Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2020/01/13

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.

Q741032

trigger point (Q741032): discrete spot in taut bands of muscle that produce local and referred pain when muscle bands are compressed: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

It should be merged with trigger point (Q1956673) as they refer to the same concept. --Nasch92 (talk) 11:31, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

They both have a zh.wp link, can someone native check if that is true they are the same? Q.Zanden questions? 23:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 14:50, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

@Lakokat: Please take a look. Thanks in advance! Bencemac (talk) 12:26, 8 June 2019 (UTC)

Bencemac, I suggest to ping editors of both zhwiki articles instead: @Kasuga, Waihorace, Winstonlighter, Wolfch, Kolyma:@Tigerzeng: plus bot operators of bots that edited: @Luckas Blade, Toto Azéro, Addshore, 和平奮鬥救地球, Emaus:, if they agree merging of articles, them let them, but if not, them both should keep normally. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:38, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

@Nasch92, QZanden, Bencemac, Liuxinyu970226: For starters, don't get mad at me, because I don't understand much. I add something to advance the debate (or not =( ). dewiki, perhaps: (translated) From a pathophysiological point of view, myogelosis is probably the same phenomenon as the “trigger point”. The term myogelosis emphasizes the palpable hardening of the muscles, while the term trigger point emphasizes the painfulness and the appearance of the contracted muscle bundles… (with ref) Looking forward. —Eihel (talk) 00:32, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Eihel: Well, @Wolfch: suggested to merge both zhwiki articles. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:35, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Eihel, QZanden, Bencemac, Liuxinyu970226, Wolfch: As a physiotherapist, there is only one kind of trigger point referred to in scientific literature as a nodule, band or knot involving the muscle and its surrounding connective tissue. This term has an abbreviation: trigger point, more commonly used among the laypeople, but they both refer to the same concept.--Nasch92 (talk) 23:23, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

I have requested to merge these two articles in zhwiki[1].--Wolfch (talk) 01:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

Not done, not a candidate for deletion.-- H^akan·IST 07:24, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q20984678

eater (Q20984678): human or other live being who eats something: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

@Thierry Caro, Sjoerddebruin: I don't think that "eater" is really an occupation, or that pointing to this item with subclass of (P279) or occupation (P106) is the proper way to model that something eats something else. I don't think this item serves any real purpose. Yair rand (talk) 03:28, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 2 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:30, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Keep. It's OK. Thierry Caro (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Comment @Yair rand: if this is not the proper way, how would you suggest to do it? In particular, I'm thinking about competitive eaters like Molly Schuyler (Q6896676) who do have for principal - and sometimes professional - occupation to be an eater. Until then I would lean towards

Keep. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

@VIGNERON: One's occupation can be participating in eating competitions, but one's occupation can't be "being an entity that eats". (I see that User:Thierry Caro has created competitive eater (Q63554580) for the actual occupation, which is more accurate.) man-eater (Q1365331) and Cookie Monster (Q1754267) are not modeled in a way that makes sense, though. We have main food source (P1034), though I'm not sure that would work here. --Yair rand (talk) 18:37, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q19907064

Q19907064: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty item --Sakhalinio (talk) 08:25, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:31, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by HakanIST (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 07:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q10272232

Q10272232: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty item --Sakhalinio (talk) 08:27, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:31, 10 January 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by HakanIST (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 07:20, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q42811782

Beth Kustan (Q42811782): village in Midyat, Mardin, Turkey: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

? E4024 (talk) 15:43, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 15:50, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Looks like a duplicate of Beth Kustan (Q1004629); the German article that mentions this name links it to that item and https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=dqpEBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA246 mentions Bekusyone as another name. Peter James (talk) 16:33, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

@MB-one: you created the item nominated for deletion here. Can you remember where you got this information from and whether it is indeed a duplicate as indicated above? Thanks, MisterSynergy (talk) 10:37, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:HakanIST, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:30, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q77285095

Arctic Data Center (Q77285095): data repository in the United States providing data about Arctic regions: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not Notable P134toP4913 (talk) 07:09, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 10:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I am giving this a weak keep based on the fact that it has a notable founder. Quakewoody (talk)

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:36, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q25649159

Phalacrocorax melanoleucos (Q25649159): species of bird: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Duplicate of Q783177 and with less info. Should be merged to Q783177. As a newbie I was overwhelmed by merging so I couldn't do it myself yet. I am not an expert on this subject so this probably should be confirmed by someone.

Other similar cases: Q28106685 (Q703790 is the better article), Q27452709 (Q47109 is better), Q20782128 (Q45696 is better).

I found these because the description couldn't be edited (duplicate label/description combination). All of them seem to be synonyms of the same species. --Epätiedoton (talk) 15:16, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 15:21, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.: expert help would be appreciated. What to do here? Can someone please repair the items or indicate whether I should use the admin tools or tell that everything is fine as it is? Thanks in advance! —MisterSynergy (talk) 18:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

It shouldn't be deleted, since Phalacrocorax melanoleucos is a valid taxon name (P225) and therefore worthy of an individual Wikidata item. However since it is a taxon synonym (P1420) rather than a valid taxon it must be marked as an instance of synonym (Q1040689) rather than an instance of taxon (Q16521). Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 18:31, 13 December 2019 (UTC).

Synonyms ARE NOT aliases, but valid taxon names. They should never be merged. There is also an issue with marking them as instances of synonym rather than taxon, sonce (for plants), many authorities do not agree. MargaretRDonald (talk) 19:21, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

You're right. As I said, it shouldn't be deleted, but of course they shouldn't be merged either. Thanks for specifying that. As for the synonym marking I'm not a botanist, but you're right there as well. –Tommy Kronkvist (talk), 21:12, 15 December 2019 (UTC).

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:37, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q62102265

Aline Dajoz (Q62102265): English teacher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Doesn't seem to pass WD:N --Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:42, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 7 others. --DeltaBot (talk) 21:50, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Keep All the people with own WD items related to her have Wikipedia pages. I'm afraid/supposing that this item may be re-created later anyway, justifying it by a sctructural need (WD:N #3) and in order to complete the "family tree". --Wolverène (talk) 07:55, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
Keep as noted above.

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:39, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q78590622

Q78590622: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Nonsense P134toP4913 (talk) 10:45, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

I can't read the language, but the item is linked to a wikisource page. Quakewoody (talk)
The item itself doesn't need to be deleted (as it contains a Wikisource sitelink), but the label/description/alias in Moroccan Arabic it was created with seemed to be nonsense indeed, so I removed those. Not sure what kind of instance of (P31) statements need to be added in such cases of Wikisource copies of texts. --Kam Solusar (talk) 18:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
The other items Q19173464, Q19173467 and Q19173471 are instances of fairy tale (Q699), but it would probably be more accurate to say that they are versions of Death's Messengers (Q878937). Peter James (talk) 18:28, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
Oppose The given "nonsense" seems to be self-reffering. - сyсn - (talk • contribs • logs) 12:26, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:43, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q80913172

45th parallel (Q80913172): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Double entry --Wendelin (talk) 21:55, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 22:05, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

What is the other item you are speaking of? Quakewoody (talk) 22:10, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Wendelin: Unfortunately it cannot be merged with 45th parallel north (Q1256191) or 45th parallel south (Q1390836). The thing is that german wikipedia chose to include both these in the same article. The corresponding item, 45th parallel (Q80913172) follows the same philosophy. So I cannot see any solution other than keep it as is at least until the German Wikipedia article stays as is. --Kostas20142 (talk) 22:24, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

which is why I asked what item they were talking about. I mean, it is possible that there is a duplicate out there other than what we can "easily" see. Quakewoody (talk) 13:16, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:45, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q17990971

public enterprise (Q17990971): business organization wholly or partly owned by a government and controlled through a public authority: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Should be merged with Q270791 --Merkasso (talk) 10:37, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 10:40, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

By chance, are you a Communist? Quakewoody (talk) 12:05, 7 January 2020 (UTC)

And I am not trying to be a wiseguy. I am just wondering why private and public business should be merged. And the only thing I can come up with is that on the ideological spectrum, you are somewhere close to marxism. Quakewoody (talk)

@Quakewoody: Their proposal is to merge state-owned enterprise (Q270791) and public enterprise (Q17990971) --Kostas20142 (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Comment there is a sitelink conflict for some wikis, notably ptwiki were a merger request has been previously failed. --Kostas20142 (talk) 12:36, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

The fact that they have articles on the same projects means WD can't do anything about it. Plus, while similar, they are different ideas. Quakewoody (talk) 13:34, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

I think this was a newcomer's mistake. --Wolverène (talk) 04:35, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Not done then.-- H^akan·IST 07:46, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Q66907689

Q66907689: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Previously nominated. Prematurely closed. Awaiting one more article deletion. --Quakewoody (talk) 19:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Originally nominated with Cross-wiki spam for a subject with no relevance whatsoever, speedy deletion has been requested on all projects affected. Archived here.
I really wish people would be more careful when they close a nomination. There's been more than 2 dozen articles deleted, with one still remaining. There was absolutely no reason to close the WD nomination. Quakewoody (talk) 19:20, 6 December 2019 (UTC)
- we just need somebody who can clean up in vo:Klad:Pads moükabik, there are this rapper and many other useless pages... --Wolverène (talk) 23:35, 14 December 2019 (UTC)

I would much rather you self-revert the removal of the WP link from the item. We all know that it is going to be deleted, followed by the item deleted from WD. But until it actually gets deleted, all it takes is for someone to revert/remove the present edits and nominations. Quakewoody (talk) 00:06, 15 December 2019 (UTC)