The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Approved. The test edits look good, and this has been open for quite a while. The bot will add P107 in accordance with the current consensus/status quo. Discussion about P107 should be at WD:RFD. Legoktm (talk) 19:44, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Task/s:
Populate Wikidata with the intersection of VIAF data from Deutsche and English Wikipedias. In 2012 the same task was run on English Wikipedia.
Function details:
Find transclusions of the Deutsche Template Vorlage:Normdaten and English Template Template:Authority control, search for the VIAF template parameter, and if there's no disagreement, write the Property:VIAF (approved, waiting for StringValue) to the Wikidata item, following the enwiki Wikidata interlanguage link.
If consensus allows, there's possibility to also Populate the Property:ISNI (approved, waiting for StringValue simulataenously as for ~90% of ISNIs, there is a one-to-one correspondence.
Support Max, I thought that 2012 task run on English Wikipedia was quite different since you were not copying from one wikipedia to the other. If you are still working on the code than you might want to check Commons:User:JarektBot/Commons_People_categories.py. Parts of that code do exactly what you propose but were copying the values to Commons and Italian Wikipedia. Which identifiers are you planning to copy? Just VIAF and ISNI, or most of the other authority files like GND and entity type, LCCN, ULAN, etc. May be we need to figure out which is the final set before we proceed. --Jarekt (talk) 04:53, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If you import entity type from the GND database, you may want to add the source, to distinguish it from user's guesses (I think that isP:P143: Q36578). Other properties may not need a source, at least I do not really see what a source would mean for that type of things. --Zolo (talk) 19:45, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To replace template in Commons, German or English Wikipedia, we would need much more properties: English version has ~12, Commons ~17. --Jarekt (talk) 12:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wow, the stringdatatype is live! Cool, as for the Reference, I can set those that came from VIAF.org's algorithm to VIAF, but otherwise, if the reference came from the German Wikipedia shall I use Q48183? Maximilianklein (talk) 23:03, 7 March 2013 (UTC)23:02, 7 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Answer I've decided that while I'm at it, it might be wise to get all the authority data, from all the big languages, and write it to Wikidata at once. Here is my plan on flow chart. This is an flowchart for showing how VIAFbot is planned to work for Wikidata Do I need to resubmit for a new bot, or can we extend this RfC? Maximilianklein (talk) 21:33, 12 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the code is written, I am waiting to have the community meeting to finalize some of the details. I expect to make test edits The week of April 1st. Maximilianklein (talk) 18:28, 25 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose From reading comments here and elsewhere, it seems the proposal has been extended to include assigning "GND main type" (P107) statements. That was not in the original description and is a significant new feature that I think warrants its own approval process. As outlined at Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Property:P107 and many sections of Property_talk:P107, that property has several significant problems. Other than that, I don't see any issues with VIAFbot. Emw (talk) 12:12, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The only significant problem with P107 is, that you fight against it since weeks, open a new threat daily. You now got you RFD (after you failed with changing the name and the use of the property) and it would be nice if you accept the outcome. --Kolja21 (talk) 12:58, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The idea that I am somehow the only contributor noting that P107 has significant problems is, frankly, absurd. Many others have raised issues with this property. VIAFbot seems like a decent idea, but adding on a P107-specific feature is not uncontroversial. Given that, and since that feature was not mentioned in the original proposal, in my opinion it warrants its own review. Emw (talk) 04:50, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello,
The doodle poll has spoken, please mark your calendars for Thursday 28th March 2013, at 3pm California time.
Let's have a discussion about how we'd like to discuss. The simplest ways are IRC or Skype, Google Hangout, Webex. I can also make a toll-free conference call. Please state your preference on the agenda, and add anything you want to talk about: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/VIAFbot/Meeting agenda.
Comment please do some test edit, after the properties have been created. --β16 - (talk) 08:24, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Support -- Aubrey (talk) 09:36, 6 March 2013 (UTC) User forgot to sign -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 16:12, 6 March 2013 (UTC)
Answer I just realized it might be nice to have a meeting about Authorities. Please fill out this Doodle if you want to participate, and I'll organize the meeting. Maximilianklein (talk) 19:42, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
Question Could you also use the french template fr:modèle:Autorité (similar to Vorlage:Normdaten) ? Thanks. --Eric-92 (talk) 04:47, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
Oppose From reading comments here and elsewhere, it seems the proposal has been extended to include assigning "GND main type" (P107) statements. That was not in the original description and is a significant new feature that I think warrants its own approval process. As outlined at Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions#Property:P107 and many sections of Property_talk:P107, that property has several significant problems. Other than that, I don't see any issues with VIAFbot. Emw (talk) 12:12, 29 March 2013 (UTC)