Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive/2015/10
|
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion. |
Not sure what to do. Edit pattern remains the same and the user doesn't respond to comments on their talk page. Maybe they only edit through the Game and don't ever visit Wikidata. --- Jura 07:05, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
- Who knows!?! But I've gone through their most obvious mistakes and made corrections etc. That took up the majority of my day and almost 500 edits. Jared Preston (talk) 17:24, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Merge request
optical spectrometer (Q21026511) should be merged into optical spectrometer (Q912034). Thanks! --Denny (talk) 17:43, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
Done. For merging items you can try the merge gadget. You can activate it in your preferences --Nikosguard talk 10:56, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
Cneo Hosidio Geta
Buenas noches:
El artículo de la wikipedia en español Cneo Hosidio Geta se corresponde con el artículo en varias wikipedias, entre otras la latina, Gneaeu Hosidius Geta. No se fusionar ambas entradas; ruego procedan a hacerlo.
Atentamente --scutum (talk) 22:54, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
pavement (Q3328263) vs. permeable pavement (Q2638253) mixup
Several local pages that dealt with pavement in general were linked to the "permeable pavement" item. I could move several but due to one being flagged as a good article I'm unable to do the last.
The "shall not delete unless trying to move" and "can't link here - already linked there" warnings without offering a "for god's sake yes, I want to f*ing move it" option are a real pain in the ass by the way.
The remaining wrong item in permeable pavement (Q2638253) is de->"Pflaster (Belag)" which should be linked in pavement (Q3328263) but requires an admin to do so - gnarl.
Since the german wikipedia contains an article on permeable pavement (de->"Versickerungsfähige Verkehrsflächen"), it should be linked to Q2638253.
And at last Q2638253 should maybe not be called "permeable pavement" but rather "permeable road surface" as even the english article also describes permeable asphalt and permeable concrete for use as traffic surface (it's after all not really widely used for roads due to the restricted load bearing capabilities but instead mainly for parking areas).
CmdrFirewalker (talk) 16:18, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
- Deleted de:Pflaster (Belag) from permeable road surface (Q2638253) and added it to paver (Q3328263). Then merged permeable road surface (Q15852720) into permeable road surface (Q2638253) (in order to add de:Versickerungsfähige Verkehrsflächen to the latter). The renaming doesn't require an admin. Mbch331 (talk) 06:52, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
The page is heavily backlogged, and help would be appreciated. Please take an item, check that it has indeed been deleted in a project (not moved), that it has no incoming links on Wikidata, and then it can be deleted as non-notable. Thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Proposed global ban for Tobias Conradi (aka Tamawashi)
I posted this on the Project chat page, but just in case anyone here misses that: There is currently an open RfC on Meta-Wiki proposing a global ban for Tobias Conradi (aka Tamawashi). The RfC is at meta:Requests for comment/Global ban for Tobias Conradi. - Nikki (talk) 15:57, 5 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, Nikki. --AmaryllisGardener talk 04:33, 6 October 2015 (UTC)
- Pinging @Nikki, AmaryllisGardener, TomT0m, Multichill, Ymblanter, Jasper Deng: and anyone else looking here (since we can only ping six users at a time): this is just a "FYI" to say that 91.9.107.44 (talk • contribs • logs) appears to be Herr Conradi editing anonymously. I'm not so up-to-speed with this person, so I just wanted to let you know in case anyone would either like to block locally (if required) or add to the list(s) on meta etc. Jared Preston (talk) 11:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 13:16, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Continued as 91.9.120.118 (talk • contribs • logs). Blocked too. The whole block is 91.0.0.0/10. That's a bit too big to block. Multichill (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- There was also 91.9.97.245 (talk • contribs • logs) between the two, do we want to block that too, even though the IP address already changed? - Nikki (talk) 16:29, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Multichill: I just noticed that there's a block on enwiki for 91.9.96.0/19 (see en:Special:Contributions/91.9.120.118 for example). I know nothing about IP ranges, but maybe that would work here too. - Nikki (talk) 16:43, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Continued as 91.9.120.118 (talk • contribs • logs). Blocked too. The whole block is 91.0.0.0/10. That's a bit too big to block. Multichill (talk) 15:56, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Pinging @Nikki, AmaryllisGardener, TomT0m, Multichill, Ymblanter, Jasper Deng: and anyone else looking here (since we can only ping six users at a time): this is just a "FYI" to say that 91.9.107.44 (talk • contribs • logs) appears to be Herr Conradi editing anonymously. I'm not so up-to-speed with this person, so I just wanted to let you know in case anyone would either like to block locally (if required) or add to the list(s) on meta etc. Jared Preston (talk) 11:54, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- 91.9.127.198 (talk • contribs • logs) --Succu (talk) 16:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- Blocked as well now. - Nikki (talk) 16:53, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- 91.9.127.198 (talk • contribs • logs) --Succu (talk) 16:46, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
To keep things simple, I have rangeblocked 91.9.96.0/19 (talk • contribs • logs) for 6 months. The block covers all IPv4 addresses from 91.9.96.0 to 91.9.127.255 (8192 addresses).--Jasper Deng (talk) 18:51, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
- I just looked in one of my routers and got a /10 in return. Didn't look any further. This should solve it I hope. Multichill (talk) 19:40, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Cottage cheese is in finnish raejuusto
Hi!
I recommand you to add "Raejuusto" as a finnish article of Cottage cheese english article and other way around. to link from Raejuusto article to Cottage Cheese article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raejuusto These two means the same thing.
I'm finnish myself living in Finland so I know.
- Hey, I was going to decline your request, but looking at those articles closer it seems that the enwp article about raejuusto is only talking about Finnish raejuusto, when cottage cheese is a general term, as is the article on fiwiki also. So done. --Stryn (talk) 19:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Obesity not linked
On English Wikipedia I do not see all the language links for obesity (Q12174) on the left-hand side menu. When I go to other languages (e.g., Dutch), I do see the links. Within EN Wiki, I only see French and Simple English. If there is a genuine problem, please share with me how I could help fix it if I notice it again. --Lucas559 (talk) 18:15, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
- Fixed, I have made a null edit on en.wiki. Problably a cache problem. --ValterVB (talk) 18:49, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
- I seem them all now. thanks.--Lucas559 (talk) 19:31, 8 October 2015 (UTC)
Liverpool F.C.
In spanish Wikipedia, "Anexo:Temporadas del Liverpool Football Club" now it's a good article, please, if you can change the status to good here. Thank you. --Políticaydeporte (talk) 16:44, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done - Mbch331 (talk) 16:47, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
Gender denominations in Spanish
Hi. I watch the description today about Ada Lovelace and in Spanish we have the option to use the Gender-neutral language in the description of the occupations using feminine ways. For an example Lovelace is described as "programador" when she was "programadora". There's a manner to add as an option to use the inclusive language in the feminine descriptions? Thanks, --ProtoplasmaKid (talk) 00:26, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
- ProtoplasmaKid: please see this. --- Jura 11:58, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Q200183
Please temporarily semi-protect the above.--- Jura 11:58, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done for 2 weeks. Jared Preston (talk) 12:27, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Haha, Nikki chose one week! Jared Preston (talk) 12:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks to both of you ;) --- Jura 12:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm just not fast enough today it seems, you also deleted that last Javad Ramezani spam item while I was trying to. :P - Nikki (talk) 12:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- In this case just a block for User:94.12.70.74 would have been sufficient too. As the other IP was reverting the vandalism by this IP. Mbch331 (talk) 12:35, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- I didn't even notice the bgwiki page was deleted. So fast Jared was. Mbch331 (talk) 12:38, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Mbch331, usually I'm a slow coach, but I'd put this on my watchlist to delete it as soon as it was possible! By the way, would it make sense to think about creating something similar to enwp's RFPP and/or AIV? Jared Preston (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- I guess we will not have so many requests as in en.wp, and this page would so far work perfectly for such requests.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm fine with that. Jared Preston (talk) 15:59, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- I guess we will not have so many requests as in en.wp, and this page would so far work perfectly for such requests.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)
- Mbch331, usually I'm a slow coach, but I'd put this on my watchlist to delete it as soon as it was possible! By the way, would it make sense to think about creating something similar to enwp's RFPP and/or AIV? Jared Preston (talk) 16:07, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- I'm just not fast enough today it seems, you also deleted that last Javad Ramezani spam item while I was trying to. :P - Nikki (talk) 12:33, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks to both of you ;) --- Jura 12:32, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
- Haha, Nikki chose one week! Jared Preston (talk) 12:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
Sitenotice for merge problems
I activated a sitenotice requesting users not to perform merges until the problems with merges are fixed (see phab:T115892). If it's solved, please remove the sitenotice. Mbch331 (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
El usuario Roy23654 ha vandalizado el articulo en repetidas ocasiones.--mrlost (talk) 23:31, 20 October 2015 (UTC)
- User seems to have stopped for now. Left a warning on his talkpage. If user continues, he will be blocked. Mbch331 (talk) 07:52, 21 October 2015 (UTC)
동옥항주트럭 is not a good article, but someone added it in wikidata with a badge. I tried to remove the GA badge, but the abuse filter refused me to do it: See abuse filter log. Please remove a badge in kowiki instead of me. Thank you. -- Hwangjy9 (talk) 21:06, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done, thanks for your notice. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:08, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
not GA in kowiki
These are not GA but were added with badges.
Please remove wrong badges. Thank you. -- Hwangjy9 (talk) 21:41, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
- Removed. --Diego Grez-Cañete (talk) 22:51, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
205 articles about Q4617
Some of the articles still seem to come out of google translate. How should one go about cleaning them out? --- Jura 09:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's not really an issue for Wikidata - an article which was translated by Google Translate is still a valid sitelink, so the only way to remove them would be to get them deleted at the local wikis. Somewhere like meta:Small Wiki Monitoring Team might be able to give you better advice, you might also want to read User:Billinghurst's response to a similar question I had over at meta:Steward_requests/Global/2015-09#Global_block_for_24.251.24.100_2 (unfortunately I haven't got round to doing anything about that case yet, so I can't say how effective it is).
- As for identifying which pages should potentially be deleted (or at least need reviewing), I can only suggest looking at the history of each page and seeing who created it (it looks like many of them were created by IP addresses from Saudi Arabia) and whether there's been any significant changes since (the pages were created before Wikidata and the history is littered with bots editing interwiki links, so it's probably easiest to just use the "cur" link to diff the original version with the current version).
- - Nikki (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Normally, when I find a content issue with stuff we get from one wiki, I tell them about it (and many are quite responsive).
- Maybe we should find a place this type of issue can be listed. I don't feel like going to 205 wikis one-by-one.
- I will try to do a query on the contributions across the 205 wikis. --- Jura 14:47, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Looking at the cited case, the edits of the conflict of interest took place so long ago that it is pretty hard to undo the specific garbage. Whereas now, with Wikidata, is great in how it allows for quick identification of these conflict of interest articles when the linking starts.
So retrospectively, I cannot offer advice beyond "talk to the respective wikipedia". For current examples, there is good news, local abuse filters can help; start reporting to m:Vandalism reports and we can start to record into global abuse filters, and other measures. @Jared Preston: has been doing a great job here, and feeding information back to the meta/global community. So I encourage a concerted effort, and to know that WD is the perfect place to identify new problem CoI users, and I think that we (global) should be getting you to identify how you can put data to meta of these problems. [Great conversation] — billinghurst sDrewth 18:02, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- It was actually only a few days ago that I came across en:Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/جواد رمضانی شوراب/Archive on the English Wikipedia. I didn't know how bad it was and can't believe this imbecile is still wasting his time. I feel, however, that our capacities on Wikidata are somewhat limited, and in billinghurst's words, it really would take a concerted effort, but when it's technologically possible to edit despite being blocked, it's just like a greyhound chasing a hare and this hare seems to have a better stamina. It's not that I think we're losing the race, but the cross-wiki rules make it very difficult to act in a quick fashion. Jared Preston (talk) 18:23, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
- Looking at the cited case, the edits of the conflict of interest took place so long ago that it is pretty hard to undo the specific garbage. Whereas now, with Wikidata, is great in how it allows for quick identification of these conflict of interest articles when the linking starts.
Rewrite of Wikidata:Glossary
I have rewritten Wikidata:Glossary. my draft is at User:Filceolaire/Draft:Glossary and this is now ready to replace the existing version so translations can start. I asked for help on Wikidata:Project_chat#Rewrite_for_the_Glossary but didn't get much. Please advise what needs to happen next. Help! Joe Filceolaire (talk) 16:12, 23 October 2015 (UTC)
IP
Please stop Special:Contributions/104.236.52.26. --- Jura 11:34, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
- I've blocked them. It looks like this is an ongoing thing and they're spamming the same URL each time (I already found 5 other recent ones: Special:Contributions/192.185.4.42, Special:Contributions/82.165.15.146, Special:Contributions/64.64.16.21, Special:Contributions/68.171.211.178 and Special:Contributions/2607:4000:200:12:0:0:0:32 as well as Special:Contributions/176.10.104.234 from back in April). It seems like adding the URL to an abuse filter would make sense (can someone with more experience with abuse filters do that?) - Nikki (talk) 12:09, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
Q91 (Abraham Lincoln)
Dear colleagues! As far as I see, the all edits made in Q91 by unregistered users during September and October are vandalism. I think, it would be good to semiprotect this item to allow only registered users to edit it. Gamliel Fishkin 22:37, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done, for a year--Ymblanter (talk) 02:55, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
This element is being added as P31. Is this kind of element correct? Shouldn't it be enought to add Q5398426 on P31 with Q17 on P495?--Manbemel (talk) 20:21, 24 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Manbemel: I would say that your suggestion is right, and that using Japanese television series (Q21191019) for P31 is bad. --AmaryllisGardener talk 02:57, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- Once they are all identified, you can convert them to the correct P31 and P495=Q17. --- Jura 12:21, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- This discussion would be better on Wikidata:Project chat. There's more people reading that page and this isn't a topic which specifically needs attention from admins. Pinging @TomT0m: anyway who seems to be the person using it. - Nikki (talk) 12:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Jura1, Manbemel: It's a subclass so it should not be a problem. Either SPARQL or WDQ can han this pretty well, so I don't understand why this should be a problem. Also I don't really understand why this problem appears here. author TomT0m / talk page 19:34, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- Oh, so you just implemented the "solution" right away ? Good I'm not fond of edit wars because it's a potential large scale one. If our goal is to fight redundancy then I think this way to do this is pretty bad at fighting redundancy. Let's talk of this again when WikiProject Reasoning will be up, if you may. Because one inference mechanism would save a lot of claim if it is implicit that any Jananese TV series in from Japan as the <Jananese TV series> has such a claim. For the record, I'm not happy with how things just happened here. author TomT0m / talk page 19:43, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- It seems you created quite a mess yesterday, by adding random or duplicated values in P31.
- Please check the relevant WikiProjects for guidance on what properties to use and be careful when experimenting with tools. I think it might be a good idea to double-check your contributions of yesterday and fix us much as you can. --- Jura 20:59, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- I used the Category "Living people" removing all kinds of item classes from the result until I got something acceptable, but I might have forgotten a few one, or remove instances of classes higher in the class tree (there was something like 600 not-yet-person in that cat left). in enwiki with Widar who might not countain only people after all ... I'll be more careful to remove known "not person" from the result. And I'll double check. author TomT0m / talk page 22:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
- What generally works is to exclude anything that has P31 or P279 from the result: sample (slow). It can still need some checking, but it avoids adding more P31 to existing values. --- Jura 11:07, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- I used the Category "Living people" removing all kinds of item classes from the result until I got something acceptable, but I might have forgotten a few one, or remove instances of classes higher in the class tree (there was something like 600 not-yet-person in that cat left). in enwiki with Widar who might not countain only people after all ... I'll be more careful to remove known "not person" from the result. And I'll double check. author TomT0m / talk page 22:12, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
Please redirect Q15501645 to Agave dolichantha (Q391709). Thanks. --Succu (talk) 17:27, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
Q43353
User:Andreasmperu continues to revert my changes to streamline linking to the Commons category at Q43353. I have tried two different approaches, I have asked questions on his user talk page, but I have not been given a reason for the reversion. User:555 then stepped in, moved the discussion to my talk page, called me a noob and told me not to try to improve Wikidata. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:28, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- Commons category (P373) shouldn't be used as qualifier, your edit is incorrect. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 21:30, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- Please point me to the page that explains proper linking to Commons categories. There seem to be at least three different approaches in use, and there is no consistency. Some data items use one approach, some another, and some use all three. If P373 shouldn't be used as qualifier, then there are a great many data items that need cleanup, because finding examples like this is fairly easy to do. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- Do you have some examples of where Commons category (P373) is being used as a qualifier? I did a search (here) and the only place that finds where topic's main category (P910) has a Commons category (P373) qualifer is Q43353. - Nikki (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- Not sure offhand where I saw examples this morning. I'm on a different computer now, so I can't check my browser history to see where I might have found it, and am not turning the examples up now, which is frustrating. Most of my recent work has been in Greek drama and Biblical minor prophets, but I saw a couple of examples of such linking this morning, which is why I tried shifting to this approach over my previous attempts at cleanup. The sublisting as qualifier makes logical sense, since the Category itself is a separate data item, and the link to the Commons category is handled at that data item, so the link is not data specific to the topic but to the category. That category is listed as data under "topic's main category". Doing so would also allow for a bot check against the data item for the category to catch missing or mis-matched links.
- Do you have some examples of where Commons category (P373) is being used as a qualifier? I did a search (here) and the only place that finds where topic's main category (P910) has a Commons category (P373) qualifer is Q43353. - Nikki (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- Please point me to the page that explains proper linking to Commons categories. There seem to be at least three different approaches in use, and there is no consistency. Some data items use one approach, some another, and some use all three. If P373 shouldn't be used as qualifier, then there are a great many data items that need cleanup, because finding examples like this is fairly easy to do. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- But all that aside, what I need is a page that clearly explains the "correct" set-up on Wikidata for linking Commons categories. As I say, I have seen several different redundant approaches. If there is a proper rationale attached, that would be a bonus. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Nikki: Try
claim[119]{claim[373]}. - @EncycloPetey: It is redundant to duplicate statements of target items in qualifiers. So as you can have Commons category (P373) in both Aristophanes (Q43353) and Category:Aristophanes (Q8881849), no additional qualifier has to be used. And by the way, I would consider this edit vandalism. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 13:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks :) Those make sense to me - the Commons category doesn't apply to the whole item, only to the place of burial. - Nikki (talk) 14:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- @EncycloPetey: There is (unfortunately) still some disagreement about where Commons category sitelinks should be added (some people want sitelinks on the main item, others want them on the category item), but adding a P373 statement to the item is widely accepted, even though it's often redundant to the sitelink (either on the item itself, or the category linked via P910). We have over 1.1 million items with a P373 statement and numerous templates and modules on other wikis are using the property (see the talk page of Commons category (P373) for some of them), so changing or removing it is not something that we can do without a lot of work and causing a lot of disruption. - Nikki (talk) 14:28, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
- @Nikki: Try
- But all that aside, what I need is a page that clearly explains the "correct" set-up on Wikidata for linking Commons categories. As I say, I have seen several different redundant approaches. If there is a proper rationale attached, that would be a bonus. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:53, 26 October 2015 (UTC)
EyeHateGod Q973113
The German Articel is rated as featured Article. Im no administrators or trusted users here, so I can't add the Badge. Thanks--Fraoch (talk) 16:17, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
Q15123969
Sam Smith is good article in es:Wiki. Thnks for your work! ;)
Regards, Graph+sas (talk) 14:02, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done --Pasleim (talk) 14:04, 28 October 2015 (UTC)
Update of "passer montanus".
I just cataloging the article "passer montanus" as good article. I think that someone has to update it in Wikidata, but I can not.--Juenti el toju (talk) 19:08, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done --Pasleim (talk) 19:11, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Please protect Q3437637
Because of vandalism.--M777 (talk) 16:13, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
- Done. --Stryn (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Automatic traslation in Latin
The automatic traslation of the dates of birth and death doesn't work anymore. In our wikipedia .la.wikipedia.org they appear only in English. Could you help us please.--Helveticus montanus (talk) 06:12, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
- It's being tracked at phab:T116503. - Nikki (talk) 07:14, 31 October 2015 (UTC)