My apologies. I've actually been using Wikidata for some time, but this is the first occasion I've encountered duplicate pages that got in the way of making connections or edits and couldn't be worked around. I shall be more careful. ~~~~
I merged them. You can do it yourself. See Help:Merge.
Hi Bovlb, thank for your message about Q94360470. Undoubtfully, I made a mistake when creating this page. In fact, a page for this person already exists. Q94360470 is the same person as Q33175464.
OK. I have merged them, thanks. See Help:Merge for how you could do this yourself.
Hello, could you please help with updating a protected wikidata
Hi! coming from eswiki, i saw some vandalism on article about Diego Pérez de los Cobos. The wikidata statement for that article has been vandalized and it seems that the vandalism survived the protection of the article. The wikidata is: Q40761267. Under occupation, in english language it says "Carlista", while the spanish version says "Heroe Nacional" (National hero).
That is incorrect and non-neutral. The correct statement should be : occupation: Guardia Civil (Q50681172), both in spanish and english.
thanks fr your help. ~~~~
Thanks for getting in touch. This seems to have been a caching problem that I have fixed by purging the page's cache.
Thank you, and thanks for the tip con cache (still learning things). Cheers. ~~~~
Blocked user decided not to request an unblock.
Please note Wikidata:Administrators#Involved_administrators.
It appears that you have a view that differs from that of Tagishsimon about aliases, a topic you repeatedly brought up on project chat and where both of you commented.
I'm not entirely convinced that your block meets the benchmark of the guideline.
Thanks for your feedback. It is true that Tagishsimon appears to have the view that aliases (or perhaps the quality thereof) are unimportant. In 2018, I argued in favour of improving the quality of aliases. I do not feel that this point is strongly related to this block, however. Users cannot evade scrutiny merely by espousing a view that many administrators would disagree with.
If Tagishsimon feels that other administrators would not be likely to have taken the same action, then they are welcome to confirm this by making an unblock request. I don't own the block.
Wikidata:Administrators#Involved_administrators attempts to describe cases where you can actually use admin tools.
Whether the block of Tagishsimon is justified or not is not a factor that needs to be taken in account when doing so. Does this clarify it?
I'm somewhat troubled to see that you think that it mattters whether the user asked for an unblock or not.
If you prefer, we can ask for feedback on project chat.
I'm not sure what else you want from me here.
I responded to the point you raised. Apparently you don't like my response, but you have not given me any reason to change it.
I explained to Tagishsimon how they could seek an unblock from any (uninvolved) administrator and I even gave advice on how to make a successful unblock request. Tagishsimon chose not to make an unblock request, presumably because they did not feel it would be worthwhile.
So I have responded to your point, and the block has now expired uncontested. That seems to me to have resolved the matter.
The question is if your conduct as an administrator is consistent with the guideline or not.
I'd had expected that you'd think it over and maybe conclude that it hadn't been appropriate. I suppose it would be too much to expect that you'd apologize to the user you blocked.
It doesn't matter if the user contested the block or not.
You appear to be suggesting that I was "involved" and therefore should not have acted in this case, although strangely in four messages on the subject you never actually make this claim directly. If I understand your innuendo correctly, I was involved because this user's incivility related to the notion that the quality of aliases is unimportant, and I am on record (two years ago) as considering the quality of aliases to be important. As I explained, this is such a broad and controversial position that opposition to it would include most (perhaps all) administrators, and the connection to me specifically is too tenuous to consider me to be involved. There is therefore no credible claim about my impartiality, and I reject your suggestion (again).
I note that you do not address the question of whether the block itself was reasonable which, for me, is the most important issue here. If Tagishsimon felt that the block was improper, the correct path for them to take would have been to make an unblock request. This would have resolved the issue about whether other administrators would have reached the same conclusion, or would have imposed a lesser (or greater) sanction. This is why I provided detailed advice about making an unblock request, to provide them with the best opportunity to make their case. They did not appeal the block, and the block has now expired, which is why I considered the matter to be resolved.
So to summarise: You have repeatedly hinted that I was "involved", and I have explained why I reject this suggestion. You have expressed no concern about whether the block was justified, nor whether the blocked user has any interest in pursuing the matter further. I do appreciate your feedback, and it has caused me to reflect on this incident and how I could have handled it differently. I am human, I make mistakes, and I am always willing to try to do better, but in this case you just seem to be making the same suggestion repeatedly, and I feel I have adequately refuted it.
Hi Bovlb, it looks like you restored a duplicate over here: Q64551811. Why do you think it isn't one?
Hi! thanks for getting in touch. This concept is for a specific human who is a researcher. If you go to the ORCID page, you will see a list of publications for this person.You merged this page with researcher (Q1650915), the general concept for researchers. In particular, your merge added this ORCID to "researcher".
Unfortunately, we have no name for this person, and neither does ORCID. I don't know why this is, as I have never seen an ORCID entry without a name before. I would have been reluctant to create a page with no labels myself, but this was done by a bot that has now been indefinitely blocked.
I understand now. Thank you!
I had a past interest in Cyc
Hi, sorry for adding superfluous information/communication on your talk page. I just wanted to add that I had a past interest in Cyc when I was very interested in Artificial Intelligence(I read about it a lot many many years ago, in an intensive way). Nowadays I'm not 'that crazy' about it(AI in general) and this interest has mostly died out though my main interest in wikidata stems from a Ted Talk I watched where Tim-Berners Lee talked about linked data called "Tim Berners-Lee: The next web", sometimes that leads to further editing, but I'm mostly new so who knows if this 'behavior' will continue or not. The querying service is amazing, I'm not really "programming minded"(if that can be defined, or at best I'm a "slow markup programmer") but sometimes I watch tutorials by Wikimedia people how to use the query service and for basic stuff I can do most of the queries that I need(when I talk to people/friends/family members regarding what they are interested in). wikidata is finally something that I'm good at cause I'm good at details. Details usually catch my eye which is why I never felt I had a really good time on Wikipedia where 'seeing the whole picture' is important. Thanks again for helping me with the stepping stones to a dark theme :) this window is dark-on-light but I have all the time to dedicate to perfect it so it works the way I want ~~~~
I'm happy I could help, and your communication is not superfluous. As chance would have it, someone just asked me to present a talk on Cyc. Maybe I will share it when I am done.
I'm glad that you're finding useful tutorials on the Wikidata query service as I was also planning to prepare a talk on that as well. Perhaps you can help me. What questions do you have that the existing tutorials don't answer (well)?
Your question inspired me to try out dark mode myself. I do too much reading at night when my eyes are tired, and I am supposed to be falling asleep.
Whenever I want to review my skills in getting better at querying wikidata I check the video at which is called "Querying Wikidata with SPARQL for Absolute Beginners" which is also available on, what I assume is, the official Wikimedia Foundation YouTube channel. The length of the video is roughly 1 hour and 51 minutes.
A belated thanks for the suggestion. Based on your recommendation, I used that video for internal training.
Email. Sorry I’m doing this 37 minutes after the fact
Hello, Bovlb. The reason why I have been removing information for Spanish organizations from Wikidata is that information was wrong. I have fixed it in the wikipedia's web page.
Thanks for the response. In the cases I checked, there did seem to be a valid and relevant website at the URL you removed, but perhaps I am missing something because my Spanish is weak.
Not a 100% sure, but based on the edit patterns (car companies, media companies) it looks to me like https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/126.96.36.199&offset=&limit=500&target=188.8.131.52 is the same serial vandal you blocked here: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/184.108.40.206&offset=&limit=500&target=220.127.116.11
These edits are especially harmful, as they look kinda-sorta plausible at first glance and so can be hard to spot.
Thanks. Blocked for a year. I usually keep IP blocks short, but this user just seems to run and run.