User talk:Randykitty/Archive 1

Welcome to Wikidata, Randykitty!

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 familarise yourself with:

• Wikidata:About – About the project.
• Wikidata:Introduction – Another introduction to the project.
• Help:Contents – The main help portal for editing and using the site.
• Wikidata:Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Wikidata:Tools – A collection of user-developed JS tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. 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, —Theopolisme 16:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Also...

Hello, Randykitty! I am just letting you know that I have added the autopatroller flag to your account, as you are a trusted user on Wikidata. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me or leave a message at the Project chat. Thanks, —Theopolisme 16:37, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

• Thank you! --Randykitty (talk) 16:48, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Responded at User talk:Theopolisme#Q4218532. -- Cheers, Riley Huntley 16:55, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Q27576859

Hey Randykitty, this is my response to your request on my talk page (Topic:Tyyqlt6199fgnulw).

Wikidata has its own notability criteria. They do of course somewhat differ from the versions in other Wikimedia projects, and they do let space for items about entities that are not notable in any Wikipedia. One can basically check against three sub-criteria, given here in the same order as in the policy page:

1. If the item has a (valid) sitelink, it is notable (i.e. almost anything that is notable in any Wikimedia project is notable here as well).
2. This one is the relevant aspect here. The items refers to a “clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity” (no doubt that the artist is real, though I don’t want to judge about her work), and it “can be described using serious and publicly available references”. We treat those external identifiers as “serious references”, which are maintained and issued by some independent authority. For Union List of Artist Names ID (P245) this is the case, and you can find this identifier in Terry Ananny (Q27576859). However, social media links such as a X username (P2002) are not issued by an authority, they can just be registered by the subject itself and are not deemed “serious” in terms of the notability criteria.
3. If the item is in use by another item (or, in some cases, in other Wikimedia projects such as Commons), it has “structural need” and is notable as well.

An item is notable (and thus not deleted) if one or more of the three cases apply.

The second aspect is perhaps the most important one for the part of Wikidata which is not primarily support of Wikipedias. This project does indeed aim to be valuable for other purposes as well and hosts content which will very likely never see any Wikipedia, thus many large-scale data sets are imported to Wikidata and then used by external users via the Wikidata Query Service and other machine-readable interfaces. The external identifiers play an important role to unambiguously identify the entity, tell it apart from others which can be very similar (think of persons named “John Doe”), and they help us to assess notability of course.

Okay, lots of text now. I hope I was able to explain the rationale behind my decision, otherwise you may of course ask for more details. I’ll take this talk page on my watchlist for a while. Regards, MisterSynergy (talk) 21:50, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

• Thanks, got it. At first sight a bit unexpected, but, yes, Wikidata is not only here to be a repository for Wikipedias. --Randykitty (talk) 06:52, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Thales Alenia Space (Q128356)

Bonjour, je vous prie d'aller voir ce que je viens de dire dans la PdD de l'article concernant la photo d'illustration de l'article.--Kasos fr (talk) 07:04, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Deletion of images from Wikidata items

Hi Randykitty,

I noticed that you deleted valid image (P18) statements from items ([1] and [2]) and then listed the images for deletion on Commons for being "out of scope".

Please note that Wikidata is a WMF project that uses Commons and valid statements should not be deleted from Wikidata.
--- Jura 10:48, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

• Weird thing is, that Wikidata will not delete an item if it has an image on Commons and Commons will not delete an item if it is "used" on Wikidata. A perfect catch-22 situation that permits non-notable (or even promotional) images to linger without any possibility to get rid of the trash. --Randykitty (talk) 10:54, 18 August 2018 (UTC)
  • The item can get deleted even with an image on it.
    --- Jura 10:57, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

• Not when I tried this in the past. In any case, I've lost most of my confidence in Wikidata and only come here if it impedes my work on other projects. Randykitty (talk) 11:06, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

• I can have a look at the previous one. Which was it?
  --- Jura 11:22, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

• Thanks for the offer, but for the life of me, I can't remember. This probably would have been a case where I deleted a biography on enWP, which had a portrait on Commons, so it was likely not something that I would remember anyway (like the two cases above. Even now I'd have to look at the items to recall the names). It may have been a while ago, as I said, I don't come here that much any more... Randykitty (talk) 11:49, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘ @Jura1:, here's an example for an item that just because it has some identifiers was not deleted here and because of that the out-of-scope image on Commons will be kept, too. The article on enWP was deleted after an AFD and I don't see why the WD item needs an image holding up its deletion from Commons... --Randykitty (talk) 05:23, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

• Well, Wikidata is somewhat biased toward anyone who wrote something that ended up in a library, especially the LC. Some of the pictures on Commons aren't that great, but nice ones are good to have if a person's achievements get better known later. This somewhat suffers from the absence of good images of people in the prime of life.
  --- Jura 05:56, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

• Which confirms my opinion that in contrast to WP, WD is an "indiscriminate collection of information"... And this leaks over to other projects, such as Commons being forced to keep this image of a non-notable person, which it would never do if WD didn't exist. And keeping something on the assumption that it will become notable in future just opens the door to all kinds of abuse. --Randykitty (talk) 16:46, 25 August 2018 (UTC)

Do you realise that professor is not an occupation

Hoi, a profession relates to the work that you do and consequently behavourial geneticist is one. Professor is a rank, and consequently not a profession. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 05:30, 14 September 2019 (UTC)