User talk:Kolja21/Archive/2014

Latest comment: 9 years ago by Kolja21 in topic BBF ID (P1650)
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

primary school (Q9842)

Hallo Kolja, da bist Du ziemlich mit der Axt durchgegangen: Das GND-Grundschule entspricht dem Wikidata-Grundschule, und das ist die Grundschule (Klassen 1-4,5 oder 6) in allen Ländern. Das ist aber gerade nicht das de:WP-Grundschule, denn das betrifft nur die Bundesrepublik. Parallel dazu gibt es noch Artikel für die Ausprägungen/Instanzen Grundschule in der DDR, in der Schweiz, etc. Nur eben kein Pendant zum Wikidata- oder GND-Grundschule... Also bitte etwas Vorsicht (ich habe z.B. über die meisten "constraint violations" die derzeit für GND ID (P227) notiert sind, schon ausgiebig (und meist erfolglos) meditiert: Wenn Du auf der Suche nach etwas wirklich anspruchsvollem bist, versuche einmal "Speck" aufzuräumen (unter Berücksichtigung von Ham, Bacon, Kochschinken, Schinkenspeck, Frühstücksspeck etc.), aber dabei nicht die Aufdröselung in nl:Spek#Soorten zu stören ;-). -- Gymel (talk) 22:39, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Hm, stimmt, wenn man den Inhalt des Artikels berücksichtigt, was man natürlich tun sollte ;) Der Kahlschlag kam, wie du weißt, dadurch zustanden, dass das Lemma dummerweise schlicht "Grundschule" heißt. "Grundschule (Begriffsklärung)" (Q1550658) und "Primarstufe" (Q1376838) scheiden als BKL aus. Eine wirklich befriedigende Lösung fällt mir auf Anhieb nicht ein. Im Grunde müsste man in deWP "Grundschule" nach "Grundschule in Deutschland" verschieben und unter "Grundschule" einen übergreifenden Artikel schreiben. Auf jeden Fall danke für den Hinweis. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

P1084

Regarding the link to EUL editions (P1084), indeed Naguib Mahfouz' Ehrenwerter Herr (German edition, 1996) (Q15692204) = EUL 835285022 does not work. From a title search we can find two editions, whose Control Numbers 835285022 or 854258949 should work, but neither do, even using explicitly their advanced search... Yet both of their ISBNs work fine (3293002323 and 3293201253) on the same search engine, so I'm lost too... Possibly a problem on the site itself. LaddΩ chat ;) 20:26, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Strange indeed. I'll write a mail to EUL and ask if they can provide us with a stable URL. It's worth a try. --Kolja21 (talk) 02:58, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

radio station (Q14350)

Hi/Guten Abend!

I agree the radio station entry is ambiguous. In English the phrase refers to both an institution that broadcasts programs, but also a piece of engineering that transmits. My description was based on reading a few of the wiki links -- eg de:Rundfunksender / fr:Station de radio (which both refer to the piece of engineering = the transmitter) but also es:Radio (medio de comunicación), which refers to the whole topic. Then the page en:Radio station redirects to 'Radio Broadcasting', again the transmission as opposed to the media company.

Perhaps it is the English title that is wrong? Smb1001 (talk) 00:06, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback! --Kolja21 (talk) 00:10, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Bouncing a thought

Since I know you're active with identifier-like properties, it seems like we have multiple ways of specifying the property "X identifier" and "X ID". Do you think it would be a good idea to standardize the naming to one or the other? --Izno (talk) 14:37, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Sure. AFAIK most users prefer "X identifier", but I'm no native English speaker so I'll use whatever is becoming common. Personally I prefer the shortest label for a property. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:03, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
There's also things like "control number" (see above). Whose toes will I step on...? :) I also personally prefer the shortest label if possible. --Izno (talk) 15:29, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
True, "control number" is a synonym. I don't think anyone of the Wikidata:Books task force will mind if you change it to ID or identifier. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
PS: In one case we have to be careful: There are authorities and editions IDs that shouldn't be mixed. For example: IdRef ID (P269) and SUDOC editions (P1025). Authority IDs are for identifying a person, an organisation or a work, edition IDs are used for a single copy of a book (translation, 2nd edition etc.). --Kolja21 (talk) 18:22, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

What is this?

The said user tells me on IRC that you are accusing him of sockpuppetry here and Google Translate seems to affirm that. Do you have any evidence to support that allegation? If not, I ask that you retract your claim. Thanks.--Jasper Deng (talk) 23:04, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Reinhart, User:לערי ריינהארט, is well known long user, with every strange, let's say "individual edits". There where endless discussions with him on German, Romanian, and Esperanto Wikipedia, since he makes his own rules with winding paths that do not fit in any concept developed by the WP community. Hence my request to him: Please do concentrate on one subject and only use one account! Reinhart has multiple aliases like User:Gangleri, or User:I18n and loves to experiment. I'm not accusing him of sockpuppetry (he has never hidden), but of a lack of teamwork. --Kolja21 (talk) 04:14, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Benutzer-Datenobjekt

Hallo Kolja21,

ich bin neu hier und wollte mal fragen ob Benutzer für ihre Benutzerseiten auch so welche Datenobjekte erstellen dürfen.

MfG

Suriyaa Kudo (talk) 17:29, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Suriyaa, was für Datenobjekte meinst du? Items? Die sind, wie bei Wikipedia, für lexikalische Einträge (und nicht für Benutzerseiten) gedacht, siehe WD:N. Fröhliches Schaffen --Kolja21 (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Reihenzugehörigkeit

Hi! Ich habe heute die Datenobjekte für die letzten vier Ausgaben des International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Q693148) erstellt. Alle gehören zur Reihe Regnum Vegetabile ([1]). Ich hab allerdings gerade keine Idee wie ich das (Reihe+Band) mit WD-Mitteln ausdrücken könnte. Kannst du helfen? Gruß --Succu (talk) 21:27, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Succu, für Buchreihen / Serien / mehrbändige Ausgaben stehen die Regeln noch nicht fest. Im Moment nehme ich die Hilfskonstruktion: "ist ein(e)" Buch + Serie. --Kolja21 (talk) 22:06, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
Danke. Ich hatte befürchtet, ich hätte was verpasst. --Succu (talk) 22:12, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

von GND nach DDC

Hi! re: https://www.wikidata.org/?diff=89056477&oldid=87569610#top Kannst Du mich bitte bezüglich DDC zurückrufen?
talk philosophy (Q5891) enthält unter anderen den link http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/tree.html?lang=de&q=5891&rp=361&method=d3&live . Einige der Teilgebiete sind als part of (P361) definiert.
Die Übersicht wird erst ca. alle 15 min aktualisiert; http://tools.wmflabs.org/reasonator/?lang=de&q=Q5891&live ist live. Gruß gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 20:00, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

Hallo gangLeri, danke für den Hinweis. Der Edit vom 24. November 2013 liegt schon etwas zurück, aber es scheint auf jeden Fall etwas falsch gelaufen zu sein. Die URL ist leider offline. Vielleicht war sie als Quellenangabe gedacht, aber ich vermute, es ist einfach ein Drag'n'Drop-Fehler. Korrekt ist deine Angabe DDC 100 (Philosophie), was du anhand des automatisch erzeugten Links überprüfen kannst. Der zweite Wert, den die GND verzeichnet, DDC "T1--01", erzeugt eine Fehlermeldung, ist für uns also nicht zu gebrauchen. (Keine Ahnung, wofür er steht oder woher die GND ihn übernommen hat.) --Kolja21 (talk) 20:52, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

re: https://www.wikidata.org/?diff=120766091&oldid=120765063#top manche Tx--xx funktionieren, Ich habe sie erst zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt eingefügt. Du findest Beispiele in meinen Beiträgen.
Ich wollte mich mündlich über hunderten von semantischen Konflikten unterhalten. Gruß לערי ריינהארט (talk) 10:25, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

http://dewey.info/class/T2--162/about works for me לערי ריינהארט (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
Identical with http://dewey.info/class/2--162/about --Kolja21 (talk) 14:04, 23 April 2014 (UTC)

Re: Normdaten

Tja, bei VIAF wird auch nur mit Wasser gekocht und gibt es anscheinend viele Unstimmigkeiten. Du kennst Dich aber damit viel besser aus. In der DE-WP hat man in Qualitätssicherung in diesem Bereich (GND) bereits viel Arbeit investiert. Ich klopfe manchmal bei der Gelegenheit mit dem "Autority control"-Tool die Normdaten für die Pl-bezogene Themen in WD, weil sich bisher kaum jemand mit diesem Themenbereich beschäftigte. Ich bin aber mit der Menge der Artikel/Arbeit in diesem Bereich ziemlich erschlagen, und sehe es erst mal eher als Erstfüllung, damit überhaupt irgendwelche Normdaten zur Verfügung stehen, und mit den Einzelheiten und Unstimmigkeiten muss man sich ggf. im Detail noch in der Zukunft auseinandersetzten. Grüße--Alan ffm (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Ja, es ist gut, dass es vorangeht. Formatfehler werden in der Regel auf Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P227 gelistet, so dass man die Daten auch nach der Löschung durch den Bot retten kann. So long --Kolja21 (talk) 13:17, 16 May 2014 (UTC)

Undeletion requested : Common Knowledge An Ethnography Wikipedia

See http://www.amazon.com/Common-Knowledge-An-Ethnography-Wikipedia/dp/0804789444 the item had been created to source a claim on the structure of politics on the "Wikipedia" item. I ask for its undeletion therefore.

(btw. I still do not agree to the reason it was deleted : beeing out of scope of a project do not imply the item has to be deleted as it can still meet the general criteria :) )

TomT0m (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. But never ever use Amazon as a reliable source. (Open Library (Q1201876) is full of errors based on this book, cell phone and shoe store.) What the hell we got libraries for ; ) Library of Congress Control Number (LCCN) (bibliographic) (P1144): 2013047786. Greetings --Kolja21 (talk) 13:22, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

escudo (Q17093752)

ist leider keine Währung, sondern eine Auswahl/Menge von konkreten Währungen mit einer bestimmten Eigenschaft (gleicher Name, vermutlich auch gleiches Symbol). Insofern halt immer noch eine Begriffsklärung und fatalerweise eben keine Oberklasse, in die sich Mozambican escudo (Q600213) und andere zwanglos einklinken könnten. Vertrackt... -- Gymel (talk) 22:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

@Gymel: Klar, der Escudo ist ein Sonderfall. Aber findest du nicht auch, dass es besser ist, die BKL (Währung/en, plus weitere Bedeutungen) von "Escudo (Währung/en)" zu trennen? Für mich klingt das logisch, denn so stimmt das Objekt mit der GND überein. Einmalig ist der Fall übrigens nicht. Mit dem pound (Q339180) und der mark (Q4281830) verhält es sich genauso. Mit der Einteilung in Klassen kenne ich mich allerdings zuwenig aus. Das ist ein spannende Frage, die wir in größerem Kreis diskutieren sollten: Property talk:P279#Currency. Fröhliches Schaffen --Kolja21 (talk) 03:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

Edit warring

This is simply not constructive. Yes, all Latin Americanists are social scientists, and no, not all of them are philologists (I would say only few of them are, so that statement is basically nonsense). I know that because I have read tons of papers written by Latin Americanists because of my degree on Latin American studies. Please stop edit warring, or at least give reasons. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 17:14, 3 June 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Andreasm, you can't take possession of a hole occupation only because your personal view of a Latin Americanists is the one of a social scientist. A social scientist is not a philologist. In addition this item is used not only for English. In other languages a Latin Americanist is, if you like it or not, mainly a philologist. I see no problem in using both: social scientist and philologist. Compare: Americanist (Q16308157) and other philologists. This is not my personal view. You can look it up: Amerikanist, "Oberbegriff(e): Philologe". Cheers --Kolja21 (talk) 19:17, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
Who is taking possession of anything? I think the problem here is that you do not understand the use of subclass of (P279). Like I said, not all Latin Americanists are philologists, therefore Latin Americanist (Q16334430) cannot be a subclass of philologist (Q13418253). It is not my personal view that all Latin Americanists are social scientists, but simply a fact easy to verify. For instance, all area studies at the University of Oxford are part of the School of Interdisciplinary Area Studies, and this department belongs to the Social Sciences Division not the Humanities Division where the Philology department is (here) Once again, stop your edit warring, specially including other items like this one. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:50, 3 June 2014 (UTC)
You are taking possession. Why? Because your not accepting the simple and proven fact that at least some if not most Latin Americanists are philologist. If you are a social scientist, fine with me. If you want to have an item for Latin Americanist that are only social scientist you have to create a new item. (I don't know what kind of degree who have received but I have a PhD and I've studied both social science and philology.) --Kolja21 (talk) 00:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
I do not understand where did you get that from me. I shall rephrase (or repeat myself): not all Latin Americanists are philologists (some of them are, as we both agree, but not all). Therefore, Latin Americanist cannot be a subclass of philologist. For that to happen, all of them should be philologists, but that is not the case. Anyway, that is how the property subclass of (P279) works. Finally, I remind you that you need to assume good faith, so please stop accusing me of taking possession when I am not. I believe this issue is due to your lack of understanding of the before mentioned property, nothing else. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 01:45, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
You've changed Latin Americanist into a subclass of social scientist and deleted philologist. In your words: For that to happen, all of them should be social scientists, but that is not the case. I wouldn't mind if this change would only effect Latin Americanists but we have all kind of philologists and of cause talking about literature and language often results in an overlap with other disciplines. Just one of many examples: For Romance studies (Q1277348) FelGru added over a year ago subclass of (P279): philology (Q40634). If we follow you, we needed to change romanist (Q16267749) nevertheless into subclass of social scientist. --Kolja21 (talk) 02:27, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for pointing me out more wrong uses of the property subclass of (P279) (according to its description: "All of these items are instances of those items; this item is a subclass of that item"). So, philologist is out of the question in the case of Latin Americanist. As for all the other supposed subclasses of philologist, I shall check them up. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 03:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Well it doesn't bring us any further if you keep insiting that your right, because your right. As I said before if you want a strict interpretation of subclass of (P279) you need to change Latin Americanist (Q16334430) to an ambiguous item and add at least two new items "Latin Americanist (philologist)" and "Latin Americanist (social scientist)". Since we have a lot of sciences and even more scientists who think they are the only "real" scientist in their field and unwilling to work with other scientists you can spend the next few weeks adding new sub sciences. In the best case one science item for every professorship ;) --Kolja21 (talk) 04:07, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
So, do you agree or not that some Latin Americanists (not all of them) are philologists? If you do agree with that (which you actually did before), then subclass of (P279) is out of the question. I am not interpreting strictly anything: that property is being wrongly used in this case, because not all A are a subclass of B. If you still find it hard to understand this explanation, you could read Help:Basic membership properties. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 14:40, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
You won't find an answer by reading Help:Basic membership properties, it's more a subject of en:Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. I appreciate your work for WD but I can't help you. The facts haven't change since our first conversation. Authority control certify that Americanist, Romanist etc. are part of philologists. As Hispanist, for example, is part of Romanist. Your are saying that "all Latin Americanists are social scientists". Your argument: "... because I have read tons of papers written by Latin Americanists". I know that it's a legitimate point of view to say not all (Latin) Americanist are philologist. (Read the above statement about ambiguous items.) I've spend half my life at universities and I know that we can have the same debate about many more sciences. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:43, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
Could you please explain me why have you not undone your edition which includes Latin Americanist as a subclass of philologist? You said that only some Latin Americanists are philologists, so it is plain nonsense to keep the subclass of (P279) in there. I do not understand either why you keep mentioning other items (Romanist, etc) when I am only talking about Latin Americanist. I have not ask for any help, but thank you for your effort. Unfortunately, you seem unable to understand how subclass of (P279) works, which is a little worrying given that you keep using it. Andreasm háblame / just talk to me 23:59, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
We are not talking about Latin Americanist. You are talking about Latin Americanist and your way you see Latin Americanist and your resistance to exept any other view. If you don't even try to understand - after hours of talking - that Latin Americanistic is part of the academic system (like any other philology or area study) it's just a waste of time. I told you the facts. Ignore the sources, create "Latin Americanist (social scientist)" and do not bother me again. EOD. --Kolja21 (talk) 00:40, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Postscript: To a third reader who might think I was rude. Here is the prove that the academic kindergarden called "university" hasn't changed. --Kolja21 (talk) 20:38, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Städte-, Gemeinde- usw. -Partnerschaften

Hallo Kolja21! Siehe bitte Redakteure, Mentoren und Mitwirkende gesucht. Das Thema betrifft viele Sprachversionen und mit schrittweiser Vorgehensweise können viele Benutzer mitwirken. Gruß gangLeri לערי ריינהארט (talk) 19:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Danke, ich schaue es mir an. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:45, 7 June 2014 (UTC)

Books

Hi, thanks for the warning. I've been looking at the Books task force page and I get why editions and works are different, but I don't totally understand how they are supposed to be linked here. To take the example of Hamlet (Q41567), which is about the work, it seems to me the currently linked English wikisource is wrong, since it is a particular edition, and it should be the disambiguation page s:Hamlet. And the current property "edition of" does not belong there. Is that right? But then what about (say) the German translation, which is the only German version, but does reflect a specific edition? Perhaps if you point to a fairly complex case that is correctly entered into WikiData I could understand this better. Rigadoun (talk) 19:58, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

@Rigadoun: The examples given at Wikidata:WikiProject Books are - or at least should have been - checked and include complex cases. The Hamlet case is special. The disambiguation page s:Hamlet would fit, if it contains a list of different editions. But it links to the drama, "Tales from Shakespeare", and "Characters of Shakespeare's Plays." s:Hamlet is like Hamlet (Q224491) = Wikipedia disambiguation page. If the drama page s:The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark would be about a single edition the Wikisource link should be moved to this edition. (The Hamlet case can't be solved by Wikidata. It has to be done by English Wikisource. That's why the page has the warning sign: "The source document of this text is not known.") --Kolja21 (talk) 23:57, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

Re: VIAF is outdated

Thanks for your note. I didn't noticed until now that Datensatz im Katalog aufrufen contains the right URL for the record. I'll now pay more attention to it. Best, Lugusto (talk) 16:47, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

URL

Hallo Kolja21, es gibt ja Eigenschaften, aus denen im Datenobjekt eine URL erzeugt wird, z.B. wird in Q352999 in der Property Find a grave aus dem Wert 7951199 die URL http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=7951199 . Wird diese URL eigentlich regelmäßig durch ein Bot auf ihre Gültigkeit (http-Status 404 usw.) geprüft, bzw gibt es eine Liste mit fehlerhaften Werten? Wenn nicht, was bedeutet dann Aufgaben von Bots und Helferleins: Check URL: e.g. auf Property talk:P535 Grüße --Färber (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Färber, der Hinweis dient dem Eintrag in MediaWiki:Gadget-AuthorityControl.js (= Helferlein). In der Zeile könnte z.B. auch stehen: Bitte Daten aus deutscher Wikipedia "Vorlage xy" importieren (= Bot). Ein Bot, der die URL auf ihre Gültigkeit überprüft, ist mir nicht bekannt, aber es gibt zahlreiche lokale Wartungslisten wie de:Kategorie:Wikipedia:Normdaten-Wartung. --Kolja21 (talk) 21:39, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Macedonian translations and showcases

I shall certainly do as you advise! I was looking for such showcases and untranslated properties myself, so as to have it as complete as possible with all kinds of things translated. Thank you for the idea and do drop others if they come to you. Cheers --B. Jankuloski (talk) 01:25, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

@Bjankuloski06: Thank you so much. Great job! --Kolja21 (talk) 08:18, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

New properties

Dialnet author ID (P1607), Dialnet book ID (P1608), Dialnet journal ID (P1609), Dialnet article ID (P1610) are ready. --Tobias1984 (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kolja21 (talk) 14:51, 11 November 2014 (UTC)

Object to property

Hi I just wanted to ask you for help. From my point of view it whould be much better to have https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q466511 as a property. Since it describes nearly every combustion engine. How to convert it or how to start a convertations discussion in the right way.

Thank you in advance F6F (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Items and properties are two different things, see Help:Properties => Wikidata:Property proposal. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:09, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

values for property

Hi, I just found https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P1002 unfortunately I dont know which values are available for the Property. From my point of view there should be something like Star, Row, V, L, w and Wankel engine types available. I could not find them. Could you might help me a little bit?

F6F (talk) 13:57, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@F6F: Sorry, configuration of the car's engine pistons is not my topic. I only ride bike ;) But the examples given on Property talk:P1002 show which values are meant: straight-four engine (Q1784109), V6 (Q10856569) etc. --Kolja21 (talk) 15:05, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

KMDb person ID (P1649)

KMDb person ID (P1649) is ready. --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:45, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

BBF ID (P1650)

BBF ID (P1650) ist jetzt bereit. --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:54, 21 December 2014 (UTC)

Super! Danke für den Hinweis. --Kolja21 (talk) 12:47, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Kolja21/Archive/2014".