User talk:Multichill

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Welcome to my talk page. Use it; don't send me e-mail.

I reply to messages left on my talk, on my talk page. If I left a message on your talk page, I will reply there (unless you specify otherwise).

Question about items[edit]

Hello Multichill, I created items that seemed to be logic for me, but when reading various discussions here on Wikidata I have some doubts about the relevance or the necessity of such items. And if so I would not want to still go on this wrong path. Just one example:

Pholiota nubigena (Q53857309)
no label (Q53857505)

My question is, did I do something wrong when I created no label (Q53857505)? should I have just put a link in Pholiota nubigena (Q53857309) "other sites" to the Commons category.

You are experienced and I thanks you in advance to light me. Regards, Christian Ferrer (talk) 09:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

@Christian Ferrer: sorry for the late reply. I have been traveling the last couple of months. no label (Q53857505) is currently not notable because it only links to a category on Commons. Best thing to do is to move the sitelink to Pholiota nubigena (Q53857309). Multichill (talk) 09:43, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Ok, thanks you for the answer, I will fix my mistakes. --Christian Ferrer (talk) 10:28, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Adding missing labels requires internationalization sometimes[edit]

Regarding this edit by BotMultichillT: Could you filter from "Added missing labels in … languages based on ULAN ………":

  1. items with a instance of (P31) statement whose value is not human (Q5), here notname (Q1747829) would have prevented the edit,
  2. labels that case-insensitive start with "master ", "monogrammist ", "painter " or end in " the elder" or " the younger".

An alternative would be to internationalize them. Translations are in c:Module:I18n/name. Thanks a lot in advance! --Marsupium (talk) 16:32, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

I looked into this before. I rather have a label that needs improvement than no label at all. Besides that it seems to be an edge case. I count 178 items which could be affected by this (out of 78.000). It would make sense to make a (Listeria based) report for labels that need improvement. Something like [1] and than filtered for non-English labels that contain a known English keyword like master. Multichill (talk) 09:37, 25 June 2018 (UTC)

Absurd aliases[edit]

Hi. Your bot insists in adding absurd aliases on Jean Petitot's page. "Emails par le célèbre Petitot" simply means "Enamels by the famous Petitot". It is a laudative description of works by Petitot and in no way an alias. Sapphorain (talk) 09:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

ULAN thinks it's a valid alias, you might want to check with them. Edit warring with a bot won't get you anywhere. Multichill (talk) 09:41, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
So what you are saying is: « well, my bot is programmed to reproduce in Wikidata any information contained in ULAN; that ULAN could be an unreliable source is none of my concern; ask them ». This appear to me to be a rather peculiar way of contributing to an encyclopedia. Thanks anyway. Sapphorain (talk) 20:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
No, I’m not saying that, I usually just don’t bother helping people that much who approach me in the way you do. Multichill (talk) 09:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Well, I "approached" you in a rather terse manner only after I had to revert 3 times your bot on Petitot's page (May 5, June 7, June 14), the first time explaining precisely why. Don’t tell me you weren’t noticed. Sapphorain (talk) 12:24, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Sapphorain, I am confused by your edits here. You were told (correctly in my opinion) that the bot copies the alias data from ULAN. There are multiple comments elsewhere about this bot doing that, usually because of similar objections like yours. You are not the first to notice this. The conclusion has historically been that any strange entries are also indeed welcome here. You can better contact the Getty if you feel so strongly about this specific one. The bot also copies aliases from the RKD. I for one am very happy the bot does this. Jane023 (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
While I don't have any strong opinion about this particular alias (though we shouldn't spam them, they are also displayed, e.g. in |Alternative names= of c:Template:Creator) I think it isn't good behavior of a bot not to respect human editors' edits. --Marsupium (talk) 14:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
Of course these aliases are displayed on Commons, as they should be. I also have this display enabled on English Wikipedia when I am logged in, through the use of a gadget. In this particular case, the alias has to do with the most common search result for this artist, which is why the Getty probably included it. I find it debatable whether or not the Getty's judgement goes above the opinion of any editor or not (thus my reasoning for contacting them in individual cases). BTW, this case is exactly the whole point of why we want properties and LOD in general. Jane023 (talk) 11:59, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
@Sapphorain: you're making the wrong assumption here: You assume I would notice it if some undid one of the edits done by my bots. I don't see that. My bots have over 15 million edits and run mostly autonomous. Multichill (talk) 09:27, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
Well, that’s even worse than I thought, then. 15 million edits by autonomous bots without surveillance appear quite disquieting to me. Sapphorain (talk) 07:30, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

NT vs Art UK for the really big collections[edit]

I know we discussed this before, but I guess I didn't realize there was a large group with the same ID for both NT and location. So Waddesdon Manor doesn't work (yet), but Upton House definitely does. I was triggered into making an item when I noticed someone had updated the Art UK image on Commons. It was only after creation that I could merge it to the proper item through the NT property constraint. This was because both location and artist were not linked in the item yet. The case where a painting on Commons is attributed to someone on Art UK but not NT is fairly common. If you could maybe make a pass for Upton House and add the location for those NT numbers that would be great. Here is the Q: An Unknown Woman (Q52300649). Also please check what should be in collection/inventory. I think location=Upton, collection/inventory=NT only? Thanks, Jane023 (talk) 05:52, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

Found an older one for comparison: NT inventory, collection both, location Upton: View of Alkmaar (Q20971448). Jane023 (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
I already have a bot for that so I just fired that up (example edit). You should keep an eye on this list. Multichill (talk) 07:05, 8 July 2018 (UTC)
Hmm yes I get that it is possible to merge after the fact, but I am more interested in reducing the need to create items based off commons images. In your linked exampe, the artist was the same as Art UK, but in many cases from the NT they are not. Also, the image has a full-metadata record now so I could categorize the image and add it to the item. It is only through the enhanced image metadata that I could also add location. This should be semi-automatic though! I would especially like it for the paintings in Upton House, but of course smaller locations like this should be possible now (I think all Art UK venues are on Commons and Wikidata now, but am not positive about that). Jane023 (talk) 07:28, 8 July 2018 (UTC)

JotaCartas undos[edit]

I see that you have been undoing the moves from category to subject by User:JotaCartas. I noticed them earlier today and had no chance to properly address. I am going to assume that you have got them under control and leave them with you. If that is a false assumption, please let me know where you got back to. Thanks for your cleanup work.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:01, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

@billinghurst: I noticed a couple and undid them (example), I didn't really have time to look further and leaving him a note so would be nice if you could follow up. I wonder if one of Mike's bots would have picked it up if I didn't undo the edit.
I guess not because Wikidata:Database_reports/Complex_constraint_violations/P910#Items_that_link_to_a_Commons_category is quite long. Quite a few items on that list where sitelinks to Commons categories have been moved in the wrong direction. Multichill (talk) 15:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/Pi bot 6 would sort it out, if it's approved. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)
The bot task has now been approved, so it's running. Let me know if you spot any issues / any cases that it misses. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 10:50, 14 July 2018 (UTC)