User talk:Andrew J.Kurbiko

Welcome to Wikidata, Andrew J.Kurbiko!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards! Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:06, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

Elementy Q105298919 i Q29642658 są o tym samym. Niepotrzebnie tworzyłeś duplikat.

Hello, in your quickstatements batch https://quickstatements.toolforge.org/#/batch/3984 you have added incorrect P31 statements to many coin types for example Q12157398.

The same seems to have happened in other batches of yours. Can you change the property to P279 or use coin type (Q113813711) as value?

Check Wikidata:WikiProject Numismatics for details.

Why did you merged streets with their surroundings (like https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q63323496&diff=1557207694&oldid=1531630939 )? These items are not the same - one is a street, the second is an architectural complex.

There is Q1497364 (building complex) but in this case complex=each building with that street address, so effectively the entire street is one complex. Having several items is absolutely excessive.

Hello Vunj9lx57t275txi,

Really sorry for the inconvenience. This is a gentle note to request that you check your email. We sent you a message titled "The Community Insights survey is coming!". If you have questions, email surveys@wikimedia.org.

You can see my explanation here.

Hi! You added a bunch of elevation above sea level (P2044) statements with unit “http://www.wikidata.org/entity/undefined”, see error report e.g. here. Please fix them.

Hong Kong is not a sovereign country, and wasn't it in any historic periods, that's a SAR of China, and was a BNO area.

HK is not China, so for different items it's logical to put it as a country. Then, the HK has P:17 Country:China in its own item, so the hierarchy will be kept.

Following the same reasons, shouldn't I call Scotland as "logical to put it as a country", and Scotland should have P:17 UK, which also won't break any hierarchies?

Scotland has no borders and own passports. But I am not going to argue with you about the world order. I simply import data from wikipedias. They always have a link with a reference. For similar reasons some people have, for example, England as their citizenship (see https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q73612&oldid=1040541916). I see nothing wrong about it. And you can always help and put a more detailed value.

Guys, Hong Kong is Never Ever a country, it's a part of China!

Yes, Hong Kong peoples always issue(ing/ed) their own passport, but their passports' cover says "中華人民共和國香港特別行政區護照 Hong Kong Special Administrative Region People's Republic of China Passport", how isn't this indicate that their nationalities are part of?

Share your experience in this survey

Hi V7p6xqpmn12mnj9z,

A couple of weeks ago, we invited you to take the Community Insights Survey. It is the Wikimedia Foundation’s annual survey of our global communities. We want to learn how well we support your work on wiki. We are 10% towards our goal for participation. If you have not already taken the survey, you can help us reach our goal! Your voice matters to us.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 19:53, 20 September 2019 (UTC)

Dear Andrew! As far as I know, the state railway company is NOT the operator of ČHR. They are their own organization.--Jetam2 (talk) 15:30, 15 September 2019 (UTC)

Share your experience in this survey

Hi V72pe4lbjgqk7c2g,

The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey about your experience with Wikidata and Wikimedia. The purpose of this survey is to learn how well the Foundation is supporting your work on wiki and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation.

Please take 15 to 25 minutes to give your feedback through this survey. It is available in various languages.

This survey is hosted by a third-party and governed by this privacy statement (in English).

Find more information about this project. Email us if you have any questions, or if you don't want to receive future messages about taking this survey.

Sincerely,

RMaung (WMF) 17:37, 10 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi Andrew, for commissioning dates of power stations using service entry (P729) instead of work period (start) (P2031) is better, because P2031 is for people. Could you change your edits please?

Technically i can, but lets talk about it. Before making mass edits i checked popular articled. Q12514 and Q172822 both have P2031. It seems to be a popular mistake. Should we do something about it?

Thanks. I have also seen this usage sometimes before, but not very often. In the case of Three Gorges Dam (Q12514) and Hoover Dam (Q172822), I guess, User:Amadalvarez used it because work period (start) (P2031) has no Catalan description and can be misunderstood therefore. I added as a workaround. What else could be done? Adding a type constraint "human" to work period (start) (P2031) would make sense, but I'm unsure about possible side effects, so I won't do this myself.

Thanks for change wrong property. Have you changed some other dam, or just this two ?.

I already fixed all instance of (P31) = gravity dam (Q3497167), dome dam (Q56631985), earth-fill dam (Q47499777), arch dam (Q890545), arch-gravity dam (Q357679).

@Andrew J.Kurbiko tell me which P31 have those 2000 items and I'll change them with a quickstatement, if you wish, of course

They look like Q56357203. I used ''hydroelectric power station'' and I am absolutely sure it is correct. There is a duality because each dam is also a power plant. Category in uk.wiki is here.

@Andrew J.Kurbiko Two things: A) I changed in the 2 items affected. However, my offer was to change P2031 by P729 in WD, not to get from template. I just used Harvesttemplate a few times because it doesn't run too much well for formats different of "element" or "string". Probably in date, it dislike the brackets or the date format (yy-mm-dd / dd-mm-yyyy /....). I don't know; Sorry.

B) An ''hydroelectric power station'' is not always a dam (Q12323), but usually it "is in a dam (Q12323)". For instance, in Catalonia we have ''hydroelectric power station in a valley, at the end of a several km. pipe (Q41551) that bring water from a lake at top of the mountains. Without dam.

I invite you to visit ca:Plantilla:Infotaula_edifici#Presa_vs_embassament_o_pantà where we have the ontology description of all the WD properties involved in dam (Q12323) + Reservoir (Q131681). Sorry for the catalan text. However, if you have "english" in your preferences, it will be easier to understand and you can see the generated infoboxes also in english (the first one is for the "dam article" and the second one is for "reservoir article"; don't care on the third one).

Thank you very much! You helped a lot. Catalan is not a problem, i will manage. I am actually jealous because it is organized much better than Ukrainian version. Will try to study it and continue those imports later.

See also en:Template:Infobox power station#Parameters (and Wikidata talk:WikiProject Energy#Identifying how to store power station data), which was mainly worked out by Rehman (that's why I pinged him below).

Good job. I'll take note for infobox oriented to "energy production". In the sample I showed you, the focus are dam+reservoir and the data related to energy are limited to hydroelectric one. I'll take a glance to check if I can improve with this inventaire. Thanks, again

@Andrew J.Kurbiko If you wish, I can share a XLS that show up a data-entry template and generates all properties and its qualifiers to fill both items: dam & reservoir. Then, copy & paste in a quickstatement and that's all.

By the way, our core infoboxes (6 infoboxes cover 70% of all cawiki) are multilingual and you can see them also in ukrainian. I'll show next october in WikidataCon, and my plans are share them among other WPs.

Today, I only changed these two. In the past months, I've probably changed some others, but not many (only when spotted by accident).

look my previous message (done after your answer, sorry). I changed all those P31. Really, not more than 10 items

All previous edits made by me are cancelled.

Maybe you can help we with further import? Ukrainian wiki has more than 2000 articles about those dams. I use HarvestTemplates, but for service entry (P729) its not working and says //Constraint violation: Type undefined//.

Sorry, I don't know how to handle such issues with the HarvestTemplates tool; never used it. But service entry (P729) has type contraints "facility" and "building", which should cover all power stations via subclass(es). Maybe the "undefinded" bit comes from the template uk:Шаблон:Картка:Сучасна споруда (used at uk:Гребля Гувера)?

No, they look like this

https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%93%D0%95%D0%A1_%D0%A1%D0%B0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B0%D1%86 and use Template:Infobox dam

Maybe Rehman has an idea how commissioning dates are handled best in power station templates, and how they can be imported via the HarvestTemplates tool?

Hi Te750iv. Thanks for the ping. I'm sorry, I haven't heard of HarvestTemplates tool before, so I cannot comment on that aspect. Is there something in particular we are trying to achieve? (sorry I couldn't follow the thread above)

With regards to commissioning dates, we currently use P729 as that is the property for "commissioned" or "date commissioned" (it is the official terminology used for power stations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_commissioning ). Please let me know if I did not understand your question.

@Rehman@Te750iv I red the Wikidata talk:WikiProject Energy#Identifying how to store power station data, and specially the ontology proposal in en:Template:Infobox power station#Parameters

Do you know/have some WD items [well] filled as it is described, in order to have a case study of the different typologies ?. Thanks

I don't know of any outstanding "almost complete" power station item. Some items are ok, but most of them are incomplete in one or the other aspect, or come with a mixture of statements following different schemes. It's rather easy to describe a thermal power station or a wind farm as a coherent structure in one Wikidata item. But hydropower seems a special case, because Wikipedia articles often differ in terms of "what it is about". Is an article/item about a dam/barrage (= focus on architecture, building/structure aspects), about a reservoir including its dam (= focus on hydrological features, geographically larger perspective), or specifically about a power station (= focus on the electricity side)? These differences are imported to Wikidata items depending on sources/languages used. And which approach should be followed in which case (covering all aspects in one item, or divide into different but interconnected items)? Maybe it's time to select a set of power stations of different types that we can try to "make perfect" together (a bit like showcase items)? Suggestions?

Thanks, @Te750iv. I had supposed that you already had a collection of items "made according to the criteria" that you had set. You have made a coherent model among all the different types of power plants.

It is true that many items in WD inherit structures designed for WP infoboxes and articles. For this reason, I divided the dam of the reservoir in the case of hydroelectric plants. The lack of properties relative to the plant in my [current] model is due to my lack of knowledge about energy. That's why I was interested in how you had resolved.

I have started preparing the changes to my infobox to be able to apply the criteria you have set, as well as a game of model articles to try and show.

If I encounter any problem in implementing the criterion that you have set, I'll share with you and @Rehman.

We keep in touch

To make it clear: all thanks for these energy-related infobox/criteria/model efforts should not go to me (wasn't really involved), but to Rehman (and potentially some other users).

To lighten this topic on Andrew's talk page, I've moved the suggestion for a collection of "best practice" power station items to WikiProject Energy's talk page.

You're right, @Te750iv. With this new perspective, is better to migrate to a temathic page. Let's go there.

Thanks, @Andrew J.Kurbiko for hosting us for a while.