User talk:Romaine/2017

Latest comment: 6 years ago by Lydia Pintscher (WMDE) in topic Wikidata weekly summary #292

Wikidata weekly summary #242 edit

Bureaucratship edit

There are currently only two active bureaucrats, resulting in slightly slower than ideal response times on the Bureaucrats' noticeboard. Would you accept being nominated for bureaucratship? --Yair rand (talk) 20:01, 2 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Yair rand, If you think there are no other (better) candidates that can do this, I am willing to do this. The processes on this wiki need to continue, and I think decisions need to be based on good arguments. Thank you for the confidence - Romaine (talk) 20:31, 2 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Thank you. Please accept the nomination here. --Yair rand (talk) 21:21, 2 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #242 edit

WikiConference edit

Have a great timeMechQuester (talk) 00:59, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

HI MechQuester, Thanks, but... who are you? And which WikiConference you refer to? Romaine (talk) 06:27, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Idk, I hate voted for you in your RFB so I still remember it. Other than that, We don't know each other, as far as I know. Im referencing meta:Wikimedia Conference 2017. MechQuester (talk) 14:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Yes I remember your vote, thank you for your support. So I guess we will meet in Berlin? Romaine (talk) 19:28, 11 January 2017 (UTC)Reply
Actually no. Im not going. Maybe wikimania in a few years. MechQuester (talk) 05:17, 12 January 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #243 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #244 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #245 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #246 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #247 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #248 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #249 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #250 edit

Automated edits of mountains edit

Please stop adding instance of (P31) mountain (Q8502) via QuickStatement, at least on items that already have mountain range (Q46831) or non-geologically related mountain range (Q1437459), as this is mostly wrong. The templates on Wikipedia are not used in a consistent way and many mountain ranges have the same infobox as mountains.

Koxinga (talk) 12:05, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Koxinga, All items where I added instance of (P31) mountain (Q8502) are those items that are categorised as mountain on a Wikipedia. None of these items where categorised as mountain range (Q46831) or non-geologically related mountain range (Q1437459). I agree that if something is a mountain range (Q46831) or a non-geologically related mountain range (Q1437459), it should not have the statement of instance of (P31) mountain (Q8502). But how to know that something is a mountain range (Q46831) or a non-geologically related mountain range (Q1437459), if a Wikipedia says it is a mountain (Q8502)... Romaine (talk) 14:02, 12 March 2017 (UTC)Reply
PS: I did already a check on which items I added the example you gave, and have fixed it at those items. Romaine (talk) 23:00, 18 April 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #251 edit

Weekly Summary #252 edit

edit conflict on Q28354703 - sorry about that! edit

I think we had a bit of edit conflict on Harry Forsblom's entry - I've removed one of the duplicates we each unknowingly added. Alex Cohn (talk) 17:21, 20 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Alex Cohn, Excellent! I had not noticed it was edited. Thank you for expending it even larger! If you expend items, try to make sure that the English label is also added, so that in other languages it can also be understood. Great work! :-) Romaine (talk) 17:25, 20 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #253 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #254 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #255 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #256 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #257 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #258 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #259 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #260 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #261 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #262 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #263 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #264 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #265 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #266 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #267 edit

MuseScore property edit

For MuseScore ID (P4097), would only OpenScore scores be allowed? Jc86035 (talk) 10:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hello Jc86035, No all scores can be connected. But you can wait with adding this property to items on Wikidata, there is a large import upcoming from the the MuseScore database and would be a waste of time to filter already added MuseScore items out. Thanks - Romaine (talk) 02:49, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply
Aren't most MuseScore.com scores unofficial/user-generated? I don't know anything about this import, but it seems odd to me to this on such a scale when many scores have multiple versions uploaded by different users and could potentially have licensing issues. Jc86035 (talk) 15:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #268 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #269 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #270 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #271 edit

Pontedera Teatro edit

You asked for help for your list. "Pontedera Teatro" is not clear. Pontedera is not a small town. There is a small theatre in the centre which is also a cinema (at least, so I remember when I was young) and there is another one on the east on Via Indipendenza. Recent events are usually scheduled in the latter one, which is big and modern... it is called "Teatro Era" I think. If you give more details, I can be 100% sure about that.--Alexmar983 (talk) 08:30, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Hi Alexmar983, This is how it comes out the database, and yes it is not always clear, sadly. The database item says the location has been used from 2003 to 2015 by Flemish theatre groups. If you need specific info, I perhaps can ask the database maintainers.
Does any of these two theatres you mention already an article in Wikipedia or an item in Wikidata? Romaine (talk) 08:36, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
The first one was "small", a cinema-theatre originally owned by the church. Than it was given to some private organization, see it:Pontedera#Teatro. The article on itwiki it:Cinema Teatro Roma points out its big number of international cooperations. The communist and socialist parties at the center of the town administration probably promoted some other public infrastructures besides their small political circles but it took time and only in recent years this new big, theatre was finally created. it:Teatro Era. website. I have been in the first one as a teen age boy, it was "old style", the other one is probably modernist.--Alexmar983 (talk) 08:51, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply
Apparently, the Roma was already closed in January 2015, but the "Era" opened only in 2008. Maybe the used both...--Alexmar983 (talk) 08:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Living in China with no google don't expect miracles from me. Maybe someone in Italy can google and get a more precise idea. I only got trash. But 99% is in one of those two theatre (or... both, who knows). --Alexmar983 (talk) 09:08, 1 August 2017 (UTC)Reply

Wikidata weekly summary #272 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #273 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #274 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #275 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #276 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #277 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #278 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #279 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #280 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #281 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #282 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #282

Wikidata weekly summary #283 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #282

Wikidata weekly summary #284 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #285 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #286 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #287 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #287 Global message delivery/Targets/Wikidata

Wikidata weekly summary #288 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #289 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #290 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #291 edit

Wikidata weekly summary #292 edit

Return to the user page of "Romaine/2017".