[13:13:41] hi [13:14:40] how can we specify on the item of a holiday or a awareness day that it happens on, for example, the first Saturday of March every year ? [13:17:38] Ash_Crow, Christmas has a property for that: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19809 [13:19:18] Ash_Crow, And I guess if you can't find an item, you would need to create an item for "first saturday of march". If anyone needs to know the data, they have to do their own calendaric math. [13:19:38] *needs to know the date* [13:19:44] OK [14:10:04] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P837 yes. [14:37:04] <_kmh_> hi [14:37:42] <_kmh_> I got a problem with editing https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q158657 [14:38:20] <_kmh_> for some reason I can't enter pt (for portuguese) in the list of interwikis [14:41:01] probably because there's already a link to the portuguese wiki [14:41:09] That. [14:41:45] Also, your moving of links looks invalid. [14:41:52] https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q89&action=history [14:43:26] probably related to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Talk:Q20638126 [14:44:19] Ah, the good old story... [14:44:42] I really wish wikidata weren't so tied to the idea that a wikipedia page can only be about one concept and that there can only be one page about the concept :/ [14:52:59] <_kmh_> what's incorrect about the move [14:53:34] <_kmh_> nikki, strictly speaking wikidata can't do that anyhow [14:53:53] do what? [14:54:06] <_kmh_> otherwise you can't really use wikidata for interwikis [14:54:51] <_kmh_> nikki, i mean right now you create a wikidata object for any wikipedia article i assume [14:55:31] I don't think it's impossible, it would need changes, but of course it would need changes, otherwise it would already be possible [14:58:29] (I'm also not saying they would be easy changes to make, I imagine it would break everything, since it seems to be a core idea of how it's intended to work) [14:58:46] <_kmh_> ah ok there is a second article in pt, i didn't see that [14:59:24] <_kmh_> nikki, not sure we are talking about the same thing [14:59:33] possibly not :) [15:00:03] <_kmh_> if there is an English article A_and_B and a German article A_und_B [15:00:25] <_kmh_> that we link them as interwikis [15:00:39] <_kmh_> which now requires a wikidata item [15:01:27] <_kmh_> but that item would be A_and_B as well so neither about concept A or concept B only [15:02:37] <_kmh_> you still can have items A and B in their own right, but the wikidata item used for the interwikis would A_and_B [15:02:52] <_kmh_> or do I misunderstand something here? [15:04:55] what I'm referring to is how some wikis will have separate items for A and B and no combined article, so you can't have interwiki links to/from wikis which have a combined article [15:07:34] the thing I usually run into is populated places which are almost equivalent to the municipality they're in... a lot of the time, there'll be a single article which covers both, but sometimes there'll be two separate articles [15:10:00] <_kmh_> nikki, well yes in the case where you have separate articles in one and a combined article in the other you can't really match them [15:10:17] <_kmh_> bbut that didn't work before wikidata either [15:11:01] These kind of stuff also had conflicts before Wikidata. [15:11:05] it worked better, since you could link both articles on the wiki which has them separate to the same article on the wiki which has a combined article [15:11:18] <_kmh_> i guess in dinvidual cases it might make sense to simply define A and B as A [15:12:17] <_kmh_> so in the case at hand it actually makes sense to treat plant_and_fruit simply as plant [15:13:08] <_kmh_> as from encyclopedic perspective at least every plant article will always cover the associated fruit as well [15:13:45] <_kmh_> only when the section on the fruit becomes/is rather large in scope it is like to spawn its own article [15:14:45] <_kmh_> in other words an article apple_tree_and_apple can simply be seen as an article on apple_tree [15:15:44] <_kmh_> nikki, but yes i agree the old system was more flexible which allowed "good hacks" in individual cases [15:16:08] <_kmh_> which improved the interwiki navigation in an individual case [15:16:46] <_kmh_> you sometimes can still do something similar by using redirects [15:17:33] <_kmh_> in the case of A_and_B you for instance create a page A that redirects to A_and_B [15:17:55] <_kmh_> and that page A you can link to the other interwikis for A [15:19:12] <_kmh_> unfortunately that only fixes the problem in one direction, but on the other hand a symmetric/bidirectional solution is not possible anyhow [15:20:40] redirects like that seem messy, since you can't really tell that the page is about multiple topics [15:23:43] hm. I should probably stop thinking about it and do more productive things, it's not like it's going to change any time soon anyway [15:40:59] <_kmh_> nikki, actually the redirect just serve as placeholder (for a future article) and link where the topic is covered currently [15:41:08] <_kmh_> so imho that's really messy [19:04:09] question for those staff/devs who are still here on the weekend even though they should be drunk somewhere else: [19:04:29] why is the language selection thing on [[Special:NewItem]] still fucked? [19:04:30] 10[1] 04https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:NewItem [19:04:36] Still fucked? [19:04:41] it's been like this for more than one week i think [19:05:04] sjoerddebruin, yeah, it always defaults to Qafar �f (Afar) instead of the user's interface language [19:05:14] Not seeing that here. [19:05:26] Always on Dutch (my language) here. [19:05:34] really? i've been seeing it for a long time, and have had reports from frustrated nowiki users [19:05:35] hmmmm [19:05:43] Ah, nowiki? [19:05:50] okay, well, that explains the "still" part at least, if only a few people are seeing it :P [19:05:53] Could be something to do with the two language variants. [19:06:06] That it doesn't know what one to select. [19:06:23] good point, i'll do some testing [19:07:54] When I switch to norsk bokmål, I can confirm your bug. [19:08:12] norsk nynorsk works correct [19:08:43] Have you filled a bug on Phab yet? [19:09:50] sjoerddebruin, i honestly assumed it was messed up for everyone and thus a fix would come "automatically", so i didn't even do a phab search for it [19:09:52] will fill one now [19:09:59] thanks for the help :) [19:10:06] :) [19:42:16] sjoerddebruin: were you one of the people having trouble with js stuff not loading properly and having to refresh the page? [19:42:31] Yeah, but it seems over now. [19:44:09] hm. I've been having issues constantly since august :/ [19:45:35] I was wondering if there was something in phabricator about it, but I'm guessing not... [19:49:48] I thought it was the statement sorting stuff I had in my common.js, but I just tried commenting it out and I still have issues with other things in my common.js not running or gadgets not working... [19:54:14] Hm... [19:54:22] Whats in your javascript console? [19:55:12] nothing [19:55:29] Weird. [20:05:46] Pyb: you seem to be using the statementsort.js script, do you have issues with pages not loading properly? [20:06:09] nikki: yes [20:07:08] ok [20:07:17] I would say good, but it's obviously not good :P [20:07:24] :P [20:07:32] I think I'm going to make a phab ticket anyway [21:17:46] Pyb: I created https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115794 anyway. hopefully someone will be able to find a way to make these things work reliably again [21:29:22] For what its worth its a good idea to create a phab ticket. Worst case scenario they will close it and tell you why [21:29:49] yeah, I did :) [21:30:13] now if only I could remember what I was doing before I finally got frustrated enough by it to make a ticket [21:31:40] nikki: thx