Cavernia

Welcome to Wikidata, Cavernia!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards! Jon Harald Søby (talk) 18:02, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Personlig rekord

Hei Cavernia. Dette med personal best (P2415) igjen. Se gjerne på hvilke kvalifikatorer som er brukt ved denne propertien på Wikidata-eksempelet: Usain Bolt (Q1189), med bruk av for eksempel propertien sports discipline competed in (P2416), location (P276) og point in time (P585). For mere komplett info på wikidata. Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 19:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Ja, jeg er klar over det, men de kildene jeg legger inn fra nå mangler stort sett disse ekstra parametrene, dermed må det tas en ny runde for å få komplettert disse. Må også se nærmere på hvordan rekordene skal hentes inn i malen infoboks sportbiografi ettersom det ikke ser så skapelig ut i f.eks. artikkelen om nevnte Usain Bolt. Jeg har prøvd å finne ut om disse hentes automatisk i andre wikier, men dessverre ikke funnet det. --Cavernia (talk) 20:09, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Beklager at jeg glemte bort å svare igjen... Men veldig flott at du prøver å finne ut en mulig måte og løse det på ? er spent på om du finner ut av det. Lykke til !! Ps. Mulig tips for å finne ut av mulig bruk fra wikidata, om mulig noe tungvint kanskje, men prøv å følg noen av redigeringene til de som var mest for å inkludere propertien på wikidata ved opprettelsen av den her. Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 23:39, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Prøvde tipset ditt, fikk god respons, men svaret var deprimerende. Det er tilsynelatende ikke utviklet noen mekanisme for å hente qualifiers fra Wikidata. Trenger noen med kompetanse på Lua. --Cavernia (talk) 22:09, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Flott med respons da men... og dessverre så kan ikke jeg heller noe særlig Lua. Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 00:24, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Ikke helt uventet at man blir stående igjen med Lua i hånden. --Cavernia (talk) 08:13, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

Why are you adding incomplete info about ski jumpers personal records? It should contain not only distance but also a place and date. 99kerob (talk) 12:53, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Sure, but when the source is not complete it takes time to locate this additional information. The most important thing is to update the personal record, as this information is directly used in Wikipedia articles. --Cavernia (talk) 13:02, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

sport (P641) for sportspersons…

Hey Cavernia, I see that you are currently adding lots of sport (P641) claims for sportspersons. This is actually the wrong way to relate these persons to a particular type of sport, please use occupation (P106) instead. sport (P641) does not add any value to sportsperson items, it just unnecessarily bloats them up… Regards, MisterSynergy (talk) 07:45, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Frankly, I expect you to be responsive during massive imports. I am later going to ask you to remove all the P641:Q159354 claims again (I spent a lot of work to get it the way it was). This way you just add unnecessary load to servers and watchlists… —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:03, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

This property was in use for about half of all sports athletes already (and about 90 % of all football players), and it is automatically picked up by the biography infobox in nowiki (i guess other languages too). Therefore the property is relevant as I see it. --Cavernia (talk) 08:42, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

This P641 usage in sportsperson items, particularly about football players, is a leftover of early Wikidata times, when many users did not understand how to use P106 correctly. This has changed meanwhile, thus P641 should not be systematically imported for sportspersons any longer. If Wikipedia infoboxes rely on that, they are poorly designed and should be changed to P106 usage instead. Wikidata would otherwise become overloaded with problematic claims such as this one.

The problem in this case is that P641 does not carry any useful meaning in sportsperson items. It does not tell you anything about the role a person has or had in the type of sport, which is given as the value. It could in fact be anything, such as an elite athlete, a coach, official, researcher, umpire, club owner, equipment supplier, casual supporter, inventor of this type of sport, whatever… . If a person is only known for their achievements in one type of sport, this might not be a problem. There are many persons, however, who have achieved notability in more than one type of sport in different roles, and P641 usage is the perfect path to make plain false claims about these persons. Thus, P641 should no longer be systematically used in sportspersons, not even in infoboxes. —MisterSynergy (talk) 08:55, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

I did a quick check of volleyball players (which I haven't touched), 3165 athletes have not P641 defined, and 1909 athletes have it defined. For cross country skiing it is 723/1094. I can't see any consensus for your view in the discussion page, and the documentation of the property even includes an athletes as an example of how to use the property. If you still mean that this is the wrong use of the property, you should address it in the project chat and get consensus for a change in the property definition. --Cavernia (talk) 09:08, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

There are detailed instructions in Property talk:P641 how (not) to use it, and I contributed a lot to those instructions after many discussions with different editors, also at WD:PC. The main reason not to forbid this property on sportspersons (i.e. exclude persons from domain) is that a couple of users use it to tag items without any claims, so that more experienced users can find this item and improve it. A full ban would somewhat de-legalize this useful edit behavior. Still, P641 is unable to express useful meaning for sportspersons, and it even does not provide any useful handles for queries. In properly maintained items it is nothing else than a useless burden; it has the potential to make false claims about the person described by the item; it also motivates data users (Wikipedias and externals) to use sub-optimal queries for their applications, just as it is the case with the infobox mentioned by you. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:20, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Again, please refer to consensus about this, or else your claims are just personal opinions. --Cavernia (talk) 09:31, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

This is consensus, and the help section on Property talk:P641 is a consequence of this consensus. —MisterSynergy (talk) 09:34, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

OK, please show me this consensus you refer to there. --Cavernia (talk) 12:10, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

This consensus was not found in a single discussion, thus I cannot refer to a single section or site. It was even discussed several times over a prolonged time frame of more than a year, involving the input of several users. Yet it finally resulted in the creation of a dedicated help page for P641 in September 2016, which clearly states that P641 is far from optimal in many situations, sometimes even harmful due to its inherent ambiguity. It also offers options which properties shall be used instead, depending on the item’s entity. The creation of the help page was publicly accounced on Property talk:P641, and all interested users were invited to participate in this process. Since then, no massive P641 imports have been performed, as users are advised to check property talk pages before imports anyway.

Besides this formal notice on the property’s talk page there is still the ambiguous nature of these claims. They are not specific enough to express their intended meaning in all situations, which potentially results in false claims upon usage; their vast amount also encourages data users to rely on these claims, rather than querying better data which is already available at Wikidata. The longer we accept those problematic imports, the worse the situation becomes, and the more difficult it becomes to solve it at all at some point. A crappy Wikidata with tons of problematic legacy data from more or less ancient times is a horror scenario which we should avoid in every single edit we perform here. —MisterSynergy (talk) 13:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

The message about this is still more ambigous than the use of the property P641 theoretically could be. I totally agree that this is not the optimal solution, but Wikidata is far from optimal as there for example is no way to automatically pick up qualifiers. The use of P641 is even less controversial as P106 as P106 often refers to the person's career after the sports career is over (see Q669709). To use this property to describe which sport the person has performed would not work. The only major problem I see with this is that it is in conflict with the anti-redundancy principle, but as long as we don't have functionality to make use of inherited statements, this is the way to do it. The best solutions would be to change P106 to "Athlete" or "Sportsperson" and then use P641 to define which sport(s) the person has performed. Most of the athletes from before 1980 were not professionals and had a regular job in addition to their sports career, and this makes your Armagheddon scenario much more adequat for P106 compared to P641. --Cavernia (talk) 15:27, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Response in two parts:

• P106 is not about professional occupations or regular jobs; it is about regular (paid or unpaid) notable activities during a person’s life. Granularity within its values is valuable to easily query items, thus it is the perfect property for our goal here exactly in the way it is used.
• Wikidata data is read by machines, not by humans. This involves querying in some way, typically either by template programming (in Wikipedias) or via the Wikidata Query Service (external data users). In both ways it is fairly simple to gain additional information about a given value. For instance, all sportsperson occupations have a field of this occupation (P425) claim set, which links them to their particular type of sport, and additionally all of them subclass athlete (Q2066131). This way it is easy to distinguish between sports-related P106 values which are useful for a sportsperson infobox (for instance) and those unrelated ones which are not.

Regards, MisterSynergy (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Workshop om Wikidata

Hei, jeg veit ikke om du har fått det med deg, men jeg og Wikimedia Norge skal holde en workshop 18. november om Wikidata-relaterte verktøy, og siden du er ganske aktiv her så tenkte jeg kanskje det kunne være interessant for deg? Om du bor utafor Oslo-området kan Wikimedia Norge også dekke reiseutgifter. Du kan lese mer her, og si fra om det virker interessant! Jon Harald Søby (WMNO) (talk) 11:58, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

DS «Suevic» / Skytteren

God aften! Jeg ser at du har satt på Brutto Tonn lik 12 531 for . Etter det jeg finner på f.eks LARDEX så er 12 531 der oppgitt som Brutto Register Tonn. gross tonnage (P1093) gjelder for Brutto Tonn som er volumet av alle lukkede rom på fartøyet ref International Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships (Q1979787) multiplisert med en faktor, mens Brutto Register Tonn er tonnasje målt etter Oslokonvensjonen av 1947. Mvh Pmt (talk) 22:07, 20 October 2018 (UTC)

Hei, du har selvsagt helt rett, her har jeg hentet tonnasje for en lang rekke fartøy uten å oppdage at flere av dem hadde anført BRT i stedet for BT. Disse er nå reversert. --Cavernia (talk) 19:46, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Edit on Ingrid Halstensen (Q59923468)

Hello fellow contributor! Your latest edit on Ingrid Halstensen (Q59923468) is much appreciated. But there is missing a reference to the site where you found her date of birth (P569). Hope you could take care of that at a time suitable to you. Keep up the good work. Regards Premeditated (talk) 23:37, 25 December 2018 (UTC)

Hurtigløp

Hei Cavernia. Denne redigeringen blir feil i mine øyne siden Norges Skøyteforbund kaller dette for hurtigløp og ikke skøyteløp på langbane. PS. Jeg er forøvrig litt usikker på hvordan gjøre forskjell på overkategorien for kortbaneløp og hurtigløp på skøyter for noe om det finnes noe annet begrep enn det samme som for hurtigløp. Kortbaneløp i Norge har jo aldri vært stort, så det er godt mulig det ikke finnes noe slikt godt innarbeidet begrep. Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 00:19, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

Ja, jeg var obs på problemstillingen. Ettersom kortbaneløp i praksis ikke eksisterer i Norge tenker alle - inkludert skøyteforbundet - på skøyteløp som hurtigløp på langbane. Wikidata er imidlertid ikke et norsk prosjekt, og poenget her er å skille hurtigløp på langbane fra hurtigløp på kortbane. En mulig mellomløsning er å bruke beskrivelsesfeltet til å presisere at dette er skøyteløp slik det normalt oppfattes i Norge. --Cavernia (talk) 07:28, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Ja eller lengdeløp som noen påstår. Ikke enig i å skjære alle over en kam angående kortbaneløp i skøyteforbundet. jeg er forøvrig i gang med en diskusjon med Bruker lil2mas/Theilert om dette temaet på brukersiden til Løken samt at jeg også har lagt ut et spørsmål på facebook-gruppen Forum for skøytehistorie. Ps. Jeg var offisiell svingdommer under no:Sprint-VM på skøyter 1997 på Hamar, så har en relativt god innsikt i skøytesporten. Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 21:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Cavernia,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikidata and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

statement remove request

Please remove native label (P1705) from Ukrainian Wikipedia (Q199698), since already available as official name (P1448). Thanks!!! --151.49.106.147 19:14, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

I'm not involved there, maybe you should try the general project discussion? --Cavernia (talk) 19:18, 19 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Cavernia,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

More care needed on authors of HEP papers

Hi - I just noticed that a few months ago you replaced "F. Zhang" on a number of high energy physics papers with Feng Zhang (Q47305434). However, that person is a genetics researcher, and was not an author on any of those papers. I'm working on fixing this case so don't worry about that, but in general I'd urge you to exercise a bit more care in matching up authors on these papers where we have many authors with common surnames and only an initial for first name. Thanks! ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:26, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Indeed, Chinese researcher is the worst area I've been into. I've used the tool Author Disambiguator to do these changes only on matching studies, which means that the researchers were mixed up in another study in the first place, or there are several researchers with these initials who did research together with the same researcher. Unfortunately, the quality of imported data on researchers is poor, there are thousands of dublets which are very timeconsuming to fix. Thanks a lot for you effort to try to lift the quality here! --Cavernia (talk) 17:41, 17 October 2019 (UTC)

Roll back batch #temporary_batch_1581973851693

country (P17) should not be used on ships as it is a geographic property. Use country of origin (P495) instead. /ℇsquilo 15:35, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Esquilo: Thanks for addressing this issue. I agree that country (P17) is not the ideal property to use. However, country of origin (P495) would not be any better, as the data don't reflect where the ship was built, but the country it's registered in. The only reason why I'm using country (P17) is that this has been the consensus so far, only 9 ship items use country of origin (P495). I have considered proposing Country of registry as a new property, this would solve this issue. --Cavernia (talk) 19:52, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

I agree that country (P17) is used in a lot of places where it should not be used (just like P107 (P107) used to be). There is the property port of registry (P532) that is supposed to be used to describe where a ship is registered. By the way, I realize I forgot to put a "please" in my original request. It was not supposed to sound like an order. /ℇsquilo 20:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

@Esquilo: Sure, the proposed property will reflect port of registry (P532) as located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) reflects country (P17). Then it could be argued that we don't need both properties, but in many cases we don't know which port the ship was registered in, only under which flag it was sailing. A port can as well change country, i.e. a ship registered in Rostock from 1985 to 1995 would have been sailing under two different flags. Regarding «please»; been there, done that ;-) --Cavernia (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

Is it too bold to put flag image (P41) directly in a ship object? It will be nessesary anyway for ships that fly flags nobody else have, like Category:Götheborg (ship, 2005) (Q55290899). /ℇsquilo 06:48, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

Interesting idea. But again, this could be interpreted that the flag is representing the ship. Not sure if this is the solution, and it would be difficult to retrieve the parameter from infoboxes at Wikipedia. I have now proposed a new property, appreciating your considerations there. --Cavernia (talk) 08:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

How will this proposed property handle navy ships? In many nations they fly a different flag from merchant ships (which in turn can fly a different flag from the state flag)? /ℇsquilo 12:30, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Measures of size of naval vessels

Hello. Naval vessels are measured by displacement, in units of tons/tonnes (standard or metric, but not short tons). Civilian vessels are typically measured by gross tonnage, which does not measure weight or mass, but is a specialised system of calculating size, and is related to gross register tonnage, a measure of volume which is no longer in use. Neither gt nor grt are used for warships. (Deadweight tonnage also is a measure of weight, used for tankers; often such vessels use both gt and dwt.) So your additions of gross tonnage to warships is incorrect, and should be removed, and replaced by displacement where indicated. Do not use displacement figures from your sources as gross tonnages; they are not the same and cannot be converted. Kablammo (talk) 17:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Hi, the match has been done between an external source and the IMO number. Mostly, naval vessels don't have a IMO number unless they've had a civil career, but it seems that there is a range of navy vessels starting with 49. I have now removed the data from the script generator, then these items should not be supplied with GT. --Cavernia (talk) 20:57, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you. As you now know, your source is in error, as it conflates displacement with gt. I did not go through all of your edits, but did see some other vessels with prefixes beginning with US- or HM- , which no doubt are naval vessels.

Do you know if your data source(s) are all relatively recent, and do not include historic vessels measured by the former measure of gross register tons (grt)? Kablammo (talk) 23:15, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

Sure, I realized that the source lists GT for ships wrecked long before GT was the standard, which probably means that the values are indicating GRT instead. I then added a formula to skip adding GT to ships built before 1982. --Cavernia (talk) 09:39, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Thank you.

We can only hope that http://www.vesseltracking.net/ and www.marinetraffic.com learn the difference between displacement and gt. Kablammo (talk) 16:13, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

country of registry

Hey Cavernia, my bot task regarding country of registry (P8047) was approved, so I started a batch of 500 items to see whether there are complaints from other users. If not, I will do the rest in a few days. —MisterSynergy (talk)

Great! --Cavernia (talk) 14:34, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

This task has just finished. Three reverts so far (well justified: [1][2][3]), otherwise I have not received any complaints or comments yet. The query service still needs to catch up with the edits, thus you can't really see it there completely within the next few hours. There are a couple of cases where no move was done, because the target property P8047 was already present in the item. I leave it up to you to decide what to do with them. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:37, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I will look into the items. --Cavernia (talk) 21:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Port of registry of the Marshall Islands

Hello Cavernia, regarding to your changes of ships with registry in the Marshall Island keep in mind, that Majuro (the capital) is the homeport and not the island Majuro-Atoll. An island as port of registry is definitely wrong! Greeting --Ein Dahmer (talk) 18:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I'm aware of that. However, the item describing the atoll is in most languages in Wikipedia described as the city (and port), and more than 90 % of the ships where linked to this item (as well as other WD links). At least it's better to move all the links to one item instead of using two separate items. --Cavernia (talk) 20:35, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

However, at the stern of these ships is only „Majuro“ written! If wikidata shows another spelling the users will be confused. On the other hand the wikidata entry should be identical with the responding c:Category:Ships registered in Majuro. --Ein Dahmer (talk) 17:09, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Sure, but this is a problem that must be solved separately, the confusion of port of registry is only a consequense of this problem. In a perfect world the Commons categories would match the Wikidata items, but the only way to make this possible was to make these categories based on data from Wikidata. To manually maintain these categories would we too timeconsuming. --Cavernia (talk) 17:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Cont'd from my user discussion: Here is the requested link. In the CIA World Factbook you will find following about the capital name: Majuro; note - the capital is an atoll of 64 islands; governmental buildings are housed on three fused islands on the eastern side of the atoll: Djarrit, Uliga, and Delap. This might be the reason for the discrepancies. All officials use Majuro, only some wikidata users not. That is a needless problem! --Ein Dahmer (talk) 16:38, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Nobody denies that Majuro is the capital of Marshall Islands, but in German (and one other language) somebody got the idea to separate the atoll and the city into two different items. There are then 2 options:

1. Create new items for 100+ languages and change 1000+ Wikidata links.

2. Adapt German and one other language to the rest.

If you take a look at the list of links to Majuro Atoll (Q14523617) you will realize that what you call "only some wikidata users" is in fact all Wikidata contributors excepts you. --Cavernia (talk) 22:13, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Oki doki, that was the misunderstanding: Two data sets for one object. I always got Majuro Atoll (Q14523617) as default and not Majuro (Q12919)! I solved the problem by editing a modified German title. Majuro Atoll (Q14523617) is unnecessary and has to be deleted. Sorry for the inconvenience --Ein Dahmer (talk) 19:09, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Disregard my statement about Majuro Atoll (Q14523617), there are also some pages about the atoll. --Ein Dahmer (talk) 19:31, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Pi bot edits this evening

Hi, this is just a heads-up that I'm running Pi bot through commons:Category:Ships by IMO number again this evening, to catch new additions and to create new items for them. Please let me know if you spot any issues with the edits. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail

Hello Cavernia,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:45, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

Images for ships

I see you've done a lot of work around ships! Do you know about m:WDFIST? It's a very easy tool to find and add photos for items which lack one. If you select "search Commons", be careful with homonyms. See an example search. Nemo 15:42, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

No, I didn't know about it, thank you! I actually made my own (offline) tool to do this job. I've tried WDFIST, it's not perfect, but can help saving some time. --Cavernia (talk) 18:03, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Plausibility between country and port of registry

Please note that ships of Antigua and Barbuda are registered in Saint John's (Q36262) and not in St. John's (Q2082) (Newfoundland). It's a lot of work to correct all mistakes done by your program. I suggest to insert a plausibility check between country and port of registry. Ein Dahmer (talk) 12:41, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

These cities were spelled the same way in English. I have now changed the label of Saint John's (Q36262) to reflect what is used in most other languages. The items are corrected as well. --Cavernia (talk) 18:49, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

Skipsrevyen og QuickStatements

Sann. Da har jeg fått testa ut QuickStatements for første gang, og ingen større ulykker har skjedd ser det ut til. Jeg testa på den nye Skipsrevyen IDen du fikk opprettet. Dessverre så var det bare 35 entiteter jeg klarte å matche med IMO-nummer, men jeg sitter på en full dump av alle IDene og tilhørende IMO-nummer hvis du eller noen andre har lyst på.

Vet du hvorfor kjøringa mi ble merket med temporary batch og ikke det navnet jeg hadde gitt forresten? Og er det noe jeg bør merke meg dersom jeg gjør flere QS kjøringer i fremtiden? --Infrastruktur wdt:P31 wd:Q5 wdt:P1552 wd:Q11423 (T | C) 13:53, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Flott, send meg gjerne en e-post via Wikipedia, så sender jeg deg min e-post-adresse hvor du kan sende meg dumpen. Etter det jeg har hørt vil Skipsrevyen starte å digitalisere eldre skipsomtaler som kun er trykket i papirutgaven og gjøre dem fritt tilgjengelige slik at det blir mange flere av disse. Tror ikke det er fare for at de forsvinner bak betalingsmur med det første. Angående navn på batcher har jeg aldri blitt helt klok på det. Dette er et verktøy som er gjort mye endringer på, og det er fortsatt ikke alt som fungerer optimalt. Det jeg pleier å gjøre er å teste en batch med 2-3 oppføringer og sjekke at det blir riktig før jeg setter i gang en stor import. --Cavernia (talk) 17:16, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Lastet opp til en pastebin-lignende tjeneste, siden den ikke var større en 38 kiB (2072 båtomtaler i alt). Den kommer opp greit håper jeg? Formatet er CSV. --Infrastruktur wdt:P31 wd:Q5 wdt:P1552 wd:Q11423 (T | C) 18:09, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@Infrastruktur: Tusen takk, har importert ca. 500 oppføringer nå. --Cavernia (talk) 21:15, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

Kult. Hvordan klarte du å finne flere matcher? --Infrastruktur wdt:P31 wd:Q5 wdt:P1552 wd:Q11423 (T | C) 09:49, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Jeg tok en eksport av alle oppføringer med IMO-nummer angitt, deretter kryssjekket jeg med listen din. Se gjerne min verktøykasse på Wikipedia hvor det bl.a. er listet opp en del spørringer som er relevante for skipsfart. --Cavernia (talk) 11:54, 19 June 2021 (UTC)

Dutch names

Hi, In this edit you capitalized the "van" in this person's name. This isn't how Dutch people write their full name. The Tussenvoegsel (Q2620828) isn't capitalized in Dutch names. It's a clear sign that someone is Belgian if they do. Please be more carefull copying the way people write their own name. --1Veertje (talk) 12:08, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

This is from a batch of data imported from an external source, which means that thousands of names have been imported. Any misspelling at the external source will be reflected in the imported value. --Cavernia (talk) 18:10, 24 August 2021 (UTC)

When you write a Dutch family name on its own then the tussenvoegsel is typically capitalized. You can't just paste the first name to the last name though. Whenever I check these on ORCID the name is capitalized correctly at the top page. 1Veertje (talk) 09:05, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, my mistake. As a lot of the names in ORCID are written with lowercase (example), I had to run it through a formula that capitalized the first letters. This is the cause of the problem. I now try to add some exceptions and run the batch over again. Thanks for notifying me. --Cavernia (talk) 17:13, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Danske salmedigtere

Hvor har du emner som f.eks. Mari Clausen (Q109925087) fra? Du har ikke angivet kilde nogen steder.--Hjart (talk) 23:03, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

De er oppgitt som forfattere i Ways of the Lord (Q11975219). --Cavernia (talk) 13:04, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

Er det muligt du kunne angive det ved brug af f.eks. described by source (P1343)? --Hjart (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2021 (UTC)

MSC Buffalo

Is commons:Category:IMO 235083197 incorrect?--Hjart (talk) 14:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, IMO is only 7 digits. --Cavernia (talk) 14:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Jacklyn (Q4356988)

Hey there, I saw you added information to Jacklyn (Q4356988) about its scrapping, but I cannot find any sources which link it to International Shipbreaking (Q115282619). Can you please share the source of this information? Thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 23:04, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

According to Shipbreaking Platform it was scrapped in Brownsville, which is supposed to be International Shipbreaking (Q115282619). --Cavernia (talk) 08:22, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Ah, I understand. The problem is that there is also SteelCoast located in Brownsville, so without more information we cannot make a determination. Even with the only photos I know of Jacklyn's breaking underway (https://twitter.com/thejackbeyer/status/1621946038104776705), I still cannot narrow down between the two companies. The buildings in the background don't really match against satellite photos. So, without additional data, the company name will need to come out. — Huntster (t @ c) 14:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

So, there is one company at each side of the channel, and we don't know which ship has been scrapped at which company. It seems that SteelCoast (Q117023217) started with shipbreaking in 2017, but was the area used for shipbreaking before that by Esco Marine? --Cavernia (talk) 15:49, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's my understanding. Esco Marine apparently shut down circa 2015, and when SteelCoast started through a joint venture in 2017 it appears they simply took up residence at the existing facility. — Huntster (t @ c) 16:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the WQT UI requirements elicitation online workshop

Dear Cavernia,

I hope you are doing well,

We are a group of researchers from King’s College London working on developing WQT (Wikidata Quality Toolkit), which will support a diverse set of editors in curating and validating Wikidata content.

We are inviting you to participate in an online workshop aimed at understanding the requirements for designing effective and easy-to-use user interfaces (UI) for three tools within WQT that can support the daily activities of Wikidata editors: recommending items to edit based on their personal preferences, finding items that need better references, and generating entity schemas automatically for better item quality.

The main activity during this workshop will be UI mockup sketching. To facilitate this, we encourage you to attend the workshop using a tablet or laptop with PowerPoint installed or any other drawing tools you prefer. This will allow for a more interactive and productive session as we delve into the UI mockup sketching activities.

Participation is completely voluntary. You should only take part if you want to and choosing not to take part will not disadvantage you in any way. However, your cooperation will be valuable for the WQT design. Please note that all data and responses collected during the workshop will be used solely for the purpose of improving the WQT and understanding editor requirements. We will analyze the results in an anonymized form, ensuring your privacy is protected. Personal information will be kept confidential and will be deleted once it has served its purpose in this research.

The online workshop, which will be held on April 5th, should take no more than 3 hours.

If you agree to participate in this workshop, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form to register your interest https://forms.office.com/e/9mrE8rXZVg Then, I will contact you with all the instructions for the workshop.

For more information about my project, please read this page: https://king-s-knowledge-graph-lab.github.io/WikidataQualityToolkit/

If you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me at the email address mentioned above.

Thank you for considering taking part in this project.

Regards Kholoudsaa (talk) 01:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)