User talk:Simon Villeneuve/Archives/2018

Cette page est une archive. Merci de ne pas la modifier. Utiliser la page actuelle, même pour continuer une ancienne discussion.

National Library and Archives of Québec

Bonjour, Simon Villeneuve, savez vous comment activer B2Q en tant qu'autorité, ça n'apparait pas dans les choix possibles de WD, et certaines personalités du Québec ne sont pas enregistrées au LAC mais seulement sur B2Q? Merci d'avance--DDupard (talk) 10:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Bonjour @DDupard:,
Je suis loin d'être un expert dans ce domaine. Je suis cependant tombé sur Q22916615, qui a pour alias en anglais « B2Q ». Cet élément semble être lié à deux propriétés : P:P1823 (pour les ouvrages) et P:P3280 (pour les humains). Simon Villeneuve (talk) 10:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Bon merci Simon Villeneuve, c'est un début --DDupard (talk) 11:23, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@DDupard: Pour le moment, contrairement au LAC, l'identifiant auteur de BAnQ ne lie pas à un URL (voir, par exemple, Q25999518#P1670). Je n'arrive pas à trouver de fiche consacrée aux personnes sur le site de BAnQ. C'est normal @Benoit Rochon: ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:49, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Ah sais pas comment ça marche [1] mais on dirait qu'on peut interroger un bibliothécaire ou archiviste....--DDupard (talk) 13:46, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

Simon Villeneuve, non je ne sais pas. Peut-être que Fralambert saurais ? Benoit Rochon (talk) 22:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

J'ai pas d'idée, mais c'est Hsarrazin Qui a fait la proposition de la propriété [2]. --Fralambert (talk) 22:36, 21 June 2017 (UTC)

@DDupard, Simon Villeneuve, Benoit Rochon, Fralambert:

contrairement à d'autres autorités de bibliothèques, l'id BanQ ne rattache effectivement pas encore sur une fiche d'autorité, car la BanQ n'a, pour le moment espérons-le, pas encore mis son fichier d'autorité en ligne.

toutefois, pour cet identifiant comme pour LAC, nous récupérons les identifiants depuis le VIAF, à l'aide d'un script à installer dans son common.js . Il est important de vérifier qu'il n'y a pas d'erreur de viaf avant de le lancer, pour éviter des imports massifs d'erreurs.

si vous avez des problèmes pour importer BAnQ authority ID (P3280), n'hésitez pas à me contacter. --Hsarrazin (talk) 07:10, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

C’est à dire que par exemple sur ce viaf [3], il y a bien un numéro B2Q, mais quand je demande B2Q sur Wdata dans identifiants, B2Q n’est pas reconnu......--DDupard (talk) 08:58, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Operator vs. part of

Re [4] - I've been using the convention that if a telescope is at an observatory, then that should be linked through part of (P361) (with reciprocal has part(s) (P527)), and operator (P137) should typically be e.g. the university/consortium that owns the telescope. Having part of and operator the same seems to be duplication. What do you think here? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

@Mike Peel: Hum, that's a good question. I putted this property cause on frwiki, operator (P137) is called in the fr:Modèle:Infobox Observatoire and in the fr:Modèle:Infobox Télescope with the label « gestionnaire ». I also had a problem with maintained by (P126), who is similar.
I'll think about that. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) I've been developing en:Template:Infobox telescope and en:Template:Infobox observatory, and you can see the properties used in each row in the documentation there - I think they've diverged a bit from the French ones, and it would be good to bring them back into sync. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 17:59, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Ajouter un prénom usuel

Salut Simon,

J'en arrache un peu sur Wikidata! Tu verras dans mes contributions que je suis arrivé de peine et de misère a documenter que le prénom complet de l'avocat L. Yves Fortier était Louis-Yves. (Quelqu'un l'avait ajouté dans en.wp sans source, et j'en ai trouvé quelques-unes dont une que je trouvais plus probante). Maintenant je voudrais dire que son prénom usuel est Yves. J'ai trouvé un élément Prénom usuel (Q3409033), mais quand j'essaie d'ajouter une déclaration à cet effet, et que je tape "Prénom usuel" dans la case propriété, ça dit "aucune correspondance trouvée". D'ailleurs cette propriété semble peu utilisée. Est-ce que je m'y prends de la bonne manière ? Cortomaltais (talk) 23:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

Allo @Cortomaltais:,
Bravo pour ta persévérance ! Du mieux que j'en comprends (je ne connais pas parfaitement Wikidata), ton principal problème est que le prénom usuel que tu as trouvé est un « élément », alors que l'on ajoute une « propriété » (et non un élément) sur les éléments. Les propriétés sont nommées « PXXX », alors que les éléments sont nommés « QXXX ». Chaque élément de la base de données est donc constitué de propriétés qui pointent chacune sur un ou plusieurs éléments et ces derniers possèdent parfois eux-mêmes des propriétés pointant vers d'autres éléments (dans ces cas, on parle de qualifiers).
Donc, dans ton cas, l'élément L. Yves Fortier (Q3205904) est constitué de 10 propriétés, dont 3 pointent vers plusieurs éléments (scolarité, occupation et distinction reçue) et dont l'un des éléments possède un qualifier (ordre national du Québec -> date -> 2006).
Il semble exister plus de 4 000 propriétés et je ne sais pas si l'une d'elles a rapport avec le « prénom usuel » (d'après les choix qui sont offerts lorsque l'on entre une nouvelle propriété, je ne crois pas). Il y aurait moyen de demander la création de cette propriété, mais je ne pense pas que c'est la bonne manière de faire. Perso, j'opterais pour ajouter le prénom « Yves » (Q1920728) dans la propriété « prénom » et je lui donnerais un rang privilégié (flèches à gauche de l'entrée). Qu'en penses-tu @Fralambert: ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 00:21, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Je ne suis pas un expert des noms, mais j'ai ajouté Yves à prénom avec usual forename (Q3409033) dans les qualificatifs. --Fralambert (talk) 00:39, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

R. Lecoq

Bonjour Simon Villeneuve, j'ai complété un peu cet élément, mais je ne parviens pas à trouver/insérer un identifiant BNF. Je ne maîtrise pas vraiment Wikidata… je passe donc le bébé. Page BNF consultable ICI. Merci, cordialement . ~ Antoniex (discuter) 17:16, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

@Antoniex: Bonjour,
Comme indiqué sur la page de discussion de la propriété, il faut sélectionner la partie de l'URL suivant le « cb ». Dans le cas de Lecoq, l'adresse dédiée de la BNF est http://catalogue.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/cb135638625. J'ai donc ajouté 135638625 à la propriété P268 sur l'élément. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:23, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup pour les explications. À vous (te) recroiser . ~ Antoniex (discuter) 17:25, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Q25347

Please double-check the addition of "mousses" to moss (Q25347). From reading the article, it sounds as though they are treating "mousses" as a synonym of bryophyte (Q29993). --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Hi,
It seems that the Encyclopaedia Universalis already have an article for "bryophytes". You can see that P3219 of Q29993 is already pointing to it. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that. What I'm saying is that their "mousses" article seems to cover the same subject. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:46, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Maybe. I'm not an expert on this subject. Feel free to change if you think it must be changed. But on French Wikipedia article about bryophyta, the word mousses is in bold in the article. That means that it is considered as a synonym of the article title. Usually, the frwiki biology articles are named with their latin name and the common name is putted in bold in the text. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:59, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Terms like "mousses" have several meanings in several European languages, so a more careful check usually has to be done by a person. The primary diagram in the article at Encyclopaedia Universalis has a group labelled "mousses (bryophytes au sens large)", and includes the hépatiques and anthocérotes in the mousses. Judging by this, the Encyclopaedia Universalis is using mousses in a broader sense than fr.WP is doing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 02:19, 8 March 2018 (UTC)

Universalis

Salut,

Aurais-tu accès à l'intégralité des articles d'Universalis ? De prime abord, j'aurais tendance à annuler ton ajout Special:Diff/651772535 sur site naturel classé ou inscrit (Q18002388) (qui concerne un type de protection bien précis) et créer un élément spécifique pour SITES NATURELS, France. Mais sans accès à l'intégralité du texte, j'hésite un peu sur quoi mettre dans ce nouvel élément.

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 09:32, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: Salut,
Ton diff ne pointe pas vers la bonne chose.
Non, je n'ai pas accès à Universalis. J'étais conscient que l'association de SITES NATURELS, France n'était pas parfaite, mais je me suis dit que c'était ce qui s'en rapprochait le plus. N'hésite pas à créer un nouvel élément si tu juges que c'est mieux ainsi. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:20, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Ooups, je viens de corriger le diff ;)

À la lecture de l'article, ce n'est vraiment pas le bon lien puisque l'article ne parle pas du tout des site naturel classé ou inscrit (Q18002388) ! Après réflexion, je me dit que l'élément protected area of France (Q2828309) convient et qu'il n'y a pas besoin d'en créer un nouveau. Qu'en penses-tu ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 14:19, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Parfait. Tu t'y connais sûrement plus que moi à ce niveau. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 16:08, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

 Done, merci pour ton aide. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 08:32, 19 March 2018 (UTC)

---

Salut Simon,

comment fais-tu pour savoir quelles notices Universalis ne sont pas rattachées à un élément ? Cdt. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2018 (UTC).

Salut,
J'utilise simplement mix'n'match : https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/list/698/unmatched Simon Villeneuve (talk) 18:33, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

@Nomen ad hoc: Y a aussi la possibilité de chercher par mot avec l'URL suivant il est atrocement long, c'est comme ça, en remplaçant « martin-pêcheur » dans l'adresse par l'objet de la recherche.

https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/search/martin-p%C3%AAcheur/1,2,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,37,38,39,40,41,42,43,44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60,61,63,64,65,66,67,68,69,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89,90,91,93,94,95,97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106,107,108,109,110,111,112,113,114,115,116,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132,133,134,135,136,137,139,140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,153,155,156,157,158,160,161,162,163,164,165,166,167,168,169,170,171,173,174,175,176,177,178,179,180,181,182,183,185,186,187,188,189,191,193,194,195,196,197,198,199,200,201,203,204,205,206,207,209,210,211,212,215,216,217,218,219,220,221,222,223,224,225,226,227,229,231,232,233,234,235,236,237,238,239,240,241,242,243,244,246,247,248,249,250,251,252,255,257,258,259,260,261,262,264,265,266,267,268,269,270,271,272,273,275,276,277,280,281,284,285,286,287,289,290,291,292,293,294,295,296,297,298,299,300,301,302,305,307,308,310,311,312,313,314,315,316,317,318,319,320,321,323,324,325,326,327,328,329,330,331,332,333,334,335,336,337,338,339,340,341,342,343,344,345,346,347,348,349,350,351,352,354,355,356,357,358,360,361,362,363,364,365,366,367,368,370,371,372,373,374,375,376,377,378,379,380,381,382,383,385,386,387,389,390,391,392,393,394,395,396,397,398,399,400,401,403,404,405,406,407,408,409,410,411,412,413,414,415,416,417,418,419,420,421,422,423,424,425,426,427,428,429,431,433,434,435,436,438,439,440,442,444,445,446,447,448,449,450,451,452,453,454,455,456,457,458,459,461,462,463,464,465,466,467,468,469,470,471,472,473,474,475,476,477,478,479,480,481,482,483,484,485,486,487,488,489,490,491,492,495,496,497,498,499,500,501,502,503,504,505,506,507,508,510,511,512,513,514,515,516,517,518,519,520,521,522,523,524,525,526,527,528,529,530,533,534,535,536,537,538,539,540,541,545,546,547,548,549,550,551,552,553,554,555,556,557,558,559,560,561,562,563,564,565,566,567,568,569,570,571,572,573,574,575,576,577,578,579,580,581,582,583,584,585,586,587,588,589,590,591,592,593,594,595,596,597,598,599,600,601,602,603,604,605,606,607,608,609,610,611,612,613,614,615,616,617,618,619,620,622,623,624,625,626,627,628,629,630,631,632,633,634,635,636,637,638,639,640,641,642,643,644,645,646,647,648,649,651,652,653,654,655,656,657,658,659,660,661,662,663,664,665,666,667,668,669,670,671,672,673,674,675,676,677,678,679,680,681,682,683,684,685,686,687,688,690,691,692,693,694,695,696,697,699,700,701,702,703,705,706,707,708,709,711,712,713,714,715,716,718,719,721,722,723,724,725,729,730,731,732,733,734,735,736,737,738,739,740,741,742,743,744,745,746,747,748,749,750,751,752,753,754,755,756,757,758,759,760,761,762,763,765,766,767,768,769,770,771,772,773,775,777,778,779,780,781,783,784,785,786,787,788,789,790,791,792,793,795,797,798,799,800,801,802,803,804,805,806,807,808,809,810,811,812,813,814,815,816,817,818,819,820,821,822,823,824,825,826,827,828,829,831,832,833,834,835,836,837,838,839,840,841,842,843,844,845,846,847,848,849,850,851,852,853,854,855,856,857,858,859,860,861,862,863,864,865,866,868,869,870,871,872,874,875,876,877,878,879,880,881,882,883,884,885,886,887,888,889,890,891,892,893,894,895,896,897,898,899,900,905,906,907,908,909,910,911,912,913,914,915,916,917,918,919,920,921,922,923,924,925,926,927,928,929,930,931,932,933,934,938,939,940,941,942,943,944,945,946,947,948,949,950,951,952,954,955,956,957,958,959,960,961,962,963,965,966,967,968,969,978,979,980,981,982,983,984,985,986,987,988,989,990,991,992,993,994,995,996,997,998,999,1000,1001,1003,1005,1006,1007,1008,1010,1011,1012,1013,1014,1015,1016,1017,1018,1019,1020,1021,1022,1023,1024,1025,1026,1027,1028,1029,1035,1037,1038,1039,1040,1041,1042,1043,1044,1045,1046,1047,1048,1049,1050,1051,1052,1054,1055,1056,1057,1058,1059,1060,1061,1062,1063,1064,1065,1066,1067,1068,1070,1071,1072,1073,1074,1075,1077,1076,1083,1087,1086,1085,1079,1080,1078,1084,1081,1082,1096,1095,1088,1089,1090,1091,1104,1097,1103,1102,1101,1094,1093,1100,1099,1092,1098,1107,1105 Simon Villeneuve (talk) 00:37, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Q19911412

Simon, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Venus-and-the-Lute-Player only shows a message "Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic." This link adds nevative value to the item, since each time smeone clicks on that link you waste time without gaining any knowledge. I thin we should add links like that after Britannica writes an article. --Jarekt (talk) 18:59, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jarekt, Magnus Manske: Hi,
About one entry on two of mix'n'match Britannica entries are directory pages. If you cancel all the links pointing to directory pages, we'll lose about 100,000 Britannica links on Wikidata. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 22:13, 2 July 2018 (UTC)

Are pages with "Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic." called directory pages? Whatever we call them it is a form of en:HTTP 404 or en:Wikipedia:Red link and 100k such links will make wikidata very frustrating when you are looking for sources of unrefereenced properties. --Jarekt (talk) 01:39, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jarekt: No, these pages aren't deadlinks. They gives search results of the expression in their Britannica articles. It's a basic webpage, but it is not dead. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:49, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

A page with text "Britannica does not currently have an article on this topic." is a dead link as the page has zero information content. However, my feelings on the subject are not strong enough to do anything about it. Maybe it would be worth it to have this discussion on Project chat to see what others think. May be someone can suprise me and provide an example of a positive thing that was a result of having those links. --Jarekt (talk) 02:01, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

@Jarekt: These pages aren't empty. Look carefully. They show SEARCH RESULTS OF THE SUBJECT INSIDE BRITANNICA ARTICLES in the section named « Learn about this topic in these articles: ». --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 02:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

I see. That could be usefull. --Jarekt (talk) 02:11, 3 July 2018 (UTC)

Steve Suissa

Bonjour, pouvez vous retirer de Q3499131 l'occupation boxer que vous avez ajouter en octobre 2016 et qui n'est préente sur aucune des 3 versions wiki, et sans source sur wikidata. Cordialement. 78.238.225.248 13:49, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour,
La mention de son parcours en boxe était belle et bien présente sur son article de frwiki au moment où j'ai ajouté la chose sur son élément. Pour des raisons que j'ignore, elle a été peu à peu retirée depuis (voir, par exemple, [5] et [6]). Si vous désirez retirer cela, à votre guise, mais perso, je ne toucherai rien. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 21:12, 21 July 2018 (UTC)

Bonjour, iles teffectivement indiqué dans l'infobox boxeur, et dans l'article "pratique de la boxe". Mais aucune source ne l'indique. cette pratique, est-elle en enfance, plus tard... Doit-on ajouter tous les sports pratiqués, ou autres acitvités (musique ...), même de mannière amateure ou occasionnelle (en exagérant, doit-on mettre l'occupation footballeur à Giscard, bien qu'il soit très facile de sourcer le fait qu'il est ait joué ; ne ne crois pas. Lionel Jospin n'est pas qualifié de basketteur ([7])).

Pour le retrait, j'ai assayé de le faire, mais cela n'a pas pu être validé. Cordialement. 78.238.225.248 20:49, 24 July 2018 (UTC)

Merci

Merci pour ton intervention par rapport à Veillg1. Même si j'ai l'impression qu'il ne comprendra jamais rien. --Fralambert (talk) 01:49, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Keep the faith. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 02:05, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Truc que j'ai appris cette semaine est que la commission de toponymie réponds très vite quand on constate une erreur. Du moins c'est ce que j'ai constaté avec Q22438619 qui était dans la mauvaise municipalité. C'est déjà corrigé. :) (Bref, je manipule les sources. :P) --Fralambert (talk) 03:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

C'est toujours une bonne nouvelle d'apprendre qu'un organisme gouvernemental arrive à être réactif. Ils ne le sont malheureusement pas tous.
Bonne continuation ! --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 10:27, 28 July 2018 (UTC)

Les fois que j'ai envoyé un courriel à la Commission, ils ont généralement été très réactifs. Pour revenir, à Veillg1, personnellement, je commence à être désespéré avec lui. Il a continué à rajouté ses sections «géographie» avec son lien vers la page d’accueil de Toporama sur fr:Rivière du Port au Saumon, fr:Rivière des Petites Bergeronnes, fr:Rivière du Moulin à Baude et fr:Rivière Moreau (La Haute-Côte-Nord). La semaine prochaine, je disparais dans la nature et quand je reviens, je soumets son cas au projet:Québec et si ça marche pas, il va me rester le RA. C'est triste, mais il n'écoute vraiment pas (et pas plus les autres généralement). --Fralambert (talk) 15:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

@Fralambert: Je ne me suis pas penché sur le fond de votre conflit. J'avais l'impression que son travail pouvait être adéquatement sourcé par l'atlas du Canada. Je suis présentement en voyage. Je ne pourrai creuser le sujet que d'ici 2 semaines. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:34, 3 August 2018 (UTC)

Publishers

You've been adding publishers to work data items, but only editions have publishers. --EncycloPetey (talk) 00:25, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Hi,
I understand what you mean, but this situation didn't seem so clear to me.
As you can see, all these values are coming from the enwiki articles associated to the concerned elements. I think that the vast majority of books only have one entry on Wikidata and I'm not sure that the goal is to create an element for every edition of every work. Considering this, putting an editor on a work seems natural to me. If you take a look to the property page, you can see that the example given is about a work (and not about an edition), so this seems to support my PoV about this.
I'm relatively new in this field of contribution and I can be wrong. I'll stop to do that until I'll have a clearer vision of this. Can you show me some discussions about this topic ? There's nothing about that on the talk page of the property. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 00:45, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The individual en-Wikipedia articles will also have ISBN, and other information specific to editions, so the Wikipedias are not a good model to rely upon. They have applied many different approaches with inconsistency.

The example of the Oxford English Dictionary on publisher (P123) is a very unusual case since all editions of the OED have been published by only one publisher. It is not representative of works in general. For most works, and especially for novels, there will be many different publishers depending upon the particular edition. In general, information placed on the work's data item should apply to all editions, and not to one particular edition.

It is true that most properties associated with Books do not have good information right now. WP:Books is currently revising its model, and I suspect that the next step will be to document best practices and to put more information on the relevant properties and values.

The model that WP:Books is adopting work will have a separate data item for every edition. That is the goal. And some other websites, such a WorldCat, are already doing this. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:15, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey:Ok. Do you have links to discussions about that ? I want to follow and participate to these reflexions. For example, I don't think that most of work will have many publisher and I think that it is relevant to put all the publishers for the works who have more than one.
I also suggest to you to change or propose to change the example on P123 and to open a discussion on the talk page of 123 to explain what you are explaining to me here. Otherwise, it is a matter of time before someone else will do the same thing than me. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:06, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

The best place to discuss is Wikidata talk:WikiProject Books. Starting a discussion on a Property talk page will have no response, in my experience. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:42, 22 August 2018 (UTC)

re: prénoms

• ça dépend .. on pourrait les mettre. Quand le nom original est absent, j'ai tendance à le remplacer (p.e. "Ivan" > "Иван"); sinon je le laisse. Quelques éléments ont encore des prénoms italiens provenant d'un import par bot aux débuts sans que le nom soit nécessairement traduit. Pour les papes, on pourrait débattre de la langue "originale". Un autre problème sont les noms qui datent d'avant l'orthographe standardisée .. J'avais mis la priorité à donner à une valeur par élément. --- Jura 08:10, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

P921

I don't know how are you taking your values for this property but this is plain wrong https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4423784&type=revision&diff=750397258&oldid=750039904 . I also corrected your edit in Oxford American Dictionary (Q17199133). KaMan (talk) 05:22, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi @KaMan:,
I retrieve the values from infobox of enwiki.
I agree with you that these entries are wrong. I think it's because I tried to use the Harvest Template with an inapropriate option. I'll correct that.
For the first case, we can see that there's 24 entries like this. Once I'll have finish to import the data, I'll check and correct every one of them.
Thank you for your vigilance. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

publisher

Please refer to Wikidata:WikiProject Books. The property of publisher (P123) belongs on items that are editions, not on data items for works. --EncycloPetey (talk) 13:36, 24 September 2018 (UTC)

Cricket no pic.png

You added this picture to series of items but this picture is blank. For example here https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8049789&diff=prev&oldid=753178090 KaMan (talk) 16:40, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@KaMan: Hi,
This is a mistake. Thank you to have find it. I have adjusted P18 to stop importing this kind of file and I'll clean the mess soon. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:15, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Why do keep importing this blank picture? Steak (talk) 18:57, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

I've blocked you for 31 hours because you're still importing that image. Mbch331 (talk) 19:23, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Steak, KaMan, Mbch331: Hi everybody,
I can't answer to you on the admin noticeboard, so I decided to write to you all here.
I was AFK and I understand the decision you have taken here. I think that what I've done is easy to correct and that maybe you have a little bit overreacted, but I understand that if there's any doubt, we must protect the database before everything else.
As I said to KaMan, I corrected P18 to block any automatic importation of a file containing the expression "no pic". The problem is that I've forget to reload my lists on Harvest Template, so the new command haven't been taken in account. This is why the upload of this inappropriate file have continued.
Since, the mess have been cleaned. As I understand, ListeriaBot and KrBot usually clean that kind of things regularly within few days (see Wikidata:WikiProject Q5/reports/identical P18 and Special:Diff/753187377).
The other problem raised in the section below, about the language of links, come from this SPARQL query. I forgot to remove from the query all items who have any other entry than English (Q1860) for language of work or name (P407). I'll check back the QuickStatements batch to correct this tomorrow or Friday by reviewing the items of this query. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 23:51, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Language of websites

There are some issues with wrong language of websites: Talk:Q50377918, Talk:Q21870255, Talk:Q55989992 at least. These websites are Danish. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 19:46, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

@Fnielsen: Look at my answer just above. I'll correct these links as soon as I'll be unblocked. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:58, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

@Fnielsen: Hi,
I have corrected all the wrong links I have detected (less than 10) + some other one I didn't touch before with my request. Please let me know if you find another problem with my editions. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:19, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Thanks! — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 15:16, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Demande de déblocage

Unblock request granted This blocked user asked to be unblocked, and one or more administrators has reviewed and granted this request. Simon Villeneuve/Archives block log • ipblocklist • crossblock • luxo's • unblock • remove gblock • contribs: +/-

---

Request reason:

I have corrected the situation as explained here.
There's no documentation explaining how I must fill this template, so I don't know if I'm filling it correctly. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 23:59, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Unblock reason:

I’ve unblocked you; please make sure that all malicious edits are reverted (although it looks quite good already), and take care next time, please. Regards, —MisterSynergy (talk) 07:37, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

This template should be archived normally.

---

беларуская (тарашкевіца) | български | čeština | English | español | français | македонски | português | português do Brasil | русский | svenska | 中文 | +/−

L for your audio !

intergouvernementalisation (L11278). Thanks. --- Jura 14:20, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Ça fait plaisir. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 14:29, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

J'ai fait la première stat sur le lexique: Wikidata:Lists/lexemes/fr. --- Jura 14:32, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

Navalpino

Hi. I've removed Navalpino.png as image of Navalpino because it is a localization map. You can see that it is already used as such. It's a common mistake in many a Wikipedia to use maps, seals and even flags as images of municipalities. We're presently working hard on getting photos from all municipalities in Spain; I've participated in Wiki Takes Zamora last weekend and I've taken pictures there and also in other provinces, including Ciudad Real, where Navalpino is located. Unfortunately, Navalpino is still to be done!

Thank you for your interest and work.

B25es (talk) 14:04, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

@B25es: Hi,
I have corrected the mistake. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 14:16, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

http://1ua.com.ua

Hi! This website not official website villages in Ukraine! This is a private site by Олег Сироватко that publishes itself as official sites of settlements. --Микола Василечко (talk) 16:43, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Микола Василечко: Hi,
There's 64 official website with the expression 1ua in the URL. I propose to you to finish to upload all the websites I have to do and to call you back after to verify with you wich one we must suppress.
Good idea ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

Autor the project 1ua.com.ua - Олег Сироватко. This is comparable to the pages in Facebook - Mark Zuckerberg. Does Facebook pages Official? No. Also 1ua.com.ua. Compare it: uk:Великі Бірки (official website) and page in 1ua.com.ua. All links need to be deleted. --Микола Василечко (talk) 18:24, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Микола Василечко: Hi again,
Well, actually, a lot of peoples use Facebook as an official website. I cannot say that it is the case for all the 314 pages using facebook as official website (P856), but I know that it is the case of a lot of them. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 18:31, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

This is my native village. This is my site (in fact, the official site, because there is no other information about the village with this amount of information), and Facebook page. This is page village in 1ua.com.ua, all news in this page about my village — example — figment created by the robot with the substitution of the village name. What is trust in such "official website"? No trust. Figment. --Микола Василечко (talk) 19:14, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Микола Василечко: Hi,
There's now a French version of the article about your native village ! \o/
I don't know what you mean by "figment". What I suggest to you is to wait until I've automatically imported all the websites I want to import and to clean all that after. It will be done before the end of the week.
Can you live with that ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 19:36, 15 October 2018 (UTC)

@Микола Василечко: I have finished my upload of officials websites. There's now 119 items with a official website beginning with "1ua". Do you still think that all these links should be deleted ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:42, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Yes. Which indicates its officiality? 1ua is a private site that publishes itself as official pages. This is not the official site of thіs villages. This is official site, and this (separate page from many on this portal and other). I repeat - 1ua not the official site of villages. --Микола Василечко (talk) 15:18, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

 Done --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 15:33, 21 October 2018 (UTC)

Places in Estonia (elevation, inception etc.)

Hi! Please avoid importing elevation values for Estonian settlements. Since elevation often varies to large degree (10s of meters) then without specifying what this value stands for (maximum, minimum, something else?) it has no meaning whatsoever. Qualierless elevation might be appropriate for settlements in some other countries, for instance statistics office in Italy uses municipality elevation values for some designated reference points, but nothing like that is the case for Estonia. These elevation values probably originate from some poor quality source like Geonames that automatically extracts elevation for some random point from an elevation model around the territory of given place.

I've spotted numerous errors in other Estonia related data that you import as well. For instance, here you provide a year as an inception data while this not even what referenced Wikipedia infobox says (it's status change year, labeled on Wikipedia as "Town status"). Here you import an inception year that, as history section of given Wikipedia article clarifies, again isn't an inception year. Also, please note that for Estonian settlements/municipalities start time (P580) is generally used for this purpose instead.

Website here is (was) in fact not website for this item but for Q993046, here the locator map doesn't really show location of given settlement, at least not explicitly, etc. To my understanding, if you use hepler tools to gather data, then you are still supposed to check and ensure that data is of sufficent quality. Please check the data more carefully. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:355E:2EF7:7EE7:9D62 05:25, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@2001:7D0:81F7:B580:355E:2EF7:7EE7:9D62:Hi,
There's a lot to answer here. Give me a couple of hours. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:39, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

@2001:7D0:81F7:B580:355E:2EF7:7EE7:9D62: Ok. I understand that you blame me for not reviewing enough the automatic imports I do with reCh. You give some examples to support your PoV for 4 kinds of imports : inception (P571), elevation above sea level (P2044), official website (P856) and locator map image (P242). Here's what I think :
1- The locator map you showed me is'nt perfect, but I think it is not really wrong. If you disagree, you can delete it, but I don't think it is a good enough reason to stop automatic importation of location maps. It is mainly a question of personnal perception.
2- Frankly, human revision or not, I can't detect the problems of edit like the inclusion of the website on Kernu (Q3456935). The enwiki article give it 2 time, saying that it concern the element, and the other element you point to me gives another website as P856.
From my experience, that kind of error will stay and spread until peoples knowing the subject like you can detect it and correct it. So if you can correct the enwiki article about it, you'll stop the problem.
3- For elevations and inceptions dates, the "problems" not only concern localities of Estonia.
3.1- For elevations, I agree that it is hard to know exactly what kind of elevation it is. I think that this problem is inherent to this property. I think that a general value about a place is not that bad, but if you still think that is not ok, I can easily find the values and delete them. However, I only can do this after the automatic imports.
Another option is to put a kind of constraint on P2044 to stop automatic importation of elements having Estonia (Q191) in country (P17). I seems to be a good option considering that none of the ~7,000 settlements of Estonia have a P2044 value.
For now, I'll continue to import elevations and, if you want so, I'll delete the one concerning Estonia afterward. If you or other users show me that there's problems for elevations for other places, I'll delete them afterward.
3.2- For inceptions, the problem is also because the property isn't precise enough without qualifiers. There can be many kind of inceptions and I think again that giving a general value is better than not. However, I can understand that not everybody agree with that and that the situation must be discussed (as I said to @VIGNERON: in the second section above), so I'll stop for now to automatically import inceptions dates. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:11, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Infobox Localité

Bonjour, l'infobox Localité utilise-t-elle la superficie totale pour calculer la densité de population ? Selon mes vérifications, sur WD la surface est souvent renseignée par Statistique Canada qui utilise une surface terrestre, ce qui est logique pour calculer une densité de population. Le MAMOT fourni la surface totale et la surface terrestre. Comment devrait-on harmoniser tout cela ? --Yanik ^B 17:08, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Salut Yanik,
Le module de l'infobox calcule la densité en divisant simplement la population par la superficie, qui est rapatriée à partir de area (P2046).
Concernant les différents types de superficie, la question a été soulevée en 2015. J'ai à peu près le même avis que @Fralambert:. Je ne sais pas si sa pensée a évoluée depuis ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:40, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Je crois aussi qu'il est plus simple d'ajouter un qualificatif applies to part (P518) land (Q11081619). Dans le cas ou il y a plusieurs superficies le modèle:Localité devrait se servir de la surface terrestre pour calculer la densité. Il faudrait aussi utilisé la propriété sans qualificatif pour afficher la superficie(totale) dans l'infobox. Qu'en dis-tu, est-ce possible ? --Yanik ^B 13:41, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Ça me semble faire sens. Malheureusement, je ne connais pas suffisamment le Lua pour créer une telle fonction. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 14:15, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Peut-être que @Cantons-de-l'Est: qui est actif sur le Projet Scribunto sait comment faire. Sinon je peux y faire une demande. --Yanik ^B 14:40, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Je sais que Cantons est très occupé ces temps-ci. De plus, je n'ai jamais été très chanceux avec le projet Scribunto. Mais bon, peut-être que tu auras plus de chance que moi. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 15:31, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Yanik, Je suis en effet trop occupé. Bonne chance pour la suite de ce projet. Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 15:34, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

OK, demande effectuée, on verra bien. --Yanik ^B 16:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Child/parent

Hello,

Je crois que c'est utile de vérifier si les deux entités ont la même valeur en P31. --- Jura 17:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

 Done ([8]), Ça élimine les cas non-humains (les divinités, animaux, êtres de fiction, etc.) pour une occurrence d'erreurs que je crois être de moins de 0,1 %, mais bon... Simon Villeneuve (talk) 19:33, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Q107401

Hi, thanks for good job in WD. Is that edit OK?

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q107401&curid=110044&diff=792839625&oldid=734162451

- Kareyac (talk) 10:29, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

UPD. Don't mention please, just thank you. - Kareyac (talk) 10:35, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Lahore fondé en 2013

Salut,

Cette information que tu as ajouté Special:Diff/759855582 est étrange, Lahore existait bien avant 2013, elle est juste devenue officiellement une Metropolitan area en 2013.

Je ne suis pas certain de la meilleure façon de faire mais je propose de retirer inception (P571) (car cela déclenche tout un tas de contraintes, notamment des contraintes de simultanéité, par exemple sur Khan-e-Jahan Bahadur Kokaltash (Q31181840) qui est mort en 1697 dans un lieu indiqué comme n'existant pas avant 2013) et :

• soit ajouter
  ⟨ Lahore (Q11739)    ⟩ instance of (P31) ⟨ metropolitan area (Q1907114)    ⟩
  start time (P580) ⟨ 2013 ⟩
• soit créer un élément spécifique sur la Metropolitan area et y mettre inception (P571) = 2013

Qu'en penses-tu ?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 12:49, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: C'est une bonne question. Je ne pense pas être suffisamment savant pour savoir si l'une de tes deux propositions est meilleure que l'autre, ou s'il y a d'autres options possibles. Il faudrait élargir la discussion, ou creuser pour savoir si cela a déjà été discuté. Ça serait d'ailleurs bien d'éclaircir cela car plusieurs dates de fondation que j'importe de enwiki amènent ce genre de situation. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:36, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

P69/P1066

Hello. Property P1066 (student of) is used only for persons. If you add institutions, you have to use P69 (educated at). So edits like this are incorrect. Have a nice day. --Silesianus (talk) 10:03, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Silesianus: Hi !
I fully understand that. The problem is that Urakhin School named after Alibek Alibekovich Taho-Godi (Q28473613) have 2 entries for student of (P1066). I suppose that @ArinaDemidova: wanted to inform that these two students of the institution were notable. Do you know a property for that ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:49, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

I believe it doesn't exist. And honestly I'm not sure if it should exist. You know, [9]. --Silesianus (talk) 12:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

@Silesianus: I think the same, but maybe other peoples don't. And the number of entries is not always a brake. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:05, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I wish the boxes here would be collapsible... Anyway, I have removed these two students from Q28473613, cause it is incorrect use of property. --Silesianus (talk) 12:26, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Ok. I can't suppress the other student on my list, so I'll reverse it manually within the day. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:00, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Famille Arianiti

Hello! I removed this, as this property does not make sense in terms of a family. Pasztilla (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

@Pasztilla: Thank you ! The problem where on Gojko Balšić (Q5577978). A lot of errors on spouse (P26) have been put in light by my last editions. I'm cleaning this right now. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:26, 16 November 2018 (UTC)

Propriétés pour films

P364 et P407

Salut,
À propos de ça, je crois lire qu'il y a des problèmes concernant original language of film or TV show (P364). Bien qu'elle n'ait pas (encore ?) été supprimée, on affirme qu'elle est obsolète au moins pour les médias écrits.
Dans tous les cas, est-ce vraiment un problème d'avoir les deux (P364 et language of work or name (P407)) sur un élément ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Il y a une liste à Wikidata:WikiProject_Movies/Properties. Apparemment, c'est plus compliqué pour les médias écrits. --- Jura 11:47, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jura1: Je veux bien, mais ça ne me dit pas que P407 et P364 sont mutuellement exclusives. Si c'est le cas, alors il faudrait mettre une property constraint (P2302) supplémentaire sur P407 disant que si c'est une œuvre filmée, il faut prioriser P364. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Ce n'est pas prévu de le mettre. Aussi ça ne dit pas de ne pas mettre P569, P570 .. sans qu'il y ait une contrainte. A part ça, actuellement l'une est une sous-propriété de l'autre. Est-ce qu'il y a quelque chose que ça aurait dû exprimer en plus? --- Jura 12:03, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jura1: Je ne comprends pas ta réponse. Tu ironises en disant « ne pas mettre P569, P570 » ? Parce que je ne comprends pas le rapport. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:09, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Le fait que ça ne soit pas exclu explicitement ne veut pas dire que c'est une bonne idée .. sauf évidemment, si tu cherches à exprimer quelque chose en plus avec la déclaration. --- Jura 12:10, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jura1: C'est un peu léger. Sans nécessairement exprimer quelque chose en plus, l'ajout me semble aller, au minimum, dans le sens de la redondance, ce qui renforce l'information. Dans ce cas, je pense que laisser les deux propriétés est pertinent si ce n'est pas exclusif, et non pertinent si c'est exclusif. Considérant que tu as plus d'expérience que moi, j'aurais aimé comprendre pourquoi on ne devrait pas définir adéquatement les contraintes ici. Ça permet un meilleur nettoyage si c'est exclusif et une plus grande redondance si ça ne l'est pas. Là, tout ce que je perçois, c'est quelqu'un qui se concentre sur la défense de son revert. --Simon Villeneuve (talk)

@Jura1: Pour le moment, on a environ mille éléments qui ont les deux propriétés. À la fin de ma batch, est-ce que je retire systématiquement P407 de ceux qui sont des œuvres audiovisuelles ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Je crois qu'il y a déjà un autre bot qui le fait .. Il reste quelques éléments qui mélangent les deux (écrit et audiovisuel). --- Jura 13:13, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

adding P1830

Hello Simon, to Üstra Q265625 you added some metro stations. Please note that P1830 requires to be the OWNER, while Üstra (Q265625) is only the OPERATOR of the stations. Please revert your changes. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 20:10, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

@Gerd Fahrenhorst: Hi,
The import is a mirror of the owned by (P127) of all the three elements added. The P127 of all of them are "sourced" with enwiki and two of them (Waterloo (Q15081775) and Steintor (Q15089846)) have Infra Infrastrukturgesellschaft Region Hannover GmbH (Q1122564) as operator (P137) (and not, as you say, üstra (Q265625)). The information is sourced with https://www.infra-hannover.de/
So, here what we can conclude :
1- enwiki said that Q265625 is the owner of the elements. If this is wrong, it must be corrected. Otherwise, the problem will occur again in the future.
2- https://www.infra-hannover.de/ said that it is the operator of the elements. If it is wrong, you need a better source to correct this. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:27, 20 November 2018 (UTC)

https://www.infra-hannover.de/ says they are the owner. I fixed the pages. -- Gerd Fahrenhorst (talk) 14:39, 21 November 2018 (UTC)

P1830

adding P1830 in museum collections

Are you sure to have a mirror of owned by (P127) for all the pieces that a museum owns ?. Some museums have millions of items. I believe it must be handle via query of "all items that belong to the museus (listerisbot)" and not within the museu item. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 12:12, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Following the message of @marsupium:, I already reverted all your mass additions in Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya (Q861252). Amadalvarez (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Mass adding owner of (P1830)

I think your mass adding of owner of (P1830) was quite a bad idea spamming items with information that is well kept on the items for the things owned. I've reverted your edits here. There are probably many more cases where the statements are misplaced. Please consider to consult with others before doing any similar mass edits and please use batch mode in QuickStatements so that the edits can be more easily evaluated publicly. Thanks, --Marsupium (talk) 12:16, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

Ah ah, I see your batch is still running. PLEASE STOP IT until further discussion!!! --Marsupium (talk) 12:17, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

I have ask to block your account at Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Please block User:Simon Villeneuve to stop controversial mass edits to allow further discussion in case you miss the message above. It's not meant offensive, just not to make things more difficult if decision will be not to do those edits. --Marsupium (talk) 12:30, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm AFK. I'll answer in a couple of hours. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:47, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Marsupium, Amadalvarez: Ok. Let see what we can/must do here :
First of all, P127 and P1830 are symetrics. It is specified on the talk page of both properties and it is constructed as this. So for now, it is like this and talking about "spamming" isn't correct and don't help to have a good discussion.
I understand that maybe the case of million of items probably haven't been thinked of at the moment of the creation of P1830, but for now, there's not a million of items concerning a peculiar museum. If you take a look at this, you can see that we're talking of a range of 10,000 items for Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya (Q861252). I understand that this number is pretty big, but as far as I know, the number of statements for a item must not be taken in account (@VIGNERON:). I have asked for a query who can help us see the range of this.
So, I understand that a discussion must be done about this. Where do you think it must be done ? I think of the talk page of P1830, but I fear that nobody will see it. Simon Villeneuve (talk) 15:20, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Marsupium, Amadalvarez, VIGNERON: Ok, as we can see here, there's only a dozen items with more than 1,000 possessions for now, and Q861252 is the biggest one. So we are far from the "million possessions problem". Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:39, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Marsupium, VIGNERON:Beside what the property discussions said (remember P127 was created in 2013 and P1380 in 2015), the property constraint (P2302) for owned by (P127) has no inverse constraint (Q21510855), so probably there is a gap between what was thought in the creation and the reality. In addition, the resultant ontology you tried to construct make no sense. A (logical) duplicate information can be justified by performance reason. However, if the result is to have thousand of duplicate entries under one item, point to a bad design. In my oppinion, the reverse property concept was invented for a casual pairs (no more than 10 entries). Expand the idea of "if a ↔ b then b ↔ a" will cause thousand of redundancies in, for instance, the masterpieces or books. All of them have an author, a location (museum) a publisher (books). Can you image that the publisher item should have all the titles and editions of all writer published ? Should Mozart item have all the pieces he composed ?. WD structure allow via inverse query have the full catalog of any music or witer or museum in nanoseconds without have a heavy structures.

Are you the guilty of this problem ?, I think nobody told it. If the rule is wrong, you have give us the opportunity to debate about changed it. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 22:33, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Amadalvarez: Thank you for the "non-guilty" part. I don't take it personal. I'm just in strong disagreement with you.
I don't bought the "duplical/redundancies" statement. With that kind of reasoning, we'll not put a entry on child (P40) on an item cause the entry already have a father (P22) and/or mother (P25) pointing to that item. That reasoning can be apply to all properties linked by inverse property (P1696). The others examples you give (publishers, location, Mozart) seems to me to be a slippery slope.
IMHO, the only valuable statement here is that a property with more than a thousand statements is maybe too heavy, but as I said in my last post, other contributors said to me before that this is not an issue.
In any way, I think that this must be discussed further somewhere else than on my user talk page. So where ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:53, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Simon Villeneuve:I disagree with you about "the only valuable statement here is that a property with more than a thousand statements...[is or not acceptable]". And I agree to don't follow the discussion here and move it to another place. My pourpose to you and @Marsupium, VIGNERON: is to move to the discussion page of inverse property (P1696), because, IMHO, what we have in discussion is the scope of applicaion of this concept in several others properties. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 05:22, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Amadalvarez: you don't have to ping me on my user talk page ;)
Like I said before, I'm not sure that a property talk page is the good place to discuss this subject. For at least 2 reasons : it is too broad (too much implications) and talk pages of properties usually aren't seen by the community.
A similar topic have been started on Wikidata:Project chat. I think it can be the good place to expose our PoV. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 18:11, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Same for countries (like Czech Republic (Q213)) or items like private collection (Q768717). It cannot be added blindely to everything.--Jklamo (talk) 16:49, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@Jklamo:This is a different case. We've have discussed this kind of values on the French Village Pump and we agreed that this is a result, at least partly, of a misuse of P127 in the concerned items. My automatic importations here help to correct these misuse.
So I have deleted the 179 values private collection (Q768717) from P127 (#temporary_batch_1542992977161). For the countries, I'm not sure that it is incorrect. So I think that too must be discussed somewhere. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 17:11, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

• I think the nice thing about these P1830 statements is that it illustrates that many of the inverse statements are problematic. --- Jura 05:46, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Derivative works

I can't tell from Q47430811 and Q47430839 whether these are derivative works or staged productions of Oedipus Rex (Q148643). Do you have any further information, or are you making your edits based on the information in them? I think they are editions of, and not derivative works, based on what I'm seeing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:17, 23 November 2018 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey: Hi,
I don't have any further information. I'm making my edits based on the information in them. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 01:38, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:41, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Quickstatements batch too quick?

Have a look at this: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q134556&curid=136299&diff=797173009&oldid=793857866

Fortunately, this seems to be the only one case. Thanks for your awareness. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 02:44, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Here's another one: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q156616&curid=157711&diff=797245998&oldid=797245982 Maybe "operated by" or "owner of" might be more appropriate? Moebeus (talk) And this one: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q184940&curid=183850&diff=797267701&oldid=797267681 Moebeus (talk) 02:52, 24 November 2018 (UTC) And this one: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q4010125&curid=3823101&diff=797182177&oldid=782780974 Is there a way to exclude partner-statements that link to non-humans maybe? Moebeus (talk) 02:58, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Ok, I have stopped all QuickStatements imports for now and I'll see to everything you said next week to seeks the problems. I need this week end. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 03:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Moebeus: Ok. I got 2 minutes to do this :

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel WHERE {?item wdt:P451 ?partenaire MINUS {{?partenaire wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q5 .} UNION {?partenaire wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q24199478 .} UNION {?partenaire wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q95074 .}} SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],fr" } }

Try it!

Keeping just humans is too restrictive. As we can see here, the property can be used for deities, fictional entities and even pandas ! For now, there's only 14 results and some of them are ok (the unknowns as for Jesus and Solomon). Do you think of a better request ? --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:15, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

I'm no expert but that looks good to me! I'd have to say that tuning your script to the point where it misses out on pandas maybe isn't such a bad thing? Just joking, good luck! Moebeus (talk)

Image imports

I've just noticed your image imports seem to be adding a few coats of arms images in image (P18) that might go better in coat of arms image (P94) - eg here. I've corrected the recent ones but you might want to keep an eye in case others turn up. Andrew Gray (talk) 16:33, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

@Andrew Gray:Hi,
Thanks for your awareness. I added the expression "arms." in the constraints of image (P18). I'll check back the batch when it will be done. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 18:05, 24 November 2018 (UTC)

Great, thanks! The regexp looks like a good approach. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:49, 25 November 2018 (UTC)

P131 vs P159

Hello, organisations are not "found in administrative entity", they just have headquarters there. Therefore, proper way to document that is not through located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) but rather headquarters location (P159). See how I corrected you. Thanks, --Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 11:28, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@Vojtěch Dostál: Hi,
There's 3/4 of a million of items about organisations with a P131 value. I'm not sure that we can classify them as easily as you said. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:39, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

owner of (P1830) sur Musée Saint-Raymond (Q1376)  ?

Bonjour Simon Villeneuve. J'ai vu que tu avais ajouté des déclarations owner of (P1830) sur l'élément Musée Saint-Raymond (Q1376) en inverse de owned by (P127) : Musée Saint-Raymond (Q1376). Il y a aujourd'hui plus de 900 œuvres de ce musée sur wikidata et on comprend vite que la pente de type d'édition massive peut être fâcheusement glissante. Si on suit la même logique l'élément France pourrait avoir des dizaines (centaines) de milliers de déclarations à terme. L'intérêt d'inverser des propriétés est réel et on fait par exemple régulièrement des doublons "partie de" / "comprend". Mais l'usage pour owned by (P127) / owner of (P1830) ne semble pas pertinent aujourd'hui pour des raisons purement pratiques. Si on fait une analyse du potentiel éditable :

SELECT DISTINCT SELECT (count(distinct ?item) as ?nb) ?item2 ?item2Label 
WHERE 
{
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q3305213.
  ?item wdt:P127 ?item2.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
} GROUP BY ?item2 ?item2Label 
ORDER BY DESC(?nb)

Try it!

L'élément Art Museum of Estonia (Q1754105) se retrouverait alors avec aujourd'hui environ 7600 déclarations owner of (P1830). Ne serait-il pas souhaitbale de supprimer ces déclarations owner of (P1830) sur Musée Saint-Raymond (Q1376) ? Ces déclarations sont partielles sur l'ensemble des œuvres et ne peuvent être complétées au risque de rendre l'élément saturé dans l'interface actuelle. Bien à toi. Shonagon (talk) 11:40, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

@Shonagon: Salut,
Si tu regardes un peu plus haut, tu peux voir que le sujet a été abordé à quelques reprises ici. Le champion est Museu Nacional d'Art de Catalunya (Q861252), avec plus de 10,000 éléments.
On a ouvert une discussion plus générale sur le Bistro. Mon avis est le même qu'à ce moment : la symétrie impose l'équivalence, peu importe la lourdeur que ça amène sur les éléments concernés. Si la lourdeur est un argument jugé pertinent par la communauté, alors il y aurait probablement moyen de créer des sous-éléments spécifiques pour diminuer la quantité de possessions (par exemple, le nom d'une institution particulière plutôt que le nom de l'État, la division des éléments par collection pour un musée, etc.).
Àmha, il n'y a pas 36 solutions. Soit on supprime ces propriétés amenant une quantité d'éléments trop grande (P1830, P4969, etc.), soit on accepte la symétrie. Mais ça reste mon avis personnel et puisque la communauté n'a pas jugé bon d'en discuter, je me suis désintéressé du sujet. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 12:38, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Merci Simon Villeneuve pour ta réponse. Je n'étais pas remonté assez haut et n'avais pas vu la discussion. Oui la symétrie devrait induire l'équivalence. Créer des sous-ensembles n'est en revanche pas toujours possible. Juridiquement, comme indiqué dans la base Joconde, les collections nationales sont propriétés de l'état et non des musées.

En effet il y a théoriquement 2 scénarios mais j'avoue ne pas avoir d'avis arrêté sur la question. D'un côté, l'idée de supprimer certaines propriétés, comme owner of (P1830), est séduisante à condition que l'information remonte dans l'interface de l'élément valeur. Pour les séries d'oeuvres d'art ou œuvres composites, "comprend"/P527 (inverse de "partie de"/p361) est vraiment utile à l'édition, et évite pas mal d'erreurs. D'un autre côté, garder toutes les déclarations inversée pourrait être théoriquement possible mais actuellement l'interface ne le permet pas.

Amha, nous sommes actuellement dans une 3e solution, théoriquement bancale mais assez pragmatique, on inverse les propriétés quand c'est pertinent et supportable dans l'interface actuelle, selon les propriétés, les domaines, les volumes (et peut-être aussi l'âge du capitaine). Hormis par exemple dans le domaine des œuvres d'art, c'est sans doute aujourd'hui pertinent, dans d'autres cas, d'inverser owned by (P127) et owner of (P1830). Pour le musée Saint-Raymond, je vais supprimer, au moins par cohérence avec les autres institutions et parce que cette édition est trop incomplète et ne peut être complétée. Bien à toi --Shonagon (talk) 13:06, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Commons categories

Please don’t add Commons Categories that are not exact matches to Wikidata items. You’ve added the same category to multiple kinds of embroidery stitches, and you’ve added the category for a book to its author. This is not how these links are supposed to work in Wikidata. Thanks, - PKM (talk) 20:07, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

@PKM: Ok. --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:22, 15 December 2018 (UTC)

Une modif

Salut Simon, tu penses quoi de ce genre de modifications? Est-ce que je devrais relancer un RA sur le sujet ou tu penses que je devrais laisser tomber? La dernière fois en août j'avais averti un arabophone à cause de ce genre de modification. Il a en résulté une RA [10] où il avait arrêter pour le bengali, le chinois et l'arabe, mais il a recommencé il y a quelques jours (Je l'ai vu à cause d'une rivière que j'avais sur ma LdS). J'espère avoir un peu de tes conseils, puisqu'il s'agit de quelqu'un dont j'ai un conflit latent. --Fralambert (talk) 05:02, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Salut @Fralambert:,
Effectivement, tu fais bien d'être « prudent » puisque tu es en conflit avec cet utilisateur.
Les RA me semblent la bonne initiative à prendre. Ça fait en sorte que d'autres se penchent sur le sujet et peuvent intervenir. Cela évite qu'on t'accuse de personnaliser le conflit. De plus, ça ajoute à la liste des interventions visant à réhabiliter le contributeur. Plus cette liste s'allonge, plus la patience s’amincit et plus les interventions seront lourdes. J'aimerais pouvoir ajouter « et plus il y a de chance qu'il y ait prise de conscience des erreurs et modification du comportement de l'utilisateur concerné », mais l'expérience semble montrer que ça ne marche pas vraiment comme ça. :( --Simon Villeneuve (talk) 11:37, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Je sais que les RA sur Wikidata sont plus cordiale. Bon, je me fait pas trop d'espoir sur cette dernière, mais bon qui sait. (J'ai l'impression qu'on là foutu dans une machine dans le temps et qu'on me l'a redonné avec des diffs de 5 mois passé) --Fralambert (talk) 14:46, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

Je viens de voir que @VIGNERON: lui a laisser un message sur sa Pdd. Je pense que je vais attendre un peu avant de lancer la RA. À moins que ce dernier pense que ça pourrait être bénéfique de la lancer en parallèle. --Fralambert (talk) 15:28, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

L'habitude est d'abord attendre une réponse avant de lancer une RA. Vu que ce contributeur continue malgré mon dernier message (sans compter tout les messages précédents), j'imagine qu'une RA est inéluctable mais laissons lui encore une chance. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 15:35, 16 December 2018 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: Tien, avec les reverts du chinois que tu as fait, je me demande si ça serait pas possible de programmer un bot pour réverter les libellé, alias et description les modifications qui utilisent un système d'écriture différent que prévu. --Fralambert (talk) 13:52, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Fralambert: c'est techniquement possible mais ce ne serait pas forcément une bonne idée car il existe quelques exceptions où l'utilisation d'un système d'écriture différent est justifié (.ca (Q39582) par exemple). Par contre, il est facile de faire une requête SPARQL pour les repérer et les corriger (heureusement ils sont assez peu nombreux) : https://query.wikidata.org/embed.html#SELECT%20DISTINCT%20%3Fitem%20%28%20CONCAT%28lcase%28substr%28%3FitemLabel%2C1%2C1%29%29%2C%20substr%28%3FitemLabel%2C2%29%29%20as%20%3Fnom%20%29%20WHERE%20%7B%0A%09%3Fitem%20wdt%3AP17%20wd%3AQ16%20%3B%20wdt%3AP31%2Fwdt%3AP279%2a%20wd%3AQ355304%20%3B%20rdfs%3Alabel%20%3FitemLabel%20.%0A%09FILTER%20%28lang%28%3FitemLabel%29%20%3D%20%22zh%22%29.%20%0A%09FILTER%20regex%20%28%3FitemLabel%2C%20%22%5Ba-z%5D%22%29.%0A%7D (en me limitant aux cours d'eau canadien). Sinon, sur Telegram, on me signale la possibilité de créer un Wikidata:Abuse filter pour bloquer un utilisateur spécifique sur un schéma particulier (je ne m'y connais pas trop en abuse filter mais je pourrais essayer de trouver ce schéma, ça pourrait être une solution intéressante de compromis plutôt qu'un brutal blocage). Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 14:15, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: Oui, ça pourrait être une option intéressante. Rapidement, il ne crée pas de problème quand il lie l'article à Wikipédia et il crée beaucoup moins de problème dans les fusions d'articles qu'avant son blocage de juin 2017. Son gros problème est qu'il utilise Google translate pour traduire dans les autres langues que le français. Ce qui nous donne des traductions parfois douteuses, voir illisibles. Donc le plus simple est de lui empêcher de modifier les labels, alias et descriptions des autres langues que le français (et peut être l'anglais je vous laisse juger). --Fralambert (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

@Fralambert: je viens de nouveau de lui laisser un message, sans réponse dans les jours à venir je laisserais un message aux admins. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2018 (UTC)