Open main menu

User talk:Infovarius


Welcome to Wikidata, Infovarius!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike, and you can help. Go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familarise yourself with:

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. 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.

Regards, --Ymblanter (talk) 17:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)
Привет, Ярослав :) Infovarius (talk) 17:38, 2 November 2012 (UTC)


Alanis Obomsawin (Q637195)Edit

Hi! I saw that you removed a good chunk of the work I did on Alanis Obomsawin's Wikidata page (which I did so then I could figure out how to correct the error you pointed out). Yesterday I had no luck in doing that but did not want to delete the changes as I was going to focus on that today. Do you have a recommendation on what would be a more suitable descriptor for all of the documentaries and shorts she did? Because "directed" does not exist, and trying to input it under her role as director results in messy data. I'd appreciate your support.

Morinjam (talk) 15:41, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

UPDATE: Issue has been fixed (very easily). Now I'm going to try to find references for what you inputted yesterday.

Morinjam (talk) 16:28, 2 March 2018 (UTC)

@Morinjam: Values of list of works (P1455) should be lists ("filmography" for example). Values of director (P57) should be humans (this property is for film items). I am afraid that there are no properties which can do what you want. And it is logical because 1) it is redundant as all this facts are already at appropriate film items (see below at; 2) some creators have so many creations that it would be impossible to list all of them at one item. --Infovarius (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2018 (UTC)

@infovarius I reverted previous (directors) to facilitate moving to the new listing (list of works). I uploaded this keeping in mind that some people are not literate in reasonator (like myself). Some people just want to scroll and see the data. It may be illogical to you, but I'm thinking more about accessibility of data here, thinking from the perspective of someone just learning how to harness it. Additionally, (I'm unsure if this shows up in reasonator, Alanis also has a music album, which currently does not have a wikidata item or wikipedia page. I'm currently working on fixing that and am planning on adding it into the "list of works" I was working on. While Alanis does have 50 films out there, I'm sure you've noticed only a small percentage of those films are actually represented on Wikimedia, which is why the ones I added in were in that list - they highlight the most well-known works by her. Once I have finished revising the article (and publishing it) I am planning on reverting your edit.

I would much rather join forces than do this constant delete-revert, wouldn't you?

Morinjam (talk) 22:46, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for reverting, User:Morinjam, but Wikidata is naturally constructed for machine readability not by humans. And the data you are talking about is accessible by machines as it is presented in linked items. Anyway you are using wrong properties and you would be reverted by someone else. If you still insist on adding this information to Q637195, please try to create new properties for this. This is bad news. But there are good news also: you can add full list of her works without creating Wikipedia articles! You should just create new item per each of her work and enrich those items with appropriate items (and then you see a full list in the Reasonator). --Infovarius (talk) 15:41, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


"For history"

For history? The page history continues to have the history. You don't need to have a page simply for that.

"convenient links"

Uh, no? I don't even understand what that means.


Most definitely not. That's what I wanted to get rid of.

In summary, the reason I removed the template to begin with was because none of those are necessary nor desired if the information is captured at a centralized location as it currently is.

Furthermore, no other items use this system, nor should they. Someone tried it (I think you!) and it failed to catch steam (and for good measure). Placing it on one page does not capture the conflicts; by their very nature, they almost always have multiple items involved.

Please remove it. --Izno (talk) 16:08, 26 April 2013 (UTC)

1) about history: the template and the categories help (I believe) to find some old resolved conflict, if it needs.
2) links: I mean direct links to centralized discussion + automated analysis for better clearing local iw-links (which is not finished as you can see).
3) Do you really suppose that having all unresolved conflicts in one place (for example, Template:Cl) is of no help to anybody?? Infovarius (talk) 20:07, 26 April 2013 (UTC)
I disagree completely on the first. All you're doing is decentralizing the discussion and making it hard for people to actually make sure that the issues are solved.
That... still doesn't make sense.
All unresolved conflicts are in one place: WD:IC. What you are doing is duplicating and decentralizing discussion for no reason. Please stop. --Izno (talk) 03:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
If you really think we need to create a permanent history to record these things on the individual item (or property!) pages, then you should create a template like Template:Article history. I think that might be useful in general (for things like WD:PFD for "kept" properties). But we should only do that when the discussion is archived as done, at the very earliest. Scattering "in doubt" all over the wiki only really makes extra work for no reason. In doubt or in work should be left on WD:IC. --Izno (talk) 04:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Returning to this discussion, User:Izno... Yes, decentralization is good in some cases. Now WD:IC is growing so big that I am rarely to watch it, but the category of not-resolved issues would be great. And all discussions at WD:IC are minimized so it's difficult to browse them. --Infovarius (talk) 14:08, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

IC growing big is an issue of not having enough editors (interested in interwiki resolution). --Izno (talk) 02:07, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Please be carefulEdit

This is just wrong. You don't need to know the language to realize that "circumferència" comes from the same latin root as "circumference". So it was right to be in here. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:05, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Of course, I see the root. But a name of an article is not the full content of the article. Ca-article (as I understand) is about curve (geometric location, with equation in coordinates) and not only about length of the perimeter. Besides, es-article too, but there's conflict with es:Disco (topología). Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
I have requested an opinion on the Catalan project chat. Let's wait and see the response. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
Why on Earth have you created a new element (Q13107360) without consensus? I have told you we should better wait for opinions from native speakers. The discusion on cawiki (here) is in favour of maintaing the statu quo (previous to the creation of Q13107360 and this removal). I am also expecting comments on eswiki. So please merge Q13107360 with Q238231 and stop removing interwikis until we hear further opinions. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 21:50, 11 May 2013 (UTC)
Sorry for delay - I have no time to do an analysis of answers yet. I'll read the discussion (through translators) and if I have doubt in my actions (now I haven't) I do the revert myself. Otherwise I provide my arguments. Infovarius (talk) 20:22, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

There is a talk about this issue in Wikidata:Interwiki_conflicts#Circle.2FKreis. I suggest continuing all discussions there.--Pere prlpz (talk) 15:58, 27 May 2013 (UTC)


We have a complete different usage of has part (P527):

You use has part (P527) because the character interrobang (Q427676) is a composition of the characters exclamation mark (Q166764) and question mark (Q11169). I use has part (P527) because the article inverted question and exclamation marks (Q1152312) describes the characters inverted exclamation mark (Q11639406) and inverted question mark (Q10854940). The composition of these two characters is gnaborretni (Q13141081).

Both relations are useful relations. But they should use different properties. Which is the right property? --Fomafix (talk) 11:27, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

City and administrative unitEdit

Hey Infovarius. Please tread the terms "administrative unit" and "subdivision unit" respectively P132 (P132) and located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) carefully. An administrative division is a portion of a country or other political division, established for the purpose of government. Administrative divisions are each granted a certain degree of autonomy, and are required to manage themselves through their own local governments.(1) Especially, city (Q515) hasn't to be a subdivision unit. In some countries "city" is a term used by people but it has nothing to do with government (e.g. Australia, Switzerland). Also smaller populated places like hamlet (Q5084) aren't necessarily administrative units if they don't have their own local government. I hope that helps you to understand this terms. If you're troubled about some of my edits, please let first discuss it before undoing them. Thanks. --Pasleim (talk) 16:48, 5 November 2013 (UTC)


Потому что "cake" - это не "пирожное". Пирожное - это всё-таки небольшое штучное изделие, а "cake" - наоборот (пирог, торт, кекс...). По-моему, в английском нет аналога для слова "пирожное", а в русском нет аналога для слова "cake". Хотя для меня английский не является родным, я могу серьёзно ошибаться.

Поэтому пусть вепсская интервики пока будет в отрыве от остальных, ничего страшного. --Tamara Ustinova (talk) 11:57, 19 December 2013 (UTC)

Неужели она не соответствует ни одному русскому и ни одному английскому понятию? --Infovarius (talk) 21:09, 21 December 2013 (UTC)

Multiple heads of governmentEdit

To your question from this summary: because it makes the Infobox of the w:ro:România article look like this (see "Sistem politic" / "Prim-Ministru"), and the P6 property thus behaves in an unexpected way (instead of returning the current head of government, as expected, it returns the comma-separated list of the last two prime ministers). Basically, no wiki can use this property to display the name of the current prime minister in an infobox. AFAIK, Wikidata indeed expects to store data for lists, but so far only Infobox data can be displayed.Andrei Stroe (talk) 10:52, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

@Andrei Stroe:, it's not a problem - one can use "preferred rank" to select current head of government. I suppose that this is implemented in ru-wiki, if you want I can search for the code of consult with other users. --Infovarius (talk) 10:42, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the answer. If you have an example of how it was implemented in a wiki, I think I'll be able to take it from there and implement it in ro.wp.Andrei Stroe (talk) 08:19, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Revert on followed by (P156)Edit

Hi, I don't understand your revert to followed by (P156)... The fact that it is used incorrectly on thousands of items doesn't make it less incorrect, surely? Jon Harald Søby (talk) 17:06, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Your revert and question at nonprofit organization (Q163740)Edit

Regarding your question at the revert: I made the change because a company (company (Q783794)) is only a form of organization (look at en:company: A company is an association or collection of individuals, whether natural persons, legal persons, or a mixture of both. ). What you mean is, that a nonprofit organization (Q163740) is the opposite of a business (business (Q4830453)) (according to en:business: A business, also known as an enterprise or a firm, is an organization involved in the trade of goods, services, or both to consumers.). Or otherwise said, company (company (Q783794)) is about form (multiple persons pursuing a goal together), business (business (Q4830453)) about purpose (earning money). That everyday language often assumes company==business shouldn't stop us from being exact in Wikidata. :-) --S.K. (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

God and god (deity) are not the same thingEdit

I see you are insisting that deity (Q178885) is the same as God (Q190). How have you arrived at that conclusion? Danrok (talk) 12:56, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

Wikidata:Database reports/Wikipedia versionsEdit

lang=ru : ?lang=ru&props=31,218,219,220,506,1406&q=claim[1800]русский

Hello Infovarius! I have seen you contributing to a lot at pages linked to (as for today titled Wikipedia versions but intended in general for WMF projects). I would be happy if you can review the properties of these pages, create the missing Wikibook and Wikiversity project pages, comment on user:I18n/sandbox (where you may find many usefull queries) and comment there with new / additional ideas. Best regards [[]user:Gangleri|] also aka I18n (talk) 15:52, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Please follow the main discussion at property talk:P218#whats next and see also: m:Talk:Facebook pages. I added more property related queries at d:user:I18n/sandbox#property_Wikimedia_database_name. Best regards I18n (talk) 13:31, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Skier subclass of athletics competitor?Edit

Huh? How is skier, person who performs in skiing subclass of athletics competitor, sportsperson that competes in athletics (track and field, running, walking). Skiing (skier) has nothing to do with high jump, javelin and other track and field sports. So, I don't understand why did you undo my edit. --Stryn (talk) 11:57, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

@Stryn:, I've answered at Wikidata:Project chat, you've been a bit hurry to create 2 disccusions :) Duplicating here: I've overviewed definitions and must admit that you are right. Skiing is not light athletics because the last is strictly defined. I was misguided by the thought that everything not being heavy athletics is light athletics. --Infovarius (talk) 05:08, 28 January 2016 (UTC)


Hello Infovarius. You moved it:Fratello from 'Sibling' to 'Brother'. That means you undid the shift I made a few days earlier. I did that one because the Italian article deals with both brothers and sisters (which together make 'siblings'). I also did that with Romanian, Spanish and Portuguese, for the same reason. Regards, Apdency (talk) 18:38, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for reverting my error. :-) --Redaktor (talk) 14:09, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


Я не возражаю против добавления. Только теперь у меня две просьбы:

  1. Разобраться с unique value violation. Либо переделать synchronized swimmer (Q18715859), либо внести в исключения.
  2. Расставить ранги, чтобы в карточки Википедии попадало ровно одно значение.

--Lockal (talk) 18:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

А вот против юристки и адвокатессы я возражаю сильно. Юристка это разговорное слово. "Адвокатессы" вообще противоречат ГПК РФ. --Lockal (talk) 17:43, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
Туда же трубадурша, типографка (спасибо, что не типографиня), видеоблоггерша, депутатка (вне закона) и прочие слова. Полный список: Help:Female form of label/lists/ru. --Lockal (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2016 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius,

I see that you state that "not everybody considers [Malus pumila] to be [a] duplicate of Malus pumila. How so? Also, the bulk of apples is produced by Malus pumila. Other species of the genus Malus also producing apple-shaped fruit, that, because it varies strongly in size, may (or may not) be called apples, and in some cases can be used as apples. For apple cider very small "apples" are usable, but the majority of the public would not even think about peeling them and using them as hand-apples. - Brya (talk) 04:40, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

Edda de SnorriEdit

Hello Infovarius. You moved q:Edda de Snorri from Q205882 to Q22691366. I don't understand why you did that : that page is about the Prose Edda, regardless of the translator. Lykos (talk) 01:21, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

I see that all quotes are in French, so they cannot be from original "Prose Edda" (which is in Ancient Norse). Also I see the name of translator (François-Xavier Dillmann). And that is all that I put in the item for these quotes. They are obviously taken from French version of Prose Edda. --Infovarius (talk) 21:21, 17 February 2016 (UTC)
Please, see fr:q:Beowulf : quotes are in French and in Old English ; on fr:q:Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra, all the quotes are in French, but there is four different tanslators. Tomorrow, I could add quotes on fr:q:Edda de Snorri from the Paul-Henri Mallet translation. Wikiquote is not Wikisource : we don't create separate pages for each translation. Lykos (talk) 01:43, 18 February 2016 (UTC)


The property domain (P1568) is for mathematics (domain of a function), I think you should use another property instead, maybe facet of (P1269).--Micru (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

@Micru:, facet of (P1269) doesn't exact because it doesn't differ definition domain from values domain. I don't know why we can't expand domain (P1568) in order to use it for properties. Property is a transform which can have domains. --Infovarius (talk) 17:01, 5 March 2016 (UTC)
Both the property description, and the translations refer to a mathematical function. It is easier to start a new property proposal for "knowledge domain".--Micru (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2016 (UTC)


What is needed is a Categorie:Moose, but the German Wikipedia has no such category. Categorie:Laubmoose is the same as Category:Bryophyta; it is a duplicate category. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:42, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


What is the correct relation between grand uncle or grand aunt (Q19901270) and grand uncle (Q3813877)/grand aunt (Q11972456)? --Fomafix (talk) 13:08, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

I suppose subclass of (P279) (from last to first). part of (P361)/has part (P527), for example, would give us head/arms/stomach... --Infovarius (talk) 11:07, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Bambuseae (Q35922)Edit

Please do never change the meaning of an item. There where a lot of taxonomic backlinks you destroyed. BTW: This is an good example why redirects in the sitelink section are bad. --Succu (talk)

@Succu:, sorry for the change, I thought it would be easier. For example, User:Brya did this for several fruits. Some points:

P.S. Redirects can be adjusted (removed, changed) if needed. Though here en-redirect has complicated a thing. --Infovarius (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

"and what is left over"Edit

Hi Infovarius,

I don't see why you want to pull Q23017641 out of the garbage can? This is a Wikipedia 'entry' based on a mechanical method of presenting a Tree of Life (looking like it belongs in Wikispecies, not Wikipedia), after it has run out of meaningful material. It indicates that there are some groups of fossil taxa that cannot be placed and that have been dumped in a garbage-can-page of "and what is left over". It has no taxonomic significance (or coherence) and there was no name published. The fossil taxa themselves do exist, although they don't look particularly notable, but that they have in common that they cannot be placed looks like coincidence. - Brya (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikimedia template (Q11266439)Edit

Regarding the edit you undid on Wikimedia template (Q11266439), I don't understand what you wrote in the summary, but I originally removed that statement because it's incorrect: Wikimedia project page (Q14204246) is for pages in the project namespace, but templates have their own namespace, so they're not a subclass of pages in the project namespace. - Nikki (talk) 22:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Hmm, @Nikki:, Russian description in Q14204246 says about any "not-article" namespace so as subclasses of it. It's like "maintenance pages of Wikimedia". Why not to use like that? --Infovarius (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I think Russian is an exception there, all the other descriptions (not sure about Czech and Swedish) appear to say the same as the English one. I don't see why we should change it to be for all non-article namespaces. We organise most other non-article items by namespace and we already have Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446) and Wikimedia page outside the main knowledge tree (Q17379835) (not sure what the difference between those is supposed to be) for things which aren't articles. - Nikki (talk) 06:54, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Рисовый пудинг и Рисовая кашаEdit

Рисовый пудинг он сладкий, варится рис в молоке с сахаром. А словом рисовая каша обозначают в русском языке любой варёный рис. Обычно без сахара, несладкий. --Glovacki (talk) 14:39, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

@Glovacki:, и вы считаете, что congee - это именно каша?? Во французском, например, написано, что это "типа супа". Почему не оставить, как я разделял - кашу в отдельном? --Infovarius (talk) 14:30, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

About my revertsEdit

@Snipre: and others. I must beg pardon for this, but I have so overwhelming size of wathchlist (which I am still trying to tackle) that this became my style... I can see ping or revert of my revert and then to discuss. But I cannot afford to start a discussion without reverting because I will either lose it the some days after or I should to keep a tab in my browser (but this is painful as I have already a lot of tabs which slows my work...). Can you advice me something? --Infovarius (talk) 14:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

item (or property) other namesEdit

- what do you think it's purpose is? pls your own opinion, as one of most experienced users, for no experiensed novices, wth no espetialy lngws knowlages!, regardly your last edit (undo) of sex or gender (P21). Welcome sex or gender←here--Avatar6 (talk) 19:35, 31 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikinews Labor linksEdit

Hi. I notice you moved most — but apparently not all — of the Wikinews links from labour movement (Q208701) to Q268378. This raises some troublesome issues, and I'd be most interested to hear your thinking on them. Some of these issues are specific to these items and categories, while others start with these specifics and reach outward to involve the whole infrastructure of the sisterhood.

  • The English Wikinews Category:Labor is about the labor movement, not about "economic work" in some abstract sense. So moving that one was definitely wrong. I suspect that most, if not all, of the others also are about the labor movement, but it's honestly very difficult to tell. Figuring out this subtlety for any given language would likely require someone fluent in that language to go in and study the category and perhaps the articles contained in it as well. It wouldn't amaze me if there were no languages whose Wikinews category analogous to "labor" is really associated with Q268378. There appears, btw, to be no English Wikipedia article for the subject of that item.
  • These Wikinews categories in different languages should all interwiki to each other. Moving most to Q268378 while leaving a few at labour movement (Q208701) is damaging to all of them, and most damaging to the few that are left behind, because it systematically deprives these categories of interwikis to other-language Wikinews categories that they absolutely should interwiki to. The purpose of interwikis is, after all, to link each page to the most nearly analogous other-language and other-sister pages, providing useful information to readers and increasing traffic all around — which often involves making connections more flexible than the high regimented and limited ontological identifications practiced on Wikidata.
  • I find this problem really distressing, because in my experience Wikidatans are, almost without exception, great people who are trying to do positive things. It seems to require massively rethinking — in some way or other — the role of Wikidata in choosing interwikis. I really do think that on balance, by absolutely no fault of any Wikidatan, the use of Wikidata for automatic interwikis has done more harm than good for the sisterhood.

--Pi zero (talk) 19:43, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Unicode character (P487)Edit


Apparently, I'm kind of the only one to care about Unicode character (P487) and its constraints, I'll be happy if you want to help. I saw you asking why I removed some claims on dash (Q187819) : Special:Diff/320034705. – is a dash (Q187819), but more precisely, it's a en-dash (Q13219273) ; since there is a Unique value constraint, it seems more logic to put it only on the more precise item, don't you think ? (same thing for — and em-dash (Q10941604)).

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:26, 9 April 2016 (UTC)

Fibonacci numbersEdit

Use part of the series (P179) for numbers in a series like the Fibonacci number (Q47577). The reason being that an individual number can't be an instance of (P31) because there is only one fibonacci sequence. -- Netoholic (talk) 22:34, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

@Netoholic:, one fibonacci sequence is a class of (some) natural numbers. So they are instances of Fibonacci numbers (which is the label of the Fibonacci number (Q47577) in some languages). --Infovarius (talk) 21:01, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
Then that is a problem "Fibonacci sequence" and "Fibonacci number" are different entities and should have different Q items. -- Netoholic (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2016 (UTC) Update: I created Fibonacci series (Q23835349). -- Netoholic (talk) 05:18, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
The Swedish label and its aliases names both "numbers" AND "sequence". The article is about the sequence but the sitelink and the label tells about "numbers". Wikipedia is an instance of chaos theory (Q166314) sometimes.
A Q here: When I studied this field, I encountered many Fibonacci-like sequences and I did a lot of calculations with them, but there is still only one Fibonacci sequence? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 07:46, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
+1, by the way. I'd name a sequence "Fibonacci" if the recurrent rule is a(n)=a(n-1)+a(n-2). From any start. --Infovarius (talk) 21:21, 17 April 2016 (UTC)

Union of chemical element ???Edit

That edit : does not make any sense to me. Can you explain what you mean ? author  TomT0m / talk page 06:35, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

I mean "each chemical compound (Q11173) consists of chemical elements". And previous values don't make any sense to me, can you explain them? How can chemical compound be a union of phases? --Infovarius (talk) 21:47, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
Please read Help:BMP. for "consist of" the relevant property is has part (P527). "Union of" is for subtypes, more what is explained with Help:Classification : the content of a glass of liquid water, for example, is "liquid water". The phase allows us to divide all liquid water substances in more specific subclasses. author  TomT0m / talk page 06:30, 19 April 2016 (UTC)


May you explain this better? --Horcrux92 (talk) 19:28, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Horcrux92, because "Kasha" is for more general каша, and "buckweat groats" is a fair translation for гречневая каша. --Infovarius (talk) 21:32, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
According to your reasoning, Q186817 should link to commons:Category:Kasha instead of commons:Category:Porridges.
I think it has no sense to keep en:Kasha linking to commons:Category:Buckwheat groats instead of commons:Category:Kasha. If the problem is ru:Гречневая каша you should split the item. --Horcrux92 (talk) 21:42, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

pinacols (Q4362942)Edit

Could you please check whether or not pinacols (Q4362942) may be merged into pinacol (Q421634)? Is the former about an individual compound or a group? I ask you as a native RU speaker and because of Special:Diff/6193077/254281263. --Leyo 14:42, 22 April 2016 (UTC)

@Leyo: pinacols (Q4362942) is about a family of compounds. Radicals R2 can be different. --Infovarius (talk) 21:54, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
OK, I added pinacols as the English label. --Leyo 18:34, 22 May 2016 (UTC)


Потому что, статья про лит.произведение, издававшееся кучей издательств. DZ (talk) 08:25, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Interwiki to redirect pagesEdit

Hi Infovarius. Thank you for helping me. I'm puzzled by your edit. I tried the same multiple times and Wikidata kept saying that w:en:Logic puzzle (the redirect target) already had an entry here. Did I miss something? — Xavier, 13:03, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Xavier, there is a trick here. Redirect can't be added directly, so at first it should be converted to non-redirect. After adding it can be turned to redirect again. See history. --Infovarius (talk) 21:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Don't do it, Xavier. --Succu (talk) 21:30, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you Infovarius. If this simple trick can circumvent this restriction in WD, I wonder why this restriction exists at all. Succu, care to elaborate? — Xavier, 23:28, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
There is ongoing discussion and open feature request about allowing redirects. Redirects are not prohibited and not officially allowed, so the trick is out of law now. Succu is obviously contra, I am pro. --Infovarius (talk) 17:55, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Химические веществаEdit

Вот это меня смутило: Special:Diff/327798931. Противоречит соответствующему википроекту. --4th-otaku (talk) 21:14, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

@4th-otaku: Наверное потому, что nitrocellulose (Q143874) не конкретное вещество, а семейство. Поэтому моя правка была уточняющей (Q143874 более узкий класс сущностей, чем "химическое вещество"). --Infovarius (talk) 18:08, 20 May 2016 (UTC)


Please read the pages of the links you change before erasing my modifications, specially after i gave you explanations. There is only one page for the order Sphenisciformes and the family Sphenicidae in most of the wikipedia languages. The good page for penguins in the french wikipedia is the page "Sphenisciformes" which is like in all this other wiki a Sphenisciformes/Sphenicidae article. The page "Manchot" is a wrong article which is going to be merged in "Sphenisciformes". --Boogie Boy (talk) 19:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Please do not change the link of the french page for penguins. I already said that in all wiki except .fy, .hy and .ro there is only one page for Sphenisciformes and Spheniscidae. The title of the article doesn't really matter. --Boogie Boy (talk) 12:19, 4 September 2016 (UTC)

cousin second cousin (Q11275656), first cousin once removed descending (Q19901611)Edit

is now a mass, you reverted many edit's by native speakers, now both items have the same englisch description--Oursana (talk) 14:02, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

encyclopedia (Q5292) vs encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413)Edit

Добрый день, я вообще-то считал, что encyclopedia (Q5292) и encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413) — синонимы. Но вы, видимо, различаете эти значения. Поясните вот это. И приведите пример энциклопедии, не являющейся словарём. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 07:26, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Серия энциклопедий от Аванты не являются словарями. Серия советских детских энциклопедий. Словарь подразумевает некий список статей, часто в алфавитном порядке. Энциклопедия же подразумевает развёрнутую справочную информацию, формат бывает различный. --Infovarius (talk) 21:59, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
«Серия советских детских энциклопедий» — у меня есть одна такая дома (трёхтомник рыжего цвета с парусником на верхней крышке), но она тоже организованна по словарному принципу. Энциклопедий от Аванты я не видел. Как я себе представляю такую энциклопедию-не-словарь, я бы назвал её просто справочником. Но я вас понял — вы считаете encyclopedia (Q5292) гиперонимом encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413).
Если принять эту точку зрения, тогда надо поменять instance of (P31) на encyclopedic dictionary (Q975413) у некоторых изданий, организованных по словарному принципу, например, у Small Soviet Encyclopedia (Q1976178), Bible Encyclopedia of Archimandrite Nicephorus (Q4086271), Yuzhakov Big Encyclopedia (Q4091878), Sytin Military Encyclopedia (Q4114391), Jewish Encyclopedia of Brockhaus and Efron (Q4173137), Literary Encyclopedia 1929—1939 (Q4263804), Orthodox Theological Encyclopedia (Q19211082) и др. Как видно из этого списка, люди чаще ориентируются на заглавие — если написано «Энциклопедия», то и ставят P31 = encyclopedia (Q5292). -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 10:24, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Woman/female for sisterEdit

I do not understand your edit at sister Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 18:41, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

You see that there is two different items female (Q6581072) and woman (Q467) used here? -- Innocent bystander (talk) 14:37, 17 May 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I saw you reverted me. But I thought the MathWorld "Circumcircle" applied to circumscribed circle for triangle (Q2946460) in stead of Circumscribed circle (Q110176). Lymantria (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, Lymantria, you are right. I've forgotten about circumscribed circle for triangle (Q2946460). --Infovarius (talk) 15:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Lymantria (talk) 17:16, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


Thanks for editing my mistake. First I thought that the language links were distributed wrongly, therefore I changed them, nevertheless afterwards I understood that it was mistake. Sincerely--Nəcməddin Kəbirli (talk) 12:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)


А Вы зайдите в статью о нём в русской википедии и посмотрите, как там выглядит ссылка из Викиданных. По Вашему, формат типа «Лакшин В. Я. БСЭ / Булгаков Михаил Афанасьевич // Большая Советская Энциклопедия: [в 30 т.] — 3-е изд. — М.: Советская энциклопедия, 1971.» вполне допустим? А по-моему, повтор «БСЭ», «Большая Советская Энциклопедия» выглядит плохо. Illustr (talk) 15:41, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Я вообще-то не об этом Вам писал. Но если вы о метке в элементе статьи, то 1) такая метка информативнее для Викиданных; 2) для формирования библиографической ссылки можно брать свойство "название" из этого элемента. Впрочем, это можно обсудить на форуме (Викиданных). --Infovarius (talk) 15:48, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
А о чём, предлагаете использовать statement is subject of (P805) вместо section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958) для заголовка статьи? Не вижу разницы. Основная проблема для меня сейчас в том, что у многих статей из БСЭ title (P1476) забивает заголовок книги, поэтому статья из БСЭ выглядит как отдельная книга, см. например первую сноску в статье. Светлов, Михаил Аркадьевич. Illustr (talk) 16:49, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
Предлагаю использовать. Не обязательно вместо, но как минимум в дополнение. Суть в том, что элемент о статье всё равно будет и там можно будет указать всю сопутствующую информацию. Проблему в сноске увидел, но этой кухни подробно не знаю. Наверное, тоже можно решить через создание элемента и P:P805. --Infovarius (talk) 13:28, 8 June 2016 (UTC)


Hi! You reverted a merge of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) with Internet encyclopedia (Q615699). Could you please provide some additional information about hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) (labels, description, other statements) to better show the difference? Are there instances of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) which are not Internet encyclopedia (Q615699) or the other way round? -- JakobVoss (talk) 08:27, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

I suppose that this is obvious: hypertext encyclopedia has hyperlinks in its text and it needn't to be online (it can be distributed by discs). Many of instances of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) that I've added are not Internet encyclopedia (Q615699). --Infovarius (talk) 20:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Reversely some online encyclopedias can be of plain text, without hyperlinks. --Infovarius (talk) 20:46, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

P248, P805Edit

Вы вчера заменили stated in (P248) на statement is subject of (P805). Из-за этого в рувикипедии сломался гаджет WEF, виснет и в консоль браузера пишет, что не находит свойства: Error: Qualifiers «P248» of P1343[Q4173137] not found or not an array. Также сломалась перелинковка статей в викитеке (расположена в шапке в графе "другие источники", пример).

По определению формата заполнения библиографических элементов в Wikidata:WikiProject Books#Qualifiers для ссылок на элементы статей надо использовать именно P248. --Vladis13 (talk) 19:25, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Alexandra Pfemfert (Q2643653)Edit

Hi, I see that you have given Alexandra Pfemfert the property of being a citizen of the Soviet Union. I have not found any evidence that she ever visited the USSR or became a citizen of that state. I would be interested to here your reasons for the addition. Leutha (talk) 17:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for noticing, that's an error. I've just deduced it automatically from country of citizenship (P27) Russia (Q159) as this statement was plainly wrong (Russia (Q159) has begun in 1991). --Infovarius (talk) 20:55, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

demi-fond et P527Edit

Bonjour, vous avez supprimé des modifications que j'avais réalisé, en indiquant que ce n'était pas l'inverse de P279. Soit, mais que Property il faut utiliser dans ce cas ? Dans l'attente de votre réponse. Cordialement Mith (talk) 08:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

@Mith: Il n'a a pas de telle propriete. Il faut utiliser seulement P279 en 2000 metres (Q211164)/../.. ou P527 et P361. --Infovarius (talk) 12:00, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

статьи о пикапе, элементы Q20661975 и Q936820Edit

Добрый день! Можно попросить Вас пояснить откат моих правок в интервики? --eugrus (talk) 07:46, 25 June 2016 (UTC)


Hi, I wonder why you deleted this? --Rabbid (talk) 17:55, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

@Rabbid: Because righteousness (Q1144825) is not disambiguation. --Infovarius (talk) 19:51, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Emergency numbersEdit

Hi Infovarius,

I have to admit that I've never been in Russia (Q159). Nevertheless I try to sort out the mess of emergency phone number (P2852) we have here. Could you please have another look at 01 (Q24233148), 02 (Q25648899) and 03 (Q25648900) and give either an explanation for the two phone number (P1329) statements or delete one of them based on the current situation in Russia? The data is for example used at voy:en:Russia.

Thank you very much,

T.seppelt (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. But one time (may be in past) there were special analogues of emergency numbers for mobile phones. I suppose with "1" in front, I should check... How to add them better? --Infovarius (talk) 11:56, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. Maybe those numbers could be added to the same items with qualifiers and a lower rank... -- T.seppelt (talk) 17:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

Anatol Astapenka (Q13028434)Edit

Dear Infovarius, please see my answer here. Tomasz Bladyniec (talk) 12:06, 15 July 2016 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius,

Why not participate in the discussion on the WikiProject instead of doing random changes to the implementation of its model?
--- Jura 20:58, 23 July 2016 (UTC)

@Jura1: I'm sorry, my position has not changed from Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Names#Once_more:_Russian_name: I see problems with what you are doing, I don't see a clear position for Cyrillic names, and I don't know a solution. I am just trying to correct items where your edits are complete disaster. --Infovarius (talk) 11:08, 25 July 2016 (UTC)
I don't quite see why we can't find a solution for Russian names. We managed Korean, Belorussian and Japanese. If we differentiate between items for original spellings of a person's name and transliterations we should be able to work it out.
The suggestion by TomT0m also limits problems: Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Names#Linking_names_item_to_their_string
--- Jura 10:15, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

electronvolt (Q83327) for particle massEdit

I don't think one should consider eV a unit of mass. It is officially allowed to be used together with the SI system and for the SI system, the statement is wrong, since it needs to be eV/c^2. Of course eV is a unit for mass when using natural units with c=1 and one might be tempted to use a qualifier for that, but I am not sure this would be a good idea: When setting the appropriate physical constants=1, one can in principle express every quantity by some power of only one basis unit. In other words, one can use any unit^x for any quantity. Mass in eV is a very popular example, but depending on the context, things like photon energy in THz (h=1 which makes Hz a unit for energy) are also widely used. I wouldn't know where to draw the boundary between commonly used and completely unusual choice of unit.--Debenben (talk) 00:23, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

@Debenben: yes, you are right. I don't have final answer either. But I should say that 1) this unit is widely used in such manner; 2) we count also units from centimetre–gram–second system of units (Q26240), MKS system of units (Q512417), gravitational metric system (Q1213508) and other systems correspondingly, not only SI. --Infovarius (talk) 10:28, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Gabriel MetsuEdit

Why do you think we need to keep the less accurate date? הנדב הנכון (talk) 08:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Because it is present at authoritative sources. We can make it with "deprecate" rank, I think. --Infovarius (talk) 10:29, 25 July 2016 (UTC)


As far as I understand see also (P1659) should only be applied to properties and not to items. (reaction to your revert Michiel1972 (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Dictionary is not a genreEdit

Regarding your edit here. Dictionary isn't claimed to be a genre of literature, and indeed it isn't, it is a type of reference work (Q13136). More of a thing, than a style. Danrok (talk) 02:21, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Ok, but why didn't you move this value to instance of (P31) then? --Infovarius (talk) 23:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

Your revertsEdit

Hi, I noticed that you reverted me on Disneyland Resort station (Q2114035) and Olympic station (Q2076558). I removed instance of (P31) because I thought connecting line (P81) would be enough, as instance of (P31) seems to require has part (P527) on the other item as well (necessitating 111 extra values on MTR (Q14751)). Should instance of (P31) be added back to the other 109 items? Jc86035 (talk) 03:12, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

I understand that this is redundancy... But I suppose that instance of (P31) has the priority and it has to be at each item (or P:P279). May be connecting line (P81) is redundant? --Infovarius (talk) 23:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
I guess we could just have the same value for both connecting line (P81) and instance of (P31) (for most stations – stations of Tung Chung line (Q989358) and Airport Express (Q409036) could share P31:Q(Lantau Airport Railway); although the item doesn't exist yet). Jc86035 (talk) 13:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Oh, actually my reverts are about part of (P361) and this is other thing... We have no doubts about instance of (P31) I hope. But I am not sure about necessity of P:P361.. --Infovarius (talk) 22:31, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
Sorry about that; my mistake. Should part of (P361) then be removed, or replaced with part of (P361):(lines)? Jc86035 (talk) 13:04, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
(Removed; feel free to add it back if you so wish) Jc86035 (talk) 06:22, 17 August 2016 (UTC)


  • Some* archangels are Biblical figures. Many, perhaps even most, are not. --Palnatoke (talk) 15:15, 18 August 2016 (UTC)
Really? I didn't know. You mean, they are not mentioned in the canonical books of Bible? --Infovarius (talk) 10:15, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

"rowing(sport)" (Q159354) & "Canoe sprint" (Q1141850)Edit

hi! yesterday i removed "rowing(sport)" (Q159354) = bn:নৌকা বাইচ & you reverted it (correct). but whats the problem in "Canoe sprint" (Q1141850) = bn:নৌকাবাইচ; which is same link in bangla wikipedia bn:নৌকা বাইচ. it will be created as bn:নৌকাচালনা. look at en:Canoe sprint. pls correct it to build up a better wikipedia. have a nice day. - Suvray (talk) 14:55, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

I suppose you are right, thanks, I moved bn-link. --Infovarius (talk) 19:44, 20 August 2016 (UTC)


Добрый день, для «опера комик» (французская вариация комической оперы) есть элемент Q785479, поэтому я убрал это наименование из Q13220650, чтобы избежать путаницы — при выборе на русском языке. Я сильно ошибаюсь?))--EUvin (talk) 10:24, 22 August 2016 (UTC)


Hi infovarius,

could you help me with I want to extend Q1444 organ to fully semantics organology, it means: Organ placed in SomeBuilding(Church) was Created in year and Created by manufacturer and maybe Ceased to exist in year. This Organ has keyboards with Lowest and Highest notes (X manuals and Y pedals), every Keyboard has Stop(s) with Footage...

North America (Q2017699)Edit

Hi, you've just reverted my edition: . I don't think it's right because the definition of shares border with (P47) says: *countries or administrative subdivisions, of equal level*. Northern America (region) has a different level than Mexico (sovereign state). Nurni (talk) 06:34, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Ah, yes, it makes sense. But I suppose that in cases where there are no bounding regions of equal level we can choose not the same level, can't we? --Infovarius (talk) 12:49, 31 August 2016 (UTC)


Hello.The three items Includes information on Wikipedia.See also Q21010653.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 13:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2: Yes, list of Wikipedias (Q21010653) contains information on Wikipedia. And many-many others. But it doesn't mean that these items are about the same. --Infovarius (talk) 09:57, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

Q26879042 and Q26879054Edit

Hi Infovarius, could you add the labels in English if you know these words in English? It could help to translate in other languages. Thanks in advance. Pamputt (talk) 05:48, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

I've done for second. But I found no offcial translation for the first. En-wiki says that Udmurt and Georgian have Adverbial case, and ru-wiki says that cases in these languages called differently: "соответственный" in Udmurt, and "трансформативный" in Georgian. I am not an expert but I suspect that ru-wiki classifies adverbial case into more precise classes (e.g. "соответственный" also called "adverbial-positive"). --Infovarius (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

территориальное деление России?Edit

по [1]/ Для чего "территориальное деление России" в населённых пунктах (деревня, село, посёлок и т.п. наследуемых от "населённый пункт")?--User№101 (talk) 21:17, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Для того, чтобы в итоге все населённые пункты и другие административные единицы России попали в одно дерево: Query: claim[31:(TREE[121594][][279])]. Да, напрямую делать P31 некрасиво, но для того, чтобы этого избежать, нужно создавать подклассы и соединять с ними. Пример для Украины: rural council of Ukraine (Q4414033) вместо selsoviet (Q27002). --Infovarius (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
населённые пункты — это не административные единицы--User№101 (talk) 21:02, 28 September 2016 (UTC)
Город не административная единица? Деревня не административная единица? --Infovarius (talk) 21:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)
Да! Сельсовет да, деревня нет. Город нет, администрация которой подчинены нп - да. В связи с муниципальной реформой (не путать с составами муниципальных образований, который 100% не в Вашу пользу), в уже в 80-90% НП подчинены в России либо районам либо городским округам, остальные в состоянии оформл. бумаг, ОКАтО Вам в помощь, который д.б. заменён на ОКтМО - который 100% не в пользу Вашей попытки аргументации --User№101 (talk) 20:03, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Fibonacci number/seriesEdit

The articles in Q47577 and Q23835349 are about exactly the same. Some languages have just named the article by a word for number and some for series/sequence. No language has an article for both words and there is no reason to split the articles. See e.g. en:Fibonacci number which bolds Fibonacci sequence in the opening sentence, writes the start of the sequence, has lots of general formulas about the sequence, and so on. Wikidata items are for articles about the same subject. The titles don't have to be word-by-word direct translations. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:25, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

Except the number is an item of the set we call the series... so these, in-fact, aren't the same. --Izno (talk) 13:28, 2 October 2016 (UTC)
Wrong! The numbers in the sequence are related by the Fibonacci recursion relation. You cannot have the numbers without the series and you cannot have the series without the numbers. The articles should not be split!TonyMath (talk) 19:42, 5 October 2016 (UTC)
So a series {1, 1, 1, ...} (sequence, rather!) are related by equivalency to the number "1", yet I can say that the one is not the other fairly trivially... --Izno (talk) 22:21, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Actually we have 2 questions here: 1) do we even need 2 items? 2) if we need, should all sitelinks (despite of titles, and may be content) clusterize in one item? I have doubts about both of them. Look for example a recent item: Q26851286. Do we need it? --Infovarius (talk) 12:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

Primary sources toolEdit

Just FYI: it seems that this tool adds duplicated entries sometimes. See this your edit. Ankry (talk) 09:36, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

May be I've clicked the value, not the source as I intended. So it's my fault. --Infovarius (talk) 11:18, 4 October 2016 (UTC)

transliteration (Q134550)Edit

Why did you undo my edit in Special:Diff/383275680? "Transliteration" involves converting text from one script to another. The pages do use different scripts, but the content is not the same - it was not converted from one script to another, so it is not a transliteration. - Nikki (talk) 10:12, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hm. But the title is a transliteration. --Infovarius (talk) 11:21, 4 October 2016 (UTC)
It seems strange to me to add statements which only refer to the page name (page names can be changed, it's not clear that it only applies to the page name and it prevents other sitelinks from being added to the item). Anyway, I've started a broader discussion at Property_talk:P2959#Describing_duplicated_pages. - Nikki (talk) 07:49, 7 October 2016 (UTC)


What purpose does it serve to have a less accurate, even if sourced, date on wikidata? This information already appears in the two sourced dates. הנדב הנכון (talk) 12:00, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

hydroelectricity (Q80638)Edit

In Russian гидроэнергетика may also be an industry, but in all germanic langages it's only a form of electricity.--Kopiersperre (talk) 21:12, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Please answer me. If not, I will separate this item.--Kopiersperre (talk) 09:23, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
@Kopiersperre: there is already hydropower (Q170196). --Infovarius (talk) 19:59, 8 October 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages and family nameEdit

Hello! Please verify your work before changing the P31 of disambiguation pages. I'm working on P734 and P735 and correcting hundreds of items. When disambiguation pages are linked to family name using different from (P1889), it means that at least one of the interwiki is really a disambiguation page and so the existence of both items is valid. I understand that several of these interwikis can be wrong (about the surname and not a disambiguation page) because right now I'm only verifying if the existence of both is needed or not; correcting the interwiki will come at a later date, because I had to prioritize. So if you encounter on of these cases, instead of "correcting" only P31 (and to let description saying it's a disambiguation page!) you can move the interwiki about surnames to the surname item. Which is listed with P1889 on the disambiguation page. Thank you. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 11:27, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

@Harmonia Amanda: Do you know there is the problem with surname pages (mostly consisting of a list of persons) on some wikis? Often they have some kind of template which contains DISAMBIG in it, so formally they are disambigs, but practically (and should be used as) they are P31 family name (Q101352). Also it is useful that such pages should be linked together (see Phase 1 of Wikidata), so I'd move (almost) all of the sitelinks to newly created "surname" item. And it will make previous item unnecessary and either delete or merged with the new. So I'd propose to you not to make new empty items but simply to change the type of existing. --Infovarius (talk) 19:46, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
As I stated in my previous message, I only create a new family name item when at least one of the interwiki linked to the disambiguation page item is really a disambiguation page (meaning it's listing something other than just people sharing the same name). If all interwikis are only about a family name and listing people who share it, then I correct the P31 and the descriptions. I did that to hundreds of items these last months. But when a Wikipedia article is a disambiguation page which lists locations as well as people, then using "family name" as the P31 would be blatantly false and we need to separate the two. I'm not in the habit of creating empty items, seeing how I merged hundreds of Yellowcard's creations should have proved that. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:21, 8 October 2016 (UTC)
I glad that you are more rational than someone. But still there can be a disagreement. How do you define a page to be disambig? Take for example a page which contains a little info about surname, a list of persons, and a list of things (locations too) in a section "Named after" (or "See also"). --Infovarius (talk) 13:34, 11 October 2016 (UTC)


To solve this problem: Halon is in many languages a synonym for haloalkane (Q271026) (en:Halon). Is Галогенорганические соединения correctly translated by Halogenorganic compounds and Галогенуглеводороды by Halogenhydrocarbons?--Kopiersperre (talk) 10:24, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kopiersperre: So why es-wiki has both es:Halón and es:Haloalcano? About words it seems correct, but let's better check properties and then we can find the difference in definitions. Do you agree with these: 1) ; 2) ; 3) ; 4) ; 5) but not ; 6) ; 7) there are some alcohol (Q156) which are organofluorine (Q2200141) (sorry, couldn't found specific items). --Infovarius (talk) 13:04, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Halon is a synonym for Haloalkan AND a family name for fire extinguishing halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920) (Spanish: "El halón es un gas extintor"). I've moved all languages which articles deal about these fire extinguishing gases to Q27209842.--Kopiersperre (talk) 13:23, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kopiersperre: So what about my statements? Are they all correct? --Infovarius (talk) 11:45, 18 October 2016 (UTC)


Why: [2]? 2nd name clearly qualifies as "another given name". Ankry (talk) 18:43, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

Cyrillic given nameEdit

Hi! It made no sense to have a label in another writing system than the one used by each language, but you were totally right that there were still errors/misleading labels in the item. So I hope that with my modifications, it's better? I deleted the Latin transliteration when there weren't a description present to clarify what string the item was about and added the real given name as an alias in all languages which use a different writing system than the Cyrillic one. Is that correct for you? --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 12:00, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Still speaking about Anna (Q22713652), of course. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 12:16, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
Ça va. Not ideal though. I imaging another variant - label in another writing system can be a list of all possible transliterations. Example: Евгений. --Infovarius (talk) 09:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)


Доброго времени суток. По какому праву Вы исправили описание элемента Q143368 на неправильное? --VladXe (talk) 15:44, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Прошу прощения, это был перевод английского. Просто очень общее описание - слишком туманно, лучше поточнее. --Infovarius (talk) 09:56, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Замена типа НПEdit

Добрый день! В статье Высокогорный (Хабаровский край) несколько раз менялся тип НП. Вы ссылаетесь на #autolist2. Может быть подправить лист2? Подозреваю, что есть и другие несоответствия ОКТМО. Как бы нам их исправить? Игорь Темиров (talk) 19:44, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Не понял, в чём вы видите ошибку? --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
Ой, и вправду, чего это я вас потревожил. Игорь Темиров (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Jesus ChristEdit

Hi. I think you can't classify Christ's religion as "judaism" because he belived he was a Messiah. Faith that Jesus was indeed a Messiah is a basic and most important difference between christianity and judaism. --22merlin (talk) 14:10, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@22merlin: According to some his statements, he doesn't deny "old faith", i.e. judaism. And he was baptised as judaist. Christians base themselves on a sacred book "New Testament" which obviously been written after the Christ. And many apostles count themselves judaists. And what about original sin? --Infovarius (talk) 14:09, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Q8138689 and Q27516889Edit

I moved the hifwiki link from Q8138689 to a new item because the hifwiki page does not seem to be a permanent (i.e. intentional) duplicate. Could you explain why you think it is? - Nikki (talk) 14:40, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

I supposed that this was in some other dialect... --Infovarius (talk) 13:57, 25 October 2016 (UTC)


Коллега, Вы изменили даты рождения и формат дат с юлианского на григорианский. В результате этого при загрузке даты в карточку теряется юлианская дата. Для отображения в карточке даты по юлианскому и григорианскому календарям в Викиданных необходимо размещать дату в юлианском календаре с пометкой "юлианский". Считаю, что для двойного отображения дат в карточке следует вернуть даты рождения "6 декабря 1878/Юлианский" и "9 декабря 1879/Юлианский". Kalendar (talk) 19:01, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

@Kalendar: а разве автоматического вычисления юлианской даты не настроено? Метка "юлианский" как раз предназначена для того, чтобы сохранённая григорианская дата отображалась в юлианском стиле. А тут какой-то костыль на костыле получается - хранится в григорианском календаре, а мы её считаем юлианской. --Infovarius (talk) 14:01, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Формат хранения даты в Викиданых сменён. Сейчас для возможности отображения даты в карточке в юлианском и григорианском формате в Викиданных нужно ввести юлианскую дату и поставить формат даты "юлианский". Проверьте это в данной статье, убрав в карточке строку "дата рождения". Вы увидите лишь григорианскую дату. Kalendar (talk) 19:26, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
Не понял - что значит "сменён"? Можете дать ссылку на это изменение? --Infovarius (talk) 11:20, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
Обоснование изменение мне неизвестно. Косвенная ссылка — ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Технический/2016/09#Формат двойной даты в Викиданных. Возможно, из этого можно извлечь какую-нибудь информацию. Kalendar (talk) 18:36, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Порри ГаттерEdit

Зачем? В статье одно изображение уже есть, пусть и несвободное (а так появляется ещё и это во второй карточке). А эта картинка -- не непосредственная иллюстрация к "Порри Гаттеру", а постер несостоявшегося любительского мультфильма. Неужели с ней лучше, чем без неё? --Colt browning (talk) 14:18, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

@Colt browning:. Хм, интересный конфликт. C одной стороны я понимаю проблему рувики и уберу это изображение, с другой - в элементе тоже должно быть какое-нибудь изображение, и если оно единственное, пусть и плохое, - придётся оставлять его. Это, например, для того, чтобы другие языки могли что-нибудь показать (они же не могут отобразить изображение с рувики). Так что, в общем случае я за изображение в элементе. --Infovarius (talk) 11:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


Dear Infovarius, I hope I'm posting in the right place. I'm a beginner on Wikidata. I don't understand why Earth is not an instance of 'planet'. I'm trying to obtain a list of planets on the Wikidata Query Service, and there is almost nothing. Shouldn't a request for all the instances of 'planet' return all planets? Is there a good documentation about how I should use 'instance of'? Because it's not clear for me right now. THank you Cubewano (talk) 21:36, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

OK sorry for bothering you - I think I got it. It's way more clever to do a query using "items in any subclass of the planet class" than to tag "Earth" with all classes above a particular class until we reach 'planet'. Cubewano (talk) 22:15, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
Yes, User:Cubewano, you understand right: we try to use as narrow class as possible and query needs to use "all subclasses of the planet class". --Infovarius (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Orycteropus (Q1975774)Edit

Do you have a source for this edit? en:Orycteropus lists the genus as having several species. --Njardarlogar (talk) 07:50, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

group (Q83478) and redundant subclass statementsEdit

i removed the is subclass of magma (Q679903) relation because i think it is redundant. i think that (at least with mathematical objects) subclass statements that follow transitively should be avoided. it would clutter things up really bad to make any possible subclass statement, so i tried to weed the redundant ones out and replace them with more specific ones. i won't remove your statement again, tho. --opensofias (talk) 19:06, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

) --opensofias (talk) 16:22, 6 November 2016 (UTC)


Это подсвойство от "языки, на которых говорит или пишет персона" - так что использование его у персон, у которых вообще нет печатных работ или известных публичных выступлений, сомнительно, а без источников - и ориссно. NBS (talk) 17:29, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Я руководствуюсь здравым смыслом, если честно. Люди, которых считают русскими писателями/актёрами/учёными, обычно по-русски говорят. И если они родились в России, то с большой доле вероятности русский - родной. Можете предложить какой-нибудь более строгий подход для массового добавления этого свойства, или хотя бы, languages spoken, written or signed (P1412)? --Infovarius (talk) 12:49, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
1) А зачем его добавлять массово? 2) При заполнении P1412 у писателей и актёров, вроде, проблем возникнуть не должно, у учёных несколько посложнее - а вот с P103 здравый смысл легко переходит в орисс (вот что здравый смысл подскажет о русских дворянах пушкинских времён?). Но я-то даже не об этом - я о подобных случаях (спортсмен и художник, никаких сведений о печатных публикациях нет). NBS (talk) 15:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)
1) Ну как, в идеале каждая персона должна иметь P103, хочу приблизиться к этому идеалу. Ну и понять распределение по языкам. Сейчас родной французский указан у 36 тыс. (первое место), а русский только у 9,8 тыс. (до моих правок было всего 550). Насколько это соответствует правде? 2) С дворянами всё понятно - французский или русский, заполнять не буду. А вот с Q1800184 не вижу проблемы - разве есть какие-то сомнения? --Infovarius (talk) 09:58, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
1) У многих вообще P103 невозможно определить: даже не говоря о умерших во младенчестве принцев и всяких Маугли - некоторые не смогли бы даже в автобиографии указать это свойство настолько однозначно и без комментариев, как требуют Викиданные; о ком-то просто не осталось АИ; у кого-то детство пришлось на тот период, по которому в АИ нет согласия, был ли это уже язык или ещё диалект, и т.д. 2) Об общем подходе: предлагаете чисто на основании русских ФИО делать выводы о родном языке? Допустим, в начале XX века это будет соответствовать действительности даже в 90% случаев - но читатель-то будет воспринимать (если это свойство будет где-то использовано) это как дополнительную информацию, а не как оригинальное исследование на основе написанного в статье. Конкретный случай: Немухин скорее всего был из более-менее зажиточной семьи (тогда спортом редко занимались выходцы из низов), и больше о его детстве мне ничего неизвестно - так что есть некоторая вероятность (хотя и небольшая), что в детстве благодаря гувернантке он мог лучше знать, скажем, немецкий или французский (АИ это тоже не противоречит). NBS (talk) 20:20, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Bourgade and townEdit

Hi, I'm refering to [3]. Fistly. I didn't find the word bourgade in any dictionary no matter it was one-language or two-language. I used [4], [5] and [6]. As an answer of your question. I differed using Czech language (which is my mother one). As Q3374262 says it can be translated as "městys" to Czech. "Městys" means something smaller than town but bigger than village. So I think that isn't said that bourgade is the same as town. The best, --Martin Urbanec (talk) 10:04, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Do you have analog of "town" in Czech? (Different from "city") And did you see Městys (Q16155707)? :) --Infovarius (talk) 12:56, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Moss vs BryophyteEdit

No one has ever claimed that "mosses" and "bryophytes" are the same thing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: You know, it's hard to distinguish between Bryophyta (Bryophita sensu stricto) and bryophytes (Bryophyta)... Would you be so kind to explain me the difference? As I see Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178) includes Category:Mosses (Q8994906)+Category:Liverworts (Q8266107)+Category:Hornworts (Q8522280), right? Rather small difference... --Infovarius (talk) 11:40, 9 November 2016 (UTC)
"Small" difference? No. Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178) is a far more inclusive category. "Mosses" include about 10K species, and "Liverworts" include about 8K species. "Bryophytes" (sensu lato) thus includes almost twice as many species as "Mosses" does. There are also enormous differences in fundamental anatomy and morphology between the several member groups, so if "mosses" are like "birds" and "liverworts" are like "mammals", then "bryophytes" would be "mammals + birds". That's definitely not a "small" difference. And yes, there are about as many different species of mosses as there are of birds (both are about 10K species), but there are more kinds of liverworts (6-8K species) than there are mammals (5K species).
Also, you're only including the currently living groups of plants is your breakdown. There are additional fossils that belong to Category:Bryophytes (Q5924178), but are not part of any of those three groups of living plants. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:44, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776)Edit

Sorry, but I don't get your point - of course members of both classes are fictional, but that alone doesn't make anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776) a subclass of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) - otherwise we could stop categorizing fictional entities at all. anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) contains objects being normally inanimate (toasters, tables etc.) being depicted with human characteristics. Mouses are normally living creatures. anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) is a subclass of fictional object (Q15706911) AND Q1972868, anthropomorphic mouse or rat (Q27303776) only of fictional object (Q15706911) (most anthropomorphic mouses are not instances of fictional object (Q15706911)). If you claim anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) a subclass of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) you could claim just as well fictional character (Q95074) a subclass of fictional object (Q15706911). But I think it could be useful to make a difference between (normally) living things (Q1972868) and non-living things (fictional object (Q15706911)).Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:35, 13 November 2016 (UTC)

I don't get too. If you assure inanimate nature of anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) then all properties in it (especially instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279)) are wrong (because they are about classes of animate things). And I don't understand how do you differ between animate and inanimate characters. Is Winnie-the-Pooh animate (fictional bear) or inanimate (anthropomorphic object (Q27598544))? --Infovarius (talk) 18:38, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
Ok. I think we both agree that there are no inanimate characters. But there are characters based on living organisms (sheep, anthropomorphic cows, fictional humans etc.) and characters based on inanimate things (living tables, talking cups, thinking teddy bears (plush toys)). For the first group there is this class Q1972868. But (as far as I see) there is no class for fictional characters being items. Thatswhy I created this class in the section of Q1972868 and fictional object (Q15706911). Winnie-the-Pooh is actually a teddy bear (a plush toy) and under that aspect an anthropomorphic object.Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 22:27, 14 November 2016 (UTC)
But he is also fictional bear (Q27132946) which is Q1972868 (animate?). --Infovarius (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
All anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) are Q1972868. It's a subclass. Winnie-the-Pooh is a living plush toy. But many people would also consider him a fictional bear and looking for fictional bears they would expect to (also) find Winnie-the-Pooh.Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 23:41, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

watch (Q178794) and wristwatch (Q26965868)Edit

Why you separated wristwatch (Q26965868) from watch (Q178794)? Both use on wrist... !?!? I can't find any discussion about your changes... Please somewhere discuss before you something merge, separate or make large interwikis moves from one entry to another entry. --Treisijs (talk) 22:53, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

Because pocket watch (Q849813) are watch (Q178794) but not wristwatch (Q26965868). I just followed the discussion: Topic:Tcb7ffcuscfznav8. I suppose that I shouldn't discuss every merge or separation which can be self-explained by properties. In other way, I'll explain all my edits and revert them if I would be wrong. --Infovarius (talk) 08:28, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
@Treisijs: Another problem with discussions is that I can't add edit summary :( so I can't explain my actions during them. --Infovarius (talk) 15:10, 6 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Bisection construction.gifEdit

Hello, bisection (Q3128632) - why not? --Fractaler (talk) 11:19, 23 November 2016 (UTC)


ja:河川敷」に一番近い英語は riverbed かと今は思っています。提案してくださった「ru:Речное русло」も近そうなのですが判断しかねています。なので私が編集する前の版に戻そうと考えているのですが、構いませんか?

I'm sorry I can't speak any language but Japanese. "ja:河川敷" means "敷地(site/area/zone) for 河川(river)." I finally came to think "riverbed" in English is the closest to the meaning of "河川敷." "ru:Речное русло" is linked to "nl:rivierbedding," but not to "en:stream bed." So I'll give up and restore the earliest revision I'd not edited yet. Could I restore it although your edits are also undone? --和太郎 (talk) 06:36, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

In such a case, at least respond to my message before undoing, please.--和太郎 (talk) 13:18, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
@和太郎: Oh, yes, sorry. So we have Q1837011 and Q1429491 additionally. Do you feel the need for 2 notions? I see only 2 languages with 2 articles: eo:Fluejo+eo:Riverujo, and ja:川底+ja:河川敷. What's the difference? --Infovarius (talk) 15:28, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
"ja:河川敷" means "the area between banks." What does "сухое русло реки" mean? I thought water isn't flowing there. At 河川敷, water is commonly flowing. "ja:川底" is "底(bottom) of 川(river, which looks like a river, doesn't it? 川川川)" and literally means "the bottom of a river."
The space between a flow and its bank is included at 河川敷, but not 川底. I have no idea if you have spaces like this in continental countries where rivers aren't very steep. The major difference between the 2 Japanese words is the space.--和太郎 (talk) 06:45, 10 December 2016 (UTC)


The reason I removed the link in Q16692637 is that as far as I could tell it's a link to a page in the user namespace. And those links aren't notable. Mbch331 (talk) 12:09, 30 November 2016 (UTC)

@Mbch331:, I understand this. But moving to user namespace was a temporary deal, and we lose the link between the item and the article during back moving if we have no link now. So this link is for convenient maintenance in future. Or do you promise to track this article and to add a sitelink when the article will be moved to main namespace again? :) --Infovarius (talk) 14:11, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
I couldn't tell it was a temporary move. I'm not deleting the link anymore. Mbch331 (talk) 16:20, 2 December 2016 (UTC)

Languages of RussiaEdit

I have reverted your edits about the languages of Russia. In my opinion the statements about locally official languages should be referred only to the individual federal entities. The "tag applies to part" is necessary only when the parts doesn't have their own Wikidata entities, which is not the case for the republics of Russia. Having this informations referring also to Russia is a useless duplication, which makes Wikidata maintenance more complicated, and is also misleading. For example, a query for all the countries of the world with the respective official languages [7] would return all the local languages, which is probably not what the user wanted, since the central government only works in Russian. Tcp-ip (talk) 08:31, 1 December 2016 (UTC)

Do you propose to clear (almost) all statements about official languages in Spain (Q29)? Infovarius (talk) 15:07, 6 December 2016 (UTC)
So by your edits in Q29 I see that we should do the same in Q159. So I revert your revert. --Infovarius (talk) 12:39, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
First, actually, I haven't edited Spain (Q29) . Since you have looked at my edits, you may have noticed that I am working at improving data about official languages because I have noticed that there are still many flaws about these in Wikidata, but I haven't studied the page about Spain (Q29) yet. In my opinion, as I have already stated, there is no need, and it is even misleading, to use the qualifier applies to part (P518) when the same thing can be clearly expressed by directly attributing the statement at the entity about that part. Currently, as you can see here [8], only Spain (Q29), Russia (Q159) and United Kingdom (Q145) use applies to part (P518) in statements about their official language and I do think that they could all be replaced.Tcp-ip (talk) 15:38, 18 December 2016 (UTC)


The currency that is really in use is the euro, while the lira is just something that formally coexist. I've reduced the ranking in order to extract just euro for the infobox. That said, let me know if you agree on previous ranking or not. --Andyrom75 (talk) 16:58, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

@Andyrom75: Sorry I am not familiar with the situation and I don't understand the problem. If the lira is formally correct why would you ignore it? If it is not used today (but was used earlier) then we can increase a ranking for euro. While "deprecated" rank means that the value was not correct ever. --Infovarius (talk) 11:29, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
Oh thanks, in this case it's me that I'm not familiar with Wikidata :-) because I have assumed that the meaning/use of "depracated" is the same like in programming, that stands for some istruction that's works (hence correct) but there are other that should be used in their place. Generally speaking, I think that something that is wrong should be just deleted and not classified in a specific way.
So ok, since both are formally correct, I'm ok with your approach. I'm going to set the ranking as per your comment. Let me know if you are fine with it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:53, 9 December 2016 (UTC)
@Andyrom75: Ok. But what is with lyra? Is it used now or not? --Infovarius (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Italian Lira is the previous official currency in Italy. San Marino Lira was the equivalent in San Marino with an exchange rate 1:1 with the Italian one.
In 2002 San Marino has adopted Euro (because Italy did), so as far as I know, San Marino Lira do not exist anymore. --Andyrom75 (talk) 22:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Kings in Greek mythologyEdit

What do you think of this? No one has given an opinion yet. Thank you, --Epìdosis 17:16, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

Q5608148 and commons:Category:Insects vs commons:Category:InsectaEdit

About you revert of Q5608148:

  • commons:Category:Insects is placed in commons:Category:Insecta. So referencing Category:Insecta is enough (it is on top of the other)
  • Many taxon have 2 commons categories (scientific name + vernacular name). The vernacular category is always secondary and should not be pointed at by wikipedias. Mostly they contain picture of non identified species
  • If you look at commons:Category:Insecta you will see the error "Error in Wikidata: wikidata cat item 'catégorie Commons' (P373) should not have multiple values." It is due to the fact that Category:Insecta has a double P935 in wikidata (the only biology category in this case).

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 21:09, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello, @Liné1:. The biggest problem I see now is your last sentence. But I don't like the situation. Why is this mess with 2 equivalent categories? I am just pointing this problem, because we cannot prefer one category after another. --Infovarius (talk) 12:16, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
Excellent quesstion. For which I have 2 answers:
  • On wikicommons we like scientific names (valid in all countries). So we have a tree of scientific names. Only lower categories (species category or subspecies category) should contain pictures. If a picture displays a specimen of unidentified species , it should be in a "Unidentified XXX" category (placed in category XXX. XXX being a scientific name.)
    Example: an unidentified bird picture should be in commons:Category:Unidentified Aves. But pictures providers don't like it because "Unidentified" is negativ. So they also put commons:Category:Birds. This category also contains all the pictures arround birds but without bird on it (birds road signs, birds caretakers, birds hunters, bird food...)
    vernacular categories are always **placed in** the scentific name category.
  • On wikipedias: Some wikipedias have both scientific names categories (to see in one shot what scientific name we cover) and vernacular categories (to search a bird by its name).
Hope it helps. BR Liné1 (talk) 14:50, 12 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't like this ambiguity... But I found the item with scientific name, so I moved commons:Category:Insecta there. --Infovarius (talk) 15:00, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
Yes, there are 3 items. Here is my proposition:
Category:Insecta (Q8977496) linked to insect (Q1390) and linked to commons:Category:Insecta and commons:Insecta
Category:Insects (Q5608148) linked to commons:Category:Insects and commons:Insect (no plural for unknown reason)
BR Liné1 (talk) 20:37, 13 December 2016 (UTC)
I don't see why shouldn't we have both categories (topic's main category (P910)) in insect (Q1390). Infovarius (talk) 13:52, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Namespace for disambiguation pagesEdit

Hi! in this edit, you asserted that all disambiguation pages are in the project namespace. They were already asserted to be in the main namespace, and namespaces are (obviously) disjoint. Thus your change makes the set of disambiguation pages empty. Did you mean to imply that they could be in either namespace? Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:31, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

prose (Q676)Edit

Hi there. I'm trying to understand the rationale behind this edit you made. Do you feel that prose (Q676) should not be regarded as a genre? ~nmaia d 23:34, 3 January 2017 (UTC)

Hi, User:NMaia. Yes, but may be I can't to explain it 100% well. It's like animated film (Q202866). They are both forms (the Q676 is a form of text, the second is a form of film), not stylistic genres. Also Q676 is marked as subclass of genre, so it is not a genre itself too. --Infovarius (talk) 19:24, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

non-fiction (Q213051)Edit

Добрый день! Данный элемент - о направлении в искусстве/творчестве вообще, а fiction (Q8253) говорит сама за себя. Я её в качестве противоположного элемента как раз и поставил в non-fiction literature (Q27801). --INS Pirat (t | c) 05:00, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

А, вероятно, в элементе смешаны литература и не только литература. --INS Pirat (t | c) 05:03, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Кстати, спасибо, забыл об этом аспекте. Но в Q8253 действительно смесь... Fiction означает не только литературу. --Infovarius (talk) 19:27, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

revert 1Edit

Hello Infovarius,
about this revert:
Category:Manis (Q9754908) is a category corresponding at the genus Manis (Q25397).
Manis (Q2659251) being a subgenus, it is only a part of genus Manis (Q25397) (and not a synonym).
A genus can contain hundred of subtaxa (the possible rank being: subgenera, Sectiones, Series, species, subspecies, varietas, forma).
category's main topic (P301) should contain the exact taxon subject, not all its content (Imaging for "Animal", it would contain millions of items ;-))
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 07:04, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

I know it, thank you. There was some inconsistency in Q2659251 and sitelinks in Q9754908, that was the reason. I've fixed it. --Infovarius (talk) 12:41, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

revert 2Edit

The same with [9]:
Category:Hippocastanoideae (Q8270304) is a family and Hippocastanoideae (Q163489) a subfamily (and they are not synonyms).
Regards Liné1 (talk) 07:06, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Again there was a problem with Category:Hippocastanoideae (Q8270304) because it contained a mixture of family and subfamily. But thanks to User:Brya we've fixed it now. --Infovarius (talk) 12:56, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

Elements and periodsEdit

Hi, after these changes and according to this query only magnesium (Q660) appears to be using part of (P361) period 3 (Q211331) while other elements use subclass of (P279) period 3 (Q211331). I don't know which one is right but I think they should be kept consistent :) --Ricordisamoa 13:56, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

@Ricordisamoa: Yes, I understand it. There's also an inconsistency of labels in period 3 (Q211331)-like items. Russian (and not only) articles are about periods which are parts of the table. In advance: but I don't want to create items about periods :) --Infovarius (talk) 19:32, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Asked at Wikidata talk:WikiProject Chemistry#Elements and periods --Ricordisamoa 16:13, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

electromagnetic wave (Q11386) and Q20076678Edit

Electromagnetic waves aren't same thing as electromagnetic radiation. --Treisijs (talk) 15:49, 5 January 2017 (UTC)

Yes. But redirects are about waves. --Infovarius (talk) 19:34, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Ok, then need create redirects in all languages and add this page. Why only these languages had redirects?!?! If my English would be better, I will give some examples, why redirects are bad idea not only in this case, but also another, too... --Treisijs (talk) 21:17, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
Maybe both items need to merge?!?! --Treisijs (talk) 21:18, 6 January 2017 (UTC)
I remove only Latvian redirect, because in this case definetly that is wrong redirect. In article about eletromagnetic radiation (in Latvian Wikipedia) at this moment is only one sentence about waves... --Treisijs (talk) 21:22, 6 January 2017 (UTC)

film series (Q24856)Edit

Hi, I dont fully understand why you reverted film series (Q24856) [10]. I wanted to remove them from constraint violations. Do you know better solution? JAn Dudík (talk) 06:06, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

@JAn Dudík: Because it's not exact: it's not a one film. Why not to add it to allowable types? television series (Q5398426) is already there. --Infovarius (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2017 (UTC)

based on (P144) as property of Christianity (Q5043)Edit

I don't think that based on (P144) is the right property for what you want to express with Christianity (Q5043) based on (P144) Judaism (Q9268) as based on (P144) is restricted to work (Q386724) and Christianity (Q5043) is not an instance of work (Q386724). What about separated from (P807)? — Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:10, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

P807 sounds good for me. But I am ready to consider Christianity (Q5043) and Judaism (Q9268) as work (Q386724) (of human brain). --Infovarius (talk) 21:07, 17 January 2017 (UTC)


Hey. why did you revert me?--Mikey641 (talk) 19:49, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Because administrative territorial entity of Israel (Q1550119) is about full hierarchy of division: not only ‏מחוזות but also ‏נפות‎‏‏‏ and more. And what did you mean when adding first-level administrative country subdivision (Q10864048)? --Infovarius (talk) 22:15, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
Oh.. I'm sorry. The hebrew label in administrative territorial entity of Israel (Q1550119). The hebrew label says that it's just about the "מחוזות" but it's not. Thanks--Mikey641 (talk) 18:42, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

astronomical object (Q6999) Subclass change revertEdit


Can we please use the talk page of this entity for this issue ? As already evoked, there is a noticeable conflict in the vicinity of astronomical object (Q6999), and the subclass you reverted could be part of it. There probably needs to be a clarification on the intent of this entity as a whole, and changes to be made around it (either on astronomical object (Q6999)'s subclasses themselves, or on a bunch of other entities pointing at it). Right now, astronomical object (Q6999) stands as both a non-specific (not only natural) entity AND a natural-only entity (eg. satellite (Q1297322)), which is problematic for definition purposes. Eledeuh (talk) 04:32, 21 January 2017 (UTC)


Я удалил все эти обозначения со словами в скобках, ибо так их никто не называет. Это только уточнение в названиях статей. Хорошо, со словом «буква» в начале ещё ладно. По поводу [11]: что такое «зе»? Если уж, то «зэ». Ну да, произношение букв тоже можно вносить. И строчные тоже. Но в декапитализации диграфов не вижу смысла. Зачем? — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 19:17, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

@1234qwer1234qwer4: Возможно, некоторые уточнения лишние. И лучше "зэ", чем "зе", да. Но моё мнение, что название статьи в Википедии обязано присутствовать если не в метке, то в синонимах - так определённее поиск будет. Насчёт диграфов, я не вижу смысла в капитализации диграфов - это же не имена собственные, да и чаще они встречаются в середине слова. И ещё, насчёт "предыдущий-следующий". Это зависит от языка, т.к. не все буквы кириллицы есть во всех кириллических алфавитах. Поэтому я изначально не стал проставлять эти свойства. Если уж быть точным, то надо их добавлять одновременно с "часть от: алфавит Х-го языка" (одно из этих свойств должно быть квалификаторов другого). --Infovarius (talk) 17:43, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
То есть, буквы вы капитализируете, а диграфы нет? Название статьи в Википедии: хорошо, буду его оставлять. А про предыдущий-следующий: да, добавлю «русский алфавит» в часть от. —1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 18:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
Да. В буквах капитализация имеет значение: употребляются и В и в, причём узус различен. В метках для диграфов важно лишь отметить последовательность букв. Как вариант - можно наоборот все буквы диграфа капитализировать, но капитализировать только первую нелогично. Кстати, а что за символы вы добавляете в синонимы? У меня браузер их не распознаёт. --Infovarius (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2017 (UTC)
В синонимы добавляю архаичные формы, например: Д — Д с длинными ножками, Ъ — высокий Ъ и т. п. См. w:ru:Расширенная кириллица — C и [12]. — 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2017 (UTC)

Re:Anatomical partsEdit

Hi! According to this thread and this edit by Pigsonthewing. --Adert (talk) 18:57, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

physical quantity (Q107715) subclass of magnitude?Edit

Hi Infovarius, I think there is a contradiction:

vector physical quantity subclass-of physical quantity subclass-of magnitude

but surely a vector can't be a magnitude of a physical system or of any object because it is not "a property by which the object can be compared as larger or smaller than other objects of the same kind". A vector merely *has* a magnitude such as its "length" in geometric terms. DavRosen (talk) 01:57, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Prime numberEdit

Regarding this edit: When I did this edit I interpreted the statement as "prime number is the opposite of 1", which is obviously not correct. I now realized that you probably intend this to be interpreted together with the other "opposite of" statement like "the opposite of a number being prime is that it is either composite or 1 (which is true as long as you restrict the numbers to positive integers). I suspect, however, that this is not the correct use of "opposite of" as it results in a violation in the constraint report. /Pontus (talk) 13:16, 29 January 2017 (UTC)

Ok, may be it's not ideal so better to remove both. --Infovarius (talk) 19:34, 30 January 2017 (UTC)


Hi! In my opinion only Pallas (Q3361501) should have named after (P138) Pallas (Q2276869). Athena (Q37122) already has said to be the same as (P460) Pallas (Q3361501), so named after (P138) Pallas (Q2276869) may be redundant. Do you agree? Best, --Epìdosis 20:30, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

Maybe redundant. But another point that Athena (Q37122) is not about the name "Afina" or smth. but about goddess which has several names. --Infovarius (talk) 14:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)


I don't understand why you have reverted my edit. The Polish category „Kategoria:Przysłowia indiańskie” refers to North American Indians, not to India, and the English "Category:Indian proverbs" refers to India, not to North America. Please, restore my edit. NoychoH (talk) 22:05, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

@NoychoH: Yeah, sorry. Changed. --Infovarius (talk) 14:36, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Mark TwainEdit

Прошу объяснить, почему вы отбросили в свойственной вам манере написание имени с большой буквы в birth name Mark Twain? Или уже имя в рос. Вики пишут с маленькой буквы? samuel? Или это начало преследования конкретного пользователя? --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

@Шкурба Андрій Вікторович:, извините, это я откатывал вандализм анонима, но что-то пошло не так... или я был невнимателен. Конечно, ваши подозрения не имеют оснований. --Infovarius (talk) 08:37, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
Спасибо за объяснение. --Шкурба Андрій Вікторович (talk) 09:30, 9 February 2017 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius!

Please stop redirecting the Wikiversity Charges lecture to (Q1111) Electric charge! The lecture is about much more than the physical quantity of charge! Also, please discuss your suggested changes first on the item Discussion page! --Marshallsumter (talk) 21:56, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

@Marshallsumter: Can you please explain what does this lecture include other than electric charge? There is words "responsible for electrical phenomena" in the introduction, and there is nothing about other charges (e.g. color charge) inside, so I believe that it is only about electric charge. --Infovarius (talk) 09:16, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: The lecture is about the origin of charge not about quark theory! And thanks for checking out the lecture and leaving it at Q28728293! --Marshallsumter (talk) 15:22, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: I still want to merge this lecture with some Wikipedia item. Explain me which charge do you mean? General physical charge (which is at charge (Q73792)) or electrical? --Infovarius (talk) 14:09, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: Wikiversity is not Wikipedia! The charge I'm lecturing about is not covered by either! Please leave the Wikiversity lecture where it is! Also, your attempts to understand are much appreciated! Please feel free to add them to the lecture's "Discuss" page! --Marshallsumter (talk) 22:48, 10 February 2017 (UTC)
@Marshallsumter: can you be more specific? What do you plan your lecture to be about? Summarize it. --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

Q1271511 and Q1271511Edit

Hi. I sorted out some articles and made some changes so that articles about the same thing was linked to the same item. You reverted my changes. Why?
--Item Q1271511 now linkes to one German and one Norwegian article which is about the same thing as item Q1329540. I did check the English and the French article and they are the same as the Norwegian and the German in item Q1271511.
-- The German article (w:de:Maßverkörperung) you connected back to item Q1271511 is a different thing. w:de:Maßverkörperung is a subset of w:de:Normal and should be linked to its own at present nonexistent item
-- The English article w:en:Standard (metrology), the French w:fr:Étalon (métrologie), the Norwegian w:no:Normal (metrologi) and the German w:de:Normal should be linked to the same Wikidata item. It is clear from the content of the articles.
-- Please bring the order that I tried to bring to Wikidata back. --Dyveldi (talk) 18:48, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I have now merged "everything", again. One of the items was marked as a subset of the other which was clearly wrong as they are the same thing. w:de:Maßverkörperung is now without an item and this is a subset of all of this. Please to not revert my changes a second time. --Dyveldi (talk) 06:53, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
@Dyveldi: Why have you done this? w:de:Maßverkörperung should have an item and it will have it, so anyway we'll have two items. And we had them. We just needed to sort sitelinks and statements. Can you make structure of 2 items with all prescribed sitelinks so as I can check it? P.S. Sorry for not answering before, I just have little time for analysis... --Infovarius (talk) 11:57, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Now w:de:Maßverkörperung has an item all of its own which is not connected to the old item(s) which were merged because they were the same. --Dyveldi (talk) 22:43, 14 February 2017 (UTC)


Please keep care of your wording within edit comments. --Succu (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2017 (UTC)

I am just stating the fact. You've said that commons:Category:Birds is a redirect, but it is not. --Infovarius (talk) 11:53, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
Obviously you don't know what a lie (Q4925193) is. I erred because I had another diff in mind. I think the removal of c:Category:Birds by Liné1 was correct, because this cat did not correspond to the taxon. --Succu (talk) 19:48, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Criterion neededEdit

From checking the en cat for Category:Dictyoptera (Q8376194) it was not obvious how it was different from Category:Dictyoptera (Q14953429). Would you please be able to put a criterion in place that makes the decision more overt. Thanks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 05:48, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

One is a genus, the other a superorder. - Brya (talk) 14:45, 12 February 2017 (UTC)
Why en? There is no en in Category:Dictyoptera (Q14953429). All should be clear from statements (compare category's main topic (P301)). --Infovarius (talk) 11:59, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

highest class of quantum particle (bound system?) for all antimatter, and one for matter? ALSO should matter (Q35758) be considered to include both matter and antimatter?Edit

Good question: "but what should be a highest class for all (anti)particles?)". We have "quantum particles" but this includes non-matter particles like photons as well as antimatter particles and matter particles. We have ordinary quantum particle (not of antimatter) (Q28726955), which includes both matter and non-matter (but not antimatter) particles -- this item might not have really been necessary but I'm not certain. I may have made a mistake when I changed quantum particle of antimatter to elementary particle of antimatter -- I may have been too hesitant to create a new item for the latter since your message on my talk page :-) Maybe I should change that one back to being the highest class for all antimatter particles (bound systems of (only) matter particles? i.e. would technically even include macroscopic ionic crystals?), and maybe also change "quarks or leptons" (formerly baryons or leptons) to "quantum particle of antimatter" (highest class for particles of antimatter). I'm not certain whether or not we would really still need two classes for elementary particle of matter and elementary particle of antimatter, but I think maybe we still would and these could be new classes.

ALSO: another topic: I had created material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) because I thought matter (Q35758) excluded antimatter, but I'm no longer certain since both matter and antimatter have mass and and equally "take up space". I see two options if we don't want to consider (Q35758) to be in the strict sense of matter composed of quarks/leptons and not anti, and create a new item for matter in the strict sense excluding antimatter:

  1. we could leave matter (Q35758) as conceptual/multidefinitional (like their wikipedia articles) and leave material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) as-is
  2. Or perhaps merge material substance (matter or antimatter) (Q28728771) with matter (Q35758) ??

leave elementary particle of antimatter (antiquark or antilepton) and quark or lepton as they are ?Edit

Come to think of it, maybe we should leave elementary particle of antimatter (antiquark or antilepton) and quark or lepton as they are so you don't have to change the Russian labels again? :-)


A sitelink cannot point to a redirect.See Wikidata:Notability.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 06:55, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل : It can and it is allowed. See remark there. --Infovarius (talk) 12:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

"antibaryon" (Q14861565) isn't an elementary particle at all, so it can't be a subclass of elementary particle of antimatter...Edit

Hi Infovarius, I've added discussion about its property "subclass of elementary particle of antimatter" but you keep re-adding it without joining the discussion. I said there: antibaryon is not an elementary particle so it can't be an "elementary particle of antimatter". Unless... are you are suggesting that we revert "elementary particle of antimatter" to its original label of "particle of antimatter" and treat it as such? The other alternative would be to create a new item for "particle of antimatter", and the present antibaryon would be a subclass of it. Do you have a preference between these two alternatives? DavRosen (talk) 19:51, 16 February 2017 (UTC)

criminal organization (Q1788992) vs organized crime group (Q4335775)Edit

Hi! I don’t object to cswiki’s link moved to organized crime group (Q4335775), but I guess dewiki’s de:Bildung krimineller Vereinigungen should be moved as well in that case? IIANM this is basically the same topic as the article on cswiki? --Mormegil (talk) 14:36, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

"фунты" "доллары" и "рубли"Edit

Я предпологал Q8142 как legal tender и lawful money. currency (Q8142): "generally accepted medium of exchange for goods or services"

Исходя из этого:

"валюта" и "платёжное средство" это отъемлемая часть монет и денег.

Золотые монеты будут валютой, пока золото - обменное средство.

Приветсвую более точные определения с экономической т.з. d1g (talk) 04:46, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius: I don't understand edit here: 1.

How can Australian pound (not a dollar) or Irish pound claimed as current currency or generally accepted medium of exchange?

English and Russian Wikipedia quite clearly states them as currency in the past, not in present. d1g (talk) 08:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

@D1gggg: Currency - is not necessary "current" :) Мы тут и историю описываем, если что. Так что можно добавлять "это валюта", имея в виду прошлый факт. Можно квалификатором добавить даты существования факта. --Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius:, посмотрел как сделано у стран в Q713750 и Q34266: у обоих используется и историческое и суверенное государство.
В случае валют есть только "исторические" и обычные; "государство" у Q713750 и Q34266 не указано напрямую, только через 2 подкласса, поэтому я и указывал только "исторические" по примеру стран.
Остаётся вопрос нужно ли поднимать ранг у "историческое государство" на "рекомендуемый"? d1g (talk) 06:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC)
@D1gggg: я бы поднимал. Если в свойстве содержатся исторические данные (особенно с датами окончания), то актуальная информация должна иметь высший ранг. --Infovarius (talk) 21:09, 26 March 2017 (UTC)

d:Q7013901 d:Q9451860Edit

? 91.197.junr3170 (talk) 14:37, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Coordinates for mountain rangesEdit

Regarding your edit: Yes, I think that adding coordinates to mountain ranges is wrong. At least it is very imprecise. Mountain ranges normally cover large areas, that cannot be represented by a single point. The better way to find their position is to map all the mountains belonging to this range, like this query. You can compare it with the results of the coordinates attribute, the first one gives a lot more information (even though the mountain ranges hierarchy does not look complete, it should be continuous). It would also be possible to find the coordinates of the highest mountain if we really need to represent a mountain range by a point, but explicitely giving them a coordinate is at best a duplication of data and at worst misleading. Koxinga (talk) 20:52, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

@Kokinga: Yes, I think that all geographical objects should have coordinates (even oceans and countries do have). Of course, it is imprecise. So we should use least possible precision for example. Query is really good! If it were only possible to add it instead of coordinates! Actually there are very few really point objects on the Earth, so almost any coordinates are not precise and can be regarded by you as misleading :) --Infovarius (talk) 20:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Susannah Q28790008/Q756861/Q16930210Edit

Hello Infovarius,

Thanks for your efforts but you have made mass changes in those items which I worked to fix just day or two before.


Why? Don't you think adding information on preceding/succeeding group members would be more useful for users than removal of information on element order? Szczureq (talk) 15:30, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

@Szczureq: This is enough. Because precedence depends on a sequence, e.g. for being part of Q428818 there are different preceding/succeeding elements. --Infovarius (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2017 (UTC)
Ah, I see it now and you're right. Szczureq (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

золото, серебро и платинаEdit

Являются исключениями которые не смотря на всё измеряют в третийских унциях. d1g (talk) 02:23, 5 March 2017 (UTC)


Wind orchestrasEdit

Dear Infovarius, you reverted part of my work on wind orchestra (Q881942) and concert band (Q762048). The former item is intended for all kinds of wind orchestras and ensembles. The latter is for larger orchestras with both wood and brass instruments (symphonic band or orchestre d'harmonie). I put the Italian article Banda musicale in Q881942 because it also discusses marching bands, fanfare and brass bands. The Galician article (gl:Banda de música) was first attached to the item for brass bands (brass band (Q3244156)), which was plainly wrong since the mentioned orchestras and the picture also have clarinets etc. It is a stub article, so categorization is difficult, but I thought the more general item was the best choice.

In this comment, you asked if I think Q881942 and Q762048 are the same, because I removed the statement that they are not the same, but instead I thought that different from (P1889) should not be used when there is another relationship between two items, like symphonic wind orchestras being a subclass of wind orchestras. Sincerely, Bever (talk) 02:42, 6 March 2017 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius,

I saw that you made a lot of edits dealing with Cryptogramma, like this one. These Cryptogramma names are just that: names. They are scientific names, formally established. They are not taxa. And as far as I can tell, it is unclear if they are synonyms of anything, let alone to which genus they should assigned.

The proper form is this. - Brya (talk) 11:49, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

Incomplete additionsEdit

Hi Infovarius. Additions such as Special:Diff/311127278, Special:Diff/251722090/254061222 or Special:Diff/252668348/Special:Diff/311128932 are worse than adding nothing, because you failed to add all atoms. Could you please fix those and also all other items with incomplete elements caused by your additions? --Leyo 20:48, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

@Leyo:, I am sorry for these cases. Actually I was running the task for all elements (by included categories), so they should be full usually. I've fixed these three. --Infovarius (talk) 10:40, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
Which “included categories” are you referring to? Haven't you considered the chemical elements in chemical formula (P274)? --Leyo 14:33, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
I am still interested to read your answer. ;-) --Leyo 10:37, 4 January 2019 (UTC)
@Leyo: I was using subcategories of Category:Chemical compounds by element (Q7158409) in Russian and probably English wikipedia. Chemical formula is an important indicator but I don't know how to use it. --Infovarius (talk) 02:26, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

cyclical conceptEdit

Hi, Infovarius --

I noticed that you reverted a March 1st change I made to the concept (Q151885) WD item, removing its subclass link to the mental representation (Q2145290) item. The difficulty here, and the reason for my edit, is that as it stands, Q151885->Q2145290 forms part of the following cycle:

 concept (Q151885) subclass of (P279) mental representation (Q2145290)  subclass of (P279) representation (Q1272626)  instance of (P31) concept (Q151885)

Not only does this chain create an indirect self-reference, but it also seems to imply that Q151885 is both a first- and a second-order collection (it's a subclass of the first-order Q2145290, but also has the first-order Q1272626 as an instance).

Breaking the cycle at the point of the concept (Q151885) subclass of (P279) mental representation (Q2145290) link seemed to me a relatively low-impact way to address the situation, but perhaps you could suggest an alternative solution to this imbroglio?

Thanks, Bill DeSmedt

@billdesmedt: I took the liberty of reformatting your assertions. Bovlb (talk) 21:39, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

No sense - dabEdit

This is a dab page about anything name like the title. Thus, it is not a subclass of something from Kazakhstan. 06:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)

Really? Can you find anything in these pages which is not about Kazakhstan? --Infovarius (talk) 13:41, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Stop vandalizing the dab page. An dab page is not a subclass of a district of Kazakhstan. You have been told, you did it again. 02:32, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
Why don't you discuss? --Infovarius (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
We do, you don't. Instead of proving that the initial two sentences are wrong, you only ask "Really?", which can be answered with "Yes, really" and you ask an unrelated question. Some clarification: "This is a dab page about anything named like the title. Thus, it is not a subclass of something from Kazakhstan." - because the title does not contain "of Kazakhstan" 12:20, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
Dab pages also can be on some specific topic (see Wikipedia:Set index articles (Q24068417)). And here are the very examples. As for the title, not all properties are derivable from a pure title. For example, 12 (Q175014) doesn't contain "film" in its title but it nevertheless is. To summarize, don't be so formal, if practically some pages have some obvious properties rules should not prevent us from using them. --Infovarius (talk) 12:44, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

disjoint union in Natural NumberEdit

Hi Infovarius, I thought it would better to have it in the unambiguous "positive integer" (Q28920044), but I haven't done so yet. One could argue about the correct meaning of Natural Number but the fact is that different people use it in both ways.

disjoint union of: values as qualifiers: of: 1: prime number: composite number

DavRosen (talk) 23:01, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

Отмена правки №465888606Edit

Я по поводу отмены моей правки — удаления элементов из элемента Punto Switcher (Q4047648). Для чего вообще хранить историю о прошлых версиях? Считаю вообще ненужным занятием: если нужно, можно всегда посмотреть changelog от автора. — Dimon4ezzz (обс.) 17:53, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

А для чего вообще хранить номер версии, если можно посмотреть его на оф.сайте? Это базовая информация, которую мы можем, а значит будем хранить. Конечно, достаточно иметь timeline для основных версий (первая цифра). --Infovarius (talk) 19:42, 13 March 2017 (UTC)


Hello Infovarius. You reverted my edits regarding the Tullimonstrum genus and the Tullimonstrum gregarium species. You may have not noticed that there's only one single species in the genus Tullimonstrum and, thus, all of these articles share exactly the same subject, they deal with the very same item. Consequently, they have to be reunited in one single item in Wikidata. Regards. Kintaro (talk) 11:36, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius - Thank you for separating genus from species. Some Wikipedias match their articles to the exact taxon, and linking an article to the wrong taxon causes errors if Wikidata-data is dynamically used in the article. 22:22, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

head of state vs head of governmentEdit

If I am not mistaken, head of state = Governor, head of Government = Chief Minister. In Q1159 So both governor and CM cannot be placed under HOG. Please correct me if I am wrong. -- Mdmahir (talk) 04:26, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

@Mdmahir: May be. But head of state (P35) is incorrect too. It is only for countries. --Infovarius (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Orcinus orca - cryptic species complexEdit

What is that [13]? 22:13, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

it is taxon suspected in containing more than 1 species. --Infovarius (talk) 13:54, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Switzerland mergeEdit

I do not agree. The reason why I created a separate item was because s:ru:Швейцария is a disambiguation page, not a page about Switzerland. --Gikü (talk) 20:33, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

@Gikü: it's a disambig about Switzerland like en:Switzerland (disambiguation) is too. --Infovarius (talk) 12:58, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Privy Councillor (Q718660)Edit

Тайных советников может быть несколько, так? Я полагаю что отмечать это нужно subclass of (P279) Q28745974.

Представителем Q718660 является каждый человек с таким титулом (Q4264611, только вместо P31 используем occupation (P106), правильно?

Версию Q718660&oldid=453289910 не совсем понял: почему instance of (P31) использован? d1g (talk) 06:05, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Дело в том, что Q28745974 - это метакласс, т.е. как бы отмечает типы должностей (ведь ставим же мы для профессий P31=профессия). P106 в некотором смысле похоже на P31, да, поэтому смотрите: Q4264611 будет (~P31) тайным советников и, по транзитивности, если сделать Q718660 подклассом, будет также гражданским чином. Но ведь Алексей Александрович не гражданский чин, а человек, имеющий данный чин, правда ведь? Поэтому я считаю, что все чины должны стать P31 Q28745974. --Infovarius (talk) 12:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: речь о синекдохе по профессии:
если в книге написан "статский советник" то мы делаем вывод о human who may be fictional (Q21070568)
а уж "Алексей Александрович" ли он - это третье дело.
представители State Councillor (Q677455) как класса это неназванные личности - либо это следует делать по-другому?
"лесоруб" или "дровосек" как классы не следует использовать? d1g (talk) 11:57, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
Пожалуйста, без синекдох в классификации :) Как класс советников (и лесорубов, дровосеков) я, полагаю, можно рассматривать (другие против, но я ещё поспорю), правда не подклассом Q28745974, а например подклассом human (Q5) (или персон). --Infovarius (talk) 20:13, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: без них не обойтись, так язык работает:
observer (Q28973077) - явно "кто-то", а не просто "существующий объект".
Подсолнухи следящие за солнцем в Q28973077 подходят?
"возможная синекдоха о" свойство всячески поддерживаю.
Про глав завтра прочитаю. d1g (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

generic languages names items on given names pagesEdit

Hello! For information, I always delete generic languages names items ("Korean name", "Ukrainian name", etc.) as a secondary P31 when the other P31 is more specific ("given name" or "family name"), after verifying that the language is correctly present in language of work or name (P407). It's for maintenance purposes, because these generic items are subclass of "name" and not of "given name" or "family name". It makes it more difficult to spot the items using a family name as a given name for example.

These items weren't created because they were needed in the ontology but only because some wikipedia have articles about it. I have yet to find an item like that without sitelink. When no sitelink exists, no one bothered to create items like that because the information is already correctly here with language of work or name (P407).

I don't usually delete correct-level-alternate-P31 (like "Ukrainian given name") because that doesn't mess up the queries but I don't think we should use them actually. I'm all for a more generic system we can reliably query no matter the language. But that's not exactly the same question than the name-level one, and something that we should probably discuss sometimes on the project. Granularity is always worth discussing :).

Either way, I deleted dozens of these redundant-non-correct-level-alternate-P31 and you reverted me on one, so I thought I would explain. I always verify the language is present on the item before deleting, so no data is lost. Have a good day! --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 07:44, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Painting image restoredEdit

Here you go File:Landscape at Night (Malevich, ca. 1900).jpg ready to go back on d:Q15918830 per your request. Thanks for catching that, however, in future, message to my talk page, not on the deletion requests. Nothing is to be added to closed deletion requests. Cheers! Ellin Beltz (talk) 14:11, 23 March 2017 (UTC) PS ping for attention.

Ok, thanks! --Infovarius (talk) 19:26, 23 March 2017 (UTC)

Stop vandalizing P18Edit - NO! 14:34, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Don't be so rude. There was no vandalizing in adding an appropriate image. Infovarius (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on Andrapradesh (Q1159)Edit

Please explain, this change

ESL narasimhan is not head of government. He is head of state (governor). So I edit such a way. I can't get the info about violation. You can check other Indian state for similiar data. ie. Head of government and head of state. Thank in advance--Arjunkmohan (talk) 03:47, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

@Arjunkmohan: The problem is that head of state (P35) corresponds to state (Q7275) and not to federated state (Q107390), so this is a wrong property. This restriction is written in head of state (P35) and any misuse is logged at constraint violations page (to which I gave a link). All violations should be cleaned sometime (and if you say about all Indian states, they too). But another problem is that I don't know another appropriate property for your statements... May be it should be created?.. --Infovarius (talk) 12:52, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for clarification. How can we create a property which entitle 'head of federal state'. Its very common post in federal republic. I like to work on it. Thank in advance--Arjunkmohan (talk) 14:53, 28 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on starfish (Q25349)Edit

Hello Infovarius,
About this revert:

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 06:35, 27 March 2017 (UTC)

Empty valueEdit

Hallo Infovarius. The property / spouse from Ludwig van Beethoven has "no value" (oder auf Deutsch: Das Feld Ehepartner hat "Kein Wert"). Greets, Harry Canyon (talk) 14:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)

@Harry Canyon: Ja, welche Probleme ist es? --Infovarius (talk) 13:08, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

your revert on Sergei Diaghilev (Q211513)Edit

Hello Infovarius, about your revert:

You confused impresario (Q943995) with empresario (Q1049924). Sergei Diaghilev was an impresario.

Empresario means: a person who had been granted the right to settle on land in exchange for recruiting and taking responsibility for new settlers.

Please, correct your mistake, Csurla (talk) 10:36, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

Oh, you are right, thanks. --Infovarius (talk) 08:59, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

grandparent (Q167918)Edit

Thanks, I did not know about this property. JAn Dudík (talk) 05:43, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

Spasibo bolshoi!Edit catalog (P972): Wikipedia:List of 1000 articles each Wikipedia should have (Q5460604) . Otchen helpful. 15:15, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

«Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351)Edit

Пояснение (в ответ на комментарий «почему нет» к откату моей правки (ссылка)):

Удалил из элемента викиданных «Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351) добавленную мной же чуть раньше ссылку на статью русского Викиверситета v:ru:Викиверситет:Компромисс потому, что добавилось не то, что я хотел добавить. А хотел я добавить ссылку на другую статью v:ru:Консенсус. Но такую ссылку добавить не удалось, поскольку она уже входит в другой элемент викиданных «Консенсус (Q202722)». И при попытке добавить ссылку на «Консенсус» автоматически подставлялась ссылка на «Викиверситет:Компромисс». Поначалу думал, что эти элементы неплохо бы слить. Но потом понял, что они не совсем об одном и том же. По крайней мере, относятся в РуВики и в РуВикиверситете к разным пространствам (статей и правил). И сливать элементы никогда раньше не пробовал. Поэтому и удалил неправильно введенную мной ссылку из элемента «Википедия:Консенсус» (Q4654351).

Просьба: Если Вы умеете объединять элементы, и если объединение этих двух элементов в данном случае возможно и целесообразно, то сделайте это или помогите мне это сделать. Victor Manohin (talk) 11:29, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Victor Manohin:, насколько я вижу страница v:ru:Консенсус всё-таки об общем понятии и его свойствах, а совсем не только о правилах конкретного вики-проекта (о чём Q4654351 и v:ru:Викиверситет:Компромисс). Поэтому мне кажется, сейчас обе страницы Викиверситета на своих местах. Infovarius (talk) 11:44, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
Согласен, что и статьи, и ссылки на них в Викиданных сейчас как раз на месте. Пусть пока так и остается. Просто названия статей почти об одном и том же правиле в РуВики и в русском Викиверситете, которые теперь связаны интер-вики-ссылкой, зачем-то были сделаны немножко разными: Консенсус в правилах Википедии и Компромисс в правилах Викиверситета. И в этом тоже ничего страшного не вижу (Компромисс - частный случай Консенсуса). Причем внутри РуВики статья правила Консенсуса не только опирается на соответствующее общее понятие, и даже прямо ссылается внутри Википедии на соответствующую тематическую статью обычной ссылкой. Но она не связана интер-вики-ссылкой с этой тематической статьей, и тем более не связана такими ссылками с аналогичными тематическими статьями в других проектах.
Проблему (техническую) вижу в том, что невозможно установить между статьями разных проектов более одной интер-вики-связи даже с помощью Викиданных. И невозможно создать интер-вики-связь между статьями внутри одного проекта (например с одним и тем же названием или на близкую тему, но в разных подпространствах одного проекта). В этой технической невозможности я теперь почти уверен. Но если ошибаюсь, то поправьте меня, и покажите способ установить более одной связи между двумя проектами. И покажите способ (если он таки-есть) установить интер-вики-связь между двумя статьями внутри одного проекта. Тогда я связал бы между собой многими ссылками все компромиссы и все консенсусы. А получившаяся у меня ненароком связь между правилом Компромисса и правилом Консенсуса (пока их не назовут одинаково) осталась бы дальше такой как получилась.
Понимаю, что интер-вики-связи внутри одного проекта не особо-то нужны. Технически возможно вставить в статью правил (Консенсуса или Компромисса) обычную ссылку на соответствующую тематическую статью того же и даже другого проекта. Кстати, внутри РуВики такая ссылка в правиле консенсуса на статью об общем понятии консенсуса есть. Причем добавить туда же еще одну ссылку на соответствующую тематическую статью Викиверситета технически возможно, но для этого пришлось бы внести изменение в правило РуВики, а это уже организационная проблема. Причем для меня на данный момент именно в РуВики просто неразрешимая (моя учетка в РуВики бессрочно заблокирована за ОРИССы). Но и в Викиверситете, все не так-то просто, во-первых, формально название тематической статьи (Консенсус) отличается от названия статьи правил (Компромисс). Во-вторых, правило должно опираться на что-то устоявшееся, а не на незаконченное и не рецензированное исследование. И в-третьих, изменение правила уже само по себе (по моему личному горькому опыту, приобретенному на правиле цитирования в РуВики) дело довольно муторное и неблагодарное.
На этот мой комментарий можете не отвечать, если я правильно понял упомянутые в нем технические ограничения Викиданных на установление дополнительных связей между статьями. Victor Manohin (talk) 13:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

stop vandalizing ia-labelsEdit - Q144 is P31=common name, but Canis lupus familiaris is not the common name. Why do you so frequently vandalize ia/iawiki content? 18:23, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

It is to make mistakes in languages without good dictionaries.
Please create an account, so that you can indicate your levels of proficiency in languages. d1g (talk) 20:59, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

отличия Q11707 и Q19316447Edit

Замысел на Википедии не могу уловить.

"Ресторан" сильно недописан по сравнению с "Restaurant".

Мне нажется что "предприятие общественного питания" впихивают в "restaurant" и не парятся от отличиях. d1g (talk) 20:55, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Мне больше волнуют отличия "ресторана" от "restaurant". Да, мне тоже кажется, что "restaurant"="предприятие общественного питания" в некотором смысле. В том числе и бургерные и макдональдсы, которые в России бы ресторанами не называли, я считаю. --Infovarius (talk) 09:23, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Ещё User:Edward какую-то деятельность по пересортировке провёл, надо его спросить. @Edward:, can you please comment, how do you relate ru:Ресторан and ru:Предприятие общественного питания vs en:Restaurant? --Infovarius (talk) 09:32, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't speak Russian. Q19316447 has the English label 'high-class restaurant', do you think this translation is reasonable? I think Q19316447 is a subclass of Q11707 (restaurant). Edward (talk) 11:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Mineral: named afterEdit

Dear Infovarius (about [14]). A sentence can not be substituted by two items on Wikidata, I try a binominal notation as a compromise. Sometimes I need two items for a meaning, but originally it is only one Greek word. I want to count them someday, as well. Examples: halite (word), milarite (naming locality), iowaite (naming state), surinamite (naming country), shibkovite (two people), rruffite (organisation), yanomanite (ethnic group), neptunite (deity), banalsite (acronym), clinoclase (compound word), etc. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 04:53, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Can you translate russian code into english codeEdit

{{Навигация |Викисклад={{#if:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|Category:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|}} |Тема={{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}} }} --Arjunkmohan (talk) 15:49, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

Or can you forward to other Russian Wikipedians and retreat the code. This template code is not in my wiki. Help me!--Arjunkmohan (talk) 16:14, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

@Arjunkmohan: May be such:

{{Navigation |Commons={{#if:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|Category:{{wikidata|p373|{{{1|}}}|plain=true}}|}} |Topic={{{2|{{PAGENAME}}}}} }} But you will also need Module:Wikidata copied. --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

subclass of an item when they are almost the same as... (P460)Edit


My intuition was that Q20055913 was the same tool as items I edited recently. I did several attempts but was unable to spot functional difference from "решётка для гриля".

Feel free to object this talk about Q20055913 or my suggestion at P279 about almost the same items. d1g (talk) 17:55, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

Да, с богами есть сложности. Но в данном случае (моя правка) вроде проще: Q3773693 явно более общее понятие, чем гриль. --Infovarius (talk) 17:18, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
В Q20055913 была одна португальская ссылка grelha (решётка 30 на 60 см), я её объединил с Q390409.
Грилей в любом языке два: один как технология grilling (Q264619), другой - установка по этой технологии barbecue grill (Q853185)
Решетки и шампуры (и ухваты, которые я потерял) относятся ко второму в качестве вспомогательных объектов. d1g (talk) 07:27, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Lowest point in PolandEdit

Hi you reverted my edit of lowest point (P1589) in Poland, so I thought we can talk about it. I could not find any references for the claim about Żuławy Wiślane being the lowest point in Poland, while Central Statistical Office of Poland the most respected institution in Poland charged in keeping track of stuff like that, listed Raczki Elbląskie as the lowest point in Poland. I followed the reference "English Wikipedia" to check if they had a reference for Żuławy Wiślane claim and w:en:Poland also lists Raczki Elbląskie as the lowest point. So unless we can find some references for it I would rather keep it out. --Jarekt (talk) 12:24, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt:, thanks for writing me. I've found an article about this valley in Russian geographical encyclopedia, it says about -1.8 meter, so I've added the reference. --Infovarius (talk) 17:13, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

My UndosEdit

I have Undone you edits as The Electro magenetic radiation is the suitable topic for மின்காந்த அலைகள். Don't be confused and Hope you'll ping me while replying!--Shriheeran (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

@Shriheeran: isn't this article about electromagnetic waves? I see many parameters of waves are discussed there. --Infovarius (talk) 17:07, 3 May 2017 (UTC)
No, it is about Radiation--Shriheeran (talk) 09:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Metrology defintionsEdit

Hi Infovarius

A courtesy note ot let you know that I have modified some of the changes that you made to Metrolgy-related defintions ("Unit of measurement" and "English system of units". After you made your changes, I reread the article on the differences between "is an instance of" and "is a sub-class of" and found that I had made a few errors. I have also reverted one of your changes, but only after consulting these documents. Martinvl (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment, User:Martinvl, but I don't understand your changes in statements... --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

competition (Q23807345) and competition (Q476300)Edit

Hello, I am quite confused about these two items. Would you please explain to me what is the difference between them? Regards, --Sintakso (talk) 14:06, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Splitting mixed names instead of adding new P1705Edit

Hello. We all agree to the "one string" / "one item" system for names. We agree that "Leonid" isn't the same name as "Леонид". We also know that right now, thousands of item are mixing several names. Can you please split the names instead of just adding another P1705 and writing system? In all cases, we need to correct: labels, descriptions, and uses so that they are correct with the P1705/writing system. I know Jura decided many mixed name were in fact Latin-script ones, but I really don't care if you keep that or not.

But I care when you only half-correct these items, adding a Cyrillic P1705 and Cyrillic writing system without correcting labels, descriptions and uses. Either you create a new Cyrillic item or a new Latin item; I don't care at all which one, if in the end we have only clean items (labels, descriptions, properties and uses). When you only "correct" the P1705 without cleaning up the rest, we have German people with the name "Леонид", which is as much wrong as Russian people with "Leonid" was. We should strive to make Wikidata better, not replace mistakes by other mistakes. Thank you. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 09:43, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

@Harmonia Amanda: I appreciate your work and attitude but statement that "Leonid" isn't the same name as "Леонид" is doubtful for me. They are like different forms of one name. What should we do if a person with name "Леонид" is widely referred in Latin-alphabet sources as "Leonid" (which is logical as it is the only transliteration)? "Latin" speakers know him as Leonid, "cyrillic" speakers know him as Леонид, but these are the same. Or do you think that we should add to each person all transliterations of their name into all scripts? --Infovarius (talk) 13:17, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius:. No, "Leonid" is not the only transliteration of Леонид. For example, in French, it could be "Léonide". A person should have only their name in their language; multiple values for people who emigrated, for example. So a Russian person would only have Леонид, and a German one Leonid. That's the only correct values. We split variations of the same names since 2013; Jules is the French variation of the Spanish Julio, and of the Italian Giulio, etc. A string, an item, that's the system chosen for years. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 13:25, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
@Harmonia Amanda: There's logic in your word... But I don't feel fully comfortable with this system. Couple of issues: 1) if we split Q6081128 into Latin and Cyrillic items where commons:Category:Alexandra (given name) should go? It fits both as Commons doesn't separate names of different scripts yet. 2) Again about belorussian names. E.g. Ihar (Q16831923). Let's take for example Igor Lapshin (Q1657767) - he was a soviet man, so obviously he has Russian name (Игорь). But he was born at city of modern Belorussia so it has given name (P735) Ihar (Q16831923). I don't know about his main or tongue language, but he has official Russian name "Лапшин, Игорь Олегович". Actually be:Ігар=ru:Игорь and they are used interchangeably in Belorussia. Should we use both forms of name? --Infovarius (talk) 13:35, 18 May 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: I don't know for Commons, we should probably ask a Commonist what they want to do. I don't usually move Commons categories around if they are linked to a credible item. It's like any other case of Wikipedia talking about several subjects at once, except this time it's Commons. We created many items "name" just for the sake of enwiki which is talking about both given names and surnames in its articles; we could probably create items like Andrew and variants (Q389) just to handle Commons if they don't want to clean up.
For Belarusian people during the Soviet times, they had both names legally, no? I would add both names, Ігар and Игорь, since both were true. Like all Alsacians people who became Germans in the 1870s and suddenly had their names changed; both names were true (or when the reverse happened after World War I). I think it's exactly like an Icelandic or Czech person in France; we would most of the time use their names in Latin-script "normally", including such signs as Þ or č they have in their native languages, but if they became French, their names would be "normalized" with only signs existing in the French alphabet. In Wikidata, we would add both form of their names. Or like for Indian people, who speak several languages, whose languages can be written in several writing systems…
There are also two-scripts languages, like Japanese. Most names are in kanji, but all names can be written in kanas, and the same kanji can be written several ways in kanas (but each combination kanji-kana is a different name, and the same person will always write their name the same way): we created items for each combination. Like Yomo (Q27242665) and Nishikata (Q27242666) are actually written the same way in kanji, but are not at all the same name. Everyone with a kanji name have a kana form of their name; but the reverse is not true…
I think human names are really complicated and we can't have a perfect system which will work every time. The world is to big a place for that. But I think the "one string, one item" offers the most easy way to handle most cases. So that we can know if someone was really named "Aleksiej" or if he was named Алексей and it was a Polish person who transliterated… --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 15:16, 18 May 2017 (UTC)

Antwort auf die Frage "Why not"Edit

Hallo Infovarius, wegen deiner Bearbeitung an der Bundesautobahn 6 siehe Hinweise unter Help:Label/ru#Неоднозначность. Die russische Bezeichnung habe ich von Q9042 = А20 kopiert. --Labant (talk) 00:53, 11 May 2017 (UTC)

@Labant: und was muss ich da sehen? "Метки могут быть неоднозначными"? --Infovarius (talk) 13:08, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
Und darunter ein Beispiel:
Titel des Artikels in Wikipedia: Russland (Theater)
Label in Wikidata: Russland
Beschreibung in Wikidata: Theater in Moskau
--Labant (talk) 18:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
So "A6" ist besser als "Автомагистраль A6", nicht war? --Infovarius (talk) 21:13, 13 May 2017 (UTC)
Genau passt --Labant (talk) 00:16, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

Доктор химических наукEdit

Добрьій день! Касательно Q17281079... А не могли бьі Вьі присоединить туда перенаправление uk:Доктор хімічних наук? А то я пьітался, но не смог...   --Олег.Н (talk) 14:56, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

@Олег.Н:   Done --Infovarius (talk) 19:58, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Aussage instance of (P31) in Bundesautobahn 6 (Q9016)Edit


Hi. Why did you make this revert? I split the items ru:Хейфец and en:Heifetz following these guidelines. There is another rule in wikidata to make separate items for pages that are disambiguations and pages about surnames thar contain lists of people with this surname. --Jarash (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@Jarash: I don't like separation of surname-disambigs from surname item, but here was also another problem: there were three items about Heifetz! --Infovarius (talk) 10:23, 7 June 2017 (UTC)


Hey, thanks for your edits, I was testing a tool, and I pressed the wrong button without noticing it! Martinligabue (talk) 13:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)

Undo revision 493174039: what do you mean?Edit

I mean ru:Шаблон:Кинопремия

| метка4       = Место проведения
| викиданные4  = P276

- Kareyac (talk) 13:36, 2 June 2017 (UTC)

@Kareyac: Sometimes using autofilling from infoboxes can be wrong, but here... May be you're right. It just looks not ideal property for me (how can award be located somewhere?) --Infovarius (talk) 10:26, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Yes, award can't be located, but only award ceremony. Maybe significant event (P793)award ceremony (Q4504495) with location (P276) when location (Q17334923) is permanent looks some better? - Kareyac (talk) 12:38, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Reversion in The Hunger Games (Q212965)Edit

Hi, I used part of (P361) instead of part of the series (P179) there because I was fixing the constraint errors from The Hunger Games tetralogy (Q11885031). The way you fixed it displays a constraint error in the property of The Hunger Games tetralogy (Q11885031). If instead of part of (P361) I should be using part of the series (P179) then there should be a way to specify in has part (P527) that the inverse could be any of part of the series (P179) or part of (P361). -- Agabi10 (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

Hm, it's a problem. But part of the series (P179) is subproperty of (P1647) of part of (P361) so it should be allowed as a reverse of has part (P527)?.. --Infovarius (talk) 11:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)


zh.wikipedia "蠵龟" is just a redirect (is even not using R from XXX templates) to zh:赤蠵龜, why do you think that such redirects are permanent duplicates? on-going RFC? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:31, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Hm, I don't want duplicates-redirects. I don't know why it was, may be zh:蠵龟 was deleted after item creation? --Infovarius (talk) 10:19, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Pyotr Ilyich Tchaikovsky didn't live in Russia?Edit

I am confused by your edit. Russia (Q159) is an item for articles about concept of "Russia" which started in 862 (see w:ru:Россия#История). It is not an article about "Russian Federation" that started in 1991. You can create a new item for each stage of Russian history if you need to differentiate them. --Jarekt (talk) 17:57, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jarekt: There are items about all stages of Russian history. Or do you believe that Russia (Q159) includes periods of Kyivska Rus' (Q1108445), Russian Empire (Q34266) and Soviet Union (Q15180)?? Do you think then that Kiev (Q1899) can be called Russian city as it was in Kyivska Rus' (Q1108445), and Warsaw (Q270) is Russian because it was in Russian Empire (Q34266)? Even if so, it is better to use more exact term, and practically Russia (Q159) is used as "Russian Federation". See Template:Constraint:Period at Talk page, for example. --Infovarius (talk) 10:53, 9 June 2017 (UTC)
And by the way, what do you mean by Commons Creator page (Q24731821)? There exists commons:Template:Creator (unfortunately not at this item), but I couldn't find such template in Tchaikovsky pages... --Infovarius (talk) 10:55, 9 June 2017 (UTC)


自行车运动的第一句是:“自行车运动常指借助自行车(或称单车)开展的各种运动的总称”,明确说明了该条目仅指自行车运动。对应于 Cycling 的中文应该叫做“自行车骑行”之类的。 -- Ma3r (talk) 13:41, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I am sorry, Google Translate seemed bad for this. Please do as you know. --Infovarius (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the Q82732Edit

Hello Imfovarius! I reverted this edit of mine, because I thought that there wouldn't be much sense for the name of a mythological person in a native language, as it's not a real person, and thus it doesn't have a native language. On the other hand it makes sense to give as native name the name in the language in which the person was first fictionalised or had a great influence. So I guess in this subject 2 native names should be given, one in Ancient Greek and not Greek, and one in Latin, as Aeneas was also referenced in Roman mythology. I am all ears to listen to your opinion! SucreRouge (talk) 21:25, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

Hello @SucreRouge:! Of course, it should be Ancient Greek and not Greek, I missed that. And you are right about Latin, I think. It's interesting opinion about language of first fictionalizing, I have to think about it, at least I have no objections now. --Infovarius (talk) 13:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
I made these 2 edits, so we are clear for now. Happy editing!SucreRouge (talk) 13:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Ok, SucreRouge, but one more thing: Ancient Greeks used Aspirated consonant (Q320433) (one of 2 types) necessarily when a word starts with vowel, so it should be corrected here. --Infovarius (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Нужна помощьEdit

Привет, у тебя, случайно, нету бота, которым может поудалять неверное утверждение для набора элементов? Около 5 тысяч элементов я случайно запортил, и руками править как-то тяжко. ShinePhantom (talk) 17:56, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Да, я могу, что нужно сделать? --Infovarius (talk) 12:34, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
@ShinePhantom: sorry for not pinging... --Infovarius (talk) 15:51, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

Roerich (Q27144654)Edit

Hi, seeing this diff, I'm not too sure what you mean: if it is an item about the family (and not the family name), then the instance of (P31)family name (Q101352) must be removed, along with most of the statements, but the item cannot have the two P31s at once: it is either a family (ie a group of people related by blood, with a founder, members and so on) or a family name (ie, a string, with a writing system, a language, etc.) -Ash Crow (talk) 20:01, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

@Ash Crow: it's difficult to differ. The article is about surname, with its history and variants of spelling (writing system doesn't matter, surnames are usually transliterated and translated frequently). But all persons having this surname are from one family which (of course) is described in the article, with its head and kinship. --Infovarius (talk) 21:47, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

съедобные в сыром виде вещи fruit (Q3314483) не все плодыEdit

головка чеснока не плод, а луковица

Я такую правку делать не стал, потому что исключений много может быть, особенно среди редких растений (съедобные листья?) d1g (talk) 11:36, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


Hi there,

i removed link to en.wikt, because it's a list with all languages contained in English Wiktionary. At de.wikt or lb.wikt there a statistics about languages. At mi.wikt is no comparable content. At csb.wikt there is a list with languages containing languages which are not in csb.wikt. Do you now understand why i deleted en.wikt? Maybe there are more links, which are not like de.wikt, lb.wikt or nds.wikt containing statistics. Best regards --Yoursmile (talk) 15:13, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I understand, thanks for the analysis. By the way, mi and km are just translations of en, so they should fit. But pl is about phrasemes, I'll move it. I'll think how to divide en-group and de-group. --Infovarius (talk) 21:11, 28 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia list as P279Edit

Hi, I don't understand why you reverted me [15], list of Middle-earth animals (Q2700354) is a Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) that should not be used to "define things" with P279 or P31 (it is the same for Wikimedia categories). This a constraint violations of P279 [16]. There is has list (P2354) to link to Wikimedia list. For dragons of Middle-earth (Q2014788) there are already Middle-earth races (Q989255) and fictional species of animal (Q15702752) as instance of (P31). Akeron (talk) 09:00, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


Please stop removing sh:Safavidska Monarhija from the main item. Article is about both dynasty and empire, like English and majority of other articles. --Orijentolog (talk) 02:25, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

@Orijentolog: but the problem is that items in Wikidata should be clearly about one topic. And we have Safavid dynasty (Q161205) for dynasty, and Safavid Empire (Q18234383) for state. What do you think is the best choice for sh? --Infovarius (talk) 21:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

reversion in Johann Wolfgang von GoetheEdit

Hi, why do you revert my deletion of Sturm und Drang (Q207741) as a genre (P136) ?. What Sturm und Drang (Q207741) is, a movement (P135) or a genre (P136) ?. One of them, but no both properties. In my opinion is a movement (P135), as WP articles say. Disagree ?, tell me why. Otherwise, please delete the one you consider is wrong. Thank you.--Amadalvarez (talk) 20:38, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

I presume, you agree. I go ahead. Thanks --Amadalvarez (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
@Amadalvarez: oh, I haven't noticed movement (P135) with the same value. Then it's ok. --Infovarius (talk) 22:18, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Wiktionary links from WikidataEdit

Thanks for providing a little more information. Is there a guide for how to link Wikidata items with Wiktionary pages or should I just not bother. The information at Wikidata:Wiktionary may be useful for regular Wiktionary contributors, but there is nothing there I can parse as instructions for how to proceed; if that information is there, it would definitely be useful for someone to make it easier to understand. — OwenBlacker (talk) 01:01, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@OwenBlacker: there is not so much information at all, I suppose. I can say that now we are linking categories, templates, indices, appendices and rhymes (if the latters are relevant at all). Articles in main space (words/phrases themselves) are not linked through Wikidata now, the work is going to maintain them but this will be very different from usual sitelinks. You can find a scheme at Wikidata:Wiktionary but honestly I don't understand it completely yet. On the other hand, different articles from language editions of Wiktionary are linked automatically now, just after creation, e.g. en:check to de:check. --Infovarius (talk) 21:18, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
{Ping|Infovarius}} It sounds like I might want to avoid making any edits related to Wiktionary for now, at least. Thanks anyway :) — OwenBlacker (talk) 12:16, 13 July 2017 (UTC)


Коллега, мне кажется семантика этих свойств следующая: imported from Wikimedia project (P143) - это место, откуда информация была взята (википедия, freebase, любая другая база данных, которая может быть, а может не быть reliable source), а stated in (P248) - это как раз reliable source, т.е. то что может быть сноской в википедии. Разве нет? --Ghuron (talk) 09:56, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Ghuron:, да, конечно. Извините, невнимательная правка была. --Infovarius (talk) 21:11, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

Q12503 "The integers"Edit

The reason I made this edit is to distinguish integer (Q12503) the set of integers from integer data type (Q729138), one integer. It's correct to link the latter to, but not the former.

Why do I think integer (Q12503) refers to the set of all integers: because it's denoted Z and it's "instance of: set". So not only its label, but the description should also be changed. And "different from integer data type (Q729138)" should be added --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:17, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Please comment on the above! --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:20, 26 August 2017 (UTC)


Why these two edits? paraphyly (Q208755) is currently defined as a subclass of taxon (Q16521), and parent taxon (P171) is a subproperty of subclass of (P279). --Njardarlogar (talk) 11:54, 13 July 2017 (UTC)

Duration in filmsEdit

Hi, Infovarius. I removed the durarion in some films because in some versions of Wikipedia (such as the Spanish) we use various infoboxes for different uses. For example, when we are talking about the soundtrack we can't see the duration of the soundtrack album (not the film) because the parameter in Wikidata understand the durarion for all infoboxes in the same article. I think is a data that anyone can find easily in IMDb, for example. Will there be any problem? Thanks. --5truenos (talk) 21:28, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

@5truenos: I think that this is a specific problem of Spanish Wikipedia, because in Wikidata we tend to separate different objects into different items. So soundtrack is always at different item from the film. You can load data for soundtrack into the article using some Lua functions through statements in item for film. So I insist on keeping the durations in film items. --Infovarius (talk) 15:10, 31 July 2017 (UTC)



you reverted my edits. I merged islamic prophet and you revert this. please sir revert edits to my last rivision. thanks --BukhariSaeed (talk) 13:49, 17 July 2017 (UTC)

Please stop readding incorrect information to Q174907 (SPICE)Edit

Several of the statements for Q174907 (SPICE) were incorrect for the SPICE electronic circuit simulator that it is supposed to describe. Several others had previously tried to remove them, since they kept affecting the English Wikipedia article on that program, but you added them again. I have just removed them once more, with an explanation on the item's Talk page. Whoever originally added those statements confused the SPICE electronics simulator with an unrelated program, the SPICE remote-display system. The latter is written in C++ and has a source-code repository on, as well as a Gentoo package under app-emulation/spice. These have no connection to Berkeley's SPICE electronics software, which was only written in Fortran and C, and long predates online source-code repositories (though source archives do exist). --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 01:03, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

@Colin Douglas Howell: I've moved statements to Simple Protocol for Independent Computing Environments (Q1557101). Is it right? --Infovarius (talk) 15:07, 31 July 2017 (UTC)
That looks great, thanks! That should solve the problem once and for all. --Colin Douglas Howell (talk) 19:46, 1 August 2017 (UTC)


Добрый день! Мы не ставим ссылки на перенаправления, в s:ЭСБЕ/Моль только и говориться, что "моль" — это тоже самое, что и "грамм-молекула", но нет никакого объяснения, что это такое. Поэтому нет никакой пользы в этой связи. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 07:21, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Почему нет? Польза хотя бы в том, что мы честно показываем, что есть статья с одноимённым названием, пусть и недостатья. Кстати, а все элементы для ЭСБЕ-перенаправлений имеют общий класс (типа Wikipedia:Soft redirect (Q7200789))? --Infovarius (talk) 15:01, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Ilf and Petrov (Q262816)Edit

I removed occupation (P106) from Ilf and Petrov (Q262816) because it violates type constraint (Q21503250), and the occupation (P106) statement is present on Ilya Ilf (Q471443) and Yevgeny Petrov (Q714739). Danmichaelo (talk) 11:23, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

I understand that, but how should we mark that this is specifically writers duet? --Infovarius (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Juk and congeeEdit

Hi! I'd like to do just one merge, as juk (Korean: 죽(粥)) is a Korean name for congee Please see that the Chinese article zhōu ) and the Japanese article gayu 粥(かゆ) that are linked with congee use the same Chinese character as juk. The English article congee also contains juk as its Korean name. Other dishes in en:List of rice dishes are not the same case. --Azeite (talk) 07:33, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

@Azeite: oh, such a trouble with these cultural differences in cuisine! The problem was that ru/uk/some others articles were not about juk (and may be not about congee), so I was against your moves. Now after rethinking I created a new item: rice porridge (Q35661296) and moved some links and statements there. You can check please. And now I am doubt that ms/id articles are the same as congee (Q878624)... --Infovarius (talk) 14:02, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Why not ?Edit

( ) Because it’s not really a useful property. That do not match what it’s supposed to represent. What is meant is that the solar system is fully partitioned into « inner » and « outer part ». But this vaguely works because there is only two parts that « complements » each other to form the solar system. This is nowhere close to be able to express that france is partitioned into its regions. This is why I think that while full of good intentions the « opposite » solution is a bad attempt to represent something real. We should create a property to represent that. I think of a property similar to disjoint union of (P2738)   but for the whole/part relationship. author  TomT0m / talk page 22:07, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

see Wikidata:Property_proposal/fully_divised_into
Ok, may be "opposite" is a vague property here (you mean the next diff, I suppose?). But I don't feel the need in new property, it's enough to put all possible (all known) constituents in e.g. P527 and we will mean that they form a full set. Better may be to create (or use some) item for "etc." meaning that the set is not full. --Infovarius (talk) 19:57, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) are not Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410)Edit

Hi, I don't understand why you are engaging in an edit war on Vučetić (Q4128453) to insert a constraint violation. Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) pages lists entries that share a common thematic. Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) pages lists entries that share a common name. Both are subclasses of list (Q12139612), but they don't have the same purpose. If you consider that all disambiguation pages should be doubled as list pages, this would be a major change, so please first obtain a project-wide consensus on the project chat. -Ash Crow (talk) 12:47, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

Your comments have been moved into a discussion of GeonamesEdit

work of art (Q838948) subclass of item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264)Edit

This statement was deleted, , because to be subclass of (P279) implies to have *all* the caracteristics of the parent in heritage and it is not the case. Not all artworks are items of collection or exhibition. Some examples of artworks, among many, which have no collection (P195) : Fallen Astronaut (Q1161218), Fresco of Saint Christopher of Saint-Sorlin-en-Bugey (Q19318054), The Sun (Q18891206), Flammarion engraving (Q1426992), Q10538835. Furthermore, as described in the item page, if an item is an instance of item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264) or subclass, it implies that the work has ou should have the property inventory number (P217) and it will not be possible for all work of art (Q838948). Therefore work of art (Q838948) should not be subclass of item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264). Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 08:55, 15 August 2017 (UTC)

@Shonagon: I'd say that item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264) mean "it can be in collection or exhibition". May be I'm wrong.
Hello Infovarius . item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264) doesn't mean "it can be in collection or exhibition" but "it is in collection or exhibition" not only in descriptions (French, English, German, Spanish ...) but ontologically too with the properties for this type (P1963) that implies inventory number (P217) and collection (P195). As explained, that doesn't correspond to many instances of work of art (Q838948) so logically this item should not be subclass of (P279) of item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264). I just want to aware you about two things on which I am worried here: first, an explicit and strange vision of the world that artworks are necessarily linked to collection or exhibition; secondly, the consideration that subclass of (P279) could be used approximately without any specific need. An exemple of perverse consequence of the second: if we want to look for item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264) (and subclasses by inferences) missing inventory number (P217), tere will a big lot of false positive of artworks. Best regards --Shonagon (talk) 13:03, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

backing vocalist (Q798487) et alEdit

Sorry for the vandalism - testing band infobox harvesting, and apparently someone linked the role instead of the member's name.
--Ejegg (talk) 04:27, 16 August 2017 (UTC)


Hi, regarding your reversion, as I understand it couldn't be together swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) and 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8613), because second one includes the first one which is redundant. I deleted swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) to be coherent with the level of the other values from previous games. Probably, the item to keep should be swimming at the 2016 Summer Olympics (Q8022145) because it's more specific and also change the other values to their correspondance (Swimming at the 2012 Summer Olympics (Q193735), etc.). Do you agree ?.--Amadalvarez (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)

@Infovarius: I assume you agree. I proceed, thanks.--Amadalvarez (talk) 07:02, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
@Amadalvarez: I agree. The more specific the better. --Infovarius (talk) 10:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)


In what wiki is Q5678860 a disambiguation page? In both, EN and SR, the pages seem not to describe a particular data structure, but list some lemmas, known as "Hash trie". So I would consider them as disambiguation page, even if the do not use the according categories. --jmkeil (talk) 15:37, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

I am afraid that User:ValterVB wouldn't agree with you :) --Infovarius (talk) 12:03, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
It isn't only my idea :) You can start a discussion on Wikipedia and ask if there is agree to change the page in a disambiguation page. --ValterVB (talk) 15:42, 21 August 2017 (UTC)


Why you are undoing my edits? BukhariSaeed (talk) 12:51, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

@BukhariSaeed: because Wiktionary articles should not be linked to usual items. Only Wiktionary categories/appendices/templates and so on. The reason is that they are linked to each other by Extension:Cognate now, but which word (of which language) to link with a notion is a random choice so it is wrong. But don't be afraid, they will be linked to Wikidata soon - through special type of items: Lexemes. Read carefully Wikidata:Wiktionary. --Infovarius (talk) 21:31, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
i didn't know about that and thanks for explanation. BukhariSaeed (talk) 01:46, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Имён "Ричард/Рихард/Ришар" и "Петер/Питер" нетEdit

Richard (Q1249148) Peter (Q2793400)

Не понимаю почему речь о произношении когда в метках написание в первую очередь.

Для произношения IPA свойства нужны. d1g (talk) 08:58, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Дело в том, что это не русские имена, а Richard и Peter. Нельзя однозначно сказать, каким русским словам они соответствуют, поэтому нельзя дать однозначную метку. Я бы предпочёл вообще оставить оригинальное написание. Другой аргумент: разве Richard Wagner (Q1511) - Ричард? --Infovarius (talk) 20:52, 30 August 2017 (UTC)
Ну никак не "Ричард/Рихард/Ришар Вагнер"; через дробь - самый проблемный вариант для множества задач.
@Infovarius: в описании можно первым словом "Richard - англоязычное, мужское" d1g (talk) 12:01, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
@D1gggg: не вижу, чем плохо через дробь. А какую метку вы предлагаете? Кстати, это не только англоязычное - остальные не готовы разделять английские и прочие (французские, напр.) имена, если они имеют одинаковое написание. Хотя можно попробовать надавить в этом вопросе. Бразильские/португальские/испанские уже некоторые разделены. --Infovarius (talk) 19:55, 25 September 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: никакую либо Richard
В любом поиске "Ричард/Рихард/Ришар Вагнер" это 0 результатов и без подсказок.
Смысл не только вводить, но и пользоваться потом без лишних движений.
"Richard Вагнер" подсказывает варианты d1g (talk) 20:00, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Coat of arms of RussiaEdit

Hi, Infovarius (talkcontribslogs), I noticed your edit and added the Coat of arms of the Russian Federation (1992-1993) to the gallery to make it complete. Hopefully that was not a bad move. Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you for your time.   Lotje (talk) 05:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)


Ş = spoken sch! Yours Avernarius (talk) 17:20, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

It is spoken "шакшука" :) but sch or sh - it depends on language. --Infovarius (talk) 13:02, 1 September 2017 (UTC)


Please read en:Drama - you'll see that this is only a part of fiction - along with epic and lyric. So "historical drama" isn't equal to "historical fiction". --Infovarius (talk) 21:34, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

YOU should read it carefully. As I said before (and said in the article you mention), Drama has two different senses in English :
  • the one you admit ("Considered as a genre of poetry in general, the dramatic mode has been contrasted with the epic and the lyrical modes ever since Aristotle's Poetics (c. 335 BCE)—the earliest work of dramatic theory." or "The use of "drama" in a more narrow sense to designate a specific type of play dates from the modern era. "Drama" in this sense refers to a play that is neither a comedy nor a tragedy")
  • and the other one, broader, means "fiction" : see the first sentence of the article ("Drama is the specific mode of fiction represented in performance.") or "In English (as was the analogous case in many other European languages), the word "play" or "game" (translating the Anglo-Saxon plèga or Latin ludus) was the standard term used to describe drama until William Shakespeare's time—just as its creator was a "play-maker" rather than a "dramatist" and the building was a "play-house" rather than a "theatre"."
Concerning Historical period drama, it is clear that the second sense is use : "The term, historical period drama (also historical drama, period drama, costume drama, and period piece) refers to a work set in an earlier time period" and "It is an informal crossover term that can apply to several genres"...
Elfast (talk) 18:06, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

National artist of Soviet UnionEdit

Привет. Это не понимаю точно: [17]. Если для эти две звания употребляется P155, потом - есть это хорошо, что для народный артист РСФСР и народный артист СССР употребляется P156? --Okino (talk) 23:28, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

@Okino: Не говорю 100%, но по-моему P155/P156 употребляется не всегда однозначно. Здесь их можно понимать как "следующий по времени существования награды" или "следующий по этапу присуждения". --Infovarius (talk) 19:50, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

"Instance of" of fictional charactersEdit

Здравствуйте, Infovarius. У меня возникли сомнения на счет Нужно ли вообще указывать все "реинкарнации" вымышленных персонажей? В случае, например, некоторых зарубежных персонажей в шапке "instance of" может быть по 7 (!) и более элементов (animated character, comic character, film character, game character, television character и т.д.) просто из-за того, что франшизы обрастают фильмами, комиксами, мультфильмами и прочим.

Есть ли какие-нибудь правила на счет этого? Выглядит это все не очень, из-за чего я склоняюсь к тому, что лучше оставлять в "instance of" только те элементы, которые относятся именно к оригинальному персонажу (в случае Электроника — это элемент "literary character", "film character" же уже вторичен). Не говоря уже о том, что при такой практике "instance of" в элементах персонажей будет сильно разрастаться. --Russian Rocky (talk) 14:09, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

А что делать? Если элемент реально о персонаже всех этих жанров, то нужно указывать. Другое решение - разделять персонажа на несколько элементов (один из книги, другой из фильма и т.д.), но он мне не всегда нравится. --Infovarius (talk) 16:48, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Т.е. каких-то четких правил, как я понял, нет?
На счет же разделения персонажей, то это уже чрезмерно. Конечно, если это не отдельный случай, вроде Кларка Кента (Супермена) из "Тайн Смолвиля", который имеет собственную статью:
Как вариант, для всех сопутствующих воплощений персонажа франшизы (animated character, comic character, film character, game character, television character и т.д.) можно использовать отдельный элемент. Заметил подобную практику в отношении списков персонажей, например, в случае списка персонажей Винни-Пуха: Хотя, пока я не могу судить насколько адекватен такой вариант.
Было бы, конечно, намного лучше выработать какой-то консенсус по этому поводу. --Russian Rocky (talk) 17:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Участница Valentina.Anitnelav уже по факту разделяет некоторых персонажей - особенно выделяет диснеевских. См. например: Snow White (Q2739228) vs Snow White (Q14153484). Да, и Винни-пух тоже, причём не пойму, куда лучше воткнуть связь с нашими мультиками в Q1427030 или в Q188574.
Так что пока стандарта, наверное, нет. Надо пробовать и обсуждать всем вместе. --Infovarius (talk) 11:19, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

assembly is not an eventEdit

Why you classified Q1752346 as type of meeting? I reverted as it implied that "organization that uses parliamentary procedure to make decisions" is special type of meeting. Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:45, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Because in en-wiki: "A Deliberative assembly is a gathering of members". --Infovarius (talk) 23:28, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

instance of (P31) algebraic structure (Q205464)Edit

hello, sorry for bothering. but could you elaborate ob why you think algebraic structures shouldn't be marked as instance of (P31) algebraic structure (Q205464)? i presume it's not only regarding group? because its used for many algebraic structures, and i didn't start it. i don't particularly care for for their instanceof value, i'm just curious and open for improvement. thanks. :) --opensofias (talk) 17:17, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

@Opensofias: do you know the difference between instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279)? There are several groups for example, and all of them are algebraic structure (Q205464) I suppose. So group should be subclass of (P279) algebraic structure (Q205464). --Infovarius (talk) 13:06, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

card gameEdit

Regarding this revert in card game (Q142714): subclasses of this item are used with the sport (P641) property, thus this item somehow should be subclassing sport (P641) — or you need to repair all affected P641 claims as well. I spend a lot of time to keep the constraint violations list at Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P641 short, and you shouldn’t break things up like that. Thanks and regards, MisterSynergy (talk) 19:56, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

It's sufficient to add some sport subclass to card games which really are. I've worked out CoVi report a little bit: What are you specifically unhappy now about? --Infovarius (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2017 (UTC)

Crimean PeninsulaEdit

Hi. Could you explain why you reverted this edit please? It's also relevant for Q4053951, and I'd like to understand how we should be representing the country of things in this area at the moment (and how we can ingest that into location maps in infoboxes on the English Wikipedia). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:48, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Because it is not a state and it is violating property constraints. As status quo I suppose we just mark both countries for current Crimea objects. --Infovarius (talk) 12:07, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
OK, thanks. Something like this? Mike Peel (talk) 22:54, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
@Mike Peel: Yes, and it can be refined further. --Infovarius (talk) 23:00, 22 September 2017 (UTC)


What makes you think Maria B. Ospina (Q38304648) was wrongly merged? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Because Wikimedia permanent duplicate item (Q21286738) is not a human at all... --Infovarius (talk) 14:47, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
Ooops! Good, spot, thanks. I wonder how that happened? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:19, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: I can't help - I don't know which tool you've used. --Infovarius (talk) 20:17, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Q7111053 vs Q31362405Edit

As I understand your changes at [18], you are saying that the given name (P735) of Konstantin Päts (Q299114) was in Cyrillic script (Q8209) rather than Latin script (Q8229)? Do you have a source for this, as that seems rather unlikely? --Oravrattas (talk) 08:01, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@Oravrattas: He was born in Russian Empire and lived in USSR so he is likely to have passport (or other official documents) in Russian as official language of these countries, but I cannot prove this by good source. And ok, Latin form is probably was used too. --Infovarius (talk) 23:08, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
He was born in Estonia, during the period of the revival of the Estonian language, and before the period of Russification, so it seems highly unlikely that his documents would have been in Russian, at least at birth. And as the founder of an Estonian language newspaper, and a leader of the War of Independence, etc., it also seems highly likely that, even were his documents bilingual, he would have very strongly preferred the Estonian language version. --Oravrattas (talk) 06:05, 23 September 2017 (UTC)
I suppose that bilinguality of documents would be enough for using Cyrillic too. --Infovarius (talk) 20:18, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Black Sea part of Atalantic ocean?Edit

I see you rb, why you consider Black Sea part of Atalantic ocean? Is part of Mediterranean Sea. --ValterVB (talk) 20:03, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Hm, can you prove that it is a part of Mediterranean Sea? --Infovarius (talk) 23:14, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Duplicate properties Mariya (Q39897333) and Maria (Q325872)Edit

Здравствуйте! Я заметил, что 15 сентября вы создали свойство Mariya. Нашёл я его по использованию в утверждениях к объекту Но ведь уже есть свойство Maria, оно очень похоже на созданное Вами. Если я правильно понимаю, то Вам надо удалить похожее свойство, если я прав? -- NEW ZENIT (talk) 21:52, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

@NEW ZENIT: проблема в том, что Q325872="Maria" & Q39897333="Мария" (разные алфавиты). Это если кратко. --Infovarius (talk) 23:12, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius: понятно. А есть где-то объяснения на эту тему? А то не очень очевидно, зачем для одной сущности создавать несколько страниц, хотя для этого есть "In more languages". --NEW ZENIT (talk) 23:28, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
@NEW ZENIT: Если немного подробнее: 1) "Мария" может транслитерироваться на латиницу по-разному: Mary, Maria, Marja и т.д. и все эти формы могут считаться разными именами у них. 2) В англовики создаются разные статьи под разные варианты и в результате не избежать нескольких элементов... 3) вообще добро пожаловать на Wikidata:Project Names и тамошнее обсуждение. --Infovarius (talk) 20:16, 25 September 2017 (UTC)

Food ingredientEdit

Re: Q27643250 - food (Q2095) is defined (by us) as "any substance consumed to provide nutritional support for the body...", so yes, I am sure that starch (Q41534) is covered by that. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:25, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Одинаковые именаEdit

Здравствуйте. Вижу, что вы участвовали в обсуждениях об именах Константин, Сантош и т.п. Можете вкратце по-русски объяснить, как это тут устроено, и почему существуют разные items для одного и того же имени. Я вот столкнулся с Q30724063, Q21654787 и Q933726, которые судя по статьям ВП на разных языках - суть одно и тоже. Dmitry89 (talk) 08:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Русскую вики даже имеет смысл поправить на тему фонтановEdit

Определение "фонтан" я из ГОСТа взял.

Другие выходы воды в природе отличаются по происхождению:

Выход лавы отдельное являение: может "фонтанировать", а может медленно растекаться.

Разные слова по разному происхождению "фонтанов". d1g (talk) 13:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Смысл "фонтан = столб воды" (или жидкости или газа) не отрицаю, но на "городских" фонтанах он не усместен. d1g (talk) 13:11, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Re:Why not?Edit

This because it is redundant w.r.t. data transfer rate (Q495092)--Horcrux92 (talk) 10:40, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Isn't it? --Horcrux92 (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
@Horcrux92: Oh, yes, sorry. --Infovarius (talk) 10:29, 4 October 2017 (UTC)


На каком основании Вы отменили мою правку в Q8559959? Это категория для статей о клещах из рода Ixodes, которая как раз входит в категорию Иксодовые клещи. В русском языке разделяют эти понятия. --VladXsmall (talk) 17:21, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@VladXsmall: Пусть разделяют. Но это же монотипное семейство? Так почему нельзя называть Ixodes также именем "Иксодовые клещи"? Я же просто синоним добавил. --Infovarius (talk) 10:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
1) Не монотипическое (19 родов). 2) Согласно :ru:ВП:ИС/Таксон на любое рус. название нужно АИ. У Вас есть АИ, что Ixodes = Иксодовые клещи? --VladXsmall (talk) 13:24, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
@VladXsmall: Я имел в виду подсемейство. Но да, раз в семействе "Иксодовые клещи" есть несколько родов, то нельзя отождествлять только Ixodes с ними. Убираю. --Infovarius (talk) 12:06, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Intensive physical propertyEdit

Are you saying that an "intensive physical property" is not a "physical property"? It sounds weird. --Horcrux92 (talk) 19:24, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Horcrux92: It was not-exact English label that embarassed you, I suppose. "Intensive physical quantity" is a "physical quantity", of course. --Infovarius (talk) 10:34, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
The english (and italian, and spanish, and so on) label came from intensive or extensive property (Q911916) and I think it was the correct one. I think we should create four distinct items for "intensive/extensive property" and "intensive/extensive phisical quantity", making the first ones subclasses of the second ones. --Horcrux92 (talk) 15:04, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
@Horcrux92: Oh, the problem is deeper, I see. intensive or extensive property (Q911916) also has different labels in en and ru - "property" against "quantity". Reading en:Physical property I see a sentence "Quantifiable physical property is called physical quantity." But the page (and discussion page) is quite stale, and it doesn't contain energy or velocity as an examples of physical properties (but I insist that they are physical quantities nevertheless), so I don't know what to think... --Infovarius (talk) 15:19, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Saint GeorgeEdit

Hello. As you reverted my edit on Saint George, you must have access to some kind of information that has escaped the rest of the informed world. His alleged live and death is based on legends and speculations about possibilities. Please state your sources. --Orland (talk) 07:14, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Russian speaker neededEdit

Could you translate my message on User_talk:Ovagner? I think he doesn't understand English, keep fixing this every day. Thanks in advance. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 15:27, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Done. --Infovarius (talk) 20:21, 7 October 2017 (UTC)

Beedle the Bard and fictive authorsEdit

Hello, answering to your 'Why not' revert comment, setting fictive characters as author (P50) values is considered a constraint violation, and rightly so in my opinion: if we start to mix authors and narrators in the same property, that's gonna be a hell to sort them apart later :) -- Maxlath (talk) 08:41, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

It's strange CoVi. Because P31 fictional book (Q74574) is allowed but who is the author of it? In my opinion we can allow any class of authors. For some authors we can't even tell if them fictional or not (or could not some time ago, e.g. Ossian (Q15837802)). Sorting them is not so hard actually. --Infovarius (talk) 12:29, 12 October 2017 (UTC)


Why did you revert the merging? Steak (talk) 19:02, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

@Steak: because I've investigated that one category is about individual remarcable trees (instances) and another is about classes of trees (usually species which are grown in this country). If you suppose that any sitelink is placed wrongly you feel free to move it. --Infovarius (talk) 11:41, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Ok. Steak (talk) 19:54, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Latin in VaticanEdit

I have removed again Latin from the official languages of Vatican city. Vatican city has only Italian as official language. Latin is the official language for the Holy See, which is a different entity from Vatican City.

Tcp-ip (talk) 14:21, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

unit of account (Q747699)Edit

"Unit of account" in Russian is "Денежная единица" (now redirect to "Валюта", currency) or "Мера стоимости" (now redirect to "Деньги", as one of money functions, measure of value). "Счетная денежная единица" or "Счетно-денежная монета" means "Coin of account" (de: Rechnungswährung). "Условная единица" is local russian form of unit of account. --Kalashnov (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Не обратил внимание, что русский для вас -- родной язык. Могу все это изложить еще раз по-русски, так будет точнее. Есть некоторая путаница в интервиках, которая начинается с понятия "Условная единица". Это российское явление, точного мирового аналога я не нашел, поэтому интервику у него пока не нужно делать. Сейчас же она направлена на "Coin of account" (Q354091).

  • "Coin of account" (Q354091) -- это русская "Счётно-денежная монета" (а сейчас это "unit of account" (Q747699))
  • "unit of account" (Q747699) -- в зависимости от контекста это русские "Денежная единица" (сейчас редирект на "Валюта") или "Мера стоимости", одна из функцией денег (сейчас редирект на "Деньги"). Чаще русскому "Мера стоимости" стоимости соответствует английское "Measure of value", поэтому лучше делать соответствие между "unit of account" и "денежная единица". --Kalashnov (talk) 20:16, 14 October 2017 (UTC)


Categories with categories, not pages with categories. There's already the link to the Commons category on the Aria (band) Wikidata item. If the item is about a page there's the property P373 to add the Commons category -- Blackcat (talk) 09:12, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Blackcat: Categories with categories, and pages with pages. --Infovarius (talk) 18:45, 21 October 2017 (UTC)


Hello, could you please construct an English-language description for Q1211272, to aid clarifying exactly the distinction you wish to maintain between it and Q24841283? Thank you! Also, based on the German-language Wikipedia article linked from Q1211272 and the English-language Wikipedia article linked from Q24841283, I have restored the AAT and LCSH terms to both Wikidata records. --TimK MSI (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

state with limited recognition (Q15634554)Edit

Hi! About your rollback on this item, in italian we use to capitalize the word "Stato" for avoiding ambiguity ("stato" is also the past participle of "essere"). See for example it:Stato. --BohemianRhapsody (talk) 07:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)


I have removed unit from RMS Titanic (Q25173) because the property definition for P1093 clearly says "Gross tonnage (GT) is a unitless index related to a ship's overall internal volume", examples have no units and most of the actual uses have no units. Having just a couple of values with units just adds confusion. If you think there should be units, then the property definition should be changed and units added to all uses. Also, having net register tonnage (Q6998519) and deadweight tonnage (Q1332978) as units on gross tonnage (P1093) does not look right - if these are quantities different from GT, they should have their own properties. Q6998519 doesn't even have instance of unit. And Q1332978 does not have any useful unit definition - if it's unit of volume, how much cubic meters is it? Without this, it is not useable as unit - you can not compare it with other units of volume. And the point of units is that they are convertable and comparable. So I don't think putting units on this is the right way to go - at least without adding more properties and/or changing the definitions. Laboramus (talk) 17:17, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

Given names are linked with P1533 to family namesEdit

Hi! The links in the given names items prevent the merging of the two items, so there is actually no need at all to add a link from the family name to the given name. If a need arose, like for infoboxes or such, some people thought about creating a property "given name identical to this surname". So if you have a real need, talk to them? There seems to be absolutely no case where different from (P1889) would make sense. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 09:32, 2 November 2017 (UTC)


Здравствуйте! там не только про войну на востоке Украины, но и про вторжение в Крым (посмотрите интервики). Так что я поправил определение. --Шмурак (talk) 21:27, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Please clean *entirely* items when you change their purposeEdit

I don't really care which way given names are cleaned up when the original item was a mix of several names, I usually go with the easiest way to clean. And I let them with clean labels, descriptions, aliases, properties and uses. We can disagree on what the easiest way to clean was and what given name should have the dubious honor to "keep" the original Qid. As I said, I don't care.

But what I care about is that when you start to revert the clean-up because for some reason you want to change the Qid (no idea why, by the way), you should do it entirely: clean up labels, descriptions, properties and uses. Because otherwise you are leaving a mess worse than what things where at first. You repurposed the "Vlada" I used as a Latin-script name as a Cyrillic name, cleaning the uses but not all the descriptions, labels and aliases, which most certainly ensure it will be wrongly used in the future. If you change the properties and the uses please correct the labels/descriptions/aliases too. That's part of the work.

(And for information, most Slavic names will have several perfectly valid transliterations in the same Latin language. So yes, it's perfectly normal to have several label/aliases in French to the same Russian name for example, all correct.)

--Harmonia Amanda (talk) 16:41, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

I won't change the meanings of different Влада now, but I consider the current situation wrong. 1) Actually it's you who repurposed Q22806785 (and now completely demolished it) - it was created as Russian name "Влада" (but with ambiguous latin labels "Vlada" as it was no problem then. Note that you also not cleaned uses of this redirect. 2) Now Q21531807 has inadequate Latin labels, as for Belorussian part of the item, because it usually transliterated as Ulada. Look at 2016's edits of Jura1, which are now demolished. P.S. But I don't let you to change from Vlada to Ulada in the item. 3) I don't know if User:Чаховіч Уладзіслаў will be happy with merging of Russian and Belorussian names. --Infovarius (talk) 22:10, 9 November 2017 (UTC)
I don't understand your remarks: you said that Vlada (Q21531807) was at first a Cyrillic name and... it still is. All people wearing this name really wear the Cyrillic one and not the Latin-script one, even people who are linked to the redirection right now (because a bot correct the uses of redirections to the correct items, so it would be a problem if in reality their names were in Latin script but since they are in Cyrillic and using a redirection to the Cyrillic name it creates no problems).
For Vlada (Q7938169) I agree with you that the current form is problematic. There are two way to deal with it, either consider that "encompassing" items like that should have a writing system as they are only here to has part (P527) the correct existing given names, which would mean deleting native label (P1705) and writing system (P282) from the item, or to specifically restrict it to one native label (P1705) same as all other names, which would mean deleting has part (P527)/part of (P361) to the Cyrillic name. Frankly both types are in use in the project right now for encompassing items (we have several for different Japanese sharing a transliteration for example) and I'm not sure which way would be better. I'm mostly of the mind that we should delete string information from encompassing items because content articles are usually about several names but I'm not deeply convinced it's the better solution and we should have a collective discussion on the project about it. Right now Vlada (Q7938169) is both about the string "Vlada" and all names either written or transliterated as "Vlada", which we both agree is absurd.
Please don't ever use Jura1's edits of 2016 as an example of serious work about transliterations. These edits were made based only on one label, without taking into account the original string. He used the English label for all latin-script languages even when these languages don't share at all the same transliterations systems. He did it not only for Cyrillic but also for Korean or Armenian, etc. There were talk at the time to just massively delete all his contributions because most of them were terribly wrong. The only reason why it wasn't done is that we didn't have the necessary tools then to only delete his "work" on transliterations and keep his other edits. But they are still wrong for the most part. Vlada is the most frequent transliteration of Влада, even in its Belarussion version, in all languages I checked, Ulada being another less usited one. And yes, I checked, instead of just copying it mindlessly from language to language.
We create one string, one item, regardless of how many languages use the same string. So Улада (which by the way is most frequently transliterated as "Ulada") would be another item than Влада. Alyaksey (Q19412966) (Аляксей) is not the same as Alexey (Q29014670) (Алексей). But when Belarussian and Russian names are written stricly the same way, I don't see whey they shouldn't share an item? --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 12:58, 17 November 2017 (UTC)

Euclidean plane geometry (Q3760348) and planimetrics (Q1133157)Edit

Reading the different sitelinks in Category:Euclidean plane geometry (Q6770414), I realised there could be a problem. In several languages (like German, English, French, Italian, or Spanish), planimetrics (Q1133157) refers to either the study of plane measurements or to the representation of space or surface in a plane; however, in Russian and Ukrainian at least (could be many more languages), the sitelinks in planimetrics (Q1133157) appear to correspond with Euclidean plane geometry (Q3760348). It seems to be a case of words with the same root, but having evolved into a different meaning. Could you check them up please? Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 01:21, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Andreasmperu: I am not sure that I understand the difference between planimetrics (Q1133157) and Euclidean plane geometry (Q3760348)... --Infovarius (talk) 13:02, 16 November 2017 (UTC)


Привет! А как правильно отчества указывать? Dr Bug (Vladimir V. Medeyko) 19:22, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Привет! Да не указываются они в виде утверждений (пока?). И элементов специально для русских отчеств я не находил, и свойство patronym or matronym for this name (P2976) предназначено для связи имени (а не человека) с отчеством (например, Johansson (Q1699018) для Johan (Q10989273)). --Infovarius (talk) 10:42, 16 November 2017 (UTC)

Commons category (P373) on animal (Q729)Edit

Hello Infovarius,
About [19]: On wikicommons for biology, for many taxon there is 2 categories:

  • one named with the scientific name (Animalia). These are recommanded because scientific name use a latin form which is international
  • one named with the vernacular name (Animals).

Venacular name categories are not to linked to:

  • They are only tolerated because named in a single language (compared to international 'scientific name'). We fear that contributor will create cat for other languages (we already have some chinese cat)
  • It is a kind of trash were photos of unindentified species
  • Vernacular name cat are always placed inside scientific name cat. So access to Animalia give you direct access to Animals
  • Currently 100% of taxon have only one Commons category (P373): the scientific name (I enforce it with templates which put the bad wikidata items in wikicommons:Category:Pages with biology property incorrect on Wikidata)
  • If we want to use Commons category (P373) in templates, it is simplier if they contain only 1 value

When we try to hide it, you want to promote it.
Please, let me remove it.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 07:28, 18 November 2017 (UTC)

Many pedias have articles for "property" instead of "functions having property"Edit

@Infovarius: I can cite the articles linked to semi-continuity (Q955072). Altough there is no such thing as semi-continuity (Q955072) as an indipendent concept (semi-continuity (Q955072) is the property exhibited by semi-continuous function (Q43304466)), many pedias have articles named after the first that instead talk of the latter. To avoid potential flames caused by moving all those pages, or controversely defining semi-continuity (Q955072) as a subclass of function, the statement has quality (P1552): semi-continuity (Q955072) for semi-continuous function (Q43304466) seemed to me a good compromise to connect those Qs. --Ogoorcs (talk) 16:07, 23 November 2017 (UTC)

Language propertyEdit


The discussion on Wikidata talk:WikiProject Books#Language property had been a bit hijacked (sorry about that). So I come here directly to be sure, is it clear to you now? Do you need more explanations? (I can give you, no problem, don't hesitate to tell me if I'm not clear   )

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:01, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: I must admit that I was more comfortable with using P364+P407 in edition (Wikisource) items as it shows both original language and language of a translation. Often there are no "original" item and sometimes it is even unknown (so it can't be or shouldn't be created)... --Infovarius (talk) 15:31, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
I understand one can find it easier to have all information on the same item but in the long run, it is a very bad idea (especially for books with many editions, it leads to duplicate the same information other and other instead of centralising it on the item about the work). And true sometimes the item about the work doesn't exist but the solution is then to create it (and if needed to create the page on Wikisource, I create a lot of those on frwikisource). I may be wrong but I feel you are mixing the item about the original edition (which is indeed sometimes unknown) and the item about the work (which is always known and quite easy to create). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 15:43, 24 November 2017 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius. Schießpulver is the same as english gunpowder, so please don't revert my correction. Or do you really understand Alemannic? --Holder (talk) 17:22, 24 November 2017 (UTC)

Are you sure? The way I read it, Schwarzpulver is gunpowder, Schießpulver is more general. - Brya (talk) 20:10, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Well, may be you're right. So I think it would really be the best to merge de:Schwarzpulver and als:SChwarzpulver with en:gunpowder. Thanks and best regards. --Holder (talk) 20:47, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. - Brya (talk) 19:51, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

One Piece, season 1 (Q334877)Edit

One Piece, season 1 (Q334877) is both "a list of episodes" and also "an anime tv series season", since its article en:List of One Piece episodes (season 1) also describe the details of the season, not just list the episodes. "anime tv series season" is subclass of "anime tv series", so One Piece, season 1 (Q334877) is an "anime tv series" (or "tv anime" (anime television program (Q11086742)) in short). --Ans (talk) 19:33, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Elvis PresleyEdit

Sorry, I did not think he had a twin :( --ValterVB (talk) 18:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

About your revert on Q54050Edit

That's the correct definition, bro. And I don't know why you think my edit is suspicious - I am a patroller and rollbacker in Chinese Wikipedia and I also hold one global right due to difficulties... --1233 (talk) 08:56, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

@1233: I am sorry, I have used Google Translate and it showed complete nonsense. Can you please translate here your description to English? --Infovarius (talk) 14:30, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
@Infovarius:: Both means a general description of a geographical location which is slightly higher than the surrounding areas.--1233 (talk) 18:17, 7 December 2017 (UTC)


Hey Infovarius, could you please reasonably object at Talk:Q31645, or revert your revert in multisport race (Q31645)? The entire process to optimize the situation around this item is stalled since your revert. Thanks, —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:45, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Narrative FunctionsEdit

Hello Infovarius. You obviously want to keep the narrative functions (protagonist, antagonist, etc.) as a qualifier on present in work (P1441) and you started to remove the direct claims. It is ok for me to keep the qualifiers, but I'm against removing the uses as main properties.

First: I also think that subject has role (P2868) should be mainly used as a qualifier. But it is/was not restricted to the use of a qualifier. It is used on taxa quite a lot as a main property (75838 results) and I think that it can be useful to indicate the narrative function(s) of a character in this way, too.

The narrative function is the kind of information about an entity that should be expressed in a direct claim: It is a significant trait if a character appears anywhere as a main character, it is useful for lists and categories like Category:Video game bosses (Q8218450) and the only way to be able to qualify the narrative function (e.g. via sourcing circumstances (P1480)). To be a foil (Q5563727) means to be a foil with respect to another character. One would need to express this via another qualifier (see Christian Buddenbrook (Q42324815) - I admit that the qualifier I used here may not be the right one).

I started to remove the qualifiers to avoid redundance and make it easier to maintain. If you still want to keep them I will leave them there. But please give reasons for removing the direct claims. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:07, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

Ok, let's keep both for a moment. I think that at least it should be possible to query qualifiers too. I don't know if it is possible now. @Magnus Manske:, how about full support of qualifiers in Reasonator (list of linked items through qualifier, for example)? --Infovarius (talk) 13:18, 15 December 2017 (UTC)


Вы вот спрашиваете "зачем удалять?", отвечаю: затем что эти даты означают одно и тоже. Зачем заставлять редакторов сопоставлять даты разных календарей, это ведь черевато ошибками. К чему ваше "это вообще должно быть первоосновой" я вообще не понимаю. Представление даты в источнике я указываю в quote (P1683), взгляните на статьи ЭСБЕ в referenc'ах для грегорианских дат. -- Sergey kudryavtsev (talk) 11:36, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Одно и то же, да. Но какой формат нужнее? Современный григорианский для удобного использования или юлианский для оригинальной даты? Я не уверен, что можно выбрать единообразно и раз и навсегда... --Infovarius (talk) 11:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

TeX commandsEdit


I don't happy with moving this property to qualifiers. How would you model restrictions like (P518)/(Q295299) and sources for the command?

well, I see your point. This is a restriction with Wikidata's data model.

There are three options.

  1. How you had edited them (separate TeX strings). This (A) allows for qualifiers to the TeX strings, but (B) does not allow for associating TeX strings to specific case/form/variant. (\varsigma vs \sigma vs \Sigma)
  2. How I had edited them (TeX strings as qualifiers). This has the opposite pro/con.
  3. Both qualifiers and properties for TeX strings. This (A) preserves all information, but (B) may have redundant and/or conflicting information.

I think the last one (having both) might be a good idea. What do you think? If you like, please feel free to edit them as you see fit. Merry Christmas. Osteologia (talk) 21:07, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, @Osteologia:. I understand that #3 could be an option. But I suppose #1 also allows to associate TeX strings to specific variant (by qualifiers!). --Infovarius (talk) 13:25, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

stag (Q29838881) / Q46643175Edit

Why do you think modeling them as subclass of (P279) of male organism (Q44148) / female organism (Q43445) is a good idea. There was no contraint violation of sex or gender (P21) reported. --Succu (talk) 22:34, 25 December 2017 (UTC)

@Succu: How is it there is no CoVi?? Please read constraints for sex or gender (P21): subject of the item should be some instance of (P31) of person (Q215627) or similar. Then, I think that modelling "male deer" as subclass of "male organism" is very logical and doesn't violate any constraint. Why do you think that this is not a good idea? --Infovarius (talk) 13:30, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
We should proceed here. --Succu (talk) 22:39, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

artwork series (Q15709879)Edit

The description artwork series (Q15709879) is fine when the form of the art is to be left unspecified, or the group is mixed or of physical art. But using it in place of musical composition (Q207628) means that we no longer know what kind of art is in the series. When all the music was assembled and published as a single composition, we can safely call it a musical composition (Q207628) instead of artwork series (Q15709879). --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: were these concerts assembled and regarded as a single composition? If you want to specify that they are pieces of music we can use qualifier of (P642) musical composition (Q207628). --Infovarius (talk) 14:06, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
Yes, they were assembled and published together as a unit. The assemblage bears a single title; the components have only nicknames or descriptions, but originally had no titles of their own. This seems to have happened a lot in the Baroque period, and not so much afterwards. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

R (Q206904)Edit


You wanted to know why I removed these: [20]. It was because of information overload. Most were repetitions of the "programming paradigm" field. Also, "programming language" is redundant to "multi-paradigm programming language". The later gives all the information that the former gives.

Best regards,
Codename Lisa (talk) 02:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

@Codename Lisa: I see the redundancy. But there is 2 approaches: using special class or using special property for indicating e.g. paradigm. The approaches are quite parallel and which of them to use is not yet defined (or do you know some RfC about choosing?). So I'd prefer to use both for a while. --Infovarius (talk) 13:20, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Paprika (2006 film)Edit

Hello Infovarius!

Sorry i do not speak well in English. I am Hungarian. The paprika feature film, this really right. But does not display this unfortunately in the Hungarian at us. But it, that whole evening film. "játékfilm = Feautre Film" The feature film film like that, that played real stories, stories guessed even as characters by way of actors or animated figures even, through scenes directed by a director taken in a script introduces. "egész estés film = Whole Evening Film" 80-90 minute films are the whole evening films in the average. What is a whole evening film, it much longer, we say it 2 clockmaker you are a film yet longer. Nowadays all of the evening film generally the 80 and 210 minute ones mean films. 60 and 120 mean ones between a minute generally at the child films. But what is longer than 1 clockmaker film, you are at least 1 clockmaker film, we may regard it as whole evening one already. In the Hungarian wiki this expression, which is not important in him, appears unfortunately let the box be-ban and very much lengthens the text at us the box-ban, this would need to substitute instead of the whole evening film the feature film expression let in the huwiki appear. I hope so you understood what I wrote.

You're Welcome:. --Vakondka (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Vakondka! I am sorry, I don't understand all what you've written (may be you try to write in Hungarian, and I'll try to translate it with Google Translate?). As I understand, in Hungarian there could be 2 not equal terms, "játékfilm" and "egész estés film" (why only "evening"?). I used Q24869 as a quite long, self-consistent film (in opposition to short film (Q24862)). At least in Russian this item means so, but I agree with phrase in en-wiki: "The majority of feature films are between 70 and 210 minutes long". Which of your terms is better suited for this item? --Infovarius (talk) 13:09, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I think we solved it that long expression did not appear in Hungarian now, but in English knew to do let us not lose info. But wiki I write to you in an e-mail in Hungarian, what I thought of punctually how. --Vakondka (talk) 21:53, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

I sent it to you through the surface of the wikipedia e-mail in a message on a Hungarian language. --Vakondka (talk) 09:58, 11 January 2018 (UTC)

part of (P361)Edit

Hi! I removed part of (P361) because it requires, in the other item, has part (P527); moreover, in my opinion facet of (P1269) is sufficient in this case. Am I wrong? Thank you! --Epìdosis 18:10, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

New typesEdit

Before adding non-standard types to P31, could you bring it up on WP movies?
--- Jura 10:49, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

I don't think silent short film (Q20667187) is more non-standard type than e.g. animated film (Q202866) or short film (Q24862). --Infovarius (talk) 13:57, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1: But why did you mass-revert of admin's additions without discussion? See Q4415135 --Infovarius (talk) 13:59, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  • It is, at least compared to short film (Q24862). Periodically, I clean up and complete film project related items. I didn't investigate in detail who added what and when. I did advise some users of problematic conversions.
    --- Jura 17:35, 22 January 2018 (UTC)
  • Can you stop this .. it just adds more to cleanup.
    --- Jura 02:32, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

Thans for deleting P279Edit

Thanks, you for deleting this property, it was a awful failure from me. -- Спасибоб, Вы оказали мне болшой помощь. Вчера старалься исправлать эту глупую ошибкуб но не получилось. С приветом. Texaner (talk) 13:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (Film)Edit

Hello Infovarius! The feature film dot, that reports the whole evening film (film like that, that would be able to amount to a cinema program merely, and not double could be going as the part of feature only for example. That trouble, the Hungarian wikiben display it so: egész estés film. This very much info at us in the box and pulls it apart very much. It would be necessary to make changes in this info in the Hungarian in order to be a word short one with an expression there. Máté Hungarian editor tries to reflect on how he should be, but we may eliminate it somehow in the scheme theoretically. --Vakondka (talk) 08:38, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

No the aim that he should get out would be needed in the Hungarian some other way to express the info, it it would be necessary to change it to something somehow in order for an expression to be shorter, back up let him be found. --Vakondka (talk) 08:47, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Feature filmEdit

Hello! Máté solved my problem. Back up I make it for you everywhere the feature expression. :) --Vakondka (talk) 13:41, 28 January 2018 (UTC)


Добрый день. Можно ли заблокировать и отменить все правки данного участника User:Maitsavend, так как практически не один его перевод на татарский язык не является правильным, участник сам придумывает словосочетания, слова, можно в этом убедиться открыв словарь или переводчик.--Damir (talk) 07:15, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Re: merge Wiktionary appendices with real termsEdit

Hi Infovarius, if you disagree/feel that it's improper, please feel free to revert. Have a nice day. :) Osteologia (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

@Osteologia: If I was sure I would do like this :) I am just willing to discuss. --Infovarius (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2018 (UTC)


Hi, look this: Because is a useless parameter, there isn't date for that, and there is a problem in italian wikipedia with it:Mercurio (astronomia), becasue "sconosciuto" in the template it must not appear.--Kirk39 (talk) 10:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

@Kirk39: I don't understand why it shouldn't? It seems to me quite relevant information. --Infovarius (talk) 14:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)
Mercury, like sun, moon and all planets up to Saturn, it's known since ancient times, it's impossible to known that parameter (date, and the author too).--Kirk39 (talk) 14:16, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Sport, or not sport, that is the questionEdit


I notice you changed



Now all sports subclass of (P279) of winter sport (Q204686) used in value for sport (P641) triggers a constraint violation (not being a subclass of (P279) of sport (Q349)). That's annoying as there is a lot, especially now with the 2018 Winter Olympics (Q9680).

What should we do, revert your change or modify the constraint?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 08:26, 11 February 2018 (UTC)

PS: a third solution (maybe a better one?) would be to add on other values as subclass of (P279) on skiing (Q130949) (but not idea which one...).


Infovarius, let me explain my edit and maybe we can agree on resolution. I am working on resolving some of Commons category (P373) constraint violations, and one of the constraints is single value constraint (Q19474404) that maze (Q606777) is violating. It means that we have to pick a single category on Commons for that item, and c:Category:Labyrinths is (at the moment) the parent of c:Category:Mazes, so a better choice. --Jarekt (talk) 12:45, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

@Jarekt: I see. This constrain is sometimes hard to accomplish. In this case I don't really understand the difference between labyrinth and maze (in English). --Infovarius (talk) 10:20, 26 February 2018 (UTC)
There is no difference between labyrinth and maze in popular English, although Labyrinth says that to some maze has branching paths and Labyrinth could include structures with a single path. It is a pretty minor difference but that explains why on Commons c:Category:Labyrinths is the parent of c:Category:Mazes. --Jarekt (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Мастацкая літаратураEdit

Доброго времени суток. Просьба не трогать мои правки. Делаю по образцу русской Википедии. --Artificial123 (talk) 03:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)

@Artificial123: хотелось бы понять подход. Ибо "літаратура" имхо однозначно указывает, что это не должны быть фильмы. --Infovarius (talk) 10:21, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

admin boundary deprEdit

Hi, re [21], I agree, I saw the deprecation rules. I filed a bot request to fix all of these, still pending. In the mean time, the current ones should be marked as preferred. --Yurik (talk) 02:01, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

Yes, of course. --Infovarius (talk) 10:22, 26 February 2018 (UTC)


Question, is this capitalized? If so, what is the lowercase? thanks. Artix Kreiger 2 (talk) 14:55, 26 February 2018 (UTC)

@Artix Kreiger 2: yep, the small letter is "и". --Infovarius (talk) 18:40, 27 February 2018 (UTC)


Почему ты отменил правку ? (и даже не поинтересовался). Ты умеешь читать по-грузински ? Я вижу что не умеешь... Здесь идет речь о расходе воды а в ка. вики о стоке. Некорректно был указан Интервики. Так что твою правку отменяю. - Otogi (talk) 08:28, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

@Otogi: виноват, простите. Я переводил Гуглом и увидел упоминание разных единиц измерения... А куда тогда эту статью присоединить? Может, в torrent stream (Q1437299)? --Infovarius (talk) 15:34, 6 March 2018 (UTC)

Нет. ჩამონადენი это конкретно, сток. Извините за поздний ответ. - Otogi (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Rank on Q1387882Edit

Hi, sorry for deleting the old rank. I didn't realise there was a rank field available symbolised by the arrows on the left. However, why did you promote suborder from deprecated to normal? My understanding is that suborder is deprecated. Mvolz (talk) 20:13, 5 March 2018 (UTC)

@Mvolz: deprecated rank in Wikidata is used for some wrong data. While this taxonomic rank (although was deprecated by some classifications) has been regarded as correct some time ago. So we can keep old rank with specific date of deprecation (please add if you know it!). Normal rank in Wikidata is used for historical data, and preferred rank is for actual data. --Infovarius (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2018 (UTC)


это не государство, а вот это - государство. --Shmurak (talk) 15:11, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Category:Animals (Q7157802)Edit

Re [22] - Commons category (P373) is only supposed to have one value, otherwise it ends up at Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P373#"Single_value"_violations. The value I removed properly belongs at Category:Animalia (Q6254409). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 11:35, 14 March 2018 (UTC)


Hey :) I'm not sure what you meant by adding measured by (P1880) = volume percent (Q2080811) to volume fraction (Q909482)? Both are the same thing, but writen in different way and the percents are not any 'scale' here, but a way to write a fraction. Wostr (talk) 02:30, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

@Wostr: because volume fraction (Q909482) is definitely a quantity. Calling volume percent (Q2080811) a unit is a bit pulling strings but I admit it. --Infovarius (talk) 12:32, 16 March 2018 (UTC)

Michael de VladimirEdit

Regardez, voici une source pour la date exacte: 12akd (talk) 18:13, 17 March 2018 (UTC)

Merci pour la source. Mais elle est "a la home-page" de Miroslav Marek - non trop solide... --Infovarius (talk) 19:54, 18 March 2018 (UTC)



I didn't realise that artificial satellite (Q26540) was about different concept depending on the languages. Shouldn't we split it into two items? ("искусственный спутник Земли" and "искусственный спутник" / "Earth artificial satellite" and "artificial satellite")

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 07:32, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: can you please give me an example of non-Earth artificial satellite? --Infovarius (talk) 11:46, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Almost all probes send to other planets are non-Earth artificial satellite, look at the articles of exploration of Mars (Q716774) and you can find dozens of examples, e.g. Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter (Q183160) which is still operational and currently orbiting Mars. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: ok, so we have to have 2 items. --Infovarius (talk) 16:48, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
There is two concepts: the general "artificial satellite" and the specific "Earth artificial satellite", the item artificial satellite (Q26540) seems to be about the first but the article in the Wikipedia in Russian seems about the second. That why a suggest to split the item to reflect this distinction. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 17:17, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
@VIGNERON: seems to be about the first - it depends: almost all "what links here" are about Earth. So I am in doubt what is better: to move almost all sitelinks to a new item or to move almost all subclasses and instances to a new item? --Infovarius (talk) 12:08, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Johann Sebastian Bach (Q1339)Edit

The "classical music" you are citing and referencing is not the value you have added. There are two different meanings of "classical music" in English. One of the meanings is that of classical music (Q9730), which is a style dominant in Western European music from about 1750 to 1827. The other meaning of the term is "more serious forms of music, taught through formal education and performed according to strict rules, as opposed to folk music or popular music" (see wikt:en:classical music).

The locations you have cited for calling J. S. Bach "classical" are using the second sense of the term, which is not a genre, and is not represented by the use of classical music (Q9730). You would need to use a different data item for that sense of the term. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:22, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Addendum: I have found art music (Q1583807) exists for this purpose. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:56, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Never mind all of the above. This situation was far more confused and tangled than I thought. I have added different from (P1889) to all three of the related data items. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:10, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Former settlementsEdit

Hi! You recently undid some of my work related to former settlements, unfortunately without explanation. As for more generic item, please see Talk:Q22674925. Secondly you merged Q50323443 (former village) into abandoned village (Q350895) while there is a clear distinction. As with Q22674925, not all former villages are former because they were abandoned. I created "former village" item specifically for villages that have been merged into other villages, and that are not known to have become unpopulated or abandoned. I believe that instead of merging, "abandoned village" should be subclass of "former village". Would you be kind enough to explain or to reconsider your actions? 19:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)


uk [граматичні] роди́ = en grammatical genders ≠ ru ро́ды. Are you sure that you're not massively making other similar mistakes, based on homographs, on Wikidata? --Ата (talk) 16:15, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

@Ата: uk [граматичні] род = en grammatical gender = ru род. Are you sure that you understand all the meanings of ru:род? --Infovarius (talk) 18:45, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
This is correct. I only mean that in this certain edit you mixed роды́ meaning uk:роди with ро́ды meaning uk:пологи (child-birth). --Ата (talk) 19:39, 30 March 2018 (UTC)
Ah! Now I understood, I am sorry. I just overviewed recent edits and thought that the aliases was accidently lost and Google Translate (I am sorry for using it) showed me ru:"склонение по родам". --Infovarius (talk) 20:42, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Q10927630 и Q10927615Edit

Здравствуйте. Дал неточную ссылку в описании правок, поэтому указываю её здесь: ru:Википедия:Форум/Архив/Викиданные/2018/1 полугодие#Wikidata:Q10927630. Пожалуйста, не вносите в третий раз неконсенсусную версию с несуществующими в русской хоккейной терминологии понятиями. С уважением, Sealle (talk) 13:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC)


hello. you reverted my edit on

the bayan is a type of button accordion spesific to Russia, "button accordion" is the general type of accordion with buttons, Bayan would be a subtype of it, not the same, I would write this while making the edit, and indeed I have often wished for a text field of sorts to put justifications in before doing anything. but iiuc it is not possible unless with a bot, if you know of a way to add a description of what one is doing while editing a wikidata item, please tell me! --CatQuest, The Endavouring Cat (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Ok, CatQuest. And I often pity about the absence of edit comments too... --Infovarius (talk) 14:22, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

Q48963 ~ Q1091243Edit

I noticed you revert my edits on Q48963. I partially agree with you because Labyrinth deals with both the palace of Knossos and with traditional labyrinths form Classical times. We must decide what Q48963 deals with. The palace of Knossos (then it should be merged with Q1091243) or the ancient idea of a labyrinth?--Carnby (talk) 11:54, 16 April 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Carnby! Oh, I didn't know about Q1091243... But I am not sure what is it about: palace or labyrinth? And do you think that much of Q48963 still represents (other) traditional labyrinths? --Infovarius (talk) 12:09, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
In my opinion Wikidata items should be at least three: 1) Original Labyrinth (Palace of Knossos) 2) traditional unicursal labyrinth 3) modern labyrinth (maze).--Carnby (talk) 12:24, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius,

I noticed you making these edits, which surely you know are wrong. Why? - Brya (talk) 05:09, 5 May 2018 (UTC)

Hi, Brya. I would say the same for your edit. Why did you delete correct ast-link? Why do you create nonsensical Q3546082 even not knowing what the article is about? Why do you think that the name of sitelink in an item is wrong as alias? Do you understand what is alias in Wikidata? --Infovarius (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Hi Infovarius,
you are indeed right about the ast-link. My apologies! But I don't see what Q3546082 has to do with it, and I certainly did not create that. As to the names of sitelinks, surely you know that in many cases we add sitelinks to items when they don't belong there, just so that they don't sit isolated in the items where they do belong. That does not mean that their names match the concept of the item. - Brya (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2018 (UTC)


Hello Infovarius,
My English is not very good,In fact,I don't really understand the difference between punctuation mark and punctuation,but my first language is Chinese,in chinese,punctuation (Q82622) is 書面上用於標明句讀和語氣的符號, Chinese description is usually very compendious.Actually article 标点符号 is not only marks but also grammatics,rules and others.and Q24841628 is part of punctuation (Q82622),That is 句讀 is part of 标点符号.But 句讀 is ancient Chinese writing note marks, So 句讀 it's still not the same as punctuation mark.My editor was wrong at the beginning,Should not be redirected 句讀.I know a little Japanese.In Japanese,句読点 is part of 約物.So I think 句読点 is punctuation mark.So I think my editor should have no problem now. As for other languages, I have no idea how to distinguish them, because I do not understand them at all.--chaus (talk) 16:38, 10 May 2018 (UTC)

@Ffffnm: good, let it be so. I believe you. I recommend you in future to check that articles in your language corresponds to the statements (like subclass of (P279), part of (P361) and so on) in the items. --Infovarius (talk) 21:12, 10 May 2018 (UTC)
Ok, thanks!--chaus (talk) 02:25, 11 May 2018 (UTC)

Your feedbackEdit

Hi Infovarius. I think we addressed your feedback here. Would you kindly respond to it?
--- Jura 07:34, 13 May 2018 (UTC)

Ksenia (Q43979833)Edit

Hey Infovarius, something went wrong your one of your recent batches. You added Ksenia (Q43979833) as given name to many people with variants of (seemingly cyrillic) Georgi as a given name. Can you please check your recent contributions? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 13:20, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

You seem to be ignoring this, but according to this list the problem is quite large. Could you please fix it? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 10:00, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
@MisterSynergy: oh, that's my error, sorry. I'll correct them, yes. --Infovarius (talk) 08:32, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Georgius AgricolaEdit

Hello Infovarius. Are you sure? Your edit on Q76579 seems strange to me. Georgius Agricola is the Latin form for a German name: Georg Bauer. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 07:15, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Chris.urs-o: no. He is called "Георгий Агрикола" in Russia, so it is logical for Russian that he has the name Георгий. But I am not sure if we should put it in the item. --Infovarius (talk) 10:11, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Accidentally undoing your editEdit

Hi Hi. Sorry for accidentally undoing your edit on Lexeme:L305 and Lexeme:L311, I was actually intending on undoing edits on linked Items and Properties. Adam Shorland (WMDE) (talk) 10:09, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

@Adam Shorland (WMDE): It's OK. You've undone it, so you can even avoid mentioning it :) --Infovarius (talk) 09:56, 29 May 2018 (UTC)


Hi, could I ask what is the reason of this edit? HastaLaVi2 (talk) 21:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Error in replyto template: Username not given. See Template:Replyto for usage. because the category contains personal pronouns and thus perfectly fits this item. May I ask you in reverse: what was the reason of deleting it? --Infovarius (talk) 21:15, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Sorry for replying this late, but I got it all wrong that day, even though I speak Turkish. Now I see, sorry. Good day! :) HastaLaVi2 (talk) 20:36, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

Undo revision – natural rubber (Q131877)Edit

Hi, you have undo my edition where I added "NR" as Also-known-as parameter to polish language. I meant the abbreviation of name of rubber which is used in industry like other. For example: polyethylene - PE, polyethylene terephthalate - PTFE and so on. And this abbreviation is approved in US standard (ASTM D1418) and ISO standard (ISO/DIN 1629) (see: In addition this abbreviation exist in english and german Also-known-as. Is my edition can be restored? — Piotr Osada (talk) 14:16, 5 June 2018 (UTC)

Lexeme: masculineEdit

Hi Infovarius, family (P53) is a property for families, including dynasty and nobility houses. For a lexeme like "Theaterintendant" (Lexeme:L2254) grammatical gender (P5185) fits better. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

@Kolja21: of course, it's an obvious error. --Infovarius (talk) 15:30, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
Thanks for the fast reply. I wasn't sure because the translations of the properties might mix different meanings. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:52, 7 June 2018 (UTC)


Я правильно понял что проблема в многочисленности квалификаторов P143 (вполне достаточно одного)? --Ghuron (talk) 13:00, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@Ghuron: квалификаторы "взято из ХХХ-Википедия" вообще имеют мало смысла - они обычно появляются при различных автоматических импортах из языковых разделов. Я их удаляю как мусор - они всё равно не могут являться настоящими подтверждениями. И да, иметь более одного такого значения добавляет нулей после запятой в их значимость (0,00...1). --Infovarius (talk) 12:08, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
Так я и делаю автоматический импорт   Идея imported from Wikimedia project (P143) не в том, что это ссылка на АИ, а в том, что если оно висит у откровенно неверного утверждения, можно пойти в соответствующий языковой раздел и снести его и там тоже. Но иметь их шлейф смысла никакого нет, я поправил исходный запрос. Спасибо что заметили! --Ghuron (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

keyboard emoji reversionEdit

Hi, you reverted my removal of the "keyboard" (🎹) emoji on the piano saying it quite fits. I actually do see your point, but I respectfully disagree.

"keyboard" is not a piano, but just the keys, and many instruments have a keyboard like this; Organs, synthesizers, melodica, accordion, all have keys like this, and by such logic should all include the "keyboard" (🎹) emoji. I see keyboard emoji more as an emoji for the part of instrument "keyboard" than any one specific instrument. --CatQuest, The Endavouring Cat (talk) 19:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC) note the use of the name "Musical Keyboard" and a general look of only keys and no indication of specifically piano (other than "Also Known As" which, are "fan names" and not official) or any other instrument for that matter. :) --CatQuest, The Endavouring Cat (talk) 19:11, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

@CatCat: Yes, you're right. --Infovarius (talk) 11:35, 17 June 2018 (UTC)


Dear Infovarious,

Why did you undo my edit?Caleb The Wipper (talk) 02:03, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

@Caleb The Wipper: how can a voice be a watercourse? --Infovarius (talk) 11:32, 17 June 2018 (UTC)

[1] I did not list it as a watercourse. Caleb The Wipper (talk) 00:55, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

I just realized the problem. I linked it to Q491713 when I should have linked it to Q11461. Stupid English language having multiple meanings for the word "sound"Caleb The Wipper (talk) 01:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

@Caleb The Wipper: yes, I understand. But again, P31=Q491713 is redundant (and wrong) as there is already P279=natural sound (Q6980787) (which is subclass of sound (Q491713)). --Infovarius (talk) 14:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
  1. citeurl=}}%7Ctitle=diff

Грамматическая категория лица у форм глаголовEdit

Привет! Я заметил, что для Russian (Q7737) ты добавил в свойство has grammatical person (P5110) значения типа third-person feminine singular (Q52431970). И я было подумал их ипользовать в описании грамматических признаков у форм глаголов, но не нашел варианта для «первое лицо женский род единственное число», «первое лицо мужской род единственное число». Насколько я понял это предложение ещё не принято, но есть отдельные first person (Q21714344), second person (Q51929049) и third person (Q51929074). В общем я тут пока путаюсь с описанием лексем. Не подскажешь, как лучше делать на примере идти и пойти? Don Rumata 16:22, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

@DonRumata: Привет, я сам не знаю, что лучше использовать. Действительно, обсуждается ещё. --Infovarius (talk) 11:11, 29 June 2018 (UTC)

Graduate student vs graduate studentEdit

Would you please explain how these two items are different, and how separating the ja/zh sitelinks from the de/ru etc sitelinks is useful to our readers? --Deryck Chan (talk) 11:30, 29 June 2018 (UTC)


Здравствуйте, Infovarius. Не подскажете какое свойство лучше использовать в элементах маскотов организаций/мероприятий, чтобы указать организацию/мероприятие, к которому относится данный маскот? Я заметил, что другие участники используют свойства "facet of/тематически относится к" (P1269) или "represents/представляет" (P1268), чтобы указать организацию/мероприятие, к которому относится маскот.

Как Вы считаете, какое из этих двух свойств (P1269, P1268) наиболее подходящее для маскотов? Наверное, если какое-то из них подходит больше, то стоит убрать дублирующее свойство в таких элементах, как вот этот: (World Cup Willie). Там представлены сразу два этих свойства.

Еще хотел спросить на счет обозначений (меток) на русском языке для элементов персоналий. Я правильно понимаю, в Викиданных стандарт — это «имя отчество фамилия», как вот в этом элементе: (Александр Сергеевич Пушкин)?--Russian Rocky (talk) 13:41, 13 July 2018 (UTC)

@Russian Rocky: Я точно не берусь выбрать, по названию оба свойства мне нравятся. Конечно, первое более общее, поэтому если со вторым все согласны, то лучше использовать второе. Однако в вашем примере P1268 вызывает CoVi (constraint violation), т.к. задумано, что у этого свойства значения должны быть только люди или организации. Но если что, можно попробовать расширить его, добавив и события (или мероприятия).
Насчёт персоналий - да, обсуждали здесь на форуме, что лучше иметь прямой порядок, а все остальные добавлять в синонимы. Даже в воздухе висит необходимость пройтись ботом и исправить это. --Infovarius (talk) 12:35, 14 July 2018 (UTC)
Наверное, я попозже подниму этот вопрос на странице свойства P1268. Теперь, когда с русскими названиями персоналий все предельно ясно, то я буду по возможности исправлять все встречающиеся ФИО, унося их в синонимы. Спасибо за Ваши ответы и потраченное на меня время.--Russian Rocky (talk) 23:51, 14 July 2018 (UTC)


These two (benzodiazepine (Q9168929), benzodiazepine (Q83871)) items are about different classes of compounds. The first about dibenzodiazepines (every compound having e.g. 1,4-benzodiazepine, 1,5-benzodiazepine etc. ring system), the second about compounds of the general struture File:Benzodiazepine a.svg showing psychoactive properties. Please keep it in mind when editing these two items (I had to revert one of your edit). Thanks, Wostr (talk) 17:28, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Also, you've copied MeSH ID and BabelNet ID to the other item and now these two ids are present in both items. I think both ids are describing concepts described in benzodiazepine (Q83871), not in benzodiazepine (Q9168929) (the MeSH is a medical database and in BabelNet entry there are medical categories linked to the entry). Regards, Wostr (talk) 17:31, 14 July 2018 (UTC)


One might hunt

SELECT ?billionaire ?billionaireLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?billionaire wdt:P31 wd:Q1062083.
  MINUS { ?billionaire wdt:P31 wd:Q5. }

Try it! another time through Petscan. :)

Cheers, --Marsupium (talk) 17:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Aha, thanks for noticing, User:Marsupium! I am fixing them now. --Infovarius (talk) 21:07, 16 July 2018 (UTC)


Please, read the property documentation before doing such edits (or at least post some reasons for you revert in the description, not just a comma). phase of matter (P515) is a qualifier only and there is simply no reason for indicating state of matter in such way. There're melting and boiling points for indicating state of matter in given temperature. Could you restore my deletion or give me some explanation? Regards, Wostr (talk) 23:13, 16 July 2018 (UTC)


?? Which anachronistic claims are you talking about? -- Blackcat (talk) 08:01, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Blackcat: because modern state was initiated at 1946 and before that there were different other states like Kingdom of Italy (Q172579). Infovarius (talk) 23:32, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
Infovarius, there's no State discontinuity. Italy has been an unitarian State since 1861 and its only variation is that until 1946 was a monarchy. But the State is the same. -- Blackcat (talk) 08:41, 19 July 2018 (UTC)

Empty fieldEdit

Thanks for your correction. The field seems to be empty - or am I missing something? Maybe you know that the person was married, but no name? Sian EJ (talk) 10:35, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

@Sian EJ: this special value means that he had no wife. --Infovarius (talk) 23:39, 18 July 2018 (UTC)

Removed claim: subclass of (P279): human (Q5) from 'woman'Edit

Hi Infovarius

Could you explain to me your reason for this edit?

(Firstly, it's not a woman, which is at woman (Q467)) I would say that this is P31=gender (Q48277) but then we should also delete Homo sapiens (Q15978631)... --Infovarius (talk) 09:47, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

organofluorine chemistry (Q1090893) and organofluorine (Q2200141)Edit

Hi, you reverted my merge of these two and perhaps rightly so, but the problem with something like the organofluorine compounds is that there is more or less by definition not much more to them than their chemistry. If we are to keep both items, I suggest moving all the sitelinks to one of the items, I think organofluorine (Q2200141) is best. Some wikis choose a name that include «chemistry», others not, but afaics they are all very similar in scope and should be linked to each other. Are you ok with that solution? Danmichaelo (talk) 19:15, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

@Danmichaelo: I agree that there is such problem. One solution is to move (almost) all sitelinks to one item (but it has drawback that claims would be incompatible with titles), the other is to keep sitelinks at right places (but then we have no all interwiki links between them). Ontologically I prefer the second solution. And the drawback can be solved by some hacks, one of them - to create redirects at Wikipedias with proper names which would be at proper items. If we have a pair of article/redirect at each wiki, we have a full interwiki-linking between them. But this solution is quite tedious... --Infovarius (talk) 09:52, 24 July 2018 (UTC)


Hi. I'm not sure what is the concern that led to this edit. My understanding is that, despite sharing the same name and being both musical terms, C major (Q1022293) is a major scale (Q190812) (according to its Wikipedia article), while C major (Q55706505) is a major chord (Q2372455). Perhaps the way the Wikidata items are modeled don't correspond exactly to the Wikipedia articles connected to them? Please clarify. Regards, Waldir (talk) 21:16, 26 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I see now. You've duplicated C major (Q55706505) from D major (Q50286885) and forgotten to change labels (ru) so I saw it like D major (Q50286885)... Now I've fixed them both. --Infovarius (talk) 21:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Subclasses of landformsEdit

You have changes numerous items to be subclasses of landform, instead "instance of". Landforms like Mount Queets (Q29633678) and Lot's wife (Q24566570) are concrete objects at particular location. They are not types of landform (like mountain (Q8502) or valley (Q39816)) and so they shouldn't be marked as subclass of landform. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:CD58:9119:4D87:E170 11:37, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Oh, that's an error... (because they have no coordinates I've regarded them as classes...) Thanks for noticing, I'll try to revert wrong ones tomorrow. --Infovarius (talk) 21:08, 30 July 2018 (UTC)
I worked some time, please check what is left. --Infovarius (talk) 12:37, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Собор Святого Александра Невского» (Q1603677)Edit

Вы отменили мою правку. Однако, никакого "регистрационного номера культурного наследия" российским ресурсом не могло быть присвоено памятнику на Украине. Поскольку 15-значные номера и ЕГРОКН действуют с 2014 года. Это ошибка. Если Вы не согласны, то прошу представить АИ на рег. номер 8231626000, по сути являющийся сегодня плодом самодеятельного творчества группы заинтересованных граждан проекта Викигид. --Frutti-mytti (talk) 05:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

Да, действительно, смог подтвердить только номер 911711040770005 для собора... --Infovarius (talk) 08:43, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

Moscow - capital of Russia - former capital - cityEdit

По поводу этой правки: [24]. Почему избыточно? Сейчас получается, что она не является столицей (Q5119) и скрипт ( по wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q5119 не покажет Москву. То есть где-то должно быть явно указано, что она столица, или я что-то не понимаю? Dhārmikatva (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2018 (UTC)

@Dhārmikatva: Потому что она уже capital of Russia (Q4442912). Хм, Q4442912 не было подклассом столицы, а только "бывшей столицы"... Я добавил, но может быть это неверно и вы правы, что нужно особо указывать для текущих столиц... В любом случае сейчас есть:
SELECT ?item ?label ?_image WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q5119.
  ?item wdt:P17 wd:Q159.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "ru" . ?item rdfs:label ?label } 

Try it!

P.S. Блин, сколько же мелочи в столицах сидит (закомментируйте строчку про Россию)! --Infovarius (talk) 08:27, 2 August 2018 (UTC)

  • Ну теперь тоже не совсем верно. Смоленск проходит как wd:Q5119, но не должен проходить (ибо не столица). Хотя может он и раньше проходил... Dhārmikatva (talk) 15:21, 2 August 2018 (UTC)
    Я его не менял, так и было. Но ведь он столица Смоленской области, не так ли? :) А ещё я имел в виду, что по всему миру столиц гораздо больше:
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?countryLabel WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q5119.
  ?item wdt:P17 ?country.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "ru,[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }

Try it! --Infovarius (talk) 15:40, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

removal of uses from directed acyclic graph (Q1195339)Edit

Why were the uses removed from Q1195339? Some cryptocurrencies use blockdags (block directed acyclic graphs)

I am referring to this edit

TB5ivVaO1y55FkAogw1X (talk) 01:29, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@TB5ivVaO1y55FkAogw1X: because acyclic graphs don't use cryptocurrencies. Or did you mean different property - used by (P1535)? --Infovarius (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@Infovarius: Oh yes I meant used by (P1535), I didn't notice I used the wrong property, thanks! TB5ivVaO1y55FkAogw1X (talk) 01:10, 23 August 2018 (UTC)

Meow.ogg removal on house cat (Q146)Edit

Please explain. —Tom.Reding (talk) 02:38, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Tom.Reding: please explain why do you insist that File:Institute of Zoology NASU (9).jpg is audiofile? --Infovarius (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Советское гражданство у БессоновойEdit

Добрый день! Это такой же Орисс, как проставить в место рождения "СССР" человеку 1985 года рождения с русской фамилией и российским паспортом при отсутствии данных в АИ. Но обсуждать этот момент здесь смысла нет, вопрос более глобальный. Ведь можно же по такой логике просто ботом пройтись по всем персоналиям с гражданством Украина, местом рождения Киев и датой рождения между 1946 и 1991, подставив им гражданство СССР.--Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 18:03, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

@Сидик из ПТУ: можно, я не против :) Я понимаю, что могут быть какие-то единичные исключения (семья увезла младенца сразу после рождения и потом вернулись уже после распада СССР), но они же настолько редкие, разве не так? --Infovarius (talk) 15:49, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Это бессмысленные домыслы, из-за них в карточки людям 1990 года рождения полезет советский флаг. Опять же, аналогия с местом рождения "СССР": очень редкие случаи, когда младенец рождался за пределами СССР, но являлся его гражданином.Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 15:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@Сидик из ПТУ: Насчёт первого предложения - 1990 год, может, и преувеличение. Как насчёт отсекать где-нибудь по 1987 году (т.е. если родился в СССР до 1987 года, то имел гражданство СССР)? Второе предложение не понял: где я утверждал, что рождённый за пределами СССР является его гражданином? Кстати, о какой Бессоновой идёт речь? --Infovarius (talk) 16:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Мы ничего отсекать не должны, такой подход — чистейший ОРИСС и додумывание, я сравниваю это с идеей считать всех граждан СССР, родившихся после 1945 года, по умолчанию родившимися в СССР, если в АИ нет точного места рождения. А конфликт у нас возник тут: Anna Bessonova (Q253461) Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 17:15, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Элемент ВикиданныхEdit

Здравствуйте, коллега! Раз уж вы отменили мою правку, то сделайте, пожалуйста, так, чтобы Роберт Адамсон стал в инфобоксе директором школы, а не завучем. Eugene M (talk) 23:28, 11 August 2018 (UTC)

Придётся мне, видимо, откатить вашу правку? Eugene M (talk) 17:08, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Коллега, я объяснил свою правку. Причина — Адамсон. Вы же ничего не ответили и ничего не предприняли. Eugene M (talk) 22:43, 19 August 2018 (UTC)

@Eugene M: ага, вижу проблему. Давайте тогда определимся, Q1056391 всё-таки про завуча (и тогда моя метка правильная) или про директора школы (и тогда русскую статью надо уносить в другой элемент)? Я почему подумал, что это про завуча (кроме русской статьи) - в английской метке-описании написано "head teacher" и к тому же ведёт занятия. А директор школы не обязан вести занятия (да и по-английски обычно называется "headmaster"). --Infovarius (talk) 16:13, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
Как уж они там за бугром себя называют, не знаю. Но headmaster тут стоит как синоним head teacher. Видать, отсюда и проблемы. Eugene M (talk) 18:51, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@Infovarius:, директор Адамсон всё ещё числится завучем. Надо что-то делать. Eugene M (talk) 23:18, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
@Infovarius:, в этих [...] Викиданных что, не существует должности директора школы? Ну сколько уже можно смотреть на дезинформацию в статье об Адамсоне? Вы откатили мою правку, сами же ничего не предпринимаете. Eugene M (talk) 16:14, 20 September 2018 (UTC)


Please, stop mass adding country of citizenship Russian Empire to the people, who have nothing to do with it. (Example) --Silesianus (talk) 12:38, 15 August 2018 (UTC)


In you wondered why I had entered dramaturge (Q487596) subclass of (P279) researcher (Q1650915). I made that claim based on its English Wikipedia article lede: "A dramaturge or dramaturg is a literary adviser or editor in a theatre, opera, or film company who researches, selects, adapts, edits, and interprets scripts, libretti, texts, and printed programmes (or helps others with these tasks), consults with authors, and does public relations work." Since "researches" was the first word in the job description, I added "researcher" to the subclasses. Runner1928 (talk) 18:39, 15 August 2018 (UTC)

Help us improving the user experience of Lexicographical DataEdit


I’m Jan, doing research on user experience in the Wikidata team. I’m currently discussing with people who are editing Lexemes, in order to understand their needs better, and improve their experience with the interface.

We noticed that you have been actively editing Lexemes recently (thank you for that!) and we would love to have a discussion with you about what you’re doing, how you work, what motivates you to create Lexemes, and how you imagine reusing the data later.

This discussion would take place as an individual interview with one of our designers. Via the communication platform of your choice, you’ll be able to share your screen, show how you’re currently editing the data and chat with us. The discussion would take between 30 and 60 min, we will set up the appointment depending on when you are available. Depending on your preferred language, the discussion can happen in English, German or French.

If you’re interested, feel free to reply to this message or send me an email:

If you don’t want to be contacted by us on this topic anymore, please let me know.

Thanks a lot for your help Jan Dittrich (WMDE) (talk) 11:39, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

IPA and "язык произведения или названия" (P407)Edit

Hi, I wonder why you made series of removals of language of work or name (P407) from mango (L7565) (like this). I wonder because in IPA transcription (P898) there is constraint property constraint (P2302) mandatory qualifier constraint (Q21510856) property (P2306) language of work or name (P407). KaMan (talk) 06:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

@KaMan: constraint, I see. I made this because they are redundant in a Lexeme (it is obvious that in Polish word we show Polish transcription, why would it be otherwise?). And at the same time they are necessary for transcription in Items... So now I start thinking that it is wrong to use the same property IPA transcription (P898) for items and lexemes. Or may be to exclude this property from items completely? Because notion can't have any pronunciation, only words describing it can have (and they can be different!) --Infovarius (talk) 16:19, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
@Infovarius: I not agree. We have various dialects in Polish and the same Polish word can be pronounced differently so language of work or name (P407) is needed to point out if this is general Polish or dialectal one. See for example into Wiktionary (L3402), there are five IPAs and each has different language of work or name (P407). This property is not redundant at all. KaMan (talk) 07:18, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

Q327742 revert will help ja community, thanksEdit

FYI, I am proposing label change at village pump (ja) for d:Q327742; it's present page title in ja suggests it's for field and athletics, but there is d:Q12469953 for that deffinition. Thank you reverting my misunderstanding, and hopefully ja community would agree to rename Q327742 as for swimming. --Omotecho (talk) 11:07, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Hey, Omotecho, wait! Actually I was too bold in removing the category (taking only Russian label into account). We should investigate labels and sitelinks for all languages at the same time, if to do it properly. There is non-zero probability that this category item should be splitted to two! --Infovarius (talk) 16:22, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, my motive was in a similar situation as taking Japanese into account. Do you go ahead and move this problem into some public light, say, community portal please? I'm not sure of what's the best as I'm a data geek but not used to discussion kind of elements here. --Omotecho (talk) 16:51, 21 August 2018 (UTC)

Senior lecturer ()Edit

Hi Inforvarius,

Can you explain why you reverted my edit on this item? I know you have indicated that you disagree with the statement instance of (P31)academic rank (Q486983) but I don't understand why. The first sentence of the English Wikipedia article is "Senior lecturer is an academic rank" and a translation of the Russian Wikipedia article indicates that it has the same meaning. I suspect that usage of senior lecturer varies in different countries (like professor, for example) and it might be necessary to have more than one item to reflect this. Simon Cobb (Sic19 ; talk page) 17:31, 4 September 2018 (UTC)

Yes, Sic19, probably you are right. In Russia it is not a rank but a position which can be held by almost anyone (who has a diploma). It seems that it was a wrong merge by User:Glovacki, I undid it and here you are: second item senior lecturer (Q7450737). Please check. Though there is a little doubt: it is said in English wiki: "is an academic rank" and in the next sentence "is a faculty position". Isn't it contradictory? --Infovarius (talk) 18:53, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Harry Potter in musicEdit

It was a mistake and I correct other like this. Thank you. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:41, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Finally, I read more about this and I think it's correct. The sequence is the discography of the composer John Williams. Isn't correct ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:48, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
Can you just discuss here rather than only cancel my modifications ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 10:48, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Hello, Simon! I believe that the sequence should be clear, and in your cases it is far from being obvious. Look at 1 (Q199) - it would be very ambiguous to use follows (P155)/followed by (P156) without qualifiers there, isn't it? So it is better to use part of (P361) with qualifiers P155/P156. And honestly I doubt that we need such sequence as "discography of a composer". Some kind of such list we can generate by Sparql on the basis of publication dates:
SELECT ?item ?label ?year WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q4176708.
  ?item wdt:P86 wd:Q363241.
  OPTIONAL{?item wdt:P577 ?year.}
  SERVICE wikibase:label {
    bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "ru".
    ?item rdfs:label ?label.

Try it!

but strict sequence can't exist actually (why a composer couldn't work on several compositions at once?). P.S. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (Q1190705) is not by John Williams. --Infovarius (talk) 14:32, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

There's a lot to answer here.
First of all, I think that we can't compare this case with 1 (Q199). We don't process numbers as we process artwork.
Secondly, every wikipedia versions that I know are classifing the timeline of albums/singles/songs with a previous one and a next one and I think it can be the same on Wikidata.
At last, we don't break contribution here because we can find another way to get the information. Even if we consider that this is a kind of redondancy (and I'm not convinced about this), it can, among others, help a greater number of users to get what they are looking for. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 14:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)


Hi, I have found several cases where you have added the given name "Ilya" and also the given name "Fedor", although only Fedor is correct. Examples are this, this and that. Could you please check where you made this error and remove the statements? Steak (talk) 07:22, 12 September 2018 (UTC)

@Steak: yes, sorry, my mistake. Fixing. --Infovarius (talk) 10:53, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

Sacred textsEdit

Ok for this. Then, the two categories need to be fixed between each other. Is there a property or a template to indicate that? :-) --Superchilum(talk to me!) 10:13, 14 September 2018 (UTC)

@Superchilum: said to be the same as (P460) usually means that :) --Infovarius (talk) 10:05, 21 September 2018 (UTC)


Hi Infovarius,

I'm not agree with you about thaht.

Q7465774, Thermal conduction, is a physical phenomenon. Q14946524, conduction, is not a physical phenomenon ; it's a disambiguation page for simple english. Thermal conduction and Electric conduction are not part of conduction.

Ludo29 (talk) 10:08, 19 September 2018 (UTC)

@Ludo29: May be it's arguable, but. Q14946524 is not disambig (even formally) - it is about a class of "ways of moving energy" (the other are radiation and convection). So it can have more narrow subclasses too. --Infovarius (talk) 10:00, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
No. Thermal conduction, convection and thermal rays are part or subclass of Thermal transfert.
But Thermal conduction is not a subclass of conduction. Because Thermal conduction is a physical phenomenon and conduction is.... nothing in physics. It's just a disambiguation page.
Ludo29 (talk) 10:34, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Dana InternationalEdit

Hello Infovarius, why have you restored Dana's website ( if it has been discontinued for at least 2 years and is no longer available? -- Blackcat (talk) 12:32, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

@Blackcat: but it was true 2 years ago and Wikidata tracks history too. You can check this website at WebArchive: --Infovarius (talk) 14:12, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Your revertsEdit

Hi Infovarius, just saw your reverts of my edits here and here. Unfortunately, you're a bit mistaken here, Germany (Q183) is indeed the correct item for the country of origin (P495) statements, even for dates before the German reunification. The Federal Republic of Germany was founded in 1949 and continues to exist to this day, as covered in Germany (Q183). "West Germany" was simply the name used to differentiate it from the "other Germany", the German Democratic Republic (Q16957) or "East Germany" while that one also existed. In 1989, the GDR ceased to exist and its states joined the FRG. But West Germany was never a separate country from the current FRG, no new country was formed. So while it's okay to use "West Germany" and "west german" in texts (e.g. Wikipedia) when talking about that time period, to indicate which of the two Germanys is meant, we don't need that in a database like Wikdata, where we can simply use the item for the country in question to indicate which country is meant - which is Germany (Q183). Hope that helps. Regards, --Kam Solusar (talk) 01:04, 22 September 2018 (UTC)


Hello, as far as I could see here that's a festival, not a honorary award or a special prize equivalent say, to the Medal of freedom or the Order of the British Empire. So what that award is about? -- Blackcat (talk) 22:59, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

There is an award (fr:Trophée) handed at each festival which called Премия "Золотой Остап". It is described in the same article and so the same item is used as award. --Infovarius (talk) 10:18, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

"subset of" vs. "instance of"Edit

I write you because of this Edit.

Non-mathematical explanation:
A subclass gets (inherits) all properties of its superclass. (see en:Subclass (computer science))
Baseball is subclass of team sport is subclass of type of sport is instance of first-order metaclass.
Because Baseball gets (inherits) all properties of its superclass we have:
Baseball is instance of first-order metaclass.

Baseball is of course not instance of first-order metaclass. Thus, Baseball cannot be a subclass of type of sports.
Thus, either baseball is not subclass of team sport or team sport is not subclass of type of sport.

Short-mathematical explanation:
Let's say, we have the following 5 type of sports.

  1. soccer
  2. american football
  3. baseball
  4. tennis (with 2 persons)
  5. golf

We can write sport =  {soccer, american football, baseball, tennis, golf}.
Subclasses of sport are classes, which have only elements from sport.
For example:

  • team sport =  {soccer, american football}.
  • individual sport =   {tennis, golf}.

Each element of team sport is also an element of sport. Thus, team sport is a subclass of sport.
Each element of individual sport is also an element of sport. Thus, team sport is a subclass of sport.

What is with type of sport:
type of sport =   {{soccer}, {american football}, {baseball}, {tennis}, {golf}, {team sport}, {individual sport}} = {soccer, american football, baseball, tennis, golf, team sport, individual sport}.

Thus, soccer, american football, baseball, tennis, golf, team sport, individual sport are all instances of type of sport.

Long-mathematical explanation:
If desired, I can give a more detailed mathematical explanation. --Eulenspiegel1 (talk) 03:34, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

You said look at the subclasses of "type of sport": The subclass ist not "sport". The subclass is "class of sport". As I said! --Eulenspiegel1 (talk) 21:35, 1 October 2018 (UTC)
Let's discuss, Eulenspiegel1 (I am not 100% sure too). Firstly, about Non-mathematical explanation. Only "set" properties are inherited from superclass. They are majority but not all. P31 is not one of them. A subclass of B subclass of C → A subclass of C, A instance (P31) of B subclass of C → A instance of C. But not "A subclass of B instance of C → A instance of C"!!
Secondly, about mathematical explanation. Here is more subtle. You mix sets and elements here, and misinterprets the symbol   (union of sets). I agree that two sets can consist of this elements:
  • team sport(s) = {soccer, american football}.
  • individual sport(s) = {tennis, golf}.
Then the set sport = team sports   individual sports. We can write it (though not entirely correct) as   {team sports, individual sports}.
But your last formula doesn't make sense at all. If you write that type of sport = {soccer, american football, baseball, tennis, golf, team sport, individual sport} then your type of sport will be a metaclass of variable order (consisting of elements and sets) which is not desirable I suppose.
The difficulty I see here that I don't know exactly if each of type of sport (e.g. one of 5 mentioned by you) is an instance or class (element or set). And I don't understand ontological difference between type of sport (Q31629) and sport (Q349)... --Infovarius (talk) 11:04, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, you're right with with your first point. It's not: "A subclass of B instance of C → A instance of C". Yet, outside the mathematic it's very often the case that A is an instance of C.
Soccer, tennis etc. are no elements. An element is, if we two play tennis, today. This match is an element. Tennis consists of all tennis matches wich are ever played. Soccer is a set of all soccer games which are ever played.
The   is the union ( ) of all sets inside the set:
Let's say:   and  .
In sport, we have the following sets:
  • soccer = { }
  • football = { }
  • baseball = { }
  • tennis = { }
  • golf ={ }
  • team sport =  {baseball, soccer, football} = baseball   soccer   football = { }
  • individual sport =   {tennis, golf} = tennis   golf = { }
  • sport =  {team sport, individual sport} = team sport   individual sport = { }
That's the difference between "sport" and "type of sport": sport consist of all single matches. "type of sport" consists of subclasses of sport:
  • type of sport = {soccer, football, baseball, tennis, golf, team sport, individual sport} = { }
The ontological difference between sport and type of sport is, that sport refers to single matches. If you have a single match (e.g. the finals in FIFA World Cup 2018), it's an instance of sport. In type of sport you don't look at single gamnes. You look at structures.
In sport (Q349), there is a difference between the finals in FIFA World Cup 2018 and the finals in in FIFA World Cup 2014, because these are two different games. In type of sport (Q31629) both is the same. Both is soccer. You dont't look at single games, you look at structures.
Let's assume we play golf, today (g1). You win. Tomorrow, we play golf again (g2), but I win. These are two different games: One game is today, the other game is tomorrow. Yet, both are instances of golf. We can also look at the type of sport: The two different games belong to the same type of sport. --Eulenspiegel1 (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2018 (UTC)


Hello Infovarius, could you tell me where did you find this lexeme? I guess this is a proto-language and so it should not be tagged as West Germanic languages (Q26721). But now, I am not able to know which proto-language. That is why I think it is important to add references for proto-language. Pamputt (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, @Pamputt: I am not an expert, please look at etymology of wikt:en:wæter. --Infovarius (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2018 (UTC)
Hi, ok it looks weird. I think we should delete this lexeme. Pamputt (talk) 19:20, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

L1041 KrakówEdit

This is false definition KaMan (talk) 08:54, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Oh, I am stupid! Sorry. Thanks for noticing, KaMan. --Infovarius (talk) 15:18, 19 October 2018 (UTC)


Hello Infovarius, Why are you reverting my changes that really seem better:

    • All the sources provided on this items show that Diatomea is a long outdated name (1, NCBI, ITIS, EOL). The current name is Bacillariophyta
    • This is a taxonomic item, so it should point to wikicommons taxonomic category commons:Bacillariophyta not on the english named page commons:Diatoms.
    • To avoid conflict between english nativ speaker and other country, wikicommons decided to name taxon categories and pages with scientific names. English named categories and pages are only tolerated and must be under scientific named categories. English named categories contain mostly garbage (Unidentified pictures).
    • Please don't go against wikicommons own rules
    • Following this 99,9% of the taxon items point to only one wikicommons category. I have a detector that detect those 0,1%. Your revert placed the wikicommons page in my automatic error category.

Regards Liné1 (talk) 07:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

wrong mergeEdit it was not the same, it was wrong merge KaMan (talk) 17:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

@KaMan: can you explain the difference? --Infovarius (talk) 10:50, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
Just compare photos. Q17163130 is about sprouts - young (a few days) plants - just root and two, three small leaves while Q57544960 is about flowers of mature plant. Both are used as food and both are product of the same plant but they are different parts of different age of broccoli. KaMan (talk) 11:11, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Ranking for statistical data - nominal GDPEdit

Hi Infovarius, the Preferential Bot now operates the nominal GDP. Because we now have only one source for the data, the preferred rank gets only the most actual data for the property in queries. If someone decides to import Euro values and these are more actual, then the query will get the Euro value. I opened a topic about this here:

I would be glad to see your opinion there. Cheers! Datawiki30 (talk) 12:51, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

Julián vs JulianEdit

Sorry, no speak english. Julián y Julian son lo mismo.

But they have different spellings, different language of use and different items. --Infovarius (talk) 11:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


Please read the articles before your provide them as references. --Succu (talk) 22:12, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Chemical substanceEdit

Why you've moved all the sitelinks from chemical substance (Q79529) to Q21652022? Many moved sitelinks describe chemical substance (Q79529), so I don't understand your action. Wostr (talk) 16:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

@Wostr: there are two concepts: Q21652022 (which have mostly constant proportion of molecules) and more general chemical substance (Q79529) (which is almost any non-energetic matter). For example, honey (Q10987) can't be regarded as Q21652022 so it is chemical substance (Q79529). Are you sure that moved sitelinks describe honey (Q10987), soil (Q36133), milk (Q8495) and other substances? --Infovarius (talk) 10:54, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
Agree that there may be two different concepts. The problem is that: chemical substance (Q79529) still describes 'chemical substance' (statements, identifies), but all the sitelinks have been moved. Wrong instances of/subclasses of should be corrected in specific items, not by swapping two general items. Qids are meant to be permanent, and for long time chemical substance (Q79529) was defined (and is still defined by properties and identifies) as 'chemical substance'. We have a mess now: chemical substance (Q79529) should remain 'chemical substance' with 'matter of constant composition best characterized by the entities (molecules, formula units, atoms) it is composed of' definition (as in IUPAC definition) and sitelinks from Q21652022, and Q21652022 may be freely used for the second definition. Wostr (talk) 19:57, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
GoldBook is quite clear about the definiton, yet you deleted [25] all the 'chemical' adjectives. Why? Wostr (talk) 20:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

@Wostr: and Infovarius: Most of the sitelinks of languages originated from latin are incorrectly related to Q21652022 while should be on chemical substance (Q79529). I think it is messed up. There's no differenciation as you've said in my language (pt), and I really don't see any difference. I agree that "Q21652022 may be freely used for the second definition", but almost all sitelinks should be on chemical substance (Q79529). Rafael Kenneth (talk) 04:25, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

administrative territorial entity of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (Q3253485)Edit

Hi Infovarius,

the French article definitely is a list of administrative entities and all linked articles were also lists at the time I added instance of (P31).

It seems this item was merged or articles were added that were not lists... but until recently, this item was clearly a list.

Your modifications are are, in fact, repurposing the item… then, what do we do with the actual lists ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 18:10, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

провансальский диалектEdit

Проблема в том, что если элемент Provençal (Q241243) не имеет утверждения "научная дисциплина", то он не добавляется тем персонам, которые изучали его в учебном заведении. — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 18:48, 12 November 2018 (UTC)

Чем не добавляется? Проблема не в элементе (всем языкам будем добавлять "научная дисциплина"? а может всё-таки русистике, а не русскому языку?), а в инструменте, который "не добавляет". --Infovarius (talk) 22:43, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
Русский язык изучал (в школе), русистику — не изучал. Английский язык изучал, англистику — не изучал. Так какой нужен инструмент, говорите? — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 06:07, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
@Дмитрий Кошелев: Вот именно поэтому Russian (Q7737) не наука, а Russian linguistics (Q4261898) - наука. English (Q1860) - язык, а English studies (Q27968) - дисциплина. Где не добавляется-то? --Infovarius (talk) 10:58, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
В Q295516, где про Парижский университет. — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 11:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
Ну я вижу, что нормально добавлено. Если вы о constraint violation, то их и надо править. Я попробовал добавить языки в допустимые классы, посмотрим, как впишется. --Infovarius (talk) 14:08, 20 November 2018 (UTC)


debut participant (P2318) is intended to be used for events, not for the first time a character appears in a book. --Yair rand (talk) 23:03, 21 November 2018 (UTC)


Are you saying the Landkreis existed before 2011? That's not what it says in Q2909. --Aeroid (talk) 11:28, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

«Жаков» как русское мужское имяEdit

20 ноября вы откатили объединение страницы Yakov (Q19802347) со страницей Yakov (Q544124) на том основании, что страница Yakov (Q19802347) якобы об имени, которое в оригинале пишется латиницей. В действительности же относящаяся к элементу Yakov (Q19802347) статья en:Yakov прямо указывает, что это «Russian or Hebrew variant of the given names Jacob and James» (непосредственно в элементе Yakov (Q19802347) указана его частота среди личных имён в Израиле). Где же вы тут увидели латиницу? Вы также восстановили очевидно неправильный заголовок «Jakov» в элементе Yakov (Q544124), хотя непосредственно в этом элементе указано, что он относится к русскому имени «Яков». Полагаю, что вам следует откатить эти ваши правки и связанные с ними.LesNick19 (talk) 21:19, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

@LesNick19: Спасибо, внёс пару исправлений на дальнейшее разделение. Правда мне не нравится "Яков" в качестве английской метки... Но так, наверное, точнее. Ещё какие-то есть несостыковки? Если вам не нравится разделение, попробуйте ответить, какое имя у Yakov Fuchs (Q8047155), Yakov Springer (Q827694) или у Yakov Rekhter (Q8047167)? --Infovarius (talk) 17:37, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
Прежде всего, действительно спасибо за ‏יעקב‏‎ (Q58902451).
Что касается Yakov (Q19802347), то, очевидно, вариант в латинском написании тоже есть. Правда, надо ещё найти, у кого именно он исходный. Так, из трёх указанных вами персон: Yakov Fuchs (Q8047155) – актёр в «a Yiddish theater», Yakov Springer (Q827694) – тренер сборной Израиля и о Yakov Rekhter (Q8047167) персонально ничего не известно, так что может быть израильским гражданином. (Первым двум имя я исправил на ‏יעקב‏‎ (Q58902451).)
Также я добавил связи между элементами. (Например, в Jacob (Q25999604). Кстати, нашлись румынский и венгерский варианты имени.) -- LesNick19 (talk) 11:54, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
@LesNick19: Почти ок. Только почему вы считаете, что у польского актёра (пусть и еврейского происхождения), имя от рождения не может писаться латиницей? Или даже кириллицей (вроде он жил в Российской империи?). --Infovarius (talk) 21:37, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
Могло ли писаться? Тут вопрос в том, кем оно могло так писаться: выдававшими документы чиновниками или семьёй и лицами его круга. (Кстати, как-нибудь надо будет на элемент о Якове Фухсе добавить сына Leo Fuchs (Q1590884) и жену Ruzha Fuchs (Q7383665).)
Если первое, то город Львов: (1) до 1914 года принадлежал Австро-Венгрии и в её составе управлялся австрийскими властями (2) в 1914 году был занят русскими войсками и включён в созданное генерал-губернаторство Галиции General Government of Galicia and Bukovina (Q2377789) (3) в 1915 году был отбит обратно (4) в 1918 году был провозглашён столицей ЗУНР (5) практически сразу после этого был занят Польшей.
Где в это время проживал Фухс, неизвестно. Если выехал, то потом вернулся – умер он во Львове. Числился постоянно проживающим он, очевидно, в любом случае во Львове. Какой же «язык документов» тут правильный: немецкий, русский, польский или украинский?
Если второе, то у его сына Leo Fuchs (Q1590884) родным языком тоже был идиш.
Полагаю, что правильное написание в данном случае еврейским письмом. (К слову – какое написание имени правильное для проживавших в 1919-1939 в Галиции украинцев: украинское или польское?) -- LesNick19 (talk) 12:56, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
@LesNick19: Сложный вопрос, я не могу ответить однозначно. На всякий случай, я бы добавил все возможные варианты - удалить ненужное потом проще, чем искать и добавлять недостающее. --Infovarius (talk) 22:33, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Your revert on Q21Edit

Hi, and thanks for your revert. However there's a constraint on P85 / anthem - the property should only contain a single value. And as you did not add any refrences for 'And did those feet in ancient time' (etc) being an anthem, I reverted. Please add references, or revert your reversion. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:43, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

IPA lexemeEdit

Hi Infovarius,

There was quite a lot of discussion about an edit of yours on invalid ID (L21070). You might want to comment on Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data#Phoneme,_grapheme_and_Wikidata:Lexicographical_data/Notability. Oddly, none bothered pinging you before me. I would be glad if you would comment there. --- Jura 06:46, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Che GuevaraEdit

Dear Infovarius. Hi. I corrected the cause of death in Che Guevara because it wasn't a "method of execution by multiple shooters firing rifles simultaneously on command". Guevara was not condemned to any penalty, and was shot by one soldier in a no formal way. Officially, he was killed in combat the day before. So I corrected to "shooting", that is more more appropriate. Sincerely.--Roblespepe (talk) 22:28, 27 November 2018 (UTC)

Q54603424 additionsEdit

I'm curious about this addition by you on a number of pages. Q54603424 is a Ukrainian/Russian male name so I don't know why it would be added to people named Alisa. Was there another female name you were trying to add? -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:08, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

@Ricky81682: Thanks for noticing, you're right, it's an error. I'll fix it. --Infovarius (talk) 22:31, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I noticed it via Commons when I saw this red-linked category. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 04:19, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Done. How strange - I couldn't find prescribed category in subcategories... --Infovarius (talk) 21:09, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


Good timening.

Скорее всего, данные, которые я удалил, не соотв. действительности.

По англовики 100 млн[26], а здесь было 28. Или проделки ботов, или що. Так что я пока вас обатно отменил, попробуйте проверить. Longbowman (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

@Longbowman: Я понял - есть 2 панджаби : восточный (у которого 28) и западный (у которого 90 млн.) - о них есть данные в Ethnologue. А об объединённом даже нету. Но простым суммированием получается 118 млн. --Infovarius (talk) 16:51, 23 December 2018 (UTC)


Hi! You reverted here, now for the second time, eventhough there was no vandalism or obvious error or a like. As said in edit summary, statements were only moved, they were not deprecated in relation to item about settlement. This is because they never applied to the settlement, as long as settlement and municipality are considered distinct entities and there are different items. In 2017 municipality ceased to exist, but coextensive settlement did not.

Generally, my experience is that users are encouraged to use discussion pages in case of possible disputes and they are supposed to assume good faith. I think your combative editing style does not follow that spirit. Edit summaries are not a proper venue for discussion, unless discussion page comments were really unnoticed or they came to a standstill. Currently you tend to reinstate erroneous or otherwise messed up data that may easily stay in place. Also, putting things back and forth does not really contribute to the stability of data. Please do leave a comment on talk page of relevat item if you simply don't understand an edit. Over the past year or so I've encountered that a few of my edits have been reverted by a few other users due to some misunderstandings. I haven't encountered anyone near as eager as you to revert edits that one simply doesn't understand.

When moving statements or removing non-matching ones I've tried to revert edits where these statements were added, so that I could write an explanation in edit summary. Nonetheless, people are not supposed to revert, the main "remove" links provide no way to enter an edit summary. So I'm pretty sure you are supposed to assume good faith even if there is no edit summary.

Lastly, end time (P582), that you changed here, is generally used for municipalities/settlements in Estonia. Changing this for particular item breaks country related quaries that rely on this statement. To my understanding use of P582 as a non-qualifer is not discouraged. I'd rather avoid using dissolved, abolished or demolished (P576) as it has vague meaning and since it's very hard to translate it's label between languages then its use is a source of endless confusions. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:8990:1492:5FD:A052 09:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)

@2001:7D0:81F7:B580:8990:1492:5FD:A052: It is a strange conception for me that settlement and municipality are different as in Russia it is not the case I suppose. So it is strange for me to see all the removals like in Tartu (Q13972). Please explain me aren't all these statements correct at least for Soviet period? --Infovarius (talk) 14:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
I'm not entirely sure what was the relation between settlements and administrative entities in Estonia in Soviet period. I don't know if any city lost their administrative entity status while retaining settlement status back then. If not, then the distinction might not have been considered important. Anyway, settlements per se aren't administrative entities and if there was an administrative entity then this is either the same same as current (Tartu City (Q42307965)), or it may be considered as a separate historical administrative entity which currently doesn't have its own item. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:3849:1F84:7835:7DF4 18:24, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Re: your wrong reversalsEdit

In Mexico there is no separate “head of government” because it does not have a parliamentary government. That role would lie upon the president. Also, Peña does not hold any public office anymore. —Born2bgratis (talk) 16:41, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

@Born2bgratis: Ok, I understand about government. But as for "does not hold...anymore" - Wikidata can (and I believe that it should) keep historical data too. The only difference that current, present values should be marked as "preferred rank", and previous values would be as "normal rank". --Infovarius (talk) 19:29, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Mineral ClassificationEdit

Hello Infovarius
I might be wrong, but did you merge Mineral Classification? (de.wikipedia) is complaining. I think that I'll build the item up again. Four meanings:
  • Strunz Classification of Minerals (8 ed): 8th edition, updated
  • Nickel-Strunz Classification of Minerals (9 ed): 9th edition, updated 2009
  • Nickel-Strunz Classification of Minerals ("10 ed"): updated 9 ed by, incomplete
  • Mineral Classification, up to date: following Glossary of Minerals; International Mineralogy Association (IMA); and
Thank you. Regards --Chris.urs-o (talk) 09:07, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


Why did you revert my edit here: Q319123? Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Can you explain me instead why did you remove relevant genre? --Infovarius (talk) 17:15, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

Because, there is no movie genre that treasure hunts. Hungarikusz Firkász (talk) 09:28, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

What about genre about treasure hunting? --Infovarius (talk) 00:06, 1 January 2019 (UTC)

Флаг Абхазской автономной республикиEdit

У Абхазской автономной республики официально нету никакого флага ни герба. Потому и удалил. С уважением!--Surprizi (talk) 05:09, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

Вот источник, но тут говорится что это проекты гералдики. Я разузнаю приняли ли их официально или они пока еще находятся в проекте.--Surprizi (talk) 05:26, 31 December 2018 (UTC)


There is no exact Malayalam article for magazine in Malayalam wikipedia.--Vengolis (talk) 22:24, 31 December 2018 (UTC)

@Vengolis: are you sure? Can you please describe difference in the Malaylam article? --Infovarius (talk) 14:19, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
ml:മാസിക means monthly(a magazine that is published once a month).There are also articles like ml:വാരിക(a magazine that is published once a week) and ml:ദ്വൈവാരിക (every two weeks).Thank you--Vengolis (talk) 02:53, 3 January 2019 (UTC)
@Vengolis: ok, I found monthly magazine (Q11780435), fortnightly magazine (Q13112752) and weekly magazine (Q12340140). --Infovarius (talk) 20:56, 3 January 2019 (UTC)


Ha, the problem is that there are not scientific evidence. Not to mention the fact that in order to warrant a surviving offspring you need at least 85 couples, less is riskful and one couple only is doomed to extintion   -- Blackcat (talk) 09:00, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I understand the scientific side. But I use the property as a cultural phenomenon. --Infovarius (talk) 02:15, 5 January 2019 (UTC)

профессор (Q121594)Edit

Добрый вечер, коллега! По поводу этого - я понизил ранг, чтобы эта краткая форма не грузилась в карточки, например в "Учёный" в поле "учёное звание", потому как выглядит это крайне некомильфо и непонятно. Моя правка что-то где-то поломала? эта краткая форма ещё куда-то подгружается, где необходима именно такая краткая форма? Borodun (talk) 17:39, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Спасибо за объяснение, Borodun. Но не понимаю, при чём тут элемент в Викиданных. По-моему, проблема в карточке - зачем она отображает краткое название вместо полного? --Infovarius (talk) 15:38, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Дело в том, что свойство d:Property:P1813 было специально сделано для "use as label for a link to the item, in infoboxes, navboxes and others" и ни для чего другого. --Shmurak (talk) 15:49, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
@Ghuron: --Shmurak (talk) 15:50, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Скажу честно, я вообще не понимаю, зачем это всё автогрузить в карточки :) (если что, я противник безоглядной подгрузки всего и вся из ВД вместо локального заполнения). Ну и как коллега выше уже дал ссылку на обсуждение на форуме в руВики - там пеняют на ВД, тут пеняют на ВП... круг замкнулся :) Borodun (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
Насколько я понимаю, P1813 было придумано для случаев, когда в карточке в большинстве случаев нужно показывать не название статьи, а общепринятое сокращение. Например практически везде вместо "Союз Советских Социалистических Республик" следует показывать СССР, вместо "Килограмм" - кг и т.п. Эта логика и реализована в модуле показа карточек. В этом смысле зачем вместо "профессор" где либо показывать "проф." мне не понятно. @AlexKozur: возможно Вам тоже будет интересно --Ghuron (talk) 11:28, 16 January 2019 (UTC)


Насколько я понимаю, для включенных в категорию Q7710943 персоналий сколь-нибудь точная оценка года рождения отсутствует, но почти наверняка она попадает в XIII век. Русскоязычный лейбл был неудачный, факт --Ghuron (talk) 04:55, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

А, я кажется не заметил приписку "XIII век" (может, её не было в описании правки?). Кстати, в чём отличие этой категории от Q7710943? --Infovarius (talk) 15:56, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Signs and symptomsEdit

Hi! Regarding this undo, perhaps you'd like to join in this discussion. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 17:41, 22 January 2019 (UTC)

Regarding dates for EnglandEdit

Hey, I noticed you reverted my edits regarding the item for England (and I figured someone would). It may be my inexperience with Wikidata, but could you explain why the date of 12 April 1927 is significant for England? See, I added it as the country of citizenship for David Ashworth, but I was met with an exclamation mark which told me that it couldn't have been, since England only became an entity in 1927, after Ashworth's death. At least, that is how I interpreted it. Thank you. Jay D. Easy (talk) 20:41, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

@Jay D. Easy: how England can be country within the United Kingdom (Q3336843) (part of UK) when United Kingdom (Q145) itself began in 1927?? The problem with David is probably that country (Q6256) is now not a type of administrative division, or something like that. --Infovarius (talk) 14:24, 28 January 2019 (UTC)
@Infovarius: thanks for clearing that up. It's still weird that if England is selected as country qualifier for a person not born before 1927, an exclamation mark appears. In any case, feel free to undo my changes again if you want to. Jay D. Easy (talk) 20:44, 28 January 2019 (UTC)


Доброго вечера! Возможно Элиша и отлично от Елисей, но венг. Elizeus и пол. Elizeusz (imię) уж точно не тождественно нем. и англ. Elisha --Migel Sances Huares (talk) 18:25, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

По существующим порядкам и для них нужно создавать отдельные элементы... --Infovarius (talk) 15:42, 29 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my merges of physico-geographical object (Q20719696) and natural geographic entity (Q27096220)Edit

I'm glad that I successfully prompted someone to clarify the intended distinctions between those three entities. Let's get them stated definitively -- I've opened a discussion on [[Talk:Q27096220#Distinction_between_this_and_physico-geographical object (Q20719696)_and_natural geographic object (Q35145263)|the talk page]] where we can do so. JesseW (talk) 22:41, 8 February 2019 (UTC)

Ref for statement on Q604984Edit


By any chance, do you have a references for the statement said to be the same as (P460) on singulare tantum (Q604984) (Special:Diff/769791792) ?

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 05:49, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

North AmericaEdit

Basically we have one problem, rather two: the first is that in Italian "America settentrionale" means the whole subcontinent from the Arctic Sea down to the Southern border of Mexico. There's no a "Northern America" including only English speaking countries. The second is that we are using an obsolete thus deprecated property. If it's deprecated it means that it is not fit for qualificator, so the question is not "how to express this otherwise?" but "must it be expressed if there are not feasible tools?". -- Blackcat (talk) 00:18, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

sports club (Q847017)Edit

Hi, in regards to your edit, I did not believe an item could be both a instance of (P31) and a subclass of (P279) of a sports club (Q847017)? I believed the former was used for clubs like Dynamo Sports Club (Q1269063), whilst the latter for instance was used for type of club; like basketball team (Q13393265), association football club (Q476028), ice hockey team (Q4498974), etc. Please convince me otherwise? =) Yours sincerely, Theilert (talk) 19:39, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

@Theilert: This item is about union of several clubs, or in other words, class of clubs. Yes, it is not a P31. --Infovarius (talk) 15:27, 28 February 2019 (UTC)

Sallie Gardner au galopEdit

Hi, This is not really a film, and Eadweard Muybridge is not a film director. As you can see, there is an error in Sallie Gardner at a Gallop (Q3924909). Regards, Yann (talk) 01:41, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: The notion "film" is not strict I believe. You cannot say what number of frames serves as boundary between "film" and "series of images"... Thus I suppose it wouldn't hurt to call this "a film". --Infovarius (talk) 20:12, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
This was not made as a film. It is more comparable to an animated GIF. And adding "film" produces errors (rightly so). Regards, Yann (talk) 09:24, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
As I already told you above, this was not made as a film. Regards, Yann (talk) 16:17, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Harry Potter (Q3244512 ) as a Horcrux and whether or not he diedEdit

It is not clear whether or not Harry Potter himself was a Horcrux or if it was simply a piece of Voldemort's soul inside of Harry that was the final Horcrux. The book also does not make it clear whether or not Harry Potter actually died when he was hit with the Killing Curse and found himself at a dream-like King's Cross Station. In an interview with TIME, J.K. Rowling writes, "The Avada Kedavra curse, however, is so powerful that it does hurt Harry, and also succeeds in killing the part of him that is not truly him, in other words, the fragment of Voldemort's own soul that is still clinging to his. The curse also disables Harry severely enough that he could have succumbed to death if he had chosen that path." If authorial intent doesn't mean much, there is also something to be said about the lack of fan consensus in interpreting this situation. Quora and Stack Exchange offer a sampling of the disagreement.

Personally, I think in the absence of conclusive evidence for his death in the books, it would be better to presume he did not die. Do you know if there's any kind of precedent or policy on Wikidata for handling scenarios like this? I tried looking, but I didn't even quite know what to search for.

--njohnson7 (talk)

Harry Potter is a fictional humanEdit

Join Harry Potter talk about wikidata item at wikidata Harry Potter talk page. You did not contact me when you reverted that Harry Potter is a fictional human and you deleted my reference too about J.K. Rowling saying Harry Potter is a human. On the talk page I explain my sources too Btqfshfst (talk) 17:10, 27 February 2019 (UTC)

I'm asking over at Wikidata:Project_chat about how I go to revert your edit cause I don't know an effective way to do that. Considering you didn't add anything to my talk page when reverting my edit I suppose asking you wouldn't help. Do you know how I go on about to do that, or can you revert it yourself? As far as I know the author says Harry is as human as possible, then I think fictional human is perfectly valid, please tell me if you disagree Btqfshfst (talk) 17:17, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
@Btqfshfst: is correct but it is just redundant as there is already (subclass of fictional human (Q15632617)) which implies this. --Infovarius (talk) 20:25, 27 February 2019 (UTC)


Hi, why Q6189125 and Q59420974 are different? They seem to be the same. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 16:39, 4 March 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Superchilum, difference is quite theoretical and they have big overlap, yes. But I can imagine wikt category Категория:Артикль@ru which contains lexemes like "article"@en, "definite article"@en and similar. Compare with Категория:Артикли@ru which contains lexemes like "the"@en, "a"@en. Compare also Category:Noun (Q9557799) vs Category:Nouns (Q61945932). --Infovarius (talk) 10:51, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Ok, I see :-) thank you. --Superchilum(talk to me!) 13:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


Hello, Do you really think that tide (Q23384) was discovered by Julius Caesar? People have been living on seashore for thousands of years without noticing that sea level could go up and down? The citation means that Cesar's soldiers didn't know that big tides occur during full moon. Even Cesar, who was quite boastful, wouldn't have claimed that he discovered such an obvious phenomenon. --El Caro (talk) 07:00, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

May be he first described (explained) this? But ok, it's quite strange. --Infovarius (talk) 08:56, 5 March 2019 (UTC)
Actually it was added by a banned user [27]. time of earliest written record (P1249) would need a stronger reference. WP:en writes " Pytheas travelled to the British Isles about 325 BC and seems to be the first to have related spring tides to the phase of the moon" without any source. Bu it is about the relation between the moon and tides, not tides alone. --El Caro (talk) 09:29, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


So I had a look at your last contribs. Many of the automatic replacement "Russia->USSR" are wrong, you should check them (Michel Strogoff, War and Peace, Boris Godounoff...), did you mean "Russia-> Russian Empire", another replacement you did before and which seems correct? --El Caro (talk) 07:11, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for your look. I suspected that USSR value would be more inaccurate. I'll overview and correct them. --Infovarius (talk) 11:09, 5 March 2019 (UTC)


Really? --Succu (talk) 21:25, 7 March 2019 (UTC)

@Succu: It's not a modern taxon anyway. All species were moved to Rhododendron. Sources are being found. --Infovarius (talk) 20:10, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
It's a nomen rejiciendum (Q17276482) not a polyphyly (Q217743). --Succu (talk) 20:30, 8 March 2019 (UTC)


Simple queries show that there are towns/cities that are not administrative entities of given countries: 151 in the Netherlands, 1584 in South Africa, 146 in Spain etc. There are some false positives and stuff that needs cleanup, but generally it gives an idea of what the actual situation is. Apart from cases where city/town is not and has not been an administrative entity, there are also cases where settlement and respective administrative entity have separate items for the sake of clarity, e.g. Amsterdam (Q9899) and Amsterdam (Q727), Tallinn (Q1770) and Tallinn City (Q4450503). For these, item that is an instance of settlement (and its subclass "city/town") shouldn't be an instance of administrative entity at the same time. So obviously there are many towns/cities that are not administrative entities, these are not even exceptions.

Due to this change its harder to classify entities accurately (I commented on this item here) yesterday. Comment here on settings appropriate cities/towns accurately as instance of specific administrative entity designations applys here as well since Q515 is a subclass of "city/town". 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:6D9E:AD28:835E:C2C0 10:57, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, yes, I agree. --Infovarius (talk) 20:34, 8 March 2019 (UTC)

Ваша отменаEdit

Добрый день, коллега! Я не понял Вашей отмены в элементе Q4401271: населённый пункт называется Ручей, а не Русей. Это два разных слова, поэтому первоначальное удаление подобного "синонима" было оправданным. Если по-болгарски он может быть написан, так как Вы указали, то он и должен фигурировать в качестве синонима на болгарском, а не русском языке. --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 18:57, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

@Ksc~ruwiki:, сорри, не заметил этого отличия. Думал, что это просто уточнение "(Россия)". --Infovarius (talk) 18:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
ОК! Вопрос закрыт. --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Федеральные округаEdit

При всей дискуссионности вопроса (обусловленной скорее теоретическими, нежели практическими причинами), самый авторитетный в России научный журнал на тему публичного права — а именно "Государство и право" — отдаёт предпочтение публикациям, которые говорят, что фед. округа являются "новыми административно-территориальными образованиями", "административно-территориальными единицами управленческого типа" и т. д. См. Черкасов К. В. Федеральные округа: сущность и место в территориальном устройстве России // ГиП, 2008, № 12, с. 68. Или Федорец М. Н. Федеральные округа: значимость и роль в государственно-территориальном устройстве Российской Федерации // ГиП, 2018, № 10, с. 139. Если же переходить к практической стороне вопроса, то на уровне федеральных округов осуществляется управление целым рядом структур: прокуратурой, Банком России, таможней, Росгвардией. Итого, фед. округа это более чем реальные административно-территориальные единицы, даже если сравнивать с дореволюционными губерниями. — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 06:09, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

Brötchen Q23004Edit

Hi Infovarius, you rfeverted my correction, but Q23004 is not a Q1401891 - Because these must have more 10 % Fat, otherwise its a Q1746803 - I don't know, how its in russia, but in English it's the same like in german like in Austrian german - reagrds from Vienna K@rl (talk) 09:55, 18 March 2019 (UTC)

But I cann see, than Хлебобулочное изделие is not the same like Q1401891
Sorry, but can telle you it only in german - Brötchen = Kleingebäck, please ask also other for a third meaning. It could be that the your description is not the corresponding to the german - this I can't answer you. regards K@rl (talk) 20:43, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Lonesome GeorgeEdit

Hey there, regarding Lonesome George. How is he not a subclass of animal? Was the last dinosaur not a subclass of animal? Cheers (: --Rasinj (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

@Rasinj: The Lonesome George (Q16570) was the last of subspecies of Chelonoidis nigra abingdonii (Q4045992), why it can be a subclass? And hm why did you mention dinosaurs? --Infovarius (talk) 13:32, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

science fiction novelEdit

Note that novel (Q8261) shouldn't be used as a genre (Q483394), see discussions in Wikidata talk:WikiProject Books --JavierCantero (talk) 08:39, 1 April 2019 (UTC)

Q1004: "penciller"Edit

Hey there-- I had removed "penciller" from "practiced by" on the comics item because it's already a subclass of "comics artist", which is also there. It just seemed redundant to me. I'm not going to get into an edit war over it, though, just thought I'd explain my reasoning in case you agree ;) LadiesMakingComics (talk) 16:06, 3 April 2019 (UTC)

100500-я отмена правокEdit

Я присутствую в различных проектах фонда Викимедиа с 2007 года. И у меня во во всех проектах, вместе взятых, за целый год не набирается столько отмен правок, сколько Вы мне тут нагородили всего за пару месяцев. Если цель в том, чтобы вынудить меня уйти из Викиданных, то скажите прямо, и я уйду, невелика беда. — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 03:19, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

@Дмитрий Кошелев: спокойнее. В каких правках вы видите проблему? С федеральными округами я спорить не буду - Вам как специалисту виднее. Я сначала просто возвращал к стандартному состоянию, ибо раньше наоборот меня откатывали, когда я добавлял округа как АТЕ. Сейчас поищу, кто. Я не помню, что ещё я у Вас отменял. P.S. У меня в Викиданных 27 тысяч правок отменено, но я не жалуюсь. Только иногда :), на "таксономическую мафию", которая до сих пор не даёт подступиться ни к чему биологическому. --Infovarius (talk) 14:27, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
Может быть, это был User:MaksOttoVonStirlitz, кто боролся с федеральными округами как АТЕ? Или User:Сидик из ПТУ? --Infovarius (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
С фед. округами уже давно разобрались. Оказалось достаточно немного дописать статью в Википедии. Сейчас речь о Q10037858 и Q7015682. Я согласен с Вашим замечанием, что православную олимпиаду сложно отнести к числу научных состязаний. Как и вообще любые предметные олимпиады, ибо это образовательные события, а не научные. Научное состязание - это, например, конкурсы DARPA. Поэтому желательно расселить понятия по разным квартирам. Например, на Викискладе выделить категорию Education competitions и перенести в неё события, относящиеся к предметным олимпиадам. И я даже лично готов это сделать. Но когда диалог ведётся через отмену правок, у меня пропадает желание что-либо делать. — Дмитрий Кошелев (talk) 03:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Category:Ukrainian poetsEdit

Hi Infovarius, you reverted my correction Q14899407 (Category:Ukrainian poets) and Q7066552 (Category:Ukranian-language poets). Q14899407 is about country and Q7066552 is about language. I checked all my edits and they are really about country, aren't they? --LiMr (talk) 14:01, 12 April 2019 (UTC)


Уважаемый Infovarius, не могли бы вы помочь в вопросе с Игорем. ВП:Форум/Викиданные#Игорь ? Мешает ли pазное "название на языке оригинала" объединению Igor (Q28038713) с Igor (Q26214577)? - Kareyac (talk) 03:09, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Oboyan (Q72656) administrative statusEdit

For some reason the most up to date statement according to the qualifiers in Q72656#P131 is deprecated. Is it a mistake and should be preferred instead ? author  TomT0m / talk page 11:18, 15 April 2019 (UTC)

Probably, the mess is because Oboyansky District (Q2629924) was (and is) an administrative unit (districts in Russia (Q1572329) and became also municipal district (municipal formation in Russia (Q1849719)). Also this strange difference between "город" and "городское поселение" (Q20659049) which are the same in this case... I'll make both preferred for a while. What do you think, User:М епифанов?


Hi Infovarius , I don't know the german language but did you check the definitions in the other language before you reverted my modification ? Except in Russian, that is a mess, all other languages refer to a block in metal used in printing. --Pixeltoo (talk) 10:16, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

Brendan RodgersEdit

Yes, he WAS indeed. But so far that property is believed to host the current coach, not the whole chronology, as it's used by wikimedia templates for sports teams... -- Blackcat (talk) 13:38, 21 April 2019 (UTC)

You are wrong. Wikidata properties not only for current situation but the whole chronology. Current value is marked by higher rank than others and is obtained by queries and templates by default. --Infovarius (talk) 11:28, 15 May 2019 (UTC)



Вместо того, чтобы снести вот это безобразие, очевидно выпирающее в истории правок, Вы удаляете две моих темы (и бог знает сколько других) без архивирования. И, собственно, с какой стати Вам пришло в голову, что Блантер не управится со своим user_talk самостоятельно? Он просил Вас о какой-то подобной помощи?

Incnis Mrsi (talk) 20:44, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

On your edit at Q29043256Edit

Hello. I would like to know why you reverted my edit[28]. We write the Portuguese name José "ジョゼ," not "ホセ" in Japanese("ホセ" is a Japanese writing of Spanish name Jose) and your edit seems to be a restoring the wrong information. --Ohtani tanya (talk) 07:08, 3 May 2019 (UTC)


Frankly I don't understand. Football is the generic name. A specific sport is played either with spheric ball or a spheroid, but that has nothing to do with this item which is only a metaclass for the several types of 'football'... -- Blackcat (talk) 17:06, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

@Blackcat: because these items are also generic. E.g. football (Q262090) is not always spheric. --Infovarius (talk) 16:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
And wouldn't be better keeping football the blanket item? -- Blackcat (talk) 17:10, 15 May 2019 (UTC)



Как же мне не нравятся отмены до обсуждения...

Вот это не сайт, а типичный лендинг, не содержащий информации и созданный лишь для перевода пользователей на конечную страницу.

Кроме того, в этом свойстве должно быть одно значение (он показывает ошибку рядом со свойством).

Ну или если так хочется пойти поперёк, то хотя бы одно из них назначить главным. Или вот что происходит n:ru:Категория:Ансамбль песни и пляски Российской армии имени А. В. Александрова (справа под картинкой значок ссылки, можно посмотреть как меняется при соотв. изменениях в Викиданных по количеству и главной, только пустую правку там нужно делать, чтобы кеш обновлялся). Можно, конечно, и там подстроить под все чудачества, и выбирать хоть что-то, но если есть какие-то соглашения (по одному значению, по главному в случае множественности и т.д.), то почему бы им не следовать. --sasha (krassotkin) 18:13, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

@Krassotkin: я делаю тысячи правок (часто в день), если бы я обсуждал каждую... Как человек со стороны может определить, что это не официальный сайт? Хотя взглянул повнимательнее и, наверное, в этом случае вы правы - информации здесь меньше и в основном перенаправления. "в этом свойстве должно быть одно значение" - неочевидно. По-моему, шаблоны должны уметь обрабатывать такие случаи. --Infovarius (talk) 11:17, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Спасибо за пинг, а то я уже перестал следить. Насколько понял по комментарию, эта отмена всё же вызвала вопросы, поэтому лучше было спросить я же тоже не ради вандализма сюда захожу, какое-то обоснование есть в этих действиях. "Неочевидно", - там прямо ошибка выдаётся в явном виде. "Шаблон должен", - в принципе согласен, хотя до конца не уверен. Если бы не отвлекали, то может и шаблон можно было довести, а так приходится выбирать. А неуверен, потому что обычно такие ошибки - это в большинстве случаев на самом деле что-то не то и нужно с ним разбираться, возможно даже хуже, если они будут замыливаться. При существующем же положении они явно визуально видны. --sasha (krassotkin) 12:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

writing system (P282) = unwritten language (Q4085712)Edit

Hello! Yesterday I made this edit, since unwritten language (Q4085712) is not an alphabet. I tried in some way to assert that no value Help is "caused by" unwritten language (Q4085712), but I didn't find a way to do it. I also noticed that there are a lot of other items like this. I was wondering if the best way is to assert:

What do you think? --Horcrux (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2019 (UTC)

@Horcrux: yeah, probably this modelling is better. --Infovarius (talk) 11:06, 15 May 2019 (UTC)



В wikidata я перенес три интервики статьи Антон (ru, uk, bg) из Q35663473 в Q5401576. Вы откатили мои изменения с комментарием «something strange». А что ж тут странного, это ведь одно и то же имя, разве нет? --Montegorn (talk) 11:07, 15 May 2019 (UTC)

@Montegorn: Этот комментарий был не в этих статьях. Посмотрите в историю Q5401576 - я там пояснил отмену. На засыпку вопрос: почему вы перенесли интервики не в Q27873442? --Infovarius (talk) 11:25, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
В каком смысле - "different spelling, can have different transliterations"? В обоих случаях речь идет о мужском личном имени Антон, только в одних языках оно пишется кириллицей, а в других латиницей. Но имя-то одно. Или вы утверждаете, что это два разных имени и две отдельных сущности?
Сейчас разнесено по двум разным элементам - из-за этого большинство интервики не работает. О существовании Q27873442 я просто не знал, а так-то да, надо его тоже добавить. --Montegorn (talk) 11:48, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
@Infovarius:? --Montegorn (talk) 13:58, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Отвечу вместо коллеги: увы, да, с точки зрения Викиданных Антон (русский и украинский) и Anton (то же самое, но транскрибированное на инглиш) - две разные сущности, см. Wikidata:WikiProject_Names#Basic_principles. Это ужасно мешает с точки зрения Википедии, но тут такой консенсус. Wikisaurus (talk) 08:02, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
Да, спасибо, Викизавр за ссылку. @Montegorn: я пытаюсь как-то объяснить смысл этой системы. Представьте, что в какой-то Википедии есть несколько статей, соответствующих русской "Антон" (может, не с этим именем, но такая ситуация часто встречается в англовики). С какой бы из них не соединять русскую - будет несимметрично и "нечестно". Единственный симметричный вариант - ни с кем (явно, через интервики) и со всеми (через свойство said to be the same as (P460)). --Infovarius (talk) 13:24, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
@Infovarius: @Wikisaurus: Нет слов, коллеги.
А почему же тогда, к примеру, имя "Глеб" соединено с немецкой, итальянской и польской статьями - это же аналогичный случай, или просто руки пока не дошли разделить? --Montegorn (talk) 15:44, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
Недоработка :) Кстати, с Глебом ещё хуже - белорусы решили отделиться: Hleb (Q20971659). User:Montegorn, если хотите обсудить структуру элементов об именах - прошу пожаловать в обсуждение вышеупомянутого проекта. Мне тоже не нравится нынешняя система, и я активно боролся с ней поначалу. Но в итоге, т.к. не смог предложить ничего более удобного и хорошего, смирился и пытаюсь отстаивать наши "кириллические" права в этой системе. --Infovarius (talk) 22:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

New yearEdit

Re [29], I'm puzzled, doesn't ruwp separate New Year (Q34812) from New Year celebrations (Q1980736)? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2019 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: I am puzzled too: what's the difference between them? I suppose the beginning of new year is always a fest in some sense. And if you mean New Year (Q34812) to be just a day why not to merge it with January 1 (Q2150)? --Infovarius (talk) 12:58, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
I think it's that one is the event, and the other is the celebrations of the event. New year is commonly January 1st, but it depends on the calendar system, so they're separate. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 13:10, 26 May 2019 (UTC)

Les Joueurs de cartesEdit

Hi, It is useless to add images here, it just produces errors when using the item in a list. And no, we can't add all the images. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:18, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@Yann: Where an image in a class (group) produces error? --Infovarius (talk) 16:33, 4 June 2019 (UTC)


In this change you claim that the given name Joan is best given as "Джоан/Жоан" in Russian. This seems unlikely to me. Can you cite any documents in which someone is referred to as "Джоан/Жоан"? Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 16:05, 3 June 2019 (UTC)

@Bovlb: This is a question of modelling. Joan has no single correspondence in Russian so I want to show it by enumerating all variants for it. It is like for a name Q12902079 which has no single transliteration into latinic languages and it is shown in de-label (English is wrong with single label, just look at ). --Infovarius (talk) 16:53, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
We normally handle this by picking the best form to be the label, and having other forms as aliases. It is not (IMHO) correct to give a form that is never correct because it embodies a list of forms. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 18:08, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
@Bovlb: The best form for Q1484457 is Joan but it's not Cyrillic. And there are no the best Cyrillic form. Any form would be wrong for some persons. And the label "a list of all possible forms" at least partly correct always and understandable. --Infovarius (talk) 20:40, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


[30] Yes, you are completely right about Testudinata being a wider group than Testudines and it's also why I made the edit. Those three articles are not about Testudinata, they are about Testudines but they regard Testudinata and Testudines as synonyms. In my opinion they should be linked with Testudines regardless of their erroneous names. For example now it looks like the Portuguese Wikipedia doesn't have an article about turtles, which is untrue. --Paranaja (talk) 15:05, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

@Paranaja: it is a usual situation when many wikis don't have an article about common name of animals/plants' common name. If these article are really about modern turtles why not to rename them in common name? --Infovarius (talk) 16:37, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
I now tried to do like you suggested, but I was only able to move suwiki. --Paranaja (talk) 17:11, 4 June 2019 (UTC)

Alcoholic cocktailsEdit

Hi :-) what's the difference between Q18562959 and Q7214075? --Superchilum(talk to me!) 14:26, 7 June 2019 (UTC)

Hi, Superchilum! Honestly I don't know (I marked them as "nearly duplicates" myself). Probably in different languages there is difference in terminology according to different alcohol concentration? By the way, please revert your moves because in English and French "cocktail" means always with alcohol (and Category:Cocktail (Q6511353) is about non-alcoholic too). --Infovarius (talk) 13:05, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Ups, I didn't know about english, my bad. I will revert it. However, in French it doesn't seem to be so, on they have fr:Catégorie:Cocktail with the subcategory fr:Catégorie:Cocktail alcoolisé. Regarding my previous question, I think we can merge them, don't you? :-) --Superchilum(talk to me!) 13:47, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Ley's try. If there would be some counter-argument one can unmerge at that time. --Infovarius (talk) 20:57, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


Hello. Property date of death should contain date of end of life, it is logical. For example, we do not write dates of clinical death for living persons there. Otherwise, we would have to specify date of resurrection too, but we aren't able. --SkоrP24 17:31, 11 June 2019 (UTC)

@Skorp24: Hm, interesting argument. And I tend to agree but for characters there can be a "real resurrection"! Else how to reflect those events for the character? --Infovarius (talk) 13:08, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
Should the events be reflected? Death in the middle of life. I don't think so. We specify dates of birth and death as they are specified for biographies of real persons, but there is no resurrection in real life. For example, we don't refrect date of university entrance in Wikidata though it may be important event too. --SkоrP24 17:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Distinguishing individuals from collectionsEdit

Hi! In this edit, you asserted:

but we already have:

You edit makes "God the Father" an instance of an instance of God, which seems ontologically incoherent to me. How do you plan to fix this?

Also, your edit summary for this edit does not appear to describe the reasons for the edit. Instead it seems to address another editor. You should use talk pages for this purpose.

Finally, you appear to have reverted the same edit by multiple users, which is edit warring. I discourage you from continuing to do this.

Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 16:55, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

@Bovlb: I understand incoherency, let's discuss. And yes, I revert this deletion in second time and I explained my revert in the first reversion while both deletions were unexplained. Who are edit-warring then?
The problem with christianity is the Trinity. It consists of Jesus (which is God in some traditions) and others. And it is considered to be the God itself. So seems to be that both P31 are correct. But we can add also P279 to the second to avoid violations. --Infovarius (talk) 19:58, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Infovarius".