User talk:Llywelyn2000

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Llywelyn2000/Archive 1 on 2016-02-09.

You've likely seen me reverting many of the changes you made in August 2020 to Irish bird names. I'm not sure what the source was but almost all of them are incorrect. I've been cross-referencing with the official names at tearma.ie so I'll eventually have those cleaned up.

More worrying is the fact that you appear to have added Manx Gaelic names as Scottish Gaelic in Wikidata (both the label and the common name). Would it be possible for you to do a mass revert of all of those changes? See for example Q235057.

Hi Kevin. The source used was [https://www.avionary.info/explandict/monticola-saxatilis/ Avionary, here], which is usually excellent. I added 'Smólach creige' as that is the term used by Avionary. I can't find Avionary's source however.

I see that you're using 'The National Terminology Database for Irish', which, I should think, has more authority.

Manx / Scottish: yes, indeed these can be reverted if they're incorrect. I'll check these out tomorrow. There's only a handful of Manx names.

The main sources of Irish bird names on Avionary are: Diarmaid O’hAirt and tearma.ie.

Mmm. Yes, you're right with the Manx names having been placed as gd. As there so few of them, I'll do them manually and add refs. in the next few days. Thanks for the heads up on this.

Interesting about Avionary. Those would be in principle reliable sources, but the names I reverted were in conflict with the terms on téarma.ie and in standard dictionaries. All cleaned up now so it's no big deal. And thanks for the handling those Manx names. Best regards!

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner.

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner.

I see that you created then emptied this item (probably linked to the previous discussion), why did you do that? this is considered bad form.

Either, you merge them (probably the best solution if I understood right the previsou discussion) or you ask for deletion, don't leave empty item like that.

Thanks Dexbot. The automated cleaner works well.

We still have an empty item, this is no good ; please do something about it.

Any particular reason that you removed instance of (P31) = civil parish (Q1115575) from Kenwyn (Q6392533) ? (diff) ?

Kenwyn is still very much a live civil parish according to ONS : .

It's important that we should be able to query for all civil parishes within a larger location, so this P31 value was needed.

Also, without this instance of (P31) value, items within the parish will show a constraint error on statements which say located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) = Kenwyn.

If you have made any more edits like this, please fix them.

Kenwyn (Q6392533) is a village (Q532) and suburb of Truro. Kenwyn Civil Parish (Q116180182) is the civil parish (Q1115575). Two distinctly different items.

If you really want to have a separate item for the built-up area from the civil parish, then please make sure all the identifiers end up connected to the right items, please make sure all the incoming P131 statements are pointing to the correct item, please make sure your built-up area item has a P131 pointing to the parish item, please update the relevant objects on OSM to point to the right items, and please split images and sub-categories on Commons appropriately between categories for each.

I'm not here to finish the jig-so: just to make Wikimedia projects slightly better. Others can add images etc. I differentiated between a village and a parish as the sources dictate that they're distinct items. Please search for similar names before wrongly correcting editors in the future. 'If you have made any more edits like this, please fix them.'

Sorry, but it's not my job to clear up after you. Parishes in England systematically (over 80% of them) use the same items as settlements of the same name. If you want to separate them, then fine. But do the whole job. Make sure you update any statements that need to be changed as a result of your redefinition; make sure identifiers end up connected to the right items after your redefinition. Make sure external objects you know about - in particular OSM - get updated to take account of your redefinition. And don't break Commons, which relies on categories accurately matching wikidata items, or otherwise lots of auto-categorisation tools break (in particular the ones related to the import of geograph images). It's also helpful to try to make sure that articles on wikis remain connected via mutual sitelinks to (some appropriate) Commons category.

If you change the meaning of an item, it's on you to make sure everything is adapted accordingly. If you break it you own it.

I didn't ask you to clean up! Wikimedia projects are ongoing, unfinished. Nothing is broken!

If an identifier is connected to an item that doesn't belong to it and isn't appropriate to it, that's broken (and can be highly misleading). If the map gadget on an item is picking up a misleading map outline from OSM, because the OSM object hasn't been updated to point to the right item, that's broken. If places have a located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) pointing to an item that's not an administrative area, that's broken. If the Commons category (typically for a parish) is no longer connected to an item that represents a parish, that's broken. All of these breakages in turn break queries and workflows.

Bottom line: if you change the meaning of an item, you have to follow through and make sure you've fixed the consequences. Otherwise the action is not "making a Wikimedia project slightly better", it's making things that did work no longer work, so things are worse.

Hello, I'm Eihel. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent description edits to Q3357220 didn't meet the Wikidata description guidelines. Descriptions should appear as though they were in the middle of a sentence, typically start with a lowercase letter, and written from a neutral point of view. For example, "pop singer" would be a better description than "He is the best pop singer." If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks!  Eihel (talk) 12:43, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Salut @Eihel:,

Quel était le problème exactement avec cette description ? tu indiques Help:Description#Length en résumé de modification mais les deux descriptions ont quasiment la même longueur... La descripton d'OwenBlacker était certes un peu plus informative mais celle de Llywelyn2000 n'est pas mauvaise pour autant contrairement à ce que laisse penser ton message ci-dessus.

Enfin, pour l'écrasement de descriptions existantes, voir le message ci-dessous Disgrifiadau Cymraeg sur le même sujet.

Hello VIGNERON ,

réalisateur français (en gallois) me semble plus convenir que réalisateur né à Paris en 1977. Cordialement.

@Eihel: d'accord (encore que...) mais ce n'est pas clair du tout avec ton message (ni avec ton résumé de modification), même moi je ne savais pas de quoi tu parlais.

Thanks for clarifying Vigneron! Nationality can be very problematic; the year of birth is not. Eihel - my edit was (to translate) - ''film director born in Paris in 1977'', which is not a whole sentence, is completely neutral and is 100% correct. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 12:06, 25 July 2022 (UTC)

Shwmae,

Fe sylwais i ar ambell i olygiad a wnaethoch i unigolion, yn benodol i’r disgrifiad Cymraeg. Fe welaf fod y rhan helaeth o’r rhain yn ychwanegu disgrifiad lle nad oedd un eisoes, ond mewn sawl achos roedd y disgrifiad newydd yn amnewid y disgrifiad cyfredol am un oedd â llai o wybodaeth ynddi (e.e. John Charles McLean (Q108525988)).

A alla i awgrymu y dylid gwirio fod y disgrifiad Cymraeg yn wag cyn ychwanegu un newydd algorithmig? Diolch!

Diolch o galon, a dw i'n cytuno fod eich golygiad gwreiddiol yn un gwell o'r hanner. Y broblem ydy nad oes modd gwahaniaethu, nac unrhyw ddull i rannu'r ddau faes yma: dw i wedi gofyn iddyn nhw wneud hynny, ond dim ymateb hyd yma. Bu'n rhaid penderfynu pa un oedd orau: hanner miliwn o ddisgrifiadau newydd, neu llond llaw o ddisgrifiadau'n cael eu hail-sgwennu, ac yn gywir neu'n anghywir mi es am y niferoedd! Croeso i chi fy saethu! Mi chwiliai ymhellach er mwyn gwella'r tecun. Can diolch unwaith eto! ~~~~

@Llywelyn2000 : just my 2 cents, indeed Quickstatements can't know if there is already a description or not (contrary to other tools like OpenRefine). But how did you construct the instruction for Quickstatements ? couldn't you exclude the items with description before ?

Hi Vigneron - Quickstatements was an afterthought; the db was constructed for something else - but you're qite right, and many thanks for this great suggestion! Next time! ~~~~

I see you are adding a lot of Welsh descriptions. Nice to someone do that. I don't speak or understand Welsh. But I did notice the description for Johnny Orlando (Johnny Orlando (Q21931273)). You added actor a aned yn 2003 which to my understanding means actor born in 2003. Even though is Wikidata page mentions he's an actor, he's mainly a singer. Could you change his description to singer born in 2003 (in Welsh of course) or singer and actor born in 2003 (in Welsh of course)? I could do this, but it would be from what Google Translate provides me and I'm not sure that would be correct.

While I was cleaning up my watchlist, I noticed your description for Peter R. de Vries (Peter R. de Vries (Q1944867)). Peter R. de Vries wasn't know for being an actor. He mainly was a crime reporter. So can you change his description to crime reporter?

Thank you User:Mbch331 for your keen eye! I will take a look at this in the morning; I'm sure you're quite right. As we say in Welsh: diolch yn fawr! [Lit: Thank you big!] ~~~~

All done! Thanks again! ~~~~

Dear Llywelyn2000,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits.

Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link

I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa

In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Hi there, please add cy translations to https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:I18n/Template:Airport-Statistics.tab and https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Data:I18n/Template:Graphs.tab https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodyn:Graph:Lines https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nodyn:Airport-Statistics/doc and graph:lines should be usable on cywiki...

cy:Newton, Swydd Gaer (Q7020035) seems to have always linked to a disambiguation page (https://cy.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Newton,_Swydd_Gaer&oldid=1488599). There are several places called Newton, and the article doesn't identify which this is; do you have any more information, or is there a reference that could be added?

Thanks! I'll take a look later. ~~~~