Edmund Eagles Played Out.jpeg

Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 17:38, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

BádmintonEdit

Hello. I've seen this edition and I want to know if there is some kind of model to follow in this type of competitions, because I usually edit in the leagues of various sports and in "instance of" I put "sports league", not the league to which it belongs. Greetings and thanks. --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 05:47, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Right now I still need it in this form for current additions and maintenance like in Category:WikiProject Badminton or tasks on User:Florentyna. When I finished with all, everything can be changed. Or reverted. Or deleted. Florentyna (talk) 05:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)
But, for me this kind of edition are wrong. ¿Why do you use Q18608583? --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 20:21, 15 September 2019 (UTC)
I think one can use both. I will readd sports season in parallel. Often I need recurring event for maintenance, because I have no maintenance queries with sports season. Florentyna (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
You don't have queries, and that's why you're editing badly on Wikidata? The league is a recurring event, so you have to put sports league. And then you change your queries, but that's why you're not going to do everything wrong. Ask for help with the queries but don't leave it wrong, please.
Do you know, what is very interesting for me? It is the second time during a long editing history with a lot of edits, that somebody approaches me somehow aggressive and both times the guys were eswiki related (I hope it is not the common tone there). But at the end we are here to improve Wikipedia, with different people using different ways, methods or tools. I think we can finish our discussion here and start having fun with editing Wikpedia again. Best regards Florentyna (talk) 15:37, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
Sorry, but to modify my edits to adapt the result to your queries seems to me more aggressive than writing to the user's discussion to know the reasons. Something that I have done and you have not deigned to do a ping for me to find out. I'm sorry, but your interests don't matter, neither do mine. You have to edit as the community has decided and not as you think. --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 15:44, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
On aggressiveness and eswiki, it will be because it is not our language, but I am really very kind ;) I'm sorry if I ever expressed myself wrongly, I didn't mean to. The problem here is that you are putting different information to the rest of sports. I usually edit on all the sports leagues in Spain, and the only case that is getting different is in badmiton. If you want, I can help you with the querys, but we can not go against the rest of sports. Here are some examples: 2018–19 ACB season (Q55189135), 2019–20 La Liga (Q61686471) or Q66812853. Take care. --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 19:21, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
No problem, everything is fine. I don't know if your bot can help in some cases for badminton. References were a a big task during my last 100.000 edits. Another task comprises of the automated import of external IDs - here especially Babelnet. I did not found a way yet, to add these Babelnet IDs P2581 from the Babelnet page to the Wikidata item, even if the Wikidata item is listed there with the Wikidata ID. --Florentyna (talk) 20:36, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
If you give me an example, I can see if I can program it. --Vanbasten 23 (talk) 08:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights SurveyEdit

RMaung (WMF) 19:54, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

mergeEdit

Hi Florentyna, i just made a mistake by creating an item that already exist. Could you help me to merge this item Q72533978 and Q27817608. Thank you --Stvbastian (talk) 09:25, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

No problem, done. Florentyna (talk) 09:29, 27 October 2019 (UTC)
another merge. Q27893295 and Q27869788 . per tournament participation with Haideé Ojeda. Thank you --Stvbastian (talk) 05:19, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

HelloEdit

Hello Florentyna,

I saw you reverted my editions in Q131499 and Q2895813 but these 2 pages are the same, can you please merge the two?

Kind regards

Hi JozeSlb, one item is about football only, one about the multi-sports club. So, if in the language version of the article is something written about more sports than soccer, the item will be Q2895813, for soccer only Q131499. In the French version of Wikipedia for instance you have both versions: fr:Benfica Lisbonne and fr:Benfica Lisbonne (omnisports). Florentyna (talk) 05:35, 14 November 2019 (UTC)


Hi Florentyna, in most wikis SL Benfica only have one article both for multi-sports club and for the football team, as you can see if you see the articles from the two items. SInce the articles from the two items are basically the same (direct translations, as you can see in the wiki pt and en, one in one item and one in another), it makes no sence to have 2 item so all articles should me merged in the item about the multi-sports club (with the exception of the wikis that have 2 articles).

Kind regards, JozeSlb (talk) 20:33, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

If you agree, I would copy this discussion to Wikidata:Project_chat, or you restart this discussion there by yourself to get consensus in the community. Florentyna (talk) 20:55, 15 November 2019 (UTC)

Of course, can you do it please? JozeSlb (talk) 18:36, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

Adding (wrong) VIAF idsEdit

Hi, Florentyna: thx a lot for your corrections. My jobs are adding a lot of VIAF ids, and unfortunately they also import (a very small number of) VIAF errors. Full quality of their clusterization process can be ensured only recurring to human eyes. I hope that (your) corrections of Wikidata items could reach or could be sent to VIAF, to help them correct their ambiguous clusters. Ciao. --Bargioni (talk) 15:09, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

No problem. You are adding only things artificial intelligence allows. And VIAF is very incorrect as a basis for Wikidata statements. They collecting simply everything and put it into one ID - what is often wrong. I follow only items with statement sport=badminton (P641=Q7291). Normally, there will be on Wikidata for badminton humans alredy the statement occupation=non-fiction writer (P106=Q15980158), so one can easily identify that a VIAF must exist. So if you add an ID for a badminton person not yet known as author, I look at this person very carefully. Some people already tried to add similar IDs, see history of Q1597184. So what we can do? If something is wrongly added here, we should create a new Wikidata item with the property from VIAF (or assign the property correctly to an existing Wikidata item) (similar like I did it for Q1597184, now Q42297159). Often other databases are using our assignments for their databases. And when we are wrong, we supporting these wrong assignments - and importing it back to our database. --Florentyna (talk) 17:01, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
At the moment it is really getting wrong - some people where it is not known anything about are added. Q27914211, Q27914189, Q27914458. This is real non-sonse. Please, do not add this. The algorithm on VIAF is bullshit (sorry). Florentyna (talk) 17:54, 17 November 2019 (UTC)

@Florentyna: please add whatever errors you find to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:VIAF/errors (make a new section at the bottom). Then we'll submit to the email indicated in the last section "Status". I'll do the same for the Worldcat Identities errors that you and others have reported.

  • Please quantify "often" and "really wrong": in my experience VIAF quality is very high. Any resource of that size (55M entries, of them 35M people) is bound some errors, but the fact is that VIAF is a crucially important resource in global authority control. Eg for Worldcat Identities I imported 1.5M IDs, got 200 "thank you" and maybe 20-30 reverts (all of which I will collect). That's an excellently low error rate --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 14:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

ADAGP-identifiersEdit

Hi Florentyna,

Thank you for you corrections and patience. I batch uploaded ADAGP copyright identification numbers for 200.000 persons based on the same year of birth and name, but especially for Chinese names that gave some mismatches. Coming days I plan to do an extra verification of the professions of the persons who have the identifier added. --Hannolans (talk) 12:41, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Worldcat IdentityEdit

Hi Florentyna! About https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q65429637&diff=prev&oldid=1110501419 "This WorldCat entry is a collection of different people. This guy here only wrote one book". You don't dispute the VIAF ID, and the WorldCat entry is directly based on the VIAF ID. So our link to WorldCat is correct. What is incorrect are the extra books (as you say, the VIAF page shows his single book) but that's a problem of OCLC not WD. Hopefully OCLC will fix that WorldCat page some day; I still think the WorldCat link is useful. So I'll ask you to please accept my edit, but won't insist on it.

Note: I've posted 1.7M such statements, and it'll take some months for them to trickle through QuickStatements. Then I'll search for missing statements and make another batch to add this much smaller number. At that time, I may reinsert this disputed statement, please don't be offended, and if you like revert it again. Cheers! --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 10:07, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

On VIAF I found only the one correct book for Mielke. But also VIAF is often incorrect. It was already tried once to use the data from there, but a high percentage of the data was really wrong and bad, see for instance the batch with this example [1]. A lot of people and institutions rely on Wikidata, so I would prefer not to add incorrect data, or at least check the correctness before adding --Florentyna (talk) 11:40, 6 February 2020 (UTC)
@Florentyna: I see one record there (is that two Hans-Peter Meyer improperly merged?) Please quantify "often incorrect", or more constructively, report the errors to VIAF as described above. I can assure you that a LOT more institutions rely on VIAF (all national libraries and pretty much most libraries in the world), so shunning VIAF to the side is not an option. Just for comparison, VIAF has 8-10x more person records than Wikidata --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)
I really don't want to make the work for VIAF (even if we are doing this already by adding data here). For me it seems, that they are running a script where name and birth date are similar to the data here and adding these data then to VIAF (without any human interaction). And we reimporting the wrong data back. We should try to keep the data here as correct as possible, so nobody gets the chance to import from here wrong data. And the result on VIAF is often total nonsense. User Bargioni already tried to import all VIAFs - example:[2]. I following only badminton, and there I reverted at least 50% of the VIAFs (if not 80%) for persons [3]. For institutions and geographical regions the VIAFs are not so bad, but for persons their script is very bad. There were added for instance VIAFs to badminton players Weiß, Turner, Minet (that is all, what is known about them, i.e. last name and some results and a guessed birth year) - and VIAF added IDs (and this way also publications to them). Crazy, wrong, bad. I only know a few badminton players who wrote a book (dissertation), so from the point of view of badminton the VIAF IDs are extremely unreliable. And I don't think, that a lot of libraries rely on VIAF. I think it is vice versa: VIAF imports everything from other databases, like from here, like from DNB. One has to send for instance every publication printed in Germany (as an official book, except diploma thesis) in two copies to the DNB. These data were published in the catalogues of the DNB - and who wonders, some time later the data appear on VIAF, too. Florentyna (talk) 16:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Q65927822 - Hans-Peter Meyer (East Germany, Greifswald) is a good example for the work of VIAF. I added the statement born circa 1927 to Wikidata (circa!!!). VIAF uses this for a guy Hans Meyer (also known as Hans-Peter Meyer) from the DNB who was born exactly 1927 and published in West Germany books about animals. But in normal cases it was not possible to go from East to West Germany. So there is only a very low probabilty that the persons are the same, but for VIAF this is no problem. We re-importing the data and then for them is everything fine and we have here unreliable data, too. So I suggest to check every VIAF entry manually. The data from there are based in a lot of cases on a logical construction of different databases without review. By the way: For me it seems, that also DNB unites different persons named Hans Meyer under one entry. The Meyer there switched according to DNB from animals and Vienna/Munich to juristical problems in 1973 in Berlin-West (Die Beteiligung des Bürgers an der Planung als Rechtsproblem). Can be, but sounds unlogical. Florentyna (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Samuel Vaughan (Q16859178)Edit

Hi. Can you please explain why you have removed the sourced entry I added to Samuel Vaughan (Q16859178)?[4] If you dispute the entry then please use deprecation, otherwise the entry will be readded either by me or another user later on. From Hill To Shore (talk) 17:52, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I looked into the book - I'm sure it is a typo. He will not own both names - Frier and Fuer. The ri is misreaded as u in the book. The birth registry should clarify that. And the second name should be added to ENWP - and discussed there. --Florentyna (talk) 18:07, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
PS: I also don't think that Frier and Fuer are given names. Never heard. Frier as family in Denmark is okay. --Florentyna (talk) 18:15, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
Here are additional sources for Samuel Fuer Vaughan. Descendants of William Vaughan (PDF), Genealogy.com forum entry, Franklin Gazette Fall 1991 (PDF) - page 2, middle column, 7th line. Just because you have never heard a particular name before from millenia of history and across hundreds of languages, doesn't mean the name doesn't exist. We should rely on source material, not gut reactions. I am going to restore the entry to the item. If you object to it and have reliable source material to dispute it, use the deprecation option. Regards. From Hill To Shore (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

All the sources are based one on the other. An entry from a census would be good (but also there it is sometimes hard to read). I guess, that neither Frier or Fuer will be the correct name, and maximal one of these names, but never both. But now Wikidata has two more general first names in its database, where one is at least wrong. From one guessed first name so in the meantime there are a couple of wrong data generated - this is my major concern. I hope you will follow this item in the future and make the necessary corrections. Sometimes on special occasions the whole census data are available for free, so one should have a look on the original data. --Florentyna (talk) 19:14, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

I created Frier (Q91105369) based on the Geni entry, which has since proved to be an erroneous record when compared to the other sources. I then looked for other Wikidata items that had Frier as a middle name and stumbled on Lena Frier Kristiansen (Q435114), which had a label that included Frier in the middle of the name but no record of it in the statements. I added it as a given name but you have since clarified that it should have been a second surname entry. That leaves Frier (Q91105369) as an orphan. In this case the entry should be retained as it exists in an external database; if we delete it, it will only be created later when another user refers to the same database. However, I will mark the entry as deprecated so it isn't used accidentally. If new people are identified that use the name as a given name, then we can remove the deprecation at that point.
For Fuer (Q91106017) we have a number of published documents that make use of this name. Until evidence is provided to dispute the source material, the item should remain active. If sufficient source material is found to say the entry is wrong, we can depricate Fuer (Q91106017) so it isn't used accidentally. However, again the entry should not be deleted as it exists in source material. We either keep it is as a valid item or we keep it as a deprecated item, so that editors don't recreate it later from referencing the same disputed source material.
One thing you may want to note is that many English speaking families have a tradition of converting the mother's maiden name (Q1376230) into a given name (P735) for their offspring. As an example, see Dudley Pound (Q552191) (Alfred Dudley Pickman Rogers Pound) who took some of his given names from his ancestors' family names; Richard Saltonstall Rogers (Q32938413) and Dudley Leavitt Pickman (Q5311909). If anyone with the Danish surname Frier (Q21452264) married into an English family, it is possible that some of their descendants may have gained the given name Frier (Q91105369). We can resolve that situation later, if it ever materialises, but I wanted to highlight that you shouldn't assume that a family name can never be a given name. From Hill To Shore (talk) 20:59, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mailEdit

Hello Florentyna,

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)

Norwegian "no" labels to removed/mergedEdit

Hello @Florentyna: You undid the changes Q27906501 and Q194654 of my User:GeertivpBot. As per User_talk:Geertivp#Norwegian_labels the language code "no" must not be used in Wikidata, and and is to be moved/merged into "nb" (or "nn"). So I did, so please undo your changes. Note that the language code "no" is only used for Wikipedia. Actually it should be blocked system-wise on Wikidata. For info @Mahir256: Geertivp (talk) 08:01, 13 October 2020 (UTC)

2019 Silicon Valley International SeriesEdit

I think there is some problem need to check: Winner of 2019 Silicon Valley International Series record in Q65706135 is different from tournamentsoftware.com. Are they the same? →→ 某幻 (留言給我) 02:56, 15 October 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is an error. A copy paste error, looks like all winners are wrongly pasted from 2019 Zambia International Badminton Championships. Must be corrected. Florentyna (talk) 04:40, 15 October 2020 (UTC)