This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
Video: Wikidata editing #31 Free Software Day -
YouTube,
Facebook
Video: Knowledge Graphs for AI: Wikidata and beyond -
YouTube
Tool of the week
UseAsRef script allows you to add references to statements using one external ID as source (see
User:Bargioni/UseAsRef and this
YouTube video for more information)
Public Domain Tool, developed by the Flemish Institute for Archives automates the process of determining whether their collection items could be in the public domain.
Sizes of country items (like
"Portugal" (Q45)) were recently reduced by 30% to 50% by moving a few economics properties to "economy of"-items (sample:
"economy of Portugal" (Q1649355)). The item "economy of Portugal" is currently larger than "Portugal". This can simplify uses of country items that previously timed-out. Infoboxes can still access the properties with the link through
"economy of topic" (P8744).
Later this week, the development team will enable a rate limit for assigning new item IDs. Bots and users who successfully create items should notice no change, since the rate limit is equal to the existing limit on all edits. However, bots that often fail to create items may start to see different error messages than usual. This will hopefully reduce the problem of skipped item IDs.
Work on the Simple Query Builder continues. We finished connecting query conditions via OR (
phab:T272694). Next we will work on adding the UI for sharing the visual query via a link (
phab:T272887)
Improved the deployment process for the Query Service UI to make it easier to deploy
Fixed language code "dag" for Dagbani not working for Lemmas for Lexemes (
phab:T272242)
Fixing the bug where the Property selector is not falling back from language variant to major language for Property labels (
phab:T272712)
Adding a rate limit for creating Item IDs to avoid skipping so many due to misbehaving bots (
phab:T272032)
Fixed the case where no error was shown when trying to save a lemma with an invalid language code (
phab:T265783)
Fixed a but where merging two Lexemes fails if the source Lexeme has links to its own Senses (
phab:T273830)
Increasing the rate of edits that trigger a check by the constraint checker to 50%. This will increase the number of constraints violations that you can query in the Query Service. (
phab:T204031)
Making it possible to add interwiki links to/from Multilingual Wikisource (
phab:T138332)
Past: Online Talk Show on Fri, Feb 19, 2021, by Wikimedia Indonesia and Fariz Darari - Take a peek into the data warehouse of Wikimedia projects (= Wikidata):
Youtube link
Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries
LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: Adding bibliographic data to Wikidata with Jason Evans, Wikimedian in residence at the Wales National Library, Tuesday, February 23rd.
[1]
Upcoming video: LIVE Wikidata editing #33 -
YouTube,
Facebook, February 27
Upcoming:
Wikidata-based Data Sprint hosted by the University of New Brunswick. One Wikidata data set will be provided on 11th March 2021 and various teams will have 2 hours to run a set of SPARQL queries against the Wikidata Query Service (WDQS) and showcase their results.
Video: How to create new Wikidata item (in Dutch) -
YouTube
Video: Merging Wikidata items (in Dutch) -
YouTube
Tool of the week
EditSum, a new user script which allows to attach custom summary text to any label/statement/sitelink/etc. modification.
Other Noteworthy Stuff
User:Nikki/LexemeInterwikiLinks.js, is a userscript that adds Wiktionary interwiki links in the sidebar on Lexeme pages. (It links to pages corresponding to the first lemma and puts the lexeme language's Wiktionary first, followed by languages in the user's Babel box).
Shared Citations, a proposal arising from the WikiCite project, for a central reference management database supporting all Wikimedia projects, with significant relationship to Wikidata. Seeking feedback.
Modèle:Indice de diversité de genre (Template:Gender diversity index) is a new template in the French Wikipedia which use P21 (gender property) to count the number of people by gender mentioned in an article. It helps to find articles which "forget" to cite women.
Lexeme JSON dumps are now available as a collection of individual lexeme data in the regular JSON format, separate from the regular Wikidata dumps containing Items and Properties.
phab:T264883
Working on first version of small tool that lets you get the average ORES quality score for a list of Items and find the lowest-quality Items in the batch so it's easier to improve them.
Taking a closer look at what larger improvements we want to make to Lexemes later this year.
Thinking through different ways how we can technically get mismatches between Wikidata's data and other databases so we can later expose them.
Thinking through what the first version of the REST API should contain and what should come later.
Fixed an issue with whitespaces when editing Lexemes (
phab:T250550)
Made sure all languages show up in the language selector for monolingual text Properties at least with their language code because them not showing up was very confusing (
phab:T124758)
Fixed an issue with generating correct links for external IDs with + (
phab:T271126)
Fixing an issue with Property selector not falling back from language variant to major language (
phab:T272712)
Due to the planned delay of the release of MediaWiki 1.36, the Wikibase team has been working on preparing a Wikibase update that includes new functionality (such as the “Federated Properties” feature) based on v1.35. To that end, we started backporting certain features and fixes into the Wikibase 1.35 release. Follow our progress
here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!16:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Margaret. None of the taxa you placed in this category were actually named by Paul Kummer. Take for example, Inocybe lacera (Fr.) P.Kumm. (1871). The species was originally given a "name" by Elias Magnus Fries, as Agaricus lacerus Fr. Paul Kummer transferred the species to the genus Inocybe in 1871. When Kummer transferred it to a different genus, the "name" stayed the same. ("name" = "epithet" = "specific epithet" = "species epithet" = "species name" - these are used interchangably, and all mean the second part of the
binomial name). Hope that helps with your future categorisation efforts.
Esculenta (
talk)
18:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the interpretation, @
Esculenta:. I would agree that the first naming is by Fries. However, the name does change with the genus change, with the epithet staying the same (but agreeing with gender of the new genus). And of course, the description is changed with the change of genus. Perhaps you could give a reference for your interpretation. (Certainly within the plantae, it is the practice of wikipedians to also use the final authority in a "named by" category.) Regards,
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
19:01, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
No, the "name" does not change when the genus changes. As above, the "name" = the
specific epithet. The description does not necessarily change either. See the article
Author citation (botany) "In botanical nomenclature, author citation is the way of citing the person or group of people who validly published a botanical name, i.e. who first published the name while fulfilling the formal requirements..." If there are instances of plant taxa also using the final authority (i.e. the genus changer) for author categorization, then this is simply wrong, and the incorrect categorizations should be removed.
Esculenta (
talk)
19:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help on this. @
Esculenta:. I believe the category should not be deleted until more wikipedians have read these arguments. (I did not find your reference compelling, but perhaps I misread it.) Meanwhile what you are suggesting would mean changes in the practice of many, many wikipedians, so I would like some time before the category is deleted to allow others to put their point of view.
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
21:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok. It's clear to me, but I would also welcome the opinion of other Wikipedians. There is currently a discussion about this type of categorization (taxa by author) in another thread at the
WP:ToL talk page, so it would be a good idea to get this all sorted out at the same time.
Esculenta (
talk)
23:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
This is quite a complex issue, and there are very important differences between the two main codes. It's necessary to be very careful about the terminology: see the table at
Binomial nomenclature#Codes. You can't write much about binomials without stating the code that applies. I'm afraid that
Esculenta is wrong above in equating some terms without being clear as to which code applies. The second part of a binomial is a specific name in the ICZN, but only a specific epithet in the ICNafp. The attitudes of these two codes to transfers reflect this difference. In the ICZN it's absolutely clear, I think, that those who make transfers do not create new names, and indeed are not (normally) even credited with the transfer, which is merely marked by the parentheses around the name of the author of the specific name. So in zoological names, the transferrer should definitely not be placed in the same category as the author of the specific name.
There's more of a case for treating transferrers as authors for botanical names, but I still think it's not right to put them in the same category as the original author. When a transfer of genus is made and the specific epithet remains the same, this will be published as comb. nov. Only if the epithet has to be changed because it would create a homonym of an earlier combination is it said to be nom. nov. (a replacement name in more recent usage). So even under the ICNafp, the publisher(s) of the original combination (i.e. the one that first used a particular epithet), the basionym, are treated differently from the publisher(s) of a new combination, although both are more plausibly described as "authors".
So in summary, I do think it's wrong to put basionym authors and combination authors in the same category, regardless of the code.
Peter coxhead (
talk)
23:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
@
Esculenta:, @
Peter coxhead: Thanks for this. For me, the issue is less about the naming conventions of the codes, but rather more about wikipedian conventions for linking authors (whether "de novo" or creating new combinations) to their work. IPNI records authors as having named taxa whether they wrote the original description or created a new combination, and I would prefer our wikipedian conventions to follow its lead. We could distinguish the two kinds of authors in our wikipedia categories, but I suspect it would be less useful than the current practice, which allows (like IPNI) a simple numerical summary at the top and would require fewer button bresses. If we must have different categories for both kinds of authors, I hope someone will propose a category name, because I do think people like Paul Kummer should be linked to the things he changed. (People's work in wikipedia should be demonstrable as well as referenced. And the category system with its "Taxa named by" has been a useful mechanism for this.)
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
@
MargaretRDonald: I sympathize with your point, but there remains the problem that many biologists created names/combinations for both plants and animals, and it seems wrong for them to be put into a category for transferring a plant name but not an animal name – in terms of the philosophy of categorizing it makes the category inhomogeneous. There are two solutions:
Treat the "Taxa named by" categories as authors of ICZN specific names and ICNafp basionyms. This makes the categories consistent with the "... described in YEAR" categories, which definitely mean "first described in". There could then be separate categories for combinations (but this leaves the issue of changes of rank unresolved).
Have separate categories for the codes of nomenclature, which could then have different inclusion criteria.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!15:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Using page mover
When using Page mover as an event coordinator, it's best to de-select the option to create a redirect from the editor's sandbox.
Oronsay (
talk)
15:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
MargaretRDonald, Problem is that the sandbox is now created by MargaretRDonald and so their next article, even if moved correctly, will still have MRD as the creator. Better to pop a note on their Talk page to advise of the move.
Oronsay (
talk)
19:27, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries
LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: OCLC Research’s CONTENTdm Wikibase data model for pilot project to improve collection discoverability, Tuesday, March 9th.
[2]
Upcoming:
SPARQL queries live on Twitch and in French by Vigneron, March 9 at 18:00 CET
Upcoming: LIVE Wikidata editing #35 -
YouTube,
Facebook, March 13
"
Giving knowledge back to Wikipedia: Towards a Systematic Approach to Sync Factual Data across Wikipedia, Wikidata and External Data Sources" (by DBPedia)
Fixed an issue where the Property selector is not falling back from language variant to major language (
phab:T272712)
Working on support for editing statements on Senses on Lexemes via wbeditentity (
phab:T199896)
Continuing to work on the
Query Builder and making it possible to query for quantities and dates with it.
Putting finishing touches on a small tool that lets you get the average ORES quality score for a list of Items as well as the individual scores for each of the Items
Plantilla:Infotaula persona, infobox for people on Catalan Wikipedia with extensive use of Wikidata, used 175000 times, with Bridge editing. Sample use at
ca:Frits Zernike.
Mismatch Finder: Added various dialogs and help texts to make it easier to understand what reviewers need to do and what information they are seeing in the tool
Mismatch Finder: started polishing and bug fixing for release of the first version
Making the order of Lexeme's grammatical features consistent (
phab:T232557)
Investigating how to share complex SPARQL queries in Wikidata Query Service via short URL (
phab:T295560)
This
post about the question of the week is showing how questions can be answered over Wikidata. Also it gives some insights on how Google and Siri are using Wikidata.
A new openly accessible
book on knowledge graphs has been published by prominent researchers in the field.
Working on displaying the grammatical features of Lexemes in a particular order in the UI (
phab:T232557)
Mismatch Finder: continuing polishing before first release. Focusing on making API documentation available and adding a footer to the site
The ongoing work on MediaWiki skin improvements especially for Wikipedia will break the search box for Wikidata. We're working on addressing this. (
phab:T275251)
Migrating a number of components to vue 3 to keep up with the rest of MediaWiki (
phab:T294465)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Next
LD4 Wikibase Working Hour. Thurs. 16 December 2021, 11AM-12PM Eastern, (
time zone converter). "We will continue work developing our WBStack sandbox which seeks to explore how Wikibase could help track the usage of alternate labels for terms in vocabularies like LCSH"
LIVE Wikidata editing #64 -
YouTube,
Facebook, December 4 at 19:00 UTC
Mismatch Finder: Continued working on last remaining tickets for the first version. Added a footer to the site, improved documentation and added ability to delete a batch of mismatches.
Made good progress on migrating our on-wiki Vue apps to support the new Vue.createMwApp compatibility layer in MediaWiki core (
phab:T294465)
Continued work on making it possible to define a custom ordering of grammatical features on Lexemes (
phab:T232557)
More research and discussion on mul language code (
phab:T285156)
Discussing with data re-users about their views on the ontology issue classification we worked on earlier this year to get their input (
slides from Data Quality Days session)
You added Styphelia mitchellii to the list of Styphelia species using PoWO as the reference. Unfortunately, it's not listed at the Australian Plant Census, so I've moved it to Leucopogon mitchellii. I acknowledge my error in stating that S. mitchellii is listed as a synonym at PoWO, but since the species list in the article uses APC as the reference, it would look a bit odd to include it in the list. Apparently Crayn et. al. clumped some Leucopogon specis as well as Astroloma and Coelanthera. As usual, the APC is slow to catch up. We could resolve this by using PoWO as the reference to the species list, or add the species clumped by Crayn in the second list, lower down the page. Your thoughts? I'm happy to do the updating, whichever way you go.
Gderrin (
talk)
07:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Geoff. Yes I should not have added it into the list without changing the reference.. Styphelia is something of a mess as it is unclear whether it is a matter of scientific disagreement or just a failure to catch up (although APNI references the papers used by FloraBase as justification for their changes.) I think the simplest thing might be to simply delete Styphelia mitchelli from the list of Styphelia species and wait. The article for Leucopogon mitchellii states some of the story about acceptance or otherwise. And genera articles do not always give complete lists. The annoying thing is that I have not been able to get the Queensland plant census of 2020 which would give a definitive view of whether the Queensland herbarium accepts the change to Styphelia mitchellii....@
Gderrin:MargaretRDonald (
talk)
12:30, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #497
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
"Knowledge Based Multilingual Language Model" Using the Wikidata to build the language models that not only memorize the factual knowledge but also learn useful logical patterns. (Liu et al, 2021)
Videos
Summary of Transbordados, the pre-WikidataCon conference organized by Wiki Movimento Brasil (in Brazilian Portuguese)
Tool of the week
Weaviate big graph (
source) is a vectorised search engine which returns similar items in Wikidata.
Other Noteworthy Stuff
Wikimedia Deutschland is running a survey to evaluate Wikibase Installation and Updating experience for users. Please answer a few questions so we can continue to identify areas of improvement for users. Survey links
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the
current talk page.
Video: Wikidata editing #31 Free Software Day -
YouTube,
Facebook
Video: Knowledge Graphs for AI: Wikidata and beyond -
YouTube
Tool of the week
UseAsRef script allows you to add references to statements using one external ID as source (see
User:Bargioni/UseAsRef and this
YouTube video for more information)
Public Domain Tool, developed by the Flemish Institute for Archives automates the process of determining whether their collection items could be in the public domain.
Sizes of country items (like
"Portugal" (Q45)) were recently reduced by 30% to 50% by moving a few economics properties to "economy of"-items (sample:
"economy of Portugal" (Q1649355)). The item "economy of Portugal" is currently larger than "Portugal". This can simplify uses of country items that previously timed-out. Infoboxes can still access the properties with the link through
"economy of topic" (P8744).
Later this week, the development team will enable a rate limit for assigning new item IDs. Bots and users who successfully create items should notice no change, since the rate limit is equal to the existing limit on all edits. However, bots that often fail to create items may start to see different error messages than usual. This will hopefully reduce the problem of skipped item IDs.
Work on the Simple Query Builder continues. We finished connecting query conditions via OR (
phab:T272694). Next we will work on adding the UI for sharing the visual query via a link (
phab:T272887)
Improved the deployment process for the Query Service UI to make it easier to deploy
Fixed language code "dag" for Dagbani not working for Lemmas for Lexemes (
phab:T272242)
Fixing the bug where the Property selector is not falling back from language variant to major language for Property labels (
phab:T272712)
Adding a rate limit for creating Item IDs to avoid skipping so many due to misbehaving bots (
phab:T272032)
Fixed the case where no error was shown when trying to save a lemma with an invalid language code (
phab:T265783)
Fixed a but where merging two Lexemes fails if the source Lexeme has links to its own Senses (
phab:T273830)
Increasing the rate of edits that trigger a check by the constraint checker to 50%. This will increase the number of constraints violations that you can query in the Query Service. (
phab:T204031)
Making it possible to add interwiki links to/from Multilingual Wikisource (
phab:T138332)
Past: Online Talk Show on Fri, Feb 19, 2021, by Wikimedia Indonesia and Fariz Darari - Take a peek into the data warehouse of Wikimedia projects (= Wikidata):
Youtube link
Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries
LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: Adding bibliographic data to Wikidata with Jason Evans, Wikimedian in residence at the Wales National Library, Tuesday, February 23rd.
[1]
Upcoming video: LIVE Wikidata editing #33 -
YouTube,
Facebook, February 27
Upcoming:
Wikidata-based Data Sprint hosted by the University of New Brunswick. One Wikidata data set will be provided on 11th March 2021 and various teams will have 2 hours to run a set of SPARQL queries against the Wikidata Query Service (WDQS) and showcase their results.
Video: How to create new Wikidata item (in Dutch) -
YouTube
Video: Merging Wikidata items (in Dutch) -
YouTube
Tool of the week
EditSum, a new user script which allows to attach custom summary text to any label/statement/sitelink/etc. modification.
Other Noteworthy Stuff
User:Nikki/LexemeInterwikiLinks.js, is a userscript that adds Wiktionary interwiki links in the sidebar on Lexeme pages. (It links to pages corresponding to the first lemma and puts the lexeme language's Wiktionary first, followed by languages in the user's Babel box).
Shared Citations, a proposal arising from the WikiCite project, for a central reference management database supporting all Wikimedia projects, with significant relationship to Wikidata. Seeking feedback.
Modèle:Indice de diversité de genre (Template:Gender diversity index) is a new template in the French Wikipedia which use P21 (gender property) to count the number of people by gender mentioned in an article. It helps to find articles which "forget" to cite women.
Lexeme JSON dumps are now available as a collection of individual lexeme data in the regular JSON format, separate from the regular Wikidata dumps containing Items and Properties.
phab:T264883
Working on first version of small tool that lets you get the average ORES quality score for a list of Items and find the lowest-quality Items in the batch so it's easier to improve them.
Taking a closer look at what larger improvements we want to make to Lexemes later this year.
Thinking through different ways how we can technically get mismatches between Wikidata's data and other databases so we can later expose them.
Thinking through what the first version of the REST API should contain and what should come later.
Fixed an issue with whitespaces when editing Lexemes (
phab:T250550)
Made sure all languages show up in the language selector for monolingual text Properties at least with their language code because them not showing up was very confusing (
phab:T124758)
Fixed an issue with generating correct links for external IDs with + (
phab:T271126)
Fixing an issue with Property selector not falling back from language variant to major language (
phab:T272712)
Due to the planned delay of the release of MediaWiki 1.36, the Wikibase team has been working on preparing a Wikibase update that includes new functionality (such as the “Federated Properties” feature) based on v1.35. To that end, we started backporting certain features and fixes into the Wikibase 1.35 release. Follow our progress
here.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!16:34, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Margaret. None of the taxa you placed in this category were actually named by Paul Kummer. Take for example, Inocybe lacera (Fr.) P.Kumm. (1871). The species was originally given a "name" by Elias Magnus Fries, as Agaricus lacerus Fr. Paul Kummer transferred the species to the genus Inocybe in 1871. When Kummer transferred it to a different genus, the "name" stayed the same. ("name" = "epithet" = "specific epithet" = "species epithet" = "species name" - these are used interchangably, and all mean the second part of the
binomial name). Hope that helps with your future categorisation efforts.
Esculenta (
talk)
18:52, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the interpretation, @
Esculenta:. I would agree that the first naming is by Fries. However, the name does change with the genus change, with the epithet staying the same (but agreeing with gender of the new genus). And of course, the description is changed with the change of genus. Perhaps you could give a reference for your interpretation. (Certainly within the plantae, it is the practice of wikipedians to also use the final authority in a "named by" category.) Regards,
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
19:01, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
No, the "name" does not change when the genus changes. As above, the "name" = the
specific epithet. The description does not necessarily change either. See the article
Author citation (botany) "In botanical nomenclature, author citation is the way of citing the person or group of people who validly published a botanical name, i.e. who first published the name while fulfilling the formal requirements..." If there are instances of plant taxa also using the final authority (i.e. the genus changer) for author categorization, then this is simply wrong, and the incorrect categorizations should be removed.
Esculenta (
talk)
19:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for your help on this. @
Esculenta:. I believe the category should not be deleted until more wikipedians have read these arguments. (I did not find your reference compelling, but perhaps I misread it.) Meanwhile what you are suggesting would mean changes in the practice of many, many wikipedians, so I would like some time before the category is deleted to allow others to put their point of view.
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
21:33, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok. It's clear to me, but I would also welcome the opinion of other Wikipedians. There is currently a discussion about this type of categorization (taxa by author) in another thread at the
WP:ToL talk page, so it would be a good idea to get this all sorted out at the same time.
Esculenta (
talk)
23:03, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
This is quite a complex issue, and there are very important differences between the two main codes. It's necessary to be very careful about the terminology: see the table at
Binomial nomenclature#Codes. You can't write much about binomials without stating the code that applies. I'm afraid that
Esculenta is wrong above in equating some terms without being clear as to which code applies. The second part of a binomial is a specific name in the ICZN, but only a specific epithet in the ICNafp. The attitudes of these two codes to transfers reflect this difference. In the ICZN it's absolutely clear, I think, that those who make transfers do not create new names, and indeed are not (normally) even credited with the transfer, which is merely marked by the parentheses around the name of the author of the specific name. So in zoological names, the transferrer should definitely not be placed in the same category as the author of the specific name.
There's more of a case for treating transferrers as authors for botanical names, but I still think it's not right to put them in the same category as the original author. When a transfer of genus is made and the specific epithet remains the same, this will be published as comb. nov. Only if the epithet has to be changed because it would create a homonym of an earlier combination is it said to be nom. nov. (a replacement name in more recent usage). So even under the ICNafp, the publisher(s) of the original combination (i.e. the one that first used a particular epithet), the basionym, are treated differently from the publisher(s) of a new combination, although both are more plausibly described as "authors".
So in summary, I do think it's wrong to put basionym authors and combination authors in the same category, regardless of the code.
Peter coxhead (
talk)
23:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
@
Esculenta:, @
Peter coxhead: Thanks for this. For me, the issue is less about the naming conventions of the codes, but rather more about wikipedian conventions for linking authors (whether "de novo" or creating new combinations) to their work. IPNI records authors as having named taxa whether they wrote the original description or created a new combination, and I would prefer our wikipedian conventions to follow its lead. We could distinguish the two kinds of authors in our wikipedia categories, but I suspect it would be less useful than the current practice, which allows (like IPNI) a simple numerical summary at the top and would require fewer button bresses. If we must have different categories for both kinds of authors, I hope someone will propose a category name, because I do think people like Paul Kummer should be linked to the things he changed. (People's work in wikipedia should be demonstrable as well as referenced. And the category system with its "Taxa named by" has been a useful mechanism for this.)
MargaretRDonald (
talk)
@
MargaretRDonald: I sympathize with your point, but there remains the problem that many biologists created names/combinations for both plants and animals, and it seems wrong for them to be put into a category for transferring a plant name but not an animal name – in terms of the philosophy of categorizing it makes the category inhomogeneous. There are two solutions:
Treat the "Taxa named by" categories as authors of ICZN specific names and ICNafp basionyms. This makes the categories consistent with the "... described in YEAR" categories, which definitely mean "first described in". There could then be separate categories for combinations (but this leaves the issue of changes of rank unresolved).
Have separate categories for the codes of nomenclature, which could then have different inclusion criteria.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by
visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. LizRead!Talk!15:55, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
Using page mover
When using Page mover as an event coordinator, it's best to de-select the option to create a redirect from the editor's sandbox.
Oronsay (
talk)
15:16, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
MargaretRDonald, Problem is that the sandbox is now created by MargaretRDonald and so their next article, even if moved correctly, will still have MRD as the creator. Better to pop a note on their Talk page to advise of the move.
Oronsay (
talk)
19:27, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
Upcoming: Next Linked Data for Libraries
LD4 Wikidata Affinity Group call: OCLC Research’s CONTENTdm Wikibase data model for pilot project to improve collection discoverability, Tuesday, March 9th.
[2]
Upcoming:
SPARQL queries live on Twitch and in French by Vigneron, March 9 at 18:00 CET
Upcoming: LIVE Wikidata editing #35 -
YouTube,
Facebook, March 13
"
Giving knowledge back to Wikipedia: Towards a Systematic Approach to Sync Factual Data across Wikipedia, Wikidata and External Data Sources" (by DBPedia)
Fixed an issue where the Property selector is not falling back from language variant to major language (
phab:T272712)
Working on support for editing statements on Senses on Lexemes via wbeditentity (
phab:T199896)
Continuing to work on the
Query Builder and making it possible to query for quantities and dates with it.
Putting finishing touches on a small tool that lets you get the average ORES quality score for a list of Items as well as the individual scores for each of the Items
Plantilla:Infotaula persona, infobox for people on Catalan Wikipedia with extensive use of Wikidata, used 175000 times, with Bridge editing. Sample use at
ca:Frits Zernike.
Mismatch Finder: Added various dialogs and help texts to make it easier to understand what reviewers need to do and what information they are seeing in the tool
Mismatch Finder: started polishing and bug fixing for release of the first version
Making the order of Lexeme's grammatical features consistent (
phab:T232557)
Investigating how to share complex SPARQL queries in Wikidata Query Service via short URL (
phab:T295560)
This
post about the question of the week is showing how questions can be answered over Wikidata. Also it gives some insights on how Google and Siri are using Wikidata.
A new openly accessible
book on knowledge graphs has been published by prominent researchers in the field.
Working on displaying the grammatical features of Lexemes in a particular order in the UI (
phab:T232557)
Mismatch Finder: continuing polishing before first release. Focusing on making API documentation available and adding a footer to the site
The ongoing work on MediaWiki skin improvements especially for Wikipedia will break the search box for Wikidata. We're working on addressing this. (
phab:T275251)
Migrating a number of components to vue 3 to keep up with the rest of MediaWiki (
phab:T294465)
Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the
Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
Next
LD4 Wikibase Working Hour. Thurs. 16 December 2021, 11AM-12PM Eastern, (
time zone converter). "We will continue work developing our WBStack sandbox which seeks to explore how Wikibase could help track the usage of alternate labels for terms in vocabularies like LCSH"
LIVE Wikidata editing #64 -
YouTube,
Facebook, December 4 at 19:00 UTC
Mismatch Finder: Continued working on last remaining tickets for the first version. Added a footer to the site, improved documentation and added ability to delete a batch of mismatches.
Made good progress on migrating our on-wiki Vue apps to support the new Vue.createMwApp compatibility layer in MediaWiki core (
phab:T294465)
Continued work on making it possible to define a custom ordering of grammatical features on Lexemes (
phab:T232557)
More research and discussion on mul language code (
phab:T285156)
Discussing with data re-users about their views on the ontology issue classification we worked on earlier this year to get their input (
slides from Data Quality Days session)
You added Styphelia mitchellii to the list of Styphelia species using PoWO as the reference. Unfortunately, it's not listed at the Australian Plant Census, so I've moved it to Leucopogon mitchellii. I acknowledge my error in stating that S. mitchellii is listed as a synonym at PoWO, but since the species list in the article uses APC as the reference, it would look a bit odd to include it in the list. Apparently Crayn et. al. clumped some Leucopogon specis as well as Astroloma and Coelanthera. As usual, the APC is slow to catch up. We could resolve this by using PoWO as the reference to the species list, or add the species clumped by Crayn in the second list, lower down the page. Your thoughts? I'm happy to do the updating, whichever way you go.
Gderrin (
talk)
07:32, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Hi Geoff. Yes I should not have added it into the list without changing the reference.. Styphelia is something of a mess as it is unclear whether it is a matter of scientific disagreement or just a failure to catch up (although APNI references the papers used by FloraBase as justification for their changes.) I think the simplest thing might be to simply delete Styphelia mitchelli from the list of Styphelia species and wait. The article for Leucopogon mitchellii states some of the story about acceptance or otherwise. And genera articles do not always give complete lists. The annoying thing is that I have not been able to get the Queensland plant census of 2020 which would give a definitive view of whether the Queensland herbarium accepts the change to Styphelia mitchellii....@
Gderrin:MargaretRDonald (
talk)
12:30, 2 December 2021 (UTC)
Wikidata weekly summary #497
Here's your quick overview of what has been happening around Wikidata over the last week.
"Knowledge Based Multilingual Language Model" Using the Wikidata to build the language models that not only memorize the factual knowledge but also learn useful logical patterns. (Liu et al, 2021)
Videos
Summary of Transbordados, the pre-WikidataCon conference organized by Wiki Movimento Brasil (in Brazilian Portuguese)
Tool of the week
Weaviate big graph (
source) is a vectorised search engine which returns similar items in Wikidata.
Other Noteworthy Stuff
Wikimedia Deutschland is running a survey to evaluate Wikibase Installation and Updating experience for users. Please answer a few questions so we can continue to identify areas of improvement for users. Survey links