User talk:Fralambert/Archive 3

Latest comment: 2 years ago by Mohammed Sadat (WMDE) in topic Wikidata weekly summary #510

User:Fralambert/Archive

Wikidata weekly summary #495 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #496 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #497 edit

Your unexplained reversions of my edits edit

Could you please explain why you reverted 1, 2 and 3. The pages on English Wikipedia are no longer featured articles as they have been removed from w:en:Wikipedia:Featured articles in this edit. Wikidata:Rollbackers says that "Rollback should only be used to revert vandalism and test edits". How were those edits vandalism or test edits? EN-Jungwon 06:41, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

The pages still have the featured article badge on enwiki because there is a delay in bot processing of the featured article review. Here are the reviews
The reviews were closed my Nikkimaria in these edits:
EN-Jungwon 07:06, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
@EN-Jungwon Sorry, I was checking the main page and the talk page of these article. Like en:Yosemite National Park and en:Bradley Joseph always have their badges and there is no mention of the talk page of a review about loosing their labels. Also the modification was badged ad probamatic in Wikidata. Sorry of not understanding that a FA label is note a FA label. Fralambert (talk) 13:20, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Please explain the retention decision edit

At which point of the relevance criteria do the data objects Q108299619 and Q108299625 meet? --Gymnicus (talk) 12:46, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

L'Humanité (Q1137404) is a reliable French newspaper. Fralambert (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
And? But that has nothing to do with the articles. They have to meet the relevance criteria and not the newspaper. --Gymnicus (talk) 13:15, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
I was tring to close old RfDs, and I was thinking that the argument of @Silanoc was a good point. But feel free to repropose if you you think they are not relevent, but last time their was no consensus after 4 months. Fralambert (talk) 13:23, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
But it's not about consensus, but about whether a data object meets the relevance criteria or not. In the case of an irrelevant Youtuber, musician or entrepreneur, it doesn't matter whether 10 people vote for keep and only one against, they will still be deleted. Then why does a consensus have to be reached here? --Gymnicus (talk) 14:20, 11 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #498 edit

Removal of deletion request edit

Hi Fralambert,

I saw you removed the deletion request for Q21507102. Why was this actually removed (in one day)? Ii gives the impression that it never existed, certainly disquieting.

Secondly, it has been claimed it "has a sitelink", meaning a wikilink or a external link? An external link to a regional media outlet producing a sensationalistic phrase, as far as I see always in Spanish and Spain, with clearly derogatory undertones at least in Spanish, I do not think a phrase creates a reality. Iñaki LL (talk) 23:13, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Hi, We you look at our notability page (WD:N), this page have a siterlink to eswiki, so this is notable by Wikidata criterion. The page have to be deleted from eswiki first do be deleted. Fralambert (talk) 23:19, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
I happened to edit the page while you replied. Sad to hear that. It is very easy to create in eswiki a page with no or little substance and notability for issues of highly emotional content and nationalistic catharsis. It is a linguistic phrase-based item. Iñaki LL (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
Make them delete in eswiki and you could deleted Troitiño Clan (Q21507102) as a empty item. There is not this is easier in one or another wiki, that sitelink was present in this item since it's ceration. Fralambert (talk) 00:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply
The problem lies that anything related to ETA is an emotional issue with loads of sensationalist literature, charged vocabulary and aggressivity. I do not edit in the ESWP. Iñaki LL (talk) 10:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #499 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #500 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #501 edit

How we will see unregistered users edit

Hi!

You get this message because you are an admin on a Wikimedia wiki.

When someone edits a Wikimedia wiki without being logged in today, we show their IP address. As you may already know, we will not be able to do this in the future. This is a decision by the Wikimedia Foundation Legal department, because norms and regulations for privacy online have changed.

Instead of the IP we will show a masked identity. You as an admin will still be able to access the IP. There will also be a new user right for those who need to see the full IPs of unregistered users to fight vandalism, harassment and spam without being admins. Patrollers will also see part of the IP even without this user right. We are also working on better tools to help.

If you have not seen it before, you can read more on Meta. If you want to make sure you don’t miss technical changes on the Wikimedia wikis, you can subscribe to the weekly technical newsletter.

We have two suggested ways this identity could work. We would appreciate your feedback on which way you think would work best for you and your wiki, now and in the future. You can let us know on the talk page. You can write in your language. The suggestions were posted in October and we will decide after 17 January.

Thank you. /Johan (WMF)

18:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)

Call for participation in a task-based online experiment edit

Dear Fralamber,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits. Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk) 23:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #502 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #503 edit

Q29508255 edit

What was the item about? --- Jura 07:02, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

This was a disambiguation page. The last sitelink was deleted on itwiki. Fralambert (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #504 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #505 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #506 edit

Recensement 2021 edit

Bonsoir, comme on a les données[1] et que j'ai du temps de libre, je me demandais si tu y travaillait sinon je m'y attelle. --Yanik B 22:26, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Je vais me pratiquer avec l'Alberta, l'autre province où les municipalités ont une bonne instance of (P31). Après je me lance pour le Québec. Fralambert (talk) 23:16, 10 February 2022 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #507 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #508 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #509 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #510 edit

Return to the user page of "Fralambert/Archive 3".