Wikidata:Requests for permissions/RfPropertyCreator/June 2021
This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion. |
Contents
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
Gymnicus
Gymnicus (talk • contribs • new items • new lexemes • SUL • Block log • User rights log • User rights • xtools)
Hello everybody. I would like to get even more involved here in Wikidata. That's why I want to apply for this right. This would enable me to help edit the property suggestions that have been accumulated in the area of sport. I have already suggested several properties in this area myself. In addition, I have already made several edits to various identifiers myself so that they can be better used as a reference. If I meet the requirements for this right, I would be happy to help Wikidata. Gymnicus (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
- On hold until 20:01, 6 May 2021 per policy --DannyS712 (talk) 05:17, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Question @Gymnicus: You seem to hold some non-mainstream opinions on notability (I’m not saying that they are wrong or unfounded, they just seem to be at odds with other users’ opinions). Do you feel that you also hold non-mainstream opinions on property creation? --Emu (talk) 10:25, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Emu: Regarding the creation, I would clearly say no, because the four-eyes principle is used here, right? At least that's how I understood it. In the sports area now often ArthurPSmith who has the rights of the property creator has marked the proposed properties as "ready" and then they are executed by another user who has the rights of the property creator. With this four eyes principle, I see no danger because if I mark a property as “ready”, the other user then checks this decision again. --Gymnicus (talk) 10:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- I understand, but given your recent behaviour (see here), I’m not quite sure it would be a good idea to give you additional permissions at this point. But in the end, it’s not up to me. --Emu (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Emu: I don't understand now what one has to do with the other. But if you want, we can agree that I do not make any decisions about proberties that Mahir suggested. --Gymnicus (talk) 10:48, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- I understand, but given your recent behaviour (see here), I’m not quite sure it would be a good idea to give you additional permissions at this point. But in the end, it’s not up to me. --Emu (talk) 10:00, 9 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Emu: Regarding the creation, I would clearly say no, because the four-eyes principle is used here, right? At least that's how I understood it. In the sports area now often ArthurPSmith who has the rights of the property creator has marked the proposed properties as "ready" and then they are executed by another user who has the rights of the property creator. With this four eyes principle, I see no danger because if I mark a property as “ready”, the other user then checks this decision again. --Gymnicus (talk) 10:58, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support (PCRE syntax to improve) —Eihel (talk) 09:02, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ameisenigel (talk) 21:39, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Gymnicus: Could you please provide a few diffs showing you have worked with properties?--Ymblanter (talk) 19:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter: What do you mean by working with properties exactly? Your question is a bit unspecific, I could show you a lot of edits and not show what you want. --Gymnicus (talk) 20:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- I just read in the requirements above: Administrators may add the property creator flag to the accounts of users who: are generally trusted members of the community, preferably with at least some history in working with properties ... --Ymblanter (talk) 20:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter: Okay, then I have to answer in the dark again. As I already wrote in my "application" above, I have already suggested several qualities. Here is an overview:
- Number of conferences – This is my first suggested property. The discussion is still ongoing, so you are welcome to participate.
- IBSF competition ID (IBSF competition ID (P9535)) – This is the first created property that was suggested by me.
- won sets, DTB artistic gymnast ID – I also suggested these two properties, but they are probably controversial, which is why the discussion is still ongoing. You are also welcome to participate there.
- These are the properties I have suggested so far. In principle, there is the property lost sets on top of that. But because it goes hand in hand with won sets it makes no sense to propose it until the property won sets has not been created. Not only do I propose properties, I also edit, expand, and revise properties. A very recent example is the property VBL people ID (P4298). I made some basic edits on this property because the current layout wasn't correct. In addition, I also edit properties through my source work, as some identifiers are only set to be used as a value, although they can also be used as a source. I hope these explanations are sufficient for now. If not, I would be happy to receive a more detailed description of the required information. --Gymnicus (talk) 16:36, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter: Okay, then I have to answer in the dark again. As I already wrote in my "application" above, I have already suggested several qualities. Here is an overview:
- I just read in the requirements above: Administrators may add the property creator flag to the accounts of users who: are generally trusted members of the community, preferably with at least some history in working with properties ... --Ymblanter (talk) 20:26, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Ymblanter: What do you mean by working with properties exactly? Your question is a bit unspecific, I could show you a lot of edits and not show what you want. --Gymnicus (talk) 20:08, 7 June 2021 (UTC)
- Done--Ymblanter (talk) 16:48, 8 June 2021 (UTC)