User talk:DarwIn/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikidata, DarwIn!

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!

Welcome to Wikidata, DarwIn!

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, please ask me on my talk page. 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!

-- Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:10, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

About sitelinks to commonswiki

Hello,
I do not understand why you have removed the Commons sitelink Category:Lisbon from the item "Category:Lisbon" and then added it into the item "Lisbon"?
When an item has no associated main category, is is usual to add its Commons category into the Commons category (P373) of this item, and into the Commons sitelink of this item. But when an item has an associated main category, is is usual to keep its Commons category into the Commons category (P373) of this item, and to place the Commons category sitelink into the item of the associated main category.
When commons:Category:Lisbon is only in Commons category (P373) of Lisbon (Q597), but not in the Commons sitelink of Lisbon (Q597), there is no problem, because the Wikipedia articles use Commons category (P373) to display the interprojects link to Commons.
Regards --NicoScribe (talk) 09:20, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Hello NicoScribe. In Commons, the general working rule is that an article should link to a category, and viceversa. When there is no article linking, but there is a Wikipedia category, Commons categories can be linked to Wikipedia categories. It is generally useless to link Commons categories to Wikipedia categories when there is an article about it, and it is completely pointless and useless to link Commons galleries as if they were articles, as Wikidata constantly does, possible out of a deficient understanding about what are Commons galleries. On this specific case, I noticed that the wonderful Wikidata Infobox Mike Peel had developed was linking to the useless galleries in the case of Lisbon, instead of the category, as it should (and as it does, in many cases), which is useful for navigation. And what is causing that apparently is precisely that pointless connection between Lisbon Commons and Wikipedia cats, because in cases where it does not exist (like "Santa Maria Maior (Lisbon)"), it works OK. So I tried to fix it, but you reverted me - I've no idea why, as it's apparently an error of the Wikidata entry.--DarwIn (talk) 12:29, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

I have several remarks:

1. Sorry, on 20 May, when I have transferred commons:Category:Lisbon from the Commons sitelink of Lisbon (Q597) into the Commons sitelink of Category:Lisbon (Q8805930) ([1] + [2]), I was not aware that you had done the opposite transfer two days before ([3] + [4]). And when I wrote my message above, I was not aware that your (identical) transfer of May 21 ([5] + [6]) was an attempt to fix a specific error of the Wikidata entry.
2. What is the page where you have "noticed that the wonderful Wikidata Infobox Mike Peel had developed was linking to the useless galleries in the case of Lisbon"? I have seen that Mike Peel has created commons:Template:Wikidata Infobox, but I do not see this infobox in commons:Category:Lisbon or in commons:Lisboa. In the infobox of w:pt:Lisboa I do not see a link to Commons. In the infobox of w:en:Lisbon I see a link to Commons, but it does not rely on Wikidata.
3. I do not understand your comparison with Santa Maria Maior (Q10367953), because I have not found a gallery for this town in Commons (so no page could link "to the useless galleries", so no page could have an error similar to Lisbon's error), and commons:Category:Santa Maria Maior (Lisbon) does not display an infobox, and in the infobox of w:pt:Santa Maria Maior (Lisboa) I do not see a link to Commons, and in the infobox of w:en:Santa Maria Maior (Lisbon) I do not see a link to Commons.
4. Perhaps you were looking at the interproject links in the left side bar of a page? Let's look at Sintra (Q190187) (who has "Commons sitelink = commons:Sintra") and Category:Sintra (Q8747907) (who has "Commons sitelink = commons:Category:Sintra"): I see no problem of interproject links in the left side bar of commons:Sintra, or commons:Category:Sintra, or w:en:Sintra, or w:pt:Sintra.

--NicoScribe (talk) 16:04, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@NicoScribe: Hello, you can see the infobox at Category:Palácio Albergaria, for instance. If there is a gallery, and the Commons Category is sitelinked to the Wikipedia category, it will link to the Commons gallery, which is something we never want to see linked there. As commons:Category:Santa Maria Maior (Lisbon) has not a gallery in Commons, it is working fine. But it's kind of broken that Wikidata seems to interpret Commons galleries as a kind of "Wikipedia main space", when they are mere showcases, 99% of them with no maintenance at all.--DarwIn (talk) 16:16, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

OK. What is your answer to my remark n°2? What is your answer to my remark n°4? Do you see a problem with Sintra? Even if I add commons:Template:Wikidata Infobox (in preview of editing mode) into commons:Sintra or into commons:Category:Sintra, I do not see a problem. --NicoScribe (talk) 16:40, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

@NicoScribe: Nr2: Category:Palácio Albergaria ; Nr4: I want the connections between Commons and other projects to be properly set, so that everything works correctly. As that Commons category seemed to be erroneously linked to a Wikipedia category, instead of the article, as it should be, it was producing an unexpected and unwanted result: It was linking to the gallery in the Wikidata Infobox, instead of the category, which is what would make sense.--DarwIn (talk) 21:26, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Thanks, now I see the situation, at last. I was searching for an isolated line in the infobox (like in w:en:Lisbon), whereas you were thinking about the field "location" in the infobox of commons:Category:Palácio Albergaria. This field "location" is currently displaying "Santa Maria Maior (the category), Lisbon (the category), Portugal (the gallery)". I suppose that the infobox computes these values by using Palácio Albergaria (Q53865916) like that:

• the infobox extracts from location (P276) the value Santa Maria Maior (Q10367953), and displays its Commons sitelink: commons:Category:Santa Maria Maior (Lisbon)
• the infobox extracts from located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) the value Lisbon (Q597), and displays its Commons sitelink: commons:Category:Lisbon
• the infobox extracts from country (P17) the value Portugal (Q45), and displays its Commons sitelink: commons:Portugal

@Mike Peel: do you confirm my supposition? and do you confirm that the expected behavior is to show only categories and no galleries in the field "location" of the infobox? and is it possible for the infobox to use Commons category (P373) of the three items instead of using their sitelinks? and do you confirm that my transfer of commons:Category:Lisbon from the Commons sitelink of Lisbon (Q597) into the Commons sitelink of Category:Lisbon (Q8805930) ([7] + [8]) was an error? and do you confirm that Sintra (Q190187) with "Commons sitelink = commons:Sintra" and Portugal (Q45) with "Commons sitelink = commons:Portugal" are incorrect? --NicoScribe (talk) 07:41, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

@NicoScribe: The infobox fetches information from the sitelinked Wikidata item (and follows category's main topic (P301) if needed). It then displays the Wikidata label for each value in the language of the user, and if available it links that to the local wiki's sitelink - which could be the gallery or the category. It is not possible to use Commons category (P373) for performance reasons as that requires an additional arbitrary access call, while the sitelink is immediately available (along with the labels). The current convention here is to have the commons category sitelinked from the category item, and the gallery sitelinked from the article item, so I don't think you did anything wrong with your edit. The bigger issues are whether the Wikidata sitelinks to Commons are appropriately following the conventions on Commons (i.e., should we sitelink to galleries?); whether galleries are still useful on Commons; and whether the appropriate information is being made available without needing expensive arbitrary access calls. This probably needs an RfC at some point. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 00:22, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

DarwIn: with these explanations from Mike Peel, are you OK if I transfer again commons:Category:Lisbon from the Commons sitelink of Lisbon (Q597) into the Commons sitelink of Category:Lisbon (Q8805930)? I have seen that Pi bot is making such transfers (e.g. [9] + [10]). I think that commons:Category:Palácio Albergaria will display its Infobox with a location including a link to commons:Category:Lisbon, in accordance with your wish. --NicoScribe (talk) 22:08, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Just to note that things have moved on since the earlier conversation: the infobox now displays the P373 value where available, rather than the sitelinks to commons galleries, and we now have Wikidata category items for all items that have gallery sitelinks, so we hopefuly no longer have conflicts between whether the gallery or the category is sitelinked, we can do both. Pi bot moves items to commons categories to category items where possible primarily for consistency more than anything else (and it can easily be reversed in the future if there's consensus to do that). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:29, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Rio de Janeiro / São Paulo / Brazil (Mapas)

Eu sou Brasileira, aqui no Brasil, Município = Cidade. Aqui no Brasil os Bairros ficam dentro de Cidades, e as 'Cidades ficam dentro dos Estados. Ana Gauna (discussão) 16:11, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

---

Mapa dos Bairros da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro = https://www.google.com.br/search?biw=1229&bih=585&tbm=isch&sa=1&ei=qsCyW_G4BcKAwgStjb6gAQ&q=mapa+dos+bairros+da+cidade+do+rio+de+janeiro&oq=mapa+dos+bairros+do+rio+de+janeiro&gs_l=img.1.3.0l3j0i7i30k1l2.1079525.1081310.0.1088548.10.10.0.0.0.0.175.1072.1j8.9.0....0...1c.1.64.img..1.9.1069....0.Ka4LsGi2yF8#imgrc=1F8aCCVB2hswDM:

---

Mapa dos Municípios do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) = http://manchetesdoriodejaneiro.blogspot.com/2013/11/mapa-municipios-do-estado-do-rio-de.html

---

Mapa da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) = https://www.google.com.br/search?q=mapa+da+cidade+do+rio+de+janeiro&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjyyuDIxObdAhUCiJAKHRmOCD4Q_AUICygC&biw=1229&bih=585#imgrc=ox-gZW39Fcd6QM:

---

Mapa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Brazil) = https://www.google.com.br/search?ei=Eq6yW4nCI4P7wQTipZjACA&q=mapa+do+estado+do+rio+de+janeiro&oq=mapa+do+estado+do+rio+de+janeiro&gs_l=psy-ab.3..0l10.105935.107492.0.108741.8.8.0.0.0.0.226.1127.0j7j1.8.0....0...1c.1.64.psy-ab..0.8.1125...0i7i30k1j0i13k1.0.HY1qYY1XxgM

---

Mapa do Estado de São Paulo (com Cidades/Municípios) = http://www.mapas-sp.com/municipios.htm

---

Mapa dos Estados do Brazil = https://www.google.com.br/search?q=Mapa+dos+Estados+do+Brasil&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj5jL7IxubdAhXKjZAKHYHHDkEQ_AUICigB&biw=1229&bih=585#imgrc=PHQtswBC_k_uyM:

---

Fiz uma tabela: Regiões Administrativas + Estados + UF + Capitais do Brasil = [11]

---

Botafogo (Q894624) + Botafogo (Q50134346)

Existe repetido dois itens se referindo ao Bairro de Botafogo (é um bairro localizado na zona sul da Cidade do Rio de Janeiro), o item Botafogo(Q894624) e o item Botafogo(Q50134346). Somente hoje de noite que eu notei que são dois itens repetidos. Aqui no Wikidata se faz merge quando tem dois itens iguais se referindo ao mesmo assunto? Boa noite Ana Gauna (talk) 05:58, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Q62429926

Hello! I reverted your edit to Odete Muximpua (Q62429926) because date of birth (P569) requires a year, and I wanted to explain because I see that you have now made the same edit again. Please use birthday (P3150) if the year of birth is unknown. I would make this edit myself, but I do not know that the birthday is correct in the first place; a reference would be helpful if you have one. If you look at the diff, you will see that the date you entered was recorded in Wikidata as "+0025-09-00T00:00:00Z"; in other words, September in the year 25 CE, nearly 2000 years ago. Thank you for fixing this! --Jamie7687 (talk) 22:06, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jamie7687: I did? I'm sorry, it was a pure mistake, as I was trying to follow your suggestion.. But apparently I've done it again! Well, let's try this time... Thank you very much for taking the care to warn me (and for the suggestion on the revert!).--DarwIn (talk) 23:25, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

@Jamie7687: There seems to be widespread confusion about that.. :\ --DarwIn (talk) 13:52, 19 April 2019 (UTC)