User talk:Billinghurst

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Wikinews and elephants[edit]

Hi. I only just noticed (through a spot-check) that way back in May 2017 you had moved the link for en.wn topic category "Elephants". This is (so I gather) one of the more easily confused principles of item linking from Wikidata: Wikinews topic categories are one of several cases where non-content pages on a sister project correspond to Wikipedia articles (another that comes to mind is Wikisource author-space pages). So that n:en:Category:Elephants corresponds to w:en:Elephant, not w:en:Category:Elephants. (Just letting you know; I've fixed it, so, no further action needed atm on that particular item.) --Pi zero (talk) 12:54, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

@Pi zero: yep /Archives/2017#Wikinews_categories  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:57, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
(Ah! That explains my feeling of deja vu. Thx.) --Pi zero (talk) 14:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Deja vu? I have a feeling that I have had that before. :-)  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:56, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Margaret McLarty[edit]

Hi Billinghurst. I'm looking for references to support the date of birth and date of death of Margaret McLarty (Q15429233) which you added. This was over a year ago so you might not remember but where did you get that information? Cheers. Pichpich (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

@Pichpich: That would appear to be VIAF-supplied data that I added. I have done a little search, and found birth date in a secondary record, though it looks sound (1929 and 1961 supplied). And as I am typing, I have found an obituary.  — billinghurst sDrewth 20:56, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
... and I thought I was actually pretty good at hunting down references... This is great, thanks. :-) Pichpich (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
The scan I see for the obituary is pretty ordinary and only the first page, someone with good library access should be able to get you a better copy of the obituary for the article. You probably are good, I have similar goodness, adding good access, and many years of people research experience, though will admit to be better on older time periods.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:06, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
@Pichpich:Noting that I don't see either a death in GRO for 1996, nor a probate in England 1996, 97, 98, so not seemingly dying in England. I don't have access to Scottish records from here, would have to check those another time.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:16, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
The obituary is good enough. It only provides the year of birth/death but we're talking about a really marginal biography here so I'd say you've already spent too much time on this! Cheers, Pichpich (talk) 21:25, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
Hah! You should see my obsessiveness with working through s:Category:Authors with unidentified initials‎‎ and other such obscure author categories identifying them for posterity.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:35, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Wikisource[edit]

Hey Billinghurst, this edit leaves an empty item, and the sitelink apparently isn’t connected to Wikidata right now. Is this the desired solution, and what do we do with the empty item now? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 06:15, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

@MisterSynergy: I would have nominated it for deletion following removing the link. I don't know why that wasn't undertaken. It isn't a notable part of the book, so it shouldn't have an item, and should be deleted. There were some other pages from the same work that I processed similarly, and I don't know whether they were deleted or not. As the items are not labelled for action, and after deletion they are unrecognisable, it is a hard process to monitor. — billinghurst sDrewth 07:18, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Thanks, now deleted (see next comment). I wouldn't be surprised if someone showed up to request undeletion, to be honest. Help:Import NBD from enwikisource/lists/other pages lists a couple of similar items. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
Okay, already undeleted. It was RfD’d by you at Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2018/04/09#Q23989688, but User:Jura1 and User:علاء decided to keep it. I also re-add the sitelink to prevent that someone creates another item for it, but I don’t express any preference for this solution hereby. Maybe Jura and Alaa want to comment as well here. —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:35, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: A pretty rubbish decision process IMNSHO, and not what I consider in line with Wikidata talk:Wikisource when it was discussed what was notability to be included. Under this new undiscussed methodology I look forward to each chapter of every novel being included, every index in every biographical and non-fiction work, and every table of contents, each on a level of these pages. Hey we may as well add in the advertisements and the like in the front matter and the end matter. It is a nonsense, and brings no value to the Wikisource work. The pages that I identified are contextual to the work to themselves, and not relevant outside of the work. If it is simply a wikidatian making a decision on inclusivity criteria without reference to the Wikisources, and the discussion on inclusion, especially by parties who did not participate when WS was rolled out. The subpages to be included are those that are referential to the outside world, so those with biographical detail, and references.  — billinghurst sDrewth 08:17, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
As I indicated, I do not express preference for the current situation ("no deletion"). I undeleted the item due to the fact that I overlooked relevant previous discussions, and thus the deletion was a formal mistake. Wikidata talk:Wikisource is a bit imprecise to learn about Wikisource sitelinks. There is Wikidata:Wikisource/How to help#Works; if I get it right, the items listed in Help:Import NBD from enwikisource/lists/other pages are not really covered by it… —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:29, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

items for Maupassant's editions and works[edit]

Hi, recently, I've been working on Maupassant's works, and systematically creating and linking frws editions. Each time I found en editions on the work item, I removed them, and created the edition item with title, language, author, translator when I could find it.

Just wanted to let you know, in case I let some slip through, or forgot to re-create the item for enws. Please let me know if I you find mistakes :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:32, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: I love working with a knowledgeable professional. Not certain that I would even know what we have, though will keep an eye out.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:41, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
also, for your info, Tpt has created a nice script that allows to auto-import author, translator, publisher, date, etc. from the header in frws [1]. Maybe samwilson would be interested in adapting it for enws : it really saves a lot of time, especially for poems and short stories grouped in a collection ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:49, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
sorry, just realized I forgot the link User:Tpt/ws2wd.js --Hsarrazin (talk) 14:51, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
^^^ @Samwilson:  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:53, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

Æsop and La Fontaine tales[edit]

Hi Billinghurst,

I just began disantangling Aesop's and La Fontaine's tales, that have been mixed up, because of similar title, and probably to have direct interwiki links.

On Aesop's tales, there are generally a lot of wikisource links. For enws, links are like s:en:The_Lion_and_the_Mouse_(Aesop), which makes me hesitate to leave them on the work item, because there are 4 translations of the same original greek text, which then could not be separate editions.

What do you think I should do with those ? leave them on work item ou create a (fictive) en edition one ?

PS : on frws, we would have each translation on a separate page, which would be simpler ;) --Hsarrazin (talk) 11:58, 6 May 2018 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: They are old transcriptions for us, and we wouldn't do them that way now (same with the Bible pages). Issue is that no one has gone and split them apart, and probably due to lack of clear edition data. I would suggest that in this ugly state that they should be linked to the literary work, as when/if we split them the pages would be a versions page ("disambiguation" equivalents).  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:51, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
OK. That's what I would do on fr, but I couldn't be sure enws would do the same.
Feel free to help with them if you want ;D - thanks. --Hsarrazin (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Still fixing DNB linking at enWS, day 8, or thereabouts.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:30, 6 May 2018 (UTC)