we plan to drop the wb_entity_per_page table sometime soon, because
it is just not required (as we will likely always have a programmatic
mapping from entity id to page title) and it does not supported non
-numeric entity ids as it is now. Due to this removing it is a blocker
for the commons metadata.
Is anybody using that for their tools (on tool labs)? If so, please
tell us so that we can give you instructions and a longer grace period
to update your scripts.
Jura1 created a wonderful list of people who died in Brazil in 2015 . It
is a page that may update regularly from Wikidata thanks to the
ListeriaBot. Obviously, there may be a few more because I am falling ever
more behind with my quest for registering deaths in 2015.
I have copied his work and created a page for people who died in the
Netherlands in 2015 . It is trivially easy to do this and, the result is
great. The result looks great, it can be used for any country in any
The Dutch Wikipedia indicated that they nowadays maintain important
metadata at Wikidata. I am really happy that we can showcase their work. It
is important work because as someone reminded me at some stage, this is
part of what amounts to the policy of living people...
Many items were created for Wikimania talks. They were created because
Wikimania talks represent the best practices of the Wikimedia projects. All
these talks were selected in a process to bring out the best our movement
has to offer in the many years Wikimania was held. All the persons who gave
these presentation are known by either their nick or their name as they
themselves identified them at the time of offering the presentation for
For whatever reasons a Wikidata admin removed these items without any
discussion. In the discussion that followed other people presented the
arguments why there are no valid arguments for this deletion. A request was
made repeatedly to undelete the items involved.
Given the current state of affair there is little option but to recreate
these items. It must be noted that the current situation is problematic on
many levels. Among them it became clear that admins do as they wish and are
not held accountable for their actions. The only thing asked is for the
undeletion of items and some sober thought on what may be expected of a
Would it be possible to have a link to the project(s) that have a focus on a given topic, when editing an item. For instance (because that's what I'm mostly interested in ;-), it would be useful to have a link to
because it is released under a license that is a subclass of a Free Software license. Has this been discussed before ? And maybe discarded because it's a bad idea(TM) ?
Loïc Dachary, Artisan Logiciel Libre
Lydia (or somebody operating the @Wikidata handle :) posted this question
on Twitter and a few great ideas started trickling in
I went ahead and created an AllOurIdeas poll <https://t.co/IbsBmY6Kpg>,
seeded with the first ideas posted on Twitter, to crowdsource the
generation of new ideas and produce a robust ranking.
If you're unfamiliar with AllOurIdeas </>, it's an open consultation engine
allowing people to choose which idea they like best via pairwise
comparisons (I am cc'ing Matt Salganik, the project lead). It's very simple
on the surface but it uses algorithms such as the Condorcet method
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Condorcet_method> to test how strongly each
idea performs against another, reducing the weighing of the oldest ideas to
create a level playing field for newly created ideas and preventing gaming
or self-promotion of one's own ideas.
Try it out or post new ideas: the more votes it gets, the higher the
confidence of the ranking. Real-time results and statistics are here
Right now, quantities with units are displayed by attaching unit name to
the number. While it gives the idea of what is going on, it is somewhat
ungrammatical in English (83 kilgoramm, 185 centimetre, etc.)  and in
other languages - i.e. in Russian it's 83 килограмм, 185 сантиметр -
instead of the correct "83 килограмма", "185 сантиметров". For some
units, the norms are kind of tricky and fluid (e.g. see ), and they
are not even identical across all units in the same language, but the
common theme is that there are grammatical rules on how to do it and
we're ignoring them right now.
I think we do have some means to grammatically display numbers - for
example, number of references is displayed correctly in English and
Russian. As I understand, it is done by using certain formats in message
strings, and these formats are supported in the code in Language
classes. So, I wonder if we should maybe have an (optional) property
that defines the same format for units? We could then reuse the same
code to display units in proper grammatical way.
Alternatively, we could use short units display  - i.e. cm instead of
centimetre - and then plurals are not required. However, this relies on
units having short names, and for some units short names can be rather
obscure, and maybe in some language short names need grammatical forms
too. Given that we do not link unit names, it would be rather confusing
(btw, why don't we?). Some units may not have short forms at all.
And the short names do not exactly match the languages - rather, they
usually match the script (i.e. Cyrillic, or Latin, or Hebrew) - and we
may not even have data on which language uses which script, in a useful
form. So using short forms is very tricky.
Any other ideas on this topic? Do we have a ticket tracking this
somewhere? I looked but couldn't find it.
Hey everyone :)
I just posted exciting news about structured data support for Commons
*SPOILER* There is a first demo system now! *SPOILER*
Lydia Pintscher - http://about.me/lydia.pintscher
Product Manager for Wikidata
Wikimedia Deutschland e.V.
Tempelhofer Ufer 23-24
Wikimedia Deutschland - Gesellschaft zur Förderung Freien Wissens e. V.
Eingetragen im Vereinsregister des Amtsgerichts Berlin-Charlottenburg
unter der Nummer 23855 Nz. Als gemeinnützig anerkannt durch das
Finanzamt für Körperschaften I Berlin, Steuernummer 27/029/42207.
I'm wondering if MS will pull citations from Wikipedia and/or make use of
I'm also wondering if this will decrease Wikimedia site traffic in a
similar way to how search engine knowledge panels may have decreased
Wikimedia site traffic, particularly in this case from users who have
access to MS Office.
[Begging pardon if you have already read this in the Wikidata project chat]
If you care about data quality, you probably know that high quality is
synonym of references to trusted sources.
That's why the primary sources tool is out there as a Wikidata gadget:
*The tool definitely needs an uplift.*
That's why I'm requesting a *renewal* of the StrepHit IEG.
Remember StrepHit, the Web agent that reads authoritative sources and
feeds Wikidata with references?
These 6 months of work have led to the release of the first version: its
datasets are now in the primary sources tool, together with Freebase.
To support the IEG renewal, feel free to play with them!
Please follow the instructions in this request for comment to activate
Are you satisfied with it? Do you agree with the current discussion?
If you have any remark for improvement, please help me refine the
renewal proposal via its talk page.
If you think the primary sources tool requires a boost, please endorse
the StrepHit IEG renewal!