Nw520

Welcome

Welcome to Wikidata, Nw520!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards!

Property proposal

Thanks a lot for your contributions! If you have time to drop by at Wikidata:Property proposal/accreditation it would be great! − Pintoch (talk) 14:45, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your reminder. I kind of overlooked the notification. --Naseweis520 (talk) 20:47, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Better class for Q15235563

Hi,

I see that you added subclass of (P279) = geographical feature (Q618123) on Löschbezirk (Q15235563) but that seems a bit too general. Could you find a more specific value? (maybe Bezirk (Q264441) would be more appropriate for instance but I'm not familiar with this concept). It's also a bit strange to have both instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279), usually we choose one of the two, not both (but that's a lesser problem).

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 18:29, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi VIGNERON,

I know that Löschbezirk (Q15235563)subclass of (P279)geographical feature (Q618123) is a rather general statement. However, I'm not that familiar with the depicted conecpt and thought that having a general statement is better than having none at all. I changed geographical feature (Q618123) to hierarchy of administrative territorial entities (Q4057633) but I'm not 100% sure if it really fits.

Also, I don't agree that using both instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) is that unusual. I noticed quite some amount of entities having both (example). --Nw520 (talk) 17:48, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

True, that was better than nothing and if you're not sure about a more precise value, maybe we can go back to the more general one.

And also true, having both instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) is not that unusual but it's not ideal either.

Anyway, thanks for you help already.

Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

Q63850327

Q63850327 ... could you please add an English description too? Taylor 49 (talk) 12:04, 14 August 2019 (UTC)

Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Nw520,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikidata and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Reminder: Community Insights Survey

Share your experience in this survey

Hi Nw520,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Corrupted dates

Hello, this date has invalid format. Could you fix this and other corrupted dates? — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 15:11, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ivan A. Krestinin, thanks for informing me. I've just corrected all items with award received (P166)Instrument of the Year (Q48757486). --Nw520 (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Thank you! — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Merge "Jugendverkehrsschule" with "traffic park"

Hey, in 2018 you created Q15821982 (Jugendverkehrsschule) but there was already an object "traffic park" (Q3490443). Could you have a look on this objects and merge them? I tried for myself but I'm not familiar with wikidata... Thanks! --SupapleX (talk) 19:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi SupapleX,

I'd like to highlight that Q15821982 was actually created by a bot since there has been an unlinked Wikipedia article. Though you are right, in 2018 I already noticed that there was also an item on traffic parks and decided against merging. I think that there's a slight difference between "Jugendverkehrsschulen" (literally youth traffic schools) and traffic parks as "Jugendverkehrsschulen" are the institutions that teach children how to ride their bicycle while traffic parks are the - I'm copying the description from OSM - scaled down streets that may be used for traffic safety education or as a type of a playground. So personally I won't perform the merge since I think that those two items don't exactly describe the same thing. --Nw520 (talk) 19:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Alles klar, kein Problem. Ich kam darauf, weil ich Interwiki-Links/Sprachverknüpfungen zwischen DE:Jugendverkehrsschule und dem EN:Traffic park-Artikelraum herstellen wollte. Nach deiner Logik würdest du dann wahrscheinlich auch darauf verzichten? Vielleicht lässt sich das Problem umgehen, in dem es eine Seite "Verkehrsgarten" gibt, die in das traffic-park-Datenobjekt eingegliedert wird und dann auf die Jugendverkehrsschule weiterleitet... (Da ich leider in den letzten Jahren nur wenig in Wikipedia aktiv war, fehlt mir gerade das Wissen und die Routine, das zu tun bzw. das Wissen, wie/ob man einen Sprachlink auch auf andere Weise herstellen kann als über das Wikidata-Objekt...) --SupapleX (talk) 11:50, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi SupapleX, die Auslegung der beiden Datenobjekte ist natürlich nur meine Interpretation. Falls du meinst, dass eine solche Unterscheidung nicht notwendig ist, kann man die Diskussion auch ins Forum verschieben, um weitere Meinungen einzuholen. Datenobjekte mit Weiterleitungen in der WP zu verknüpfen ist leider derzeit "nicht" (=nur mit Tricks) möglich. Verkehrsgarten ist in der deWP bereits als Weiterleitung erstellt - die Vorlage Wikidata-Weiterleitung habe ich gerade eingesetzt. Zum Verknüpfen müsste man die Weiterleitung aus dem Artikel rausnehmen, dann verknüpfen, dann die Weiterleitung wieder reinmachen. Ich bin kein WP-Beitragender, daher weiß ich nicht wie die WP-Community zu soetwas steht. Sprachlinks jenseits von WD-Datenobjekten sind nicht mehr im Einsatz. --Nw520 (talk) 12:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

P2013 = novalue, and without any qualifiers to explain why needed

e.g. here, I wonder why do you think adding such an unsourced novalue is needed (at the very least, this isn't country (P17) to which at least novalue is forced for every Antarctica related items per WD:ATA), every properties' values can be by default novalue just if you don't add them, and manually add too many novalue properties can eventually be considered as abuses. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 01:16, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

@Liuxinyu970226

> I wonder why do you think adding such an unsourced novalue

I've just added a source: "No Farcebook, though. I hate Farcebook."

> every properties' values can be by default novalue

I doubt that. Most properties' values could be by default somevalue but according to my understanding not necessarily novalue since novalue is a stronger statement than somevalue and makes a claim that an information is not just unknown but actually non-existent.

> can eventually be considered as abuses

I'm not sure why you felt the need to stress that. To me that statement felt quite reproachful. Personally, I would prefer you to be a little less confrontational in your first contact with an user. --Nw520 (talk) 11:21, 4 August 2020 (UTC)

We sent you an e-mail

Hello Nw520,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:46, 25 September 2020 (UTC)

You did not "undo"

You claim you undid one of my edits... You did not. The award existed twice. Thanks, 20:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC)  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by GerardM (talk • contribs) at 20:00, 3 October 2020 (UTC).

GerardM I suppose you're talking about 1286064881. What do you mean by "The award existed twice"? If I'm not mistaken, before your edit there already was the statement Friedel Grützmacher (Q101181)award received (P166)Officer's Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany (Q10905334), then you've added the same one again (although that award is only rewarded once per person) which I have reverted not only for this item but for well more than a thousand. Honestly, I don't really see the issue — could you please point it out more clearly.

"You did not": I can hardly revert something using the revert function without making changes. And looking at the diff of 1286064881 and the change in file size which I've reduced by 415 bytes I'd claim that I in fact did undo one of your edits. --Nw520 (talk) 20:34, 3 October 2020 (UTC)

Technically you are wrong. It was a duplicate of the same award. Given that awards are not added individually but most often as part of a batch job, the duplicate is not noticed. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:17, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

GerardM I cannot understand in which way I'm supposed be "technically" wrong. I have reverted your change so that what you've added was removed by me, nothing more and nothing less. Removing that duplicate claim means in my interpretation that the subject received the award only once rather than twice so of course semantics are changed to. And I can't understand why it should be relevant that your changes were part of a batch job. Of course, duplicate claims (which yield no more information than other already existing statements) are noticeable, for example in SPARQL-queries, and of course duplicate claims in batch jobs can be avoided by pre-filtering and checking the changes, or at least be undone as quickly as possible to actively prevent them from being "not noticed"; this of course applies to WiDaR too.

This one manual reversal was only to inform you of my systematic edits so if you have no criticism on the actual result of my reversal of more than 1000 of changes or in other words have no interest in having the duplicate award readded, I see no need to discuss the matter further. --Nw520 (talk) 11:04, 4 October 2020 (UTC)

German elections

Hi!

I contact you because you are the one listed as participant in the project on German elections. I have a spreadsheet with data on local (municipal) elections in some 75 German municipalities from 1970s to 2014. The data was compiled by a University Professor, who shared it with me, wishing it to be uploaded – if relevant – to Wikidata.

Would you have any interest in such a spreadsheet? If not, do you know someone who would? Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Hello Eric Luth (WMSE), thank you for contacting me. I'm certainly interested in having this data added to Wikidata but depending on what that dataset contains am not sure how difficult it would be to find a good way to model that data. Could you please elaborate what information that spreadsheet contains? Does it list results of parties, of candidates or other statistics? My main concern is whether and to what extend new items would have to created since especially for persons I'm not if they are notable enough.

I think it would also be a good idea to ask in the Forum whether there are more German-speaking people interested — if you want I can add a topic there. --Nw520 (talk) 18:05, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Nw520 Thanks for your reply! It would of course be ok with a topic on the forum. The dataset does not contain the individual elected candidates, but is a list of the population size, number of eligible to vote, what parties that took part, how many valid votes they got in numbers and percent, and how many seats that rendered, per municipality and year (for all elections starting in 1979 and up until 2014), for, if I counted correctly, 77 of the largest German municipalities. Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 07:30, 28 October 2020 (UTC)

@Eric Luth (WMSE): The thread in the forum unfortunately didn't receive any replies. Could you maybe send me the spreadsheet so that I can have a closer look at it and, if possible, import its data? --Nw520 (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@Nw520: I can! Can I send it to you via the email function here? Eric Luth (WMSE) (talk) 12:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

@Eric Luth (WMSE): Yes, sure. :) --Nw520 (talk) 12:49, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

USK 

Hi! When adding USK classifications to items would you kindly add the platform qualifier after the start time qualifier?--Trade (talk) 21:17, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

Hi Trade, sure, for new claims I'll use the order rating certificate ID (P2676), start time (P580), platform (P400). --Nw520 (talk) 21:21, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

QuickStatements

Hey, i messed up with my last QS. Mind giving me a helping hand? --Trade (talk) 11:43, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Trade:, please excuse my late reply. I'm not sure whether I have sufficient skill for helping you but I'd certainly like to try. Could you please tell me what exactly happened? --Nw520 (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

I need all instances of animated sitcom (Q4765080) followed by (P156) moved to genre (P136)--Trade (talk) 16:02, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

@Trade: I'm counting 371 statements which need to be migrated all of which have no qualifiers or sources. Does the number roughly fit? To summarize I'd change a statement from

followed by	animated sitcom edit 0 references add reference
		add value

to

genre	animated sitcom edit 0 references add reference
		add value

--Nw520 (talk) 16:14, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Now 367 statements since 4 were duplicates which I have already deleted. I'll start the QS-batch as soon as you've given me your okay. --Nw520 (talk) 16:22, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

[WMF Board of Trustees - Call for feedback: Community Board seats] Meetings with the Wikidata community

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is organizing a call for feedback about community selection processes between February 1 and March 14. While the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement have grown about five times in the past ten years, the Board’s structure and processes have remained basically the same. As the Board is designed today, we have a problem of capacity, performance, and lack of representation of the movement’s diversity. Our current processes to select individual volunteer and affiliate seats have some limitations. Direct elections tend to favor candidates from the leading language communities, regardless of how relevant their skills and experience might be in serving as a Board member, or contributing to the ability of the Board to perform its specific responsibilities. It is also a fact that the current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Western Europe. In the upcoming months, we need to renew three community seats and appoint three more community members in the new seats. This call for feedback is to see what processes can we all collaboratively design to promote and choose candidates that represent our movement and are prepared with the experience, skills, and insight to perform as trustees?

In this regard, two rounds of feedback meetings are being hosted to collect feedback from the Wikidata community. Two rounds are being hosted with the same agenda, to accomodate people from various time zones across the globe. We will be discussing ideas proposed by the Board and the community to address the above mentioned problems. Please sign-up according to whatever is most comfortable to you. You are welcome to participate in both as well!

• Round 1 - Feb 24, 4:00 pm UTC
• Round 2 - Mar 3, 4:00 am UTC
• Sign-up and meeting details: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Wikidata

Also, please share this with other volunteers who might be interested in this. Let me know if you have any questions. KCVelaga (WMF), 14:33, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Upload request

Hello.

Can you upload the newly created Dutch language article nl:Azerbeidzjaanse Wikipedia in Q58251, which I cannot do, because it is semi-protected.

Thank you in advance.

Yours sincerely, 31.200.20.163 22:47, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

 Done Added to Azerbaijani Wikipedia (Q58251) --Nw520 (talk) 22:49, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much. 31.200.20.163 22:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Call for participation in the interview study with Wikidata editors

Dear Nw520,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me at kholoudsaa@gmail.com or kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdmmFHaiB20nK14wrQJgfrA18PtmdagyeRib3xGtvzkdn3Lgw/viewform?usp=sf_link with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk)

software edition (Q92275711) == software version (Q20826013) ?

Hi Nw520,

I see that you have created software edition (Q92275711). Is it the same thing as software version (Q20826013), or is there a nuance I don't get ?

Thank you,

CaLéValab (talk) 19:49, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Hi CaLéValab, I intended software edition (Q92275711) to be about different software editions like for example "Windows 10 Home Edition" and "Windows 10 Professional". In contrast, if I'm understanding it correctly, software version (Q20826013) would rather describe the difference between "Windows 8" and "Windows 10" or more granularly, the difference between "MediaWiki 1.37" and "MediaWiki 1.36". --Nw520 (talk) 19:57, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nw520: thank you. Indeed, it seems justified to keep both then. I added a different from (P1889) to both entities, and a url reference to this talk section. CaLéValab (talk) 20:13, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Architectural ensemble

Hi, I see that you recently reverted my claim that world's fair (Q172754) is (among other things) a subclass of architectural ensemble (Q1497375) for being a case of conflation. Since I'm always eager to learn from my mistakes (in order to avoid repeating them), could you please clarify what was wrong with that claim?

By making that claim, I was trying to resolve a property constraints violation, that of the General Art and Industrial Exposition of Stockholm (Q1505471) being assigned an architectural style (P149) of Art Nouveau (Q34636). Looking through the list of item classes to which an architectural style may be assigned, I found "architectural ensemble" the most fitting one, as World's fairs have often (if not always) been arranged to illustrate a particular architectural style. Or is that just a local idea in Stockholm?

Someone else has since changed the class of General Art and Industrial Exposition of Stockholm (Q1505471) from World's Fair to exhibition (Q464980), but that makes little difference in this respect.

If a World's Fair can in no way be considered an architectural ensemble, do you see any other relationship between these two classes? I mean, there are usually buildings erected in such a venue, some of them even being left standing after the exhibition has ended, and those buildings are certainly works of architecture, so there must be some relationship, right?

The issue could of course have been resolved in other ways, but right now all I want to know is why this particular solution of mine was wrong. --SM5POR (talk) 10:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Scripted Undo of Ericmclachlan's changes

Hi @Nw520:

It seems you are rolling back changes made by myself yesterday.

I'm actively trying to fix the underlying issue and I'm concerned your script is going to make my repair harder to do.

At the very least, are you able to stop the reverts at a particular timepoint?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ericmclachlan (talk • contribs) at 22:50, 9 February 2022 (UTC).

Hello Ericmclachlan, those were manual changes so no need to worry, I won't do any more reverts so that your repairs are not disturbed. --Nw520 (talk) 23:03, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Ah, OK. That's great. Thanks for confirming that. And thank you for being considerate to my needs. I sincerely appreciate it. Eric McLachlan (talk) 23:04, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

Meine Bearbeitung an der Seite Q1724

Der Eintrag zeigte "Potenzielle Probleme: Eigenschaftseinschränkung "keiner von" ... Landeshauptstadt ..." und so habe ich P279 statt P31 verwendet. why not? --Beegies (talk) 14:58, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hallo Beegies und danke für die Kontaktaufnahme. Soweit ich sehe, hast du die Änderungen auch an sonstigen (ehemaligen) Instanzen von state capital in Germany (Q14784328) durchgeführt. Die Grundidee der Einschränkung, die dir angezeigt wurde, wurde im Januar 2022 von Lectrician1 hinzugefügt, Landeshauptstadt konkret folgte kurz darauf. Ich vermute mal, dass die Intention dahinter ist, dass die Aussage, dass eine Stadt eine Landeshauptstadt ist, gar nicht mehr über instance of (P31) erfasst werden soll, sondern ausschließlich über die Eigenschaft capital of (P1376) ausgedrückt werden soll. Ob das sinnvoll ist…, nun gut, nicht meine Schwerpunkt, nicht mein Bier.

Was aber konkreter Anlass für meine Verwunderung über deine Änderung war, ist die Verwendung in subclass of (P279). Die ist in meinen Augen inkorrekt, da eine (konkrete) Stadt eben keinen Klasse und somit auch keine Unterklasse ist. Möchte man der Einschränkung folgen, wäre in meinen Augen die Konsequenz, dass state capital in Germany (Q14784328) weder in instance of (P31) noch subclass of (P279) eingesetzt wird und schlicht ersatzlos entfernt wird. Zuvor sollte aber sichergestellt werden, dass ⟨Stadt⟩capital of (P1376)⟨(Bundes-)Land⟩ existiert. --Nw520 (talk) 17:00, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Danke für diese Erläuterungen. Die Vermutung über die Intention der angezeigten Probleme kann ich nachvollziehen. Meine Verwendung von P279 entferne ich nach Prüfung. Beegies (talk) 19:32, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Geocaching

@Nw520: @Frettie: Okay, I think I'm getting what this "conflation" issue is about now. I was going through the list of file formats supported by GPSBabel (Q1486544) to resolve the constraint issues, where geocaching (Q14930) was stated to be one of them. But then I suppose the proper solution is to create a new item for the EasyGPS (.loc) file format instead; do you agree? If so, I could do the same for the navigator brands, unless they are treated differently (like, defining a "Garmin format" as a file format family, distinct from the Garmin company, right)? A yes or no should be sufficient to tell me whether I'm on the right track.

But I would still like to see your comments on the architectural ensemble I asked about above, so that I can finally fix that one too. --SM5POR (talk) 11:08, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi, i think, thats correct. .Loc file type isnt geocacing file type, easygps file format is better. Thanks! --Frettie (talk) 12:20, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi SM5POR, file types are not my speciality but from what I can tell your proposed model seems to be reasonable. --Nw520 (talk) 14:07, 3 March 2022 (UTC)

screw gun (Q15807771)

Hallo NW,

eine screw gun im Englischen ist etwas ziemlich Spezifisches nur zum Schraubenhereindrehen.

https://waltcotoolsinc.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/6201A.jpg

--Union of Secret Surveillance Republics (talk) 14:00, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Hallo Union of Secret Surveillance Republics, besten Dank für deinen Hinweis. Verstehe ich richtig, dass man mit einer Screw Gun ausschließlich Schrauben hineindrehen kann, während der Schrauber sowohl hinein- als auch herausdrehen kann? In dem Fall würde ich dann ein zweites Datenobjekt für „Schrauber“ erstellen und den Seitenlink w:fi:Ruuvinväännin zu diesem verschieben. --Nw520 (talk) 20:32, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

military aircraft (Q216916) (label question)

As you seem to be knowledgeable of both German and aviation, could you please take a look at the German label/description of this item? It does not match the dewiki article name, but instead matches that for combat aircraft (Q19287541), which is a sub-class of the this one. It does not seem right to me, but not being fluent enough in German, I feel unqualified to change it. Thank you! Josh Baumgartner (talk) 02:51, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Hello Josh Baumgartner, “Kampfflugzeuge” are indeed a proper subclass of military aircraft (Q216916), namely armed aircrafts. I have changed the German label to the article's name. The description is fine and essentially equal to the English ones. Luxembourgish was conflated too, so I have created a new item for it. Thanks for the tip and best wishes. (Small warning: I'm not exactly knowledgeable about aviation. My participation in the discussion about aircraft types was rather an accident. :D). --Nw520 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Request

Hello.

Can you add in the Wikidata page "Azerbaijani Wikipedia" (Q58251), the Samogitian language edition bat-smg:Azėrbaidžianėitėška Vikipedėjė and the Furlan language edition fur:Vichipedie azeri? That page is semi-protected and I cannot add them as a result.

Yours sincerely, 31.200.13.90 09:19, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

@31.200.13.90:  Done Thank you! --Nw520 (talk) 09:28, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. 31.200.13.90 09:56, 1 September 2022 (UTC)

Q1473437

Hallo User:Nw520, Das von Dir eingefügte: "Arbeitsgebiet" im Beitrag "Sucharit Bhakdi" existiert nicht. COVID-19-Leugner ist kein Arbeitsgebiet. Wer in Rente ist, hat keinen Arbeitgeber und auch kein Arbeitsgebiet und keinen Arbeitsplatz, weil er kener Arbeit mehr nachgeht. Man kann das vielleicht unter "Interessensgebiet" oder "Hobbys" oder ähnliches reingeben, Arbeit ist es per Definition keine. Ich lösche daher die ganze Zeile raus und bitte Dich, eine passenderen Eintragung dafür zu suchen. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 04:24, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Ergibt Sinn, besten Dank für die Erläuterung. --Nw520 (talk) 09:09, 6 September 2022 (UTC)

Q6746

Das vermeintliche 2021er Logo von Citroen war nie ein offizielles, siehe https://www.media.stellantis.com/em-en/citroen/press/new-citroen-brand-identity-and-logo-signal-exciting-energetic-and-modern-era-to-come, also lass es bitte draußen, danke. Aidepikiw-nick (talk) 18:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Panoviewer

Panoviewer, das du derzeit via common.js lädst, wurde in ein Gadget umgewandelt. Damit die Abhängigkeiten auch geladen werden, würde ich empfehlen, das Gadget in den Einstellungen einzuschalten. :)

Falls du es weiterhin via common.js laden möchtest, solltest du mw.loader.load( 'ext.gadget.Panoviewer' ); benutzen, um die Abhängigkeiten mitzuladen.

- Nikki (talk) 12:40, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Vielen Dank für den Hinweis, Nikki. Meine Commons.js ist nun aktualisiert. Nw520 (talk) 21:17, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Isn't cycling equipment also sports equipment?

You changed cycling equipment (Q114715826)subclass of (P279)sports equipment (Q768186) to cycling equipment (Q114715826)subclass of (P279)equipment (Q10273457) and I wonder why. --Push-f (talk) 04:26, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Hello Push-f, yes, you are right, cycling equipment (Q114715826)subclass of (P279)sports equipment (Q768186) was indeed correct. The German label and linked article on Wikipedia at sports equipment (Q768186) seem to be conflating and I failed to properly check the English label. Sorry for that, I reverted my edit. --Nw520 (talk) 18:18, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for looking into it :) --Push-f (talk) 06:06, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

Deutscher Wetterdienst

Sorry I, do not understand why you have reverted my edit as it is referenced by https://www.dwd.de/DE/leistungen/jahresberichte_dwd/jahresberichte_pdf/jahresbericht_2012.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=2#page=94 directly from DWD? It says clearly that it was signed by the RFA president on November 11, 1952 and promulgated on the November 29. According to your comment, you can to change the founding date to November 29, 1952 not revert to only 1952. Pierre cb (talk) 23:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Pierre cb, the link you've used as reference indeed states that the constitutive law was signed on 11 November 1952 and promulgated on 29 November. However, I'm not entirely sure when the law has actually come into force. Typically, for German laws there's a paragraph which mandates on which date it comes into force, but for the original DWD-Gesetz no date was defined. Deutscher Bundestag and the Handbuch der Rechtsförmigkeit cite Grundgesetz Art. 82 II Satz 2 stating that, if not mandated otherwise, a law comes into effect 14 days after its promulgation. --Nw520 (talk) 01:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

My German is minimal so I cannot read most of your links, so I am not arguing with the details. I am not about the do further editing on the subject. However, your explanation looks very formal, for me the moment the law is signed by the President or the day of its promulgation seems to me the foundation of the DWD. After that, it could have taken years for all the the services to cooperate and act as one, it does not matter. Pierre cb (talk) 04:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

German Shooting and Archery Federation (Q1205299): member count (P2124)

Du hast die Mitgliederzahl von German Shooting and Archery Federation (Q1205299) auf 20 gesetzt, weil im Lobbyregister des dt. Bundestags steht „Mitglieder: 20“. Das bezieht sich aber vmtl. auf die Anzahl der Lobbyisten im Bundestag, die Eigenschaft member count (P2124) bezieht sich aber darauf, wie viele Menschen Mitglied in der Organisation sind.

Für die Anzahl der Lobbyisten sollte also eher eine andere Eigenschaft gewählt werden. Evtl. auch eher als Eigenschaft von German Bundestag (Q154797) mit German Shooting and Archery Federation (Q1205299) als Qualifier.

Siehe https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q1205299&diff=1623123614&oldid=1620830561&diffmode=source --Floscher (talk) 13:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hallo Floscher, ich gehe eher davor aus, dass sich die 20 hier auf die Anzahl der Mitgliedsorganisationen des German Shooting and Archery Federation (Q1205299) bezieht (i.d.R. Landesverbände). Unter dieser Annahme hätte der Verband dann auch keinen unmittelbaren „menschlichen“ Mitglieder sondern nur mittelbar über die untergeordneten Gliederungen. --Nw520 (talk) 14:31, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Gerade nachgezählt, es gibt in der Tat 20 Landesverbände. --Nw520 (talk) 14:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nw520: Danke für die Änderung. Ja, mit organization (Q43229) als Einheit macht es natürlich Sinn. --Floscher (talk) 14:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

link einfügen etc

Hallo, da ich mich hier nicht so gut auskenne, kannst du bei Beeren (Q116502089) den link/die Quelle in der dortigen disk richtig eintragen. Ich bin da gescheitert. lG Hannes 24 (talk) 16:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

noch was: bei Adelsgeschlechtern wird die Verknüpfung „von (aus)“ beim Anlegen als „problematisch“ gemeldet. Welche Funktion wäre das besser? --Hannes 24 (talk) 16:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Hallo Hannes 24, Adelsgeschlechter sprengen leider völlig meinen Kompetenzrahmen, insofern würde ich vorschlagen im Forum mal nachzufragen (eine passende Arbeitsgruppe konnte ich leider nicht finden, Wikidata:WikiProject Medieval Nobility ist zu spezialisiert). --Nw520 (talk) 04:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

Bastide de Tour sainte (Q2887699)

The tower named "Tour sainte" is NOT included in the domain named "Bastide de Tour sainte". A picture of it should not be used to illustrate the "bastide". For more, if you can read it, see :

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Bastide_de_Tour_Sainte

Fr.Latreille (talk) 23:10, 5 March 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for removal. Fr.Latreille (talk) 17:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)

TK Development

You removed link to description of two companies, but in changes description you don't explain why ? Can you explain this change ? (p.s. please answer below with call my nick with @) Krzysztof Popławski (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

@KrzysztofPoplawski: Could you please provide me with the Q-IDs of the items you are referring to? --Nw520 (talk) 13:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Sure. Q110064625, Q110064612 Krzysztof Popławski (talk) 13:04, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Krzysztof Popławski, I've moved the URLs from the generic described at URL (P973)-property to the specialised North Data ID (P10306)-property. --Nw520 (talk) 13:06, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank You. Good to know that North Data have their own property. Thanks for change and explain. Krzysztof Popławski (talk) 13:15, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

Sucharit Bhakdi

Hallo Nw520, Deine Rücksetzung im Beitrag Sucharit Bhakdi ist nicht korrekt. COVID-19-Leugnung ist keine "Eigenschaft" und kein "Arbeitsgebiet. Das kann wo anders hin, aber sicher nicht unter "Arbeitsgebiet" oder "Eigenschaft", weil es eine solche "Arbeit" nicht gibt. Bitte stell den ursprünglichen Zustand wieder her. Danke. SG, Asurnipal (talk) 04:58, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Hallo Asurnipal, mit Änderung vom September 2022 wird field of work (P101) nicht mehr genutzt. Insofern kann ich nicht recht nachvollziehen, welche Änderung du revertiert sehen möchtest. --Nw520 (talk) 11:45, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Bundesverdienstkreuze

Hallo Nw520,

hast du zufällig eine Statistik über die Vollständigkeit der Bundesverdienstkreuzträger bei Wikidata?

Viele Grüße-- U. M. Owen (talk) 10:13, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Hallo U. M. Owen, leider habe ich keine solche Statistik. Zwar übernehme ich Änderungen an der Wikipedia in Wikidata, aber die Listen dort sind leider nicht vollständig. Nw520 (talk) 10:42, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Wäre eigentlicher jeder Träger relevant? Erstellt du Datenobjekte für fehlende Personen?--U. M. Owen (talk) 10:43, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Hallo U. M. Owen, ich lege in diesem Fall keine Datenobjekte für fehlende Personen an. Das hängt vor allem damit zusammen, dass ich mich etwas schwer mit den Relevanzkriterien tue. Ich würde mal behaupten, dass man die Frage inwieweit Preisträger relevant sind ganz gut im Forum sondieren kann. --Nw520 (talk) 10:57, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

Juristischer Sitz vs. Hauptverwaltung

Hallo Nw520, dürfte ich Dich – wenn es die Zeit erlaubt – um die Mithilfe bei einer Präzisierung bitten, die leider meine technischen Wikidata-Fähigkeiten übersteigt? Es geht in Werteunion booster club (Q31837984) um die Trennung von juristischem Sitz (Vereinssitz) und Hauptverwaltung. Zur Zeit ist unter headquarters location (P159) beides eingetragen, Plankstadt und Worms. Ich habe erfolglos versucht, seat (Q470540) (juristischer Sitz, der Wert dazu ist Plankstadt, Fundstelle existiert) als neue, zusätzliche Aussage zu etablieren, es wurde jedoch sogleich mit P159, der Aussage Hauptverwaltung, fusioniert. Worms ist im Impressum der Website lediglich mit Postfach als Kontaktadresse angegeben. Ob sich in Worms auch effektiv eine Hauptverwaltung befindet ist nicht erwiesen. Wie kann man das korrekt darstellen, weißt Du einen Rat? Gonepteryx (talk) 15:44, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Hallo Gonepteryx, keine ganz einfache Frage, würde ich mal behaupten. Soweit ich sehe, gibt es in Wikidata nur die Eigenschaft headquarters location (P159) mit der (mindestens de facto) sowohl der rechtliche Hauptsitz als auch die Hauptverwaltung modelliert wird. Eine Möglichkeit das zu trennen wäre die Verwendung von Qualifikatoren. Im Falle der Werteunion würde das dann die Aussagen ergeben:

headquarters location	Worms edit applies to partobject has role seat 0 references add reference
		add value

headquarters location	Plankstadt edit applies to partobject has role legal seat 0 references add reference
		add value

Sauberer wäre der Vorschlag einer neuen Eigenschaft, dies müsste dann aber in größerem Plenum besprochen werden. Beste Grüße! --Nw520 (talk) 17:00, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Hallo Nw520, vielen Dank für den Hilfsvorschlag. Nach einigem Ausprobieren hab ich eine Lösung gefunden, wie sie nun im Datenobjekt steht. Seltsamerweise kann man legal seat (Q44623403) nur als Qualifikator, nicht jedoch als Aussage verwenden. Bei Verwendung von applies to part (P518) als Qualifikator für den Vereinssitz kam wieder die Warnung vor einem „potenziellen Problem“, so wie es auch weiterhin bei der Aussage zum Vereinsregistereintrag der Fall ist. Alles in allem bleibt Wikidata irgendwie eine „black box“ für mich. Gonepteryx (talk) 18:34, 23 January 2024 (UTC)

Hallo Gonepteryx, ich glaube hinsichtlich der Terminologie weichen wir etwas voneinander ab:

Eigenschaft/Prädikat (beginnt immer mit P)	Wert/Objekt (beginnt meist mit Q) edit Qualifikator-Eigenschaft (immer P) Qualifikator-Wert (meist Q) 0 references add reference
		add value

Prädikate und Qualifikator-Eigenschaften können nur Eigenschaften sein und die Kennungen für Eigenschaften beginnen alle mit „P“. Objekte/Werte sind in den meisten Fällen Datenobjekte, deren Kennungen mit „Q“ beginnen. legal seat (Q44623403) ist ein Datenobjekt und kann daher nur „auf der rechten Seite“ stehen, also als Wert; nicht aber als Prädikat genutzt werden.
Eine Aussage ist alles mitsamt Eigenschaft und Wert (=Behauptung) sowie Qualifikatoren.

In der Tat wirft applies to part (P518) einen Fehler, ich habe stattdessen mal object has role (P3831) genutzt, da mir location (P276) in dem Kontext nicht korrekt erschien. Das „Objekt“ in object has role (P3831) bezieht sich hier auf SubjektPrädikatObjekt, z.B. Werteunion booster club (Q31837984)headquarters location (P159)Plankstadt (Q81959); somit lässt sich die Aussage verbalisieren als „Plankstadt fungiert als Satzungssitz der sog. Werteunion“.

Auf jeden Fall schon einmal besten Dank dafür, dass du dich auf Wikidata einlässt – kein leichtes Unterfangen, da stimmen dir sicherlich viele (auch hierzuwiki) zu. --Nw520 (talk) 00:30, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the WQT UI requirements elicitation online workshop

Dear Nw520,

I hope you are doing well,

We are a group of researchers from King’s College London working on developing WQT (Wikidata Quality Toolkit), which will support a diverse set of editors in curating and validating Wikidata content.

We are inviting you to participate in an online workshop aimed at understanding the requirements for designing effective and easy-to-use user interfaces (UI) for three tools within WQT that can support the daily activities of Wikidata editors: recommending items to edit based on their personal preferences, finding items that need better references, and generating entity schemas automatically for better item quality.

The main activity during this workshop will be UI mockup sketching. To facilitate this, we encourage you to attend the workshop using a tablet or laptop with PowerPoint installed or any other drawing tools you prefer. This will allow for a more interactive and productive session as we delve into the UI mockup sketching activities.

Participation is completely voluntary. You should only take part if you want to and choosing not to take part will not disadvantage you in any way. However, your cooperation will be valuable for the WQT design. Please note that all data and responses collected during the workshop will be used solely for the purpose of improving the WQT and understanding editor requirements. We will analyze the results in an anonymized form, ensuring your privacy is protected. Personal information will be kept confidential and will be deleted once it has served its purpose in this research.

The online workshop, which will be held on April 5th, should take no more than 3 hours.

If you agree to participate in this workshop, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form to register your interest https://forms.office.com/e/9mrE8rXZVg Then, I will contact you with all the instructions for the workshop.

For more information about my project, please read this page: https://king-s-knowledge-graph-lab.github.io/WikidataQualityToolkit/

If you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me at the email address mentioned above.

Thank you for considering taking part in this project.

Regards Kholoudsaa (talk) 17:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)