User talk:Fuzheado

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Fuzheado/Archive 1 on 2021-02-02.

Dear Fuzheado,

I hope you are doing well,

We are a group of researchers from King’s College London working on developing WQT (Wikidata Quality Toolkit), which will support a diverse set of editors in curating and validating Wikidata content.

We are inviting you to participate in an online workshop aimed at understanding the requirements for designing effective and easy-to-use user interfaces (UI) for three tools within WQT that can support the daily activities of Wikidata editors: recommending items to edit based on their personal preferences, finding items that need better references, and generating entity schemas automatically for better item quality.

The main activity during this workshop will be UI mockup sketching. To facilitate this, we encourage you to attend the workshop using a tablet or laptop with PowerPoint installed or any other drawing tools you prefer. This will allow for a more interactive and productive session as we delve into the UI mockup sketching activities.

Participation is completely voluntary. You should only take part if you want to and choosing not to take part will not disadvantage you in any way. However, your cooperation will be valuable for the WQT design. Please note that all data and responses collected during the workshop will be used solely for the purpose of improving the WQT and understanding editor requirements. We will analyze the results in an anonymized form, ensuring your privacy is protected. Personal information will be kept confidential and will be deleted once it has served its purpose in this research.

The online workshop, which will be held on April 5th, should take no more than 3 hours.

If you agree to participate in this workshop, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form to register your interest https://forms.office.com/e/9mrE8rXZVg Then, I will contact you with all the instructions for the workshop.

For more information about my project, please read this page: https://king-s-knowledge-graph-lab.github.io/WikidataQualityToolkit/

If you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me at the email address mentioned above.

Thank you for considering taking part in this project.

Regards

Hi, Ia m Robert of fullyfundedschorlarships.com. I had my external links deleted because they were inappropriate. Please can you help me to edit them well. I am sort of confused about the whole thing now.

For example, this is one of my external links.

https://myblogpay.com/read/113658/the_2023_promotion_results_can_the_ges_ever_get_anything_right

How should I have entered it?

Where do you want to add such links? Wikidata is not an advertisement site and any promotion will be quickly deleted.

Hi Fuzheado, at meta I have requested removal of your sysop rights a minute ago, due to our inactivity policy. Thank you very much for the good work you have done, and perhaps we'll see you back in the future. Kind regards, Lymantria.

I see you did several deletions yesterday. Request withdrawn.

Thanks, much appreciated!

Hi Andrew, what is the point of adding noise like this? And why are you running a bot under your own account? I think it's better to add object stated in reference as (P5997) in the reference section.

I agree, I'm not sure about this use of object named as (P1932) as qualifier of instance of (P31); usually P1932 requires a reference. I agree with the suggestion by @Multichill: and I would recommend rollbacking the batch.

Thanks folks, I agree that the object stated in reference as (P5997) solution is a better one and can adjust to using that. It was created relatively recently (2018) without much fanfare so I missed that discussion. As for the actual reference associated with it, it looks as though reference vocabulary (P5967) is preferred over adding full URL links to object pages. I'll put this all into a bot request for further feedback. - ~~~~

Any plans for clean up?

Incorrect use of subclass of (P279)

Hello –

This edit to "dry stone wall" (Q544504) was in error. The properties instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) define key ontological relationships. Because subclass of (P279) is transitive, such errors lead to numerous false inferences, such as dry stone wall (Q544504)subclass of (P279)fabrication method (P2079). Before you use these properties, please look at the object item to be sure it's the one you intend. You can also review the usage instructions on these two properties, and Help:Basic membership properties. (In particular, note that "A" is only a subclass of "B" if all instances of "A" are also instances of "B".) There is often another property better suited to expressing the relationship you had in mind; you can search for one here. Thanks! Swpb (talk) 20:24, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Andrew!

I saw you edited the item about prompt engineering on Wikidata and I am trying to find out the Wikidatians interested in joining a WikiProject Large Language Models,

The idea is to try and group Wikidatians that are interested in tracking/modelling what is happening on the interface of Wikidata and Large Language Models, such as ChatGPT.

I thought maybe you would be interested on joining/contributing!

The idea is open-ended, motivated by finding ways to advance the coverage of Wikidata on the topic, and the discussions of our role in this new ecosystem.

Cheers!

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner.

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner.

Same initials though! See [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q15431364&type=revision&diff=1734223644&oldid=1604537331

Hi, I noticed this recent edit: diff and a few like it.

Normally subject named as (P1810) would seem to be the qualifier to use for a statement like this, as you are indicating how the source has referred to the subject of the item.

It also looks like it would be worth proposing a property for entries in this database (even if its values would not be linkable).

Hey I think you are right - let me take a look and amend. Thanks for your insights.