User talk:Multichill/Archives/2018/January

Black Lunch Table

Your recent deletions of the catalog tag for the Black Lunch Table project is literally destroying an outreach initiative's work to integrate Wikidata in its Wikipedia work. I would ask that you revert the edits that you have made. These deletions represent hours of careful work that establishes notability of an underrepresented population on both Wikidata and Wikipedia. Also, before doing something so negatively impactful, if you could reach out and discuss it first? -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 20:31, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Cleaning up the mess, see Property_talk:P972#Abuse_of_this_property_for_original_research. Multichill (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

"the mess"?!? What mess? Your cavalier approach to destroying hundreds of hours of painstaking work here? Did it not cross your mind when you were doing this deletion that maybe it would (a) have a negative impact and (b) might be a functional thing? I am astounded at the arrogance of this act, and the offensive way you have referred to so much hard work. Unbelievable. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 20:48, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you should have thought about that before appropriating a unrelated property. The current status of who had the property is available on multiple pages ([1] & [2]) so no data is lost here. Multichill (talk) 20:51, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Maybe you should think about the negative impact you are having on multiple outreach initiatives before taking such a position. Why are you hurting these initiatives and deleting all of this hard work? What gives you the right to do this. Data is lost. Connective data that is being used for Wikipedia task lists. Which Magnus knows about and has not objected to. I don't understand why you think this is okay. -- Erika aka BrillLyle (talk) 20:57, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

We're all trying to do what's best for the Wiki projects. In some cases efforts to improve one part, might hurt other parts and people become offensive. That's unfortunate, but all part of the game. Multichill (talk) 21:08, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Multichill, I have always respected you as a valuable user of Wikidata. But your statement, that the efforts to improve one part might hurt other parts, goes completely against the grain for me. Wikidata is a collaborative project, one can discuss problems, and it is always possible to improve one part without hurting other parts. In case of Black Lunch Table, one could for example create a new property and move the statements there instead of deleting them. --Pasleim (talk) 22:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Monteverdi

Looks like your bot is adding someone's typo [3]. --EncycloPetey (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: bots generally don't make typos :-) In this case it's imported from ULAN. According to their sourcing (look at the bottom of the page), they got it from the Library of Congress Authorities database (n.d.) n 79074370. Both are generally quite reliable sources I'm not sure if they made a typo. As long as it is listed as a valid alias on ULAN, the bot will import it. You could contact LOC/ULAN to check if it's a typo or not. Multichill (talk) 17:49, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

I didn't say the bot made a typo; I said the bot is importing someone else's typo. Based on what LoC normally does, "Monteverri" is almost certainly a typo for "Moteverdi".

Yes, LoC is usually accurate, but I've found problems in their database before, including duplicate authority listings for the same item. It happens.

I have no means of contacting LoC. I have tried before, but they do not respond to inquiries, it seems. That is why I contacted you. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:32, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

@Fuzheado: do you have any contacts at the library of congress that could help out here? Multichill (talk) 18:41, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

We can send something to our LC contacts and see what they think. -- Fuzheado (talk) 19:02, 5 January 2018 (UTC)

Reminder about Blocking consultation

Hello again,

The discussion about new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools is happening on meta now and is in the final days.

We contacted you because you are one of the top users of the blocking tool on this wiki. We think that your comments will help us make better improvements. There is still time to share your ideas. You can post to the discussion in any language.

Thank you if you have already shared your thoughts. You can also help out by sharing a link to the meta discussion with users on this wiki. Or you can translate the summary of the discussion and share it on this wiki.

If you have questions you can contact me on wiki or by email.

• I apologize for posting in English.

For the Anti-Harassment Tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 22:49, 16 January 2018 (UTC)

Flemish painters

We just got called out by User:Fram on en-wiki (diff) for an edit your bot made (diff), taking a reference that described a painter as Flemish, and recording that as country of citizenship (P27)Belgium (Q31).

Historic nationalities (and current sub-nationalities) is of course an issue that I'm not sure we've ever quite nailed. (The "Wales" thread at Village Pump is currently once again trying to find ways forward). But I was wondering, is this something your bot is routinely doing? Do we have any guidance on recommended best practice for this, eg at Sum of All Paintings? (Because with things like "Flemish" or "Welsh" or pre-20th century "British" I am never quite sure what the right thing to do is). And if this is the approach, would it be worth adding a qualifier object named as (P1932) = "Flemish" in such cases?

Thanks, Jheald (talk) 11:55, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

@Jheald: I did some small imports years ago, but stopped after I was unable to filter out enough false positives.

So the basic problem here is nationalism. A lot of artists have been connected to a country later on. Brueghel to Belgium, Rembrandt to the Netherlands, Leonardo da Vinci to Italy, etc.

We need a way to express <some historic person> <claimed by country property> <the current country>. I talked about this with some people at the Wikidata conference as one of the big problems to solve, but didn't really feel like following up on it. Would it be as simple as having a new property? Figuring out the right label is going to be the hard part. Multichill (talk) 19:34, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Trying to come up with a new property with an appropriate label is pretty much where User:Andrew Gray has been trying to get to in the thread on project chat. Not easy/obvious though. And not so much with the mapping to a current country, which is a further wrinkle. See also most recent section at Wikidata:Request a query for various queries trying to get a quantitative handle on where we are at currently. Jheald (talk) 19:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC)

See also the failed Wikidata:Property proposal/Nationality. --Marsupium (talk) 20:45, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Marsupium:: That seems to be a sort of catch all very broad scope. I care mostly about a specific group of people: Historic artists claimed by current countries. From that (probably too narrow scope) we could expand with small iterations. Multichill (talk) 21:18, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

@Multichill, Marsupium: But a word that sources very very often use (like the one behind the diff above) is "Flemish". Not a current country; but a statement we should try to capture, accurately.

The previous propsal seemed to fail in part because of the word "Nationality". Perhaps we need a more roundabout phrase -- more circumspect, more open to wide interpretation. "National or cultural affiliation" ? Or does something like that just give people a greater choice of trigger words to object to? Jheald (talk) 21:38, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Recoin as gadget

Hi Multichill,

Thanks for your comments on Recoin! I wanted to ask whether you could advise us on how we can turn it into a gadget? Is there an established process to follow?

Thanks, Ls1g (talk) 13:16, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Ah, I missed your reply at the VP Ls1g. Don't know what the process is, I usually just create them. Is User:Vvekbv/recoin.js ready to be turned into a gadget or do you want to do more tweaking first? Multichill (talk) 16:59, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Tweaking is finished, so if you could turn it into a gadget that would be great! Ls1g (talk) 17:45, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Let me know if there is anything from my side I can do to help. Ls1g (talk) 20:40, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

@Multichill: Best wishes for the holidays! Looking forward to chat about how to turn Recoin into a gadget whenever convenient :) Ls1g (talk) 10:19, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

@Ls1g:  Done. I'll leave it up to you to announce it :-) Multichill (talk) 15:27, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Ls1g (talk) 19:43, 2 January 2018 (UTC)

Hi @Multichill: We extended Recoin based on the feedback the gadget received, in particular we added multilinguality (anyone can add translations here), and the function to immediately add claims of datatype item. We tested it and found it reliable and useful. Would you mind to push the new version from importScript('User:Vvekbv/recoin_beta.js'); into the gadget? Thanks and cheers, Ls1g (talk) 22:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)

Or even better, could you forward the gadget to the user script User:Vvekbv/recoin.js? Then we could push further updates ourselves. (I am not sure that is against the principle of gadgets, but we noticed several other gadgets are doing that (e.g. MediaWiki:Gadget-currentDate.js, MediaWiki:Gadget-wikEd.js and MediaWiki:Gadget-diff.js)) Ls1g (talk) 10:12, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

Done this. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 09:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Ls1g, Sjoerddebruin: thanks, probably a better solution. Multichill (talk) 12:12, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! Ls1g (talk) 17:25, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

"previously attributed to" - which property ?

Hi,

I'am presently working on some Creators, and I stumbled on https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?search=previously+attributed+to+jean-baptiste+monnoyer+&title=Special:Search&profile=default&searchToken=71t3esg7nsppc3ydovb1klsd6

Which is the property to use to indicate this kind of relationship ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 22:06, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

creator (P170) with rank deprecated. Multichill (talk) 22:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

thanks - is there a criterium for deprecation ? or do I just deprecate and add source ? --Hsarrazin (talk) 23:11, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: sorry, missed your reply. I only do it when I have a good source. For example in RKDimages they keep track of previous now rejected attributions. Multichill (talk) 11:56, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

thanks for that precision. I guess Monnoyer will stay on top of this list for some time, then. Nice tool by the way : allows to easily check the paintings, and use M'n'Match for creation :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 12:05, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: probably inspired by http://tools.wmflabs.org/multichill/painters/index.php?collection=Q1542668 (replace the collection with the one you're working on). The Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection (Q18600731) is really messing up the matching because they don't include the given name. So for example Portrait of Albert van Dalsum (1889-1971) (Q28086663) is made by Kees Verwey (Q1882521). I do see they include dates now in the source so maybe that can be used for easier matching. Multichill (talk) 12:11, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

yes, obviously inspired by your tool ;) - I'm not working on a specific collection, rather trying to reduce by number of paintings concerned...

and yes, Cultural Heritage Agency of the Netherlands Art Collection (Q18600731) include dates, which allowed me to find some painters, whose names where not really obvious ;) - will try to continue regurlarly, a few painters at a time :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 12:28, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

It's a lot of work. I set up User:Multichill/Kladblok some time ago so if you make one match, it will suggest other paintings that could probably use the same match. Still 3279 to go... Multichill (talk) 13:27, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Q46999227

Hi Multichill,

Trying to cleanup Wikidata:Database reports/items with P569=P570, I found that item, that seems really weird : the label looks like the name of a web site... and dates are absurd...

Could it be a test item, that RKD would not have deleted ? https://rkd.nl/en/explore/artists/452514

Either way, I really don't think it can be a human (Q5), unless it's a pseudonym. Could you please check ? :) --Hsarrazin (talk) 23:10, 23 January 2018 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: forgot to filter out that test item in my bot. Updated the code and deleted this item. Multichill (talk) 11:54, 28 January 2018 (UTC)