Open Humans EditEdit
Hi Arlo Barnes, Thanks for the Open Humans edit with a lower Q number for Madeleine Ball, but in that instance since the replaced Q was the same entity (see ORCID) a merge would have been a better fit so the second Q doesn't hang around for the same entity. I've made the merge in this case. Wolfgang8741 (talk) 06:01, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
Personal Data WikiProjectEdit
Hi Arlo Barnes, I see you have expressed interest to work on the Personal Data WikiProject! I can certainly use the help ;-) Particularly, at this stage, around defining the scope and specifying it in a good way so others see it too. Pdehaye (talk) 12:54, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
title character of Q66048962Edit
Hey, instead of writing the number in the description could you just use the name of the item instead? So instead of title character of Q66048962 you could write title character of Spooky's House of Jumpscares --Trade (talk) 19:16, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
- Sure, I usually try to do the name and then the Q-number in parens, but I forgot that time.
- I like to include the number because on the rare occasion that someone includes it, it has helped me when doing edits.
- Thanks for the catch, though.
- Arlo Barnes (talk) 21:53, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
- Hmm, in my experience including a number doesn't make much of a difference in the difficulty of finding a description.
- Do you have any examples where removing the number makes the item harder to find?
- --Trade (talk) 10:29, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
- It's more like an efficiency measure, since I can plop the number directly into the URL bar rather than using the search.
- Also, it helps disambiguate items that have the same label; it is generally pretty clear which one is meant once their entries are opened, but again that requires an additional step.
- Arlo Barnes (talk) 17:51, 29 September 2019 (UTC)
Community Insights SurveyEdit
RMaung (WMF) 17:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)
I've been cleaning up some odd values in date of death (P570) and noticed you added a few of them recently (eg). "no value" is really meant for cases where there is no meaningful value and won't ever be one - eg "spouse" for someone who was never married, "educated at" for someone with no formal education, or "number of children" for someone who never had any. As a result, it gets a bit conceptually weird to use it for dates/places of death, and the consensus has generally been to avoid it. (It also confuses a lot of database queries, which use "has any P570 statement" as a proxy for "is dead", on the assumption that novalue isn't used.)
We don't unfortunately have any clear way to record "is currently alive"; it's usually inferred by a recent birthdate + absence of a deathdate rather than an explicit statement. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:19, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
Lack of refs on Q63016981Edit
Reading Wikidata:Autobiography, I see that even if people edit their own item (like Q63016981 seems to be), they need a verificable source. It seems that most properties on that item are not properly sourced, so could you add them so people can verify the affirmations ? --Misc (talk) 19:30, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
- Sure, let me know if there is a particular statement you think is lacking. Arlo Barnes (talk) 21:55, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
archive URL (P1065) should only be used when linking to archived versions of internet pages such as this. If you wanna link to files hosted by Internet Archive (Q461) you should use Internet Archive ID (P724) instead. Kh. --Trade (talk) 20:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
Hey, I deleted your has part (P527)-edits on Profanity in American Sign Language (Q7247906). The items you added may be part of the general item for Profanity, but they are not connected to the American Sign Language. --CENNOXX (talk) 14:37, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
I noticed your Wikidata editing stats on Wikiscan , which led me to look up your profile. Thank you for all the hard work!
I’m reaching out to you because I’m working on a research project about understanding what motivates editors like you to contribute to Wikidata. We’re also interested in learning about how you feel your contributions are being used outside of Wikidata. Since you are such an active community member, I thought you might also be interested in helping to build the broader community’s knowledge about Wikidata, and why it matters.
If you’re interested, let’s schedule a time to talk over Zoom, or whichever platform you prefer. You could leave a direct message or fill in a questionnaire. The conversation should take about 30 min.
Hope you have a great day,
Thanks for the edits of "Big Ears". I see you're adding the chapters as "also known as." I don't think that's appropriate. I think you can leave those out of the aka. See Big Ears: Listening for Gender in Jazz Studies (Q96360168). I'll add the rest of the chapters and connect them to the digital version. Trilotat (talk) 01:18, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for both the attention to detail and your own efforts on the item; you are correct that it was not proper, but merely a stopgap measure. If you have a plan I will definitely follow your lead on that. Arlo Barnes (talk) 01:20, 18 June 2020 (UTC)
- My pleasure. The work on Duke University publications I did was very early on in my wikidata education, so I don't claim it was all that good. I'm very happy to revisit and improve what I can. See Big Ears: Listening for Gender in Jazz Studies (Q96360168) with the addition of "has part". I am in no way familiar with the text, so I'm just going by what I find online. I also made that online version of the book a version of the one you were working on. I am not sure that's right, though. Trilotat (talk) 01:48, 18 June 2020 (UTC)