Jump to content

Wikidata:Project chat

Edit links
Add topic
Shortcuts: WD:PC, WD:CHAT, WD:?
From Wikidata
Latest comment: 15 minutes ago by Immanuelle in topic P39 mentioned in a short description


Edit

Abu Obeida (Q12178106)

[edit]
Latest comment: 7 days ago13 comments6 people in discussion

The item Abu Obeida (Q12178106) is fully-protected. Could someone add death date, death place, image and link to Commons Category:Abu Obaida (Hamas)? -- Vysotsky (talk) 23:09, 21 September 2025 (UTC)Reply

If you want information about date of death/death place added it would make sense to provide sources. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:06, 22 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cm214r5rd29o.amp QwertyZ34 (talk) 10:01, 23 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
Also assassination of Abu Obaida (Q136030663). --Marsupium (talk) 17:00, 30 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mohammed Qays: can you explain why you created the admin only protection / solve these issues? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:09, 30 September 2025 (UTC)Reply
@ChristianKl The person has not been officially announced as deceased, and the item has experienced a lot of vandalism. I protected it for that reason, and it is proper that we wait for an official announcement from the organization they work with before confirming the death or that they are still alive. Mohammed Qays (talk) 07:33, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mohammed Qays Generally, semiprotecting items helps preventing real vandalism. Vandalism is not a word for "views that you disagree with".
"Only a official annoucement from the organization someone works for" seems to be a sourcing standard that's not our usual sourcing standard on Wikidata, so it sounds to me like you are trying to use your moderator rights to enforce a personal content preference without seeking consensus for it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:10, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@ChristianKl Thank you for the comment. I would like to clarify that the action is not related to any personal preference, but is based on clear reasons concerning the protection of the item from repeated vandalism and unstable edits, including those occasionally made by users with advanced rights.
According to established practice, the usual procedure in such cases is to restore the stable version prior to the vandalism, and then apply temporary protection until a community consensus is reached.
This is due to the existing disagreement regarding the death of the individual, and therefore, the purpose of the action is to maintain content stability and ensure data accuracy, with any proposed additions or modifications to be discussed on the talk page for further review.
In addition, other encyclopedic projects — including the Arabic Wikipedia — use Wikidata in their infoboxes, which makes the accuracy of this data directly affect the reliability of the content in those projects. Mohammed Qays (talk) 11:39, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
The term vandalism means that a user intentionally crated a bad edit. It doesn't mean that the created an edit that you disagree with even if you would have good reasons for the disagreement. Which Wikidata users are you accusing of having created edits that they know to be bad in that item?
The way to handle disagreements in content is to have a discussion to find consensus about the disagreement. You seem didn't open any discussion on the talk page to find consensus on the question about how date of death should be modeled. Is there a discussion that you opened somewhere else to find consensus? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:47, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@ChristianKl Thank you for your clarification. I appreciate your note, and I will make sure to open discussions on the talk page in the future whenever there is disagreement about content, in order to reach community consensus.
For clarification, the protection on the item was temporary and expired on 1 October 2025.
I would also like to point out that your comment included a degree of personalization, implying that I have a particular interest or personal views about this individual. In my opinion, this is not an appropriate approach for discussion and does not help in reaching constructive understanding.
Therefore, I prefer not to continue this type of exchange. Thank you for your understanding. Mohammed Qays (talk) 11:56, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Regarding the underlying content question here, it appears that someone (indeed many people) definitely died, but there remains uncertainty about whether the person who died is the same individual using this pseudonym.
A quick survey of the 26 Wikipedia projects with an article shows that (today) 13 state that he is dead, 4 report claims of his death with careful attribution, and 9 make no mention of it. Many in the last category are stub articles. This makes Arabic Wikipedia something of an outlier in providing substantial coverage yet with no mention of either death claims or identity claims.
Wikidata has to serve all client projects, even when they are inconsistent with each other. The appropriate response here is to report claims of the death with careful sourcing and use of statement supported by (P3680) and statement disputed by (P1310). There might also be a case for using a non-default rank, depending on the strength of sources.
Regarding the administrative actions, it does seem unusual to have used full protection in this instance, especially as it effectively supported the editorial position of one project among many. Raising questions about this is a normal and healthy part of community oversight and should not be taken either as personal criticism or as offence. Bovlb (talk) 21:19, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Bovlb Thank you for your kind and precise reply. Best regards. Mohammed Qays (talk) 12:43, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Mohammed Qays With power comes responsibility. If you use your admin power to silence estabilished users, looking at reasons why you do so is important. If your position is that you don't want to be held accountable for using admin powers like full protection, then don't use them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:34, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

How can Wikidata be useful IRL if it has less data than Wikipedia?

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago21 comments8 people in discussion

Currently, for many topics and applications, it would make more sense to query Wikipedia than to query Wikidata and to extract the data from there. This kind of negates the point of Wikidata.

Many people, software, projects, plants, diseases, films and organizations have more data in their infoboxes and categories than in their Wikidata item.

This could be images of the subject like a skin disease or the info which license a free software is under or which programming language it was programmed in.

Another more concrete example are spoken text audio (P989) – those are set in the articles of the Wikipedias but in Wikidata only English ones are widely set and even these are quite a way from being complete.

  • I think for Wikidata to be really useful and successful in the real world, such as for querying metadata about things like software or films, it needs to be AT LEAST as good as Wikipedia for the data and then move on from there to cover additional areas and contain additional data in more parseable formats.
  • One can also query Wikipedia in various ways so currently, it would often if not usually be more advisable to recommend or implement uses of APIs to query Wikipedia. I think striving to have all the data and cover the same applications when it comes to data as Wikipedia would be a great goal for Wikidata for now if it is to become successful in terms of people using it in practice (and by extension of many people being aware of it existing).

Currently, it seems like there only is one major tool to synchronize data from Wikipedia into Wikidata and from Wikidata into Wikipedia: Harvest Templates. That tool appears to be unmaintained, not used much, not known about much, there aren't many discussions or meta pages or coordination regarding it, and it has severe bugs and limitations. For example, it can't set a qualifier alongside a value and when trying to import spoken Wikipedia audios via the Wikipedia template for these it fails due to some bug after 30 seconds or so.

A nice thing about it is that people can share the configurations they use for importing data so other people could pick it up – https://pltools.toolforge.org/harvesttemplates/share.php Note that however, there are no indications for how much is still being done and whether the harvest is currently already regularly done or which language versions it could be used on too and so on. Here's the HT for Wikipedia audio versions that is also in that large list. You could use this for testing and to see the aforementioned bug. Those harvests are all specific to one language Wikipedia, one can't adjust it to import the narrated article audios from all the Wikipedias with a template for these so one would have to adjust the harvest for each and every of the Wikipedia of the hundreds of Wikipedias that have these...and then regularly update this manually every once in a while. It doesn't seem like anybody is doing or did this for most (well or all) Wikipedias. Likewise, Wikipedia has more images on skin diseases than the Wikidata items about the skin diseases and software items do not have the programming language info set despite that this metadata could be imported from for example GitHub and/or the Wikipedia categories.

I think being more useful than Wikipedia for some applications would be a second step after first outmatching Wikipedia on structured data.

This is not specific to this tool – it just seems like this would be the biggest way for equalizing data coverage of Wikidata and Wikipedia. Are there any further things or tools to know regarding this? How else than using and improving this tool could Wikidata improve on this and what could be done in regards to the former? In regards to the former, I made this wish in the Community Wishlist: Continue the development of the Harvest Templates tool that allows importing data to WData. Prototyperspective (talk) 00:15, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

"Currently, for many topics and applications, it would make more sense to query Wikipedia than to query Wikidata and to extract the data from there. " There are hundreds if not thousands of infobox parameters which does not have an equivalent data property on Wikidata. That's the issue. There is also the issue that new data property proposals tends to face an heavy amount of scrutinization compared to other types of properties which can discourage users from trying to make new proposals. --Trade (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I am curious how to implement a query of Wikipedia, given the infoboxes are not structured : do you mean it's more useful to copy-paste article per article from a wikipedia than to run a wikidata query ? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 08:57, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
how to implement a query of Wikipedia, given the infoboxes are not structured since you got no reply and since Trade only mentioned this and I think only so in reference to what I said: Wikipedia can be queried using APIs and you can then extract the data in the infoboxes because they are structured by the predefined infobox parameters. Search the Web for example for wikipedia get data from infobox and you'll find many tutorials and premade tools for this using the Wikipedia API such as this post in 2012 with a premade tool to extract the infobox data. These are probably more viewed or popular on the Web than questions & tutorials about querying data from Wikidata. Additionally, there is a new dataset which has the data prestructured; see Matěj Suchánek's comment below. Just to clarify again the thread topic and intent: I think Wikidata would have to be at least as good as Wikipedia for structured data for this to change in the sense of (category&)infobox data there being all covered here. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:20, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Not sure what you mean by "data property proposals" vs other types of properties? External identifiers are the exception here, with slightly lower requirements for approval and creation.
More importantly we need more people regularly commenting on and supporting properties they want created; without clear support they won't be. See Wikidata:Property proposal/Overview for the current list, there are a lot still open with no comments in the last 3 months, many 6 months or more. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:53, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I don't think the challenges or scrutiny faced by new data properties are a major factor – there already are very many properties but they aren't set on many items where Wikipedia has the data. The main example of one such was spoken text audio (P989) but this also applies to many other properties.
It may be an issue but it's not "the" issue and as far as I can see not among the main issues. Instead, people propose more and more properties but there is little work and consideration of how to get the data for these into Wikidata, not even when lots or all of that data is readily available in other Wikimedia projects. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
"there is little work and consideration of how to get the data for these into Wikidata" There's plenty of people who do want the data into Wikidata but there are much less people willing to "lend" out their bots by giving it additional tasks Trade (talk) 22:05, 3 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That doesn't or wouldn't change anything – so if you're arguing there is not little consideration but moderate or even much consideration of that, I couldn't see any evidence or indications of that and would welcome any info suggesting to the contrary. Moreover, these aren't two separate groups – if people want to have the data, they could for example get Harvest Template to work or ask about HT and at least document and discuss its issues or build a bot or ask for bots like that. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:42, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Combining data from multiple sources is a useful skill, more people should get into the habit of doing this. DBpedia might have more data imported from Wikipedia templates (e.g [1]), and thanks to sitelinks there should be no problem combining this with data from Wikidata in a query. Infrastruktur (talk) 10:21, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
On a related note, Wikimedia Enterprise has recently started publishing datasets of Wikipedia's "parsed content", including infoboxes (see Tech News). I wonder if this is something where we could go for missing data and import them to Wikidata.
However, the habit of copying Wikipedia infoboxes to Wikidata has been somewhat controversial because of its error rate and lack of references to sources (or means to import them). On Wikidata, we can take a different approach and import directly from external sources (public registries, etc.), and we also indicate them as the source. Of course, this is possible on Wikipedia, too, but AFAIC imports like this are not done often. On Wikidata, this is "by design".
Also, queries over Wikipedia are more difficult, inefficient, or the available data varies by Wikipedia editions (e.g., categorization trees). Nothing comparable to WDQS is available for Wikipedia.
So to answer your question how can Wikidata be useful IRL if it has less data than Wikipedia: 1) by offering actual structured data, 2) by offering quality, 3) by offering efficient means for aggregating results over many data entries. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:17, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • publishing datasets of Wikipedia's "parsed content", including infoboxes (see Tech News). I wonder if this is something where we could go for missing data and import them to Wikidata. That's a great idea! Has somebody looked into this? This may enable importing more data more quickly more easily in comparison to Harvest Templates. Please also let me know if you know of any resources that are about importing data to Wikidata from these dumps.
  • Good point. 1. many people also edit items by hand (and without adding a source) 2. many values in Wikipedia do have sources which could be imported too 3. for many values like again spoken Wikipedia audios there is no need for a source as it would make no sense 4. if there are some flaws from time to time, these are quite rare on at least ENWP and other sources where data is being imported from can also be flawed; most importantly though if the value gets edited some tool could show a mismatch so that it can be fixed in Wikipedia or Wikidata wherever the error is.
  • There's the Wikipedia API and probably more questions, demos, and projects online to get data from Wikipedia infoboxes etc than from Wikidata even though querying Wikidata via sparql is often more convenient (despite that it can quickly run into timeouts and sparql is not sth many people know much about). That the available data varies per language is unimportant as, depending on the data sought, people can simply import from the largest Wikipedia, ENWP. They aren't necessarily more difficult or inefficient; people can use premade packages for making Wikipedia API calls and if you get less data with WD that is still less efficient even when WDQS is more designed for these kinds of things.
  • 1) Wikipedia also has structured data in infoboxes and categories. Here's just more and basically only structured data and things built with queryability in mind. That it has structured data doesn't answer the question as is; if the data is too incomplete it can be as structured as it can be but not enable any real-world uses 2) Wikipedia is checked by far more people and other databases have quality too so I wonder how that would answer the question – it's more like a goal or positive aspect; WD is not super reliable and how millions of for example book and study items with essentially no watcher can be all effectively protected from vandalism may be a subject for another day 3) appreciate the answer but here again what is missing is the real-world practical part – this may be great in theory but in practice even the best efficient means for aggregating results over many data entries are of no use if the data is very incomplete. The emphasis is on the use in practice, secondarily in specific uses that are of interest to many people and only third about Wikidata in terms of technical tool / potential aspects.
Prototyperspective (talk) 21:48, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
"many people also edit items by hand (and without adding a source)" Perhaps Wikidata should make editing items by hand less cumbersome then? Trade (talk) 22:12, 3 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
You can't take out tiny parts completely out of context like that. I said this in the context of Suchánek's claim about error rate of data in English Wikipedia infoboxes. This doesn't address anything I said and Wikidata editing isn't cumbersome I think except that the add statement button shouldn't just be at a variable place at the bottom. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:38, 4 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Well, since there appareantly isn't an issue with manual editing or adding sources being cumbersome i guess there's nothing for us to discuss then?
I guess the issues i run into must be a figment of my imagination and i'm just being lazy then Trade (talk) 00:51, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Your comments really aren't constructive. If you personally find there is nothing to discuss, I'd suggest to not comment. The comment by Suchánek whose thread you derailed by bringing up something entirely unrelated and unconnected to the thread topics was precisely ontopic, insightful and interesting. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:13, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
it's more like a goal or positive aspect Yes, maybe this describes my view better.
are of no use if the data is very incomplete I agree. It's worth noting, though, that we can use it to measure (in)completeness, too.
about error rate of data in English Wikipedia infoboxes In infoboxes in general. Perhaps English Wikipedia has higher quality, yet it doesn't cover all items. If true, this would be a good motivation for trying to import these dumps.
let me know if you know of any resources Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any related resources or tools. OpenRefine? Mismatch Finder? --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:39, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Any effort to import data from infoboxes should be avoided unless the citations used in those infoboxes are imported as well. Too often I see large imports using imported from Wikimedia project (P143) as a reference. Citing the Wikipedia article is as bad as having nothing at all, not only because the data may change and we're left with an incongruity, and because those imports can sit for years without being properly reviewed and cited, but also for the same reason Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source (Q22964187) exists on multiple sites. — Huntster (t @ c) 13:07, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
that we can use it to measure (in)completeness, too If one could measure it that way by comparing both data then that would probably usually already 3/4th of importing the Wikipedia data into Wikidata. I guess except if one takes a small sample and compares the data for these. Perhaps English Wikipedia has higher quality, yet it doesn't cover all items It depends on the subject for many cases (and one could also limit the imports to these), it has like >95% of items across the Wikipedias. Basically one could limit infobox data imports to the global Wikipedia which is ENWP. Mismatch Finder? Interesting, didn't know about it and if that tool can't do this yet this seems like a perfect candidate tool for functionality to find mismatches and missing data in Wikidata when comparing the linked Wikipedia article(s). Prototyperspective (talk) 23:30, 5 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
My attempts to use wikipedia infoboxes generally fail as there is huge inconsistency in the way infoboxes are coded on each page, with attempts to parse fields scuppered by inconsistent units and endless inline templates. The raw wikicode is hard to parse, the formatted html is easier, but mostly other sources that just render databases are better still. And unlike here there is no attempt make consistent infoboxes across the whole of human knowledge, its very balkanised. Vicarage (talk) 18:16, 2 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
It would be very useful if you could document the difficulties you faces as well as the methods (including the tools) you used. In my limited experience templates simply had parameters that were set in the articles in consistent ways with no embedded templates other than refs and these kinds of [sup notes] which I think could be excluded via regexing away {{xyz}} basically. Interesting to hear from your experience with this.
I'll make a page about Wikipedia <-> Wikidata data. Prototyperspective (talk) 11:51, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Note that the wish linked above about Harvest Templates can now be voted on and includes some more info on the tool's current status and problems. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:27, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Are they the same entities?

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago9 comments5 people in discussion

Q131896022 and Q131640686 . Same name for companies, possibly different countries? I've pinged creators but they haven't replied to me.

Outside coutry not matching, there is no contradictory information. Could it be the same company registered in two countries? Piotrus (talk) 09:10, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

u-blox AG (Q131896022) provides an official website (P856) and an EU Transparency Register ID (P2657).
U BLOX AG (Q131640686) provides an OpenCorporates ID (P1320) and a SIREN number (P1616).
All four of these sources list the address Zürcherstrasse 68, Thalwil, Switzerland, so I think it's safe to say that both entities represent the same company.
Do we need separate items for the company's branches in these different countries? I would say no. I'm not seeing any indication that u-blox's French operations are particularly distinguished from their headquarters in Switzerland, considering that they are still listed using their Swiss address and the Swiss business terminology (AG = Aktiengesellschaft), and fall under the French legal category of "Foreign company not registered with the RCS". Grešla (talk) 09:25, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Grešla Thanks. Since one creator ignored my comment on their talk, and the other is inactive, I'd suggested merging them. Piotrus (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Piotrus: There's also U-blox (Q2466238), which is about the same company.
Note: The Wikipedia article U-blox refers to U-blox Holding AG, which is the holding company for U-blox AG and thus technically a distinct entity, as discussed on page 41 of this PDF. We currently don't seem to have an entity for the holding company. Grešla (talk) 16:29, 9 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Grešla, I think is the same "franchise" (don't know if its the correct term) in different countries. So I think we can merge them. I wouldn't merge them with U-blox (Q2466238) because that's the holding, so they're not technically the same. Soylacarli (talk) 14:22, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Are there similar precendents. Do we have at Wikidata rules on how to deal with local franchises by country? It would be good to have a rule. I recently reported another similar issue to the creator, it was handled so far by keeping both, see User_talk:Sabelöga#Bontonfilm_(Q122949552)_vs_Bontonfilm_(Q11228089) @Sabelöga @Soylacarli @Grešla Piotrus (talk) 01:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I've seen similar cases such as Rappi (Q36879490), which are modeled more like franchises and use operating area (P2541) for each country of operation. Soylacarli (talk) 13:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
u-blox AG (Q131896022) and U BLOX AG (Q131640686) are not merged. Should we merge them? Immanuelle (talk) 04:21, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
My stance is that are there the two items different juridicial entities (e.g. two subdivisions of a larger company in different companies) then we should have two items as the two are two identifiably different concepts. With identifiers to showcase this of course. Sabelöga (talk) 13:35, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

hair color (P1884) and eye color (P1340) and shades of colors

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

Is there any guidelines for how specific the values are allowed to be? Are we allowed to use specific shades as values? Like if someone have hair or eyes that is Dodger blue (Q856862) can we use that as a value instead just simply blue hair (Q4930092)? Trade (talk) 01:44, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Both currently has a one-of-constraint that suggests it should be one of a list. eye color (P1340) has the constraint deprecated so that it's only supposed to provide suggestions, hair color (P1884) however currently doesn't, so has a suggestion that specific values should be used. From my perspective deprecating the constraint on hair color (P1884) would make sense, but it's not something I feel strongly about.
When it comes to more specific guidelines, we don't have that for a lot in Wikidata. One step to move in that direction in cases like that is to have the discussion about a property at the property talk page so that users can more easily find it in the future and the discussion becomes something like a guideline. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:39, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Is there a compelling reason why we need to manually whitelist every eye or hair color in the constraints? Trade (talk) 19:43, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Trade One reason it is done is so that you can automatic completions of eye/hair color when typing. One-of-constraints are as far as I remember currently the only way to give Wikidata a list of things to autocomplete. black (Q17244465) and black (Q23445) are two different items, so the current autocompletion helps with selecting the right item. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:48, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That would be a useful feature to add in the future Immanuelle (talk) 20:10, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Trade names as properties versus individual items

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

I noticed an apparent inconsistency for some pharmaceuticals:

So what is the right approach here? As far as I can see, these four trade names should be treated in the same manner. --Njardarlogar (talk) 04:30, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Also, what is the distinction between trade name (Q1417728) and pharmaceutical product (Q28885102) in this context? Should e.g. all pharmaceutical product (Q28885102) also be instances of trade name (Q1417728) (using instance of (P31))? Cf. Jardiance (Q29006055), which seems to me like it should also be treated in the samme manner as the four trade names above. --Njardarlogar (talk) 04:39, 8 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Maybe this could be appropriate: Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine --Njardarlogar (talk) 16:46, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
In medicine in the UK we refer to "generic" and "brand name" medications. You can find a plain language explanation here [2]. The "generic drug" label is generic drug (Q506319). The brand name or "proprietary drug" proprietary drug (Q108325978) has had a product licence granted to a company. There are sometimes differences between generic and brand name products, such as bioequivalence, and Brand name versus generic warfarin: a systematic review of the literature (Q37859367) is an example of a systematic review that explores this. Drchriswilliams (talk) 07:05, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
+1 for items for "brand name" medications — though not items for all formulations. "Instance of" --> "trade name" seems wrong, though.
so Q47521958 is a class of pharmaceutical products (with, say, slightly different dosages or packs) sold under the trade name "Ozempic" TiagoLubiana🌴T🦋C🐬 13:49, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

A Wikipedia article has no Wikidata entry or ID, what to do?

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago6 comments5 people in discussion

The Croatian Wikipedia article at the URL https://hr.wikipedia.org/wiki/O_djelima_kraljeva_Dalmacije_i_Hrvatske has no Wikidata ID and no Wikidata page. I do not understand what to do in such case, or where to look for instructions. I looked at ways to report Interwiki conflicts, but it does not seem to cover the case of missing Wikidata ID. I would like this page to have the Wikidata ID. Thanks for help! Tranquillus (talk) 10:16, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Hi, you may create a new Wikidata item at Special:NewItem :). Samoasambia ✎ 11:15, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ah, so this is not different than an item which has no Wikipedia article? I thought there might be a difference. I guess then I add the Wikipedia page address in the "Wikipedia" segment of the Wikidata page. Thank you. Tranquillus (talk) 18:59, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yes, it's the same process. Of course, it makes sense to search a bit before whether Wikidata already has an existing item for the topic as sometimes the existing Wikidata item doesn't have the first name you are thinking of. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Tranquillus, ✓ Done, but I would suggest for future reference Help:Description, and Help:Default values for labels and aliases. I've already corrected that ;). Soylacarli (talk) 14:35, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Here is the item The Deeds of the Dalmatian and the Croatian Kings (Q136471265) Immanuelle (talk) 04:18, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Social media not a reliable source

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

Hello, why isn’t social media a reliable source? What happens if you cite them? 2600:387:F:4B12:0:0:0:B 11:12, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Per Wikipedia's Reliable Sources guidance, social media is not a reliable source because it is self-published and user-generated. BTracy-WMF (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Aren't we allowed to use social media as sources to some extent on wikidata especially for personal claims of birthdays or whatever? Immanuelle (talk) 04:40, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

WMF board reform

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Since reform of the WMF Board of Trustees would affect more than just people from enwiki, active wikidata editors may be interested in the m:2025 WMF Board reform petition. Clovermoss (talk) 12:07, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I will look at that. This is important even though I do not really understand it Immanuelle (talk) 04:39, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Distinguishing spoken text audio of Wikipedia articles vs of other literary works

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Currently, spoken text audio (P989) is apparently used for both audio versions of Wikipedia articles as well as of audio versions of texts which may or may not also have a Wikipedia article about it largely without specifying which type it is.

Most uses of that property are for spoken Wikipedia. However, there's also many items where this prop is used for the text itself. See for example A Calendar of Wisdom (Q2894412) A Midsummer Night's Dream (Q55873489) A Reminiscence of Dr. Samuel Johnson (Q4177057) A Wonderful Bird is the Pelican (Q19027266) All's Well That Ends Well (Q55964658) Article One of the United States Constitution (Q48416).

I found all these via this dynamic list (since they didn't have the recording date qualifier set): Wikidata:List of audio podcasts of Wikipedia articles in English. By the way, I also used this table by checking items with empty rec date for adding missing Commons categories like Spoken English Wikipedia and Audio versions of Wikipedia articles from 2005 to files. Note that the table is only meant to show audio versions of Wikipedia articles / Wikipedia articles with audio versions so all the other items should be removed from that table.

What would the solution to distinguishing between these two+ types of uses for the property?

  • If it's moving files to a new property, which would that be and if needed could you propose it (=splitting the prop)?
  • If it's setting a qualifier, could somebody set it at scale to the items with P989 set?
  • If you have any other idea(s) regarding this, please elaborate.

Prototyperspective (talk) 17:58, 10 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I would rather a new property for spoken words. Spoken Wikipedia articles by far seems to be the most common so migrating that to a new property would be harder Trade (talk) 13:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
What do you mean with "a new property for spoken words"? Those aren't pronunciation files but spoken texts. So maybe you're proposing to use P989 only for spoken Wikipedia (imo that would require a prop rename) and a new separate property for all the rest of uses for that property. In that case, a main key question remains: how to distinguish these two types of prop-values? One idea I have would be to check whether the audio file on Commons is anywhere underneath c:Category:Spoken Wikipedia and if not it's likely of the other type (there will be some false positives) but if that's the best or only way to do that, I basically won't be able to write the sparql / script to identify these (note that it's multiple layers of categories, not just the top-level so a deepcategory scan) and to implement the changes to all the files so they're moved to the new prop. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I think we should start writing a property proposal. I know people are stingy about properties here but I think this is probably worth doing. Immanuelle (talk) 17:40, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Ok but I think many people think things are done or can be left at creating a new property. But that's the easy part compared to making a property complete and useful / populating items that should have the prop set with the property. As explained, I can't populate it so then the question would be how it could be done.
Actually, it may be a worse situation than before to have two separate properties because then people think or assume that the prop-values have already been or always were distinguished – for example people could make some query to build a chart of how many items have a spoken Wikipedia audio: this would fail for two reasons: 1. many items with such an audio don't have it set in WD 2. many cases of where it's set is actually the spoken audio of the text that is the subject of the Wikipedia article, not the text of the Wikipedia article. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:49, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Prototyperspective what about deprecating spoken text audio (P989) and making a property for each of them? Immanuelle (talk) 18:39, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yūko Nakamura is part of WD disambiguation page

[edit]
Latest comment: 6 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

E.g. Yūko Nakamura (Q126947429) and the disambiguation page Q126894715 hasPart several humans.

How to change that without just removing it? The WD dab page could use main topic, or the human listedAtCatalogue or so?

https://w.wiki/Fdax - 78 cases of "human is part of WD disambiguation page" - which is wrong. OSMan2025 (talk) 00:54, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Simply removing it, is the standard way we handle the case. I ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:19, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

IUCN Red List

[edit]
Latest comment: 14 hours ago3 comments2 people in discussion

"The update was released at the IUCN World Conservation Congress in Abu Dhabi. The IUCN Red List now includes 172,620 species of which 48,646 are threatened with extinction."

So a bulk update of the Wikidata needs to be performed. @Succu: OJJ (talk) 11:18, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@OJJ how do we suggest we do this bulk update? Immanuelle (talk) 04:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Immanuelle: I can't advise on how to carry out the update, but it's necessary. The IUCN status is used by templates on Wikipedias, and in general, it's important to keep this information up to date. OJJ (talk) 08:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata Game, several versions

[edit]
Latest comment: 4 days ago6 comments3 people in discussion

Hello

Please, be careful then using this tool and you have no knowledge of the circumstances or local conditions.

Example mismatch commons category with wikidata:

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q41378342&oldid=2415084442

Thank you for your attention. AnBuKu (talk) 14:38, 11 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@AnBuKu Can you elaborate on what you are trying to say here? Immanuelle (talk) 04:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Simply, that I had until now to fix three wrong pairs of wikidata item with the wrong category. Some buildings of the KGS list in CH glued with a Category of a building in Germany.
HTH, AnBuKu (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@AnBuKu How is this related to a game? Immanuelle (talk) 20:23, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
"Wikidata Game" is simply the name of the tool. You play by adding data: QwertyZ34 (talk) 20:35, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
and again :
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q41312776
https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q41312776&oldid=2416390477
Sorry, that's NO FUN AnBuKu (talk) 21:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

How do I report vandalism from a user

[edit]
Latest comment: 6 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

An ip vandalized administrators noticeboard [3] and created an incoherent entry Q136481414 How do I report this? I guess that they vandalized a very quick place to be noticed. But in the future what should I do? Immanuelle (talk) 03:16, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

In general, the admin noticeboard is the place to report users. In the case of vandalism happening to that page itself, you should expect admins to notice the vandalism quite fast, so reporting it isn't really necessary. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:54, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thank you Immanuelle (talk) 19:59, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago11 comments5 people in discussion

How can I find when language link removed from item. For example this article was linke to WD item but it was removed. How can I find the Q id that it was removed from? Geagea (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Geagea Looking at an archived version of the article [4] it appears to have originally been linked to evolutionary economics (Q1382559) and changed with this edit. Piecesofuk (talk) 11:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. web.archive is a good idea but do we have internal tool. Geagea (talk) 11:34, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Wasn't able to find one. A bespoke query is an option to find events no older than a month. Infrastruktur (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Infrastruktur, can you please give an example of what "bespoke query" means here? I mean, what kind of framework can be used to approach this task?
Thanks! E L Yekutiel (talk) 16:48, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Gladly. What I meant was asking for the information directly from a replica database. This can be done a couple of ways as described on the page, Quarry let's you just run SQL queries directly. Wikis that use the Wikibase Client extension will have relevant Wikidata events pushed to it whenever something happens to a Wikidata item that an article on a wiki is connected to via a sitelink. We can see the last events on the Recentchanges special page with the 'Wikidata edits' filter. We can also inspect the events by looking at the 'recentchanges' database table, which keeps a log of events for the last 30 or so days. The information we are interested in is encoded in a PHP serialization format I believe, but we can still freetext search for things in it. Ok, so example time... a look in the 'nowiki_p' database for the norwegian Wikipedial Let's use Quarry for this. 
select rc_params from recentchanges where rc_source="wb" and rc_params like '%sitelink-%' and rc_params like '%Jimmy Gressier%' limit 5;
This shows Wikidata events related to the page no:Jimmy Gressier, in this case we specifically asked for sitelink events. At the moment this lists two events, a sitelink removal from hewiki and a sitelink added to ptwiki. Note that if the sitelink to nowiki was removed the wiki would also stop receiving events from Wikidata after this. To see the five last events we can use 
select rc_params from recentchanges where rc_source="wb" and rc_params like '%sitelink-%' limit 5;
It's not in a very readable form, so if people are planning to do this kind of thing a lot, it would be a good idea to turn it into a tool. Infrastruktur (talk) 19:06, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Amazing, thank you very much for the detailed answer! It already taught me a lot, and I'll look into the first link to learn more.
Thanks again! E L Yekutiel (talk) 19:12, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
The point is that "keeps a log of events for the last 30 or so days", like the other ways offered her. Geagea (talk) 21:23, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
True, as already pointed out by Infrastruktur above, when they first mentioned this option. You are right that it won't help for vandalisms more than a month old; but I still think that it's a powerful tool worth knowing about. E L Yekutiel (talk) 22:22, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
We do have https://wdvd.toolforge.org/ for unpatrolled sitelink removals (and label/description/alias edits). However, it is limited to only 30 days. Also User:KrBot/Lost links exists. Samoasambia ✎ 17:38, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
We have this page. It for removal sitelinks by new editors. May be we need page like this for all editors, than we can use this tool. Geagea (talk) 06:21, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

P1038

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

the purpose of relative (P1038) is easy to comprehend. Nevertheless I consider Q84705#P1038 by @Userofmusic♪♫: a bad example. There is no need to model the grandfather, if the father of the father is already modelled. This extreme example is highly redundant and on the set of all person items difficult to maintain. Father & mother & child (on the other side of the relation) & siblings (not really) should be sufficient to manage all queries. Can the wisdom of the crowd manage to define a clear rule on P1038 and execute it all over WD? best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 09:59, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

The way to solve it would be to open a new discussion thread on the property talk page to propose a rule. Then if it finds agreement, add Wikidata usage instructions (P2559). ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:55, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
citing the heading: A place to discuss any and all aspects of Wikidata. I wanted to start a discussion, not to propose a rule. But thanks for the link where I can proceed with the topic. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 11:38, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Item with 10 sitelinks, but no real notability

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago5 comments3 people in discussion

The Wounded Tone (Q3291150) is about a band with no real notability. There are articles in 10 languages but all very short with no references, and Google search only finds Wikipedia and pages based on Wikipedia articles, but I'm not sure a Wikidata deletion request would succeed because of the number of sitelinks that would have to be deleted first. Is there somewhere to make deletion requests such as this? Peter James (talk) 20:17, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Also the related item Thin Shoes (Q3291087), 11 sitelinks but says it's non-existent. Peter James (talk) 20:24, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
My guess is that someone related to the band made it and because they did so around 2009 and because the articles were so old they flew under the radar Immanuelle (talk) 21:08, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
We cannot delete it here while valid sitelinks remain. You would need to request deletion on every project and wait for that to complete. You might find Twinkle Global useful, and note the "Request at m:Global sysops/Requests" option available on small wikis. Bovlb (talk) 21:16, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Bovlb @Peter James have you two done work on this? Immanuelle (talk) 20:11, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

So is everyone okay with my recent editing

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago10 comments3 people in discussion

I decided to tone things down and focus on doing smaller scale edits. I hope that everyone is happy with my editing. Immanuelle (talk) 20:22, 12 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I am still interested in doing my proposal around sourcing shrine rankings but want to avoid doing anything like that unless I seem to have clear community support Immanuelle (talk) 07:01, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
If you want feedback on your proposal about shrines, how about writing a page in your user space detailing the data model you have in mind and what data you want to import? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:32, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@ChristianKl here User:Immanuelle/shrine_proposal. imo not a whole lot in terms of complexity but it would impact around 4133 items. The end dates could be done entirely with quickstatements. Immanuelle (talk) 17:35, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I added all the end dates for examples which do not have the same end date Immanuelle (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Manually Immanuelle (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
For the last 2-3 posts you've made in Project Chat, up until very recently I did not see you take any advice or criticism seriously. I will say what I said last time: dial back your ambitions, stop running huge batch edits (or any batch edits at all), and focus on manual edits fixing the problems you have created. William Graham (talk) 13:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I did take the criticism seriously, but I took it seriously by disappearing for long periods of time after every single post. So not what you might consider constructive but I wasn't just ignoring it with no behavioral changes. Immanuelle (talk) 17:37, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I have followed those suggestions since then. Immanuelle (talk) 23:17, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I have not encountered anyone objecting to my behavior recently. Although that does not mean nobody has issues. Immanuelle (talk) 04:54, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Delete Q136486740

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, how i can tag entry for deletion when needed here? Dr.Bookman (talk) 09:15, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Please next time merge the items when you find duplicates. I did it for you now. Samoasambia ✎ 10:44, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thanks i installed Merge gadget, VERY USEFUL!!! Thank you! --Dr.Bookman (talk) 16:53, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata community survey [2024] has been published

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello,

In July 2024, many of you participated in the Wikidata community survey. We have now analyzed and summarized the results, which you can review in the slides available on Commons.

Your responses provided us with valuable insights into the demographics of Wikidata editors, including their geographic distribution, gender, age, and the activities they engage in on Wikidata.

These results, combined with the findings from our previous survey in 2021, will help us understand the evolution of our community and its potential future trajectory. We hope that they will inspire community activities aimed at increasing diversity and provide further insights into the composition of our editor community and their activities.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to reach out to the team on the discussion page linked here.

Cheers, Mohammed Abdulai (WMDE) (talk) 09:43, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Human races item

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago3 comments3 people in discussion

I never thought to watch it but to my surprise the item human race (Q3254959) is definitely model as if it was a legit concept, with absolutely no mention of the scientific consensus that biological human races has no reality … this is a bit disturbing. author  TomT0m / talk page 11:27, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

The item seems to mix different concepts:
(1) The theory of human races. (2) Class for individual items about classifications like Bronze race (Q4974225), Telingan (Q7697283), Atlantid race (Q4816661) that are obsolete (3) class of race classifications that the US census (and a lot of other US policy like requirements for FDA drug approval uses).
In phlogiston theory (Q120999319) we have instance of (P31) superseded scientific theory (Q4115113). Maybe, we could also use that for the general concept of race theory. It might also worth thinking about whether we generally need new ways to model outdated scientific ideas. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:00, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Did we sort this out? Immanuelle (talk) 20:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #701

[edit]
Latest comment: 5 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata in the
week leading up to 2025-10-13. Missed the previous one? See issue #700.

Discussions

  • Closed request for permissions/Bot: DifoolBot 7 - closed as approved.

Events

  • Upcoming events:
    • The next Linked Data for Libraries LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group session: Tuesday 14 Oct, 2025 from 16:00 UTC / 6pm CEST (click for your Time zone) WikiProject Personal Pronouns members will lead three implementation sessions to improve the data modeling and ethics of personal pronoun representation in Wikidata based on newly-established best practices and Wikidata policy by remediating legacy statements with participants. No prior Wikidata experience required. More info on the Personal Pronouns event page.
    • Upcoming LD4 Affinity Group sessions: Oct 14, Nov 25, Dec 9, at 9am PT/ 12pm ET/ 4pm UTC / 6pm CEST.
    • Wikidata + Wikibase Office Hour, join us in the Wikidata Telegram channel for our Quarterly roundup of what's been happening with Wikidata and Wikibase. If you can't make it, read the transcript later. Oct 15, 18:00 - 19:00 CEST (UTC 16:00 - 17:00).
    • The Next Wikimedia Research Showcase is Wednesday, October 15, at 9:30 AM PT / 16:30 UTC. The theme is "Celebrating 13 Years: Wikidata’s Role in Learning and Culture". Watch via the YouTube stream.

Press, articles, blog posts, videos

Tool of the week

  • Wikidata Useful is a UserScript by Magnus Manske that adds a box of quick "add statement" links to the right side of the page. Entity and phylogeny types, countries (location and citizenship). Also, tries to load and display a blurb from en or de Wikipedia.

Other Noteworthy Stuff

  • The 2024 Wikidata Community Survey results are out! Read the full report on Commons: Wikidata Community Survey 2024 Report. If you have any thoughts or questions feel free to write on this discussion page: Wikidata talk:Usability and usefulness/2024-Community-Survey
  • Wikimedia Deutschland is seeking feedback on the Mobile Editing Experience prototype, especially from contributors who edit right-to-left (RTL) languages like Arabic, Hebrew, Persian, Urdu, etc. We’ve already received helpful input from various editors, but feedback from RTL language communities is still missing. Your perspective is important to ensure the design works well for everyone. Please go to Beta Wikidata (in mobile view) to test the prototype with the instructions below and share your feedback on this talk page.
    • Add "businessperson" as an occupation
    • Add a start date to the relationship with A$AP Rocky and provide a reference
    • Find the place of birth (Saint Michael) and open that page
    • Add the coordinate location for Saint Michael

Newest properties and property proposals to review

You can comment on all open property proposals!

Did you know?

Development

  • Wikidata integration on Wikipedia and co:
    • We finished work on adding an icon to changes coming from Wikidata in recent changes and watchlist (phab:T397258)
    • We are finishing work on a new usage aspect for qualifiers and references so their use can be tracked separately. This will lead to less Wikidata changes showing up in recent changes and watchlist that don't actually affect the article (phab:T397258)
    • We are continuing the work on improving Databox (phab:T400322)
  • GraphQL: We are continuing to work on making labels of linked entities in the values of statements accessible (phab:T404692)
  • Mobile statement editing: We have been working on showing the different value types (phab:T404684) and making references editable (phab:T405236)

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

Cultural issue - need help regarding references on P21 statements

[edit]
Latest comment: 19 hours ago15 comments5 people in discussion

Are there any guidelines or policies regarding references on P21 statements?

P21 is very important when trying to convert LD into certain human languages. In some languages it may be not that important, because one can say "Anna is a king", but in some languages one would have to say "Anna is a queen". There are even "female form of label" (or something like that) in WD. But many items have no P21. It is maybe not important for convertion of LD into the English language, but in Europe, Latinamerica and several countries in Africa it is important to know the sex/gender of a human if one wants to state something in a human language from these regions.

I filled a tiny part of the missing P21.

Then I was approached on my talk page regarding these P21, but when trying to understand what the asking person wants, I found out that that person themself did add P21 without any reference.

I now stopped filling the sex/gender gaps. I would like to first understand what the issue is with filling the sex/gender gaps. OSMan2025 (talk) 21:55, 13 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@OSMan2025: how are you choosing the gender you add to the items? I counted roughly 20,000 additions of gender using quickstatements on 12 October. I looked at one at random Suzanne Boucher (Q124388829), where you Created claim: sex or gender (P21): male at 23:03, 12 October 2025, which doesn't look right. TSventon (talk) 02:41, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That is from https://quickstatements.toolforge.org/#/batch/250963 it looks as if each item has ISNI and a given name claimed to be a female given name. That batch seems to be gone wrong. User:Epìdosis switched Suzanne Boucher (Q124388829), maybe s/he could switch each of that batch.
Did you find any error in one of the other batches? They seem mostly related to GND items, probably GND contains more information. Disclosure: German is one of the languages affected by the lack of P21.
Regarding the original issue here: any policy on P21 references? EditReview1 (talk) 17:07, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@OSMan2025 What does LD stand for? Immanuelle (talk) 05:19, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Immanuelle, OSMan2025: LD is probably WD:LD, i.e. Wikidata:Lexicographical data. TSventon (talk) 11:17, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Linked Data, in WD: linked data (Q515701), en:Linked data. OSMan2025 (talk) 13:28, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@OSMan2025: please can you confirm how you are choosing the gender you add to the items? TSventon (talk) 13:33, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
OP now blocked as a sock of a blocked user. TSventon (talk) 15:30, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I just reverted the group.. It contains too many errors. Olivier.roy1 (talk) 18:42, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Please make them female instead. That group just had the P22 as male, but was completely for female. EditReview1 (talk) 18:52, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply


Statistics no P21 2025-10-14 ~14:30 UTC by ID:

  1. (-) 2377910 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  2. ISNI 169772 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP213+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  3. ORCID 1253097 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP496+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  4. VIAF 155456 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP214+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  5. GND 213352 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP227+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  6. GND/DDB 65859 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP13049+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  7. GND/DtBio 410 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP7902+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  8. GND/Kalliope 20 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP9964+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  9. GND/FID/PA 303 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP10608+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  10. GND/JudaicaLink 225 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP13183+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  11. GND/HessBio 0 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP13226+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  12. GND/RPPD 0 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP8748+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  13. GND/Saebi 0 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP1710+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  14. LC 46606 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP244+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  15. IdRef 8345 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP269+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  16. NLCR 25651 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP691+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  17. NUKAT 17519 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP1207+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  18. BNF 3322 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP268+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  19. NTA 4728 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP1006+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  20. CBDB 32 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP497+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  21. BNE 3296 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP950+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  22. SBN 1198 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP396+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  23. Genealogics 22 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP1819+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  24. Geni 2 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP2600+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
  25. WikiTree 0 https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP2949+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1

EditReview1 (talk) 18:51, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@EditReview1 I am confused, are you a bot? If not what is this about? Immanuelle (talk) 20:13, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
It says "Statistics no P21 2025-10-14 ~14:30 UTC by ID" and then lists these statistics including a link to verify - but the results change, as the data is taken from the normal search.
It directly addresses the topic "cultural issue". The CDBD only has 32 without P21, the US LC has 46606. The users that wrote on OSMan2025 talk page are from the USA. The user that started the blocking process was one of them. The user that enacted the block is from a Western EU NATO member state. It's a cultural issue, "solved" with a block. EditReview1 (talk) 20:41, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Note that @EditReview1 has been blocked as a sockpuppet of @Tamawashi just as the OP @OSMan2025 also was Immanuelle (talk) 19:15, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Also sorry if this is kind of unrelated but they more or less defeated their case with the Western Europe thing since almost all Western European languages are in fact gendered ones. NATO has nothing to do with this, and almost all NATO languages require grammatical gender. Immanuelle (talk) 03:06, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Is there any time limit on property proposals?

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I have made a few property proposals. Two of them went through ‎modern shrine ranking (P13723) and Kokugakuin University Digital Museum entry ID (P13677) after about 2 months and 2 weeks respectively. But now many of them have been up for months. Is there any kind of time limit involved with proposals? Immanuelle (talk) 03:56, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

There's no explicit time limit. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:37, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
There's a minimum 1 week for review before a property can be created. The main criterion for creation is a consensus to create, which means at least a few non-involved Wikidata editors commenting in support and the proposal being sufficiently clear and complete. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:55, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Yes, there's the one week minimum. On the other hand, we don't have a maximum for how long it stays open. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:08, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Should Disputed Shikinaisha or Shikigeisha (Q135038714) instances also be instance of (P31) Shinto shrine (Q845945)

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago4 comments1 person in discussion

I heard some people say that the instance of (P31) property should only be used to reflect current existing objects and their status. So for instances of Disputed Shikinaisha or Shikigeisha (Q135038714) since they do not refer to a specific known shrine in the world today, does that mean they should not be instance of (P31) Shinto shrine (Q845945)? Immanuelle (talk) 16:26, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

These ones are shrines that existed and were identified in a medieval text. But they have multiple candidates today which might be them. Immanuelle (talk) 16:31, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hanging Gardens of Babylon (Q41931) is instance of (P31) destroyed building or structure (Q19860854). Now Lost Shikinaisha or Shikigeisha (Q135039972) are the one that are likely destroyed, but technically neither one is destroyed. Both might exist but we do not know their identity for sure. So ontologically this is confusing and I think some people were upset over this ontological problem. Immanuelle (talk) 20:16, 14 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Is this an actual ontological problem? Immanuelle (talk) 20:51, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Suggestions

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Any video tutotrial or Suggestions for this "Using both Wikidata and the Library of Congress Name Authority File, find a person that a) has a Library of Congress name authority ID but b) lacks the Library of Congress authority ID property in Wikidata, and add the authority ID to the Wikidata item." ? 151.253.95.130 08:29, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Can you elaborate a bit on what you are trying to do here? Immanuelle (talk) 04:36, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata as database for house numbering grids

[edit]
Latest comment: 3 days ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A web search for

  • Where is the origin of the Los Angeles house numbering grid?
  • Where is the origin of the Chicago house numbering grid?
  • Where is the origin of the Denver house numbering grid?

and then reading w:Street_system_of_Denver makes one wonder, would Wikidata be a good place to store, each origin, numbers per mile, etc. in a standardized format, so people could query for any town's particulars? Jidanni (talk) 11:55, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Would Genbu.net ID be a good external identifier

[edit]
Latest comment: 20 hours ago13 comments1 person in discussion

I found this website https://www.genbu.net/haizetu/old/pyonyan_title.htm which has a lot of different articles on Shinto shrines. I think it might be a good external identifier but I am not sure enough about its structure to know if it would work. Any thoughts on this? Immanuelle (talk) 19:39, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Heijō Shrine (Q11482369) -> https://www.genbu.net/haizetu/old/pyonyan_title.htm Immanuelle (talk) 20:05, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Hikoyai-no-mikoto (Q11086120) -> https://genbu.net/saijin/hikoyai.htm Immanuelle (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Araki Shrine (Q122973464) -> https://genbu.net/data/oki/araki_title.htm Immanuelle (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Chōsen Jingū (Q488935) -> https://www.genbu.net/haizetu/old/cyousen_title.htm Immanuelle (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Not sure about any others here. But I am interested in it but also do not know enough of these for it Immanuelle (talk) 04:20, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
A major issue I have with this is I do not know if the site is structured enough in its entries to be able to do the ids properly. But Fandom article ID (P6262) has a similar complex form I think Immanuelle (talk) 04:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
haizetu/old/pyonyan_title
saijin/hikoyai
data/oki/araki_title
haizetu/old/cyousen_title
Like how fandom ones are like wiki_name:title Immanuelle (talk) 04:56, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Main issue is that because I do not really know the structure of them, I do not know how they would be structured. Immanuelle (talk) 05:00, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
here's the sitemap which might help https://genbu.net/sitemap.xml Immanuelle (talk) 06:10, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
All seem to go https://genbu.net/xxx/yyy/zzz.htm Immanuelle (talk) 06:14, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Oh and Iwai Shrine (Q135179342) -> https://genbu.net/data/yamasiro/iwai_title.htm Immanuelle (talk) 20:54, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I made a proposal here Wikidata:Property_proposal/Genbu.net_ID Immanuelle (talk) 02:11, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Data cleaning street address (P6375)

[edit]
Latest comment: 14 hours ago5 comments4 people in discussion

Is it normal to see brackets in adresses such as in Venezia — Wikidata ? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 09:00, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Generally we don't expect text properties to contain wiki text, including square brackets for page links. However, there are Wikipedias that rely on it for infoboxes, like I think is happening here. The article it:Venezia (metropolitana di Roma) on itwiki has a template that retrieves that statement to value to be parsed as wiki text.
I am opposed to this practice, but I don't often change it when I see it. It would really require a dialogue with that wiki and the template users before making a breaking change. William Graham (talk) 13:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
What I was wondering is whether I'd ask a cleaning bot (removing brackets and wikicode stuff) inside text such as adresses, or if it'd better be cleaned using quickstatements (removing, cleaning, restored) ? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 08:44, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Neither, before a discussion with the Italian wiki community is initiated. Anyway this might require a more coordinated aproach (e.g. RfC) as wikicode is also used in other properties such as media legend (P2096). Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 19:18, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Wikitext shouldn't be used on Wikidata, because it is interpreted differently per project (i.e., [[link]] may be blue on itwiki, but red on cswiki). This makes the data useful only for the project where it was imported from, and we shouldn't really give up on this. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 07:49, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Wikiproject Universities

[edit]
Latest comment: 2 days ago2 comments2 people in discussion

How do you contribute exactly? or add a university to this list? Tjac77j (talk) 16:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Tjac77j if the university does not exist on wikidata add it as Special:NewItem Immanuelle (talk) 20:30, 16 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Merge two hotel profiles in Panama

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Hi there! Can anyone help me to merge two profiles? It's https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q136522687 with https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q111415198. It's the same hotel. The first page is the good one, the second is an old one with the old name of the hotel. If you can explain me how to do it, I will not disturb you with this anymore... Emilio Lop (talk) 07:23, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Emilio Lop I did the merge. I hope it was good. Immanuelle (talk) 08:35, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much! Emilio Lop (talk) 08:40, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Ask for property creation

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hi:

I've proposed this Wikidata:Property proposal/Biographical Dictionary of Almería identifier and it got 11 positive votes. Is it ready to be created? Thanks in advance. —Ismael Olea (talk) 10:35, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Yes. I changed the status. Best NGOgo (WikiProject Nonprofits!) 12:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Items with long descriptions?

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 day ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Hi everyone! Do we have a way to identify items that have long descriptions in a given language? For reference, this item Siddharth Patel (Q136481316) has a description that doesn’t follow the description guidelines. I was wondering if there’s a way to find other items that fall into this category, maybe with a query? Thanks Soylacarli (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Its easy to run into a timeout, but with enough restrictions FILTER(STRLEN(?description) > 200) could work. I. e. this query. Best NGOgo (WikiProject Nonprofits!) 16:36, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
awesome! I'll take into account the timeout, thanks :D Soylacarli (talk) 19:57, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Soylacarli that one is so weird. It is clear that someone just machine translated the description into those other languages instead of writing them in their languages Immanuelle (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Gun drawn at Wikimedia North America conference in NYC

[edit]
Latest comment: 22 hours ago2 comments2 people in discussion

https://www.amny.com/news/armed-man-custody-union-square-civic-hall/

I'm glad our friends there are reported to be unhurt. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:54, 17 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

I hope everyone is safe. Immanuelle (talk) 00:15, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

P39 mentioned in a short description

[edit]
Latest comment: 15 minutes ago9 comments4 people in discussion

On the page burgomaster (Q177529) the short descriptions in most languages mention (to be used in P39). That is useful on wikidata, but it causes issues on wikipedias so should we remove it? I already removed it on English. Immanuelle (talk) 00:16, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

G 102.90.101.117 01:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Bold 102.90.101.117 01:27, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I think you meant that I should be bold on it? I just did so and removed the mention from all of the language descriptions I saw it in Immanuelle (talk) 01:35, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
That was clearly just spam/vandalism/test editing (delete as appropriate) by an IP user with no other contributions. M2Ys4U (talk) 03:47, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@M2Ys4U oh okay. Do you agree with my decision on this issue in spite of the bad source of my decision. Immanuelle (talk) 03:51, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
No. I don't think such use should be encouraged, but I also don't think actively removing it is a good idea. It's a clunky workaround for clunky UX problem, but there aren't any other useful solutions right now. We have Wikidata usage instructions (P2559) but that isn't actually surfaced anywhere in the Wikidata UI AFAIK. (see phab:T97566 and phab:T140131) M2Ys4U (talk) 05:01, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I have a very experimental user script to surface the usage instructions at User:Ainali/usageInstructions.js. If there are any, a small icon is shown next to the property that gives a tiny popup with the instructions. (Unfortunately, it still only works on existing statements, not while adding new ones.) Ainali (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Ainali do you have thoughts on the short descriptions? I undid my edits to them, but am not sure what to actually do with them. Immanuelle (talk) 22:13, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Structure of Engishiki Shrine entries

[edit]
Latest comment: 25 minutes ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I want to try to revive this discussion Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2025/07#Structuring_Engishiki_entries. Did we have ontological issues that are not ones we are actively trying to resolve with new property proposals? I definitely have made a lot of changes since then, but are there still any systemic issues with the structure that we would want to address? Immanuelle (talk) 02:01, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

If you want to revive a discussion like that it would make sense for you to do the work to make it easy to engage for other people. Linking to a long discussion doesn't make it easy for other people to engage. Having a document with what you think the structure should be, would make it easier for someone else to comment whether they agree or think there are issues. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:14, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
And this is not the page for multiple detailed discussions of shrines. the Japan or Religion projects should be used. Vicarage (talk) 19:19, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
I apologize for this. So where are the projects I should be responding in? The religion one is one I have had trouble with finding. Immanuelle (talk) 22:03, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

Funders and funded entities

[edit]
Latest comment: 1 hour ago3 comments2 people in discussion

I'm adding entries for churches and I've been linking the church to the benefactor using funder (P8324). eg St Francis de Sales & St Gertrude, Stockwell (Q136528273) was funded by Frances Ellis (Q136211068). I would like to list the churches she funded on Frances Ellis (Q136211068). I used funded by grant (P11814) but that seems to be limited to grants/research rather than funding physical objects. Secretlondon (talk) 12:45, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply

funded by grant (P11814) has a completely different meaning. Frances Ellis (Q136211068) isn't a physical object and he's not getting funded as the property suggests. He's funding.
In cases like that we don't have an inverse property. The relateditems gadget can be used to look at the reverse statements. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:10, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
ok Secretlondon (talk) 21:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC)Reply
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&oldid=2418195440"