User talk:Infovarius/Archive/2016

Wikidata:Database reports/Wikipedia versions

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 https://www.wikidata.org/?curid=24028442# (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?

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)

Fratello

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)

Q4654299

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

Синхронистка

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)

apple

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 Snorri

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)

P1568

The property definition 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 definition 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)

Q5924178

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)

Relation

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

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

Bambuseae (Q35922)

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:

• da:Bambus claims about sub-family Bambusoideae, not tribe.
• So you think there are no such vernacular concept? But I see it, e.g., in cs:Bambus, simple:Bamboo, may be in pt:Bambu.

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"

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)

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 каша

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 reverts

@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 names

- 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 links

Hi. I notice you moved most — but apparently not all — of the Wikinews links from labour movement (Q208701) to work (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 work (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 work (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)

Hi,

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 numbers

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 sequence (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 ???

That edit : https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q11173&curid=12663&diff=322489319&oldid=322325234 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(s) (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)

Explanation

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 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)

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)

Q47598

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

Interwiki to redirect pages

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 вещества

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)

Sphenisciformes

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)

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)

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)

@Sergey kudryavtsev: Уточнение возможно, но более широкий класс тоже подходит. --Infovarius (talk) 11:54, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Woman/female for sister

I do not understand your edit at sister https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q595094&diff=336918873&oldid=335800944 — Finn 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)

Circumcircle

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

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)

Булгаков

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)

Q13419255

Hi! You reverted a merge of hypertext encyclopedia (Q13419255) with online 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 online 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 online 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, P805

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)

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 P527

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 Q936820

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

• Пожалуйста, также см. мой комментарий на w:ru:Обсуждение:Пикап-сообщество#Интервики --eugrus (talk) 13:31, 25 June 2016 (UTC)
• Полторы недели без ответа — вернул мою версию. --eugrus (talk) 23:23, 4 July 2016 (UTC)
• @Eugrus: простите, не было времени для ответа. Ок, соединили вы "пикап" с "seduction community", и о чём теперь будет элемент Q936820? О сообществе? И как теперь связать его с human behavior (Q3769299), seduction (Q1527023), human sexuality (Q154136)? А связь, очевидно, есть. --Infovarius (talk) 12:31, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

Rechtschaffenheit

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 numbers

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)

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

Reverts

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 mass

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 centimeter–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 Metsu

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)

P1659

As far as I understand related property (P1659) should only be applied to properties and not to items. (reaction to your revert https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q189567&type=revision&diff=359662871&oldid=359465960). Michiel1972 (talk) 21:02, 30 July 2016 (UTC)

Dictionary is not a genre

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 reverts

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(s) (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)

Archangels

• 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)

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)

Q13220650

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)

Q1444

Hi infovarius,

could you help me with https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1444&diff=368834471&oldid=368414996? 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...

Northern America (Q2017699)

Hi, you've just reverted my edition: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q2017699&oldid=prev&diff=371436216 . 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)

Undo

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 Q26879054

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?

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/series

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 tool

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)

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)

Michelangelo

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)

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 name

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)

Halon

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)

⟨ hydrofluorocarbon (Q1031943)    ⟩ subclass of (P279) ⟨ organofluorine (Q2200141)    ⟩

; 2)

⟨ hydrofluorocarbon (Q1031943)    ⟩ subclass of (P279) ⟨ halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920)    ⟩

; 3)

⟨ organofluorine (Q2200141)    ⟩ subclass of (P279) ⟨ organohalogen compound (Q387914)    ⟩

; 4)

⟨ halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920)    ⟩ subclass of (P279) ⟨ organohalogen compound (Q387914)    ⟩

; 5)

⟨ fluroxypyr (Q13416874)    ⟩ instance of (P31) ⟨ organofluorine (Q2200141)    ⟩

but not

⟨ fluroxypyr (Q13416874)    ⟩ instance of (P31) ⟨ halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920)    ⟩

; 6)

⟨ freon (Q12858303)    ⟩ subclass of (P279) ⟨ halogenated hydrocarbon (Q14333920)    ⟩

; 7) there are some alcohols (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 halon (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)

Q1268

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

@Ankry: I suppose his second given name is "Franciszek". --Infovarius (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

.

Cyrillic given name

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: Юджин/Эжен/Ойген. --Infovarius (talk) 09:49, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Q143368

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 НП

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 Christ

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 Q27516889

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)

Q855

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 Гаттер

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)

Q2

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)

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 statements

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)

Property:P103

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 town

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 Bryophyte

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)

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 fictional organism (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 (fictional organism (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 fictional organism (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 fictional organism (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 fictional organism (Q1972868) (animate?). --Infovarius (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2016 (UTC)

All anthropomorphic object (Q27598544) are fictional organism (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)

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.gif

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

河川敷(Q11553848)

「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)

トークページにメッセージが残されている場合は、少なくとも返答してから差し戻してください。

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)

Q16692637

The reason I removed the link in Russian republic (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 Russia

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)

Now not only these countries... --Infovarius (talk) 21:50, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Q238

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 mythology

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:Insecta

Hello,
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 pages

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)