Roll back after a wrong merge

edit

Hello Billinghurst, how are you?

As you've seen, there has been a wrong merge, here: wood engraver is a printmaking occupation, not a sculpture one. I had to revert it, I hope you agree with that.

In addition, I think you've asked a bot to change wood engraver by wood carver to all items that had this occupation. So now, all the artists who where wood engravers are entitled wood carvers, which is a wrong information.

Could you please ask the bot to roll back if it's possible? Information is currently wrong on many items.

Thank you very much, Daehan (talk) 13:16, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Hi Daehan. I did see that unmerge. I don't control the bot, nor have any control, you would be best to ask the powers to be at WD. I do hope that you have also added a "different from" statement to stop them from being merged in the future.  — billinghurst sDrewth 13:23, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Hello Billinghurst,
Thank you for your prompt response.
Meanwhile, another contributor reverted the bot's edits and show me how to do it.
Could you please explain how can I add a "different from" statement and where? Daehan (talk) 13:27, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Oh, ok, you mean different from (P1889), right? I thought it was some kind of tag to stop the bot doing this operation as an authomatic process. Daehan (talk) 13:34, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Daehan: an inhibitor to merging rather than the bot's cleanup following a merge.  — billinghurst sDrewth 22:53, 25 August 2023 (UTC)Reply


  Hello, I'm Bovlb. I notice that you have blanked an item, either fully or partially, by removing some combination of sitelinks, claims, and labels, or by replacing valid labels with strings such as “DELETE THIS”. It's possible that you did this because you were attempting to delete the item, but I’m afraid that’s not how things work here.

If you want to request deletion of an item, please do so at Wikidata:Requests for deletions. Even once you have done this, you should still not be blanking the item in anticipation of its deletion. There are several important reasons for this:

  • Anyone reviewing the item will want to assess for themselves whether it ought to be deleted. If you have already removed information, then this may make it harder for them to determine correctly whether the item is notable. In particular, a sitelink usually implies that the item is notable, so they need to be reviewed carefully.
  • Your deletion request may be declined. In this case, your removals will need to be reverted.
  • The item may be deleted but subsequently undeleted.
  • The item may be a duplicate of another item. In this case, the two items will be merged using a merge tool, and everything will be copied from one to the other. It is helpful for this merge for the item to retain as much information as possible. Incorrect labels like “DELETE THIS” may end up in the result.
  • Wikidata administrators have access to a special searchable archive of deleted items. This is used, for example, to determine if a newly-created item is a recreation of one that has been created in the past. For this reason, it is helpful if the deleted version of an item is as complete as possible.
  • If we remove a sitelink, but the article remains on the client project, then someone on that client project may end up creating a new item, duplicating the original.

It is also possible that you were blanking an item because you want to repurpose it for another concept. Do not do this! There is no shortage of item numbers, and we never reuse an item for a different concept.

If you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!  Bovlb (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC) --Bovlb (talk) 22:15, 19 June 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Bovlb: Please don't use these templated generic messages with me. Please look to clearly, concisely and specifically address concerns. Unless you can give me the specific information on the item, then please don't bother with these warnings, they are of really low value.

I will have been operating at Commons on cleaning up problematic images, typically self-promotion that ends up here. If I nominated an item for deletion, it would have been due to lacking notability according to criteria in your system. If I removed something here it will typically have been due to a clean-up at Commons and will be in accordance to the guidance. As an administrator at Commons for 14 years, and a long term user here who has resolved many problematic issues here, I am well aware of the guidance for both sites.  — billinghurst sDrewth 01:46, 21 June 2024 (UTC)Reply