User talk:Yv91

Heinzel

You changed the subject of Philipp Gustav Heinzel (Q102314793) to be a different person. That's really damaging, so I have undone your edits. Please do not do that again. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:17, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Pigsonthewing

Philipp Gustav Heinzel is described in Q21515663.

Q102314793 was written from Wikispecies, but Wikispecies made a mistake between Philipp Gustav Heinzel, botanist and L. Heinzel, helminthologist, who described the Rhynchodemini tribe.

So it seems me that the good way is to rename Q102314793 to L. Heinzel. Why have you undone that ?

Regards Yv91 (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

For the reason I gave above. If the are two items about PGH, the can be merged. We do not repurpose items as you did. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:42, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

However, User:Estopedist1 asserts that the items are not about the same person, so they cannot be merged. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:45, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Pigsonthewing

User:Estopedist1 has created Q102314793 in 2020 on the basis of Wikispecies article "Philipp Gustav Heinzel " created in june 2020, whos attribute the Rhynchodemini taxon to Philipp Gustav Heinzel and gave the " helminthologist" attribute. But it is a mistake. It is not the good "Heinzel". The good author is "L. Heinzel", helminthologist. And this error was reported to Wikidata.

So, how can I correct wikidata ? I don't like that this error will survive.

Regards Yv91 (talk) 20:59, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

We need to give Estopedist1 the courtesy of waiting for their response. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:43, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

ok. Yv91 (talk) 12:21, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Estopedist1, could you look at this talk and tell us about. For me, Philipp Gustav Heinzel (Q102314793) is a problem. There is no helminthologist with the name Philipp Gustav Heinzel. The true name of the helminthologist is L. Heinzel described in Q124336826. And Philipp Gustav Heinzel is a botanist described in Q21515663. Thanks for your reply. Yv91 (talk) 17:36, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing@Yv91: thanks for re-noticing. See Wikispecies:Talk:Philipp Gustav Heinzel Estopedist1 (talk) 20:40, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing @Yv91 @Estopedist1: I think this issue may have been blown up a bit more than necessary. What seems to have happened here was that on Wikispecies, Nytexcome created the page Philipp Gustav Heinzel mistakenly believing him to be the "Heinzel" that authored Rhynchodemini, when it was in fact "L. Heinzel" as Yv91 says. All that Estopedist1 did was create an item for the Wikispecies page because it didn't already have an item connected to it (I assume), I do not see that Estopedist1 "asserted" that the items are not the same person, maybe he just assumed they weren't the same because of the "helminthologist" occupation claimed on Wikispecies? Also, "really damaging" is a bit hyperbole, what was being damaged here? Note that there were no other references on the Wikispecies-generated item to prove what occupation he had or not (neither were there any references or any other actual data on Wikispecies itself for that matter, up to this point), so I have now removed the "different from" property and merged this duplicate item to Philipp Gustav Heinzel (Q21515663), a previously existing item based on IPNI's record of the botanist, since I see no purpose in maintaining the two separate "Philipp Gustav Heinzel" items anymore, and now that an Lothar Heinzel (Q124336826) item exists anyway. I have also cleaned up the Wikispecies page further to correspond to the botanist in IPNI's record. Hopefully this resolves all the issues involved here. Monster Iestyn (talk) 20:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Monster Iestyn. I agree with you. I'm happy this little problem is finished. Yv91 (talk) 20:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The assertion (for that is the correct term) was made by Estopedist1 in this edit. My initial point was that changing the subject of an item is damaging, and so it is. Who knows which external sites were relying on the QID of the item as an identifier for P.G. Heinzel, only to find it arbitrarily referring to another person? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Pigsonthewing Okay true, I understand that. Unfortunately the issue was that the item was created from mixed up data imported from Wikispecies to begin with. That itself is also really damaging to any external site relying on Wikidata, because then they've imported or link to bad data. Admittedly I took your meaning of "assertion" incorrectly, I thought you were saying that Estopedist1 had said so in a talk discussion somewhere (though I couldn't find any such discussion, so that should have been a red flag for me). Again, hopefully this is all resolved now. Monster Iestyn (talk) 23:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)