User talk:ArthurPSmith

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

See User talk:ArthurPSmith/Archive for older discussions.

list of property proposal for Wikidata[edit]

Dear Arthur, I have created a property proposal for wikidata, I hope I have done this correctly. In this process I have noticed that the page was added however to an admin category of pages exceeding the allowed inclusions, I am not sure this is relevant, but I thought perhaps just to drop a message about that. Thank you very much! --Pietromarialiuzzo (talk) 13:56, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pietromarialiuzzo: Sure, it is a good start. Several pointers: (1) the "represents" line ("Subject item" in the template) should point to the item for the specific database ("Beta masaheft" in this case?) that the property is associated with, or other item that is specifically related to what the property does. You should probably create an item for this project if there isn't one already. You can move the current values you have here down to the "Domain" line. (2) the data type for this is surely "external-id" and not "string", as it is a real identifier for an entity with the project. (3) It is useful to link the examples (use the single-square-bracket '[' syntax) using your formatter URL to make it easy for readers to verify these links work and are useful. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:25, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

VG databases[edit]

Indeed, there sure are a lot :-) I’m conscious of the extra-load I’m causing :-/ ; will stop with these soon. And then process proposals myself, as penance ^_^'. Jean-Fred (talk) 17:53, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

…and thanks for your patience and diligence in processing these proposals (mine and others’), I appreciate it :) Jean-Fred (talk) 17:54, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Canmore monument type[edit]

Would it be possible to mark this proposal as "ready" too ?  :-) Jheald (talk) 18:49, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jheald: Done! ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:57, 3 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creating a Bot[edit]

Hello Arthur,

I asked if it is possible to add statements with a bot in a way what is similar to QuickStatements. Can you look to the page Wikidata:Bot requests and answer there please if you know a way how it works. I think it can help for big uploads. -- Hogü-456 (talk) 16:27, 10 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property proposal discussion progress[edit]

Please pardon my visit to your talk page with a request! Would you be willing to take a look at Wikidata:Property_proposal/WeChangEd_ID to see if you'd be up for creating it? Thank you for considering. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 22:14, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done! ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Japanese label[edit]

I don't think it is a practice to add space between surname and given name in Japanese labels. None of Japanese article use this practice (example).--GZWDer (talk) 13:48, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was just cutting/pasting from the source documents (which were Japanese websites). Chinese names don't use a space, but it seems to be common for Japanese. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@GZWDer: Example here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
But if you think it's wrong I don't mind being corrected! ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Japanese Wikipedia does not use this convention (ja:WP:NC#PERSON). I don't know what should the practice of Wikidata be.--GZWDer (talk) 14:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that jawiki page is fairly clear; I don't see any reason why Wikidata should be different, I'll follow that rule going forward (and fix ones I notice going back). Thanks. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property proposal - historic county[edit]

Thanks for looking in at Property proposal/historic county. Where do we go now to press the button on creating it? Does it need extra work because of the limited "Allowed values"? I've not done one of these before. Thanks. Hogweard (talk) 17:42, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Hogweard: Once the property has been created, other people can add constraints or do other parts of the process by editing the property page. So all that's really needed is to hit the "create" button - but you have to have "property creator" permission to do it. Since I was slightly involved I'd prefer if somebody else actually took that on in this case. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:41, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Creating properties for premodern works[edit]

If you would not mind creating these (I do not have the necessary permissions), I can subsequently tidy them up:

Thank you for your help with these! AndrewNJ (talk) 13:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your help with all these is most appreciated! AndrewNJ (talk) 19:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@AndrewNJ: You're welcome! All done I think - a few of them were completed by somebody else. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hindi as language qualifier[edit]

I can not add Hindi as a language qualifier for my entries. It shows an error of code.

Please consult!

Murchana (talk) 12:47, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Murchana: I'm not sure exactly what you are trying to do - can you give me a link to the item you were trying to edit, and which property you were using? If it's a monolingual text property, then the language should be given as the "Wikimedia language code" - which should be 'hi' for Hindi. See the relevant statements on Hindi (Q1568). But if this isn't helpful please ask again! ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property creation[edit]

Hi Arthur,

Would you review/create this (fairly urgent) and that. If you click create I/others will/can complete the properties. Also, I responded to your feedback on hardiness and Filceolaire. --- Jura 13:14, 1 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property proposal Donations[edit]

Hey @ArthurPSmith:, thank you for moving the Wikidata:Property proposal/Donations to Ready. Is there anything I can/should do to take this further? Or is there kind o a queue admins are working on? Best --Newt713 (talk) 14:48, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect. Thank you! --Newt713 (talk) 14:46, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


I really don't appreciate the reverts. Especially when the topic hasn't been resolved and most people disagreed with the premise that you can't translate a proper noun into English. I'm not doing this off of personal preferences and neither should you. If there's a sound policy based reason behind it, fine. But I have yet to see one and the fact that you ignored my examples and can't answer basic questions about it anymore then Matthew hk can shows your not doing it from one. I've been pretty reasonable about this and I really don't feel like edit warring. We should be able to settle it in a civil manor. Just reverting me instead of actually discussing it or at least providing an actual policy to base it on isn't though. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, I asked about this on help:Label, because unlike you and Matthew hk I'm actually making a good faith effort to work this out. If there isn't a clear answer or the discussion involves canvassing/personal attacks from either of you, I will just revert you and report you for edit warring. Feel free to add a constructive, on topic comment to it if you have one though. --Adamant1 (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Adamant1: Sorry, I thought we had come to a conclusion there, and I went ahead and looked at the examples presented and tried to judge what was the right solution. If there's a specific question you still have that I haven't answered, feel free to go ahead and ask it again. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It's cool. It seemed like to that me that you and Mathew hk decided based on your opinions and just went ahead with reverting me without a sound reason behind it or actually explaining anything. Maybe it will be figured out in the label talk page though at least. --Adamant1 (talk) 03:49, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Arthur,

Would you click create on the COVID one? I would complete it as needed. --- Jura 17:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Ciao ArturPSmith, do we continue to propose changes on your Git, but with formatter URL (P1630) =… or do we have to create a developer account?

What is the procedure?

Thanks for all. —Eihel (talk) 17:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

proposed changes in git is fine. Yes, the URL has changed, as is being switched over to the new domain with this pattern. But nothing else has changed. You'll start seeing this with all the other tools too (if you haven't already)! ArthurPSmith (talk) 01:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Eihel: Forgot to ping! ArthurPSmith (talk) 01:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

property creation: "banned in"[edit]

Hi Arthur! As you know, I proposed the property "banned in" recently to aid with interconnecting items. Instead of creating this property "banned in" you have suggested starting to create thousands of new data items like "Ban of slavery in Qatar", "Ban of chewing gum in Singapore", "Ban of Breitbart from en.wp", "Ban of Mediator in France".

I asked you to explain how such tri-partite items would be linked to the data items of fundamental interest on the discussion page but forgot to ping you. Could you explain how those looking for a list of all medicines banned in France in 2009, or for all the dates of slavery being banned, or for all the news organizations banned from en.wp could do so easily from your proposed reification of 1000s of banned in x predicates into items.

This would be very easy with a property, which is why I'm asking you to demonstrate that that information could be as easily recovered automatically with a SPARQL query. Before I start creating the reifications you suggest, I would like to be sure that this information would not remain inaccessible in the labels of thousands of items. Here is a link to the discussion for convenience. Thanks for your help cleaning up the disinformation in WikiData (e.g. the problem of benfluorex (Q421695) being listed as a medication, without mention that is banned in France, was taken off the market in Spain, Italy, etc.) SashiRolls (talk) 22:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your perseverance. Please don't give up before you've explained your proposed model, though! Based on your additions I assume you plan to generate the query along the following lines: Find all (instances of ban) where (main subject = medication) and (date=2009) and (country = France). The sticking point I see is that (main subject = Benfluorex) is not the same as (main subject = medication) though Benfluorex is an (instance of a medication). I would love to see the SPARQL query you are aiming for... won't you be so kind as to add that last bit of pedagogy, please? So far, we've added an item and 4 statements to accomplish (perhaps?) what could be done with one property statement... SashiRolls (talk) 20:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SashiRolls: I'm afraid I don't have time for this discussion right now. I may get back to it, but please engage other people on this too. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, no problem. Thanks for trying to explain your intuition. SashiRolls (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Inviting editors for a short interview study[edit]

Hi Arthur,

I recently created an interview study research proposal to talk with Wikidata editors and understand their perception of Wikidata reuse. I have posted an invite on Wikidata project chat but I'm not getting responses. So I'm writing to ask if you could have any suggestions on other ways to recruit editors to participate. Thank you very much! Have a great day. Chuankaz (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Chuankaz: I'm not sure what to advise. For those who read your proposal in some detail it seemed to be looking for people who were roughly evenly divided in their editing of Wikipedia (do you mean in any language or just English?) and Wikidata, but I'm not sure there are many who fit that criterion - at least for myself I primarily edit only Wikidata, not anything else. I've occasionally edited English Wikipedia, and also in French, German, and some other languages, but in Wikidata I have thousands of times more edits. Maybe you should do a short first-round one or two-question survey to better characterize what you are looking for? ArthurPSmith (talk) 03:02, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the very useful advice! It would be great if participants have experience in editing Wikipedia only because it could provide a contrast of experience. It is not mandatory but I did not clarified it clearly in my proposal. I'll definitely adjust it. Thanks again! Chuankaz (talk) 03:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

National Film Board of Canada director identifier[edit]

Hi Arthur. Thank you for creating P6891 last year. I just noticed it, and was wondering if I should help by adding the ID codes from to items on NFB filmmakers. My question is, how does it help, because at this time, it doesn't seem to appear as an authority control identifier on Wikipedia? thanks, Shawn à Montréal (talk) 00:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Shawn à Montréal: It is helpful to link the NFB identifier to all the other external identifiers within Wikidata. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia rules on authority control but I suspect if there's a large enough/reliable set of identifiers on Wikidata then there is a process for adding it. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, with that in mind I will start adding them in WD, if I can. Shawn à Montréal (talk) 20:15, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello again. Actually thanks to Simon Villeneuve at frwiki it is being used. One either adds the template {{ONF}} or better yet it appears alongside other identifiers using {{Bases audiovisuel}}. So it is being put to good use. Shawn à Montréal (talk) 20:41, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Regarding your revert: In my opinion it would make more sense to have lyricist as a subclass of author and songwriter as a subclass of lyricist and composer. What do you think? --Discostu (talk) 07:42, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Discostu: Actually the subclass statements on songwriter (Q753110) don't make sense as they are, and what you propose wouldn't really help: 'A' subclass of 'B' is supposed to mean that every instance of A is also an instance of B, but not every songwriter is a composer. Maybe it should go directly to creator (Q2500638) as superclass? Anyway, songwriter definitely shouldn't be a subclass of lyricist, as not all songwriters are lyricists. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:52, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sports season[edit]

Hello, I must have done that by error, maybe due to confusion. Actually it should have been the rugby union season as subclass of sports season. -- Blackcat (talk) 07:56, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dowker-Thistlethwaite name property[edit]

Hi! I've amended Wikidata:Property proposal/Dowker-Thistlethwaite name to take your suggestion into account. Could you take a look at the finished proposal, and check if it's OK? Kind regards, The Anome (talk) 14:20, 27 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

New OpenRefine reconciliation service[edit]


Thank you for wearing the {{User loves OpenRefine}} userbox on your user page!

Because the existing Wikidata reconciliation service has had severe performance issues recently, I have created a new one which should be faster and more robust. You can add it to OpenRefine in the reconciliation dialog with the following URL: (or by replacing en by any other language code).

If you have any issues with this new service, let me know.

Happy reconciling! − Pintoch (talk)

Thanks, I'll give it a try (I was just using OpenRefine last week, but probably won't be again for a little while...) ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Property proposal/Henrik Ibsen skrifter ID Edit conflict[edit]

An edit conflict occured. I hope my last edit made things a bit clearer (?). Pls have a second look if possible. Breg Pmt (talk) 18:47, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Pmt: Looks ok to me, thanks for letting me know. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:57, 10 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Opening hours[edit]

I think Syced and Hannes' concerns were addressed in the opening hours proposal. Would you mind going ahead and creating the property? NMaia (talk) 01:24, 7 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We sent you an e-mail[edit]

Hello ArthurPSmith,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

error in GRID[edit]

This entry contains an alias "Zūnyì yīxuéyuàn", which is wrong. How can this be removed?--GZWDer (talk) 16:47, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@GZWDer: You can send GRID a message, or if you'd prefer I can do it, I've sent them many corrections in the past. It will probably take a few months to show up though, they don't update things very quickly. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:01, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Are you sure about this? As fas as I know, EMEF never had any operations in Amadora — rather in Campolide, Guifães, FFoz, Barreiro and elsewhere. In Amadora existed for several decades a much bigger rail manuf. company — Sorefame. Maybe there was some confusion between these two? Tuvalkin (talk) 04:14, 21 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Tuvalkin: That was based on the GRID data - here - but I didn't independently verify it, feel free to correct? ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:01, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I saw the GRID page you linked to — but how is GRID content created and sourced and why do we trust it? I will not correct it because I’m not 100% sure myself right now, but when I come around to find the necessary authoritative sources for each and every EMEF facility (there were many: EMEF is it’s mostly a 1990s privatization of all rolling stocks repair workshops in Portugal, and every major station had one) I will add the info to pt:EMEF, S.A. (and pt:Sorefame) — I will not come over to WikiData to waste my time clicking UI rat mazes, no offense. Tuvalkin (talk) 23:58, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jewish Museum Berlin object ID[edit]

Thanks for fixing my typo at Jewish Museum Berlin object ID and not excoriating me for it! --RAN (talk) 21:35, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I want my talk page to look like User talk:Belteshassar's talk page[edit]

Hi. I'm asking for your help(totally out of the blue) if my talk page can look like User talk:Belteshassar's talk page. LotsofTheories (talk) 21:03, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

L14698 and L184508[edit]

Hi! I just came across the two lexemes bow (L14698) and bow (L184508) I asked myself why these two lexemes were not combined into one lexeme. Because you are the creator of both lexemes, what your intention is behind them? --Gymnicus (talk) 22:07, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Gymnicus: Because they are two distinct lexemes, pronounced differently even though they are spelled the same and have the same forms. See the differing senses on the two lexemes. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In my opinion, the different senses are no justification for separate lexemes. As a counter-example to this thesis, I would cite the lexeme Bienenstich (L10226) In the German language, this lexeme describes both the sting of a bee and a sheet cake. These two senses are also completely different and yet it is a lexeme. There must be other differences. For example, by the lexemes Bank (L34723) and Bank (L34791) the reason for the separation is the different grammatical forms. In this case of bow (L14698) and bow (L184508) the different pronunciation you mentioned could be the reason for the separation into two lexemes. But then, from my point of view, the different pronunciation should also be specified. There are various properties that can be used for this in Wikidata. You can see an overview in the template Lexicographical properties. Perhaps you can incorporate at least one of the three properties into each of the two lexemes so that one can see the difference between them. --Gymnicus (talk) 14:44, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Gymnicus: I think any English speaker would understand the difference by looking at the senses, that was my implication. Yes hopefully pronunciation properties will be added, but I've added thousands of lexemes without those statements, and working on other things right now, so it's unlikely I will get to it. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:05, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
One reference on this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:07, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
or more humorously... ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:11, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
“I think any English speaker would understand the difference by looking at the senses” - This assumption has already been refuted by me, as you have already noticed. I speak English, but I didn't know the difference between bow (L14698) and bow (L184508). That is why it could have been that I thoughtlessly put the two lexemes together because I saw no difference between them, except for the different meanings. But as already shown on the lexeme Bienenstich (L10226), this is no reason not to merge the two lexemes. I think it's a shame that you don't add the pronunciation. Then one must hope that the two lexemes are not carelessly put together by someone. Unfortunately, I cannot add the pronunciation either, because I have no idea about it. --Gymnicus (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strange merge[edit]

Hi Arthur, you've merged de:Universidad Santa María (Ecuador) (founded 1996) with en:Federico Santa María Technical University (founded 1931). [2] --Kolja21 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kolja21: It is the same institution - however the inception date from GRID would appear to be incorrect (based on the dewiki text). It seems to be a branch of the Chilean university, Federico Santa María Technical University (Q457793); I'll link them together. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, wait, now I don't understand your comment. I didn't merge the de entry with the en entry, the de entry is for the university in Ecuador, the en one is from Chile. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:35, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Should Android and iOS versions of apps have seperate items? I cannot for the life of me find anything regarding the modeling of apps --Trade (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: No, I think a single item is generally the right thing for a single piece of software - see Wikidata:WikiProject Informatics/Software/Properties and related pages. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:53, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: @ArthurPSmith: You should create separate item for iOS and Android otherwise it will be messed. Eurohunter (talk) 20:44, 15 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Ho ricevuto un messaggio tuo ma non ho capito se c'è un testo.... Ho fatto qualcosa?...  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gabriele.badii (talk • contribs) at 18:41, April 16, 2021‎ (UTC).

@Gabriele.badii: It's just a standard welcome template - I try to add it when I see somebody commenting on here who seems new. Nothing you did was a problem at all! ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:27, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Gabriele.badii (talk) 12:34, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Call for participation in the interview study with Wikidata editors[edit]

Dear ArthurPSmith,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at the King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized (?) to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me on or use this form with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me using the email mentioned above if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.



judge (L4623)[edit]

Apologies for the incorrect edit. The context is linking the particular form in Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow! (L501732). I meant imperative (Q22716) but was confused; 'case' versus 'mood' should have tipped me off. Sorry again and thanks for catching it. Arlo Barnes (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • No problem - English is in some ways a much simpler language than some others... ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:21, 11 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Property proposal: Tax Identification Number (Belarus)[edit]

Hi Arthur,

Could you take a look at Wikidata:Property proposal/Tax identification number when you have a chance? Aestrum (talk) 17:23, 3 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting edits by Kinvidia[edit]

Is there a chance you could revert all changes to existing items yesterday by Kinvidia (talkcontribslogs)? See my comments on his user page. --Hjart (talk) 06:46, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Hjart: (1) I'm not an administrator so I don't think I can do that easily, and (2) there are thousands of changes from that user dated August 26 (almost all Quickstatements), many of them creating new items, and the ones I checked look ok to me. However, the user is not responding to comments on their talk page so maybe something should be brought up on the Administrators Noticeboard about this? ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:32, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I posted a note on the noticeboard. We'll see what comes of it... ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:41, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

music created for[edit]

Hi, thanks for marking "created for" ready for creation. Any chance that the related proposal music created for could also be ready? There's only been one objection and many supports, and I had hoped I had answered the objections. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Author Disambiguator stalled?[edit]

Hi Arthur, I'm not being impatient, but I noticed that the last few batches haven't been executing. There even seem to be some that are still at READY, but are no longer queued [3]. Maybe you could take a look? Thanks! --Azertus (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Azertus: Thanks for letting me know! The background job runner had definitely crashed. I restarted the server - however it won't automatically restart those queued batches, you need to manually restart at least one of them (or submit a new batch) and then I think it will run the others; it doesn't save OAuth credentials in a way that it can use them after restart. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:35, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Alatalojm, GerardM, BugWarp, Daniel Mietchen, Infovarius: See above - sorry for the problem, but you need to check your batches on Author Disambiguator and restart at least one of them. Thanks! ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:46, 9 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:WikiProject Energy - Are power outages relevant?[edit]

Do you know if it would be relevant to add power outages to Wikidata? I know of a power outage where around 10 thousand people had a power outage for about an hour. Would this be relevant to Wikidata or should I consider making my own Wikibase instance where I can add such information? Only asking for advice since I find Wikidata scary.(the politics of Wikidata, not the database software itself) Oduci (talk) 14:03, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Oduci: It may depend on the size of the dataset you are planning, and also whether the outages are notable in the sense that they are documented by some third party source (a newspaper article for instance). We already have things like 2009 Brazil and Paraguay blackout (Q32375), 2006 European blackout (Q1324840), and 2006 Queens blackout (Q4606840) - along with many more instances of power outage (Q828827). If you plan to add at most a few thousand such things here it's probably fine. If you have millions of them, then a separate wikibase would likely be a better choice, just for capacity reasons. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:15, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

dissertation program ready but not appearing on the list of proposals ready for creation[edit]

Hi, thanks for marking the proposal for dissertation program ready for creation. But do you know why it is not appearing on the list of proposals that are ready for creation? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 16:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@UWashPrincipalCataloger: It seems to be there now - maybe there's some delay? Not sure how that works. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:57, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Or maybe I am just going blind! Anyway, thanks again! UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:27, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Property proposal/ film ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/Channel One Russia show ID[edit]

Good evening. Could you summarize my suggested properties, which have been ready for a few weeks now? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 20:54, 11 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your recent merges[edit]

I guess I created some items based on redirecting DOIs. Thanks for merging them. I was aware that was happening, but I thought I repaired them. I'm not surprised I missed some, but I regret missing so many. Trilotat (talk) 01:45, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trilotat: I don't think you were the worst offender! I've been going through the list at User:Ivan A. Krestinin/To merge/Scholarly articles and done what I can so far; waiting on the next update to that list to see if there's a lot still left. Unfortunately there are also many non-duplicates in that list due to some journals listing several distinct articles under the same DOI, so just merging based on DOI isn't sufficiently reliable. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:55, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata:Property proposal/original catalog description[edit]

Hi Arthur,

Any chance you could take a look again at Wikidata:Property proposal/original catalog description? Other than Jura, there seems to be mostly support, and no additional comments in almost a month now. It would be great to be able to add these statements soon. Thanks! Dominic (talk) 15:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dominic: I am really not familiar with Commons or SDC at all; I'd prefer that a property creator more familiar with the situation do this. Check out the list on Wikidata:Property creators and see if you recognize anybody who might be more involved with Commons. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, no worries! I just saw you'd commented on it earlier. Thanks! Dominic (talk) 16:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

pole positions (P10640)[edit]

Hello. Would you help with this property? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 15:43, 16 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MasterRus21thCentury: It looks ok to me? I guess somebody else helped? ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:32, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]