User talk:Infovarius

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikidata-logo-en.svg

Welcome to Wikidata, Infovarius!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike, and you can help. Go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familarise yourself with:

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. 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.

Regards, --Ymblanter (talk) 17:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Привет, Ярослав :) Infovarius (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

Contents

Talk:Q16518[edit]

"For history"

For history? The page history continues to have the history. You don't need to have a page simply for that.

"convenient links"

Uh, no? I don't even understand what that means.

"categorizaton"

Most definitely not. That's what I wanted to get rid of.

In summary, the reason I removed the template to begin with was because none of those are necessary nor desired if the information is captured at a centralized location as it currently is.

Furthermore, no other items use this system, nor should they. Someone tried it (I think you!) and it failed to catch steam (and for good measure). Placing it on one page does not capture the conflicts; by their very nature, they almost always have multiple items involved.

Please remove it. --Izno (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

1) about history: the template and the categories help (I believe) to find some old resolved conflict, if it needs.
2) links: I mean direct links to centralized discussion + automated analysis for better clearing local iw-links (which is not finished as you can see).
3) Do you really suppose that having all unresolved conflicts in one place (for example, Template:Cl) is of no help to anybody?? Infovarius (talk) 20:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I disagree completely on the first. All you're doing is decentralizing the discussion and making it hard for people to actually make sure that the issues are solved.
That... still doesn't make sense.
All unresolved conflicts are in one place: WD:IC. What you are doing is duplicating and decentralizing discussion for no reason. Please stop. --Izno (talk) 03:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
If you really think we need to create a permanent history to record these things on the individual item (or property!) pages, then you should create a template like Template:Article history. I think that might be useful in general (for things like WD:PFD for "kept" properties). But we should only do that when the discussion is archived as done, at the very earliest. Scattering "in doubt" all over the wiki only really makes extra work for no reason. In doubt or in work should be left on WD:IC. --Izno (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Returning to this discussion, User:Izno... Yes, decentralization is good in some cases. Now WD:IC is growing so big that I am rarely to watch it, but the category of not-resolved issues would be great. And all discussions at WD:IC are minimized so it's difficult to browse them. --Infovarius (talk) 14:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

IC growing big is an issue of not having enough editors (interested in interwiki resolution). --Izno (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Please be careful[edit]

This is just wrong. You don't need to know the language to realize that "circumferència" comes from the same latin root as "circumference". So it was right to be in here. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course, I see the root. But a name of an article is not the full content of the article. Ca-article (as I understand) is about curve (geometric location, with equation in coordinates) and not only about length of the perimeter. Besides, es-article too, but there's conflict with es:Disco (topología). Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I have requested an opinion on the Catalan project chat. Let's wait and see the response. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Why on Earth have you created a new element (Q13107360) without consensus? I have told you we should better wait for opinions from native speakers. The discusion on cawiki (here) is in favour of maintaing the statu quo (previous to the creation of Q13107360 and this removal). I am also expecting comments on eswiki. So please merge Q13107360 with Q238231 and stop removing interwikis until we hear further opinions. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for delay - I have no time to do an analysis of answers yet. I'll read the discussion (through translators) and if I have doubt in my actions (now I haven't) I do the revert myself. Otherwise I provide my arguments. Infovarius (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a talk about this issue in Wikidata:Interwiki_conflicts#Circle.2FKreis. I suggest continuing all discussions there.--Pere prlpz (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


P527[edit]

We have a complete different usage of has part (P527):

You use has part (P527) because the character interrobang (Q427676) is a composition of the characters exclamation mark (Q166764) and ? (Q11169). I use has part (P527) because the article Inverted question and exclamation marks (Q1152312) describes the characters Inverted exclamation mark (Q11639406) and Inverted question mark (Q10854940). The composition of these two characters is Gnaborretni (Q13141081).

Both relations are useful relations. But they should use different properties. Which is the right property? --Fomafix (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

City and administrative unit[edit]

Hey Infovarius. Please tread the terms "administrative unit" and "subdivision unit" respectively no label (P132) and located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) carefully. An administrative division is a portion of a country or other political division, established for the purpose of government. Administrative divisions are each granted a certain degree of autonomy, and are required to manage themselves through their own local governments.(1) Especially, city (Q515) hasn't to be a subdivision unit. In some countries "city" is a term used by people but it has nothing to do with government (e.g. Australia, Switzerland). Also smaller populated places like hamlet (Q5084) aren't necessarily administrative units if they don't have their own local government. I hope that helps you to understand this terms. If you're troubled about some of my edits, please let first discuss it before undoing them. Thanks. --Pasleim (talk) 16:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Q13276[edit]

Потому что "cake" - это не "пирожное". Пирожное - это всё-таки небольшое штучное изделие, а "cake" - наоборот (пирог, торт, кекс...). По-моему, в английском нет аналога для слова "пирожное", а в русском нет аналога для слова "cake". Хотя для меня английский не является родным, я могу серьёзно ошибаться.

Поэтому пусть вепсская интервики пока будет в отрыве от остальных, ничего страшного. --Tamara Ustinova (talk) 11:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Неужели она не соответствует ни одному русскому и ни одному английскому понятию? --Infovarius (talk) 21:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Multiple heads of government[edit]

To your question from this summary: because it makes the Infobox of the w:ro:România article look like this (see "Sistem politic" / "Prim-Ministru"), and the P6 property thus behaves in an unexpected way (instead of returning the current head of government, as expected, it returns the comma-separated list of the last two prime ministers). Basically, no wiki can use this property to display the name of the current prime minister in an infobox. AFAIK, Wikidata indeed expects to store data for lists, but so far only Infobox data can be displayed.Andrei Stroe (talk) 10:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@Andrei Stroe:, it's not a problem - one can use "preferred rank" to select current head of government. I suppose that this is implemented in ru-wiki, if you want I can search for the code of consult with other users. --Infovarius (talk) 10:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer. If you have an example of how it was implemented in a wiki, I think I'll be able to take it from there and implement it in ro.wp.Andrei Stroe (talk) 08:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Revert on followed by (P156)[edit]

Hi, I don't understand your revert to followed by (P156)... The fact that it is used incorrectly on thousands of items doesn't make it less incorrect, surely? Jon Harald Søby (talk) 17:06, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Your revert and question at nonprofit organization (Q163740)[edit]

Regarding your question at the revert: I made the change because a company (company (Q783794)) is only a form of organization (look at en:company: A company is an association or collection of individuals, whether natural persons, legal persons, or a mixture of both. ). What you mean is, that a nonprofit organization (Q163740) is the opposite of a business (business enterprise (Q4830453)) (according to en:business: A business, also known as an enterprise or a firm, is an organization involved in the trade of goods, services, or both to consumers.). Or otherwise said, company (company (Q783794)) is about form (multiple persons pursuing a goal together), business (business enterprise (Q4830453)) about purpose (earning money). That everyday language often assumes company==business shouldn't stop us from being exact in Wikidata. :-) --S.K. (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

God and god (deity) are not the same thing[edit]

I see you are insisting that deity (Q178885) is the same as God (Q190). How have you arrived at that conclusion? Danrok (talk) 12:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)


Wikidata:Database reports/Wikipedia versions[edit]

lang=ru : ?lang=ru&props=31,218,219,220,506,1406&q=claim[1800]русский

Hello Infovarius! I have seen you contributing to a lot at pages linked to https://www.wikidata.org/?curid=24028442# (as for today titled Wikipedia versions but intended in general for WMF projects). I would be happy if you can review the properties of these pages, create the missing Wikibook and Wikiversity project pages, comment on user:I18n/sandbox (where you may find many usefull queries) and comment there with new / additional ideas. Best regards [[]user:Gangleri|] also aka I18n (talk) 15:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Please follow the main discussion at property talk:P218#whats next and see also: m:Talk:Facebook pages. I added more property related queries at d:user:I18n/sandbox#property_Wikimedia_database_name. Best regards I18n (talk) 13:31, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Skier subclass of athletics competitor?[edit]

Huh? How is skier, person who performs in skiing subclass of athletics competitor, sportsperson that competes in athletics (track and field, running, walking). Skiing (skier) has nothing to do with high jump, javelin and other track and field sports. So, I don't understand why did you undo my edit. --Stryn (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@Stryn:, I've answered at Wikidata:Project chat, you've been a bit hurry to create 2 disccusions :) Duplicating here: I've overviewed definitions and must admit that you are right. Skiing is not light athletics because the last is strictly defined. I was misguided by the thought that everything not being heavy athletics is light athletics. --Infovarius (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Fratello[edit]

Hello Infovarius. You moved it:Fratello from 'Sibling' to 'Brother'. That means you undid the shift I made a few days earlier. I did that one because the Italian article deals with both brothers and sisters (which together make 'siblings'). I also did that with Romanian, Spanish and Portuguese, for the same reason. Regards, Apdency (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Q4654299[edit]

Thanks for reverting my error. :-) --Redaktor (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Синхронистка[edit]

Я не возражаю против добавления. Только теперь у меня две просьбы:

  1. Разобраться с unique value violation. Либо переделать synchronized swimmer (Q18715859), либо внести в исключения.
  2. Расставить ранги, чтобы в карточки Википедии попадало ровно одно значение.

--Lockal (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

А вот против юристки и адвокатессы я возражаю сильно. Юристка это разговорное слово. "Адвокатессы" вообще противоречат ГПК РФ. --Lockal (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Туда же трубадурша, типографка (спасибо, что не типографиня), видеоблоггерша, депутатка (вне закона) и прочие слова. Полный список: Help:Female form of label/lists/ru. --Lockal (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2016 (UTC)

apple[edit]

Hi Infovarius,

I see that you state that "not everybody considers [Malus pumila] to be [a] duplicate of Malus pumila. How so? Also, the bulk of apples is produced by Malus pumila. Other species of the genus Malus also producing apple-shaped fruit, that, because it varies strongly in size, may (or may not) be called apples, and in some cases can be used as apples. For apple cider very small "apples" are usable, but the majority of the public would not even think about peeling them and using them as hand-apples. - Brya (talk) 04:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Edda de Snorri[edit]

Hello Infovarius. You moved q:Edda de Snorri from Q205882 to Q22691366. I don't understand why you did that : that page is about the Prose Edda, regardless of the translator. Lykos (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I see that all quotes are in French, so they cannot be from original "Prose Edda" (which is in Ancient Norse). Also I see the name of translator (François-Xavier Dillmann). And that is all that I put in the item for these quotes. They are obviously taken from French version of Prose Edda. --Infovarius (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Please, see fr:q:Beowulf : quotes are in French and in Old English ; on fr:q:Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra, all the quotes are in French, but there is four different tanslators. Tomorrow, I could add quotes on fr:q:Edda de Snorri from the Paul-Henri Mallet translation. Wikiquote is not Wikisource : we don't create separate pages for each translation. Lykos (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)

P1568[edit]

The property domain (P1568) is for mathematics (domain of a function), I think you should use another property instead, maybe facet of (P1269).--Micru (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Micru:, facet of (P1269) doesn't exact because it doesn't differ definition domain from values domain. I don't know why we can't expand domain (P1568) in order to use it for properties. Property is a transform which can have domains. --Infovarius (talk) 17:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Both the property description, and the translations refer to a mathematical function. It is easier to start a new property proposal for "knowledge domain".--Micru (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2016 (UTC)

Q5924178[edit]

What is needed is a Categorie:Moose, but the German Wikipedia has no such category. Categorie:Laubmoose is the same as Category:Bryophyta; it is a duplicate category. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Relation[edit]

What is the correct relation between grand uncle or grand aunt (Q19901270) and grand uncle (Q3813877)/grand aunt (Q11972456)? --Fomafix (talk) 13:08, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I suppose subclass of (P279) (from last to first). part of (P361)/has part (P527), for example, would give us head/arms/stomach... --Infovarius (talk) 11:07, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Bambuseae (Q35922)[edit]

Please do never change the meaning of an item. There where a lot of taxonomic backlinks you destroyed. BTW: This is an good example why redirects in the sitelink section are bad. --Succu (talk)

@Succu:, sorry for the change, I thought it would be easier. For example, User:Brya did this for several fruits. Some points:

P.S. Redirects can be adjusted (removed, changed) if needed. Though here en-redirect has complicated a thing. --Infovarius (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

"and what is left over"[edit]

Hi Infovarius,

I don't see why you want to pull Q23017641 out of the garbage can? This is a Wikipedia 'entry' based on a mechanical method of presenting a Tree of Life (looking like it belongs in Wikispecies, not Wikipedia), after it has run out of meaningful material. It indicates that there are some groups of fossil taxa that cannot be placed and that have been dumped in a garbage-can-page of "and what is left over". It has no taxonomic significance (or coherence) and there was no name published. The fossil taxa themselves do exist, although they don't look particularly notable, but that they have in common that they cannot be placed looks like coincidence. - Brya (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikimedia template (Q11266439)[edit]

Regarding the edit you undid on Wikimedia template (Q11266439), I don't understand what you wrote in the summary, but I originally removed that statement because it's incorrect: Wikimedia project page (Q14204246) is for pages in the project namespace, but templates have their own namespace, so they're not a subclass of pages in the project namespace. - Nikki (talk) 22:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, @Nikki:, Russian description in Q14204246 says about any "not-article" namespace so as subclasses of it. It's like "maintenance pages of Wikimedia". Why not to use like that? --Infovarius (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I think Russian is an exception there, all the other descriptions (not sure about Czech and Swedish) appear to say the same as the English one. I don't see why we should change it to be for all non-article namespaces. We organise most other non-article items by namespace and we already have Wikimedia internal stuff (Q17442446) and Wikimedia page outside the main knowledge tree (Q17379835) (not sure what the difference between those is supposed to be) for things which aren't articles. - Nikki (talk) 06:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Рисовый пудинг и Рисовая каша[edit]

Рисовый пудинг он сладкий, варится рис в молоке с сахаром. А словом рисовая каша обозначают в русском языке любой варёный рис. Обычно без сахара, несладкий. --Glovacki (talk) 14:39, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Glovacki:, и вы считаете, что congee - это именно каша?? Во французском, например, написано, что это "типа супа". Почему не оставить, как я разделял - кашу в отдельном? --Infovarius (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

About my reverts[edit]

@Snipre: and others. I must beg pardon for this, but I have so overwhelming size of wathchlist (which I am still trying to tackle) that this became my style... I can see ping or revert of my revert and then to discuss. But I cannot afford to start a discussion without reverting because I will either lose it the some days after or I should to keep a tab in my browser (but this is painful as I have already a lot of tabs which slows my work...). Can you advice me something? --Infovarius (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

item (or property) other names[edit]

- what do you think it's purpose is? pls your own opinion, as one of most experienced users, for no experiensed novices, wth no espetialy lngws knowlages!, regardly your last edit (undo) of sex or gender (P21). Welcome sex or gender←here--Avatar6 (talk) 19:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikinews Labor links[edit]

Hi. I notice you moved most — but apparently not all — of the Wikinews links from labour movement (Q208701) to labour (Q268378). This raises some troublesome issues, and I'd be most interested to hear your thinking on them. Some of these issues are specific to these items and categories, while others start with these specifics and reach outward to involve the whole infrastructure of the sisterhood.

  • The English Wikinews Category:Labor is about the labor movement, not about "economic work" in some abstract sense. So moving that one was definitely wrong. I suspect that most, if not all, of the others also are about the labor movement, but it's honestly very difficult to tell. Figuring out this subtlety for any given language would likely require someone fluent in that language to go in and study the category and perhaps the articles contained in it as well. It wouldn't amaze me if there were no languages whose Wikinews category analogous to "labor" is really associated with labour (Q268378). There appears, btw, to be no English Wikipedia article for the subject of that item.
  • These Wikinews categories in different languages should all interwiki to each other. Moving most to labour (Q268378) while leaving a few at labour movement (Q208701) is damaging to all of them, and most damaging to the few that are left behind, because it systematically deprives these categories of interwikis to other-language Wikinews categories that they absolutely should interwiki to. The purpose of interwikis is, after all, to link each page to the most nearly analogous other-language and other-sister pages, providing useful information to readers and increasing traffic all around — which often involves making connections more flexible than the high regimented and limited ontological identifications practiced on Wikidata.
  • I find this problem really distressing, because in my experience Wikidatans are, almost without exception, great people who are trying to do positive things. It seems to require massively rethinking — in some way or other — the role of Wikidata in choosing interwikis. I really do think that on balance, by absolutely no fault of any Wikidatan, the use of Wikidata for automatic interwikis has done more harm than good for the sisterhood.

--Pi zero (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Unicode character (P487)[edit]

Hi,

Apparently, I'm kind of the only one to care about Unicode character (P487) and its constraints, I'll be happy if you want to help. I saw you asking why I removed some claims on dash (Q187819) : Special:Diff/320034705. – is a dash (Q187819), but more precisely, it's a en-dash (Q13219273) ; since there is a Unique value constraint, it seems more logic to put it only on the more precise item, don't you think ? (same thing for — and em-dash (Q10941604)).

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Fibonacci numbers[edit]

Use series (P179) for numbers in a series like the Fibonacci number (Q47577). The reason being that an individual number can't be an instance of (P31) because there is only one fibonacci sequence. -- Netoholic (talk) 22:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Netoholic:, one fibonacci sequence is a class of (some) natural numbers. So they are instances of Fibonacci numbers (which is the label of the Fibonacci number (Q47577) in some languages). --Infovarius (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Then that is a problem "Fibonacci sequence" and "Fibonacci number" are different entities and should have different Q items. -- Netoholic (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC) Update: I created Fibonacci series (Q23835349). -- Netoholic (talk) 05:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
The Swedish label and its aliases names both "numbers" AND "sequence". The article is about the sequence but the sitelink and the label tells about "numbers". Wikipedia is an instance of chaos theory (Q166314) sometimes.
A Q here: When I studied this field, I encountered many Fibonacci-like sequences and I did a lot of calculations with them, but there is still only one Fibonacci sequence? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
+1, by the way. I'd name a sequence "Fibonacci" if the recurrent rule is a(n)=a(n-1)+a(n-2). From any start. --Infovarius (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Union of chemical element ???[edit]

That edit : https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q11173&curid=12663&diff=322489319&oldid=322325234 does not make any sense to me. Can you explain what you mean ? author  TomT0m / talk page 06:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I mean "each chemical compound (Q11173) consists of chemical elements". And previous values don't make any sense to me, can you explain them? How can chemical compound be a union of phases? --Infovarius (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Please read Help:BMP. for "consist of" the relevant property is has part (P527). "Union of" is for subtypes, more what is explained with Help:Classification : the content of a glass of liquid water, for example, is "liquid water". The phase allows us to divide all liquid water substances in more specific subclasses. author  TomT0m / talk page 06:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Explanation[edit]

May you explain this better? --Horcrux92 (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Horcrux92, because "Kasha" is for more general каша, and "buckweat groats" is a fair translation for гречневая каша. --Infovarius (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
According to your reasoning, Q186817 should link to commons:Category:Kasha instead of commons:Category:Porridges.
I think it has no sense to keep en:Kasha linking to commons:Category:Buckwheat groats instead of commons:Category:Kasha. If the problem is ru:Гречневая каша you should split the item. --Horcrux92 (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

pinacols (Q4362942)[edit]

Could you please check whether or not pinacols (Q4362942) may be merged into pinacol (Q421634)? Is the former about an individual compound or a group? I ask you as a native RU speaker and because of Special:Diff/6193077/254281263. --Leyo 14:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

@Leyo: pinacols (Q4362942) is about a family of compounds. Radicals R2 can be different. --Infovarius (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, I added pinacols as the English label. --Leyo 18:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

Q47598[edit]

Потому что, статья про лит.произведение, издававшееся кучей издательств. DZ (talk) 08:25, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Interwiki to redirect pages[edit]

Hi Infovarius. Thank you for helping me. I'm puzzled by your edit. I tried the same multiple times and Wikidata kept saying that w:en:Logic puzzle (the redirect target) already had an entry here. Did I miss something? — Xavier, 13:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Xavier, there is a trick here. Redirect can't be added directly, so at first it should be converted to non-redirect. After adding it can be turned to redirect again. See history. --Infovarius (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Don't do it, Xavier. --Succu (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Infovarius. If this simple trick can circumvent this restriction in WD, I wonder why this restriction exists at all. Succu, care to elaborate? — Xavier, 23:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
There is ongoing discussion and open feature request about allowing redirects. Redirects are not prohibited and not officially allowed, so the trick is out of law now. Succu is obviously contra, I am pro. --Infovarius (talk) 17:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Химические вещества[edit]

Вот это меня смутило: Special:Diff/327798931. Противоречит соответствующему википроекту. --4th-otaku (talk) 21:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@4th-otaku: Наверное потому, что nitrocellulose (Q143874) не конкретное вещество, а семейство. Поэтому моя правка была уточняющей (Q143874 более узкий класс сущностей, чем "химическое вещество"). --Infovarius (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Sphenisciformes[edit]

Please read the pages of the links you change before erasing my modifications, specially after i gave you explanations. There is only one page for the order Sphenisciformes and the family Sphenicidae in most of the wikipedia languages. The good page for penguins in the french wikipedia is the page "Sphenisciformes" which is like in all this other wiki a Sphenisciformes/Sphenicidae article. The page "Manchot" is a wrong article which is going to be merged in "Sphenisciformes". --Boogie Boy (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Please do not change the link of the french page for penguins. I already said that in all wiki except .fy, .hy and .ro there is only one page for Sphenisciformes and Spheniscidae. The title of the article doesn't really matter. --Boogie Boy (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

cousin second cousin (Q11275656), second nephew or second niece (Q19901611)[edit]

is now a mass, you reverted many edit's by native speakers, now both items have the same englisch description--Oursana (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

encyclopedia (Q5292) vs encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413)[edit]

Добрый день, я вообще-то считал, что encyclopedia (Q5292) и encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413) — синонимы. Но вы, видимо, различаете эти значения. Поясните вот это. И приведите пример энциклопедии, не являющейся словарём. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 07:26, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Серия энциклопедий от Аванты не являются словарями. Серия советских детских энциклопедий. Словарь подразумевает некий список статей, часто в алфавитном порядке. Энциклопедия же подразумевает развёрнутую справочную информацию, формат бывает различный. --Infovarius (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
«Серия советских детских энциклопедий» — у меня есть одна такая дома (трёхтомник рыжего цвета с парусником на верхней крышке), но она тоже организованна по словарному принципу. Энциклопедий от Аванты я не видел. Как я себе представляю такую энциклопедию-не-словарь, я бы назвал её просто справочником. Но я вас понял — вы считаете encyclopedia (Q5292) гиперонимом encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413).
Если принять эту точку зрения, тогда надо поменять instance of (P31) на encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413) у некоторых изданий, организованных по словарному принципу, например, у Small Soviet Encyclopedia (Q1976178), Bible Encyclopedia of Archimandrite Nicephorus (Q4086271), Yuzhakov Big Encyclopedia (Q4091878), Sytin Military Encyclopedia (Q4114391), Jewish Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron (Q4173137), Literary Encyclopedia 1929—1939 (Q4263804), Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia (Q19211082) и др. Как видно из этого списка, люди чаще ориентируются на заглавие — если написано «Энциклопедия», то и ставят P31 = encyclopedia (Q5292). -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 10:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Woman/female for sister[edit]

I do not understand your edit at sister https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q595094&diff=336918873&oldid=335800944Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 18:41, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

You see that there is two different items female (Q6581072) and woman (Q467) used here? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Circumcircle[edit]

Hi, I saw you reverted me. But I thought the MathWorld "Circumcircle" applied to circumscribed circle for triangle (Q2946460) in stead of circumscribed circle (Q110176). Lymantria (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Lymantria, you are right. I've forgotten about circumscribed circle for triangle (Q2946460). --Infovarius (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 17:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for editing my mistake. First I thought that the language links were distributed wrongly, therefore I changed them, nevertheless afterwards I understood that it was mistake. Sincerely--Nəcməddin Kəbirli (talk) 12:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Булгаков[edit]

А Вы зайдите в статью о нём в русской википедии и посмотрите, как там выглядит ссылка из Викиданных. По Вашему, формат типа «Лакшин В. Я. БСЭ / Булгаков Михаил Афанасьевич // Большая Советская Энциклопедия: [в 30 т.] — 3-е изд. — М.: Советская энциклопедия, 1971.» вполне допустим? А по-моему, повтор «БСЭ», «Большая Советская Энциклопедия» выглядит плохо. Illustr (talk) 15:41, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Я вообще-то не об этом Вам писал. Но если вы о метке в элементе статьи, то 1) такая метка информативнее для Викиданных; 2) для формирования библиографической ссылки можно брать свойство "название" из этого элемента. Впрочем, это можно обсудить на форуме (Викиданных). --Infovarius (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
А о чём, предлагаете использовать subject of the statement (P805) вместо section, verse, or paragraph (P958) для заголовка статьи? Не вижу разницы. Основная проблема для меня сейчас в том, что у многих статей из БСЭ title (P1476) забивает заголовок книги, поэтому статья из БСЭ выглядит как отдельная книга, см. например первую сноску в статье. Светлов, Михаил Аркадьевич. Illustr (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Предлагаю использовать. Не обязательно вместо, но как минимум в дополнение. Суть в том, что элемент о статье всё равно будет и там можно будет указать всю сопутствующую информацию. Проблему в сноске увидел, но этой кухни подробно не знаю. Наверное, тоже можно решить через создание элемента и P:P805. --Infovarius (talk) 13:28, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Q13419255[edit]

Hi! You reverted a merge of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) with Internet encyclopedia (Q615699). Could you please provide some additional information about hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) (labels, description, other statements) to better show the difference? Are there instances of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) which are not Internet encyclopedia (Q615699) or the other way round? -- JakobVoss (talk) 08:27, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I suppose that this is obvious: hypertext encyclopedia has hyperlinks in its text and it needn't to be online (it can be distributed by discs). Many of instances of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) that I've added are not Internet encyclopedia (Q615699). --Infovarius (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Reversely some online encyclopedias can be of plain text, without hyperlinks. --Infovarius (talk) 20:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

P248, P805[edit]

Вы вчера заменили stated in (P248) на subject of the statement (P805). Из-за этого в рувикипедии сломался гаджет WEF, виснет и в консоль браузера пишет, что не находит свойства: Error: Qualifiers «P248» of P1343[Q4173137] not found or not an array. Также сломалась перелинковка статей в викитеке (расположена в шапке в графе "другие источники", пример).

По определению формата заполнения библиографических элементов в Wikidata:WikiProject Books#Qualifiers для ссылок на элементы статей надо использовать именно P248. --Vladis13 (talk) 19:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Alexandra Pfemfert (Q2643653)[edit]

Hi, I see that you have given Alexandra Pfemfert the property of being a citizen of the Soviet Union. I have not found any evidence that she ever visited the USSR or became a citizen of that state. I would be interested to here your reasons for the addition. Leutha (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing, that's an error. I've just deduced it automatically from country of citizenship (P27) Russia (Q159) as this statement was plainly wrong (Russia (Q159) has begun in 1991). --Infovarius (talk) 20:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

demi-fond et P527[edit]

Bonjour, vous avez supprimé des modifications que j'avais réalisé, en indiquant que ce n'était pas l'inverse de P279. Soit, mais que Property il faut utiliser dans ce cas ? Dans l'attente de votre réponse. Cordialement Mith (talk) 08:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mith: Il n'a a pas de telle propriete. Il faut utiliser seulement P279 en 2000 metres (Q211164)/../.. ou P527 et P361. --Infovarius (talk) 12:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

статьи о пикапе, элементы Q20661975 и Q936820[edit]

Добрый день! Можно попросить Вас пояснить откат моих правок в интервики? --eugrus (talk) 07:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Rechtschaffenheit[edit]

Hi, I wonder why you deleted this? --Rabbid (talk) 17:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Rabbid: Because righteousness (Q1144825) is not disambiguation. --Infovarius (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Emergency numbers[edit]

Hi Infovarius,

I have to admit that I've never been in Russia (Q159). Nevertheless I try to sort out the mess of emergency phone number (P2852) we have here. Could you please have another look at 1 (Q24233148), 2 (Q25648899) and 3 (Q25648900) and give either an explanation for the two phone number (P1329) statements or delete one of them based on the current situation in Russia? The data is for example used at voy:en:Russia.

Thank you very much,

T.seppelt (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. But one time (may be in past) there were special analogues of emergency numbers for mobile phones. I suppose with "1" in front, I should check... How to add them better? --Infovarius (talk) 11:56, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Maybe those numbers could be added to the same items with qualifiers and a lower rank... -- T.seppelt (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Anatol Astapenka (Q13028434)[edit]

Dear Infovarius, please see my answer here. Tomasz Bladyniec (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Reverts[edit]

Hi Infovarius,

Why not participate in the discussion on the WikiProject instead of doing random changes to the implementation of its model?
--- Jura 20:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jura1: I'm sorry, my position has not changed from Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Names#Once_more:_Russian_name: I see problems with what you are doing, I don't see a clear position for Cyrillic names, and I don't know a solution. I am just trying to correct items where your edits are complete disaster. --Infovarius (talk) 11:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't quite see why we can't find a solution for Russian names. We managed Korean, Belorussian and Japanese. If we differentiate between items for original spellings of a person's name and transliterations we should be able to work it out.
The suggestion by TomT0m also limits problems: Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Names#Linking_names_item_to_their_string
--- Jura 10:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

electronvolt (Q83327) for particle mass[edit]

I don't think one should consider eV a unit of mass. It is officially allowed to be used together with the SI system and for the SI system, the statement is wrong, since it needs to be eV/c^2. Of course eV is a unit for mass when using natural units with c=1 and one might be tempted to use a qualifier for that, but I am not sure this would be a good idea: When setting the appropriate physical constants=1, one can in principle express every quantity by some power of only one basis unit. In other words, one can use any unit^x for any quantity. Mass in eV is a very popular example, but depending on the context, things like photon energy in THz (h=1 which makes Hz a unit for energy) are also widely used. I wouldn't know where to draw the boundary between commonly used and completely unusual choice of unit.--Debenben (talk) 00:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@Debenben: yes, you are right. I don't have final answer either. But I should say that 1) this unit is widely used in such manner; 2) we count also units from centimetre–gram–second system of units (Q26240), MKS system of units (Q512417), gravitational metric system (Q1213508) and other systems correspondingly, not only SI. --Infovarius (talk) 10:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Gabriel Metsu[edit]

Why do you think we need to keep the less accurate date? הנדב הנכון (talk) 08:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Because it is present at authoritative sources. We can make it with "deprecate" rank, I think. --Infovarius (talk) 10:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

P1659[edit]

As far as I understand see also (P1659) should only be applied to properties and not to items. (reaction to your revert https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q189567&type=revision&diff=359662871&oldid=359465960). Michiel1972 (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Dictionary is not a genre[edit]

Regarding your edit here. Dictionary isn't claimed to be a genre of literature, and indeed it isn't, it is a type of reference work (Q13136). More of a thing, than a style. Danrok (talk) 02:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, but why didn't you move this value to instance of (P31) then? --Infovarius (talk) 23:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Your reverts[edit]

Hi, I noticed that you reverted me on Disneyland Resort Station (Q2114035) and Olympic Station (Q2076558). I removed instance of (P31) because I thought connecting line (P81) would be enough, as instance of (P31) seems to require has part (P527) on the other item as well (necessitating 111 extra values on MTR (Q14751)). Should instance of (P31) be added back to the other 109 items? Jc86035 (talk) 03:12, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I understand that this is redundancy... But I suppose that instance of (P31) has the priority and it has to be at each item (or P:P279). May be connecting line (P81) is redundant? --Infovarius (talk) 23:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
I guess we could just have the same value for both connecting line (P81) and instance of (P31) (for most stations – stations of Tung Chung Line (Q989358) and Airport Express (Q409036) could share P31:Q(Lantau Airport Railway); although the item doesn't exist yet). Jc86035 (talk) 13:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, actually my reverts are about part of (P361) and this is other thing... We have no doubts about instance of (P31) I hope. But I am not sure about necessity of P:P361.. --Infovarius (talk) 22:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that; my mistake. Should part of (P361) then be removed, or replaced with part of (P361):(lines)? Jc86035 (talk) 13:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
(Removed; feel free to add it back if you so wish) Jc86035 (talk) 06:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Archangels[edit]

  • Some* archangels are Biblical figures. Many, perhaps even most, are not. --Palnatoke (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Really? I didn't know. You mean, they are not mentioned in the canonical books of Bible? --Infovarius (talk) 10:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

"rowing(sport)" (Q159354) & "Canoe sprint" (Q1141850)[edit]

hi! yesterday i removed "rowing(sport)" (Q159354) = bn:নৌকা বাইচ & you reverted it (correct). but whats the problem in "Canoe sprint" (Q1141850) = bn:নৌকাবাইচ; which is same link in bangla wikipedia bn:নৌকা বাইচ. it will be created as bn:নৌকাচালনা. look at en:Canoe sprint. pls correct it to build up a better wikipedia. have a nice day. - Suvray (talk) 14:55, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I suppose you are right, thanks, I moved bn-link. --Infovarius (talk) 19:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Q13220650[edit]

Добрый день, для «опера комик» (французская вариация комической оперы) есть элемент Q785479, поэтому я убрал это наименование из Q13220650, чтобы избежать путаницы — при выборе на русском языке. Я сильно ошибаюсь?))--EUvin (talk) 10:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Q1444[edit]

Hi infovarius,

could you help me with https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1444&diff=368834471&oldid=368414996? I want to extend Q1444 organ to fully semantics organology, it means: Organ placed in SomeBuilding(Church) was Created in year and Created by manufacturer and maybe Ceased to exist in year. This Organ has keyboards with Lowest and Highest notes (X manuals and Y pedals), every Keyboard has Stop(s) with Footage...

Northern America (Q2017699)[edit]

Hi, you've just reverted my edition: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q2017699&oldid=prev&diff=371436216 . I don't think it's right because the definition of shares border with (P47) says: *countries or administrative subdivisions, of equal level*. Northern America (region) has a different level than Mexico (sovereign state). Nurni (talk) 06:34, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes, it makes sense. But I suppose that in cases where there are no bounding regions of equal level we can choose not the same level, can't we? --Infovarius (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Undo[edit]

Hello.The three items Includes information on Wikipedia.See also Q21010653.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: Yes, List of Wikipedias (Q21010653) contains information on Wikipedia. And many-many others. But it doesn't mean that these items are about the same. --Infovarius (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Q26879042 and Q26879054[edit]

Hi Infovarius, could you add the labels in English if you know these words in English? It could help to translate in other languages. Thanks in advance. Pamputt (talk) 05:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I've done for second. But I found no offcial translation for the first. En-wiki says that Udmurt and Georgian have Adverbial case, and ru-wiki says that cases in these languages called differently: "соответственный" in Udmurt, and "трансформативный" in Georgian. I am not an expert but I suspect that ru-wiki classifies adverbial case into more precise classes (e.g. "соответственный" also called "adverbial-positive"). --Infovarius (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

территориальное деление России?[edit]

по [1]/ Для чего "территориальное деление России" в населённых пунктах (деревня, село, посёлок и т.п. наследуемых от "населённый пункт")?--User№101 (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Для того, чтобы в итоге все населённые пункты и другие административные единицы России попали в одно дерево: Query: claim[31:(TREE[121594][][279])]. Да, напрямую делать P31 некрасиво, но для того, чтобы этого избежать, нужно создавать подклассы и соединять с ними. Пример для Украины: rural council of Ukraine (Q4414033) вместо selsoviet (Q27002). --Infovarius (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
населённые пункты — это не административные единицы--User№101 (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Город не административная единица? Деревня не административная единица? --Infovarius (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Да! Сельсовет да, деревня нет. Город нет, администрация которой подчинены нп - да. В связи с муниципальной реформой (не путать с составами муниципальных образований, который 100% не в Вашу пользу), в уже в 80-90% НП подчинены в России либо районам либо городским округам, остальные в состоянии оформл. бумаг, ОКАтО Вам в помощь, который д.б. заменён на ОКтМО - который 100% не в пользу Вашей попытки аргументации --User№101 (talk) 20:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Fibonacci number/series[edit]

The articles in Q47577 and Q23835349 are about exactly the same. Some languages have just named the article by a word for number and some for series/sequence. No language has an article for both words and there is no reason to split the articles. See e.g. en:Fibonacci number which bolds Fibonacci sequence in the opening sentence, writes the start of the sequence, has lots of general formulas about the sequence, and so on. Wikidata items are for articles about the same subject. The titles don't have to be word-by-word direct translations. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Except the number is an item of the set we call the series... so these, in-fact, aren't the same. --Izno (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Wrong! The numbers in the sequence are related by the Fibonacci recursion relation. You cannot have the numbers without the series and you cannot have the series without the numbers. The articles should not be split!TonyMath (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
So a series {1, 1, 1, ...} (sequence, rather!) are related by equivalency to the number "1", yet I can say that the one is not the other fairly trivially... --Izno (talk) 22:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Actually we have 2 questions here: 1) do we even need 2 items? 2) if we need, should all sitelinks (despite of titles, and may be content) clusterize in one item? I have doubts about both of them. Look for example a recent item: Q26851286. Do we need it? --Infovarius (talk) 12:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Primary sources tool[edit]

Just FYI: it seems that this tool adds duplicated entries sometimes. See this your edit. Ankry (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

May be I've clicked the value, not the source as I intended. So it's my fault. --Infovarius (talk) 11:18, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

transliteration (Q134550)[edit]

Why did you undo my edit in Special:Diff/383275680? "Transliteration" involves converting text from one script to another. The pages do use different scripts, but the content is not the same - it was not converted from one script to another, so it is not a transliteration. - Nikki (talk) 10:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hm. But the title is a transliteration. --Infovarius (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
It seems strange to me to add statements which only refer to the page name (page names can be changed, it's not clear that it only applies to the page name and it prevents other sitelinks from being added to the item). Anyway, I've started a broader discussion at Property_talk:P2959#Describing_duplicated_pages. - Nikki (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Michelangelo[edit]

What purpose does it serve to have a less accurate, even if sourced, date on wikidata? This information already appears in the two sourced dates. הנדב הנכון (talk) 12:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

hydroelectricity (Q80638)[edit]

In Russian гидроэнергетика may also be an industry, but in all germanic langages it's only a form of electricity.--Kopiersperre (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Please answer me. If not, I will separate this item.--Kopiersperre (talk) 09:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
@Kopiersperre: there is already hydropower (Q170196). --Infovarius (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages and family name[edit]

Hello! Please verify your work before changing the P31 of disambiguation pages. I'm working on P734 and P735 and correcting hundreds of items. When disambiguation pages are linked to family name using different from (P1889), it means that at least one of the interwiki is really a disambiguation page and so the existence of both items is valid. I understand that several of these interwikis can be wrong (about the surname and not a disambiguation page) because right now I'm only verifying if the existence of both is needed or not; correcting the interwiki will come at a later date, because I had to prioritize. So if you encounter on of these cases, instead of "correcting" only P31 (and to let description saying it's a disambiguation page!) you can move the interwiki about surnames to the surname item. Which is listed with P1889 on the disambiguation page. Thank you. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 11:27, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@Harmonia Amanda: Do you know there is the problem with surname pages (mostly consisting of a list of persons) on some wikis? Often they have some kind of template which contains DISAMBIG in it, so formally they are disambigs, but practically (and should be used as) they are P31 family name (Q101352). Also it is useful that such pages should be linked together (see Phase 1 of Wikidata), so I'd move (almost) all of the sitelinks to newly created "surname" item. And it will make previous item unnecessary and either delete or merged with the new. So I'd propose to you not to make new empty items but simply to change the type of existing. --Infovarius (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
As I stated in my previous message, I only create a new family name item when at least one of the interwiki linked to the disambiguation page item is really a disambiguation page (meaning it's listing something other than just people sharing the same name). If all interwikis are only about a family name and listing people who share it, then I correct the P31 and the descriptions. I did that to hundreds of items these last months. But when a Wikipedia article is a disambiguation page which lists locations as well as people, then using "family name" as the P31 would be blatantly false and we need to separate the two. I'm not in the habit of creating empty items, seeing how I merged hundreds of Yellowcard's creations should have proved that. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:21, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I glad that you are more rational than someone. But still there can be a disagreement. How do you define a page to be disambig? Take for example a page which contains a little info about surname, a list of persons, and a list of things (locations too) in a section "Named after" (or "See also"). --Infovarius (talk) 13:34, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Halon[edit]

To solve this problem: Halon is in many languages a synonym for haloalkane (Q271026) (en:Halon). Is Галогенорганические соединения correctly translated by Halogenorganic compounds and Галогенуглеводороды by Halogenhydrocarbons?--Kopiersperre (talk) 10:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kopiersperre: So why es-wiki has both es:Halón and es:Haloalcano? About words it seems correct, but let's better check properties and then we can find the difference in definitions. Do you agree with these: 1) ; 2) ; 3) ; 4) ; 5) but not ; 6) ; 7) there are some alcohol (Q156) which are organofluorine (Q2200141) (sorry, couldn't found specific items). --Infovarius (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Halon is a synonym for Haloalkan AND a family name for fire extinguishing halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920) (Spanish: "El halón es un gas extintor"). I've moved all languages which articles deal about these fire extinguishing gases to no label (Q27209842).--Kopiersperre (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kopiersperre: So what about my statements? Are they all correct? --Infovarius (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

Q1268[edit]

Why: [2]? 2nd name clearly qualifies as "another given name". Ankry (talk) 18:43, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Cyrillic given name[edit]

Hi! It made no sense to have a label in another writing system than the one used by each language, but you were totally right that there were still errors/misleading labels in the item. So I hope that with my modifications, it's better? I deleted the Latin transliteration when there weren't a description present to clarify what string the item was about and added the real given name as an alias in all languages which use a different writing system than the Cyrillic one. Is that correct for you? --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Still speaking about Anna (Q22713652), of course. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 12:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Ça va. Not ideal though. I imaging another variant - label in another writing system can be a list of all possible transliterations. Example: Eugene. --Infovarius (talk) 09:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Q143368[edit]

Доброго времени суток. По какому праву Вы исправили описание элемента Q143368 на неправильное? --VladXe (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Прошу прощения, это был перевод английского. Просто очень общее описание - слишком туманно, лучше поточнее. --Infovarius (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Замена типа НП[edit]

Добрый день! В статье Высокогорный (Хабаровский край) несколько раз менялся тип НП. Вы ссылаетесь на #autolist2. Может быть подправить лист2? Подозреваю, что есть и другие несоответствия ОКТМО. Как бы нам их исправить? Игорь Темиров (talk) 19:44, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Не понял, в чём вы видите ошибку? --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Ой, и вправду, чего это я вас потревожил. Игорь Темиров (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Jesus Christ[edit]

Hi. I think you can't classify Christ's religion as "judaism" because he belived he was a Messiah. Faith that Jesus was indeed a Messiah is a basic and most important difference between christianity and judaism. --22merlin (talk) 14:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@22merlin: According to some his statements, he doesn't deny "old faith", i.e. judaism. And he was baptised as judaist. Christians base themselves on a sacred book "New Testament" which obviously been written after the Christ. And many apostles count themselves judaists. And what about original sin? --Infovarius (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Q8138689 and Q27516889[edit]

I moved the hifwiki link from Q8138689 to a new item because the hifwiki page does not seem to be a permanent (i.e. intentional) duplicate. Could you explain why you think it is? - Nikki (talk) 14:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I supposed that this was in some other dialect... --Infovarius (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Q855[edit]

Коллега, Вы изменили даты рождения и формат дат с юлианского на григорианский. В результате этого при загрузке даты в карточку теряется юлианская дата. Для отображения в карточке даты по юлианскому и григорианскому календарям в Викиданных необходимо размещать дату в юлианском календаре с пометкой "юлианский". Считаю, что для двойного отображения дат в карточке следует вернуть даты рождения "6 декабря 1878/Юлианский" и "9 декабря 1879/Юлианский". Kalendar (talk) 19:01, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kalendar: а разве автоматического вычисления юлианской даты не настроено? Метка "юлианский" как раз предназначена для того, чтобы сохранённая григорианская дата отображалась в юлианском стиле. А тут какой-то костыль на костыле получается - хранится в григорианском календаре, а мы её считаем юлианской. --Infovarius (talk) 14:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Формат хранения даты в Викиданых сменён. Сейчас для возможности отображения даты в карточке в юлианском и григорианском формате в Викиданных нужно ввести юлианскую дату и поставить формат даты "юлианский". Проверьте это в данной статье, убрав в карточке строку "дата рождения". Вы увидите лишь григорианскую дату. Kalendar (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Не понял - что значит "сменён"? Можете дать ссылку на это изменение? --Infovarius (talk) 11:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Обоснование изменение мне неизвестно. Косвенная ссылка — ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Технический/2016/09#Формат двойной даты в Викиданных. Возможно, из этого можно извлечь какую-нибудь информацию. Kalendar (talk) 18:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Порри Гаттер[edit]

Зачем? В статье одно изображение уже есть, пусть и несвободное (а так появляется ещё и это во второй карточке). А эта картинка -- не непосредственная иллюстрация к "Порри Гаттеру", а постер несостоявшегося любительского мультфильма. Неужели с ней лучше, чем без неё? --Colt browning (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@Colt browning:. Хм, интересный конфликт. C одной стороны я понимаю проблему рувики и уберу это изображение, с другой - в элементе тоже должно быть какое-нибудь изображение, и если оно единственное, пусть и плохое, - придётся оставлять его. Это, например, для того, чтобы другие языки могли что-нибудь показать (они же не могут отобразить изображение с рувики). Так что, в общем случае я за изображение в элементе. --Infovarius (talk) 11:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Q2[edit]

Dear Infovarius, I hope I'm posting in the right place. I'm a beginner on Wikidata. I don't understand why Earth is not an instance of 'planet'. I'm trying to obtain a list of planets on the Wikidata Query Service, and there is almost nothing. Shouldn't a request for all the instances of 'planet' return all planets? Is there a good documentation about how I should use 'instance of'? Because it's not clear for me right now. THank you Cubewano (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

OK sorry for bothering you - I think I got it. It's way more clever to do a query using "items in any subclass of the planet class" than to tag "Earth" with all classes above a particular class until we reach 'planet'. Cubewano (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, User:Cubewano, you understand right: we try to use as narrow class as possible and query needs to use "all subclasses of the planet class". --Infovarius (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Orycteropus (Q1975774)[edit]

Do you have a source for this edit? en:Orycteropus lists the genus as having several species. --Njardarlogar (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

group (Q83478) and redundant subclass statements[edit]

i removed the is subclass of magma (Q679903) relation because i think it is redundant. i think that (at least with mathematical objects) subclass statements that follow transitively should be avoided. it would clutter things up really bad to make any possible subclass statement, so i tried to weed the redundant ones out and replace them with more specific ones. i won't remove your statement again, tho. --opensofias (talk) 19:06, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

) --opensofias (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Property:P103[edit]

Это подсвойство от "языки, на которых говорит или пишет персона" - так что использование его у персон, у которых вообще нет печатных работ или известных публичных выступлений, сомнительно, а без источников - и ориссно. NBS (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Я руководствуюсь здравым смыслом, если честно. Люди, которых считают русскими писателями/актёрами/учёными, обычно по-русски говорят. И если они родились в России, то с большой доле вероятности русский - родной. Можете предложить какой-нибудь более строгий подход для массового добавления этого свойства, или хотя бы, languages spoken, written or signed (P1412)? --Infovarius (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
1) А зачем его добавлять массово? 2) При заполнении P1412 у писателей и актёров, вроде, проблем возникнуть не должно, у учёных несколько посложнее - а вот с P103 здравый смысл легко переходит в орисс (вот что здравый смысл подскажет о русских дворянах пушкинских времён?). Но я-то даже не об этом - я о подобных случаях (спортсмен и художник, никаких сведений о печатных публикациях нет). NBS (talk) 15:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
1) Ну как, в идеале каждая персона должна иметь P103, хочу приблизиться к этому идеалу. Ну и понять распределение по языкам. Сейчас родной французский указан у 36 тыс. (первое место), а русский только у 9,8 тыс. (до моих правок было всего 550). Насколько это соответствует правде? 2) С дворянами всё понятно - французский или русский, заполнять не буду. А вот с no label (Q1800184) не вижу проблемы - разве есть какие-то сомнения? --Infovarius (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
1) У многих вообще P103 невозможно определить: даже не говоря о умерших во младенчестве принцев и всяких Маугли - некоторые не смогли бы даже в автобиографии указать это свойство настолько однозначно и без комментариев, как требуют Викиданные; о ком-то просто не осталось АИ; у кого-то детство пришлось на тот период, по которому в АИ нет согласия, был ли это уже язык или ещё диалект, и т.д. 2) Об общем подходе: предлагаете чисто на основании русских ФИО делать выводы о родном языке? Допустим, в начале XX века это будет соответствовать действительности даже в 90% случаев - но читатель-то будет воспринимать (если это свойство будет где-то использовано) это как дополнительную информацию, а не как оригинальное исследование на основе написанного в статье. Конкретный случай: Немухин скорее всего был из более-менее зажиточной семьи (тогда спортом редко занимались выходцы из низов), и больше о его детстве мне ничего неизвестно - так что есть некоторая вероятность (хотя и небольшая), что в детстве благодаря гувернантке он мог лучше знать, скажем, немецкий или французский (АИ это тоже не противоречит). NBS (talk) 20:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Bourgade and town[edit]

Hi, I'm refering to [3]. Fistly. I didn't find the word bourgade in any dictionary no matter it was one-language or two-language. I used [4], [5] and [6]. As an answer of your question. I differed using Czech language (which is my mother one). As Q3374262 says it can be translated as "městys" to Czech. "Městys" means something smaller than town but bigger than village. So I think that isn't said that bourgade is the same as town. The best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Do you have analog of "town" in Czech? (Different from "city") And did you see Městys (Q16155707)? :) --Infovarius (talk) 12:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Moss vs Bryophyte[edit]

No one has ever claimed that "mosses" and "bryophytes" are the same thing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: You know, it's hard to distinguish between Bryophyta (Bryophita sensu stricto) and bryophytes (Bryophyta)... Would you be so kind to explain me the difference? As I see Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178) includes Category:Mosses (Q8994906)+Category:Liverworts (Q8266107)+Category:Hornworts (Q8522280), right? Rather small difference... --Infovarius (talk) 11:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
"Small" difference? No. Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178) is a far more inclusive category. "Mosses" include about 10K species, and "Liverworts" include about 8K species. "Bryophytes" (sensu lato) thus includes almost twice as many species as "Mosses" does. There are also enormous differences in fundamental anatomy and morphology between the several member groups, so if "mosses" are like "birds" and "liverworts" are like "mammals", then "bryophytes" would be "mammals + birds". That's definitely not a "small" difference. And yes, there are about as many different species of mosses as there are of birds (both are about 10K species), but there are more kinds of liverworts (6-8K species) than there are mammals (5K species).
Also, you're only including the currently living groups of plants is your breakdown. There are additional fossils that belong to Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178), but are not part of any of those three groups of living plants. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776)[edit]

Sorry, but I don't get your point - of course members of both classes are fictional, but that alone doesn't make anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776) a subclass of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) - otherwise we could stop categorizing fictional entities at all. anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) contains objects being normally inanimate (toasters, tables etc.) being depicted with human characteristics. Mouses are normally living creatures. anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) is a subclass of fictional object (Q15706911) AND imaginary lifeform (Q1972868), anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776) only of fictional object (Q15706911) (most anthropomorphic mouses are not instances of fictional object (Q15706911)). If you claim anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) a subclass of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) you could claim just as well fictional character (Q95074) a subclass of fictional object (Q15706911). But I think it could be useful to make a difference between (normally) living things (imaginary lifeform (Q1972868)) and non-living things (fictional object (Q15706911)).Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't get too. If you assure inanimate nature of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) then all properties in it (especially instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279)) are wrong (because they are about classes of animate things). And I don't understand how do you differ between animate and inanimate characters. Is Winnie-the-Pooh animate (fictional bear) or inanimate (anthropomorphic object (Q27598544))? --Infovarius (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok. I think we both agree that there are no inanimate characters. But there are characters based on living organisms (sheep, anthropomorphic cows, fictional humans etc.) and characters based on inanimate things (living tables, talking cups, thinking teddy bears (plush toys)). For the first group there is this class imaginary lifeform (Q1972868). But (as far as I see) there is no class for fictional characters being items. Thatswhy I created this class in the section of imaginary lifeform (Q1972868) and fictional object (Q15706911). Winnie-the-Pooh is actually a teddy bear (a plush toy) and under that aspect an anthropomorphic object.Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
But he is also fictional bear (Q27132946) which is imaginary lifeform (Q1972868) (animate?). --Infovarius (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
All anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) are imaginary lifeform (Q1972868). It's a subclass. Winnie-the-Pooh is a living plush toy. But many people would also consider him a fictional bear and looking for fictional bears they would expect to (also) find Winnie-the-Pooh.Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 23:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

watch (Q178794) and wristwatch (Q26965868)[edit]

Why you separated wristwatch (Q26965868) from watch (Q178794)? Both use on wrist... !?!? I can't find any discussion about your changes... Please somewhere discuss before you something merge, separate or make large interwikis moves from one entry to another entry. --Treisijs (talk) 22:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Because pocket watch (Q849813) are watch (Q178794) but not wristwatch (Q26965868). I just followed the discussion: Topic:Tcb7ffcuscfznav8. I suppose that I shouldn't discuss every merge or separation which can be self-explained by properties. In other way, I'll explain all my edits and revert them if I would be wrong. --Infovarius (talk) 08:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Treisijs: Another problem with discussions is that I can't add edit summary :( so I can't explain my actions during them. --Infovarius (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Bisection construction.gif[edit]

Hello, bisection (Q3128632) - why not? --Fractaler (talk) 11:19, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

河川敷(Q11553848)[edit]

ja:河川敷」に一番近い英語は riverbed かと今は思っています。提案してくださった「ru:Речное русло」も近そうなのですが判断しかねています。なので私が編集する前の版に戻そうと考えているのですが、構いませんか?

I'm sorry I can't speak any language but Japanese. "ja:河川敷" means "敷地(site/area/zone) for 河川(river)." I finally came to think "riverbed" in English is the closest to the meaning of "河川敷." "ru:Речное русло" is linked to "nl:rivierbedding," but not to "en:stream bed." So I'll give up and restore the earliest revision I'd not edited yet. Could I restore it although your edits are also undone? --和太郎 (talk) 06:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

トークページにメッセージが残されている場合は、少なくとも返答してから差し戻してください。
In such a case, at least respond to my message before undoing, please.--和太郎 (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@和太郎: Oh, yes, sorry. So we have Q1837011 and Q1429491 additionally. Do you feel the need for 2 notions? I see only 2 languages with 2 articles: eo:Fluejo+eo:Riverujo, and ja:川底+ja:河川敷. What's the difference? --Infovarius (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
"ja:河川敷" means "the area between banks." What does "сухое русло реки" mean? I thought water isn't flowing there. At 河川敷, water is commonly flowing. "ja:川底" is "底(bottom) of 川(river, which looks like a river, doesn't it? 川川川)" and literally means "the bottom of a river."
The space between a flow and its bank is included at 河川敷, but not 川底. I have no idea if you have spaces like this in continental countries where rivers aren't very steep. The major difference between the 2 Japanese words is the space.--和太郎 (talk) 06:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

Q16692637[edit]

The reason I removed the link in no label (Q16692637) is that as far as I could tell it's a link to a page in the user namespace. And those links aren't notable. Mbch331 (talk) 12:09, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Mbch331:, I understand this. But moving to user namespace was a temporary deal, and we lose the link between the item and the article during back moving if we have no link now. So this link is for convenient maintenance in future. Or do you promise to track this article and to add a sitelink when the article will be moved to main namespace again? :) --Infovarius (talk) 14:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't tell it was a temporary move. I'm not deleting the link anymore. Mbch331 (talk) 16:20, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Languages of Russia[edit]

I have reverted your edits about the languages of Russia. In my opinion the statements about locally official languages should be referred only to the individual federal entities. The "tag applies to part" is necessary only when the parts doesn't have their own Wikidata entities, which is not the case for the republics of Russia. Having this informations referring also to Russia is a useless duplication, which makes Wikidata maintenance more complicated, and is also misleading. For example, a query for all the countries of the world with the respective official languages [7] would return all the local languages, which is probably not what the user wanted, since the central government only works in Russian. Tcp-ip (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Do you propose to clear (almost) all statements about official languages in Spain (Q29)? Infovarius (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
So by your edits in Q29 I see that we should do the same in Q159. So I revert your revert. --Infovarius (talk) 12:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
First, actually, I haven't edited Spain (Q29) . Since you have looked at my edits, you may have noticed that I am working at improving data about official languages because I have noticed that there are still many flaws about these in Wikidata, but I haven't studied the page about Spain (Q29) yet. In my opinion, as I have already stated, there is no need, and it is even misleading, to use the qualifier applies to part (P518) when the same thing can be clearly expressed by directly attributing the statement at the entity about that part. Currently, as you can see here [8], only Spain (Q29), Russia (Q159) and United Kingdom (Q145) use applies to part (P518) in statements about their official language and I do think that they could all be replaced.Tcp-ip (talk) 15:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Q238[edit]

The currency that is really in use is the euro, while the lira is just something that formally coexist. I've reduced the ranking in order to extract just euro for the infobox. That said, let me know if you agree on previous ranking or not. --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

@Andyrom75: Sorry I am not familiar with the situation and I don't understand the problem. If the lira is formally correct why would you ignore it? If it is not used today (but was used earlier) then we can increase a ranking for euro. While "deprecated" rank means that the value was not correct ever. --Infovarius (talk) 11:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh thanks, in this case it's me that I'm not familiar with Wikidata :-) because I have assumed that the meaning/use of "depracated" is the same like in programming, that stands for some istruction that's works (hence correct) but there are other that should be used in their place. Generally speaking, I think that something that is wrong should be just deleted and not classified in a specific way.
So ok, since both are formally correct, I'm ok with your approach. I'm going to set the ranking as per your comment. Let me know if you are fine with it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: Ok. But what is with lyra? Is it used now or not? --Infovarius (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Italian Lira is the previous official currency in Italy. San Marino Lira was the equivalent in San Marino with an exchange rate 1:1 with the Italian one.
In 2002 San Marino has adopted Euro (because Italy did), so as far as I know, San Marino Lira do not exist anymore. --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Kings in Greek mythology[edit]

What do you think of this? No one has given an opinion yet. Thank you, --Epìdosis 17:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Q5608148 and commons:Category:Insects vs commons:Category:Insecta[edit]

Hello,
About you revert of Q5608148:

  • commons:Category:Insects is placed in commons:Category:Insecta. So referencing Category:Insecta is enough (it is on top of the other)
  • Many taxon have 2 commons categories (scientific name + vernacular name). The vernacular category is always secondary and should not be pointed at by wikipedias. Mostly they contain picture of non identified species
  • If you look at commons:Category:Insecta you will see the error "Error in Wikidata: wikidata cat item 'catégorie Commons' (P373) should not have multiple values." It is due to the fact that Category:Insecta has a double P935 in wikidata (the only biology category in this case).

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 21:09, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, @Liné1:. The biggest problem I see now is your last sentence. But I don't like the situation. Why is this mess with 2 equivalent categories? I am just pointing this problem, because we cannot prefer one category after another. --Infovarius (talk) 12:16, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Excellent quesstion. For which I have 2 answers:
  • On wikicommons we like scientific names (valid in all countries). So we have a tree of scientific names. Only lower categories (species category or subspecies category) should contain pictures. If a picture displays a specimen of unidentified species , it should be in a "Unidentified XXX" category (placed in category XXX. XXX being a scientific name.)
    Example: an unidentified bird picture should be in commons:Category:Unidentified Aves. But pictures providers don't like it because "Unidentified" is negativ. So they also put commons:Category:Birds. This category also contains all the pictures arround birds but without bird on it (birds road signs, birds caretakers, birds hunters, bird food...)
    vernacular categories are always **placed in** the scentific name category.
  • On wikipedias: Some wikipedias have both scientific names categories (to see in one shot what scientific name we cover) and vernacular categories (to search a bird by its name).
Hope it helps. BR Liné1 (talk) 14:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't like this ambiguity... But I found the item with scientific name, so I moved commons:Category:Insecta there. --Infovarius (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, there are 3 items. Here is my proposition:
Category:Insecta (Q8977496) linked to insects (Q1390) and linked to commons:Category:Insecta and commons:Insecta
Category:Insects (Q5608148) linked to commons:Category:Insects and commons:Insect (no plural for unknown reason)
BR Liné1 (talk) 20:37, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't see why shouldn't we have both categories (topic's main category (P910)) in insects (Q1390). Infovarius (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Namespace for disambiguation pages[edit]

Hi! in this edit, you asserted that all disambiguation pages are in the project namespace. They were already asserted to be in the main namespace, and namespaces are (obviously) disjoint. Thus your change makes the set of disambiguation pages empty. Did you mean to imply that they could be in either namespace? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

prose (Q676)[edit]

Hi there. I'm trying to understand the rationale behind this edit you made. Do you feel that prose (Q676) should not be regarded as a genre? ~nmaia d 23:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, User:NMaia. Yes, but may be I can't to explain it 100% well. It's like animated film (Q202866). They are both forms (the Q676 is a form of text, the second is a form of film), not stylistic genres. Also Q676 is marked as subclass of genre, so it is not a genre itself too. --Infovarius (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

non-fiction (Q213051)[edit]

Добрый день! Данный элемент - о направлении в искусстве/творчестве вообще, а fiction (Q8253) говорит сама за себя. Я её в качестве противоположного элемента как раз и поставил в non-fiction literature (Q27801). --INS Pirat (t | c) 05:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

А, вероятно, в элементе смешаны литература и не только литература. --INS Pirat (t | c) 05:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Кстати, спасибо, забыл об этом аспекте. Но в Q8253 действительно смесь... Fiction означает не только литературу. --Infovarius (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

revert 1[edit]

Hello Infovarius,
about this revert:
Category:Manis (Q9754908) is a category corresponding at the genus Manis (Q25397).
Manis (Q2659251) being a subgenus, it is only a part of genus Manis (Q25397) (and not a synonym).
A genus can contain hundred of subtaxa (the possible rank being: subgenera, Sectiones, Series, species, subspecies, varietas, forma).
category's main topic (P301) should contain the exact taxon subject, not all its content (Imaging for "Animal", it would contain millions of items ;-))
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 07:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

I know it, thank you. There was some inconsistency in Q2659251 and sitelinks in Q9754908, that was the reason. I've fixed it. --Infovarius (talk) 12:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

revert 2[edit]

The same with [9]:
Category:Hippocastanoideae (Q8270304) is a family and Hippocastanoideae (Q163489) a subfamily (and they are not synonyms).
Regards Liné1 (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Again there was a problem with Category:Hippocastanoideae (Q8270304) because it contained a mixture of family and subfamily. But thanks to User:Brya we've fixed it now. --Infovarius (talk) 12:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Elements and periods[edit]

Hi, after these changes and according to this query only magnesium (Q660) appears to be using part of (P361)  period 3 (Q211331) while other elements use subclass of (P279)  period 3 (Q211331). I don't know which one is right but I think they should be kept consistent :) --Ricordisamoa 13:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ricordisamoa: Yes, I understand it. There's also an inconsistency of labels in period 3 (Q211331)-like items. Russian (and not only) articles are about periods which are parts of the table. In advance: but I don't want to create items about periods :) --Infovarius (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Asked at Wikidata talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Elements and periods --Ricordisamoa 16:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

electromagnetic wave (Q11386) and electromagnetic radiation (Q20076678)[edit]

Electromagnetic waves aren't same thing as electromagnetic radiation. --Treisijs (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. But redirects are about waves. --Infovarius (talk) 19:34, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok, then need create redirects in all languages and add this page. Why only these languages had redirects?!?! If my English would be better, I will give some examples, why redirects are bad idea not only in this case, but also another, too... --Treisijs (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Maybe both items need to merge?!?! --Treisijs (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
I remove only Latvian redirect, because in this case definetly that is wrong redirect. In article about eletromagnetic radiation (in Latvian Wikipedia) at this moment is only one sentence about waves... --Treisijs (talk) 21:22, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

film series (Q24856)[edit]

Hi, I dont fully understand why you reverted film series (Q24856) [10]. I wanted to remove them from constraint violations. Do you know better solution? JAn Dudík (talk) 06:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@JAn Dudík: Because it's not exact: it's not a one film. Why not to add it to allowable types? television series (Q5398426) is already there. --Infovarius (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

based on (P144) as property of Christianity (Q5043)[edit]

I don't think that based on (P144) is the right property for what you want to express with Christianity (Q5043) based on (P144) Judaism (Q9268) as based on (P144) is restricted to work (Q386724) and Christianity (Q5043) is not an instance of work (Q386724). What about separated from (P807)? — Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:10, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

P807 sounds good for me. But I am ready to consider Christianity (Q5043) and Judaism (Q9268) as work (Q386724) (of human brain). --Infovarius (talk) 21:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Why[edit]

Hey. why did you revert me?--Mikey641 (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Because administrative territorial entity of Israel (Q1550119) is about full hierarchy of division: not only ‏מחוזות but also ‏נפות‎‏‏‏ and more. And what did you mean when adding first-level administrative country subdivision (Q10864048)? --Infovarius (talk) 22:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh.. I'm sorry. The hebrew label in administrative territorial entity of Israel (Q1550119). The hebrew label says that it's just about the "מחוזות" but it's not. Thanks--Mikey641 (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

astronomical object (Q6999) Subclass change revert[edit]

Hi.

Can we please use the talk page of this entity for this issue ? As already evoked, there is a noticeable conflict in the vicinity of astronomical object (Q6999), and the subclass you reverted could be part of it. There probably needs to be a clarification on the intent of this entity as a whole, and changes to be made around it (either on astronomical object (Q6999)'s subclasses themselves, or on a bunch of other entities pointing at it). Right now, astronomical object (Q6999) stands as both a non-specific (not only natural) entity AND a natural-only entity (eg. satellite (Q1297322)), which is problematic for definition purposes. Eledeuh (talk) 04:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Буквы[edit]

Я удалил все эти обозначения со словами в скобках, ибо так их никто не называет. Это только уточнение в названиях статей. Хорошо, со словом «буква» в начале ещё ладно. По поводу [11]: что такое «зе»? Если уж, то «зэ». Ну да, произношение букв тоже можно вносить. И строчные тоже. Но в декапитализации диграфов не вижу смысла. Зачем? — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4: Возможно, некоторые уточнения лишние. И лучше "зэ", чем "зе", да. Но моё мнение, что название статьи в Википедии обязано присутствовать если не в метке, то в синонимах - так определённее поиск будет. Насчёт диграфов, я не вижу смысла в капитализации диграфов - это же не имена собственные, да и чаще они встречаются в середине слова. И ещё, насчёт "предыдущий-следующий". Это зависит от языка, т.к. не все буквы кириллицы есть во всех кириллических алфавитах. Поэтому я изначально не стал проставлять эти свойства. Если уж быть точным, то надо их добавлять одновременно с "часть от: алфавит Х-го языка" (одно из этих свойств должно быть квалификаторов другого). --Infovarius (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
То есть, буквы вы капитализируете, а диграфы нет? Название статьи в Википедии: хорошо, буду его оставлять. А про предыдущий-следующий: да, добавлю «русский алфавит» в часть от. —1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Да. В буквах капитализация имеет значение: употребляются и В и в, причём узус различен. В метках для диграфов важно лишь отметить последовательность букв. Как вариант - можно наоборот все буквы диграфа капитализировать, но капитализировать только первую нелогично. Кстати, а что за символы вы добавляете в синонимы? У меня браузер их не распознаёт. --Infovarius (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
В синонимы добавляю архаичные формы, например: Д — Д с длинными ножками, Ъ — высокий Ъ и т. п. См. w:ru:Расширенная кириллица — C и [12]. — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Re:Anatomical parts[edit]

Hi! According to this thread and this edit by Pigsonthewing. --Adert (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

physical quantity (Q107715) subclass of magnitude?[edit]

Hi Infovarius, I think there is a contradiction:

vector physical quantity subclass-of physical quantity subclass-of magnitude

but surely a vector can't be a magnitude of a physical system or of any object because it is not "a property by which the object can be compared as larger or smaller than other objects of the same kind". A vector merely *has* a magnitude such as its "length" in geometric terms. DavRosen (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Prime number[edit]

Regarding this edit: When I did this edit I interpreted the statement as "prime number is the opposite of 1", which is obviously not correct. I now realized that you probably intend this to be interpreted together with the other "opposite of" statement like "the opposite of a number being prime is that it is either composite or 1 (which is true as long as you restrict the numbers to positive integers). I suspect, however, that this is not the correct use of "opposite of" as it results in a violation in the constraint report. /Pontus (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, may be it's not ideal so better to remove both. --Infovarius (talk) 19:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Pallas[edit]

Hi! In my opinion only Pallas (Q3361501) should have named after (P138)  Pallas (Q2276869). Athena (Q37122) already has said to be the same as (P460)  Pallas (Q3361501), so named after (P138)  Pallas (Q2276869) may be redundant. Do you agree? Best, --Epìdosis 20:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe redundant. But another point that Athena (Q37122) is not about the name "Afina" or smth. but about goddess which has several names. --Infovarius (talk) 14:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Q16887424[edit]

I don't understand why you have reverted my edit. The Polish category „Kategoria:Przysłowia indiańskie” refers to North American Indians, not to India, and the English "Category:Indian proverbs" refers to India, not to North America. Please, restore my edit. NoychoH (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

@NoychoH: Yeah, sorry. Changed. --Infovarius (talk) 14:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Mark Twain[edit]

Прошу объяснить, почему вы отбросили в свойственной вам манере написание имени с большой буквы в birth name Mark Twain? Или уже имя в рос. Вики пишут с маленькой буквы? samuel? Или это начало преследования конкретного пользователя? --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

@Шкурба Андрій Вікторович:, извините, это я откатывал вандализм анонима, но что-то пошло не так... или я был невнимателен. Конечно, ваши подозрения не имеют оснований. --Infovarius (talk) 08:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Спасибо за объяснение. --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 09:30, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Q28728293[edit]

Hi Infovarius!

Please stop redirecting the Wikiversity Charges lecture to (Q1111) Electric charge! The lecture is about much more than the physical quantity of charge! Also, please discuss your suggested changes first on the item Discussion page! --Marshallsumter (talk) 21:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: Can you please explain what does this lecture include other than electric charge? There is words "responsible for electrical phenomena" in the introduction, and there is nothing about other charges (e.g. color charge) inside, so I believe that it is only about electric charge. --Infovarius (talk) 09:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: The lecture is about the origin of charge not about quark theory! And thanks for checking out the lecture and leaving it at Q28728293! --Marshallsumter (talk) 15:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: I still want to merge this lecture with some Wikipedia item. Explain me which charge do you mean? General physical charge (which is at charge (generalized) (Q73792)) or electrical? --Infovarius (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: Wikiversity is not Wikipedia! The charge I'm lecturing about is not covered by either! Please leave the Wikiversity lecture where it is! Also, your attempts to understand are much appreciated! Please feel free to add them to the lecture's "Discuss" page! --Marshallsumter (talk) 22:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: can you be more specific? What do you plan your lecture to be about? Summarize it. --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Q1271511 and Q1271511[edit]

Hi. I sorted out some articles and made some changes so that articles about the same thing was linked to the same item. You reverted my changes. Why?
--Item Q1271511 now linkes to one German and one Norwegian article which is about the same thing as item Q1329540. I did check the English and the French article and they are the same as the Norwegian and the German in item Q1271511.
-- The German article (w:de:Maßverkörperung) you connected back to item Q1271511 is a different thing. w:de:Maßverkörperung is a subset of w:de:Normal and should be linked to its own at present nonexistent item
-- The English article w:en:Standard (metrology), the French w:fr:Étalon (métrologie), the Norwegian w:no:Normal (metrologi) and the German w:de:Normal should be linked to the same Wikidata item. It is clear from the content of the articles.
-- Please bring the order that I tried to bring to Wikidata back. --Dyveldi (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I have now merged "everything", again. One of the items was marked as a subset of the other which was clearly wrong as they are the same thing. w:de:Maßverkörperung is now without an item and this is a subset of all of this. Please to not revert my changes a second time. --Dyveldi (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Dyveldi: Why have you done this? w:de:Maßverkörperung should have an item and it will have it, so anyway we'll have two items. And we had them. We just needed to sort sitelinks and statements. Can you make structure of 2 items with all prescribed sitelinks so as I can check it? P.S. Sorry for not answering before, I just have little time for analysis... --Infovarius (talk) 11:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Now w:de:Maßverkörperung has an item all of its own which is not connected to the old item(s) which were merged because they were the same. --Dyveldi (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Wording[edit]

Please keep care of your wording within edit comments. --Succu (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I am just stating the fact. You've said that commons:Category:Birds is a redirect, but it is not. --Infovarius (talk) 11:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Obviously you don't know what a lie (Q4925193) is. I erred because I had another diff in mind. I think the removal of c:Category:Birds by Liné1 was correct, because this cat did not correspond to the taxon. --Succu (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Criterion needed[edit]

From checking the en cat for Category:Dictyoptera (Q8376194) it was not obvious how it was different from Category:Dictyoptera (Q14953429). Would you please be able to put a criterion in place that makes the decision more overt. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

One is a genus, the other a superorder. - Brya (talk) 14:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Why en? There is no en in Category:Dictyoptera (Q14953429). All should be clear from statements (compare category's main topic (P301)). --Infovarius (talk) 11:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

highest class of quantum particle (bound system?) for all antimatter, and one for matter? ALSO should matter (Q35758) be considered to include both matter and antimatter?[edit]

Good question: "but what should be a highest class for all (anti)particles?)". We have "quantum particles" but this includes non-matter particles like photons as well as antimatter particles and matter particles. We have ordinary quantum particle (not of antimatter) (Q28726955), which includes both matter and non-matter (but not antimatter) particles -- this item might not have really been necessary but I'm not certain. I may have made a mistake when I changed quantum particle of antimatter to elementary particle of antimatter -- I may have been too hesitant to create a new item for the latter since your message on my talk page :-) Maybe I should change that one back to being the highest class for all antimatter particles (bound systems of (only) matter particles? i.e. would technically even include macroscopic ionic crystals?), and maybe also change "quarks or leptons" (formerly baryons or leptons) to "quantum particle of antimatter" (highest class for particles of antimatter). I'm not certain whether or not we would really still need two classes for elementary particle of matter and elementary particle of antimatter, but I think maybe we still would and these could be new classes.

ALSO: another topic: I had created material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) because I thought matter (Q35758) excluded antimatter, but I'm no longer certain since both matter and antimatter have mass and and equally "take up space". I see two options if we don't want to consider (Q35758) to be in the strict sense of matter composed of quarks/leptons and not anti, and create a new item for matter in the strict sense excluding antimatter:

  1. we could leave matter (Q35758) as conceptual/multidefinitional (like their wikipedia articles) and leave material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) as-is
  2. Or perhaps merge material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) with matter (Q35758) ??

leave elementary particle of antimatter (antiquark or antilepton) and quark or lepton as they are ?[edit]

Come to think of it, maybe we should leave elementary particle of antimatter (antiquark or antilepton) and quark or lepton as they are so you don't have to change the Russian labels again?  :-)

Category:Opiliones[edit]

A sitelink cannot point to a redirect.See Wikidata:Notability.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 06:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل : It can and it is allowed. See remark there. --Infovarius (talk) 12:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

"antibaryon" (Q14861565) isn't an elementary particle at all, so it can't be a subclass of elementary particle of antimatter...[edit]

Hi Infovarius, I've added discussion about its property "subclass of elementary particle of antimatter" but you keep re-adding it without joining the discussion. I said there: antibaryon is not an elementary particle so it can't be an "elementary particle of antimatter". Unless... are you are suggesting that we revert "elementary particle of antimatter" to its original label of "particle of antimatter" and treat it as such? The other alternative would be to create a new item for "particle of antimatter", and the present antibaryon would be a subclass of it. Do you have a preference between these two alternatives? DavRosen (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

criminal organization (Q1788992) vs organized crime group (Q4335775)[edit]

Hi! I don’t object to cswiki’s link moved to organized crime group (Q4335775), but I guess dewiki’s de:Bildung krimineller Vereinigungen should be moved as well in that case? IIANM this is basically the same topic as the article on cswiki? --Mormegil (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

"фунты" "доллары" и "рубли"[edit]

Я предпологал Q8142 как legal tender и lawful money. currency (Q8142): "generally accepted medium of exchange for goods or services"

Исходя из этого:

"валюта" и "платёжное средство" это отъемлемая часть монет и денег.

Золотые монеты будут валютой, пока золото - обменное средство.

Приветсвую более точные определения с экономической т.з. d1g (talk) 04:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)


@Infovarius: I don't understand edit here: 1.

How can Australian pound (not a dollar) or Irish pound claimed as current currency or generally accepted medium of exchange?

English and Russian Wikipedia quite clearly states them as currency in the past, not in present. d1g (talk) 08:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

@D1gggg: Currency - is not necessary "current" :) Мы тут и историю описываем, если что. Так что можно добавлять "это валюта", имея в виду прошлый факт. Можно квалификатором добавить даты существования факта. --Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius:, посмотрел как сделано у стран в Q713750 и Q34266: у обоих используется и историческое и суверенное государство.
В случае валют есть только "исторические" и обычные; "государство" у Q713750 и Q34266 не указано напрямую, только через 2 подкласса, поэтому я и указывал только "исторические" по примеру стран.
Остаётся вопрос нужно ли поднимать ранг у "историческое государство" на "рекомендуемый"? d1g (talk) 06:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
@D1gggg: я бы поднимал. Если в свойстве содержатся исторические данные (особенно с датами окончания), то актуальная информация должна иметь высший ранг. --Infovarius (talk) 21:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

d:Q7013901 d:Q9451860[edit]

? 91.197.junr3170 (talk) 14:37, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Coordinates for mountain ranges[edit]

Regarding your edit: Yes, I think that adding coordinates to mountain ranges is wrong. At least it is very imprecise. Mountain ranges normally cover large areas, that cannot be represented by a single point. The better way to find their position is to map all the mountains belonging to this range, like this query. You can compare it with the results of the coordinates attribute, the first one gives a lot more information (even though the mountain ranges hierarchy does not look complete, it should be continuous). It would also be possible to find the coordinates of the highest mountain if we really need to represent a mountain range by a point, but explicitely giving them a coordinate is at best a duplication of data and at worst misleading. Koxinga (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kokinga: Yes, I think that all geographical objects should have coordinates (even oceans and countries do have). Of course, it is imprecise. So we should use least possible precision for example. Query is really good! If it were only possible to add it instead of coordinates! Actually there are very few really point objects on the Earth, so almost any coordinates are not precise and can be regarded by you as misleading :) --Infovarius (talk) 20:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Susannah Q28790008/Q756861/Q16930210[edit]

Hello Infovarius,

Thanks for your efforts but you have made mass changes in those items which I worked to fix just day or two before.

Undo[edit]

Why? Don't you think adding information on preceding/succeeding group members would be more useful for users than removal of information on element order? Szczureq (talk) 15:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Szczureq: This is enough. Because precedence depends on a sequence, e.g. for being part of Q428818 there are different preceding/succeeding elements. --Infovarius (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I see it now and you're right. Szczureq (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

золото, серебро и платина[edit]

Являются исключениями которые не смотря на всё измеряют в третийских унциях. d1g (talk) 02:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Giraffes[edit]

I see that you have restored the Swedish interwiki link. Do you have any comment on Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts/Unresolved/2017#Giraffa (Q862089)/Northern giraffe (Q15083)? Lophotrochozoa (talk) 11:16, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

Wind orchestras[edit]

Dear Infovarius, you reverted part of my work on wind orchestra (Q881942) and concert band (Q762048). The former item is intended for all kinds of wind orchestras and ensembles. The latter is for larger orchestras with both wood and brass instruments (symphonic band or orchestre d'harmonie). I put the Italian article Banda musicale in Q881942 because it also discusses marching bands, fanfare and brass bands. The Galician article (gl:Banda de música) was first attached to the item for brass bands (brass band (Q3244156)), which was plainly wrong since the mentioned orchestras and the picture also have clarinets etc. It is a stub article, so categorization is difficult, but I thought the more general item was the best choice.

In this comment, you asked if I think Q881942 and Q762048 are the same, because I removed the statement that they are not the same, but instead I thought that different from (P1889) should not be used when there is another relationship between two items, like symphonic wind orchestras being a subclass of wind orchestras. Sincerely, Bever (talk) 02:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Cryptogramma[edit]

Hi Infovarius,

I saw that you made a lot of edits dealing with Cryptogramma, like this one. These Cryptogramma names are just that: names. They are scientific names, formally established. They are not taxa. And as far as I can tell, it is unclear if they are synonyms of anything, let alone to which genus they should assigned.

The proper form is this. - Brya (talk) 11:49, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete additions[edit]

Hi Infovarius. Additions such as Special:Diff/311127278, Special:Diff/251722090/254061222 or Special:Diff/252668348/Special:Diff/311128932 are worse than adding nothing, because you failed to add all atoms. Could you please fix those and also all other items with incomplete elements caused by your additions? --Leyo 20:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Leyo:, I am sorry for these cases. Actually I was running the task for all elements (by included categories), so they should be full usually. I've fixed these three. --Infovarius (talk) 10:40, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Which “included categories” are you referring to? Haven't you considered the chemical elements in chemical formula (P274)? --Leyo 14:33, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

cyclical concept[edit]

Hi, Infovarius --

I noticed that you reverted a March 1st change I made to the concept (Q151885) WD item, removing its subclass link to the mental representation (Q2145290) item. The difficulty here, and the reason for my edit, is that as it stands, Q151885->Q2145290 forms part of the following cycle:

 concept (Q151885)subclass of (P279)  mental representation (Q2145290) subclass of (P279)  representation (Q1272626) instance of (P31)  concept (Q151885)

Not only does this chain create an indirect self-reference, but it also seems to imply that Q151885 is both a first- and a second-order collection (it's a subclass of the first-order Q2145290, but also has the first-order Q1272626 as an instance).

Breaking the cycle at the point of the concept (Q151885)subclass of (P279)  mental representation (Q2145290) link seemed to me a relatively low-impact way to address the situation, but perhaps you could suggest an alternative solution to this imbroglio?

Thanks, Bill DeSmedt

@billdesmedt: I took the liberty of reformatting your assertions. Bovlb (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

No sense - dab[edit]

This is a dab page about anything name like the title. Thus, it is not a subclass of something from Kazakhstan. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q364858&diff=365656833&oldid=365509599 85.182.8.26 06:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Really? Can you find anything in these pages which is not about Kazakhstan? --Infovarius (talk) 13:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Stop vandalizing the dab page. An dab page is not a subclass of a district of Kazakhstan. You have been told, you did it again. 85.181.191.148 02:32, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Why don't you discuss? --Infovarius (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
We do, you don't. Instead of proving that the initial two sentences are wrong, you only ask "Really?", which can be answered with "Yes, really" and you ask an unrelated question. Some clarification: "This is a dab page about anything named like the title. Thus, it is not a subclass of something from Kazakhstan." - because the title does not contain "of Kazakhstan" 77.180.36.209 12:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Dab pages also can be on some specific topic (see Wikipedia:Set index articles (Q24068417)). And here are the very examples. As for the title, not all properties are derivable from a pure title. For example, 12 (Q175014) doesn't contain "film" in its title but it nevertheless is. To summarize, don't be so formal, if practically some pages have some obvious properties rules should not prevent us from using them. --Infovarius (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

disjoint union in Natural Number[edit]

Hi Infovarius, I thought it would better to have it in the unambiguous "positive integer" (Q28920044), but I haven't done so yet. One could argue about the correct meaning of Natural Number but the fact is that different people use it in both ways.

disjoint union of: values as qualifiers: of: 1: prime number: composite number

DavRosen (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Отмена правки №465888606[edit]

Я по поводу отмены моей правки — удаления элементов из элемента Punto Switcher (Q4047648). Для чего вообще хранить историю о прошлых версиях? Считаю вообще ненужным занятием: если нужно, можно всегда посмотреть changelog от автора. — Dimon4ezzz (обс.) 17:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

А для чего вообще хранить номер версии, если можно посмотреть его на оф.сайте? Это базовая информация, которую мы можем, а значит будем хранить. Конечно, достаточно иметь timeline для основных версий (первая цифра). --Infovarius (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Tullimonstrum[edit]

Hello Infovarius. You reverted my edits regarding the Tullimonstrum genus and the Tullimonstrum gregarium species. You may have not noticed that there's only one single species in the genus Tullimonstrum and, thus, all of these articles share exactly the same subject, they deal with the very same item. Consequently, they have to be reunited in one single item in Wikidata. Regards. Kintaro (talk) 11:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius - Thank you for separating genus from species. Some Wikipedias match their articles to the exact taxon, and linking an article to the wrong taxon causes errors if Wikidata-data is dynamically used in the article. 78.55.212.36 22:22, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

head of state vs head of government[edit]

If I am not mistaken, head of state = Governor, head of Government = Chief Minister. In Q1159 So both governor and CM cannot be placed under HOG. Please correct me if I am wrong. -- Mdmahir (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Mdmahir: May be. But head of state (P35) is incorrect too. It is only for countries. --Infovarius (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Orcinus orca - cryptic species complex[edit]

What is that [13]? 78.55.212.36 22:13, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

it is taxon suspected in containing more than 1 species. --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Switzerland merge[edit]

I do not agree. The reason why I created a separate item was because s:ru:Швейцария is a disambiguation page, not a page about Switzerland. --Gikü (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@Gikü: it's a disambig about Switzerland like en:Switzerland (disambiguation) is too. --Infovarius (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

no label (Q718660)[edit]

Тайных советников может быть несколько, так? Я полагаю что отмечать это нужно subclass of (P279) no label (Q28745974).

Представителем Q718660 является каждый человек с таким титулом (no label (Q4264611), только вместо P31 используем occupation (P106), правильно?

Версию Q718660&oldid=453289910 не совсем понял: почему instance of (P31) использован? d1g (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Дело в том, что no label (Q28745974) - это метакласс, т.е. как бы отмечает типы должностей (ведь ставим же мы для профессий P31=профессия). P106 в некотором смысле похоже на P31, да, поэтому смотрите: no label (Q4264611) будет (~P31) тайным советников и, по транзитивности, если сделать Q718660 подклассом, будет также гражданским чином. Но ведь Алексей Александрович не гражданский чин, а человек, имеющий данный чин, правда ведь? Поэтому я считаю, что все чины должны стать P31 Q28745974. --Infovarius (talk) 12:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

generic languages names items on given names pages[edit]

Hello! For information, I always delete generic languages names items ("Korean name", "Ukrainian name", etc.) as a secondary P31 when the other P31 is more specific ("given name" or "family name"), after verifying that the language is correctly present in language of work or name (P407). It's for maintenance purposes, because these generic items are subclass of "name" and not of "given name" or "family name". It makes it more difficult to spot the items using a family name as a given name for example.

These items weren't created because they were needed in the ontology but only because some wikipedia have articles about it. I have yet to find an item like that without sitelink. When no sitelink exists, no one bothered to create items like that because the information is already correctly here with language of work or name (P407).

I don't usually delete correct-level-alternate-P31 (like "Ukrainian given name") because that doesn't mess up the queries but I don't think we should use them actually. I'm all for a more generic system we can reliably query no matter the language. But that's not exactly the same question than the name-level one, and something that we should probably discuss sometimes on the project. Granularity is always worth discussing :).

Either way, I deleted dozens of these redundant-non-correct-level-alternate-P31 and you reverted me on one, so I thought I would explain. I always verify the language is present on the item before deleting, so no data is lost. Have a good day! --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 07:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Painting image restored[edit]

Here you go File:Landscape at Night (Malevich, ca. 1900).jpg ready to go back on d:Q15918830 per your request. Thanks for catching that, however, in future, message to my talk page, not on the deletion requests. Nothing is to be added to closed deletion requests. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:11, 23 March 2017 (UTC) PS ping for attention.

Ok, thanks! --Infovarius (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing P18[edit]

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q165115&diff=460851325&oldid=456290717 - NO! 77.180.29.207 14:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't be so rude. There was no vandalizing in adding an appropriate image. Infovarius (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on Andrapradesh (Q1159)[edit]

Please explain, this change

ESL narasimhan is not head of government. He is head of state (governor). So I edit such a way. I can't get the info about violation. You can check other Indian state for similiar data. ie. Head of government and head of state. Thank in advance--Arjunkmohan (talk) 03:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Arjunkmohan: The problem is that head of state (P35) corresponds to state (Q7275) and not to federated state (Q107390), so this is a wrong property. This restriction is written in head of state (P35) and any misuse is logged at constraint violations page (to which I gave a link). All violations should be cleaned sometime (and if you say about all Indian states, they too). But another problem is that I don't know another appropriate property for your statements... May be it should be created?.. --Infovarius (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification. How can we create a property which entitle 'head of federal state'. Its very common post in federal republic. I like to work on it. Thank in advance--Arjunkmohan (talk) 14:53, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on starfish (Q25349)[edit]

Hello Infovarius,
About this revert:

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Empty value[edit]

Hallo Infovarius. The property / spouse from Ludwig van Beethoven has "no value" (oder auf Deutsch: Das Feld Ehepartner hat "Kein Wert"). Greets, Harry Canyon (talk) 14:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Harry Canyon: Ja, welche Probleme ist es? --Infovarius (talk) 13:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on Sergei Diaghilev (Q211513)[edit]

Hello Infovarius, about your revert:

You confused impresario (Q943995) with empresario (Q1049924). Sergei Diaghilev was an impresario.

Empresario means: a person who had been granted the right to settle on land in exchange for recruiting and taking responsibility for new settlers.

Please, correct your mistake, Csurla (talk) 10:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, you are right, thanks. --Infovarius (talk) 08:59, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

grandparent (Q167918)[edit]

Thanks, I did not know about this property. JAn Dudík (talk) 05:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Spasibo bolshoi![edit]

..za catalog (P972): Wikipedia:List of 1000 articles each Wikipedia should have (Q5460604) . Otchen helpful. 85.180.174.34 15:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

«Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351)[edit]

Пояснение (в ответ на комментарий «почему нет» к откату моей правки (ссылка)):

Удалил из элемента викиданных «Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351) добавленную мной же чуть раньше ссылку на статью русского Викиверситета v:ru:Викиверситет:Компромисс потому, что добавилось не то, что я хотел добавить. А хотел я добавить ссылку на другую статью v:ru:Консенсус. Но такую ссылку добавить не удалось, поскольку она уже входит в другой элемент викиданных «Консенсус (Q202722)». И при попытке добавить ссылку на «Консенсус» автоматически подставлялась ссылка на «Викиверситет:Компромисс». Поначалу думал, что эти элементы неплохо бы слить. Но потом понял, что они не совсем об одном и том же. По крайней мере, относятся в РуВики и в РуВикиверситете к разным пространствам (статей и правил). И сливать элементы никогда раньше не пробовал. Поэтому и удалил неправильно введенную мной ссылку из элемента «Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351).

Просьба: Если Вы умеете объединять элементы, и если объединение этих двух элементов в данном случае возможно и целесообразно, то сделайте это или помогите мне это сделать. Victor Manohin (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Victor Manohin:, насколько я вижу страница v:ru:Консенсус всё-таки об общем понятии и его свойствах, а совсем не только о правилах конкретного вики-проекта (о чём Q4654351 и v:ru:Викиверситет:Компромисс). Поэтому мне кажется, сейчас обе страницы Викиверситета на своих местах. Infovarius (talk) 11:44, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Согласен, что и статьи, и ссылки на них в Викиданных сейчас как раз на месте. Пусть пока так и остается. Просто названия статей почти об одном и том же правиле в РуВики и в русском Викиверситете, которые теперь связаны интер-вики-ссылкой, зачем-то были сделаны немножко разными: Консенсус в правилах Википедии и Компромисс в правилах Викиверситета. И в этом тоже ничего страшного не вижу (Компромисс - частный случай Консенсуса). Причем внутри РуВики статья правила Консенсуса не только опирается на соответствующее общее понятие, и даже прямо ссылается внутри Википедии на соответствующую тематическую статью обычной ссылкой. Но она не связана интер-вики-ссылкой с этой тематической статьей, и тем более не связана такими ссылками с аналогичными тематическими статьями в других проектах.
Проблему (техническую) вижу в том, что невозможно установить между статьями разных проектов более одной интер-вики-связи даже с помощью Викиданных. И невозможно создать интер-вики-связь между статьями внутри одного проекта (например с одним и тем же названием или на близкую тему, но в разных подпространствах одного проекта). В этой технической невозможности я теперь почти уверен. Но если ошибаюсь, то поправьте меня, и покажите способ установить более одной связи между двумя проектами. И покажите способ (если он таки-есть) установить интер-вики-связь между двумя статьями внутри одного проекта. Тогда я связал бы между собой многими ссылками все компромиссы и все консенсусы. А получившаяся у меня ненароком связь между правилом Компромисса и правилом Консенсуса (пока их не назовут одинаково) осталась бы дальше такой как получилась.
Понимаю, что интер-вики-связи внутри одного проекта не особо-то нужны. Технически возможно вставить в статью правил (Консенсуса или Компромисса) обычную ссылку на соответствующую тематическую статью того же и даже другого проекта. Кстати, внутри РуВики такая ссылка в правиле консенсуса на статью об общем понятии консенсуса есть. Причем добавить туда же еще одну ссылку на соответствующую тематическую статью Викиверситета технически возможно, но для этого пришлось бы внести изменение в правило РуВики, а это уже организационная проблема. Причем для меня на данный момент именно в РуВики просто неразрешимая (моя учетка в РуВики бессрочно заблокирована за ОРИССы). Но и в Викиверситете, все не так-то просто, во-первых, формально название тематической статьи (Консенсус) отличается от названия статьи правил (Компромисс). Во-вторых, правило должно опираться на что-то устоявшееся, а не на незаконченное и не рецензированное исследование. И в-третьих, изменение правила уже само по себе (по моему личному горькому опыту, приобретенному на правиле цитирования в РуВики) дело довольно муторное и неблагодарное.
На этот мой комментарий можете не отвечать, если я правильно понял упомянутые в нем технические ограничения Викиданных на установление дополнительных связей между статьями. Victor Manohin (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

stop vandalizing ia-labels[edit]

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q144&diff=474883328&oldid=474727475 - Q144 is P31=common name, but Canis lupus familiaris is not the common name. Why do you so frequently vandalize ia/iawiki content? 92.228.158.143 18:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

It is to make mistakes in languages without good dictionaries.
Please create an account, so that you can indicate your levels of proficiency in languages. d1g (talk) 20:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

отличия Q11707 и Q19316447[edit]

Замысел на Википедии не могу уловить.

"Ресторан" сильно недописан по сравнению с "Restaurant".

Мне нажется что "предприятие общественного питания" впихивают в "restaurant" и не парятся от отличиях. d1g (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Мне больше волнуют отличия "ресторана" от "restaurant". Да, мне тоже кажется, что "restaurant"="предприятие общественного питания" в некотором смысле. В том числе и бургерные и макдональдсы, которые в России бы ресторанами не называли, я считаю. --Infovarius (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Ещё User:Edward какую-то деятельность по пересортировке провёл, надо его спросить. @Edward:, can you please comment, how do you relate ru:Ресторан and ru:Предприятие общественного питания vs en:Restaurant? --Infovarius (talk) 09:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't speak Russian. Q19316447 has the English label 'high-class restaurant', do you think this translation is reasonable? I think Q19316447 is a subclass of Q11707 (restaurant). Edward (talk) 11:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Mineral: named after[edit]

Dear Infovarius (about [14]). A sentence can not be substituted by two items on Wikidata, I try a binominal notation as a compromise. Sometimes I need two items for a meaning, but originally it is only one Greek word. I want to count them someday, as well. Examples: halite (word), milarite (naming locality), iowaite (naming state), surinamite (naming country), shibkovite (two people), rruffite (organisation), yanomanite (ethnic group), neptunite (deity), banalsite (acronym), clinoclase (compound word), etc. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you translate russian code into english code[edit]

{{Навигация |Викисклад={{#if:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|Category:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|}} |Тема={{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}} }} --Arjunkmohan (talk) 15:49, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Or can you forward to other Russian Wikipedians and retreat the code. This template code is not in my wiki. Help me!--Arjunkmohan (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Arjunkmohan: May be such:

{{Navigation |Commons={{#if:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|Category:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|}} |Topic={{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}} }} But you will also need Module:Wikidata copied. --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

subclass of an item when they are almost the same as... (P460)[edit]

re:

My intuition was that Q20055913 was the same tool as items I edited recently. I did several attempts but was unable to spot functional difference from "решётка для гриля".

Feel free to object this talk about Q20055913 or my suggestion at P279 about almost the same items. d1g (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Да, с богами есть сложности. Но в данном случае (моя правка) вроде проще: Q3773693 явно более общее понятие, чем гриль. --Infovarius (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
В Q20055913 была одна португальская ссылка grelha (решётка 30 на 60 см), я её объединил с Q390409.
Грилей в любом языке два: один как технология grilling (Q264619), другой - установка по этой технологии barbecue grill (Q853185)
Решетки и шампуры (и ухваты, которые я потерял) относятся ко второму в качестве вспомогательных объектов. d1g (talk) 07:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Lowest point in Poland[edit]

Hi you reverted my edit of deepest point (P1589) in Poland, so I thought we can talk about it. I could not find any references for the claim about Żuławy Wiślane being the lowest point in Poland, while Central Statistical Office of Poland the most respected institution in Poland charged in keeping track of stuff like that, listed Raczki Elbląskie as the lowest point in Poland. I followed the reference "English Wikipedia" to check if they had a reference for Żuławy Wiślane claim and w:en:Poland also lists Raczki Elbląskie as the lowest point. So unless we can find some references for it I would rather keep it out. --Jarekt (talk) 12:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt:, thanks for writing me. I've found an article about this valley in Russian geographical encyclopedia, it says about -1.8 meter, so I've added the reference. --Infovarius (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

My Undos[edit]

I have Undone you edits as The Electro magenetic radiation is the suitable topic for மின்காந்த அலைகள். Don't be confused and Hope you'll ping me while replying!--Shriheeran (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Shriheeran: isn't this article about electromagnetic waves? I see many parameters of waves are discussed there. --Infovarius (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
No, it is about Radiation--Shriheeran (talk) 09:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Metrology defintions[edit]

Hi Infovarius

A courtesy note ot let you know that I have modified some of the changes that you made to Metrolgy-related defintions ("Unit of measurement" and "English system of units". After you made your changes, I reread the article on the differences between "is an instance of" and "is a sub-class of" and found that I had made a few errors. I have also reverted one of your changes, but only after consulting these documents. Martinvl (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, User:Martinvl, but I don't understand your changes in statements... --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

competition (Q23807345) and competition (Q476300)[edit]

Hello, I am quite confused about these two items. Would you please explain to me what is the difference between them? Regards, --Sintakso (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Splitting mixed names instead of adding new P1705[edit]

Hello. We all agree to the "one string" / "one item" system for names. We agree that "Leonid" isn't the same name as "Леонид". We also know that right now, thousands of item are mixing several names. Can you please split the names instead of just adding another P1705 and writing system? In all cases, we need to correct: labels, descriptions, and uses so that they are correct with the P1705/writing system. I know Jura decided many mixed name were in fact Latin-script ones, but I really don't care if you keep that or not.

But I care when you only half-correct these items, adding a Cyrillic P1705 and Cyrillic writing system without correcting labels, descriptions and uses. Either you create a new Cyrillic item or a new Latin item; I don't care at all which one, if in the end we have only clean items (labels, descriptions, properties and uses). When you only "correct" the P1705 without cleaning up the rest, we have German people with the name "Леонид", which is as much wrong as Russian people with "Leonid" was. We should strive to make Wikidata better, not replace mistakes by other mistakes. Thank you. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 09:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Harmonia Amanda: I appreciate your work and attitude but statement that "Leonid" isn't the same name as "Леонид" is doubtful for me. They are like different forms of one name. What should we do if a person with name "Леонид" is widely referred in Latin-alphabet sources as "Leonid" (which is logical as it is the only transliteration)? "Latin" speakers know him as Leonid, "cyrillic" speakers know him as Леонид, but these are the same. Or do you think that we should add to each person all transliterations of their name into all scripts? --Infovarius (talk) 13:17, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius:. No, "Leonid" is not the only transliteration of Леонид. For example, in French, it could be "Léonide". A person should have only their name in their language; multiple values for people who emigrated, for example. So a Russian person would only have Леонид, and a German one Leonid. That's the only correct values. We split variations of the same names since 2013; Jules is the French variation of the Spanish Julio, and of the Italian Giulio, etc. A string, an item, that's the system chosen for years. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 13:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
@Harmonia Amanda: There's logic in your word... But I don't feel fully comfortable with this system. Couple of issues: 1) if we split Q6081128 into Latin and Cyrillic items where commons:Category:Alexandra (given name) should go? It fits both as Commons doesn't separate names of different scripts yet. 2) Again about belorussian names. E.g. Ihar (Q16831923). Let's take for example Igor Lapshin (Q1657767) - he was a soviet man, so obviously he has Russian name (Игорь). But he was born at city of modern Belorussia so it has given name (P735) Ihar (Q16831923). I don't know about his main or tongue language, but he has official Russian name "Лапшин, Игорь Олегович". Actually be:Ігар=ru:Игорь and they are used interchangeably in Belorussia. Should we use both forms of name? --Infovarius (talk) 13:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: I don't know for Commons, we should probably ask a Commonist what they want to do. I don't usually move Commons categories around if they are linked to a credible item. It's like any other case of Wikipedia talking about several subjects at once, except this time it's Commons. We created many items "name" just for the sake of enwiki which is talking about both given names and surnames in its articles; we could probably create items like Andrew and variants (Q389) just to handle Commons if they don't want to clean up.
For Belarusian people during the Soviet times, they had both names legally, no? I would add both names, Ігар and Игорь, since both were true. Like all Alsacians people who became Germans in the 1870s and suddenly had their names changed; both names were true (or when the reverse happened after World War I). I think it's exactly like an Icelandic or Czech person in France; we would most of the time use their names in Latin-script "normally", including such signs as Þ or č they have in their native languages, but if they became French, their names would be "normalized" with only signs existing in the French alphabet. In Wikidata, we would add both form of their names. Or like for Indian people, who speak several languages, whose languages can be written in several writing systems…
There are also two-scripts languages, like Japanese. Most names are in kanji, but all names can be written in kanas, and the same kanji can be written several ways in kanas (but each combination kanji-kana is a different name, and the same person will always write their name the same way): we created items for each combination. Like Yomo (Q27242665) and Nishikata (Q27242666) are actually written the same way in kanji, but are not at all the same name. Everyone with a kanji name have a kana form of their name; but the reverse is not true…
I think human names are really complicated and we can't have a perfect system which will work every time. The world is to big a place for that. But I think the "one string, one item" offers the most easy way to handle most cases. So that we can know if someone was really named "Aleksiej" or if he was named Алексей and it was a Polish person who transliterated… --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Antwort auf die Frage "Why not"[edit]

Hallo Infovarius, wegen deiner Bearbeitung an der Bundesautobahn 6 siehe Hinweise unter Help:Label/ru#Неоднозначность. Die russische Bezeichnung habe ich von Q9042 = А20 kopiert. --Labant (talk) 00:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Labant: und was muss ich da sehen? "Метки могут быть неоднозначными"? --Infovarius (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Und darunter ein Beispiel:
Titel des Artikels in Wikipedia: Russland (Theater)
Label in Wikidata: Russland
Beschreibung in Wikidata: Theater in Moskau
--Labant (talk) 18:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
So "A6" ist besser als "Автомагистраль A6", nicht war? --Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Genau passt --Labant (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Доктор химических наук[edit]

Добрьій день! Касательно Q17281079... А не могли бьі Вьі присоединить туда перенаправление uk:Доктор хімічних наук? А то я пьітался, но не смог... Face-sad.svg --Олег.Н (talk) 14:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@Олег.Н: ✓ Done --Infovarius (talk) 19:58, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Aussage instance of (P31) in Bundesautobahn 6 (Q9016)[edit]

Ein kleiner Hinweis:

Siehe auch Wikidata:WikiProject Roads/Germany/Bundesautobahn. --Labant (talk) 00:53, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

It isn't clear for me... I don't see any road network (Q358078) in German autobahn (Q313301) but I see subclass of (P279) controlled-access highway (Q46622). --Infovarius (talk) 18:26, 20 May 2017 (UTC)
Here are the statements:
Bundesautobahn 6 (Q9016)highway system (P16)  German autobahn (Q313301)
German autobahn (Q313301)part of (P361)  road network in Germany (Q1683114)
road network in Germany (Q1683114)instance of (P31)  road network (Q358078)
--Labant (talk) 00:05, 21 May 2017 (UTC)

Q21450099[edit]

Hi. Why did you make this revert? I split the items ru:Хейфец and en:Heifetz following these guidelines. There is another rule in wikidata to make separate items for pages that are disambiguations and pages about surnames thar contain lists of people with this surname. --Jarash (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jarash: I don't like separation of surname-disambigs from surname item, but here was also another problem: there were three items about Heifetz! --Infovarius (talk) 10:23, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Thanks[edit]

Hey, thanks for your edits, I was testing a tool, and I pressed the wrong button without noticing it! Martinligabue (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Undo revision 493174039: what do you mean?[edit]

I mean ru:Шаблон:Кинопремия

| метка4       = Место проведения
| викиданные4  = P276

- Kareyac (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Kareyac: Sometimes using autofilling from infoboxes can be wrong, but here... May be you're right. It just looks not ideal property for me (how can award be located somewhere?) --Infovarius (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, award can't be located, but only award ceremony. Maybe significant event (P793)award ceremony (Q4504495) with location (P276) when location (Q17334923) is permanent looks some better? - Kareyac (talk) 12:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Reversion in The Hunger Games (Q212965)[edit]

Hi, I used part of (P361) instead of series (P179) there because I was fixing the constraint errors from The Hunger Games tetralogy (Q11885031). The way you fixed it displays a constraint error in the property of The Hunger Games tetralogy (Q11885031). If instead of part of (P361) I should be using series (P179) then there should be a way to specify in has part (P527) that the inverse could be any of series (P179) or part of (P361). -- Agabi10 (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Hm, it's a problem. But series (P179) is subproperty of (P1647) of part of (P361) so it should be allowed as a reverse of has part (P527)?.. --Infovarius (talk) 11:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

no label (Q28418687)[edit]

zh.wikipedia "蠵龟" is just a redirect (is even not using R from XXX templates) to zh:赤蠵龜, why do you think that such redirects are permanent duplicates? on-going RFC? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Hm, I don't want duplicates-redirects. I don't know why it was, may be zh:蠵龟 was deleted after item creation? --Infovarius (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky didn't live in Russia?[edit]

I am confused by your edit. Russia (Q159) is an item for articles about concept of "Russia" which started in 862 (see w:ru:Россия#История). It is not an article about "Russian Federation" that started in 1991. You can create a new item for each stage of Russian history if you need to differentiate them. --Jarekt (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt: There are items about all stages of Russian history. Or do you believe that Russia (Q159) includes periods of Kyivska Rus' (Q1108445), Russian Empire (Q34266) and Soviet Union (Q15180)?? Do you think then that Kiev (Q1899) can be called Russian city as it was in Kyivska Rus' (Q1108445), and Warsaw (Q270) is Russian because it was in Russian Empire (Q34266)? Even if so, it is better to use more exact term, and practically Russia (Q159) is used as "Russian Federation". See Template:Constraint:Period at Talk page, for example. --Infovarius (talk) 10:53, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
And by the way, what do you mean by Commons Creator page (Q24731821)? There exists commons:Template:Creator (unfortunately not at this item), but I couldn't find such template in Tchaikovsky pages... --Infovarius (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

自行车运动确实讲的是自行车运动[edit]

自行车运动的第一句是:“自行车运动常指借助自行车(或称单车)开展的各种运动的总称”,明确说明了该条目仅指自行车运动。对应于 Cycling 的中文应该叫做“自行车骑行”之类的。 -- Ma3r (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I am sorry, Google Translate seemed bad for this. Please do as you know. --Infovarius (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the Q82732[edit]

Hello Imfovarius! I reverted this edit of mine, because I thought that there wouldn't be much sense for the name of a mythological person in a native language, as it's not a real person, and thus it doesn't have a native language. On the other hand it makes sense to give as native name the name in the language in which the person was first fictionalised or had a great influence. So I guess in this subject 2 native names should be given, one in Ancient Greek and not Greek, and one in Latin, as Aeneas was also referenced in Roman mythology. I am all ears to listen to your opinion! SucreRouge (talk) 21:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello @SucreRouge:! Of course, it should be Ancient Greek and not Greek, I missed that. And you are right about Latin, I think. It's interesting opinion about language of first fictionalizing, I have to think about it, at least I have no objections now. --Infovarius (talk) 13:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I made these 2 edits, so we are clear for now. Happy editing!SucreRouge (talk) 13:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok, SucreRouge, but one more thing: Ancient Greeks used Aspirated consonant (Q320433) (one of 2 types) necessarily when a word starts with vowel, so it should be corrected here. --Infovarius (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Нужна помощь[edit]

Привет, у тебя, случайно, нету бота, которым может поудалять неверное утверждение для набора элементов? Около 5 тысяч элементов я случайно запортил, и руками править как-то тяжко. ShinePhantom (talk) 17:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Да, я могу, что нужно сделать? --Infovarius (talk) 12:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
@ShinePhantom: sorry for not pinging... --Infovarius (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Roerich (Q27144654)[edit]

Hi, seeing this diff, I'm not too sure what you mean: if it is an item about the family (and not the family name), then the instance of (P31)family name (Q101352) must be removed, along with most of the statements, but the item cannot have the two P31s at once: it is either a family (ie a group of people related by blood, with a founder, members and so on) or a family name (ie, a string, with a writing system, a language, etc.) -Ash Crow (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ash Crow: it's difficult to differ. The article is about surname, with its history and variants of spelling (writing system doesn't matter, surnames are usually transliterated and translated frequently). But all persons having this surname are from one family which (of course) is described in the article, with its head and kinship. --Infovarius (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

съедобные в сыром виде вещи fruit (Q3314483) не все плоды[edit]

головка чеснока не плод, а луковица

Я такую правку делать не стал, потому что исключений много может быть, особенно среди редких растений (съедобные листья?) d1g (talk) 11:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

Q30419856[edit]

Hi there,

i removed link to en.wikt, because it's a list with all languages contained in English Wiktionary. At de.wikt or lb.wikt there a statistics about languages. At mi.wikt is no comparable content. At csb.wikt there is a list with languages containing languages which are not in csb.wikt. Do you now understand why i deleted en.wikt? Maybe there are more links, which are not like de.wikt, lb.wikt or nds.wikt containing statistics. Best regards --Yoursmile (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I understand, thanks for the analysis. By the way, mi and km are just translations of en, so they should fit. But pl is about phrasemes, I'll move it. I'll think how to divide en-group and de-group. --Infovarius (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia list as P279[edit]

Hi, I don't understand why you reverted me [15], List of Middle-earth animals (Q2700354) is a Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) that should not be used to "define things" with P279 or P31 (it is the same for Wikimedia categories). This a constraint violations of P279 [16]. There is has list (P2354) to link to Wikimedia list. For dragons of Middle-earth (Q2014788) there are already Middle-earth races (Q989255) and fictional species of animal (Q15702752) as instance of (P31). Akeron (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Safavids[edit]

Please stop removing sh:Safavidska Monarhija from the main item. Article is about both dynasty and empire, like English and majority of other articles. --Orijentolog (talk) 02:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: but the problem is that items in Wikidata should be clearly about one topic. And we have Safavid dynasty (Q161205) for dynasty, and Safavids state (Q18234383) for state. What do you think is the best choice for sh? --Infovarius (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

reversion in Johann Wolfgang von Goethe[edit]

Hi, why do you revert my deletion of Sturm und Drang (Q207741) as a genre (P136) ?. What Sturm und Drang (Q207741) is, a movement (P135) or a genre (P136) ?. One of them, but no both properties. In my opinion is a movement (P135), as WP articles say. Disagree ?, tell me why. Otherwise, please delete the one you consider is wrong. Thank you.--Amadalvarez (talk) 20:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I presume, you agree. I go ahead. Thanks --Amadalvarez (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@Amadalvarez: oh, I haven't noticed movement (P135) with the same value. Then it's ok. --Infovarius (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Wiktionary links from Wikidata[edit]

Thanks for providing a little more information. Is there a guide for how to link Wikidata items with Wiktionary pages or should I just not bother. The information at Wikidata:Wiktionary may be useful for regular Wiktionary contributors, but there is nothing there I can parse as instructions for how to proceed; if that information is there, it would definitely be useful for someone to make it easier to understand. — OwenBlacker (talk) 01:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@OwenBlacker: there is not so much information at all, I suppose. I can say that now we are linking categories, templates, indices, appendices and rhymes (if the latters are relevant at all). Articles in main space (words/phrases themselves) are not linked through Wikidata now, the work is going to maintain them but this will be very different from usual sitelinks. You can find a scheme at Wikidata:Wiktionary but honestly I don't understand it completely yet. On the other hand, different articles from language editions of Wiktionary are linked automatically now, just after creation, e.g. en:check to de:check. --Infovarius (talk) 21:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
{Ping|Infovarius}} It sounds like I might want to avoid making any edits related to Wiktionary for now, at least. Thanks anyway :) — OwenBlacker (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

P143/P248[edit]

Коллега, мне кажется семантика этих свойств следующая: imported from (P143) - это место, откуда информация была взята (википедия, freebase, любая другая база данных, которая может быть, а может не быть reliable source), а stated in (P248) - это как раз reliable source, т.е. то что может быть сноской в википедии. Разве нет? --Ghuron (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ghuron:, да, конечно. Извините, невнимательная правка была. --Infovarius (talk) 21:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Q12503 "The integers"[edit]

The reason I made this edit is to distinguish integer (Q12503) the set of integers from Integer (Q729138), one integer. It's correct to link the latter to http://schema.org/Integer, but not the former.

Why do I think integer (Q12503) refers to the set of all integers: because it's denoted Z and it's "instance of: set". So not only its label, but the description should also be changed. And "different from Integer (Q729138)" should be added --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Please comment on the above! --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:20, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Invertebrata[edit]

Why these two edits? paraphyletic group (Q208755) is currently defined as a subclass of taxon (Q16521), and parent taxon (P171) is a subproperty of subclass of (P279). --Njardarlogar (talk) 11:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Duration in films[edit]

Hi, Infovarius. I removed the durarion in some films because in some versions of Wikipedia (such as the Spanish) we use various infoboxes for different uses. For example, when we are talking about the soundtrack we can't see the duration of the soundtrack album (not the film) because the parameter in Wikidata understand the durarion for all infoboxes in the same article. I think is a data that anyone can find easily in IMDb, for example. Will there be any problem? Thanks. --5truenos (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@5truenos: I think that this is a specific problem of Spanish Wikipedia, because in Wikidata we tend to separate different objects into different items. So soundtrack is always at different item from the film. You can load data for soundtrack into the article using some Lua functions through statements in item for film. So I insist on keeping the durations in film items. --Infovarius (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Request[edit]

Hello,

you reverted my edits. I merged islamic prophet and you revert this. please sir revert edits to my last rivision. thanks --BukhariSaeed (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Please stop readding incorrect information to Q174907 (SPICE)[edit]

Several of the statements for Q174907 (SPICE) were incorrect for the SPICE electronic circuit simulator that it is supposed to describe. Several others had previously tried to remove them, since they kept affecting the English Wikipedia article on that program, but you added them again. I have just removed them once more, with an explanation on the item's Talk page. Whoever originally added those statements confused the SPICE electronics simulator with an unrelated program, the SPICE remote-display system. The latter is written in C++ and has a source-code repository on freedesktop.org, as well as a Gentoo package under app-emulation/spice. These have no connection to Berkeley's SPICE electronics software, which was only written in Fortran and C, and long predates online source-code repositories (though source archives do exist). --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 01:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@Colin Douglas Howell: I've moved statements to SPICE (Q1557101). Is it right? --Infovarius (talk) 15:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
That looks great, thanks! That should solve the problem once and for all. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Q41509s:ЭСБЕ/Моль[edit]

Добрый день! Мы не ставим ссылки на перенаправления, в s:ЭСБЕ/Моль только и говориться, что "моль" — это тоже самое, что и "грамм-молекула", но нет никакого объяснения, что это такое. Поэтому нет никакой пользы в этой связи. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 07:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Почему нет? Польза хотя бы в том, что мы честно показываем, что есть статья с одноимённым названием, пусть и недостатья. Кстати, а все элементы для ЭСБЕ-перенаправлений имеют общий класс (типа Wikipedia:Soft redirect (Q7200789))? --Infovarius (talk) 15:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Ilf and Petrov (Q262816)[edit]

I removed occupation (P106) from Ilf and Petrov (Q262816) because it violates type constraint (Q21503250), and the occupation (P106) statement is present on Ilya Ilf (Q471443) and Yevgeny Petrov (Q714739). Danmichaelo (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I understand that, but how should we mark that this is specifically writers duet? --Infovarius (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Juk and congee[edit]

Hi! I'd like to do just one merge, as juk (Korean: 죽(粥)) is a Korean name for congee Please see that the Chinese article zhōu ) and the Japanese article gayu 粥(かゆ) that are linked with congee use the same Chinese character as juk. The English article congee also contains juk as its Korean name. Other dishes in en:List of rice dishes are not the same case. --Azeite (talk) 07:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Azeite: oh, such a trouble with these cultural differences in cuisine! The problem was that ru/uk/some others articles were not about juk (and may be not about congee), so I was against your moves. Now after rethinking I created a new item: rice porridge (Q35661296) and moved some links and statements there. You can check please. And now I am doubt that ms/id articles are the same as Congee (Q878624)... --Infovarius (talk) 14:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Why not ?[edit]

( https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q30250598&oldid=prev&diff=530867958 ) Because it’s not really a useful property. That do not match what it’s supposed to represent. What is meant is that the solar system is fully partitioned into « inner » and « outer part ». But this vaguely works because there is only two parts that « complements » each other to form the solar system. This is nowhere close to be able to express that france is partitioned into its regions. This is why I think that while full of good intentions the « opposite » solution is a bad attempt to represent something real. We should create a property to represent that. I think of a property similar to disjoint union of (P2738) View with SQID but for the whole/part relationship. author  TomT0m / talk page 22:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

see Wikidata:Property_proposal/fully_divised_into
Ok, may be "opposite" is a vague property here (you mean the next diff, I suppose?). But I don't feel the need in new property, it's enough to put all possible (all known) constituents in e.g. P527 and we will mean that they form a full set. Better may be to create (or use some) item for "etc." meaning that the set is not full. --Infovarius (talk) 19:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) are not Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410)[edit]

Hi, I don't understand why you are engaging in an edit war on Vučetić (Q4128453) to insert a constraint violation. Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) pages lists entries that share a common thematic. Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) pages lists entries that share a common name. Both are subclasses of enumeration (Q12139612), but they don't have the same purpose. If you consider that all disambiguation pages should be doubled as list pages, this would be a major change, so please first obtain a project-wide consensus on the project chat. -Ash Crow (talk) 12:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Your comments have been moved into a discussion of Geonames[edit]

Please note User_talk:Liuxinyu970226#Moving_my_comment_about_Chinese_conversion_.28Q15630179.29_into_a_thread_about_Geonames_.3F
--- Jura 16:28, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

work of art (Q838948) subclass of item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264)[edit]

This statement was deleted, https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q838948&diff=prev&oldid=537270330 , because to be subclass of (P279) implies to have *all* the caracteristics of the parent in heritage and it is not the case. Not all artworks are items of collection or exhibition. Some examples of artworks, among many, which have no collection (P195) : Fallen Astronaut (Q1161218), Fresco of Saint Christopher of Saint-Sorlin-en-Bugey (Q19318054), The Sun (Q18891206), Flammarion engraving (Q1426992), no label (Q10538835). Furthermore, as described in the item page, if an item is an instance of item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264) or subclass, it implies that the work has ou should have the property inventory number (P217) and it will not be possible for all work of art (Q838948). Therefore work of art (Q838948) should not be subclass of item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264). Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 08:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@Shonagon: I'd say that item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264) mean "it can be in collection or exhibition". May be I'm wrong.
Hello Infovarius . item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264) doesn't mean "it can be in collection or exhibition" but "it is in collection or exhibition" not only in descriptions (French, English, German, Spanish ...) but ontologically too with the properties for this type (P1963) that implies inventory number (P217) and collection (P195). As explained, that doesn't correspond to many instances of work of art (Q838948) so logically this item should not be subclass of (P279) of item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264). I just want to aware you about two things on which I am worried here: first, an explicit and strange vision of the world that artworks are necessarily linked to collection or exhibition; secondly, the consideration that subclass of (P279) could be used approximately without any specific need. An exemple of perverse consequence of the second: if we want to look for item of collections or exhibitions (Q18593264) (and subclasses by inferences) missing inventory number (P217), tere will a big lot of false positive of artworks. Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

backing vocalist (Q798487) et al[edit]

Sorry for the vandalism - testing band infobox harvesting, and apparently someone linked the role instead of the member's name.
--Ejegg (talk) 04:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

reversion[edit]

Hi, regarding your reversion, as I understand it couldn't be together swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) and 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8613), because second one includes the first one which is redundant. I deleted swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) to be coherent with the level of the other values from previous games. Probably, the item to keep should be swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) because it's more specific and also change the other values to their correspondance (Swimming at the 2012 Summer Olympics (Q193735), etc.). Do you agree ?.--Amadalvarez (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius: I assume you agree. I proceed, thanks.--Amadalvarez (talk) 07:02, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
@Amadalvarez: I agree. The more specific the better. --Infovarius (talk) 10:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Q5678860[edit]

In what wiki is Q5678860 a disambiguation page? In both, EN and SR, the pages seem not to describe a particular data structure, but list some lemmas, known as "Hash trie". So I would consider them as disambiguation page, even if the do not use the according categories. --jmkeil (talk) 15:37, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid that User:ValterVB wouldn't agree with you :) --Infovarius (talk) 12:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
It isn't only my idea :) You can start a discussion on Wikipedia and ask if there is agree to change the page in a disambiguation page. --ValterVB (talk) 15:42, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Reversion[edit]

Why you are undoing my edits? BukhariSaeed (talk) 12:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: because Wiktionary articles should not be linked to usual items. Only Wiktionary categories/appendices/templates and so on. The reason is that they are linked to each other by Extension:Cognate now, but which word (of which language) to link with a notion is a random choice so it is wrong. But don't be afraid, they will be linked to Wikidata soon - through special type of items: Lexemes. Read carefully Wikidata:Wiktionary. --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
i didn't know about that and thanks for explanation. BukhariSaeed (talk) 01:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Имён "Ричард/Рихард/Ришар" и "Петер/Питер" нет[edit]

Richard (Q1249148) Peter (Q2793400)

Не понимаю почему речь о произношении когда в метках написание в первую очередь.

Для произношения IPA свойства нужны. d1g (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Дело в том, что это не русские имена, а Richard и Peter. Нельзя однозначно сказать, каким русским словам они соответствуют, поэтому нельзя дать однозначную метку. Я бы предпочёл вообще оставить оригинальное написание. Другой аргумент: разве Richard Wagner (Q1511) - Ричард? --Infovarius (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Coat of arms of Russia[edit]

Hi, Infovarius (talkcontribslogs), I noticed your edit and added the Coat of arms of the Russian Federation (1992-1993) to the gallery to make it complete. Hopefully that was not a bad move. Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you for your time. Face-smile.svg Lotje (talk) 05:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Şakşuka[edit]

Ş = spoken sch! Yours Avernarius (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

It is spoken "шакшука" :) but sch or sh - it depends on language. --Infovarius (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Drama[edit]

Please read en:Drama - you'll see that this is only a part of fiction - along with epic and lyric. So "historical drama" isn't equal to "historical fiction". --Infovarius (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

YOU should read it carefully. As I said before (and said in the article you mention), Drama has two different senses in English :
  • the one you admit ("Considered as a genre of poetry in general, the dramatic mode has been contrasted with the epic and the lyrical modes ever since Aristotle's Poetics (c. 335 BCE)—the earliest work of dramatic theory." or "The use of "drama" in a more narrow sense to designate a specific type of play dates from the modern era. "Drama" in this sense refers to a play that is neither a comedy nor a tragedy")
  • and the other one, broader, means "fiction" : see the first sentence of the article ("Drama is the specific mode of fiction represented in performance.") or "In English (as was the analogous case in many other European languages), the word "play" or "game" (translating the Anglo-Saxon plèga or Latin ludus) was the standard term used to describe drama until William Shakespeare's time—just as its creator was a "play-maker" rather than a "dramatist" and the building was a "play-house" rather than a "theatre"."
Concerning Historical period drama, it is clear that the second sense is use : "The term, historical period drama (also historical drama, period drama, costume drama, and period piece) refers to a work set in an earlier time period" and "It is an informal crossover term that can apply to several genres"...
Elfast (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

National artist of Soviet Union[edit]

Привет. Это не понимаю точно: [17]. Если для эти две звания употребляется P155, потом - есть это хорошо, что для народный артист РСФСР и народный артист СССР употребляется P156? --Okino (talk) 23:28, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@Okino: Не говорю 100%, но по-моему P155/P156 употребляется не всегда однозначно. Здесь их можно понимать как "следующий по времени существования награды" или "следующий по этапу присуждения". --Infovarius (talk) 19:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

"Instance of" of fictional characters[edit]

Здравствуйте, Infovarius. У меня возникли сомнения на счет https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4530918&oldid=553390272. Нужно ли вообще указывать все "реинкарнации" вымышленных персонажей? В случае, например, некоторых зарубежных персонажей в шапке "instance of" может быть по 7 (!) и более элементов (animated character, comic character, film character, game character, television character и т.д.) просто из-за того, что франшизы обрастают фильмами, комиксами, мультфильмами и прочим.

Есть ли какие-нибудь правила на счет этого? Выглядит это все не очень, из-за чего я склоняюсь к тому, что лучше оставлять в "instance of" только те элементы, которые относятся именно к оригинальному персонажу (в случае Электроника — это элемент "literary character", "film character" же уже вторичен). Не говоря уже о том, что при такой практике "instance of" в элементах персонажей будет сильно разрастаться. --Russian Rocky (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

А что делать? Если элемент реально о персонаже всех этих жанров, то нужно указывать. Другое решение - разделять персонажа на несколько элементов (один из книги, другой из фильма и т.д.), но он мне не всегда нравится. --Infovarius (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Т.е. каких-то четких правил, как я понял, нет?
На счет же разделения персонажей, то это уже чрезмерно. Конечно, если это не отдельный случай, вроде Кларка Кента (Супермена) из "Тайн Смолвиля", который имеет собственную статью: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q774772
Как вариант, для всех сопутствующих воплощений персонажа франшизы (animated character, comic character, film character, game character, television character и т.д.) можно использовать отдельный элемент. Заметил подобную практику в отношении списков персонажей, например, в случае списка персонажей Винни-Пуха: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1153462 Хотя, пока я не могу судить насколько адекватен такой вариант.
Было бы, конечно, намного лучше выработать какой-то консенсус по этому поводу. --Russian Rocky (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Участница Valentina.Anitnelav уже по факту разделяет некоторых персонажей - особенно выделяет диснеевских. См. например: Snow White (Q2739228) vs Snow White (Q14153484). Да, и Винни-пух тоже, причём не пойму, куда лучше воткнуть связь с нашими мультиками в Q1427030 или в Q188574.
Так что пока стандарта, наверное, нет. Надо пробовать и обсуждать всем вместе. --Infovarius (talk) 11:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

assembly is not an event[edit]

Why you classified Q1752346 as type of meeting? I reverted https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1752346&diff=496829498&oldid=481126783 as it implied that "organization that uses parliamentary procedure to make decisions" is special type of meeting. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Because in en-wiki: "A Deliberative assembly is a gathering of members". --Infovarius (talk) 23:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

instance of (P31) algebraic structure (Q205464)[edit]

hello, sorry for bothering. but could you elaborate ob why you think algebraic structures shouldn't be marked as instance of (P31) algebraic structure (Q205464)? i presume it's not only regarding group? because its used for many algebraic structures, and i didn't start it. i don't particularly care for for their instanceof value, i'm just curious and open for improvement. thanks. :) --opensofias (talk) 17:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

@Opensofias: do you know the difference between instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279)? There are several groups for example, and all of them are algebraic structure (Q205464) I suppose. So group should be subclass of (P279) algebraic structure (Q205464). --Infovarius (talk) 13:06, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

card game[edit]

Regarding this revert in card game (Q142714): subclasses of this item are used with the sport (P641) property, thus this item somehow should be subclassing sport (P641) — or you need to repair all affected P641 claims as well. I spend a lot of time to keep the constraint violations list at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P641 short, and you shouldn’t break things up like that. Thanks and regards, MisterSynergy (talk) 19:56, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

It's sufficient to add some sport subclass to card games which really are. I've worked out CoVi report a little bit: tinyurl.com/ycpdabv9. What are you specifically unhappy now about? --Infovarius (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Crimean Peninsula[edit]

Hi. Could you explain why you reverted this edit please? It's also relevant for Q4053951, and I'd like to understand how we should be representing the country of things in this area at the moment (and how we can ingest that into location maps in infoboxes on the English Wikipedia). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Because it is not a state and it is violating property constraints. As status quo I suppose we just mark both countries for current Crimea objects. --Infovarius (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Something like this? Mike Peel (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Q38304648[edit]

What makes you think Maria B Ospina (Q38304648) was wrongly merged? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Because Wikimedia permanent duplicated page (Q21286738) is not a human at all... --Infovarius (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)