User talk:Eihel/2020

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Voter eligibility

Wasn't this Masum's 100th non-automated Wikidata edit? Deryck Chan (talk) 13:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

@Deryck Chan: [1] and here, the non-automated edits with Qs. It shouldn't be a non-automated edit.—Eihel (talk) 14:29, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Aren't we supposed to count non-automated edits in Property, Lexeme and discussion (Wikidata:, * talk:) namespaces too? Deryck Chan (talk) 15:02, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

See Special:Diff/1125416329. I think it's all pages… —Eihel (talk) 15:28, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix

Hi Eihel, This is a mistake of mine because I am used to drag a text from one field to another, and until past Thursday, it automatically was copied instead of cut from where I dragged it (and I am still not used to that). Romaine (talk) 14:53, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Yes dear @Romaine:, no problem: I had thought of that too. —Eihel (talk) 14:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Resolving Property_talk:P7963#type_constraint

Please respond on Property_talk:P7963#type_constraint so we can resolve this matter. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 23:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Voting

Hi, I see you created a voting page for a candidate for CU rights. However I think you/we should not create pages before the candidate accept with the request. At least in my home wiki (fiwiki) all request for permissions pages will be removed if created without approval from candidate first. But now when it's there already, let it be and hope that the candidate will answer soon yes or no. Stryn (talk) 08:32, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Stryn
If the sysop application page indicates that it must not be transclued before acceptance, the application page for CU does not indicate this. If you don't want it to happen again, you can change the header. In any case, here, applying for another candidate on the request page is common practice (see archives). A SWMT colleague has already done so. Other wiki, other practices. Personally, I would like someone typically WD an active Wikidata contributor to be CU. —Eihel (talk) 08:46, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

It is common sense that we should discuss with users before nominating them for advanced rights. Even without changing the header nobody should do it, plus I don't see what you just said about sysop application anywhere on that page. And what do you mean by "A SWMT colleague had already done so."? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:08, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

1997kB Do you mean I don't use WD:UCS? purely rhetorical question —Eihel (talk) 14:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

You do, but in this case surely you didn't. Instead you called nominations non-typical WD users and then without discussing with Romaine first, you nominated him so that there could be a nomination against those so called non-typical users as early as possible. If you have any issues with those users, you should resolve that with them, but this vengeance is surely no good for anyone. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 13:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

A few days for closing old files

1997kB After you doubt my perception of common sense, you think I am taking vengeance. I rather think that you extrapolate far too much. I think, and other Wikidatians think, that people directly related to Wikidata are more predisposed candidates. Other projects are hosting local CUs and that doesn't seem to be a problem. First think that we are all on the same boat before we think that one is part of a dissidence. If it were another project, I would not do what you call "vengeance". Wikidata welcomes experts at all levels and this task can very well be fulfilled by more than one Wikidatian. Let's be clear, finding an IP or range on an iw LTA or spam is not very difficult. Only this charge is followed by a clanical and opaque sense without reason and I think that the good wills and installed of the various projects should be better received, even accompanied. For example, I was also thinking of Mahir256, who is part of the seraglio and who is also an interesting candidate. Vandalism on WD is important, but of low magnitude by each vandal and I bet that non-local CUs can be exceeded. My opinions and my choices verify my way of thinking and do not correspond to your accusations: do you understand candidate ≠ contributor. If the candidates felt cheated (@Sotiale, Jasper Deng:), once again the comments of my votes are proof that I have absolutely nothing against them. In this sense, I am happy that User: علاء is part of the CUs. At the sight of certain votes concerning the candidacy of User: Romaine, I am really sorry for the turn that it took. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 13:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Eihel, Don't worry! It feels great to hear that what I do is appreciated by others. Too often people expect that other people know this, but many do not realize it that they are appreciated. I have seen various users on nl-wiki who are hugely appreciated, but get strongly demotivated as result of criticism by only a couple of people.

Also I must say that I was happy that in full sight I was able to give my opinion about the too often overly negative approach towards users with (getting) roles I have seen over the past years.

To me what matters, and I think this should count for everyone, is that you had a positive approach, something we should have more. :-) Romaine (talk) 13:33, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Your behaviour

I like to point that you calling (1, 2) current CU noms a non-typical WD user is not acceptable. They are serving this project from a long time and have enough "typical" WD experience to be a typical WD user. These shenanigans you playing towards specific users is not great. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 09:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Oops, I meant active, 1997kB. "typical" was really not appropriate. —Eihel (talk) 10:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

WD:CHECK

Hey, Special:Diff/1174337769 will not work as cases will be subpages of main page already and archiving them doesn't make sense to me. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:50, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

For that reason Wikidata:Requests for checkuser/Archive/2020 is unnecessary, so If you don't have any objection, can I delete it? ‐‐1997kB (talk) 15:16, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hey too 1997kB Please, would you be so kind as to look at this, when done, look at this. When you click Edit, all requests are tidy : __TOC__ … … … {{Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/1997kB}} … … So I don't see where the problem is. Especially since the other archive pages are named "Archive", not "Archives" (it's a CC from another wiki). Before, the archive page was only the first steps; I improved. The other way does the same, but there is no automatic archiving… and it is especially less pretty. My changes are therefore completely legitimate. —Eihel (talk) 15:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

In the above diff you added settings for bot archiving that page, while as we can see those permission pages are not archived by bot. So I am confused what are you trying to implement. Also I am not against naming that page 'Archive' but that setup is used by bot archiving pages. So if we gonna do it by hand why not keep it simple. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

1997kB, I allow requests to this page to be archived by a bot. In this section, you start by writing to me that it is a sub-page. Then I show you your archived sub-page. But it still doesn't suit you; you erase my work by retorting: while as we can see those permission pages are not archived by bot. Uh, if you delete my work, it's obvious. If you are talking about a permission page, be aware that WD:AN is not a "permission page", but that it has archive lines by the same bot (SpBot). Since you claim to be using WD:UCS, I suggest that you will restore my work shortly and I could write to you that this page is archived by bot! You persist in writing to me: that setup is used by bot archiving pages. No, all the pages archived in this project are named Archive: Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive, Wikidata:Bureaucrats' noticeboard/Archive, etc. (ps. WD:BN is not a "permission page" either). And yes, all Archive pages can contain bot editions. If you are confused, I am even more confused by your actions. —Eihel (talk) 13:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Then I show you your archived sub-page. — Firstly what you showed is a permission request page, which is archived manually. Secondly the way you set-up the archiving settings is way too much for that page since I don't think there will be enough request that it will require a separate page each month. In the end if you think "that way" is what it will be just because everything should be identical despite the actual need for that page, start discussion at Wikidata talk:Requests for checkuser. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 14:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Mind giving me a hand

Keep an eye on Connie Glynn (Q55510399). I don't have time to whack-a-mole with this guy --Trade (talk) 00:23, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Ok. On Watchlist. Txs Trade. —Eihel (talk) 00:26, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Fralambert blocked the user —Eihel (talk) 00:47, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Space

Hi! Even after your edit the date is still not showing. Do you know what may be the problem? Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 08:37, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

look again @Nadzik: —Eihel (talk) 08:40, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Okay, now it works. Thanks! Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 09:03, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it was already done 13 minutes before your first message on my TP… —Eihel (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, I clicked a link from the notification and saw that it didn't work. After brewing a cup of coffe I came back to write you a message about it, I didn't see that made another edit. No need to be rude. Cheers! Nadzik (talk) 09:20, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Nadzik:

I did not want to offend you, but admit that the process is not very consistent. A sentence starting with "Prior to" and followed by a comma, we want to answer "Prior to what". On WD, when you see a template that does not work, instead of ignoring it, add tl after the first 2 braces. Consequently, you will have an idea of the formation of the text, but you will especially have the link to the template to see how to use it.

Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 07:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Vitesse et précipitation

Bonjour,

Je viens de voir passer https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Project_chat&diff=prev&oldid=1227343779 et je dois dire que c'est pour le moins étrange. Déjà le fait de proposer à une personne de se présenter et le rendre public avant son acceptation me semble être de la précipitation malvenue. Mais en plus, la tournure non neutre dudit message est du démarchage (canvassing) qui est globalement condamné sur les projets Wiki.

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 19:25, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Bonsoir @VIGNERON:,

Je vous remercie de m'interpeller. Exactement, je m'apprêtais à le présenter, à moins qu'il ne l'eût fait lui-même (ce que j'ai écrit sur sa page). Maintenant que vous m'écrivez, il est vrai que ma démarche sonne clairement comme du démarchage, mais ce n'était pas mon intention. Auriez-vous l'amabilité de m'excuser pour cet écrit malheureux ? Effectivement, à la recherche d'un sysop et presque obnubilé par ça, Hiàn était un bon candidat. Pour qu'il en prenne conscience, je voulais que d'autres l'aident à se lancer. Ce n'était pas une demande pour voter Pour, mais avec mes œillères, j'ai fait un mauvais calcul. Encore une fois, mille excuses. Cordialement. —Eihel (talk) 20:02, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Bonjour,

Pas de problème et sans rancune. Je n'en reste pas moins intrigué par cette démarche et surtout par sa prémisse : y a-t-il vraiment un manque d'admin ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 08:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Bonjour @VIGNERON:, Une réponse : Stewardry. Pour moi il n'y a aucun doute. Vous y pensez…? —Eihel (talk) 01:59, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Pas sûr de bien comprendre la question mais presque quasiment sûr que la réponse est non. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:20, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Revert of Q423221

Hi,

You reverted my changes on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q423221 I am the president of the Chamilo Association and one of the founders of the project (see https://chamilo.org/en/chamilo/), so I am quite the person to fill this page correctly, so I was surprised when I saw my changes were reverted without an explanation. Would you mind helping me doing it the right way?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ywarnier (talk • contribs) at 13:01‎, 20 July 2020 (UTC).

Edit: I have re-applied a more synthesized version of my changes. Please do respond before just reverting my changes. Those changes are factual and I can vouch for it in the name of the Chamilo Association (which is a registered organization with a board of directors). Thanks.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ywarnier (talk • contribs) at 15:20‎, 28 July 2020 (UTC).

Hello @Ywarnier:,
Thank you for contributing to Wikidata. The changes you made were to Descriptions, official website (P856) and inception (P571). Each had problems:

• Regarding the descriptions, they do not respect the conventions described on this page. The precision of the Descriptions tends to suggest spamming. Information such as owned by (P127), copyright license (P275), based on (P144), official blog URL (P1581) should appear as Statements, but if you want to write text, edit Wikipedia pages.
• Regarding official website (P856), you generated 2 additional constraint errors. single-best-value constraint (Q52060874) specifies that this property:
  • can only contain a single value or
  • contains different qualifiers or
  • have a deprecated rank.

It is suggested to add language of work or name (P407) as well. But in addition, 2 of your entries do not match the description of the property: URL of the official homepage of an item.

• Regarding inception (P571), the date is simply wrong.

If you are who you claim to be on your personal page, you shouldn't make a mistake. A username doesn't allow everything.

I have nothing to say about the last modifications except that the es description is too long. Remember to sign your messages. I wish you a good continuation in the edition. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 12:41, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Eihel: I have reviewed the constraint errors but I'm stuck with the version identifier statement, which the constraint validator tells me is "is not a valid regular expression". However, the regular expression itself comes from the wikidata form. I'm not stating it myself. What should I do? I tried "1.11.12" and "v1.11.12" and they match the regular expression that appears, but somehow this generated a constraint error of type "Bad parameter"  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ywarnier (talk • contribs) at 8:44‎, 8 September 2020 (UTC).

Hello @Ywarnier:, My reply is going to be very simple: don't worry about it. Because you are in the following case: It’s possible that the item is a rare, but legitimate exception to the constraint, and nothing should be done.

Historical explanations

Initially, a bot added a format constraint (Q21502404) with a format as a regular expression (P1793) for this property. Then 2 contributors worked to make it more specific: @Verdy p, Matěj Suchánek:. This is to their credit. But there are incompatibility issues between the flavors in Wikidata. If your id is running under PCRE, it still causes a violation. (Aside. Personally, when I add a RegEx in Wikidata, I stop at negative lookbehind assertions; this way, I have a better chance of not causing violations. POSIX patterns are not allowed in WD)
Then in May of this year, another contributor, Manu1400, got around the problem by adding another very permissive constraint. It's really not a good way to do (and there are contributors who cause violations with his RegEx ?!). So there is a violation, but your id is correct. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 12:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

		The Wikidata Barnstar
		I just want to say I'm sorry for any trouble I have caused you in the past; I have no bad intentions. Please forgive me. Your work on WD is great, and please keep it up! Regards, Prahlad (tell me all about it / private venue) (Please {{ping}} me) 03:11, 28 August 2020 (UTC)

Notification de traduction : Template:Hello

Bonjour, Eihel,

Vous recevez cette notification parce que vous vous êtes inscrit comme traducteur en français sur Wikidata. La page Template:Hello est prête à être traduite. Vous pouvez la traduire ici :

• traduire en français

Cette page a une priorité moyenne.

Votre aide est grandement appréciée. Les traducteurs comme vous aident Wikidata à fonctionner comme une véritable communauté multilingue.

Vous pouvez modifier vos préférences de notification.

Merci !

Les coordinateurs de traduction de Wikidata‎, 19:10, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of references

Hi Eihel,

Can you stop deleting references from Wikidata? This is not appreciated. --- Jura 18:01, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Jura1:,

What I put is a reference. Can you go on Talk:Q29934236#Hide errors… under the carpet and tell me why you undo which seems logical? To cancel my work is not to appreciate, indeed. —Eihel (talk) 18:11, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

Property:P854

Sorry, here I was a bit quick in editing and I confused properties... Thanks for noticing! - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:20, 25 October 2020 (UTC)

Filmstarts title ID (P8531)

May I ask why you reverted my additions to Filmstarts title ID (P8531)? Trivialist (talk) 06:22, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

I gave a reply on Property talk:P8531#Your modification. Again, sorry about the rb instead of mw-undo. —Eihel (talk) 06:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

No problem; it's easy for one's finger to slip. :) Trivialist (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2020 (UTC)

Templates translation

Hi!

A few months ago you supported a proposal I wrote at mw:Global templates/Discuss. Thank you very much for that!

An essential part of that big project is now a community wish: m:Community Wishlist Survey 2021/Translation/Templates translation.

It would be very nice if you could vote for it, and invite your friends to do the same.

Thanks! :) --Amir E. Aharoni {{🌎🌍🌏}} talk 19:13, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.