Wikidata

Wikidata:Bot requests

Revision as of 13:55, 6 June 2014 by Blackfish (talk | contribs) (→Change names & links of categories from plwiki: typo)
 SpBot archives all sections tagged with {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} after 2 days.

Remove obsolete imported from Wikimedia project (P143)->Wikipedia-based sources

imported from Wikimedia project (P143) is important to show from which Wikipedia a claim has been imported from. This allows to find the source of errors (e.g., Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations). Importing basic claims from Wikipedia is in turn important as an empty item has no information to identify itself. However, we all agree that Wikipedia is no "real" source to be used in Wikipedia and elsewhere again. Thus, all sources imported from Wikimedia project (P143)->Wikipedia where the claim is referenced by any other third party source should be removed. Ideally, in soon future, no imported from Wikimedia project (P143)->Wikipedia remain. This work should be performed continuously and, thus, by a bot living at Labs. Manual example edit: [1].  — Felix Reimann (talk) 08:09, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I misinterpreted the request. Agreed to remove P143 if an other valid source is present. HenkvD (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Add descriptions

In this days I'm working on item of Category. Someone ask to me to add descriptions also for other languages. So if user add in this table correct description and also if is necessary replace if already exist description, I can do it. I can use descriptions in MediaWiki:Gadget-autoEdit.js, but not all are correct (Wikipedia/Wikimedia) and there aren't indication about replace or not. --ValterVB (talk) 19:50, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't it just be the same text as in Wikimedia category (Q4167836), Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) and Wikimedia template (Q11266439)? --тнояsтеn ⇔ 20:46, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it would ideally be the same, but by default the label of Wikimedia category (Q4167836) is equal to the sitelink, and in many languages we still have things like "Wikipedia:Disambiguation" instead of the more elegant "Wikipedia disambiguation page".
I think the auto-edit descriptions are ok except that in the "wikipedia" has been to to "wikimedia category" at some points and some languages have not yet been updated. --Zolo (talk) 22:35, 29 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't we then also update pages like Help:Description#Non-article_items and Help:Description/de?--Zuphilip (talk) 14:16, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe objects with type Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) could be handled similarly? --Zuphilip (talk) 18:37, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The French translations are wrong: Wikimedia must NOT be translated to Wikimédia (corrected in the table below). See w:fr:Wikimedia. -- Bjung (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK none oppose so I start to replace "Wikimédia" with "Wikimedia" --ValterVB (talk) 10:44, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it categoria di un progetto Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
fr page de catégorie d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Kategorie Y тнояsтеn ⇔
pt categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
pt-br categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
ru категория в проекте Викимедиa Y Infovarius (talk)
sv, da, nb, nn Wikimedia-kategori Y --October wind (talk)
nl Wikimedia-categorie Y --October wind (talk)
es categoría de Wikimedia Y --October wind (talk)
gl categoría de Wikimedia --October wind (talk)
en Wikimedia category --October wind (talk)
eo Vikimedia-kategorio לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro categorie pe paginile Wikimedia לערי ריינהארט (talk)
fi Wikimedia-luokka --October wind (talk)
cs kategorie Wikimedie Y --October wind (talk)
pl kategoria w projekcie Wikimedia --October wind (talk)

Next task:

Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it pagina di disambiguazione Y ValterVB (talk)
fr page d'homonymie d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Begriffsklärungsseite Y тнояsтеn ⇔
pt página de desambiguação de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
pt-br página de desambiguação de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
sv grensida 20:59, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
eo apartigilo לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro pagină de dezambiguizare לערי ריינהארט (talk)
Lang description Replace(Y/N) Sign
it template di un progetto Wikimedia Y ValterVB (talk)
fr modèle d'un projet Wikimedia Y Zolo (talk)
de Wikimedia-Vorlage Y тнояsтеn ⇔
pt predefinição de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
pt-br predefinição de um projeto da Wikimedia MisterSanderson (talk)
ru шаблон проекта Викимедиa Y Infovarius (talk)
eo Vikimedia-ŝablono לערי ריינהארט (talk)
ro format pe paginile Wikimedia לערי ריינהארט (talk)

disambiguation pages with additional statements

Hi! re: Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) I noticed that more and more disambiguation pages contain additional statements. Please do not add the descriptions in this case. Please let us know what pages are affected (please let us know an url). לערי ריינהארט (talk) 08:36, 26 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

disambiguation pages causing constraint violations

Hi! Archetype (Q346973) caused a constraint violation. See https://www.wikidata.org/?oldid=118796912 . I removed the relation see https://www.wikidata.org/?diff=118826806&oldid=118825682#top .
Please verify if "special:WhatLinksHere" links to a relevant Wikidata object ("Qxxxx") and generate a report on the identified pages. Thanks in advance! לערי ריינהארט (talk) 08:55, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@לערי ריינהארט, ValterVB, Thgoiter, Zolo, Infovarius: Let's continue below in the section wrong category item descriptions. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{Section resolved|1=Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)}}[reply]

@Matěj_Suchánek I added new languages to the list but did not see any change since then.
I think that this task should be done on a regullary base. With a report if the disambuguations are "clean"
a) no additional statements to WD dis pages
c) no normal articles from WMF projects linked to WD dis pages
d) no WD items linking to WD dis pages
e) label should always start with capital letters
f) basic quality validations (as namespace consistency across linked WMF pages, no redirect pages and no anchors at WMF project links, etc.)
The bot run should be transparent. A report and to do list should be generated. לערי ריינהארט (talk) 10:58, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@לערי ריינהארט: I missing your request, sorry, It was a "one shot" task, but naturally I can add "eo" and "ro" label description. I can replace existing label or not? --ValterVB (talk) 12:26, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @ValterVB for the feedback. Please add the descriptions to the set of languages. During the last months I created hundred of new WD dis pages. Maybe you start from WLH from=16800000 .
Regards gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:07, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@לערי ריינהארט: I can start from beginning, but is necessary that you say how do if already exist label: replace with new label or not? --ValterVB (talk) 13:14, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Another thing: only disambiguation or disambiguation, template and category? --ValterVB (talk) 13:17, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@ValterVB I think it is best to start with disambiguations.
Regarding labels I think that the WMF page labels have a higher priority (for disambiguation pages). To my understanding pipes should be removed.
For disambiguations pages without English labels and with labels in languages using LATN scripts I think it is wise to add the most appropriate label. Maybe we can use the "hierarchy" defined in the list of WMF projects sorted by the number of articles.
Adding descriptions for template and category can follow later. There I have seen many descriptions added manually . They sould be preserved.
Note: If WD develops to an ontology (consists of ontological object) labels would need to describe the items and may differ from the WMF articles (explaining some aspects of these items). Normally only humans can see the differences and can chose the proper label. לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:33, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
::@לערי ריינהארט: Sorry I mean descriptions not label: replace with new description or not? I don't add or change label. --ValterVB (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@ValterVB Please replace the description(s) with the description texts from listed in the requirement in the main paragraph. These texts are up to date using Wikimedia and not Wikipedia. I have seen some English descriptions worded only as "disambiguation". לערי ריינהארט (talk) 13:54, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create items for Wikipedia articles

Many Wikipedia articles are currently not linked to Wikidata, so new items should be created. Some of them may be duplicates, but that seems to be a small minority, and they are easier to spot if they are in Wikidata anyway. --Zolo (talk) 08:55, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

is there a specific Wikipedia where more items are missing then in other Wikipedias? --Bene* talk 14:48, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Some time ago many articles with sv:Template:Insjöfakta Sverige did not have any item here. -- Lavallen (talk) 15:24, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The English Wikipedia, obviously.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:13, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolo:: You stated: „Some of them may be duplicates, but that seems to be a small minority, and they are easier to spot if they are in Wikidata anyway“ (my emphasis). Is this knowledge or only a guess? How useful are new created items without a single (useable) statement? --Succu (talk) 20:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
For the languages I have checked in the topics I have browsed: more missing items in Chinese and English than in French and German.
@Succu: yes, this is only a guess based on a non-random experience. To state things more rigorously, I have seen rather many Wikipedia articles that did not have any link to Wikipedia, and almost all of those I checked could not be linked to any existing item. Once it is in Wikidata, an item gets a chance to get statements. Actually, what prompted me to make this request is user:Magnus Manske's new "Widar" tool that allows to add statements based on Wikipedia category but leaves out articles that are not in Wikipedia (of course in this case, another solution would be to add an option for creating items through the tool ;). --Zolo (talk) 21:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Short-term, I can offer Swedish people on en.wp without Wikidata item. --Magnus Manske (talk) 22:45, 11 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A lot of new items were created just after the start of Wikidata, but afterwards we didn't setup anything to keep importing new articles.
I wrote added a bot to Pywikibot to make it easy to create new items. I do a query to find articles without an item and use this as input for the bot.
The bot doesn't touch an article if it's created to recently (default: 3 weeks) and if it has been edit recently (default: 7 days). This prevents new items from being created when people might be still working on it.
I'm thinking about setting up a shared account (on Toollabs) with this bot in it. It could work on every Wikipedia, but we should probably start with a smaller subset.
What do you think? Is this a good idea? Who wants to help to setup this bot and maintain it? Multichill (talk) 15:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It's a good idea. I hope you find a bot co-maintainer. :) Wikidata would need a tenfold increase of bot runners it seems, too much work on the table! --Nemo 17:42, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My bot is doing this taks for two months in for first twenty languages of Wikipedia and Wikisource and all langugaes of Wikiquote Amir (talk) 20:07, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably, the ill-conceived and incomplete solution of the relation between Wikidata and Commons caused doubleness of the links to Commons. Wikidata have properties Commons category (P373) and Commons gallery (P935) as well as "Wikimedia Commons page linked to this item" section in interwiki links but none of the possibilities is fully-fledged and fully functional yet. Until any definitive arrangement is applied, we need to keep consistency between both types of links.

The interwiki link in the section "Wikimedia Commons page linked to this item" should be imported, exported or compared in relation to properties linking to Commons.

  • If the iw link contains a category page of Commons, the link should be automatically rendered (copied) to P373 property (Commons category). Possible collision should be reported as possible error.
  • If the iw link contains a gallery page of Commons, the link should be automatically rendered (copied) to P935 property (Commons gallery). Possible collision should be reported as possible error.
  • P373 and P935 properties should be rendered (exported) as interwiki links linking from the Wikidata item to Commons - however, the priority must be specified for the cases that both these properties are filled and for such cases that more Wikidata items link (through these properties) to identic Commons page. --ŠJů (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
report for first item - sourcecode. --Steenth (talk) 15:52, 5 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fix invalid dates

Some dates were entered in a wrong format with one leading "0" missing (for instance here). According to Lydia Pintscher (WMDE), it should be a fixed bug, but current values still need to be fixed, can a bot do it ? --Zolo (talk) 08:20, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Zolo: Pywikibot can (apparently) fix such values automatically (example) when deserializing claims and serializing them back, or it could be a WikibaseRepo feature. --Ricordisamoa 22:43, 12 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tennis-statistics

Last year someone ran a bot to keep the statistics of tennis players up to date. At the moment, this is primarily the win/loose stats for both single and double tournaments. This data can be derived from either the WTA/ATP/ITF websites, where this is kept up to date. The data is live used on some languages (dk/es/ru, from the top of my head). Once we can use numbers on WikiData, I think there will be more properties connected with this (making auto-update even more interesting). Edoderoo (talk) 10:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to add that the German Wikipedia Portal:Tennis is right now also looking into possibilities of using Wikidata in infoboxes and that this is the main issue to solve before we can proceed. I think that this is true for all languages. As far as we see, the update has to be run once a week (Monday) when the new world rankings are published.

In addition, there are sometimes differences between ITF on one side and WTA/ATP on the other side and it is our understanding that ATP/WTA data should be used. It would be great if someone could set up a bot or even rerun the once existing bot.

Please ping me on German Wikipedia if there are any updates as I am not a regular visitor on Wikidata. --Mad melone (talk) 13:09, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The main problem will be this: Terms of Use Agreement. According to this it is not allowed to copy data from the ATP website and put them in our database. --Pasleim (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Pasleim: Thanks a lot for your input. Not surpisingly, the WTA has a similar segment in their TUA Section 5, however the wording is different.
However, isn't this basically what we do today in the local wikipedias already? As far as i see it, we go to the two websites every monday and insert the data into the local infobox templates, thereby "storing" them as well. My understanding is that we can do that due to the fact that we cite the respective source, even though the content is copyrighted (on a side note: a huge portion of what we cite as sources is copyright protected, e.g. newspaper articles, books, etc, so that shouldn't be the issue at hand.). Only difference is that we would use a crawler bot.
That being said, I am definitely not an expert on the question of what we can do and what we can't do within the legal framework that the Foundation has set up for Wikimedia projects. In my personal opinion, we should be able to do so, but it surely isn't a bad idea to involve people more knowledgeable in this area. Is there a special place on Wikidata for that? --Mad melone (talk) 07:19, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The key difference is that Wikipedia includes prose that should discuss the statistics, which means fair-use is a defense. However infoboxes (on English Wikipedia and others, but maybe not all Wikipedias) often contain data which isnt critically discussed in the prose, which means it isnt immune from a copyright battle, but the 'owners' of this data probably dont want to sue Wikipedia. However if Wikidata offered a high quality replica of their data, able to be easily extracted via our APIs, we need to be extremely careful about how we obtained that data to avoid violating w:database rights. John Vandenberg (talk) 08:32, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your input as well. Even though this isn't in our favor, after doing some reading I agree with you. Wikimedia has always been very tight on copyright issues - and rightfully so, as we have to protect our users that rely on the free use of our output. This is true even though most of the media or other people using copyrighted data use it on a "they won't sue me" basis, which we can't afford to use. I thought about contacting WTA/ATP in this regard, but I want to let sleeping dogs lie.
Nonetheless, this is an unfourtunate situation, as it dooes not only affect tennis, but more or less all infoboxes with regularly changing data. Probably it's best to get a broad concensus on this one, but I am no expert on WIkidata and would rely on someone else to initiate such discussion.--Mad melone (talk) 10:28, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
As iknow there is a big problem to crawl data automaticaly if there is a data copyright on the crawled websites. In the business there was always a problem to get data auto via an automatized process. It is no problem to take a secretary to type thousands of data published in publicy. But it is a big problem to crawl them. Imho we should use iuristical help in this case because lawyers have in most cases the sight of both parties, the right owners and the users. So maybe there is a lawyer in the WP or WM to look on this case? --DonPedro71 (talk) 11:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lydia has provided me with a link to the Foundation's legal team analysis of the situation: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikilegal/Database_Rights It basically backs up what was mentioned earlier, so at this time being I see no chance for crawling websites :( --Mad melone (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some Wikisource projects are not best example of inter-projects linking :-)

I'd like to automate next suggestions for Wikisource categories:

  • List of categories in Wikipedia and Wikisource with same name. Please note that year categories have different meaning: Wikisource ones are about works created in particular year.
  • Author categories. For example in Russian Wikisource author pages and categories have same name. Category item could be found via page item's Property:P910.

I'd like to highlight suggestions.

EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:01, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like these author-categories can be linked to Commons, who have many categories about authors. -- Lavallen (talk) 16:00, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
EugeneZelenko, I agree it would be nice to interlink such categories automatically. You could also enable mw:Extension:Wikibase_Client#Other_projects_sidebar on ru.s. ;) --Nemo 09:22, 14 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up sources for Property:P21

Will be good idea to remove from Property:P21 sources specified by Property:P143 as Italian Wikipedia or Swedish Wikipedia, if Property:P143 was also imported from Virtual International Authority File or patronymic. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@EugeneZelenko: This request looks simlair to "#Remove obsolete etc" above? -- Lavallen (talk) 19:16, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirects for alternate page titles of translatable project pages

It would be helpful if there was a bot that went through pages translatable through Translate that have localized titles and made redirects out of those titles where possible. For example, Wikidata:Indsatsgrupper could be created to redirect to Wikidata:Task forces/da. --Yair rand (talk) 07:29, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  Oppose – the search function should be smart enough to show the translated page first. If that doesn't happen, then there is a problem with Search. --Ricordisamoa 17:24, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fix coordinates

I think this request has already be made, but it appears that many invalid items remain. There were apparently errors in the handling of the globe parameter of the geocoordinate type and many items miss it. It can be mostly fixed by assuming that no globe = earth, but that is not really good (actually they show as errors in edit summaries like here). The problem can be quickly fixed by hand through doing a dummy edit like adding a white space at the end, but there are really many items, so we would need a bot to fix it. --Zolo (talk) 08:10, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PS: a new version of module:Coordinates with a smarter use of Wikidata is ready to be deployed in fr.wikipedia but it shows a n error message when Wikidata data are invalid (I think it is a good thing, but only once this bug is fixed). --Zolo (talk) 16:30, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolo: So to fix this could simple be to null edit all items with coordinate location (P625)?  Hazard SJ  19:10, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Hazard-SJ:. Not really. Apparently, the missing "globe = Earth" gets automatically added whenever you edit coordinates through the UI but you have to edit the p625, it doesn't work if you edit something else in the item. And I doubt it works the same way when editing through the API. --Zolo (talk) 20:25, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
addendum: it's not just the globe. Precision is also nil on some items. Unless I am mistaken, this is also a bug. --Zolo (talk) 22:32, 4 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
addendum2: Also, it seems that the precision parameter wzs set to the highest possible level in many items where it should not have been. For instance coordinates of the form latitude = Z.66666666667, longitude = Z.66666667 (sort of like here) should almost certainly have a precision to an arcminute. That should be fixed, otherwise, some Wikipedia display weird things like 45° 00' 00.0" while it should only be "45°". --Zolo (talk) 19:48, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikidata talk:Coordinates tracking#Comparing coordinates and Bugzilla: 62105. Multichill (talk) 11:32, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remove sources for categories, templates, portal, etc items

I think will be good idea to remove source for Property:P31 values of category, template, portal, etc. Of course will be good idea to check that all links are from particular namespace. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:02, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This week end my bot will work on category to fix an old error, If no one oppose I can delete instance of (P31) source of instance of (P31) on categories. I can do it also for Template and Portal. --ValterVB (talk) 19:33, 6 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Please not that I asked to delete source, not property value itself. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:19, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Of course I mean delete source of instance of (P31) :) --ValterVB (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why do you think this would be a good idea?
First I get shouted at for not including the source and now you want to remove it? No, let's not do this. @ValterVB: please stop doing this. Multichill (talk) 11:42, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill: For now I remove only a wrong source: example (my old error). If there isn't consensus, I don't delete source. --ValterVB (talk) 12:29, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Support deleting. We don't need sources for categories, templates and project pages etc. It is clear that they've been imported from Wikipedia, so what's the sense of adding a source to say this? --Stryn (talk) 12:23, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  Strong oppose, sources are useful to detect errors. for example, If a bot add p31=disambigion page to an item which is not linked to a disambigion page in enwiki, it's useful to detect this page in which language is a disambigion. And it's also useful to detect this problem (now cleaned).--GZWDer (talk) 12:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We need dedicated check for disambiguation status in projects directly. Source will not help. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose per GZWDer: Sources aren't just for verification of correct data; they help users track down the reasons for bad data. I have trouble understanding why someone would want to remove sources en masse, even if it's a trivial source. Removing wrong sources is OK; removing true sources is not OK. --Closeapple (talk) 03:04, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Huge work: from P60 (P60) to instance of (P31)

Hi, while the decision concerning the deletion of P60 (P60) is pending (see this discussion), I open a request for a bot that copy P60 statements to P31.

More precisely, for every item with P60 property, the bot should copy the value in an instance of P31, with also the source. In some cases the statements was already copied, but not the source, that should be copied. Probably exist items with both properties but with different values! In this case I hope it is possible make a list to check manually (!!) the items. Note that the bot will check nearly 70000 items (see Database_reports/Popular_properties). Thank you very much! --Paperoastro (talk) 10:17, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  On hold per PFD. --Ricordisamoa 00:10, 20 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Paperoastro: a test edit. But... how long is the PFD going to last? --Ricordisamoa 22:34, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is ok, thanks Ricordisamoa! No one seems to want to close it, but, even if I'm strictly involved, in few days I will close it (I need to read once the discussion). --Paperoastro (talk) 10:08, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricordisamoa: I have just created the item unknown astronomical object (Q16945799). You can use it for some few cases when P60 is "unknown" or "no value". Thanks for your work! --Paperoastro (talk) 10:33, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Why not to use "unknown" or "no value" directly? --Ricordisamoa 06:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Imho, because using directly P31 we lose the information that the item "is" (or should is) an astronomical object. --Paperoastro (talk) 08:07, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Paperoastro: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/SamoaBot 45 --Ricordisamoa 06:49, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

academic degree (P512)

Descriptive conventions of the Integrated Authority File (Q36578) includes the academic degree. Can someone write a bot to import this data? Example: Christiaan Hendrik Persoon (Q346451), GND ID (P227): 116091509. Academic title: Dr., Sources: Online GND and DNB portal. BTW: We could also import the field "Occupation", but this would be a bit more work. --Kolja21 (talk) 17:29, 27 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, the academic degree isn't part of the rdf files, Christian Hendrik Persoon. And it is quite annoying to parse the html if there is a rdf. Maybe I will do it if Wikidata:Requests_for_permissions/Bot/PLbot_4 gets accepted. --Pasleim (talk) 13:04, 7 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Population of French communes

@Lavallen, ValterVB, JulesWinnfield-hu: we need to get it right, but it is a bit tricky. So a lengthy post about what might be done:

get the data

at least two solutions:

  1. download the excel file with the 2010 census data ([2]) and go to the "Communes" sheet. Population is splitted by sex and age, so you need to add a column with the sum of columns D to W (line 10 should be "784").
  2. Use the commune-specific pages ([3]). The bad thing is that it requires some parsing of the html code. The good thing is that it can be easily extended to all years. "Population municipale" is the most important figure to have but it might be interesting to have the "population totale" too.
map onto Wikidata
qualifiers
precision

if you change the format in the Excel file to see more decimal after the unit you will see a suprising thing. Population of L'Abergement-Clémenciat is 784,00 but the male population less than 3 year old is "17.087179". This seems to be because total population is extrapolated and rounded, and only then distributed among sex and age group. That would entail that the precision should not be set to 0 (it should be at least 1, but probably more, I don't know exactly).--Zolo (talk) 08:10, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Zolo: I'm working on it with xls file. Step 1: I prepare the mapping list with INSEE municipality code (P374). Precision: I round to integer so precision must be +- 1. Qualifier:point in time (P585)= 2010 Isn't to much generic? I use criterion used (P1013) = municipal population (Q15715409). Source=http://www.insee.fr/fr/ppp/bases-de-donnees/recensement/populations-legales/commune.asp?depcom=01001&annee=2010 is correct? --ValterVB (talk) 11:17, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If they haven't specified more than "2010", it's enough to have precision=year. -- Lavallen (talk) 11:37, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@ValterVB:. Thanks. Sorry, actually, I have just found a slightly better file at http://www.insee.fr/fr/ppp/bases-de-donnees/donnees-detaillees/rp2010/chiffres-cles/base-cc-evol-struct-pop-2010/base-cc-evol-struct-pop-2010.zip It can be used essentially the same way except that the total population is directly given in column I (no need to sum columns).
It is true true that having only the year seems a bit vague when population is precise to +/-1 but I as far as I can tell it is the only info provided.
For the rest, I think it is current, except that we should probably have a few additional things in the source, but I am not sure how to do it with an excel file, perhaps use the title given in http://www.insee.fr/fr/themes/detail.asp?reg_id=99&ref_id=base-cc-evol-struct-pop-2010 and do it this way ? --Zolo (talk) 15:36, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the diff, shouldn't it be "publisher:The National Institute of Statistics and Economic Studies (Q156616)" and not "author"? -- Lavallen (talk) 15:48, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We should really have all of the available data (including gender ratios, population by age, etc.) available in the items, but there isn't any clean way to do that yet. I recommend holding off on adding this data until Bug 62555 is resolved. --Yair rand (talk) 04:18, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Yair rand:: Yes, it seems a bit realy for the detailed data, but I think we can already do the total population (this is widely used in Wikipedias, and we would really benefit from having it here). Beside, in this case, the population by age is somehow estimated based on the total population rather than the other way around. --Zolo (talk) 07:13, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Either way, I imagine there's probably some complex data we would want to import. If, in the end, the figure for total population is not going to be included as an independent separate simple statement, we would have to do a whole series of edits removing the statements added now if we don't wait until a full solution is available. --Yair rand (talk) 08:44, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We do not know yet when (or even if) bug 62555 will be solved. -- Lavallen (talk) 09:54, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That is correct. I assume, though, that if the bug is not going to be solved, the Wikidata team will tell us at some point. (For the record, I   Oppose adding the data before there's a resolution.) --Yair rand (talk) 21:36, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Adding all range of data for age, sex etc, does neither I support at the moment. But I support these two numbers. -- Lavallen (talk) 01:16, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
If this bug is to be solved one day, I am afraid it is not going to be anytime soon. We still do not have all the datatypes that were supposed to be released during the first year of development... --Zolo (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolo: I have finished mapping. There are 165 municipalities without data (list here). If you confirm that your diff is correct, I can start. --ValterVB (talk) 18:22, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@ValterVB: I think it is correct but I have asked for feedback on fr.wikipedia. I have just added publication date (P577) [4].
Missing data appear to be former communes that have been abolished. --Zolo (talk) 18:59, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
OK, ping me when ready. --ValterVB (talk) 19:58, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolo: Use the web page scheme to source your file: URL, original language, title, point in time, date of publication, author or publisher but in that case better author because INSEE did the data collection and the calculations. Snipre (talk) 15:20, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Snipre:. That seems to be what I have done. My main question is actually about what title we should use. It seems that the best file to use is actually http://www.insee.fr/fr/ppp/bases-de-donnees/recensement/populations-legales/pages2013/xls/ensemble.xls . "Populations légales des communes associées ou déléguées en vigueur au 1er janvier 2014" sounds good, but it is only the name of one sheet in an unnamed workbook. --Zolo (talk) 18:25, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I would say that is better to link a page with the file link like [5] and indicate somehow the source, rather than the file itself. --JulesWinnfield-hu (talk) 19:13, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Zolo: And what's about the license of the data ? Is the copyright compatible with the CC0 license ? This is always the question of the " la réutilisation est toutefois subordonnée au respect de l'intégrité de l'information et des données et à la mention précise des sources" which is not totally correct with the CC0 license as reutilization of data from WD is not following that rule. Snipre (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that "subordonnée au respect de l'intégrité de l'information" means that we cannot attribute to the INSEE claims they did not make, which seems ok. "et à la mention précise des sources." is more problematic, I think the issue should rather be discussed at WD:PC#Modifying license ?. --Zolo (talk) 21:24, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Updating category and template labels

Is there a bot operator whose bot would repeatedly process the following task?

When a category/template link is moved, the label should also be moved (i.e. deleted and recreated elsewhere). This isn't done often, though. I want the bot to (1) delete labels which are/should be placed elsewhere (regardless capitalisation of the first letter or the letter after the first colon) and (2) update labels of items which are linked with categories with changed titles. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 12:28, 30 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ping @Akkakk:, your bot is working on labels, could you please take a look on this? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:23, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
my bot don't watch recentchanges, but get items from the database. so it's more than just a small change to the code. i won't do that at the moment. (the code is published, so maybe someone else want to take this task)--Akkakk 17:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
My English is very interesting... I mean regular running bot, not watching RC. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 19:32, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Add IMSLP ID property

Dear all,

In Wikpedia EN, there is a nice template w:Template:IMSLP

That is used

{ { IMSLP|id=Dvořák, Antonín|cname=Antonín Dvořák } } 

   or

{ { IMSLP|Dvořák, Antonín } }

in the corresponding WIKIDATA article it should become

IMSLP ID (P839) : Dvořák, Antonín

And it's done !

Thanks

(by User:Xmlizer, 30. März 2014, 22:53 Uhr)

Note: IMSLP ID (P839), import "Category:Dvořák, Antonín" etc. en:Antonín Dvořák for example is outdated. (No bot import in this case possible.) --Kolja21 (talk) 00:02, 31 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, it was a very bad example. please use all the other https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:IMSLP&limit=1000 Xmlizer (talk) 22:27, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
How can I know, that en:Antonín Dvořák was the only outdated article? --Pasleim (talk) 12:09, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Pasleim: Maybe you can spot them with the TemplateTiger? Also Template:IMSLP2 (Q7532243) should be imported (for works).--Micru (talk) 13:50, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all, Is there anyone who migrate the interwiki links of categories and articles to wikidata from urdu wiki? I have lot of cats and arts, Thanks. --Muhammad Shuaib (talk) 22:40, 1 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@محمد شعیب: It's not a bot, but you can try this tool. — Ayack (talk) 09:39, 3 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal to import data for the Internet Broadway Database from English Wikipedia

Wikidata has four properties for different types of entries in the Internet Broadway Database (Q31964), but very few items link to them. Perhaps the following can be imported from templates on English Wikipedia?

--Bensin (talk) 23:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Harvest defunct data from Wikipedia

Hello, over at Wikipedia Wikiproject Video games, we need to clean up our article code and remove a hell of a lot of redundant data.

Since the project started, a number of template fields have been added and removed from the main article template. We now have 15 defunct fields that still appear in the code for some article pages, and we're now in the position where all of this old data is getting in the way and making things confusing for new users (They copy over template code from existing articles only to find that some template fields aren't working after they have populated them with data.)

Initially we were just going to delete the data, but a request to save it for Wikidata was made, which is why I'm here.

In order to aid all users (especially new ones) in editing the infobox code, and at the same time preserve the data, we need a bot run by Wikidata to harvest and then remove the defunct data fields.

As we have over 11,000 articles that need this process carried out on them, a bot really is the only way of collecting this data.

We have a tracking category that lists every article that needs editing.

The discussions around this job are at the following:

1

2

I've also put the details in a table to make things easier to read.

Job Description
Item Comment
Template Infobox Video game
Brief outline: Harvest and remove defunct fields from article template code.
Defunct Fields: picture format, aspect ratio, input, license, resolution, ratings, requirements, version, preceded by, followed by, latest release version, latest release date, latest preview version, latest preview date, website
Category Infobox video game with deprecated parameters
Number of Articles: 11,766
Other info. Most of the formatting is standard, but the requirements field can have a number of different user devised layouts.

Its not going to be easy as some of the fields contain user's own unique - and sometimes differing - formatting styles, but we know you'll find a way to cope with it. Hope you can help. - X201 (talk) 08:25, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to press for a reply, but we need to start deleting these; probably next month. Could someone tell me if this can/will be done, or if collecting from the article edit history is just as easy for you? - X201 (talk) 13:07, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@X201: I'm importing properties from the following fields: input input device (P479), license copyright license (P275), version software version identifier (P348), 'preceded by' follows (P155), 'followed by' followed by (P156), website official website (P856).--Underlying lk (talk) 06:30, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Underlying lk! Release date(s) would also be valuable, as maintaining them locally is a pain. From some past discussions I gather one can use significant event (P793) with appropriate qualifiers, but 577 may be of use too, I don't know. --Nemo 07:25, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Underlying lk:Great, thanks (and indeed, great thanks). Could you ping me to let me know when you're done please. I can get BotReq on Wikipedia to start the clean up over there after your run is complete. Does anyone think any of the other defunct fields are of use to WikiData? - X201 (talk) 09:50, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@X201:   Done, let me know if more fields need to be imported.--Underlying lk (talk) 06:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Underlying lk:Thanks. I have no idea what fields need importing as I'm not from round this parts, I'm just here to alert Wikidata to the ability to salvage some of it before its removed from Wikipedia. Personally, the only other field I can think WikiData might find useful is the Ratings field, but I don't know if anyone would want you to import it. - X201 (talk) 15:46, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Nemo_bis: I already imported publication date (P577) from all the video game infoboxes on the English Wikipedia.--Underlying lk (talk) 06:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If anyone wants any of the other fields importing, speak now, because we're going to start removing them from Wikipedia next week. - X201 (talk) 11:48, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking open proxies

I checked some IPs of non-constructive edits. I found some potential open proxies: 174.48.129.192 (talk • contribs • logs), 111.93.48.228 (talk • contribs • logs), 188.227.222.104 (talk • contribs • logs). Maybe a lot of such IPs are open proxies, so should we make a bot to block open proxies automatically, or create a page like Open proxy detection? Note I'm not sure that any of them are really open proxies.--GZWDer (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Such requests have been rejected by the community: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/HaroldBot and Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/HaroldBot. --Ricordisamoa 23:42, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
We don't seem to be having that big of an open proxy abuse problem, and even then I don't like how block bots tend to clutter the local block log.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:58, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricordisamoa, Jasper Deng: Do you think something like Open proxy detection is needed?--GZWDer (talk) 04:56, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's bad enough to the point that we need such a centralized effort. I've blocked open proxies as I've found them, but manually and only after verification.--Jasper Deng (talk) 05:50, 17 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Freebase identifiers

According to Wikidata:Database reports/Popular properties we currently have only about a million Freebase identifiers here (the next most common identifier is VIAF). It makes little sense to have this property half used; please import the remaining million items from [6] (CC0). --Nemo 14:31, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Create items for Spanish Wikipedia and Commons categories

There are 123 missing items for year categories of the Spanish Wikipedia (in the tree es:Categoría:Organizaciones por año de fundación) for which there exist no categories in other Wikipedias or on Wikimedia Commons. Can anyone create those with all the labels and descriptions as in other existing category items, as described in User:October wind/missing items/Categoría:Organizaciones por año de fundación, please? That’s too much to do manually, so I will leave this to the bots. I checked all the categories in this tree also in other Wikipedias which are now all on Wikidata.

There are also many items of this tree missing which only are on Commons (in the c:Category:Organizations by year of establishment). Is it possible to create also these items with labels and descriptions, if I create also a list for those ones? Or a bot can check itself which of the year categories haven’t already a Wikidata item. That will be much more than these 123. I’ve already created those year categories on Commons for which there exists a category in a Wikipedia (es, en, fr, sv, ru especially). I think it will be helpful, if a new Wikipedia year category will be created, that there will exist an item with descriptions and labels for that here, so that it will be easier to add a new Wikipedia category to them. --October wind (talk) 20:54, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are 249 category items missing (in c:Category:Organizations by year of establishment) that should be imported from Commons, see this list now. They should look like this example after creating: Category:Organizations established in 590 (Q16741007). --October wind (talk) 13:31, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

wrong category item descriptions

There should be corrected many wrong descriptions of category items.

  • I’ve often found in the descriptions for Dutch (nl:) "Wikimedia categorie" which had been added by a bot. It has to be "Wikimedia-categorie" instead, that’s no Dutch grammar, see also Wikimedia category (Q4167836). I’ve corrected a lot of items, but there still are many more mistakes I think.

And there often are descriptions with wrong capitalization of the first letter, also added by bot:

  • It should be "categoría de Wikimedia" in Spanish (es:), not "Categoría de Wikimedia" or "categoría de Wikipedia" (which I also corrected very often, the same is the case for the following errors),
  • "categoria di un progetto Wikimedia" in Italian (it:), not "Categoria di un progetto Wikimedia",
  • "categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia" in pt:, not "Categoria de um projeto da Wikimedia",
  • "page de catégorie d'un projet Wikimedia" in French (fr:), not "Page de catégorie de Wikimédia". But the label of Wikimedia category (Q4167836) for French isn’t anything with "page", just "catégorie de Wikimedia" (which has been "catégorie de Wikimédia" up to now, but this differs from the French article fr:Wikimedia). So there’s much chaos, but most of the French descriptions are "page de catégorie d'un projet Wikimedia" now, so it would be better to leave that with "page de".
  • I’ve also often changed the Russian description "категория в проекте Викимедия" to "категория в проекте Викимедиа". The я is wrong there, as can be seen in Wikimedia category (Q4167836) and on the main page of the Russian Wikipedia or in the article ru:Фонд Викимедиа. Also for Russian is another label in Wikimedia category (Q4167836), perhaps the label there is wrong? I haven’t found that version in any item.
  • I also don’t understand, why there are often Swedish descriptions "kategorisida" which means "category page", while the term should say "Wikimedia category" which is "Wikimedia-kategori" in Swedish, this is also the label in Swedish in Wikimedia category (Q4167836). I don’t see any need to leave out the word "Wikimedia" just in that language. There exist two different descriptions in Swedish now which means that new categories with "Wikimedia-kategori" as description will not be identified as existing by the system, when there already exists the same label with the description "kategorisida", also the other way round. That means that a person who adds the same label to a new created item will not get an error message, because the descriptions are different.
  • The same is the case in English, where there exist "Wikimedia category" and "Wikimedia category page" and also "Wikipedia category page" (or was it "Wikipedia category"?, too many different versions – i.e. "Wikipedia category" here), so that noone knows which one shall be taken.

It would be the best to have just one description for category items for each language and not two or more different ones. Then wrong descriptions can be identified better, and double items can be found better. --October wind (talk) 22:16, 30 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@October wind: At the moment I'm trying to replace some descriptions in Wikimedia category (Q4167836), let's see how many users will (not) agree. There was a discussion above but I suggested to continue here. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
That’s good. There was an old discussion above, where it wasn’t even clear to me, in which direction the descriptions had been changed there, so I thought, it would be better to start the discussion new. Perhaps something can be taken from above, I don’t know.
I changed English to "Wikimedia category" in Wikimedia category (Q4167836), because I think that is the normal form without "page" (usually taken as descriptions for category items in English and in other languages except French, I think). Therefore, it wouldn’t be good, if only English should be changed back to the version with "page". But perhaps there might be a statistic anywhere, how often the 4 English descriptions are used by now: with/without "page", with "Wikimedia" or with "Wikipedia" (which should not be used anymore). If the version "Wikimedia category page" should be the English description in most of the category items, then the others can also be changed to that version. I just don’t have this impression by now. In French, I only saw descriptions with "page de", but not in English, so I prefer the version without "page" there. If English should use "page", then other languages’ descriptions would also be changed by other people to versions with "page" in the translations, and then we have the same problem again. So, it’s better to have some kind of identical descriptions in many languages, then there will be less chaos later. --October wind (talk) 22:15, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In the section above, there are listed "категория в проекте Викимедия" for ru: (which is wrong) and "kategorisida" for sv: for example, and I can’t see, if those are replaced by "категория в проекте Викимедиa" and "Wikimedia-kategori" (they should be replace this way) or if other correct (or other wrong) descriptions are replaced by those wrong descriptions, so it is better not to use the descriptions from above for category items. The other category descriptions seem to be right there and don’t need to be replaced, so I don’t know, in which direction descriptions are replaced or added there. There is a Y after those descriptions, which can mean, that those wrong descriptions have been replaced or that correct descriptions and other wrong descriptions are both replaced by those wrong descriptions. That’s a bit confusing to me. And the description for eo: in Wikimedia category (Q4167836) is "kategorio en Vikimedio" now, above it is "Vikimedio-kategorio". So, was "kategorio en Vikimedio" replaced by "Vikimedio-kategorio" or what? That’s all too confusing. --October wind (talk) 22:37, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
"Y" mean: add label if don't exist or replace existing label with new label, without "Y" I don't replace existing Label. --ValterVB (talk) 19:16, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, then ru: and sv: should be changed above, so that they aren’t used anymore in that form, and eo: should be discussed. Why is there an Y behind the wrong Russian version (see links in this section)? It can’t be right that the main page of the Russian Wikipedia and the Russian article about Wikimedia and also Wikimedia category (Q4167836) all are wrong, so I fear there have been replaced and added a lot of wrong Russian descriptions. Who added this description there or the Y? Did noone look at all those Russian spellings (which are all the same and all with a) before changing or adding wrong descriptions? Very strange. --October wind (talk) 23:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are also a lot of Finnish (fi:) descriptions "Wikipedia-luokka" which should be changed into "Wikimedia-luokka".
  • Then, there are the wrong descriptions "kategorie Wikipedie" in cs: and "kategoria Wikipedii" in pl:. Which descriptions with "Wikimedia" are right there, is it "Wikimedie" and "Wikimedii" instead?
  • "Kategorie op Wikipedia" in nds: can be "Wikimedia-Kategorie" instead, perhaps also "Kategorie op Wikimedia"? I don’t know which is better there.
  • "Wikipedia-kategori" in Danish (da:) should be changed to "Wikimedia-kategori". This should be the description in da:, nb:, nn: and sv:, not "Wikipedia-kategori" and not "kategorisida" or something like that.
  • Also gl: "categoría de Wikipedia" should also be changed, perhaps into "categoría de Wikimedia" (the same as in Spanish). Which language is that? --October wind (talk) 23:11, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
In Wikimedia category (Q4167836), cs: is "kategorie Wikimedie", so it should be changed this way. And pl: is "kategoria w projekcie Wikimedia" there, not "kategoria Wikimedii", so maybe take this one instead? I’ll add those two also above. --October wind (talk) 23:59, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

the bot should check if all linked pages are categories. it's annoying to revert such edits if they are wrong --Akkakk 09:35, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The bot can check this, if it adds new descriptions, but this bot request is only to correct those lots of wrong descriptions which already exist. The wrong descriptions "Wikimedia categorie" (nl:), "категория в проекте Викимедия" (ru:) or those with "Wikipedia" instead of "Wikimedia" should be corrected in any case, even if in another language there might be a wrong link that doesn’t link to a category or if there might be a bigger error in an item. If those errors would not be corrected, the wrong descriptions would be taken also for other category items. That’s not good, because there are problems with this (see above, there is no error message, when there are two items with the same label and different descriptions). I think a bot should just correct the wrong descriptions, so that there is afterwards just one description for each of those languages and not two or more. I don’t think that anyone would need to revert any of those bot edits, because then also those wrong descriptions would be wrong now which they are anyway (and not after the bot run). It doesn’t matter, if the descriptions are wrong, because it is wrong grammar/spelling or because it is "Wikipedia" instead of "Wikimedia", or if the descriptions are wrong, because it is no category item, they are wrong anyway. So there will be added no error that isn’t already existing now. It could only be that an already existing error could be found by such a bot edit, but then the whole item would have to be corrected anyway and a bot revert wouldn’t be enough.
By the way, wrong spelling and wrong grammar would also be corrected in Wikipedia articles, even if the article is being discussed and isn’t relevant at all, so there’s no reason not to correct errors, because there might be more errors with some of the items. ;-) --October wind (talk) 22:27, 14 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Remove descriptions consisting of language names only

Based on Wikidata:Bot requests/Archive/2014/01#Remove English descriptions consisting of language names only. After three months, we expanded the filter a bit. Is it possible to run a bot again for all descriptions and aliases (for labels there's false positives)? Matěj Suchánek (talk) 10:50, 8 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ping @Bene*:, you had done this task. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 16:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb

fr:Modèle:Imdb nom and de:Vorlage:IMDb Name could be used for IMDb ID (P345) ----- Jura 03:48, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Rotten Tomatoes

For Rotten Tomatoes ID (P1258), there is Template:Rotten Tomatoes (Q5615409). ----- Jura 07:47, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When running a bot for this, remember that sometimes Wikipedia articles contain Rotten Tomatoes references (or other database references) to different movies or people, besides the main topic of the article. --Closeapple (talk) 03:44, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

date of birth

For Q1062402, there is the date of birth in de:Template:Personendaten. Maybe others could be imported as well. --- Jura 08:10, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Place of birth, date of death, and place of death could probably be imported from there as well. ----- Jura 17:02, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stagnating fall of 0-statement items

The reduction of of 0-statement items has been stagnating in the last months. The last statistic even stows them growing again (http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/stats.php - see "Statements per item"). I was thinking that we should try to add at least one statement to those 5 million items till the end of the year. A translation in one of the major European languages would also be helpful. A good way of accessing 0-statement items is this tool (http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/important_blank_items.php). Some items are fairly exotic, but there would be opportunity for bot-edits. Here are some of them:

  • IC 2879 (Q3688473) - A lot of items labelled "IC 1234". Some information could be pulled from e.g. sr-wiki infobox on astronomical objects.
  • Photoisomerase (Q7316766) - It seems that the en-wiki infobox for enzymes has not been copied by bots. Fetching the CAS-number would be helpful so that Chemistry and Molecular-Biology WikiProjects could work on constraint violations.
  • NGC 930 (Q666669) - Many items labelled "NGC 12345" are also referring to astronomical objects and have a variety of infoboxes that could be matched against each other.
  • Taxtakəran (Q3674627), Udovičić (Q11185246) - Some countries still have geographic infoboxes that were not aquired yet.
  • Highway H23 (Q1961843) - Some wikis still have unaquired road infoboxes.

Adding one or two unsourced statments goes along with the whole Widar-trend. I still think it is helpful to do a rough categorization (even with missing sources), because it becomes easier for people to find the items they want to improve with sources. Also we shouldn't be ignoring 1/3 of our items. Tobias1984 (talk) 13:54, 12 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Intel processors

Hello. Can some bot please read Intel's site http://ark.intel.com and gather information from that database for the Wikidata? Its needed that it catches the name of the processors, create an item corresponding to each one and complete the item with the properties socket supported (P1041), instruction set (P1068), manufacturer (P176) and number of processor cores (P1141).--MisterSanderson (talk) 15:58, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you write them to ask that they release that data via a dump/machine readable API under a free license (or rather CC-0)? Even better, they could add it themselves here on Wikidata, to save us some work. --Nemo 17:16, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I could not find an appropiate e-mail adress at http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/company-overview/contact-us.html, so there is no way to contact them.--MisterSanderson (talk) 18:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Try any of the first four in "Intel PR Departments" [7] (calling yourself an analyst) and [8], you'll be fine. --Nemo 15:51, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I sent them a message.--MisterSanderson (talk) 11:37, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The contact was closed without response.--MisterSanderson (talk) 16:50, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NLA Persistent Identifier

New property: NLA Trove people ID (P1315).

It would be nice if a bot take a look at items with Libraries Australia ID (P409) and add the new property. --Kolja21 (talk) 18:50, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Fix italian born lists

There is a number of items referencing itwiki with names like "Nati nel <number>". I suggest that the following be done:

Manual example (no merge): [9],[10] GranD (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The relevant categories to get all such lists are w:it:Liste di morti nell'anno‎ (deaths) and w:it:Liste di nati nell'anno‎ (births). --Nemo 15:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Estonian biographical dictionary

I see a lot of et.wiki articles with w:et:Mall:ETBL lack properties on Wikidata. It's a tag for content from a biographical dictionary, so it seems safe to add instance of (P31) > human (Q5) to all of them. --Nemo 15:42, 23 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Importing coordinates from Polish Wikipedia

I've noticed that geographical coordinates have already been imported to Wikidata from most language versions of Wikipedia, but I can hardly see any imported from my own home wiki, which is Polish Wikipedia. We've got really loads of articles with coordinates, so I think it would be really beneficial to bring it all to Wikidata. Thank you in advance. Powerek38 (talk) 08:50, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Powerek38, I've been importing coordinates from several Wikipedia's. Maybe you could set up Wikidata:Coordinates tracking at the Polish Wikipedia? After that I'm more than happy to do the import. Multichill (talk) 09:06, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot Multichill, I'm not really a very technical user, so I've just set up a discussion in our coordinates wikiproject, so that my more able collegues can check if we can meet this requirement and how to do that. Feel free to join in if you have any hints, all members of that project understand English with no problems. Powerek38 (talk) 09:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Powerek38: Enabling it isn't that difficult. You just have to get pl:Moduł:Koordynaty modified like en:Module:Coordinates (example). It looks if the coordinates are displayed in the title and than looks for coordinate location (P625) to add the different tracker categories. I'll post this at the Polish Wikipedia too. Multichill (talk) 09:38, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. The category is created and I'm now importing. You'll see a error message on the coordinates. That's already fixed in the code (see bugzilla:62105 ) and will probably be deployed soon(ish). Multichill (talk) 18:27, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for your help on this, Multichill! Powerek38 (talk) 16:49, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"country of citizenship" <-- "place of birth"

Would it be possible to create a bot to add country of citizenship (P27) based in value of place of birth (P19)? For example, I added "country of citizenship:Brazil" in an item where "place of birth:<some city for which 'country:Brazil'>" Helder.wiki 13:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)

I would be very cautious with that. In many countries, you do not automatically get citizenship just because you were born in the country. --Zolo (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not only do many countries not have jus soli (Q604971), but even countries that have it sometimes have exceptions: For example, a child of a foreign diplomat is often exempt; the child is either not eligible for jus soli, or is presumed not to have local citizenship unless the child or parents assert that the child wants to retain it. A more common problem is that people sometimes renounce citizenship rather than retaining multiple citizenship (Q756296); I suspect this happens pretty often with notable people that have moved to other countries. Some other people lose citizenship against their will: see statelessness (Q223050). --Closeapple (talk) 00:44, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Importing coordinates from Spanish Wikipedia

If it is possible I would like to ask someone with bot to import into wikidata the coordinates from the pages of the categories w:es:Categoría:Wikipedia:Artículos con Ficha de entidad subnacional por trasladar coordenadas a Wikidata and w:es:Categoría:Wikipedia:Artículos por trasladar coordenadas a Wikidata. Thanks. --Agabi10 (talk) 14:22, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I can import that. No problem. You probably want to update es:Módulo:Coordenadas to add a category like Category:Coordinates not on Wikidata (Q15181099).
Enabling it isn't that difficult. You just have to get es:Módulo:Coordenadas modified like en:Module:Coordinates (example). It looks if the coordinates are displayed in the title and than looks for coordinate location (P625) to add the different tracker categories. Multichill (talk) 18:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  Done @Agabi10: a lot of the leftovers have invalid coordinates. Multichill (talk) 09:01, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill: And what is the problem the bot found to tell they are invalid? Because I try to put some of them and I could without any problem. --Agabi10 (talk) 12:28, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Agabi10: see for example es:Chavezpamba (parroquia) -> "Coordenadas: segundos de latitud >= 60 {{#coordinates:}}: latitud no válida". Multichill (talk) 12:53, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Multichill: OK, thanks for the example. I'll comment it in the spanish wikipedia and depending on what they say I'll close this request. Thank you. -- Agabi10 (talk) 14:23, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Multichill: They said me they'll try to repair them with a bot in the cases that it's possible. When it's done I'll tell you on your user talk page when it's done to run again your bot.

Importing images from da.wikipedia

Hi,

not sure if this is possible or not, but there is a category on da.wikipedia with about 5000 pages that have images, where wikidata does not have images [11]. If these could be brought into Wikidata that would be great. Sincerely, Taketa (talk) 21:22, 28 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Running. Multichill (talk) 09:04, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  Done @Taketa: leftovers should be checked by hand. Multichill (talk) 10:13, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

link enwiki article to items

See User:GZWDer/temp16. Note:

  1. There're some false positives in "Genus and other" section.
  2. There may be also some homonymous species in "Species" section.
  3. If there're more than one item after links, all such items should be merged too.

--GZWDer (talk) 10:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@GZWDer: how reliable are those data? --Ricordisamoa 00:49, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
@Ricordisamoa: This data is only from page title and labels/aliases. To be sure, please only link items with at least one sitelink whose page name is the same as page name in enwiki in "Species" section. "Genus and other" section should not be done for the time being.--GZWDer (talk) 08:29, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I can handle the species section. But this has to wait until I could report all of my yesterdays merges. The rest is a little bit more problematic, but I have some ideas. --Succu (talk) 08:36, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  Doing… the "Species" section. Skipping Q286251 since it matches "Coloborhynchus araripensis" and "Coloborhynchus clavirostris". --Ricordisamoa 12:17, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Connection of it.wiki categories

There are ~180 categories on it.wiki of the form Categoria:Trasporti nel <year> (from it:Categoria:Trasporti nel 1830 to it:Categoria:Trasporti nel 2014), all without wikidata items. Each one should be connected to the corresponding en.wiki page Category:<year> in transport (e.g. en:Category:1830 in transport). Would it be possible to do it with a bot? Thanks in advance--Dr Zimbu (talk) 20:29, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Dr Zimbu:   Done 185 changes. --Ricordisamoa 00:54, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

P6 script?

moved from Wikidata:Project_chat#P6_script

While working on Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P6 I thought about a script to add P6 statements more easily to our items. A nice to have would be a list with basic information on heads of government and the position held plus a script that adds that information to existing items for teritorial entities as well as creates new items for persons if necessary.
A basic list could look like this: 

Territorial entity;person;sex;citizenship;position;start;end
Q723796;Jean Claude Legoux;m;France;Q30185;2008;09.2011
Q723796;Jacky Furaux;m;France;Q30185;09.2011;

A script should add P6 statements to the item (Q723796) including start and end of term as qualifiers. Further it should create new items for the persons (if not already existing) and add statements like P31:Q5 (human), P21 (sex/gender), P27 (citizenship), P39 (position held) including the territorial entity as qualifier and links to the predecessor and succssor. Finally the script should remove the line from the list.
I could fill the list with the required information. Anybody, who could do the script? -- Pütz M. (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The right place for this request is Bot requests. However, the problem I see is on the person, need the item becuse the name can be "ambiguos".--ValterVB (talk) 18:12, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is indeed a problem as people could have had more than one position held. Could we implement in the script a semi-automatic duplicates check? Meaning, that no action is done if the name exists as label or alias. Those names could be checked manually. -- Pütz M. (talk) 18:43, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The problem is more complex. For ex. if person is John Richardson, what is the correct one in this list? And if the specific item isn't created, but exist another person with that name? Probably the risk of errors is too high. --ValterVB (talk) 19:45, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a specific bot problem. Also by manual editing a new item "John Richardson" could be created, although he might exist already.
In a case of possible duplicates (same label, same alias) I suggest that the bot takes no action, but leaves a notice in the list. Those cases could be checked manually. Like this we could minimize the risk of duplicates. -- Pütz M. (talk) 23:01, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On Polish Wikipedia names of 2000 categories were changed. I would like to rename records and link with new categories on plwiki. I have no idea how to extract and join Wikidata with these categories, but I hope some bot can do it :-)

List of categories is in my sandbox, and it is prepared as follow: 

Category:Old name ==> Category:New name

Sample editions: name & link. -- Blackfish (talk) 14:06, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Correct name parameter

In some pages given name (P735) has as value François (Q1450800) and it should be François (Q1166840). Can anyone correct this with a bot? Thanks. -- Agabi10 (talk) 08:17, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Bot_requests&oldid=136933480"