody know if there is a pronunciation variety which includes English pronounced by software? I did a query about subclass of English with little luck. Maybe Broken English (Q20504733) can be used in cases where speech synthesis is being used? LotsofTheories ( talk ) 09:21, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@ LotsofTheories : We have Chinese speech synthesis (Q16369) so I don't see why we couldn't have a similar item for English. On the other hand if you know a specific piece of software was used then the item for that software perhaps should be used? ArthurPSmith ( talk ) 14:32, 30 November 2020 (UTC)When do we use Start/End time qualifier and for which sources of information it is applicable?[ edit ]

Hi Community

Hope you are doing well!

I'm looking for your guidance regarding the start/end time qualifier that we have to include when an old website is switched to a new one, for example . However, I was wondering should we use this qualifier also for Name, Address, Phone number and etc? I would really appreciate it if you could explain more thoroughly when and where we should use Start/End time so I could follow strictly Wikidata's guidelines on this matter.

Thank you in advance!

-- Valgetova ( talk ) 13:54, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

It's applicable whenever information changes over time (was true at one point in time and not at another) and it's still the same item. ChristianKl ❫ 14:00, 30 November 2020 (UTC)Thank you for your kind response User:ChristianKl My last question is if this start/end time qualifier is mandatory to be added for every edit that we make in Wikidata? For example, if I change business name am I obliged to add this qualifier or it depends on my desire to include this information? Thank you once again! -- Valgetova ( talk ) 06:42, 1 December 2020 (UTC) It's against Wikidata's rules to delete valid data. If at some point in time a business was named X and has a official name (P1448) statement or a statement with another subproperty of name (P2561) , that's name is not allowed to be removed. You can add a new name without adding qualifiers but then it's not clear to a user whether the old name still applies if you don't add qualifiers to the old name. ChristianKl ❫ 12:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Wikidata descriptions changes to be included more often in Recent Changes and Watchlist on Wikimedia wikis[ edit ]

Hello all,

As you may know, you can include changes coming from Wikidata in your Watchlist and Recent Changes on other Wikimedia projects. Until now, this feature didn’t always include changes made on Wikidata descriptions. This is due to how Wikidata tracks what data is used in a given article.

Starting on December 3rd, the Watchlist and Recent Changes will include changes on the descriptions of Wikidata Items that are used in the pages that you watch on the client wiki. This will only include descriptions in the language of your wiki to make sure that you’re only seeing changes that are relevant to your wiki.

This improvement was requested by many users from different projects. We hope that it can help contributors of Wikipedia and the Wikimedia projects to monitor the changes on Wikidata descriptions and participate in the effort of improving the data quality.

If you encounter any issue or want to provide feedback, feel free to use this Phabricator ticket . Thanks! Lea Lacroix (WMDE) ( talk ) 14:50, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #444[ edit ] Wikidata-logo-en.svg Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week. Events Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: We will have several speakers joining us to discuss their projects in lightning talks, 1 December. Agenda Upcoming: WMF search platform team office hour, Wednesday, December 2nd, 2020. 16:00-17:00 GMT / 08:00-09:00 PST / 11:00-12:00 EST / 17:00-18:00 CET. Etherpad , Google Meet . You can come and chat about the Wikidata & Commons Query Service.Online edition of the Wikimedia Coolest Tool Award ceremony, on Friday, December 11th at 17:00 UTC.Upcoming: Online Wikidata meetup in Swedish #41 , December 6 Press, articles, blog posts, videos Linking OpenStreetMap with knowledge graphs — Link discovery for schema-agnostic volunteered geographic information (the KGs referred to are Wikidata & DBPedia) "Women’s representation and voice in media coverage of the coronavirus crisis" : an analysis linking news articles to information on Wikipedia and Wikidata. Wikidata Bib v0 , prototype for personalized analytics of scientific readings using Wikidata.Video: Strategies for Assembling the Biodiversity Knowledge Graph by Roderic PageVideo: Semantic Web in Libraries 2020 (replay) ORCID for Wikidata: A workflow for matching author and publication items in Wikidata id.loc.gov and Wikidata, one year later Tool of the week osm2kg is a tool to facilitate matching Wikidata entries to OSM nodes.Other Noteworthy Stuff The second edition of the Coolest Tool Award will happen online on Friday 11 December 2020 at 17:00 UTC The awarded tools will be showcased in a virtual event, with broadcasted video and chat channels for socializing.The University of Nevada has an open position around Wikidata; Digital Collections Wikimedian-in-Residence Round 2 of the consultation on using Wikidata for curriculum digitization begun on November 24th, and will end on December 7th. You can participate by sharing your ideas in this response form (Google forms) Wiki Movimento Brasil will support WikidataCon 2021 Wikidata descriptions changes will be included more often in Recent Changes and Watchlist on Wikimedia wikis Did you know?Newest properties : General datatypes: facial hair , identity element , mathematical inverse , has operator , has marker , Hong Kong film rating , indexed in bibliographic review , number of taxpayers , ITRANS , complementary property , number of points/goals attempted , Water area , MTRCB rating , power consumption index , heating energy consumption index External identifiers: Absolute Games person ID , FIS grass skier ID , FISG athlete ID , Kinorium movie ID , CONOR.AL ID , CONOR.BG ID , CONOR.KS ID , CONOR.SR ID , Musica Brasilis ID , Salzburgwiki ID , IEV number , British Phonographic Industry ID , CRGPG ID , Drizly product ID , Canada Business Number , FINA Wiki ID , Foodlocate restaurant ID , Qobuz label ID , AAA campground ID , AAA hotel ID , AAA restaurant ID , Hyperion Records person ID , Southwest Harbor Public Library item ID , DriveThruComics numeric publisher identifier , Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada ID , HLTV player ID , Kinorium person ID , AstroGen ID , BBC sound effects asset ID , Namuwiki ID , CIP data sheet , AniDB episode ID , edition humboldt digital Flora ID , Sistema de Información Legislativa ID New property proposals to review: General datatypes: ELSPA rating , cites work string , artistic director , MDJF ID , Coordinates of depicted place , first family name in Portuguese name , propriétés à éviter , Commons category for the view from the item , Filmstriben film-ID , Mailing List , provides HTML microdata , provides JSON-LD data External identifiers: vets.cz ID , Parler ID , HAL Journal id , Fitzwilliam Museum ID , National Gallery of Australia ID , U.S. Masters Swimming ID , Gab ID , Museo del Prado ID , National Gallery of Ireland ID , Auckland Art Gallery ID , Artfacts ID , Order of Canada ID , SKD ID , DIA ID , ZOBODAT , AppGallery app ID , Czech Gymnastics athlete ID , Students of Prague Universities ID , Amsterdam Museum ID , theses.cz ID , curid Query examples: Politicians with an account at GitHub, CPAN, or Wikimedia ( Source ) Percentage of deaths caused by tuberculosis by decade ( Source ) Number of programming languages and their paradigms ( Source ) Museums within 2 miles of MoMA (federated query) ( Source ) Largest cities of the world ordered by population ( Source ) Italian politicians who served as a minister in more than one cabinet since 1990 ( Source ) People born after 1800 whose “name in native language” is in Latin ( Source ) UK statues and whether they are of nobles and/or women ( Source ) Location of German cities with a population count greater than 50.000 ( Source ) Map of medicines used (green) to fight infectious diseases (orange) ( Source )Schema examples: museum DevelopmentDevelopment on the Query Builder is continuing. You can follow along at https://query-builder-test.toolforge.org Fixed an issue where language fallback indicators were still shown when falling back from a variant of the language ( phab:T267502 )Fixed an issue on Lexeme pages where language and lexical category fields turn red on unfocus even though no changes were made ( phab:T266936 )Working on improving what happens to sitelinks when an article is moved to a unsupported namespace ( phab:T261275) )Investigating a significant increase in skipped Item IDs ( phab:T268625 )Addressing the feedback for the draft of the REST API spec You can see all open tickets related to Wikidata here

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 .

Monthly TasksAdd labels, in your own language(s), for the new properties listed above.Comment on property proposals: all open proposals Contribute to a Showcase item .Help translate or proofread the interface and documentation pages, in your own language! Help merge identical items across Wikimedia projects.Help write the next summary! Read the full report · Unsubscribe · Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) 15:44, 30 November 2020 (UTC) Translation of a title[ edit ]

Hello everyone,

Could someone translate the title of this page either in English (international language) or in Norwegian (language that is concerned). I can't do it by myself. I know there's only one article (from the Walloon Wikipedia), but I intend to translate this article in French and in Dutch.

Sincerely yours,


Doubts about mobile phones[ edit ]

When reviewing the mobile phones data I have noticed some inconsistencies. With this query:

SELECT?phone?phoneLabel?instanceOf?created?publishedWHERE{?phonewdt:P279wd:Q17517.?phonewdt:P31?instanceOf.OPTIONAL{?phonewdt:P577?published.}OPTIONAL{?phonewdt:P571?created.}SERVICEwikibase:label{bd:serviceParamwikibase:language"[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en"}} Try it!

Try it! }

Two things can be observed:

Most phones are an instance of model (Q10929058) but more than 400 are instances of one of the following items: mobile phone form factor (Q2636061) system (Q58778) cell phone model (Q19723444) mobile phone series (Q20488450) electronic device model (Q62008942) model series (Q811701) electronic machine (Q2858615) brand (Q431289) Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) (this can be omitted as it is a valid property)What would be the correct value for instance of (P31) ? I suppose model (Q10929058) since it is in most of the phones but I don't know if there is a consensus about it.Isn't inception (P571) and publication date (P577) somewhat redundant? Using the GSMArena phone ID (P4723) as a reference, I would think that the inception (P571) corresponds to the moment the phone was announced and publication date (P577) would be when it was released for sale, but from what I've been seeing it seems that both properties are used indistinctly to indicate the date when the phone became available to the public.-- Swicher ( talk ) 01:55, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Personally, I'd go with model (Q10929058) for a single model and model series (Q811701) for a family or models (which will have subclasses which are model (Q10929058) .) For the dates, I think the most relevant are announcement date (P6949) and date of commercialization (P5204) , since hardware isn't really "published" and inception (P571) presumably predates any public announcement, but is typically unknown. Ghouston ( talk ) 04:40, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Being both a Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) and another page is generally not valid. ChristianKl ❫ 12:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)A case like this needs thinking about how mobile phones be modeled and that model written down in a Wikiproject where it can be discussed and referenced in the future. ChristianKl ❫ 12:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Notification of request for Oversight access[ edit ]

Hi. As instructed, I'm notifying the community of my request for Oversight access: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Oversight/DannyS712 . Thanks, -- DannyS712 ( talk ) 03:19, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata:Property proposal/cites work string[ edit ]

I made a proposal for a new property. Based on the feedback I have been adding "placeholder for <somevalue>" only to have it replaced by a bot. For me the whole understanding of the argument why the proposed property is controversial becomes lost again. My intention is not one of mix'n match, my intention is to have links to papers.

Having worked on adding citations for this paper , I find that adding a new item with only one maybe more properties would suit me fine. I would add a DOI and all the rest is extra. The benefits are: 1 it makes no material difference for my workflow, 2 it generates an identifiable paper that will show up properly as a referenced paper in Scholia, 3 it will enable links for citations from other papers enabling its growth. However such a paper is of the one but lowest level of quality; it only has a presence and one link. This would be no problem when there are processes that clean up and import the missing information..

Please comment. Thanks, GerardM ( talk ) 07:08, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

The basic reason that it's opposed is that it solving the problem this way would mean creating a bunch of different XY string properties for different cases. Handling it with unknown value Help means that users can use that model with any property instead of us having to create new properties. ChristianKl ❫ 13:45, 1 December 2020 (UTC) I understand. I hate it that a bot is replacing the placeholder with a text. I assume that you can query for "scholarly papers" with such a string. Thanks, GerardM ( talk ) 15:24, 1 December 2020 (UTC) If you have a problem with a particular type of bot edits it would make sense to link to a diff and ping the bot. Otherwise it's a lot harder to engage with your complaint. ChristianKl ❫ 15:30, 1 December 2020 (UTC) an example.. Thanks, GerardM ( talk ) 15:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC) placeholder for <somevalue> (Q53569537) is a workaround for QuickStatements not supporting unknown_value being specified directly. The bot just changes it to the thing that's meant. ChristianKl ❫ 16:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)what tool / workflow are you using to import these papers? is it entirely manual? is there a reason a tool cannot be used? in a perfect world the tool would make the items for the missing articles. in principle though i'm not against the proposal but I'd prefer we invest in tooling. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 17:13, 1 December 2020 (UTC) What I do at this time is entirely manual not by choice but by lack of tools. I cannot trigger an update for a paper or for an author. I attended a presentation about this paper .. It introduced a methodology to consider ecological diversity. At this moment I am adding missing papers to Wikidata in order to complete the papers it used as a citation. There are no tools, the quality of what we have at Wikidata is poor as a consequence. So yes have tooling and have something that works for now. Thanks, GerardM ( talk ) 12:07, 3 December 2020 (UTC) Kip Noll (Q390033) [ edit ] El Gaafary

El Gaafary has reinserted claims of birth date and death date, citing probably unreliable sources, like IMDB, and (possibly) using original research. The person's rumored death has been debated at Egyptian Arabian Wikipedia talk page and en:Talk:Kip Noll . At enwiki, the death rumor has been disregarded per core content policies like en:WP:NOR . Why couldn't the user apply the same principle to Wikidata and Egyptian Arabian Wikipedia? George Ho ( talk ) 09:13, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

EnWiki has different policies then other Wikimedia projects. Given that the Libary of Congress believes those birth & death dates are real, I don't see a problem with them. ChristianKl ❫ 12:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)What about Wikidata:Living people ? Are the standards just as high as enwiki? Furthermore, the LOC page cites Wikipedia, Wikidata, and IMDB as "sources". I don't see how it is reliable at this point. By the way, I don't know much about standards on pages about living persons at arzwiki. George Ho ( talk ) 18:47, 1 December 2020 (UTC) The living people policy exists for living people and he seems dead. Even would apply it it's a different principle then the one you pointed to as being used on EnWiki. The libary of congress is an authority that does research. It's not perfect but no source is perfect. Better sources might his SALT LAKE TRIBUNE obituary from the May 24, 2001 but that unfortunately doesn't seem to be easily available online. ChristianKl ❫ 19:46, 1 December 2020 (UTC) I was able to access the obituary via ProQuest (just go to Wikipedia Library). The obituary does not refer any alias of the deceased person "Thomas Earl Hagen", and it doesn't mention "Kip Noll" (or similar names) as well. To me, it doesn't verify the connection between the two names. George Ho ( talk ) 01:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC) answers.com suggests "It appears that Kip Noll was actually Thomas Earl Hagen, born in Greenwich, CT, on August 7, 1957. The location and date correspond to information given by Kip Noll in a STALLION magazine ((June 1982) interview." is that article also available via Wikipedia Library or another way? ChristianKl ❫ 12:43, 2 December 2020 (UTC) I don't know which specific policy prevents me from (re-)deleting unverifiable yet sourced birth and death dates and locations. Is it "use common sense" policy ? However, that's not the only issue. As I have realized, Wikidata and other projects have become interdependent with each other, especially by sharing Wikidata into infoboxes. I notice other threads about. I fear that Wikidata's impact on projects would undermine the influence of English Wikipedia. Don't you think?

BTW, enwiki doesn't take Answers.com seriously ; it's user-generated, like Wikidata. I tried finding the Noll interview on Google and Wikipedia Library; no such luck except data about the magazine issue itself. George Ho ( talk ) 18:06, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

@ George Ho : In general sourced data should NEVER be deleted on wikidata; if you doubt its veracity you can adjust the ranking (if you have a reliable source for your doubts, then use "deprecated" rank and describe that with the reason for deprecation qualifier, otherwise add a new entry with "preferred" rank and the value you think is right, along with any source for that). Wikidata is designed to allow for multiple conflicting sources of information to be present on the same item. ArthurPSmith ( talk ) 18:21, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I couldn't deprecate because customization is impossible. Instead, I must insert another item as "reason for deprecation". Say that I would like to insert either "English Wikipedia" or "chicken", but that's due to AutoCompletion feature. Also, connection Stallion interview and the obituary would be original research, which is against enwiki's policy (and other policies applied) , isn't it? Somehow, I could not find Wikidata's policy about this.... unless Wikidata is allowing original research? Where's the RfC or past discussions on this? George Ho ( talk ) 18:51, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

There's no Wikidata policy forbidden this. I'm not aware of any RfC that tried to implement such a policy. "reason for deprecation" indeed has to be an item. In particular it should be a subclass of Wikidata reason for deprecation (Q27949697) . If none of the existing one's say what you need in a specific case you can create a new one. We do it that way, because Wikidata in multilingual and every language version can show the reason for deprecation this way by translating the label. ChristianKl ❫ 19:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Isn't creating another item less practical than what people have been optimistic about? Anyways, perhaps I should create an RfC without creating a draft yet... but I'll make the discussion about original research on living people, not about original research in general, which can be separate from my narrow(ed) topic. Any other ideas besides it? George Ho ( talk ) 20:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC)The idea is that there are a finite number of reasonable reasons for deprecating statements and in most cases we can reuse existing statements. Creating a new item is for those rare cases where there's a new valid reason for deprecating that doesn't already have an item. Wikidata is structured data. Structured data makes some things harder but has advantages like translation into other languages and it being easier for computers to interact with it. ChristianKl ❫ 23:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)I created three more items: Q103598308 , Q103598309 , Q103598310 . George Ho ( talk ) 00:14, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Regarding original research, I've been encouraged to publish original research on Wikiversity. I've accumulated a number of technical reports under " Wikiversity:Category:Freedom and abundance ". There is now a w:Wikipedia:Wiki to journal publication procedure for submitting an article from Wikipedia to a refereed academic journal. I haven't studied that, but something similar could doubtless be done with a well written research report on Wikiversity. DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 20:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Model de-transition[ edit ]

I have created Keira Bell (Q103120340) but I dont know how to model a person who was born female, transitioned to male and then de-transitioned to female. My guess is that at least she should be recorded as female right now. Is there a consensus on how do this? Or should it even be recorded? Maybe significant event (P793) would be the right approach? I also could not find an example here on how to do this. -- Hannes Röst ( talk ) 15:43, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

I would use start time (P580) / end time (P582) to specify the time when the individual genders where true and mark the current gender as preferred value. ChristianKl ❫ 16:02, 1 December 2020 (UTC) end cause (P1534) may also be of use. -- SilentSpike ( talk ) 11:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Q59318277 seems to have disappeared[ edit ]

How can the history of Q59318277 be researched?

I created a citation to it on 2018-12-04.

I believe it was a valid QID when I created it, though I can't prove that. However, it seems to have been valid on 2020-07-26, because it was NOT listed on Wikiversity:Category:Pages with empty citations on that date, even though three other Wikiversity pages were listed there then . However, early this morning, 2020-12-01, I was notified that it appeared then on Wikiversity:Category:Pages with empty citations .

I believe it used to describe A People's History of the American Revolution , which I just recreated this morning as Q102951790 .

This says to me that something strange happened between 2020-07-26 and 2020-12-01. I see only two possible explanations for this:

Q59318277 was valid when I created it but disappeared from Wikidata sometime between 2020-07-26 and 2020-12-01.Q59318277 was invalid when I created it but was only detected as such and added to Wikiversity:Category:Pages with empty citations until after 2020-07-26, over 1.5 years later, even though it had been invalid since I created it 2018-12-04.

??? Thanks, DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 19:35, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

On 24 April 2019 it was deleted by User:Jianhui67 following the request at Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2019/04/24#Q59318277 . You can actually see the deletion log entry on Q59318277 and find the deletion request via Special:WhatLinksHere/Q59318277 . Shall I undelete the item, so that you can merge the new one? — MisterSynergy ( talk ) 19:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)When it comes to creating entries for books and not having them deleted, it's useful to add an external ID like an ISBN number. ChristianKl ❫ 20:05, 1 December 2020 (UTC)Please undelete it and point me to documentation on how to merge entries.Also: @ Randykitty : @ Jianhui67 :: You deleted Q59318277 as "Completely unreference" even though it was being used on Wikiversity, as noted above. How can I easily identify other Wikidata entries that I've created and that have been deleted on false claims that it was "Completely unreferenced"? This is frightening: I've created lots of Wikidata entries like that and used them extensively. Now at least one has been deleted as "Completely unreferenced", when it had been referenced from Wikiversity well over 4 months before it was deleted as "Completely unreferenced". Might there be others waiting to be detected? Fifteen months after this deletion, it was not listed as invalid on Wikiversity:Category:Pages with empty citations , as noted above. ( An obituary for Mark Twain was reportedly published before he died. He replied, "the report of my death was an exaggeration." )What needs to happen to fix your algorithm that reported it as "Completely unreferenced", even though it had been referenced from Wikiversity well over 4 months before then? That algorithm should be able to identify references like [https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q102407368 Qui sont Julia et Agathe Cagé, mobilisées pour Benoît Hamon jusqu’au bout ? - Elle], which I plan to add to an article I'm planning to create on es.wikipedia.org. (I'm translating fr:Julia Cagé into Spanish. Will your algorithm find Q102407368 in the French language Wikipedia as a reference? Wikipedia:template:cite Q exists in French but not Spanish, so I'm using a naked URL. I've so far been unable to get a counterpart to Wikipedia:template:cite Q functioning in es.wikipedia.org.)Also, what needs to happen to make the defective algorithm that was used to search for references available to mere mortals, similar to the "File usage on other wikis" on Wikimedia Commons? "What links here" in Wikidata only identifies other links in Wikidata.What needs to happen so that "Requests for deletion" of QIDs trigger a notification to the creator of said Wikidata items? If your defective "Completely unreferenced" algorithm knows about uses in Wikipedia but not Wikiversity, in this case I could have replaced the citation to that book to the Wikipedia article on w:Ray Raphael with a reference to this Wikidata item, even if I might not have easily found where I used it in Wikiversity.Secondarily, how will adding an ISBN number prevent a book from being deleted as "completely unreferenced"? That does not sound like a "reference" to me.Thanks very much for the reply. DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 21:10, 1 December 2020 (UTC)The item is restored. See Help:Merge how to proceed with the merge process.@ MisterSynergy : Help:Merge says, 'There are two ways to perform an automatic merge: the Merge gadget or the Special "Merge two items" page.' How can I find the '"Merge two items" page.'? I cannot find it, and I'd prefer not to install a gadget if I can avoid it. Thanks, DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 21:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Special:MergeItems MisterSynergy ( talk ) 22:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC) This tool shows which of the items that you have created were deleted.— MisterSynergy ( talk ) 21:49, 1 December 2020 (UTC) Here completely unreferenced means that the item itself has no references for it's information. An ISBN number does provide the opportunity to check the information about a given book externally.Usage of Wikipedia:template:cite Q is practically invisible from Wikidata. I recently opened a thread at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Contact_the_development_team#Template:Cite_Q_(Q22321052)_and_deletions about this being problematic and you might want to comment to it if you think this is important. ChristianKl ❫ 23:15, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

When Q59318277 was nominated for deletion, and when it was deleted, it had a statement author (P50) = Ray Raphael (Q7298002) ; it took only a second for a Google search to confirm it as a real entity. Furthermore, the author has a Wikipedia biography which discusses the work in detail. There seems to have been no attempt to notify its creator that the item was nominated for deletion, nor to ask them to provide further data. We need to stop valid, albeit incomplete, items from being deleted in this way. Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy ; Andy's edits 23:27, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

indeed the deletion policy is way too aggressive. I've complained about this many times but the admins insist that aggressive deleting with occasional undeleting is better than adding any process that would slow it down (notifying creators / simple googling /etc). BrokenSegue ( talk ) 02:32, 2 December 2020 (UTC)First, I have to say that I wouldn't have deleted the item in the state in which it was. Our line about what we delete and not delete comes from discussions on RfD. If you want to move it it makes sense to participate more on RfD.The fact that we don't have notification of creators for RfD is not do to "admins" but due to no one writing the bot code for such notifications. Pasleim ( talk contribs logs )'s DeltaBot ( talk contribs logs ) would be in a good position to create pings but Pasleim ( talk contribs logs ) isn't the only person who could do that work. ChristianKl ❫ 09:36, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ ChristianKl : So unfortunately part of the problem is admins (or at least the policy as interpreted by some of them). Many many items are deleted without RfD review. Some admins assert that review would be pointless because deletions here are purely mechanical and thus there is no room for discussion (they say the RfD page is merely to notify admins not a place to reach consensus or discuss). Even if we did notify authors of deletion nominations there is no time limit there and admins can delete things whenever they want. For an example of my grievance see this discussion where multiple admins disagree with your assertion that RfD is for discussion. This isn't just a matter of solving a tooling issue or else I'd be glad to fill that gap. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 15:56, 2 December 2020 (UTC)@ BrokenSegue : In the linked discussion the only admin that replied is RfD is a mix of discussions and requests that are closed without discussion. It's my understanding that the current defacto deletion policy is essentially one of case law that comes from the discussions we have at RfD. It's my impression that deletions that don't go through RfD mostly reflect the RfD case law.The issues involved in deletion are complex. Some of them are issues of tooling while others are issues of policy. The fact that articles can go to RfD without their creators knowing about it is an issue of tooling that could be easily fixed.Creating a new process of speedy deletion that could be used in cases where admins currently delete items directly would also be good, but is complex mix of technology and policy. ChristianKl ❫ 16:23, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ ChristianKl : Well one admin there did say "For good reasons RfD does not have a minimum discussion period defined or any other formal requirements that need to be respected while resolving cases" which seems kinda outrageous to me. What use is notifying users if there is no minimum waiting period (and what harm could such a waiting period even cause)? I think both issues are a mix of policy and technology. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 16:29, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ BrokenSegue : the fact that there's no formal required minimum waiting period doesn't mean that most RfD discussions aren't open for many days. Especially deletion decisions that aren't clear cut are often open for longer periods of time.The harm that a minimum waiting period causes is that it adds extra work to process RfD's. Keeping bureaucratcy down both for users who create items and for admins is valuable. ChristianKl ❫ 18:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC)What should I do to argue more forcefully for the following:Before any Wikidata item is deleted, any human who contributed to such item should be notified, explaining the time at which the item is scheduled for deletion and clear instructions on what needs to happen to cancel that deletion. I think the deletion time should be between 3 and 6 days (72 and 144 hours) from the time of the notice to allow user(s) time to schedule time to research the problem, to figure out what to do, and then do it. This deletion time might be 36 hours in the future IF you make it easy for users to see items to which they contributed after they've been deleted, as suggested below; I don't know how to do that right now.Very compelling labeling of the Wikidata input screen for each new Wikidata item stating clearly and succinctly Wikidata policies for deletion. That labeling should disappear only after the criteria for retention have been met.It should be easy for users to see the details of deleted items to which they contributed with appropriate banners explaining that it has been deleted and cannot be used, though they can copy the contents to new items.It should be much easier than it is presently for people to get help understanding Wikidata policies and recommended practices. I've been a fan of Wikidata since 2017, but I failed to find adequate instructions on how to use it until I got individual help with it in Wikimania 2018 Cape Town. There have been several times since then -- like now -- that I've struggled with whether and how to do something in Wikidata. Some of my posts to "Wikidata:Project chat" have gone unanswered. It should be easy, for example, for a user to find how to delete a Wikidata item they created in error; I have not found it so.Permit me to add to my comments above on why this concerns me:I spent most of yesterday on tasks that should have been unnecessary if policies like what I recommend were in place.First, I got a notice that Wikidata item Q59318277 appeared on " Wikiversity:Category:Pages with empty citations ", even though it was cited on Wikiversity:The Great American Paradox .If that {{cite Q|Q59318277}} had not had a page number following it, I would not likely have been able to overcome that immediate problem within any reasonable period of time. I found that I had added that reference to {{cite Q|Q59318277}} on 2018-12-04. Sadly, my research of my notes from that date failed to identify the document to which Q59318277 referred. Fortunately, the reference included a page number as, "{{cite Q|Q59318277}}, p. 89.". I then pulled a dozen books off my shelves and checked p. 89 in each until I found the one I needed. Then I recreated the Wikidata item for that book.Then I began to worry that the replacement I created may itself soon disappear. I still don't know what I need to do to prevent that. I've heard that MAYBE if I add an ISBN number, it might reduce the chances that this replacement for Q59318277 that I created yesterday may itself disappear. However, the criteria for deletion are still not clear to me.IF WIKIDATA ITEMS DISAPPEAR SEEMINGLY AT RANDOM WITHOUT EXPLANATION, IT SHOULD RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT WHETHER WIKIDATA SHOULD BE USED FOR ANYTHING.I've been a registered Wikidata user since 2012-12-24, but I made only 16 total edits in Wikidata prior to 2018 Wikimania Cape Town, as I mentioned above. I remember attending a presentation on Wikidata at 2017 Wikimania Montreal, but it was not feasible for me to actually use it until I got individual help a year later. It shouldn't be that hard.Yesterday, I learned that 6 Wikidata items I had created had been deleted. Two have since been restored. I still have to create time to figure out what to do with those two. And it's not clear what I need to do to understand what happened to the other four. I may have requested the deletion of one or two of those four, but I doubt if I requested the deletion of all four.I'm in the process of translating the Wikipedia article on w:Julia Cagé from French into Spanish. It's taking a long time, in part because I insist on creating Wikidata items for every reference I use, and I can't find some of their references ;-)And I've encountered a certain level of mild hostility in my requests to have w:Template:Cite Q made available in the Spanish language Wikipedia. I plan to get around that using constructs like [URL comment]</ref>, e.g., <nowiki>[https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q102407368 Qui sont Julia et Agathe Cagé, mobilisées pour Benoît Hamon jusqu’au bout ? - Elle]. If Wikidata items disappear seemingly at random, the mild hostility I've encountered from Spanish language Wikimedians is justified.Thanks for all you to do help make the entire world better informed. DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 14:27, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ DavidMCEddy :I went through your deleted one's yesterday. One was request by you to be deleted. The other three had no statements and were named Julia et Agathe Cagé, les sœurs douées/Essays in the Political Economy of Information and Taxation/news email. ChristianKl ❫ 18:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)


@ ChristianKl : It's difficult to see what the appropriate thing is to do with these.Q96951498 was created 2020-07-04 18:47 and deleted 2020-07-13. It was titled, "Julia et Agathe Cagé, les sœurs douées". This seems to be a duplicate of Q96951729, which was created 2020-07-04 18:52, five minutes later. Without being able to look at the edits on Q96951498, I cannot say more about this. If Q96951498 included more than one edit, I think it should be restored, and I should merge it with Q96951729. Wikidata item Q96951729 is currently cited in both the English and French language articles on Julia Cagé, and I plan to cite it as [https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q96951729 Julia y Agathe Cagé, las hermanas superdotadas (en francés).] in a Spanish language article on Cagé.Q96950823 was created 2020-07-04 18:37 and also deleted also 2020-07-13. It was titled, "Essays in the Political Economy of Information and Taxation". I assume it's the same as Q102421658, which I created on 2020-11-28 with English title, 'Certification of doctoral defense of "Essays on the political economy of information and taxation"'. The latter documents the defense of a French-language PhD dissertation by Julia Cagé. Could you please recreate Q96950823, so I can see if it's the same as the certification I have of thesis defense or it's the actual thesis? (It's in French, so the difference between "in" and "on" in the title is more a function of the translator than the content ;-)Might the "news email" document a comment on an email list that I might have cited somewhere? If yes, I think I should examine it as well.After Q59318277 was restored, User:Trade changed "instance of (P31)" from "book (Q571)" to "literary work (Q7725634)". Is "literary work (Q7725634)" preferable to "book (Q571)" for something like this? This is a carefully documented history of the American Revolution, for which "book" sounds more appropriate. More generally, how can I research when one should use Q571, when Q7725634, and when both? Also, I've looked at Help:Merge , and it's not clear to me where I should go from here. I suppose I should try the instructions for "Automatic merge" and see what happens. I see that, "Usually the more recent item should be marked" as "duplicated" and the other as the "main" item. Does that mean I should start at Q59318277 and merge Q102951790 into it?Thanks again. DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 19:50, 2 December 2020 (UTC)@ DavidMCEddy : I undeleted Certification of doctoral defense of "Essays on the political economy of information and taxation" (Q96950823) : Documentation of 2013 doctoral defense at EHESS and Q66424630 : no description as well. Given that both lack statements they are not viable in their current form.@ ChristianKl : Thanks. I looked at Certification of doctoral defense of "Essays on the political economy of information and taxation" (Q96950823) : Documentation of 2013 doctoral defense at EHESS and Q66424630 : no description. You're right: They "both lack statements". I will try to merge Certification of doctoral defense of "Essays on the political economy of information and taxation" (Q96950823) : Documentation of 2013 doctoral defense at EHESS with 'Certification of doctoral defense of "Essays on the political economy of information and taxation" (Q102421658)'.Since no other Wikidata item links to Q66424630 : no description, I suggest you speedily delete it before someone else tries to use it ;-) DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 21:33, 2 December 2020 (UTC)As far as the topic of books goes https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Books#Bibliographic_properties explain our modelling. ChristianKl ❫ 20:59, 2 December 2020 (UTC)@ ChristianKl : Am I reading your https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Books#Bibliographic_properties correctly to suggest that I should avoid using "book (Q571)", because it's too general, and instead use "literary work (Q7725634)", because it's more specific? And where I've assigned both, I should delete "book (Q571)"?A related question is when to use "news (Q38926)" vs. "news article (Q5707594)"?I've recently been assigning both. However, if "literary work (Q7725634)" is preferred to "book (Q571)" because it's more specific, then "news article (Q5707594)" should be preferred to "news (Q38926)" for a news report that I've found in a news medium? And, again, where I've assigned both, I should delete "news (Q38926)" in favor of "news article (Q5707594)"?Thanks again, DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 21:20, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Theoretically, the place that should document the answer to that question is https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_Periodicals . It currently doesn't speak about news aricles explictely but about article (Q191067) . To me that suggests using news article (Q5707594) is the way to go here. At the same time it would likely be good if the documentation would explictely say so, so I raised the issue of being more specific on the discussion page of that Wikiproject. ChristianKl ❫ 22:49, 2 December 2020 (UTC)As long as it's not visible from Wikidata whether or not items are used with w:Template:Cite Q and thus that has no inpact on deletion decisions, I do agree that skepticism towards it is warrented. Even if you do think we should generally delete fewer items, having access to that information seem valuable and that's why I created the topic over at Contact the development team. ChristianKl ❫ 18:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Making policy more legible is not something you archieve by forcefully arguing for it but by actually doing the work of working on making policies more legible and doing tasks like answering questions on the project chat. ChristianKl ❫ 18:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)This is why we need to introduce a speedy deletion process (and change existing deletion to a 7-day process).-- GZWDer ( talk ) 15:46, 2 December 2020 (UTC) I strongly agree and proposed such a thing in this long discussion but got pushback (and others have made similar proposals [2] and [3] ). It seems @ MisterSynergy : opposes this kind of reform. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 16:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ BrokenSegue : when it comes to create a proposal for such a system it's important to understand the technical features that our current system has. I'm generally willing to work to formulate policy. In the linked discussion there's an open question about whether abuse filters can be used to mark a property in a way that it can only be added by users with a specific right but removed by everyone. If that's possible we can go further and write a speedy deletion system based on that principle, but without knowing it there's no way to move forward with that specific way of implementing it. ChristianKl ❫ 18:15, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Any speedy deletion process that does NOT honestly and effectively address the concerns I raised above is user hostile and drives volunteers away from the Wikimedia project. It is a threat to the sustainability of what we are trying to do here.After I had translated the first 20% of the French language Wikipedia article on w:Julia Cagé into Spanish, someone speedily deleted what I had done. That already included 7 references documenting her status as an economist with PhDs from both Harvard and Science Po and her status as an expert in the economics of media and democracy. The person who speedily deleted what I wrote did not respond to my comments about why I thought it should not be deleted. I've gotten zero response to requests for information on what needs to happen to have that article restored.You want to know why Wikimedia projects have such a hard time recruiting and keeping volunteers? This is one of the reasons.I agree that there should be speedy deletion processes, but they should not be managed in such a user hostile fashion as I've experienced recently with es.wikipedia.org and Wikidata. DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 16:11, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Wikidata is very inclusive, at least compared to most Wikipedia projects. The biggest gap (as discussed above and elsewhere) seems to be whether the Wikidata item has incoming links from certain external projects (e.g. Wikipedia references, OpenStreetMap). Should being cited in a Wikipedia article be enough to make a Wikidata item notable? Should being in OpenStreetMap? Not absolutely, but it ought to move the needle towards inclusion. Unfortunately, other than the sitelinks, there is simply no mechanism for a deleting admin to detect such links and it is not explicitly part of the notability criteria. A possible mitigation would be to create some sort of "deletion review" tool that would report such external references.Looking at the earlier discussions (and ignoring the specific implementation details), it seems like people are asking for: an easy way for any trusted user to propose deletion of an item; and a reasonable opportunity to object to proposed deletions, including notifications and delay. I would favour such a process. People are also asking for ways to view deleted content, which I sympathise with, but it would be hard to provide without raising concerns about hosting copyright- or BLP-violating content. Bovlb ( talk ) 19:01, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ Bovlb : in addition to what you said, admins who delete a lot of items also don't want to create 1000s of RfD's per week but a way to delete items with less overhead. If we had a way where an admin could tag an item for deletion and if nobody objects it gets automatically deleted after X days and if someone objects it goes to RfD that would help with that concern. ChristianKl ❫ 19:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC) In the English Wikipedia there is PROD (proposed deletion), which works exactly like this (but anybody can PROD articles, not only admins).-- Ymblanter ( talk ) 20:09, 2 December 2020 (UTC) we have the tools to implement this today. just make a new property called "wikidata review status" and have people set it to "proposed deletion". BrokenSegue ( talk ) 20:37, 2 December 2020 (UTC) The difference between Wikidata and Wikipedia is that plenty of pages on Wikidata get a lot less attention and have fewer people who have it on their watchlist. I don't think that every user should be able to delete items that are on nobodies watchlist. On Wikipedia I would limit that to admins and either a new right or to people with the rollbacker right. Basically, only people who can be trusted to understand how our deletion policy works should be able to delete items without interaction from other people. ChristianKl ❫ 20:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC)I thought more about the issue and wrote a draft that just needs a bot and no other technical features: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:ChristianKl/Draft:ProposeDeletion#Detecting_manual_removal_of_propose_deletion_for_reason I'm happy for input. ChristianKl ❫ 11:12, 3 December 2020 (UTC)@ Ymblanter : I looked at the PROD policy and according to it there's admin review of items which means workload. Here we want a system that doesn't produce additional human workload and thus it makes sense to restrict the right to use the mechanism. ChristianKl ❫ 19:28, 3 December 2020 (UTC) PROD indeed has admin review. If we have the system without additional admin review, the only way out is restrict the mechanism to admins, otherwise users without an admin flag get an opportunity to delete articles - which, I believe, is not something that the community generally supports.-- Ymblanter ( talk ) 19:32, 3 December 2020 (UTC) FWIW, the linked proposal restricts this to the rollbackers user group. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 20:09, 3 December 2020 (UTC)It is unfortunate, but the best way to prevent deletion of valid entries is to have as much cross linking as possible. The author should be linked, and at the author page notable_work=X. As mentioned the ISBN number and the Google Book ID as well as the Amazon ID should be included. The more you add the less likely the unfortunate deletion will occur. If the book has a specific topic, you can add described_by_source=X from that topic. When an item is linked from another item, autodeletion is prevented because the item has a structural need. -- RAN ( talk ) 14:11, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Anne[ edit ]

Why was Anne (Q564684) changed from instance of female given name to unisex given name, in 2019? @ HarryNº2 :? Andy Mabbett ( Pigsonthewing ); Talk to Andy ; Andy's edits 23:18, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Does it even make sense to have male and female versions of identical names? E.g., Anne (Q47860848) , is it really a different name? Ghouston ( talk ) 00:03, 2 December 2020 (UTC) As long as Anne feminum and Anne masculinum has different orgins all the of them should exist. Then QXXXXXX will be the female name is a form of the Latin female given name Anna. This in turn is a representation of the Hebrew Hannah, which means 'favour' or 'grace and then Anne (Q47860848) is related to Germanic arn-names and means 'eagle. Also then Anne (Q564684) must exist do describe the unisex part. Also bear in mind interwikis. Some day maybe the property: name orgins from will be created as a complementary property (P8882) to named after (P138) Pmt ( talk ) 01:10, 2 December 2020 (UTC) Wouldn't it be difficult to work out which "Anne" any particular person is supposed to be using? What about a male who's middle name is "Anne" to commemorate his grandmother, or some such? Ghouston ( talk ) 01:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Because the given name Anne is given to women and men. -- HarryNº2 ( talk ) 02:52, 2 December 2020 (UTC) That is not in dispute. However, this item was at one point about the female form of the name. We have a separate item Q47860848 , about the male form. I want to know why this item was repurposed, and what it should be classed as. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy ; Andy's edits 17:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Actually, it is a unisex given name (Q3409032) since 2014: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q564684&type=revision&diff=153553200&oldid=152051515 Ayack ( talk ) 08:35, 2 December 2020 (UTC) If one person is using both the feminum and masculinum the second name that in western (mostly) use will be a middle name (Q245025) and will have qualifier series ordinal (P1545) with 2 and then also use (P366) with male given name (Q12308941) and so of (P642) as middle name (Q245025) . See Q103420151 . Pmt ( talk ) 15:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)And yet the item links to Wikipedia articles that are about the female form. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy ; Andy's edits 17:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC) @ Pigsonthewing : Not in French: “Anne est un prénom épicène”. Ayack ( talk ) 18:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Maybe we should get out of the business of assigning genders to first names altogether? We've settled on instance of (P31) human (Q5) for people, so why should it be different for their names? Between cultural differences and changes in law and society regarding both names and genders, the distinction is complicated at best and only getting worse. Since we link people with their first names, data on their use in the so-called real world is just a query away, and the distinction via instance of (P31) is both duplicative and less accurate. -- Matthias Winkelmann ( talk ) 18:07, 2 December 2020 (UTC)I've stopped assigning gender to humans unless their preferred pronouns are clearly documented somewhere.A year or two ago I made a video for a trans friend of a memorial for murdered transgender people. One of the speakers insisted, "I am neither male nor female." DavidMCEddy ( talk ) 18:14, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Different jurisdictions and cultures treat genders differently. At Wikidata we don't try to set standards but allow different jurisdictions and cultures to express themselves. In Germany it's legally relevant whether or not a name is a female or male name as parents are not allowed to name children with a name that goes against their gender. ChristianKl ❫ 10:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Olympics[ edit ]

At Oscar Kreuzer (Q461349) we have "participant in=1912 Summer Olympics" and "participant in=tennis at the 1912 Summer Olympics – men's outdoor singles". Looking at various Olympic entries we have a mix "participant in=YYYY Olympics" and "participant in=YYYY event at the Olympics" with some containing one or the other, and some with both. What do we want as our standard? I was assuming once we had event, the "participant in=YYYY Olympics" would be redundant. But I think a bot may be involved adding "participant in=YYYY Olympics" based on a category at Wikipedia. -- RAN ( talk ) 21:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

We have items for each and every event of the modern Olympics (example: tennis at the 1912 Summer Olympics – men's outdoor singles (Q2314432) ) and they are all properly connected via has part (P527) / part of (P361) with the Olympic discipline event (example: Tennis at the 1912 Summer Olympics (Q855399) ) and further via has part (P527) / part of (P361) to the Olympic Games edition (example: 1912 Summer Olympics (Q8118) ). I spent quite some time last winter to get this pretty complete when the Sports-Reference.com website as the most reliable source was about to be closed and it was unclear at that time whether there would be an appropriate successor. For participant in (P1344) , the most specific item should be used, so please do "participant in=tennis at the 1912 Summer Olympics – men's outdoor singles"; it could be qualified with further related information, such as the final ranking in that event using ranking (P1352) and some other things. Mind that this is also pretty much the level of detail that one would add to an infobox in Wikipedia, which means that this data structure aims to be most useful for data use by Wikipedias. The "participant in=1912 Summer Olympics" claims have in most cases been added some years ago when event-level items were often missing, and they should probably be removed in order to avoid redundancy. — MisterSynergy ( talk ) 21:26, 2 December 2020 (UTC)Tight crops only?[ edit ]

Will someone explain to me with reference to Joe Henry (Q1810016) why there is a need to crop the photo I took, which has been the image on this item since 17 February 2015? Was there some decision I missed that Wikidata wants tight crops only, or is someone being arbitrary? - Jmabel ( talk ) 05:16, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

Why are you asking here? An IP added a tag to a photo on Commons. It's a commons issue. (Your image is ... not very good - very poorly lit. I'll change the Joe Henry (Q1810016) image to Joe-Henry DSC00919.jpg, which whilst being b&w, seems about the best of those in the Joe Henry category.) -- Tagishsimon ( talk ) 05:27, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Newbie question: Instance of versus subclass of[ edit ]

Hi, I'm looking at Chess Openings as my first project on Wikidata. Starting with the top, we have:

King's Pawn Game (Q1631907) subclass of (P279) chess opening (Q103632)

King's Pawn Game (Q1631907) subclass of (P279) chess opening (Q103632) .

Open Game (Q753060) subclass of (P279) King's Pawn Game (Q1631907)

Open Game (Q753060) subclass of (P279) King's Pawn Game (Q1631907) .

When we get to King's Knight Opening (Q1237452) , it is instance of (P31) chess opening (Q103632) , and also is subclass of (P279) Open Game (Q753060) . This makes sense because the King's Knight Opening is a chess opening and also it defines a class of chess openings which begin with that sequence, which is also true. What I don't understand is why Open Game (Q753060) isn't similarly instance of (P31) chess opening (Q103632) ? It should be, right? Also, thinking about the "terminal nodes" of the graph defined by the subclass relation starting at chess opening, something like Semi-Slav Defense (Q1570575) seems like a terminal node ( query ). There are no subclasses of it, and no instances of it. By leaving the statement of Semi-Slav Defense (Q1570575) subclass of (P279) Queen's Gambit (Q107925) , are we saying essentially that "There are a whole class of chess openings further branched from this one, we just don't have names for them?" Or is it just a relic of how the data was modeled? And wouldn't Semi-Slav Defense (Q1570575) instance of (P31) Queen's Gambit (Q107925) be more correct than chess opening (Q103632) ? Given that, wouldn't the initial example, King's Knight Opening (Q1237452) be better to instance of (P31) Open Game (Q753060) instead of the generic chess opening (Q103632) ?

Basically, I'm suggesting that chess openings are both an instance and a subclass of the chess opening they derive from. Does this make sense? And should the subclass relationship be pruned from openings where there are no named/known instances? Thanks!-- Audiodude ( talk ) 06:25, 3 December 2020 (UTC)

@ Audiodude : Not sure I entirely follow, but it seems like these are modeled so that chess opening (Q103632) is a metaclass, and the classes of openings would have instances (if they existed) that were occasions when that opening was actually used in a game? Just because something is a class with no instances here in Wikidata doesn't mean that its "real world" (abstract) meaning wouldn't actually have instances of some sort. ArthurPSmith ( talk ) 18:47, 3 December 2020 (UTC) Thanks for the response and the welcome message! I guess it makes sense to think about something analogous that's more basic, like colors. alice blue (Q372669) instance of (P31) color (Q1075) , but also alice blue (Q372669) subclass of (P279) blue (Q1088) . So following that example, it would make sense to model the chess openings the same way right? So King's Knight Opening should be "instance of" chess opening, but "subclass of" the specific chess opening that it derives from (in this case Open Game). The only thing about this modeling that strikes me odd is that you don't end up with any colors that are "instances of" blue. And is alice blue really a "class" of colors? Thanks! -- Audiodude ( talk ) 20:54, 3 December 2020 (UTC) @ Audiodude : The difference between instance/subclass for non-physical things is really subtle sometimes and I think even experienced people get confused. Some of this is just trying to be consistent within the same realm. Does it make sense to say there is an "instance of" blue anywhere? Maybe a particular frequency? Really blue is a rough region of color space and other blue-ish colors are subregions of blue. I don't think adding chess opening (Q103632) to Open Game (Q753060) would hurt but it's a little redundant. Have you seen Help:Basic membership properties ? BrokenSegue ( talk ) 21:10, 3 December 2020 (UTC) Thanks for the reply! I can see how it's tricky, yes. And yes I was referring to that help document specifically when working on these issues, and the key that struck me was that for an entity to be a subclass of another entity, both of them must be classes. Looking at ArthurPSmith's answer above, it seems like it's okay to have a class "Semi-Slav Defense" of chess openings, even if there are no entities in Wikidata that are instances of that class. What concerns me more is setting "Semi-Slave Defence" to be instance of "chess opening" instead of instance of "Queen's Gambit" because if we follow that practice, the "class" Queen's Gambit is never going to have any instance members. Thanks! -- Audiodude ( talk ) 21:17, 3 December 2020 (UTC) Yeah I don't think it matters if a class never has an instance in wikidata. I think you could safely delete that "instance of" but optimally there would be a "Wikiproject Chess" that would come to an agreement on this. BrokenSegue ( talk ) 21:24, 3 December 2020 (UTC)Wikidata for mythical names[ edit ]

Inviting participants of the WikiProject Ancient Greece to join the Linked Pasts session on Exploring Names in Wikidata, Mythical and Otherwise on Dec 8, 2020 UTC 13:00. Anyone with an interest to the topic is welcome! See the event doc for the Zoom link (Search for Exploring Names in Wikidata, Mythical and Otherwise ) or get in touch with me or User:JBradyK . – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) ( talk ) 06:55, 4 December 2020 (UTC) Epìdosis B20180 Geraki Azertus Alexander Doria Shisma Sp!ros Marcus Cyron Marsupium (observing member) Mrakia Alexmar983 DerHexer Lykos EncycloPetey Jahl de Vautban JBradyK

Pictogram voting comment.svg

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Ancient Greece

deletion request[ edit ]

Please delete Karolina Protsenko (Q101071444) . Thanks in advance!!! -- 2001:B07:6442:8903:4572:EA66:C788:E0C8 10:07, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

It's unclear why. Isn't it the same person as Karolina Protsenko (Q91313507) and thus a merge candidate? ChristianKl ❫ 10:16, 4 December 2020 (UTC)Wikidata entries from a Wikipedia category?[ edit ]

I want to find all Wikidata entries from only articles in a Wikipedia category and in a specific language. How can I do this ? Thanks. Best regards, Pelanch3 ( talk ) 13:42, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

mw:Wikidata Query Service/User Manual/MWAPI#Find_category members , Wikidata:Request a query -- Lockal ( talk ) 16:06, 4 December 2020 (UTC) Hello @ Pelanch3 , Lockal : in addition to SPARQL also Petscan could be used: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/PetScan https://petscan.wmflabs.org/

-- M2k~dewiki ( talk ) 16:35, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Political convention delegates[ edit ]

Do we have a standardized way of showing someone was a delegate to one of the political conventions? -- RAN ( talk ) 14:06, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

electric locomotives properties[ edit ] Q841273

Q841273 was bicourrant engine for 3 kV direct current and 25 kV alternate current. I try to use the P2436 property, but it does not accept Q1412243 as value. How can I do this? Smiley.toerist ( talk ) 14:49, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Proposed deletion[ edit ]

Welcome to comment on a proposal for proposed deletion system in Wikidata.-- GZWDer ( talk ) 17:46, 4 December 2020 (UTC)

Retrieved from " https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=1317781549 " Category : Wikidata-en Navigation menuPersonal toolsNot logged in Talk Contributions Create account Log in Namespaces Project page Discussion VariantsViews Read Edit Add topic View history MoreSearch
Navigation Main page Community portal Project chat Create a new Item Recent changes Random Item Query Service Nearby Help Donate Lexicographical data Create a new Lexeme Recent changes Random Lexeme Tools What links here Related changes Special pages Permanent link Page information Wikidata item Print/export Create a book Download as PDF Printable version In other projects Wikimedia Commons MediaWiki Meta-Wiki Wikispecies Wikibooks Wikinews Wikipedia Wikiquote Wikisource Wikiversity Wikivoyage Wiktionary In Wikipedia Аҧсшәа Acèh Адыгабзэ Afrikaans Akan Alemannisch አማርኛ Aragonés Ænglisc العربية ܐܪܡܝܐ مصرى ������� Asturianu Atikamekw Aymar aru تۆرکجه Башҡортса Basa Bali Boarisch Žemaitėška Български ������� Banjar Bamanankan ����� ������� ������������� ������� Brezhoneg Bosanski ᨅᨔ ᨕᨘᨁᨗ Català Chavacano de Zamboanga Mìng-dĕ̤ng-ngṳ̄ Нохчийн Cebuano ᏣᎳᎩ Tsetsêhestâhese کوردی Corsu Nēhiyawēwin / ᓀᐦᐃᔭᐍᐏᐣ Qırımtatarca Čeština Kaszëbsczi Чӑвашла Cymraeg Dansk Deutsch Thuɔŋjäŋ Zazaki Dolnoserbski ������ Ελληνικά Emiliàn e rumagnòl English Esperanto Español Eesti Euskara Estremeñu فارسی Fulfulde Suomi Võro Føroyskt Français Arpetan Nordfriisk Furlan Frysk Gaeilge 贛語 Gàidhlig Galego گیلکی Avañe'ẽ ������ ������ / Gõychi Konknni Bahasa Hulontalo ������������������������ ������� 客家語/Hak-kâ-ngî Hawaiʻi עברית ������ Hrvatski Hornjoserbsce Kreyòl ayisyen Magyar Հայերեն Արեւմտահայերէն Interlingua Bahasa Indonesia Interlingue Igbo Iñupiak Ilokano Ido Íslenska Italiano ᐃᓄᒃᑎᑐᑦ/inuktitut 日本語 Patois La .lojban. Jawa ქართული Taqbaylit Gĩkũyũ Қазақша Kalaallisut ����� 한국어 Къарачай-малкъар ����� / کٲشُر Ripoarisch Kurdî Kernowek Кыргызча Latina Ladino Lëtzebuergesch Лакку Лезги Lingua Franca Nova Luganda Limburgs Ladin Lumbaart Lingála ��� لۊری شومالی Lietuvių Latgaļu Latviešu ������ Basa Banyumasan Malagasy Māori Minangkabau Македонски ������ Монгол ����� Bahasa Melayu Malti Mirandés မြန်မာဘာသာ مازِرونی Dorerin Naoero Nāhuatl Napulitano Plattdüütsch Nedersaksies ������ Nederlands Norsk nynorsk Norsk Novial ߒߞߏ Diné bizaad Chi-Chewa Occitan ����� Ирон ������ Picard Deitsch Pälzisch Norfuk / Pitkern Polski Piemontèis Ποντιακά پښتو Português Rumantsch Romani čhib Kirundi Română Armãneashti Русский Русиньскый ��������� Саха тыла Sardu Sicilianu Scots سنڌي Davvisámegiella Sängö Srpskohrvatski / српскохрватски ၽႃႇသႃႇတႆး ����� Simple English Slovenčina Slovenščina Gagana Samoa Anarâškielâ ChiShona Soomaaliga Shqip Српски / srpski Sranantongo SiSwati Sesotho Sunda Svenska Kiswahili Ślůnski ����� ���� ������ Tetun Тоҷикӣ ��� Tagalog Türkçe Татарча/tatarça ChiTumbuka Twi ئۇيغۇرچە / Uyghurche Українська اردو Oʻzbekcha/ўзбекча Vèneto Tiếng Việt West-Vlams Volapük Walon Winaray Wolof 吴语 ייִדיש Yorùbá Zeêuws 中文 文言 Bân-lâm-gú 粵語 IsiZulu Edit links This page was last edited on 4 December 2020, at 17:46.All structured data from the main, Property, Lexeme, and EntitySchema namespaces is available under the Creative Commons CC0 License ; text in the other namespaces is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Privacy policy About Wikidata Disclaimers Mobile view Data access Developers Statistics Cookie statement Wikimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki
© 2014-2020 ЯВИКС - все права защищены.
Наши контакты/Карта ссылок