Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2020/08/20

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

Q98077491

Q98077491: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No such position --- Jura 07:33, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 07:41, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: I'm not sure what the concern is here. Can you elaborate? This is to follow a similar pattern to Member of the 1st Scottish Parliament (Q30580541). It's a more specific description of the position held for a specific time period, namely a Congress of the United States. It is a subclass of United States senator (Q4416090). This allows us to more smoothly and directly import the data from government data sources such as https://bioguideretro.congress.gov/Static_Files/data/S/S000033.xml. Since it's a different entity than United States senator (Q4416090) both can coexist while allowing a clear distinction of what they describe. I've collected information from government sources on all historical senators and plan on uploading them shortly following this pattern. If you can describe your concerns I'm sure we can address them. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 09:29, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

The position is just "US senator" or "member of the US senate". It may be different in the UK. If you create such an item, the P31 would require a solid reference. Please avoid creating database artificats (or importing them unchecked) or convert items to a model that may be suitable for the UK.

It's fairly embarrasing for the project that we now have three inconsistent statements for Kamala Harris (see Wikidata:Project_chat#Senator_Harris). --- Jura 09:38, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1:I'm sorry. I don't quite get your point. Senators are listed per government sources as occupying a senate seat by congress. I've offered sources to show this. Are you simply asserting that this isn't the case? Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 10:01, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

The problem is the statement at Q98077491#P31. It lacks a reference. Simple fix would probably be to replace Q98077491 with Q4416090 everywhere. --- Jura 09:55, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Fix for what? You haven't made your concern clear. As I said senators occupy a seat by congress. That's how the congress works. How does removing an item make up for a lack of a reference? Also United States senator (Q4416090) lacks a reference as well. I'm not following your logic.Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 10:01, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Sources on how to add a reference for the statement at Q98077491#P31. That "you say" isn't a reference. --- Jura 10:03, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Should we delete Q98077491 as well? This is feeling very arbitrary.

[edit] Sorry I meant United States senator (Q4416090) in this comment, hence the "as well". -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 10:07, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

This is why I listed it (Q98077491) here. It appears to be an artificat. Also, unless some other reference is given to confirm the label, it seems to be malformed. See Help:Labels on how to do label in Wikidata. --- Jura 10:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1:I'm not sure of the etiquette here, but is it common to request deletion of items created by others without discussion? I would think that would lead to unproductice edit wars wasting both resources and people's time. Shall we delete this request and continue the discussion on the talk page for Q98077491 -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 10:12, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

This is the place to discuss deletion request on Wikidata. If you think Q4416090 should be deleted, that would be another section, not here. --- Jura 10:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Again, that request was not made by the creator of the information and made without discussion with the creator. It strikes me as unproductive to unnecessarily force someone to react to a delete request when a healthy conversation can take place on the talk page. Please delete this request. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Is this some enwiki policy? --- Jura 11:11, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Per https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution#Resolving_user_conduct_disputes, let's move this discussion to a User talk page. I'm happy to have it on mine if you prefer.

Note: this appears to be a rehash of previous behaviour for which Jura1 came close to a topic ban: Wikidata:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive/2019/04#Q33129158:_unreferenced_statements_addition, Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2018/08/06#Q52474426, etc. --Oravrattas (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Wikidata is not enwiki. Your user page is not a suitable place for to discuss deletion requests. --- Jura 11:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Moreover, it has scared Teester away from Wikidata. He is no longer a user because of this. Again, my goal is not to "get" anyone. I'd be more than happy if this is made into a productive conversation. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 11:27, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: To be explicit: The discussion is about how to make this conversation productive, not about the information itself. You have ignored all my references to source data on the topic itself. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 22:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

I don't mind discussing your way of discussing things, but apparently you consider that harrassment. The problem is that this isn't really the place to do that: Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions is for deletions.

As mentioned before, references should be added to the items themselves per Help:Sources. I can't make much of your sentence ("You have ignored all my references to source data on the topic itself.").

Labels on items should be consistent with Help:Labels. If you have more questions about how to apply either, please use Wikidata:Project chat.

A clear way how to fix the statements for consistency with the format Teester opted for was already given. Let's not re-invent the wheel and move forward. --- Jura 16:52, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: First, you argued strenuously against Teester's way of doing things. Second this is not re-inventing the wheel. As I mentioned to you elsewhere and in this very chat, this new format will disambiguate the two types of entries that you claim cause confusion. Also mentioned previously this is part of an on going project to unify and complete all such entries for all historical U.S. senators. You have not acknowledged a single piece of information offered to you. This does not qualify as a discussion. Making me provide references to conversations you're involved in is a form of harassment. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 22:21, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

For other readers of this thread, can you provide links to the argument about Teester's model you refer to (the one that is generally used for this position except Q98077491) and the new "project to unify" you refer to? --- Jura 13:56, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not about to read all of this. But I heard that Teester isn't editing anymore? Um, he's been missing for a few hours. How is that relevant? Quakewoody (talk) 23:24, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

@Quakewoody: Let's say it's not relevant and get back to the point. There is nothing wrong with this entry. This delete request should be removed. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk)

If it's not relevant, why would you mention it here? --- Jura 13:54, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Since it's not relevant let's drop it. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 21:38, 17 August 2020 (UTC)

Well you brought it up, can you respond on the relevant points above? --- Jura 01:56, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura: I have already. Can you make it clear which ones you think are open? -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 23:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

My comment above: "For other readers of this thread, can you provide links to the argument about Teester's model you refer to (the one that is generally used for this position except Q98077491) and the new "project to unify" you refer to? ". --- Jura 04:35, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Can you explain your concern? I never heard back what specifically concerns you. Is it the inconsistency? Without understanding what we're trying to resolve this is just busy work. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 06:17, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

It's points you brought up. If you don't want to elaborate, I think we can just delete this, clean up and move on. --- Jura 06:20, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Let's not go round in circles. If you don't have any practical concerns, let's just delete this request and move on. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 06:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Indeed: you keep bringing up points in discussions that are either irrelevant or false. Let's delete the item, as we still haven't seen a reference for it. We can then clean up the inconsistency that was added recently. --- Jura 06:42, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

@Jura1: Do you have specific concerns or not? If not, please don't delete anything. That's vandalism. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 06:44, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

References for what? For the instance of? There are 112942 instances of instance of (P31) position (Q4164871). Of those only 775 have references on them. Of those, the vast majority are simply imported from Wikimedia project (P143)

SELECT ?refType (count(*) as ?refTypeCnt) WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q4164871 .
  ?item p:P31 ?inst.
  ?inst ps:P31 wd:Q4164871;
        prov:wasDerivedFrom ?ref.
  ?ref ?refType ?reference.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
} group by (?refType)

Try it!

-- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Many statements on Wikidata still need references: I think we all know that. The others aren't up for deletion or haven't been challenged. It has now been four days and we still haven't seen the requested reference, this despite that we have drawn your attention to Help:Sources and the way to add them to Wikidata. --- Jura 09:03, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Please explain what makes this one different. Also, please explain what you expect of a reference. There clearly aren't enough examples to know what you're talking about. Also please explain your concern in clear terms. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

In any event this seems arbitrary and not enough justification for deleting an entry. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I'd expect that the reference allows to verify that such a position exists and isn't just a term of Q4416090. OTH, it seems fairly straightforward to find a reference for Q4416090#P31.

Can you answer the two open questions on my side as well? "For other readers of this thread, can you provide links to the argument about Teester's model you refer to (the one that is generally used for this position except Q98077491) and the new "project to unify" you refer to? ". --- Jura 12:45, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

The very first post in this very thread shows a link making it clear that such a position exists. [1] Senator Harris was United States senator in the 116th Congress. Q98077491 represents the position of United States senator (Q4416090) identity of subject in context (P4649) 116th United States Congress (Q28227688) as this entity has always indicated. Please give examples of entities of position references which do what you're requesting here. It should be easier with the SPARQL query above. I'm not sure what argument you're talking about. Please clarify. Also, you haven't made clear what the ultimate goal is here. What will having this answer accomplish? -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 19:58, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Again this seems far from standard practice and hence no basis for requesting deletion. Let's remove this deletion request and continue this discussion on the talk page. Requesting deletion to force a reaction is not behavior conducive to a cooperative environment. -- Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 20:11, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Not deleted There are clearly deeper issues here than this one item, but there is no consensus to delete the item. If this item should be deleted, by the same logic Q98081012, Q98082336, and every other Congress' version should be deleted, as well as those for other countries. I suggest opening a discussion with the relevant WikiProject, or an RfC, if there is a desire to remove all such items. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:06, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q98476949

Rue Hubert Colombier (Q98476949): no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Doublon TCY (talk) 04:24, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Stanglavine, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 00:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q98509847

Q98509847: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

No such category in other wikis, whether spanish or english Prahlad (tell me all about it / private venue) (Please {{ping}} me) 21:29, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by Stanglavine (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 00:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q98510584

Category:Nature reserves in Landkreis Ostallgäu (Q98510584): Wikimedia category: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty doublet of Q98382906 --Olaf Studt (talk) 21:36, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Stanglavine, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 00:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q15635201

Picture of the Year (Q15635201): Wikimedia project page: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Redundancy. Same than Q28155311. Only the link to c:Commons:Picture of the Year is correct, and thus should probably be moved. --Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 1 other. --DeltaBot (talk) 00:10, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

They should be merged; the sl: link, which was added later, looks like something similar to Commons:Featured pictures (Q73329740). Peter James (talk) 09:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Agree they should be merged. How to do that? Can we just remove the main link to Commons, on the first one (Q15635201), and then add it to the 2nd one (Q28155311)? I think the sl: link should be ignored. Thanks, Peter James. -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Special:MergeItems, or "merge" in the menu (can be enabled from Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets - there is also "move" which adds a "move" button next to statements and sitelinks). The sl: link is also "picture of the year", I thought it was just "featured pictures", as that's what the top part of it describes, but the subpage /Slika_leta is picture of the year. It's possible that Q15635201 is a general "picture of the year" and Q28155311 is specifically Commons:Picture of the Year, because of the official website (P856) and links to the item. There is also the difference between "competition" and "project page". Peter James (talk) 10:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Peter James, the official website of Q28155311 is the same page than the target of Q15635201 (other site: Commons). How is it possible? -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I've mentioned it at Wikidata:Project chat#Two items that should have the same sitelink. Peter James (talk) 09:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Could the categories on Commons be merged? - сyсn - (talk • contribs • logs) 06:16, 16 April 2020 (UTC)

One is a category, the other is a project page. The category could be removed, but what is preventing them being merged is that one is a competition specifically on Commons, the other is a project page which has the same page on Commons and an equivalent Wikipedia page that it should be linked to. Peter James (talk) 17:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Merged, so

Not deleted. Hazard-SJ (talk) 01:35, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q91030617

Pokémon Red and Green (Q91030617): 1996 video games: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Published in difference region.Can be treated as same game. Meger to Q637137. MirrorWuu (talk) 08:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 08:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

It looks like they are different combinations of Pokémon Red (Q25536523), Pokémon Blue (Q25536524) and Pokémon Green (Q11942165); there are probably structural reasons to keep them separate, as well as different dates and identifiers (although some of the identifiers look like they should be on the parts). If combined it would look like there was an earlier release date for Pokémon Blue, for example. Peter James (talk) 13:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Notified participants of WikiProject Pokémon ^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:32, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

These two items refers to different games (Red and Green have been published in Japan in 1996 while Red and Blue worldwide in 1998) and they also have different identifiers. Wikidata is not Wikipedia: if items refer to different items they must have different Q-items. I'm against the merging and the deletion (WD:N #2) --★ → A ir on 90 09:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Not deleted. Hazard-SJ (talk) 01:43, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q96313197

Wanted: Strong Woman (Q96313197): 2019 short film directed by Marilyn Cooke: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not notable, together with Q96313343. MovieFex (talk) 04:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Keep Please also provide an explanation why it is not notable instead of just claiming it. According to this source the movie was shown at several film festivals. -- Discostu (talk) 09:28, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Keep, found in 3 festivals and one article. Short films find it harder to achieve blockbuster notoriety and what I have found seems sufficient. —Eihel (talk) 13:46, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

In the meantime, it has identifiers. --- Jura 12:50, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Not deleted. Hazard-SJ (talk) 01:53, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q59391587

Q59391587: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Not sure if it is a duplicate of classified heritage immovable (Q13789518) of classified heritage site (Q14124496). Unused. Fralambert (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by Hazard-SJ (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 02:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q97221218

Holtzbrinck Publishing Group (Q97221218): privately held German company: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Wait for locaal deletion Quakewoody (talk) 16:32, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

Done Redirect created by User:Gnoeee, you can do it yourself next time. --DeltaBot (talk) 04:41, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q98516696

Q98516696: no description: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Test item Prahlad (tell me all about it / private venue) (Please {{ping}} me) 02:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Deleted by Gnoeee (talk • contribs • logs) --DeltaBot (talk) 05:00, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

Q79179892

Joanna Orne-Gliemann (Q79179892): researcher: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Does not meet the notability policy. HarryNº2 (talk) 03:26, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

On hold This item is linked from 10+ others. --DeltaBot (talk) 03:30, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

First please perform due diligence and state why it does not meet notability policy. It is a scientist who has through multiple papers multiple co-authors. When you delete these items with a wrong notion of notability, you are a force of destruction. It is hard to get the data back. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 08:19, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Not deleted - the item has enough back-links to notable publications.-❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 05:37, 20 August 2020 (UTC)