User talk:Andreasmperu

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2016-2017.


What was thelabel had no label (Q41302258)? crew (Q345844) (body or a class of people who work at a common activity, generally in a structured or hierarchical organization) consists of crew member (Q5184855) (crew member serving in the operation of an aircraft, naval vessel, or train)? And only (film crew member (Q17291399), no label (Q1563520), male rowing crew (Q26710982), etc.)? --Fractaler (talk) 13:25, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Q1124523, Q288204[edit]

Hello! I do not understand why you consider them different: as far as I understand, almost all the articles are about the formation of female form of nouns, and almost all content of them, such as examples, is about professions. Ukrainian article contains something about gender-neutral titles, while Czech article contains something about proper names, but they are just small parts of articles. The only difference I see is that the first group of articles if more about rules and examples, and the second about history and opinions, which are the different sides of the same thing. So I believe that there can not exist both articles on one Wikipedia at the same time, they will be merged. Why should not they be merged? Wikisaurus (talk) 00:26, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Items should only be merged if they are exactly about the same subject. gender inflection (Q1124523) is a broad item covering all cases, whereas gender-specific job title (Q288204) is limited to job titles. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 00:30, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Давайте начнём с начала. Вы знаете русский язык? Вам известно, что по-русски "продавщица" (феминитив от "продавец") является грубым просторечием, слово "генеральша" означает жену генерала, а не женщину в генеральском звании, а слово "генералка" является окказионализмом и означает "нечто генеральное женского рода"? С немецким Вы так же хорошо знакомы и готовы доказывать немцам, что дочь по отношению к отцу не является вещью? Фил Вечеровский (talk) 14:54, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
So I can just move all the articles from the first to the second? They are not about gender reflection! P. S. I moved Russian article (which was just today rewritten by me) and Ukrainian article (the title is the almost the same word) to the second wikidata. Wikisaurus (talk) 00:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
Wrong again. One item is specific to job titles, the other is a general one. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 00:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
"Not the same item" THE ITEMS ARE DIFFERENT I MOVED ONLY TWO OUT OF SIX DO WHATEVER YOU LIKE WITH OTHER FOUR Wikisaurus (talk) 00:48, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
By the way, may I kindly remind you that Rollback should only be used to revert vandalism and test edits, not in the edit warring. I see that you have acquired an administratorship, and I am extremely surprised and disappointed to find that there are administrators of Wikidata who avoided to know it. Wikisaurus (talk) 01:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
It may be useful having different entries for gender inflection in general (e.g. Spanish gato/gata, Russian кот/кошка - male cat/female cat), and an entry for gender inflection for people (e.g. actor/actress). However, an entry for gender inflection of only professions (to the exclusion for other types of gender inflection for human beings) is not useful. Consider that a prince or king is not a profession; but the relationship between king/queen, prince/princess is exactly of the same kind as between actor/actress. Therefore, I suggest broadening the scope of Q288204 to "gender marking for people", or at least "gender marking for social roles". And moving almost all of the Q1124523 Wikipedia entries to Q288204. Because at the moment, Q1124523 is a bad fit for Wikipedia articles about terms for human beings, not grammatical gender inflection in general. Tetromino (talk) 17:31, 9 January 2018 (UTC)
A wise comment, thank you.--Ssola (talk) 23:09, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

no label (Q30014647)/no label (Q30014632)[edit]

Could you provide a link to the discussion of deleting these items? --Fractaler (talk) 14:14, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

w:Homology (chemistry), homology (Q11321452), homologue (Q47400224)[edit]

"homology is the appearance of homologues" (no references). What other sentences from the article make up it possible to assert that this article is about homology? --Fractaler (talk) 15:55, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

no label (Q40887218)[edit]

Could you provide a link to the discussion of deleting these item? --Fractaler (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2018 (UTC)

Reminder about Blocking consultation[edit]

Hello again,

The discussion about new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools is happening on meta now and is in the final days.

We contacted you because you are one of the top users of the blocking tool on this wiki. We think that your comments will help us make better improvements. There is still time to share your ideas. You can post to the discussion in any language.

Thank you if you have already shared your thoughts. You can also help out by sharing a link to the meta discussion with users on this wiki. Or you can translate the summary of the discussion and share it on this wiki.

If you have questions you can contact me on wiki or by email.

  • I apologize for posting in English.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

no label (Q41792334)[edit]

Could you provide a link to the discussion of deleting these item? --Fractaler (talk) 06:49, 17 January 2018 (UTC)


Hola. Ya sé que los descripciones sugieren que "no es lo mismo". Lo que pasa es que consideré que erré al crear al ítem, que habría eliminado si supiera.--Asqueladd (talk) 07:05, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

member of the Real Academia de la Historia (Q18692979) es un elemento válido y necesario para agregar como declaración a los elementos sobre los académicos. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 07:08, 20 January 2018 (UTC)
Pues gracias por el piropo, por la cuenta que me toca, adiós.--Asqueladd (talk) 21:46, 20 January 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Removal/Andreasmperu[edit]

With a lot of cases I found that you avoid necessary and import responses, and looked out your a lot of unfair disencourage-of-merge, I requested it. You may respond to me that what I said wrong on my request page, and I will do my best respect to your aganist opinions. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:15, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Sexual disorder[edit]

Why not include sadosmasochism and masochism in the sphere of sexual disorders? These are qualitative deviances/perversions of sexual conduct. Although not precisely psychiatric disorders. --Dapifer (talk) 10:56, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

I am afraid I don't understand the point, so I am going to assume you are referring to this removal from masochism (Q12754745) of an instance of sexual disorder (Q18553616). I removed it because it was a redundant statement: masochism (Q12754745) already had the statement "subclass of paraphilia (Q178059)", which in turn is a subclass of sexual disorder (Q18553616). Therefore, masochism (Q12754745) is already included as a sexual disorder (Q18553616) (I added the item documentation in Talk:Q12754745, so it's clear). The same logic explains this removal from sadomasochism (Q2211650). Please, next time provide links to specific diffs or even items (my interface is not set in English, and on a good day I can do thousands of edits). Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:09, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
You're right, surely I had not been clear and I did not understand the error that had been committed. Also because I had not been given an explanation. Now I understand, thanks. --Dapifer (talk) 23:28, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Mercedes Aráoz[edit]

I would guess that adding "no value" in replaced by (P1366) in Mercedes Aráoz (Q9031673) only makes sense if the office is extinguished. No idea why this should be included in end time (P582) if still in charge. Thanks! --Jey (talk) 20:10, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

"No value" is a way of showing that Mercedes Aráoz (Q9031673) is still in office (see Property_talk:P39#Current_office-holders). I do agree further discussion is needed to establish the best way to illustrate the fact that a person is the current office-holder of a given position. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:12, 31 January 2018 (UTC)
@Jey, Andreasmperu: Hola, no me queda claro que en esa discusión que mencionas se haya decidido nada concreto. Personalmente opino que ponerle "no value" da mas trabajo que no poner nada y es igual de impreciso. Me explico: si cuando deje el cargo nadie se acuerda de actualizarlo serà tan incorrecto que este vacio o que ponga "no value". Por contra, que valor debe ponerse para indicar que "no hay sucesor" porque se ha acabado ese cargo ?. Yo entiendo el "no value" para expresar que "ni está, ni se le espera"; no tiene sentido poner "no value" a lo que esté vacio. Está discusión ya la tuve (no me la hagas buscar, por favor) sobre las fechas y los conyugues. Hay que poner "no value" en conyugue a los solteros? Hay que poner "no value" en la fecha de defunción de los vivos?. Por ejemplo, creo que se puede poner "no value" a la propiedad hijos en personas muertas que no han tenido hijos, però no así mientras estan vivos, ja que "no tenerlos ahora" no significa que no puedan tenerlos antes de morirte. Però también me parece aceptable que no tenga esa propiedad, ja que la falta de información en propiedades opcionales se sobrentiende que "no la tiene" o no es destacable, però alguien podria argumentar que "no tener la propiedad" puede significar que "se desconoce". Que opinais ?. --Amadalvarez (talk) 22:28, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Orden cronológico - Notabilidad[edit]

Estimada Administradora:

Observo que Wikidata no ordena automáticamente los parámetros conforme a criterios cronológicos. Ese es el motivo por el que me he visto obligada a introducir tantos cambios en el statement "partner" del ítem dedicado a Albert Camus: Mi objetivo era que el conjunto quedara organizado desde los puntos de vista temporal y temático.

Me consta que la creación de nuevos ítems está regida por el principio de "notabilidad". No estoy segura de que esta persona sea "notable", dado que no dispongo de más datos sobre ella: ¿Usted qué opina?


Soleil222 (talk) 12:10, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Q30067601 and Q19829999[edit]

Hi! Where is your meaning from, that a culturologist, that is a Kulturwissenschaftler in German, (Q30067601) and a Kulturwissenschaftler (Q19829999) are not the same? Doc Taxon (talk) 22:18, 19 February 2018 (UTC)

What are you talking about? culturologist (Q30067601) has no German label, and even if that was the case translations can be wrongly added by some users. That is why it is so important to check all sitelinks, labels, and descriptions available in different languages, as well as the statements. In the case of professions, a good indicator is what is stated in field of this occupation (P425). In the case you mentioned, there was cultural studies (Q1143546) and culturology (Q1418771), which are two different disciplines and therefore practiced by two different types of professionals (hence, the need for two different items for each profession). Again, do not perform a merge unless there’s no difference in statements. Also, it is important to consider that a wrong translation may have been added in one language which is why it is so important to check all languages available. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 22:34, 19 February 2018 (UTC)
okay, thank you Doc Taxon (talk) 23:33, 19 February 2018 (UTC)


Hola Andrea, espero que estés bien. ¿Podrías eliminar este elemento? Es un caso de un adolescente que está buscando autopromocionarse a través de varios proyectos y ha hecho estragos en Commons, y veo que quiere inmortalizarse acá. Tiene varios títeres, el autor del elemento es uno de ellos. Si tienes dudas puedes preguntarme o a Bernard. Saludos. --Taichi (talk) 19:34, 21 February 2018 (UTC)

@Taichi: ✓ Done ¿Han elaborado una lista de todos sus títeres para echarle una mirada? Gracias por el aviso, Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 13:05, 22 February 2018 (UTC)
¡Gracias! En teoría ya todo está en orden. La información en detalle está aquí. Saludos. --Taichi (talk) 05:46, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

Historiografía vs Geschichtswerk[edit]

Andreas, you may want to consult User:Valentina.Anitnelav and User:Mnnlaxer, both of whom agreed to the merge between historical work (Q1517777), history book (Q10916116), and historical work (Q1517777) at this RfD. If you want to dispute an RfD result, raise it at WD:PC before reverting. Deryck Chan (talk) 05:57, 24 February 2018 (UTC)



Could you at create the articles en:Architecture of Azerbaijan (Republic of Azerbaijan), en:List of Azerbaijani film directors (Republic of Azerbaijan) and en:Bodies of water of Azerbaijan (Republic of Azerbaijan) in Spanish (or request them yourself to other users in Spanish Wikipedia)?

Thank you. 15:49, 24 February 2018 (UTC)

Instance of genre or subclass of creative work[edit]

Hello, Andreasm!

There's something I'd like to ask. I think biography (Q36279) and historiography (Q30277550) are instances of genre (Q483394). However, are biographical work (Q15706467), biographical film (Q645928), historical work (Q1517777) and history book (Q10916116) instance of genre (Q483394)? In my opinion, these items are subclasses of creative work (Q17537576), film (Q11424), or book (Q571), and they are not instances of genre. I want to organize the relation of "instance of genre" and "subclass of creative work" clearly. Could you please let me know what you think about this issue?

By the way, you have created contradictory statements ([1] and [2]). I think the latter one is wrong. Is that correct?

Thank you, --Okkn (talk) 18:02, 27 February 2018 (UTC)

Κατά συρροήν δολοφόνος[edit]

Ήθελα να ρωτήσω γιατί αντέστρεψες την επεξεργασία; το να είσαι κατά συρροήν δολοφόνος είναι ασχολία;; (Dor-astra (talk) 13:48, 22 March 2018 (UTC))

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

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

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey[edit]

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

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey[edit]

WMF Surveys, 00:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)


Feel free to ping me if you want to talk about this more. (I'm not watching this page.) WhatamIdoing (talk) 20:53, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

type of business entity (Q1269299)[edit]

Hi, I noted you reverted my edit, but type of business entity (Q1269299) is linked to {{:w:List_of_business_entities}}, which is a list. I checked also other interlanguage links and most of them are lists, too.--Malore (talk) 00:39, 14 May 2018 (UTC)


Hi! You stated that triangular and pentagonal bipyramids are deltahedra. But it is not necessarily true: they are deltahedra (or, better, strictly-convex deltahedron (Q53858343)) only if their faces are equilateral triangles. Should we create an item for "regular triangular bipyramid" and "regular pentagonal bipyramid"? --Horcrux92 (talk) 10:28, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Italian Health Minister[edit]

Hello there,

Have you checked the Wikilinks? The English and Italian articles are almost exact translations and thus should be in the same category.

--RaviC (talk) 11:57, 2 June 2018 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Wikidata:Introduction[edit]

Hola, Andreasmperu:

Has recibido esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductora de español y francés en Wikidata. La página Wikidata:Introduction está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:

Agradecemos enormemente tu ayuda. Traductores como tú hacen que Wikidata funcione como una verdadera comunidad multilingüe.

Puedes cambiar tus preferencias de notificación.


Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikidata‎, 08:02, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

etnia en Q37175[edit]

Sorry I only speak Spanish

Hola, el tema es que el señor Johnny Depp (Q37175) es de más de una ethnic group (P172), no sé si se trata de toda su ascendencia o tiene muliple personalidad o son vandalismos, me inclino por lo último. ¿Puedes repasarlo?. Saludos --Tiberius1701 (talk) 20:40, 16 July 2018 (UTC) P2558[edit]

Hola Andreasmperu, ¿como estás?. He revertido estas ediciones ya que por un lado ID es un identificador de personas (autores de todo tipo, no solo escritores), y por otro también es un identificador de obras literarias, científicas y artísticas. Saludos, --Zeroth (talk) 13:45, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Wikidata property for authority control for artists (Q55653847)[edit]

You created Wikidata property for authority control for artists (Q55653847) and moved some properties, but not all of them. Do you plan to complete the move (or undo it) to get into a consistent state again? Pages like Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Creator missing collection authority control are breaking, but quite hard to fix in an inconsistent state. Multichill (talk) 10:16, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

@Multichill: ✓ Done In the process of doing that, I noticed at least two properties you created (J. Paul Getty Museum artist id (P2432) and National Gallery of Art artist ID (P2252)) with the same problem: the type constraint is set for “person (Q215627), organization (Q43229), group of humans (Q16334295)”; however, they mention that the item should also have properties used only for items about people (such as occupation (P106), sex or gender (P21), place of birth (P19), date of birth (P569)), so an organization would trigger several constraint violations. It might be a good idea to check if this happens elsewhere. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 17:06, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Julian Assange[edit]

Hi, I changed the image on Julian Assange (Q360) for a higher-resolution and more recent one, that is actually currently being used in the English Wikipedia. Could we go back to the other picture? Thanks, --Townie (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2018 (UTC)

The problem was that you also added a wrong alias and wrong descriptions to that image. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 11:30, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
The only wrong alias I could find was a typo (now ✓ solved), and I think the media legends are also accurate (I changed them from the previous image). --Townie (talk) 11:40, 29 July 2018 (UTC)


The articles describe exactly the same topic. What is the difference according to you? BoH (talk) 18:20, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Please take the time to read all labels, descriptions, and statements before merging two items. As in this case, they would show the differences between the items. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 18:40, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
So what is the difference according to you? BoH (talk) 18:46, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Can you enlighten me on the difference, as I don't see it. Not here and not between the English, German and Dutch Wikipedia's. BoH (talk) 01:25, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
Are you investigating? BoH (talk) 18:16, 1 August 2018 (UTC)
I see you contributing everywhere but here. As I have not seen any arguments to the contrary, I will take this as agreeing with merging the two items. BoH (talk) 01:25, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
That is because there is a lot of maintenance to do, and not enough hands, so I get busy, that’s why I would really appreciate if you stop with the harassment. Is polyploidy the same word as polyploid? One refers to a cell or organism, the other to the chromosomal constitution of a cell or organism. And again. I took the time to edit both items, so the information is there. You just needed to read and think. I cannot do that for you. --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 17:50, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
No need to react so uptight. I would appreciate a less condescending tone, we all have the same goal. Maintenance is not an excuse for not entering a proper discussion.
Now I did as you said, and checked the descriptions a couple of days ago and came to the conclusion that the arcticles refer to the same thing. So the only thing for you to do was read and think, and come back with arguments why you think the articles do not refer to the same thing, or indicate that indeed they do. BoH (talk) 21:28, 3 August 2018 (UTC)
Ok, I fixed it differently. All articles are about the phenomenon of more than two sets of chromosoms, so I moved everything to Q213410. That leaves all remaining data on Q44445817 intact. BoH (talk) 02:04, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
By the way, polyploid is not a cell, but the adjective of the noun polyploidy, so a cell with more than two sets of chromosomes. Humans are not polyploid organisms, as they have two sets. So polyploidy is not found in humans. Compare the noun 'heat' and 'heated' cell. Heat and heated refer to the same phenomenon. BoH (talk) 02:10, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
So you don't have time to discuss with me over here, but as soon as I take action, it only takes you 10 minutes to revert me. Besides that, after that you find time to edit a whole series of topics on adjectives and nouns, only just after I raise those as part of the discussion above.
I think you know that is no way to go about reverting things. You properly discuss matters when they are raised, or you refrain yourself from action. Especially when you are a moderator.
Therefore, I will reinstate my alterations. If you disagree, you can enter into a discussion on where you think I am wrong. Once that discussion has finished, you may take action, if required. Of course you know that is how it should be done. BoH (talk) 12:40, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
I won’t engage in a fruitless discussion with you only because you have the need to be right: from the onset, you have shown no intention to collaborate but to waste time. I cannot understand why anybody would ignore labels, descriptions, and statements to force their point of view, nor can I understand an account only caring in editing about two items for days when there’s so much that needs to be done. You could have used that time to check on items with similar characteristics in order to learn how Wikidata works, and help the project there on. But no, let’s keep wasting time. Here a few examples: parasite (Q10253316)/parasitism (Q186517), predator (Q29017578)/predation (Q170430), racist (Q28528178)/racism (Q8461), etc. And now, please, for the second time, stop with the harassment. --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 14:23, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
You turn things around, it is you who is being rude. First of all, you reverted my merge without any explanation. I start a discussion with a proper question. You answer with a request to me to read the description, which I did. On this point we disagree to what it actually says. I try to enter in to discussion on content, but you fail for days to answer. When you do, you keep talking about labels that are supposedly different, but do not specify where exactly the problem lies. The only thing you mention content-wise is:
Is polyploidy the same word as polyploid? One refers to a cell or organism, the other to the chromosomal constitution of a cell or organism.
That is a ridiculous statement to justify reverting me. It would be the same argument to push for two separate articles on grease and greasy because according to you, a greasy cell and a cell that has grease on it, would need to be distinguished. If there is a new policy where we write separate articles on adjectives and nouns, please show me the link. Otherwise, just be big enough to admit you made a mistake.
For your reading pleasure, see polyploidy on Britannica and polyploidy on Nature.
Even if you are right on the status here on Wikidata, you are wrong on the status on the Wikipedia's. This follows easily from the English Wikipedia, which I hope you read by this time:
Polyploid cells and organisms are those containing more than two paired (homologous) sets of chromosomes. Most species whose cells have nuclei (eukaryotes) are diploid, meaning they have two sets of chromosomes—one set inherited from each parent. However, polyploidy is found in some organisms and is especially common in plants.
I don't mind leaving Q44445817 where it is, but the interwiki's should all be in the same place. BoH (talk) 14:43, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
Additionally, indeed you are right that parasite and parasitism should be separate items. As could be polyploidy and polyploid organisms. However, that is not at issue here. The articles on both polyploidy (Q213410) and polyploid (Q44445817) discuss both the phenomenon and the organisms that have the phenomenon. So unless someone writes en:Polyploid organisms, there is no reason for separation. BoH (talk) 15:22, 4 August 2018 (UTC)
It seems you are back to the silent treatment again. By now I think it is fair to say that communication is not one of your strong points. I hope you do understand that is not the way how disagreements are solved. Rather disappointing to have a moderator who can't substantiate his actions, instead regressing to simple reversions. Given your unwillingness to enter into a meaningfull dialogue, I will see where I can find others to shed their light on this, actually rather simple, situation. BoH (talk) 20:53, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

A discussion is ongoing at Wikidata:Project chat#polyploidy / polyploid. BoH (talk) 12:31, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Atención Primaria de Salud[edit]


¿Por qué has revertido las ediciones de atención primaria de salud y atención primaria? Un cordial saludo:--Raimundo Pastor (talk) 18:34, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

WD:L, WD:D Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 18:44, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


Hi, In french is

and is

Someone made a mistake. Can you please help me fix it ? Best regards. --0I23A567B (talk) 18:54, 31 July 2018 (UTC)


Hola, una consulta, ¿cuál es el motivo de esta reversión? El departamento de Chile es una división administrativa que fue suprimida en los 70 con el proceso de regionalización, creándose las regiones y las provincias, actual subdivisión administrativa. La misma duda tengo de esto. Saludos--Luccnoir (talk) 04:47, 4 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018[edit]

Reading the articles, I saw that they were at odds, the comic book article on Wikipedia in English is wider, since the Spanish article refers only to American comics. Hyju (talk) 14:11, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

The same goes for the other languages Hyju (talk) 14:12, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

That is incorrect. es:Comic book refers to a publication format, and there’s a specific article for American comics, which is es:Historieta en los Estados Unidos. And please don’t ever delete a sitelink unless you plan to add it to another item. --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 14:17, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

Yes, but the English article talks about other formats, I think es:Revista de historietas are a bit wider, the same for other languages I changed.I was going to link this hispanic article and the francophone together, taking the comic book article. Hyju (talk) 14:20, 6 August 2018 (UTC)



Please see Talk:Q1114502 and Talk:Q1760610. There was big incoherencies in those pages. Kokonino (talk) 19:51, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

PS: I checked every article before doing my changes.

Hi, could you answer to what I wrote on talk pages before reverting? Kokonino (talk) 20:07, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
The problem is not the separatiion of items, but which sitelinks belong with wich. I found several mistakes in your moves, that is why I undid the changes. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:10, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Please let me finish (in 10 minutes), then explain to me what I did wrong so that we can correct the wrong changes. Kokonino (talk) 20:11, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Keep in mind that you should not completely change an item that is being used as statement on hundred of other items, unless you are absolutely sure. Fixing such mistakes is incredibly difficult. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:15, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
Of course. Could you tell me if you agree theoretically on the division I stated on Talk:Q1760610, how you would better it, and how many time can you give me for me to check everything? Kokonino (talk) 20:19, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm done. What pages do you see on comics anthology (Q867242) which don't refer to articles about periodicals containing comics in general, and not specifically the standard American comic book format? (I used Google Translate for non-European languages). Kokonino (talk) 20:27, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I've just told you some sitelinks did not belong together with others and to not change the meaning of items that are used as statements in hundreds of other items, and you still went ahead and merge them. Please stop. --Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:31, 8 August 2018 (UTC)
I mean it, please do not do anything else. It is going to take some time to fix it all. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 20:32, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

I have obviously been too eager to better a mess without thinking I could be creating a bigger one... Sorry for this, I had became too used to doing things on Wikidata without anyone commenting it. I won't intervene anymore on general articles about comics here in the next few days; and then won't do it without having talked about it and reached a consensus.

That said there still is a problem about the fact that comic book (Q1760610) is extremely vague and incoherent: I understand it should be about a format (the standard developed in the US in the 30s and used in other places), not about any periodicals containing comics (what en:comic book is about, and also most articles in other languages so this revert doesn't seem convincing to me), nor about any publication containing comics (what simple:comic book is about). This problem will need to be sorted.


  1. comic magazine (Q3185361) and comics anthology (Q867242) are two items about the same thing, periodicals containing comics (es:Libro de historietas and es:Revista de historietas should be merged on, why unmerge them?
  2. why deleting no label (Q56026891)? en:American comic book and fr:Comic book are about the same subject: the comic book format in the US.
  3. both アンソロジ and 앤솔러지 are phonetical transcription of « anthology » so why reverting them from no label (Q56027103) ?

I understand I have acted too unilateraly before doing such huge modifications; is there any other places than the talk pages of Wikidata items and your talk page to discuss all this? Like a Wikidata equivalent of WikiProject Comics (Q11306264)? Kokonino (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2018 (UTC)

Sorry, I had to deal with some real-life stuff yesterday. I agree with you, those items need to be sorted out, and I also agree with most of your classification. The problem that remains is how to deal with the sitelinks. The first step is to determine what is the subject of each Wikipedia article, but the second step is as important as the first: to check in which way those items are currently being used (as statements on hundreds of other items). That is why is not the best idea to just merge two items which are intensively used, before sorting this out. So, no rush. And why not? Ask for some feedback on the Project Chat or maybe Wikidata:WikiProject Periodicals. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 14:26, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer. I understand better my mistakes from yesterday. Some of my mess is still here as you nicely didn't revert everything. To take a fresh start, comic book (Q1760610) should first be reverted to its 6 August 2018 version ([3]); and no label (Q56027103) merged back into comics anthology (Q867242) (I know understand my creation of no label (Q56027103) to be unnecessary). I'm posting a long message on Talk:Q1760610 to explain what I did and what I aim to do. But I prefer not to do the reverts to the previous situation myself for now, please see if it pleases you to do so. Kokonino (talk) 16:07, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
Everything should be settled now. I'll let you know by pinging you when I start the discussion about how to better comic book (Q1760610) without creating havoc. Kokonino (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I am Brazilian and editor in Wikipedia in Portuguese, editing on comics and I saw that comic book article had changed in Wikipedia in English, so I decided to change, in Spanish it still has no label (Q5792893). Hyju (talk) 21:38, 12 August 2018 (UTC)

According to me, no label (Q5792893) is a specific subgenre of comic magazine (Q3185361). Kokonino (talk) 10:22, 14 August 2018 (UTC)


The interwiki in the Hebrew wikipedia is wrong. It should lead to Q7112808 (EN:phonograph), but instead it leads to a subclass, gramophone. Please mend the situation. TIA, אילן שמעוני (talk) 22:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

What are you talking about? he:פונוגרף is contained in phonograph (Q116434), and he:פטיפון in gramophone (Q7112808). Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 22:17, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
I'm talking about HE:פטיפון, take a look at the article if you must. HE:פטיפון is about turntable record player, just as EN:phonograph אילן שמעוני (talk) 08:22, 10 August 2018 (UTC)
You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, huh? Never mind, I'll transfer this issue to someone with better judgement. אילן שמעוני (talk) 15:12, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Give your feedback about changes to Special:Block[edit]


You are receiving this message because you are a top user of Special:Block on this wiki. Thank you for the important work that you do. There is a discussion happening about plans to improve Special:Block with the ability to set new types of blocks. To get the best design and new functions added, it is essential that people who use the tool join the discussion and share their opinions about these changes.

Instead of a full site wide block, you would be able to set a Partial Block. A user could be blocked from a single page, multiple pages, one or more namespaces, from uploading files, etc. There are several different ways to add this feature to Special:Block. Right now Important decisions are being made about the design and function.

Please review the page on Meta and share your feedback on the discussion page. Or you can reach me by email Also, share this message with anyone else who might be interested in participating in the discussion.

I appreciate any time that you can give to assist with making improvements to this feature. Cheers, SPoore (WMF) (talk) , Trust and Safety Specialist, Community health initiative (talk) 01:59, 10 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Apologizes for posting in English.

Ediciones deshechas[edit]

No las critico pero si me gustaría que en adelante dejaras un pequeño mensaje que justifique el motivo de las mismas. Un saludo. Triplecaña (talk) 08:03, 13 August 2018 (UTC)


¡Gracias por la bienvenida! ya te estaré hostigando con consultas Wikidateras, un abrazo!--Caleidoscopic (talk) 02:20, 18 August 2018 (UTC)