We have been doing this for the Wiki Loves Monuments Wikipedia list articles, here is some info https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_WLM https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_WLM/Mapping_tables <https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:WikiProject_WLM/Mapping_tables> Thanks John On 17 October 2017 at 16:42, Nicolas VIGNERON &lt;vigneron.nicolas(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

There is a better alternative to storing lists - https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Help:Tabular_Data -- it allows you to store a CSV-like table of data on Commons, with localized columns, and access it from all other wikis from the <graph> and Lua scripts. A good example of it -- "per state GDP" page -- see graph in the upper right corner. Page: List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_GDP> Data: GDP_by_state.tab <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:Bea.gov/GDP_by_state.tab> Wikidata is not very well suited for lists data, but tabular data was designed for a relatively large (up to 2mb) lists. On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 12:46 PM, Marco Neumann &lt;marco.neumann(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Wikibase, per Daniel K. What do you mean by further sharing without uri? Btw, there is a wikidata property to link to the .map data pages. Not sure about the .tab, but might also work

I like the idea of storing tables in Commons, but for now I am still using Wikidata to store the lists I upload, because: * tabular data is not integrated with WDQS as far as I know * the tabular data format is quite poor compared to things like https://www.w3.org/TR/tabular-metadata/ * it is not clear to me how this new Wikibase datatype should be used by the community. Should we create tabular counterparts of many existing properties? Should we have one generic tabular property for use as a qualifier of a traditional property? I find the feature very promising, but for now it is still in its infancy. I don't see how I could use it for edits like this one: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q37461404&diff=578074181&… Antonin On 18/10/2017 11:50, Yuri Astrakhan wrote:

Hoi, What bothers me is that when the individual values correspond with Wikidata items or statements, we have to again include all the labels. It is not really effective in this way, Thanks, GerardM On 18 October 2017 at 13:35, Yuri Astrakhan &lt;yuriastrakhan(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:

Hi Stas and Antonin, Regarding triple storage of list-like data... In fact, the primary motivation that OpenRefine was developed was as an importer tool of list-like data to be uploaded into Freebase. I had tons of difficulty with Freebase's earlier importer tool that did not allow much flexibility. And I was adamant and vocal in complaints to Freebase staff to "give us better importing tools". OpenRefine was born from those discussions and working with Freebase staff to develop and design Gridworks, ala Google Refine, ala OpenRefine.. Lists are just rows of lots of individual facts or statements that need have to be aligned against a schema.. So having a schema alignment dialog, as we had in OpenRefine against Freebase schema, will be important for absorbing any lists and aligning and uploading into Wikidata's triple store. The schema alignment dialog was the core feature that the previous Freebase importer tool lacked sufficient fluid UI/UX. It worked fantastic with Freebase and I do not see any reason why it couldn't be done for Wikidata and simplify the absorption of lists into Wikidata. Antonin, was it in your plans to eventually work on the schema alignment dialog also for uploading data back to Wikidata to complete the circle of life, "take and give" ? Thad +ThadGuidry <https://www.google.com/+ThadGuidry>