Welcome edit


Welcome to Wikidata, FakirNL!

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! The Anonymouse (talk | contribs) 21:16, 15 February 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Milan – San Remo is not a tennis tournament. edit

Milan – San Remo (Q3313977) is not a tennis tournament, it's a cycling race. Why did you change that? - FakirNL (talk) 22:45, 20 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Oh sorry, I don't why I change this item. I make modifications for tennis project, and I don't know why I bump into this item… Sorry, and thank you for the correction. Regards — Hawk-Eye (talk) 06:38, 21 March 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deletion edit

If you want to request the deletion of a merged item, please request it at WD:Requests for deletions. Thanks! The Anonymouse (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Please accept my nomination here. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:46, 28 May 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Congratulations, Dear Administrator! edit

English | español | français | Nederlands | русский | +/−

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades... (our gift is better than the one at Commons or Meta)

You have your gun; now here's your badge: {{User admin}}/{{#babel:admin}} and {{Admin topicon}}. Enjoy!

FakirNL, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Wikidata. Please take a moment to read the Wikidata:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Wikidata:Project chat, Wikidata:Requests for comment, and Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings, or modifications of protected pages.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikidata-admin @ irc.freenode.net. If you need access, you can flag someone down at @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Wikidata:Guide to Adminship to be useful reading. You may also want to consider adding yourself to meta:Template:Wikidata/Ambassadors, and to any similar page on your home wiki if one exists. (Check Wikipedia:Wikidata/Wikidatans (Q14964498).)

Please also add/update the languages you speak to your listing at Wikidata:List of administrators. You may also like to add your username to this list if you would not like that items you delete at RfD get marked as deleted automatically.

Sorry for being so late but apparently nobody else was unlazy enough for pasting this initial introduction before. This is probably a sign how much we indeed need you on this site! Again, welcome to the admin corps! --Vogone (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sicyopterus halei (Q1383835) edit

Please undo this merge. These are different species. --Succu (talk) 14:11, 25 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Sicyopterus halei is now at Q1383835 and Sicyopterus lagocephalus at Q644014. I have removed the link to the French article w:fr:Bichique though, because that page states it's about the common name for two species. - FakirNL (talk) 00:10, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reason I assumed that these two species were the same was the fact that on English Wikipedia w:en:Sicyopterus halei redirects to w:en:Sicyopterus lagocephalus. So if these species are distinct, you might want to change that as well. - FakirNL (talk) 00:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hymenocaris vermicauda (Q15198276) edit

Never merge different ranks. Move site links if necessary. Please undo this merge. --Succu (talk) 07:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I merged page Q15198276 with Q2615922 because they were about the same genus, and I still think so. Let's compare the first sentences of the English and Dutch page:
English: "Hymenocaris is a genus of Cambrian crustaceans."
Dutch: "Hymenocaris is een uitgestorven geslacht van kreeftachtigen." (Hymenocaris is an extinct genus of crustaceans.)
Looks like the same subject to me! - FakirNL (talk) 10:34, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It's a monotypic genus, but we need an item for both ranks (species and genus). Now the item points to itself: Markierung: self-referencing (see parent taxon (P171)). The sitelinks should go to the species item. --Succu (talk) 11:22, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've undeleted Q15198276 so you can establish that item as one for the species (should be without a Wikipedia-link though). - FakirNL (talk) 11:32, 9 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wrong merge edit

Hi FakirNL, please restore 1919 in radio (Q16831988). The item was about radio. The item you merged it with is about broadcasting (radio + televion). --Kolja21 (talk) 13:52, 28 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you are really sure that the German "Rundfunk"-items should be different from the English/Portuguese/Scandinavian items, there are 95 more items to separate (see German category). - FakirNL (talk) 14:04, 28 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, I know. The year 1919 wouldn't be a problem, but if you look at 2014 in broadcasting (Q15485842) you see that we can't merge broadcasting with radio and televison at the same time. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:37, 28 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, it seems we have quite some work to do then, splitting off the Rundfunk-items for years 1920-20something... - FakirNL (talk) 09:59, 29 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Phaenanthoecium koestlinii (Q15138231) edit

An older merge mixed the species item with the genus item. Please resore the item and move links instead. Thanks. --Succu (talk) 18:14, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  Done. Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator something for you? - FakirNL (talk) 19:18, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for asking, but deleting merged items is a little bit boring. ;) Maybe later. Regards --Succu (talk) 19:46, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If you are an administrator, you can merge items and automatically delete them! - FakirNL (talk) 21:48, 31 July 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge-project edit

Hallo, I am working on the merge project you mentioned on my talk page. What should be done with the definite false positives? If I just leave these items in the list as they are they will never be removed. E.g Anastasius I (Q134682) - Anastasius I (Q173470) are listed as potential items for merge but they refer to two different persons. Csigabi (talk) 11:58, 2 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Csigabi: False positives should be put on User:Pasleim/whitelist. Both merge projects use that whitelist. - FakirNL (talk) 12:26, 2 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Now moved to Wikidata:Do not merge. - FakirNL (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

about merging different name variants edit

Hello, you deleted Jurgen (Q16909265). Please see Special:WhatLinksHere/Q16909265 and note that there are people items linking to the name variant Jurgen which you merged into Jürgen (Q2670311) with the comment "same name". You also did this with the south-african variant "Jurgens" Yevdokym (Q11979566).

I don't think this is good, because now – eg. at Jurgen van den Goorbergh (Q2189825) and Jurgen Van Goolen (Q1330316) – you only have the options to remove the given name (P735) claims (which were perfectly valid before), or to replace them with "Jürgen" (which is a related variant, but factually wrong). Speaking for the German handling of such names i can say that variants are handled separately, not only in passports and other official documents (maybe we tend more to keep original language spellings than some other countries?).

If you think that different name variants (i mean different spellings, not slightly different transcriptions because of an other writing system like Japanese) should generally be merged into one item, then this is relevant to many other name items and probably needs broad discussion. And i think this would lead to many conflicts because especially larger Wikipedias have also pages for many variants, not only for the most popular form of a name, see eg. the P460 list at Johannes (Q2117521).

Maybe you can rethink your merge of Jürgen/Jurgen/Jurgens? Holger1959 (talk) 09:22, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As long as no language edition has more than one page I prefer merging. Feel free to ask someone else (maybe a more seasoned/experienced user) for a second opinion though. I'm not the expert here. - FakirNL (talk) 10:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
the problem is, you deleted items which still are used (have links to them). so you have to care about this part, or you don't have to delete them. Holger1959 (talk) 12:41, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I have restored Jurgen (Q16909265). - FakirNL (talk) 12:55, 3 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Paravespula edit

Look the discussion about (sub)genus on User talk:Succu, and unmerge the items. --Infovarius (talk) 19:55, 23 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merging and deleting an item in one task is a nogo for me. BTW: your edit comment is wrong. --Succu (talk) 20:01, 23 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Infovarius, Succu: I merged these items based on the English and Dutch pages that were both about the same subgenus (hence the merge comment). I turns out the Dutch sitelink (and the English description) were on the wrong item. Unmerged and fixed.
Also, I'm sorry to tell you that I won't stop merging and deleting items in one task. In the last three months I have merged and deleted over five thousands items and it would be a huge burden upon the rest of the community to constantly require others to delete them (let alone check each merge when I'm sure over 99.5% are correct). The more efficient thing would probably to go to WD:RFA and request to perform the undeletions yourself in the future. - FakirNL (talk) 20:17, 26 August 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gastrique edit

Weet je zeker dat deze samenvoeging goed is? Het Nederlandse artikel gaat niet over hetzelfde, het Franse begrip wordt daarin maar kort behandeld en wordt beschreven als een "geheel ander product". Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 10:48, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ik las iets met azijn in allebei de eerste zinnen en toen leek het me hetzelfde, maar het is eigenlijk ook wel iets anders dus ik heb het samenvoegen teruggedraaid. Het Nederlandse artikel vind ik eerlijk gezegd wat verwarrend. - FakirNL (talk) 10:52, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Er schijnt een Belgische en Franse gastrique te zijn, zie hier onder de G. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:07, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Zie ook de nieuwe doorverwijspagina: nl:Gastrique. - FakirNL (talk) 11:20, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Top! Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:47, 20 September 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Bugatti changes reverted edit

Hi Fakir, I reverted your changes on Bugatti 8-cylinder line (Q17308668) and Bugatti Type 30 (Q3646636) since, despite the names of these WP articles, their contents actually refer to the whole line of cars, not only to one single model. This same discussion arises every time someone new looks at Ivan's reports :)

On another topic, I believe I encountered some cases where you had deleted items that you had recently merged. If I'm not mistaken, it might be worth for you to have a look at Wikidata:Requests for comment/Redirect vs. deletion, the consensus seems to go toward redirecting most merged items, rather than deleting them. This is still being discussed, though. LaddΩ chat ;) 20:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Laddo. About the Bugatti, the German article starts with "Bugatti Type 30 ist die Bezeichnung für ein Fahrzeugmodell des Automobilherstellers Bugatti" which translates to "Bugatti Type 30 est le nom d'un modèle de voiture du constructeur automobile Bugatti" in French, so at first sight it looks like it's about the Type 30 only (though later in the page it indeed mentions the variants); somewhat the same for Swedish page. If you are certain you never want this 'error' (false positive) to appear in Ivan's reports again, you can add them to the whitelist at Wikidata:Do not merge, but be careful, because it will never appear again.
About the redirecting versus deleting, you are correct about the fact that I delete many items and I will probably keep doing that until consensus is reached that redirecting is better than deleting. I hadn't seen this Request for comment yet, so thanks for mentioning it. I'll take a look at it and give my opinion there. - FakirNL (talk) 10:24, 17 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
P.S. Laddo, I saw you writing "Removed one deleted item - but with an edit, all links to shortcuts will be updated (become green)" in an edit summary. You know you can always purge the page to update it without making an edit? More information at w:fr:Aide:Purge du cache. - FakirNL (talk) 13:53, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for the hint, but I tried multiple times purging the cache over the last weeks and it didn't work. Recent redirects are colored properly only upon a new edit on the page - can't guess why. However I figured just recently that I can just "preview" the edit of the page - with no edit yet - and the green coloring appears. So finally I won't be doing silly one-liner edits of that sort anymore :) I really appreciate your comment, though, such hints are very useful to improve our effectiveness on WD. Cheers -- LaddΩ chat ;) 14:49, 18 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Appeared in 2013 edit

Please provide the criterium which categories should go to Category:2013 establishments (Q18325981) and which to Category:2013 establishments (Q6445637). Because I suppose that they either should be all linked together or separation should be different. --Infovarius (talk) 19:13, 21 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I was told the Belorussian word "Зьявіліся" (old-be) or "З'явіліся" (new-be) means "appeared". On be-wiki they also have categories for "Заснаваны" which I've been told mean "founded". Because "founded" more closely resembles gegründet/established/fondation it was obvious that the Belorussian categories with "Заснаваны" should be linked to the "established" (etc.) ones. The fact that be:Катэгорыя:Заснаваны ў 2013 годзе does not exist yet doesn't change that. - FakirNL (talk) 19:22, 21 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
But look at Category:Establishments by year (Q7163273). --Infovarius (talk) 19:24, 27 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2006 and 2012 European Artistic Gymnastics Championships edit

About this and this.

I think there's no need for separate articles just because some of them are disambiguation pages and some are content pages. (And actually, this one is more than a disambiguation page: [1].

The men's and women's championships are officially regarded as separate competitions. But in fact, they are usually held at the same arena, and people don't think about them as separate events. That's why in some languages there are two separate articles and in some there is only one covering both. I searched Wikipedia and found many such occasions and linked them with disambiguation pages cause it's convenient for everyone. --Moscow Connection (talk) 03:01, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If one of them is a disambiguation page, and the other isn't, then the articles are definitely different and in my opinion should have different Wikidata-items. Maybe ask the Wikidata:Project chat whether there is an existing guideline or consensus about this? - FakirNL (talk) 10:45, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here: Wikidata:Project chat#Different article types in one Wikidata_item. --Moscow Connection (talk) 13:32, 29 October 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

iw from 'Categoria:Opere letterarie del #' to enwiki edit

Useful list? User:Steenth/Sandkasse5: It's easy make a list like this for some issues. --Steenth (talk) 12:55, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, it looks pretty useful! What's the easiest way to make lists like this? - FakirNL (talk) 13:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From a category like ' it: Category: Opere letter aria per annum I use it to find a list of categories. The next step is to check interwiki links to other wiki and check Wikidata-id. I use command line scripts on toollabs, so it is easy there. If you wish to items .. --Steenth (talk) 15:00, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Polish list seems to be longer then the Italian one so that one is even more useful, also check for false positives with Spanish. And there is another list that keeps popping up (and should be finished rather this week then next). So if you have the time, I would like to see these three lists. Tusinder tak på forhånd! - FakirNL (talk) 15:15, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • PL: 'Kategoria:Utwory literackie z #' — EN: 'Category:# books'
  • ES: 'Categoría:Obras literarias de #' — EN: 'Category:# books'
  • FR: 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — 'Category:Populated places established in #'
Done --Steenth (talk) 15:58, 11 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Steenth:, I think I have solved all of them. But I have made a list of queries that would establish with quite some certainty that at least these "administrative divisions" and "literary works"-categories have all been done. So if you find the time could you maybe run these comparisons? There are fifteen in total, and hopefully none of them will yield any results. - FakirNL (talk) 14:34, 14 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • FR 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — EN 'Category:Populated places established in #'
  • FR 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — NO 'Kategori:Befolkede områder etablert i #
  • FR 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — RU 'Категория:Населённые пункты, основанные в # году'
  • FR 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — EN 'Category:States and territories established in #'
  • FR 'Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #' — ES 'Categoría:Estados y territorios fundados en #'
  • ITWIKI 'Categoria:Opere letterarie del #' — VI 'Thể loại:Sách #'
  • ITWIKI 'Categoria:Opere letterarie del #' — EN 'Category:# books'
  • GLWIKI 'Categoría:Obras literarias de #' — VI 'Thể loại:Sách #'
  • GLWIKI 'Categoría:Obras literarias de #' — EN 'Category:# books'
  • ESWIKI 'Categoría:Obras literarias de #' — VI 'Thể loại:Sách #'
  • ESWIKI 'Categoría:Obras literarias de #' — EN 'Category:# books'
  • PLWIKI 'Kategoria:Utwory literackie z #' — VI 'Thể loại:Sách #'
  • PLWIKI 'Kategoria:Utwory literackie z #' — EN 'Category:# books'
  • ITWIKISOURCE 'Categoria:Opere letterarie del #' — VI 'Thể loại:Sách #'
  • ITWIKISOURCE 'Categoria:Opere letterarie del #' — EN 'Category:# books'
You have solved all! And all in the new reports is also solved! --Steenth (talk) 16:16, 14 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]
NICE!   - FakirNL (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thomasia (Q16965062) edit

Please undo this merge. Merge a plant with an animal genus. Thanks. --Succu (talk) 19:22, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Well, I restored Thomasia (Q16965062) as you asked, but it's empty now and what use is it anyway? Haramiya (Q3753330) is all about the mammal genus while Thomasia (Q952089) is about the plant genus. Dutch page nl:Thomasia is about the mammal genus, but uses only a different name. - FakirNL (talk) 20:36, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
These species have their correct genus now. --Succu (talk) 21:09, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The Dutch article says "these days most biologists agree that Haramiya and Thomasia are the same genus". And I never merged a plant with an animal, so that confused me a little. - FakirNL (talk) 22:06, 29 January 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikinews links edit

Hi. I noticed you moved Wikinews topic-category links from 2010 Winter Olympics (Q9674) to Category:2010 Winter Olympics (Q6251690). This is incorrect. Wikinews topic categories correspond to Wikipedia articles, rather than to Wikipedia categories. (This is one of the growing number of cases where non-mainspace pages on non-wikipedian sisters correspond to Wikipedia mainspace pages.) --Pi zero (talk) 12:03, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If Wikinews-categories are linked to Wikipedia-articles, what about Wikinews articles and portals? For example Category:2006 Winter Olympics (Q8517655) and 2006 Winter Olympics (Q9672) and n:it:Categoria:Olimpiadi invernali 2006 and n:it:XX Olimpiade invernale di Torino 2006? - FakirNL (talk) 12:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wikinews articles do not correspond to Wikipedia articles. Wikinews portals correspond to Wikipedia portals. (There are one or two languages' Wikinewses that actually have their portals in mainspace, but most Wikinewses use a portal space.) --Pi zero (talk) 14:34, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

User:Ivan A. Krestinin/To merge/* pages edit

Hi! and also @Ivan A. Krestinin:. Just wondering if there is any need to delete these pages each time? Could we not keep them and the bot simply post over the old version thus keeping the history for people to look at if they want? :) ·addshore· talk to me! 12:16, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The main reason I delete empty items is so that User:Ivan A. Krestinin/To merge remains a short list with only useful pages as opposed to a very long list with many pages where no improvements can be made. If keeping empty reports is a better solution, I'm happy to stop deleting. - FakirNL (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ahh, and that pages uses Special:Prefixindex :) Nah, that makes sense! :) ·addshore· talk to me! 12:39, 3 March 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

nowiki: Kategori:Hendelser i #-årene edit

Nowiki's "Kategori:Hendelser i #-årene" is incorrectly matched for a long time. I'm about to fix it up. --Steenth (talk) 10:05, 19 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are right. It should be matched to the Italian series "Categoria:Eventi degli anni #" though. - FakirNL (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Here is at list for rest: User:Steenth/Sandkasse --Steenth (talk) 13:26, 20 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
And @Steenth: how about Italian "Categoria:Eventi del #" and Norsk Bokmål "Kategori:Hendelser i #"? - FakirNL (talk) 16:08, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It have update User:Steenth/Sandkasse with "Categoria:Eventi del #" and Norsk Bokmål "Kategori:Hendelser i #". nnwiki is okay. --Steenth (talk) 19:36, 21 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Катэгорыя:Зьявіліся ў 930 годзе edit

Could You please explain this revert? --Taravyvan Adijene (talk) 10:35, 15 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The Belarussian equivalent of the "Category:[year] establishment" series is "Катэгорыя:Заснаваны ў [year] годзе" with 'Заснаваны' meaning something like 'established' or 'founded'. The Belarussian word 'Зьявіліся' means something like 'appeared' so I connected the 'Заснаваны' to 'established' and made seperate items for the 'Зьявіліся'-series. - FakirNL (talk) 10:40, 15 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please take a look at this parent category. We don’t in fact have separate categories for «establishments» and «appearances», so You should eventually put all the separated categories together. --Taravyvan Adijene (talk) 12:25, 15 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Since Belarussian language has categories for both 'Заснаваны' and 'Зьявіліся', not all links can be in the same Wikidata item. So I had to choose which one is closer in meaning to the 'establishments' in English. That was 'Заснаваны'. So we should split the parent category. - FakirNL (talk) 08:03, 16 September 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

New Wikidata proposal ? edit

Hello FakirNL. I got some help to propose a new wikidata-property, which I would like you to take a stand for: Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control#Speedskatingbase.eu ID (en) / Speedskatingbase.eu-identificatiecode (nl) ? So what do you say about that suggestion ? Best regards Migrant (talk) 01:47, 15 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Administrative divisions vs. States and territories edit


Would you mind to elaborate on this edit and similar ones ? The frwiki categories Division administrative fondée en... are equivalent to States and territories established in.... I noticed that the enwiki categories have the word states in their name, but there are administrative divisions called state in many countries, and there is no category hierarchy called Administrative divisions established in... or something equivalent on enwiki or another wiki (and there should not be, as it would be a duplicate). Therefore, I believe these categories should remained linked to the same Wikidata item, to allow interwiki links between them and easier navigation for the reader. Place Clichy (talk) 10:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

If you look at the way the French categories "Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en #" are used, you'll see that they also include provinces, districts, municipalities. For the years in early history the French Wikipedia might mainly have pages about states, but when you look at w:fr:Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en 2014 and w:fr:Catégorie:Division administrative fondée en 2015 you'll see. That is a huge difference from just states and territories. Therefore I feel those categories are not equivalent and need separate Wikidata-items. - FakirNL (talk) 10:24, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Frankly I think that the emphasis in this categories is the established in... part, not the (very slight) distinction between states and territories and administrative divisions. If this distinction was the focus, then at least one Wikipedia would have 2 parallel category trees. I think it hurts more to keep these categories apart than to link them with one another. Wikidata can't control how Wikipedia categories are populated, and should not try to, and categories (and articles) are not always 100% strict equivalent. Thanks for the title, sorry for forgetting it. Place Clichy (talk) 13:30, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Esperanto-wiki has two parallel category trees. Look at w:eo:Kategorio:Ŝtatoj kaj teritorioj fonditaj en la 20-a jarcento and w:eo:Kategorio:Administraj unuoj fonditaj en la 20-a jarcento. - FakirNL (talk) 13:36, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Indeed there was two category trees, with competing logics, few articles, and a lot of hard redirects between them. I cleaned them so that there is no duplicate any more. Therefore I think that nothing forbids merging the Wikidata items. Place Clichy (talk) 17:57, 1 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, I still don't agree with merging items that are so obviously different, but if you do merge them consistently and for all years and decades I won't undo or restore. - FakirNL (talk) 09:47, 2 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

"decade number" and "Events in the decade number" edit

Why does the integration is wrong?Is there a difference between "decade number" and "Events in the decade number"? --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:17, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, there is a difference between those two. A category about the entire decade is not the same as a category about events in the decade. - FakirNL (talk) 13:21, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
If there is no difference then Category:2010s events (Q10050096) should be merged with Category:2010s (Q6583701). - FakirNL (talk) 13:23, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
So, these pages must be protected.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:45, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There is no reason they must protected. People who use the lists to find and merge duplicate items should be careful not to merge pages that are not identical. It says "(Warning: false positive are possible)" for a reason. - FakirNL (talk) 15:15, 19 March 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wiki(data)Zaterdag edit

Hey Fakir,

Op 29 oktober vieren we de vierde verjaardag van dit prachtige project. Het lijkt mij heel leuk om af te spreken met diverse Nederlandstalige vrijwilligers in Utrecht, zie Wikidata:Fourth Birthday voor meer informatie.

Met vriendelijke groet, Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 18:47, 3 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wie weet, wie weet. - FakirNL (talk) 08:54, 4 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
De kans is helaas niet zo groot meer. - FakirNL (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Jammer, wel bedankt dat je er nog aan gedacht hebt. :) Zie ik je anders op de WCN of wellicht op de nieuwsjaarsborrel? Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:11, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Undid item and category item merges edit

Hi. Saw that you merged Category:2004 Summer Olympics (Q34521240) and 2004 Summer Olympics (Q8558) as one was the item, and the other the category:item, and it is my understanding that the two are not the same. I saw a couple that I resolved, if there are more, then I will leave you to resolve/revert.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:56, 11 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

With Wikinews it's always a bit different. Sometimes the categories in Wikinews are added to the item of the event itself, not the category item. - FakirNL (talk) 09:22, 11 August 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wikinews date categories edit

Hello, thre is schisophrenic situation with wikinews categories. Some of them should be connected with categories and some with articles. But categories about dates should be connected with categories, because there are also date "articles". And if there is cca 15 Wikinews categories about years why you connect some of them with articles and other leave with categories? JAn Dudík (talk) 11:50, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think it is better to be more consistent and connect every Wikinews category to a Wikipedia article. As far as I know I have moved every Wikinews category about years to the articles, but I might have missed a few. - FakirNL (talk) 11:53, 27 April 2018 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, it was consistent to link date categories of Wikinews to category items on Wikidata. Something that exists for about ten years now! But whether option is used, it should not end up in the mess it is since the past 24 hours:
  • Apparently many date categories have been moved to date pages, but this did not happen for thousands of date categories. See: Q95749493 + Q18123357 and so on.
  • Nothing has been done with the empty category items. See: Q95749489
  • Also these empty category items still link to the date item, and the date item links back to the category item.
  • Then also empty items, besides one sitelink to Évènements du ... have been created. Example: Q95852870.
    • Every item on Wikidata should have at least a instance of (P31) or a subclass of (P279) on it, but this is missing! I would suggest to use Wikinews date page (Q94574287).
    • These Wikinews date pages have a relationship to the the date items. How is that relationship going to be added to the item?
    • Small detail: labels should not ben capitalised: Évènements... -> évènements... Example with issue: Q95852870
  • Many date items still have the label/alias évènements du ... in French. If these pages are no longer connected, this should be removed. Example: Q57396755
Please fix these issues for every date page/category/etc. Thanks! Romaine (talk) 23:05, 30 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Please note that I did not create the mess. For example, for most dates, some Wikinews language categories where linked at the date page, while others where are the category page. This is obviously very inconsistent. To solve this mess it's probably time for me to invest some time in building a bot that can help with this operation. I have not yet worked with Pywikibot, though I have worked with AutoWikiBrowser. - FakirNL (talk) 10:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
AWB doesn't work in Wikidata items. Some actions can be done with QuickStatements, but pywikidata is probably more universal. --Infovarius (talk) 22:47, 1 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Translation request edit


Can you create en:Template:Azerbaijani political parties in Dutch Wikipedia?

Yours sincerely, Artoxx (talk) 09:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi, since there are no articles about current Azerbaijani political in Dutch Wikpedia (see: w:nl:Categorie:Azerbeidzjaanse politieke partij), a template wouldn't be very useful. - FakirNL (talk) 11:58, 5 May 2019 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Category pages from frwiki news edit

Hi Fakir, Last month i have restored some items related to Space Shuttle program (Q1775296) that affected from wrong merges. I noticed that you have removed frwiki news category links from items linked to category pages and added to the items to article linked item pages. Category pages are not supposed to linked to article pages. Can i know why you are linking category pages to article linked items.-❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ 16:55, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As stated in Wikidata:Wikinews/Development it is policy to link mainspace articles to Wikinews categories. - FakirNL (talk) 19:40, 13 September 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]

We sent you an e-mail edit

Hello FakirNL,

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)Reply[reply]

Help with a page you merged edit


I tried linking a page to wikidata for the first time, and apparently I didn't do such a good job, and instead of linking the Hebrew version of Sanger sequencing to the existing page (Q181940), I created a new page (Q106986972). I reported this on the interwiki conflicts page, and you resolved this by redirecting Q106986972 to Q181940. The problem is that if you are in the English Wikipedia, you can't see Hebrew in the languages box, and the Hebrew page is only linked to the English version and no other languages. How can this be resolved? I'm not sure that your personal discussion page is the correct place for this request, but I didn't know where to post this. I hope you can help or transfer this to the correct page. Thanks

Try going to the page (Hebrew or English) and reload the page. If that doesn't work, click Edit and Publish Changes without actually making a change. The interlanguage links will now be visible. - FakirNL (talk) 11:33, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you, I do see more languages from the Hebrew page - however I noticed that the English page still does not seem to have a link to the Hebrew. In addition, the Hebrew page does not have a link to the page in Germen (Deutsch), which the English page does have. I didn't try to Edit and Publish - do you think this will solve these issues?
The German page is linked on English with an old interwiki link: [[de:Sanger-Methode]] which links to a paragraph on the German page: de:DNA-Sequenzierung#Didesoxymethode_nach_Sanger. - FakirNL (talk) 12:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see. What about the link to the Hebrew page from the English one?
That one is visible to me. Try reloading the page or making a zero-change edit as described above. - FakirNL (talk) 12:20, 28 May 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A zero-change edit solved it! Thank yo so much for your help!

Bot redirect edit

The redirect of Q111015947 to Q4433235 caused some errors in the new page. Please explain or revert. Gabriel Kielland (talk) 08:16, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No problem. - FakirNL (talk) 10:01, 24 March 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Compositions ≠ Musical works edit

en:Category:2020 compositions (Q97275139) don't contain en:Category:2020 albums. be:Катэгорыя:Музычныя_творы_2020_года, ru:Категория:Музыкальные_произведения_2020_года and zh:Category:2020年音樂作品 (Q111684969) contain en:Category:2020 albums. Compositions ≠ Musical works, Musical works contain Compositions. -- 15:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Q9059213Q5626704, Q9059213 contain Q5626704. -- 15:36, 15 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @寒吉:, according to @OBender12: musical works and compositions are the same, see this edit. So what is it? Merging or splitting? - FakirNL (talk) 07:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
splitting. 07:39, 30 May 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge edit

Merge Q114060249 to Q32242327 same content 17:13, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done. - FakirNL (talk) 08:13, 4 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Wrong undo edit

Sorry, I made a wrong undo here, but I've already fixed it. Of course your editing was good, sorry! Pallor (talk) 09:23, 23 October 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Automated report of empty item: Q99519709 edit

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner, Dexbot (talk) 06:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]