User talk:Richard Nevell

Welcome to Wikidata, Richard Nevell!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards! Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:32, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Q28596473

Hi,

Something went wrong on The disruptive potential of data publication (Q28596473) as you put the item iself as the author (P50) of the item itself. Could you take a look and correct it if possible?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:31, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

VIGNERON Thanks for spotting that, I must have copied the wrong Q number. Now fixed. Richard Nevell (talk) 13:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

Q43145991

The ISSN value on International Journal of Heritage, Tourism, and Hospitality (Q43145991), which you created, was invalid, so I've removed it. There are no other properties than instance of (P31) on that item, and nothing links to it. Please check it. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:14, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Pigsonthewing I should have twigged the unusual format listed here. I've added a link from another item, and added a couple of other statements and will try to add more later. Richard Nevell (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for comment/Privacy and Living People

You are receiving this message because you commented at the above RFC. There are additional proposals that have been made there that you are welcome to comment on. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC) (for Rschen7754)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Lisa L

Sorry - I've just been making a hash of the education. It's back as you had it. Normal incompetence. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:40, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Tagishsimon No worse that I do on a daily basis :) Thanks for sorting it out before I noticed anything was awry (which could have ataken a while). Richard Nevell (talk) 08:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Book reviews

Hi Richard Nevell,

As you seem to create a lot of these items, I thought you might be interested in Wikidata:Bot_requests#Reviews_in_articles.

BTW, maybe Topic:V64n8o927s1gmcr9 was your batch. It should be fairly easy to replace the P31 statement on these. --- Jura 09:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jura - thanks for making the bot request. On the subject of that particular batch, I might have batch added the articles for History Workshop Journal (Q5774776) but can't entirely remember. It's certainly the kind of thing I've been doing. I tend to do batches one journal at a time. I'm not sure why they ended up classified as scientific publication (Q591041) instead of scholarly article (Q13442814) but reckon it should be reasonably straightforward to sort out. I've worked out which items need changing so I'll try to sort that out this week. Richard Nevell (talk) 09:23, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

• Thx. Things like that happen to me too. BTW, I also came across some stray text. --- Jura 11:02, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

• Jura1 That does need to be fixed. I'm wondering how it would work with QuickStatements. Is there a way to remove part of a string of text, or would i t all have to be removed and added correctly? Richard Nevell (talk) 12:55, 14 September 2019 (UTC)
  • The labels can be overwritten, but I think the titles need to be deleted and then added. --- Jura 16:13, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Richard Nevell,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikidata and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Metadata and diacritic

Hi Richard, thanks for your recent items about Czech castellology articles and related articles about scientists. Please consider to add some metadata to the articles about people, use of VIAF search is pretty fast and adding the result to the VIAF ID (P214) takes only a few seconds (we have much more metadata properties, but at least VIAF is much better than nothing). In regard to the articles please check the diacritic before the upload, as a considerable part of items about articles has messed up diacritic.--Jklamo (talk) 08:20, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi Jklamo, I'd say all the items have problems with the diacritics, but I am in the process of correcting them - that's been an additional step in the import process. Richard Nevell (talk) 09:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Hi again Jklamo, apologies for the brief reply earlier. As you can see I've been adding some bibliographic information around Castellologica Bohemica (Q69499259) and filling in gaps about authors here and there. I was working with QuickStatements to add items on the individual papers, but the CSV format didn't recognise the diacritic characters. I'm sure there's a way around that, but I figured that since it's a limited number and I would be going through the articles to add subjects in any case I could fix them manually. I understand it's unhelpful to have characters appear incorrectly, so it was my intention to have this done quickly. I believe I have sorted out the diacritics and I'm sorry I wasn't able to do it faster.

That's a good point about including more author metadata. I've started adding in VIAF numbers as a first step, and will try to include other identifiers such as P6656 (P6656) and ORCID iD (P496) where I can find them, as well any other useful metadata such as employer (P108) or educated at (P69).

I'm mainly adding stuff about castellology because it happens to be a subject I'm interested in, but I'll keep this all in mind if I add more stuff (likely to do with archaeology). Richard Nevell (talk) 18:02, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

@Jklamo: By the way, any idea about good sources for country of citizenship (P27)? Since I've been creating articles on authors in Castellologica Bohemica many have Czech names but there's no guarantee they're citizens of Czech Republic (Q213). Richard Nevell (talk) 21:56, 8 October 2019 (UTC)

Interview Invitation

Greetings,

I noticed your editing stats in Wikidata, which led me to look up your profile. Thank you for all the great work!

I’m reaching out to you because I’m working on a research project about understanding what motivates editors like you to contribute to Wikidata. We’re also interested in learning about how you feel your contributions are being used outside of Wikidata. Since you are such an active community member, I thought you might also be interested in helping to build the broader community’s knowledge about Wikidata, and why it matters.

If you’re interested, let’s schedule a time to talk over Zoom, or whichever platform you prefer. If you are interested, please fill in a questionnaire. The conversation should take about 30 min.

Hope you have a great day,

Chuankaz (talk) 14:42, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Question about an item you created

Regarding Book Reviews : Catherine Weinberger-Thomas, Ashes of Immortality: Widow- Burning in India, translated by Jeffrey Mehlman and David Gordon White, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, 1999 (Originally published as Cendres d'immortalité) (Q81667886), I was wondering if that title got cut off partway through during an import or something? Just happened upon it and wanted to ask. Nicereddy (talk) 03:14, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Book reviews often include all the bibliographic details about the reviewed work in the title, which often exceeds the character limit for labels on Wikidata. There's more space in title (P1476).

Nicereddy I created that item using sourcemd which pulled the information from CrossRef. It automatically trims the label to fit on Wikidata, which means sometimes it will stop mid-sentence or even mid word. There will be other examples, but I've manually trimmed the label so it doesn't dangle. Richard Nevell (talk) 09:10, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

invalid identifier

Hello, Regarding Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology (Q98805281), I don't understand the addition of the Archaeology Data Service person ID (P6734) relationship to it. It isn't valid as entered, according to the "potential issue" automated feedback, which reads, "type constraint Entities using the Archaeology Data Service person ID property should be instances or subclasses of human (or of a subclass of it), but Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology currently isn't."

I've deleted it, but if there ia another valid way to frame a relationship please consider it.

Thanks, Beth

Hi Beth, it does look a bit odd. As the ADS uses it, the property is a bit broader than 'person', and could reasonably described as 'author' since you can have publications attributed to organisations. 'Person' is the terminology the ADS uses – hence the name of the Wikidata property – and their 'person' dataset has an entry for Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology (Q98805281). They have another dataset for organisations, though work around that hasn't started yet. Over the medium term, the Wikidata import will highlight such inconsistencies and allow the ADS to modify their dataset. I'm helping with reconciling their dataset to Wikidata so they can add more external identifiers to their own database, and there are going to be incidental improvements along the way as issues are spotted. Richard Nevell (talk) 09:34, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello again Richard Nevell Aha! So I see the problem is with the ADS itself -- I'm looking at https://archaeologydataservice.ac.uk/library/browse/personDetails.xhtml?personId=24251. The data service should definitely provide and enter organizations/societies/etc. under a separate category of IDs, e.g, "Archaeology Data Service organization ID" (and rather than referencing ORCID IDs, ADS could reference ISNIs ...

Since you are working on this issue with the ADS, would you mind restoring the entry that I deleted? I now know what is happening behind the scenes (thanks so much for contacting me) however if I restore it, questions may come my way that would be best addressed by you.

Many thanks, Beth

It does have about 3,400 IDs for organisations, so it may be possible for them to switch over at some point. I've restored the ID for now, and will happily field any questions! Richard Nevell (talk) 17:20, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Self-citation on Q59225017

Hi,

Could you take a look at this edit Special:Diff/1348019444 on Where Do Research Problems Come From? (Q59225017). Does this paper cite itself? (I don't see it online but I can't see the full article).

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:22, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi VIGNERON, it doesn't that was my mistake in adding the wrong Q number. I've fixed it and have double checked my edits made around that time; that looks like the only one I made a mistake on. Thanks for spotting it! Richard Nevell (talk) 11:49, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:02, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

Q63118590 F. R. Fairbank

I'm uploading work by Frederick Royston Fairbank, who died on October 3rd 1913. He was a medical doctor and also an antiquarian. His obituary is in British Medical Journal Oct 18th 1913, p. 1047. Is this the same person? If so, I'll add the details I have, if not I'll create another entry. BTW I'm curious about why you have created an entry with only the statement human. Kognos (talk) 22:31, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Kognos, F Royston Fairbank is in the Archaeology Data Service person ID (P6734) with some of the same publications as F. R. Fairbank so I'm confident that's the same person as Frederick. I created the item a while back as part of improving the data around the Sussex Archaeological Collections (Q15764602) (which is indexed in the Archaeology Data Service). There are some items with minimal data which I've been meaning to come back to, but obviously it's not great practice to leave something with such minimal data. Richard Nevell (talk) 08:22, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Richard Nevell, that's great. I've added more information from his obituary. Kognos (talk) 10:11, 16 March 2021 (UTC)

Call for participation in a task-based online experiment

Dear Richard Nevell,

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, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits.

Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link

I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa

In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk) 15:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Reason to add archaeology (Q23498) as the subject of Q110894564?

Greetings,

I see you added archaeology (Q23498) as the main subject (P921) of On the accuracy of lichenometric dates: an assessment based on the 'Little Ice Age' moraine sequence of Nigardsbreen, southern Norway (Q110894564). Did you have any reason beyond the presence of Archeology (Q10855079)? I ask because I have found Archeology (Q10855079) (the album title) to be automatically added as subject for many earth science article which have no relation to the archaeology (Q23498) the study of human cultural material. I occasionally remove ALL subject:Archeology (Q10855079) (the album title) in order to avoid this conflation. Given I studied anthropology in my college days (focused on archeology), I would like to understand if there is a connection in this article. Note, many here have been adding {[P|887}} - inferred from title (Q69652283) when adding main subject (P921) from the title. V/r, Trilotat (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

The main reason was replacing Archeology (Q10855079) as the main subject. As for whether archaeology (Q23498) is actually an appropriate main subject, I'd say probably not. 'Archaeology' doesn't appear anywhere in the paper, none of the keywords are directly related to archaeology (climatic change and dating can relate to archaeology, but don't seem to here). I had recently added a few papers which automatically included Archeology (Q10855079) as the main subject, where archaeology (Q23498) did actually make sense, and grabbed all the remaining items where this applied on the assumption that it would help a little. As you say, removing it outright would probably have been more helpful! Richard Nevell (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

Northern Ireland Department for Communities data for monuments

Hi Richard, you may know me better by my alt. account Djm-leighpark. I have raised some issues Wikidata talk:WikiProject UK and Ireland/monuments/issues#NIEA building ID issues and wonder if you have any thoughts. The absence of good data also probably impacts the WLM initiative in Northern Ireland. I wonder if you have any throughts, ideas, backgrounds, suggestions or contacts to help get the data etc improved. As indef blocked on the enWP I am really somewhat tainted as an ambassador so help from that direction or improvements into articles therein is not within my permitted activities. Thankyou. -- Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga_(a)^talk 07:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata recommender system online evaluation

Dear Richard, I hope all is going well with you.

As per the last email I sent to you, I am still waiting for your response, and in case you have any comment or question, don't hesitate to ask me.

Thank you Kholoudsaa (talk) Kholoudsaa (talk) 15:12, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Kholoudsaa, I just completed the questionnaire. No questions on my part. Richard Nevell (talk) 15:57, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Article on "pendeloque"

Hi,

First: thanks a lot for creating La pendeloque anthropomorphe de l'Ile Lavret (Q112340715) and Les pendeloques de la crypte de Lanmeur (Finistère) (Q112340757), it will be quite useful to me.

Then, I have two question :

• I added cites work (P2860) on this two items, did I do it right? (I must say I don't use often this property I'm unsure of the specifics and best practices)
• any idea how to translate "pendeloque" in English? (it seems to be commonly translated by "pendant", but it's already the label of the superclass pendant (Q2111434) so it would be too confusing)

Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 10:45, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @VIGNERON en résidence, you added references the right way. Rod Page created a very useful tool for adding references if there is data in an external sites such as CrossRef, but it doesn't work for publications which don't have DOIs - which applies to most books.

Your second question is trickier, which is why I've taken a while to respond. In short, I'm not familiar enough with the source material to be completely confident. However, Dark Age anthropomorphic figurines from Brittany (Q58905225) is a note from Pierre-Roland Giot and Philippe Guigon. As it is written in English they, or the translator must have worked out how to translate pendeloque. The paper references both the papers you mention and uses the term pendant. I'm not sure why pendant (Q2111434) and Q66660200 are different items - I think there's some nuance I'm missing! Richard Nevell (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks already :

To be fair, pendant (Q2111434) and Q66660200 are very close concepts and I'm not sure either how to express the difference (I kind of know it intuitively but that's all). I'll keep looking... Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 08:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Duplicate articles

Hi. You seems to have created quite a few duplicates articles back in June for the Journal of Field Archaeology (Q15761992), and by "quite a few" I mean several hundred. I'd appreciate if you could have a look at this query and start merging them also. Thanks,

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?date ?volume ?pages ?number WHERE {
 ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q13442814 .
  ?item wdt:P1433 wd:Q15761992 .
  ?item wdt:P577 ?date .
  ?item wdt:P478 ?volume .
  ?item wdt:P304 ?pages .
  ?item wdt:P433 ?number .
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}

Try it!

--Jahl de Vautban (talk) 17:30, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, the duplication arose because for some articles have multiple DOIs, which I had not appreciated. Thank you for the query, you may have noticed I've been merging some since I noticed the issue as it is important to clean up such situations. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The Archaeology Data Service and Wikidata

Just wanted to say thanks for your article and the work you've done with the Archaeology Data Service. I'd seen the IDs popping up in a few places but hadn't really looked into the service before; it's fun browsing the info on local sites. It prompted me to add Archaeology Data Service person IDs to a few familiar items (from Wikiproject YDIH) by using this query; I'll be sure to keep an eye out for more in the future! Cheers, Aluxosm (talk) 13:36, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for adding more IDs! There's a lot to be said for someone who is familiar with a subject area adding IDs like that. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

American Antiquity

Hi there, and happy new year! I don't know if you were behind the import of American Antiquity articles, but anyway as you process a lot of articles in general I may as well ask you in case you ran into similar issues. I am a bit puzzled by AAQ volume 20 issue 2 Cover and Back matter (Q59230185) and AAQ volume 20 issue 2 Cover and Back matter (Q59230321), which content appears to be the same, but which are not placed in the same issues - I am lead to believe that there may have been a processing problem on the editor side which lead to issue 1's back cover missing, but I don't know how I could report it. Kind of a similar thing on Errata: Book Review (Q59236595), which I eventually merged with another article, because even if the DOI don't resolve, on the editor side I don't know where a second Errata: Book Review would fit and I am not even sure a separate article for a single line is really significant. Happy to have your insight on both issue. Thanks! -Jahl de Vautban (talk) 09:02, 2 January 2024 (UTC)