Open main menu
     

Wikidata Weekly SummariesEdit

Empty category itemsEdit

Hey Laddo, there are items Q61237312, Q61237365, Q61237397, Q61238762, and Q61238833 which are apparently missing sitelinks. Can you please add them? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 20:50, 5 February 2019 (UTC)

Done LaddΩ chat ;) 20:50, 6 February 2019 (UTC)

Alves da SilvaEdit

"Alves da Silva" in and by itself, is an unproductive combination of two disparate surnames (Alves and Silva), and it is of no use to treat it as a unit. Only spcific “dinasties” of related people could gain from being bagged together; people with random, volatile instances of this or any other combination of surnames do not. Tuvalkin (talk) 00:27, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

@Tuvalkin: I don't have specific opinion on that case, but guess it depends; I know some compound names that constitute a unity despite that they are made up by two family names, like the French case Miville-Dechêne (Q59196647), see this search. I would expect such cases to be written with a dash ("-") in between the two surnames, generally. Lαδδo chat ;) 00:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Not a matter of opinion, a matter of facts and knowledge thereof — up which decisions concerning how onomastics are to be curated can be made and opinions about those decisions can be developed. You don’t know the first thing about Portuguese onomastics (or else you would not be refering the unrelated matter of hyphenated surnames), yet you think «it depends». Well, it kinda does: It depends on Wikidata’s rules on how to treat Portuguese onomastics — which has its challenges and doesn’t fit the simple "given name + surname" system, but which is relatively simple campared with Spanish, Icelandic, Slavic, Hungarian, Arabic, or Far Eastern onomastics. Sadly, Wikidata doesn’t seem to have developed a meaningful way to deal with onomastics. Is has been merely vampirizing human-entered data from Wikimedia Commons and serving it back via its toxic, non-wiki interface. I wish Commons would take back control over its own data, given the huge disappointment Wikidata has become. Tuvalkin (talk) 01:02, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
@Tuvalkin: You are correct I know nothing about Portuguese surnames, though I now have an idea of some differences. Wikidata attempts to provide machine-readable that reflect reality, and it is not without flaws. If you know for sure that the concept of compound family name does not exist in Portuguese, feel free to fix those but understand that other languages may require that. Lαδδo chat ;) 01:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Wrong again: In Portuguese onomastics yes there are compound surnames (we have been plagued for centuries with endless strings of Pacheco Pereira, Morais Sarmento, Câmara Pereira and many others), but that’s almost never the case of multuple-name surname sections of the typical Brazilian or Portuguese person. A clever system would have tools to curate that and a bunch of other issues of Portuguese onomastics such as, say, particles ("e" and "d*") and two-word surnames — necessarily harmonized with analogous issues of Spanish and other onomastics and with special consideration to things like the differential treatment these issues get when integrated with onomastics of yet other cultures in the case of immigrant’s names (in France, the US, etc). You in Wikidata don’t have such a system, as said, and you don’t seem to have either the will or the resources for it. And you personally chose to engage in petty edit wars. Very well — at least things are clear now. Tuvalkin (talk) 13:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Laddo".