This is false: multiple sockpuppets I blocked made nontrivial edits here, and you are required to disclose alternate accounts or they are not considered legitimate.
In reply to your email: I have filed phabricator:T232696 about the talk page issue.
In regards to the sockpuppetry issue, what I said isn't wrong: every account I blocked made non-automated edits here. Since it is rather deceptive for you to do so without declaring these alternate accounts, and because the policy explicitly requires that you declare them, I have blocked the accounts.
I will refuse to unblock, and will oppose an unblock by others, unless you demonstrate that you understand this.
Sorry, the policy is explicit that you must declare those alternate accounts, and there is no room for interpretation. You tried to hide these accounts from the community, making your operating of them deceptive.
Requiring you to understand the policy which you violated before unblocking you is perfectly reasonable.
I specifically need you to declare any and all alternate accounts you have and to convince another admin that you will refrain from further misuse of multiple accounts. Considering that you have an outstanding investigation open on the English Wikipedia, you are going to have to be very upfront about all of them.
You may declare all the accounts on this page (Topic:V73q4742vi3wb49x), or if you can't even reply below, email them and I will post them here.
However, please do not insinuate that I am "importing drama". Note that I have blocked you on the sole basis of a local policy for your sockpuppets that made local edits here. If you do not understand that, then you are not welcome to continue editing the project.
Thank you for declaring all of your alternate accounts. I will leave the unblock request to the admin above.
I still oppose unblocking you because you think I blocked you because you were blocked on the English Wikipedia. That I got aware of this via the English Wikipedia is irrelevant (i.e. a red herring (Q572959)): you still committed a gross violation of Wikidata:Alternate accounts, a local policy, and are blocked for that.
@Jasper Deng: I found a new sock with edits after the block: Special:Contributions/Langston-lemon. Maybe a CU should look into (haven't compared all his enwiki CU confirmed accounts with wikidata). Just FYI.
1995; 2007 - 2017; done
1955 to 1987 done https://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/Military_Law/Intl_Review_Red_Cross.html
gaps in pdf's 1921-1953; 1989 - 2005
You are receiving this message because you commented at the above RFC. There are additional proposals that have been made there that you are welcome to comment on. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:50, 9 April 2018 (UTC) (for Rschen7754)
Thanks for the link to the PET scan. I started from scratch and was able to reproduce the one you generated for me so I am feeling some comfort that I know how to do that. I want the actual data in a way I can format it but I see that I can change the output format to either CSV or wiki, which should work for me.
I do have one question that I haven't yet figured out.
I see that for the entries don't have coordinates listed. I understand in the case of Air Line State Park trail because the article itself doesn't have coordinates which makes sense because it's a trail not a single location. I also get why the "List of Connecticut state parks" entry doesn't have coordinates.
However I'm puzzled to see that "Mianus River State Park" and "Haystack Mountain State Park" don't have coordinates. My initial thought is that perhaps the underlying article failed to have coordinates but they do. My second thought was perhaps the wiki data wasn't picking up the coordinates but in both cases they do. So I am now puzzled why coordinates don't appear in that listing. Any thoughts?
i'm in the dark also. that is the easiest thing i can do, to reuse an existing tool. i tried to do a VizQuery but totally flunked
there is also the listeria tool for making lists on english i.e. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jane023/Still-life_paintings_in_SAAM which you might modify to meet your needs
observation that both of those are redirects, a little UX bug
coordinates and wikidata are a controversial topic as you might see on commons. there are varying degrees of accuracy and meaning, which means lots of curation and consensus - do not know the accuracy of OSM, since it is user generated
(That message in other languages: العربية • bosanski • català • Deutsch • Esperanto • français • עברית • polski • português • português do Brasil • русский • اردو • 中文 – translate that message)
Like some other community members, you are using Flow.
An increasing number of communities now use Flow or are considering it. Although Flow itself is not scheduled for major development during 2016 fiscal year, the Collaboration Team remains interested in the project and in providing an improved system for structured discussions.
You can help us make decisions about the way forward in this area by sharing your thoughts about Flow — what works, doesn't work or should be improved?
Thanks for your ideas and opinions about Flow!
I couldn't really think of other ways to list the collection than genre, but I suppose canvas vs panel and some other ones may work as well. I will expand the page to include more lists. Meanwhile I changed the query to include all subclasses of portrait as genre, so it will pick up the self-portrait and group portrait genres as well.
yes it's all good, you could have a list for each genre, and then a final "not included in genre" - the null list will be the one with the missing images
saam has fewer portraits than landscapes and history paintings, the national portrait gallery (us) has the majority of the portraits, but they may have a re-org
this will be a major commons metadata cleanup drive, might as well organize it on wikidata
I hope they don't change the id numbers because that will be a pain to change unless someone gives us the concordance.
no they tend to change the front end
sometimes they broke links but the id stays the same
but they are better now, and will archive
maybe also a sculpture list?
Sigh. Yes someone needs to start on sculpture. We have trouble modelling sculpture though on Wikidata still
i feel your pain, having struggled with sculpture issues
in some ways smithsonian got penalized as early adopter as their items were uploaded with bad metadata, and the late arrival national gallery got the cleaner data ingestion.
genre still life ?
just looking to chip away at the null set
well, the metadata is bad, will have to comb through and find them
and everybody likes landscapes more - the american propensity for awe,