User talk:Reosarevok

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

MusicBrainz as a source for ISO-codes?

[edit]

I'm not sure is it correct to put MusicBrainz as a source for ISO-codes like here: [1]. I don't know so good what is on MusicBrainz, but hard to believe that music database includes ISO-codes for regions. --Stryn (talk) 11:16, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I will correct a few values from that import based on Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P300. For example Merthyr Tydfil (Q752762) is the town and Merthyr Tydfil County Borough (Q14865256) is the county where the ISO code belongs to. Do you want some notice on such things? Maybe you can correct them in the MucsiBrainz database as well... --Zuphilip (talk) 12:07, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MBAreaBot

[edit]

Your bot has been listed at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Removal/Inactive bot accounts as being inactive for over two years. As a housekeeping measure it's proposed to remove the bot flag from inactive bot accounts, unless you expect the bot will be operated again in the near future. If you consent to the removal of the bot flag (or do not reply on the deflag page) you can rerequest the bot flag at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot should you need it again. Of course, You may request retaining your bot flag here if you need the bot flag. Regards--GZWDer (talk) 12:38, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ReosarevokBot

[edit]

I granted the bot flag. Happy botting. Lymantria (talk) 20:05, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Author tag

[edit]

Is there an easy way to add multiple items to wikidata? Or convert them to the right type?

some botting maybe.

[edit]

hi! since you have it, can you do a bot thing where you for Norwegian where it has "instance of" Surname like on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q26036685 the Description "etternavn" (which is the Norwegian term)? --CatQuest, The Endavouring Cat (talk) 10:14, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey

[edit]

Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this survey on the project page and see how your feedback helps the Wikimedia Foundation support editors like you. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement (in English). Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through the EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys to remove you from the list.

Thank you!

WMF Surveys, 18:57, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder: Share your feedback in this Wikimedia survey

[edit]

Every response for this survey can help the Wikimedia Foundation improve your experience on the Wikimedia projects. So far, we have heard from just 29% of Wikimedia contributors. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes to be completed. Take the survey now.

If you have already taken the survey, we are sorry you've received this reminder. We have design the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. If you wish to opt-out of the next reminder or any other survey, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement. Thanks!

WMF Surveys, 01:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey

[edit]

Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 23 April, 2018 (07:00 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We will not bother you again. We have designed the survey to make it impossible to identify which users have taken the survey, so we have to send reminders to everyone. To opt-out of future surveys, send an email through EmailUser feature to WMF Surveys. You can also send any questions you have to this user email. Learn more about this survey on the project page. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this Wikimedia Foundation privacy statement.

WMF Surveys, 00:50, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Same type of library?

[edit]

Hi,

Could you take a look and tell me if archival library (Q26944915) and archival library (Q25504402) are the same type of library or not (ping @K2suvi: too), can I merge the two items? or maybe one of the item is a subtype of the other?

Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:09, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS: same thing for virtual library (Q1224870) and virtual library (Q25499211).
@VIGNERON
Hi! archival library (Q25504402) is an "archival library", but not necessarily the "library of an archive" as suggested by the English description of archival library (Q26944915). In fact, most of the ones we have in Estonia seem to be connected with museums more than archives. The idea seems to be more about archiving their contents for conservation rather than just having them as long as they're useful and then getting rid of them when nobody wants to read them anymore like most other libraries in here do. I'm not 100% sure they should be merged but I probably would, myself. For virtual library (Q1224870) and virtual library (Q25499211) - it's not completely clear to me *what* this thing is and how it's different from a digital library, even after comparing the German an Estonian articles with someone who speaks both languages, but they do seem to refer to mostly the same thing --Reosarevok (talk) 19:01, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Missing painters

[edit]

I see you are importing all sorts of nice paintings! I noticed one of my reports getting quite large so I split it out. For Estonia we now have Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Location/Estonia/Missing creator. Could you please rerun the bot on existing paintings and add a description in the form "painting by <creator>"? See for example [2]. This will make the creator bot add painters if these are available and will make it easier to create missing creators.

Some other improvements: Please add a bit more extensive reference, just stated in (P248) is not really enough, you should also add MuIS object ID (P4525) and retrieved (P813) example. It would also be nice if you can add location (P276).

Do they provide images under a free license that you would like to have on Commons? If you add Commons compatible image available at URL (P4765) with the right fields (example) a bot will upload the image to Commons and add it to the item.

I see you are using Python, you might find something useful in https://github.com/multichill/toollabs/tree/master/bot/wikidata . I use artdatabot.py to do the hard work (yes, needs refactoring) and a generator per source, for example Boijmans or Web Umenia.

Keep up the good work, Multichill (talk) 12:16, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Multichill
Hi! The painters can mostly be added by their IDs in the MuIS system as well, so we don't need to guess by names. What I'm doing right now is a two-time pass, where I add the paintings first (some already get authors because their author IDs are already linked in Wikidata), then I look at the missing authors and link their IDs, then run the bot again to let it auto-assign the author to all the relevant paintings. It doesn't work all the time (MuIS sometimes misses the right data in their RDF) but it does most of the time, and any left can often just be done by hand. It might cause a small mess with your reports for a week or two though, sorry! Hopefully that's not too bad a problem :/
Re: location (P276) I'm still struggling with deciding what's the right option, especially since Art Museum of Estonia (Q1754105) has multiple different museum buildings the painting can be at. If you want me to add location = the main museum, that's trivial and I can do that for sure.
Re: references, I thought since the same MuIS thing is already linked it would be a bit duplicate-y to add it again, but I can definitely add them if you think it's for the best :) I can also eventually change it it to extend the reference for the old ones as well I guess, just need to figure out how to edit existing references but I imagine it's not too hard. EDIT: done now for future references!
Re: images, we'll get to that :) A lot of these paintings are too new to be able to upload to Commons, but we're working with the Tartu museum to get good quality images for the ones that are indeed PD. The Tallinn museums we haven't agreed anything with yet (other than "sure, upload the data I guess?") but hopefully that'll eventually also work out! --Reosarevok (talk) 12:29, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Multichill
Also, before I forget: we're having some issues with dates, and how Wikidata stores them. Sometimes we have a single year, and that's easy. But often we have a date range, which can mean either "was painted during these years" or "was painted at some, unknown point in this year range". I'm still not sure what's the right way to do this, so I've disable inception data for now for the Tallinn museums (the old imports for the Tartu museums just took the latest date, but that only works if it's really a range, it doesn't work if it's "maybe this year, but maybe the year before". How do you deal with uncertainty in dates? --Reosarevok (talk) 12:44, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Administrative entities in Estonia

[edit]

Hi! About Special:Diff/1030749184: EHAK, as its title indicates, is a classification of both administrative units and settlements. Administrative entities in Estonia are counties and municipalities (cities and rural municipalities) per § 2 (1) of the Territory of Estonia Administrative Division Act that reads: the administrative division of the territory of Estonia is the division of the territory of Estonia into counties, rural municipalities and cities. For non-administrative territorial entities (including settlements) in Estonia I have used location (P276). In this particular item its currently used to provide precise location that is a sublocation of the settlement (Q13972). 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:28D0:69B5:EFC5:28F6 11:17, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, as there are no further administrative levels below vald/linn. I find it misleading to state otherwise.
It seems common to me that not all parts of location hierarchy are linked directly. If you use located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) to link village instead, then municipality is not linked directly. Maybe there are some qualifiers that allow providing village along with house or other address parts like street under location (P276) for some cases.
PS You might be looking for Sänna manor house (Q20529749) instead as location of the library. 2001:7D0:81F7:B580:28D0:69B5:EFC5:28F6 14:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, why not, let's standardise on that, at least then we have a standard :) --Reosarevok (talk) 14:43, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

video games, soundtracks, and video games

[edit]

Hello,

I am working on Wikidata:WikiProject_Video_games, and I am a bit lost when it comes to how to model soundtracks, and how to best cross-link with MusicBrainz.

I tried to better understand how MusicBrainz is organized on that particular area ; however I did not find much about it on either the Wiki or the Style Guide. I have explored a bit some examples at User:Jean-Frédéric/Videogame & MusicBrainz and tried to draw some conclusions/best practices − there are still some unknowns for me though.

I’m not too sure where best to go with this ; as you’re involved with MusicBrainz I was hoping you may have guidance for me, or have the address of the right door for me to knock on?

Thanks :)

Jean-Fred (talk) 11:36, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hi there! Would you consider stopping your MineoBot from adding identifiers based on Wikipedia articles? It causes some problems with items like this : https://musicbrainz.org/release-group/f9e7851a-aaa5-49fc-9f53-00c89bdcc335 (now both songs plus the single have the MB release group ID on Wikidata). Moebeus (talk) 14:31, 17 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Moebeus: I made the change (hopefully - I'm still kinda new to this code!). I only changed it for release groups for now since that seems to be the place where most of the issues appear - if that seems not to be enough, we can keep looking into it. By the way, I think the bot is completely skipping work entities at the moment, which does not seem ideal. Do you think it would be workable to make it add work IDs again, but also skipping Wikipedia and following only Wikidata? I'm not sure how bad the direct Wikidata linkage is from MB to be honest. --Reosarevok (talk) 08:45, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Most of the issues I've seen stem from Wikipedia links, so that sounds fine to me. Will let you know if I see any weirdness :) Thank you for taking the time to look into this! Moebeus (talk) 10:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    I started adding IDs to works linked via Wikidata now. I expect most of those to be classical works and correct, but do let me know if you feel it's becoming problematic! --Reosarevok (talk) 10:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strange date in MB reference

[edit]

Hi, could you check why https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q12071620&diff=prev&oldid=1834334820 has check date = 10.02.2023? MusicBrainz entry was created and linked today, so I think there is probably a bug somewhere in date parser. Lockal (talk) 06:37, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Good catch, I checked and the bot was apparently saving the date once (at the start of the run) and using it for as long as it ran, which could be days. I think it should be fine now, but if you see it still failing do let me know, please! Reosarevok (talk) 12:17, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Specifying music genre names with bot

[edit]

Hi! Is it possible to enhance MineoBot's export to also specify the qualifier subject named as (P1810) for music genre IDs from musicbrainz? I'm using this property for the Wikidata:WikiProject Music/Lists/Instance of music genre table, and have to fill it in manually after the bot. Solidest (talk) 14:31, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Took me a while but I finally got to this - it now adds the qualifier for all IDs, not just genre ones, since it seems like it should never hurt :) Thanks for the suggestion! Reosarevok (talk) 10:43, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MineoBot added a MBID multiple times

[edit]

Hi! Thanks for maintaining MineoBot. I noticed today that the bot added an artist MBID three times to Q15994524. This is the first time I've noticed this redundant behaviour. — Ringbang (talk) 17:01, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have noticed this seemingly at random and I haven't yet figured out why it does it - it is not because we have the link multiple times in MusicBrainz, nor multiple entries for the artist...
I'll put some time aside this week to look into it more properly. Reosarevok (talk) 17:41, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If it helps, I regularly monitor genre IDs and I think the first time I noticed the duplication was on 22 June. Solidest (talk) 09:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, as long as I'm paying attention to what the bot does, no duplicates are added - so still not sure where they are coming from. Will try to keep on keeping an eye. Reosarevok (talk) 08:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The bot duplicated a statement 5 times for the first time today. And x2 + x3 in other cases with music genres. Solidest (talk) 18:18, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I clearly need better logging at the very least, to be able to match these to the logs better. I removed these duplicates for now, sorry about the mess. Reosarevok (talk) 18:26, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Reo, this is unfortunately still a thing. Most additions are duplicated 2/3 times on average, up to 7 times in a row for Pantelejmon Markovič Norcov. Mr maxis (talk) 00:43, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so for some reason it works fine when I restart it but it starts getting worse and worse the longer it runs. I've stopped it for now. Reosarevok (talk) 08:44, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

ReosarevokBot

[edit]

Hi, Reosarevok, The last edit by your bot ReosarevokBot dates from December 8th, 2017. I would propose to remove its bot flag due to inactivity. Do you oppose to that? Of course you can always reapply for a bot flag, once you would want to reactivate it. --Lymantria (talk) 12:12, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I'm not currently using it so it seems fair to drop it, go for it. Reosarevok (talk) 13:18, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. --Lymantria (talk) 14:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Reosarevok&oldid=2076345485"