I would like to know why this was deleted -
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Reply to "wtskora.com"
Reply to "Botteghi dj"
Reply to "Wondering"
About this board
|Babel user information|
|Users by language|
This page uses the Structured Discussions extension of MediaWiki (SD, formerly known as “Flow”). I think that we really need something like this instead of the classical discussion approach, but I am also aware of the fact that not everything works smoothly yet in SD.
If you struggle to use this discussion page perfectly, do not worry and just leave a messy or broken comment for me. You do not need to figure out how to write a perfectly formatted comment with lots of trial-and-error edits. I am hopefully going to figure out what is on, otherwise I am going to ask you. Thanks!
Btw. SD comment do not need to be signed, since the software manages all contributions and puts user names above them. Experienced users might also like the wikitext mode of SD, to be actived in the lower right corner of the input field.
Previous discussion was archived aton 2015-11-09.
As it is stated in the deletion summary, the item was empty (i.e. no statements were added). Can you comment whether it would be possible to make in item that complies to the Wikidata:Notability policy?
Why Q94579031 has been deleted? is a real person and famous dj, i have linked all official websites talk about him.
what do u need to establish he is not notable? he is present in most store of world and produced tracks for most important labels
The relevant policy is Wikidata:Notability, and the item does not comply with it.
There need to be serious sources about him, not under control by himself, no user-generated content, and not of predominantly promotional nature. Do you have something like that?
i have anything what do u need?
Can you list some of your serious sources here?
OK i links all official sources stores & social Media:
Well yes, most or all of these links had been placed in the item Q94579031 itself, but there is no independent editorial content about the artist available apparently.
ok i link editorial links abou Botteghi
Thanks. I am going to consult Italian speaking admins tomorrow to have a closer look.
ok i wait for more info
- I did delete Q94579031 after it was listed at Wikidata:Requests for deletions yesterday. It contained various social media and streaming-related identifiers, but nothing that we usually consider as important in a notability assessment. Now the user has complained here.
- They came along with the list of links above—but I cannot read most of them. It appears that they are mostly advertisements for events where the artist had an appearance, but actually I am not sure whether the item should be considered notable now. It still looks like the typical promotional stuff we see so much of recently.
- Can you please give some input here?
I've never heard about him, and it's almost certainly not notable even for Wikidata standards. Also, with the notable exception of Agenzia Nazionale Stampa Associata (Q392934) (where Botteghi is just cited at the end of the article as part of the DJ lineup, nothing more), all the sources provided are not-so-reliable sources.
Can you explain to me why Q94978691 was deleted?
Hallo MisterSynergy, ich habe mich längere Zeit nicht mehr gemeldet und ich denke, dass ich beachtliche Fortschritte in Benutzung von Wikidata gemacht habe. Zwei Datenobjekte kann ich immer noch nicht vereinigen - die Beschreibung dazu ist wirklich unverständlich. Deswegen möchte ich ich dich bitten die beiden Datenobjekte Q21555898 und Q53508560 (Melchior Haffner) zu vereinigen. Ich dachte, es wäre blöd, das einfach zu lassen, nachdem es mir aufgefallen ist, dass zwei Datenobjekte sich auf die gleiche Person beziehen. Wenn ich es selber machen könnte, würde ich dich damit nicht belästigen. Grüße Mewa767 (talk) 02:05, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
Hallo Mewa767, ich habe das schnell mal erledigt.
Wenn Du Probleme bei der Anleitung zum Vereinigen von Objekten siehst (Special:MyLanguage/Help:Merge), dann sollten wir da einen Blick drauf werfen und ggf. die Anleitung verbessern. Wo genau klemmt es?
List of Jinn in Folklore
please undelete it
it is not empty, just two members delete link repeatedly
This link Q83411528
en:List of Jinn in Folklore is currently not an article, and draft pages such as en:Draft:List of Jinn in Folklore must not be connected to Wikidata items. Thus, please sort out the status of this article in enwiki first; once you got the content moved back to the article namespace *permanently*, I'd undelete the item and connect the sitelink.
Question... there are biographies in Wikidata with the field "Country", which is not allowed because it cannot be used for people. My idea is to pass all cases to "Country of nationality" with a bot. Would that be correct? Or should we go one by one, especially for medieval characters. Thanks.
Not sure whether it is worth the effort.
These very generic properties such as country (P17), genre (P136), sport (P641), and so on are pretty meaningless in many situations, as editors just drop them everywhere. Very difficult to maintain in useable form, but fortunately there are usually better ways to express the same information (for items about humans for instance country of citizenship (P27) instead of country (P17), or occupation (P106) instead of sport (P641), and so on...). Thus: I just ignore those crappy properties :-)
If you nevertheless want to clean up here, I suggest to do it step by step. Query for portions of the problem (if possible, could be difficult due to the large amount of uses):
- if country (P17) and country of citizenship (P27) have the same value, consider deleting the country (P17) value
- if there is country (P17) but not country of citizenship (P27) , and the country (P17) value is an item about a country (i.e. the value fulfills the "value type constraint" of country of citizenship (P27)), consider moving it as proposed
- if there is country (P17) with a value not about an item, consider removing it
- ... and so on
I suggest to provide a comprehensive edit summary in English (and if you want to, in an other language such as Spanish). Feel free to add follow-up questions here.
Umm, are you indeed supporting "Hong Kong independence" and "Macau independence" movements?
If not, then what means your "as in many situations Hong Kong (Q8646) and Macau (Q14773) are proper values for P17"? You should know that such claim will result Wikidata banned-based-on-ISP in Asian countries.
Under your claim, I would also think that Scotland (Q22) should be proper value, as there are really having items, that they claim that they are parts of non-UK Scotland!
Mixed sports/Mixed doubles
Hi there! I saw your revert - I had difficulty separating the concepts of mixed sex sports Q1940854 and mixed doubles Q70113667 across languages. I translated the article text to try to determine the concept in each language. It looks like "Mikst" in Polish aligns with the doubles concept more than the general concept, so I have moved that article link. Hope that is OK. Thanks!
Hey Sillyfolkboy, yes I was planning to create a new item for "mixed doubles" as well, just as you did now with mixed doubles (Q70113667). I am going to align it with women's singles (Q61588176), men's singles (Q61588168), women's doubles (Q61588198), and men's doubles (Q61588190) by making it "instance of: term", as this is more like an umbrella term shared by different types of sport for comparable situations, rather than a clear classification scheme that has a formal definition.
The problem with the merge was that the item mixed-sex sports (Q1940854) is in use in some statement in other items, and the post-merge situation clearly did not fit to those backlinks. Thus, Q1940854 was re-defined beyond an acceptable degree by the merge and had to be undone.
Thanks for fixing my error! I'm mostly working on articles at the moment, so it's useful to have someone to help with the data organisation. Cheers
Webseite nur mehr im Internetarchiv
In Q119883#P856 ist die Webseite von irgendwas mit Dachisolationen "gekapert". Bei https://web.archive.org/web/20190517173046/https://www.sylvainluc.fr/ ist sie noch zu sehen, wie trägt man das ein? Einfach nur den Archivlink reinsetzen oder wildes Gedaddel?
Typischerweise tut man da dann P1065- und P2960-Qualifikatoren dran, und lässt die gekaperte Website drin.
[x] Done – Merci!
Nachtrag: vielleicht legst Du noch einen end time (P582)-Qualifikator bei, um anzuzeigen dass die Website nicht mehr offiziell bzw. unter deren Kontrolle liegt.
Reminder: Community Insights Survey
RMaung (WMF) 19:54, 20 September 2019 (UTC)