Gymnicus
Joined 4 December 2020
Latest comment: 9 hours ago by Epìdosis in topic Deleting of information
Deleting of information
editWhy do you - the person who is known for fighting for WorldCat Identities (Wikidata:Properties for deletion/P7859), fighting for keeping of redirects etc. - are now, since you are back, systematically delete information about GND check? --Kolja21 (talk) 16:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Because GND statements with no content have no added value for me. Either a correct GND identifier is entered or not. The topic cannot be compared with valid WorldCat identifiers. --Gymnicus (talk) 16:57, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- This info doesn't need to have any value for you. It is used by librarians. If a person should have a GND experienced users either enter the GND or note the retrieval date with the comment "No value". This is common practice in library catalogs, in Wikipedia (de:Vorlage:Normdaten: GNDCheck) and Wikidata (Property talk:P227/human/wanted/no value). --Kolja21 (talk) 17:36, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- But we are not in a library or on Wikipedia. This kind of thing has no place here because it has no added value. --Gymnicus (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Ach Gymnicus, mehr als erklären kann ich es dir nicht. Unergiebige Diskussionen hatten wir ja schon früher mit dir. Wenn du nicht in der Lage bist, die Arbeit anderer zu respektieren, muss dein Account gesperrt werden. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- You want to block someone who removes invalid statements? Then have fun with it. Because I won't let that intimidate me. Statements without added value can be deleted and that includes GND statements with no value. PS: I have no idea why you're switching to German. --Gymnicus (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Simple Frage: Warum glaubst du, dass Bibliothekare und Wikipedianer die "invalid statements" eintragen? --Kolja21 (talk) 22:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- In order to, as can be read at Vorlage:Normdaten, request the GND and its employees to create a data object for this person, organization or concept. But that is not Wikidata's job, especially since Wikidata, unlike Wikipedia, considers that a GND identifier makes a dataobject notable. So what this means is that by adding a GND statement without a value, Wikidata is asking the GND itself to make the data object relevant. And that is a fatal mistake and undermines the notability criteria. --Gymnicus (talk) 23:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- So users want to aks librarians to create a GND? Possible. But the key point is that you can tell from the retrieval date when the last check was made to see if a GND is present. If this crucial information is missing, users will make the same query again and again. Therefore, we use this method known from libraries in Wikipedia and Wikidata. And this has been the case for years. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Hi! I agree that Wikidata contains some data that have no added value and can be removed (cf. Wikidata:WikiProject Redundancy with many possible examples) and that we need to establish criteria for the use of novalue for external identifiers (a minimum requirement should be retrieved (P813)); for this I opened a general discussion in Wikidata talk:Identifiers#Novalue for missing IDs that I invite you to join.
- At the same time, I think that external IDs (particularly authority file IDs) can be usefully used with novalue to mark the absence of a certain entity in it, as @Kolja21: said; the practice of indicating not found in is common both to various authority files and to Wikidata (through not found in (P9660), which has more than 16k uses, and through novalues, which are used more than 85k times). In the specific case of GND, referenced novalues have also been used in a workflow for new ID creation for nearly two years (Property talk:P227/human/wanted/no value).
- So I would propose to discuss a general guideline in the aforementioned discussion and in the meanwhile restore the novalues removed through batches 1739386767371, 1739387384964, 1739388581746, 1739389305282, 1739390362360; since there seems to be already consensus on the necessity of retrieved (P813) references, I think 1739385849294 is uncontroversial. Thanks and good evening! Epìdosis 21:09, 15 February 2025 (UTC)
- So if you have no objections to the plan I proposed, I will undo the 5 aformentioned batches tomorrow, so that it will be easy, when the discussion at Wikidata talk:Identifiers#Novalue for missing IDs will reach a consensus, either convert them to a different form (e.g. on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) or not found in (P9660)) or keep them as they are. Thanks for participating in the discussion there! Epìdosis 09:23, 18 February 2025 (UTC)
- So users want to aks librarians to create a GND? Possible. But the key point is that you can tell from the retrieval date when the last check was made to see if a GND is present. If this crucial information is missing, users will make the same query again and again. Therefore, we use this method known from libraries in Wikipedia and Wikidata. And this has been the case for years. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:39, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- In order to, as can be read at Vorlage:Normdaten, request the GND and its employees to create a data object for this person, organization or concept. But that is not Wikidata's job, especially since Wikidata, unlike Wikipedia, considers that a GND identifier makes a dataobject notable. So what this means is that by adding a GND statement without a value, Wikidata is asking the GND itself to make the data object relevant. And that is a fatal mistake and undermines the notability criteria. --Gymnicus (talk) 23:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Simple Frage: Warum glaubst du, dass Bibliothekare und Wikipedianer die "invalid statements" eintragen? --Kolja21 (talk) 22:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- You want to block someone who removes invalid statements? Then have fun with it. Because I won't let that intimidate me. Statements without added value can be deleted and that includes GND statements with no value. PS: I have no idea why you're switching to German. --Gymnicus (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- Ach Gymnicus, mehr als erklären kann ich es dir nicht. Unergiebige Diskussionen hatten wir ja schon früher mit dir. Wenn du nicht in der Lage bist, die Arbeit anderer zu respektieren, muss dein Account gesperrt werden. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:12, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- But we are not in a library or on Wikipedia. This kind of thing has no place here because it has no added value. --Gymnicus (talk) 18:11, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
- This info doesn't need to have any value for you. It is used by librarians. If a person should have a GND experienced users either enter the GND or note the retrieval date with the comment "No value". This is common practice in library catalogs, in Wikipedia (de:Vorlage:Normdaten: GNDCheck) and Wikidata (Property talk:P227/human/wanted/no value). --Kolja21 (talk) 17:36, 14 February 2025 (UTC)