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 2025/01.

SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 1 day and sections whose oldest comment is older than 7 days.

I was speaking with Moebeus about the subject and from the way he responded it didn't sounded like WD had any modeling in place on how to handle Vocaloid music.

Any suggestions how the items should be done?--Trade (talk) 04:50, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's add some context: In a Vocaloid song there are at least four performers involved. The Vocaloid-P, the Vocaloid voicebank used to make the music and the character who represents the voicebank and the VA behind the voicebank itself. Question is how should these three entities be modeled into the item? --Trade (talk) 04:59, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since Vocaloid songs are performed by fictional characters, the characters themselves should be credited as the singers.(see Tell Your World EP (Q11250586).) Conversely, it would be incorrect to credit the voice actors as the performers, as they are not the ones actually singing; their voices are simply sampled to create the characters' vocals. Given that Vocaloid songs are often entirely written, composed, arranged, and produced by Vocaloid producers (Vocaloid-Ps), I believe they should also be credited as performers. Afaz (talk) 00:47, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Where does the circle Livetune (Q859315) and the voice actors fit into this? Trade (talk) 01:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"the characters themselves should be credited as the singers." But the character is not currently credited as the singer. The voicebank is. Trade (talk) 02:01, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Japanese interface shows Hatsune Miku (Q552682) as a fictional character, and p31 is also labeled as a fictional human (Q15632617). The voicebank is Hatsune Miku (Q112748598), which lists Saki Fujita (Q1066065) as the voice actor. I added Livetune (Q859315) as they were not credited as a performer. Afaz (talk) 04:33, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think we should use voice actor (P725) as a qualifier on performer? Trade (talk) 05:24, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, it’s not. This is because Saki Fujita (Q1066065) herself doesn’t sing the song. She is the voice provider for Hatsune Miku (Q552682), and that information is already recorded in the Q552682. Afaz (talk) 15:51, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few changes. Thoughts? Trade (talk) 09:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe your change is incorrect. I don’t understand why we need to individually record the voice provider's data for each Vocaloid song. It should follow a format similar to existing databases like MusicBrainz. Afaz (talk) 00:33, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am following the scope as stated in the description of performer (P175)

Just because the voice actor weren't actively involved in the work, it's still her voice being used Trade (talk) 19:37, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If you are referring to the English description of that property ("actor, musician, band or other performer associated with this role or musical work") it is unhelpfully, and unnecessarily, broad. To simplify it quite a bit; the way "performer" is currently being used, it is reserved for the artist(s) named on the cover (the "release artist"). For anyone else that might be mentioned in the liner notes, like back-up singers, individual musicians of a band, recording engineers, etc. use contributor to the creative work or subject qualified with object of statement has role. Moebeus (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately performer (P175) keeps giving constraint errors when using Vocaloid voicebanks Trade (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still need to figure out whether or not to list the Voicebank or the persona Trade (talk) 23:49, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Does this sound reasonable to you? @Moebeus:--Trade (talk) 02:29, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know the first thing about Vocaloid, all I have to offer is general advice like "look at how the streamers (Spotify, iTunes JP), large music databases like MusicBrainz, and speciality sites (vocadb.net ?) are doing it, and try not to reinvent the wheel". Oh, and not everyone involved belong in performer necessarily, contributor to the creative work or subject is your friend. Moebeus (talk) 14:23, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vocadb have a field dedicated to the vocaloid named "Vocalists". Just trying to figure out how to translate that to Wikidata Trade (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MusicBrainz links to the voicebank while every other site links to the character Trade (talk) 08:53, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Afaz. Which Miku do we list as the featured "artist"?@Afaz: --Trade (talk) 11:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It feels wrong to list the character as the value when identity of object in context (P4626) already exists to indicate that--Trade (talk) 11:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The full discussion of Trying to get a consensus on English label for Q30 -- "United States of America" vs "United States" has been archived, so here's a quick summary and the results.

• Background: There has never been a consensus on "United States of America" or "United States" -- despite the visibility of the topic, the length of time it has been kept as "United States of America", the persistence of the reversions back to "United States of America", and the edict issued (without consensus) on the talk page.
• Proposal: Change the label to the shorter and more commonly used "United States" over the "United States of America" on the basis that it overwhelmingly better follows Wikidata's general principles for labels:

• Consensus has been reached to change the label for Q30 to "United States": after two weeks, from Dec 23 2024 to Jan 6 2025, eight members  Support changing the label to the original "United States" while two members  Oppose the change
• Any other changes to the label, such as changing it again to "United States of America", should only be done after opening a new discussion for consensus. Otherwise the change will be being done without consensus.

Lorenmaxwell (talk) 12:05, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lorenmaxwell Thank you for taking the time to seek and reach consensus on this matter. William Graham (talk) 01:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Lorenmaxwell: Please stop spamming my watchlist on the English Wikipedia. Every week I get more unremovable spam on my English Wikipedia watchlist because someone "updated properties for aliases" on the United States Wikidata item. This has been going on for several years. I do not follow Wikidata items. I have NEVER added this to my watchlist. I have NEVER wanted to know, from having the Wikipedia Signpost on my watchlist, which people are updating the "United States" Wikidata item. Nobody seems willing or able to fix this. Nobody knows how to make it go away. I have tried every possible method to hide it. This is my last resort: please let me stop seeing these worthless twiddles. JPxG (talk) 04:40, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

JPxG (talk) 04:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think you have to do that on either your watchlist or your preferences. I don't have anything to do with your watchlist or your email preferences. Lorenmaxwell (talk) 04:45, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SPINACH Wikidata agent created this query in response to my question "who are the top 10 longest-living humans?" The query seems to be correct (the bot fails to create on in ca 4 of 5 cases) and it shows José Aguinelo dos Santos (Q18708565) as the oldest but according to Wikipedia and many sources it's Jeanne Calment. The Wikidata item values for age/birthdate/deathdate and role "oldest human" does not contain any qualifiers like disputed or that it's unconfirmed. I think something should be done. What do you think should be done (i.e. at or mainly at Q18708565)? Prototyperspective (talk) 16:34, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your query is vague "longest-living" could be interpreted as oldest living now, or longest who ever lived. Try asking 2 different and more explicit questions. Vicarage (talk) 16:39, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's intentionally vague as that's how humans ask things. The point in this tool is that it can answer such things despite of that. Moreover, you don't seem to have read the question which is about something different. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:52, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be clearer, this question is about d:Q18708565. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:53, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what is the question? Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 11:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Could something be done at Q18708565 (what do you think would be the right thing to do there)? […] does not contain any qualifiers like disputed or that it's unconfirmed Prototyperspective (talk) 12:03, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean. Why should something be done with that item? What is the problem? Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to repeat what I wrote in the original post. If you don't understand it even after my comments making it clearer, then please simply don't reply. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you won't ask an understandable question, you won't get any answers. That's your loss. But if some SPARQL query doesn't give the desired result, then fix the query instead of talking about an item. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:24, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Q: Well, what is the question? A: Could something be done at Q18708565 (what do you think would be the right thing to do there)? [see what I previously wrote:] "[…] does not contain any qualifiers like disputed or that it's unconfirmed" Reply: Well, if you won't ask an understandable question -> obviously you still haven't gotten the point that I'm asking you to please refrain from putting a larger wall of text into this thread if you fail to not understand the very simple question. Thank you. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You don't make yourself more understandable by repeating yourself. The literal but useless answer is "yes, something can be done at Q18708565". But you fail to explain why you want something done at the item, which precludes a useful answer. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 15:46, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is the question of this thread. The whole point of why I'm asking here. I didn't think repeating things several times to an elementary level is needed so again I asked to please not comment if you fail to understand the question. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:53, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Repeating an incomprehensible question is neither necessary nor desired. Instead, please explain yourself so that others can understand what you want. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 17:34, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Add sources or improve your query so it ignores Wikipedia-sourced statements. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 19:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It is not about the query. I already said it's not about the query and the query doesn't use or show Wikipedia-sourced statements. Please don't remove the wrapper template I just added for no reason. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:58, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's disrespectful to others to just hide their comments based on your personal view. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's also disrespectful to ask for the question over and over putting a wall of text into a thread even after if the simple question has been rephrased; if you don't understand it that's fine. I don't think it's appropriate to remove the wrapper templates and now the discussion is derailed here even more.

Please stay on topic and so far the only thing that has been said in this wall of text that prevents more users from participating is Add sources (not detailed and not a lot). Please don't make this meta/discussion page useless in frequently adding lots of comments that don't relate to the thread topic, it will become futile to ask about anything here or coordinate anything as a community. Prototyperspective (talk) 23:07, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think the best-quality sources are in Portuguese. There is this in English. Just adding them may not capture that it appears to be disputed and/or not recognized and Jeanne Calment has no ref for 'oldest human' (contradictory) but 4 for year of birth & year of death. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:04, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

___

For other user seeking to participate in this thread: you don't need to read all of the above. It was questions about what I'm asking. What has been suggested so far by a user is adding sources to the relevant claims.

Here's another thing: Longevity claims#Past has lots of people but Wikidata only has an item with birth and death year for one of these (the one I've linked). Should anything be done there, like creating items for these people too if they don't already exist? Prototyperspective (talk) 23:14, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Some already have birth and death dates (including Maria do Carmo Gerônimo (Q1421997) and Swami Kalyandev (Q7653194)) but only with Wikipedia as a source. They are not in the results because the query is for items with subject has role (P2868)=oldest human (Q254917) and they only have supercentenarian (Q1200828) and centenarian (Q2944360). Peter James (talk) 18:22, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks, it looked like it queried for the calculated age. I guess that should be replaced with instance of: human if anybody was to use or publish this query. If the query was adjusted to show all humans sorted by longest calculated age, it would still show all of these in the same way. This is not about the query but what should be done about the items (I thought it was just 1 item but apparently it's more). Do you have a suggestion other than merely adding sources to the claims? I think they may also need the disputed qualifier for instance. Prototyperspective (talk) 19:18, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The thing that should be done is to research sources. If you find sources that disagree we have statement disputed by (P1310) for that. Depending on the available sources, disputed claims can be deprecated. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 01:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that's all I wanted to know and if there are no other proposals about what to do soon, I think this thread could be marked as solved and archived. However, at least any time soon I'm not going to do what you described so this is also serving as a way to raise awareness about this so somebody else may do something (ie add sources and disputed by claims) to these items. Those sources may already be in the Wikipedia articles (maybe at some point there could be a more automatic addition of sources from the linked Wikipedia article albeit Longevity claims#Past wouldn't be among them and the main location of these). Prototyperspective (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

sourcing circumstances (P1480)=allegedly (Q32188232) is also a useful qualifier for longevity claims. Peter James (talk) 02:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You can also look at the pages of alleged supercentenarian (Q106991708) how they deprecated statements Difool (talk) 13:34, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

During the discussion on Wikidata:Requests for comment/Constraints for Germanies, one side argued about the needs of "their" Wikipedia, while others claimed such measures to be tagging for the renderer, which then was declared "not a policy on Wikidata". Then there's things like string not for label in WikiProject (Q105690472), used to explicitly exclude statements for usage in a Wikipedia and string for label in WikiProject (Q105690470) for the opposite. Since I'm not that experienced in Wikidata, I would like to know more about the general mindset/attitude about this: Is Wikidata just a service for the Wikipedias or is this supposed to be an "independent" project of it's own? Is there any documentation about these kinds of things, maybe also about NPOV, conflict resolution etc.?

Please forgive me, if this is written tendentiously. I really was under the impression, that things like official names of countries or League of Nation memberships would be objective criteria, and therefore I am still a bit amazed, that this created such a conflict. --Flominator (talk) 19:55, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata was started with a key role as being a backend of facts for the infoboxes of Wikipedias, though in practice the editors of the latter are distrustful of outside projects, and takeup has been very slow. WD has grown to be a database of facts used much more widely than the Wikipedia ecosystem, though clearly its quality and comprehensiveness, while better than any rival, has big gaps. Those facts need to be globally accepted, but are still aimed at a early 21st century audience. There seems to be a lot fewer procedures (and less nitpicking) here, partly because facts are less contentious than descriptive text, and with fewer editors and a vast workspace, conflicts are rarer. But as we've seen for the Germanies, its not the facts that are a problem, as the wooly nature of labels like "country", where POV will be an issue. Vicarage (talk) 20:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The answer is on WD:N, Wikidata is its own project, which means it can have objectives that goes beyond the sole objective of being a Wikipedia backend and has its own policies. But of course serving Wikipedias is one of its main reason for being and admissibility on Wikipedia is a sufficient reason for admissibility on WD of course.

Wikidata has ways to handle conflicting viewpoints by allowing to set different statements with their own sources and ways to describe the disputes, like statement disputed by (P1310) or statement supported by (P3680) , for example. author  TomT0m / talk page 10:56, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In response to feedback to our previous, now-deprecated proposal in an archived version of Project Chat, WikiProject Personal Pronouns has posted a Request for Comment. This RFC includes our proposed approach to best practices, consistent data modeling, and data cleanup for personal pronouns in Wikidata. We haven't done an RFC before, so if we need to announce this or post about it elsewhere, would someone kindly let us know about the norms or process? --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 21:58, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's generally useful to have some discussions before writing a formal RfC, so that you have a good policy proposal when you open an RfC that can then find approval. One of the issues, I pointed out over there is that Wikibase has no feature to change the datatype from item to lexeme. Datatype changes that go beyond exchanging string and external ID (which are both strings in the database) have never been done in Wikidata's history.

From looking at the issue myself, it seems that a key problem is that there are different kinds of pronouns. Maybe we should have one property for "subjective pronoun" (he,she,they) and another property for (objective pronoun) "him, her, them". Practically, the way to do that would with the problem of mixing different kinds pronouns together in the existing property. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 17:13, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKl, Clements.UWLib: The new proposal seems well thought-out to me. They are no longer proposing a datatype change, so perhaps you were reading the wrong page? In any case given this is now an RFC we should probably comment at least on the talk page there now. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just saw that a huge part of the linked page is still the old proposal. I think the standard we have is that a new proposal generally gets it's own page with a link to the old proposal. That makes it easier to interact with it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:55, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In England, there are many villages within a parish of the same name.

For example, item Great Bedwyn has P31 (instance of) statements as a village and a civil parish.

• The complexity is that 'Great Bedwyn village' (GSS code E63005235) is only a subset of the 'Great Bedwyn civil parish' (GSS code E04011723).
• Item Tottenham House is within 'Great Bedwyn civil parish', but not 'Great Bedwyn village'.
• Similarly, items Crofton Pumping Station and Crofton Locks are in the hamlet of Crofton which is in the 'Great Bedwyn civil parish' but not the 'Great Bedwyn village'.
  • Crofton hamlet has a wikipedia redirect page, but this does not have an associated wikidata identifier
• Alternatively, St Mary's Church is within 'Great Bedwyn village' and so also 'Great Bedwyn civil parish'
• Is it possible to accurately describe the relationships above using a P131 statement with a suitable qualifier?
• I would presume that the only way to accurately describe the relationships is to have a separate wikidata item for 'Great Bedwyn village' and 'Great Bedwyn civil parish', but would this also mean that separate Wikipedia pages would be needed (even if one was a redirect page etc)

MrTAP (talk) 12:21, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd agree that we should not be conflating two different entities in one Wikidata item, no matter how closely related, although that rule is often broken. You don't absolutely need a (redirect) Wikipedia page. If this division splits the sitelinks into two groups (because some articles are about the village and others about the parish, then you might want to look into Template:Interwiki extra (Q21286810), which would let you retain the whole list of interwiki links on the Wikipedia article. Bovlb (talk) 15:54, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Most parishes are not separate items, or if separate items exist are claimed to be instances of Wikimedia duplicated page (Q17362920). There are a few exceptions such as Stanhope (Q428342)/Stanhope (Q24665841), a large parish with separate Commons categories for village and parish. It's the same for places in many countries; in some the terms for the administrative areas are translated to "village". There is Great Bedwyn (Q24668528) but it is mostly not used; Q995623 is used instead. There is also Crofton (Q21697119); I added a link to the redirect. Peter James (talk) 02:13, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well yes Great Bedwyn (Q24668528) is about the parish so you could just move the statements for the parish there but as noted we normally don't have separate items. Lucywood (talk) 18:10, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am trying to avoid an edit war with Peaceray here, but I think he is dead wrong. The only rationale I can see for this edit is if we were to stop using interwiki links to Commons categories at all; I believe we have well over a million of these, and the bulk of them also use Commons category (P373), so it is not considered an unacceptable redundancy. If something else is going on here, I leave it to him to explain what he is up to. It does look like I accidentally created a second instance of P373 here with the same value he had already added, and of course I would have no problem with reverting that actual duplication. - Jmabel (talk) 21:57, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It would rather be the inverse in the feature, no more statements and only sitelinks. This doesn't seem to indicate any consensus, i'm not aware of any decision and this could break user scripts, queries and other things. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like a mistake, as the summary mentions "removing duplicate value". Peter James (talk) 00:00, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jmabel, I think we have a misunderstanding here.

1. With this edit, I inserted the value of Grave of Wesley Everest for the Commons category (P373) property of Wesley Everest Gravesite (Q131705307)
2. With this edit, Jmabel inserted a duplicate value of Grave of Wesley Everest for the Commons category (P373) property of Wesley Everest Gravesite (Q131705307)
3. With this edit, I reverted the duplicate value that Jmabel inserted with this edit summary: Undo revision 2296371805 by Jmabel (talk): User:Jmabel : removing duplicate value as initial value was added with https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q131705307&diff=2296278372&oldid=2296278263&diffmode=source. That URL linked back to edit #1 in this comment.
4. I am unsure what Peter James was doing with this edit (edit summary: Undo revision 2296372086 by Jmabel (talk)) then this edit (edit summary Undo revision 2296559840 by Peaceray (talk)), but we do seem to be back at the original value of the property, or as {{Data|item=Q131705307|property=P373}} returns, Grave of Wesley Everest.

Now as to Jmabels point, I am in absolute agreement with the reality that Wikidata is the home for interwiki links, which is why I inserted the value for Commons category (P373) in the first place.

Perhaps some of the confusion came from the Commons side of things. Here is my current sequence of editing on Commons & Wikidata regarding creating categories.

1. I create a new category on Commons.
2. I create the link to the Commons Category on the corresponding Wikidata item.
3. I add {{Wikidata infobox|qid=<value>}} to the category even though I know that is will soon not be needed (and that ArndBot will eventually come along & remove the QID) for the following reasons.
   1. Instant gratification
   2. There is a considerable lag to the linkage, & I do not like having a page that I saved showing errors, even if it is only a matter of hours.
   3. In some instances, as a visual justification for other editors, who may wonder why I am creating a category for a single image, such as for Mary Olson Farm.

Just to be clear, my insert of the value for the Commons Category on Wikidata item Wesley Everest Gravesite (Q131705307) occurred at 2025-01-08T18:52:06 & my insertion of the Wikidata Infobox at Grave of Wesley Everest occurred at 2025-01-08T21:33:54, at which time the iterwiki link lag had not subsided.

I hope this clarifies matters. Peaceray (talk) 05:41, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Peaceray: There is no lag on the Commons side if you make an interwiki link on Wikidata (not just a property) point to the Commons category.

You may well have intended your edit to remove my accidental duplicate of the Commons category (P373), but what you removed was the interwiki link. - Jmabel (talk) 06:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Sorry about that. I see my error. Mea culpa. I will note that I remember that it did seem to remove the 2nd value from the Commons category property when I viewed it afterward.

One further thing though, I do see Mike Peel's Pi bot does create the interwiki link on a Wikidata item based on the QID in the Commons Wikidata infobox, as with its edit on Bernardine Szold Fritz (Q131492006).

Going forward, I will endeavor to add the Multilingual sites – commons interwiki link at the same time as I am adding the Commons category. Peaceray (talk) 06:46, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, more confusion caused by the existence of Commons category (P373), please could we just kill that property already and use the sitelinks? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Former disk: [1], Pinging @Sjoerddebruin, Lockal:

Question was:

By the very construction of the value for Google Knowledge Graph ID (P2671) (To find the Google Knowledge Graph ID, open the page source and search for "/g/XXXX" where XXXXX is the numeric part of the ID. Alternatively, use the share functionality in the sidebar to generate a g.co/kgs/XXXXX short URL, open it and copy the kgmid= parameter from the resulting full URL.) and because the Qid is not present neither in the search string nor in the search results, I think that these links will get stalled as soon as a (wrong) label is changed to another (correct) value. In my case the value of Google Knowledge Graph ID (P2671) was added by User:Lockalbot, who is not active since 2021. BTW, I have no idea how this will work with multilingual labels.

Google Knowledge Graph ID (P2671) needs proper update or deletion, when labels change. This will not work manually (nobody will care, fixing manually is quite tedious).

So how to proceed?

• Find a bot who cares and updates / deletes after label changes
• rethink Google Knowledge Graph ID (P2671) and delete it (google search is always an alternative, no lock-in to google search).
• deprecate label changes, instead create new items

best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What item are we talking about? The Machine-Readable Entity IDs resolver could be helpful with this case. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:11, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Huggachköpfe (Q21868106) and this diff: [2]. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 13:06, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, How is that possible to receive a copy of an entity (like in json) after an entity was deleted? is there forum where can I request that data without being an admin? Thanks Ms040got (talk) 06:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! How to specify the penalty score for a football match (Q268567, Q55659738)? Maybe we should suggest a new property for the score? Mitte27 (talk) 16:53, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From Special:WhatLinksHere/Q2691960 I found Q55350317#P1363 where match interval (P6887) is a qualifier for points/goal scored by (P1363). For the score I found Q4597128#P1923 but I'm not sure about that as score method (P1443) only works as a qualifier for one of the number of points/goals/set scored (P1351) qualifiers, not for the participating team (P1923). Peter James (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think @Mitte27 has asked about the second usage, the score — unfortunately I think this example is not viable, because there score method (P1443) is a qualifier for Nigeria men's national football team (Q181930) and Cameroon men's national football team (Q175309) values, and not a qualifier for the number of points/goals/set scored (P1351) qualifier's second value. Well very well (talk) 11:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Returned from archive. Well very well (talk) 09:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Property proposal/Match Score was proposed in 2018; another proposal could be made but I'm unsure of the data type (part of the reason the 2018 proposal was withdrawn). Splitting the participating team (P1923) into multiple statements with different qualifiers is possible, but I would prefer multiple statements with number of points/goals/set scored (P1351) as a main value (which is allowed in the property constraints but not mentioned in the description) and participating team (P1923) and match interval (P6887) as qualifiers; there should probably be consistency so more discussion is needed. Peter James (talk) 12:28, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Myself I'd suggest something like just creating a new qualifier for participating team (P1923) — something like "number of penalty goals" ― to go along with the current number of points/goals/set scored (P1351) qualifier for the same property Well very well (talk) 06:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is something to be done along the line of WD:Request a query where we try to answer the requests for someone who wants a query, but for the problems like #Penalty score just above.

Someone wants to express something, we don't have a solution, or we have.

• Either we try to find a model with the current properties, we answer the question and we put the answer somewhere for documentation
• Either we answer "data not really appropriate for Wikidata" and we deny the request
• Either we suggest a model and create the necessary properties.

ADDENDUM : I forgot to mention that there is also Wikidata:WikiProject Schemas/Request an EntitySchema, which is barely used and that should fit somehow in the scheme, whether it's what I propose or not. It could be the support to document a reference model.

I think this could be a good alternative for the current "property proposal" process which is not really optimal in my view because we expect an already baked solution, and is slow and cumbersome. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:10, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Requests for data modelling are best done in the relevant Project page if active, but so few are nowadays. Posting them here seems a good alternative, as we don't get many and it gives them visibility. A new dedicated page is just something else to poll. Perhaps it could be used for discussions that get too involved for here. Vicarage (talk) 12:12, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicarage I'm not sure how the property proposal pages are active either these day, and the discussions are in practice very not visible because super fragmented property by property, usually invisible I think.

Proposals here are diluted into the other discussions either, and frequently justs leads to nothing, in my experiences a few years ago. It's difficult to get a proposal by going to a project because it does not imply the proposals if there is a concensus because the property proposals are actually to be made and this is a pain.

I think a page the property creators could easily poll with a list of properties to create if there is a concensus reached could be much more efficient and motivating for people with ideas, and could bring together peoples with problems to solutions to their problem without being lost in the jungle of the project with motivation loss. author  TomT0m / talk page 12:37, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We may work on coordinating Journalism related tasks like adding journalists(goal), determining what a notable journalist is through discussion and consensus, adding newspapers that don't exist yet. Would anyone like to help me create this Wikiproject? This is the Wikidata item for it WikiProject Journalism (Q8486805). We have 8 language Wikipedias with such Wikiprojects.

Another reason is making sure that I know what I'm adding is not suddenly gonna be deleted by deletionists. I'm not saying deletionism is bad, I'm just saying that it can often lead to chaos and wasting my time adding things that aren't notable is not worth it. Someone deleting your edits(even if they were in the wrong) is discouraging people from contributing. A Wikiproject would help new and hesitant users to add useful data while being sure they are helping. What do you think?

@Deansfa:. Are you interested to help in creating this WikiProject or do you think we should consider some things first before we start? ie. that I'm just a new user account and perhaps that I should do more edits before we create it? Journalisticape (talk) 18:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Journalisticape: Just to be clear, I don't care about deletionism or inclusionism and would like to be very far from those conversations. I created thousands of wikidata item about news articles (including NYT obituaries) and never had any issue with anyone. You just arrived, create one single item, and already spinning a false debate about "wow my item will be deleted". Sorry but bye! And please don't bring me on your debates. --Deansfa (talk) 23:25, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been working on adding various consumer electronics to Wikidata and many have several different identifiers to apply to them. I'm trying to figure out how to model these. Consumer devices will usually have many identifiers. For Android devices there are basically 3:

Device name - How consumers and advertising usually refers to an item. Can be imprecise and refer to a family of devices (e.g. Galaxy Tab4 10.1).

^ Easy to store in the Name of the item

Android codename - Codename used for the device to determine software compatibility (source). Commonly used to reference devices across wikis (e.g. LineageOS, postmarketOS).

^ This refers to code name (Q590490), but there's no Property for it. There is working title (P1638), but I'm unclear if I should use that as it doesn't say it applies to devices or engineering efforts.

Model number - One or more model numbers may apply to a single device name, sometimes there's multiple because of different markets or minor feature differences (e.g. color). These are commonly used to look up manufacturer specs/documentation or find the exact product when shopping online.

^ This could be product code (Q57446692) or part number (Q3879409), I think they're just different terminology for the same concept. There was a proposal to add a part_number property, but it stalled out. It be useful to have short descriptions associated with each model number.

So for any physical Android device, it will have exactly one of each of these. However, in Wikidata, I'd probably organize it such that there is 1 Device with the name, it has a codename, and then could have multiple Model Numbers that apply to it. This is how the postmarketOS wiki is organized and it works pretty well. So for example:

Samsung Galaxy Tab 10.1 Wi-Fi:

• Android codename - matissewifi
• Model number - SM-T530, SM-T530X

Google Pixel 3a:

• Android codename - sargo
• Model numbers - G020A, G020E, G020B, G020G, & G020H

I was thinking to use name (P2561) here and applies to part (P518) with code name (Q590490) & product code (Q57446692) respectively, but that doesn't seem right as those aren't really "parts" of the smartphone, right? Would the better things to do be adding these two new properties? BasilicumTree (talk) 20:41, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just edited {{Chat header}} because a class=… was shown in the browser. Not sure if it is the right fix or if the issue is more in an edit of {{Box}} however. No motivation to dig more. Any idea ? author  TomT0m / talk page 12:19, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@RogueScholar seems to have changed Box recently in a way that affects parameter 1. Bovlb (talk) 12:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata in the
week leading up to 2025-01-13. Missed the previous one? See issue #661

Events

• Upcoming events:
  • The next Wikidata+Wikibase office hours will take place on Wednesday, 17:00 UTC, 15th January 2025 (18:00 Berlin time) in the Wikidata Telegram group. The Wikidata and Wikibase office hours are online events where the development team presents what they have been working on over the past quarter, and the community is welcome to ask questions and discuss important issues related to the development of Wikidata and Wikibase.
  • Join the Wikidata Training Event 2025 organised by Wikimedia Botswana UG for Wikidata enthusiasts of all levels. Starts 18 Jan 10:00am CAT (UTC+2), registration required.

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

• Blogs
  • Updates on the Wikimedian-in-Residence at the Biodiversity Heritage Library focusing on Structured Data on Commons and Wikidata
  • Wikidata module for the Hidden Figures CURE - The newly published Wikidata module for the Hidden Figures CURE teaches undergraduates to use Wikidata for uncovering and highlighting the contributions of hidden figures in natural history, such as women, people of color, and Indigenous peoples.
  • Memory of the World: Ways forward - Efforts to improve the representation of UNESCO's Memory of the World (MOW) international register on Wikidata include new articles, enhanced data quality, and training on creating structured data. Key contributions involve updating Wikipedia and Wikidata entries, addressing data inconsistencies, and expanding the visibility of MOW inscriptions across languages.
  • Empowering Multilingual Knowledge: The Journey Behind the 1-Click-Info Extension Powered by Wikidata - Introduces the 1-Click Data extension for your browser. A project funded by the Arcadia grant through Wikimedia Deutschland and fiscally sponsored by the Dagbani Wikimedians user group.
  • Public domain visibility on Wikidata (in Catalan). The article discusses how Wikidata is being used to enhance the visibility of public domain works by integrating copyright information and making it easily accessible.
• Videos
  • Tracking Looted Art with Graphs, Graphs and Networks in the Humanities 2022 Conference
  • How Wikimedia Uses AI to Vectorize its Knowledge Base
• Presentations: Wikibase e Wikidata per lo studio dell'epigrafia greca (in Italian, i.e. Wikibase and Wikidata for the study of Greek epigraphy), presentation at SAEG (Advanced Seminar of Greek Epigraphy) IX in Rome, 10 January 2025, by Pietro Ortimini, Anna Clara Maniero Azzolini, Epìdosis - slides

Tool of the week

• Dungeon Of Knowledge - is a roguelike game with Items generated from Wikidata that lets you crawl through the Dungeon of Knowledge in a classic ASCII interface. (toot) (blog)

Other Noteworthy Stuff

• Zita Ursula Zage has joined the Software Communication team (SCoT) at Wikimedia Deutschland as an intern until the end of June 2025. Welcome Zita!
• VIAF (cf. Q54919 and P214) underwent a relevant change of interface on January 10; the way of visualizing clusters in JSON format has changed in comparison with present OCLC documentation and e.g. http://viaf.org/viaf/102333412/viaf.json doesn't work anymore; this broke most or all Wikidata gadgets using VIAF data; in the absence of official communications from OCLC, developers are trying to understand if the new VIAF interface is stable before changing their gadgets accordingly

Newest properties and property proposals to review

• Newest General datatypes:
  • bequest income (the sum a organisations receives from bequests/legacies in a timeframe)
  • taxon known by this common name (taxon item of which this common name refers)
  • homonymous taxon (taxon item of which the taxon name is an exact homonym)
  • role named in credits as (use as qualifier to indicate how the object's role was named in the credits of its respective work)
  • meeting of (subject is a meeting or session of this organization)
  • organisation tax status (jurisdiction specific tax status of organisations like non-profits)
• Newest External identifiers: Collectie Nederland ID, Hachette author ID, CamerounWeb person ID, Hindi Shabdamitra entry ID, OpenSSF Practices ID, Japanese Health Insurance System Facility ID, Centre d'Etudes Picasso ID, CUATM statistical code, CUATM unique identification code, JudaicaLink person (GND) ID, teams.by national team ID, Eyrolles author ID, Mémoire des avocats ID, BCU Kirundi-English Dictionary ID, Estonian–Latvian Dictionary ID, WHL player ID, Indo-European Lexicon ID, Battle.net game ID, Singapore Unique Entity Number, AniSearch character ID, Three Decks conflict ID, Berlinische Galerie object ID, ThePWHL.com player ID, Play:Right genre ID, Resistance in Belgium ID, Paris Match ID, Kyiv Independent topic, Newmark Albanian-English Dictionary ID, Wellcome Collection concept ID, Amsterdam Monumentenstad ID, VG247 game ID, DNCI label ID, National Football Teams.com stadium ID, Kamus Pelajar ID, Dictionary of Norwegian Translators ID, MACM artist ID, Lutris company ID, hockey1946.ru player ID, DOSBoxWiki article, NBA G League player ID, World Women's Snooker player ID, footballdatabase.eu match ID, GERS ID, Comprehensive Historical Dictionary of Ladino entry ID, SBOID, Game Vortex software ID, Syrian Memory Institution person ID, Mishramilan catalog ID, myCast work ID, Hessian Biography person (GND) ID, Beaux-Arts ID, Gaia ID
• New General datatypes property proposals to review:
  • About box (Screenshot of the About Box of the respective software (contains important information such as authors, license, version number and year(s) and is included in almost every software))
  • nomenclatural type of (taxon item of which this item is the taxonomic type (name-bearing type), e.g. the family for which this genus is the type, the genus for which this species is the type, the taxon for which this type specimen is the type, ect...)
  • World Heritage type (Propriety of World heritage site : the Type (Cultural, Natural, Mixed))
  • DVD region code (DVD release is restricted to region code)
  • number of shading units (number of shading units in a graphics processing unit)
  • Archaeological National Register code (identifier of elements of the National archaeological register of Moldova)
  • presented works (works of art performed, displayed or presented at a given event)
  • identifiant REGAFI ()
  • Maximum beam energy (Maximum beam energy of a particle accelerator)
  • Accused of (Crime or other misdeed a person has been accused of, but ''not proven or convicted'')
  • hat gespendet (Amount of money donated to a person or organization)
  • name starts with (The name that this qualifies, the full contents of which are unknown, is known to start with these characters.)
  • духовный сан (formal styles of address used for members of the clergy)
  • A2B2 user ID (User ID on a2b2.org)
  • Source language (headword languge of dictionary)
  • Entry height (Height of the entrance above ground level for boarding public transport vehicles.)
  • location code (the location code of the location item. Should be used with qualifier property {{Q|P459}} to specify which location code system being used.)
  • DIF historia player ID (Identifier for a sportsperson connected to Djurgårdens IF on difhistoria.se (official site))
  • number of texture mapping units (number of texture mapping units in a graphics processing unit)
  • number of render output units (number of render output units in a graphics processing unit)
  • number of ray tracing cores (number of ray tracing cores in a graphics processing unit)
• New External identifier property proposals to review: Algeria Press Service tag ID (French), Algeria Press Service tag ID (English), Algeria Press Service tag ID (Arabic), Lyricfind artist ID, HonestGamers game ID, Identifiant d'un(e) auteurice sur le site Mille ans de littérature d'oc, Kamus Dewan Edisi Tiga, identifiant Registre national des gels, Identifiant Cimetières de France, Ech-Chaab tag ID, Shamela Algeria person ID, enterprise number (Germany), Ohio University ArchivesSpace Subject ID, Progetto Euploos ID, Nafziger Order of Battle ID, DataGov dataset, ERR keyword ID, Ohio University ArchivesSpace Agent ID, Russian Football National League player ID, Inventory of Natural Heritage site ID, Inventory of Natural Heritage tree ID, Spanish-German Dictionary ID, UAF match ID, Identifiant d'un(e) journaliste sur Francetvinfo, identifiant Pappers d'un dirigeant, Database of Canada's Early Women Writers ID, Canadian Writing Research Collaboratory ID, SearchCulture.gr ID, Cinema Belgica venue ID, Cinema Belgica person ID, Cinema Belgica film ID, Cinema Belgica company ID, Cinema Belgica censorship ID, Archaeological Cadastre (Greece) ID, Hankook Ilbo tag ID, Rijksmuseum ID, SOIUSA code, MetalTabs.com track ID, MUBI Festival ID, rutracker.org page ID, Park Merwestein Bomenwijzer ID, RPG Maker game ID, RateMyProfessors ID, PubMed author ID, BodyMeasurements.org ID, Kvikmyndavefurinn, Kvikmyndavefurinn person ID, Bluepages article ID, Kvikmyndavefurinn company ID, Archaeological Cadastre (Greece) info ID, A Dictionary of Geology and Earth Sciences entry ID, Wikishia item ID, EHIS educational institution ID, Bertsolaritzaren Datu Basea ID, A Dictionary of Sociology entry ID, A Dictionary of Cultural Anthropology entry ID, A Dictionary of Geography entry ID, DGLAi ID, Jeune Afrique person ID, norskeflyplasser.no-ID, taz topic ID, Euronews topic ID (English), Euronews topic ID (French), Euronews topic ID (Spanish), Euronews topic ID (Arabic), Roman Inscriptions of Britain Online ID, Unine thesis id, Enpedia ID, Dizionario Biografico della Calabria Contemporanea ID, Bahamut Animation Crazy Serial Number, Finnish Olympic Committee ID, Team Norway profile ID (new), NOC of Belarus champion ID (new), JOC profile ID (new), Répertoire du patrimoine bâti de Québec

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

• Query examples:
  • Search for Items where description begins with capitalised letters, filter by language, country of citizenship and occupation
  • Wikidata Items using the 'smells of' property
• Newest WikiProjects: Writing Systems aims to standardize and enhance Wikipedia's coverage of writing systems and related subjects.
• Newest database reports: Some statistics about sitelinks
• Showcase Items: The Night Watch (Q219831) - 1642 painting by Rembrandt
• Showcase Lexemes: дополнение (L107276) - Rusian noun (dopólnenie) that can mean "addition", "supplement" or an "an object"

Development

• Wikidata Query Service UI: We fixed a long-standing issue with missing edge labels in graph visualisations (phab:T317702)
• Wikibase REST API: We implemented a proof of concept for a search endpoint you can try out.
• EntitySchemas: We’re working on language fallback for the heading on EntitySchema pages (phab:T228423)
• Language codes: We cleaned up language codes in WikibaseLexeme after moving some of them to CLDR (phab:T352922)

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.

Weekly Tasks

• Add labels, in your own language(s), for the new properties listed above.
• Contribute to the showcase Item and Lexeme above.
• Govdirectory weekly focus country: Greenland
• Summarize your WikiProject's ongoing activities in one or two sentences.
• 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!

· Previous issue · Unsubscribe · Mohammed Abdulai (WMDE) talk · MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:25, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there anybody here with catalogue editor rights who can add ‎eHLFL ID (P13079) to https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/catalog/3981 and add graphclasses.org ID (P13104) to https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/catalog/6380? D3rT!m (talk) 11:44, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! In my recent editing I encountered this unusually long item title: planned mass deportation of illegal immigrants under the second presidency of Donald Trump (Q131189861). This plan has been given a title as "Operation Aurora" by Donald Trump and reliable sources. The term "Operation Aurora" also conflicts with the item Operation Aurora (Q1063139), a cyberattack from nearly twenty years ago.

Since I am unfamiliar with Wikidata, I looked into how a move would be proposed and performed, searching "move" in the search box and seeing multiple "Move" items with same or similar titles (for example: Q285547, Q3109221, Q84413313, etc.)

Given the many references and for simplicity sake (including typical naming conventions), should we change the title of Q131189861 to Operation Aurora?

Thanks for any replies or suggestions! WMrapids (talk) 18:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Different items can have the same label on Wikidata (however the combination of label and description in a given language must be unique). I don't see the problem in having a long label for the item, though. If you do make the change, please set the current label as an alias. M2Ys4U (talk) 18:47, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Was there a planned mass deportation of illegal immigrants under the first presidency of Donald Trump? Otherwise it seems redundant Trade (talk) 18:58, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@M2Ys4U, Trade: Thanks you two! Just wanted some clarification before I went ahead with the new label.--WMrapids (talk) 23:09, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]