Obsuser

Welcome to Wikidata, Obsuser!

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, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. 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) 05:29, 5 April 2015 (UTC)

IMDb

Hello. Who use it without "ID"? In Poland many people does too but it's obviously incorrect form. Eurohunter (talk) 16:03, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Milan Jelisavčić also used to add it that way, and other editors for Serbian as well. Please stop removing it at all or change to the form that is more acceptable. Some properties you left without anything and they were translated. That's irresponsible. --Obsuser (talk) 16:06, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

I have removed incorrect labels and left them empty for someone who can add their correct forms. Look at Indonesian, you removed already fixed label. Eurohunter (talk) 16:10, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Just correct them or leave some already entered useful mark someone added as a translation. It is not completely wrong and you are doing vandalism by removing everything and leaving blank mark for translating it again and again. Correct those marks. --Obsuser (talk) 16:16, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

First be familar what vandalism means because you are abusing this word. Leaving incorect labels would lead to mess. Incorrect labels should be atleast removed or fixed if possible. Eurohunter (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Yes, it is a vandalism. No more or less. You removed ALL languages' marks, not only Serbian. They are not all incorrect, it is not possible that several dozens of people got it wrong. "ID" is not needed in every case, for main topic designations. You probably made other bad edits too. --Obsuser (talk) 16:25, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

No. Wikipedia:Vandalism. You are wrong again. You know what is vandalism? That you have deleted Indonesian label which was already fixed. You have deleted Indonesian label which was already fixed and you don't even bother to restore it even I'm telling it to you probably 6th or 7th time. As I told I removed all and only incorrect labels, I think it's very transparent. "it is not possible that several dozens of people got it wrong" - not possible? Enough said that probably someone just added it to random languages because some people don't care. Have you checked all edits? It was probably fixed language by language for long time (for example Indonesia which you have removed). Eurohunter (talk) 19:39, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Summary. I have deleted just incorrect labels. You have deleted correct label in Indonesian and restored incorrect labels. In this case I sould restore everything without any discussion. Eurohunter (talk) 19:45, 10 July 2019 (UTC)

Lets say it one more time? You have deleted correct label in Indonesian. If you not take any actions I will restore Indonesian label which you have deleted and I will remove incorrect labels just beacuse you were unfair. Eurohunter (talk) 15:32, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I don't care for Indonesian if someone deleted 150 designations for most of the European languages and says it is good like that. Restore Indonesian if it is good but no – you cannot remove "incorrect" ones because they are not incorrect. Third time, I repeat: "ID" is not used always even though it is present in English source designation. --Obsuser (talk) 16:09, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

I removed over 40 incorrect labels (not 150 but it doesn't matter, all were incorect). If label is incorect it doesn't matter, it should be removed otherwise it's missleading. I just noticed you removed also my fixes for other 3 labels so that's the real vandalism. All theese incorrect labels were added randomly by @Jura1:. Many of them was fixed to until today (compare this version with neewer). Eurohunter (talk) 16:57, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

They are not incorrect. For Serbian, it should be "Твитер", "Фејсбук" etc. Don't remove those, I don't care much for other marks. --Obsuser (talk) 17:44, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Please merge instead of blanking

Thank you for your work in maintaining Wikidata. I have a small suggestion to improve your future work. If you notice that two items are duplicates, please merge them instead of blanking one of them as you did with the page Q16513128. External sites use Wikidata identifiers, so it is important that we preserve the chain of references. See Help:Merge for more information on how to do this, and consider installing the Merge Gadget. Thanks!

Blocked

You have been blocked for a period of 3 days for block evasion. Once this block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by editing this page and adding the following template with a suitable reason: {{unblock|1=<the reason for your unblock request>}}. If you are logged in, and the option has not been disabled, you may also email the blocking administrator (or any administrator from this list) by using this form. See Wikidata:Guide to appealing blocks for more information.

---

⁠ ‐‐1997kB (talk) 17:14, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, It seems that you are hell-bent on removing those numbers and if you gonna continue that without any consensus on that project chat thread, these blocks will be infinite. I have now converted the block to partial on this account so that you can continue discussion. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 02:51, 11 January 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked for a period of 1 month for Edit warring. Once this block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest it by editing this page and adding the following template with a suitable reason: {{unblock|1=<the reason for your unblock request>}}. If you are logged in, and the option has not been disabled, you may also email the blocking administrator (or any administrator from this list) by using this form. See Wikidata:Guide to appealing blocks for more information.

---

⁠ ‐‐1997kB (talk) 16:52, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Reminder

Hi Obsuser,

Thanks for adding more recent data to Wikidata. However, please bear in mind that Wikidata aims to include historic information as well. Accordingly, please do not delete or overwrite such information as done here [1]. It seems that you have already been blocked for a similar issue and the subsequent discussion hasn't lead to any change to our datamodel. You are obviously free to re-open that the discussion, however, in the meantime, avoid deleting data and change constraints. --- Jura 15:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Asof taken is also historic. It is really our, including me, with your opinion wrong. I did not see any discussion you mention and know I was not part of it so it is not applicable. --Obsuser (talk) 15:36, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

• See Wikidata:Property_proposal/social_media_followers for the datamodel. Previous discussions at Wikidata:Property_proposal/subscribers and Wikidata:Property_proposal/Number_of_twitter_follower.

Also, at Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2021/01#BorkedBot_non-valid_additions. It seems indeed that you didn't participate in any of these discussions, but we can't obviously re-start just because you started contributing. Somehow I thought you were already going back and forth about this with @Gyrostat:, but maybe you didn't. --- Jura 15:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I will check that but subscribers is termed that way only on YouTube but truth is that all those most used social media sites, Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, have followers and telecommunication companies or providers are demanding payment for viaing services. YT subscribers are actually simply followers, there is not much or at all content requiring payment there. Number of subscribers thus can be still used for YT in Identifiers but first part should and must have consistent social media followers property with statistics given for all three mentioned social media sites, at least high-preferably because giving it for unpopular Twitter only is problem indeed. I thus correct it for Balkan singers important to me via reg. and IP mostly so that it is not only Twitter there, even double info, even though YT or Instagram for e.g. is more important for them. --Obsuser (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

We try to move away from the qualifier approach (that might take some time). In the meantime, please don't add social media followers (P8687) as qualifier anywhere. You can add the counts directly as statements, as you did on the item for Shakira. You can add preferred rank for the most recent numbers. If we don't keep the numbers for the previous year, we can't really see what changed. --- Jura 16:11, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I disagree so I will continue. Your approach is unstructruralism and Wikidata needs to be structured. Wikidata is not for extraction purpose but for viewable normal structured general statistics for entities. --Obsuser (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Please seek consensus before making changes to property constraints or deleting data. In the meantime, please undo all changes you made to property constraint. --- Jura 16:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Same applies for non-rational consensuses and unneeded adding of data. I will not undo those my changes because I think it is right that way and will continue to revert your or others' possible reverts, not important where we come (whose version will remain)... --Obsuser (talk) 17:53, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Can you propose a constructive alternative solution or provide a sample of something that can't be solved with the current approach? Merely reverting isn't getting us anywhere. --- Jura 18:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

I think my solution works better than yours and is only correct for this case. It is not about solving anything but having proper content format (comparison is check). --Obsuser (talk) 19:43, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

Initially, the format you prefer was favored (see Wikidata:Property_proposal/subscribers), but adding several statements with the same identifier didn't prove practical. Obviously, if you think historic data should be deleted, I suppose you don't mind. Can I count on you that you wont be doing that and use the current model going forward? --- Jura 19:50, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

That one identifier, social media followers, should not have only one statement or record of one social website statistics. Wikidata is not for historic data but current comprehensive database (if several values existed, they can be found in item's history). BorkedBot introduced something new as well, not respecting run approval request (check project chat section); I just correct for rationale and consistency, and save what can be saved. --Obsuser (talk) 19:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)

You have already been blocked for deleting statements from Wikidata. Shall I ask an admin to look into your more recent deletions and can I just revert your edits? --- Jura 20:00, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

OK. That is your problem. --Obsuser (talk) 17:55, 1 March 2021 (UTC)