User talk:Andreasmperu/2019/2013-2015

Welcome to Wikidata, Andreasmperu/2019!

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! Si tienes dudas puedes dejarme un mensajito o bien usar el Wikidata:Café, con gusto responderemos. LadyInGrey (talk) 22:10, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Antiquarian

Hi. I have just removed 6 wikilinks linking to en:Antiquarian; you promptly reverted. My actions were not vandalism: I removed these links because they were incorrect. The word "antiquarian" has a particular meaning in English, which is a specific type of historical scholar. The equivalent word in many (or most) other European languages has changed, to mean a dealer in old books (or sometimes a dealer in antique objects). This linguistic distinction is noted at en:Antiquarian, fr:Antiquaire, and briefly at nl:Antiquaar. The 6 articles I delinked are all on the old book trade: the links are not appropriate. This is my first venture into Wikidata, and I may not have been following the correct procedure, but I was attempting to follow the advice at en:wp:wdata. Please advise. GrindtXX (talk) 21:06, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

Categorías

Hola, ¿puedes pasarte por esta discusión? Me interesaría conocer la opinión de los usuarios más activos. --Kizar (talk) 16:50, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

removal

Hi, I removed "es:Etapa de potencia" from amplification (totally wrong, belongs to rhetorics). When trying to add it to an adequate term I failed (you had done it meanwhile ...). Best regards --Jkbw (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Hey Adrea, I removed the "fr:Match on Card" from Multi-factor authentication, I guess you didnt read the article en french : the english page and the French one are NOT about the same thing, the links has to be removed. I understand you care about the removals but please check what you're doing. There is currently no page in English about Match on Card. And there is no french page about "Multi-factor authentication"... the closest french page would be "Authentification forte" but its already linked to the corresponding english page: "Strong authentication". Please listen and use your "older user" authority to fix the nonsense links. I just hope I wont have to justify that much all my contributions with people actually not checking their reverts... Thanks in advance.--Bikepunk2 (talk) 12:34, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

DiffFixer

The known bug of diff pages is now solved, you can remove "User:Ricordisamoa/DiffFixer.js" from User:Andreasmperu/common.js.

Thanks! --Ricordisamoa 05:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Brussels

• DE: Bitte achten Sie auf den Unterschied zwischen Artikeln zur Stadt Brüssel, zur Region Brüssel-Hauptstadt und zu Brüssel im Allgemeinen.
• EN: Please distinguish articles about the City of Brussels, the Brussels-Capital Region and Brussels in general.
• FR: Distinguez s'il vous plaît les articles sur la Ville de Bruxelles, la Région de Bruxelles-Capitale et Bruxelles en général.
• IT: Distinguere le voci che riguardano la Città di Bruxelles, la Regione di Bruxelles-Capitale e Bruxelles in generale.

--Monsieurbecker (talk) 06:24, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

Reuniones IRC sobre Wikidata

Hemos planteado una reunión para el próximo jueves en la que trataremos temas de Wikidata. Nos gustaría que asistiera la máxima gente posible. Más información aquí. --Kizar (talk) 14:03, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts#Circle/Kreis

Explain your actions there↑. Admit that en:Circumference ≠ be:Акружнасць, absolutely. Infovarius (talk) 18:11, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

¡Gracias!

¡Gracias por el aviso! Ahora arreglo todo. -- GRuellan  ^¿Hmm? 22:04, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

KLBot2

Ya estoy haciendo los cambios propuestos: [1] [2] [3]. --Kizar (talk) 20:33, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

No se si es porque la descripción en ruso es demasiado larga, que lo es, o por el filtro que tienen activado para las reglas del plural en ruso. En todo caso yo no se ruso y no puedo cambiar esa descripción. Ya me ha pasado alguna vez en otros elementos, habría que abrir un bug en bugzilla diciendo que los elementos que se crearon antes de aplicar el filtro están bloqueados. --Kizar (talk) 08:40, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Unas preguntas

Hola Andreasmperu, ¿qué tal? Como los dos estamos con traducciones (eres administradora de traducciones, ¿no?) te quería preguntar un par de cosillas. Primero, he visto que parece que el espacio de nombres no se puede traducir, lo que no me parece adecuado y no ayuda a la gente que viene desde los proyectos .es; ¿sabes si va a quedarse así? Segundo, he visto que traduces "Interlanguage" por "interlengua", y yo lo he hecho por "interlingüistico" básicamente porque era el término que siempre he visto en es.wikipedia. Sin saber mucho de esto "Interlengua" tiene otro significado: es:Interlengua. Y tercero, ¿hay alguna página de coordinación de las traducciones?, para poder discutir cosas como la de mi primera pregunta o similares. Un cordial saludo. --Erfil (talk) 11:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Muchas gracias por las respuestas. Con lo de administradora de traducciones me equivoque con los registros de revisión de traducciones :). Sobre lo de interlengua/interlingüistico, veo que en Help:Sitelinks ponen como sinónimo de "sitelink" a "interlanguage link" y en :en tienen en:Help:Interlanguage links cuyo equivalente en español es es:Ayuda:Enlaces interlingüsticos. No veo lo de que enlace de sitio, enlace interwiki, y enlace interlingüistico no sean sinónimos, su función es la misma y solo ha variado donde se almacenan. Un saludo. --Erfil (talk) 12:03, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Buen trabajo y gracias, me parece que ahora queda más claro, y podemos ir asentando el uso correcto de estos términos. --Erfil (talk) 18:20, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Grande

Gracias por acabar con la traducción del glosario :-) Salutes, Farisori » 15:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hola de nuevo (gracias por la bienvenida :)) "string" se traduce como "cadena de caracteres" (es básicamente cualquier conjunto de letras o símbolos del teclado). Las otras dos, ni idea. Saludos, Farisori » 17:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Sysop

Hey Andrea. Un placer al fin comentar en tu página de discusión. Te he visto por todos lados y estoy impresioado por el esfuerzo que has dedicado a Wikidata. Por ello, creo que te serian muy util los botones de administrador, y pues aquí estoy, preguntando si estarías interesada en aceptar una humilde nominación de tu compañero wikidatista :P — ΛΧΣ²¹ 05:52, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Gracias por aceptar. Contigo ya seremos dos los hispanohablantes con permisos de administrador :) Ya correré a preparar la candidatura mientras estas online. — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:02, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Listo: Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Andreasmperu. Solo debes aceptar y luego transcluir. Te deseo mucha suerte :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Ya lo he transcluído. Nos hablamos mañana :) — ΛΧΣ²¹ 06:39, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Wikidata:Flooders

Hola Andreasmperu,

Estás recibiendo esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de Wikidata en español y francés.

La página Wikidata:Flooders está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:

• traducir al español
• traducir al francés

La prioridad de esta página es media. La fecha límite para la traducción de esta página es 2013-05-12.

Please translate the new policy affecting the new "flood" user group.

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

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikidata‎, 14:57, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Vandal warnings

I notice that you just warned the link-removing vandal. Is there is a page listing all the warnings? If there is, I have not been able to find it yet. Regards, AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

They are all categorized here. But you could also add the script Wikidata:Tools#userwarn.js into your common.js. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 15:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I will have to take a look at those scripts. AutomaticStrikeout (talk) 15:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Importar declaraciones desde infoboxes

Estamos trabajando con infoboxes porque es lo más cómodo. Mi bot también está trabajando con categorías, por ejemplo para añadir los países. No existe ninguna limitación que impida sacar propiedades del contenido del artículo, pero es complicado porque no suelen tener todos el mismo formato. Si se te ocurre algún caso que sea necesario dímelo y lo estudio. --Kizar (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Aquí tienes 3 listas [4]. La primera sin infobox ni interwikis, la segunda sin infobox, la tercera sin interwikis. Es importante añadir la plantilla infobox a las que no lo tienen porque es necesaria para mostrar los datos de Wikidata. No se si es conveniente crearlas con los datos actuales de momento o esperar a que la plantilla tome los datos de Wikidata. --Kizar (talk) 13:59, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

No es muy complejo. Dentro de las funciones que utilizamos para los bots hay una que te permite hacer listas de artículos que cumplen unos criterios, por ejemplo, los que están en tal categoría o los que tienen tal plantilla. Es hacer una lista de los artículos de la categoría XXX sin la plantilla y otra lista con los artículos de la categoría XXX sin interwikis y se comparan las dos listas y se sacan los que están en las dos. Puedo hacer más listas sin problema pero si se va a trabajar sobre ellas. He hecho listas muchas veces y al final la gente lo coge con fuerza el primer día y luego lo deja abandonado. Véase [5] --Kizar (talk) 06:43, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Dutch

Hello,

can you translate your message in Dutch? My english is not Verry Good and i can't translate it.

Josse.Cottenier (talk) 16:51, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Muchas gracias por el mensaje de bienvenida

Lo agradezco sinceramente, y devoré las páginas de ayuda.

En verdad, tal vez sea mi falla por no manejar bien la terminología, a pesar del tesauro especializado que ya se ofrece, o bien por alguna otra razón, pero aún no puedo fusionar un artículo nuevo en un Wikidata existente. Hace unas semanas lo hacía sin dificultad, pero luego que cambiaron un poco las cosas, supongo para dar más seguridad a los procedimientos, yo ya no pude.

Comprendo que debo dar de baja una entrada antes de incluirla en otra WIKIDATA, pero no puedo hacerlo pues no logro visualizar la Wikidata, al menos cuando allí hay un solo elemento.

Y ese detalle me impide proceder con el procedimiento completo.

Bueno, o bien ya mejoraré yo, o bien los procedimientos de wikidata mejorarán.

VEREMOS !!

--AnselmiJuan (talk) 21:33, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Sysop

Se me había olvidado... Felicidades! :D — ΛΧΣ²¹ 02:37, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Mis aportes a las descripciones

Muchas gracias por informarme sobre los criterios para aportar en las descripciones. Veo que he cometido algunos errores, pero bueno, sólo había registrado una veintena de descripciones, y además, tengo la lista, así que podré repasarlas y corregir errores.

No entiendo uno de los ejemplos.

NO primera ministra del Reino Unido entre 1979 y 1990
SÍ primera ministra del Reino Unido

Parecería tan válida una descripción como la otra, aunque tal vez se quiera una categoría que dé acceso a muchas entradas, por ser genérica para que sea útil, o sea, que si se pone una descripción suficientemente larga como para que dé concepto pero que sea tan precisa que sólo identifique una entrada, entonces, seguro esa descripción no serviría.

Creo que mejor sería ponerle título DESCRIPCIÓN DE CATEGORÍA SUPERIOR PRINCIPAL, pues yo por ignorancia, la interpreté como DESCRIPCIÓN DE LA ENTRADA.

En caso de biografía de una persona que sea arquitecto y escritor, debería ponerse o arquitecto, o escritor, según lo que se dé más importancia en el artículo de Wikipedia, pero no poner ambas cosas, y supongo además se deberá indicar la nacionalidad o nacimiento de origen, según sea lo más importante en ese caso particular.

--AnselmiJuan (talk) 03:36, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Ah, ahora sí que se entiende lo de la descripción, y repaso lo que me parece fundamental: El largo adecuado de una descripción debe ubicarse entre las dos y las doce palabras, y la idea es que las descripciones sirvan para desambiguar elementos (o sea Q) que tengan la misma etiqueta, y que no brinden información que pueda variar con el tiempo o que pueda ser incluida en las declaraciones. --AnselmiJuan (talk) 20:52, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Una simple consulta

Me voy a referir a Q3050615 - Mundo multipolar.

Como descripción, cuál sería la más correcta :

• sistema internacional, en oposición al mundo bipolar de la guerra fría y al mundo unipolar en el que hay una sola nación que predomina.
• sistema internacional.
• sistema político internacional.
• otro (especificar)

--AnselmiJuan (talk) 04:48, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hecho .-

También estoy trabajando sobre Mundo bipolar, Mundo unipolar, etc, y naturalmente le pondré lo mismo.

--AnselmiJuan (talk) 14:35, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Spanish

Hi Andreasmperu, you translated two occupations:

• art historian -> historiador del arte
• media historian -> historiadora de los medios

Why the "a" is needed? Because "media" is plural? --Media watch (talk) 21:11, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Hi, as you can see here, I added "historiadora de los medios" as a Spanish alias for Q8175949, whose Spanish label still is "historiador de los medios". The "a" corresponds to the feminin equivalent of historian (in Spanish, "historiador" means male historian and "historiadora" means female historian). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:22, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

O.k. now I've got it! Thanks --Media watch (talk) 21:30, 6 May 2013 (UTC)

Pas de page utilisateur

Once again, please, take a look at the notability policy. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 19:51, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Bonjour, quel est votre problème ? Please, what is your problem ? --Jlvenet (talk) 14:30, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Je ne comprends pas bien l'anglais, excusez-moi. (Je vois que vous contribuez aussi en Français, peut-être pourrez-vous me répondre). Sur les pages utilisateurs de tous les contributeurs (menu de gauche), donc sur la mienne comme les autres, il est proposé de créer des liens et lorsque je crée des liens vous les supprimez. A ce que je crois comprendre, il ne faut pas créer de lien depuis sa page utilisateur puisqu'ils sont alors créés sur wikidata. Mais pleins de contributeurs en ont, j'ai regardé, et vous même sur votre page, vous en avez créé, donc ce n'est peut-être pas cela. Pour moi c'est un mystère. --Jlvenet (talk) 17:05, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Sans vouloir vous faire un faire un reproche car je me doute que vous avez tant à faire, si vous m'aviez fait savoir, dès le premier jour, comme il est d'usage et de courtoisie, que vous aviez supprimé ma page, je ne l' aurais pas recréée. En effet, j'ai cru que j'utilisais mal Wikidata et que mes modifications ne s'enregistraient pas ; j'ai demandé une aide sur Wikipedia, questions techniques, à ce sujet. Quant à ma dernière création de page, je suis allé préalablement voir votre page utilisateur, j'ai vu que vous aviez vous-même des liens depuis votre page utilisateur et j'ai pensé que c'est ma page utilisateur de Wikidata qui était en cause dans vos messages et non les liens entre les pages . j'ai d'ailleurs mis, suite à cela, ma page-utilisateur Wikidata identique à la votre. D'accord, j'aurais dû comprendre plus tôt mais je n'avais pas vu que l'on pouvait avoir le texte en français (c'est anglais qui était indiqué sur ma page) et ce soir je ne comprends toujours pas comment faire des liens depuis ma page utilisateur puisque si je clique sur "ajouter des liens", comme c'est proposé je retombe immédiatement sur le même problème Wikidata. Bon ce n'est pas grave, vu que je contribue à 99.99 % sur les pages en Français. Mais avouez quand même que ce n'est pas très limpide tout cela. Je vous souhaite une bonne soirée et surtout pardon pour tout le mal que je vous ai donné, je vous assure que ce n'est pas volontairement. Je ne mets plus aucun lien Wikidata, cela m'évitera les aneries, et voila, tout est OK. Bien Cordialement--Jlvenet (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2013 (UTC)

Circunferencias

A partir de tu aviso lo hemos discutido localmente y mis conclusiones es que se estan produdiendo falsos amigos. Lo que en catalán y en castellano español llamamos circunferencia corresponde a en:circle y fr:cercle Q17278, en cambio en:circumference y fr:circonférence Q843905 se refiere solo a la longitud de la circunferencia y por otro lado círculo en inglés es area of a circle Q4115331. Realmente un embrollo. En resumen, doy por bueno los cambios. --Vriullop (talk) 08:07, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

My edit to Concurrence item

Hello Andreasmperu,

I noticed you reverted my edit to the Concurrence item. The reason for my removing the link to the German item was that it is wrong ('Konkurrenz' is a wholly different legal concept) and that AFAIK there is no German article to link to Concurrence (and no English article to link to Konkurrenz either). Sincerely, Tschild (talk) 05:14, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

Buenas...

Andrea ¿cómo estás? Tras ver tu mensaje en mi discusión, sospeché que fue por esto. Resulta que el artículo en pt.wiki sobre el género botánico canaca, enlaza a la biografía de un personaje apodado canaca, lo cual, es error evidente. Ya que eres conocedora de wikidata, te encargo hacer la corrección pertinente. Besos, BetoCG (talk) 06:58, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Banking items

Thank for your remind, I know exactly what I do, all items are duplicated in Vietnamese Wikipedia. In this project, there are many bot-articles for genus and sepcies but it has not yet cleaned up and checked by human. Some genus has only one species, so I make redirect genus nom. to binomial name. That is the reason why I blank it. Base on the policy I have to propose for deletion at Wikidata:Requests for deletions, but I think some bots will check blank items. In addition, the requests for deletion page usually occurs conflict editing, I feel unfamiliar with it and where I summary the reason for removal. Regards.--Cheers! (talk) 04:22, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks.--Cheers! (talk) 04:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Contempt of cop language link

Hey, I recently removed a link to different languages on the English page Contempt of Cop, namely the dutch link to "Smaad", smaad means "Defamation" in English and has nothing to do with saying foul language to cops. I understand the automatic "new user; deleted a link; must be a mistake" but this wasn't a mistake. It's all fine, but now I'm banned for trying to help out. Can you please revisit your decision? Thanks. 77.168.207.87 20:30, 29 May 2013 (UTC)

boiler (Q3195517)

There is nothing about generating steam in en:Boiler – so what was your revert based on? Littledogboy (talk) 12:12, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

Please read carefully the link provided (or just the introduction): «The heated or vaporized fluid exits the boiler for use in various processes or heating applications» (vaporized fluid means steam). As for this element, you remove a valid sitelink without placing it anywhere else. es:Generador de vapor clearly belongs with it:Generatore di vapore, ca:Generador de vapor, no:Dampkjele, ro:Generator de abur. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 04:34, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

Re disambiguations: I was generally on the right track, although I thought things like Q11248337 may generally be acceptable. Thanks for pointing out the guidance to me. There may be other things I don't know – for example what is the reason behind this edit? Saludos Littledogboy (talk) 10:27, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I automatically updated the interwikis on that element, so I don't understand what happened. I'll do some research about the tool. Thanks for pointing me that out, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:08, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Re your other edits: es:Delito and en:Delict are false friends, take a good look. (From the English page: In civil law, a delict is an intentional or negligent act...) The correct match for es:Delito (accion sometida a derecho penal) is en:Crime/en:Offence. Saludos Littledogboy (talk) 23:51, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

See complete introduction of en:Delict. A "delito" is a delict or an offence, while a "crimen" (there is no article in eswiki) is a crime. There is no Spanish equivalent for felony. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:08, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

I'd render felony as delito grave. In English, there is no defined difference between a crime, an offence and a criminal offence (although there are, of course, nuances in usage). Delict is not an English legal term at all. Remember, Wikidata is not about words, it is about concepts. Littledogboy (talk) 01:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Notificación de traducción: Template:Recentchanges/text

Hola Andreasmperu,

Estás recibiendo esta notificación porque te inscribiste como traductor de Wikidata en español y francés.

La página Template:Recentchanges/text está disponible para su traducción. Puedes traducirla aquí:

• traducir al español
• traducir al francés

La prioridad de esta página es media. La fecha límite para la traducción de esta página es 2013-06-30.

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

Los coordinadores de traducción de Wikidata‎, 21:37, 8 June 2013 (UTC)

Lista de iw

No lo sé si hay más, supongo que sí. Estoy rehaciendo la lista de nuevo, cuando esté os aviso. --Kizar (talk) 08:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)

Saludos

Hola Andrea, gracias por la bienvenida. Solo quería decir al respecto que en Wikidata, a diferencia de Wikipedia, ésta no se sustituye. Como no se leía el mensaje que dejaste, tuve que corregirla. Te cuento que ya llevo un buen rato por aquí, incluso antes de empezar a editar, digamos que desde febrero de 2012 (cuando todavía el proyecto no estaba aprobado por la fundación). Enlacé a esas páginas para evitar que un bot descubra que hay páginas en blanco. En lugar de crear nuevas, cuando fusiono las marco para reutilizarlas luego. Antes no lo hacía, pero ¿para qué borrar una y luego tener que crear otra? Esa es una costumbre muy extendida en otras wikis, pero en la nuestra se está imponiendo la de reutilizar los elementos ya no usados (por ejemplo en los filtros de edición). En todo caso, eso es algo muy menor. Te agradezco que no hayas actuado por tu cuenta sin consultar primero y todavía disponga de los dos elementos que aún mantengo marcados. Y, ¡bienvenida a ti también! Saludos, --Metrónomo (talk) 00:24, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Q13219273 und Q187819

Du hast Q13219273 gelöscht und mit Q187819 vereinigt. Ich hatte zuvor die beiden Objekte aufgeteilt, denn unter Q187819 wird sowohl der Halbgeviertstrich (–) als auch der Geviertstrich (—) als Zeichen aufgeführt. So kann es nicht stehen bleiben, denn der Artikel de:Halbgeviertstrich beschreibt exakt nur das Zeichen –. --Fomafix (talk)

Yes, that was strange. Infovarius (talk) 16:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Vandalismo...

Andrea ¿cómo estás? Vengo a reportarte el siguiente vandalismo para las previsiones pertinentes. Un abrazo, BetoCG (talk) 05:29, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Y creo que esto debe ser suprimido. Saludos, BetoCG (talk) 05:39, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Sophistry

Dear Andrea, why do you edit Wikidata? Well you don't have to answer, but this is why I came here: I quite often use Wikipedias as a quick reference for how to talk about one and the same concept in different languages, and I often find that such connections (interwiki) are wrong or missing.

I know about the whole ontology idea, but do you realize that in some areas, such as law, the only way of achieving each item as a precisely defined thing would be to disconnect them all?

Now, look at sophist (Q3750514) and sophism (Q166955) – I don't want to ridicule you for this edit – the clean solution would be to have one item for sophist (person), one item for sophistry, their art, one for sophist school, one for what we mean today, when we say sophistry, one for the derogatory term and so on. Yet there is only one article on each Wikipedia. It is useful for reader and editors of Wikipedia that they are connected. What is your solution good for?

Regards Littledogboy (talk) 10:31, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

Sorry, but I prefer to avoid any discussion that favors personalizations at the expense of arguments. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:42, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Re: Páginas de usuario

Hola, he recibido tu mensaje pero no sé a que te refieres. Si revisas mis contribuciones verás que no he enlazado ni editado ninguna página de usuario, ni siquiera la mía propia. Un saludo, --AdelosRM (talk) 10:44, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Hola, por meter la pata, puedo haberla metido, pero, francamente, sigo sin saber lo que ha pasado. De todas formas, gracias por tu respuesta. Un saludo, --AdelosRM (talk) 20:17, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

Enlaces a páginas de usuario

Hola, me sorprendre que me eliminen los enlaces de wikidata a otras páginas de usuario de otras wikipedias... De hecho, he hecho lo que hacen otros usuarios. No es importante, pero me sorprendre. Saludos. --AlbertJB (talk) 08:44, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

De hecho, estoy revisando su página de usuario y también tiene enlaces wikidata a otras wikipedias :P ¿Supongo que es porque por cada página de usuario tiene cierto contenido que se admite como admisible como enlace wikidata? Soy nuevo en esto, acabo de leer las directrices de notabilidad y entiendo en cierta manera su comentario. Saludos. --AlbertJB (talk) 09:19, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

De acuerdo, Andreasmperu, gracias por la información, eso haré. Saludos. --AlbertJB (talk) 08:11, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Wikidata page Q14494658

Hola Andreasmperu,

I just noticed that you removed the data page for my user account. Could you please explain the reasons in more details? You also have a data page for your account and don't delete it. From your summary: "The only contributor was Stefan Weil". Isn't this quite normal for user pages?

Freundliche Grüße, --Stefan Weil (talk) 04:49, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Instead of data pages, interwiki links can be included directly within every user page. That solved my problem. Thank you, Andrea, for your explanation. --Stefan Weil (talk) 04:34, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Dalet

Hi, what's the difference between ד (Q11862709) and ד (Q15080)? At least English and Finnish articles are about the same thing, so maybe more like an interwiki conflict then? --Stryn (talk) 09:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

Hi, ד (Q11862709) is about the letter used in many Semitic languages and ד (Q15080) is about the letter used specifically in the Hebrew alphabet. This issue was already discussed somewhere, but it slipped my mind where exactly. Some Wikipedias, for instance eswiki, has opted for creating one article for each letter of a given alphabet. On the other hand, enwiki prefers to stick with only one article for a letter used in several alphabets. For example, ד (Q11862709) encompasses ד (Q15080), 𐤃 (Q12221446), ܕ (Q3045592) and د (Q173090). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 11:56, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

re:User Pages Links

Hello , I’m sorry but I didn’t understood what you meant.. --Almoullim (talk) 01:05, 8 August 2013 (UTC)

Question

What's wrong with my editions? Żyrafał (talk) 12:46, 10 August 2013 (UTC)

sorry

Sorry about creating not notable links, didn't have any idea userpages in different languages shouldn't be connected. Thanks for letting me know, cheers! --188.86.182.55 06:04, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

Need help

Hi, you left a message on my talk page. Please help me Understand what was wrong with my edits. Regards. -Asifmuktadir (talk) 16:16, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

About my editings

Hello Andreasmperu,
Thank you for your welcoming :)
Indeed, I tried to manage some links (especially hip-hop, as I supposed you came to me for), but I had several times the same problem : when I want to add some, it says it doesn't work and I should try again (over and over again)...
So maybe I should try again soon, but be sure that my work was done with a good intention, as the French article wasn't pointing to the right other languages article (the French one was a magazine, not an article about hip-hop as a music/culture).
Regards, --Daehan (talk) 08:29, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Re:User pages links

I'm not vandalizing Wikidata. What's wrong in links to my user page? All person have it, so why I can't? Żyrafał (talk) 16:39, 28 August 2013 (UTC) But it's not vandalism. Żyrafał (talk) 20:00, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Eliminar...

Andrea, un gusto saludarte. Te aviso que esto debe suprimirse debido a que existe otro igual. Saludos, BetoCG (talk) 18:49, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Mensaje

Recebí su mensaje, pero no sé que puedo haber hecho mal. Podrías decirmelo? Dantadd (talk) 22:08, 5 September 2013 (UTC)

Bueno, eliminé el enlace porque el artículo en portugués no tiene contenido equivalente en las otras lenguas. En el caso específico, en portugués el artículo es "Procuradoria-Geral da República", que no es en absoluto la misma cosa que "Ministério Público". A ver si en estos días puedo solucionar la cuestión ajustando los artículos en portugués. Dantadd (talk) 13:04, 7 September 2013 (UTC)

Interwiki-Konflikt um science (Q336)

Warum hast du die Lösung des Konflikts rückgängig gemacht? --Hokanomono (talk) 00:51, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Es war keine befriedigend oder vollständige Lösung. In anderen Worten, Ihre Änderungen verursachen mehr Probleme als Vorteile. Seien Sie bitte vorsichtiger das nächste Mal, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:33, 18 December 2013 (UTC)

Little favour

Is it possible to remove all items from here (except links to Croatian, Slovenian and Serbian wikipedia) and move it to new Wikidata item? Croatian, Slovenian, and Serbian Wikipedia articles have nothing to do with the rest of Wikipedia articles in other languages. M84 NORA and 152 mm towed gun-howitzer M1955 (D-20) are not the same artillery guns.--MaGa 16:06, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

legal proceeding (Q8222382)

Hallo Andreas, Deine Beschreibung evaluación de evidencia antes de un juicio erscheint mir zu speziell. Gruß--Oursana (talk) 20:48, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Pregunta

Hola, Andrea. Quisiera saber cómo agregar descripción a los items. Muchas gracias. --Laberinto16 (talk) 01:32, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

Use of rollback

Use of rollback is explicitly restricted to reverting obvious vandalism. Please do not revert good faith edits by using it. --Izno (talk) 04:33, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

Then, probably you should not do it. Obviously, I have made a mistake. If you would have assumed good faith, then you could just pointed that out to me and I would have fixed it. But no, you decided to unconstructively accuse me of wrongdoing. Unfortunately, I have no time to fix your edit where you just deleted a whole bunch of correct information because of my use of a wrong button. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:40, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Reverted edit

Re this edit - I'm not aware of any discussion about linking from entities to Wikipedia user pages, nor about the specific statement in question; please either provide a link to the one which you referenced in your edit summary; or otherwise restore what appears to be a valid statement. Or were your referring to the removal of the comma between the two words in the en-GB label, which you should also restore? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:13, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll take absence of a response, once you've edited again, as agreement that I should revert you. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:30, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

Louis Tomlinson (Q10745343)

Dear Andreasmperu,
I've added again the statement "football player" to the item on Louis Tomlinson. en:Louis Tomlinson#Football career or es:Louis Tomlinson#Carrera futbolística describe his career as professional football player in the club Doncaster Rovers. In both Wikipedia versions he is also categorizes as "football player". -- Pütz M. (talk) 16:07, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Why are you reverted my edits?

I removed interwikis, which are redirects.

• es:UTC +2 is redirect to es:Huso horario;
• es:Calabaza pumpkin is redirect to es:Calabazas, calabacines, zapallos, zapallitos y nombres afines
• es:Clasificación biológica is redirect to es:Taxonomía
• es:Crimen is redirect to es:Delito

--Treisijs (talk) 07:27, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

nuclear physicist (Q16742096)

Hi! Sorry for the edit conflict. I try to keep the English label according to en.Wikipedia and the German label according to GND names as can be seen at http://d-nb.info/gnd/4003424-0 . Regards לערי ריינהארט (talk) 23:10, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

P.S. I created dozens of scientist subclasses in the past. There are no FreeBase items avaiable for these items. Do you know some contributors or a place where to ask (WMF contributors) for help? What about BNCF, NDL, etc. identifiers?

The aliases need to be made unique. If new labels are added, the aliases need to be removed from the field of occupation for that language. Some languages are using two gender variants: one for the label and the other as alias.

Do you now a place to list new items and ask for translations?

Regards gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 23:24, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Hi, there! As for the first point, enwiki uses the term nuclear physicist (the same goes for simplewiki), and the translation for the GND name "Atomphysiker" is also "nuclear physicist". Are you referring to the term used in Commons:Category:Nuclear scientists? Because "scientist" seems to be broader than just "physicist". Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 23:59, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

As for the second part, I only know this page (probably outdated now), but it contains occupations in general. I am more than willing to help out, and you could also contact the other users that edited the aforementioned page. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:10, 2 May 2014 (UTC)

Category user fi

Why do you add nonsense to http://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Category:User_fi ? 199.190.45.157 18:44, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Etiquetas de los anexos

Muy buenas, Andreasmperu. ¿Qué tal estás? Me pregunto si podrías pasarte por este hilo. Un saludo y gracias de antemano; Rubpe19 (talk) 15:49, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Linux and GNU/Linux in Latvian

Article about GNU/Linux in Latvian Wikipedia is same as article about Linux in English Wikipedia. --Treisijs (talk) 05:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)

Educationists / Educators

Good morning, why did You reverted my edit ? Educationists are educational theoreticians, while all other categories are about people involved in the practice of education. --Kelovy (talk) 04:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I reverted your edits because they were wrong and eliminated a sitelink without adding it into another item. Category:Educators (Q7014389) refers to people involved in the practice of education, while Q10257749 refers to people involved in the theory of education. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 14:49, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

I simply could not add Polish Educationsts to any other language, because there is no such category... Even on English wiki this unique category contains only 4 articles. All connected languages are about Educators... --Kelovy (talk) 18:47, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Difference between sibling group (Q16979650) and sibling (Q31184)

Hi, I noticed you have created sibling group (Q16979650). What is special about it? I don't see any difference with Special:WhatLinksHere. --Lockal (talk) 10:59, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

That is because it was wrongly merged. I have fixed that, and added more statements to both items. I hope this clarifies the difference and the relationship between both of them. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 14:51, 27 June 2014 (UTC)

Message from Leanex77

Thanks for letting me know about the mistake. It will not happen again... My respects --Leanex77 (talk) 22:33, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Pregunta

Hola, me gustaría participar en Wikidata y me preguntaba si me podías decir cómo funciona, o enlaces de ayuda que sirvan. Gracias. Laberinto16 (talk) 02:30, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Q16402906

Please use redirect instead of actual deletion. Infovarius (talk) 09:37, 6 September 2014 (UTC)

Una simple consulta

Recurro a ti pues fuiste tú uno de los primeros en señalarme cosas en relación al proyecto Wikidata.

Hoy estuve repasando de nuevo los instructivos y recomendaciones respecto de Wikidata y de los interwikis, y lamentablemente creo observar que muchos documentos están mal traducidos, lo que obviamente ha dificultado un poco mi comprensión. Y lamentablemente mi inglés no es tan fluido como para leer documentos largos en ese idioma.

Hace ya varios meses que trato de colaborar con el proyecto Wikidata, a pesar de mi falta de conocimientos y de experiencia, pues creo es un proyecto muy importante. Y en verdad creo haber descubierto que posiblemente hacía algunas cosas bien y otras mal. Humildemente pido disculpas por los posibles errores cometidos, pues en mi intento por colaborar, por ahí también he introducido errores.

Pero en un intento de mejorar mi formación, te pido concretamente, si tienes tiempo, que mires en detalle las siguientes dos entradas, en las que recientemente he hecho aportes, posiblemente corrigiendo las cosas que en líneas generales antes hacía mal o al menos con algunas falencias.

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q6943609#sitelinks-wikipedia

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5151495#sitelinks-wikipedia

Si observas algo equivocado o que puede mejorarse allí, por favor, me lo señalas.

Gracias anticipaamente por tu posible respuesta.

--AnselmiJuan (talk) 16:54, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

museologist museologist (Q17145081)

Hi Andreasmperu, I really doubt if this qualifier fulfills Wikidata:Notability, sufficient is the use of occupation (P106) with qualifier director director / manager (P1037)director (Q1162163) with qualifier or position held (P39). Regards --Oursana (talk) 11:36, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

it.wiki Architetture VS Architettura

Hola, te aviso que he acabo de restablecer mis versiones en algunos elementos relacionados a Architetture y Architettura. Mira que las categorías de it.wiki Architetture (plural) son para los edificios y las estructuras, mientras las categorías Architettura (singular) se refieren a la arquitectura como disciplina. Saludos, Ary29 (talk) 08:01, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Item

Hola Andreasmperu, siempre veo item que tiene solo un nombre o una breve descripción, pero nada más, pero al tener eso, técnicamente no están "vacíos", para esos item puedo solicitar que los borren o no? y sí la respuesta es sí, serían considerados item vacíos o que no cumplen con la notabilidad? --Matiia (talk) 02:34, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Hola, Matiia. Dado que no me proporcionas ejemplo alguno, no puedo entender a qué te refieres exactamente. Puedes revisar aquí la política de relevancia. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:44, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Cierto cierto, me olvide de un ejemplo del caso jeje. Por ejemplo este que acabo de solicitar que borren o este otro, ya que recuerdo que una ves BeneBot* señalo que aun estaba en uso, pero ya no recuerdo el por qué. --Matiia (talk) 03:00, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Ambos elementos requerían ser borrados, efectivamente. Antes de nominar un elemento a ser borrado, es buena idea verificar si es que se encuentra enlazado a otro elemento. Para ello, puedes usar la herramienta "lo que enlaza aquí" que se encuentra en la barra izquierda. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 18:55, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Maker vs making

Please give me an advice which class is better for hatmaking (Q663375) and how can we link it to hatter (Q1639239)? @Cycn, Izno, Filceolaire, Micru:, what do you think? --Infovarius (talk) 04:03, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Property:P425 is used to link hatter (Q1639239) to hatmaking (Q663375), that's fine. So if you want a link in the other direction you may want to check other uses of P425 and check how their targets link back. If none does, there may be need of a new propery to enable this. - cycŋ - (talk • contribs • logs) 07:57, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

roll backs

Two things.. Diplomat is an occupation, ambassador is a position. Mrs Blum is a journalist.. So why revert adding diplomat, you should remove the ambassador as an occupation. GerardM (talk) 06:32, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Ambassador is a government occupation, and a specific type of diplomatic (thus, it is more precise to use ambassador than diplomatic). If you think it is a position and not an occupation, you would need some references to back that claim. Unfortunately, it is not the first time that I encountered claims added by you which are either redundant or imprecise. Even though, you have been aware of that, you have decided not to correct them. Unfortunately, there are several complains in the Administrator's noticeboard regarding your mass edits. Then, I can see a pattern of disregarding other people's work and not acknowledging your own mistakes. This is a collaborative project, so I change of attitude seems to be the only way to go from now on. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 18:45, 30 January 2015 (UTC)

Duda

¡Hola! Recurro a usted por su calidad de hispanohablante y administradora. Tengo una pequeña duda. Cuando un elemento está descrito en un "diccionario" o "enciclopedia" existe la propiedad "descrito por" (P1343). Sin embargo cuando queremos relacionar un Q de una persona, digamos «X», con un artículo en una revista científica, digamos «Y», ¿sirve también esta propiedad P1343? ¿O se deja supeditado a incluir en el elemento del artículo «Y» la propiedad "tema principal de la obra" (P921) -> persona «X»? Espero no haberme liado. ¡Un saludo! Strakhov (talk) 19:42, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

@Strakhov: Hola! No entiendo a qué se refiere con relacionar una persona con un artículo de una revista. ¿Qué tipo de relación exactamente? En casos como este, lo mejor es emplear ejemplos concretos (qué persona y qué artículo), dado que estas dudas suelen surgir en situaciones prácticas. Mientras tanto, he traducido la descripción de P1343 en Property talk:P1343. Saludos, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 23:33, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Me lo temía, fui demasiado abstracto. :( Concreto. Basilio Álvarez: "una sotana casi rebelde" es un artículo biográfico de 27 páginas publicado en la revista Espacio, tiempo y forma. Serie V, Historia contemporánea. Su temática fundamental es la persona de Basilio Álvarez, un conocido agitador agrario de comienzos de siglo. ¿Es apropiado usar en este caso la propiedad P1343 en el Q de Basilio (ya la tiene puesta) o existe una más específica para artículos en revistas? (puesto que «Basilio Álvarez: "una sotana casi rebelde» no es ni un diccionario ni una enciclopedia) ¡Saludos! Strakhov (talk) 01:01, 11 February 2015 (UTC)

@Strakhov: He retirado esa afirmación por no tratarse de una enciclopedia o diccionario (de ampliar esta propiedad a todo texto, la cantidad de artículos académicos sobre la biografía de personajes más famosas sería interminable). En estos casos, basta con usar la propiedad main subject (P921) en la obra. Saludos, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 15:50, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

Gracias, sólo me han quedado dudas con esta edición. Aparte de "periodista" (dirigir periódicos, colaborar en publicaciones periódicas con artículos de opinión, etc) este señor también publicó algún librito de cuentos, además de otras obras más "literarias". Saludos, Strakhov (talk) 17:41, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

@Strakhov: Como puedes ver, journalist (Q1930187) es una subclase de non-fiction writer (Q18931655) que, a su vez, es una subclase de writer (Q36180). Antes que añadir una declaración tan general como "escritor", es buena idea usar ocupaciones más específicas como, por ejemplo, short story writer (Q15949613) o columnist (Q1086863). Saludos, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:28, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Hi Andreasmperu,

I am sorry that I carelessly deleted a edge from wikidata. Since I am just getting started on access wikidata via pywikibot, it's possible that I might make some "dangerous" operations without realization. Can you help me to recover it? Thank you very much.

razhangwei

Removing links

Why can't I just remove a link from an item if it is wrong? "Radical center" points to "Extremismus der Mitte" in the German Wikipedia, but these are completely different things. They have nothing to do with each other. Thank you! --Anubixx (talk) 09:20, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Proposal

Hi Andreas, as you edit some of the related items (Q5094009), I was wondering if you would consider voting on Wikidata:Property_proposal/Person#hair_color. It's a bit peculiar as a property, but I think it might still be worth it. --- Jura 17:26, 11 March 2015 (UTC)

Monumentos de Venecia

Hola, no tiene mucha importancia, pero casi todos los wikienlaces de los distintos idiomas, salvo fr, hacen referencias a edificios, edificaciones o construcciones. En Italia no existe la categoría de monumentos como bienes patrimoniales, y la consideración de monumentos como edificios singulares es más que subjetiva. Además, casi todos los países de la wiki española están organizándose de manera semejante a buildings and structures, para evitar confusiones con categorías arquitectónicas o monumentales. Lo dejo a tu criterio. Un cordial saludo.--Urdangaray (talk) 18:24, 29 March 2015 (UTC)

body modification (Q890057)

Hi, I don't really understand why plastic surgery (Q182442) would not fit into the definition of a body modification (Q890057). —Wylve (talk) 16:16, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry

Hi Andreasmperu ! I want to apologize for my last edits. Sorry for the confusion genium ⟨✉⟩ 10:40, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

Children's literature

Hello, I see you have reverted my edits here: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q131539&oldid=211722049&diff=prev

This makes no sense. "childrens literature" is bad English, and grammatically incorrect due to the lack of an apostrophe. Also, the alias "juvenile literature" comes from the English Wikipedia article, and would appear to be correct.

What is your reason for reverting this? Danrok (talk) 15:55, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

@Danrok: The explanation is on the edit summary: «juvenile literature» corresponds to young adult literature (Q1233720) not to children's literature (Q131539), and both items are part of children's and youth literature (Q11163999). As for the alias, although «childrens literature» is in fact incorrect, it could be useful for search purposes. Regards, --Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:18, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

Your explanation does not make any sense, your reasoning seems to be nothing more than you own made-up arbitration.

The edit summary is not the basis for an item, and in any case I see no explanation there.

The item is referred to as juvenile literature on it's article page, and this term is in use elsewhere (I am not simply making it up as a go along). Young adults young adult literature (Q1233720) are definitely not juveniles, and that word should not be used as an alias for young adults.

"It could be useful for search purposes" could apply to a dozen misspellings across every item, how about using kat as alias for cat? Are you seriously suggesting that we go down that road? By misspelling words you are simply encouraging the use of misspelling. That's not helpful at all. Danrok (talk) 19:51, 20 April 2015 (UTC)

You seem a bit confused about the meaning of juvenile. Maybe it would be easier to see the difference by checking the rest of the sitelinks in all the three items. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:17, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Model (people) in English = Mannequinnat in French

Hello,
I think that French Wikidata correspondance with en:Model (people) is not correct. It should be in relation with fr:Mannequinnat, instead of fr:Mannequin.
There is something wrong in the Wikidata links. I tried to correct them but you reverted my modifications.
Thanks for your help, by doing it properly.
BTH (talk) 19:36, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

@BTH: Hi! Actually model (Q4610556) refers to the person (en:Model (people) or fr:Mannequin), while modelling (Q17143560) refers to the activity (modelling or fr:Mannequinnat). It is always useful to check the labels and the properties contained in each item before moving sitelinks. Regards, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 20:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Townhouse

Your recent edits to townhouse (Q1202402), some reverting mine, have conflated en:Townhouse, "a type of medium-density housing", with something much grander. Please revert them. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 06:40, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

University building

Since the school building are separated from the institution, I created university building (Q19844914) for the individual buildings of a university. --Fralambert (talk) 13:23, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

It's a Beautiful Day

Just a heads up on your comment at the Admins' noticeboard: the short story, which I uploaded to Wikisource, was published by a university, and definitely is not "self-published". In fact, I asked administrators (on IRC), at the time, to review whether the story could be added to Wikisource, which they approved. --Diego Grez (talk) 16:17, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

Revolt

Hello Andreas, I see you have move nl:Opstand from rebellion to revolt, with other languages as well. Why is that? This creates a split that only seems to be based on the Spanish WP. BoH (talk) 14:07, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi, BoH. Indeed, I was trying to make some sense between a bunch of items with similar meanings (sedition (Q544394), mutiny (Q511866), insurgency (Q1323212), rebellion (Q124734) and revolt (Q6107280)), but I went to sleep before finishing the task. The last two items probably need to be merged, because I could not find much difference between the Spanish articles, so I proposed a merge in eswiki. Please feel free to check all the items, and let me know if you find something inappropriate. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 19:26, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Hola Andreas. Ok, that's clear. Indeed, sometimes articles in different languages can be a bit of a mess. Whether the Spanish articles can be merged or not, is not for me to decide, as unfortunately my Spanish is almost non-existent. For other changes, I have to find out what has changed. In the past I have changed many interwiki's here, but there seems to be a new set-up which I haven't figured out yet. Anyway, muchos gracias! BoH (talk) 05:34, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

member of parliament or deputy

Hoi, I noticed that you favour deputy and made it a subclass of member of parliament.. I do not understand why. It seems like a lot of work for what ? Thanks, GerardM (talk) 04:11, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

In a bicameral system, a deputy is a member of the lower house whereas a senator is a member of the upper house. So, both of them are members of parliament. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 23:26, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Delete content

I don't think are redundant propertys why?-Rippitippi (talk) 21:16, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

@Rippitippi: [Edit conflict] You seem a bit confused. You already added the reference to the correct property and then added the same reference to the wrong one. So, no content has been deleted (I left an explanation on the edit summary). Please be so kind and use the rollback feature only to revert vandalism and test edits, as stated in the guideline. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

For me delete content, especially sources of statemens, without reason is like vandalism, and I ask you again why the statemens are not right? --Rippitippi (talk) 21:41, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

So now you are accusing of vandalism! Are you sure that is the path you want to take? Have you even read any of my comments? Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I'm asking you why member of (P463) is not correct? there is some guideline for politicians who I do not know? --Rippitippi (talk) 21:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

In Property talk:P39, the example is just about a parliamentary position. P39 is a property specific for political offices. Maybe, you could read the property talk pages before accusing me of vandalism, or maybe you could just follow the guidelines specially because you are an administrator. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:06, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I know position held (P39) is right but if you think that member of (P463) is wrong you must integrate the information on another statemets because Jens Rohde (Q546246) is member of (P463) European Parliament (Q8889) otherwise information is lost an you are administrator too you should add informations not delete them --Rippitippi (talk) 22:24, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Are you trying to harass me now? It is starting to feel that way since you won't stop accusing of vandalism. Following your reasoning, Angela Merkel (Q567) will have the statements Federal Chancellor of Germany (Q4970706) for position held (P39) AND Government of the Federal Republic of Germany (Q313827) for member of (P463), even though Federal Chancellor of Germany (Q4970706) part of (P361) Government of the Federal Republic of Germany (Q313827). The information is already included, so using both properties is redundant. Why would you choose a more general property over a specific one? Also, you could check Property talk:P768 for a discussion about this. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:46, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

P.D. Are you serious? If you bother to take a look at member of the European Parliament (Q27169), you'll see that "member of the European Parliament" is already part of European Parliament (Q8889). It is on its name AND in an statement as part of (P361), so using a qualifier (like of (P642)) when properties are better to express the idea, it is just nonsense. --Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

I had to do and I have not finished now I think is acceptable --Rippitippi (talk) 14:53, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

About my questions ?

We still did not talk about that, what's about genres and so on ? TomT0m ^(talk) 20:07, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

Bots

You are receiving this message because a technical change may affect a bot, gadget, or user script you have been using. The breaking change involves API calls. This change has been planned for two years. The WMF will start making this change on 30 June 2015. A partial list of affected bots can be seen here: https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-June/081931.html This includes all bots that are using pywikibot compat. Some of these bots have already been fixed. However, if you write user scripts or operate a bot that uses the API, then you should check your code, to make sure that it will not break.

What, exactly, is breaking? The "default continuation mode" for action=query requests to api.php will be changing to be easier for new coders to use correctly. To find out whether your script or bot may be affected, then search the source code (including any frameworks or libraries) for the string "query-continue". If that is not present, then the script or bot is not affected. In a few cases, the code will be present but not used. In that case, the script or bot will continue working.

This change will be part of 1.26wmf12. It will be deployed to test wikis (including mediawiki.org) on 30 June, to non-Wikipedias (such as Wiktionary) on 1 July, and to all Wikipedias on 2 July 2015.

If your bot or script is receiving the warning about this upcoming change (as seen at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages ), it's time to fix your code!

• The simple solution is to simply include the "rawcontinue" parameter with your request to continue receiving the raw continuation data (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&rawcontinue=1>). No other code changes should be necessary.
• Or you could update your code to use the simplified continuation documented at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Query#Continuing_queries (example <https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php?action=query&list=allpages&continue=>), which is much easier for clients to implement correctly.

Either of the above solutions may be tested immediately, you'll know it works because you stop seeing the warning.

Do you need help with your own bot or script? Ask questions in e-mail on the mediawiki-api or wikitech-l mailing lists. Volunteers at m:Tech or w:en:WP:Village pump (technical) or w:en:Wikipedia:Bot owners' noticeboard may also be able to help you.

Are you using someone else's gadgets or user scripts? Most scripts are not affected. To find out if a script you use needs to be updated, then post a note at the discussion page for the gadget or the talk page of the user who originally made the script. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Genres

Andreas, please, animated series (Q581714) is not a genre but a technical type of production. Each animation film can also be a comedy, or a horror and so on. --Infovarius (talk) 15:18, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

good luck to have an answer (=====> I'm out) TomT0m ^(talk) 15:26, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi! Actually, film/tv genres have more than one categorisation. For instance, the genres that you mentioned (comedy and horror) are based on the emotional tone of the work. But there are also genres based on the setting (historic, western) or topic (crime, science fiction). Finally, there are genres based on the way a given work was produced, like independent, experimental or animation films. Also, there seems to be some confusion between animation (Q11425), animated film (Q202866) and animation technique (Q3516833), so I will check those three elements later on. I am sorry that I have not been available, but this week is the last of Trinity term (Q7843023), which means it is time for the annual examinations in my university. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 06:10, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

Yazidism & Yazidi or Yazidis

Can you tell what is the difference between these two topic?

Some languages like French call Yazidism and some languages like English call Yazidis

Different languages assigned different names and they are not linked. English Yazidis should be linked to French Yazidism.68.100.166.227 08:36, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Reversiones

Hola. Veo que revertiste mis últimas ediciones. Las hice siguiendo la explicación de Juan Mayordomo en este hilo. Como habrá un motivo que desconozco, porque no participo mucho en Wikidata, me gustaría conocerlo. Muchas gracias. --Gerwoman (talk) 17:27, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Dudas sobre géneros televisivos e instancias

Hola, Andreasmperu, un gusto escribirte. Paso a hacerte una consulta sobre géneros televisivos, que veo ya te han planteado líneas arriba, no obstante intentaré planteártelo de forma distinta ya que tu explicación no me quedó del todo clara:

En lo concerniente a series de televisión específicamente ¿la animación no vendría a ser una instancia en lugar de un género de la misma? te pongo un ejemplo con la página Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated (Q680462) (cuyo artículo enciclopédico redacté prácticamente desde zero, por eso me interesa saber el porqué): esta es una serie de televisión, mas precisamente un serial animado; es decir, una serie animada como tantas otras, pero perteneciente a los géneros televisivos especificados (horror, drama, etc). Un producto puede ser animado, pero la animación guarda muchos géneros en sí misma.

En un mensaje anterior cuando Infovarius (Disc) te preguntó sobre esto, tu respuesta fue que existen géneros basados en la forma en que la obra fue producida. Eso en cine de animación te lo puedo entender, ya que este es una industria en sí misma y tiene un artículo enciclopédico definido, pero las series de televisión tienen un espectro mucho más amplio de géneros, y la animación no las define tanto como en el caso del cine. Una serie de televisión animada puede ser de comedia, drama, acción, épica, histórica, de ciencia ficción, romance, etc, mas el ser animada no define su género, sino su instancia, es decir su carácter propio. No sé si me dejo entender. Esto era así hasta hace unos días y hay quienes no comprendemos los cambios.

Asimismo, tengo otra duda: en el caso específico de Scooby-Doo! Misterios S.A. acabas de introducir como género artístico horror television series (Q20220309) que no tiene artículo enciclopédico, reemplazando al mucho más útil y apropiado horror fiction (Q16575965) que lleva al artículo adecuado del género artístico en sí, con lo cual has eliminado un enlace enciclopédico de género del artículo en Wikipedia correspondiente, además del obvio resultado antiestético ya que el género que introdujiste aún no cuenta con un enlace, a menos que se agregue una redirección al género verdadero, que es el que debería figurar. Además ¿no sería redundante ver la instancia de "serie de televisión" en el artículo principal, para líneas mas abajo ver nuevamente "serie de televisión de terror" y encima sin enlace alguno? en mi opinión, hubiera sido mejor mantener "horror" como género artístico como estaba hasta hace unas horas: es apropiado, dirige al artículo del género cinematográfico/televisivo en cuestión, evita las redundancias y otros problemas. Si me preguntas, no debería quedar así de ninguna manera, pero quizá tú tienes tus razones para esto, quizá piensas crear un artículo en Wikipedia en español para el género que introdujiste, no lo sé.

En verdad me cuesta trabajo entender por qué estos cambios, yo llevo trabajando en artículos de series animadas durante un tiempo ya pero no lo sé todo, sobre todo en esto de Wikidata. Entiendo la intención de los cambios y me parece excelente que los realices, por eso asumo que tú has de tener tus motivos y argumentos para realizar estos cambios y quisiera conocerlos. ¿Tiene algo que ver con la categorización? ¿con la estética? llevo ya algunos años en Wikipedia, mas esto de Wikidata es muy reciente, soy un tanto inexperto y aún no me manejo bien por aquí. Quizá tus razones son totalmente justificables y válidas, por eso paso a preguntar, ya que hay cosas que francamente no entiendo bien y veo que no soy el único.

Por lo demás, excelente trabajo aquí y en Wikipedia de tu parte, gracias mas bien por interesarte en el artículo en cuestión y de antemano por tu respuesta. Sé que debe ser molesto repetir las cosas pero en verdad, muchos no entendemos el porqué de estos cambios repentinos o sus circunstancias. Una explicación detallada nunca está demás.

Saludos cordiales Fantasma del Espacio (talk) 05:34, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

As for animation "genres", I've proposed new property: animation technique - this is for all "genres" like clay animation, computer animation and so on. And may be even for animation itself. --Infovarius (talk) 22:31, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Fantasma del Espacio: animated series (Q581714) es un género televisivo (incluso así está categorizada en la Wikipedia en español). Scooby-Doo! Mystery Incorporated (Q680462) es una serie de género animado por la forma en que fue producida (que no la técnica), pero también es una serie de terror por la sensación que transmite. Ambos son géneros, pero géneros de diferentes categorías. Con respecto a lo de horror, ya existía horror film (Q200092), horror literature (Q193606) e horror comics (Q5905220) (todos ellos subclases de horror), pero no había cómo categorizar un programa televisivo más que como horror fiction (Q16575965) que es un género de ficción en general. El propósito de Wikidata es recolectar información de forma estructurada. En este proceso, los errores o ausencias en los proyectos de Wikimedia son más visibles, pero por suerte es posible subsanarlos aquí y así poder mantener los datos estructurados. Así, en caso haga falta una categoría de clasificación (por ejemplo, una ocupación sin artículos enciclopédicos) lo correcto es crearla. Este es el caso de horror television series (Q20220309) creada teniendo como base la existencia de Category:Horror fiction television series (Q7163252). Las cuestiones estilísticas corresponden a cada Wikipedia no a Wikidata. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:31, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Du endret yrke til virksomhet for nb

Hei,

Du endret yrke til virksomhet for P106 30. jun kl 04:58. Jeg lurer på hva som er grunnen til denne endringen? In case you don't speak Norwegian, I'll translate. You changed the label of P106 from yrke to virksomhet for Norwegian (bokmål) as well as a huge number of changes for other languages. I would like to know the reason for this change. It created some confusion in no-wiki where I extracted the list into infoboxes for some 16000+ biographies. It actually gave me another useful test for the module. Is the intention to create another property for yrke instead of P106? Haros (talk) 20:51, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

@Haros: Hi! A user seemed confused about the property, so I realised there was a problem with the Norwegian label, among others. The property was initially limited to profession (Q28640), but then it was extended to occupation (Q13516667), as you can see in the property talk page. Unfortunately, a lot of labels remained as profession (Q28640), so I tried to fix it even though I do not speak all the languages. Please, be so kind and check the Norwegian translations taking into account that occupation (Q13516667) should be the label, whereas occupation (Q13516667) and craft (Q2207288) should be added as alias. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:51, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Ok. Not sure I can see the exact limitations of this, but we implemented this as the Norwegian yrke. (Lua-module that added the whole list to the infobox yrke.) But yrke is limited to something you get paid for, and that was definitely not the case for the item you referred to. From the description it looks still to be intended as something you get paid for, so the confusion is still present. Perhaps it is profession (Q28640) that is closest to the Norwegian yrke. Although that seems from the description to be only part of yrke, but simultaneously outside. Difficult, as the meaning of these words are not exactly identical. I don't know. Haros (talk) 20:29, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

P735 es label

Hi Andreasmperu,

Once in a while, people confuse a person's name (first name + family name) with their first name (P735). This can lead to additions like Special:Diff/224684206.

It seems to happen frequently with Spanish language contributors. It occurred to me that this may be due to Spanish language label which wasn't very specific.

This is why I had changed it from "nombre". Is there a more specific label other than "nombre de pila" you can suggest? Q202444 and the related eswiki article are also labeled "nombre de pila". --- Jura 03:28, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Jura. In cases like this (when an user ignores a warning for self-referencing), it is best to let him/her know about what is wrong by mentioning it on his/her talk page or by undoing such edit with an edit summary explaining the problem. The Spanish label is the right one ("nombre" is the most usual term for "first name"), but I made some changes on the description and alias, so it can be even more clear. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 03:55, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

memoir (Q112983)

I didn't realize that autobiography (Q4184) was incorrectly listed as a subclass of biography (Q36279). Thank you for pointing this out. Just to clarify, a memoir can be a biography or an autobiography. A biography is specifically an account of one's life that is not written by that person. An autobiography is not a type of biography, and therefore should not be a subclass of biography. I fixed autobiography (Q4184) and biography (Q36279), so that memoir (Q112983) is correct as a subclass of both. Hazmat2 (talk) 16:21, 5 July 2015 (UTC)

As a memoir is not only autobiographical, it does not belong solely as a subclass of autobiography. It needs to include biography at the very least. And don't assume I made fixes without checking sources. Hazmat2 (talk) 02:21, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

fictional entity subclass of creative work

I don't see why a fictional entity (Q14897293) can't be a subclass of a real entity. All parts of fiction are proper creative works, ideas thought up by their creators, and should fit into the tree as such. Similarly, fictional characters and worlds use the creator (P170) property to link to their creators, but removing the creative work type causes all these uses to be constraints violations. --Yair rand (talk) 05:33, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

A fictional entity cannot be a type of a real one: they belong to different categories. Please explain your point of view in the Project chat, so more users are able to voice their opinions. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 09:33, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Biological classification

Hi Andreasmperu, there is no article biological classification on enwiki, it's a redirect to en:Taxonomy (biology). And I assume you don't understand Alemannic, do you? So please don't change links to artciels on Alemannic Wikipedia without asking a native speaker. I'm sorry that I've deleted the link to kuwiki, that was indeeed a mistake. --Holder (talk) 06:07, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Could you please explain why you insert the link to this redirect on enwiki again? --Holder (talk) 08:47, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Because redirect links are allowed. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 09:27, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Ah, ok I didn' know that. --Holder (talk) 12:24, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Thriller

¡Hola, Andreasmperu!

Vi que deshiciste mis cambios en Thriller y los elementos relacionados. En esWiki estuve recategorizando y renombrando páginas cambiando la palabra «thriller» por «suspense». Los artículos que se encuentran en las categorías relacionadas con suspense y que tienen fichas (de película, de libro, de serie de televisión) enlazadas a Wikidata, en este momento muestran en ella el género thriller. Lo mismo sucede con el elemento Suspenso (que es discutible, tal como digo aquí). No edito mucho en Wikidata así que es probable que algo haya hecho mal, pero me gustaría que revises esto y veas cómo se puede modificar. ¡Gracias! Saludos. --Khiari (talk) 19:13, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Es bastante simple: Wikidata no es Wikipedia. Las etiquetas deben ser el término más usado (como, por ejemplo «perro» en lugar de «Canis lupus familiaris» en Q144) y ese no es el caso de suspense. Me pareció raro el cambio porque, si bien conozco el término, no me sonaba natural; por ello, investigué un poco y, efectivamente, suspense es el término menos empleado de los tres posibles (thriller y suspenso siendo los dos restantes). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

@Khiari: Olvidaba mencionar el problema con suspense (Q9503). Creo entender que ha habido una fusión en eswiki de dos términos bastante diferentes (las afirmaciones en cada elemento ayudan a definir estas diferencias): mientras que uno se refiere a una emoción, el otro trata sobre un género artístico. Por suerte, es mucho más difícil cometer errores tan básicos en Wikidata. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:04, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Your reverts of lock/locksmithing

Dear Andreasmperu, why did you revert my changes in lock and locksmithing? In my eyes, the old versions didn't make sense. Regards --CaZeRillo (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2015 (UTC)

@CaZeRillo: Please check the statements contained in each item. They could help you realize which are the differences between both items. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 23:26, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Painters, portrait painters and more

Hello Andreas! I noticed that you have replaced occupation (P106) painter (Q1028181) with occupation (P106) portrait painter (Q2180411), in several cases. I'm going to add occupation (P106) painter (Q1028181) again. In general, I think it's best to keep professions quite generic. I'd be curious to hear your thoughts about this. Greetings, Spinster (talk) 20:22, 15 July 2015 (UTC):

@Spinster: Hi! I was not sure about that, but I guess it would be alright as long as it is an addition instead of a removal, and portrait painting (Q1400853) is added as a statement for genre (P136). Regards, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 23:22, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

Germany

Ciao, ci sono voci che devono essere collegate tra loro e redirect vari. Se mi dai un minuto prima di annullare le modifiche... Grazie! --Mirella Cece (talk) 01:41, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@Mirella Cece: Would you please pay attention at which items are you deleting? Only itwiki was a list, the rest of them were about the position itself of German minister. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:46, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Sono elenchi: frwiki, cswiki (non il precedente redirect), in neerlandese... compare persino nel titolo "lista".--Mirella Cece (talk) 01:50, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Did you see that eswiki is a list, that cswiki is a redirect??? --Mirella Cece (talk) 01:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

enwiki, eswiki (lists on eswiki start with Anexo:) and fawiki are not lists. I have removed the redirect to cswiki. So, please stop removing those sitelinks Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:54, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

There is also cswiki (not the redirect). And even if the article in eswiki does not start with "anexo", I think you should consider the content and not only the title: that article does not speaks about the insitute, but includes only names of the holders of the ministry.--Mirella Cece (talk) 01:59, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Even itwiki is not a list, otherwise it would not be dealing with the history of the position. But regardless of that, you move the title. When you make a mistake like that in Wikidata, it has repercussions in all the Wikipedias that use Wikidata. It does not matter what I think is right (this also applies for you), but how is the system designed (lists in eswiki are anexo. That is it). So please be careful, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:03, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

The problem is this: en, it, fr, de, es Wp use different rules regarding lists. In some WP we have a list in articles which are declined in the singular; in others WP we have the same list, but the title is declined in the plural. Now, we have the same content in articles which are not linked reciprocally. I do not understand the usefulness. Regarding itwiki, I was correcting... --Mirella Cece (talk) 02:18, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

It wiki does not always use "list" when an article includes a list of names, or a sequence, while es wiki always uses "anexo". The problem is that there are differences betwenn rules of various WP, which should be overcome in a general system like Wikidata.--Mirella Cece (talk) 02:24, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Annulation de modifications

Bonjour Andreasmperu. Tu viens d'annuler mes modifications sur plusieurs noms d'occupations, par exemple [6]. Doing so, fr:Shirin Ebadi who is a woman, becames a man on fr:wikipedia, as infobox is constraint by Wikidata. You says that "militant(e)" is not a word. "militant(e)" means the word may be either "militant" (for men) or "militante" (for women). So, how to fix the point (alias cannot do) ? --La femme de menage (talk) 09:43, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@La femme de menage: Yes, the suffix "(e)" is used to try to neutralize a genre; however, it is not a recognized word in any dictionary nor is the most common form for a given noun. Labels in Wikidata should be the most used term for each item, and in this case it would be "militant". About fr:Shirin Ebadi, the article is classified as fr:Catégorie:Avocat iranien, and that does not convert her into a man. I do not see any agreement reached about this anywhere, not even in the case of categories in frwiki. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 09:53, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but the suffix is not "used to try to neutralize a genre" : it is just the correct grammatical form of the word when used for women, as one can see in every good french dictionary : on french langage academy's site. The question of category is different, as when a word describes both man and women, the grammatical rule is to use the male form. In the case of infobox, only one person is describe, so it should be militant or militante, nageur or nageuse and, if not possible, nageu(r/se) to be neutral. This question is new, as import of datas from wikidata in infobox happened just yesterday. --La femme de menage (talk) 10:09, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

I was referring to the use of "(e)" as in "militant(e)", instead of "militant" and "militante" (both of them being the accepted forms). As for the categories, that is not exactly real: returning to your example, fr:Shirin Ebadi is not categorized as a woman even though it is possible to add fr:Catégorie:Femme politique iranienne (by the way, there seems to be quite a lot of subcategories for women under fr:Catégorie:Personnalité féminine). Could you please discuss this in frwiki, so we could have a community opinion on the matter? Your proposal is not the appropriate solution. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 10:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

We began a talk : [7]. One way is to squeeze Wikidata, but it does not really fix the problem on wikidata. Would you prefer "Militant -ante" used in the dictionary ? (for categories, the usual way is categorize a woman in the main category, and to add an extra category to show she is a woman, as in fr:Martine de Bertereau, or to have a generic empty category, with to categories filled in, one for males, the other one for females (see fr:Catégorie:Personnalité de la natation, as far I know. The case of fr:Catégorie:Femme politique iranienne is to be fixed, as politician women are not under-polician people).

By the way, Militant(e) is the correct translation for activist, the meaning of

English:

militant being...

Français :

activiste. Please refer to [8]. --La femme de menage (talk) 10:51, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

solved (inside Wikipedia.fr). --La femme de menage (talk) 12:52, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

@La femme de menage: Those are wonderful news. Anyway, I will bring the subject to the Project Chat here. Would it also be correct to change the French label for militancy (Q1481938) to "activisme"? Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 13:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Sure, and the same inversion if activism exists. It would be great if you can solve the point on a meta (ie Wikidata) basis, it would avoid us to fill in both Wikidata and the fr:Module:Dictionnaire Wikidata/Métiers table associated. (And even show a less sexist image of wikidata, even if I guess this is optional!). --La femme de menage (talk) 13:19, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Raphael

Hello Andreas, there's the correct link to the Wikimedia Commons category. Articles must link to Wikicommons category, not to single pages. -- Blackcat (talk) 14:21, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi! That is incorrect. commons:Raffaello Sanzio belongs to Raphael (Q5597), whereas commons:Category:Raffaello Sanzio belongs to Category:Raphael (Q6542715). In short, every Commons category correspond to a Wikimedia category (Q4167836) item. In case there is an article in Commons, it should be linked with the equivalent not-category item. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 03:38, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Not at all. Galleries are POV, and they are not for information purpose. Article must point to the correct category. If you put a gallery name on Wikidata entry the projects who point to 'Data without parametres go straight to the gallery, not to the category. You must not mislead them. --- Blackcat (talk) 13:50, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@Blackcat: Thanks for trying to teach me how Wikidata works, but your opinion is not backed by any policy. Please refer to c:Commons:Wikidata#Sitelinks and the relevant RfC (it cannot get any clearer than this: «article-like items should only be sitelinked to gallery pages on Commons, and category-like items should only be sitelinked to category pages»). Be so kind and revert all your changes. It would be nice too if you refrain yourself from unlinking any more sitelinks. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:10, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Andreas, don't get me wrong. I am more than sure that you know how wikidata works, but my concern is the link between a Wikipedia article and Wikicommons. By definition a Commons gallery is a partial and POV collection of media whereas the only neutral repository for media is the Commons category, where one can find anything related to that topic (well, provided that the topic is well categorized, of course). That's also why I just started a discussion on Commons about the opportunity to link galleries in Wikidata entries (and more generally on the opportunity of having galleries at all). My concern is that a reader is led to a gallery on commons not knowing there's a huger category about the same topic. -- Blackcat (talk) 15:14, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I understood your point from the start, but it is nothing more than a personal opinion, which cannot override a community decision on the matter. Until a new consensus is reached, you are contravening current policies. Please stop and revert your changes. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 15:25, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Suppression de la nature d'élément manuscrit enluminé (Q48498)

Bonjour. Pourrais-je savoir pourquoi pour plusieurs éléments tu as remplacé "manuscrit enluminé (Q48498)" par "série de livres (Q277759)" comme par exemple là ou là. Les items en question ne sont pas du tout des séries de livres mais bien des manuscrits enluminés, pourquoi ce qualificatif ne serait pas le bon ? Merci d'avance. Mel22 (talk) 08:59, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Germany

No te das cuenta de lo que estás haciendo. Esto es muy triste. Lo estás haciendo todo mal: si it wiki decide escindir una parte del artículo, debe permanecer conectado con el artículo principal. Y en cualquier caso, por ejemplo, ro WP debe conectarse con it wiki. Te invito a dejar de hacer cambios desastrosos. --Mirella Cece (talk) 16:53, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Did you understand?--Mirella Cece (talk) 00:46, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

IT WIKI: MINISTERO DEGLI AFFARI ESTERI (GERMANIA) = EN WIKI: FOREIGN OFFICE (GERMANY). INCREDIBILE. --Mirella Cece (talk) 00:53, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

IT WIKI Presidente dell'Austria was canceled in 2011... --Mirella Cece (talk) 01:32, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Would you please stop this disrupting behavior? --Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:36, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

I try to help you. But you refuse to listen to any proposal. Congratulations. --Mirella Cece (talk) 01:48, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

drummer (Q386854)

Please note that the two articles don't exist on German and Lower Saxon Wikipedia overhere (es: articulos no existen) Ymnes (talk) 21:07, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

@Ymnes: Redirect links are allowed in Wikidata. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:09, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Well, I would have had opposed to it I reverted it now. Thanks for your answer! Ymnes (talk) 22:26, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

lo siento

Saludos Andreasmperu, de veras que siento ser tan torpe. Pero por más que me aplico, no acabo de aprender (y encima imprudente!!!). No sé por cual de las innumerables torpezas que de seguro he acumulado en este gran invento -misterioso e inexpugnable- de Wikidata te refieres en tu mensaje. Te agradeceré toda ayuda y enmiendas que puedas hacer. Procurare ser más prudente. (También te agradeceré que me hables en la Discusión de Wikipedia en español, porque por aquí no paso nunca. Todavía me pregunto cómo estoy ahora mismo aquí!?) Gracias por todo.--Latemplanza (talk) 08:40, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Q11972456

Here you add a self-reference. Was this intended? --Fomafix (talk) 15:28, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Catholicism (Q1841)

Hello. A few days ago, I tried to add links from the new category Katolîkî on the Kurdish Wikipedia. You removed the links. Thanks. Today, I did it again and realised that I added links to articles about Catholicism. I tried to remove them, but I could not. I am really sorry about that. CathFR (talk) 21:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

@CathFR:  Done No worries. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:29, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Your protection of Q1490

You shouldn't be doing this, because you are involved in the dispute and not neutral. You should have asked another admin to do this, although I don't think protection is warranted anyways.--Jasper Deng (talk) 00:16, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Jasper Deng: If you feel that way, then you should probably proceed about it. If you check that item history (it is a extremely long one), you shall see that I have not made a single contribution to the item's dispute, so I do not have an established position about the subject. I do not hold a personal animosity to the user either. Finally, and perhaps most important, it was a semi-protection, so the last users (who are both autoconfirmed users) can continue editing it. Unlike the other items involved (Tokyo (Q7473516) and Tokyo (Q11199581)), Tokyo (Q1490) was also edited by ips, so I thought it would be a good start to put a brief halt to that until some discussion takes place. Anyway, please feel free to undo any of my edits. I will also appreciate if you take charge of this case from now on (I do not speak any oriental language, so I try to stay away from items related to Asia). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 02:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

What about this, then? It's clearly a revert of the IP in question. When doing edit warring protection, unless libellious information or other highly compelling reason applies, leave the article as-is. Unfortunately I am of not much more help because I'm illiterate in Asian languages.--Jasper Deng (talk) 03:19, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Alejandro Toledo - soccer ?

Hello,

You undid my autolist edit here.

No problem for me, but I used en:Category:Football association players and on enwiki en:Alejandro_Toledo is categorized as en:San_Francisco_Dons_men's_soccer_players.

Is this an error on category, or did I understand something wrongly ?

thanks for explaining, so that I can avoid such edits :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:08, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin:: Hi! The problem with relying only in categories is that some categorizations are not supported by any references, like in this case (the subject is not even mentioned in the article). Also, I would leave out all subcategories of Category:College soccer (Q8388258), considering it does not cover professional footballers. Maybe ask for opinions at the Project chat first? Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:22, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

thanks, I tried to kickly sort football association players, american football players, australian football players and canadian football players, which is quite an imbroglio for a French person ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 21:35, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: Category:Association football players (Q7217464) covers Association football players (called "soccer players" in the US, and just "footballers" in the UK). The other types of footballers are Category:Players of American football (Q7135800), Category:Players of Canadian football (Q8918423), Category:Players of Australian rules football (Q7881131) and Category:Gaelic footballers (Q8479673). But, again, be careful about non-professional players, which are also included in those categories. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:53, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: I see that you have ignored my plead to ask for other opinions before adding association football player (Q937857) as an occupation for non-professional players. That is the big issue: is football played as a hobby supposed to count as an occupation? Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

as for professional/non professional football : well, until recently, football players were still amateurs in many countries, not professionals. Do you mean players of the first part of 20th century, or players that have another profession, should not be counted as footballers ? :)

also, many female football players are amateurs, not professionals :)

it is even more recent for rugby players, since rugby became professional only after 1995…

I really have a problem with reserving occupation (P106) to professionals sportspeople : this would have many consequences regarding the statuses of sports throughout the world.

as regards Alejandro Toledo (Q207426) it was automatically added again through Autolist. I changed it to deprecated so it would not be added again. As I use Autolist and not a bot, the list not being over, and I cannot exclude Category:College_soccer from my selection, only one cat. being possible.

once the first job is completed, I will have a second pass to remove the mention on all Category:College soccer (Q8388258), if you like. - Are you ok so that I finish that, please ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

Regarding your reverting on my edits of 作品 and "Creative work"

Please go to Wikidata:Bureaucrats' noticeboard#作品 really means "Creative work" for further discussion, thank you. UU (talk) 20:52, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

¡Hola!

Hola Andrea, te agradezco la bienvenida y la oportunidad de saludarte, se extrañan tus excelentes artículos. De pasada aprovecho para decirte que soy fatal por estos lares y que si me atoro vendré a pedirte ayuda. Un abrazo.--Rosymonterrey (talk) 02:11, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rosymonterrey: Fue un gusto verte por aquí y espero que se repita. Nos vendría muy bien una editora dedicada que hable español. Por ahora, vamos seriamente cortos de hispano-hablantes en Wikidata, exceptuando las ediciones vandálicas, la mayoría de las cuales proviene de América Latina (!!!). Y ni dudarlo, estaré aquí para ayudarte en lo que pueda. Un abrazo, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 03:00, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

ministry Ministries of Japan (Q15409298)

Hi Andreasmperu, the german label and description is now grammatically correct, whereas the english description is not and the fr label|descr is not consistent with singular/plural. Why do you insist on singular while e.g. the English and spanish and lt versions are in plural. I doubt whether one version uses singular. Policy is to be regularly consistent to the lemma. It should be plural= ministries not only for the lemma but because there are many ministries involved, not one special. So there is no Ministry of Japan, there is e.g. a ministry of economics of JP, but without further nomination, we must keep it open and correct as ministries. I guess you agree.--Oursana (talk) 22:16, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Italian municipal police in wikidata

Hola! Sorry Andreas, I realised there are some mistakes in the linking to wikidata of some pages of wiki.it. Some pages should be canceled and others should be merged. I have proposed these things in this discussion in Wiki.it. When I started to edit the wikidata links I didnt know there were these problems and when I realized it I had probably already lost control. I let you know now what these problems are:

• The page it:guardie delle province e dei comuni (provincial and municipal guards) is unuseful, part of it should be merged into the page it:polizia municipale and part into it:polizia provinciale. All these 3 pages describe local police institutions in Italy, actually with a very limited geopolitic point of view, since there are not similar pages describing the same institutions in general, not only in Italy I mean.
  • it:guardie delle province e dei comuni has no equivalent in en.wiki, so it is correct that now it is linked alone in Q3778360. it:polizia municipale and it:polizia provinciale are now correctly linked.
• The page it:Polizia comunale describes municipal police in Switzerland and should be therefore linked to en:Municipal police (Switzerland) (Q17101043), not to en:Municipal police (Q1758690) as it is now.
• The page it:polizia locale has no equivalent in en.wiki, but it is the most similar to en:municipal police. They both describe the institution in general. They are not equivalent because polizia locale includes the municipal police but also different institutions like the italian provincial police or the german en:Landespolizei.

I have checked some links in wikidata and I have found the following mistakes in sv.wiki:

• sv:Polisen i Italien must be linked with it:Polizia (Italia) and not with it:Polizia provinciale, as it is now
• sv:Polizia provinciale must be linked with it:Polizia provinciale

Please make the edits that you think are the most appropriated. Sorry again :) Saludos Carlo58s (talk) 19:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

series of creative works (Q7725310)

Thank you for your revert on series of creative works (Q7725310) (changing it back to just "series"), but I have re-instated my edits. I hope the following will help explain why.

See Wikidata:Classification_noticeboard#Series_of_creative_works for some more detailed comments on why I think the changes are appropriate. However, in particular can I ask you to consider that:

• the sitelinks, such as de:Mehrteiler, all have the topic of a series of creative works, rather than a series of general objects.
• almost all of the subclasses of series of creative works (Q7725310) relate to creative works; and the great majority of the instances
• I have created a new sequence (Q20937557) to accommodate the broader topic of a series of general objects.

I also made a couple of other fixes:

• I made sequence (Q133250) a subclass of sequence (Q20937557), rather than the other way round, because a sequence of mathematical objects is a subclass of a series of objects; but (for example) a series of newspapers is not a subclass of a set of mathematical objects.
• I made series of creative works (Q7725310) a subclass of group of works (Q17489659) which is a subclass of work (Q386724), rather than having it (as it was before) a subclass of work of art (Q838948).

I think all of these changes are appropriate, and so should be upheld.

You pointed to artwork series (Q15709879). But I think that is a narrower concept, being a series of work of art (Q838948) rather than a series of work (Q386724); if you look at what items are subclasses of artwork series (Q15709879) [9] you will see that this is a somewhat narrower group, than the items that are subclasses of series of creative works (Q7725310) (or rather, due to the limitations of WDQ, in fact the item series of creative works (Q20936662) that I mistakenly created and then redirected to it), [10]. There does seem to be a genuine distinction here, that can usefully be made.

I appreciate that there may be other statements, that (for the moment) still assume that series of creative works (Q7725310) will be a "series of objects" rather than a "series of creative works". I think it should be possible to find these and switch them to point to sequence (Q20937557). I know they aren't all done yet. But please do let me know if you think there are more statements and more items, or other considerations, that I need to be aware of.

Thank you again for keeping an eye on this. All best, Jheald (talk) 20:17, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Zahnarzt - Dentist

Hallo Andreas,

ja, ich habe einen Wikidata-Link entfernt. Ich weiß noch nicht, wie man das berichtigen könnte, weil das Problem in den Begriffen liegt. Der Begriff "Zahnarzt" wird in den Fremdsprachen als "dentist" o.ä. bezeichnet. Im Deutschen ist der "Dentist" ein historischer Begriff für einen fortgebildeten Zahntechniker, der begrenzt Zahnheilkunde ausüben durfte und kein Akademiker war. "Dentista" in Italienisch bedeutet ähnliches und der Zahnarzt als Akademiker heißt "odontoiatra" - jedoch gibt es dieses Lemma nicht, sondern eine Weiterleitung nach "dentista". Ein Zurücksetzen meiner Änderungen ist deshalb nicht sinnvoll gewesen. Ich schreibe auf deutsch, weil Du mich auf meiner Disk in deutsch angeschrieben hast. Grüße --Partynia (talk) 21:27, 21 September 2015 (UTC)

Das gleich gilt für "Zahnersatz". Der Wikidata-Eintrag ist schlicht falsch. Auch hier war Dein Revers nicht sinnvoll. --Partynia (talk) 04:12, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

Dear Andreasmperu,

in German language dental practitioner without formal qualifications (Q15805067) and dentist (Q27349) are not identical.--Kopiersperre (talk) 13:26, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

@Kopiersperre: Hi! I agree, dental practitioner without formal qualifications (Q15805067) and dentist (Q27349) are not identical, and therefore they should remain separated in two items. The difference between them can be seen by the description and statements included in each of the items. So I do not understand what is the problem. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 15:32, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

Reversions in Spanish labels

Hi, why did you revert the changes I made to the Spanish labels? That change is required to show the correct genre in the infoboxes of eswiki and I added the male form also to the aliases to not loose information... And if you're going to revert so much things at the same time of the same user it's more polite at least telling in the discussion page why you do that instead of waiting for the other user to appear in yours... -- Agabi10 (talk) 22:02, 1 October 2015 (UTC)

@Agabi10: Labels in Wikidata should be the most used term for each item, so the chosen word needs to exist on the first place. The words added as labels in your edits were not recognised by any dictionary nor the most common form for a given noun. That is the reason why I reverted the changes. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 16:17, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

First of all I have to doubt about your assumption that the most common form of a term with gender differences is the male singular form of the name instead of the female singular one or even any of the plural forms of the name. And secondly you can see in the dictionary of the RAE that for example for the word doctor they show it as "doctor, ra", and the same happends for the word fontanero, which is shown as "fontanero, ra". And it happens the same with lots of other terms that I don't see the point on listing. Maybe a better approach should be something like what happens in WordReference, in which can see an example for the word doctora where we can see that it specifies all the terms linked to the form they refer, but this makes only sense at label level, because making a property for that makes the entities which gender differences in more than 2 or 3 languages nearly unmaintainable and developing that functionality will maybe require a redesign of core functionalities where most part of the software depend on... So going back to the point I am interested in. What other alternative I have to show the correct gender in the Spanish Wikipedia biographic infoboxes? Because the gender inaccuracy is one of the strongest cons for people against the use of Wikidata more or less at the level of the difficulty to detect vandalism from the client wiki and the learning curve for adding and updating data of Wikidata... -- Agabi10 (talk) 19:25, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

Q550341 alias VAllegrande Municipality

Was the Spanish alias VAllegrande Municipality for Q550341 intended? --Fomafix (talk) 04:44, 7 October 2015 (UTC)

@Fomafix: Thank you for letting me know. Autocompletion tends to play tricks on me. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 18:10, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Lien entre Copy Editing et Secrétaire de rédaction

Bonjour, Il semble que vous ayez supprimé le lien entre l’article anglais Copy Editing et l’article français Secrétaire de rédaction. Sans pour autant le remplacer par quelque chose de plus pertinent. Pouvez-vous m’expliquer pourquoi ? Palpalpalpal (talk) 16:18, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

@Palpalpalpal: copy editing (Q11759562) and copy editor (Q3477303) deal about different issues. Please check statements and descriptions before merging. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 18:03, 8 October 2015 (UTC)

Reversbutton

Hallo Andreasmperu, der Reversbutton ist für die Bekämpfung von Vandalismus gedacht. Leider missbrauchst du ihn für solche Edits, ohne Erklärung; vgl. duo (Q10648343). Wir können nicht raten, was du dir dabei gedacht hast. --Kolja21 (talk) 18:34, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Orange: subclass of color

May I ask why you removed https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q39338&type=revision&diff=213899182&oldid=206040320 from the color orange (Q39338)? "Instance of color" does not really work together if "instance of human" means an individual human. There are no real "instances of a color" because a color is not an object. - The constraint violations Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P465#Format of sRGB color hex triplet (P465) also rely on all colors being a subclass of (P279) of color. --Tobias1984 (talk) 10:52, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Aristophanes

Why does the category at Commons need to be listed twice? --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:15, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

What do you mean? Are you referring to commons:Aristofane? Because it is not the same as commons:Category:Aristophanes. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 05:24, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

No, I'm referring to "topic's main category", which is the first statement listed on the page. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:58, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: you was refering to the value of topic's main category (P910) and Andreasm to the Commons category (P373). Please look closely at it: they are different. Lugusto (talk) 16:05, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

It is still a duplication. It is also logically incorrect to link the category twice on the same data item, and also to link it at two different data items. The Category is linked at both Q43353 (where it is linked twice) and at Q8881849, which is the correct location for the category. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:16, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Conversation moved to EncycloPetey user talk. Lugusto (talk) 16:29, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

programador/programadora

In your revert to may change to programmer (Q5482740) you state there is no "consensus about this approach". In my opinion there is complete consensus that wikidata items are about concepts and are not about words and there is complete consensus that Q5482740 is an item that refers to the occupation of programming computers whether this is done by a man or a woman.

If there is no single word in Spanish that covers both male and female computer programmers then any single word label in Spanish for this occupation is wrong. The only correct label is a label that includes both male and female programmers because that is what Q5482740 refers to. programador/programadora may not be the best way to do this but it is more accurate than programador so it will serve until there is a consensus on programador/a or programador é programadora or whatever. Joe Filceolaire (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Consensus? Quite the contrary, It seems that your opinion does not have much support. French Wikipedians have even agreed to implement a different solution: fr:Module:Dictionnaire Wikidata/Métiers. Anyway, the discussion is still ongoing, so it would be unfair to say that there is any consensus at all.

As for the Spanish label, the masculin form is not only used for male individuals, but also for the entire class (see 2.1). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:40, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

It's true that the male form can be used to describe the collective, but that can't be applied when reading the property into the element page. Having only the male form specified in the label, even if it is valid for the use with collectives as a gender neutral form the same rule can't be applied when talking about a female individual. So the correct form to show in female elements would be the female form, and no the male form or the "combined" form. And the same happens with males, where the correct one is the male form and not the female nor "combined" form. With any of the options we are taking a decision which is not correct for all the cases, the thing is which of them can be considered better for our current situation. And as a final point I would like to point that in the link you put to show your point into the male form for both genders they are using the combined form everywhere ("profesor/profesora", "un padre/una madre feliz", etc), so it can't be too wrong. -- Agabi10 (talk) 23:39, 29 October 2015 (UTC)

Properties for persons

Andreas, why have you deleted instance of (P31) Wikidata property for items about people (Q18608871)? --Infovarius (talk) 18:18, 30 October 2015 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Now I understand your question! (please, provide a link next time in order to illustrate your point). If a X property is an instance of Wikidata property for birth or death (Q18608756), which is a subclass of Wikidata property for a person related event (Q18636233), in turn a subclass of Wikidata property for items about people (Q18608871): then, there is no need for the X property to be listed as an instance of Wikidata property for items about people (Q18608871). A different case where Wikidata property for items about people (Q18608871) is wrong in here Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 17:35, 3 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the answer! I undestand evertyhing. --Infovarius (talk) 17:09, 4 November 2015 (UTC)

لاجوردی و سرمه ای

Theese two articles had linked to the wrong persian articles. Please don't revert. The articles ultramarine should be linked to لاجوردی. The article persian blue should be linked to سرمه ای.  دیاکو ^{«  بحث  »} 18:56, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

اگر فارسی بلدید من در اینجا برایتان توضیح دادم. لطفا اگر قانع نشدید پاسخ من را بدهید. اگر هم قانع شدید لطفا واگردانی نکنید.

I've explained you here. If you're not convinced please answer me here. If you are convinced please don't revert my editions.  دیاکو ^{«  بحث  »} 19:08, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

estampa y grabado

Hola,

Me ha costado bastante deshacer la pelota de nodos que eran Q271588, Q11060274 y Q139106 ; creo que al menos, podrias preguntar.

Si te tomas unos minutos para ver lo que he hecho, te daras cuenta que unos cuantos items estaban asociados con "grabado" cuando eran "estampa" y vice-versa. Idem con el tercer elemento aqui citado, que no tiene equivalente en otros idiomas.

En caso de duda, por favor, hablémoslo.

Cordialmente, --Daehan (talk) 11:06, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

@Daehan: You are not the only one spending a lot of time trying to figure out things around here (just check the page history of any of those items and you'll see). Also, check labels, descriptions, and statements before making any decision regarding sitelinks moves (if you do that, you could tell there is a difference between the technique and the product of that technique). And please, use the discussion page before undoing changes, because another user might have taken time and effort to reach to that stage. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 18:14, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

Hola, te he hablado en tu idioma, no entiendo por qué no haces lo mismo.

Me pides que mire los elementos, pero es exactamente lo que he hecho: y tu, puedes decir lo mismo? Lo dudo mucho, porque te darias cuenta que la version que he dejado es la correcta. Por qué simplemente raccionar de manera conservadora y asumir de antemano que lo que he hecho no esta bien? Pruébame que he hecho algun error, por favor. Justifica tus reverts.

Cordialmente, --Daehan (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

No contesto en español para que otros usuarios puedan seguir la discusión. If you check history pages and discussions, you could notice that there are several users involved in this issue, and it would be a good idea to take them into account by discussing the subject in a centralised place (certainly, not in a user talk page) and in a language spoken by all of them.

I checked all the items in June, and it took me an hour and a half only to establish the content of each Wikipedia article. On the other hand, you took only half an hour to come to a new interpretation. This could have several explanations, but I can only speak for my work: yes, I have seen all items and each one of the sitelinks contained in them.

Please, stop disregarding other users, discuss changes, and wait for replies (it may take a while, but fortunately there is no rush). Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 21:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

It took my "half an hour" after previous study.

And yet, in my version, "estampa" (es), "estampe" (fr) and "printmaking" (en) are in the same item ; "grabado" (es), "gravure" (fr) and "engraving" (en) also. How can you justify that it shouldn't be like this?

Please, check again, for instance, read again the first sentence of the english articles: you're being confused with those terms. --Daehan (talk) 22:40, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

the Wachowskis (Q195719)

I understand your revert on the Wachowskis (Q195719), but this means we either get stuck with a constraint violation, or we need to edit the screenwriter (P58) statements that point to Q195719 into the individual brothers. And that won't only be the case for Q195719, but as well for a lot of other non-individuals with a P58 claim. I requested that for P57 and the consensus there was to allow groups of people to be a director. Same would go for P58. So what do you think the solution to this problem is? Getting a bot to change non-individual P57 & P58 claims to the individuals or allowing P106 on non-individuals too. Only other solution would be to remove the P106 constraint from P57 & P58, but that doesn't seem wise to me. Mbch331 (talk) 11:36, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

@Mbch331: I'm on my way out now, but I'll give a look at this issue later. In the meantime, please undo this change. Property constraints are supposed to be discussed first. So maybe start a discussion in Project Chat and leave a message in each property talk page? Also, I noticed that you have been indiscriminately adding screenwriter (Q28389) as an occupation. Take into account that a script is a fairly recent creation: basically most people born in the XIX century and before were rather a playwright (Q214917), so please double check all your edits and amend the ones that are wrong. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 11:51, 18 November 2015 (UTC)

Please don't remove the painter property from painters

Hi, I noticed I completely reverted your changes to Claude Lorraine Ferneley (Q19833247). For ease in searching for painters, we don't remove the painter property in order to show the field of work that a painter operated in. Thanks, --Jane023 (talk) 09:13, 21 November 2015 (UTC)

Flemish - Netherland

Please stop changing citizenship of Flemish people into 'Netherlands'. Flanders was never part of the Netherlands (except between 1815-1830) and the citizenship of people such as Rubens, van Dyck etc, never was 'the Netherlands', the country with this flag:

Thanks. Hasparian (talk) 03:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata de Mauricio Macri

Estimada: sugiero los siguientes cambios en la ficha de Mauricio Macri (no he podido hacerlo yo mismo porque los datos de wikidata están protegidos):
En la sección de Cónyuge debe figurar tan solo su esposa actual (JUliana Awada), no se encuentra casado con 3 esposas, que figuren las anteriores estando separado no lo considero necesario.
En la sección de Ocupación deberían cambiar de lugar las profesiones debido a que se "auto redacta" como "empresario, político y ingeniero civil", esa doble y-i es una falta de ortografía en la ficha. Saludos cordiales. --WIKI-WOLVERINE (talk) 12:17, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

WIKI-WOLVERINE I solved the problem of the y-i updating how the local property template works and for the error of the 3 wives I'm waiting until they remove the protection of the template to make the format to show one wife in each row with the start and end date next of each of them. Removing the statements from Wikidata is not a valid solution as far as the information you want to remove is correct. -- Agabi10 (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

WIKI-WOLVERINE solved both problems in the local templates in eswiki. -- Agabi10 (talk) 14:30, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Fotograf (Q33231)

Du hast als Admin der Wikidata (Babel:Deutsch=3) kürzlich die von mir getroffene Aussage, dass die 'Tätigkeit' eines Fotografen eben auch ein Hobby sein kann, revertiert. Fakt/Tatsache ist aber, dass der überwiegende Anteil der zeitgenössischen veröffentlichten Fotografien das Werk von Hobby-Fotografen ist. Willst Du das ernsthaft bestreiten? Logik?? Du gabst an, es handele sich um 'occupation' not 'activity'. Falls das als Begründung gelten soll, hieße das, dass formal ausschließlich professionelle/berufliche Tätigkeiten in dieser Aussage zugelassen sein sollen. Dann muss ich ganz deutlich darauf hinweisen, dass das von dem deutschen Wort 'Tätigkeit' in keiner Weise so ausgedrückt wird. Es ist geradezu irreführend! Dann muss das so geändert werden, dass damit eine korrekte Ausfüllung überhaupt erst ermöglicht wird, also etwa indem man es 'Erwerbstätigkeit' nennt. Allerdings bleibt dabei der sachlich gewichtige Einwand, dass eben der Anteil nichtprofessioneller Fotografen bei 99% liegt. Sollen die tatsächlich unter den Tisch fallen? Ich bitte Dich um eine Stellungnahme, wie Du darüber denkst. Wie lassen sich die von mir aufgezeigten sachlichen und logischen Probleme bestmöglich lösen? -- Justus Nussbaum (talk) 20:41, 5 December 2015 (UTC)

Cinematographic and TV series genres

Hi, I would like to ask you to stop changing the names to the cinematographic and TV series genres labels in Spanish to "cine de...". My reasons to ask this are the following ones:

• In general both "cine de..." and the genre alone are used in the same level.
• The disambiguation of the name should be done with the description of the entity, no in its label.
• When importing the information to the Wikipedia infobox if the film has more than one genre it becomes long and repetitive, having things like "cine de acción, cine de aventuras, cine de comedia y cine de animación" for example.
• The changes are making harder to keep the automatic categorization of the articles by genre working correctly.

I know that as far as both names are correct and the one with "cine de..." has the advantage of also disambiguates the term the one with "cine de..." can look better from a Wikidata point of view, but at least I don't lose anything for trying. Also, I added the TV series also in the request, but I don't know sure if the problem also exists in those ones, what I know is that automatic categorization through Wikidata is also used in that template too. Thanks for take the time to think about it. -- Agabi10 (talk) 05:07, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

@Agabi10: And I would ask you to stop using labels that do not mean a thing by themselves (at least, not in the sense that you are trying to use them). «Acción» does not mean film genre (easy to check it up in any dictionary). On the other hand, «de acción» refers to an artistic genre, so still not quite the meaning. So to refer specifically to the film genre, the only remaining options are «cine de acción» and «película de acción». Labels are supposed to be the more common name of the item in a given language. Would you please provide any references of a film genre called the way you are proposing? So no, it is not about disambiguation, but about a proper term widely used by Spanish speakers. As for your last two points, I do not see what Wikidata has to do with them. Wikidata is not intended to serve just Wikipedias, but much more than that. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:37, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean with the part of "they do not mean a thing by themselves", most of the data doesn't have any meaning without knowing the context given by the property they are attached to. If we have Titanic (Q44578) and James Cameron (Q42574) we have nothing, we still need a context like either director (P57), producer (P162) or screenwriter (P58). And I perfectly know that Wikidata is not intended to serve just Wikipedias, but that doesn't mean that it has to ignore the needs of Wikipedias either. I try to solve the problems through local templates when it is possible, I try my best in it, but in this situation I really don't see the point on keeping the "cine de..." labels. As far as I know most of the biggest Wikipedias don't want to use Wikidata's data in their articles and they only use the interwiki-link feature. I have to tell that if all the people ignores the problems the Wikipedias have when using Wikidata's data because it has nothing to do with Wikidata that situation is going to go increasing and even less Wikipedians would like to end up using Wikidata. That's not the point and we should try to get solutions that work for both, Wikipedia AND Wikidata. And finally I have to apologize if my message sounds rude, and I don't want to attack you or anything similar, the problem is that my English is not good enough to explain it in a way that sounds more polite. -- Agabi10 (talk) 01:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Major depressive disorder

You reverted my changes from yesterday. So I will explain them. "Major depressive disorder" in EN:WP needs to be coupled to "Depression" in DE:WP. The old connection was wrong. I will redo the change, and I hope you can leave it.--Saidmann (talk) 11:54, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

@Saidmann: Please stop. There is no problem with the links, and more important your edits are suppressing one sitelink from enwiki. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, there is a problem. One link, not several. This site does not link to its German sister site. In fact, it does not link to any German site. The correct German sister site is this site. The only thing I did was to install the correct link. If this had adverse side effects, I am sorry, but they were beyond my control.

In case you can do the correction without adverse side effects, I will be grateful if you do.--Saidmann (talk) 15:41, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

If you cannot fix this problem either, could you please give me an advice where to go? This matter is urgent, because these sites have 1000+ daily visitors, and wrong couplings to sister projects are quite embarrassing. Thank you.--Saidmann (talk) 12:03, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

@Saidmann: As I said before, there is no problem with the links. To reach to that conclusion, I have checked all sitelinks (not just enwiki and dewiki): en:Major depressive disorder is a mood disorder (Q188638), and belongs to Q42844 (no German article here), en:Depression (mood) is a mood (Q331769) and belongs to Q4340209. If you keep removing valid links despite warnings, you will be blocked, so please stop. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:33, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I corrected this. Major depressive Dissorder (en) = Depression (de). I changed the object-correlation completely, simply because the german Depression is a Disease and not a Mood. @Andreasmperu: you should not post any threats if the argument is clear. -- Andreas Werle (talk) 16:46, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Joan Miró

Hi! Thanks for fixing my Joan Miró recent edits. Sorry about it. I confused among two properties. --Kippelboy (talk) 05:26, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

No problem, although I have not found all of them. Just double check next time, specially when doing mas edits. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 05:29, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Cargo ocupado por el dirigente

office held by head of the organization (P2388) is ready. Mbch331 (talk) 17:27, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

And organization directed by the office or position (P2389) for the inverse property. Mbch331 (talk) 17:40, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Sobre cantones y provincias de Costa Rica

Hola. No soy muy experto en wikidata, pero tuve que deshacer un par de cambios que hiciste en las páginas de los cantones y provincias de Costa Rica, porque daba un error en la Wikipedia en español, poniendo en el título luego del nombre de la entidad (por ejemplo): "Alajuela, provincia de Costa Rica de Costa Rica". No supe como hacer la edición correcta, así que deshice a la edición anterior para que saliera bien. Si sabes como arreglarlo pues adelante. Saludos.--Rodtico21 (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

@Rodtico21: Hola. Agradezco tu interés en Wikidata. En caso tengas cualquier duda, puedes pasarte por Wikidata:Café o por mi página de usuario (lamentablemente, no hay muchos usuarios hispanohablantes activos por aquí). Por favor, no vuelvas a deshacer cambios sin conocer cómo funciona Wikidata: Wikidata apoya a los proyectos de Wikimedia, pero su campo de acción es más amplio. Por eso, si existe un problema en Wikipedia en español, la primera opción debe ser solucionarlo dentro de Wikipedia. Un buen indicador para saber si es un asunto de Wikidata es ver si el problema existe en otras Wikipedias: si el error solo aparece en Wikipedia en español, entonces es probable que no sea un tema a ser tratado en Wikidata. Veré el asunto que mencionas y dónde se encuentra el error. A simple vista (no veo casos similares en Wikipedia en inglés, francés o italiano), parece ser un problema de Wikipedia en español. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 00:50, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

Q2879095

Hello, you wrote "This item is not about a disambiguation page" [11]. What is a problem ? Bloubéri (talk) 12:40, 12 December 2015 (UTC)

@Bloubéri: Hello. What I meant was that fr:Neuropathie optique is a disambiguation page, while optic nerve disease (Q2879095) is not, so they should stay separated in two different items. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 01:32, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, but what justifies it except your opinion ? In this case, there is no other page than "Neuropathie optique" in french, so I think it's logic to link the two pages. Bloubéri (talk) 13:12, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Statue of Liberty (Q9202)

There is an issue with [this edit]. art of sculpture (Q11634) is a concept of art history not an object; it's a subclass of method (Q2920982), subclass of process (Q3249551), subclass of concept (Q151885) :Statue of Liberty (Q9202) is not a concept. Furthermore Statue of Liberty (Q9202) has monument (Q4989906) for instance of (P31) but this is not a subclass of sculpture (Q860861) instead of monumental sculpture (Q3476533). So with [this edit], Statue of Liberty (Q9202) is not a sculpture anymore and become a concept. I don't undertsand why you did you removed my fallback. Best reards. --Shonagon (talk) 09:32, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Sorry, I meant sculpture (Q860861). Already fixed. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 09:38, 13 December 2015 (UTC)

Hola

Andrea, tengo una duda: ¿Porque este artículo no muestra las interwikis y sí aparece conectado a este? Un abrazo.--Rosymonterrey (talk) 13:38, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Hola, Rosy! No encuentro ningún problema cuando revisé ambos artículos y el elemento en Wikidata: aparecen los interwikis en ambos artículos. Quizás una captura de pantalla pueda ayudar? Un abrazo, Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 22:22, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Proposal

Hi Andreasmperu,

Would you create this one? If you do step 1, I can do all others. --- Jura 08:34, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Jura. Unfortunately, I do not see any consensus with only two opinions, one for each side. It is just over a month old, so hopefully a bit more time will suffice. Pinging the participants of WikiProject Chemistry would be an option to speed up the feedback process. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 04:33, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi Andreasm, Thanks for looking into this. As there is a clear majority favoring the creation of the property, I think we can consider the consensus as being reached. We are not looking for unanimity. Besides, I don't think there are any oppose arguments needing addressing.

Not sure if you are aware of this. Given the pattern of problematic comments by the opposer, I had been asked to stop responding. Supposedly others do the same. --- Jura 08:09, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Q350895

According which sitelinks/labels/statements do you think it is not a subclass of village? I see en:... village, Commonscat: ... villages, fr-label also. --Infovarius (talk) 14:35, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Hi, Infovarius. I reached to that conclusion after weighting what the majority of links indicate (de, nl, af and eo). Also, by being a subclass of human settlement (Q486972), it can apply as a broad category. Otherwise, hamlet (Q5084) or village (Q532) are subclasses of rural settlement (Q14788575), and therefore much more specific. One solution would be to split en:abandoned village into a new (more specific) item including the Commonscat, but I prefer to avoid leaving a sitelink by itself unless it is absolutely necessary. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 04:49, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, en-link is supposed to be in separate item then. Because based on it, also ru and fr labels were set as more specific class. --Infovarius (talk) 09:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Q5457310

Hi Andreasmperu,
you reverted the merge with DE:Entzündliche_Stoffe claiming that Q5457310 is limited to liquids. You are right, by definition entzündliche Stoffe could cover also solids. But if you read the article it covers only flammable liquids: Quote: Als entzündlich gelten nach Richtlinie 67/548/EWG "flüssige Stoffe und Zubereitungen mit einem niedrigen Flammpunkt. Therefore I think the merge was a strong improvement compared to current situation where we don't have any link to German WP. Regards --Bert (talk) 12:22, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

In that case, could you propose the move to a more appropriate title in the German Wikipedia? Otherwise, this problem will keep coming back. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 04:52, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Q8037764

Hi Andreasmperu, earlier this month you removed two statements about the above item. So I don't repeat my mistake of adding them, could you help me understand why they were removed? Richard Nevell (talk) 13:00, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

@Richard Nevell:, I suppose that moat (Q88480) and garden (Q1107656) are objects but not qualities. --Infovarius (talk) 20:55, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Sounds sensible, in that case would using 'has part' (as done here) rather than 'has quality' make sense? Richard Nevell (talk) 20:58, 26 December 2015 (UTC)

botanical illustrator (Q3148760) / scientific illustrator (Q19507792)

Hi Andreasmperu, I have a question: Was Vincent van Gogh (Q5582) by profession a botanical illustrator (Q3148760)`? --Succu (talk) 21:55, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

botanical illustrator (Q3148760) is a subclass of scientific illustrator (Q19507792), which is a subclass of scientist (Q901). Last time I checked Vincent van Gogh (Q5582) was an artist, not a scientist, so no, he should not have scientific illustrator (Q19507792) as a profession, but painter (Q1028181) which is a subclass of visual artist (Q3391743). On the other hand, Atanasio Echeverría y Godoy (Q753425) and many others should have botanical illustrator (Q3148760) as an occupation. But you could tell all this by looking at the items, so I do not understand the reasoning behind your question. Please stop doing things like this. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 05:06, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Your reverts are not helpful and I know what is modeled. But I think it's not correct. Enwiki (I know it's not a source) defines botanical illustrator as a person who paints, sketches or otherwise illustrates botanical subjects. Not a single word about profession. Georg Dionysius Ehret (Q62952) was paid for his botanical illustration (Q3796486) and earned his living with them. Charles Plumier (Q468460), a Order of the Minims (Q1367736), made wonderful botanical illustrations, but never was paid for them. Generally I think botanical illustrator (Q3148760) is an activity and not a occupation. Thus my question. --Succu (talk) 06:51, 28 December 2015 (UTC) BTW: Stuttgart Database of Scientific Illustrators ID (P2349) has no restrictions.

criterion used (P1013)

You're right, criterion used (P1013) is not optimal here. But which property to use instead? See this discussion here. There we decided to go with criterion used (P1013). --Jobu0101 (talk) 01:26, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

I do not see any decision nor any consensus reached in that discussion. A suggestion is no more than that. The property was created for a different purpose. This could change, but such modification would need to be reflected on the property talk page and documentation. Currently, there is no property for what you are trying to link, so I suggest you propose the creation of a specific property. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 05:14, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I did so. It's my first property proposal, so if you want, you may help me there. --Jobu0101 (talk) 08:28, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Can we agree on letting criterion used (P1013) as qualifier for the moment? Once we've got the new property I'll change the occurences of criterion used (P1013). That's easier for me, then we don't lose the information. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:42, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

Done. --Jobu0101 (talk) 09:59, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Imperial Circus Dead Decadence in WikiData (late response)

I just now got your message from 2 years ago. I did not realize what I did. I meant to add the link to the English article in my Japanese page's list of contributions. I also meant to use the sandbox to translate the English article to Japanese. Thank you for the correction. I apologize for the long late response and any inconvenience I may have caused. Ruukasu2005 (talk) 18:14, 20 May 2016 (UTC)