Hi, I've seen you added lot's of statements to Computer-Programs. Maybe you want to become member of Wikidata:WikiProject Informatics or Wikidata:WikiProject Informatics/FLOSS. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 14:19, 10 November 2017 (UTC)
It looks like you've added a lot of good statements on software items; thanks! Just wanted to ask about your removal of instance of (P31) Linux distribution (Q131669) and operating system (Q9135) on numerous Linux distributions (example). These should be an instance of something, and Linux distribution (Q131669) seems like the right choice for a Linux distribution. Was this a mistake or what is the intention? -LiberatorG (talk) 09:24, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- I'm glad you ask. For one thing, I wanted to remove the redundant instance of:q9135 in case of instance of:q131669. Not sure why I deleted q131669. I will investigate and repair. Maybe it was just an accidental change of sign. Thanks for catching that.--Reseletti (talk) 09:39, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
- After some digging I'm inclined to blame Petscan. That run was still open, I'm sure I entered the right command (-P31|Q9135). It even removed some P31:Q20983788, and P31:Q920890, and P31:Q170584, ... and several others. WTF. I wonder if and how this can be reproduced for an effective bugreport, if it happened before, if it has to do with internet connectivity problems, ...--Reseletti (talk) 09:58, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
After recent changes (example, example) some software licenses are no longer an instance of anything. I would expect them to be instances of some subclass of software license (Q207621). A mistake? -LiberatorG (talk) 00:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
- Not really. Having GPLv3 as "edition or translation of" instead of "instance of" GPL seems like the right thing. We could additionally make them "instance of":"version, edition, or translation" but that would just be adding messy redundancy wouldn't it? Or is an "instance of" statement somehow a mandatory thing?--Reseletti (talk) 00:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think there is an official policy on it, but instance of (P31) is usually expected on items that aren't a class (classes should have subclass of (P279)). Also there are many queries that check whether the license is an instance of a free software license; in fact many of the examples here do this (look for P275), and the proposal on the talk page (see last query on page) recommends using this as the primary means of identifying free/open source software; your changes have broken that suggested query. So if you want to change this you should bring it to the talk page first. -LiberatorG (talk) 01:19, 31 August 2019 (UTC)
Why are you removing platform from a ton of things? For example this edit removed platform but the statement for Google Play Store app ID (P3418) requires platform to be set. You created a constraint violation. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- oh god you've made changes like these thousands of times. please stop. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- The operating system goes under its own property, P306. The platform property is meant for something different.--Reseletti (talk) 01:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- The platform property is for computing platforms like e.g. ARM or x86_64, AFAIK.--Reseletti (talk) 01:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
The allowed values for platform (P400) include: Microsoft Windows, macOS, Linux, DOS, etc. Please revert your batches and please discuss bulk changes beforehand in the future. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:42, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Look at en:Template:Infobox software, for example (its platform field is likely the ancestor of P400): "following information: Processor architecture ... Software frameworks [e.g.] Java platform, .NET Framework, Adobe Flash, Adobe AIR, Microsoft Silverlight or XUL"--Reseletti (talk) 01:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- It doesn't matter what some template on enwiki says. Clearly here it means something different. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
You can also look at explanations here: Wikidata:WikiProject_Informatics/Software/Properties and lots of examples by other editors, but really the existence of the special property P306 should mean enough explanation.--Reseletti (talk) 01:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- you are creating constraint violations. clearly someone disagrees with you. hell the allowed values listed on platform (P400) disagrees with you. I'm going to raise this to the admins if you don't revert. Look at Wikidata:WikiProject_Video_games for examples of platform being used in the opposite manner as you suggest. There is room for doubt. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:56, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- an 8 year old property creation proposal commented on by like 3 people is not the basis for how we catalog data today. It is clear that at least for some kinds of software we use platform to refer to classes of operating systems (iOS / Android / Windows / etc). As is shown on the project page and on the property itself. Maybe we should change how we catalog things but doing it unilaterally and creating constraint violations is a bad way to do that. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:17, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Also the examples given for P400 are in agreement with my other evidence. I'm cleaning up after some quick and dirty mass imports from WP and other external databases. What violation are you talking about?--Reseletti (talk) 02:26, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- @User:Reseletti: the constraint from Google Play Store app ID (P3418). If you look around you will see that these usages are not stray or due to import errors. This usage is part of the ontology, especially for video games. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:29, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- platform (P400) gives the example valid values of "Microsoft Windows" and "Linux" which is exactly the kind of thing you are removing. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:31, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- yes but look at the value type constraint listed below. BrokenSegue (talk) 02:40, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- look the most common value for platform (P400) to take is windows (macOS is number 2). See this query. Your claims are just not right. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:06, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
I'm not removing the information. I move it to the obviously more appropriate location. I've demonstrated an existing consensus: I've referred you to a handful of pieces of evidence. Are you saying these people are all wrong? Would you rather have P400:Windows next to P306:Windows?--Reseletti (talk) 03:23, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- yes I would prefer redundant information. that way queries for the information will not miss it and the items will align with other similar items. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:25, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Your statistic is not an argument: One person can destroy your statistic in a single mass edit. It doesn't mean that the existing state of things is the best to have.--Reseletti (talk) 03:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC) The only argument from you that I can see so far is the constraint violation for the Android ID. If you go through the edit history for it, you can see that it has been changed back and forth and there is no discussion let alone consensus on this constraint. It looks to me like it is not formulated optimally and switching it to the more specific property would be a due improvement there as well.--Reseletti (talk) 03:48, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- ok well you can think all this but please don't re-do this without trying to find a consensus on what the correct final state should be. editing thousands of items based on what you think is right especially when others do not agree is bad form. BrokenSegue (talk) 03:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
And the only one of my evidence that you have actually disputed is the enwiki:Template. Let me remind you that the primary mission of Wikidata is to unify data for those information boxes.--Reseletti (talk) 03:57, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- don't make large changes applicable to tons of items without seeking input from others first. it causes needless conflict. BrokenSegue (talk) 04:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Your batch removing platform (P400) from video game items goes contrary to the current documented practice of Wikidata:WikiProject_Video_games. If it’s not done already, please revert all such changes, and going forward please discuss such things with all relevant wikiprojects beforehand. Notified participants of WikiProject Video games. Thanks, Jean-Fred (talk) 07:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- And since you have been asking above for "evidence", here is some:
- the EntitySchema for video game (Q7889): E272 (E272)
- the documented data model at Wikidata:WikiProject Video games/Properties.
- one of our main statistics dashboard, which slices along P400, at Wikidata:WikiProject Video games/Statistics/Platform
- which also shows 14K+ uses of Windows, 3K+ of macOS, 2K+ of DOSthere were
- Many property constraints on eg Steam application ID (P1733), Steam application ID (P1733), Abandonia identifier (P4962), PCGamingWiki ID (P6337)
- Per Property_talk:P400, this is used on dozens of Wikipedia templates. It’s also used by external reusers such as vglist (Q96096761). Really, not sure I could come up with more ways to be disruptive to Wikiproject Video games than what you are doing. Even after my message above (and BrokenSegue many other messages), you kept your disruptive edits (Special:Diff/1357629436). This is not collaborative behaviour. Please stop. Jean-Fred (talk) 09:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Jean-Fred (talk) 09:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Edits have stopped (for now) − good. Please revert your changes ASAP, thanks! Jean-Fred (talk) 11:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- The really annoying thing about that particular edit is they removed the reference for the data. Even if we wanted to move information from platform to OS we wouldn't want to lose the reference information. This is just bad all around. Please undo everything. BrokenSegue (talk) 12:12, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
- Edits have stopped (for now) − good. Please revert your changes ASAP, thanks! Jean-Fred (talk) 11:35, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
@Reseletti: As you just ignored the comments and continued the removal of the values I notified this discussion to the Administrators_noticeboard. Please stop the removal unbtil there is understanding between users that the removal is good/bad idea. --Zache (talk) 09:45, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
While I appreciate the (presumably) well-intentioned edits here, please always consult the relevant WikiProject(s) and gain consensus before making any changes as broad as this. I'm the maintainer of vglist and this would have broken _a ton_ of my data reuse. It would also have broken a bunch of my scripts I've written over the last two years to import data into Wikidata. Breaking changes are fine when the community agrees on them, but I'd at least like some forewarning. Please follow standard etiquette and consensus-gathering in the future. Nicereddy (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Platform is a very important property for pretty much everything that has a digital download on here. No harsh feelings but I don't know why you'd do that. AntisocialRyan (talk) 13:39, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
Phew. I'm still not sure I understand the extent of the problem people are seeing here, i.e. what exactly still needs discussion and what not... It seems like most of those who complained would have been fine with the target state of things I was interrupted working towards. :(
- @Jean-Fred: I appreciate your input. It makes the discussion feel more productive and less frustrating. However, it was never the plan to "remove" anything... Are you mostly pissed and would prefer if I'd just go away or would you like to clear up more things for me?
- @Jean-Fred: Some explanation: From BrokenSegue's points that I could accept, at first it looked like for the time being I can just settle for redundancy in case of the platform:Android and solve at least part of the perceived problem. So I just moved on to the next OS, while checking that, of the understandable parts of the criticism I got, there was not an analog problem with the next one. Then I let my last batch finish before dealing with further shitstorm.
- @BrokenSegue: I see the problem with the source references. Pointers to accessible solutions that avoid manual copying are very welcome.
- @AntisocialRyan: @Zache: If I don't get you wrong, it looks like you didn't do any readup and missed the point.
- @Nicereddy: So, in your case, the problem is more than missing any P400 statement, but you'd just need reaction time when information on OS moves to P306. Am I getting that right?--Reseletti (talk) 10:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
- @Reseletti: Thank you for coming back. I know I (and others) reacted fairly strongly and negatively but I do understand you were trying to help. Maybe take a look at Property_talk:P306#Restrict_to_devices where fixing this is being discussed. As to the references being lost, I'm unaware of an easy way to do this short of writing a bot (which if we had consensus, I'm sure we could write). BrokenSegue (talk) 12:53, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
You didn't manage to be too convincing and I didn't see a willingness to look beyond your video-game bubble.
- @Reseletti: The problem is partially a lack of warning (and also a lack of consensus), but I'd also disagree with the change. I don't think splitting the existing statements up between Platforms and Operating Systems is particularly useful given how many existing items, scripts, etc. treat both "Xbox 360" and "Windows" as Platforms. "Platform" as it's used for video games in Wikidata pretty much matches how all other external databases use it (MobyGames, GiantBomb, IGDB, PCGamingWiki, etc.). I'm not aware of any video game database that makes a distinction between platform and operating system like this. It'd pretty much just complicate the data model of Wikidata for very minimal benefit, while making it more difficult to map data between external databases and Wikidata. -Nicereddy (talk) 00:40, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@Nicereddy: But outside of that video game world it's a common scheme, including here on Wikidata. And I assume that we want consistency of the data model throughout Wikidata.--Reseletti (talk) 07:42, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
- My "video-game bubble"? I contribute in a wide variety of spaces here including open source software and totally non-software related work. Perhaps you don't realize it but you continue to come off as rude. Maybe you didn't find me convincing but I was right and you should find some humility there. BrokenSegue (talk) 14:46, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
@BrokenSegue: :-O Humility, huh?.. Now that left me speechless. But that could explain a lot.
Okay, you were right. And you just couldn't admit that I had a point, too, and that's why we couldn't just proceed talking about that, right? because ... that would have been humiliating..?
I might also tend to play along with shit like that to some extent, and I'm sorry for that. I don't enjoy it.
I'm trying to be straight. And okay, my bad. I just thought I had pieced together an explanation for our diverging views: Yours was outside of my bubbles. But – humiliation is what this is about? ... What a wearying culture.--Reseletti (talk) 15:11, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
- I'm hoping again this is just a language barrier issue. When I say "humility" I mean that you should maybe apologize for your rudeness and accept that as a relative newcomer you perhaps don't fully understand procedures here. I do not mean you should be humiliated. From my perspective you are the one creating a negative atmosphere here. BrokenSegue (talk) 22:25, 25 February 2021 (UTC)
I wonder, what's the reason you did so 2 years ago? The title of that license on the apache.org is "APACHE LICENSE, VERSION 2.0", no word "software" included. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 06:03, 7 April 2021 (UTC)