Jura recommended I chat with you about your survey on constraints. Is there somewhere you're collecting input on this?
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "AbuseFilter 114"
Hi! I've already analyzed most of the data and will publish the report next week, but please feel free to tell me anything you want; if it falls within the scope of the analysis and I haven't included it yet, maybe I'm in time. Thanks for your interest!
We were discussing problems with “contemporary constraint violations” - in this case, a tapestry dated “20. Century” and a weaving studio with an end date of “1999” were flagged as a constraint violation because the default entry “20. century” goes into the database as “2000 with a precision of 6”. There’s a discussion of the problem in Project Chat (and a hack to get around it that no new editor would ever think of), and a Phabricator ticket.
I’d love to see your report when it’s done!
Just to let you know, this filter doesn't work when using the suggestededit tool. I don't think any action is needed (this user calmed down it seems) but it might interrest you to know ;)
Oh, I'm sorry the filter isn't avoiding those tools. Are you sure the filter is no longer necessary?
Thanks for the warning!
I'm not sure but I will assume good faith and I don't want to escalate thing, it would only make it worse.
Please refrain from sending more emails and use my talk page unless privacy is needed.
your enzyme number additions (from Wikipedia)
Hello, in 2016 you apparently automatically created claims about items by importing the first encountered EC number from the corresponding en-WP article. This should have been restricted to items having a UniProt stmt (which are single proteins) because otherwise you are deep in error land, like this: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q6913367&diff=326122190&oldid=308896828 --- these increased my manual work somewhat today. Just don't do it again, please!
Hi, thanks for noticing and for all the work you do! If that day's batch has a sufficiently high number of wrong edits, please feel free to revert the entire batch or ask me to do so (that might be the best option even though there were a small number of errors). In 2016 I probably used https://tools.wmflabs.org/pltools/harvesttemplates/ and, missing statements in Items like that, I guess no constraint violations appeared.
Para trducir páginas de Ayuda en Wikidata
Hola! Quiera traducir todo lo que sea posible de ayuda Wikidata al catalàn, mi lengua materna. En la página Help:Contents/ca quisiera traducir Help:Properties. Como que no hay enlace al traductor Apertium, no puedo seguir. Me puedes ayudar? Gracias!
¡Hola! Prueba con este enlace. Saludos.
unprotection of items
Can you go ahead with this and revert the 3000 ?
Hi! Since both the quantitative analysis and my experience concluded those semi-protections benefit Wikimedia projects and that's my only purpose as a volunteer, reverting them myself would go against my mission; nonetheless, any other administrator with different criteria should feel free to revert those actions at their own risk, and I'll be okay with that, that's how a wiki is supposed to work. If any of them do so, they should take into account that on 26 January I only semi-protected 2357 Items, the remaining ones were already protected.
I hadn't actually seen Abian using their admin access much to actually do what it's for .. so it's something we need to think about.
You used admin rights in a way that violates policy.
It's a lot of work to unprotected those items and you are the person who caused the work through policy violating actions and thus as an admin I think it's your job to clean up the mess you created.
Per Wikidata:Administrators#Accountability, "Administrators are expected to reply promptly and civilly to concerns about their administrator actions". Can you please reply to the concern that such a large protection should have been discussed first? Can you agree to discuss before doing something similar in the future?
In the end, *that* is what I am more worried about than the protections.
I replied promptly and civilly on Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard#Protection_of_thousand_of_items twice and the first reply was mine. Those two replies and the ones in this thread are everything I can say, all I can do now is repeating them together. ChristianKl categorically claims twice in this thread that I violated policies and of course I didn't; although he can think differently, those statements are very serious without providing any evidence or quotes from Wikidata policies. Maybe he didn't reflect the exact idea he wanted to reflect, so I won't take the message too seriously.
Can you reply to my last question? "Can you agree to discuss before doing something similar in the future?"
I don't intend to semiprotect any more Wikidata entities based on their use by Wikimedia pages. If with "something similar" you mean actions with a lower degree of similarity, I'll also be happy to tell you if you give me a few examples.
Presse Chance the deleted Flag to File:Flag of the City of Suzhou.png ~~~~
I don't think the image will be deleted -~~~~
municipio vs concello
Hola, muchas gracias por la reversión de:
Mil perdones por el error. Me estoy haciendo un lío con las etiquetas en relación a las propiedades de divisiones administrativas para Galicia.(no entidades administrativas)
¿Sabrías decirme en el caso de Galicia a qué nivel pertenecen las siguientes subdivisiones administrativas? (o donde/como podría verificarlo?-las distintas wikipedias dan datos contradictorios y no acabo de verlo claro en las consultas en Wikidata-)
Muchas gracias! User:Maria zaos
No te preocupes, gracias a ti por tus contribuciones, y perdón por la brevedad del resumen de edición.
municipality (Q15284) es la entidad correspondiente a la idea general de municipio, aplicable a todo el mundo. Alguien escribió la etiqueta en gallego como «concello», y puede que esto no sea lo más acertado. No sé gallego, así que te pregunto a ti... ¿crees que la etiqueta en gallego «municipio» sería más adecuada para esta entidad?
Para aclarar el tema de la organización de entidades territoriales administrativas, hace un tiempo creé la página Help:P131/Q29, que quizá te sea de ayuda. Las comarcas cuelgan directamente de las comunidades autónomas —en este caso, Galicia—. No estoy familiarizado con la idea de las parroquias y de los lugares; no obstante, si lo que leo aquí es cierto, las parroquias deberían colgar de los municipios; los lugares, de las parroquias.
Saludos, y a tu disposición si necesitas alguna otra cosa en la que pueda ayudar.
Copy references in Wikidata schemata
I just wanted to let you know that I implemented in OpenRefine a feature you suggested: copying references in a Wikidata schema. This feature is available in the latest release, version 3.2 beta: https://github.com/OpenRefine/OpenRefine/releases/tag/3.2-beta If it does not behave as you had expected, do let me know!
I think it was @Ijon who suggested that feature. It's a useful one! Now that I know the 3.2 beta is available, I'll try it as soon as I find some free time.
Thank you very much!
Ah indeed, sorry for the confusion and the noise!
Thank you very much! :)
now is 22.214.171.124