User talk:Zolo

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

Pyramide des âges[edit]

Bonjour,

En repensant au {{Tree}}, je me suis demandé : serait-il possible de créer un modèle qui fait des fr:Pyramide des âges ? Je ne m'y connais pas trop en codage mais je me dis que l'on a besoin de deux données de base : le sexe et l'âge.

On dispose généralement de ces données pour les êtres humains. Il y a un point qui je ne vois pas clairement comment articuler : le groupe sur lequel on fait la pyramide. Dans l'idéal, j'aimerais pouvoir partir de groupes très divers (les écrivains, les sénateurs/députés, les membres d'une organisation, les habitants de tel ou tel unité administrative, etc.)

Voilà, si tu pouvais au moins m’indiquer si cela te semble possible ou non. Davance merci.

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:27, 30 September 2014 (UTC)

Salut user:VIGNERON. Générer la pyramide ne devrait pas être trop compliquée (il y a des pyramides sur Wikipédia, on doit pouvoir convertir le code en Lua, si ce n'est pas déjà fait).
Trouver les données à utiliser est nettement plus délicat. Je vois deux possiblités :
  • Les données sont stockées dans un seul élément. Ce serait sans doute le cas pour une division administrative. On pourrait utiliser population (P1082) avec des qualificatifs, ou, si l'on veut garder p1082 lisible, une nouvelle propriété.
  • On utilise une liste de personnes et on récupère les données stockées dans les éléments. Mais récupérer les données dans un élément impose de charger d'abord celui-ci Par contre trouver les données est plus délicat. Pour les divisions administratives, je pense que la seule solution serait d'indiquer les données directement dans l'élément (en ajoutant des données dans population (P1082) avec qualificatis, ou peut-être en créant de nouvelles propriétés pour laisser cela lisible. Si l'on veut faire des statistiques sur un grand groupe comme les écrivains, il faudrait utiliser les données stockées dans chaque élément, mais ça parait un peu difficile à faire directement sur Wiki. Pour récupérer les données d'un élément, il faut d'abord le charger, et c'est en pratique l'opération qui limite le plus ce qu'on peut faire avec les données. Au delà de 200 éléments environ, on arrive à une erreur "time allocated for running script has expired". Tu peux voir cela en prévisualisant {{invoke: Zolo/Test|analyze|limit = 100}} (qui compte le nombre d'achitectes nés par années) et en montant la "limit". Je ne crois pas qu'il y ait de moyen d'améliorer ça. Donc si on veut faire des statistiques un peu poussées, j'imagine qu'il faudrait passer par un site externe, ou par un bot qui ferait l'analyse en externe et mettrait périodiquement à jour les statistiques dans une base Lua, mais je ne sais pas faire ça. --Zolo (talk) 13:06, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Merci beaucoup pour cette prompte réponse, j'y vois déjà plus clair. Je craignais notamment que la mise en forme graphique soit trop compliquée pour être résolue.
Du coup, si je te suis bien, on pourrait d'ores et déjà faire un « simple » diagramme en barre. Par exemple pour des propriétés comme population (P1082) ou visitors per year (P1174) (déjà utilisé sur plus d’un millier éléments : Special:WhatLinksHere/Property:P1082 et Special:WhatLinksHere/Property:P1174). Sur Wikipédia, je vois qu'il y a plusieurs façons de faire (dont une qui utilise la balise Timeline et une autre qui utilise fr:Module:Diagramme ; et tout un tas d'autres qui utilise tout un tas de bidouillage divers et variés).
Pour le second point par contre, tu confirmes un autre de mes craintes.
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:44, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
@VIGNERON:. Statistiques sur les décennies de naissance des architectes en bas de Module talk:Test/Zolo. C'est juste pour voir, c'est un échantillon non-aléatoire (car les éléments sont classés par Qid), et plusieurs controles (av-JC, date à précision < année) non effectués). En fait j'ai même eu la flemme de vérifier le résultat espéré, donc si ça se trouve tout est décalé.--Zolo (talk) 18:48, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Wow, j'en étais seulement à demander la possibilité et toi tu me sers déjà un aperçu. C'est déjà très prometteur, cela me redonne espoir en Wikidata. Je peux faire quelques vérifications si tu veux (le code du module me semble encore à mon niveau de compréhension ; mais pas avant la semaine prochaine…). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 19:14, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Ok merci. De tout façon il faudra réécrire le code si on veut utiliser ça pour de vrai. Il faudrait surtout vérifier que les résultats sont bons. En fait, j'avais vraiment tout décalé d'une décennie ! --Zolo (talk) 09:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)

URL additions[edit]

It seems that Widar of zolo (talkcontribslogs) has 3 quirks regarding official website (P856):

  1. The bot does not put the ending / on URLs that are only hostnames. For example, the bot adds http://www.zenith-caen.fr instead of http://www.zenith-caen.fr/ (I guess this is not too important by itself, though: Not only do all the web clients correct it, but it looks like even the standards say that it's opinional for input now, but I'm having trouble finding current standards for URL normalization.)
  2. The bot is not checking whether official website (P856) exists before it adds URLs. This leads to things like [1], in which there are two of official website (P856), because one is slightly different.
  3. The bot does not add references and does not announce its source in edit summaries, so it's impossible for later users to see which wiki article on which project was the source of the URL. It might be easy for you to provide the source now; but months from now, not even you will remember the answer if someone asks.

--Closeapple (talk) 07:05, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

I was adding them based on fr.wikipedia using quickstatements.
The absence of the trailing "/" was intentional (I find it easier to read, and there is a tiny bit less of a postprocessing to do if we want to display it in a nice format). But if it is better to keep it, maybe we can find a bot to add it on every statement (not just mine).
I did not add "imported from Wikipedia" because I had a human look at the data, and changed some of them a bit before importing them. Also once these values are in Wikidata, they will probably be removed from the Wikipedia infobox. If the data are no longer to be found at their original place it will not really be useful, and arguably a bit confusing, to have "imported from fr.wikipedia" ("imported from fr.wikipedia" is imprecise, so we do not really know where to look). Now that the import is done, it is a bit more complicated to add the source, but I can try to do it if needed.
I did not find any simple way to check if there was already a p856 in the item before adding it. I planned to check for duplicates this week end (but if someone is willing to develop a script checking almost identical URL, that would certainly be useful). --Zolo (talk) 07:44, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

Suppression (et redirection) de Q3582279 (Q3582792)[edit]

Bonjour,

En faisant le ménage sur Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P380, je suis tombé sur l'élément Q3582279 (Q3582792) qui décrit une église qui n'a jamais existé (je viens de supprimer l'article sur la Wikipédia francophone). Faut-il simplement supprimer l'élément ou bien le rediriger vers Q3582279 (Q3582279) (la seule église de la commune).

Je te laisse faire au mieux.

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:09, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour Vigneron. Ca dépend peut-être de ce qu'il y avait dans l'article de Wikipédia : si la description, les coordonnées géographiques, et les photos correspondaient bien à Q3582279 (Q3582279) je pense qu'il vaut mieux rediriger, si la description était très vague ou très fantaisiste, ça me paraitrait logique de supprimer. --Zolo (talk) 09:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Il n'y avait quasiment rien dans l'article WP et c'était effectivement une confusion avec Q3582279 (Q3582279). Je me rends compte qu'en deux ans d'existence, l'article a été repris un peu partout sur le web ; la redirection est donc effectivement logique. Peux-tu t'en charger ?
Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:06, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok fait. --Zolo (talk) 15:51, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

subclass of (P279) ou part of (P361)[edit]

Bonjour,

Sur Q3485446 (Q3485446), j'avais mis part of (P361) de Q18002388 (Q18002388) puis Fralambert a ajouté subclass of (P279) de Q18002388 (Q18002388). J'imagine qu’il est incorrect de conserver les deux mais j’ai un doute sur lequel des deux il faut conserver. Pourrais-tu apporter ton expertise sur le sujet ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:15, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: c'est sous-classe (un site classé est un type de site classé ou site classé (dans les sites inscrits ou classés, il y a certains qui sont du type site inscrit). Partie de voudrait dire quelque chose comme : dans chaque site inscrit ou classé, il y a un site classé. --Zolo (talk) 15:54, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Ok, merci. J'ai corrigé. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:53, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Redirection pas effectuée[edit]

Bonjour,

J'ai essayé de fusionner NGC 135 (Q13083061) dans NGC 135 (Q911918) et j'avais coché l'option « Créer une redirection » mais visiblement cela n'a pas fonctionné. Aurais-je fait une erreur ? le gadget serait-il en panne ? Pourrais-tu regarder et m'éclairer ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:44, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Bonjour VIGNERON, le problème venait apparemment de l'existence de libellés anglais et "bs" différents sur les deux éléments (dans un il s'appelait NGC 135 et dans l'autre IC 26). Apparemment, l'outil n'est pas encore assez malin pour prévenir. --Zolo (talk) 18:09, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Ah ok, merci pour l'explication and thanks to Lymantria (talkcontribslogs) too ;) Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 18:12, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

changes done by your bot[edit]

Your last run of adding instance of (P31) human (Q5) did a lot of wrong changes, eg. i've found:

Please check what happened. Thomas11 (talk) 19:30, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

Hi Thomas11, these were added from categories in Category:Births by year (Q7128862). It was a quick and first sorting and was bound to have some errors, however from those I had checked, it seemed that the error rate was acceptable. Apparently the main exception comes from Ukrainian categories that appear more messy (for instance uk:Теорія_моделей mixes data about model theory and about Alfred Tarski). I'll try to fix some based on consistency checks, but some of the items are almost empty, so I don't think it will be able to find those. The fact that these items are now tagged as instances of humans means they will appear in people's related "games", which, hopefull, means that they will be fixed more rapidly that if they had been left empty. --Zolo (talk) 20:25, 3 November 2014 (UTC)

[5][edit]

This edit you have done was not correct.--GZWDer (talk) 16:00, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@GWDer: Ok, I should have checked more cearefully thanks (and one French label was wrong so I did not see the other stigmella). --Zolo (talk) 16:39, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Gare de Gouy-Cahon[edit]

Salut ! J'ai rien compris pourquoi tu m'a réverté sur [6] Merci de m'ếclairer. Otourly (talk) 09:35, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Salut Otourly, je suppose que tu voulais mettre country (P17) et non instance of (P31) qui ne veut pas dire grand chose. Apparemment, il y en a encore 135 je peux réparer si tu veux. --~~

depicts (P180): ?[edit]

In Rock art at Åbodsjön (Q18559971) I have written "depicts (P180) Moose", but there is also something else. Exactly what is unknown. The painting has been located outdoors in a lake for 4000 years so it has naturally been a little weathered. Do we have any system for unknown motifs? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:33, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

@Innocent bystander: I think the simplest solution wold be to give the most specific item we can like "animal" or "undulating line". In some cases, it may be useful to create items like "unidentified animal" (a subclass of "animal"). Depicts "moose and unidentified animal" would be beter than "depicts moose and animal" because in the first case "animal" may mean "another animal but I am too lazy to look for the name" or the "animal" could even mean the mmose itself. --~~
"Unidentified object" would then fit better since we do no know if it's an animal. But would that also include abstract subjects? Abstract things like sun crosses and nets are sometimes seen in this kind of rock art. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 13:46, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
I was taking animal as an example (could not find any image), but I guess it would work with anything including abstract object. If it seems that it depicts a concrete object, but we do not really know what, maybe something like "~depicts physical object (Q223557), qualifier: shape (P1419): cross"-Zolo (talk) 14:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Little tricky to take a photo since you need a boat or a snowmobile. :) The image is faced toward the lake. I've been standing 10 meters from the rock it's painted on, but couldn't get any closer since the water was cold.
All I know from the descriptions is that the unidentified object is 0,7x0,3 meter in size, and that those parts of the painting is heavily damaged. -- 78.73.94.165 17:54, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Do you have any ideas of what un "Unidentified object" could be described as? A subclass of what? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2014 (UTC) (Confirm, same as 78...)
Ok, strange there does not appear to be decent photos on the Internet yet.
I would say we would need a "unidentified X" tree that would mirror the general tree (unidentified elephant.. -> unidentified animal .. -> unidentified physical object -> unidentified entity) and should at the same time be attached to the main X class. For example "unidentified artificial physical object" is a subclass of both "unidentified physical object" and of artificial physical object (Q15222213). --Zolo (talk) 20:07, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The place is far out in the wilderness, there are some summer houses some kilometers away, and permanently populated houses 10 kilometers away if you are a bird. You can see some pictures of the bloc erratique on Google Earth, but no pictures of the painting. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 20:44, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Tokyo crisis 2[edit]

Bonjour Zolo, a new user has moved all the Tokyos completely. see https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Zolo&oldid=160830523#Prefecture_Tokyo.2C_Tokyo_Metropolis despite comments on talk pages remember we had 4

  1. Tokyo prefecture (Q1490) prefecture
  2. special ward of Tokyo (Q308891) 23 spécial wards
  3. City of Tokyo (Q7473516) Tokyo in general
en:Tokyo was between 1/3 and until now handled within 1

Tokyo Metropolis (Q11199581) instance of (P31) Wikimedia duplicated page (Q17362920) for =en:Tokyo Metropolis. What happened today is:

14 site links named prefecture Tokyo were moved from Tokyo prefecture (Q1490) to Tokyo Metropolis (Q11199581), the others with same subject including en WP stayed, despite my comment first to discuss further changes in the disc.

all wp site links were moved from City of Tokyo (Q7473516) to Tokyo prefecture (Q1490) and

this almost empty item was merged with the tokyo named wikilinks in Tokyo prefecture (Q1490) prefecture.

So we had in between: 2 prefectures: Tokyo Metropolis (Q11199581) prefecture only prefecture and metropolis wp site links//reverted Tokyo prefecture (Q1490) wp prefecture site links without prefecture naming merged with labels, properties and statements from City of Tokyo (Q7473516); reverted City of Tokyo (Q7473516) empty/= rev

I reverted all wp sitelink changes.

c:東京 seems to be prefecture?? linked to Tokyo prefecture (Q1490); But City of Tokyo (Q7473516) also has c:東京 this gallery--Oursana (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi I dont have access to a computer at the moment. I ll try to have a mook on Tuesday. -Zolo (talk) 13:30, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
Merci, I think I repaired everything and I get quicker in repairing, though it is useless time, just want to let you know. The problem comes from the dublette. I am glad if you check the japanese commons links, which seem to be inconsistent. On commons we do not have anything of site protection? --Oursana (talk) 19:37, 6 December 2014 (UTC)
@Oursana: that sounds fine. It seems that most (all ?) images in c:東京 are about things in the special wards, but I am not sure it is voluntary. That may just be because the most famous places in the Tokyo area are there.
Items can be protected or semi-protected like any other page, but I do not think it is a good idea because it would prevent non-confirmed users to add Wikipedia sitelinks, which they often do properly. And if they are not able to edit sitelink easily, they may once again complain about Wikidata, which is not very good public relations :]. --Zolo (talk) 06:51, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

German metropolitan regions ∈ districts of Mali???[edit]

Hey @Zolo:,
your bot somehow managed to assign all German metropolitan regions as "districts of Mali" (Q2115792), see here, obviously because districts of Mali were among its last jobs. I reverted whatever I found but would ask you to doublecheck what might have been the reason for the error.
Regards, --PanchoS (talk) 03:07, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi PanchoS, thanks for notifying. These were relatively small-scale edits made from autolist. It seems that I got mixed up in Qids at some point, I'll see about it. --Zolo (talk) 16:31, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Porting Module:Wikidata to Commons[edit]

Hi Zolo!

Now that Wikidata phase 2 has been switched on for Commons (even if for the moment, it is only really going to be much use at the top of galleries there), would it be possible for you to port Module:Wikidata over to Commons, so there's a good toolkit in place to write templates against?

I know you modified Module:Wikidata quite a lot for here, where arbitrary access is possible, whereas on Commons it is not possible. But on the other hand, I do think it is useful if the library used on Commons is (with that exception) as close as possible to what is in use here; and also the Wikidata version is probably 'best of breed' of any comparable module on any wikiproject, and likely to remain so.

I'd be really grateful if you could do this. Thanks, Jheald (talk) 10:23, 8 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi user:Jheald, I'll try to do something, but it will be of very limited use. Wikidata's module is built around arbitrary access. Without it, we won't even be able to make much use of item-type statements because we can only retrieve labels in the project's language (={{int:lang}}= English), while Commons is supposed to be multilingual. --Zolo (talk) 16:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
Understood. But (if I remember correctly) access to language-localised item labels is currently on the priority list for the development team to fix, so might be coming quite soon. And having the module in place to highlight the difficulty should help push it even further up the queue. Jheald (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald:, actually, adaptation to Commons should be relatively easy. Tests should be done at Commons:Commons:Wikidata/sandbox.
The main difficulty will be with date formatting. Though Module:Date is essentially an adaptation of Commons:Date to Wikibase, backporting it to Commons may be a bit tricky. I am not sure I will be able to do that in the next few days.
fr:Module:Wikidata is probably better than Module:Wikidata but it depends on modules that are specific to the French Wikipedia, and it is a bit difficult to import it to Commons.--Zolo (talk) 11:53, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, that's a great start. Jheald (talk) 14:30, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
@Jheald: Forgot to say that I have not read of any plan to all arbitrary access to labels in all languages. What should come soon is the ability to get labels in languages from the fallback chain. For example, in ty.wikipedia, int:lang == Tahitian and the fallback chain is ty -> fr -> en. It meams that absent any label in Tahitian, labels in French or English will be accessible. But this does not give access to labels outside the chain, and so it is useless for Commons, where int:lang == English, without any fallback language. (Commons multilingual infrastructure is somewhat incoherent, with some parts translated according to the user's language, and some parts shown only in the site's default language, which is English.) --Zolo (talk) 14:49, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

pendant of (P1639) created[edit]

pendant of (P1639) is ready. Emw (talk) 01:56, 9 December 2014 (UTC)


curator (P1640) created[edit]

curator (P1640) is ready. Emw (talk) 02:20, 9 December 2014 (UTC)

P31 or P279[edit]

Hi, I have a question about the use of P279 or P31 at food items. I see your bot did put P279 in most cases (e.g. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q3441161&diff=168212206&oldid=97170126). Can you explain me why it is not P31? Yesterday I claimed instance of (P31) pudding (Q9053) on a lot of items because I thought these are instances ( a specific type of pudding, no need to make it a subclass since there will no other items created that use them as subclass) Michiel1972 (talk) 08:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Hi Michiel1972, when referring to concepts, the difference between subclass and instance appears to be debatable, but in this case it is pretty clear: "cake" refers to a concrete, material object, so an "instance of cake" has to be a meterial object, like say, the wedding cake of Queen Victoria. Anything that is not a unique material object is a subclass of cake, that is, a set of features shared by potentially several instances of cakes. --Zolo (talk) 06:09, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

number of faces (P1658)[edit]

number of faces (P1658) is ready. --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:11, 21 December 2014 (UTC)