User talk:Vojtěch Dostál
Add topicArchives | |
|---|---|
|
|
Dotaz na query
[edit]Ahoj, potřeboval bych, prosím, do query řádek, který mi najde všechny položky, jejichž label obsahuje třeba řetězec "zastavení".
(konkrétně bych chtěl vyhledat památky, které jsou zastavením křížové cesty, ale mají to jen v labelu - ty, které mají uvedeno že jsou částí pomocí P361 už jsme si našel)
BTW, nebudeš mít ještě nějakou přednášku o sparql? JAn Dudík (talk) 21:07, 3 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ahoj, takhle? https://w.wiki/CHto . Je tam i ta instance, aby to vůbec doběhlo + limit 5. Přednášku zatím neplánuji, co by tě případně zajímalo - úvod či pokročilejší věci? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:08, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Já bych skoro řekl, že Jan to chce právě naopak? Což je samozřejmě problém, protože to se v tom grafu moc hledat nedá, to není úplně úkol pro SPARQL… Takže já bych spíš začal u fulltextu. Mormegil (talk) 08:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Mormegil Predpokladam, ze si tam Jan nejak nadefinuje tu pamatkovost, kterou zminuje. Ale fulltext je taky super, dik! Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Díky, nadefinovat si už můžu různé varianty, ale nenašel jsme nikde, jak jednoduše na ty labely.
- Přednášku bych uvítal nějaké lehce pokročilejší pokračování té pro začátečníky - COUNT, vymezení, podmínky...
- @Mormegil Fulltext není úplně to pravé, jelikož bych to pak chtěl použít do quickstatements, ale phab:T248440. JAn Dudík (talk) 22:34, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Tak já bych si myslel, že se beztak těmi ~1800 výsledky někdo musí prohrabat ručně, těžko se to tam dá nasypat z fleku strojově. Ale samozřejmě jde kombinovat fulltext s následným SPARQLem a případným exportem z WQS: [1] (Ale jestli dokážeš jet tím Vojtovým dotazem s explicitním vyjmenováním těch pozitivních tříd, tak samozřejmě v pohodě; jen si oprav ten P131 na P31. ;-) ) Mormegil (talk) 13:44, 5 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Mormegil Predpokladam, ze si tam Jan nejak nadefinuje tu pamatkovost, kterou zminuje. Ale fulltext je taky super, dik! Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 09:26, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
- Já bych skoro řekl, že Jan to chce právě naopak? Což je samozřejmě problém, protože to se v tom grafu moc hledat nedá, to není úplně úkol pro SPARQL… Takže já bych spíš začal u fulltextu. Mormegil (talk) 08:56, 4 December 2024 (UTC)
Shortening of information
[edit]Hallo Vojtěch, thanks for your imports. I've noticed that you shorten the name line:
- Baumann, Georg, der Ältere, Witwe, činná 1607-1618
- was shorten to: Baumann, Georg
Imho all the information (including the life dates) should be imported. --Kolja21 (talk) 04:07, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- PS: In LCAuth (maybe same as in the Czech National Authority Database) this form of entry (Ansetzungsform) is a unique identicier. --Kolja21 (talk) Kolja21 (talk) 04:15, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
- Kolja21 Yeah, it is true I only take subfield 100a for the value of P1810. In NKC, field 100 does not serve as a unique identifier (there can be two people with the same 100 values) and it seemed unnecessary to import all. I am able to make the change you propose - to use the extended name using all 100 subfields - but I'd rather first see some discussion with other people involved in authority files in Wikidata. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:59, 2 February 2025 (UTC)
Hi, I see you excluded this value. Am I right to think that the replacement value you intended instead is imprecise identification (Q130572475)? Adam78 (talk) 17:42, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- @Adam78 Hello, I think item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519) and imprecise identification (Q130572475) are different. The first is for correct statements which are just less precise than a different (more precise) statement. As for imprecise identification (Q130572475), I never used it, but I think it's intended for values assigned incorrectly because of imprecise match. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 17:45, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, so what reason for deprecation should be used now instead of item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519)? Because you recently excluded the latter and I'd like to know what is the intended replacement value. For example, when someone's name was given with some missing diacritical mark(s), and it's therefore less precise. Adam78 (talk) 17:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, in your specific example, the correct replacement probably is imprecise identification (Q130572475) or possibly just incorrect value (Q41755623). In many other cases such as Q170068#P569, the right course of action is de-deprecating the statement. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 18:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, so what reason for deprecation should be used now instead of item/value with less precision and/or accuracy (Q42727519)? Because you recently excluded the latter and I'd like to know what is the intended replacement value. For example, when someone's name was given with some missing diacritical mark(s), and it's therefore less precise. Adam78 (talk) 17:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)
After two weeks have passed, I'm still in doubt if the removal of this item from "reason for deprecated rank" was appropriate. I think the issue should be handled in a way that doesn't cause tens of thousands of new error messages. Adam78 (talk) 11:58, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Adam78 I am not sure you've done a correct thing now. Wikidata:Project_chat#On_the_correct_use_of_ranks_for_multiple_statements_with_various_degrees_of_precision was fairly clear. Other than the subjective dislike of the error messages in the user interface, why do you think we should not label these ranks as incorrect? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
We can rank them as incorrect, but the tens of thousands of existing instances should be handled first (or at the very least concurrently and within reasonable time). It's treating the result instead of the cause. If you decide on changing this practice, please do not tackle only one single aspect of it but the whole issue altogether, including the consequences. Leaving behind tens of thousands of error messages as if you had forgotten what you were about to do doesn't seem like the ideal course of action. Adam78 (talk) 12:30, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- Well, at least the number of incorrect statements wouldn't grow... Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 12:44, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Potenciální duplicity drobných památek
[edit]Ahoj, poslal jsem ti mailem tabulku, mohl bys, prosím, udělat aktuální verzi User:Vojtěch_Dostál/drobnepamatky_new_sync_2023 památek za posledních asi 16 měsíců? JAn Dudík (talk) 21:21, 26 February 2025 (UTC)
- @JAn Dudík Ahoj, vim o tom, pokusim se - nebude to hned. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:29, 27 February 2025 (UTC)
- @JAn Dudík User:Vojtěch Dostál/drobnepamatky new sync 2025 Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:21, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- Díky, zpracováno, ještě se popasovat s OpenRefine při importu zbytku a chybějících údajů. Pokud vynechám zastavení křížových cest, tak tentokrát tak 95% památek sedělo hned na první odkaz, často by to šlo sloučit už na základě názvu. JAn Dudík (talk) 20:04, 19 March 2025 (UTC)
Špatné sloučení dvou osob - jak napravit
[edit]Ahoj, při generování položek z autorit jsem omylem sloučila dvě osoby a navíc to pak spletla, když jsem to chtěla napravit, čímž se ty původní údaje ztratily. Milekić, Zoran na Q51082458, byl původně nikoli historik, ale politik, narozený 1955, a měl i připojené články ze dvou wiki. Kdyby to šlo vrátit do původního stavu, tak toho historika klidně vyrobím znovu. Pomůžeš? Předem dík. Helena Dvořáková (talk) 18:01, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
-- Tak jsem se to pokusila spravit přes kopírování do nové položky a následné undo pro jednotlivá tvrzení. Snad už budou oba Zoranové v pořádku a budu dávat větší pozor :-) --Helena Dvořáková (talk) 21:22, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- Paráda, já jinak v historii položky mám u každé revize možnost "obnovit" danou revizi, což je rychlejší než jednotlivá tvrzení revertovat. To samé je možné v historii druhé položky (https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q133161407&action=history) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:03, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Mistake in abart
[edit]Hi! I was looking back at old Flow discussions that I had in the last years and I found Topic:Xcsj12llyacogocc about an unpleasant mistake in abart: Q105295963#P570. Do you think now we have regained an effective way to report mistakes? Thanks as always, --Epìdosis 08:58, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Epìdosis Unfortunately, I haven't had any contact since then. Perhaps @Michal Josef Špaček (WMCZ) knows? Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:15, 15 March 2025 (UTC)
Stadion Na Markétě (Q9341152)
[edit]Dobrý den, potřebovala bych poradit s propsáním informací z wikidat do článku "Plochodrážní stadion Markéta". Z wd se do článku propsala pouze fotografie, souřadnice a commons (na commons je infobox vpořádku vyplněný). Kdysi mi v jiném případě pomohlo upravit název wd tak, aby se neshodoval s názvem článku ani comm, ale teď bohužel ne. Nevím si rady a prosím Vás proto o pomoc. Alena Pokorná (talk) 08:25, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Alena Pokorná Dobry den, to bude spise o nastaveni sablony Infobox - stadion. Bude potreba jeji kod prepsat tak, aby prebirala dalsi udaje... Zkuste se obratit pod technickou lipu... Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:46, 17 March 2025 (UTC)
Dotaz na query
[edit]Ahoj, mám dotaz na query. Doplňuji k památkám katastrální území. Pokud leží památka v části obce, která je shodná s katastrálním územím, není to problém, je to stejná položka. Ale Chci vyhledat například kaple, které jsou v obci, která má jediné katastrální území a získat QID tohoto území. Tedy například u
- Q93286576 na základě located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)=Vidov (Q299) získat associated cadastral district (P10254)=Vidov (Q110165990), přičemž obec nemusí na toto kú odkazovat. Jde to?
druhý případ jsou obce, které mají více částí, ale jediné kú. Dá se získat třeba pro Česká Lhota (Q8552633) katastr Dívčice (Q110390726) na základě toho, že je v obci Dívčice (Q645185) (která má jediné kú)? Obecně katastrální území mají vyplněné located in the administrative territorial entity (P131)=obec, ale naopak obce nemají associated cadastral district (P10254)=katastr JAn Dudík (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Ahoj, první případ asi takto: https://w.wiki/DewS ale radši ten výstup důkladně zkontroluj... Jsou tam nějaké objekty dvakrát, což by značilo že to není úplně správně. Druhé drobnou modifikací pravděpodobně takto: https://w.wiki/Dewg, ale opět to vyžaduje kontrolu... Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 16:56, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- super, vypadá to dobře a na očividné chyby jsem zatím nenarazil JAn Dudík (talk) 19:40, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
- Možná spíš takhle že jo? (Odlišný závěr dotazu) https://w.wiki/Dexa Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 17:11, 31 March 2025 (UTC)
Possible duplicate
[edit]Could you have a look at Josef Dorazil (Q105957552) and Josef Dorazil (Q130522053) – could they be the same person? Thank you! --Emu (talk) 18:48, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
- František Oščádal (Q95364526) and Q130521448 seem to be a somewhat similar case? --Emu (talk) 18:51, 14 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu Thanks for reporting these! The first is really the same person with two first names - merged now. The second case is more difficult, the source for Q130521448 indeed uses the birth and death dates of František aka František Oščádal (Q95364526), but his brother Josef is also notable (Josef Ošťádal (Q95477237)) and Q130521448 currently looks like a conflation of both. I'm trying to report it to the library. If I get no response, I'd be in favour of deleting Q130521448 as a conflation. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 16:55, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- Great, thank you! Emu (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu The only source for Q130521448 was now deleted from the authority base, so I'm proposing the item for speedy deletion Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- I just deleted it, thank you! --Emu (talk) 08:00, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu The only source for Q130521448 was now deleted from the authority base, so I'm proposing the item for speedy deletion Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:55, 29 April 2025 (UTC)
- Great, thank you! Emu (talk) 17:18, 15 April 2025 (UTC)
- Could you maybe have another look at those two:
- Thank you! --Emu (talk) 08:43, 12 June 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu Thanks, the first was merged, while one of the Broz guys was deleted in NKC and I nominated it for speedy deletion here. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)
Could you have another look at Jaromír Vavroš (Q95080462) and Jaromír Vavroš (Q135964191)? Thank you! --Emu (talk) 08:44, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu I don't see anything to suggest that these are two people. You can merge them :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:21, 28 August 2025 (UTC)
Slides on Commons
[edit]Hi! When you have time, could you upload to Commons these slides you used in 2021 and also ask to WMCZ if they can upload these slides of last Wikimania as well? I would need to cite them with stable links and docs.google.com is not suitable of course. Thanks as always and see you soon! --Epìdosis 09:42, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- Hi, I hope everything is good! It was a great pleasure to meet you in Bern. Two very quick questions:
- as a formality: do you agree that the video of your presentation in Bern will be published on Wikimedia Commons in CC BY-SA?;
- I discovered only today through Google this event https://www.hiu.cas.cz/user_uploads/badatelum_i_verejnosti/udalosti/2025_3_31_konference_wikimedia/konference_wikimedia_programme.pdf which was greatly interesting; I checked the archives of Wikidata:Status updates but it wasn't advertised there; if there will be something similar in the future (FYI @Frettie, Linda.jansova:), or a second edition, I think you should also advertise it there, I would be very happy to participate.
- Thanks and see you soon! Epìdosis 14:40, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
- Hi Camillo, as to your second question, I think it would be up to @Daniel Baránek as he has organized that particular conference. However, it was probably a bit more about Wikipedia than about Wikidata (my presentation, prepared together with Aleš Brožek, was rather an exception ;-). Linda.jansova (talk) 14:48, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
- @Epìdosis Yes I agree with publishing the video on Commons under CCBYSA. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 15:56, 18 September 2025 (UTC)
rEGISTRAČNÍ ZNAČKY
[edit][2] Medle dost zbytečné, když je to uvedené u nadřazeného celku - obdobně, jako se dohodlo [3], že se nedbude u každé obce uvádět časová zóna, když jde zjistit z nadřazených celků JAn Dudík (talk) 08:21, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ahoj, cekal jsem jestli se nekdo ozve. Otevru k tomu diskuzi mezi bajty :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:41, 27 August 2025 (UTC)
Vídeň, Česko
[edit]Hi, is it a known problem of NKČR that the small hamlet “Vídeň, Česko” (Vídeň (Q94528)) is mentioned as a place (and thus imported into Wikidata) instead of Vienna, Austria? Should we look into this? --Emu (talk) 21:10, 29 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu Yes, but I remember cleaning many of these mistakes a few years ago. Could you possibly have a look to see where the new errors are coming from? (which imports?) Thanks Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 07:09, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- NKČR, mostly? [4] (But I don't know how many of those are new.) Mormegil (talk) 08:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, yeah, I misunderstood the problem first. These are NKC entries which actually do mention this hamlet as the place of birth, but it is a mistake by the librarians, and values should be checked one by one and deprecated as wrong. Indeed, some people probably WERE born in this hamlet - although it will be a minority of the cases. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- The question also arises if NKČR should be notified of the wrong values and if so, how. --Emu (talk) 11:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- @Emu If we deprecate the incorrect statements, it will be eventually easy to report these issues to them. Also deprecation prevents re-addition of the wrong information by our bot. We already seem to have 52 deprecated statements with value=Vídeň, referenced with NKČR. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, 48 with the correct source filtering https://w.wiki/FCBv Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:24, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- The question also arises if NKČR should be notified of the wrong values and if so, how. --Emu (talk) 11:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, yeah, I misunderstood the problem first. These are NKC entries which actually do mention this hamlet as the place of birth, but it is a mistake by the librarians, and values should be checked one by one and deprecated as wrong. Indeed, some people probably WERE born in this hamlet - although it will be a minority of the cases. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:47, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
- NKČR, mostly? [4] (But I don't know how many of those are new.) Mormegil (talk) 08:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)
NLCR/NKC human without P21
[edit]https://qlever.dev/wikidata/zKpYWy data as of 2025-10-15, column p21_per_e
Ratios of NLCR/NKC and of similar sized and of some larger sets:
- ISNI 0.946275
- VIAF 0.983108
- GND/DtBio 1.01057
- LC 0.982301
- IdRef 1.00751
- NLCR 0.985308
- NUKAT 0.98913
Each set of those in the table and smaller than NLCR, with the exception of NUKAT: >1.0.
Fixed 100 NKC within 58 minutes: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/NKCp21&target=NKCp21&dir=prev&offset=20251016120907&limit=100
85 of these 100 have Q112... , of these 85 each that I checked created by you using OpenRefine.
Search for NKC still finds 25540: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP691+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
Search for NKC and ISNI finds 2336: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=haswbstatement%3AP691+haswbstatement%3AP213+-haswbstatement%3AP21+haswbstatement%3AP31%3DQ5&ns0=1&ns120=1
Can you help to reduce this relatively high amount of missing P21?
Of the sets in the table from EU member states and smaller than NKC only NUKAT has a similarly low ratio, but even this is higher than for NKC.
NKCp21 (talk) 16:12, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
- Hello, I recently added quite a lot of P21 from the NKC dataset. Other entries in NKC unfortunately do not contain information about their sex/gender. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 19:11, 16 October 2025 (UTC)
BLGBL
[edit]Ahoj Vojtěchu, Wikidata:Property proposal/BLGBL ID je už skoro dva týdny označena k vytvoření. Mohl by ses prosím vytvoření ujmout? Potřebuji identifikátory přidat do konce října, v listopadu nebudu mít moc času. Díky moc. -- Daniel Baránek (talk) 13:07, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
- Ahoj, jasne, radsi hned nez to zalozim: P13876 :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 13:17, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
- Díky :) Daniel Baránek (talk) 17:41, 21 October 2025 (UTC)
Socha jako součást stavby
[edit]Ahoj, předělala jsem na Wikipedii stránku Sousoší Souboj titánů na Brána gigantů (stejně pojednávala nejen o soše, ale celé bráně i s oplocením). Ale moc se mi nezdá, aby zůstalo původní propojení na wikidata, tj. Q12055474, infobox pak mate. Ovšem kategorie na commons je taky na sochu, ačkoli zobrazuje bránu i s okolím. Když samostatnou položku na bránu, co by měla mít za vlastnosti? A kam napojit commons?Dík za pomoc. Helena Dvořáková (talk) 08:54, 21 November 2025 (UTC)
Položka Q66050026
[edit]Zdravím, našel jsem chybu v názvu položky Q66050026. Adresa je Úvoz 160 / 24 - jedná se o stejný dům jako je Q66050028. Prosím o opravu. J.Broukal (talk) 11:33, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
- Hotovo,priste muzete editovat s odvahou :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 15:56, 18 January 2026 (UTC)
Fungovalo to správně...?
[edit]Ahoj, Vojto! Jak je? ;-)
Tady [5] jsi pomocí mně neznámého nástroje OpenRefine asi naimportoval cosi z IS VAVAI. Nicméně vůbec nic jiného nikde nenaznačuje, že by - snad s výjimkou jednotlivých přednášek - byl od FTK UP nějak zaměstnán. Můžeš to prosím nějak prověřit? I s ohledem na to, jestli - pokud to je chyba - při importu nemohlo dojít k dalším chybám.
Díky. Okino (talk) 20:14, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
- Ahoj, dobře, díky. IS VAVAI bohužel afiliace podchycuje dost náhodně a zaměstnanci univerzit je dost často mění. Tady asi stačilo, že byl v rámci nějaké grantové žádosti afiliován k FTK UP. Dotyčný už na to možná i zapomněl. Ač to tedy je reálně pravdivé tvrzení, nelze odhadnout jak majoritní dané zaměstnání je. Proto IS VAVAI od té doby (2021) už pro importy tohoto typu dat nepoužívám. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 20:28, 25 January 2026 (UTC)
Urpínska alej
[edit]Ahoj Vojto! Nejsou Q112090099 a Q27479586 stejná věc?--Jetam2 (talk) 08:53, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- PS: and actually, also Q112090100?--Jetam2 (talk) 08:56, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Jetam2 Ahoj, to nemám ponětí, bude se muset prozkoumat, co všechno je pod I. a II. chráněno. Je možné že alej se skládá z dvou částí, a ty jsou odděleně chráněné, netuším. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Podíváš se na to, či?--Jetam2 (talk) 10:18, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Nechce se mi to zkoumat, může to udělat kdokoliv :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:41, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Nevím, zda se dá někde nahlédnout do oficiálních slovenských seznamů, odkazy vedou jen na toolserver. Ale dle mapy a souřadnic mi přijde, že se jedná o několik objektů:
- alej
- jednořadá alej v dolní části
- dvouřadá alej v horní části
- alej
- alejí vede křížová cesta, ta zatím nemá položku, ale její jednotlivé kapličky ano.
- opravil jsem alespoň duplicitní kostel - jednou šlo o celý areál, jednou jen o samotný kostel... JAn Dudík (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2026 (UTC)
- Nevím, zda se dá někde nahlédnout do oficiálních slovenských seznamů, odkazy vedou jen na toolserver. Ale dle mapy a souřadnic mi přijde, že se jedná o několik objektů:
- Nechce se mi to zkoumat, může to udělat kdokoliv :) Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 10:41, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- Podíváš se na to, či?--Jetam2 (talk) 10:18, 27 January 2026 (UTC)
- @Jetam2 Ahoj, to nemám ponětí, bude se muset prozkoumat, co všechno je pod I. a II. chráněno. Je možné že alej se skládá z dvou částí, a ty jsou odděleně chráněné, netuším. Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 08:59, 27 January 2026 (UTC)