Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts/Unresolved/2017

The English Wikipedia has two different articles for the East-German term Plattenbau and the Czech term Panelák. However, the Czech Wikipedia article "Panelový dům" is associated with the Plattenbau article on the en-wiki, not with the Panelák article. And paradoxically, Wikidata use the Hungarian version "Panelház" as the English label for the "Plattenbau" item. The conflict is caused by English Wikipedia which doesn't have one general article about the general concept and possibly specific articles about specifics in individual countries. Spanish wikipedia has also the two articles (translated from en:). --ŠJů (talk) 18:02, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The German articles obstruct to merge it. --ŠJů (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ŠJů: no, they are not the same. In a election platform (Q2451766) you can make a election promise (Q2084839). Marking as partially solved. Q.Zanden questions? 14:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ŠJů: no, they are not the same. In a election platform (Q2451766) you can make a election promise (Q2084839). One is a program of planned change where the "promises" typically have some logical coherence. The other is simply a "promise" (which in Australia- my country - bears little relationship to the meaning of promise). MargaretRDonald (talk) 21:45, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• dinosaur interwikis need a fix

These two items seem to need better sorting of the interwikis. The simple and en would seem to belong together, and the only one that has two is nlWP. I don't doubt that the items are different, I just doubt that the interwikis are correct, and I don't have the expertise of dinosaurs to make the picks.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:56, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 21:38, 28 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The simplewiki page was internally inconsistent. Going by the taxobox it was correctly placed, but not by the lede. - Brya (talk) 05:56, 30 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Same in enWP, and accordingly simpleWP, though separately classified, though not evident why. Some languages have both, so there is some distinction that is not evident, and/or not pertinent in English language. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 12:03, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Added Wikipedia Asian Month (Q21095748), these 3 WAM links are also confusing to me, asking the founder of WAM @AddisWang:. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:45, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

PS, wondering how to link to this section which uses {{Q}}, [[Wikidata:Interwiki conflicts/Unresolved/2017#{{Q|Q21178975}}/{{Q|Q27559131}}/{{Q|Q21095748}}]] doesn't seem to work. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:03, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is that there are more WAM projects. Every year should have its own item here on WD, and an item from that year with participants. As for now, all interwiki's are crossed... Q.Zanden questions? 22:35, 19 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A lot wiki's have just two pages: WP:Asian month and WP:Asian month/participants. The problem is that on most wiki's the project never took a flight so the most pages are still empty and not even translated. I made a (hopefully) clear oversight here. For any comment or suggestion, leave a message at the talkpage there or my own usertalkpage. Q.Zanden questions? 15:26, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment from AddisWang on his Meta talk page: m:User_talk:AddisWang#Regarding_interwiki_links_that_about_WAM_on_Wikidata. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:46, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

en:Wikipedia:Wikipedia Asian Month should now be linked to de:Wikipedia:Asiatischer Monat 2017, please --NearEMPTiness (talk) 08:05, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@NearEMPTiness: I boldly merged your issue to a January issue above, since both problems are overlapped. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:44, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

O conflito se dá, muitas vezes, porque em um dos lados há um redirecionamento para o outro. Isso só mostra que devem ser fundidos. --Luan (talk) 18:28, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion between radio and radio broadcast. --Voidvector (talk) 06:57, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

They are the same animal.--Llorenzi (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The former object linked w:sv:Mall:Storkategori to w:en:Template:Category diffuse but the former's English counterpart is w:en:Template:Very large and the latter's Swedish counterpart is w:sv:Mall:Storkategoririsk. I changed the Swedish links. Is there still an interwiki conflict? --Lophotrochozoa (talk) 00:32, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly there are two items with the same name here. However, emissions trading has been identified with carbon credits in some interwiki links, but this is incorrect. Emissions trading is not only for carbon emissions - in fact, it was originally used for other types of pollution.--Greenrd (talk) 09:47, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There seem to be two and the Spanish article mixes them. --
--- Jura 09:53, 26 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikidata item mixes diferent meanings under one item code: from forest tree nursery (cs, pl, be, ru, hr, sh, mk) through tree nursery (which can include orchard or bonsai nurseries) to most general "plant nursery" which can include flower, vegetable or bush nursery. i created forest tree nursery (Q28541343) but however, I'm not able to distinguish the item scope in some languages. --ŠJů (talk) 20:20, 28 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Both items refer to the same Wikipedia administration category--Banjo (talk) 09:20, 31 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The phenomenon in question is treated in en-WP as Conscientious objector, in other language versions as Conscientious objection (e.g. de-WP: Kriegsdienstverweigerung). Redirections exist in WP, but as the two Wikidata items are in conflict, interwiki linking is not possible at the moment. --Jossi (talk) 11:32, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jossi2: the problem is at the polish wikipedia and both items are quite large, so a merge would not be logical. Also both wikidata items are different. Q262... is a human who refuses to go to military service. Q557... is about the concept of refusing any militairy obligation. Q.Zanden questions? 21:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@QZanden: Well, in my opinion the Polish article pl:Obdżektor could easily be integrated into pl:Odmowa odbycia służby wojskowej, but this is, of course, a matter of the Polish Wikipedia alone. I see the difference in meaning between the two items, but the actual content of, e.g., en:Conscientious objector is more or less the same as pl:Odmowa odbycia służby wojskowej. Anyway, this is not the real problem. In fact, a merging of the two Wikidata entries wouldn't be necessary at all, if the conflict could be resolved via Wikipedia redirects; but at the core of the problem is the fact that this simply doesn't work. In Wikidata, the list of linked Wikipedia articles is showing not the redirect lemma but the lemma of the target article (i. e. an article belonging to a completely different Wikidata entry) and what's even worse, the redirect in Wikipedia gets a "Wikidata entry not found" label and cannot be linked to the correct Wikidata entry, though this entry definitely exists (so, for example, in de:Kriegsdienstverweigerer, which is a redirect to de:Kriegsdienstverweigerung). This makes not only correct interwiki linking impossible, but also correct association of (redirect) articles with Wikidata entries. This looks to me like a fundamental bug in the construction of Wikidata. --Jossi (talk) 16:08, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This general problem is now addressed at Wikidata:Requests for comment/Allow the creation of links to redirects in Wikidata. --Jossi (talk) 10:02, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@ŠJů: they might have another word for the emergency stopping lane, but they do not have an article about it. I don't know if the English wp has one? Q.Zanden questions? 21:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, and at least in China, emergency parking/driving even on such too narrow shoulders are also legitimate (although engine (Q44167) of your vehicle is likely to be broken if you really do that). To me there's more than some splitting actions to do. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:43, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

both items look the same. --AntanO 04:58, 24 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO: In my opinion, zh:电蚊拍 needs voltage (Q25428) to work where zh:苍蝇拍 needn't. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:25, 14 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@AntanO: ^^ --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:01, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226, AntanO: To me it looks really messed up. I can't make any sense of it. Some languages describes just the flyswatter, others are talking also about other mechanical tools, and some are also taking the electrical tools into consideration. I don't know how to solve it. Q.Zanden questions? 21:29, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Some surveys per picture (flyswatter without electric marked as "fs", flyswatter with electric "efs", fly gun "fg", fly bottle "fb", flypaper "fp", fly-whisk "fw", bug zapper "bz"):

• afwiki: af:Vlieëplak - fs, efs
• amwiki: am:ጭራ perhaps fw, @Codex Sinaiticus, Elfalem, Hgetnet:
• arwiki: ar:ورق_صائد_الذباب - fp
• azwiki: az:Milçəköldürən doesn't seem related to those (about Ottoman Empire and Algeria?), need az-N users to judge @Araz Yaquboglu, Babək Akifoğlu, Cekli829, Dagli balasi.M.A, Haqverdi1, Interfase:@Meisam, Melikov Memmed, Natig98, Nicat49, Rutulec, Samak:@Sortilegus, Wertuose, ارژنگ:
• barwiki: bar:Mucknbatscher - fs
• cawiki: ca:Matamosques - fs, fw; ca:Mata-insectes elèctric - efs, bz
• cswiki: cs:Plácačka na mouchy - fs
• dawiki: da:Fluesmækker - fs
• dewiki: de:Fliegenklatsche - fs; de:Elektrische Fliegenklatsche - efs; de:Fliegenglas - fb; de:Fliegenfänger - fp; de:Elektrischer Insektenvernichter - bz
• elwiki: el:Μυγοσκοτώστρα - fs
• enwiki: en:Fly-killing device - fs, efs, fg, fb and others; en:Fly-whisk - fw; en:Flypaper - fp; en:Bug zapper - bz
• eowiki: eo:Muŝbatilo - fs, efs
• eswiki: es:Matamoscas - fs, fp, fw; es:Insecticida eléctrico - efs, bz
• etwiki: et:Kärbsepaber - fp
• fawiki: fa:کاغذ مگس‌گیر - fp
• fiwiki: fi:Kärpästen torjunta - fs, fp
• frwiki: fr:Attrape-mouche - fs, efs, fb, fp; fr:Chasse-mouche - fw; fr:Lampe anti-insectes - bz
• hewiki: he:קוטל יתושים - efs, bz
• hrwiki: hr:Muholovka - fs, efs, fg, fb, fp, fw and others
• idwiki: id:Pengusir lalat - fw
• ikwiki: ik:Patkutaq - efs
• itwiki: it:Carta moschicida - fp
• jawiki: ja:蠅叩き - fs; ja:ハエ取り紙 - fp
• jvwiki: jv:Rakèt lemut - perhaps fs efs per Beeyan's comment
• kowiki: ko:끈끈이 - fp
• lbwiki: lb:Méckefänkert - fp
• mnwiki: mn:Ялааны алуур - fs
• nlwiki: nl:Vliegenmepper - fs, efs; nl:Vliegenstrip - fp
• nnwiki: nn:Flugesmekkar - fs
• nowiki: no:Fluesmekker - fs
• plwiki: pl:Muchołapka- fb; pl:Lep na muchy - fp
• pswiki: ps:مچواژی - fs
• ptwiki: pt:Raquete elétrica - efs; pt:Electrocutador de insectos - bz
• rowiki: ro:Paletă de muște - fs, fw
• ruwiki: ru:Мухобойка - fs, efs, fw; ru:Липучка для мух - fp
• shwiki: sh:Muholovka - fs, efs, fg, fb, fp, fw and others
• srwiki: sr:Мухоловка - fs, efs; sr:Трака за инсекте - fp
• svwiki: sv:Flugsmälla - fs, efs; sv:Flugfångare - fp, fb
• tawiki: ta:கொசு மட்டை - efs; ta:சாமரம் - fw
• tewiki: te:కీటక సంహార పరికరాలు - fs, efs, fg, fb, fp
• viwiki: vi:Phất tử - fw
• zh-yuewiki: yue:烏蠅拍 - fs; yue:電蚊拍 - efs
• zhwiki: zh:苍蝇拍 - fs; zh:电蚊拍 - efs; zh:捕蝇纸 - fp; zh:捕蚊燈 - bz; zh:拂塵 - fw
• commonswiki: c:Category:Fly swatters - fs; c:Category:Electric fly swatters - efs; c:Category:Fly bottles - fb; c:Category:Fly whisks - fw; c:Category:Fly stickers - fp; c:Category:Bug zappers - bz

--Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:12, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

For JV it's efs. I'll move it Beeyan (talk) 02:48, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Splitted de + pl fb as Fly bottle (Q32049173) --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 23:01, 5 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if they are the same. One has the properties said to be the same as (P460) and has cause (P828) with the other Q as qualifier... --Q.Zanden questions? 13:02, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The item for northern giraffe appears to have many sitelinks that are about all giraffes, probably because those wikis consider all giraffes one species. --Lophotrochozoa (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

describe the same thing --178.37.150.228 19:36, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are some small differences between both items, altough I cannot tell you them. Also there are some wiki's that have links on both items, like eo.wp, ru.wp and uk.wp. Q.Zanden questions? 23:22, 6 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Prof. Squirrel has merged these two items, although I do not think it is correct. Now eo.wp has two items, where only one is now linked to wikidata. Also ru.wp and uk.wp are now with two items where only one thing is connected. @Liuxinyu970226: should this merge be undone? I don't know what to do with this... Q.Zanden questions? 14:50, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Agree that both shouldn't simply merged, so I reverted that "merge" action. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:58, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that both items refer to "cabinet for storing clothes".--Raffedada (talk) 05:47, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

German article is scoped in metalworking, while English and Russian describe a generic cutting process.--d1g (talk) 15:19, 13 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the German article specializing in cutting of metals. Actually, the German article does not mention any material at all.-<)kmk(>- (talk) 02:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

According to en.wp are they the same, as Callistege as a subgenus has been outdated. Now Callistege is a genus itself. Can someone with a bit more expertise on biology have a look on this? --Q.Zanden questions? 14:21, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:02, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

These are two different scientific names, and each deserves an item. Wikipedia pages should each be linked to the item that matches the content of the page. - Brya (talk) 04:38, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep two seperate items. Not all authors recognise Callistege again as a genus. Lymantria (talk) 05:29, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with keeping two seperate items. Dan Koehl (talk) 12:30, 9 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ambos se referem ao mesmo evento, com repercussões na tradição profana do carnaval e na prática do cristianismo. --Luan (talk) 21:37, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a conflict here. As you say, one is a secular observance (in a particular region), and the other is a liturgical observance. They have a common origin and timing, but they have diverged enough that they can be treated as separate-but-related entities. — Ipoellet (talk) 21:13, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the german wikipedia-article „Huckepack" belongs to „Piggy-back (transportation)“(Q2646130), but there seems to be a conflict, because of two japanese aricles taking different focuses on the wider topic: „ピギーバック輸送“(Q2646130) and „肩車“(Q17239834). --178.0.217.55 15:30, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

de: carrying on the shoulder or back

en: carriyng on the shoulder or back, but also in railway-examples

fa: carrying on the shoulder

it: an agreement about transporting goods

ja(Q264...): transport carrying on trains mainly

ja(Q172...): carrying on the shoulder or back

A first analysis of the situation. Hopefully it is useful for someone. Q.Zanden questions? 17:58, 22 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As @Tapetis: changed both links each other, there's something in Japanese that kindly not suitable for merging. --59.63.248.150 23:13, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The "Game Maker" software has changed its name through years to become "GameMaker: Studio". The first item GameMaker (Q243720) has been setup by a bunch of wikipedians for a series of 25 or so wikis among which ar, de, fr, jp, it, and simple. The second item Q16195922 supports 8 wikis, among which en, but also ar, de and ru, which therefore are using both, each for two articles, one for each version of the software. There is no doubt that these two objects are redundant : same software author, same company, same purpose. The [en] article does not tell about the previous version "Game Maker", but there are a few references which refer to it. Therefore, I think that merge shall be proceeded. (•) What do you think of this ?
Since I have never done such a procedure, with the potential added complexity of dual links (ar, de, ru), (•) does someone want to carry it out ? Please, could you notify me (@Eric.LEWIN:), I'll be pleased to follow the procedure and learn. If nobody has been able to do it towards mid-april (until which I am a bit "underfreetimed"), I'll jump in with help of the merge help page (french version). Any advice welcome. Best --Eric.LEWIN (talk) 14:23, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Eric.LEWIN:, as far as I had a quick look at these items, it was clear to me that GameMaker Studio is the next generation, but it is definitely not the same item. So I do not think these items should be merged. Q.Zanden questions? 14:33, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can someone able to read Arabic help to merge those ? Thanks --Jona (talk) 11:37, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I requested it at the arabic embassy. Q.Zanden questions? 13:52, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The participant of Russian Wikipedia Igel B TyMaHe noticed, that there's a mess in the items. Please, check them and correct (if it's necessary). --Ksc~ruwiki (talk) 14:22, 16 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at this query. It shows that there are two the same colors, but with a different name. Is there any expert on colors? --Q.Zanden questions? 13:15, 17 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm new to WIkidata, although I have a bit of experience on other wikis. The conflicting items appear to refer to basically the same idea, but there are some minor scoping difficulties ("good" the idea, vs "Good" the philosophical construct). In addition, there are conflicting entries in several languages I don't speak, so I am unable to reconcile them for merging. Thanks, Tamwin (talk) 19:08, 23 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:24, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When I took a look on this, it looked quite simple what the differences are, but it is a mess in sitelinks. Q1456444 is a title in tibetan Buddhism, Q965802 is the first person to have that title. But as the sitelinks are a mess, I don't want to start figuring out. Maybe when I got some more time... Q.Zanden questions? 11:35, 25 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's the difference? Especially in nl, pl, pt and zh. --Infovarius (talk) 11:57, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If your point of "Chinese" means Cantonese, ask @Deryck Chan:. But looks like that currently zh-* labels of Q132510 are following Q15043390? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:07, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

market (Q132510) is about the Market and marketplace (Q330284) is about the Marketplace. --Bigbossfarin (talk) 07:45, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

market (Q132510) can be virtual (as currency market)? market (Q132510) can be situated within marketplace (Q330284)? --Infovarius (talk) 22:39, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I still think Dutch, Polish, Portuguese and Vietnamese articles should consider text-merging. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:56, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Attention please, one user splitted some of marketplace (Q330284) links to Q30121737. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Better ask @Gray eyes, Ws227: for reasons of splitting. --117.136.55.21 17:20, 14 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

When attempting to merge these items which discuss practically the same subject, I noticed that there are articles in Esperanto (of which I know very little) and Arabic (which I do not know at all) under both reference numbers, which prevent a straightforward merger. --Schlosser67 (talk) 06:56, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Schlosser67:, these two items are not the same. Q192... is about the scale to measure the hardness of water, Q229... is about hard water, a specific value for the hardness of water. Q.Zanden questions? 16:29, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps they are not exactly the same, but Q22988272 is a subset of Q192905, as you pointed out. Is that not an argument in favour of merging, rather than against it? At least, the English article on "soft water" could easily be absorbed into the one on "hard water", the latter being the redirection target of "water hardness" anyway. Possibly a question for the philosophers ... I haven't checked other languages yet. --Schlosser67 (talk) 19:10, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Schlosser67: no, that's not an argument in favor of merging these items. Every item, how small it differs from an other item, has its own right to exist. That is why subclass of (P279) and facet of (P1269) exist. Even for a city in the Netherlands has two seperate items, one about the city and the other about the community. The power of Wikidata is because we have all these small differences made more clear by all different items. Q.Zanden questions? 00:02, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

We'd better wait for what others (with the necessary language skills) have to say on this question, after they have looked at the contents of the articles related to the Wikidata items. Of course, the articles need work. But I am not sure whether I understand you at all, perhaps somebody else can explain it better? That a city and a community need not be the same thing, and can be substantially different from each other, is old news, but a different kettle of fish. Here we have a physical quantity that changes gradually. Do you mean to say we need wikidata items for any quantity, its low and its high values (compared to what?), and perhaps the values in between? By the way, looking at the wikidata pages, there seems to be an error: "water hardness" as the more general term should not be a facet of "hard water", it is rather the other way round. --Schlosser67 (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, maybe the city and cummunity is not a good example for these items, but I meant to say that Q192... is a scale and Q229... is one value of that scale that is very largely used. Just like you have the pH-scale, and there is pH 7, or neutral water. Or there is water hardness, and drinking water where drinking water has a value for the hardness of the water. That might be some better example. Q.Zanden questions? 17:12, 2 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not all linked articles seem to match as far as I can guess from the pictures and some keywords. dewiki is about climbing, enwiki about climbing and caving, es/fr/cswiki about caves/geology. Should be splitted I guess? --тнояsтеn ⇔ 13:54, 5 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. This is really at least three different terms. The German article is about a measure of length. The measure is somewhat sloppily defined as "the length of a climbing rope". The English article is about a certain kind of rock feature relevant to climbing. And like you already mentioned, the French article is about a feature in geology.---<)kmk(>- (talk) 02:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Liturgical music" and "Church music" seems to be the same concept (see for example Encyclopædia Britannica). --BohemianRhapsody (talk) 12:31, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Yokohama College of Art and Design" and "Yokohama College of Art and Design" seems to be the same name. One is two-year college, The other is four-year college and had been abolished.

--Matěj Suchánek (talk) 09:49, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Matěj Suchánek: Where is the conflict? --Bigbossfarin (talk) 07:31, 16 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Work and a character seem to be connected. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 06:41, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is a Wikimedia list article (Q13406463) of itself. de/es/fr: about List of Comarques, rest: about Comarque. --Bigbossfarin (talk) 14:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know Russian so I need confirmation that the subjets are the same --Ske (talk) 15:37, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are two related but separate phenomena which are unfortunately both named "nutation" or similar in most languages.

1. A component of the motion of a freely rotating rigid object e.g. a top. See Nutation (English), or de:Nutation (German)
2. A component of the rotating motion of a planet under the influence of gravitational pull by moons, other planets or the central star. See Astronomical nutation (English), or de:Nutation_(Astronomie) (German)

Both kinds of nutation involve small periodic deviations of the mean axis of rotation. Both are accompanied by a second kind of motion called "precession" (or "Präzession"). So everything seems to be fine and dandy. However, the nutation of planets cannot possibly the same type of motion as the nutation of a top. The nutation of a planet is caused by a constantly varying torque by the gravitational pull of other objects. By contrast, the nutation of a top is defined to be a component of motion without any torque at all. It took physicists a bit to get this sorted. But since about 150 years it obviously is. See any physics majors textbook for the details. The formulas used to calculate the amplitude and frequency of the nutation are vastly different. In particular, it is impossible to regard one phenomenon as a limiting case for the other.

The German and the English Wikipedia dedicate separate articles to the two phenomena (see the links above). In other language versions I see:

• Rigid-body definition and rigid-body explanation combined with the motions of the earth as an example (Spanish, Italian, Polish, Dutch, Russian). → inconsistent
• Rigid-body definition, rigid-body explanation and rigid-body example (Croatian, Norwegian)
• Astronomy definition and rigid-body definition in separate sections of a single article (Turkish) → not according to universal wikipedia principles (one article per concept)
• Definition and explanation matching ridgid-body precession, rather than nutation (Nynorsk) → just wrong
• Definition based on geometry of movements. No assertion on causes. Tops, planets and ammunition as an example (schottish, finnish) → does not match the definition given in physics textbooks

Not very surprisingly, the statements attached to this wikidata item are conflicting ("motions of the Earth", but also "\mathbf{\tau} = \mathbf{\Omega} \times \mathbf{L}"). The formula given is not useful to calculate the nutation of the earth. It is the formula connected to the rigid-body motion.

So what can be done to sort this mess? At minimum, there should be two separate items in wikidata for the two meanings. This would provide adequate goals for the German and the English article. But how about the other ~50 language versions, most of which misrepresent the item in some way?---<)kmk(>- (talk) 02:55, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This item actually needs to be pulled apart it, the basis is the same of a Wilde unfinished play, though the Finnish wiki may be about something based on the original idea, though there seems to be elements that have melded that are not of the same instance. [Sorry to dump it, not got the time to currently resolve it. ] -- — billinghurst sDrewth 02:50, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aghouinite (Q4692450) & Agounit (Q2260996) are the same town but spelled differently because of transliteration issues. Two different articles in English appeared because one was written from the perspective of a Sahrawi controlled town in Western Sahara and the other from the perspective of a Morocco sub-division (this article also acknowledged that it was controlled by the Sahrawi Republic). It looks like Farsi and Urdu also created multiple articles for the topic based on the split in English. I merged the two English articles, but I'm not comfortable merging the Farsi and Urdu articles, though they are both clearly stubs and should be easy to merge. So now I don't know how to combine all the links with two articles in Urdu and two in Farsi for the same topic. --Vojen (talk) 21:50, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Geography WikiProject does not exist. Please correct the name. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:27, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

These items had been separated in November, 2016, by User:Arctic.gnome, but site to Latvian Wikipedia article was mistake. I guess, in another languages also are mistakes. Sorry about my bad English language! --Treisijs (talk) 18:51, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's not the same. The Kingdom of Denmark is a unitary state that comprises, in addition to Denmark proper, two autonomous constituent countries in the North Atlantic Ocean: Greenland and the Faroe Islands. So Denmark (Q35) is a part of Kingdom of Denmark (Q756617). Some Wikipedias describe both in one article. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 18:26, 27 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Thgoiter: I agree, these articles aren't same things, but... many sitelinks Arctic.gnome moved from Denmark (Q35) to Kingdom of Denmark (Q756617) in November, 2016. In my opinion, must check these moves. I think, there must be more mistakes, not only Latvian sitelink. --Treisijs (talk) 18:29, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to result from a dispute over the placement of Halcyonidae and Cerylidae as either families or subfamilies. On English Wikipedia, a single article covers both suborder Alcidines and Alcedinidae. --Guanaco (talk) 05:02, 13 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 22:39, 9 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I see nothing wrong here. The enwiki page focuses on the family so is properly placed. Taxonomically it is uncomfortable, but unavoidable. - Brya (talk) 19:11, 10 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looks to be messy with the people and the civilisations all mixed in a nonsensical way. -- — billinghurst sDrewth 01:18, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

On the english WP, Heijunka redirects to Production leveling. In the headlines of Production leveling, we can find "... aka heijunka". On the wikidata page : production leveling (Q18714076), there is en:Production leveling and nl:Line balancing. According to me, production leveling (Q18714076) should be renamed to "Line balancing" and the english link should be moved to Q121631. --Jona (talk) 12:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The translation of Wikipedia articles attached to Q12046531 seems to suggest that they're the same topic. But skwiki, cswiki, skwikiquote and plwikiqoute have separate articles (duplicates?). --Intgr (talk) 16:17, 28 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• @Matěj Suchánek: an opinion here? :) --XXN, 19:54, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  Per cswiki, "potravina" subclass of (P279) "potrava" ("potravina" – for people, "potrava" – for animals, incl. people). Whatever you will decide to do, please keep cswiki and skwiki together. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 20:03, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe Q21369241 can be merged into barn (Q1303167) --Hufkratzer (talk) 06:48, 8 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Glovacki: thoughts? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 10:56, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Hufkratzer:, @Glovacki:, @Liuxinyu970226:: I would merge. The Russian article's latter paragraphs, according to Google Translate, serve to disambiguate homonyms... but the article lead talks about the same concept in Russian, English and Spanish.

Waiting for your input to be sure, but this looks like a problem to be solved in Russian Wikipedia, not on Wikidata. --ArenaL5 (talk) 19:35, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't read the russian wikipedia page. I assume I only wrote this note because both wikifata pages have the same spanish label "galpón". A similar item is shed (Q721931) --Hufkratzer (talk) 00:41, 19 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. I attached the German article "Felsbilder im Hochland von Sjunik" to Q13054381 (to an English and Spanish article). These two articles are about the international known Ughtasar petroglyphs. The German article is about the Ughtasar petroglyphs too but also about other petroglyphs of the region. The other petroglyphs were discovered and object of research only in recent years and are related to the petroglyphs of Ughtasar. I would like to keep the connection of the German article to the others.

2. The data object Q3358117 contains an Armenian, French and Dutch version of the subject "Ughtasar petroglyphs". This should be merged to the first data object.

3. The data object Q4361424 contains a Russian and a Belorussian version of the subject "petroglyphs of Armenia". These articles are less about petroglyphs as archaeological objects than about proving the astronomical and astrological knowledge and activities of the ancient "Armenians" with Armenian rock art, of which the authors are convinced. Here I do not recommend the association with the first data object.

Thanks. thalmos 00:55, 3. Aug. 2017 (CEST)

I'm not hopping to see some "merge" here, as there's really a normal "one-system-one-company" case. However, it seems that at least zhwiki zh:快捷通軌道 is still describing both, so the links are still foggy. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:39, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Needs help from Malaysia users. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:39, 4 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be (more or less) the same colour in most languages but there is two articles in spanish. --VIGNERON (talk) 08:21, 5 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

If the dates in the articles at enwiki are correct, those at most other places are mixed-up. I created Q35770063 as Q1064802 is probably a mixup. --
--- Jura 06:23, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Following en:Talk:Charles Henry Churchill, there are two persons. Churchill / Spencer-Churchill conflation (Q1064802) and Charles Henry Spencer-Churchill (Q26222216) should be merged (lived 1828-1877, son of Lord Charles Spencer-Churchill (Q6679059), grandson of George Spencer-Churchill, 5th Duke of Marlborough (Q333347)). After that, the 3 articles (2x enwiki, 1x dewiki) should be overworked. As some facts are mixed up. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 16:37, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think Q1064802 should be merged into anything as it is a mixup. Just as much as most identifiers on that page and the remaining dewiki sitelink. Maybe one or the other element can be moved to either other item, but once completed, it's preferable to delete it. In any case, it would be good to have better references for any of the dates in the articles.
  --- Jura 17:39, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if there's a subtle difference there I'm missing. At least no and en are in both items, most are in only one. I've hardly done any work here myself so I don't feel capable of resolving this on my own. --Amalthea (talk) 20:08, 10 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

the wikidata entry does not contain any relevant information and there is only one page existing in the english wikipedia which has issues, here it is: [[1]]. The german wikipedia has an entry called St. Veit an der Gölsen which states that two places called "Inner-Wiesenbach" and "Außer-Wiesenbach" are part of this municipality, but does not know about "Wiesenbach". I think there doesn't exist a place called Wiesenbach, but only Inner-Wiesenbach and Außer-Wiesenbach. JoHammer (talk) 16:18, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Mix of requests for actions or explanations. --Matěj Suchánek (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

At some point smile and smiley got mixed up. --
--- Jura 07:50, 8 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored an earlier version of Q487 (but had to remove additions to other pages and one there to restore it). Peter James (talk) 19:38, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Shyamal (talk) 04:56, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose not the same --тнояsтеn ⇔ 15:12, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• I am under the impression that this is meant to solve the interwiki issues - I got here because GapFinder suggested that the Norwegian article for specific heat capacity did not exist in English but found that the concept was indeed covered in the English Wikipedia article on heat capacity and specific heat capacity is a redirect. I am quite aware that these are not the same but I would rather like to have the good old functionality of interwiki working through redirects. Shyamal (talk) 08:48, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There is a conflict for ca, es, pt, uk (others?) which should be resolved before merging. --Jona (talk) 12:00, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• cawiki: @Jmarchn:
• eswiki: @Juan Mayordomo, 91.197.junr3170:
• ptwiki: @JMGM, Pandukht, Opraco, Dbastro:
• ukwiki: @Rkononenko, Oloddin, A1, MagnusFit, Oleksandr Tahayev: @Микола Василечко, Avatar6:

For now I just marked said to be the same as (P460) each other. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:56, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lo siento, no domino escribir el inglés por lo que lo escribo en español. Deberían fusionarse. He pedido borrar la categoría Categoría:Wikipedia:Plantillas de tablas y columnas (Q8219368) de la Wikipedia en español y eliminado el enlace por lo que no debería dar ahora ningún problema. Además creo que hay que fusionar Category:Column templates (Q9385046) y Category:Multi-column templates (Q23931397). Saludos, Juan Mayordomo (talk) 19:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The first is described as "depot" in English and the second as "warehouse", but the Warehouse page in the English Wikipedia is linked to the first, so I wonder if these are the same thing. Some languages are listed for one or the other, others for both. Of those listed for both, the Czech entry in Q1362225 is a redirect to a page listed at granary (Q114768) (a type of warehouse), the Dutch and Swedish entries in Q1362225 describe them as older terms for a warehouse, and I'm not sure about the two Danish entries. I don't know if the items from Q1362225 should be merged to Q181623, moved to Q114768, or kept separate either as duplicates or as a specific type of warehouse, but to describe both just as "warehouse" would still be confusing. --Peter James (talk) 19:05, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really confused with those "Hengshui"s. -Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:01, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am not sure if this is the correct place for this, but these two items are very similar to each other. Judging by the interwiki links they seem to cause problems for Wikipedias of many languages that do not have separate pages for bilberries as in a group of closely related species, and bilberry as in the European blueberry Vaccinium myrtillus. For example the Icelandic Wikipedia article Aðalbláber is about the European blueberry, Vaccinium myrtillus, and links to Q5812410, while the Finnish Wikipedia article Mustikka is about the same species yet links to Q5413585, so the interwiki link between these two wikis is broken. Perhaps these two entries should be merged. --Turdas (talk) 18:04, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the iswiki sitelink. I guess this just shows (again) the disadvantages of using common names as labels for species. - Brya (talk) 05:15, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q7561276 and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q215014 are the same topic, how can they be merged? --Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 14:01, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid both are unlikely to be merged, as both English and Thai articles are considering "Songkran in Thailand is a subset of Songkran around world". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 14:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The two items describe similar concepts of geospatial or geographic data. The English Wikipedia article (created 2016-07-31) describes the two as aliases. There are a few interwiki language links that exist for both articles (de, pl, uk) which appear to describe similar concepts. Should these items be merged into one? -- Mwtoews (talk) 20:41, 2 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

nl:Tilburg: On the Dutch Wikipeda, only the interwikilinks for Cebuano and Arabic are displayed --Walter Anton (talk) 00:02, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There are articles for both city (nl:Tilburg) and municipality (nl:Tilburg (gemeente)). --тнояsтеn ⇔ 06:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure to understand the difference between this two items and how to structure them (is one a subclass of the other, should they have different from (P1889) or said to be the same as (P460) ?). --VIGNERON (talk) 13:49, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The lead of the English article explains it very well. In fiction, epilogue is a final chapter for a story, set some time after the main plot is resolved. Afterword is “extra content” where the author speaks directly to the readers. Outside of fiction there's no concept of epilogue (unless you're maybe writing a semi-fictional biography...?)

different from (P1889) seems more appropiate in my opinion, because there is agreement on which is which... but I'm not certain. Oddly, my first language seems to use the same word for both (I believe I remember some books using posfacio as opposed to prefacio, but that word isn't listed in the authoritative dictionary. --ArenaL5 (talk) 19:24, 18 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Those two items have the same topic. When I trying to merged it shows: 'Error: Conflicting descriptions for language de'. --Hddty. (talk) 10:48, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oil refining is not identical with oil refinery. One is the process, one the place where it happens. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 20:10, 15 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion between "Greek names in general" and "list of Greek names". --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:00, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think, part intewikies from Q41493 must be in Q435608. In one it is necessary to place the Ancient World as an object, and in the other it is a branch of science that studies the ancient world (Ancient history)--Хомелка (talk) 05:53, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Luan (talk) 15:30, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea how those 3 are different each other. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:52, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Does anyone know the difference between Q18342738 and Q861911? I thought the two should be merged, but some languages(eu, hy, ru, tl) with articles on both items make me confused. Bluemersen ⁽⁺⁾ 11:00, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

German Wiki state that Anton–Babinski syndrome and Anton syndrome are distinct diseases but for sample en:Anton–Babinski syndrome (describing de:Anton-Syndrom) is linked with fr:Syndrome d'Anton-Babinski (which is related to de:Anton-Babinski-Syndrom) Ske (talk) 15:32, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Jmrebes (talk) 07:22, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why not others? Eugen (Q18012526), Eugène (Q18012535), Jenő (Q15729621), Yevgeni (Q19830572), Eugeniusz (Q18510606), Gene (Q19802209), Eŭgeno (Q19802211), Evžen (Q19802212), Evgen (Q18579296), Jaŭhien (Q19412927), Eugênio (Q21285766), Evgeny (Q1688617), Eugén (Q25917880), Eugenio (Q18012537), Eugenijus (Q1373256), Jewgienij (Q20088017), Eugeni (Q21845087)... Common problem with names... --Infovarius (talk) 15:27, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many closely related products (dishes)... I tried once upon a time to separate notions, but I failed. I am not satisfied that they are so numerous (yet all pretend to be culture-independent). --Infovarius (talk) 15:23, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is a conflict between these 2 pages (which have the same title despite talking about different things):

• https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2051919 (most of the pages are about Intravenous extravasation)
• https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1076345 (pages about Extravasation in general)

I tried moving (de)Paravasation from https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2051919 to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1076345, since it talked about Extravasation in general, but I was not successful. --2A02:1811:413:5700:A5BA:7EA0:D3AA:7408 23:24, 30 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--Luan (talk) 01:54, 31 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Noticed this while trying to find a link back from English Wikipedia "Steamship" to German "Dampfschiff". Going the other way round I found out that the german article uses the older 2012 object by MerllwBot like 58 other projects while the english (+simple english) is connected to a 2013 object by Sk!dbot. The english link (+ all statements) of the MerllwBot object got later (in 2015) changed to the smaller steam boat. As I can't read any of the other languages linked to the Sk!dbot object those needed to be checked if they could be merged into the MerllwBot object and the Sk!dbot object could be used for the steamboat then. --Steinfeld-feld (talk) 21:13, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: As I searched for "Dampfboot" eq. "steamboat" in German another object create by Sk!dbot of 2012 popped up. It's only used by the german and swedish Wikipedia. --Steinfeld-feld (talk) 21:30, 1 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like confusing. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 05:53, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Propose both en and pt articles to be merged? --219.147.95.221 23:00, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, per spdx.org: AGPL-1.0 and AGPL-3.0 are (by terms) different. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 11:09, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Without more response on relations of both, I currently marked Wikimedia permanent duplicate item (Q21286738) on Affero General Public License (Q28130012). --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 13:50, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly this permanent duplicate is recently cancelled by @Ans:, I'd love to try understanding their opinion. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 03:39, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

So, what should I do now? There are 5 unfair splitted items, that really should decide that which two or three should be merged. Who should I ask now? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 09:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging users that are or were edited all of them: @IXavier, AVRS, Aconcagua, Tom Morris, -revi, Laddo:@AmaryllisGardener, Reaper35, Genium, Dominic Z., Ebrahim, Kette~cawiki:@Frysch, Hatas, LilyOfTheWest, Lucio for, Kotz, Vargenau:@Johanricher, Metamorforme42, Liuxinyu970226, CC0, Valerio Bozzolan, Isidre blanc:@Ykhwong, Pepe piton, Wdpp, Paputx, Waldir, إسلام:@MechQuester, Tetizeraz, Ans, BukhariSaeed, Troupal, Nmaia: This problem also is making IP users trouble and where to find A solution? --117.136.55.42 07:32, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I've clarified the English Wikipedia article on the Affero Licenses, and edited the items to reflect their correct names and relationships. I'm unsure is how to correctly model GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 or later (Q27020062) vs. GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 (Q27017232), though. Any sugestions? --Waldir (talk) 11:20, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I had no idea there were different AGPL licenses. Good to know. Too bad I can't help you, I only translated or fixed some words. Best regards. Tetizeraz (talk) 12:42, 28 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’d prefer not to merge GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 or later (Q27020062) and GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 (Q27017232). For example,

• diaspora* (Q251649) says “GNU Affero General Public License V3 or later” at COPYRIGHT file. Therefore diaspora* (Q251649) → copyright license (P275) → GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 or later (Q27020062).
• MongoDB (Q1165204) doesn't say “or later” at README file currently. Therefore MongoDB (Q1165204) → copyright license (P275) → GNU Affero General Public License, version 3.0 (Q27017232).

--Wdpp (talk) 15:15, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, why we name those specific version of GNU licenses as old SPDX identifiers like "GPL-3.0", "GPL-3.0+", "AGPL-3.0", "LGPL-3.0" etc? Aren't those confusing "-3.0" and "-3.0+" deprecated in favor of "-3.0-only" & "-3.0-or-later"? --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 04:30, 1 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The German article de:Schwibbogen (Architektur) and the Czech article cs:Prampouch seem be a different item to the en, fr, es, ca articles of diaphragm arches. The first two are about free strut arches, the next about bracing elements of roof vaults. --ŠJů (talk) 10:19, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Are those edits by 116.70.228.197 and Yoyoma88 appropriate? --本日晴天 (talk) 03:18, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea judging items that about Japanese wars so @Yoyoma88:, but one clerk point: there looks like two different wars so merging is not actionable. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 02:05, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As the second item is merged by a Korean user to Q379433, I mark this as partially resolved. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 12:29, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This item muddles two different things together in my opinion: One geographic region and one conceptual term. The German (de:Oshana-System) and Finnish (fi:Oshana (maantiede)) Wikipedia articles, respectively, deal with a specific region which lies in central northern Namibia and which is characterized by a system of dry river beds (i. e. en:Intermittent rivers). At the same time, in the northeastern part of Namibia, intermittent rivers in general are named by a specific term: The en:Herero word Omuramba, which is what the Englisch (en:Omiramba, the plural form of Omuramba) and French (fr:Omuramba) Wikipedia articles deal with. This word has been adapted to the other languages used in Namibia, such as English, Afrikaans and German, to denote such an intermittent river in the northeast of the country. In other parts of the country, the Afrikaans word af:Rivier is used for the same concept of an intermittent river (see de:Rivier), as is en:Wadi in Arabic-speaking regions and en:Creek in Australia, for instance. Therefore, Omuramba is a regional conceptual term, whilst Oshana (which derives from a different language, en:Ovambo language) denotes a region/water system. If no-one objects, I will disentangle them in a way that the English and French articles will receive a new Wikidata item for the concept (which, in the German version de:Omuramba, is a redirect to de:Rivier) whilst the existing item will continue to contain the German and Finnish article as well as the link to Commons which also deals with the specific region. --Andropov (talk) 09:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Already explained on the Talk:Q12062562. But here briefly again: BMW 2 Series (Q12062562) is used by most languages for overview articles about the BMW 2 Series (except german and polish), BMW M2 (Q31837867) is used for these two articles and BMW 2 Series (F22) (Q20748311) is used by most languages for the coupe version F22/convertible F23 except again german an catalan this time that use it for the sporty M2. What I think would be the best solution is BMW M2 (Q31837867) for all over view articles, BMW 2 Series (F22) (Q20748311) for all articles of the coupe/convertible version and BMW M2 (Q31837867) or a completly new object for the BMW M2. The only thing that makes the changing of articles complicated is that there are already some data filled into the single items where it had to be researched where it belongs.--Steinfeld-feld (talk) 19:43, 18 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Update: Mostly resolved now but still someone multilingual should check all the entries in all three objects on consistency. --Steinfeld-feld (talk) 18:16, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Two articles aren't linked correctly:

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1823435
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_(photography)
does link to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtführung
should link to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtformer

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1823429
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lichtführung
does link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_(photography)
should link to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Photographic_lighting

Who can do the changes?--Angerdan (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

--NearEMPTiness (talk) 18:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sure that this is the same place? 2637 inhabitants in 2010 (nl:Ngawi (plaats)) vs. 22412 in 2012 (sv:Ngawi (ort)). --тнояsтеn ⇔ 20:53, 1 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thgoiter:  Done by me, both are having same coordinates, as well as I tried to merge too lots of such cases in Mainland China before. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 16:01, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Liuxinyu970226: But how do you explain the big difference in inhabitant numbers (factor 8.5!)? I had such cases before, where town and municipality had the same name and same coordinates.

Here we have the same name for three administrative levels: id:Ngawi, Ngawi, Ngawi in id:Ngawi, Ngawi in id:Ngawi. --тнояsтеn ⇔ 17:58, 5 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Thgoiter: As I check both cebwiki and svwiki's coordinate link (via Bing Maps), both are mentioned Ngawi 3 times on Bing, hence matches id:Ngawi, Ngawi, Ngawi and jv:Ngawi, Ngawi, Ngawi. For inhabitants, just update by newest database datas. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:06, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Undid recently, waiting for another one to handle, probably @Nikki:. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 00:24, 6 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]