User talk:Mike Peel/Archive 4

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 → Archive 10

Multilingual captions testing is available

Greetings,

The early prototype for multilingual caption support is available for testing. More information on how to sign up to test is on Commons. Thanks, happy editing to you. - Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:06, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Listed building England

Looks like this template is redundant {{Wikidata Infobox}} when identifiers in Wikidata. I'm not sure if User:Pi bot keeps track of remaining templates, but it's often a case. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@EugeneZelenko: Yes, there are a number of identifier templates like that, which are now going to be redundant to the link in the infobox. I might write some new code/a new bot request at some point to remove those where they show the same values that are stored on Wikidata and shown in the infobox, unless someone beats me to it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:02, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pibot, wikidata, infobox

Hi,

your bot added an infobox to the monument category and marked it as located in Dresden. The monument was shown in Dresden and in Berlin. There are categories for the monument in Dresden and in Berlin. So the infobox should either be in the dresden monument category (and another infobox in the berlin monument category) or the infobox should say the mounument is located in Dresden and in Berlin. I don't know if this was caused by a bad bot code or by bad wikidata information? --C.Suthorn (talk) 11:48, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@C.Suthorn: It sounds like the info on Wikidata needs tweaking - either adding the additional location, or changing the sitelink and Commons category (P373) values to point to the correct category and moving the infobox there. I can help look into it if you want, just let me know the category. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:38, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The categories here at commons? That would be:
Category:Monument by Manaf Halbouni
Category:Monument by Manaf Halbouni in Dresden
Category:Monument by Manaf Halbouni in Berlin
--C.Suthorn (talk) 17:46, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's one structure that's been in multiple locations? It sounds like the infobox is in the right place, then. I've tweaked the Wikidata entry to include both locations, along with start/end times for when they were valid (the latter doesn't show in the infobox yet, but will in the future). How does that look to you now? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:17, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
definitly better. Still the map shows only dresden and the headline mentions dresden only. --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:58, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I've changed the description. Not much that can be done with the map at the moment, though - I haven't figured out how to show multiple coordinates in the map yet, plus I don't know the coordinates of it in Berlin. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: Berlin, Brandenburger Tor, Platz des 18. März, about 25 meters in front of Brandenburg gate (the Reichstag about 100 meters to the left, the Holocaust memorial 200 meters to the right, Barack Obama wanted to hold a speak at that very place while campaigning to become president and wasn't allowed, but actually spoke there at Kirchentag 2017, Ronald Reagan said at that place "Mr Gorbatchev open this wall"): 52.51627, 13.37727 --C.Suthorn (talk) 04:16, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I've added those coordinates to Wikidata and set them as the 'preferred rank' option, so the infobox should show those now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts with DEFAULTSORT

Hi Mike, seeing this bot edit i woundered if it really makes sense. I had at least two cases where such a DEFAULTSORT conflict lead me to errors in WD, such as [1]. In my oppinion, we should have a maintenance category for such conflicts. --Arnd (talk) 13:11, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aschroet: That edit also categorises them into Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox with defaultsort suppressed for tracking - I figured it's better to do that then clutter up Category:Pages with DEFAULTSORT conflicts too much. The ones I've looked at so far seem to be a mix of issues here (e.g., missing commas between the last and first name, or only using initials), differences in data (e.g., when a person has a well-known nickname), and issues on Wikidata. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:23, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
ok, then fine for me. Thanks, --Arnd (talk) 13:30, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alan Sorrell

Hi, Mike Peel, I was wondering wgy the self-portrait of Alan Sorrell is not on commons. If yes, it could be added to the wikidata.org infobox. Thank you for your time. Lotje (talk) 11:16, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Lotje: Unfortunately it looks like it's still copyrighted and is used on the English Wikipedia under fair use - see en:File:Alan Sorrell self-portrait.jpg. That means that we can't have it here or on Wikidata. Sorry. Mike Peel (talk) 11:23, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Mike Peel Lotje (talk) 11:30, 25 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

User:Pi bot

Congratulations! Task 2 was approved. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 22:53, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Mike Peel (talk) 22:55, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WikidataIB

I've just incorporated Mormegil's idea about reporting unknown data types in the sandbox and then updated Module:WikidataIB from the sandbox. I think it's ready now. I'll be around if any problems arise. --RexxS (talk) 19:18, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RexxS: That looks good, thanks! I've also updated the infobox to the latest version now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:22, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata Infobox

Hello Mike, excuse me, maybe I am not smart, but which problem was such template supposed to fix? To be honest, I only see a hardly manageable tool with no added value. -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 17:23, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Blackcat: Have a read of the initial discussion about it, which gives some of the initial reasons. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:35, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, thanks, but the question was about which problem was it meant to fix :-) Personally I agree to those who find it invasive and often oversized compared with the content of the category itself that might often have one photograph only (not to mention that many categories already have Institution: and Creator: template). I guess that it makes the category on Commons a duplicate of the correspondent article on Wikipedia. -- 17:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
@Blackcat: The original problem was this: I'm a photographer who's currently living in a non-English country without much knowledge of the local language. Exploring the Commons categories for the area is complicated since little English information is available about them (category names in Portuguese, only ptwp articles, if any article existed). At the same time, there's Wikidata now, which can provide basic information about the topic in any language. So having a small box that could provide that basic information in the Commons categories helped immensely, and it's also something that many others here have also found very useful. It's grown quite a bit since then to help tidy up the clutter in commons categories (Wikipedia links, identifiers, coordinates, etc.) and add more information that others find useful (see Template talk:Wikidata Infobox. Keeping it compact vs. showing that information is an ongoing balancing act. Hope that explains some of the motivations behind it? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Could it be solved transforming it in a compact template like i.e. Institution or Creator? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 18:14, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It also provides a different way of navigating through Commons media and categories. strakhov (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackcat: I don't understand the question - it is a compact template? Arguably more so than Institution and Creator since it doesn't take up any space between the top of the page and the first subcategories/images. If there are ways to make it more compact, then please suggest them at Template talk:Wikidata Infobox. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
like ie making it collapsible, Mike? -- SERGIO (aka the Blackcat) 19:03, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Blackcat: It already is, that's the link next to the title. Also see Template_talk:Wikidata_Infobox#Default_hide?. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

P39

IMHO the addition of position held (P39) cluttered the box too much when it comes to politicians. Example -> Category:Alfredo Pérez Rubalcaba. strakhov (talk) 18:45, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Strakhov: can we discuss this at Template talk:Wikidata Infobox please? It's trivial to remove the line if is a problem, and we can also auto-collapse it in the case of many values if needed. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:51, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Sorry, I thought for a moment I was reading (and commenting in) template's talk page. :S I totally agree it's better there. strakhov (talk) 18:56, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nieścisłosci w Category:Widzewska Galeria Ekslibrisu

Proszę poprawić nieścisłości w Category:Widzewska Galeria Ekslibrisu To nie jest skansen, ale żywa galeria ekslibrisów, w której aktualnie od 8 maja 2018 jest eksponowana 97. wystawa "Kobieta". Współrzędne geograficzne są błędne, poprawne są w wikipedii: 51°45′31,320″N 19°32′18,042″E Pozdrawiam M Z Wojalski (talk) 12:50, 2 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Załatwione Źródłem nieścisłości były blednę informacje w Widzewska Gallery of Exlibris in Łódź (Q9372606). Widzę ze poprawiłeś "skansen" a ja poprawiłem współrzędne geograficzne. Jeśli jest więcej problemów to popraw tam. --Jarekt (talk) 13:48, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Arrangement

Hello.What is the arrangement in which the bot works on the task "Adding {{Wikidata Infobox}}"?--ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 16:15, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: You can find the bot proposal/details at Commons:Bots/Requests/Pi_bot_1. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:26, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong edits by your bot

See [2] and [3]. --Arnd (talk) 08:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Aschroet: Thanks for the heads-up. It's unusual to have that nesting of templates, so this should be very rare, but I'll add code to remove the empty {{En}} as well. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think the error is that the line with the {{en|... has been removed. --Arnd (talk) 10:56, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Aschroet: the bot removes {{Mainw}} (if it is blank or only uses the enwp link) as the link to the Wikipedia article is included at the top of the infobox. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:41, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, now understood. I assumed that the bot only adds {{Wikidata Infobox}}. --Arnd (talk) 13:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox, exclude disambiguations

Please exclude categories with {{Disambig}} or variants from Wikidata Infobox additions. the box is of no use there. --Te750iv (talk) 18:26, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Te750iv: I've added this to the next version of the code, but it'll take a while before I can restart the processes. Can you point me to an example of where the infobox has been on a disambig page please? @Rudolphous: you might also want to make this change. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 01:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the headsup. Rudolphous (talk) 03:52, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: thanks, here is an example. --Te750iv (talk) 06:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Te750iv and Rudolphous: Thanks, I've also added a check to avoid cases where instance of (P31)=Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410). I'll set up a tracking category to catch existing ones. The bot might still add some disambig pages as there's a long-running version that I don't want to interrupt, but that one shouldn't come across many disambig pages anyway. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:35, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Now tracking at Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox for disambig pages. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:21, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

:D

File:Museu do Porto de Santos 09.jpg -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:22, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for the photobomb! Mike Peel (talk) 01:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No apologies needed, you gave scale, and sensuality for the photo hehehhe
-- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton m 01:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Suitability of infobox for some types of categories

Hi, thanks for adding Wikidata Infobox to categories, the infobox is mostly very useful. But for some types of categories, I am not sure, if there is any value added by infobox, so in some rare cases I tend to remove it. For example:

--Jklamo (talk) 11:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jklamo: I'm not sure. The main benefit of the infobox in those cases is probably that it's multilingual - so you can find out what topics the category is combining in any language, not just in English. But that might not be enough to justify having them. Could we move this discussion to Template talk:Wikidata Infobox to see what others think? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mapas equivocados

Hola, "Pi bot" al añadir "Wikidata Infobox" en los accidentes geográficos de Marte y de la Luna está equivocadamente colocando MAPAS DE LA TIERRA. Ejemplos: Category:Rimae Gassendi o Category:Nia Chaos.

Saludos, Vetranio (talk) 23:35, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Gracias, ahora arreglado / thanks, now fixed. Mike Peel (talk) 23:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Incorrect coordinates on Wikidata additions

I don't mind Pi Bot adding Wikidata Infoboxes to a lot of sites, but I had to revert the additions of Category:Davis Park, New York and Category:Rufus King House (Jamaica, Queens), because the coordinates were off and I don't know how to correct them from the box. ----DanTD (talk) 03:56, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@DanTD: The information in the box comes from Wikidata - if you click the edit icon in the bottom-right of the box, or the 'Wikidata item' link in the left-hand sidebar, then you're taken to Wikidata, where you can edit the info. In both of these cases the coordinates are from the English Wikipedia. The second one had already been corrected there, so I've also changed in on Wikidata, does that look more accurate now? The other one is still wrong on Wikipedia - if you have a more accurate coordinate could you update it on Wikipedia and/or Wikidata please? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:20, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, that one of King Manor makes much more sense. I don't have the exact coordinates for Davis Park, but I do know that they're in the water, rather than the land. Now I'm going to add a description of Rufus King's old mansion. ----DanTD (talk) 12:51, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: I fixed the other one, and added the infoboxes back, how do they look now? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:32, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect. Thanks. ----DanTD (talk) 16:29, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mike: En algunos (bastantes) "infobox" observo que no son correctas las coordenadas, por ejemplo: Category:Refugi de Coma de Vaca, Category:Tuc des Crabes, Category:Tuc des Hemnes, Category:Tuc des Neres, Category:Tuc deth Pòrt de Vielha, etc. Son distintas de las que figuran en WD. No sé el motivo. Puedes averiguar-lo? Gracias.--Isidre blanc (talk) 14:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm. @RexxS: can you have a look? It looks like, e.g. at Category:Refugi de Coma de Vaca, that the Wikidata coordinate is "42°23'4"N, 2°12'49"E", but somehow that's changing to "42° 23′ 24″ N, 2° 13′ 12″ E" when passed through WikidataIB and into Module:Coordinates. I think it's a rounding issue, as {{#invoke:WikidataIB|getPreferredValue|P625|qid=Q18006176|fwd=ALL|maxvals=1|osd=no|noicon=yes|format=dms}} returns 42°23′7.336″N 2°13′8.598″E - but I'm not sure if it's on the Lua side or there's a problem with the data on Wikidata. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: yes, it's a rounding issue. In Wikidata d:Q18006176, the coordinates in coordinate location (P625) have been set to ["latitude"] = 42.3854, ["longitude"] = 2.21889, ["precision"] = 0.012161958776693. That precision represents ±0.73 minutes of arc or ±44 seconds of arc (of the order of a mile). Because we use the precision to avoid spurious numbers of decimal places, we can't expect the deg-min-sec representation to return an answer any closer to the original than the precision allows. In the case of Refugi de Coma de Vaca, that large precision results in this sort of effect:
  • 42.385371°N 2.219055°E Edit this on Wikidata
  • 42°23′7.336″N 2°13′8.598″E Edit this on Wikidata
I can only suggest that the precision of coordinate location (P625) on d:Q18006176 ought to be changed to something more useful. The Very Large Telescope (Q265628), for example, uses a precision of 0.00001 (which is about 1 metre). As far as I can see, this sort of problem can only be fixed at the Wikidata end. Unfortunately our modules still operate n the GIGO principle.
Incidentally, I've added a new function to Module:WikidataIB: {{#invoke:WikidataIB |examine |<property> |qid=<entity>}} which will 'pretty-print' the actual contents of the Wikidata database for examination of a statement. You can try
  • {{#invoke:WikidataIB |examine |P625 |qid=Q18006176}}
It might come in handy. --RexxS (talk) 16:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@RexxS: Vean Category:Mont Caro, Category:Montardo, Category:Cap d'Urdet, Category:Cap de Boumort, etc. En todas ellas las coordenadas de infobox son pràcticamente idénticas que en WD. Dudo que sea por pura casualidad (después del redondeo).--Isidre blanc (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Isidre blanc: It's not pure chance. It's the way the rounding is set to work. In Mont Caro (Q599722): 

table#1 {
    table#2 {
        ["id"] = "Q599722$644FCFAA-C890-46D6-8FC1-02D465D8158B",
        ["mainsnak"] = table#3 {
            ["datatype"] = "globe-coordinate",
            ["datavalue"] = table#4 {
                ["type"] = "globecoordinate",
                ["value"] = table#5 {
                    ["globe"] = "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q2",
                    ["latitude"] = 40.8031301137,
                    ["longitude"] = 0.343121075505,
                    ["precision"] = 1e-10,
                },
            },
            ["property"] = "P625",
            ["snaktype"] = "value",
        },
        ["rank"] = "normal",
        ["references"] = table#6 {
            table#7 {
                ["hash"] = "657226fff90a853decb20a3fccb7af863ea2604e",
                ["snaks"] = table#8 {
                    ["P248"] = table#9 {
                        table#10 {
                            ["datatype"] = "wikibase-item",
                            ["datavalue"] = table#11 {
                                ["type"] = "wikibase-entityid",
                                ["value"] = table#12 {
                                    ["entity-type"] = "item",
                                    ["id"] = "Q31074657",
                                    ["numeric-id"] = 31074657,
                                },
                            },
                            ["property"] = "P248",
                            ["snaktype"] = "value",
                        },
                    },
                    ["P813"] = table#13 {
                        table#14 {
                            ["datatype"] = "time",
                            ["datavalue"] = table#15 {
                                ["type"] = "time",
                                ["value"] = table#16 {
                                    ["after"] = 0,
                                    ["before"] = 0,
                                    ["calendarmodel"] = "http://www.wikidata.org/entity/Q1985727",
                                    ["precision"] = 11,
                                    ["time"] = "+2022-08-12T00:00:00Z",
                                    ["timezone"] = 0,
                                },
                            },
                            ["property"] = "P813",
                            ["snaktype"] = "value",
                        },
                    },
                    ["P854"] = table#17 {
                        table#18 {
                            ["datatype"] = "url",
                            ["datavalue"] = table#19 {
                                ["type"] = "string",
                                ["value"] = "https://www.feec.cat/activitats/100-cims/cim/caro/",
                            },
                            ["property"] = "P854",
                            ["snaktype"] = "value",
                        },
                    },
                },
                ["snaks-order"] = table#20 {
                    "P248",
                    "P854",
                    "P813",
                },
            },
        },
        ["type"] = "statement",
    },
}

That precision (0.00027777777777778) is 1 arc second (about 30 metres), so although the lat/long are stored as decimals, we can expect the display to be rounded to 1".

  • 40.80313°N 0.343121°E Edit this on Wikidata
  • 40°48′11.268″N 0°20′35.236″E Edit this on Wikidata

In Montardo (Q3176503), the precision is given as 0.000001 degrees - that's about 10cm, an astonishing accuracy for the position of a mountain, don't you agree? All of the examples you give have precisions of 1 arc second or better.

However, the precision set for Refugi de Coma de Vaca (a house) is about ±44 seconds, which is an uncertainty of 1500 metres or so. If we really don't know where the house is to within a kilometre, then how can we expect the coordinates to display to an accuracy of a few metres? If we do know the location of the house to 1 second, then we should set the precision at Refugi de Coma de Vaca (Q18006176) to 1 arc second. I don't know how accurately we know that information, so I can't do anything more, sorry. --RexxS (talk) 21:25, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Update: it looks like Rudolphous has now changed the precision to 1 millionth of a degree, so they seem to know exactly where the house is. That should resolve the issues now. I've also found and fixed a bug where 'E' wasn't displaying, so thanks for that. --RexxS (talk) 21:54, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@RexxS: : Problema resuelto. "Wikidata Infobox" funciona perfectamente si las coordenadas en WD tienen mayor precisión. He hecho ya algunas correcciones. Gracias a todos.--Isidre blanc (talk) 23:03, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, I tried editing the wikidata in the infobox, and I couldn't do it. I reverted two more errors, and there are others I should do, but I won't for now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DanTD (talk • contribs)
@DanTD: That sounds odd. I'm happy to help debug what went wrong if you can provide more details? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:29, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, there are two reasons I couldn't do it, actually. One is that I suck at coordinates. Two was that I just couldn't get the wikidata to actually move. My most recent debacle is with the Category:Ezra Carll Homestead (South Huntington, New York), which as I mentioned in the edit summary is at the northwest corner of Melville Road and Eckert Street. The existing data places it a block to the north and then west on Lieper Street. Another one is with the Category:James Benjamin Homestead 1182 Flanders Road is actually diagonally northeast of where your bot placed it. Come to think of it, that was part of the reason I had trouble getting pics of the place all these years. Well, that and the fact that it's hidden behind some trees along Flanders Road. ----DanTD (talk) 11:41, 10 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: I've just resynced the values from enwp with Wikidata, as those were slightly different, do those look better now? If not, then please have a go at finding the correct coordinates - if you can find the buildings on google maps, then click+hold on the position of the building should show a small box at the bottom of the page, click on the coordinates there and they appear in the sidebar where you can then copy-paste them either here or to enwp/wikidata directly. BTW, the bot isn't coming up with these coordinates, it's just adding the infobox, which uses the coordinates already on Wikidata. It's better to fix the information than remove the infobox completely! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 02:21, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. They haven't changed much. I agree that it's better to fix the information rather than removing the infobox. I just can't fix the information. However, the real location for the James Benjamin Homestead should show up here.----DanTD (talk) 02:34, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Right. With this edit (based on your google maps link), has that fixed things in that case? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 02:39, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's it. Now here's the Ezra Carll Homestead real location. Also, I saw that the infobox for Alabama Avenue (BMT Jamaica Line) is actually a bit far west from it's actual location. I can search for others, of course. ----DanTD (talk) 02:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Can you try adding that new coordinate to Wikidata please? You can see the coordinate in the URL in this case - "@40.8279242,-73.3971074,707m" shows the coordinate and then the altitude (bonus points: also add that to Wikidata!). This will probably keep happening in different cases, so it helps if you can fix this directly. :-) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 02:55, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No I can't. When I did it, it said "Malformed value." ----DanTD (talk) 02:59, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Try again. If it shows the same message, copy-paste the coordinate here and I'll try to spot the error. But "40.8279242,-73.3971074" doesn't seem to show an error for me. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 03:03, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The error is gone, but the location is further away. And I can't get the coordinates. All I can get is the location, which I showed in the link. ----DanTD (talk) 03:13, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Huh, that's odd. I'm calling it a night, I'll look into this more tomorrow. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 03:20, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It sounds like you all might be interested in the discussion at https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Wikivoyage:Travellers%27_pub#PLEASE,_verify_the_GPS_coordinates_when_copying_Wikidata_information! as well. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:57, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it might help if I make a WikiVoyage page first. ----DanTD (talk) 20:49, 14 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Captree State Park wikidata box is wrong too. ----DanTD (talk) 23:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: Sorry for not following up on this sooner. I had a look at the Ezra Carll Homestead link again, and it seems that Google puts multiple locations in their URLs, and I think it's actually the last one that is correct. So in this case it's "40.8276382!4d-73.3959917" - which reformats to "40.8276382, -73.3959917" added to Wikidata. Is that correct? (Although Google only shows the location on the webpage, you can still get the coordinates by extracting them from the URL - sorry that this is a bit messy!) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:18, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Much better. There are certainly others, some of which I've mentioned before such as Captree State Park above, as well as the Category:William Tecumseh Sherman monument by Augustus Saint-Gaudens. Some other photographer who's pictures were miscategorized as being at an unidentified location in NYC had pictures with the correct coordinated (the Wikibox placed it on Lexington Avenue between 55th and 56th Streets), and when I tried to add those coordinates, they wouldn't stick. So I had to remove that one and use an Object Location tag instead. And there are certainly more. --DanTD (talk) 14:44, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@DanTD: If you can fix them on Wikidata as you find them, that would be the best approach. If you still have problems doing so, then let me know and I can help - but as I don't know the area I don't know what the 'correct' coordinates are! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:47, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Only one Wikidata infobox needed

In a few cases I have observed the Pi bot adding {{Wikidata infobox}} to categories which already had one (but with a slightly different capitalization). Example: https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Vammen&oldid=307044377 --Hjart (talk) 07:47, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart: If one's good, surely two is better? ;-) But seriously, thanks for the heads-up, I'll look into that. I think it's due to the two spaces between 'Wikidata' and 'infobox', which I didn't realise would even still call the template... Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:41, 19 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is a similar issue with "YEAR in Finland" categories: {{Wikidata Infobox}} is already set by {{Finlandyear}} but the bot still keeps adding duplicates. Best regards, ––Apalsola t • c 12:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Apalsola: I've written a script that removes the duplicate, and I've modified the bot code to avoid adding any more. However, there's a long-running version of the script that I can't make the change in just yet, so it may happen again. If it does, let me know and I'll run this new script to remove them again. Also, @Rudolphous: needs to add this exception into their script.
@Hjart: This one I'm still working on. My plan is to switch all of the infobox calls to the standard 'Wikidata Infobox', which the bot searches the page for before adding the infobox, but there's more exceptions than I realised so it might take a while. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:12, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Sculptures by Mustafa Arruf

Hola. Las esculturas incluidas en esta categoría se hallan permanentemente en parques, calles, plazas o vías públicas y, por tatnto, pueden ser reproducidas y distribuidas por medio de fotografías.

Por tanto, creo que sobra el infobox añadido.


Spain

The photographical reproduction of this work is covered under the article 35.2 of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 of April 12, 1996, and amended by Law 5/1998 of March 6, 1998, which states that:
Works permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by painting, drawing, photography and audiovisual processes.
See COM:CRT/Spain#Freedom of panorama for more information.

català | English | Esperanto | español | français | galego | italiano | македонски | 中文 | +/−

Article 35 of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/1996 of April 12, 1996, and amended by Law 5/1998 of March 6, 1998, states: 2. Works permanently located in parks, streets, squares or other public places may be freely reproduced, distributed and communicated by means of paintings, drawings, photographs and audiovisual processes.

Article 40bis further states the above law "may not be so interpreted that they could be applied in a manner capable of unreasonably prejudicing the legitimate interests of the author or adversely affecting the normal exploitation of the works to which they refer."

The original Spanish text: 

El artículo 35 del Real Decreto Legislativo 1/1996 de 12 de abril de 1996, modificado por la ley 5/1998 del 6 de marzo de 1998, establece: 2. Las obras situadas permanentemente en parques, calles, plazas u otras vías públicas pueden ser reproducidas, distribuidas y comunicadas libremente por medio de pinturas, dibujos, fotografías y procedimientos audiovisuales.

Artículo 40 bis. "Los artículos del presente capítulo no podrán interpretarse de manera tal que permitan su aplicación de forma que causen un perjuicio injustificado a los intereses legítimos del autor o que vayan en detrimento de la explotación normal de las obras a que se refieran".

Saludos.--Erisgp (talk) 17:01, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Erisgp: I think you meant to send this to @Túrelio: , who added {{NoUploads}} to that page. I think you are correct with {{FoP-Spain}} though. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:43, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Structured Data on Commons IRC Office Hour, Tuesday 26 June

Greetings,

There will be an IRC office hour for Structured Data on Tuesday, 26 June from 18:00-19:00 UTC in #wikimedia-office. You can find more details, as well as date and time conversion, at the IRC Office Hours page on Meta.

Thanks, I look forward to seeing you there if you can make it. -- Keegan (talk) 20:54, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

What properties does Commons need?

Greetings,

Structured Commons will need properties to make statements about files. The development team is working on making the software ready to support properties; the question is, what properties does Commons need?

You can find more information and examples to help find properties in a workshop on Commons. Please participate and help fill in the list, and let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! -- Keegan (WMF) (talk) 18:53, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong infobox

Hello, Mike Peel! Just letting you know I removed an infobox added by Pi Bot to Pincher Creek because it showed info about the town (Pincher Creek, Alberta) instead of the creek itself. Since the template has no parameters, I couldn’t see how to fix it to show the body of water instead. Please let me know if there’s a better way to deal with such cases should I come across one again.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 23:13, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Odysseus1479: Thanks for letting me know. I've updated the sitelink on Wikidata so it points to the town instead, that changes what the infobox shows. I've also now added the infobox to Category:Pincher Creek, Alberta. I'm not sure if Pincher Creek (Q22365630) is the right entry for the creek or not - can you have a look to see if that looks correct, and perhaps add the commons sitelink there if it does? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:19, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. there's some documentation for the infobox being written at Commons:Wikidata infobox help - feedback on that would be useful! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Sorry, I have no idea how to evaluate a Wikidata entry—the Q numbers mean nothing to me—but I did go there and click the “geonames” link, and the map-marker that showed me is indeed near the mouth of the creek (where it flows into the Oldman River) to which the category refers. I guess I’ll have to read that documentation before I take up your suggestion about adding a sitelink, because my (few) previous attempts to do something like that in the past have always failed.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Odysseus1479: Wikidata does take some getting used to. :-) The Q-numbers are language-independent numbers for a subject, they are unique but rather meaningless in themselves. I've added the infobox back to Category:Pincher Creek after these edits on Wikidata, see how that looks? Hopefully you can follow the edit history to figure out what I did - let me know if you have any questions, I'm always happy to help with this kind of issue. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 01:13, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that looks fine; thanks again. My memory of my previous problems is on the vague side, but IIRC they were to do with Wikipedia links, so I won’t try to explain here … I’ll let you know if I run into similar problems with Commons links.—Odysseus1479 (talk) 01:32, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Checking if the infobox is there?

Hi, You should check if the infobox is there before adding it, i.e. [4]. ;) Regards, Yann (talk) 14:51, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Yann: The code does check for the infobox, but the two spaces between "Wikidata" and "Infobox" confuse it. I'm still not sure how to handle that in the code, the best thing to do is to make sure there's only one space rather than two when adding it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:02, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I took a quick look at the code - couldn't you use regexes to test for a match instead of plain strings? You could avoid having to list things multiple times for different casing that way too. - Nikki (talk) 19:41, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikki: Probably ... but my knowledge of regexes isn't great, particularly when it comes to debugging them when they aren't working quite right. So a simple list is easiest to put together and maintain. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't even realize until now that there are a spaces. I thought that it would be a different template. Regards, Yann (talk) 19:54, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: I still don't know why this works - I also expected it to be a different template! Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Regexes are stock-in-trade for a load of stuff, so worth learning. Not that there's any consistency in the details, of course, but start with en:PCRE. Anyway a search for insource:/\{\{Wikidata Infobox/ (note the double space) turned up 22 pages, some of which had two infoboxes. I think I've fixed all of those, so the problem won't recur until Yann adds more templates with a double space in them.
P.S. Is there any good reason why pages like Château Saint-Rémy d'Altenstadt (Wissembourg) have {{Wikidata Infobox | qid = Q15940357}}? Is it to separate it from the category of the same name? You can a list of all of those by doing a search with the regex insource:/\{\{Wikidata Infobox \|/. I bet you've got the hang of it already :) Cheers --RexxS (talk) 00:24, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @RexxS! I was trying to do that search earlier, but couldn't get the right syntax for it. I'm not even sure why that page exists rather than just using the category - I think that's a question for @Rudolphous and Gzen92. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:30, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, qid because the page Château Saint-Rémy d'Altenstadt (Wissembourg) is not related to the Wikidata element. On Wikidata there was the Category:Château Saint-Rémy d'Altenstadt (Wissembourg), correcting, it works. Greetings. Gzen92 [discuter] 07:31, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Something else

Hi Mike, I added wikidata links and infoboxes for all NGC galaxies. I have problems with the last one. See also [5]. Do you know how to handle these. Rudolphous (talk) 15:39, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Rudolphous: thanks! I've sorted out the last one now. Mike Peel (talk) 22:51, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Using Image

Dear Mr. Peel My name is Lucas Stegman and I'm working on a historical lecture series being produced by Tufts University. I was hoping to use your image at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Lloyds_Bank_Limited_Law_Courts_Branch.jpg in the upcoming documentary when we discuss Lloyd's Bank. If this is not possible, I understand. Best, Lucas S. Stegman — Preceding unsigned comment was added by 130.64.34.156 (talk) 17:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thanks for asking, that is absolutely fine by me. Please see User:Mike Peel/Reuse, which explains how to appropriately attribute the photograph. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:40, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pi bot running quite slowly ? Also: IRC chat follow-up

It looks as if User:Pi bot {contribs) is only adding about 3 infoboxes a minute at the moment.

According to Category:Uses_of_Wikidata_Infobox, we're now at about 1.2 million infoboxes (incredible achievement!); but if the stats on the links count page are right, there should be potential for about 1.8 million, less about 120,000 categories for taxons (count: tinyurl.com/yadox5al), if they're being pre-empted to use a more specific template.

That would seem to leave a rough estimate of about 480,000 that could be added (though perhaps there other category types, other than taxons, that are similarly pre-empted?); but that's going to take quite a long time at about ~ 4200 edits a day?

So I was wondering, are there any things that are holding it up, any bottlenecks it's encountering that could perhaps be worked round?

As a priority set, here are 58,000 categories that are targets of the 'category combines topics' tinyurl.com/y9jopovf. I don't know how many of them currently have infoboxes, but I was a bit surprised to find something as fundamental as 'church' didn't, as recently as yesterday. So it might be good to make sure these ones were nailed down, also other categories that correspond to frequent values of high-use properties.

Now, must dash to the structured-data IRC chat session, where with luck the infoboxes may well be a topic. Hope to see you there! Jheald (talk) 18:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jheald: It's running slowly at the moment (I had to reboot the pi and haven't restarted all the jobs yet), I'll speed it back up soon. there are quite a few taxon categories that are avoided, so that's going to reduce the overall number. The main thing that slows things down is having to check each category to see if a) it has a Wikidata item, and b) it doesn't already have the infobox. I want to look into using quarry soon to try to provide candidate lists to run through instead. BTW, I'm signed in to the IRC session, and can respond if pinged, but am not closely watching it right now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I made sure the infoboxes got a mention... or maybe a bit more. :-)
Do you have an overall offline list of what already has an infobox? If so it might be an interesting quick thing to see how well covered the 58,000 from that query currently are.
A couple of other things I raised at IRC:
  • Gallery pages. Are these blocking infobox addition to any significant extent at the moment? (If so, it would potentially be on some of our very highest-interest categories). If so, has the time come to start creating WD category-items en-masse for blocked categories to sitelink to? Or is there any merit in the suggestion User:Ghouston floated recently, and give precedence to sitelinking categories rather than galleries -- in which case one might hold off creating those new WD items; but such a proposal would rather leave the galleries to twist unlinked in the wind.
  • WD items for intersection categories. We can currently identify 1.9 million Commons cats to WD items. But given 6.7 million Commons categories (as of 2 weeks ago), that leaves 4.8 million categories here unconnected + un-infoboxable + non-interpretable in structured data. The presumption has always been that very many of these are 'intersection' categories. Until now I have always carved out such categories as a class of things that items should not be made for on Wikidata -- but seeing just how well and usefully {{Wikidata infobox}} performs on intersection categories like Category:Grade I listed churches in Bedfordshire I've had a conversion, and I'm now convinced it should be a real priority to get infoboxes + sitelinks to WD items on as many of these categories as we can before SD is ready to start testing 'topics' on files, (circa October?). If creation of such items is okayed on WD (or the Commons community just says flatly: we have structural need for these), do we think we can start adding machine-support to getting the WD items created, and specifying what they combine, based on the name of the category, and the items linked to its parents (and the specifications of what they combine?).
As User:Pigsonthewing noted (though in my opinion still valuable without), it would also be nice to specify the relevant linking property too, though a new qualifier-property might be worth creating for that role ("Property:see also" is sometimes used at the moment, but that doesn't seem entirely satisfactory). One question is whether that qualifier should be property-valued or item-valued. Property-valued would be more straightforward, but a similar property used in constraint-specification is actually item-valued, which might add some useful extra flexibility. This is something we ought to nail down before opening the qualifier request process.
User:Ghouston has put up what looks like the perfect exact wording-change for WD:Notability needed to achieve this, at d:Wikidata_talk:Notability#Category_items -- but so far has had no responses. If we agree this does look right, we need to get this pushed through, and make sure that this is one RfC at Wikidata that actually does get addressed and closed. Having a bot standing ready and prepared, all set to create and populate the new items, would be good, to then be able to go to the WD admin board and say: the time has come: we need this closed and decided.
  • There's an urgent need for documentation about how to add/fix/augment Wikidata infoboxes, pitched for the level of an ordinary Commons user meeting and interacting with Wikidata for the first time. It's clear from Template_talk:Wikidata_Infobox that User:RexxS is (understandably) already getting quite frayed at having to walk people through such issues, rather than being able to develop. Competence is required, yes; but IMO documentation, to get people on the ladder to that competence, is now desperatedly needed. With WD infobox now in full production roll-out, and 1.2 million templates in play, this is now the front-line in exposing Commons users to structured data -- both in terms of seeing it, and getting used to working with it. It's something that we (and the whole SD programme) now need Commons users to become comfortable about working with. It's a journey User:Jmabel has been making very recently, so I was wondering, @Jmabel: is this something you could fit in any time to take a project-lead role on, to directly connect with a Commons user that has WD infobox itches they want to scratch? In the chat User:SandraF (WMF) mentioned that she was also touching on Wikidata, in a guide she's currently writing for GLAMs on how to make uploads SD-ready, so there might be some usable overlap/cross-over there too. (At the very least, the GLAMs ought to be adding a {{Wikidata infobox}} to the categories they are creating, backed-up by appropriate WD items for the templates to draw from, items they may even be (read: probably ought to be) using to drive the category-creation process as well, so it's not exactly far removed). But it would be good if the SD project and people would much more actively embrace the infobox wider roll-out process, as the current front-line for SD that Commons users can get involved with right now.
Some thoughts I had, from the IRC chat, as some HOWTOs the docs should include:
  1. Why does cat not have an infobox ?
  2. Why is the map wrong ? how do I fix it ?
  3. Why is the blue link going to the wrong sort of <X> (ie how to fix homophone issue on Wikidata)
  4. Why is there black text for this term not a blue link (ie how to link wd item to commons if it exists, or create one if it doesn't)
  5. Why doesn't the infobox specify the location more precisely? (eg than just country?)
  6. Why doesn't it also say <this> about the item? How can I add it?
  7. Why is this bit not showing up in my language, when all the rest is? How do I fix that?
  8. ... etc (what else are classic issues people have found? or itches users are going to want to scratch?
As I said in the chat, I do hope (and think there is a real chance) that Commons users are going start taking to the blue-link to blue-link to blue-link navigation between infoboxes in a big way, as well as the in-depth through-going i18n, and will really want to start improving them. A huge boost for SD if they do, because this is exactly how SD info is going to be represented on files -- the very same vocabulary. But documentation is they set of keys that we need to give ordinary Commons users, in order to open it up to them.
Preaching to the choir, I expect. But I do think there are actions that are needed here. Jheald (talk) 20:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Ghouston, Pigsonthewing, RexxS, and Jmabel: @SandraF (WMF), Steinsplitter, and Jarekt: for thoughts/comments/input.
@Mike: hope it's all right to convene this here. Feel free to kick us to a project page somewhere, if you need a bit of peace on your talk page! Jheald (talk) 21:00, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikki: Jheald (talk) 21:37, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: This is complicated. :-) A few answers for now: Convening here is fine if need be, although Template talk:Wikidata Infobox might be better. I now have an offline dump of Category:Uses of Wikidata Infobox - at [6] for now. I'm now using that as a cache, which speeds up the code quite a bit. Pi bot is now running through your priority query (and if you want to provide other queries, it can run through those too). With the notability document, perhaps it might be best to ask for objections to changes both on the talk page and on project chat, and if no-one objects after a week then just implement the changes. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:34, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, you might want to have a look at the code - in particular the list of 'templatestoavoid' - to see some of the sets of categories where the infobox isn't being added to. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:40, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see I've been pinged twice here, but there seem to be at least half a dozen different issues in this discussion, most of which I know nothing about. What question exactly is being directed at me? - Jmabel ! talk 23:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jmabel: What I thought you might be able to bring particular first-hand knowledge to are the things about Wikidata that are non-obvious for somebody starting from Commons with an aim of adding or correcting or improving an infobox, eg things that weren't obvious to you, things that you've picked up along the way, and things that perhaps somebody from Commons wouldn't know that they need to know (and where to find them!). It's hard for people who've been on WD for longer to always be well tuned-in to what's less obvious, or needs more or better explanation.
I have started a stub at Commons:Wikidata infobox help with some of the Qs that occurred to me in the chat last night, that I think it would be good to try to work up a bit more. No particular investment in either the structure or the name -- if people think it would be better with a different name (Commons:Wikidata infobox HOWTO and FAQ ?), or moved to the 'Help' hierarchy, (eg Help:Wikidata infobox), or if it's worth setting up a WikiProject to try to push forward infobox coverage (Commons:WikiProject wikidata infobox), then go for it. Also, I've no desire to reinvent any wheels -- if there's already a good page in Wikidata help for something, then let's send people to it. But I do think something specific and relevant and pitched directly for Commons users wanting to make their first experiments on adding or tweaking infoboxes could be very timely and useful. Jheald (talk) 14:40, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for mentioning my proposed change to Wikidata's notability page at wikidata:Wikidata_talk:Notability#Category_items. The idea of that change is to allow the creation of category items for Commons categories when the main item is already linked to a gallery. This was suggested as preferable to just unlinking the gallery, and seems to be needed on a lot of taxon categories. However, it wouldn't permit creating category items for intersection categories, unless they are also found in another project beside Commons. It also removes any special discrimination against Commons, which has existed in the Notability page for a long time. Some existing category items that are only linked to one Wikipedia would violate this new wording. --ghouston (talk) 07:59, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ghouston: I'd missed that. Would you be okay to changing the wording to of the second prong to:
or b) have one sitelink and are linked via topic's main category (P910) and category's main topic (P301) with an item which is notable in its own right; or by category combines topics (P971) to a set of such items.
With the infoboxes, I think we do now have a clear structural need for such items, and this would greenlight that. Are we happy to go ahead, and try to sell it to the WD community?
BTW, on the issue of galleries taking sitelinks and thus blocking infoboxes, this query gives an estimate of 45,765 categories affected: tinyurl.com/y7ukrgql, which tend to be particularly high-value, because that's why people were attracted to create galleries for them. Do we think it would make sense to simply fire up QuickStatements and go ahead and create WD items for these categories? Inevitably there would probably be a few duplicates created, but it would get the job done, and I can't think of any convincing way to avoid them. One alternative would be to create the infoboxes with particular hard-specified Q-numbers, but that's such a brittle mechanism compared to sitelinks, and I think would only be putting off a clean-up step we'd end up wanting to do. Should we just bite the bullet and go for it? Jheald (talk) 14:23, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I worded it that way because I assumed there wasn't much enthusiasm for creating millions of category items on Wikidata for Commons intersection categories likes "Cars facing left in 1996 in France" or whatever. Is creating Wikidata items really a good idea in these cases? Would it be possible to have a template on Commons that acts as an alternative to Wikidata Infobox, where the Wikidata main items are specified as parameters? Quite a few could probably be done with a bot based on the names and parents of intersection categories.
As for the gallery duplicates, I do think it would make sense to create those 45,765 or so categories, since that's not a big number in this context, and it would be very useful on Commons. --ghouston (talk) 23:17, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
WD items now created for first 9000 (okay, 8999) 'blocked' Commons categories, list at: https://tools.wmflabs.org/paste/view/c7286429 -- should be all ready to feed to PiBot. A handful may have inboxes already, via directly-specified Qids; also there are quite a few taxons. Jheald (talk) 12:52, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: OK, I've now set pibot running through that list. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:06, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
BTW I realise that the Category names in the Commons file are percent-encoded utf, so that eg Category:Benoît Mandelbrot was there as "Category:Beno%C3%AEt_Mandelbrot". Is this a problem, or will your code cope? I'll try and avoid it next time. Jheald (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: I just tried that specific case, and it seems the code doesn't mind. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:53, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: OK, I'm done with that list - 3585 more infoboxes were added. Let me know if/when you have another (given Jura's comments on wikidata). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:10, 29 June2018 (UTC)
Impressive. Quite hard to keep the beast fed! (That's back at me for telling it it was slow, I guess). Do you get a report as to what the other 5414 were -- mostly taxons? Or existing infoboxes? Jheald (talk) 21:08, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: The bot takes about a second to check a category and add the infobox if needed - it appears to be running much slower than that as it spends most of its time checking categories without adding the infobox for one reason or another. I haven't coded an output report for it, but looking at the log it does look like it mostly skipped taxonomy categories, plus some existing uses of e.g. {{Wikidata person}}. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:24, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Next 8969 ready to go: https://tools.wmflabs.org/paste/view/5a469b8f. Possibly quite heavy on taxons again, but there should be a good few more infobox suitable. Jheald (talk) 07:51, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Downloaded, and ready to go, but I can't get a stable enough internet connection to set it going and keep it going. Will try again later, but it might have to wait until tomorrow eve. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:44, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Next lot, just whenever PiBot's ready for them: https://tools.wmflabs.org/paste/view/b2206735 (17,955) Jheald (talk) 08:15, 1 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
One more: https://tools.wmflabs.org/paste/view/6e006892 (7757) I think this is pretty much the last lot, at least for the time being. Jheald (talk) 10:10, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: The second run added 2840 infoboxes. I've merged these latest two together, and they're running now. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 15:17, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: BTW, using the query at the start of this conversation added 9,200 infoboxes.
@Jheald: 10530 infoboxes were added for the latest two sets combined. Also, you might be interested in User:Mike Peel/Commons redirects with Wikidata items, which is a new log file that's currently being compiled by pi bot. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:46, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. A diverse set of redirects, that have come about for various different reasons, looking at the logfile. I thought there was a bot on Wikidata handling these, updating sitelinks and P373s if they pointed to a redirect here? Though I suppose that may not always be possible, eg if the new category already has its own sitelink. I have also come across some of these for taxons, where eg there is only one known species in a particular genus, so the category for the genus here has a redirect to the category for the species. (Since all pictures, presumably, must be of a member of that species) Yet the redirecting category still has a full taxonavigation template for the genus. In that case, I think maybe an incoming sitelink is permissible, even though it confuses the picture.
I am not very good with the MediaWiki SQL tables, but presumably with the right SQL query one ought to be able to get whole list at will, all in one go, by looking for the redirect template and the WD sitelink? I wish I was better at the SQL... I was thinking, also, it might be possible to query for categories that have an interwiki but no WD sitelink -- that might be a good group to try to take care of, and new meat for infoboxes.
So we got 16,955 new infoboxes in all, out of about 43,000 new category-items created. I suppose a fair number of the rest may have been taxa. I must take a closer look at your list to see what else might have been included. Out of interest, do you know whether the taxonavigation template calls {{Interwiki from wikidata}}. It would be interesting to know if many of that 43,000 beyond the 16,955 are now relying on the Wikidata link for their interwikis. Jheald (talk) 12:40, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
It seems about 22,300 were taxa tinyurl.com/yd5poml5, so that would leave about 3,750 perhaps passed over for other reasons. Jheald (talk) 12:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald: Yes, that's pi bot - these are the cases where both the redirect and the target both have sitelinks, so the bot can't sort them out automatically. I know SQL, so I should have a look at quarry at some point - the main difficulty there is figuring out how the information's stored in the database. 3,750 sounds like a reasonable number to have been skipped due to using wikidata person / creator / institution. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 14:19, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Jheald and Ghouston: In terms of the types of categories here that are lacking sitelinks from Wikidata, I've just put a list of 1,000 randomly-selected ones at User:Mike Peel/Commons categories without Wikidata sitelink. There are quite a few intersection categories, but also quite a lot about specific things that probably either have Wikidata items already, or should have as things that are probably notable in their own right. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:58, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. I couldn't resist linking a few, there are obviously still a lot of potential matches to be made. Wijdenes, Pityrodia viscida, Claude Martin, Leptaena, Gare d'Outreau, Hypselobarbus, Merodon avidus --ghouston (talk) 03:18, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mike_Peel/Archive_4&oldid=310609722"