Open main menu

User talk:Murma174


If you want to create redirects easily when merging items, use the merge gadget in your preferences. This can automatically create a redirect for you. (This is the way I create the redirects). Mbch331 (talk) 11:04, 1 May 2015 (UTC)

@Mbch331: It worked now. Thank you --Murma174 (talk) 11:35, 1 May 2015 (UTC)


Hello, be carefull when you add a link to species for the taxon; a species is not the same as a genus. For example, this was not correct. Pamputt (talk) 18:21, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

@Pamputt: Thanks for your note. And I know the difference of course. But please have a second look at the page Q20940245. I linked species:Mollivirus to w:en:Mollivirus with the 'Add links' function and that directed me to Q20940245. If that is wrong (and in this case it was!), then there's something wrong with the system. Don't you think so? --Murma174 (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
Indeed, for these specific cases (Mollivirus sibericum (Q20940245) et Pithovirus sibericum (Q15889043)), there is a mix between the species and the genus within the Wikipedia's articles. Basically, these two Wikidata items are about the genus (see taxon rank (P105) value) so it appears natural to link the matching wikispecies links. Initially, I remember that the Wikipedia's link were shared between Mollivirus sibericum (Q20940245) et Mollivirus (Q20970591) but it is not the case anymore; I do not remember why it was decided to put all the Wikipedia's link in the species item. Maybe, you could ask the question here. Pamputt (talk) 21:57, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
@Pamputt: The main problem is IMO, that some Wikipedia articles don't distinguish between: 1. the virus genus, 2. the virus type species (often there is only one species within one genus), 3. the disease caused by this virus. In Wikipedia this might be O.K., because the reader expects to find compiled informations about 1., 2. and 3. In Wikispecies it's our task to clarify this confusion after scientific sources. And sometimes (as in this case) it is not obvious, which Wikipedia article is the most appropriate one to link to. I'm convinced, such cases of doubt will occur again and again - unfortunately, but inevitably. --Murma174 (talk) 22:51, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

taxon name (P225)Edit

Hallo Murma174, zunächst mal Danke dafür, dass du für neue Wikispecies Taxa gleich Datenobjekte anlegst. Ich möchte dich aber bitten alle vier grundlegenden Eigenschaften anzugeben, also insbesondere auch taxon name (P225). Das macht meine Arbeit hier etwas einfacher. Deine letzten Datenobjekte sind auf dieser Liste gelandet: Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P171. Danke und Gruß --Succu (talk) 15:34, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Gibt es einen Grund dafür warum du meiner Bitte nicht nachkommst? --Succu (talk) 22:06, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Ich habe alle neuen Taxa unter ihrem wissenschaftlichen Namen eingetragen. Wenn das eine Verletzung von Wikidata-Regeln sein sollte, dann verstehe ich das nicht. --Murma174 (talk) 05:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Du hast mich missverstanden. Bitte auch die Eigenschaft taxon name (P225) hinzufügen; macht also insgesamt vier Eigenschaften für ein neues Datenobjekt. Danke und Gruß --Succu (talk) 06:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
@Succu: Aber das müsste doch ein Bot erledigen. Nehmen wir z.B das item Q18667424, das in keinem anderen Wikiprojekt vorhanden ist, nur auf Wikispecies. Der Wikispecies-Name ist doch (fast) immer der wissenschaftliche Name. Ausnahmen sind z.B. Homonyme, wo dem wissenschaftlichen Namen ein Unterscheidungskennzeichen hinzugefügt wurde. Und wenn in einem Namen eine Klammer auftaucht, dann kann der Bot doch auch das registrieren. --Murma174 (talk) 07:36, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
Warum darauf hoffen, dass ein Bot die wichtigste der vier Eigenschaften ergänzt, wenn man eh am Erstellen des Datenobjektes ist? Es gibt keine Bots die das aktiv tun. Es bleibt also an mir hängen. --Succu (talk) 15:12, 13 September 2016 (UTC)


Hallo Murma174,
When you merge items, you may want to use the merge.js gadget from help page about merging. It helps with merging, gives the option to always keep the lower number (which is older, so preferable in most cases) and removes the need to file a request on Wikidata:Requests for deletions.
With regards,- cycŋ - (talkcontribslogs) 15:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

@Cycn: Thanks, done now. I first had hesitataed merging these items, because in some other similar cases Wikidata-admins decided to keep the obsolete items. --Murma174 (talk) 16:35, 27 September 2016 (UTC)
I reverted your merge. Your assuption about Class Chroobacteria is wrong. --Succu (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2016 (UTC)


You've added some labels and descriptions for this language (Northern Frisian I think) and I notice something - they are capitalized. Is it right? I mean in this language are all nouns capitalized as in German? --Infovarius (talk) 14:32, 30 December 2018 (UTC)

@Infovarius: Hey there, thanks for asking. No, in frr it is like in English. At the beginning of a sentence or in a headline we capitalize nouns. And IMO labels should be treated as headlines. Am I wrong? --Murma174 (talk) 15:34, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
Common practice is that in Wikidata labels and descriptions should be treated as part of sentence: Help:Labels#Capitalization, so I would advice you to change to small letters. --Infovarius (talk) 15:02, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
@Infovarius: Thanks for clearing that up for me. I'll let me be guided by the English practice. HNY 2019 --Murma174 (talk) 15:17, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Return to the user page of "Murma174".