User talk:Multichill/Archives/2015/December

Bot edit to "Thomas More", "Galileo Galilei"

I have reverted this edit because the purported aliases ("Thomas, Sir More" and "Thomas, Saint More") are structured as if "Thomas" is the family name and "More" is the given name, but of course, this is not true. Either the logic of your bot needs to be fixed or you need a better source to import from. Jc3s5h (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Oh fun, looks like the source data has two options:

• "Hals, Frans" -> "Frans Hals"
• "Teniers, David, the younger" -> "David, the younger Teniers" should be "David Teniers the younger"

I'll update the code that normalizes the name. Multichill (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

I have also reverted this edit which claims that many non-English names for this scientist are English; some of the names are not even in the Roman alphabet. Jc3s5h (talk) 16:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

It was only a few in a 50.000 artist import so I didn't really think it mattered that much. I found a pointer on how to check if the string is Latin (as opposed to Chinese). I'll implement that for the next run. Multichill (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Please fix all your "a few" mistaken edits ! It's unacceptable to behave in that way. --Movses (talk) 10:29, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

It's sad that you revert all the stuff, instead of keeping the correct aliasses. That's also unacceptable. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 10:46, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

@Movses: a respectable (and very English) source lists these as aliases. As I said before: I'm willing to filter out the non-latin strings in future runs. I'm not going to revert anything. Multichill (talk) 18:21, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

My understanding is the bot is adding English aliases for various people. It is not sufficient to filter out aliases that are not written in a latin alphabet and consider everything that remains to be an English alias. In my mind, valid English aliases would be the most popular English form, the name as written (or transliterated into latin characters) in the person's native country, and the name as written or transliterated in a country where the person was active. If the name is written differently in some non-English-speaking country that the person has no connection with, that shouldn't be considered an English alias. For example, "Wilhelm I." is not an English alias for William the Conqueror, even though that is the title of the German Wikipedia's article about him. Jc3s5h (talk) 18:42, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcome in the world of art where languages are all mixed up. You can browse around ULAN or our 100.000 paintings to see plenty examples of this. Multichill (talk) 18:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Multichill, you are obviously wrong. There is NO statement on the link http://www.getty.edu/vow/ULANFullDisplay?find=&role=&nation=&subjectid=500006476 about "English names", they are just "names". Do you really consider "בארכעס, כארכע לויס" as English name ? Do you really consider "Борхес, Хорхе Луис" as English name ? If not, please revert all your wrong edits. --Movses (talk) 12:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Country property

Hoi Multichill, ik heb twee edits van je bot teruggedraaid die claimden dat main line (Q2412994) (Stamlijn) zich in Nederland bevond, terwijl het om een fenomeen gaat dat ook elders voorkomt: [1] [2]. Ik neem aan dat je bot dat heeft afgeleid uit het feit dat het nlwiki-artikel zich in nl:Categorie:Raccordement in Nederland bevindt. Dat is inderdaad te beperkt, maar er is geen algemene categorie voor raccordementen, dus het artikel past er wel in. Wat is de beste manier om te voorkomen dat in de toekomst je bot dit property opnieuw toevoegt? --Gpvos (talk) 11:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

@Gpvos: als ik op nl:Stamlijn kijk dan gaat het om een Nederlands fenomeen. Het artikel staat ook alleen in nl:Categorie:Raccordement in Nederland. Ik heb de boel wat opgeschoond. Een spoorwegliefhebber moet de boel maar wat herschrijven naar een wat internationaler perspectief.

In het algemeen nooit de laatste statement weggooien ook al denk je dat die fout is. Probeer in plaats daarvan een juiste toe te voegen. De bot werkt namelijk over het algemeen alleen op items die helemaal leeg zijn. Multichill (talk) 10:01, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Collection of the National Gallery, London

Thanks for this reversion. I was using AutoList 2 to add properties to the pages in en:Category:Collections of the National Gallery, London. I intended to fix the inevitable irrelevant ones manually, but I was called away from my computer and didn't get back to it till this morning. Huge thanks for all your work on SOAP as well! Ham II (talk) 07:54, 22 December 2015 (UTC)

@Ham II: no worries, I figured it was something like that. With the reports like User:Multichill/Paintings without painter and User:Multichill/SOAP enwiki monitor it's easier to spot these mistakes. I hope you continue helping out with the paintings and painters. My goals is to reduce the number of paintings without a painter even more. That makes it easier to keep it low when new collections are being added. Something else. I noticed The Assassination of Saint Peter Martyr (Q21821454). Can you add the collection as a qualifier to the inventory number and not use Wikimedia language code (P424) (fix)? Especially the language thing is quite confusing. Multichill (talk) 09:51, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

New matched painters

Hello,

Juste matched most painters with 4 paintins or more on https://tools.wmflabs.org/multichill/queries/wikidata/top_unmatched_painters.txt

I did not create any, but most already existed. If you want to make a pass with your bot ;)

Merry Christmas, --Hsarrazin (talk) 12:42, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

@Hsarrazin: great, thank you! I ran the bot and updated the lists. You can also see it at this page (might have to try several times). Couple of the high numbers are from User:Multichill/Víctor Balaguer missing painter. People are working on that. You can see an overview at User:Multichill/Paintings without painter. Multichill (talk) 09:32, 25 December 2015 (UTC)