User talk:Remitamine
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Twitter user id
[edit]Hey, thanks for populating this information. I noticed you were populating the user ids on deprecated / dead twitter accounts. For example: this edit is wrong since the twitter account that was associated was moved/deleted so that ID you populated isn't the correct one.
Also, just so you know there's a bot that goes through and populates these values weekly. See User:BorkedBot (I operate this bot). BrokenSegue (talk) 20:16, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- i think the value is valid as it's what Twitter is supplying for the username, anyway, as you already have a Bot that will populate this values, i will stop populating the numeric ID.Remitamine (talk) 20:23, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Remitamine: it is the current valid id value for that account name, but the account got renamed between when the username was valid and now and so the user id isn't what the value was when it was valid. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- @BrokenSegue: oh, i understand now what you've meant, and checking the Wayback version[1] i can confirm that, will remove it now, and will try to check if there are other errors in the other entities that i did modify.
- BTW, as i was testing there where entities that has twitter username claim but with no value[2], would it be safe to automatically remove those claims.Remitamine (talk) 21:34, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Remitamine: no don't remove those. they are indicating that the item has no twitter account which is a meaningful statement. BrokenSegue (talk) 23:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for information.Remitamine (talk) 08:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Remitamine: no don't remove those. they are indicating that the item has no twitter account which is a meaningful statement. BrokenSegue (talk) 23:22, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Remitamine: it is the current valid id value for that account name, but the account got renamed between when the username was valid and now and so the user id isn't what the value was when it was valid. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- Maybe something similar happened with Craig Skistimas (Q104908619). I think maybe his account was closed, then somebody registered a new account and took the name? Ghouston (talk) 02:15, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Ghouston: Most likely, fixed now with the old value from Wayback machine[3].Remitamine (talk) 08:05, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
SoundCloud ID
[edit]Do not add information not present in reality (not available publicly). For SoundCloud ID that is start time. For same property, number of subscribers is non-valid. Your ordering of qualifiers was wrong too. --5.43.83.177 01:00, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- there is no such thing as a "correct" order of qualifiers. BrokenSegue (talk) 01:40, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- all the information that i've addeded are available publicly and verfiable, you can find the start time by looking at the user's HTML source, search for created_at(ISO 8601 formatted), as for the number of subscribers i'm not sure why you're considiring the value to be non-valid.Remitamine (talk) 08:17, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- @BrokenSegue: There is indeed (e.g. putting 'point in time' before statistics qualifiers that that point in time is for is wrong, or start time should be first qualifier etc.; you can feel it, if it is ordered correctly or incorrectly).
- @Remitamine: Wikidata is not intendeed for rooting-out some left statistics but to collect those most important. Those are not subscribers but followers and Wikidata currently has only number of subscribers for social media sites as property (which is weird by the way) and SoundCloud is not social media but streaming service.
- @BrokenSegue, Remitamine: Please use proper English for writing. --5.43.83.177 14:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- as most of the qualifiers are filled for other websites(Youtube, Twitter, ...), why shouldn't SoundCloud statments have the same qualifiers?
- as for the number of followers added using Property:P3744, looking at the labels("Also known as" column) of the property you would find "number of followers", "followers" and "follower count".Remitamine (talk) 15:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- ignore this anonymous user. there is no correct order for qualifiers. they will be unable to find any such document stating this. the order of statements is meaningless on wikidata. and it seems they are wrong on the other points too. report them to admins if they are reverting you. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- oh they already got banned. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- ignore this anonymous user. there is no correct order for qualifiers. they will be unable to find any such document stating this. the order of statements is meaningless on wikidata. and it seems they are wrong on the other points too. report them to admins if they are reverting you. BrokenSegue (talk) 19:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)