Community Wishlist Survey 2016/Categories/Wikidata

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
26 proposals, 225 contributors, 484 support votes

Primary Sources: When a claim from the tool gets approved, the page shouldn't get reloaded

  • Problem: Currently the page reloads every time a claim from the Primary Source tool get's approved or disapproved.
  • Who would benefit: All users of the Primary Source tool, because editing is easier. All downstream users of Wikidata for domains where the Primary Source tool has data, because more data would be added.
  • Proposed solution: Don't reload the page when claims get approved or disapproved but simply communicate the information in the background to the server and show the claim on the client side as a normal Wikidata statement.

Community discussion


Voting – Primary Sources: Don't reload when a claim from the tool gets approved

  1. Support Support And I could see this for other edits as well, Sadads (talk) 15:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --Micru (talk) 16:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support --Izno (talk) 01:25, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support ChristianKl (talk) 16:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support -- Mushroom (talk) 22:08, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support --Jklamo (talk) 15:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support --Geraki TL 06:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support--Runner1928 (talk) 02:43, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:09, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support--Nikosguard (talk) 09:24, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support - DPdH (talk) 21:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Query OpenStreetMap database for Wikidata links for each item

  • Who would benefit: Wikidata and OpenStreetMap editors, plus Wikidata readers who might not otherwise know that this geographical data exists.
  • Proposed solution: On every WD item, make a query to the OSM database (there are several different APIs by which this could be done) to see if there are any links to it.
  • Phabricator tickets: None yet.

Community discussion

  • Pinging Yurik. Jc86035 (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I believe you Jc86035 has the same concerns on this subject as Susannaanas, I see why this could possible be a issue as the existing solution without a identifier in Wikidata decreases the discover-ability. I'm afraid a new database(which would simply be a extract from OSM) is not a solution to this issue. Abbe98 (talk) 21:11, 13 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Yes, I have changed my vote on this topic to focus on the OSM database instead of the Wikidata ID 402, but make sure the geographic data will be as easily queryable as if it was a native Wikidata ID. I would not want to impose the 402 ID database solution to be the selected one to solve the issue. --Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 07:14, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • this sounds like a bot request not something for wikimedia developers? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:00, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @ArthurPSmith: No, not a bot request (automatic display of info based on querying their API), although it would be perfectly fine if it were implemented that way and the Wikidata database was updated whenever the OSM database had a change (and vice versa). Jc86035 (talk) 11:12, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Jc86035: I don't believe wikidata or any WMF project should be dependent in its UI on some outside project, if that's what you're implying. However, this could be implemented as an optional gadget that does the work via javascript - again probably not something for WMF developers to do. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:48, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Here is a UserScript which adds a link to the item's corresponding OpenStreetMap element, it will add a link whenever there is a wikidata tag referencing the item's URI over at OpenStreetMap. Abbe98 (talk) 20:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • WMF is already mantaining a OSM Wikidata extract (the geoshapes service of Kartotherian), so it could build on this to satisfy this proposal. I strongly suggest against mantaining the Wikidata property to link to OSM because OpenStreetMap IDs are not stable (they can change for a given object when someone makes for example a split of a way). --Sabas88 (talk) 10:48, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Query OpenStreetMap database for Wikidata links for each item

Show only items that are allowed given the constraints of property when the user searches for them

  • Problem: When a user adds a new statement and searches for the proper item to link he's shown many items that aren't allowed by the constraints set on the property.

This means it takes more effort to select the right one.

  • Who would benefit: All Wikidata editors. It would also make it easier to become a Wikidata editor
  • Proposed solution: Only items that are allowed given the constraints that are set via statements for the property that's used should be shown in the text based search.

It should still be possible to select items that violate the constrains by entering the ID of the item.

  • Phabricator tickets:

ChristianKl (talk) 21:50, 10 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Community discussion

  • Good idea! JnRouvignac (talk) 22:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Much needed! An obvious first step would be to filter out disambiguation pages. Syced (talk) 15:40, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This functionality is offered by the suggestions. However, it can be improved and it also doesn't work for qualifiers. To make the suggestor work for qualifiers currently, you must save the statement and then open the qualifier which will narrow the number of possible choices in the drop-down considerably. Jane023 (talk) 15:48, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Jane023:What exactly do you mean with the suggestions? Those items that are offered without typing anything? ChristianKl (talk) 13:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For example, if I use P217 for "inventory number", I can save that statement. This property is suggested correctly to me after I add P31 instance of "painting". That is correct behavior of the suggestor functionality. The problem with qualifiers is that for this statement, I would prefer to have it qualified with the collection, but the suggestor does not suggest P195 for "collection" unless I first save the P217 statement and open it again to add the qualifier. It should be possible for the suggestor to suggest the P195 qualifier as it is probably the most common qualifier for the P217 statement. Jane023 (talk) 10:46, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Something like that seems useful.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:31, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Instead of restricting only to allowed items, I would rather have them appearing first in the choices. --Melderick (talk) 21:27, 20 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not really convinced that our constraint definitions can't be improved and that the universe should be limited by them, but it would help if it was more likely that useful values come first. In any case, I think the situation has much improved some time ago. At some point, one couldn't even get to useful items .. --Jura1 (talk) 23:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I agree with Jura1 here. We should spend time on improving our constraint system and related tools and not move away from one of the fundamental concepts of Wikidata. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:30, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'm not proposing creating a hard limit of the universe. It would still be possible to enter items that violate constraints by entering the items ID. In most cases it would just require a conscious choice to violate the constraint. A user would have to specifically search for the item and enter the ID.
The effect of this proposal is that *items should follow the constraints* not that *items must follow the constraints*. When constraints are violated, there should the a conscious decision whether this is simply an exception (in that case it's okay to go through the extra effort of searching the ID) or whether the constraint definition should be changed. ::ChristianKl (talk) 23:49, 27 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • If we would really think that everything goes as far as property usage and property can be used in ways that are very different from the way they were proposed the current proposal system doesn't make sense. This would encourage people to use the property the way it was proposed or alternatively advocate changing the property. ChristianKl (talk) 16:11, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In case the implemented feature is about moving items that match constraints to the top I would also a visual marker for those statements that violate constraints. ChristianKl (talk) 11:10, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Show only items that are allowed given the constraints of property

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support--Gareth (talk) 12:03, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support ChristianKl (talk) 16:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Oppose Oppose if this is a hard constraint; Support Support if the matching items are moved to the top of the list but others are also available ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support anything to improve suggestions is welcome. Jane023 (talk) 10:48, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. per ArthurPSmith, Support Support to prioritize items that are allowed given the constraints, Oppose Oppose to hide not allowed completely. --Jklamo (talk) 15:09, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Oppose Oppose per Arthur. --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. as per ArthurPSmith. Oppose Oppose if this is a hard constraint; Support Support if the matching items are moved to the top of the list but others are also available. --FocalPoint (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support matching items are moved to the top of the list but others are also available. Oppose Oppose to hide others. --Geraki TL 06:42, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --Entbert (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support -- T.seppelt (talk) 16:04, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support-- as others suggested, only to prioritize suggestions by which items are optimal and push to the bottom of suggestions (and maybe mark) those items which violate constraints Runner1928 (talk) 02:45, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support with ArthurPSmith's caveat. --Waldir (talk) 12:10, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support --NaBUru38 (talk)
  16. Support Support --Chrumps (talk) 03:18, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support -- Gelli1742 (talk) 11:11, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support - DPdH (talk) 21:19, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support Support I see a problem if the target item doesn't have (enough) statements; so per ArthurPSmith. --KuboF (talk) 21:57, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support Support by giving priority to more relevant items (but not completely banning irrelevant). It is a bit annoying to fix people born in a bot named Algeria or a hotel named UkraineNickK (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support Support Obviously. --Yann (talk) 23:51, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Statistics of use of Wikidata's data

  • Problem: At this moment it is difficult, and probably even quite impossible, to measure the quantitative effect and impact of the work that we, volunteers, do on Wikidata. Where is our data used, re-used? How often is the data viewed - both on Wikimedia projects and externally? We can measure pageviews of Wikipedia articles, to a certain extent views of media files, but we can't measure views and (Wikimedia- or externally originated) pulls and uses of data on Wikidata yet.
  • Who would benefit: Everyone in our community probably, especially the Wikidata community, as this would make the impact of our work much more visible, and would also allow us to see where there is still room for improvement. It would be extremely useful for external partners as well. I have worked with several Flemish GLAMs on an import of their collections to Wikidata and their first wish is to see how often their collections are viewed and re-used from Wikidata.
  • Proposed solution: Initiate a project to start measuring the actual use and re-use of data on Wikidata. I can imagine this would be measured by item at least.
  • More comments: We discussed this in a Wikidata+GLAM session at Wikimania 2016. Some basic notes from that discussion can be found here in this etherpad (scroll down to the bottom in the pad). When this proposal is endorsed by enough others, I (Spinster (talk)) am very willing to structure this further.
  • Phabricator tickets: phab:T138697 (still empty, more info in etherpad mentioned above)

Community discussion

  • This is an aspect to fix. Something easy like a link "what uses this" instead of "what links here" would be nice to have. On commons cross-wiki use of a file is easy to get, it should be as easy also for wikidata information.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:12, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Unlike its countrparts, Wikidata is used mostly dynamically. Often by apps outside of Wikimedia, which our privacy policy probably forbids us to disclose. So, a good way to show statistics could be "This item has been read 70 times in the last 24 hours". Syced (talk) 06:00, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
wait. Are we discussing of a in-wiki reuse or a general reuse? I don't think the proposal was to monitor the second type of reuse, that would be clearly impossible... I think it's about knowing how many templates on local platform uses wikidata information of an item and where, basically.--Alexmar983 (talk) 08:15, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It is clearly stated in the description: "both on Wikimedia projects and externally". Cheers! Syced (talk) 09:12, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, definitely also external use. I expect we're smart enough to disclose some information about that (numbers, generic categories of types of web services re-using the content...) without violating privacy policies. Spinster (talk) 18:51, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I really want this kind of data too but the issue isn't that we have the data and do not share it. We don't actually have the data. Anyone can download for example the database dump and use the data without us having any way of knowing this. There is a research project that was trying to make at least some basic guessing and heuristics about it but it isn't even really started yet. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 14:11, 18 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am surprised the two aspects were united in a single proposal, there are quite different from a wikimedian point of view. I guess I skipped it because I don't even understand how the second request could be possible. You can get some general summary of views and downloads, I guess, but that better be a separate request. And in any case, spending energy to guess it somehow before a easy interface for monitoring cross-wiki use seems excessive at the moment, the first step should be the "crosswiki" reuse. Instead of having people discussing about something that is needed for "wiki management" we end up discussing mainly about the second aspect, that looks like a dead end at the moment.--Alexmar983 (talk) 08:46, 19 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes developers can download the whole database and use it locally (just like people can read Wikipedia on a DVD or via the Kiwix apps), but most apps query the live Wikidata dynamically, so counting queries at would provide good-enough statistics. Syced (talk) 07:42, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Spinster: Do you want this proposal to focus on interwiki transclusions of Wikidata items or API/external requests for item data? or both? Ryan Kaldari (WMF) (talk) 00:08, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Both. They can be split in separate proposals if that makes things clearer. Spinster (talk) 17:02, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Statistics of use of Wikidata's data

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support--Gareth (talk) 12:05, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support as proposer. Spinster (talk) 15:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support --Mikey641 (talk) 18:26, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support Jane023 (talk) 10:38, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support Yes for better statistics of use for items but also for properties (for example d:Template:ExternalUse should be updated automatically).--Jklamo (talk) 15:17, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support Pamputt (talk) 07:34, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support --Beat Estermann (talk) 09:19, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support Jsamwrites (talk) 18:39, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --FocalPoint (talk) 20:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support Mike Peel (talk) 22:27, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 22:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support --WikedKentaur (talk) 23:20, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Weak Support Support This needs to be done in a way that respects the individual's privacy. NMaia (talk) 00:41, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support --Jordi G (talk) 09:05, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support Draceane (talk) 11:00, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support SupportJc86035 (talk) 11:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support Support--Adert (talk) 22:44, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support Support--Pauljmackay (talk) 11:12, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  22. Support Support--Runner1928 (talk) 02:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:10, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support Support--Nikosguard (talk) 09:21, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Support Support Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:15, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:28, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support Support In OpenStreetMap they have a statistic tool, called Taginfo. Perhaps this can give some inspirations what is possible. This tool is also integrated in there wiki. --Kolossos (talk) 12:48, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support Support--David1010 (talk) 20:46, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  29. Support Support - Can't manage what's not measured. DPdH (talk) 21:20, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  30. Support Support--Alexmar983 (talk) 03:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  31. Support Support--Mikheil Talk 21:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  32. Support Support more statistics — NickK (talk) 23:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support for Incubator projects

  • Problem: Currently it is not possible in Wikidata to add sitelinks to pages that belong to language versions which are still in Incubator (or OldWikisource or BetaWikiversity). This means that editors of these test-projects cannot profit from interwiki links provided by Wikidata and also not from the other data stored on Wikidata.
  • Who would benefit: Users who contribute to test-projects on Incubator (OldWS, BetaWV), wanting to start a new language version of one of our projects
  • Proposed solution: All language codes permissible for wikimedia projects (ie generally ISO 639-1 and -3) should be available for choosing in the sitelinks sections of Wikidata. When a code is entered of which there is no subdomain (of Wikipedia, Wikivoyage, etc.) yet, the target page should be searched on Incubator. (e.g. Wikipedia sitelinks, code liv, page name X => Search for incubator:Wp/liv/X and allow addition of the link if that page exists). [taken from the bug which I filed]

Community discussion

  • Yes, this is a frequently requested feature which has been "in the queue" for too long already, as far as I am concerned. I would really appreciate implementation. --Vogone (talk) 00:42, 12 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Given that incubator is experimental, I think storage should be done locally, not on Wikidata. --Jura1 (talk) 10:04, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Given that incubator aims to provide the exact same user experience as any project with an own domain, integration to Wikidata is pretty crucial to its success. --Vogone (talk) 00:28, 26 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Support for Incubator projects

  1. Support Support --MF-W 14:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --Vogone (talk) 14:22, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support --Steinsplitter (talk) 15:05, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support --Wolverène 15:18, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support --StevenJ81 (talk) 15:23, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support --Micru (talk) 16:09, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support --Base (talk) 16:16, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support --GeekEmad (talk) 18:44, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    (was support) --Ibrahim khashrowdi (talk) 18:52, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    For the record, User:Ibrahim khashrowdi has stated on Incubator that he now opposes, in that he is concerned it will create a disincentive for the Language Committee to move projects out of Incubator. StevenJ81 (talk) 17:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Which, also for the record, is complete nonsense, as LangCom (rightly) doesn't care about the usability of Incubator. I say this as a LangCom member. --MF-W 03:21, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support JAn Dudík (talk) 22:21, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support --Siri111 (talk) 23:04, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --Yair rand (talk) 07:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support --Lsanabria (talk) 15:15, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 22:57, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support NMaia (talk) 00:39, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support -Mh7kJ (talk) 01:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:44, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support Jmvkrecords (Intra talk) 10:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support - Nikki (talk) 18:20, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support Support This will be very helpful for instances like voy:fi:, which just got imported with thousands of interwiki links which need to be removed as well as a sidebar which links to language editions of Wikipedia. —Justin (koavf)TCM 19:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support Support --Framawiki (talk) 20:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support SupportAjraddatz (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  22. Support Support. Matiia (talk) 23:13, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Support Support KPFC💬 23:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support Support the wub "?!" 13:32, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Support Support --SDKmac (talk) 13:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Support Support --XXnickiXx (talk) 13:51, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support Support --Metrophil (talk) 13:52, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support Support --Œ̷͠²ð·¨´´̢́̕͘³͏¯̞̗ (talk) 13:54, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  29. Support Support --Kenny McFly (talk) 13:57, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  30. Support Support --By erdo can • TLK 17:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  31. Support Support -- Freddy2001 talk 18:46, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  32. Support Support --DCB (talk) 22:15, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  33. Support Support --Rschen7754 04:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  34. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:11, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  35. Support Support Would be a very nice feature that would further lower the difference between regular wikis and Incubator test wikis. As long as it implemented properly, i.e. each test wiki on Incubator is treated as a regular project (being able to add the language link xyz which goes to Wx/xyz/Page on Incubator). SPQRobin (talk) 22:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  36. Support Support --HakanIST (talk) 06:38, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  37. Support Support --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:17, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  38. Support Support Pabouk (talk) 13:13, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  39. Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  40. Support Support yes — regards, Revi 06:27, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  41. Support Support --Kusurija (talk) 20:05, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  42. Support Support --DangSunM (talk) 01:46, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  43. Support SupportDerHexer (Talk) 22:58, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  44. Support Support --Wnme 20:35, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  45. Support Support--David1010 (talk) 20:47, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  46. Support Support-- Save the Babies.--Stemoc 02:21, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  47. Support Support--Shanmugamp7 (talk) 02:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  48. Support Support. RadiX 02:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  49. Support Support Gives more recognition to developing wikis. Ebe123 (Communication | Activity report) 14:55, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  50. Support Support - Useful. Smile4ever (talk) 18:49, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  51. Support Support--Mikheil Talk 21:32, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  52. Support Support --DerMaxdorfer (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  53. Support Support In Incbator we are now using methods like "In this space sometime will be information". The possibility to use Wikidata's data would help a lot. --KuboF (talk) 22:05, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  54. Support SupportNickK (talk) 23:22, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Take care of disambiguation items

  • Problem: A sizeable part of Wikidata items are merely about disambiguations. Much of their maintenance could be automatize.
  • Who would benefit: Wikidata contributors finding them in other fields
Points to cover
  • 1. Complete descriptions with standard text in all languages (already exists)
    • 1a. add missing descriptions
    • 1b. normalize descriptions if possible
  • 2. Merge items with same label in all languages
  • 3. List empty disambiguation items for deletions (items with no sitelinks)
  • 4. Add P31= based on disambiguation categories at Wikidata (partially exists )
  • 5. List problems, solve some automatically
  • 6. Undo incorrect merges
    • 6a. identify by P31 values
  • 7. Ensure sitelinks are disambiguation pages
    • 7a. Disconnect sitelinks that are not disambiguation pages from disambiguation item phab:T144271
    • 7b. Disconnect sitelinks that are disambiguation pages from items that are not disambiguation items (sample)
  • 8. Process disambiguation categories per wiki for most actions
  • 9. Process some actions in two steps: analyze what needs to be done then, maybe a week later, re-analyze what needs to be done and do what still needs to done.
  • 10. Remove description "disambiguation" from items that don't have P31=Q4167410
  • 11. Delete sitelinks that are redirects to disambiguation pages

Community discussion

  • Yes it should be. Now that we have wikidata, it would be nice to have some automatic disambiguation page. One aspect is how to include the articles that don't exist yet, as it is impossible to tell to a bot if it is a problem of relevance in one wiki, or they haven't been created yet. But if a wiki is very practical, a simple "show as a red link items that exist in at least n wiki" is IMHO a decent compromise if it removes hours of editing. Many wiki will accept it.--Alexmar983 (talk) 11:45, 21 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Sure, I guess it could be expanded. With the above, I had in mind mainly the Wikidata side. There are now 1 million such items and they tend to get mixed-up with actual content. --Jura1 (talk) 21:01, 22 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Jura1: Hi, I think this is a duplicate of the more detailed proposal at .../Bots and gadgets#Import Wikidata text for disambiguation pages. If you agree, please can you merge any extra details, into that proposal, and remove this section? (So that people don't have to vote on the same thing twice). If you disagree, please could you clarify your proposal, with more details and examples from the linked page, so that people voting next week can easily understand the idea without having to read that large discussion? Much thanks. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 02:14, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Take care of disambiguation items

  1. Support Support --YMS (talk) 16:25, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --ValterVB (talk) 18:02, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support this sounds helpful - however is there anything on here that actually requires any development, or just getting the community to help fix these things (with some bots)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support we could put disambiguation pages on steroids. Jane023 (talk) 11:07, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support --Jklamo (talk) 15:19, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Oppose Oppose full automation, unless certain categories of pages will be left alone by bots. I am particularly concerned that #7 would unlink anthroponymy (human name) pages in enwiki, where the main content is a list of people sharing a name. en:MOS:DABNAME distinguishes these from disambiguation pages, even in the many cases where there is not also a disambiguation page for the same name/word. However, in many cases, the equivalent pages are disambiguation pages in other-language wikipedias. – Fayenatic london (talk) 22:58, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Point 8 should take care of such issues. --Jura1 (talk) 10:03, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support --Almondega (talk) 11:14, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support --Vogone (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support - Agree. DPdH (talk) 10:01, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

View two items at the same time

  • Problem: It's hard to copy statements and references from one item to another.
  • Who would benefit: Editors that enter data.
  • Proposed solution: Provide a UI with opens one item on the left side and another on the right side.

Allow dragging statements/references from one item to the other to copy them. Shift+Drag might move statements/references.

  • Phabricator tickets:

Community discussion

  • This sounds like a good idea. Anything to make it easier to copy statements or references would really be a good thing. – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:26, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I wrote some code at gerrit:241296 for a tool based on a similar concept; references can still be moved only along with the statements they belong to, the dragging gesture works to move pieces of data (the Ctrl key must be held down to copy them) and overall it doesn't work well but you can find a demo here --Ricordisamoa 17:54, 19 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This is why browsers have tabs, and resizeable windows... Drag-drop sounds like it would be useful, but viewing two items at once on a single page sounds less useful... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Dragging and dropping between browser windows is likely not possible. Therefore it needs to be in the website UI. ChristianKl (talk) 17:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – View two items at the same time

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support Sadads (talk) 15:11, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support and add possibility to merge them :-) JAn Dudík (talk) 22:21, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support ChristianKl (talk) 16:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support yes Jane023 (talk) 11:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support --Yiyi (talk) 15:51, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 11:16, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support Tothasze (talk) 09:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support - DPdH (talk) 10:12, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ability to edit Wikidata from WP and other projects

  • Problem: "Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". But this is true only if they are able to do it. Since we use Wikidata in Wikipedia, we have more and more articles with empty infoboxes or other similar templates, or hard-to-understand code inserted into the wikitext. If somebody tries to change this information (data) in the article, they realize that it is not possible, neither in wikitext editor nor using Visual Editor. Even many experienced editors have stopped using Wikipedia since they are not able to make the changes they wanted, and felt stupid / too old for it, and they don't want to learn another project (developed for rather technophiles). I've led some edit-a-thons recently and it is hard to explain for newbies, that editing Wikipedia is very easy, but only if you don't want to change the part of the article that's imported from Wikidata. I know that there is a link in the left side to the Wikidata page of the article, but I don't feel this would be an easy to use or final solution.
  • Who would benefit: Everybody (new and old editors especially)
  • Proposed solution: I would like to have an option to change the data (from Wikidata) in Wikipedia or at least I would like to see a direct link beside every single data which redirect me to the specified Wikidata property (statement, identifier etc) inside the Wikidata item.

Community discussion

Wikivoyage's listing editor, which integrates Wikidata in a user-friendly way
  • I don't see how this could be implemented without massive changes in the UI or in the way Wikipedia works. Even if we ignore cross-references to more than the directly associated Wikidata page: The current Wikipedia editing interface is plain text, while some Wikidata property values don't work as plain text (they are references to other items, they have multiple entries, they need specific formatting, ...). In addition, the plain text is a local thing - you don't want to update the local text every time the Wikidata entry gets modified. Importing the Wikidata user interface could work, then the user can edit the article in one area and edit the Wikidata page in a different area, but that is not very intuitive either and it would need a completely new user interface. --mfb (talk) 12:18, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This is doable, even though it probably requires a lot of development. A good example is how Wikivoyage allows readers to edit Wikidata information through a user-friendly popup, see screenshot. Syced (talk) 15:46, 14 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think this needs proper implementation of constraints first. Otherwise I would expect a lot of wrong data to be entered when multiple items have the same name. ChristianKl (talk) 13:06, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A further problem seems to be that different Wikipedia's use different software to interact with Wikidata. ChristianKl (talk) 13:10, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • wikidata literacy is a problem, it takes at least 3-4 messages per wikidata-newbie to let them understand how wikidata kinda works (basically read the item, make a manual edit, understand what is an Identifer...), and this even if the platform they are active has a more robust wikidata diffusion and they kinda got the concept that wikidata exists. More than 50%-60% of them don't even understand how the crosswikilink interface actually works (for example they are totally unaware they leave edits on wikidata when they connect pages between different language editions). We hence need to address the problem also from the software side, as the problem of this literacy is not fully understood by the vast majority or even worse monopolized by few users ("they ask me", "they ask just here") which is slightly anti-wiki. Wikidata should be an opportunity to increase the potentialities of users, not to reduce it. So I morally support every attempt to reduce the gap.--Alexmar983 (talk) 05:29, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think a key thing to implement here is to make easy the amendment of an already inserted piece of WikiData without users having to leave Wikipedia. I think the actual insertion of it will remain a technical task and is less of a concern to fix in this respect. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 00:18, 18 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Some gadgets with a similar aim are already partially functional, like fr:User:0x010C/script/DataboxEditor.js and ru:Wikipedia:WE-Framework: their developers would certainly have good ideas about this. Oliv0 (talk) 09:03, 20 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note: There's some ongoing research into this, in these links. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Also some related discussion in phab:T112987 which was out of last year's Make it easy to build infoboxes that display information from wikidata. Quiddity (WMF) (talk) 23:26, 24 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Ability to edit Wikidata from WP and other projects

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --Titou (talk) 08:51, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support--Gareth (talk) 12:08, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support Sadads (talk) 15:12, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support Even though it's unclear at the moment exactly how this could work, I very much support the thinking behind it. We should be working towards greater integration. MichaelMaggs (talk) 20:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support Note, this is not for a specific solution.— Jeblad 01:57, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support more attention to better integration, specifically. Editing Wikidata is IMHO easier than editing Wikipedia, but I can totally see that the transition between both is very confusing. Spinster (talk) 15:41, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support --Mikey641 (talk) 18:27, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support however the UI would need to be quite different from the traditional wikipedia text edit UI... ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:51, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support --Telaneo (User talk page) 22:04, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support Blue Elf (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support, at first for a single English Wikipedia infobox such as Infobox Person. UI should work on mobile too. Syced (talk) 07:24, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support Alexei Kopylov (talk) 08:16, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Oppose Oppose unless this becomes like the Commons interface for non-English Wikipedians, where they click the upload and get dumped into Commons. Now that people have got used to that, they can get used to it with Wikidata too. Jane023 (talk) 12:26, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support Trizek from FR 19:59, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support --Fixuture (talk) 21:20, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support --Ryan • (talk) • 23:22, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support --Vachovec1 (talk) 20:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support Support --FocalPoint (talk) 20:51, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support Support Mike Peel (talk) 22:30, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support Support --WikedKentaur (talk) 23:22, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  22. Support SupportPatrug (talk) 00:37, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Support Support NMaia (talk) 00:43, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:47, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Support Support --Geraki TL 06:52, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Support Support Oliv0 (talk) 07:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support Support Draceane (talk) 11:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support SupportJc86035 (talk) 11:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  29. Support Support There have been a few complaints that the way to alter Wikidata information is not intuitive and requires you to hop between websites. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:57, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  30. Support Support --Framawiki (talk) 20:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  31. Support SupportAjraddatz (talk) 23:08, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  32. Support SupportSusanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 11:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  33. Support Support Pamputt (talk) 10:44, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  34. Support Support --Julien1978 (d.) 12:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  35. Support Support -- T.seppelt (talk) 16:05, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  36. Support Support --By erdo can • TLK 17:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  37. Support Support--Runner1928 (talk) 02:39, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  38. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  39. Support Support --Kurt Jansson (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  40. Support Support I support the idea of more deep integration between Wikipedia and Wikidata. It would be really nice to do it the same way as interwiki data were changed. I also think that wikipedians should learn to use wikidata. So I'd like this divided into 2 proposals: 1. Redesign templates and infoboxes. 2. Improve experience of people who are not aware about Wikidata. --Vanuan (talk) 06:35, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  41. Support Support--Ranjithsiji (talk) 11:22, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  42. Support Support Pabouk (talk) 13:08, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  43. Support Support I think this is the most important proposal of the year. There are already multiple projects to develop this functionality, and from Wikidata's inception this was an imagined feature. Perhaps now is time. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:29, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  44. Support Support ★ → Airon 90 09:33, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  45. Support Support --Afernand74 (talk) 11:23, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  46. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 03:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  47. Support Support would be very useful --LT910001 (talk) 06:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  48. Support SupportRhododendrites talk \\ 15:00, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  49. Support Support --Fixer88 (talk) 20:59, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  50. Support Support --Arnd (talk) 13:52, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  51. Support Support --Tarjeimo (talk) 23:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  52. Support Support Blue Elf (talk) 23:38, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  53. Support Support --DangSunM (talk) 01:54, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  54. Support Support--Nizil Shah (talk) 06:57, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  55. Support Support--Kaitil (talk) 09:37, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  56. Support Support --Kjersti Lie (talk) 11:36, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  57. Support Support --Waldir (talk) 12:11, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  58. Support Support -- Gabriel Kielland (talk) 13:33, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  59. Support Support Stigmj (talk) 20:27, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  60. Support Support This is years overdue.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  18:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  61. Support Support--Ezzex (talk) 20:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  62. Support Support Ulflarsen (talk) 00:08, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  63. Support Support no-brainer RadiX 02:27, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  64. Support Support - DPdH (talk) 10:13, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  65. Support Support --Elitre (talk) 18:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  66. Support Support --KuboF (talk) 22:34, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  67. Support Support, this will kill an annoying argument "this is imported from Wikidata and some guys decided something I don't agree with, how can I remove this" by more prominent notice that Wikidata is editable as well — NickK (talk) 23:24, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  68. Support Support --Yann (talk) 23:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  69. Support Support (disclaimer: I am the initiator) -- Samat (talk) 23:56, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ability to reuse references in Wikidata

  • Problem: Even if the same reference is used for every item of a Wikidata entry, the reference data has to be entered separately for each field.
  • Who would benefit: People entering references in Wikidata.
  • Proposed solution: Have a selection drop-down in every field that displays references already entered in that Wikidata page.
  • Phabricator tickets:

Community discussion

Aracali, are you aware of the DuplicateReferences gadget (can be turned on in your Wikidata preferences)? If you are, do you propose something more extensive than that? I agree references are still cumbersome to add in Wikidata, but that gadget helps a lot. Spinster (talk) 20:21, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Part of the problem might be that these gadgets are not well-advertized. Do you know if there is a help page that lists reference-specific ones by function? – Ajraddatz (talk) 08:25, 16 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No, I was not aware of that. Perhaps it should be "on" by default. The documentation is pretty sparse, and when I tried to use the gadget I was surprised when it automatically saved the change after pasting the reference. I was expecting that it would add it in edit mode, so items such as page number could be changed, and the user would be asked before saving. Thanks for the pointer, Aracali (talk) 03:04, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for this proposal!!! I didn't know that there is a gadget/tool/artifact/cacharro/parato that allows to use one reference once and again. By the way, how do you add a page/volume number? I've been referencing with Enciclopedia Espasa (100+ volumes) and Britannica (30+ ones) and all I could say is It's (somewhere) there. Definitely documentation is pretty sparse, references are still cumbersome to add in Wikidata and these gadgets are not well-advertized. B25es (talk) 17:29, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ah. The needs are clearer to me. Yes, it would be excellent if this functionality would be integrated in the default interface. I think this is also related to the WikiCite project, but I have not explored that very much yet. Spinster (talk) 18:54, 17 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Ability to reuse references in Wikidata

  1. Support Support--Gareth (talk) 12:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support--Aracali (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support Sadads (talk) 15:13, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support Spinster (talk) 15:44, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support --YMS (talk) 16:26, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support -- Mushroom (talk) 22:12, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support Jane023 (talk) 12:27, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support --Nouill (talk) 14:12, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support B25es (talk) 17:56, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --AmaryllisGardener talk 19:05, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support Mike Peel (talk) 22:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:48, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support --Geraki TL 06:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support Oliv0 (talk) 07:28, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support --Entbert (talk) 15:15, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. Support Support I'm also sorely missing a way to reuse a reference on multiple items. - Nikki (talk) 18:22, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Support Support. Matiia (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Support SupportSusanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 11:18, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  20. Support Support Pamputt (talk) 10:44, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  21. Support Support -- Marcus Cyron (talk) 12:06, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  22. Support Support -- the wub "?!" 13:34, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  23. Support Support --By erdo can • TLK 17:01, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  24. Support Support --HHill (talk) 10:56, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  25. Support Support --Bamyers99 (talk) 18:59, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  26. Support Support Chewbacca2205 (talk) 19:53, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  27. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:00, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  28. Support Support Beyond duplicating the references I suppose this means WikiCite collections of all references also. Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  29. Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:29, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  30. Support Support --M11rtinb (talk) 16:21, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  31. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 03:03, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  32. Support Support On enwiki people keep carrying on that "OMG! Wikidata is full of unreferenced stuff!" It's often overblown, but it is a problem, and a great deal of the problem comes from the fact that the interface is tedious and fiddly to use. Opabinia regalis (talk) 06:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  33. Support Support This is a no-brainer.  — SMcCandlish ¢ ≽ʌⱷ҅ʌ≼  18:31, 11 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  34. Support Support So long I've been waiting for this. RadiX 02:31, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  35. Support Support - DPdH (talk) 10:14, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  36. Support Support, although I think a gadget is available for this — NickK (talk) 23:25, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  37. Support Support --Yann (talk) 23:52, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Allow looking up Entities by specific property value

  • Problem: :#It is hard to match Wikidata records with pages on other wikimedia projects or 3rd party services without ability to look up entities based on the external identifiers associated with them. For example if I know VIAF number to be "2481716" I would like to be able to look up d:Q728201 using Lua.
  1. Many Commons pages in different namespaces might need to access Wikidata properties, but only one can be connected by a sitelink. Currently most pages on Commons that need to access Wikidata use hardwired entry q-code which create maintenance issues to keep them in synch with links from Wikidata to Commons. A better solution would be ability to look up entities based on the values of specific properties. For example Lua code on c:Institution:Archéa page should be able to look up d:Q2860590 as entry that has P1612 set to "Archéa".
  • Who would benefit: People trying to link to Wikidata. Users on projects that can benefit from linking to Wikidata.
  • Proposed solution: Create Lua function mw.wikibase.getEntityByProperty(property, value) that can look up an entity by a value of specified property. There are tools like resolver or multibeacon that can do that, but I would like to use it from Lua. I think it would be wise to implement it only for properties that have Distinct values constraint. Other restrictions on which property that applies to might also be needed.
  • More comments: Alternative approach to problem of Commons pages needing hardwired q-codes to access Wikidata properties was to create items for them on Wikidata that redirect to the main article item where the properties are kept. Many commons category pages are connected through sitelinks to category items which redirect through property P301 to item with properties. The idea would be to extend this approach to many more categories and commons pages in Creator and Institution namespaces. The issue with this approach is that it creates a lot of extra Wikidata items that have to be maintained and kept in synch with each other. Currently if a category is renamed on Commons than that name has to be replaced in 3 different places (category item sitelink, category item P373 and article item P373). Also maintenance of P373 is not keeping up as we have 209,687 Distinct value constraint violations. I would like to avoid creating any items that only hold information kept in other item properties.
  • Phabricator tickets:

Community discussion

  • @Smalyshev (WMF): Thoughts? Would it be possible to call WDQS from Lua? Would that be a terrible idea (due to lag issues)? Ryan Kaldari (WMF) (talk) 00:17, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • We are currently in the deign phase of allowing people to create automated lists on Wikipedia and co based on queries to Wikidata. This is the solution to a much larger problem. In addition we might want to have specialized indexes for identifiers for example and expose them directly without going through sparql. Nothing concrete yet though. --Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) (talk) 08:16, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'm not sure whether it would be a good idea. There are two things to consider here:
      1. Roundtrip time (queries can take really long, and I'm not sure putting those in Lua - e.g. callable from parser) is good.
      2. Result sizes - query can return millions of items, what would we do with them?
    • If we're looking at very limited subset - like matching by VIAF number or another authority property - it can be made to work, maybe even with faster triple-fragments query. But anything more complex really needs much more careful approach, it can explode rather quickly. --Smalyshev (WMF) (talk) 20:45, 23 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Allow looking up Entities by specific property value

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --Jarekt (talk) 03:21, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support OMG yesssss! That I can't do this drives me nuts, whether it's with WLM monument numbers, painting inventory numbers or even VIAF numbers. Jane023 (talk) 12:28, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support B25es (talk) 18:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:49, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support --Geraki TL 06:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support -Entbert (talk) 15:16, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:01, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support --Jklamo (talk) 14:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support -- FriedhelmW (talk) 19:06, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --NaBUru38 (talk)

Article history integration

  • Problem: d:WD:DEVPLAN#Article history integration: for sake of verifiability on Wikipedia, there should be an option to show in the history of a Wikipedia article the Wikidata changes actually displayed in the article. Verifiability and control in Wikipedia of what is displayed from Wikidata has appeared long ago as an important question on the French Wikipedia, and has often been the proposed solution answering doubts and controversies about Wikidata data. A RfC on the German Wikipedia has decided for sake of verifiability to display only Wikidata data with a real source, and in return did not demand a better control of Wikidata data eg. in watchlist; then the corresponding RfC on the French Wikipedia did not include the question of a better control and rejected displaying only sourced data, making the question of Wikidata verifiability on Wikipedia all the more high-priority.
  • Who would benefit: People who want to see what happened in a Wikipedia article including what is displayed using Wikidata, for instance in order to have a better check after they have seen a Wikidata change in their watchlist.

Community discussion

  • I am skeptical how much it will benefit us if we replicate the Wikidata item history approx. 800 times. I don't have anything against a gadget for users who want this feature, but I don't see why this is something to add to the extension. --Vogone (talk) 23:50, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The Wikidata item history is to be used in the history of only one Wikipedia article, the corresponding one, why 800? Oliv0 (talk) 09:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Because up to approx. 800 wikis can be linked with a single Wikidata item. --Vogone (talk) 23:02, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Probably no more than 10 wikis ever display the data from a corrresponding Wikidata item (mainly in infoboxes), but more importantly, an extract of the Wikidata history showing only what is actually displayed on the wiki, integrated chronologically into the wiki article history with the same formatting, would be very beneficial to be able to view or search all of what readers actually see on a given Wikipedia page using Wikidata. Oliv0 (talk) 11:08, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I still don't know how Wikidata values are imported to articles. I mean, if on February 2016 an article says "the current population of the vilalge is 524 people" taken from a property, and on February 2017 it changes to 579 people, what happens when I check the history page? Do I get the value of the respective date, or do I get the current value? --NaBUru38 (talk) 21:59, 10 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Article history integration

  1. Support Support--Gareth (talk) 12:18, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support ChristianKl (talk) 16:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support Cette demande est déjà très ancienne, elle ne date pas même pas d'août 2015 mais de janvier et février 2014. Les choix techniques faits pour l'utilisation des données Wikidata dans Wikipédia rendent la mise en oeuvre de cette proposition indispensable pour permettre la maîtrise et le suivi du contenu d'une Wikipédia par ses contributeurs. O.Taris (discuter) 22:04, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Rough translation by Trizek from FR : that request is already pretty old, not from August 2015 but from January and February 2014 (diffs in French). The technical choices made for the use of the Wikidata data in Wikipedia make the implementation of this proposal indispensable to allow control and monitoring of Wikipedia contents by its contributors.
  4. Support Support Aidera grandement à comprendre ce qui est affiché dans l'article. Pamputt (talk) 07:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Support Support Absolutely necessary. --Tractopelle-jaune (talk) 11:02, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support NMaia (talk) 00:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support Oliv0 (talk) 07:29, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support Trizek from FR 13:53, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support --Cbyd (talk) 12:23, 3 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support Pamputt (talk) 10:45, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support. --Julien1978 (d.) 12:00, 4 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support Psemdel (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support --M11rtinb (talk) 16:21, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 03:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support, of course! Bob Saint Clar (talk) 21:15, 12 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Copy/paste statements of an item

  • Problem: Sometimes items need to be split or a series of items created and it would be nice to be able to copy paste the labels and/or statements easily
  • Who would benefit: All Wikidabata editors using the standard user interface creating items by hand (rather than through quick statements or some other auto-creation method)
  • Proposed solution: See my comments on improvements to the "Duplicate this item" gadget. This proposal is for a gadget separate from that menu item that allows copy/paste to duplicate single statements (this would be especially useful for the "depicts" statement, which often includes many reusable tags)
  • Phabricator tickets:

Community discussion

  • In the phase of the migration of interwikis to Wikidata, a tool which allowed to copy and paste wikitext to/from Wikidata became quite popular. Nemo 08:39, 15 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • More or less phab:T149905. I support it. --Melderick (talk) 22:44, 20 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Voting – Copy/paste statements of an item

  1. Support Support--Wesalius (talk) 08:20, 28 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  2. Support Support --Izno (talk) 01:20, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  3. Support Support --Melderick (talk) 13:49, 29 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  4. Support Support -- Stryn (accidentally unsigned)
  5. Support Support as proposer, Jane023 (talk) 11:05, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. Support Support Sadads (talk) 15:09, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. Support Support Trizek from FR 20:00, 30 November 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. Support Support Mike Peel (talk) 22:32, 1 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Support Support NMaia (talk) 00:45, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. Support Support Libcub (talk) 03:51, 2 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Support Support --Epìdosis 20:03, 5 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Support Support Jianhui67 talkcontribs 11:24, 7 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Support Support SamanthaNguyen (talk) 03:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  14. Support Support Ayack (talk) 12:08, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Support Support --Jklamo (talk) 14:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. Support Support --NaBUru38 (talk)

Create infobox for books in Wikipedia