Tue, Feb 18
The way Wikidata works, it should be possible. It can lead to a constraint violation, but Wikidata/Wikibase itself almost constraints nothing (only constraint is datatype constraints). If you want to prevent a duplicate entry for a property with a unique value constraint you should make a gadget for that.
Sun, Feb 16
Can you check if they work now?
Just checked Edge and I can see the checkboxes.
Firefox also shows checkboxes, even in a private tab
My chrome does have issues. And I see what the issue is.
Sat, Feb 1
Yes, if you want to use mfa for labels and descriptions, then you will need to create a new ticket for that as it has nothing to do with monolingual language codes.
Fri, Jan 31
That's because the request wasn't to make the language available for labels, but monolingual properties. That are 2 different things.
Jan 24 2020
I submitted https://github.com/addwiki/wikibase-api/pull/57 to remove the clear parameter from addwiki/wikibase-api/src/Api/Service/RevisionSaver.php as it isn't needed to remove a statement.
Jan 23 2020
Jan 21 2020
For the addwiki part talk to @Addshore he's the maintainer of the addwiki code
Found the culprit in vendor/addwiki/wikibase-api/src/Api/Service/RevisionSaver.php :
Jan 20 2020
I'm using the Addwiki library to save a new revision. The data that is sent to the API can be found in P10226 (was a lot of information, so a paste would be better than dumping it in here. (As serialized by the Addwiki library)
Jan 19 2020
Something else was wrong, scripts now work again while the CSP message still shows in the browser console.
Jan 2 2020
Have been able to reproduce it (or better my bot):
18-12 00:00 UTC / 19-12 00:00 UTC / 21-12 12:00 UTC / 23-12 00:00 UTC / 26-12 12:00 UTC / 27-12 12:00 UTC / 28-12 00:00 UTC / 28-12 12:00 UTC / 31-12 12:00 UTC / 01-01 12:00 UTC / 02-01 00:00 UTC
So it seems there is some datapolution on 1 or a few database servers that provide the triples for the Wikidata Query Service. And it doesn't look like it will be solved automatically.
Dec 24 2019
@jhsoby What is the opinion of the LangCom? I see an IETF and an Ethnologue code in the item about the language.
Dec 21 2019
@AyushBasral Why did you close this ticket? The code doesn't work and I don't see a final LangCom decision.
Dec 19 2019
Also reproduced December 18th and December 19th 12AM UTC.
Dec 16 2019
Dec 10 2019
Indeed it works fine: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4115189&oldid=1073803719
But when entering this, I didn't get an option, but that's a separate bug. The original request has been implemented.
@Bouzinac Why did you reopen this task which has been merged 2 years ago?
Dec 8 2019
Dec 2 2019
Code isn't live yet and there is a little change needed before it can go live
Dec 1 2019
Nov 28 2019
@jhsoby What's the opinion of langcom?
Nov 23 2019
Nov 22 2019
Also take in account SDOC, so set basic SDOC data
Not sure what the idea behind this task is. So for now it's stalled.
Nov 15 2019
Nov 14 2019
Oct 31 2019
Oct 30 2019
@jhsoby I see an ISO-639-3 code, IETF code and an Ethnologue entry. Is that sufficient or is more needed for LangCom approval?
@Misharim Please provide a correct Wikidata link, this one isn't about a language, but an alphabet.
@jhsoby What is the opinion of the LangCom on this one?
Oct 10 2019
@GerardM Now it's clear for everybody why you're objecting. That's not because you're against the language to be used for monolingual, but you want it to be used in a more broad sense. If you would have explained that earlier (instead of your vague statement) there would be no discussion and plans to move forward. So next time, just explain that you've proposed to have the language used for labels etc. that makes the discussion more clear for others.