Talk:Q27530432

Village and commune

@Anass Sedrati: I'm trying to clean up Lsjbot articles on SVWP, and this item seems to be a bit messed up for several reasons.

When Lsjbot created sv:Aït Ouarda and ceb:Aït Ouarda in 2016, Geonames 2559353 described a dam, but in 2017 it was changed to a populated place. Now some statements here refer to the dam, others to the populated place.

I can't read Arabic without Google Translate, but it seems that the population according to ar:آيت وعرضى is the same as the population of ar:آيت واوردا, which is linked to Ait Ouaarda (Q4699259) which apparently describes the same location. Is it theoretically meaningful to distinguish the village and its commune based on available sources for population, area etc, and is ARWP making a distinction in practice, or are the two articles duplicates? Essin (talk) 06:13, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Essin and thank you for reaching to me :) Well this is more of a political/geographical question related to Morocco than a linguistic one. Indeed, Morocco has a system of communes, and the problem is that the ministry of interior changes them from time to time. What this means concretely is that some older created articles can not be relevant (we try to do some cleaning but it is not always 100%), and another issue is that many communes have the same name as the main village in it (but they are two separate entities, and the village is only a part of the commune). In the example that you shared with me, the article ar:آيت واوردا, it says: "Ait Ouarda is a village", while the article ar:آيت وعرضى says it is a "commune". Both articles contain the same information otherwise (in terms of population, number of families etc), so I am rather confident that we can merge them (only Swedish and Cebuano are common in both). The only thing we have to be careful when merging is to decide if we merge for "village" or "commune". I would say commune is best because it is bigger, then an article for village can be created if needed. A last thing is that the correct name in Arabic is "آيت وعرضى", the writing "آيت واوردا" is wrong and was probably written by someone who wanted to transcript the Swedish article for the village. I hope that this helps :) -- Anass Sedrati (talk) 08:01, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Anass Sedrati, this information is indeed very helpful. So theoretically possible to distinguish, but not done in practice in this particular case. I agree with your reasoning and propose that

• the ARWP articles are merged (maybe you could do that?) and linked to Ait Ouaarda (Q4699259)
• the item Ait Ouaarda (Q28892663) is demerged from here and instead merged with Ait Ouaarda (Q4699259)
• sv:Aït Ouarda is redirected to sv:Ait Ouaarda because there is no other article except in Cebuano about the dam, as per consensus on sv:Wikipedia:Projekt alla platser-städning (I can deal with that part)
• this item remains as an item about the dam with ceb:Aït Ouarda as the only Wikipedia link, so the community at CEBWP can decide how to deal with it now that it is "orphaned" from its source.

Other suggestions? Essin (talk) 08:20, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the answer and suggestions Essin. Actually and while "cleaning" a bit this one, I found a third Wikidata item also on the same (Q28890169), and it has an Arabic article linked to it (mentioning "village"). I can "request merging" for the three articles in Arabic Wikipedia, but we have to solve it in Wikidata also because it is three different items, but that need to be merged also? -- Anass Sedrati (talk) 12:05, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Anass Sedrati, I don't know much about the geographical structure of Morocco and nothing at all about how it's usually described on ARWP, so I don't have any strong opinion about whether all three articles should be merged, but I don't think it hurts to propose it and discuss it on ARWP. The outcome might be one, two or three articles. I can help out with restructuring the WD items after the discussion. As there seems to be no article about the dam outside CEBWP, I will implement the third point immediately. Essin (talk) 12:37, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Essin - For merging in the Arabic Wikipedia, yes this was just to inform you. I have already put a request and will wait for the community discussion and decision. Sorry for missing your question about the Dam. Well, the dam is very famous in Morocco (Bin E Ouidane is its name). It has articles in 11 languages, and here is its Wikidata item (Q2884936). If there is another article (and item) about the Dam in Cebuano, then it needs probably to be merged with the main one (because Bin el Ouidane is the dam that is in Ait Ouaarda region). Best -- Anass Sedrati (talk) 13:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

Anass Sedrati, if I'm not completely mistaken, Bin el Ouidane Dam (Q2884936) (which also lists articles in Swedish and Cebuano) describes another dam, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/504108035 , while this item (partly) describes https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834066953 . However, the OSM way for the lower dam was linked to yet another WD item, Q2884923, so my svWP redirect was not according to consensus and some more item mergers are needed. As a temporary measure, I moved the cebWP and svWP article links about this dam there, and then we can sort out the rest of this item when the arWP discussion is finished. Essin (talk) 09:35, 22 April 2023 (UTC)

Essin - You are actually right, the dam at Ait Ouaarda is different from Bin El Ouidane Dam. There are some few meters between them. The one at Ait Ouaarda is before, to prepare for the second one (a sort of containment). There is a description of it (in French) in this website. Thank you for the precision, it will be helpful to sort out all this merging and cleaning both in Wikidata and the linguistic Wikis in question. Cheers -- Anass Sedrati (talk) 16:06, 22 April 2023 (UTC)