Dec 27 2020
mw.wikibase.getAliasesByLang would be useful, so that it's not necessary to load the whole item to access the aliases.
Dec 26 2020
It would be great to have a getValidStatements() function that works the same as getAllStatements() but filters out deprecated statements. Deprecated Wikidata statements are often of no use outside of Wikidata and usecases like listing the children of a person outside of Wikidata shouldn't list deprecated children. Without a decidated function there are plenty fo cases where users will forgot to filter out deprecated statements and then show Wikipedia users data Wikidata knows to be false as valid data.
Dec 22 2020
The main intention is to have Wikidata Labels and Aliases in mul.
Dec 18 2020
Wikidata has lexemes in addition to items. Lexemes need language codes to express to which language a lexeme belongs. To create lexemes that tell us that vote banks is a term in en-in that corresponds to vote block in en-us we need lexemes.
Dec 2 2020
The ticket looks to me more like it's about the option of filtering within Wikibase which is a slightly different concern then the filtering over at Wikipedia. At Wikipedia we have the situation that plenty of editors don't want to see Wikidata changes that don't affect Wikipedia.
Nov 30 2020
The acceptance criteria doesn't specify how this feature interacts with "Show Wikidata edits in your watchlist". I assume it's bundled into that option, but it would be nice to be explicit about that.
Nov 21 2020
Oct 9 2020
Given that we now have the badges, I think it would make sense to automatically apply the batch when creating a sidelink to a redirect and not just allow people to create unbadged sitelinks to redirects.
Sep 19 2020
I'm not sure this is the best way to frame the problem. The acceptance criteria don't cover the case where an article gets deleted but the redirect stays.
Sep 5 2020
Ordering is generally useful (but can create issues as pointed out by @MichaelSchoenitzer) but it doesn't help a user to understand the concept of deprecated statements and why we have wrong data on Wikidata that we mark as deprecated.
The ordering issues could be worked out by allowing ordering to order statements with higher point in time over statements with lower point in time. I'm unsure about whether it makes sense to program a new ordering solution that only takes in account ranks but not qualifiers (and a syntax that allows Wikidata users to specify which qualify should affect the ranking in what way).
Jun 22 2020
Jun 4 2020
Mar 17 2020
This task was opened a while ago, but stalled. I think currently, we have a consensus on Wikidata that it would be desireable to have "mul" and "mul-Latn" as languages within Wikidata.
Nov 1 2019
If a bot would make this job, the bot could be able to also move the page when the item is semiprotected which would be desirable.
Aug 8 2019
Jan 23 2019
Given that this message is likely for many people the first time they get in contact with Wikidata it would be good to have it be friendly in addition to reciting correct facts. We might even have a "Read more" link in it to allow the recipient of the message to inform themselves better about Wikidata in case they are curious.
Dec 27 2018
Dec 20 2018
Nov 25 2018
I'm linking to a page on OpenStreetMap.
On the copyright of maps OpenStreetMap suggests:
Jun 29 2018
Mar 12 2018
Feb 9 2018
The constraint that it has to be symmetric would be removed by the RfC through allowing the redirect links. One those links are there it would be possible to provide additional links via a plugin to link from an English "Bonnie and Clyde" article to a German "Bonnie" and a German "Clyde" article provided there's no German "Bonnie and Clyde" article.
Dec 22 2017
For non-bot users I think a limit of 15 per minute would be okay. It's a way to encourage people who make more edits to seek bot approval. I would have to stop time but in some cases, 10 might be reached by smart humans.
Dec 20 2017
Scientific articles are one class of entities where this problem exists and given that they have more words in the title and we have >10 million of them they are the most important. In the past with the old search I however remember similar issues with songs and geonames derived geographic items as well.
If we would import those 2 million German companies, they would likely also produce a lot of hits.
Dec 19 2017
Dec 18 2017
Dec 17 2017
I believe we can restrict links to specific namespaces in the config. I think that would be better than an abuse filter for performance reasons. Anyone up for creating a ticket?
Dec 15 2017
I'm of the opinion, that it's not our role of Wikidata to create pseudo-fake websites. In most of the relevant cases it would make sense to actually have real websites.
I'm not sure why Lydia linked to this task. If you think that the proposed check causes no performance that would be great. If it produces other performance issues it would be good to know.
Dec 14 2017
Lydia linked me here. In my current draft for a living persons policy (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Living_persons_(draft)) I have a portion that suggests that for every bot edit that a bots that doesn't have a specific "living persons" flag, the bot is supposed to check whether the item is about a living person and if so check whether the property that gets added subclasses Q44597997 or Q44601380.
Dec 13 2017
When people subscribe to a page that uses structured discussions they could be offered three choices:
Dec 6 2017
As an example, if someone would want to write a message to my user talk page on Wikidata, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User_talk:ChristianKl "User_talk:ChristianKl@wikidata.org" could be used as the email address. When the sending email address is associated with a Wikidata account, a new topic on the talk page could be opened directly.
I think the necessity of having an account is comparable to the necessity to register for a mailing list to be able to post it or receive mail that currently exists. In cases where a person writes an email that isn't associated to an account they could get an automated reply telling them about the issue that requests them to resend the mail from an account that's registered to a Wikimedia account. Setting up an Wikimedia account is easy and I don't see why people without Wikimedia accounts would need the ability to post to our mailing lists.
When it comes to the limitation of "not subscribed to the thread", I don't understand the point. I would advocate a setting that creates an automatic subscription to all new threads in a given discussion page. This means if you would simply exchange a current mailing list with a discussion page a user that's subscribed gets the same email (unless he opts out).
Dec 4 2017
Dec 3 2017
Nov 25 2017
Nov 24 2017
Marking notifications automatically as read still means that you have to wade through them when you go through unread notifications. If you have page that gets >1000 links per year (many pages on Wikidata do) that's still annoying.
Nov 17 2017
This would be very useful in Wikidata as new items in Wikidata usually link to others in their space and this feature allows to get notified about new items that a given user cares about.
There are item on Wikidata that get hundreds of thousands of links because they are used centrally. I have created items like "adopted daughter" that have less traffic but where I also don't care about every new person that's added to Wikidata that has a new statement about their adopted daughter.
Nov 14 2017
I created this as wishlist item in https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/2017_Community_Wishlist_Survey/Watchlists/Automatic_notification_of_new_links_to_a_page_should_be_able_to_be_activated/deactivated_on_a_per_page_basis .
It's worth noting that these kinds of notifications get created more often on Wikidata due to it being about linked data. When 10,000 notifications that Ijon gets on Hebrew Wikipedia for having created "jews" seems a lot it's nothing compared to the >1,000,000 for the person who created "scientific article" on Wikidata.
Nov 12 2017
Nov 11 2017
I there a reason against creating the language as mvf with the name Peripheral Mongolian?
Nov 8 2017
Nov 5 2017
Quora links to us with do-follow and we link to them with do-follow. In this case, I don't see a problem.
Jun 27 2017
Jun 24 2017
May 29 2017
I don't see a reason why VisualEditor should be tagged. If Template is the wrong group to ping for issues about templates I'm sorry.
May 28 2017
I created an RFC: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment
@Agabi10 I don't think that's an issue in practice. Wikipedia tells a user on top of the page that they are redirected. I have created dozen's of redirects and haven't seen one getting removed.
May 27 2017
May 24 2017
It might be possible to simply change the https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Template:Rfd_links template. If it's changed it might also be helpful to include the item description, P31/P279 when available, a statement count and an identifier count.
May 21 2017
May 17 2017
May 15 2017
May 14 2017
I think that this is case is the standard for property proposals and if the script could handle this case it would be a huge improvement.
May 12 2017
It seems to me that the label is nearly always clearly stated in :
And is it really impossible to operate on the information in that in the text in which the template was inserted for the purpose of the template engine?
May 11 2017
Okay, I think I understand the problem. It seems we would need to move the label inside the property proposal template for it to be accessible in the same way the description is accessible.
May 10 2017
May 6 2017
I'm also not sure what's meant with "creator of the page". There's a person who created the item. There's a person who created the article and then there's a person who added the link from the item to the article.
May 5 2017
Apr 25 2017
From a privacy standpoint, I don't see why the language of an editor should be a secret. It's valuable information that helps other users to connect with the user.
Apr 24 2017
The standard way to create properties seems to be to click on "Create" in the property proposal. That automatically copies the description and the datatype.
It's supposed to also copy the property name and actually copies the name of the property proposal page into the name field (when the name isn't changed in the property proposal discussion that's usually the name that the property should have).
I'm not sure that this will reduce the amount of errors.
Mar 4 2017
Feb 22 2017
Feb 20 2017
Wikidata's Query service (https://query.wikidata.org/) currently gives users a tiny-url link that they can share on Twitter for Wikidata Query they want to share. Unfortunately that link can't be shared on Wikimedia. It would be great if this future would be implemented, so that the short url can be shared on-wiki.
Feb 16 2017
@Lydia_Pintscher Currently when I click on "Create property" the name that was used to create the property proposal get's copied into the English name category.
The actual name it's in the property proposal get's ignored. If the name changed during the property discussion, it's required to manually copy paste the new name.
Feb 15 2017
Feb 11 2017
Jan 31 2017
@Izno It's easily possible to set edits as patrolled whenever they are undone by users who have patrolling privileges. If that's your objection it's easily addressed. In my experience, it's annoying to look at the patrolled list and see items that are already undone.
Jan 28 2017
I have asked for rollback. At the same time I don't only think about myself ;)
Jan 27 2017
Dec 22 2016
Is a dialect a language for the purposes of this discussion?
Nov 18 2016
I'm sorry I meant Alt+Shift+S.
Nov 17 2016
Oct 31 2016
Oct 19 2016
@Lydia_Pintscher : Wikipedia articles have a name that's human-readable and when they are deleted it's clear what the article is about. That's not true for Wikidata items where the item ID doesn't tell a user what the item is about.
Additionally many items do get deleted in Wikidata without noticing the person who created the item beforehand in a way that's not typical for Wikipedia.
Oct 18 2016
Oct 15 2016
Oct 14 2016
Oct 3 2016
It seems to me like this just made the tool more broken than it was before. The tool worked better last week than it works currently. How about having actual tests to not break the tool?
Oct 2 2016
I agree that (b) is likely the way to go.