User talk:Quesotiotyo/Year 1

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Q99333796

Hi, I have seen you reverted in Q99333796. Just to tell you that this item that I created by accident must be deleted because is multiplicated (Q1338854 <- this is the good one). Despite of my demand, nobody deleted it.--KajenCAT (talk) 10:44, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know about that. I merged the two items and there were no problems. --Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:35, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

My erroneous labeling articles with place info

I am not sure how I made those mistakes, but thank you for correcting them. I know better, but it appears I’ve made the error multiple times. I wish I understood what I was thinking so I can avoid repeating that mistake. I’ll be diligent. Thanks. Trilotat (talk) 04:55, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome, always happy to help! --Quesotiotyo (talk) 17:39, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Creo que ya entendi / I understand(?)

Gracias por tu contestación para revertir el cambio en Q21003496. Ya me quedo claro que puedes poner Arte contemporaneo y mexico y en un query saldrian todos los elementos que tengan estos criterios. Dos dudas, la primera por que no puede ser una instancia de una categoría? tendria que ser uan subclase? no entiendo en todos los casos la diferencia entre subclase e instancia. La segunda duda, entonces la consulta de wikidata seria idealmente haciendo queries?

Thank you for your reply to reverse the change in Q21003496. It is now clear to me that you can put contemporary Art and Mexico and in a query all the elements that have these criteria will show. Let me ask some Doubts. the first one, why can't it be an instance of a category? would it have to be a subclass? I don't understand in all cases the difference between subclass and instance. The second Doubt. The wikidata query is the prefer way to consult wikidata? --de commons a data (talk) 15:57, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Es importante que comprender la diferencia entre "arte contemporáneo de México" y "Categoría:Arte contemporáneo de México". El primero es arte y el segundo es sobre arte. Por ejemplo, una pintura es arte, mientras que un libro de pinturas con el titulo Arte no es arte. Una pintura en ese libro está en Arte pero no es una instancia de Arte (aunque es una instancia de arte). SEMEFO (Q21003496) pertenece a Category:Mexican contemporary art (Q15274536) en Wikipedia, pero los elementos en Wikidata que son categorías son solamente sobre las páginas correspondientes desde Wikimedia y no deben conectar con todos los elementos de Wikidata sobre las cosas dentro de esas categorías.
Es posible que crear un elemento por arte contemporáneo de México, sin embargo penso que no sea necesario por la razón que me dije antes. Es igualmente a que no hay un elemento por artista mexicano o artista japonés, solamente hay artist (Q483501). Es posible que buscar para artistas mexicanos o artistas japoneses por usando Servicio de Consultas de Wikidata o por usando la palabra clave "haswbstatement" (mira Help:Navigating_Wikidata/es#Searching_with_statements).
(It's important to understand the difference between "Mexican contemporary art" and "Category:Mexican contemporary art". The former is art and the latter is about art. For example, a painting is art, while a book of paintings titled Art is not art. A painting in that book is in Art but is not an instance of Art (though it is an instance of art). SEMEFO (Q21003496) belongs in Category:Mexican contemporary art (Q15274536) on Wikipedia, but the Wikidata items that are categories are only about the corresponding Wikimedia pages and should not be linked with all of the Wikidata items about the things in those categories.
It is possible to create an item for Mexican contemporary art, however I do not think it is necessary because of the reason I said before. It is equivalent to there not being an item for Mexican artist or Japanese artist, only artist (Q483501). It is possible to search for Mexican artists or Japanese artists by using Wikidata Query Service or by using the keyword "haswbstatement" (see Help:Navigating_Wikidata/es#Searching_with_statements).)
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 22:39, 9 November 2020 (UTC)

Gracias / thanks a lot. Me ayuda mucho tus comentarios para editar mejor en wikidata. Your comments help a lot to improve my editions in wikidata. --de commons a data (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2020 (UTC)

vandalism

I didn't realize that adding short description "Empty" was vandalism, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Short_descriptions#What_if_a_short_description_is_redundant? seems to imply that "blank" means a short description would be redundant, and to not add a short description. Of course, my brain somehow thought the word "Empty" instead... I don't know how that happened.

Sorry about that. Should I put "blank" in the future?

It seems to update wikidata too, but I'm not sure how else I would say that a description would be redundant, (I'm using the 'Shortdesc helper').

Also, the third last sentence on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Short_descriptions#Editing_using_Shortdesc_helper_gadget says "Editing on Wikipedia does not do anything on WikiData". Weirddd. AltoStev (talk) 22:00, 17 November 2020 (UTC)

What I meant by vandalism were edits like this and this, where a perfectly good description was replaced by "Empty". However, it appears that you were performing these edits on Wikipedia and were unaware that they were affecting Wikidata. I was also not aware that this was possible, and so I apologize for assuming that you were not acting in good faith. Please don't let my hasty misjudgment put you off from contributing to Wikidata -- you are very welcome here and there is plenty of work to be done!
As for using Shortdesc helper, there is some discussion here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Short_descriptions#Wikidata_and_Wikipedia_descriptions about how to avoid unintentionally changing Wikidata descriptions. The fact that this gadget is performing these edits without the user's knowledge or consent is very troubling. I will be sure to keep an eye out for this in the future. Thank you for bringing it to my attention.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 02:19, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Official website and follows/followed by stateements on season items

Hi Quesotiotyo.

I can kind of understand why you reverted my edits, since various bots had blindly imported these kinds of statements en masse over the years, so you can still find them on many season items. There are unfortunately not many people working on these kinds of items, so maintaining and properly structuring the data unfortunately isn't done in a timely or organized fashion.

official website (P856) should usually only contain official websites for the specific thing/topic covered by the item, not of a more general topic. So websites of TV shows are only used on the item of the show itself, while seasons, episodes and other elements of the show only use official website (P856) if there are webpages specifically for those seasons/episodes. Most season items don't contain website statements, so people querying such data would need to try to query both the season and show items anyway to find this kind of information. So it doesn't make much sensse to duplicate such data if it isn't necessary.

And the follows (P155)/followed by (P156) statements - we're moving away from using them as top level statements when it can be avoided. For season items, it's better to use them as qualifiers for part of the series (P179) together with a series ordinal (P1545) qualifier, so it's immediately clear what kind of sequence these follows/followed by statements refer to. Using them simply as main statements doesn't convey that kind of information. I estimate that the same will be done for various other kinds of items (like TV show episodes) in the near future. Regards, --Kam Solusar (talk) 16:24, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. Doing some serious overhaul on television shows is on my to-do list and this will help me understand how best to structure those items. Cheers and keep up the great work!
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

allusion versus namesake

how would you suggest the connection be modelled instead? Arlo Barnes (talk) 00:14, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

I've looked around and I'm not sure that there exists a property that best describes this kind of relationship. I do think that there is an important distinction between an item being named for/after something else and an item having a name that is merely descriptive or allusive. In the absence of a better option I will re-add the statement with a qualifier so that it can be easily converted when a more suitable property arises.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 23:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
Somehow I completely overlooked references work, tradition or theory (P8371), which is perfect for this case! I went ahead and made the changes to Q74539520.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:19, 19 February 2021 (UTC)

Apologies

I usually export enwiki short descriptions to here, I don't come here often, but I didn't know short descriptions have to start with a lowercase letter, unless the first word is capitalized. NASCARfan0548 (talk) 03:43, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

No worries, it is an easy fix and I thank you for adding descriptions to many items that did not have them.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 03:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

how to provide short descriptions

I often check topics on Wikipedia using my iPhone, and I usually see a brief description of the subject right under the title. Occasionally I just see a line that reads "+ Add article description". I like to fill in details like this when I can, perhaps to benefit others who may use their phones (and the Wikipedia app) to consult Wikipedia. I usually check the first paragraph of the article for text that would serve the purpose of providing a short (fewer than 90 characters) description, and use copy/paste to fill it in.

For "Merchant" I had seen that the description was missing and I copied the following text from the article's lede and pasted it in as a short description:

"a person who trades in commodities produced by other people"

I see now that it would have been better to just start with the word "person", but when I made my edit I didn't give it a lot of thought.

I didn't see the description "businessperson who trades in commodities that were produced by others", and wasn't consciously intending to replace it with my text. I just wanted to provide a reasonable short description for subsequent users of the Wikipedia app on mobile devices.

Now that my edit has been reverted, I once again see no short description for "Merchant" when I visit that article using my iPhone.

I am concerned that my technique for filling in short descriptions is sometimes disruptive, because I generally avoid disrupting anything. Can I ask how I should proceed to provide short descriptions when I see they are missing?

NameIsRon (talk) 20:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hmm, this seems to be the same issue that AltoStev alerted me to upthread, where edits made to short descriptions on Wikipedia are unknowingly replacing descriptions here on Wikidata. I do not have any experience with adding descriptions to WP nor with editing on a mobile device so I'm not entirely sure how to advise you. I found this post https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Short_description#Description_editing_in_the_iOS_app that mentions an issue with editing descriptions via the Wikipedia app and an upcoming fix. I'm hoping that it will be cleared up soon so that you can continue to contribute to WP without having to worry about affecting things here on WD.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 21:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

moving to P6802

Hi, Why are you moving a lot of images from P18 to P6802. Do you have a better image to assign to P18 ? Thanks,Amadalvarez (talk) 13:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry. I see now, what you do. Good job !. Amadalvarez (talk) 17:21, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

About my edit

Why you have reverted my edit on Q870262 (Chaitanya Mahaprabhu) page, calling as a disruptive edit? I have corrected the information, that the reasons of death of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is unknown. Lakkhmipriya, the first wife of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu died of a snake bite, not Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. You can check the above information from any reliable book. Regards বাক্যবাগীশ (talk) 03:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Sourced statements should generally not be overwritten, especially if the new value is not supported by the source(s). The correct procedure is to add a second value and either make that one preferred or deprecate the other one (see Help:Ranking for more information). Also, to state that an individual's cause of death is unknown (unknown in general, not just unknown to you), please assign the statement unknown value Help. Let me know if you have any further questions and I will be happy to help.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 03:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Sorry, but I haven't understand how to assign the statement unknown value Help. The death of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is a mystery. There is no consensus about the death of Chaitanya. 1. According to the most authentic biography of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu Chaitanya Charitamrita, Sri Chaitanya walked into the sea in a state of divine ecstasy and subsequently drowned. 2. According to Chaitanya Bhagavat by Vrindavan Das, Sri Chaitanya escaped from Puri in the guise of a Sanyasi (monk) and never to be seen again. 3. In ‘Chaitanya Mangal’ Jayananda says Sri Chaitanya injured his foot during Ratha Yatra festival and succumbed to it by septicemia at Tota Gopinath temple. 4. According to Chaitanya Mangal by Lochan Das, Sri Chaitanya merged with Lord Jagannath idol.(Hypothetical and impossible in physical world) 5. And most of recently, Researcher Jayadeb Mukhapadhyay, in his book "Kaha Gele Toma Pai" had written that somehow Chaitanya Mahaprabhu was murdered in Puri.
None said about the snake bite, thus I want to correct the Cause of death statement. I've no knowledge about Russian Wikipedia, and which reference the statement referring. As par the hole biographical writing about Chaitanya, it is a mystery and the cause of death is unknown to all. So, now to correct the information what to do? বাক্যবাগীশ (talk) 17:33, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
I went ahead and edited Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (Q870262) using the references that you listed (thank you for that). If you could please verify that everything looks correct, that would be great. Also, please add any additional sources that you find to support any of those statements. Remember that Wikidata allows for contradictory claims. Especially for cases such as this, where there is no general consensus, it is important to include as many claims as possible (with references) so that the whole picture can clearly be seen.
Cheers,
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘Sorry for the delay in replying to you. Yes, just now, I've added some additional references. But now, what about ranking? Most of the write claimed that Chaitanya merged with Lord Jagannath idol, which is hypothetical and impossible. And many of the writer deliberately avioded to tell the last life of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. So, I think we should take the unknown value (reason of death) in the first place. What do you think? বাক্যবাগীশ (talk) 18:43, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I agree; since there is no definitive cause of death, marking unknown value as preferred seems to be the best choice. --Quesotiotyo (talk) 00:13, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Lea Lika (Q95128953)

You reverted Lea Lika (Q95128953)family name (P734)unknown value. And yet that is exactly what the source states. We do know her maiden name (and should record that). But the family name at time of death, which would usually be recorded as family name (P734), is unknown.

I removed that statement because the value was given as unknown (Q24238356) rather than unknown value Help (also, there was no source attached). The reason that I did not change it to unknown value Help is because, as you said, as least one of her family names is known. I did not add "Veinshtein" as a family name because no item for that name appears to exist and I don't feel comfortable enough with Hebrew to create one. Also, I know that the Yad Vashem site literally says "Last Name: Surname unknown" (at least, in English), but looking at the form in the attached image, I do not see that explicitly stated. The "victim's family name" and "previous/other family name" boxes are simply blank. The "date of birth" box is also blank, but we do not add Lea Lika (Q95128953)date of birth (P569)unknown value because it is not given in a single source.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 20:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

François Tousignant, Pierre Vachon

Hi Quesotiotyo. You have changed the property P26 by indicating Q21655367, which I guess means that no sources where provided. But François Tousignant et Pierre Vachon where indeed maried together. I made the articles on them and Pierre insisted to mention that fact. What would be necessary to correct the situation? Regards, --Guerinf (talk) 21:25, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

I deprecated the statement because there was nothing on either of their WP articles that suggested a possible relationship. According to Wikidata:Living_people#Statements_likely_to_be_challenged, "in the case of a dispute, the burden of evidence rests with the editor who adds or restores material" (en français, "en cas de désaccord, la charge de preuve va au contributeur qui ajoute ou modifie l'information"). If you can find even one suitable source to add that supports the claim then everything will be good.
Bonne chance,
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 22:43, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

collector

Dear Quesotiotyo, In the item about Solange Thierry-de Saint Rapt you removed the the term "collector" with the comment that it doesn't make sense. Can you please explain me what exactly doesn't make sense and how the person can be described as the owner of a collection and how artists in her collection can get proper references to her collection? Many thanks and kind regards, E.Doornbusch (talk) 16:23, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

I removed the statement Solange Thierry-de Saint Rapt (Q33219071)instance of (P31)collection (Q2668072) because every other statement on the item was about the person. There are a few exceptions, but in general, any item that is instance of (P31)human (Q5) should not be instance of (P31) something inanimate (that is to say, a person is not also an object or concept). You will need to create a separate item to represent the collection of an individual. I went ahead and did that for Solange Thierry-de Saint Rapt to give you an idea of what it might look like; please add or adjust to meet your needs. This is the item that you should select when using has works in the collection (P6379) for artists featured in the collection. That will resolve any warnings that you may be seeing about potential constraint issues. I hope that this is helpful!
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 17:59, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Dear Quesotiotyo, That is very helpful indeed, thank you. Best wishes, E.Doornbusch (talk) 18:59, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

non-Latin-script top-level domains

So what if a particular domain is "not English"? Are you planning then to remove the labels for .shiksha (Q16049255)? for .abogado (Q20570969)? for .weibo (Q24033333)? While ordinarily I'd think "fine, go ahead and translate it", trying to translate it or render it in Punycode or any other transformation into the Latin script in this case is not particularly helpful. Mahir256 (talk) 02:43, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

A speaker of English can say and/or type ".shiksha", ".abogado", and ".weibo". That is not true for ".ලංකා", ".ευ", and ".ไทย". Those strings cannot be expressed in English and so do not belong as English labels. I did attempt to move them to a multilingual or zxx label field but those apparently do not exist. If you see a need to have them then I suppose the best workaround is to insert them into the label, similar to how it is done for non-Latin given and family name items. I agree that the "xn--" strings are not particular useful as labels, but that may be the best solution.
Thanks for expressing your concern.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 03:19, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi @Mahir256, Quesotiotyo: I think poking at WD:PC might be better, since this may affect many other ccTLD items. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:27, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

children’s writer VS children's writer

May I ask why you did this and many similar edits? --Emu (talk) 14:35, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

The correct character for an apostrophe is ' (U+0027). ’ (U+2019) is a single quotation mark.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Well, that’s simply not true: “The closing single quotation mark U+2019 (’) is preferred by Unicode when the character is to represent an apostrophe, though the typewriter apostrophe U+0027 (') is more commonly used.” (w:en:Apostrophe). Please undo and refrain from future “corrections”. --Emu (talk) 19:13, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
That is in reference to printed material. I'm sure that Unicode also has plenty to say about things such as italics that do not apply here either. English WP's Manual of Style forbids the use of curly apostrophes on that site (w:en:MOS:APOSTROPHE) and I see no reason to diverge from that here.
And I will certainly not refrain from making corrections so long as errors exist on Wikidata (so in other words, never :)).
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 20:14, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

[WMF Board of Trustees - Call for feedback: Community Board seats] Meetings with the Wikidata community

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is organizing a call for feedback about community selection processes between February 1 and March 14. While the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement have grown about five times in the past ten years, the Board’s structure and processes have remained basically the same. As the Board is designed today, we have a problem of capacity, performance, and lack of representation of the movement’s diversity. Our current processes to select individual volunteer and affiliate seats have some limitations. Direct elections tend to favor candidates from the leading language communities, regardless of how relevant their skills and experience might be in serving as a Board member, or contributing to the ability of the Board to perform its specific responsibilities. It is also a fact that the current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Western Europe. In the upcoming months, we need to renew three community seats and appoint three more community members in the new seats. This call for feedback is to see what processes can we all collaboratively design to promote and choose candidates that represent our movement and are prepared with the experience, skills, and insight to perform as trustees?

In this regard, two rounds of feedback meetings are being hosted to collect feedback from the Wikidata community. Two rounds are being hosted with the same agenda, to accomodate people from various time zones across the globe. We will be discussing ideas proposed by the Board and the community to address the above mentioned problems. Please sign-up according to whatever is most comfortable to you. You are welcome to participate in both as well!

Also, please share this with other volunteers who might be interested in this. Let me know if you have any questions. KCVelaga (WMF), 14:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Please undo your change to the label at Q105095445

I added an import url for the current title. Please avoid doing such changes to titles and labels. --- Jura 06:50, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

It's correct now.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 07:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Can you provide a reference that actually supports your view? I don't mind that you add additional statements based on references providing different views, but you can't just delete (or deprecate) anything that disagrees with your POV. Keep in mind that this is not Wikipedia, so statements don't necessarily all show the same POV. Once we have references, we can then decide which ones get which rank. I think the title as it's presented in the episode itself should be preferred. --- Jura 07:41, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
"Is" is a verb and should always be capitalized in an English-language title (that's not my opinion; please consult any grammar reference). Because it is shorter than other verbs, and because a majority of the most common two-letter English words (in, on, of, an, etc.) are not usually capitalized in titles, it is sometimes erroneously left uncapitalized. I did consider the possibility that the lack of capitalization could have been a stylistic choice, which is why I hand-checked every episode title before editing and ignored several dozen that had any other unexpectedly lowercase words. I also attempted to find title cards or footage for the two that you reverted, but was not able to. Besides, not every show displays the title on-screen, and sometimes the episode title is shown in all caps (or may be written that way on production scripts, press releases, home releases, merchandise, etc.), which in most cases would be converted to proper title case outside of the medium anyway. I honestly don't see any reason to assume that the uncapitalization of "is" in this instance is anything other than a mistake, and thus stand by how the item has been edited. I will also not make any further changes, for propriety's sake. I would rather the item be correct than myself, if both are not true.
I admire your work on WD and hope that any quibbling over so minor a detail such as this does not diminish the chance of collaborating with you in the future.
Regards,
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 09:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the detailed response. Given the difficulty to ascertain onscreen use, maybe we can follow the spelling on the DVD or by the original network. This probably explains why enwiki doesn't follow you.
As for style guides, I think so prefer caps, for other it depends on whether it's considered a minor word or not.
Let's try to avoid doing such cosmetics going forward. --- Jura 09:54, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Family dates

In relation to your revert on Adams family (Q19899759), I disagree. The Oxford Dictionary of National Biography gives definitions of the scope of its family articles in terms of dates. These articles also allow one to give a list of the family members who have identifiers in the ODNB system. In other words we can know what is meant by such a family as group of humans (Q16334295). Removing the dates causes a problem of definition. Charles Matthews (talk) 06:15, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

I can see why having the years may be helpful, but they do not belong as qualifiers for instance of (P31). As it reads now, the Adams family became a family in 1734 and ceased to be one in 1817, neither of which makes sense given the lifespans of the individuals mentioned in the source. Would you consider using work period (start) (P2031) and work period (end) (P2032) as main statement properties? I am not able to access the full ODNB article so I'm assuming that that is what is meant by "(per. 1734–1817)".
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 07:34, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Olympedia event ID import

Hey Quesotiotyo, thanks for the Olympedia event ID (P9055) import from last night. Just for curiosity: how did you collect the identifiers and how did you match them to the items? —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:10, 28 February 2021 (UTC)

You're welcome; thanks to you for helping to create the property! All of the sporting events are listed on this page on Olympedia: https://www.olympedia.org/event_names/. Each of those links has a list of all of the individual results pages for each Olympiad. I used the year, event, and sport name to match them against the English labels for WD Olympic sporting event items. I still have to go through several hundred IDs for which I could not find a matching item (most are for demonstration sports or discontinued events). I also need to match and import the nearly 1,000 Youth Olympics IDs. After that, adding a full list of participants for each item would be nice!
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 20:07, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the reply.
These are actually Olympic sporting event items (1896–2018) with missing Olympedia event IDs. Some hundred cases, not much compared to the imported identifiers. After the property proposal was successful, I actually planned to do this import by myself, but I did not find the time yet. I am glad that someone else picked this up :-)
In late 2019, I worked a lot on Olympic sporting events and made sure that we have an item for all Olympic events that have taken place, as much as this is known. I based it on SportsReference back then and wanted to finish it before the site closed (which I managed), since it was not clear whether there would be a worthy successor site. All Olympic event items have basic data, and I left reports at Wikidata:WikiProject Olympics/reports to document the situation.
Complete athlete profiles would be interesting as well—some thousand items are probably missing—and then of course results. That, however, is a pretty complicated task which would require more discussion in advance.
No idea about YOG events, though. YOG athletes are clearly incomplete. I have not really worked on those until now. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

P8017

This is meant as a qualifier. Can you move it to the relevant name? --- Jura 06:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I do not understand what you are saying. A generational suffix (P8017) pertains to an item itself, not a particular statement. Could you please show me an example of how it would be used as a qualifier?
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 06:48, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

USA Presidential elections

Hi, in november 2020 you uploaded result information for presidential election in USA (I see 2004 and 2008, by now). The votes received (P1111) must be filled ONLY with popular vote without unit information, because P1111 has not unit information. Then, to inform the "electoral vote" we decide to use number of seats in assembly (P1410) (see:Wikidata:WikiProject elections/Ontology proposal for Infobox election) assuming that "1 electoral votes" comes from a delegates that have a seat in the chamber. I assume you did not know and you did your best. Don't worry, I'll change to the correct structure. Thanks !. --Amadalvarez (talk) 15:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for letting me know and for making the corrections. I can see that you have given a lot of thought about how election items should be structured. I was not aware of Wikidata:WikiProject elections at the time, or I would have consulted it before adding the data. I was just honestly very surprised to find that almost none of the presidential election items had any information at all about candidates or vote counts, so I worked as quickly as I could to fill them in. I kept meaning to go back and see if I could structure them better, but my to-do list has a funny habit of getting longer every time I look at it! :)
Moltes gràcies,
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 21:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Stop this reverting ancient entries

Simply remove them, so you do not disturb other members with your work. Plagiat (talk) 08:55, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello there,
The undoing of problematic edits is a courtesy, not a nuisance. It notifies the user that a mistake was made, so that he can learn from it and make further corrections if necessary or make a rebuttal if the reversion was in error. It is also important for showing transparency and accountability in the item's history. Any user that finds this to be a disturbance can disable the alert in the Notifications section of Special:Preferences.
I hope that your return to Wikidata will not be confined to this page. Your previous contributions are appreciated, and any future ones would be as well. :)
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:44, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

"None" on short descriptions

Hi there Quesotiotyo, I see that you reverted my edit adding "none" to a few descriptions. Apologies, this was not intended, the edit was made by a semi-automated script I use on enwiki for short descriptions there. Again, sorry for that! EpicPupper (talk) 18:52, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Don't worry about it; no harm done. :) There had previously been a problem with Shortdesc helper where it would overwrite a perfectly good Wikidata description with the word "none" or "Empty", but I haven't seen that happen in a while so I'm hoping that it was fixed.
(Now if we could just get it to decapitalize descriptions before importing them...)
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:19, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

Your recent undo

Please explain the reason for undo these edits. 1 2, regards MdsShakil (talk) 05:32, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

The descriptions that you added were not correct. Mauz Muniz (Q106397711) is not an actor, he is the newborn son of American actor Frankie Muniz (Q310275). Undoing the edits notifies you that something was wrong and gives you a chance to fix it, instead of me just removing it without notice or retaining the error (or even worse, trying to edit descriptions in languages that I don't speak!).
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 06:12, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Reasons for Reverting Edits on Q101094562

Can I know why did you reverted the edits , Or you did by mistake ? Rockpeterson (talk) 08:32, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Oh sorry , I just checked , It was my mistake , I mistook date of joining with date of birth . Thanks for reverting . Cheers ! Rockpeterson (talk) 08:35, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Reverting my edits. Error in source versus error typing in the information here

In several cases you reverted my changes where someone typed in the wrong date of birth or date of death at Wikidata, despite the source material having the correct date. This has led to people being listed as living over 120 years old. I am not sure why you are following my changes. If you want to take over fixing the errors in people that lived over 120 years, just let me know, and I will gladly work on another project. --RAN (talk) 21:24, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for working to correct those birth and death date errors. I have fixed a bunch of them myself but new ones are always cropping up! Most of your fixes looked good; just please make sure that in the future you pay attention to the reference(s) attached to a statement and do not alter the value unless it agrees with the source(s). Also, it is important to retain errors and deprecate those statements rather than removing them; this helps prevent the error from being re-added later on and can even aid the sources that we use by tagging mistakes that need to be fixed on their end first.
I noticed that you aren't always sourcing each statement when creating new items, especially those where references are recommended or needed. Might I suggest the UseAsRef tool? I started using it recently and it has made adding references so much easier. If you need any help figuring it out just let me know.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 22:44, 26 May 2021 (UTC)

Call for participation in the interview study with Wikidata editors

Dear Quesotiotyo,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me at kholoudsaa@gmail.com or kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdmmFHaiB20nK14wrQJgfrA18PtmdagyeRib3xGtvzkdn3Lgw/viewform?usp=sf_link with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk) 15:25, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Ola Nord?

Hvorfor ændre Orla Nord (Q779622)? Jeg vil sige at ukendt er både mere akkurat og brugbart end "20. århundrede".--Hjart (talk) 04:21, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I am happy to report that, after many hours of searching online records, I found a listing for Orla Nord in a burial register index that gives his date of death as 1944/1945. I will add this information to his page. Thank you for your patience.
Hav en god dag,
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 01:27, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
Hurra! I was finally able to locate an exact death date for Mr. Nord. He died on 22 January 1945, as recorded in the Østervold parish churchbook. [1]
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 05:46, 4 June 2021 (UTC)

ja names in en field (Q2880018)

Thanks for fixing lope hole in my edit. If you find me ir others struggling to fill in kanji other names to /en field, you could ping me and I am happy to assist you. Cheers, - -Omotecho (talk) 04:56, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

Indian names in different languages & alphabets

Hello Quesotiotyo! I carefully copied the Tamil, Telugu and Hindi/Devanagari versions of the surname Ram Q25114763 from the correspondig Wikipedia entries about en:Jagjivan Ram — ta:ஜெகசீவன்ராம், te:జగ్జీవన్_రాం, hi:जगजीवन राम. So I assumed they were the correct representations of the name in those scripts/languages. Why did you remove them? Kind regards, Frlgin (talk) 14:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Every name item on Wikidata should have a unique native label (P1705) and corresponding writing system (P282). "Ram" may be a transliteration of the Hindi name "राम" in some cases, but it can also be a transliteration of the Hebrew name "רם" (as in en:Andy Ram) or it can be a native English name (as in en:Abel Ram (died 1830)). These are considered to be three separate names for Wikidata purposes and each needs its own item. Please see Wikidata:WikiProject_Names#Basic_principles for more information.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:28, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

P5008

Hi,

Regarding P5008 on items, here is where we had a discussion in Project Chat about the use of this property to identify items to put on a Listeria list: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/01#Program_for_Cooperative_Cataloging_Wikidata_Pilot You'll see that editor ChristianKI agreed that there was a valid use case for it and that it was inappropriate for other editors to delete P5008 from items that an agency created. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 14:11, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

There is a big difference between using P5008 to track items that are of a particular interest to a given Wikimedia project and indiscriminately slapping it on every item that a member of that project creates and/or edits in the name of self-interest. The latter can be achieved by external means; try this tool (called Wikidata Navel Gazer, appropriately enough): https://bambots.brucemyers.com/NavelGazer.php.
As for your assertion about "items that an agency created", please review this notice found on the "Create a new Item" page: "By clicking "Create", you agree to the terms of use, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the Creative Commons CC0 License." The notion that creating or editing an item attributes ownership of that item is completely antithetical to the Wikimedia movement.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 18:59, 10 June 2021 (UTC)
It is absurd to think that we are asserting ownership of any item. The use of P5008 is what the PCC Wikidata Pilot Project recommended to all participants, and is the basis for Listeria lists that track our contributions. The presence of this property in items certainly doesn't affect anyone else's use of Wikidata and I hope that you will not delete any further P5008 statements that PCC Wikidata participants have added to records created or edited during this WikiProject. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:35, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

P706

Hello. Please restore P706 values removed by you. If you think that existing located in or next to body of water (P206) is enough, then it's not true - some objects can be at the boundary (P206) of body of water but not inside (P706) of it, so this is different information. --Infovarius (talk) 11:34, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps there is a distinction between the two properties that has been lost in translation. The English label for P206 is "located in or next to body of water", which applies to both objects at the boundary of a body of water and objects inside of a body of water. The English label for P706 is "located on terrain feature". In English we would say that an island is in the Pacific Ocean but never on the Pacific Ocean. Also, "terrain feature" to me implies something on land, not a body of water.
Please note that I only removed P706 values that were also present at P206, and that most of them had been bot-imported from French Wikipedia in 2014, when P206 did not have the "located in" distinction yet. Also, I found relatively few of these duplications among the tens of thousands of items that could possibly have them.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 16:44, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Reasons for reverting edit on Q3486823

Can I know why did you reverted the edit? https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q3486823&oldid=prev&diff=1459732324 سمادجا is the original form for « Smadja » Alain Schneider (talk) 06:33, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Every name item should represent a unique string of characters written in a particular writing system. "Smadja" and "سمادجا" are two separate names and should have separate items. Please see Wikidata:WikiProject_Names/fr#Principes_généraux for more information.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 07:05, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Arostegui/gi: please do not merge separate names...thanks

Sorry no speak english: El apellido es el mismo, Arostegui está escrito en español, Arostegy-Arosteguy en francés y Arostegi es el mismo apellido escrito en su idioma original, el vasco.--Aitorembe (talk) 08:30, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Google traduction:The last name is the same, Arostegui is written in Spanish, Arostegy-Arosteguy in French and Arostegi is the same last name written in its original language, Basque.--Aitorembe (talk) 08:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Conecté los nombres por usando said to be the same as (P460) (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q37126846#P460). Porque los nombres están escritos diferentemente, deben permanecer como elementos separados. Vea a Wikidata:WikiProject_Names/es#Principios_básicos para más información.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:08, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Reversing items

Hi, many of the items I've done were reversed by you, e.g., Twelve Vassals (Q10904438), with a note "Not English". I am intrigued. Will you be able to elaborate? Much appreciated for your help. jshieh (talk) 13:18, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you want me to elaborate on. "十二諸侯國" is not English and does not belong in the alias field for English. You had already added it as a Chinese alias, so the item will still be found when searching for "十二諸侯國". Nothing else about the item was changed. I hope that that clears things up for you.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:28, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

Reverting Items on Q107539990

Hi, I see you keep on reverting items. Specifically this reversion. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q107539990&oldid=prev&diff=1469823618 . Why do you think that is not a correct statement? And if you know it's incorrect, why do you revert it instead of fixing the issue? I would appreciate if you could fix issues instead of continually undoing editor's hard work. I see there are many complaints on your talk page regarding aggressive reversions. Your reversions without advice or corrections are incredibly frustrating and discouraging. Acebarry (talk) 21:19, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

I do not undo anyone's hard work; I only revert edits that are in error. On the item in question, you added the given name Margret (Q1413006) to an individual whose first name is "Margaret". I undid your edit to alert you to this error, then proceeded to add the correct name as well as additional information about the person (with accompanying references). There is not always enough time for me to do so, or to leave a detailed explanation for the reversion (not to mention the character limit). I trust that in most cases that the user responsible for the error will be able to correct it on his own (if further action is required). I'm always happy to provide additional explanation and assistance here when needed (along with gratuitous parentheticals :)).
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 22:10, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Quesotiotyo/Year_1&oldid=1477950977"