Shortcuts: WD:PC, WD:CHAT, WD:?

Wikidata:Project chat

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Edit

Bunker website blocked by spam filter

[edit]

I was adding the URL for an entry for pictures.nl/ Bunkerpictures, a website of bunker pictures (lots of lovely concrete corridors and machinery rooms), and got the addition blocked with 

The text you wanted to publish was blocked by the spam filter. This is probably caused by a link to a forbidden external site. The following text is what triggered our spam filter: bunker pictures.nl

I've not come across the spam filter before, and surprised its messages don't link to more information, Where is it documented, and why doesn't it like bunkers?

(I had to split the 2 words to even allow me to ask the question here) Vicarage (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The website is globally blacklisted. A local admin on meta wiki can fix it if you report it there. It looks like a serious site so it's dumb to block it. I'm guessing some of the pictures might contain symbols from the nazi-era. Infrastruktur (talk) 21:02, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. For the benefit of others, you can appeal these blocks at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Spam_blacklist, I wish they'd change their WD popups to make this clear, and that we'd add this to our help system. Vicarage (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
6 days later, my request for the removal of the blacklisted item has not been addressed. WD is poorly served by this system. Vicarage (talk) 09:53, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that's competent handling. I have overridden their blacklist, and you should now be able to link to this site as you wish. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a dedicated undeletion request page

[edit]

Considering the size of Wikidata and the number of items that gets deleted for notability reasons dont you think we can afford this?

It would much easier for everyone if we had them collected in one place instead of spread around a dozen of project pages and user talk pages Trade (talk) 16:58, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

According to (the essay) Guide to requests for undeletion, initial undeletion requests should be on the user talk page of either the appellant or or of the deleting admin, and final appeals should be on WD:AN. When we were developing those guidelines, we initially recommended that the user go straight to WD:AN, but this quickly led to that noticeboard being overwhelmed by repetitive walls of text, so we adopted a two-step approach. The initial conversation with the deleting admin not only gives them a chance to undelete the item quickly and efficiently, but it also gives the appellant an opportunity to develop an appeal that relates to our notability criteria. Frankly, in a lot of cases, editors seeking undeletion don't know how best to help themselves.
I'm not firmly opposed to a dedicated noticeboard, but I think the number of final appeals is fairly low, and I'm not sure it would be useful to move initial appeals to a central noticeboard. I think we need to be careful not to create too many different noticeboards when our core community is so small. Niche noticeboards tend to languish unattended.
If I understand correctly, the problem that you're trying to solve here is that you can't find the initial requests for undeletion. I'm not sure why this is a problem to be solved, but one possible approach would be similar to unblock requests, where we ask appellants to use a specific template that puts the request into a category. Bovlb (talk) 21:37, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My issue is largely transparency. It's much harder for the Wikidata community to give their input on the undeletion request when no one but the creator and the deleting admin even know where the undeletion request is located meaning it's de facto hidden to most users
"but one possible approach would be similar to unblock requests, where we ask appellants to use a specific template that puts the request into a category" A template to put on the talk page of the creator or the deleting admin?
"but I think the number of final appeals is fairly low" Of course without having a dedicated page it's a bit hard to keep statistic off Trade (talk) 12:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK. I'm still struggling to grasp what transparency issue we're trying to solve here.
If someone appeals a deletion to the deleting admin and the item is undeleted, then I don't see any significant transparency issue. Are you concerned that there are items being deleted that should not have been, and that the problem is being covered over by quietly undeleting them on initial appeal?
If the initial appeal is rejected, then the appellant is free to make a final appeal on AN, which seems pretty transparent to me. I have a small concern that there might be users whose initial appeal is rejected but who never learn about the possibility of making a final appeal. Any admin receiving any message that sounds like an undeletion request should be pointing to the guide, and we should consider translating the guide into other languages. Bovlb (talk) 16:10, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"Are you concerned that there are items being deleted that should not have been, and that the problem is being covered over by quietly undeleting them on initial appeal?" I am concerned it becomes too difficult for the rest of the community to give their input on undeletion requests unlike the deletion requests Trade (talk) 14:19, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding links/IDs of full movies in YouTube

[edit]

It would be nice if the links (IDs) to full movies for free on youtube could be added to the items about the movies.
Looks like this "Popcornflix" account has many of them (and some are already integrated: example). I looked it up and there's a Wikipedia article about it: Popcornflix and the releases on that account seem like legal licensed releases. However, in that article it says On July 11, the U.S. Bankruptcy Court approved a conversion of the bankruptcy to Chapter 7, which would signal a liquidation of the company's assets, and the cessation of its subsidiaries, including Popcornflix. what does it mean for those films on YouTube? I mean it wouldn't be useful or worth the effort to link them if they soon get removed from YT.

There probably are some more YT accounts one could scan/query for links to add to Wikidata items, e.g. I'd like to link this documentary to this item but I'm not sure about whether this is an official release – it very much does seem so since the video has been up for long with 1.5 million views and the channel "PopNet" which has further full films has its own website. I guess one could also assume it's some legal licensed release if it's on YouTube or on YT for over x months but I still wanted to ask about it. Also if somebody has a list of youtube accounts with films, it would be nice if you could link it or those accounts so the links can be imported.

Background: Adding this data may be very useful in the future to potentially improve WikiFlix a lot which currently only shows films with the full video on Commons. So much so good but for films from 1930 or newer, YouTube has much more free films and this could be an UI to browse well-organized free films, including short films, in a UI dedicated to films and on the Web without having to install anything and using data in Wikidata, e.g. based on the genre. It could become one of the most useful and/or popular uses of Wikidata. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is the YouTube video ID (P1651) not suitable for this? Stuartyeates (talk) 08:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is suitable – that's the property the IDs would be written to. This isn't a property proposal and not suggesting that one is made. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Are you the one who made WikiFlix? Trade (talk) 12:02, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it was made by Magnus Manske. I think it could become quite useful but for it to be useful and used in practice, it would need to also show films whose video is only on YouTube but not on Commons. I've just created this category on Commons which contains nearly all full films that are on Commons. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It would also need some actual curation against copyright violations deleted from Commons. What is Thomas the Train even doing on Wikiflix?? Trade (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Items need to have their Wayback Machine link removed if it's offline. That seems to already be done for the item you named since I can't find it. Note that occasionally there is some documentary on the Internet Archive and while that contributes to education and making educational resources accessible – as with the case of 500 Nations (Q2817130) – I wonder whether it can be added to the Wikidata item but currently think the link shouldn't be added so don't add it but a few other editors may just add it, thinking it's fine. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:12, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are also movies on Youtube where you have to "Pay to watch" (example), so not every item with YouTube video ID (P1651) might be free. Maybe the use of a qualifier could help here. --Dorades (talk) 20:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That may not be a perfect example. When I try and access it, I get "Video unavailable\nThis program is blocked in your area. Viewing restrictions are set by our content partners. Try watching another program." Is there a good exemplar of wikidata coding this kind of thing? Stuartyeates (talk) 08:23, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good points all, thanks. If YouTube videos which are not available for free for all are added, then it clearly needs a qualifier for clarifying whether the video is geoblocked and/or blocking access by VPN users and/or only available after payment (pay to watch) or if being a paying premium member. This is needed in general and also so that WikiFlix can exclude all of the videos that have such set. A video like the example you linked is set at Q29906232#P1651 but so far without qualifier. Maybe a new Wikidata property and/or qualifier for YouTube video ID needs to be created. Moreover, I don't know if there's any difference between your example and the video that is set (one has "Try now" and one "Preview only" beneath the video). Prototyperspective (talk) 16:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Minor update to the above: the director of the documentary I linked as example has just linked to the YouTube video uploaded by "PopNet" in a tweet (where he's positive about it) so it must be fine. I have added the YouTube ID to the item now.
I guess the other videos uploaded by the channel are also fine but I don't know of any way to check whether things are for sure fully legitimately legal. Plausibly, the best approach would be to just bulk-import all full-length documentaries and films on YouTube if they have been on there for at least x months (3?) where if it's taken down from YT, the YouTube ID would also be removed from the Wikidata item (some bot regularly checks if the video is still online and if not either removes the ID or replaces it with a Wayback Machine archived URL, right?). Prototyperspective (talk) 17:03, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Further update: created this listeria table of documentaries with a YouTube ID where the video is not the trailer (thus the full film): Wikidata:List of documentaries available on YouTube.
It's just a table and not a proper UI like WikiFlix is (btw WF would need to show the YT thumbnail as cover) and it only shows 100 items because of some listeria issue (pls make it work with larger tables too and then change that sparql). This may be useful to investigate & explore things relating to this subject. Mainly, I found that many of those videos are offline so apparently no bot checks whether video links are still online and removes/replaces them accordingly. Prototyperspective (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Same or not?

[edit]

Hi, can someone help me figure out if qualifier (Q65683410) and qualifier (Q1759450) are the same? Myrealnamm (talk) 00:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

qualifier (Q65683410) is essentially empty and unused. So is it safe to merge them, unless someone can read the text coming from the ONLY link at "Q65683410", and bothers to add some useful statements or description to that item ASAP. Taylor 49 (talk) 11:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I put the text coming from the "pretty much empty" item into a translator. It seems to be talking about "qualifiers in passwords", so it seems like it (Q65683410) is something that can be something branched off of Q1759450, but is not strictly important. Is deleting Q65683410 a good idea? Myrealnamm (talk) 00:47, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Myrealnamm Have you considered simply tagging the author of the item? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Vojtěch Dostál No, I have not. Which template should I use? Myrealnamm (talk) 21:07, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Template:Ping Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:40, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging author: @Linda.jansova, could you help me find out if the two items mentioned above with two different TDKIV term IDs are the same? Thanks. Myrealnamm (talk) 13:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Myrealnamm, @Vojtěch Dostál, @Taylor 49 I have added descriptions which now hopefully provide more clarity as to the meaning of the two concepts. From the TDKIV point of view these are two different concepts (the difference is based on their usage in information science and librarianship). Linda.jansova (talk) 15:05, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging author: @Linda.jansova now Q65683410 says "a term added to a heading to help disambiguate meaning". Is it related to passwords in some way? Linda edited also the other one Q1759450 with 8 relevant links to and 4 wikipedias attached, now it says "last part of a corporate heading which helps in the disambiguation process or provides extra information about the corporation". Is Q1759450 supposed to be about corporations? Maybe the "TDKIV term ID" and descriptions need to be swapped. The current state is NOT satisfactory. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:39, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Taylor 49 No, it is not related to passwords in any way. Perhaps creating a new item for the qualifier as part of a corporate heading and moving the TDKIV ID over there (together with the right description) would then be a better option? I can do that if you think this would be a better way of describing things. (I agree that now the qualifier item seems to include too many different meanings which have something in common but are not exactly the same.) Linda.jansova (talk) 16:46, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Linda.jansova Thanks ... What is "corporate heading"? Does this term come from some automatic translator (like the previous password claim)? Based on above the swap still seems to me a good option, alternatively creating a new Q-item for the "corporate heading" (awaiting better English term) with its matching TDKIV ID as you suggest, plus the merge suggested originally by User:Myrealnamm. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:53, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Taylor 49 No, it is not a term originating from machine translation; rather, it is a term used by librarians :-). I have now created qualifier (Q132718048). I have also removed my previous edits from qualifier (Q1759450) and have marked the TDKIV ID as deprecated. It may well be that Q1759450 still contains statements which should not live together under one URI (e.g., the links to Wikipedia articles where some focus on lexicography and some on the use of qualifier in a thesaurus). I have also added descriptions to role indicator (Q65683711) which is the item that in my view might qualify as the right one to merge this troublesome item to. If you think that this would be the right course of action, please feel free to proceed :-). Thank you! Linda.jansova (talk) 17:25, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

There seem to be a lot of new and anonymous users creating items related to Nigeria today without any regard for notability or other policies and guidelines. Presumably this arises from an editathon. Does any know how to find out what editathons are running on a specific date and how to get in touch with the organizers? Bovlb (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to a tip at meta:Talk:Programs_&_Events_Dashboard#Tracking_problem_editors_back_to_an_event, I may have tracked it down. Many of the users are not registered, and many are anon, but I found two from this event. The facilitators seem to be @Jerry minor and @Iwuala Lucy. Bovlb (talk) 19:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It looks like we'll be mass deleting all contributions by the following users associated with this event: @Samuelisobo$$1, @Valour44, @Chidi_Benita_Chioma, @Calculus44, @Nnicholass, @Dave2246, @Brighttimothy713 Bovlb (talk) 21:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good detective work. This just serves to illustrate why the suggestions in the thread Wikidata:Project_chat#Should_we_certify_Wikidata_trainers? should be implemented as a long-term solution. Infrastruktur (talk) 21:24, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also @Agbor_Success_Agbor, @Sar_Bless_Etukudo, @Dede_Confidence_Prince, @Williams014, @Dondavee. Bovlb (talk) 22:01, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also @Tony303994, @Ibem mercy, @Joshuagoodluck24, @Nugaoluwatobi Bovlb (talk) 21:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I found some other editors that have a similar recent pattern but are not registered for this event. @BigSholz, @RitaOgha, @Teame01 Bovlb (talk) 18:10, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
A few appear to be books, but it's unclear what some of them refer to. Some of the items are about places in Nigeria, and I added GeoNames ID (P1566) or coordinates to some. There are others I could not identify, and it would be more useful to have them in GeoNames, Google Maps or OpenStreetMap than in Wikidata - it's possible that some are already there, but under different spellings. Q132561610, golf course (Q132557394) and possibly Ghana woman (Q132559779) look like the labels are wrong (although I found a "Ghana" in another part of Nigeria, and "woman" could just be coincidentally the same as an English word), and it's unclear if Emmanuel Street, rumuekini (Q132559181) is intended to be a street or a settlement. They need references or coordinates or more information about their location, so it is possible to identify what they are about. Peter James (talk) 20:03, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The observation has been noted.
I was having an interaction with some students and exposing them to the basis of it but its obvious that some of them missed out on the rules of creating items and improving items on wikidata. I have asked them to stop creating items while we do a follow up next week. Jerry minor (talk) 06:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for responding. In addition to not creating new items without notability, it would helpful if they could go back to the items they have already created and add notability information before the items have to be deleted. The essay User:Bovlb/How to create an item on Wikidata so that it won't get deleted might be useful to them. Bovlb (talk) 17:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Noted. Thank you. I will work on them. Jerry minor (talk) 09:34, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Amruta taxi service solapur

[edit]

I am taxi service provider in solapur city maharashtra state country india..i want my details show on wiki pedia Amruta Taxi Solapur (talk) 09:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not wikipedia, and I very much doubt the company you are self promoting will meet our notability requirements. Vicarage (talk) 10:21, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok sir 2409:40C2:3083:3CB:4DED:DBC0:F50C:41B7 10:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

location vs located in administrative territorial entity, a muddle

[edit]

location (P276) guidance is: location of the object, structure or event. In the case of an administrative entity as containing item use P131

located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) guidance is: the item is located on the territory of the following administrative entity. Use P276 for specifying locations that are non-administrative places and for items about events.

If this wording means you need to choose the property depending on the type of location, why is the guidance to use location (P276) exclusively for events, after all the location properties are the same for everything.

A different interpretation is that you should use located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) for chains of administrative items, and location (P276) if the item is not administrative itself, like an event, landform or building. This makes more sense to me, but its certainly not how its been used across WD, where we mix the two properties with gay abandon.

It can be hard to know if either source or target items are administrative or not, and can trip you up for historical events, where you might say some battle was in Kent, when its actually in the modern construct of the Medway unitary authority. And who administers the oceans when defining shipwrecks. location (P276) might be used for a wreck, but {{P|131} for a museum ship in a port, so in practice you need paired queries for the information.

I'd like guidance on whether the constraints should be place on the object or subject to try and keep the 2 properties distinct. Vicarage (talk) 14:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

There is also located in the present-day administrative territorial entity (P3842), which would probably be more useful than P131 for many historical events. For the example of Kent and Medway, there are separate items where necessary for counties in England, where one includes unitary authorities and the other does not. Most things that have P131 could also have P276, but usually it is not added. I think P131 should be administrative only, and there were constraints last time I looked, but city, town, village and hamlet are all subclasses of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) so do not show as violations: city and town via city or town (Q7930989) (although not correct for all towns or cities), and village and hamlet via statements that apply only to Canada and Spain. Some instances also have P31 statements that would be valid for use as P131, but with end time (P582) qualifiers. I'm not sure about the guidance for events - it also says "Use P1382 if the item falls only partially into the administrative entity" but that is probably only correct for linking two administrative units that overlap (such as a ward and a parish). Peter James (talk) 18:09, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
located in the present-day administrative territorial entity (P3842) would be good for events, except it has a dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576) constraint, not a end time (P582) one, and its name suggests its a variant of located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) which should not be used for events. I still think the choice of property should be with the object, as present, or the subject. River Thames (Q19686) uses located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) when it should use partially coincident with (P1382). I did add historic county (P7959) for some historic buildings, but found the task too big.
I'd certainly prefer the decision to made on the subject (who's features the editor can see), not the object (which may or not be administrative, now or at some point in the past), so queries for events and buildings could all use location (P276), and for places located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) Vicarage (talk) 11:34, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's useful to have partially coincident with (P1382) on a county or a country linking to every road, river, hill and building crossing its boundary. I've always used multiple P131 (and P7959), and that's what I've seen others use. P7959 is also added by CountyBot for most types of place or structure. For buildings P131 has always been used (it's a constraint on National Heritage List for England number (P1216), Cadw Building ID (P1459), NRHP reference number (P649) and Wiki Loves Monuments ID (P2186)), but most can also have P276. There also has to be something for suburbs (to say that places are suburbs of Huddersfield or Southport, not of areas that are only administrative such as Kirklees or Sefton, or Scottish council areas), I've used location (P276) in the past but now use part of (P361) (or both P276 and P361 for housing estates). Changes to P131 and P3842 could be proposed to allow use for events. Peter James (talk) 18:27, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've literally just noticed that the ceremonial counties in England use located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) incorrectly, for example Devon is claimed, with preferred rank, to be located in the admin territorial entity South West of England, which is a purely statistical region (albeit a notable one).
While I can't speak for other countries, at all, I think it's very useful for local items, ie a listed building, to have a P131 for the the civil parish or borough in which it is in, as many times they will be responsible for approving for example planning applications or will be the location by which heritage items are grouped, or are otherwise linked to a wider area (eg by the area having another P131, like the london boroughs are P131 in Greater London).
An example of an item with both P131 and P276 is the Church of St Bartholomew. It has P131 for it's Civil Parish & a P276 for it's village, which doesn't have it's own administrative body or a defined extent. Tæppa (talk) 21:23, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

WE-Framework

[edit]

Given that adding refs through WE-Framework now causes errors and its maintainer is no longer active, I've requested at Wikidata talk:Tools/Enhance user interface to have WE-Framework ported to this website due to its frequent use on the project and ability to unclutter history/contributor logs. ミラP@Miraclepine 16:21, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Multiple references differ only in access date - which one to keep?

[edit]

Look at Virtual reality using games for improving physical functioning in older adults: a systematic review (Q30602922), there are many statements with multiple references, same stated in (P248), different retrieved (P813). That’s a waste of space. Which one to keep, newest or oldest? Midleading (talk) 17:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a property for the US Natural Resources Conservation Service's Air & Water Database Public Reports?

[edit]

I am trying to determine if this already exists but I just do not know the property name. Here's an example:

  • "Harts Pass (515) - Site Information and Reports". wcc.sc.egov.usda.gov. 1979-10-01. Retrieved 2025-02-21.

Peaceray (talk) 18:47, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

erroneous merge - Luxor (Egypt) and Western Valley (England)??

[edit]

Western Valley of the Kings (Q14223360) seems to be a conglomerate of unrelated things.

I believe the original item for Western Valley (Civil Parish in England) is Q120420600 (now a redirect). May I kindly request someone with expertise take a look at what happened and see if the user is a vandal or made any other erroneous merges, particularly from civil parishes in England. Tæppa (talk) 04:32, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tæppa: Thank you for the heads up. I have reverted both items to their pre-merge state. This seems to be a mistake by a good-faith contributor, but I will be reviewing their other merges for any issues. –FlyingAce✈hello 04:56, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers. To deviate slightly from the title, do you think Western Valley of the Kings (Q14223360) is notable if it just links to a wikivoyage redirect? I ask here to give the item a chance before submitting it for deletion. Tæppa (talk) 22:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While this indeed probably was a mistake of good-faith contributor, it would never have happended if the Western Valley of the Kings (Q14223360) had a useful title, a useful description, and useful statements. If there is a policy promoting bot descriptions consisting of 2 or 3 words, and titles consisting of max one word, then this policy is CRAP, and this merger is one of many bad edits exposing the badness of such a policy. Just collect some more and propose a policy change. Taylor 49 (talk) 17:21, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
IMHO Western Valley of the Kings (Q14223360) is notable since it has a section in an article at wikivoyage, and probably it is a publicly known real item. I haven't visited that site, but maybe someone else has. called "West Valley" Taylor 49 (talk) 17:29, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would agree that in the real world, if it exists as named, it might be notable, but other than it's location and the P131 "tourist destination" you added, there's nothing explaining what it is or to be used as a check against duplication - especially because there's no way of deriving the Q item from wikivoyage.
Wikivoyage mentions 2 tombs, which I believe are the Q items "Tomb of Ay(WV23)" (Q7570553) and "Tomb of Amenhotep III(WV22)" (Q2480865), where the first one (WV23) is claimed to be in the archaeological site "Armana" (Q5736). From there I navigate to this page on English Wikipedia, which has a list of items in the "West Valley":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_burials_in_the_Valley_of_the_Kings#West_Valley
This could be grounds to do some linking of other items to Western Valley of the Kings (Q14223360). Perhaps a different thread, not authored by me, and a different example (of which I'm sure there's many) could be used to discuss the bot edits/wikidata policy lol (this is me opting out of opinionating on that topic). Tæppa (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming Language Community Meeting (Feb 28th, 14:00 UTC) and Newsletter

[edit]

Hello everyone!

An image symbolising multiple languages

We’re excited to announce that the next Language Community Meeting is happening soon, February 28th at 14:00 UTC! If you’d like to join, simply sign up on the wiki page.

This is a participant-driven meeting where we share updates on language-related projects, discuss technical challenges in language wikis, and collaborate on solutions. In our last meeting, we covered topics like developing language keyboards, creating the Moore Wikipedia, and updates from the language support track at Wiki Indaba.

Got a topic to share? Whether it’s a technical update from your project, a challenge you need help with, or a request for interpretation support, we’d love to hear from you! Feel free to reply to this message or add agenda items to the document here.

Also, we wanted to highlight that the sixth edition of the Language & Internationalization newsletter (January 2025) is available here: Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter/2025/January. This newsletter provides updates from the October–December 2024 quarter on new feature development, improvements in various language-related technical projects and support efforts, details about community meetings, and ideas for contributing to projects. To stay updated, you can subscribe to the newsletter on its wiki page: Wikimedia Language and Product Localization/Newsletter.

We look forward to your ideas and participation at the language community meeting, see you there!


MediaWiki message delivery 08:28, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Allow "social networking service" qualifier for "social media followers" claims

[edit]

I think we should allow social networking service (Q3220391) to qualify social media followers (P8687) and have a way to solve the agony described at Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2022/03#social media followers (P8687) was a terrible idea so updating subscriber counts is much saner. Yes, we could change the enwiki template instead, but I feel like this way would be generally saner. Aaron Liu (talk) 20:47, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like the YouTube infobox has its own module to query the subscriber count now, but still, I feel like this'd be a saner way. Aaron Liu (talk) 21:01, 23 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Data Reuse Days: coming next and how to attend

[edit]

Hello everyone,

"how to attend the online event”

We just had a great first week of the Data Reuse Days 2025, our online event focusing on how people and organizations use Wikidata's data to build interesting applications and tools. The event is continuing this week until February 28th. Here’s how to catch up on what you may have missed, and join the participants for the upcoming sessions.

Watch or rewatch past sessions: in the program table, you will find all the sessions that already took place, with a link to the Youtube recording, and the slides if the speaker already uploaded them. We will also upload the videos to Wikimedia Commons in the upcoming weeks.

What’s coming next: there are still plenty of interesting presentations coming up this week! The live sessions start every day at 17:00 UTC.

  • Today, Monday 24th: Helping AI learn from Wikidata and Model Context Protocol for Wikidata
  • Tuesday 25th: Wikidata Query Service updates, Using Wikidata to provide background information to application users and WikiFlix
  • Wednesday 26th: Application showcase: AletheiaFact, KDE Itinerary, Vglist, Paulina and Scribe
  • Thursday 27th: Wikidata’s Role in Open Library Author Pages and Data round-tripping with authority files
  • Friday 28th: open slots to rewatch some sessions together

How to attend: if you want to join the Jitsi room in order to interact with speakers and other participants, you can register on the event page in order to unlock access to the Jitsi link. You can also watch the livestream on Youtube, you will find the links in the program table.

If you have any questions or suggestions, feel free to write on the talk page or to reach out to me directly. We hope you’re enjoying the event! Best, Lea Lacroix (WMDE) (talk) 08:04, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

QuickStatements 3.0

[edit]

M2k~dewiki (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata weekly summary #668

[edit]
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata in the
week leading up to 2025-02-24. Missed the previous one? See issue #667

Discussions

Events

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week

  • The WikidataDiffAnalyzer is a Ruby gem designed to parse and analyze differences between Wikidata revisions, providing detailed statistics on changes to claims, labels, descriptions, aliases, site links, and more, while also supporting analysis of merges, redirects, and other edit types.
  • German Political parties and politicians tracked on the Fediverse - Powered by Wikidata, this Fediverse tracker aggregates social media links to official channels of German politicians. (toot)

Other Noteworthy Stuff

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • Hosting the Data Reuse Days
  • Wikibase REST API: We are continuing the work on a search endpoint for the API (phab:T383126)
  • Search: We are continuing to work on the search field that lets you search other entity types as well and not just Items (phab:T321543
  • Mobile editing: We are designing prototypes for first testing sessions

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: Uganda
  • 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 [[d:Wikidata:Status updates/Next|write the next summary!]

Q132736405

[edit]

I'd appreciate if anyone could look this over. I don't make new pages very often, so I'm never quite sure I haven't made a hash of things. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:42, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: I've expanded it a bit and connected it to the Commons category. — Huntster (t @ c) 01:59, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't film items have their IMDb score set?

[edit]

Assuming it doesn't need a new property since review score (P444) can be used, why do film items not have their IMDb score set? Even popular items like Blade Runner (Q184843) don't have it set. I think that score would be very useful for all sorts of applications, including WikiFlix.
I noticed this data being absent when I intended to show a column for the IMDb score in this table: Wikidata:List of documentaries available on YouTube. I think the IMDb API could be used for this and it doesn't need to be updated often. That API may already be widely used to create new items about films and to add data to existing ones so maybe some bot only needs some change to also retrieve and set that score. So maybe somebody here knows a better place to ask about this like the talk page of a bot that already imports similar data. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:52, 25 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This is not constructive

[edit]

The wikidata item "Catholic Church and Judaism" relations between Catholicism and Judaism (Q7310731) is given the description "Overview of antisemitism among Roman Catholics". The relationship between the Catholic Church and Judaism is not entirely antisemitism. Also, this is for some reason linked to "Roman Catholics and antisemitism in the 21st century" on Simple English Wikipedia. 2601:644:8184:F2F0:947A:B508:2101:97EA 07:07, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted these edits; at least, it is not neutral to describe the Catholic Church as definitely antisemitic religious organisation. It may be worth to take a closer look at contributions by Steven1991 since some other descriptions added by him/them have similar manner of wording (does the user want to leave a comment here?..). --Wolverène (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I partly agree that one of the edits is not accurate, but the IP user’s targeted removal of “hate group” from the entry of the Society of Saint Pius X (SSPX) does not seem reasonable. Please find the following sources with which I supported the inclusion of “hate group” in its entry.
The SSPX has a well-documented history of promoting Holocaust denial and conspiracy theories about Jews:
1. 12 Anti-Semitic Radical Traditionalist Catholic Groups - Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC)
2. Traditionalist Catholicism - Anti-Defamation League (ADL)
3. Jews and Judaism in the Political Theology of Radical Catholic Traditionalists - Vidal Sassoon International Center for the Study of Antisemitism (SICSA)
4. Catholic Bishop Williamson Unrepentant in Holocaust Denial - ABC News
5. Pope readmits Holocaust-denying priest to the church - The Independent
6. Pope Benedict and the Society of St. Pius X - The Jerusalem Post
There are plenty more sources to justify the classification upon Google search. I would rather appreciate if an informed explanation can be provided for why it is “not neutral” or “not constructive” to refer to the SSPX as a hate group. Steven1991 (talk) 10:25, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmation in the Catholic Church and elsewhere

[edit]

Confirmation in the Catholic Church (Q12311433) is currently subclass of (P279)confirmation (Q188613), whose German description is “feierliche Segenshandlung in vielen evangelischen Kirchen”, i.e. “solemn act of blessing in many Protestant churches”.

  • Confirmation in the Catholic Church is not a subclass of Confirmation in Protestant churches.
  • The real problem here seems to be, judging from the English description of confirmation (Q188613) “sacrament where baptism is confirmed in several Christian denominations”, that this item conflates confirmation as a generic term in Christianity (English description) with confirmation specifically in Protestant churches (German description). (I have not checked the description in other languages.)

How to deal with this? I think confirmation (Q188613) should be split into confirmation as a generic term in Christianity and Confirmation in Protestant Churches. Not sure about the labels. --2A02:8108:5091:E900:3CF0:DBF3:C4DB:575B 10:45, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia frontends

[edit]

New item Wikipedia frontend (Q132797854) like Wikidata frontend. Please add this to items, probably some people here know of more of these than the few I've added this to. I think it should also be set on the item for the Wikipedia app. It would also be good to create new items for other Wikipedia frontends if there's no item yet. Prototyperspective (talk) 15:36, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding coordinates in several ways

[edit]

In this file File:Map of the regions of Arabia.svg (and many others) I use {{Object location|27.15|45.19|dim:1350km}}, and in Structured data I add "coordinates of depicted place" with "27.15, -45.19". But when saved this hidden category commons:Category:Files_with_coordinates_missing_SDC_location_of_creation_(53°_N,_1°_W) is added, which is not true as I added coordinates. Tuválkin Has supported me and says this "On a closer look, it seems that somehow Wikidata expects this file to have a “location of creation”, not just coordinates of depicted place. One may say that this doesn’t make sense for an SVG file…"

  • So for me as a graphic worker it doesn't make sense that wikidata just accepts location of creation as a way to add coordinates when wikidata has several ways to add coordinates, it should accept them all.

Goran tek-en (talk) 16:16, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How are subreddit subscriber counts set?

[edit]

I noticed many items with the subreddit (P3984) set do not have the subscriber count of the subreddit set in social media followers (P8687). However, there usually the number of followers on Twitter/X is set. How are or were the counts set and if there was a script/bot could this be reenabled and be run frequently so the missing or outdated subreddit-follower counts are set?
Many subreddits are not showing up on this new list: Wikidata:List of largest subreddits such as video (Q98069877) and it looks like just one Linux distribution has the subscriber count set in this table which is supposed to be sorted by that number as a proxy for how many users a distro has: Wikidata:List of Linux distributions.
Prototyperspective (talk) 17:58, 27 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=2317816342"