Wikidata

Wikidata:Project chat

Latest comment: 1 hour ago by MediaWiki message delivery in topic Wikidata weekly summary #661

Edit

Deleted items still in use elsewhere

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago42 comments11 people in discussion

Looking at items listed in deleted. Wikidata:Database reports/Deleted Wikidata entities used in SDC - there are 40 deleted items with over 100 uses in Commons; and 78 with over 50.

A systematic, collaborative, review of the remaining items listed in our report, starting with the most-used, would be wise. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:09, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Administrators have been asking the Wikidata development team for ages for better tools and access to usage in structured data for Commons, no progress has been made to prevent this in the future. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 20:26, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I was able to glean all of the above information without such tools. While they might be nice to have, we can do better than we currently do, with what we already have. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:58, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
The deletion comment for Q232734 says "Does not meet the notability policy: RfD: See Talk:Q232734 conflation between Q105893254 and Q15924669" (links added). If it was a long-standing conflation, then we should update uses to point to the correct item, not retain it or merge it.
I agree that we need better tools for deletion. They should include: checking for in-links, SBC, and other client projects such as OpenStreetMap; checking history for recent changes; checking for recreation of existing items; notifying creators/editors. Bovlb (talk) 21:22, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
We still can't see what Talk:Q232734 said; nor examine the history to see at what point conflation might have occurred, nor what the item represented when it was created. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:23, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
The item was created in 2012 with a lot of sitelinks. Looking at the *current* contents of those sitelinks, I see at least five related but distinct concepts (city, hill, hot pools, thermal springs, travertine lake, place/site, disambiguation). Bovlb (talk) 23:22, 28 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Note that the numbers in that report are too high, it's counting most statements twice. - Nikki (talk) 13:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Now fixed. ---MisterSynergy (talk) 23:58, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Q123688861 is supposedly c:Category:Stanley Cup visits Yosemite (July 3, 2011) which has 700 files.
more importantly, that event made the news on nbc, abc, nesn, etc. : https://www.google.com/search?q=Stanley+Cup+Yosemite .
it's frustrating that time and time again wikidata users dismiss commons community's needs and delete such items. RoyZuo (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Fralambert: because of deletion of Q123688861 --Emu (talk) 20:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
We don't want to delete items that are in use any more than you do, but WMDE and the WMF are still failing (or outright refusing) to give us the tools we need to work effectively. We've been asking for SDC usage to be visible in Wikidata for at least five years (phab:T239628, phab:T334352). We've been asking for better/usable access to the Commons query service for at least four years (phab:T265891, phab:T297995). We've been asking for a way to override messages locally that works for all languages for at least eleven years (phab:T50956). - Nikki (talk) 10:23, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
The deletion policy is crystal clear - SDC is not even a consideration. If you wish to change the policies you're welcome to do so (as part of a separate thread), but otherwise I believe this discussion is concluded. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:26, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Firstly, you are wrong: the deletion policy says an item may not be deleted if it is notable; and the notability policy says an item may exist if "It fulfills a structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful." It does not say that those statements or items need to be on Wikidata rather than Commons.
Secondly, even if you are right, there is the issue of deleting an item used hundreds or even thousands of times in a sister project, without discussing with or even notifying that project. Nor even updating the affected items there.
Thirdly, an active discussion is not ended just because you say so. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:43, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Oh come on, you don’t need to be an expert on statutory interpretation to realize that items in WD:N #3 can’t possibly mean “each and everything on every project ever”. --Emu (talk) 17:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Emu: On Commons, we are pretty careful not to delete images that are in use on Wikidata, unless there is a copyright issue and we simply cannot keep the image. This comes up almost daily for images that might otherwise be deleted. I don't necessarily think a single use on SDC should be enough reason to keep an item on Wikidata but 50+ uses? Please keep in mind: WMF has been pushing Commons to move more and more data exclusively to SDC, often against the wishes of a lot of the Commons editors. It is particularly hard for us to cooperate if a sister project is liable to throw that data away, especially in a manner that does not let us readily determine what was removed.
@Sjoerddebruin: says the tools are not there. Isn't it possible to run a query on SDC to see if an item is in use? Could such a tool be made readily available so that it could be checked before deletion?
Anyone: I'm guessing there must be some overlap of Commons administrators and Wikidata administrators. Does anyone know who those might be, so that on Commons we have someone to go to who can examine deleted items referenced by SDC so that we don't have to go to the Internet Archive to try to work out what was removed from SDC?
Please ping me if replying. I don't maintain a watchlist on Wikidata. - Jmabel (talk) 18:35, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: "Isn't it possible to run a query on SDC to see if an item is in use? Could such a tool be made readily available so that it could be checked before deletion" A simple search on Commons will suffice; example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:14, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
So even simpler. It should be pretty trivial to have a gadget that would link that search from any given item on Wikidata. - Jmabel (talk) 19:32, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel I was just responding to this specific claim. I can see the problem. I’m surprised to hear that a Wikidata item is relevant to Commons notability and to be honest, this comes as a shock to me because it almost invites spam. --Emu (talk) 20:12, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
"a Wikidata item is relevant to Commons notability" Who said that? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:56, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
see above: On Commons, we are pretty careful not to delete images that are in use on Wikidata --Emu (talk) 21:00, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
It isn't exactly "notability" as such: it's just that we are pretty careful not to delete images that are in use by other projects on the basis that they are out of what Commons would usually consider its scope. And, yes, we have occasionally run into some at least borderline abuse: at least one user who created Wikidata items for non-notable family members and then used that to try to defend keeping the images on Commons. Consequently, we put a little less weight on it if the uploader is the one who added it to Wikidata, and especially if, well, it looks like there is an overall pattern of abuse. But usually our approach is "get it off of the sister project first if you want it deleted as out of Commons' scope." - Jmabel (talk) 23:55, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: The list of users who are administrators at both Wikidata and Commons is here, from what I see it is pretty much accurate except for Jarekt. Specifically, we are talking about Ebrahim, Jianhui67, Lymantria, Mike Peel, Minorax, Multichill, Romaine, Ymblanter (myself), and علاء Ymblanter (talk) 21:30, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
It's not complete, e.g. The_Squirrel_Conspiracy Bovlb (talk) 21:33, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: We're not likely to throw away items. If you look at the items that are deleted it's all items that _should_ be deleted. Effectively empty items with only a sitelink to a Commons category and such. In the case of items with no sitelinks, why would there be links to a non-notable item? If Commons needs items that are not Wikidata-notable then they should be stored on SDC. Infrastruktur (talk) 09:56, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
At least now we know the cause of your misunderstandings: There is no "stored on SDC". SDC uses - by design - items "stored" on Wikidata. Also, as stated clearly above, Q232734 was far from an "empty item with only a sitelink to a Commons category". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:13, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
The reply was in response to Jmabels comment "WMF has been pushing Commons to move more and more data exclusively to SDC". I think this is a good idea, Commons get to do as they wish without having to consider Wikidata and they don't cause maintenance hassle for Wikidata administrators. Commons administrators will also be able to check any deletions that affect SDC.
It's not reasonable to hinder deletion of non-notable items just because they are in use on SDC and it's not reasonable to expect Wikidata administrators to clean up the mess on Commons. The example I posted Q124025756 demonstrates that it was used incorrectly in any case. I expect the vast majority of cases to be like this. It's also not reasonable to expect administrators to do extra timeconsuming checks on SDC and OpenStreetMap that will seriously hamper the deletion efforts on Wikidata.
As for the non-trivial conflation case you pointed to, this is already hard enough to fix without having to also deal with items on Commons that link to the conflation. Since you care so much, are you also volunteering to do the cleanup on SDC? Infrastruktur (talk) 15:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
"Commons get to do as they wish without having to consider Wikidata" What part of "There is no 'stored on SDC'. SDC uses - by design - items "stored" on Wikidata." did you not understand? Your original statement was "If Commons needs items that are not Wikidata-notable then they should be stored on SDC." My point stands. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
You've constructed a strawman. The "design" of SDC can be changed if it needs to. This "design" also doesn't get to dictate policy on Wikidata. The added maintenance burden might have been unintended, but that doesn't mean we just have to accept it. As people have suggested, making SDC largely self-contained is one way to fix the situation. Another alternative, now that we have a list over deleted items in use at SDC, is to undelete every single one of them at regular intervals and not touch them, just let them be all junky and broken. This will not work if there is a conflation though since they need to be fixed on Wikidata, but it's not Wikidata administrators job to fix 1000 items on SDC that may now point to the wrong item. Infrastruktur (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
That's not what a strawman is; but if you wish to change way both Wikidata and Commons work and interact, at the most fundamental technical level, you're welcome to do so (as part of a separate thread). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
IMO the only reasonable approach right now, given that effective tools for admins are missing, is to restore all items which appear on this report using a bot. ---MisterSynergy (talk) 00:01, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Speaking as a Commons admin, I think that is overkill, and frankly there are enough of these that we wouldn't get to review them in a timely manner. Unless one of the people who is an admin on both projects would like to get deeply into analyzing this, wWhat I'd much prefer for a starter is to sort Wikidata:Database reports/Deleted Wikidata entities used in SDC in descending order by SDC uses and undelete the items that have, say, 40 or more uses (40 is arbitrary; if someone wants a different cutoff, fine). That would allow us to sanely get a look at what some of these items are that we lost in a straightforward on-wiki manner (instead of trying to make sense of this from the Internet Archive), and get a better handle on whether this was mostly junk or whether there is a real, extensive problem here. - Jmabel (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: Adding P31 tracking claim to the undeleted items should be doable, that way there is even a chance the item will get fixed on SDC at some point. Does "non-notable item in use at SDC" sound like a good name? And what should it be a subclass of, Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446) and MediaWiki non-main namespace page (Q118555179)? Infrastruktur (talk) 09:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Please use P5008 as host property for these claims instead of P31. ---MisterSynergy (talk) 11:23, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) seems sensible. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:05, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ok. Wikiproject Undeleted items in use on SDC (Q131620292) created for the purpose of tracking items. Add sitelinks to WikiProject pages or change the fingerprint as you like. Infrastruktur (talk) 12:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
See below for statistics. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Recently undeleted Q124025756 ("Category:Angelique Kerber at the 2014 Nürnberger Versicherungscup") which I previously deleted, so you can have a look. It was used for "significant event" on SDC a total of 74 places, which is semantic nonsense. It will probably be deleted again soon. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:14, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Third time of making the point: There is the issue of deleting an item used hundreds or even thousands of times in a sister project, without discussing with or even notifying that project. Nor even updating the affected items there. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Continuation of Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2024/11#Deletion of used/referenced wikidata objects. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Statistics - At the time of writing, there are:

  • 1 item with 16682 uses
  • 23 items with 100 or more uses
  • 51 items showing 40 or more uses on commons
  • 94 showing 20 or more
  • 174 showing 10 or more
  • 255 showing 5 or more
  • 372 showing 3 or more
  • 1237 in total

As noted above, there is some double counting, cause unknown, but the exact extent of this is also unknown, and the existence of odd-numbered totals means it cannot be a simple case of doubling. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

The double counting was referring to the number of SDC uses per deleted item (not the total number of deleted items in use), and it is fixed since yesterday evening. As much as I am aware, the numbers in the report are now correct. ---MisterSynergy (talk) 12:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Noted, thank you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Identifiers about Wikipedia articles

edit
Latest comment: 7 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

How do we show that an identifier is about an Wikipedia article as opposed to the real-life subject itself?

https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/bhutanese-passport Trade (talk) 01:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

If the Wikipedia article is notable, why not creating an item about it ? author  TomT0m / talk page 07:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I would discourage linking to memes that are not directly related or particularly relevant to the item or other common sense issues. Example: The item for Shaq has no links to memes but the item for rickrolling does. Infrastruktur (talk) 08:37, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
I dont think you can really seperate the article from the meme in this case Trade (talk) 12:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Weekly Summary #660

edit
Latest comment: 7 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata in the
week leading up to 2024-12-30. Missed the previous one? See issue #659

Welcome to 2023’s Final Weekly Summary!

A huge thank you to everyone who contributed to the newsletter this year! 🎉 Each of your contributions, whether big or small, has made a difference and has helped us create a vibrant and informative resource for the Wikidata community. 🙏 Let's continue building and sharing knowledge together in the coming year! 🙌✨

Discussions

  • Open request for oversight: Ameisenigel (RfP scheduled to end at 6 January 2025 21:52 UTC)

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

  • Papers
    • Library Data in Wikimedia Projects: Case Study from the Czech Republic by Jansová, L., Maixnerová, L., & Š´tastná, P. (2024). "The paper outlines the collaboration between the National Library of the Czech Republic and Wikimedia since 2006, focusing on linking authority records with Wikipedia articles and training librarians and users. By 2023, the National Library provided most of its databases under a CC0 license, launched a "Wikimedians in Residence" program, and collaborated on projects involving linked data and using authority records in Wikidata. This partnership has enhanced their cooperation for mutual benefit, identifying key factors for their successful long-term collaboration."
    • How have you modelled my gender? Reconstructing the history of gender representation in Wikidata by Melis, B., Fioravanti, M., Paolini, C., & Metilli, D. (2024). "The paper traces the evolution of gender representation in Wikidata, showing how the community has moved from a binary interpretation of gender to a more inclusive model for trans and non-binary identities. The Wikidata Gender Diversity project (WiGeDi) timeline highlights the significant changes influenced by external historical events and the community's increased understanding of gender complexity."
  • Videos: Arabic Wikidata Days 2024 - Data Science Course - First Practical Session: Wikibase-CLI Tool (part 1, part 2) by Saeed Habishan. "The Wikibase-CLI enables command-based interaction with Wikidata using shell scripts and JavaScript. The tool runs on NodeJS and enables automatic reading and editing of Wikidata."

Tool of the week

  • WikiORA - is a tool designed for gene over-representation analysis. It integrates data from Wikidata, Wikipedia, Gene Ontology, and PanglaoDB to help researchers identify significantly enriched gene sets in their data.

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • Most of the development team staff are still taking a break, so no development happened.

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

Conflicting "official" lake names

edit
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi, there is a Swedish lake with two names, each by offical sources: at Q10681019 it is named "Stora Horredssjön" with "also known as 'Stora Hornsjön'" - matching the name for that lake at lansstyrelsen.se and linked to the correct Swedish lake ID (SE636512-129668) and the corresponding EU Surface Water Body Code SE636512-129668. The latter uses the second named. In a separate wikidata entry Q49311762, it has the name "Stora Hornsjön", only - matching the naming on the lantmäteriet map. Which one is considered more authoritative? Should they be merged and listed as "also known as"? Uli@wiki (talk) 16:10, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

I merged Q49311762 into Q10681019. I'm not sure which name should be the main label and which should be in "also known as" - Q49311762 was based on GNS Unique Feature ID (P2326), which is unreliable for names, coordinates and feature types (as is GeoNames ID (P1566), with some exceptions), but Lake ID (Sweden) (P761) and EU Surface Water Body Code (P2856) use different names. Peter James (talk) 23:24, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! I might actually write to lansstyrelsen for clarification. Maybe they'll even answer. Uli@wiki (talk) 23:50, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Distributed by for a television series

edit
Latest comment: 5 days ago5 comments4 people in discussion

I was checking Whose Line Is It Anyway? (Q922713) and I found a constraint issue concerning distributed by (P750):

The entities Whose Line Is It Anyway? and Hulu should be contemporary to be linked through distributed by, but the latest end value of Whose Line Is It Anyway? is 4 February 1999 and the earliest start value of Hulu is March 2007.

How can I work around this problem?-- Carnby (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

The overlap requirement makes no sense, as creative works keep being distributed for ever. I suggest you make that point at distributed by (P750), and if no-one objects, remove the constraint. Obviously the first distributor makes the most difference to the project, but that's not required by the property. 2001: A Space Odyssey (Q103474) has 4 distributors. Vicarage (talk) 21:03, 30 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
Is Hulu even the distributor of this show? Film/tv distributors (en:Film distributor) are specialised companies; and streaming services like Hulu or Netflix don't automatically fall under that label simply by streaming a film/show. In some cases, Hulu might indeed be the distributor (either worldwide or in a certain country/region), but in many others they will have acquired the streaming rights from a film distribution company. Seems like there are a lot of these erronous statements that were added just because the item had an ID from a streaming service, but without any evidence whatsoever that the streaming company was actually also the distributor in these cases. To state that a particular show was available on a service, broadcast by (P3301) is the more suitable property. --2A02:810B:581:C300:50E9:90E8:D2C2:7B08 01:17, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
  Done Good workaraound, thank you very much.-- Carnby (talk) 11:22, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply
We should probably do the same with every other item that lists Hulu as the distributor because they stream the work Trade (talk) 04:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Merge request: Biggersville (Q122544740) into Biggersville (Q43080778)

edit
Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

These are the same entity. I'm not positive how to use the tools to merge them. Lorenmaxwell (talk) 04:07, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

  Done Apologies for the duplicate creation. --Quesotiotyo (talk) 04:31, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

Query to find uncategorized Commons images used on a Wikipedia

edit
Latest comment: 6 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello, before I added a category, this file was uncategorized on Commons, but was used on a page on the Greek language wikipedia. Maybe using Petscan?, is there a way of searching say all pages in the category Museums in Greece, and its subcategories, to list images used on those pages that are uncategorized in Commons? Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 06:57, 31 December 2024 (UTC)Reply

MergeItem

edit
Latest comment: 5 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Please merge the following items: Q42896436 is redundant except for the commons link. Q7915654 is connected to two wikis. Thanks in adavance! --Känguru1890 (talk) 01:10, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

  Not done: appears to be two distinct concepts. Varghese (Q42896436) is the general surname, while Varghese (Q7915654) appears to be specifically about the Syriac-Malayalam mixed-use name. — Huntster (t @ c) 15:26, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Two entries to one article question

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Hello. Del Martin has two wikidata entries: a solo entry and Del Martin and Phyllis Lyon, where she is combined with her partner. Her English Wikipedia article is for her and Phyllis, which is what the second wikidata entry points to. However, this means her solo record does not link to her Wikipedia article (and can't, since only one item can point to one article). Is there a way to address this? I have to imagine this happens to other "duos", but I had trouble finding an example. This same situation applies to Phyllis Lyon as well. Thanks! CaptainAngus (talk) 15:39, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Also, I want to point out that merging might not be the answer, because for some of non-English wiki's, each person has some individual articles as well. Not sure if there is another option I'm overlooking? Thanks again! CaptainAngus (talk) 15:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@CaptainAngus: I've added redirect links to both Del Martin (Q445893) and Phyllis Lyon (Q15056022). — Huntster (t @ c) 15:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thank you very much! CaptainAngus (talk) 18:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
It's not an ideal solution, but you might look into using Template:Interwiki extra (Q21286810). When placed on an individual Wikipedia article, it will then use additional Wikidata items as a fallback source for inter-wiki links. Bovlb (talk) 19:03, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Best articles/items to go by?

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago7 comments5 people in discussion

On Wikipedia, the Featured or even Good articles are expected to represent the best practices of the wiki. The wiki also has layout guides specific to a subject. Are there no similar concepts here on Wikidata that would make it easier to figure out the full list and extent of statements and qualifiers that are appropriate or preferable for an item in the same category (e.g. a video game item)? Daisy Blue (talk) 19:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Daisy Blue: I was asking about it in the past and it would be helpful to see what else you can add to other items, but as I know there is nothing like this. You can only check randomly the most linked items or items with the most labels or descriptions. Eurohunter (talk) 19:32, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
There are Schemas, but I'm not sure how useful/usable they are right now. M2Ys4U (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Common properties and how to use these are often listed on the respective WikiProjects, cf. Wikidata:WikiProject Video games/Properties for video games. --Dorades (talk) 20:12, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Nice! That's close to WP:VGLAYOUT on Wikipedia. Daisy Blue (talk) 20:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Is Wikidata:Showcase items what you are asking about? Ymblanter (talk) 20:21, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Pretty much. Thanks. There aren't many items listed, but at least it's something to go by. Daisy Blue (talk) 20:31, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

jury duty (Q1714040)

edit
Latest comment: 4 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Which of the photos in Category:Jury duty would be best to illustrate the item? Trade (talk) 22:06, 1 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Most of them look more suitable for liminal space (Q115470079), is there more high quality photography on Flickr or made by the US Government? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 08:31, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Adding a new name for a ship

edit
Latest comment: 3 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

At Cape Flattery (Q83651725) I tried to add "Category:Seafreeze America (ship, 1990)" (without the quotation marks) as a second value for category for ship name (P7782). I get a message "No match was found" and it won't add it. Commons:Category:Seafreeze America (ship, 1990) certainly exists, I recently created it. Is there some sort of time lag before Wikidata can use it? - Jmabel (talk) 07:57, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi. P7782 expects a Q-item so I polished the one you added and added it to the item. The modelling is somewhat convoluted. Infrastruktur (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
And it turns out that isn't the ship I photographed. There is apparently more than one Seafreeze America, as Clindberg was kind enough to point out to me. - Jmabel (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: I've sorted out the WD items (your vessel is Seafreeze America (Q7866585)) and fixed the Commons category. — Huntster (t @ c) 18:14, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Huntster: thanks! I would have gotten there, but was out for my morning coffee. - Jmabel (talk) 18:28, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Jmabel: heh, no worries. I see ship stuff, I work on ship stuff. — Huntster (t @ c) 04:37, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Kenneth Clark (Q371258)

edit
Latest comment: 2 days ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Our data for Kenneth Clark records his place of burial as the Church of St Peter and St Paul, Saltwood, Kent. I think this is entirely accurate but I cannot find a usable source to support the claim on Wikipedia. The only source I can find is the, unusable, Find A Grave. Do we have any further information on the source for the Wikidata statement? It's currently saying "no references". KJP1 (talk) 09:03, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

It was manually added by @Rouletteer here, perhaps they can indicate their source. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:27, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@KJP1: Find-a-Grave should be usable on Wikipedia, given that there's an image [1] (and the gravestone describes him as "Art Historian", so there's no chance of confusion). Essentially you're citing the gravestone, with FG as a convenience link. (See also the various RS discussion for FG linked from en:Wikipedia:RSPFINDAGRAVE). Given that it's the local parish church for Saltwood Castle, there's no surprise about finding him there, either. If anyone pushes back, they're elevating rules-for-the-sake-of-rules over any assessment of actual reliability, contrary to WP:IAR. Jheald (talk) 13:50, 4 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Jheald - That's very helpful. I've always steered clear as it's classified as "generally unreliable", being user-driven, Wikipedia:RSPFINDAGRAVE, but I shall try it and see. Thanks and regards. KJP1 (talk) 13:57, 4 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Fediverse WikiData-Bridge-Bot API

edit
Latest comment: 1 day ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello,

I'm currently developing a social-Bot, which people on Mastodon can send SPARQL-queries to to retrieve data form Wikidata (https://se-bridge.org/). However, SPARQL-queries are too complicated for the average user. The newly-released SPINACH-bot could be of great help here.

The idea is that users can send natural language requests to the bot and the bot replies with the information. Also, the bot would be rate-limited and after a number of requests, the user would be requested to also send some knowledge, which is then send to the WikiData-API (which would benefit both Mastodon and WikiData).

Is there a way to access the SPINACH-bot through an API? Or another way? Bluebbberry123 (talk) 20:18, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Honestly an easier way to solve the SPARQL issue would probably be just to give the damn thing an GUI. Just seems like common sense Trade (talk) 02:44, 5 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Date of announcement

edit
Latest comment: 3 days ago6 comments4 people in discussion

Which qualifier can be used to indicate that a given date of death is the date on which the death is announced in the news, but the date of death itself is not publicly known? I was thinking of a value for sourcing circumstances (P1480), but couldn't find one in the list of possible values. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 22:55, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

These are examples with qualifier announcement date (P6949). So maybe like this: http://www.wikidata.org/entity/statement/Q65215757-9cad9486-41eb-ffb8-3323-afe50a18d74d - Difool (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
I asked about this due to the recent death of Cristóbal Ortega (Q1140491). Now date of death (P570) has the value 2 January 2025, but the source doest't say that, but only "América announced on January 2nd the passing of Cristóbal Ortega".
But it's clear from the context that the death just happened even though the exact date is not mentioned, so I don't think "unknown value" would be appropriate. I would prefer a qualifier that says that the date listed (2 January 2025) is the announcement date. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:35, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
inferred from publication date (Q110393725), perhaps? M2Ys4U (talk) 11:55, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
Or alternatively "unknown value" with latest date (P1326) qualifier if we can assume the journalist was not a clairvoyant. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
What difference does make if the journalist was clairvoyant? They didn't write a date of death. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 16:31, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Q18549771

edit
Latest comment: 3 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Teodor Economu (Q18549771) looks to me like a conflation of a person and Karl Storck's statue of that person. - Jmabel (talk) 23:22, 2 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

The romanian wiki article is about the person, but the statue is mentioned, so the item should be instance of human (fixed). I'm not familiar with how you do things at Commons, but if the category is about "Teodor Economu" in the broader sense I don't see a problem with linking to the Commons category. If a separate item is preferred for the statue, it needs a good source to establish independent notability. Edit: There were no claims to salvage to make a new item for the statue so I opted not to. Infrastruktur (talk) 12:05, 3 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Penalty score

edit
Latest comment: 1 day ago4 comments3 people in discussion

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) 03:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Vocaloid modeling

edit
Latest comment: 3 hours ago10 comments3 people in discussion

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

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

"Participant in" (P1344) with a role

edit
Latest comment: 22 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello all. How do I specify the role of a "partcipant in" (P1344) for a sporting event? In this case an official at a world championship event who has the role of a "lacrosse onfield official" (Q131460158) in the context of that event. Is "subject has role" (P2868) OK or is there a better way? See the entry Q125984091 for an official who participated in the 2023 world championship as an example. Please forgive a newbie if this is a silly question. Gjblyth (talk) 20:11, 5 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Data Reuse Days: proposals welcome until January 12th

edit
Latest comment: 11 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello everyone,

As a reminder, we're welcoming proposals for the Data Reuse Days online event until January 12th. On the talk page you can already see a few interesting proposals from the Wikidata community and reusers.

We're especially looking for short presentations/demos of tools using Wikidata's data, in areas such as GLAM, civic tech, AI and LLMs, services and games.

If you have any questions or doubts before publishing a proposal, feel free to reach out to me. Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 07:44, 6 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Consensus has been reached to change the label for Q30 to "United States"

edit
Latest comment: 6 hours ago1 comment1 person in discussion

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.

Summary

edit
  • 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:

Results

edit
  • 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

Oldest human

edit
Latest comment: 1 hour ago4 comments2 people in discussion

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 valus 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. 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

Wikidata weekly summary #661

edit
Latest comment: 1 hour ago1 comment1 person in discussion
 
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata in the
week leading up to 2025-01-06. Missed the previous one? See issue #660

Discussions

Upcoming events

  • Workshop: Lexicography and linguistic sustainability - Mirandese documentation using Wikidata This Portuguese-language workshop takes place Thursday 16 January, 10:00 - 17:00, Room 208, 206 at the Faculty of Letters of the University of Porto.
  • Please submit your proposals for the Data Reuse Days online event until January 12th. See current proposals on the talk page and here's some ideas to inspire you: presentations/demos of tools using Wikidata's data (10mins Lightning Talk presentations), discussions and presentations connecting Wikidata editors with reusers and/or explanations and demos on how to use a specific part of the technical infrastructure to reuse Wikidata's data (APIs, dumps, etc.).
  • Talk to the Search Platform / Query Service Team --January 8, 2025. The Search Platform Team holds monthly meetings to discuss anything related to Wikimedia search, Wikidata Query Service (WDQS), Wikimedia Commons Query Service (WCQS), etc.! Time: 16:00-17:00 UTC / 08:00 PDT / 11:00 EDT / 17:00 CET
  • 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.
  • Wiki Workshop 2025 Announcement and Call for Papers. Submission deadline: March 9, 2025 (23:59 AoE)

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

  • Blogs: (fr) female authors with male pseudonyms, blog post by Le Deuxième Texte including SPARQL queries to find female authors with male pseudonyms.
  • Websites :Global Dementia and Risk Factors, website by 'Students at the Maastricht Science Programme', includes data visualizations of the prevalence and current treatments of dementia across the world. It utilises data extracted as SPARQL Endpoints from Wikidata.
  • Papers
    • Ontology-grounded Automatic Knowledge Graph Construction by LLM under Wikidata schema - This paper proposes an ontology-driven approach to KG construction using LLMs where competency questions guide ontology creation and relation extraction, leveraging Wikidata for semantic consistency. A scalable pipeline minimizes human effort while producing high-quality, interpretable KGs interoperable with Wikidata for knowledge base expansion. By Xiaohan Feng, Xixin Wu & Helen Meng (2024).
    • Knowledge Incorporated Image Question Answering Using Wikidata Repository - Proposes a Visual Question Answering (VQA) model that integrates external knowledge from Wikidata to address complex open-domain questions by combining image, question, and knowledge modalities. Evaluated on the VQAv2 dataset, the model outperforms prior state-of-the-art approaches, demonstrating improved reasoning and accuracy (Koshti et al., 2024).
  • Videos: (arabic) Part 6: SPARQL Demo Session: connecting external services - Sparql SERVICE clause gives access to additional data such as labels via wikibase:label, interaction with MediaWiki APIs using wikibase:mwapi, and integration of data from subgraphs (such as the main graph and the scholarly articles graph). Integration of data from external SPARQL endpoints such as DBpedia.

Tool of the week

  • Wikidata Entity Linker - is a Microsoft Edge browser extension that creates web links for matching inner HTML text based on a regex format of Q\d+ which is the format of a Wikidata Entity ID. (email)

Other Noteworthy Stuff

  • Vacancy: Research Software Engineer / Wikibase-Expert - The Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB) located in Hannover has a research position open for someone interested in the deployment, administration and maintenance of open source knowledge management software such as Mediawiki, Wikibase and OpenRefine as part of the NFDI4Culture partnership within the OSL.
  • January 1, 2025, marked Public Domain Day, with hundreds of 1929 films entering the public domain. Sandra has shared helpful notes to assist in making these films discoverable via WikiFlix, by adding video files to Wikicommons and Wikidata. Join the effort!

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • The development team is just settling back in after the holidays, so there haven’t been any significant updates yet.

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 topic
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=2295576199"
  NODES
admin 15
chat 7
COMMUNITY 6
Idea 4
idea 4
INTERN 3
Note 5
Project 34
todo 2
USERS 6