Hi, I see that you've merged multiple items I've created recently. I definitively have a bug to correct in my script then. Thanks for these reviews!
User talk:Emu
@Framawiki You’re welcome! I’m not sure if you know but it’s generally a good idea to put Wikidata:Database reports/identical birth and death dates/1 on your watchlist after you create a batch of new items. Many duplicates will show up there (sometimes a few days later) making debugging easier.
Hi, @Emu! Any other tips you use to find duplicates? I noticed that you merged few items I created (thanks for cleaning up!) so I'm looking for the ways to either find and merge those myself or find existing items and not create duplicates in a first place.
@Flipping Switches A good idea is to look at Wikidata:Database reports/identical birth and death dates/1 in the days after creating new items. Alas, finding existing items can be quite hard, maybe try different spelling variants or even OpenRefine. The challenges are different depending on the subject matter or in the case of people also in their cultural and linguistic background, in their period of time and other. I noticed that you have created quite some items with Cyrillic names – I don't speak any Slavic language but from my experience, spelling variants and different languages (like UK and RU) are especially challenging.
Thanks. Yes, Cyrillic - I'm figuring out how to efficiently semi-automatically attach to Wikidata some existing articles from my local Wiki.
@Flipping Switches Maybe @M2k~dewiki can help, they have ample experience with those kind of things albeit (I think) not with Cyrillic script.
Indeed, there were still a lot of my mistakes on this page, I cleaned up. Sorry for the noise :)
@Framawiki I seems that your current method of merging leaves the duplicate without redirect. Quickstatements is sadly unreliable for this task. See Help:Merge for further help.
Thanks for the corrections.
{{Tr peoplelist 10}}, then template used in the report, needs to have the appropriate link then. I've switched to Special:MergeItems , is this one usable for this task? or only the gadget can do the job correctly?
@Framawiki I generally use the Merge gadget, see Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. I’m not really familiar with Special:MergeItems to be honest.
Hi, Emu, I would greatly appreciate your input here (the summary is in the ending) [[Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Please protect Peter C. Gøtzsche page, stop User:Valepert from deleting legitimate data]], thanks in advance and best regards. ~~~~
Hello, it has been a while. There are some issues around repurposed items that needed admin's power to resolve. 1) I very recently discovered duplicate item tool and have since properly re-established some repurposed items. I proposed the old items to be deleted but they all became redirects instead. I ask for your assistance to delete the numbers listed here and Q95340858. 2) Some repurposed items you deleted and were not re-established are somewhat notable in my view. I ask for the following items be established (efficiently without many edits).
Q13164199: Charles A. Mack III used to be a media personality in Taiwan. He has coverage for a Wikipedia article and an item could help accumulate data for a Google Knowledge Graph.
Q114243359: Tsai Shao-chung 蔡紹中 is son to prominent businessman Tsai Eng-meng and has been an active and high profile business executive.
Q107723651: Silvia Micu is a Romanian opera singer. She may be notable given her active career. ~~~~
@Seanetienne I don’t quite understand:
- Why do you think that Q95340858 shouldn’t be redirected to Q52896659? They seem to have the same meaning or did I miss something?
- Q13164199: Why do you mean by has coverage for a Wikipedia article? Is there a Wikipedia article? Either way, if you feel that Charles A. Mack III is notable, feel free to create an item and remember to include references. You don’t need an admin for that.
- Q114243359 and Q107723651: Again: If you feel that the subject is notable, please create an item with sources.
1) I think the repurposed items are deleted based on previous practice; such treatment should continue in order to remove the messed-up histories from regular viewing and apply to Q95340858 as well as those I listed on Infrastruktur's talk page. 2) What I mean is that the item "C. A. Mack III" (Q13164199) may meet notability since there are sufficient sources for a potential article (I am going to work on it). I think it would be more efficient if the new items are created with one single edit by duplicating from the old items instead of adding statements one by one. I have done so without inflating edit counts. I'd be glad to do it myself but those items are already deleted, and only admins can access them. I know there are advanced editing devices out there, but I do not have any coding background to operate them. So Frau Emu, please help me out.
Okay, I have deleted Q95340858.
As for Q13164199: So you want me to restore the item to allow you to duplicate the item and then to delete the item again because it was repurposed? Sorry, that seems a little convoluted to me. You can probably create the full item in under 20 minutes so I don’t see the need for this procedure.
It would be awkward if that were the case. Given the fact that the items are deleted, I was asking for the whole procedure be done by admin (for editing efficiency). But if Frau Emu does not want to proceed, I would then have no other choice but to establish the items from scratch by myself. Aside from these, at least delete these repurposed items please: Q52621626, Q42185833, Q52774676, Q105973335, Q52637016, Q10292669, Q14223370, Q25493687, Q65436153.
I would like to know if admins can identify deleted items' content without reviving them?
@Seanetienne If I remember correctly, I created items for all subject matters that I felt confident establishing notability – that’s not the case for Charles A. Mack III. I don’t necessarily think he isn’t notable, but I can’t be sure since I don’t have enough knowledge in this field of expertise.
I deleted the repurposed items per your request.
Admins can generally see deleted items (unless they were oversighted) but it’s harder to find a specific deleted concept. I don’t know if that answers your question though.
Thank you for deleting all those messes for me. I'll handle those items such as Charles A. Mack III by myself.
So even admins cannot determine the content of a deleted item unless undelete it first. Is my understanding correct? I asked this because I was looking for the deleted item which once hosted "Category:Taiwanese opera singers", a cat deleted for being empty. After comparing both deletion logs, I found that the deletions with the summary "Wikimedia category deleted" and closest in timing should be the candidates: Q9457765, Q24634864, Q32316967. I want the item back because I need it to host the now existing Chinese version of the category. The revival and continuity would be wonderful.
Admins can generally view deleted items including all revisions even without restoring them. It’s more complicated if the Qid number isn’t known. The three Qids you mentioned have nothing to do this “Category:Taiwanese opera singers” and I was not successful locating this deleted Qid.
Appreciate your efforts checking them out. I looked into another route for the first time and I realised that the item actually still exists. Sorry for adding your workload in vain... I have good news to share with you though. I just successfully used Quickstatements to efficiently create the items I previously mentioned. I therefore would have no further requests about restoring repurposed items from now on. Thank you for your time and efforts on me.
Hi. I was wondering why you deleted Lev Cameron https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q107597363
e.g. He has 2 million followers on instagram and is a famous dancer and actor
see eg.
https://www.famousbirthdays.com/people/lev-khmelev.html
https://nationaltoday.com/birthday/lev-cameron-khmelev
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm7568721/
Thanks
Sue
@QWER9875 Follower counts are generally considered to be irrelevant since they can easily be manipulated. The links you provided do not confer notability. In any case, I won’t restore Q107597363 since it was repurposed. Should Lev Cameron be notable (I have yet to see proof for that), a new items would have to be created.
Hello Emu, I need your help to undelete this item Q120111024. Content was '' Terrence Big Cheddar Young'' to edit the item and add enough notable source and description.
Please provide proof of notability here before I can consider restoring the item.
Hello, I do not understand why you deleted this person, I request you to restore it. I leave very serious source links below
Q121069477
Rojbin Erden https://g.co/kgs/vUsXsT
The page opened by the official big television channel for the actor;
https://m.showtv.com.tr/oyuncu/rojbin-erden/8009
https://amp.onedio.com/haber/gelsin-hayat-bildigi-gibi-dizisinin-melek-i-rojbin-erden-i-gelin-birlikte-yakindan-taniyalim-1097833
https://m.haberturk.com/gelsin-hayat-bildigi-gibi-nin-melek-i-rojbin-erden-kimdir-kac-yasinda-ve-aslen-nereli-rojbin-erden-hangi-dizilerde-oynadi-3525162-amp
https://www.mynet.com/gelsin-hayat-bildigi-gibi-nin-melek-i-rojbin-erden-kimdir-rojbin-erden-kimdir-kac-yasinda-ve-nereli-423233-mymagazin
https://www.sabah.com.tr/magazin/gelsin-hayat-bildigi-gibi-dizisinin-meleki-rojbin-erden-gelecek-donemin-starlari-aramizdan-cikacak-6164455
https://www.cnnturk.com/amp/magazin/merak-edildi-gelsin-hayat-bildigi-gibi-melek-kimdir-ghbg-melekin-gercek-adi-rojbin-erden-hangi-dizilerde-oynadi
https://www.diziler.com/kisi/rojbin-erden
https://dizilah.com/person/rojbin-erden/articles
https://www.turkishworld.org/rojbin-erden/?amp=1
I have evaluated the references you provided and came to the conclusion that they do not imply notability:
- irrelevant, Google Knowledge Graph
- Error 502
- user generated content (Onedio Üyesi)
- promotional, not editorial content
- promotional, not editorial content
- seems promotional
- seems promotional
- seems to be user-generated content
- empty
- not a serious website
All in all, the sources seem to be typical for Turkish-language spam items. Please keep in mind that I don't speak Turkish so I have to rely on automatic translation. Feel free to voice your opinions about my assessment but please consider reading User:Bovlb/How to create an item on Wikidata so that it won't get deleted first.
Do you call our actor rojbin erden page on the official website of Show TV, one of the 3 biggest channels in Turkey, a mistake, but call all newspaper articles about the actor paid content? are you okay?
irrelevant google information panel is the main cast player of the series you call. Are you sure you examined it carefully?
https://m.showtv.com.tr/oyuncu/rojbin-erden/8009
Please enter again, the link opens.
type rojbin erden on google, show tv appears on the first page, click on it
Rojbin Erden https://g.co/kgs/B5cu6i
you can review it in google global english
I'm sorry for my poor English, but please review it correctly, if this person is not a pr or something, this will already be obvious. You are wrong, please interpret correctly
@Deronmen I’m not comfortable with your choice of language and have therefore referred the matter to other admins. Feel free to join the debate here: Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Deletion_review_Rojbin_Erden.
Hello why did you delete this page? 🤔 I'm Ali Baradar Khodam Khosroshahi, I am writer from Iran. I have social media's I have official site I have too many writings in forums.taakroman.ir I am official ! Why did you delete my page 😐 This is my Instagram username: instagram.com/alikhosroshahi_notes This is my Telegram Channel username: t.me/alikhosroshahi_notes This is my official site https://alikhosroshahinotes.ir These are some writing from me in Persian https://forums.taakroman.ir/threads/25096/ https://forums.taakroman.ir/threads/25383/ https://forums.taakroman.ir/threads/25472/ https://forums.taakroman.ir/threads/25487/ And ... This is my book in Persian: https://rashaypub.ir/dbtech-ecommerce/%DA%A9%D8%AA%D8%A7%D8%A8-%D9%85%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%B1.17/
This is my biography in Persian https://virgool.io/@alikayh/%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%A8%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%87-%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%B9%D9%84%DB%8C-%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AF%D8%B1-%D8%AE%D8%AF%D8%A7%D9%85-%D8%AE%D8%B3%D8%B1%D9%88%D8%B4%D8%A7%D9%87%DB%8C-%D9%86%D9%88%DB%8C%D8%B3%D9%86%D8%AF%D9%87-dkzhjj2rdmbh
What do you need anymore? 🤔
Those sources seem to be user-generated content and/or paid reporting. Please read the following pages and provide better resources or explain how the resources you mentioned fit our notability criteria:
Blij dat ik kon helpen bij deze "moeilijke" dame. Zou je er voor kunnen zorgen dat haar geboortedatum in 1916 bovenaan komt te staan, want dat is toch de enig juiste. Bron daarvoor is [https://hdl.handle.net/21.12124/A1941A56A42E4EB0B0CE3BC266F29BA2 10-jaarstabel[, waarin zij alle drie de zusjes worden genoemd. Gezien de geboortedatum van Betty Tal is het onmogelijk dat Karach in mei is geboren , Groet,~~~~
@Ceescamel Sorry, I don’t speak Dutch, but Google Translate tells me that you want the correct value to be on top of Q104599686#P569. I have changed the order of the statements accordingly. We should keep the wrong birth year because there are sources that show this incorrect life date.
There is actually some evidence that Feder-Tal died 10 October 2015 in Jerusalem. I tried to contact the maintainer of the family tree on Ancestry.
It's exactly what i meanr, thank you,~~~~
Hi Emu,
Since the discussion on deletion of Q113531294 was closed, and as you edited it since, I figured I would ask this here.
In relation to the edits you made to remove some statements, I'm not sure I understand for which types of information an independent citation is required (in general). For some of the statements, however, there are independent sources (not controlled by me in any way) which could be used.
But if being discussed in local media establishes notability, then there are some examples of that: 1, 2 (there are some other stories about that case), 3, etc. These sources are editorial in nature and weren't controlled or written by me (there are some others as well).
For languages spoken (which don't usually don't have references, as far as I can see on other pages?). The first two stories indicate directly that I speak French (being a story to a significant extent specifically about that fact). Does being quoted in English in another count as proving that I speak English? Those should all be independent sources if they are really needed for that kind of statement.
That I attended McGill University can be referenced to McGill itself (1, 2). This may not be "serious" in the sense of being editorial in nature, but I think it's reasonable to say that McGill is an authority on who its alumni are.
As for nationality and date of birth — do those really need to be referenced independently? (They also seem not to be referenced on many of the items I see...) WP:ABOUTSELF on the English Wikipedia allows for information to be sourced to the subject for birth date and country of nationality (being mundane data about the subject), so long as the claims made are not exceptional.
As not to edit war you on this, I hope you will add back the statements which are verified by those independent sources. D. Benjamin Miller (talk) 10:16, 6 July 2023 (UTC)
The problem of such items have been discussed many times and also in the RfD process: It’s the promotional and/or vanity value that is derived from the fact that somebody is an avid contributor to Wikimedia projects (which is not an adequate distinction). According to MisterSynergy’s suggestion we shall limit the promotional or vanity impact of such items by (in my words at the time) “heightened scrutiny of sources for non-trivial statements”. I think this is a sound policy. I have reinstated several statements with the sources you provided (and also the English language statement) but I do think that date of birth (P569) , place of birth (P19) and country of citizenship (P27) statements add another layer of possible value to the item that would require serious sources. Since this suggestion has – to my knowledge – never been seriously challenged nor formalized, people might have different opinions on that. We would probably need another forum (maybe WD:PC) to decide whether those statements should in fact be included absent independent sources.
I guess the question then would be what would be the line between trivial and non-trivial statements in general, in addition to the extent to which they might be promotional in nature. Of course, there are places where these items (birthdate, nationality) get sourced explicitly to independent sources, but usually they seem to just be unreferenced (which to me would indicate general triviality).
I understand the notion that a university degree, award or other qualification should reasonably be subject to increased scrutiny. Alan Mcilwraith would need sources he could never produce, for instance, while a major celebrity might say "I attended X University" and have that be good enough.
But I'm not sure of the promotional value or non-triviality for the very basic biographical data. I looked at the English Wikipedia policy to compare (since we don't have anything here which seems to define what is trivial as a matter of policy, and English Wikipedia is more strict than Wikidata in most ways, as far as I know), and its standard of unexceptionability seemed to make sense to me for defining what might make a claim trivial. That would mean that birthdate, place of birth and citizenship would generally be trivial and wouldn't need independent sourcing if not factually contentious. Obviously Wikidata is not English Wikipedia, but (as far as I know...) similar standards exist on other Wikimedia projects in general.
While birthdate/birthplace/citizenship data are of course very much verifiable in theory (considering that virtually everyone has government-issued documents proving them), they are still in many cases not stated in independent sources even for people who have a great deal of media coverage and who are undoubtedly notable. Government-issued documents are surely independent sources, but we wouldn't generally expect them to be put directly online even for many people who are straightforwardly notable. (E.g., on English Wikipedia, a birthday is often sourced to a "happy birthday to me" post by the subject, etc., or a birthplace to a statement made by the subject, but I've yet to see anyone — OK, maybe one person — post their birth certificate to prove it.)
While it's only a proposed policy (according to the page), Wikidata:Verifiability says, "Self-published information (for example, personal blogs) are acceptable sources of information when they are used to support statements about their authors and the information is clearly not self-serving." I read this to mean something similar to how the slightly more elaborate English Wikipedia policy puts it.
Also, here is another independent source: Luc Devroye's profile of my font work (which I didn't write/control) mentions my year of birth (though not my birthdate), and "New York" as my birthplace (though this is more ambiguous than what was in the statement). The university-related references also corroborate the age statement (although they don't state it outright), since I was of a unusual age to be attending at that time. The US birthplace also implies US citizenship (unless the rare exception for the children of diplomats were to apply), though the Hungarian citizenship is not mentioned there.
As I said, another forum might be in order. Just two observations:
- en.wp policy isn’t applicable here because the specific problem of marginal notability does not exist there (I don’t think that the sources you provided are enough for WD:N #2 notability, so there’s only the Commons category)
- I’m not really sure why you seem to be dead set to have all that information about yourself on Wikidata. If it’s that important, somebody else will take care of this. Yes, I know that Wikidata:Autobiography doesn’t prohibit your behavior but that doesn’t mean you should engage in it.
I agree that a general clarification could be helpful.
Certainly we agree that en.wp policies are not directly applicable to Wikidata, which is a non-Wikipedia project which operates differently from any Wikipedia. It was meant only as a point of comparison.
My understanding was also be that the cause for this has to do with the credibility of claims made by marginally notable people about themselves. This ties in with the notion from the Wikidata proposed policy that information could be subject-sourced if not self-serving; this avoids the fabricated-biography problem (whereas with major public figures we assume that the sources will fact-check the claims more).
As for the info being included: I agree that it's less structurally important per se than the item itself existing (since, after all, the metadata tags all still work). These data are found on virtually all person items for which they are available, though, are considered neutral and — most importantly to me — have a significant disambiguatory purpose. There are a lot of people (a bunch in Wikidata and many more in the world at large) with whom I share my name. Including the basic biographical data (when available) makes it clearer that we're distinct people. These are, after all, the recommended core person-statements...
FYI, I just upgraded their block to the whole site. I'd like to understand why that wasn't done earlier considering they were unreceptive to your concerns.
@Jasper Deng The main problem from my perspective wasn’t their edit history or their poor communication style per se, it was the combination, i. e. their continued reluctance or inability to discuss questionable edits in a timely and civil manner and then act accordingly.
I also try not to suppress critical voices by blocking beyond the absolutely necessary. I also generally ignored the pings when Matlin felt the need to tell other users how I am responsible for their inability to participate.
On a more general note, I think that there is probably too little questioning of admin power on Wikidata. That might of course be because the admin corps generally works well (which it does). We also try to enlist many advanced users to join our ranks. But I sometimes find it curious that there is seemingly so little discontent with my decisions, so I generally try to be extra careful in situations where I am being criticized.
That being said, I don’t object to you upgrading the block. The user’s behavior probably warrants the rationale you’ve given on the log.