Template talk:WikidataCoord

Strange error

Noticed some strange error in template or module. See Statue_of_Lutgardis,_Charles_Bridge, correct coordinates from wikidata (https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?params=50.086845_N_14.4085239_E_globe:earth&language=en) are rendered wrongly (https://tools.wmflabs.org/geohack/geohack.php?pagename=Statue_of_Lutgardis,_Charles_Bridge&params=50_4_49_N_14_24_24_E_type:landmark).Jklamo (talk) 18:37, 24 June 2019 (UTC)

Frietjes, could you take a look into this. In the above article, the associated entry at wikidata says the coords are 50 4 49, 14 24 24 which is the right place on the small wikimedia preview map shown in wikidata. But in the version of the article that used this template, those same coordinates are in a different location on the OSM map there.

Before I knew about this thread, I assumed the WD coords were just wrong; I found the location on google maps and put those coords (in decimal format) into the article (which located the statue correctly on the OSM map). I thought that was a good fix, but apparently there is more going on here. MB 05:24, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

MB, 50°05′13″N 14°24′31″E is not what is in WD (50°4′49″N 14°24′24″E). Frietjes (talk) 13:23, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Frietjes, yes, I am aware of that. But 50°4′49″N 14°24′24″E appears in a different location on the map in WD than it does here. MB 15:22, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

Changing

'coordinate parameters' are passed through to {{Coord}}. Thus we can edit 'region': such as through ISO 3166-2 code (P300), 'type': adm1st / adm2nd / adm3rd, and 'dim': "a number connected to √area (P2046)"
region is used only for adm1st / adm2nd, type is only for the three types allowed (there is no adm4th (for barangay), but dim: is used for every place (with a positive area).

'template parameters' are passed through to {{Coord}} no problem.

Thus for

{{WikidataCoord||{{safesubst:#switch:{{safesubst:#invoke:string|replace|{{safesubst:#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |P31||fwd=ALL|rank=b |osd=no |noicon=true|linked=false}}|, {{safesubst:label|Q1549591}}|replace=}}
 | municipality of the Philippines
 | city of the Philippines
 | highly urbanized city = type:adm3rd_
 | barangay =
 | province of the Philippines = region:{{safesubst:#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |P300||fwd=ALL |rank=b |osd=no |noicon=true |linked=false}}_type:adm2nd_
 | region of the Philippines = region:{{safesubst:#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |P300||fwd=ALL |rank=b |osd=no |noicon=true |linked=false}}_type:adm1st_
 }}dim:{{PH wikidata/power|{{PH wikidata/sqrt|{{convert|{{safesubst:#invoke:WikidataIB |getValue |P2046|qid=Q13669|fwd=ALL|rank=b|osd=no|noicon=true|su=false}}|km|km|2|disp=output number only|comma=off}}}}}}000|format=dms|display=it}}



1a dim:1000|format=dms|display=i}}

1b
Alang-alang, Mandaue is fourth order
https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=10_19_55_N_123_57_13_E__dim:1000
Well that's OK, and when it gets to GeoHack it's the same too.

2a type:adm3rd_dim:4000|format=dms|display=i}}

2b
Argao is third order
https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=9_53_N_123_36_E_
There are no coordinate parameters at all

3a region:PH-SIG_type:adm2nd_dim:8000|format=dms|display=i}}

3b
Siquijor is second order
https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=9_11_N_123_34_E_
There are no coordinate parameters at all

4a region:PH-07_type:adm1st_dim:16000|format=dms|display=i}}

4b
Central Visayas is first order
https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=10_0_N_123_30_E_
There are no coordinate parameters at all

Try with region=no and type=yes:

2c

https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=9_53_N_123_36_E_

Try with region=yes and type=no:

2e

https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=9_53_N_123_36_E_

Try with both region=no and type=no:

2f

https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=9_53_N_123_36_E_
That doesn't work either! Now I guess that means that GeoHack doesn't work because the coordinates in wikidata are only dm not dms. Now to try that, if I can.

So I change the wikidata coordinate to have arcseconds to:
4c https://geohack.toolforge.org/geohack.php?pagename=Template_talk:WikidataCoord&params=10_0_0_N_123_30_0_E_region:PH-07_type:adm1st_dim:1000000

At last I worked what is wrong and what is to be done. But I can't do it – wikidataCoord, GeoHack and Wikidata between them have to agree what is to be done.
(It is a bit confused, as I had to change a couple of coordinate, and that means the older coordinates have been wiped.) Maybe I'll send this to Village pump.

Overprecise Records of wikidata

In Flaminio Obelisk another user replaced my {{WikidataCoord}} with {{coord}} saying "adding coord to replace overprecise Wikidata coords". Why are wikidata coords overprecise? Why does it matter? I just wanted to use the database wikidata instead of adding the coords again manually for OSM.Ruedi33a (talk) 17:21, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Explained in WP:OPCOORD. MB 18:26, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Not the fault of the template. {{WikidataCoord}} merely renders the coordinates that are stored at Wikidata:

the raw information from wikidata:

{{#property:P625|from=Q568194}} → 41°54'38.52"N, 12°28'34.86"E

and the rendered output of {{WikidataCoord}}:

{{WikidataCoord|Q568194|display=}} →

—Trappist the monk (talk) 18:35, 8 October 2021 (UTC)

Template:WikidataCoord and Category:Coordinates_on_Wikidata

Please check Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Template:WikidataCoord_and_Category:Coordinates_on_Wikidata. --Tim Wu (talk) 15:49, 14 May 2022 (UTC)

Error

Used on Villa Park (in preview; I did not save), the markup:

{{WikidataCoord|type:landmark_region:GB |display=inline,title}}

generates an error: {{WikidataCoord}} – malformed coordinate data.

What's up? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:43, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

That error message occurs because {{{1}}} is assigned the value type:landmark_region:GB which is not a QID so the call into wikidata returns nothing and nothing is not valid coordinate data. Rewriting the template to include the QID works:

{{WikidataCoord|Q175339|type:landmark_region:GB |display=inline,title}}

See the template documentation...

—Trappist the monk (talk) 15:27, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Which template to prefer?

Should I prefer WikidataCoord over Coord? I would have expected "yes, one source of truth", but in the description of the template I read "This template does not display in the mobile view of Wikipedia ..." and "to make the coordinates visible for mobile users, one would use ..." which confuses me. PhiRho~dewiki (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)

P159?

I just encountered a few articles linking to WD QIDs that had d:Property:P159 enveloping d:Property:P625. The calls from this template currently produce errors in such a case.

Can we support that here? --Joy (talk) 20:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

{{WikidataCoord hqlocation}} doesn't work for you?

—Trappist the monk (talk) 21:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't see that, thanks. Does it have to be a separate template, can we autodetect this cheaply enough somehow? --Joy (talk) 22:10, 28 October 2025 (UTC)

We could rewrite {{WikidataCoord}} and Module:WikidataCoord to do that but is it worth the effort? A rewrite would likely require changes to the template, to the module, to the documentation, to all instances of the template wherever it is used, a WP:TFD for {{WikidataCoord hqlocation}}. Seems a lot of work for a comparatively small number of templates (~13600 {{WikidataCoord}} templates v. ~25 {{WikidataCoord hqlocation}} templates).

—Trappist the monk (talk) 14:02, 29 October 2025 (UTC)

Coord vs WikidataCoord

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Can someone help me understand this? I have found that {{Coord|display=it}} seems to produce the same result as {{WikidataCoords|display=it}} on multiple different pages... Is there some difference between these 2 templates that I am missing? Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 23:51, 12 December 2025 (UTC)

For the record, I am considering a TFD merger of the two and want to make sure I am not missing something. Other posts (see Template talk:Coord § Coord vs WikidataCoord) and questions of this have not properly addressed my concern so want to make sure I do my WP:BEFORE, before I nominate this. Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 00:26, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

I have given an answer at the other discussion. One discussion in one place please. See WP:MULTI. You should, as I did, close this discussion or close the other.

—Trappist the monk (talk) 00:43, 13 December 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Mostly eliminated

My bot run to convert from {{WikidataCoord}} to {{Coord}} has been successful, and I have gotten rid of almost all of the remaining instances of this template in articlespace. There are currently two outstanding issues: First, {{Infobox archives}} needs to be updated to use {{Coord}} instead of {{WikidataCoord}}. Second, there is an outstanding bug with Dooley's Ferry Fortifications Historic District, where the coordinates are not rendering properly when using {{Coord}}, but they are rendering fine with {{WikidataCoord}}. If someone more adept at template editing could take a look at the Infobox archives issue, I'd appreciate it.

Additionally, there are about 100 non-articlespace uses of the template that should probably be tidied up. phuzion (talk) 18:05, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

@Phuzion: GREAT WORK!!! Frietjes took care of the first and I figured out the second (it was an issue with the WikiData value). So now the question becomes what to do with the non-articles space uses...

I can take care of those! --Zackmann (^{Talk to me}/_{What I been doing}) 03:37, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Thanks! You did the vast majority of the work with writing the substitution template. All I did was the BRFA paperwork and a little cleanup here and there as the bot ran.

Glad to see that this merge is going pretty quickly and easily. As always, let me know if you can think of any other TFD’s to process! phuzion (talk) 03:43, 20 January 2026 (UTC)