What was Q57784396 - I don't know this page (not hugely familiar with wikidata) and I got a notification for This page but I don't know what it is about... Can you assist me understand?What was Q57784396 - I don't know this page (not hugely familiar with wikidata) and I got a notification for This page but I don't know what it is about... Can you assist me understand?~~~~
User talk:Matěj Suchánek
Return to the user page of "Matěj Suchánek".
Reply to "Quick question"
Reply to "Category labels"
Reply to "edit filter for P856 ?"
Reply to "74"
Reply to "Removals from Q6508"
Reply to "Duplicate MnM catalogs"
Reply to "Self-referencing"
It contained a link to w:en:Special:WhatLinksHere/Susan E. Connolly which is inappropriate and some basic information. You somehow managed to create it using Q22946134 on October 26th, 2018. Perhaps you wanted to contribute to Q57915954.
No clue what I was trying to do. Probably as you say, contribute to the correct link. I know I got a bit lost with Qnumbers from time to time. Sometimes it all worked fine and sometimes I ended up tied in knots. Thank you for your help. I wasn't sure what I had done.
Do you mean a topic on the project chat, a request on a noticeboard, RfD, RfC...? I don't know any code of conduct that would deal with it, so just go ahead.
thanks, i meant on project chat
Hello. You may can help us. See w:el:Πολιτικό#Πληθυσμός. I can't see the graph. I try for different pc, browser and internet connection. I asked in el.wikipedia Project chat. A user said that he can't see the graph. So the problem has nothing to do with my pc, browser and internet connection etc. Do you have any ideas what happened to Wikipedia? I search for templates and modules that may had changed, but nothing. (Template: w:el:Πρότυπο:Graph:Population history) Thanks.
You are not the first one to ask: Wikidata:Contact the development team#Graphes no longer working.
Hello, why do you delete so many labels? I can't imagine a reasonable reason for this. You've deleted many labels which I've done manually and reasonably.
Hello. I'm currently removing labels that are causing conflicts in other items. For most of these removals, there should a link in the edit summary to the other item for which the correct label couldn't be added. After each batch, I run the bot over each pair of items and add the correct label if possible.
Is there any item where the (cetainly) correct labels was removed? Eventually, I can run my bot over these items and readd it if there's no conflict.
Actually I didn't see any "link in the edit summary to the other item". Please help me to understand these examples: Q6542715, Q4615456 (several items can have such it-label...), Q5964 (nl-label was more general), Q6479193, Q2945159. Just note that sometimes labels are different in Wikipedia and Wikisource and Wiktionary and sometimes it is better to have a label from e.g. Wiktionary (or simply general) and slightly different from Wikipedia label.
Also I can't understand this ruwiki removal
"Q6479193 - conflict with Q8717332" yes, and for Russian too. But Q6479193 (not having ru/be/uk sitelinks) necessarily should have labels which are equal to titles in Q8717332 in order to distinguish these category items
edit filter for P856 ?
I wonder if it's worth doing an edit filter for official website (P856).
In general, users should add an end date qualifier and/or the new website with preferred rank instead of updating the existing values.
Limit cases are probably adding (or removing) a trailing "/", switching to https, and adding a language qualifier. These shouldn't be filtered.
Is there a way to skip filtering large items for now?
This is not about items being large but about clutter in the variables. Ideally, you would have there nothing but the old url if and only if it's the only changed thing (sample).
"removed_lines" wouldn't do?
It has the same problem. I'll try to find more test cases and then perhaps craft a now working filter.
Started a catch-all filter to get some test cases.
things that should probably bypass the filter (in addition to above):
- removal or addition of "www." https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126727
- removal of "/index.html" or even "/anything/something/" https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126942 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126666
- addition or removal of "/" after domain name: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8127136 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126607 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126546
- addition of some path or parameter: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8121855
- Even if it can be useful: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8121570
- change to archive: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8121740
- change of domain name: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126943 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126929 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126691 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126678 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8123720 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8122574
- change of tld: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8126982
Thanks. Seems work.
(index\.(html?|php))? could be excluded too: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8150548 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8140313 https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:AbuseLog/8137153
I added draft message at MediaWiki talk:Abusefilter-warning-120.
Supposedly we would have to do one for statement deletions as well.
Maybe (1\d\d\d-1\d\d\d) could be skipped in filter 74
The filter is supposed to catch these, they are really not valid descriptions.
Maybe. I think it's better than what was there before: Special:AbuseLog/8169543
Removals from Q6508
It looks as though most of the problematic labels on Category:Astronomy (Q6508) were the result of a missing "Category"" at the beginning of the label. Perhaps all of these labels could be salvaged?
I deleted all of them. I think the bot will add ones matching sitelinks soon.
Yes, I'm going to run the bot over these items and also items which were in conflict and couldn't have a proper label added (I wanted to put its identifier in the edit summary but as the backend of QS is being rewritten, it was ignored).
On other items, I looked at some of the French labels and found that quite a few didn't include "Catégorie:".
I recall deleting many en-gb labels that used to have that defect.
There seems to be quite a lot of them in most languages...
Hi Matěj, I have seen your list Property talk:P214/Duplicates. It is much clearer than Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P227. Is there a simular list for P227 (GND) or can you create one? Cheers
It's maintained by ListeriaBot. You can create it by copying the template and replacing all P214 with P227.
Thanks. I will try.
I've replaced "P214" and "VIAF/viaf" but the list Property talk:P227/Duplicates doesn't work. Where is the error?
It took me a while to figure it out but finally.
Perfect. Thank you!
Duplicate MnM catalogs
Hi, it appears https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/catalog/2641 and https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/catalog/986 point to the same thing? Assuming 2641 is more current, should I close 986? Should I try to port the manual matches (that don't exist in 2641) from there before?
Hi. Yes, they do and #2641 is more current. If it's possible, please merge them. By the way, shame on me that I didn't reach you about this yet.
I should also explain why I created a new catalogue. I was the one who created the original one but it had been attributed to "Mat?j Suchánek" (note "?"). That's why I couldn't amend the scraper with this new one (I did so after another user realised there were no women). MnM contains plenty of such wrong usernames.
Hi! Abuse filter 49 is catching edits like this. Can it probably modified to ignore all external identifiers? These ones are really unlikely to be errors (as they are never links), and as Wikidata evolves, it becomes more and more likely that other organizations choose our QIDs for their databases. If detecting data type is impossible, please at least blacklist Property:P6814 as well.
Hi! The information about datatype is missing. But since this isn't the first case (cf. P6413 and P6482), I am blacklisting it.