User talk:Ruslik0
Welcome to Wikidata, Ruslik0!
Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:
- Introduction – An introduction to the project.
- Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
- Community portal – The portal for community members.
- User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
- Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
- Project chat – Discussions about the project.
- Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. 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.
Best regards! Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:55, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
solar wind (Q79833) - reason for revert?[edit]
Hi. You reverted my change to solar wind (Q79833). I'm not sure what was the reason. After all solar wind is the stellar wind of Sun. Is it an incorrect way of expressing it? I'm pretty sure I have seen it done this way (instance of (P31) + of (P642)) in few other items. Please use Template:Re when replying to me (or reply on my user page) so I get notified. —192.198.151.54 11:41, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- Because this is tautology. Ruslik0 (talk) 20:38, 23 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand what you meant. "stellar wind of Sol" is not a tautology. "solar wind of Sol" would be a tautology. If instead you meant that it's saying roughly the same thing as the description, then yes. But the description is for the benefit of humans, while the qualifier is for the benefit of machines. This distinction is why Paulo Coelho (Q12881) has the "Paulo Coelho" label while at the same time having statements given name (P735) "Paulo" and family name (P734) "Coelho". Description is for the reader, statements are for machines. —192.198.151.52 12:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- The statement that "solar wind is an instance of stellar wind of sol" does not make any sense to me. Ruslik0 (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- It's an indication that a stellar wind of a certain star (Sol) has its own name/concept (solar wind). It seems to me it's the right way to express it, considering that e.g. human (Q5), life (Q3) and triskaidekaphobia (Q13) use of (P642) in this manner. —192.198.151.54 12:02, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Stellar wind of sol" IS "solar wind". You are just trying to say that solar wind is an instance of itself, which is formally true but is a trivial statement. Ruslik0 (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- Rephrasing a term by first using a wider term and then narrowing it, is called a definition. Just like water storage (Q7973769) is "storage (Q9158768) of (P642) water (Q283)", risk management (Q189447) is "control (Q29017603) of (P642) risk (Q104493)" and triskaidekaphobia (Q13) is a "phobia (Q175854) of (P642) 13 (Q37141)". —192.198.151.52 17:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- They are similarly meaningless to me. Ruslik0 (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ruslik0: Specifying that solar wind (Q79833) has a relationship to Sun (Q525) is in no way trivial. This is normal usage of of (P642) in Wikidata. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:10, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
- They are similarly meaningless to me. Ruslik0 (talk) 20:56, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- Rephrasing a term by first using a wider term and then narrowing it, is called a definition. Just like water storage (Q7973769) is "storage (Q9158768) of (P642) water (Q283)", risk management (Q189447) is "control (Q29017603) of (P642) risk (Q104493)" and triskaidekaphobia (Q13) is a "phobia (Q175854) of (P642) 13 (Q37141)". —192.198.151.52 17:14, 30 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Stellar wind of sol" IS "solar wind". You are just trying to say that solar wind is an instance of itself, which is formally true but is a trivial statement. Ruslik0 (talk) 21:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- It's an indication that a stellar wind of a certain star (Sol) has its own name/concept (solar wind). It seems to me it's the right way to express it, considering that e.g. human (Q5), life (Q3) and triskaidekaphobia (Q13) use of (P642) in this manner. —192.198.151.54 12:02, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
- The statement that "solar wind is an instance of stellar wind of sol" does not make any sense to me. Ruslik0 (talk) 14:08, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure I understand what you meant. "stellar wind of Sol" is not a tautology. "solar wind of Sol" would be a tautology. If instead you meant that it's saying roughly the same thing as the description, then yes. But the description is for the benefit of humans, while the qualifier is for the benefit of machines. This distinction is why Paulo Coelho (Q12881) has the "Paulo Coelho" label while at the same time having statements given name (P735) "Paulo" and family name (P734) "Coelho". Description is for the reader, statements are for machines. —192.198.151.52 12:57, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
How many references do you delete like this?[edit]
What’s the reason for deleting an encyclopedia id reference for a person’s date of death? The reference by the main Russian online encyclopedia that is actually displayed in the Russian Wikipedia article?
Do you understand that the date of death which is on November 22 cannot be ‘retrieved’ on October 9 the same year, and this bot addition was nonsense?
How many IP editors never notice that you destroy their contributions? — 188.123.231.0 07:12, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
Starship launch sites[edit]
Hello Ruslik! Just curious why these edits were made. I've seen no information confirming that any of them have been abandoned, just rumours. Until some kind of official word comes out, or the oil rigs are confirmed as sold/scrapped, I'd suggest that they be kept on that page. — Huntster (t @ c) 22:56, 12 February 2023 (UTC)
- There are only two real launch sites for Starship: Starbase, and a pad in the 39A complex (where some work is being done). All other so called "sites" are speculative at best and unlikely to be used in any foreseeable future. Ruslik0 (talk) 11:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)