User talk:Peter James

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Peter James/Archive 1 on 2021-04-10.

I notice you patiently adding, as aliases, the correct spellings of places I've misspelled. I can only imagine your exasperation. I am, slowly, discovering each & every logographic crime, as I reconcile Scottish places with the GB1900 gazetteer, and, sadly, finding that in the majority of instances you got there first. Thank you, and do feel free to amend the label instead: I think we've established what the pattern here is.

Most of the spellings I have added to places in the UK are from Ordnance Survey maps or data; I don't know if they are the usual spelling, an alternative, or a misspelling (and there are misspellings and other errors in OS data) so I add them as aliases if the label is not obviously wrong. I've occasionally added names from the Gazetteer for Scotland, but particularly with the Gaelic names there can be a few different spellings, and I don't know which is more likely to be correct.

Hey Peter, do you think you could assist with making some edits to a Wikipedia page that needs attention?

Just wanted to post a simple thank you for helping with the reverts to Psubhashish's batch edits. I was beginning to tire out when you swooped in, so it was very much appreciated.

Hi Peter. I'm trying to keep the distinction between hillfort (Q744099), castrum (Q88205) and fort (Q1785071) the latter defended by artillery. It can be easy when importing from Cadw or Heritage England to pick up their use of the term "fort" and assign it to the wrong WD box. I fix the ones I see

There's also artillery fort (Q39535649), which doesn't link to a Wikipedia article or any external source and only has a vague description; is that the "defended by artillery" definition? Historic England recognises "fort" and "hillfort" (and others) as monument types, and there's nothing at https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=875615&resourceID=19191 to support changing P31 of Hallgarth (Q24661375) to hillfort (compare with https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=9936&resourceID=19191). It is described as a possible burh (Q88034) in the text but not in the monument types (although it is recognised as a type: https://www.heritagegateway.org.uk/Gateway/Results_Single.aspx?uid=188490&resourceID=19191).

I wasn't aware of artillery fort (Q39535649), I'll look into it. Meanwhile I've reverted my Hallgarth (Q24661375) change

Hello Peter, coordinates from GeoNames are usually not very accurate; usually coordinates from OpenStreetMap (Q936) are better positioned. You could also use https://atlas.harita.gov.tr to verify the location of places in Turkey.

Thanks for the advice; I've been adding GeoNames IDs so I thought I would add the coordinates at the same time, although I've noticed they are often inaccurate and used nisanyanmap.com and more recently OSM if a place is missing from GeoNames or the coordinates were a long way out or pointed to the wrong place. I'd seen atlas.harita.gov.tr mentioned and had intended to look at it, although there are not many items with village in Turkey (Q1529096) or YerelNet village ID (P2123) left to be checked for GeoNames ID (P1566), and most already have coordinates. Peter James (talk) 09:31, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm checking the rural villages on OSM-side for missing wikidata/wikipedia tags and adding missing coordinates on wikidata-side. nisanyanmap is good too - also for old names which I add to osm too but lacking verifyable sources I hesitate to add those names to wikidata. Are you also editing on trwiki?

No I can understand most of what the articles are about (using Google Translate if necessary) but I can only write in English. Peter James (talk) 16:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I see that you are english speaker and that it is of your interest. Could you have a look at these results (items that do not have any P31) : https://petscan.wmflabs.org/?max_sitelink_count=&labels_no=&format=html&search_query=&cb_labels_yes_l=1&show_disambiguation_pages=both&ores_prob_to=&wpiu=none&ns%5B0%5D=1&smaller=&templates_any=&links_to_all=&wikidata_item=with&show_redirects=no&cb_labels_no_l=1&project=wikipedia&wikidata_source_sites=&sitelinks_any=&langs_labels_any=&search_filter=&show_soft_redirects=both&referrer_name=&active_tab=tab_wikidata&wikidata_label_language=&search_wiki=&after=&language=en&sitelinks_yes=&links_to_no=&interface_language=en&depth=3&wikidata_prop_item_use=P31&categories=American+nuclear+weapons+testing&referrer_url=&outlinks_any=&cb_labels_any_l=1&search_max_results=500&outlinks_no=&manual_list=&common_wiki_other=&ores_type=any&doit=

Best

And oh there are perhaps still inacuracies inside this query https://w.wiki/73V4

It was something I had just started looking at after using "Random item" and found one with no statements. For now I'm looking at the items in the Norwegian Wikipedia categories as there are several items with no statements or no P31 that are likely to be duplicates of others. There was one confusing item I found, Q11958399, where the article has the name of an operation comprising three tests (Q98960720), describes it as one test with date of the first test in that operation (Q98960663) and a yield that doesn't match any of the three tests (or the American test it shares a name with, Q98447142). I'll look at the first query as it's the duplicates and P31s I'm focusing on with these items. Peter James (talk) 09:55, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh snakker du bokmål eller nynorsk? Jeg kan en litt bokmål... Nuclear tests are very difficult to model since they in fact were numerous, covered by secrecy etc. They could be "grouped" by some nicknames. One of good sources is eller https://www.nnss.gov/docs/docs_LibraryPublications/DOE_NV-209_Rev16.pdf or http://www.johnstonsarchive.net/nuclear/tests/USA-ntests1.html Good luck

There is article pl:Bain (Lincolnshire) (about village). Article was created by bot of en:User talk:Kotniski.

I made request Afd: pl:Wikipedia:Poczekalnia/artykuły/2023:07:09:Bain (Lincolnshire). Malarz pl (dyskusja) 14:20, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

I think geonames 303553 Ömeranlı is an incorrect geoname since it is miles away. Also there should only be one geoname in a wikidata object. The only correct geoname för Ömeranlı (Q1893399) is 299553 Tavşançalı. If you did it because Ömeranlı is missing in 299553 Tavşançalı I can add the name since in the nlwp the namechange was 2014. Maundwiki (disk) 21:45, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about that one. I have seen errors in coordinates before, but in this case there would have to be two - a wrong digit and either latitude and longitude switched or inaccurate/imprecise location. There are often multiple Geonames IDs for the same place; with villages this is usually because of name changes or different languages but sometimes IDs have been repurposed based on the nearest village instead of what they originally referred to - many of the coordinates in Turkey were originally very imprecise and with the name changes seems to have caused confusion. I think I decided to add it to Q1893399 as it had "Tavşancılı" in the alternate names.

I added the name Ömeranlı in 299553 and removed 303553 from Ömeranlı (Q1893399). If you think 303553 should be moved next to 299553 that can also be done. But the wikidata object should only have one entry. The name change from 2015 is now in the object for Swedish. Maundwiki (disk) 12:37, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

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

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