User talk:GerardM

Jump to: navigation, search

About this board

Edit description

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:GerardM/Archive 1 on 2015-08-10.

By clicking "Add topic", you agree to our Terms of Use and agree to irrevocably release your text under the CC BY-SA 3.0 License and GFDL
ChristianKl (talkcontribs)

Hi Gerard,

you didn't sign your entries at Wikidata talk:Strategy 2017/Cycle 2/A Truly Global Movement#What else is important to add to this theme to make it stronger.3F. Can you do it?



Reply to "Signing posts"

Possible problem with Primary sources tool or dataset

Quiddity (talkcontribs)

Hi :-)

I was skimming through the "families who’ve had the same occupation for five generations" WDQS example from the wikidata newsletter, and saw this odd entry.

I took a look at the articles/references, and those parent attributes for Buffie Johnson (Q21648341) were incorrect - both names are of her teachers, not relatives - Stanley William Hayter (Q641304) and Francis Picabia (Q157321).

I'm just letting you know, in case this indicates a problem with either the tool, or the dataset it was using in that instance. Hopefully you know where to best followup. Thanks!

GerardM (talkcontribs)

There is a difference between there being a problem with data and problems with a tool. The fact that some data is wrong is to be expected. At that Wikidata is no better than Freebase. The problem is that we do not accept our own failure and insist on the perfection of others.

I am not OK with the discrimination of Freebase data. I am not OK with the way the Primary Sources tool works. It is in my opinion a disgrace. Thanks,

Reply to "Possible problem with Primary sources tool or dataset"
Billinghurst (talkcontribs)

I had found that system has been better and auto-creating the text descriptions so I had stopped creating/adding them. Today, however, I found an issue.

I was looking to add "Gray" as a given name, it is lost in all the mix of a long list of gray items. So I did a full search and the issue is that the search function doesn't look into the added tags, it only look at the name/description/alias fields. So searching for "gray name" returned zero hits. Searching for "gray" alone returns way too many hits, so it is problematic. Adding an alias or multiple rather than a description to overcome this weakness is equally problematic.

Anyway, there for your reflection.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

Try [ This]

Billinghurst (talkcontribs)

Thanks, thoughusing reasonator as yet another window regularly for the work that I am doing for surnames for enWS authors is not sustainable, when you one is needing to create them if they don't exist

Reply to "free text descriptions vs not adding"
ValterVB (talkcontribs)

I have reverted your edit on date of death. If you do this task periodically maybe is better wait 24-48 hours before add the data on WIkidata, because on it.wikipedia add date of death is a frequent vandalism and need some time before detect them.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

There is no way for me to know how long it has been since a Wikipedia was added. You may revert these changes particularly when there is vandalism is in play. There are literally thousands of edits waiting to happen. They are likely to be less than 1% vandalism so the ration is not that bad.

ValterVB (talkcontribs)


Jura1 (talkcontribs)

The 2017 list is sorted by time of add

GerardM (talkcontribs)

It is not about 2017, it can be in any of the people who died

Reply to "About date of death from it.wikipeida"
Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

Any reasonable person knows that Hillary Clinton is a member of the Democratic Party and opposes the Republican Party. Please, be more careful with your edits, or I will not hesitate to ask that you be blocked from editing.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

Please check the English Wikipedia article for Hillary Clinton. She has been a member of the Republican Party. Please be more careful with your accusations.

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

And yet you admitted I was right by changing it to "Democratic Party". So you can't even admit your own mistakes, not even that it was an accident. The English Wikipedia article has always said "Democratic Party" (except when vandalized).

Given this, next time, I will not hesitate to block you for an error like this. I am fully aware that you don't think you're on the hook for the content you import.. Well the fact is, you are.

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

And a followup: unless you add a date qualifier you cannot add "member of political party" for a party she's long not been a member of. Otherwise it is false information because you are implying that in the present tense. (talkcontribs)

of course he can. Everyone with edit rights can. Can even add "member of political party" that <item> never was a member of. One can add nonsense all over the place. One can! But GerardM did add something that is also stated in English Wikipedia. So what? (talkcontribs)

no he is not implying that, there are dozens of items without date. Jasper, stop harassing. You have done it all too often.

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

Do you happen to be User:Tamawashi? Because if so, accusing me of harassment is calling the kettle black.

To be quite frank, multiple other admins have told me that GerardM is a difficult user to deal with. My tone may be a bit harsh, but like I said I'm not the first complainant and would not be doing this if I were.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

For your information I added some 5000 items as member of the Republican party. They are all factual correct there will be some more who switched parties. That is however not the level of quality that can be expected it is also not the level of quality of Wikidata to be good at that.

If there is one thing your reaction shows it is a personal problem. It is why I do think you are the wrong person to be an admin.

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

I would not be saying this if you did not have a history of such things:




And in none of these cases was I the complainant. So I know others take issue with errors like this; in fact it was not me but User:Sjoerddebruin who initially brought this to my attention.

Even if our database does not have this level of quality right now, it doesn't give you license to not be held to a higher standard particularly when I am far from the only one who is concerned by this. (talkcontribs)

And many are unconcerned. Why don't you side with them? Ah, you are an admin, an admin with only few contributions. Your main justification for being in Wikidata is harrassing users?

GerardM (talkcontribs)

As you could know I am interested in raising our game. I send you a proposal to improve on how this can be achieved. You are just not interested.

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

This is not related to what I said earlier. This is merely me reiterating the concerns of others because others haven't been satisfied with the way you have responded to them. I always hate it if I have to even consider blocking someone. I don't say it lightly.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

It is related. It happens that a set of changes happen that are wrong. Typically I can find what is wrong and amend things. This is not always the case. I have said it before and I say it again, there is a given error percentage that people make in their work. Something like 6% is really good (not my numbers).

With 2,229,348 edits I have my 6% of errors. Because of the way I work, there are checks that I do perform to keep the error rate as low as possible but it is NOT possible to make no errors. This Hillary fracas has me correctly adding that she is/was a member of the Republican party. I knew that she was in the set as I had checked it beforehand. When people find fault, they can apply qualifiers as well, producing a stink is not a proper way to behave.

You should know I am working in good faith. If this was not the case I would not be able to do what I do. Your attitude is one of aggression and you hide behind others. You do not acknowledge that I am as interested in a good quality of Wikidata as you say you are and you have never produced arguments why my approach will not lead to better results. You only reiterate your point of view.

I welcome your arguments and I am quite willing and able to amend my arguments. Can you do the same?

Jasper Deng (talkcontribs)

Look, I don't doubt your good intentions. I just want you to not brush off someone's revert of your edit without checking more carefully, because the literal statement "Hillary Clinton is a member of the political party Republican Party" is quite obviously false.

I remember you pleaded to me at Wikimania 2014 to let you use WiDAR and other mass editing tools - at that conference, we agreed that bots are our friends, after all. It's a great idea to try to be efficient with it and I applaud you for championing its use. But with great power comes great responsibility. I posted this thread hoping it would be the last time I'd see this: you added a dubious claim (given Clinton's current status), you got reverted, and apparently you didn't check whether that statement made sense as-is in the context of that particular entity. (talkcontribs)

"I posted this thread hoping it would be the last time I'd see this: you added a dubious claim (given Clinton's current status), you got reverted, and apparently you didn't check whether that statement made sense as-is in the context of that particular entity." - What a nonsense. High volume editors will make mistakes and will be reverted. The error rate is important. You are an enemy of high volume contributers?

GerardM (talkcontribs)

The category on Wikipedia says exactly what is said on Wikidata with the original statement. Jasper, this is something that I checked and it is as true. Only when you drill down (read the article) you find a date for the change. This is something that has always been acceptable in Wikidata. This could be done by the person involved it does not need this drama.

The notion that I should give special people consideration is nice. There are many more people who may have switched allegiance. No clue, not really the point is that these people are registered because of their category to be or have been a member of that party. It is true for Mrs Clinton as it is for all the others.

Sjoerddebruin (talkcontribs)

Why must others always fix your mess? Like in the Hillary example, how hard is it to add the qualifier(s) yourself? I would do that if someone came on my talk page.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

When you check it, I have and some time ago at that. According to what we do the fact was straight anyway so I did not have to do it. The same can be said for those screamers, they could have done it easily enough as well. (talkcontribs)

"The same can be said for those screamers, they could have done it easily enough as well." - Exactly.

Reply to "Q6294"
Infovarius (talkcontribs)

Is it you? Login please

GerardM (talkcontribs)

Normally I am always logged in ... Would not have it any other way.

Succu (talkcontribs)

It's User:Tamawashi.

Reply to "" (talkcontribs) - what do you think how long it will take to put P972 on all articles? (talkcontribs)

missing top1000 watchlist in iawiki is broken and the recent effort to add all missing articles is halted.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

the list is on Meta.. I have added a catalog for you for the 1000 items. (talkcontribs)

Thanks a lot. Edits look good, but " SELECT ?item  { ?item wdt:P972 wd:Q5460604 }" does not work. If I try the equally structured " SELECT ?item  { ?item wdt:P92 wd:Q428  }  " it finds .

Reply to "P972"
Glorian WD (talkcontribs)

Hi Gerard!

I am aware that you have registered your name on Wikidata:Item quality campaign.

So, I want to check something. Have you tried to label items on the pilot campaign?



Reply to "Pilot Campaign"
Madglad (talkcontribs)

I have more than once observed dubious information from you. What is the source for this edit?

Mr. Jerup might have been member of this party, but he is known for beeing a politician elected for the party Enhedslisten.

GerardM (talkcontribs)

It is from Wikipedia articles or categories mainly. Thanks, ~~~~

Reply to "Problematic data"

Donatie van foto's aan wikidata/wikimedia

DirkJanse (talkcontribs)

Beste Gerard M.,

Dank voor je snelle reactie. Aangezien je Nederlands spreekt ga ik als je het goed vindt maar even verder in het Nederlands.

Ik werk bij het Nederlands Instituut voor Militaire Historie in Den Haag. We hebben een flinke fotocollectie waarvan we bij wijze van proef een klein deel van een collectie aan Wikimedia willen doneren. Het gaat om 1142 scans van glasnegatieven uit de jaren tussen 1920 en 1930 die door de toenmalige Luchtvaartafdeling zijn gemaakt. Het betreft luchtopnamen van plaatsen en forten in Nederland. We willen ze graag onder een CC-BY-4.0 licentie aanbieden in hoge resolutie. Onze hoop is dat de beelden uiteindelijk breed verspreid raken o.a. op vele wikipedialemma's.

De digitale scans zijn in de IPTC in het veld 'description' voorzien van een plaatsaanduiding van de voorstelling. De verdere informatie is generiek. Zelfde maker, zelfde periode.

Hopelijk kan jij me vertellen waar ik de beelden kan uploaden en aan welke voorwaarden er voldaan moet worden.

N.B. Dezelfde set beelden stellen we ook onder deze licentie beschikbaar via onze eigen beeldbank en Flickr the Commons. We zoeken nog naar een geschikt moment om ze op alle 3 de platforms de lucht in te laten gaan.

Vriendelijke groet

Dirk Janse

Reply to "Donatie van foto's aan wikidata/wikimedia"