User talk:Sijtze Reurich

Welkom

Leuk dat je Wikidata bewerkt! Zou je wel aan de doorverwijspagina's de verklaring instance of (P31)Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) kunnen toevoegen? Ik kom ze namens telkens tegen op Wikidata:Database reports/without claims by site/nlwiki. Alvast bedankt! Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 11:46, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Nou, ik weet niet of ik dat kan, hoor. Ik zou niet weten welke code je daarvoor moet neerzetten en zie er ook niet helemaal het nut van in. vriendelijke groet, Sijtze Reurich (talk) 11:54, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Wellicht helpt de interactieve snelcursus. Het nut is dat ik of iemand anders op deze manier geen dubbel werk doe. :) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 14:28, 24 March 2019 (UTC)

geen hoofdletter in label

‎Added [nl] description: Plaats in de gemeente Rõuge

zou moeten zijn 'plaats in xyz'

Village centres

Hi! Changes like Special:Diff/1183042880 move coordinates more towards centroid of the entire village, but coordinates of the centre where settlement is more dense, due to its prominence, may be preferable. Maps by Land Board (Q5401570) also generally place village names in the latter position, at least for villages that have single dense centre. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:59D2:2580:2575:2129 09:14, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Tallinn subdistricts

Why changes like Special:Diff/1339614781? So far Tallinn subdistricts were consistently linked to subdistrict (Q18551781), i.e. type of subdivision in Tallinn that necessarily don't compare well with subdivisions named "neighborhood", "asum" or alike in other places. Also, sources like [1] use English-language term "subdistrict". 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:7092:BCC9:1F14:C76B 08:34, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

I thought I changed the term for the Dutch version of Wikidata only. But if the Dutch term pops up in the English version too, this is not the effect I wanted to achieve. I shall undo the change. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 09:30, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Population of islands

If it wasn't evident per source given, then I clarify: I corrected these populations (e.g. Special:Diff/1437106557) because data in your source is about municipalities, not islands. We may be able to assume that municipality population is not wrong in some cases where only the main island of the municipality is inhabited, but this is not true for all islands that lie in municipality of the same name, and also we probably can't tell for sure that some small islands that were uninhabited per 2017 data are still uninhabited. So, to avoid confusion, I think it's better to use data from islands' dataset and municipalities' dataset consistently in respective items (i.e. either in island item or municipality item). In case of Hiiumaa (Q146530)'s population Statistikaamet also excludes the population of Kassari (Q1357248) from it[2]. 2001:7D0:81DA:F780:69E8:7CA6:CF1D:B407 06:35, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

You may have noticed that during the last days I spent some time updating population data of Estonian counties and municipalities, using Statistikaamet's database. I did this for Hiiu, Saare, Lääne and Pärnu county and I am now working on Harju county. Doing that I thought about the islands of Saaremaa, Muhu, Hiiumaa, Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu. What to do with them? It was clear that the island of Saaremaa cannot be equated with the municipality of Saaremaa, because of Vilsandi, Abruka and Kõinastu laid, and the island of Muhu not with the municipality of Muhu, because of Kesselaid. But I thought Hiiumaa, Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu could be equated with their municipalities. I was wrong about Hiiumaa; I completely forgot Kassari, an island with a population of its own. Sorry about that. But the populations of the islands of Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu must by definition be equal to the populations of the municipalities of Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu. Let's have a look at Püsielanikud on 22 saarel: Vormsi 411 inhabitants in 2017. And then at Statistikaamet's database: Vormsi 411 inhabitants in 2017. If someone settled on Harilaid for instance, would that make a statistical difference? I don't think so, because Harilaid doesn't have village status. The settler would be counted as a resident of Förby. kind regards, Sijtze Reurich (talk) 09:46, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, islands and municipalities nonetheless are different, and hence different items exists for islands and municpalites, as well as different articles on several Wikipedia versions. So I don't think there's need to equate Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu with their municipalites, and for clarity and consistentcy we shouldn't do it, even if in some case and at some point population was the same.

Island population is counted independent of population of settlements. For example Väike-Pakri (5 inhabitants in 2017) is part of Paldiski (Q204091). So if Harilaid gets inhabited, then I'd assume its inhabitants wouldn't be counted as inhabitants of Vormsi. 2001:7D0:81DA:F780:CCF8:E803:FA9F:2E46 12:42, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Well, if you want to change the population data of Ruhnu, Vormsi and Kihnu back from 2021 to 2017, feel free to do so. You may have noticed that I already did this for Hiiumaa and added the 2017 data to Q1357248 (Kassari). This was even an improvement, as the last figures were from 2011. A pity that Statistikaamet does not update its data on the Estonian islands more often, for I like to present the most recent figures that are available. Sijtze Reurich (talk) 17:38, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

I restored these three population values.

I note in references you use Statistics Estonia (Q3738605) (organization item) as stated in (P248) value, probably because older data for the most part uses it. You may want to use value Statistical Database of Statistics Estonia (Q59640277) instead as that's the proper item for the publication. Alternatively we may consider creating separate item for the data set (database table) use it as P248 value instead. 2001:7D0:81DA:F780:69C5:1AE9:2401:CB13 06:58, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I tried it with Q992974 (Kiili rural municipality). Sijtze Reurich (talk) 07:31, 10 June 2021 (UTC)

I'd like to point this out again. I see you made statistical service (Q480242) into an archive subclass (diff), apparently to work around a constraint violation. I think this isn't quite right as statistical service by its main function isn't an archive, it may also pass its archives to some other organization. Also archives, unlike other organizations, currently being allowed as "stated in" (P248) value is dubious (see property talk). I believe it would have been once again more appropriate to use Statistical Database of Statistics Estonia (Q59640277) as "stated in" value. 2001:7D0:81DB:1480:31BE:9B5E:BED0:85AD 08:32, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

So what I just did with Aruküla (Q617868) is the way it should be done? Sijtze Reurich (talk) 08:51, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, I believe this is better. Thanks. 2001:7D0:81DB:1480:31BE:9B5E:BED0:85AD 08:56, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

---

Thanks for adding the latest census data to items of Estonian settlements. May I suggest linking Estonian language database interface, andmed.stat.ee/et/... instead of andmed.stat.ee/en/..., as Estonian language is more relevant to this data. Or, alternatively we might consider creating an item for a database table, like Q98791666, where multiple URL-s can be added, and in reference link to this item instead. 2001:7D0:81DB:1480:CC78:3A45:7FDD:7F8C 06:31, 23 August 2023 (UTC)