User talk:Hjart

I egenskaben located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) angiver vi kun de nuværende kommuner og regioner, når det er Danmark og ikke sogne.. --Steenth (talk) 19:22, 16 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@ Hjart,

in my brain, Vesthimmerland is Westlummerland. :) --Ulamm (talk) 15:18, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please explain what you are doing.--Ymblanter (talk) 20:36, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess I got a bit confused here. Sorry about that--Hjart (talk) 20:40, 7 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks.--Ymblanter (talk) 19:40, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
The problem with Gavnø Castle (Q2241226) is that the element is, depend of the wp version, about the island (in French), the castle or both of them (in English). Do you want to clean it or I do it ? Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:37, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The danish WP version is about the castle only.--Hjart (talk) 20:41, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Simon Villeneuve (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hej, I am wondering why removing the item not fulfilling property constraint is not okay.

--Fantasticfears (talk) 09:48, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes property constraints are not complete and as such are not always valid reasons for removing things.--Hjart (talk) 10:37, 28 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you putting wrong picture of my mother back again and again - plesae dont do it again!!!!!!!!"

Mette Hønningen is not that person on that picture you keep putting back. 91.224.210.10 21:55, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hjart, located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) should not be used for organizations, but only for physical objects. The correct property here is headquarters location (P159). Cheers --MB-one (talk) 19:32, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Royal Oak Golf Club for instance is not just the club. It's also the physical golf course. --Hjart (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I see. In this case, we should consider splitting them up. --MB-one (talk) 19:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To me headquarters location (P159) really only makes sense where the organization is spread over more than 1 site. --Hjart (talk) 20:00, 3 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart,

I saw that you asked me in a comment of undoing an edit of me how I got the definition because I have chosen the wrong State. For this batch I made a query and the results where the Items without a German descriptions. A additional information was the state where they are located. I export this as a CSV and in Calc I make VLOOKUP and add for every state the correct localization. Not in every case in German a thing is located in a country there exist other prepositions too. I think that there was a mistake. The cell I have chosen was not in the row of the state you can find in that row. I make a query and look how many of my descriptions are incorrect and correct them. -- Hogü-456 (talk) 17:55, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I edit quite a lot of items, so could you please remind me which item I undid here? --Hjart (talk) 18:09, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I havent found the item you have undid. I dont know where the signature of my edit came from. I think I told it you a few weeks ago and not in 2019. --Hogü-456 (talk) 20:53, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I undid a misplaced comment from someone else (which removed most of the text in this section). Sorry that it disturbed you. --Hjart (talk) 20:59, 23 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the hint. I am fine with your revert, but why don't you remove the less accurate coordinates? Greetings, --Giorgio Michele (talk) 14:32, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes I remove them, sometimes I don't. Depends on my mood ;-). The older ones are referenced, while those I created from aerial imagery are not. Of course removing them would lessen the risk of less experienced editors removing my set of coordinates, but well, then those editors wouldn't learn about the "preferred" bit ... --Hjart (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for adding the new correct coordinates: the old ones were not read by the template in the Italian page about the lighthouse (and I was trying to figure out why), now it works correctly :) --Postcrosser (talk) 13:14, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The new coordinates are a guess. We're told the tower was moved ~70 meters, but not the exact direction. Forgot to add them right away after the event though. Thanks for reminding me ;-) --Hjart (talk) 13:21, 5 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hjart! I am just letting you know that I have added the rollback flag to your account, as you are a trusted user on Wikidata. If you have any questions or concerns, please don't hesitate to contact me or leave a message at the Project chat. Thanks, Esteban16 (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2019 (UTC) --Esteban16 (talk) 21:35, 18 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Hjart. You correctly pointed out that changing the sitelink broke the infobox on the Commons category. However, that's easily fixed by adding a qid parameter (which I've done on the 4 data entries).

Categories in wikidata seem to have their own (separate) items. If there is a gallery and a category over in commons, then the gallery should be associated with the main topic, and the category should be associated with the wikidata item (if it exists). Doesn't that make sense? Hike395 (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I much prefer keeping things simple and most commons galleries are very rarely maintained anyway, so I really prefer commons sitelinks to just point to the categories.--Hjart (talk) 21:56, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two points

1. Generally, wikidata items refer to pages in the same namespace across multiple wikis. Wikidata items that correspond to articles will refer to articles, while items that correspond to categories will refer to categories. When we have a choice between a Commons gallery and a Commons category, mixing up namespaces is less simple (more complex).
2. I spend a fair amount of time maintaining commons galleries. They do get maintained by other editors, also. So I don't think it's correct to dismiss them.

Hike395 (talk) 22:07, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've put a fair amount of effort into i.e. commons:Kastellet myself. I'm not really seeing anyone else in Denmark do that though. --Hjart (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can see why you would think Commons:Abe Fortas is not a well-maintained gallery: it only has three images with no captions. However, take a look at Commons:Al Hajar Mountains (which I just made this morning). It has descriptive captions, and a selection of images from across the mountain range. Compare that to Commons:Category:Al Hajar Mountains, which has thousands of images of the range, but only 14 at the top level of the category (and those aren't very good). I don't think you can say a brand-new gallery isn't maintained :-).

How about this --- if Danish town galleries aren't well-maintained, how about if we revert the site link for Aabyhøj ? (Although, I'm happy to try to improve Commons:Aabyhøj). Hike395 (talk) 22:42, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can see galleries as a means to help make sense of and navigate popular, large and complex category trees. Galleries with 3 images from a category with 5 images is rather pointless though. If you make galleries please make sure they are actually helpfull, rather than a waste of time and effort. --Hjart (talk) 23:00, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that 3 images out of 5 is pointless. Of course, I would claim that a 5-image category is also pointless and shouldn't have been made --- which gallery/category are you referring to? Hike395 (talk) 23:03, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Categories are our only practical means of grouping files together. That's why 5- or even 2-image categories often actually do make good sense. When I go to Commons though, I often do it to see which new images may be found in a particular category. I find it rather annoying to have to click through galleries, that wasn't updated for 12 years. Please don't create galleries just for the sake of it. --Hjart (talk) 16:52, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart, jeg forstår ikke begrundelsen for, at du har fjernet det polske navn som alias her. Det er helt almindelig praksis at have et navn på landets eget sprog stående som alias i de tilfælde, hvor der bruges en dansk oversættelse som navn; se f.eks. den polske borgerplatform eller det svenske socialdemokrati. Mvh. SorenRK (talk) 20:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Det er muligt det er "almindeligt", men jeg er efterhånden kommet dertil at jeg i mange tilfælde finder det misvisende. Desuden er det ved søgninger tilstrækkeligt at navnet optræder på originalsproget. --Hjart (talk) 20:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This item: Huldremose Woman (Q467748) your edition results: An entity should not have a statement for coordinate location if it also has a statement for instance of with value human. See: Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P735#"Conflicts_with_földrajzi_koordináta_(P625)"_violations.

Please correct it:

• place of burial (P119) & coordinate location or
• location of discovery (P189) & coordinate location

Thank you Palotabarát (talk)

Your changes caused the coordinates to disappear from the danish Wp, so I will recommend leaving it as is. Please note that this is not a live human being. Hjart (talk) 10:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The coodinate data does not appear here either: Ötzi (Q171291) da:Ötzi. Option: infobox. The data in wikidata is incorrect and needs to be corrected. Palotabarát (talk) 12:07, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Would it be okay if I add 'instance of: railway line' back, but with a temporal modifier 'until January 1, 2001' and similarly add modifier 'from July 13, 2011 ' to the statement 'instance of: heritage railway'?

--Lnkvt (talk) 19:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would be okay with that. --Hjart (talk) 19:56, 15 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it to ease queries?

Hi ~~Hjart~~, I can see that you have reverted the birth date of Erika F. Christensen, as there is no evidence available in terms of her birth date and I only know of her birth year, I would appreciate it if you removed the day and month of birth, as I would not like to have incorrect information on a page I have created. If you find proof, however, I would like to have a link to that source. Kind Regards, ~~Randeris4~~

Ok, jeg havde tidligere redigeret wikidata efter de data du havde angivet på Wikipedia og troede det var en fejltagelse at du helt slettede både dato og år. --Hjart (talk) 13:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg kiggede på Hjerting Church (Q12316917) - du har ændret den fra en flertydig til kirken i Esbjerg. Den kirke var oprindelig på Hjerting Church (Q12316919). Hvad sker der. Jeg så helst at man ikke flytter rundt på den slags. --Steenth (talk) 20:31, 1 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll buy most of your changes to my poster (Q429785) edits as desirable, except that I disagree with making poster a subclass of (P279) rather than an instance of (P31) art genre. To me that's a different level of abstraction, as you can't subdivide the property of "genre" into even smaller properties any more than you can subdivide the identity of the artist into even smaller identities!

But as I'm not really into the topic of art, I decided to do some analysis, and I found that you are actually quite in line with the majority - which I believe is just as wrong!

Now, I'm not going to lose any sleep over this; there is plenty of confusion elsewhere in Wikidata to tinker with, and the only reason I edited the poster properties was that I didn't want to see it as a direct subclass of object (Q488383), alongside the Universe, Nth-order metaclasses, the notion of God, and the very roots of existentiality and conceptuality themselves. Some company of a mundane poster, I'd say... :-)

As you may have noticed when browsing my edit history (I bet that's why you found the dog beach item and added a Danish label to it), I have only been here for a few weeks, but I'm kind of hooked, not only on a hookworm! Haven't got into lexemes yet, but that's probably a good way to become polyglot (didn't indicate either Danish or Norwegian in my Babelbox even as I do understand either reasonably well in writing; det er jo netopp samme sprog som svensk)! --SM5POR (talk) 20:58, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're right as to the art genre and I've changed it back. I've edited Wikidata for years now (mostly fairly basic stuff though) and I still get confused now and then. In this case I didn't pay enough attention to what I doing. Thanks for pointing it out.

Yes, I regularly check out the edit histories of other people, to get an idea of their level of experience and sometimes I find stuff that I can correct or expand a bit on :-) --Hjart (talk) 17:04, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have recently been working on some topographic features, such as highest point (P610), which turned out to be a little complicated for Sweden (Q34), where the identification of this point has shifted between two peaks as ice and snow has accumulated or ablated on either of them throughout the 20th century (and I'm not sure I can trust the accuracy of some measurements made in the 1920s as stated in an old encyclopedia on my bookshelf).

Then I had a look at my home town of Uppsala (Q25286) and saw that somebody had (incorrectly) stated our local skiing hill to be 60 metres (Q246681) (the real height is 42 metres). But hey, there was something odd about that value, as it was actually an item, not a numeric quantity! The unit was correct (metres), but the direction (horizontal instead of vertical) was not... Funny, but I corrected the statement and launched a query searching for similar statements elsewhere.

And I found the Danish island of Funen (Q26503) with a highest point (P610) of 138 (Q30652).

That's not a height either. That's a year...

Reviewing the item history, I think I understand what you tried to do, as you had simultaneously deleted a statement giving the elevation above sea level (P2044) as 38 metres. I don't know what that value came from, and I think it had been added by a robot a few years ago, but one guess I had was that it could be an average elevation for the entire island. Do you have some other explanation? It might actually be interesting to have both maximum and average elevation values for a number of territories in order to obtain some statistics on human settlements, but I need a detailed elevation data set to calculate those values automatically.

Anyway, to make a correct claim I looked up the Danish counterpart to Lantmäteriet (Q845497), and ... well, you can call me impressed! The sdfekort.dk map browser outperforms anything I have seen of that kind so far. So, besides fixing the Funen (Q26503) statement, I also looked up and pinned down Møllehøj (Q689106) in the same manner. And Lammefjord (Q1801605). But wait, I had just disregarded Yding Skovhøj (Q529888) for being man-made (artificial), and what is Lammefjord (Q1801605) if not man-made..? --SM5POR (talk) 20:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi:

Obviously I don't agree with your change for megalith (Q164240). I have several instances from an heritage government agency cataloging megalith as monuments. Also this change violates Guía Digital del Patrimonio Cultural de Andalucía ID (P3318) propertys (link).

Olea (talk) 11:18, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

no es sensato, no es coherente ¿cómo pueden aparecer en la <<ficha de persona>> dos (2) lugares de fallecimiento?

It is not sensible, it is not coherent. How can two (2) places of death appear on the <<infobox>>? Marinna (talk) 03:35, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In the interest of keeping the discussion in 1 place only, please see User talk:Marinna#Ulla Pia. --Hjart (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, recently you reverted an edit on item Q2084176 here. I just simply want to ask why? It's being done by script. If I did anything wrong please explain. Thanks. ~ A. Shohag (ping_me||Talk) 07:28, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ShohagS:Please note that Aastrup (Q2084176) is a Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) (it's the name of 5 different places in Denmark) and as such adding coords makes no sense here. --Hjart (talk) 07:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So, in a particular way, Its a limitation of the script. This needs to be fixed in the source code. Can you report an error regarding this? Thanks. ~ A. Shohag (ping_me||Talk) 07:36, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And one more thing, the script might do the same edit once again, I mean I run or somebody else run it. ~ A. Shohag (ping_me||Talk) 07:38, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ShohagS: What script? I only see your username. Also I think you are responsible for any script you're running. Also please note that you should not add continent (P30) to people (like i.e. Paul Abasolo (Q2750812)) and particularly not when do not even live in that continent. --Hjart (talk) 07:44, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I am responsible for doing those but I am talking about coordinate_import script written in python. ~ A. Shohag (ping_me||Talk) 07:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ShohagS: What about that script? Is it one of those adding stupid precision values to coord sets? --Hjart (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@ShohagS: Please stop your scripts immediately. You should not add coords to people (like Christine Abrahams (Q5110900)) --Hjart (talk) 08:03, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I already did actually. There was an mistake of mine understanding item. ~ A. Shohag (ping_me||Talk) 08:05, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your escalation. Let me tell you, that in Germany we have a usual customs called manners. One of these is to wait what somebody has to say before any escalation. Have a nice day. --Derzno (talk) 15:10, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Derzno: Your replies to User:Jura1 didn't exactly look like any sort of "manners", which was why I chose to "escalate" it immediately. I do mistakes too when using Quickstatements, but luckily on a much less serious scale. Please be more carefull with tools like that. --Hjart (talk) 15:24, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another manner say, don’t interfere in subjects if you are not involved into or impacted from. Or did I'd missed something and possibly you're the advocate from Jura? I’ll guess he is tough and experienced enough to act by himself. Such things like this makes me laughing and are not in line with a discussion culture. If you come up with a 2 weeks old change as urgent and hide afterward with arguments and pointing to somebody else. I don’t know your role in this game and don’t want to know. It’s up to you whatever you supposed to do. Better for you and me that our ways do not cross anymore. --Derzno (talk) 05:16, 5 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Re [1] and [2], the issue I'm trying to resolve is whether en:Category:Tjøme should link to commons:Category:Tjøme. Both enwp and commons seem to be about the former municipality, not the island. Can you provide some more insight, and/or update the enwp link please? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Peel: The english page says " is an island in Færder, and a former municipality", which I think matches the current situation well. To me both enwp and commons appears to be primarily about the island. I was thinking having commons:Category:Tjøme link to the island would be more appropriate now. --Hjart (talk) 20:22, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Do the other sitelinks at Category:Tjøme (former municipality) (Q9141446) also focus on the island? If so, maybe we can just update the topic's main category (P910)/category's main topic (P301) values to point to the island, and forget about Tjøme (Q48687). Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:24, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Peel: You're right. Apart from the subcat no:Kategori:Tjøme kommune all the sitelinks could be moved without issues. --Hjart (talk) 20:30, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I created Category:Tjøme (Q101158047) and moved the existing category sitelinks to it, the nowiki one wasn't linked so I just added it to Category:Tjøme (former municipality) (Q9141446). Does that all look OK? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:35, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Peel: Looks good to me. Thanks a lot. I tried to deprecate the former municipality in Tjøme (Q33083355), so it wouldn't mess up the Commons infobox, but it was reverted. Could the infobox ignore any located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) with a end time (P582) qualifiers instead? --Hjart (talk) 20:48, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the Commons category (P373) value from Tjøme (Q33083355), that should fix it. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:53, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Peel: Unfortunately, it didn't fix it. --Hjart (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I poked commons:Category:Tjøme (removing a template whose content is in the infobox), it looks OK to me now? But it could do with a image (P18) value. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:05, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Peel: I want the "tjørne" to disappear from the "Tjøme, Færder, Norway" line in the infobox. It disappeared when I deprecated the old municipality, but came back when my change was reverted in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q33083355&oldid=1302671691. --Hjart (talk) 21:33, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think [3] was what you were looking for. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 21:37, 4 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Мне лень спорить. Однако специальный институт вполне себе подпадает под учреждение образования. Подумайте ещё. Schekinov Alexey Victorovich (talk) 19:00, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that similar attempts were reverted before. See i.e. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q322563&oldid=1270449544 --Hjart (talk) 19:05, 9 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert my changes to the separate entries for Nolde-Haus (building) and Nolde-Stiftung (institution). --Arch2all (talk) 13:48, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you think, that the Danish and Swedish wikipedia entries to Nolde museum refer better to the building than the museum institution You have to connect this WP entries to the wikidata building entry. --Arch2all (talk) 13:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Arch2all: I've worked on this place several times over the last few years. The commons category covers the the piece of land including the garden and a few other buildings on which the artists house is situated. Maybe the german article should be split into a 3. wikidata item. And sorry, I got a little bit confused in the process --Hjart (talk) 14:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is a semantic difference between a museum as institution and the building where the museum is located. Often both is covered by one wikidata entry, but if there are separate wikidata entries the correct way to define the relation is the way I practiced for Nolde museum. So, please do not revert again! If the relating Wikipedia articles mix building and institution, it's NOT a reason to change the wikidata entries. --Arch2all (talk) 14:25, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted here that the Nolde house is just a part of the physical museum, which consists of a few other buildings around it too. --Hjart (talk) 18:00, 2 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vognmagergades navn kommer ikke vognmager, som man skulle tro, men af vognmand:

"Navnet kendes siden 1568 (Wogendmand gade) og indtil anden halvdel af 1700-tallet i former, der viser, at forleddet er en ældre flertalsform af subst. vognmand. Det vides ikke, på hvilken måde vognmænd har haft forbindelse med denne gade. Sidst i 1700-tallet (tidligst 1764 Vogenmager Gade) ændres navnet vilkårligt efter de talrige erhvervsbetegnelser på -mager, sikkert ikke mindst inspireret af den nærliggende Købmagergade, hvor -mager allerede tidligere var blevet resultatet af en vilkårlig udvikling af -manger." (Storbyens Stednavne, s. 329. Gyldendal, 1999)

I det hele taget gælder, at gadenavnene i Middelalderbyen har ændret sig en del i løbet af århundrederne, ligesom der i flere tilfælde ligger historier bag, der ikke er indlysende i dag. Gadenavnene blev først faste i slutningen af 1700-tallet, da det blev bestemt, at de skulle males på gadehjørnerne. --Dannebrog Spy (talk) 12:18, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Jeg kiggede endda lige kort på Wikipedia, men missede desværre den detalje :-/ --Hjart (talk) 12:24, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

for your copy-edits and adding the (micro-) locations! --Kresspahl (talk) 13:50, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. Jeg så SPARQL-forespørglerne som du har på din brugerside, og bemærkede at du bruger "_" i stedet danske bogstaver som "ø" i for eksempel "køn". Da du måske ikke ved det, vil jeg lige gøre opmærksom på at bogstaver på alle sprog, inkl. dansk, gerne må bruges i navne i SPARQL. Hvis du i øvrigt skulle få for hjælp med SPARQL-forespørgler, hjælper jeg gerne. Jeg har besvaret mange spørgsmål i Wikidata:Request a query‎. Mvh. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 21:16, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Jeg har slet og ret kopieret de der forespørgsler fra https://query.wikidata.org/ og har ikke tænkt så meget igen over molestreringen af æøå, men tak :-).

Jeg har de seneste dage funderet over om det kunne lade sig gøre at lave en søgning der laver en liste over alle medlemmer af en slægt/familie. Det kan nemlig hurtigt blive ret uoverskueligt at holde styr på om man har fået alle med, når man forsøger manuelt at klikke sig vej rundt f.eks. Steen Brahe (Q3430228)s familie. --Hjart (talk) 22:13, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, det kan jeg forestille mig. Der er over 1000 aner til Steen Brahe (Q3430228) over 1000 år tilbage, og 46 efterkommere frem til nutiden. Det vil blive helt uoverskueligt, og ville nok være svært at gennemføre uden timeout, hvis andre slægtninge (som søskende, efterkommere af aner, aner til efterkommere etc.) udover disse skulle medtages, i hvert fald hvis man ikke laver begrænsninger om hvor nært beslægtede de fundne personer skal være til den person søgningen starter fra.

Aner:

SELECT DISTINCT ?ane ?aneLabel ?født ?død
{
  VALUES ?start { wd:Q3430228 } # Steen Brahe til Knudstrup
  ?ane (^wdt:P22| ^wdt:P25  | wdt:P40)* ?start .
  # Rekursiv søgning efter far-, mor- eller barn-relationer i opadgående retning.
  OPTIONAL { ?ane wdt:P569 ?født . }
  OPTIONAL { ?ane wdt:P570 ?død . }
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "da,en,de,sv". } 
}

Try it!

Efterkommere:

SELECT DISTINCT ?efterkommer ?efterkommerLabel ?født ?død
{
  VALUES ?start { wd:Q3430228 } # Steen Brahe til Knudstrup
  ?efterkommer (wdt:P22| wdt:P25  | ^wdt:P40)* ?start .
  # Rekursiv søgning efter far-, mor- eller barn-relationer i nedadgående retning.
  OPTIONAL { ?efterkommer wdt:P569 ?født . }
  OPTIONAL { ?efterkommer wdt:P570 ?død . }
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "da,en,de,sv". } 
}

Try it!

--Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I merged Anton Michelsen Anton Michelsen (Q102407307) and Anton Michelsen (Q97961753) as ULAN of that one directs to Cleveland Museum. They have a vase https://www.clevelandart.org/art/2001.94 made by the firm of 'Anton Michelsen' from 1900, made by Thorvald Bindesbøll. So 'floruit 1900' in ULAN is based on the production date of that vase. --Hannolans (talk) 10:11, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for that info. I had been looking at those 2 before and indeed wondered about them, but based on the info I could find, could only conclude that somehow, there had been 2 silversmiths by the same name. --Hjart (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Anton Michelsen who died i 1877 cannot be active in 1900. This book in Danish from 1909 might help with who is who. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 22:26, 30 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

… then please remove the less accurate coordinates. Thanks. Giorgio Michele (talk) 13:47, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why? They are referenced from an official database. There's no harm in having both sets as long as one is ranked higher than the other as is the case here. Hjart (talk) 13:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I just did not know that there is no problem with various location data. Giorgio Michele (talk) 13:53, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't necessarily a problem. Just make sure that the best set is ranked higher than the rest. Also I'm personally fairly familiar with this particular bridge, so I'm fairly sure which set is the better. Hjart (talk) 13:59, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg kan se, at du har oprettet Købelev-Vindeby Parish (Q102819854). Sognet er oprettet i november 2020. Hvor har du læst om oprettelsen af dette sogn? Jeg har nemlig selv lige oprettet Helligsø-Gettrup Parish (Q105410568), der tilsyneladende er en sammenlægning af Helligsø Parish (Q2681447) og Gettrup Parish (Q2149555), men jeg har søgt forgæves efter omtale af, hvornår det er sket. Har du en god kilde til den slags? --C960657 (talk) 16:24, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg læste om det på den tilhørende artikel på dawiki, som umiddelbart inden blev oprettet af "Kort til kirken". Der kan jeg dog nu se at der heller ingen kildehenvisninger er, men måske det kan betale sig at spørge ham. --Hjart (talk) 16:38, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, tak. Jeg prøver at spørge ham. --C960657 (talk) 21:22, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees is organizing a call for feedback about community selection processes between February 1 and March 14. While the Wikimedia Foundation and the movement have grown about five times in the past ten years, the Board’s structure and processes have remained basically the same. As the Board is designed today, we have a problem of capacity, performance, and lack of representation of the movement’s diversity. Our current processes to select individual volunteer and affiliate seats have some limitations. Direct elections tend to favor candidates from the leading language communities, regardless of how relevant their skills and experience might be in serving as a Board member, or contributing to the ability of the Board to perform its specific responsibilities. It is also a fact that the current processes have favored volunteers from North America and Western Europe. In the upcoming months, we need to renew three community seats and appoint three more community members in the new seats. This call for feedback is to see what processes can we all collaboratively design to promote and choose candidates that represent our movement and are prepared with the experience, skills, and insight to perform as trustees?

In this regard, two rounds of feedback meetings are being hosted to collect feedback from the Wikidata community. Two rounds are being hosted with the same agenda, to accomodate people from various time zones across the globe. We will be discussing ideas proposed by the Board and the community to address the above mentioned problems. Please sign-up according to whatever is most comfortable to you. You are welcome to participate in both as well!

• Round 1 - Feb 24, 4:00 pm UTC
• Round 2 - Mar 3, 4:00 am UTC
• Sign-up and meeting details: Wikimedia Foundation Board of Trustees/Call for feedback: Community Board seats/Conversations/Wikidata

Also, please share this with other volunteers who might be interested in this. Let me know if you have any questions. KCVelaga (WMF), 14:32, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hjart! I see you reverted this edit. Note that the date of birth is incorrect. Some users think that birthdays (date without years) can be entered as date of birth. But that's not the case. The value of date of birth on this item is currently September of year 8 (not September 8th). I'll remove the property again. If you have the correct value, you can add it, possibly setting the precision parameters if the exact date is not known. Thank you! --MarioGom (talk) 17:42, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You should refine your software code a little bit, because in a lot of the birth dates the is the qualificator sourcing circumstances circa. See for instance Q73793276 or Q79119501. For the first case there must be dansk badmintonspiller, født ca. 1972 (or similar) as description. --Florentyna (talk) 07:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What I did was run the query

SELECT ?badmintonspiller ?badmintonspillerLabel ?badmintonspillerDescription ?f_dselsdato ?d_dsdato WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
   ?badmintonspiller wdt:P106 wd:Q13141064;     wdt:P27 wd:Q35.
   OPTIONAL { ?badmintonspiller wdt:P569 ?f_dselsdato. }
   OPTIONAL { ?badmintonspiller wdt:P570 ?d_dsdato. } }
 LIMIT 10000

download the result as .tsv and run it through a fairly simple awk script to produce those descriptions. I wasn't aware that birthdays of that many badminton players would be estimates only. I'm obviously still learning. Thank you for your feedback. --Hjart (talk) 07:48, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Artiklen på den danske Wikipedia om Ruth Hosekræmmer er slettet, da kvinden efter al sandsynlighed aldrig har eksisteret. Jeg kan ikke finde ud af, hvordan man sletter det tilhørende Wikidata-leksem (som det tilsyneladende kaldes), så jeg vil høre dig, om du kan hjælpe med den opgave? Thomas Vedelsbøl (talk) 13:30, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thomas Vedelsbøl: Jeg har en "request deletion" under "Mere" i værktøjsbjælken øverst på siden. --Hjart (talk) 13:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Det har jeg tilsyneladende ikke. Kan jeg få dig til at anmode om sletning? Thomas Vedelsbøl (talk) 14:20, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Thomas Vedelsbøl:  Gjort Det viser sig at knappen skyldes en "gadget" jeg på et tidspunkt har aktiveret, glemt alt om og ikke brugt før nu.--Hjart (talk) 14:59, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you reverting my edits? I'm just trying to merge two objects. --Voyager (talk) 07:14, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

They should not be merged. Please note that I'm fairly familiar with those bridges. --Hjart (talk) 07:16, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Aren't they the same? If I compare the German and Danish article, they seem to describe exactly the same bridge. Built from 1982 to 1987, connecting Sjaelland to Amager. Even the coordinates match. --Voyager (talk) 07:20, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I admit it's fairly easy to get confused here, but no, they are not the same. The danish article is about the combined connection consisting of the 2 bridges Sorterendebroen (Q106537809) and Q106541978, while the german article specifically is about the eastern bridge Q106541978. The combined link is commonly named the same as the eastern bridge.--Hjart (talk) 07:26, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that dewiki also has an article about Sorterendebroen (Q106537809).--Hjart (talk) 07:29, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hjart,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized (?) to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me at kholoudsaa@gmail.com or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdmmFHaiB20nK14wrQJgfrA18PtmdagyeRib3xGtvzkdn3Lgw/viewform?usp=sf_link with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me using the email mentioned above if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoud

Hej. Jeg har et problem med at du har fjernet kommune fra beskrivelse af kirker. Jeg bruger det til at tjekke om jeg har ramt den rigtige kirke ved søgning.. Det er håbløst, når det fx flertydig stednavn. Og jeg kender hellere placering ikke alle småbyer i Danmark.... Så jeg vil gerne kommunenavn, så jeg ved hvor i landet hvor kirken er. --Steenth (talk) 20:06, 8 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Steenth:Jeg har så vidt jeg husker ikke fjernet nogen kommuner fra kirkebeskrivelser, men blot udfyldt danske beskrivelser. Det er muligt jeg i enkelte tilfælde har gjordt det, da jeg har forsøgt mig med en del forskellige måder at lave beskrivelser. Nu foretrækker jeg generelt at angive landsdel eller lidt større byer alt efter hvad der giver bedst mening, fremfor kommune, så jeg håber vi kan finde et kompromis.

Du er iøvrigt velkommen til at forsøge dig med nedenstående script:

#!/bin/bash #Bash script, der finder alle danske kirker med ikke-unikke navne #Kræver wikibase.cli (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Tools/WikibaseJS-cli) IFS= read -r -d '' wdquery << SPARQL SELECT ?kirke ?kirkeLabel ?kirkeDescription WHERE { SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "da". } ?kirke wdt:P31 wd:Q16970. ?kirke wdt:P17 wd:Q35. } SPARQL wb sparql -f csv <(echo $wdquery) | sed '1d; s|http.*entity/||' | sort -k2 -t, | awk -F, 'a[$2]++{ if(a[$2]==2){ print b }; print $0}; {b=$0}'

Hello. I’m not sure why you thought this was harassment. If you look at these edits, you will see that User:Ulflarsen was quite aware of this category. He had used it to categorise his collection of amateur videos, but these were deleted at various deletion requests such as c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Ulf Larsen. At no point was Ulf Larsen harassed by this category or the Wikidata item. Please withdraw your request and ask for the item to be undeleted. Alternatively, if @MisterSynergy: sees this first, please Undelete this erroneous request. @Ulflarsen: too if he is still active. FredWalsh (talk) 17:58, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing this first:

• I deleted the item since it does not meet the notability requirements, as indicated in the deletion summary. Harassment did not play a role for the deletion decision.
• There is also a severe BLP issue. None of the claims were properly equipped with references, and I don't think there is much to expect. User-generated content from Commons is not sufficient here, and it does not matter that the subject himself had edited the item before.

So, you need to indicate first based on which serious sources we can set up this item here before we can even consider to undelete it. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:50, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@MisterSynergy: thank you for the response. My only concern was that User:Hjart's assertion of harassment was not the actual reason for deletion. I agree with deletion on your reasoning. FredWalsh (talk) 22:03, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart, you have reverted the Wikidata Infobox on the IMO-page of above ship by replacing the IMO number by the ship name. This is not correct. As far as I understood the pages, the Infobox on the IMO-page shall be independent of the ship name, as the latter can change several times during the ship's life. Therefore, the IMO number is given as identifyer, which does not change under different ship names. On the other hand, the ship category (Skjoldnaes, ship ...) with its Infobox is labeled with the ship name, however, referencing to the a.m. Infobox so that data have to be changed or inserted only once.

I know that several infoboxes still do not follow this rule, however it is the logical way and I ask you to follow this also.--Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 07:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfgang Fricke: Please note that the item Skjoldnæs (Q12325488) was originally named after the danish wikipedia article. It's not an IMO page. Also I think the Commons IMO categories makes linking wp ship articles with their Commons categories horribly unintuitive.--Hjart (talk) 07:55, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, Hjart, I do not agree. Even if the Infobox on the IMO-Wikimedia page gets the label with IMO number, there will be an Infobox on the Skjoldnaes-Wikimedia-page having the ship name in the label, and the link to the Danish Wikipedia page is still there. Of course, in case of this ship there is (up to now) only one ship name, but problems arise in case of more than one name, as outlined above.--Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 14:45, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The query:

SELECT ?f_rge ?f_rgeLabel ?f_rgeDescription WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
   ?f_rge wdt:P31 wd:Q25653.
   ?f_rge wdt:P8047 wd:Q35. }

finds a number of danish ferries. The usefullnes of queries like this depends on the wikidata labels being recognizable by humans. IMO numbers as labels makes it completely useless. IMO numbers as labels is basically bad practice. Don't do it.--Hjart (talk) 15:02, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, not sure if your edit at Q4647901 makes sense. Since the subject is primarily known as "A. J.", it makes sense for him to be sorted under that name instead of his birthname (which is already captured in the birthname parameter). For the timebeing, I think I'm going to use "A. J." as his primary name and rank the birth names lower. Ytoyoda (talk) 12:33, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ytoyoda: "Adrian James" are his actual given names, right? I've ranked them back to normal, since they don't appear to be wrong at all.--Hjart (talk) 12:42, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's fine - it just didn't make sense for "Adrian" and "James" to be ranked higher than the COMMONNAME. Thanks. Ytoyoda (talk) 12:45, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ytoyoda: Do you mean sorted over at Commons BTW?--Hjart (talk) 12:47, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I was mostly concerned with the category sorting on Commons. Ytoyoda (talk) 12:48, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Ytoyoda: Ok, then I'll recommend using the Commons DEFAULTSORT template and remove the A.J. here. --Hjart (talk) 12:51, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you just reverted my edit on this entity. Is there something I'm missing? I simply tried making it more like other federal states of Germany, such as Q980. Q183 also has for inception the date 3 October 1990, so how could a date from 1949 be correct? --NegativeMemory (talk) 13:54, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@NegativeMemory: Hmm.. you could be right. I just thought it would be superfluous and basically just duplicating country (P17) but I see that other similar regions have the same.--Hjart (talk) 14:23, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Wrong part of that edition was a weird misclick on my phone, not a vandalism (I don't know how it even happened), other one about ColoQuick was a good edition. 99kerob (talk) 20:41, 18 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@99kerob:Your edits did appear a little weird to me. Someone else did one case of obvious vandalism in between your edits though and so I thought I'd better roll the entire group back. Sorry about that.--Hjart (talk) 04:21, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart, nu har jeg forstået det der med Template:Coord wd i Wikipedia arktiklen om Altona, mange tak for korrektur!

Jeg har lavet nogle ændringsforslag i Altona, gider du at kigge på dem? På forhånd mange tak! Mvh Pod-o-mart (talk) 02:00, 25 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hej. Jeg er ikke specielt glad du rullede min ændring på Svanemøllen (Q12337848). Jeg har kigget på artikelteksten og der der er mest en artikel om møllen og mindre grad om kvarteret. Og når jeg kigger på kategorier, så peger det på mølleren og ikke på kategorier. Og jeg har en interesse i at få en liste over møller. Så der er ide med det. Og ellers burde du spørge først istedet for at rulle tilbage. Der kan godt være en mening med hvad jeg gør. --Steenth (talk) 15:01, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg kiggede også på artiklen og for mig at se nævnes møllen nærmest kun som en bisætning. Artiklen overordnet set handler om det nuværende kvarter.--Hjart (talk) 15:03, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hvert Wikidata-emne bør entydigt være om én ting. Det giver noget rod at sige at noget både er et kvarter og en mølle, for så ved man ikke hvilken ting de andre sætninger dækker over. Der bør i stedet oprettes et nyt emne til den nedrevne mølle hvor man kan anføre opførelsesdato, arkitekt, størrelse osv. uden at det kan forveksles med bydelen. Så jeg er enig med Hjart her. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 20:14, 7 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Steenth: Jeg har oprettet Q108830618 med ganske få oplysninger så der er noget at bygge videre på. Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 07:23, 8 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't merge before you read this issue: Wikidata:WikiProject Performing arts/Data structure/Data modelling issues

Thanks you Katikei (talk) 22:32, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Katikei: I think your changes in these 2 cases are really bad choices. Reading the danish articles it's clear to me that the places and article are too closely linked to be separated like that.--Hjart (talk) 05:39, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: I nedenstående søgning, hvordan får jeg kun de engelske demonymer? Jeg har tænkt mig at danne en fil, jeg kan bruge til at udlede country (P17) fra beskrivelser som f.eks. "Danish nurse".--Hjart (talk) 14:33, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SELECT ?land ?landLabel ?demonym WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
   ?land wdt:P31 wd:Q6256.
   OPTIONAL { ?land wdt:P1549 ?demonym. FILTER (LANG(?demonym) = "en") }
 }

Jeg har tilføjet FILTER (LANG(?demonym) = "en") til din kode. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 16:12, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about this rollback, fat fingers on a cellphone... –FlyingAce^✈hello 21:52, 25 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Nedenstående søgning finder en del dubletter. Jeg vil gerne finde de emner her der mangler et category combines topics (P971)->årstal. Jeg bruger typisk simple Gnu awk oneliners og kan sagtens ved hjælp af dem udlede category combines topics (P971) af emnets titel, men sådan nogle dubletter er ofte lidt tricky for mig. Hvis jeg kunne samle "?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel" i 1 felt ville det være meget nemmere for mig at udvælge de emner jeg vil have fat i. Jeg så på et tidspunkt at man kunne gøre det, men har desværre ikke umiddelbart kunnet finde eksemplet igen. PÅ forhånd tak.--Hjart (talk) 14:31, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

SELECT ?dyr ?dyrLabel ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
   ?dyr wdt:P4224 wd:Q729;     wdt:P971 wd:Q21160456.
   OPTIONAL { ?dyr wdt:P971 ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerne. }
 }

Hvis jeg har forstået spørgsmålet rigtigt, kan du bruge "GROUP BY" som samler ens værdier for de angivne variable. Man skal så bruge aggregeringsfunktioner for alle øvrige variable i SELECT-angivelsen. I dette tilfælde funktionen GROUP_CONCAT som samler alle værdier i gruppen. Bemærk at når man gør det, kan man ikke længere bruge label service i "automatic mode", men skal skifte til manual mode (forklaret i brugermanualen). Bemærk også at rækkefølgen af værdierne som sammensættes med GROUP_CONCAT er udefineret.

SELECT ?dyr ?dyrLabel (GROUP_CONCAT(?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel; SEPARATOR=",") AS ?komninerer) WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label {
     bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en".
     ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerne rdfs:label ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel.
     ?dyr rdfs:label ?dyrLabel.
   }
   ?dyr wdt:P4224 wd:Q729;     wdt:P971 wd:Q21160456.
   OPTIONAL { ?dyr wdt:P971 ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerne. }
 }
GROUP BY ?dyr ?dyrLabel

Try it!

--Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 16:39, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Perfekt! Det var lige det jeg skulle bruge, både til denne og en række andre opgaver jeg har i tankerne. Jeg bøjer mig dybt i støvet. Hjart (talk) 19:38, 1 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Velbekomme, men der er ingen grund til at gøre dig støvet for min skyld. Og bare spørg igen hvis der er andet du kan bruge hjælp til. Jeg behersker SPARQL 1.1, datamodellen brugt i WDQS og bl.a. MediaWiki API-servicen i WDQS. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 14:41, 2 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. Hvordan Søren sætter du et billede ind på en wikidate-side?? Det drejer sig om den danske fysiker "Steen Rasmussen (Q4355130)" [file:Steen Ramussen (1955).jpg]. Jeg kan ikke knække koden. Venlige hilsner -Jan Pallesen (talk) 13:51, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jan Pallesen: For mange af os tager det lidt tid at lære wikidata at kende :-). Du starter med at klikke "tilføj udsagn" nederst på siden og taster derefter "bil" i det felt der dukker op. Så plejer der at vise sig en drop-down menu, hvor du simpelthen vælger den øverste mulighed i listen, "billede" og taster "Enter". Så kommer der endnu et felt hvor du så indsætter dit billede (uden "Fil:"). Håber det lykkes. --Hjart (talk) 14:02, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Der var gevinst i første hug, mange tak. :) -Jan Pallesen (talk) 14:06, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Stop the edit war and get proper sources and evidence of the name and nationality. For your information: Hörup and Alsen belonged to the German Empire and not to Denmark at the time. --HarryNº2 (talk) 06:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

God dag! Kan du eventuelt hjelpe meg med mer informasjon om denne personen, Olav Hast (Q110560182). Folketellinger eller lignende? Pmt (talk) 12:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg kender ham desværre ikke umiddelbart. Jeg foreslår at du spørger på Diskussion:Far til fire. Det tænker jeg du kan have mere held med. Hjart (talk) 12:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Der er nogle oplysninger i Dansk Forfatterleksikon ved Niels Jensen. Se https://danskforfatterleksikon.dk/1850/HOlavHast.htm og https://danskforfatterleksikon.dk/1850bib/HOlavHast.htm. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hjart, thank you very much for reverting my edit on "Dansens Hus (Q54912419)". Indeed, I do agree such a thing is not very likely. Though, in this case I have imported data from the table I have directly from the database of Flanders Arts Institute being identified by its ids in that database, so the information is from a very good source. I also think the probably the translation of "Dansens Hus" would be "Danish house", these institutions usually promote culture in another country, if I am right judging it on the basis of existence of a similar institution in its Czech version in various cities throughout Europe. :) So, I leave it on your judgement.Purkii (talk)

Actually "Dansens Hus" translates to "The house of dance", not "Danish house" and the danish organisation basically appears to promote dancing in Copenhagen. The current name of the org appears to be "Dansehallerne" though, which translates to "The halls of dance". I really don't think there's any connection between the danish org and swedish building.--Hjart (talk) 16:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart, kan du måske hjælpe? da:Kyndelmisse kaldes for de:Darstellung des Herrn på tysk, men jeg får ikke lov til at ændre det. vh, Catfisheye (talk) 21:12, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg er ikke helt sikker på hvad det er du vil ændre? Helligdagen Candlemas (Q18647897) linker til den danske artikel "Kyndelmisse" og via en omdirigering "Lichtmess" til den tyske. Presentation of Jesus at the Temple (Q152771) linker direkte til den tyske artikel "Darstellung des Herrn", men ikke til nogen dansk artikel. Håber det hjælper lidt.--Hjart (talk) 21:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Der er to wikidata-objekter blevet blandet. Helligdagen "kyndelmisse" burde linkes til de:Darstellung des Herrn candlemas på engelsk. Lige nu er den linket til den bibelske historie en:Presentation of Jesus at the Temple. Jeg håber, jeg har forklaret det bedre nu. Nogen har blandet wikidataobjektet for den bibelske historie sammen med wikidataobjektet for helligdagen. Så egentlig burdes flyttes den tyske artikel de:Darstellung des Herrn fra den bibelske histories wikidataobjekt, hvor den er nu, til helligdagen, hvor der pt kun findes en omdirigering. Catfisheye (talk) 21:58, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Du har för malmö lagt in uppgifter om 350000 invånare det avser kommunen ej tätorten! Larske Vv lägg inte in siffror som är felYger (talk) 20:34, 11 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hej, Vedbæk står angivet under Rudersdal Kommune, men fordi den har placering som Hørsholm står den på Commons (hvis ikke andre steder) som under Hørsholm Kommune. Ved ikke... nogle forslag? TherasTaneel (talk) 20:22, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Vedbæk (Q1896694) er på dawiki inkluderet i kategorien "Bydele i Hørsholm". Måske det er derfra det kommer? Jeg har i al fald slettet den der location (P276) nu. Hjart (talk) 20:32, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hej @Hjart. Jeg ser, at du har tilbagestillet mine ændringer af d:Q23747348 (da:Hasseris Å) - er det så da:skabelon:Vandløb vi skal ha' fat på for at få det til at virke ordentligt - for det gør det ikke nu. Poul G (talk) 08:45, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har desværre ikke så meget styr på skabelonerne på dawiki, men kunne konstatere at de properties du forsøgte dig med ikke var beregnet til formålet. Det er slet ikke utænkeligt at skabelonen trænger til opdatering. Hjart (talk) 08:53, 16 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey.

I changed the place of death cause référence (book) says that he was dead in Tlemcen. Just click and look the référence.... Thank you. Best regards. – The preceding unsigned comment was added by 37.165.248.226 (talk • contribs).

All sources that I have checked says Fez.--Hjart (talk) 07:10, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Look source linked to the wikidata ... it said Tlemcen. Fez is a wrong tomb that was checked by an international team led by an emirats schoolar... and found it was a local soufi mystic's tomb. 37.165.109.204 10:16, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The book Islamic Spain of Harvey indicates that Boabdil moved to Tlemcen after his failure in Grenada and not to Fez. The thesis of Fez is based on a story that he would fought at 80 years old in Morocco. This is a fake and in fact an other member of his family. 37.165.109.204 10:36, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I could see nothing in that link directly saying anything like that. The wikipedias I checked didn't mention anything but Fez.--Hjart (talk) 10:34, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You changed the link ... and you told me you didn't see it ???

https://books.google.fr/books?id=aqEvDwAAQBAJ&newbks=0&printsec=frontcover&pg=PT88&dq=boabdil+tlemcen&hl=fr&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=boabdil%20tlemcen&f=false 37.165.109.204 10:40, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://books.google.fr/books?id=nWyXAwAAQBAJ&pg=PA327&dq=boabdil+tlemcen+fez&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwixoZ_lxob2AhULy4UKHdGoChoQ6AF6BAgHEAM#v=onepage&q=boabdil%20tlemcen%20fez&f=false 37.165.109.204 10:43, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, the Google link that I saw did not directly mention anything relevant to Boabdil. That was why I replaced it. Hjart (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://books.google.fr/books?id=pYrcDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT167&dq=boabdil+dead+in+Tlemcen&hl=fr&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjdv4rDyYb2AhVCxhoKHSbaBWUQ6AF6BAgMEAM#v=onepage&q=boabdil%20dead%20in%20Tlemcen&f=false 37.165.109.204 10:56, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't undersant the french source, that's why you didn't see the information inside. 37.165.109.204 10:57, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.zupimages.net/viewer.php?id=22/07/l7t9.jpg

Mohamed and Bou Abdallah refer to Boadil's true name in arabic... 37.165.109.204 11:01, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Mourut à Tlemcen mean died in Tlemcen. 37.165.109.204 11:02, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! You made an edit right here [4] and I would just like to be instructed on the matter. I've seen on other pages that, when available, it's better to have the Commons' gallery linked in the multilingual section rather than the corresponding category. Are you aware of the general practice around Wikidata on that matter? Is it better to link the category of the gallery of a wikidata article? Thanks friend, have a good one.--Danalieth (talk) 18:51, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The vast majority of gallery pages are very rarely updated. Most contributors just add categories to their uploads, so personally I generally prefer to avoid seeing gallery pages at all. I really just want to check out the category to see if there are any new images in there. I think many other experienced editors feel the same. There are of course gallery pages that are really helpful, but René-Édouard Caron is not one of them. Hjart (talk) 20:10, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again! Ok good, I think I'm getting it. What about a gallery like Lieutenant Governor of Quebec, which has kinda the same usefulness as, say, the gallery dedicated to american presidents? Danalieth (talk) 20:34, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gallery pages that try to help people make sense of complex subjects are good. Gallery pages that basically just display the same 3-5 images, that are also in an associated category, not so much. With Fredriksten for example, I tried to help make some sense of a complex category tree with hundreds of images in it. I hope it helps other people too. Hjart (talk) 20:48, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Beautiful and efficient. Thanks a lot for the tips, they're really helping! An excellent day to you! Danalieth (talk) 20:50, 20 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart:

You reverted two of my recent edits to the Wikidata item "Category:Amiko (ship, 1996)" (Q83945913) for the cargo ship, AMIKO - IMO 9125669.

I thought I was following the Wikidata protocols for ships and would like to understand why you thought they should be reverted so I can get it right.

Can you explain further?

Best, Gordon

GRDN711 (talk) 04:05, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that Category:Amiko (ship, 1996) (Q83945913) is a category item, which is basically just meant to hold Commons images of the ship while under the name "Amiko". It's not meant to represent the ship itself. I understand your confusion. The current system isn't all that easy to understand. Hjart (talk) 04:32, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please also note that quite a few people have misunderstood it in the past and subsequently messed up the data, which of course doesn't make the system any easier to understand. Hjart (talk) 07:10, 25 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. Der er en specielt gadgets til at flytte links imellem wikidata-emner: Move. Den fortæller bedre hvor et link er flyttet fra og til... --Steenth (talk) 08:48, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg kender den godt og brugte den i et par tilfælde, men fandt ud af at der var for meget arbejde i det i forhold til de mange litteraturemner. Hjart (talk) 08:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Kan du (med din bot) iøvrigt ændre alle underkategorier i da:Kategori:Litteratur efter årstal, så commonskat bliver rigtig? Jeg tænker bare at bruge en ren {{commonscat}}. Hjart (talk) 08:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Jeg har planer om at genere engelske etiketter og koble henvisninger til commonskategorier til svenske naturreservater mm. Til det formål er jeg kommet frem til at jeg har brug for at kunne finde alle category contains (P4224)=nature reserve (Q179049) med qualifier country (P17)=Sweden (Q34) (eks: Category:Nature reserves in Gnosjö Municipality (Q32348021). Hvordan gør jeg det?--Hjart (talk) 04:19, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

SELECT ?item
wHERE
{
  ?item p:P4224 ?statement.
  ?statement ps:P4224 wd:Q179049.
  ?statement pq:P17 wd:Q34.
}

Try it!

Jeg forstår ikke helt. Hvorfor og hvordan vil du finde engelske etiketter? --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 04:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Tak. Ændrer jeg ovenstående en lille smule, så har jeg pludselig kommunenavnene på engelsk og så er det ret enkelt med et simpelt gawk script at genere etiketterne:

SELECT ?kategori ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
   ?kategori p:P4224 ?statement.
   ?statement ps:P4224 wd:Q179049;
     pq:P17 wd:Q34.
   OPTIONAL { ?kategori wdt:P971 ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerne. }
}

Mvh --Hjart (talk) 05:11, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Hvad jeg har gjort nu er at bruge nedenstående Bash/Awk script til at knytte svwikis naturreservatkategorier per kommune til de tilsvarende kategorier på Commons (knap 300 stk.). Det er et arbejde der ikke er sjovt at gøre manuelt.

wdnaturreservater () {
  IFS= read -r -d '' wdquery << SPARQL # here dokument
SELECT ?kategori ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerneLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
  ?kategori p:P4224 ?statement.
  ?statement ps:P4224 wd:Q179049;
    pq:P17 wd:Q34.
  OPTIONAL { ?kategori wdt:P971 ?kategorien_kombinerer_emnerne. }
}
SPARQL

wb sparql -f csv <(echo $wdquery) | sed -E '1d; s|http.+entity/||;' | tr -d '\r' | gawk -F',' 'BEGIN{print "qid,Len,Scommonswiki"} $2 ~ /unicipality/ {print $1 ",Category:nature reserves in " $2 ",Category:nature reserves in " $2}';
}

Jeg ved desværre ikke hvordan jeg får det stillet nogenlunde pænt og læseligt op her.--Hjart (talk) 05:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Du kan bruge syntaxhighlight-tagget for bedre læselighed. Skabelonen {{SPARQL}} bruger også det tag med SPARQL som sprogangivelse. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 06:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I appreciate you working on hotel items. But maybe it's better to keep the building structure and the hotel business separated Q111873461 Q111873523 Germartin1 (talk) 12:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Germartin1 I'm aware of that, but there are cases where they are practically the same entity. I'm also personally familiar with many of those I've touched. Hjart (talk) 14:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart, hope this message finds u well...

Just a quick question after a few reverts you have done on IMO number labels. When i create a new Wikidata item based on a Commons category IMO number, Wikidata generates the label with IMO number automatically. You are saying this should not be done. I´ve been trying to find some more information about this, but haven´t succeeded so far. Can you show me why and which rule i should follow? Am happy to go along with both... Thanks! Niels --N. Johannes (talk) 14:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It does that because in most other cases it's correct to make the label reflect the commons category. There's also no way it can know the ship's name at creation time. So it's up to human editors to correct it to the ship's (current/preferred) name later. Please also note that IMO ship number (P458)s are identifiers just like the FIFA player ID (archived) (P1469) of i.e. Lee Geum-min (Q20641114). Identifiers are not intended to be used as labels neither for humans nor for ships nor other entities. Hjart (talk) 16:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@N. Johannes forgot to ping you. Hjart (talk) 16:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK all clear, thanks. N. Johannes (talk) 17:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@N. Johannes Please note that some very active editors unfortunately does not understand this and unfortunately have proven very difficult to convince that they have not understood the situation correctly. Admittedly the current system is not all that straightforward, so it's understandable if some new editors initially gets it wrong. Hjart (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I´ve done quite a few IMO numbers as labels myself, indeed it was not very straightforward for me. I can see a lot of varieties how ships and IMO numbers are stored in Wikidata. Anyway, good to know, will follow your guidelines from now on. N. Johannes (talk) 17:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen that you exchanged IMO numbers by ship names in many data sets I have created. So the IMO numbers disappeared, i.e. were destroyed by you! As there are no clear rules where ship names should appear (e.g. which of many names as label?), I must accept the ship name chosen by you as label. However, deleting the IMO number completely is inacceptable! You have at least to change also the alias names accordingly, inserting the IMO number there. In the way you are doing that leads to duplicated names, as label and alias!--Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 08:51, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfgang Fricke As I have explained it to you before the IMO numbers belong in IMO ship number (P458). They do not belong in the label section. Labels being IMO numbers makes it unnecessarily difficult for humans to recognize ship items. Labels must actual ship names. Hjart (talk) 12:38, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

For me it is not clear if you would accept IMO numbers under 'alias'?

Your argument that IMO numbers (only) belong to certain properties is not convincing as ship names and designations also appear in special properties! Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 16:28, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that IMO numbers are identifiers. In daily life none of us (humans) refers to ships by their IMO numbers. When I spot a ship in the harbour, I don't see the IMO number. I see the name painted on the side of the ship. That's the name I refer to and it's also the name I prefer to see in Wikidata. Hjart (talk) 16:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The point is that you have replaced the IMO number by (one of) the ship name's. By destoying it, the search function does not more work with IMO numbers any more. You should have at least moved the IMO number into the alias field, where now the ship name appears the second time.

Therefore I ask you to repair your input in the way described above! Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 07:16, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart, you have again deleted IMO numbers from the alias field! You destroy data input! This input is necessary to search for data sets by IMO numbers! They can only be found if IMO numbers are inputted here! Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 08:09, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfgang Fricke I recently did a mass edit adding IMO numbers to alias fields. Where did I delete them? Hjart (talk) 09:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the data of ESTELLE MAERSK (see history, I already made 'undo'). Good to hear from your repairs. Wolfgang Fricke (talk) 09:49, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What I did there was revert your removal of correct labels. I did not remove an IMO alias of Estelle Mærsk (Q1982699). Hjart (talk) 09:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolfgang Fricke Also please note that the deleted IMO number was incorrect and that it wasn't me who did it. Hjart (talk) 10:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Template:UnsignedIP2

	The Technical Barnstar
	15th of June 2022 -- thank you very much and have a cool day...User_talk:HjartUser_talk:Hjart.... (UTC)

Du har lagt in bilden från commons i Wikidata, men jag uppfattar den vara ofri? Yger (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hvis den er ufri vil jeg anbefale at du markerer den som copyvio. Så vil den snart blive slettet. Jeg har de seneste ~2 år gennemgået et stort antal ukategoriserede billeder uploadet gennem dansk, norsk og svensk wikipedia og har desværre ikke altid tid til at tjekke om de er copyvio. Hjart (talk) 06:06, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Yger Hjart (talk) 06:09, 8 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I made a mistake, however, Grotte is assigned to both cave (Q35509) and grotto (Q1131329), which is an error. Carnby (talk) 15:15, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Carnby Yeah. I'm having some difficulties deciding which one is more appropriate, since in dawiki the 2 are described as practically the same. https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/grotte appears a bit closer to cave (Q35509) though. Hjart (talk) 15:36, 9 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an wikidata item that describes to the Danish 'anlægslov' in connection to deciding on building a road or a railway? Regards QubeCube (talk) 16:39, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@QubeCube If there is, it's not one that I'm aware of. I think @C960657 may be more into that kind of stuff. Hjart (talk) 16:44, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you! I'll talk to C960657 then. Regards QubeCube (talk) 17:07, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@QubeCube: I don't think such an item exists. I would expect it to be a subclass of statute (Q820655) or perhaps act of parliament (Q1076579). I can roughly explain what it is, but I assume that is not what you are asking for. In general, I am a bit confused about the precise meaning of the many law-related items and how they map to Danish concepts. Perhaps some country-specific subclasses would make things easier to grasp. --19:01, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

@C960657: Okay, thank you for your answer. The reason I'm asking is because I'm adding main subjects to Swedish Riksdagen documents. Q97845912 is one motion which talks about Danish anlægslov for example so that's why I searched for some kind of general item. From the little knowledge I have regarding anlægslov, I would agree that a subclass of act of parliament (Q1076579) could fit, however I know far too little about Danish law to add a new item. I think I'll just leave the motion without main subject for now. Cheers QubeCube (talk) 20:02, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hei. I går fjernet jeg forbindelsen mellom den norske nazisten Søren Georg Daniel de Fine von Krogh Hasle (Q27920266) og den norske billedkunstneren Søren von Krogh. Nazisten er født i Vikersund, Norge i mars 1910. Kunstneren er født i Stamford, Connecticut, USA i januar 1910. Men du er sikker på at dette er samme person? Mvh Orland (talk) 05:21, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Orland Jeg bemærkede bare at de var født samme år og tænkte at din redigering måtte være en fejl. Jeg beklager fejltagelsen. Hjart (talk) 11:13, 15 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert my corrections to Frøslev Moor (Q30715697). The item is about the German protected area, anything Danish mixed inside there is wrong. There might be a separate protected area on the Danish side, but that needs a separate item. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 10:23, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

please note that the item originally was about the danish part north of the border Hjart (talk) 10:25, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to let you know how much I appreciate your contributions to the items I'm currently creating and updating.

I'm in the process of making the entire public domain collection of Commons:SMK - Statens Museum for Kunst available on Wikidata and eventually Commons.

I'm using the SMK API to get metadata for artists that have works in the collection of SMK. The API provides gender, nationality, DOBs, DODs, name, given name, family name - rarely less, sometimes more.

Using the same API we can also get metadata and images for the artworks in the collections of SMK, a total of approx. 130,000, of which public domain images exists for approx. 35.000.

I've started the process slowly, focusing on Danish female artists that have works in the collection of SMK, currently I'm working on 143 items, the only thing I haven't added yet is DODs, I expect to do this later today.

My next step is the create Wikidata items for the artworks listed in the API for these 143 items, so I'm prepared for uploading images to Commons.

Collaboration like this is what makes working on Wikimedia projects so enjoyable!

Thank you! Kim Bach (talk) 12:33, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kim Bach Super at du er glad for hvad jeg har lavet. Jeg har rodet med wikidata et par år nu og har efterhånden en del erfaring med simple wikidatasøgninger og halvautomatiserede masseredigeringer ved hjælp af hjemmestrikkede Bash/Awk scripts. Jeg er også stødt på en del danske kunstnere i tidens løb, fundet det interessant og tænkte derfor godt jeg kunne bidrage her. Jeg har bl.a. gennemgået alle has works in the collection (P6379)=Statens Museum for Kunst (Q671384) uden Kunstindeks Danmark Artist ID (P1138) og tror jeg fandt alle de resterende nævnt i Weilbachs. Hjart (talk) 13:29, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Intet mindre end fantastisk, jeg savnede faktisk et bredt anerkendt ID på de emner jeg oprettede. SMK har deres eget interne kunstner-ID (<nummer>"_person"), men det synes jeg ikke rigtig hørte hjemme på Wikidata, og heller ikke havde brug for Wikidata property Kim Bach (talk) 15:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har angivet gravsted.dk ID (P4359) for en række kunstnere. Jeg tænker man sagtens kan "narre" https://www.gravsted.dk/ til at oprette profiler for kendte danske kunstnere og så håbe på at nogen af deres brugere finder relevante gravsteder og dermed mere sikre datoer. Hjart (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, If you think this addendum is needed, so tell me please. --Tommes (talk) ,_born_1967" class="ext-discussiontools-init-timestamplink">19:14, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have encountered tons of cases where i couldn't add a label or a (standard) description, because there already was some other person with the exact same label and description. I've have also very often found dates very usefull when trying to match up different wikipedia articles. Adding dates to peoples descriptions is practically always helpful, so please leave them alone. Hjart (talk) 19:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are seriuos you should start a request to add the year of birth to every person. It is not necessary in advance for only danish people. So stop inserting please. --Tommes (talk) 19:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommes I am serious, but unfortunately far from all understand the issue and I really don't feel like arguing with some of them. Hjart (talk) 19:58, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommes Stop it please. Hjart (talk) 20:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have the chance to explain. But don't repeat points. --Tommes (talk) 20:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommes Consider Andreas Kron (Q28970245). His full name is "Andreas Lorentz Kron". Now if one source labels him by his first and middle name and another by his first and last name (which is far from an unusual scenario) or at some point he changes one of his names (not unusual either) having his birthdate in the description makes it much more likely that we will discover the correspondence. Hjart (talk) 20:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strange construction doesn't justify standard adding of birth year. --Tommes (talk) 20:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommes Doesn't justify removing it either. Stop it please. Hjart (talk) 20:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tommes WTF is "strange" about it? Do you mean you plain don't understand it? Hjart (talk) 20:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See Talk:Q575727 for why we want museum ship to be a has_use property. Vicarage (talk) 15:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Vicarage That's just you? That page doesn't explain why. Hjart (talk) 15:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Because instance of (P31) is for intrinsic properties of things, not the uses to which they are put. If you disagree with the principle for museum ships, could you write up your argument there. Vicarage (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please explain your reasoning, how the ship named Ortelius built in 1989 operated by Oceanwide Expeditions, is a "different item" than the Oceanwide Expeditions ship named Ortelius built in 1989? Thanks --Enyavar (talk) 14:58, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ship items are a bit more complex than most other wikidata items. I have merged it to the correct item MV Ortelius (Q6719888). Hjart (talk) 15:03, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see! Best regards, --Enyavar (talk) 15:04, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Ortelius (ship, 1989) (Q83907988) is a "ship name category". Not a ship item. Hjart (talk) 15:06, 1 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart, some days ago I modified the family name of LEGO Founder Ole Kirk Kristiansen that have a big mistake (in all languages) because his surname (and his family name) isn't Christiansen but Kristiansen even if is not a mistake call him with Ch. But you has remove my change to put again the old one. Officially the real surname is Kristiansen. If you don't trust me follow the official LEGO page to see that my information is true (I'm an LEGO history expert, and a geek LEGO, so my information this is right) https://www.lego.com/en-us/history/articles/a-kristiansen-or-christiansen

Thanks --Gozerathome (talk) 18:58, 6 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dipsacus fullonum: Når jeg kører nedenstående søgning er der en hel del located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) med end time (P582) qualifiers imellem. Hvordan filtrerer jeg dem ud? Jeg er kun interesseret i de aktuelle kommuner. der ikke har et sluttidspunkt.

SELECT ?bebyggelse ?bebyggelseLabel ?bebyggelseDescription ?beliggende_i_det_administrative_områdeLabel WHERE {
   SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en". }
   ?bebyggelse wdt:P31 wd:Q486972;
     wdt:P17 wd:Q20.
   ?bebyggelse wdt:P131 ?beliggende_i_det_administrative_område.
 } LIMIT 100

--Hjart (talk) 09:17, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. I stedet for

   ?bebyggelse wdt:P131 ?beliggende_i_det_administrative_område.

kan du bruge

  ?bebyggelse p:P131 ?udsagn .
  ?udsagn ps:P131 ?beliggende_i_det_administrative_område .
  ?udsagn rdf:type wikibase:BestRank . # Brug kun udsagn med bedste rangering (samme som ved brug af wdt: præfix)
  OPTIONAL { ?udsagn pq:P582 ?sluttidspunkt }
  FILTER (! BOUND(?sluttidspunkt)) # Fjern resultater med et sluttidspunkt for P131

De brugte præfikse (p:, ps:, pq:) er forklaret på mw:Wikibase/Indexing/RDF Dump Format --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 10:34, 13 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q17401792&oldid=1752518563 ΛΑΘΟΣ https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q17401792&oldid=1752621663

== Γεράσιμος Λυκιαρδόπουλος[επεξεργασία | Προσθήκη θέματος] ==

ημερομηνία θανάτου 2013 αναφέρεται στο

ΜΑΚ

ΑΝΑΓΝΩΡΙΣΤΙΚΌ PLWABN

9810614189705606

θέμα που ονομάζεται ως

Γεράσιμος Λυκιαρδόπουλος ΛΑΘΟΣ ΔώραΣτρουμπούκη

Could you please explain this edit?

Why would an image of this vessel not belong?

If you figured an image from 1977 could not be of a vessel launched in 1937, you should be aware that lake freighters, vessels that sail in fresh water, can last decades longer than salt water vessels. Some have remained in service for over 100 years. Geo Swan (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The image should instead be added to Ralph H. Watson (Q106317899). This item is supposed to be a Wikimedia category (Q4167836). The system regarding ships unfortunately isn't all that straight forward, sorry. Hjart (talk) 18:33, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Geo Swan Forgot tagging you. Ship items are unfortunately somewhat more complex than most other items. Hjart (talk) 19:01, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ships ARE complicated.

1. While unique ship names may outnumber ship names that are re-used, some ship names do get re-used. But it is pretty rare for the name to be used just one year apart.
2. Ships take some time to construct. A ship like this might end up with redundant categories, redundant wikidata entries, one of which is based on the date the keel was laid, and then again the date the ship was actually commissioned.
3. Noteː The Commons category Category:IMO 5289637 is tied to Category:Ralph H. Watson (ship, 1937) - while on wikidata it is the entry for Ralph H. Watson (Q106317899) that includes IMO 5289637. IMO numbers are unique, right? When what seemed like two ships share an IMO number doesn't that strongly suggest there really is only one vessel?

So, do you think this confirms that Q106317899 and Q106317900 should be merged? Do you think this confirms that the image should be restored?

If you don't reply within a reasonable period of time I am going to just go ahead and merge the two wikidata entries. Geo Swan (talk) 04:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Geo Swan They should not be merged. What you see here is currently the standard way of handling ships in wikidata (see i.e. SS Washington (Q1740902) and its 2 associated category for ship name (P7782)). As mentioned above, the image should be added to Ralph H. Watson (Q106317899). Following that, the image will appear in both of the above commons categories. Category:Ralph H. Watson (ship, 1937) is just supposed to hold images of this ship while operating under that specific name. Hjart (talk) 06:58, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Geo Swan Also please note that I meant by "isn't all that straight forward" is the way ships are represented in Wikidata, not the physical ships. Hjart (talk) 07:03, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I started dozen of articles on ships on en.wiki, and have probably started commons categories on hundreds of ships.

I think you may be implying there is something problematic about the dozens of wikidata entries I have started here, in the last couple of years. Could you please explain further your comments on "the standard way of handling ships in wikidata"? Geo Swan (talk) 23:04, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Geo Swan Please see Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons category for ship name. 30000+ ships in wikidata is now represented this way. Also please note that I'm not a big fan of the new system myself. Hjart (talk) 07:57, 1 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart:

When the ship's name is in the label (Amiko in this case), that label name should not be added as an alias in the "Also known as" column. "Also know as" references should only be (IMO 9125669, Blexen), the other names that the Label name is also know as.

If Wikidata protocols are different from this, please provide a reference.

I have another Wiiidata issue that I am composing an email to you on. Please stop making Wikidata changes on ship images until you receive it because I think you are following incorrect protocols in at least one of the changes you are making.

Best, GRDN711 GRDN711 (talk) 15:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 There's really nothing wrong about having the same value as both label and alias. Hjart (talk) 16:01, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart Yes, it is wrong as it is not by definition, correct. "Also known as" or alias is an alternate name by which the label name is known. The label name should not be included in that list. We do not say "Hyart" also known as "Hyart". It just adds confusion, and Wikidata is confusing enough already.

If you have a definitive Wikidata discussion where it was decided as you state, or a Wikidata template that directly answers the issue, please provide a reference. I will consider it.

If you want an another opinion than mine, we can take the issue to the "Request for comment" forum at the Wikidata Administrators Board and see what others think.

Alternately, I would suggest you accept my case and stop putting the label name in the "also knon as list" for all Wikidata topics, including ships.

Less work for you and greater clarity. Please consider.

Best,

--GRDN711 (talk) 21:48, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart:

My email is filling up with the Wikidata changes that you are making to my ship images. While occasional changes have been a useful addition of information, most are related to two cases where I believe your actions are not correct.

The first we have already discussed. By definition of the phrase “Also known as” in the Wikidata item label, the exisitng label name should not be added to the “Also know as” list as it is incorrect by definition.

The second is that you have been merging Wikidata items for ship names and categories under the mistaken rational that this is fine as “it is all the same ship”. Instead, you are creating inconsistencies in Wikimedia Commons where Wikidata item info is being used in the infoboxes for Commons categories.

Ships can have different names over their working lives. Your change of lumping together Wikidata items of the same ship with different names (example – merging items for the same ship when named Boubon Arctic and Horizon Arcitc) has ripple effects in Wikimedia Commons where the ships are sub-categorized by name under the unique identifying IMO#. Example is Category:Bourbon Arctic (tugboat, 2016) where the image in the Wikidata infobox is the same ship, when later named “Horizon Arctic”. It just adds confusion.

I did not create but follow the existing system of separate Wikidata items for the unique IMO#, separate ship name categories and ship names. It may not be the most elegant but it works well to hold the information for proper dissemination into Wikimedia Commons. Keeping the ship data in Wikidata and referencing to it is the most efficient and effective over time for everyone.

Happy to discuss this further with you but would request that you stop merging Wikidata items for ship categories and names for my ship images and others until you resolve the conflicts you are creating. I am not aware of a definitive Wikidata reference on this issue but if there is, please let me know.

Best, Gordon GRDN711 (talk) 20:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 Please note that you should not create duplicates, such as in the case of Tigre (Q114987347). Hjart (talk) 13:50, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart Thank you for catching the duplicate. We must have been working on this item at nearly the same time. I looked for the ship name in Wikidata this morning (my time) but did not find it, and created a new item. Best, Gordon --GRDN711 (talk) 14:16, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 No, Pi bot created the older one a week ago. Hjart (talk) 14:20, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello :@Hjart

As a follow up to our previous conversation above on Wikidata items for ships, can you restore the merging changes you made to my following ship images? With admin rights and a good understanding of the Wikidata structure, you would be better than I.

Amiko (Q83600892) Horizon Arctic (Q52515219) MV Blue Puttees (Q6719295) Almirante Condell (FF-06) (Q109357797) Cauquenes which is now Corcovado (Q83637376)

I will continue to follow the Wikidata protocols below (implemented before my time) for ship images and information until Wikidata comes up with something better and documents it with a topic or template. I would actually be strongly in favor of more inovation in this area. As structured, it works but is clunky.

IMO # - unique Wikidata item # as identifying hull number for a ship with one or more names Ship name (ship, year) - unique Wikidata item # for Wikimedia category holding images of ship by name Ship name - unique Wikidata item # for image identification and items unique to that ship by name

Best, Gordon --GRDN711 (talk) 15:23, 6 November 2022 (UTC) GRDN711 (talk) 15:29, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 I still think ships should be represented by only 1 item and most other contributors appear to be of the same opinion. Otherwise our database just ends up being way too complex. Hjart (talk) 15:33, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 Please note that most other people (including me) get confused when they see the same physical ship represented by 2 different wikidata items. Also please note that humans and i.e. buildings are often known by different names during their lives and still are represented by only 1 wikidata item. Hjart (talk) 15:49, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart I also have no disagreement with your proposal of having one Wikidata item for a ship but there needs to be Wikidata consensus on this so that it applies to all ships, not just mine. Work with your Wikidata colleagues to define such a change, create a reference document for the revised procedure and announce it to all exisitng Commons ship photographers, along with a change-over date for existing Wikidata items. It can't just be you or me. Will you revert the merging changes you made on my ship images?

I seldom make images of buildings but when they are distinctive enough to have a name rather than just an address, or have saleable naming rights, they rarely have more than one name. Ships often have multiple names over time and it is an identifying nameplate on the bow. This would have to be accomodated as there are often other changes that accompany a name change (owner, operator, color scheme, sometimes structural change). --GRDN711 (talk) 17:34, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 Please note that this was not my proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons category for ship name and that more than 30.000 other ships are now represented this way. Hjart (talk) 17:53, 6 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry @Hjart, I have been traveling and off-line for a few days. I have just re-connected and read your latest.

The proposal you cite is hardly convincing. There was one person strongly for the proposal and one person strongly against. That’s a draw and hardly the basis for new Wikidata policy, especially when the proposal can result in the display of the wrong ship by name in Commons. Also, the proposal you cite was not presented at the Wikidata:WikiProject Ships forum which would seem the best place for getting a policy on ships accepted by consensus across Wikidata.

Commons groups ship images using 2 categories - a sub-category of the ship by name under a parent category of a unique identifying number for the ship, the most common of which is IMO#. While originally, Commons would add ship information in the ship-by-name sub-categories, after Wikidata came along, it became the accepted policy of placing the ship data in Wikidata and referencing to the Wikidata item number in the Commons ship infobox. Commons, in effect, is probably the largest user of Wikidata ship information.

When I started looking at referencing ship info in Wikidata to images uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, I found Wikidata using 3 items – one for the identifying number parent category, the ship-by-name sub-category and the ship name. I agree with you that having 3 Wikidata items to document a ship is excessive and awkward. IMHO, for efficiency, it could be reduced to 1 Wikidata item per ship name as you would like, but just not the way you are doing it as it creates problems in Commons ship inforboxes.

Where is the best forum to have this discussion in Wikidata and get consensus on 1 Wikidata item per ship name? - Wikidata:WikiProject Ships?

Best,

Gordon

GRDN711 (talk) 14:55, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 I suggest you ask the guy who did the proposal. He's in a better position to do that. Also please note that the name displayed in the infobox isn't necessarily wrong just because it doesn't reflect the commons category you're in. Hjart (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Hjart You create the problem and I have to clean it up :(.

What is wrong is shown in the example I provided, When you merge ship-by-name Wikidata items based on the prepostion that it is all the same ship, Commons category infoboxes based on input from Wikidata, can show a ship image with a different name from the category label and different as well from images in that category. It may be the same ship (or a sister ship) but how would a viewer know? A wikidata proposal that creates misinformation is not cool, especially when not documented nor thought through.

I will see if Wikidata:WikiProject Ships forum will consider a proposal I have that may be able to resolve this. In the meantime, if you could stop merging Wikidata ship-by-name items, that would be helpful. Will keep you posted. --GRDN711 (talk) 03:40, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 Exactly what problem did I create? Hjart (talk) 08:07, 13 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart,

Longerons (longeron (Q1662372)) and stringers (stringer (Q18401972)) are not the same. How could en:Longeron say „Longerons are used in conjunction with stringers to form structural frameworks“ if both would be the same?

de:Halbschalenbauweise translates them into German as Rumpfholme (Longerons) und schwächere Longerons (Stringer).

Please don't revert if you simply can't read Slavic languages. Budy Greene (talk) 18:15, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Budy Greene I was comparing with primarily the Danish article. I also noted that you did not adjust the German label and description, so I assumed your edit was a mistake. Hjart (talk) 18:24, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, it was intentional. The terminology is indeed difficult due to the reuse of words for different objects.--Budy Greene (talk) 18:27, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart,

About your comment: "don't remove or change sourced claims".

Why?

Is it sacred?

I would understand if the years were different.

Or will we also add three values of "Date of birth" for the rest of the persons, for example: "July 31, 1973", "July 1973", "1973"? Игорь Темиров (talk) 12:05, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Игорь Темиров The value you deleted is still valuable because it has a source (the Czech National Authority Database (Q13550863)). More sources from various entities, supporting the claim that he was born in 1973, makes it more likely that the more accurate date is actually correct. Dates without sources can usually be deleted. Hjart (talk) 12:21, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Hjart, if you disagree please change claim instead of reverting claim. --1020D (talk) 21:02, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@1020D I changed those that could be reasonably changed. Hjart (talk) 21:04, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but some new claims you just reverted, instead of improving. --1020D (talk) 21:09, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@1020D Yes, because using i.e. gas station chain (Q64027599) with product, material, or service produced or provided (P1056) really makes no sense at all. At least not with an item where it's allready used with instance of (P31). Hjart (talk) 21:13, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A product can also be a work or service. --1020D (talk) 21:18, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@1020D YX Energi (Q4580519) for eksempel, er en gas station chain (Q64027599). Det er noget sludder at sige at de "producerer" "tankstationkæde". gas station chain (Q64027599) bruges normalt med instance of (P31). Hjart (talk) 21:23, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then change claim --1020D (talk) 21:26, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@1020D Jeg kunne ikke komme på noget mere fornuftigt. Hvis du vil have det ændret må du gøre det. Hjart (talk) 21:29, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some of your changes are fine. However, you continue to merge Ship-by-name records without authority or proper documentation from the Ships Project Team in Wikidata) and it is causing problems with Ship-by-name info boxes with my images in Commons. Please stop this behavior or I will move forward to have you declared a vandal in Wikidata. You are not god here and your arbitrary actions in merging ship names are causing negative ripples in Commons. Last chance – stop doing this. GRDN711 (talk) 16:44, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 Please note that you appear to be pretty much alone with your views. Vicarage and I have been trying to explain the issues to you, but apparently in vain. Please stop splitting those records. I've been reporting vandals before and can report you too, if you don't stop bullshitting everyone. Hjart (talk) 16:54, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart I am not alone in my views and unlike you, I am not tryimg implement a merge of Ship-by-name records that is different from current Wikidata practice. I made a proposal to try and help you and Ship Project Team get closer to a single record. Unlike you I am not imposing that on anyone. I am just trying to stop you from arbitrarily making changes that affect my ship images in Commons. Again, please stop your arbitrary method of merging of Ship-by-name records. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:05, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@GRDN711 "current Wikidata practice" obviously does not agree with you. Hjart (talk) 17:14, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Hjart The current Wikidata practice is to have 3 records for IMO#, Ship-by-name-category and Ship name. While this not the most efficent, ti works and is not in conflict in Commons, the only regular user of Wikidata ship data. The Wikidata Ships Project has not come up with a better one to date.

Your method of merging Ship-by-name records is arbitrary and is being implemented by only by you without aurthority or documentation from any consensus opinion at Wikidata. Some of your changes are fine but your method of merging Ship-by-name records that lead to conflicts has to stop. I will be reverting your Ship-by-name records merges as harmful (other changes except for the alias name issue seem fine). If you want to protest, take it to a higher forum at Wikidata and make your case. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:35, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I came here because I was mentioned. I don't think there really is a Ships Project team, if only 4 people have commented on such a radical proposal as changing ship labels, and of those only one wants the change. But to avoid edit wars I suggest @GRDN711 raises the issue on Wikidata:Project_chat to get a broader perspective, and we all stop making and reverting changes and making threats until the 2 issues are decided 1) one record per hull, 2) ship labels with metadata in. Vicarage (talk) 20:22, 30 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner, Dexbot (talk) 17:18, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, an item that you have edited (and you are the only non-bot editor) is considered empty and will be deleted in 72 hours if it doesn't improve. Your automated cleaner, Dexbot (talk) 08:06, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Why are edits such as this and this being made? Thanks! — Huntster (t @ c) 02:25, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Huntster That's part of a batch which has still not finished. The batch will eventually do one more edit to each of these items. The batch consists of 1378 individual edits and for some reason Quickstatement batches currently runs at only ~1 edit per minute, so it will unfortunately be a while before you'll see the next edits to those items. Hjart (talk) 04:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so first batch is addition, second batch is cleanup or somesuch? — Huntster (t @ c) 05:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Huntster No, it's one batch with 2 individual edits to each item. I wanted to make the english label match the current enwiki article and move the current label to alias. The next edits will be copying the english article title to the wikidata label. Hjart (talk) 05:27, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know that that's a good idea? Titles on en.wiki may not always be the most current data. Kings Pointer (Q3237812) is a good example, and certainly not the only one. Sorry, automated imports from wikiprojects to WD always worry me. — Huntster (t @ c) 07:05, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Huntster I recently noticed several cases of enwiki and other projects being updated with new ship names, without the associated WD items being updated too. That's why I did this batch. It may not be perfect, but I think if the current name of the vessel is updated, why isn't the associated wikiproject updated too? Hjart (talk) 07:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's certainly valid uses in syncing! But some folks may work exclusively on WD, or just don't venture on en.wiki for varied reasons. So, it's more a matter of just being mindful that the titles on en.wiki might not be the most up-to-date, or that naming conventions might differ between the two (for example, en.wiki still uses a lot of parenthetical hull numbers for military vessels in their titles, whereas WD does not because there was never a need for disambiguation here). — Huntster (t @ c) 08:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. Hvis du har styr på hvilke udsagn der bruges for danske landsbyer, vil det være en stor hjælp hvis du vil oprette et emne for Årslev i Årslev Parish (Q4391223) syd for Randers. Byen er fødested for Børge Halvgaard (Q116981530). Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I don’t understand why the dates need to be in the description because tey are also in the section date of birth and date of death.

So in wiki source, you see : John Doe (1564-1616) (1564-1616)

If the same information is in two places, there are chances that they are not the same. HenriLeFoll

@HenriLeFoll: Many of us find it very usefull to have that information in the description too. Among other things I've often found it helpfull for fighting vandalism, since mismatches between dates in the description and data always makes me suspicius.--Hjart (talk) 11:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that when you display the information of someone, the dates should be displayed but They should not be in the field description. Like it is in all the other languages ! HenriLeFoll (talk) 11:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HenriLeFoll There are lots of cases of people with identical names and jobs. In these cases it's outright necessary to have some way of telling them apart in the description. Adding the lifespan is the obvious way to do this. Hjart (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "wiki source" by the way? Hjart (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

on this page :

https://eo.wikisource.org/wiki/A%C5%ADtoro:Claudius_Colas

you can see what I mean. HenriLeFoll (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@HenriLeFoll Whatever script creates pages like that should simply strip whatever "(" + year wikidata descriptions already contains. Hjart (talk) 17:24, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hej, det ser umiddelbart ud til at Q112942988 skulle have været en med samme navn der levede mellem 1864 og 1940, skoleinspektør og formand for Dansk Lærerforening. Det kan selvfølgelig være svært at finde ud af, når den var oprettet med så få oplysninger. Om ikke andet må den oprettes igen med nogle kilder, hvis der findes mere at gå efter. TherasTaneel (talk) 17:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TherasTaneel Jeg tænker at når man tillader sig at oprette emner med så få oplysninger, så må man finde sig i risikoen for at de bliver genbrugt til mere konkrete formål. Hjart (talk) 17:11, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Forhåbentlig, det er i hvert fald sket nu :) TherasTaneel (talk) 17:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings; you may be a party to the discussion at Wikidata:Project chat#Label bug from 2018-07-12, try to set labels for several languages - get weird message "As an anti-abuse measure...". Elizium23 (talk) 23:18, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why you have canceled edits, that contains "birthdays like this actually are often helpful" xD You mean rarely? Matlin (talk) 16:04, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Matlin I actually meant often. In my experience having birthdays in descriptions are often helpful. Hjart (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, I looked at the edits wrong - as if your cancel removes the dates. (example). Matlin (talk) 10:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you reverted me here, do you have any reliable (preferably english) reference for the date he passed away? Kind regards Saschaporsche (talk) 13:08, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a reference where the 16th of may is confirmed: see here. I've changed the date back to the 16th. Saschaporsche (talk) 17:24, 17 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, these articles in Spanish should be linked to their equivalents in other languages:

• Bajada (fiesta) - Bajada (festival).
• Lorenzo Olarte Cullén - Lorenzo Olarte Cullen.

I have tried to do it myself. But I get an error. Thank you. 87.223.201.8 15:45, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I happened to notice this and took care of it. Merged Mr. Cullén, but keeping the two festivals separate. Fiestas Lustrales de la Bajada de la Virgen de las Nieves (Q4848804) is a subset of Bajada (Q21002573), and are not the same entity. — Huntster (t @ c) 19:44, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hej, så at du skabte en kategori for nogle af mine billeder. Tak! Vil du være med på Wikidata:WikiProject Campsites? So9q (talk) 07:58, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@So9q Jeg laver en masse andre ting på dawiki, commons og wikidata, men jeg har da uploadet nogle fotos af shelters i Dk: Category:Lean-tos in Denmark, Bemærk også Category:Lean-tos in Sweden. Hjart (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Super. Jeg har en plan om at digitalisere en shelter med billeder om ugen hele sommeren 😀 So9q (talk) 20:07, 11 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. I noticed you reverted [5]. I don't remember exactly any more, but I'm pretty sure I clicked merge there in order for en:Attell to have interwiki links to pages in other languages that describe the same thing. Can you advise on a better solution for this issue? --Joy (talk) 15:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy There's a small, but important difference between the the 2 items. Please note that one is family name (Q101352) and the other is a Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410). They should not be merged. Hjart (talk) 15:40, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but there's no real difference in interwiki outcome. The German page de:Attell says both Familienname and Begriffsklärungsseite. How do you handle these then? --Joy (talk) 16:06, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy There are purposes for which the difference is important. enwiki appears to take it more serious than many other wikis. I really think the various wikis should be more aware of the difference. In case of ambigousnes I have sometimes allowed myself to judge whether a page appears to be more one than the other and in other cases squarely went by the category. Hjart (talk) 16:16, 9 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Hjart,

I hope you are doing well,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I am working on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender model that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our model based on your previous edits.

Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published in a research venue.

The experiment should take no more than 15 minutes, and it will be held next week.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfA1wfdBfCRlcG3WhDyc-V8lzgPNx3fDFCNXkyn4CSwahXZ_A/viewform?usp=sf_link

Then, I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about my project, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa

In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards Kholoudsaa (talk) 17:21, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

God dag. Jeg la merke til at du hadde en imponerende historikk med anti-vandal arbeid. Hvorfor søker du ikke om administrator rettigheter slik at du kan håndtere enkle tilfeller på egen hånd? Det er nesten ikke noen krav om aktivitet. Jeg synes folk bør søke selv, men jeg vil så absolutt gi min støtte dersom du gjør det. Wikidata har en terskel for 8 stemmer for, som er nesten kriminelt lav... Infrastruktur (talk) 16:20, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

English | español | français | العربية | Nederlands | русский | +/−

Congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Wikidata. Please take a moment to read the Wikidata:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Wikidata:Project chat, Wikidata:Requests for comment, and Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings, or modifications of protected pages.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikidata-admin^connect. If you need access, you can flag someone down at #wikidata^connect. You may find Wikidata:Guide to Adminship to be useful reading. You may also want to consider adding yourself to meta:Template:Wikidata/Ambassadors, and to any similar page on your home wiki if one exists. (Check Wikipedia:Wikidata/Wikidatans (Q14964498).)

Please also add/update the languages you speak to your listing at Wikidata:List of administrators and Wikidata:Administrators/Timeline. You may also like to add your username to this list if you would not like that items you delete at RfD get marked as deleted automatically. Again, welcome to the admin corps!

--Lymantria (talk) 13:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 15:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC).

What did I do wrong there? M. B., Jr. (talk) 18:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@M. B., Jr.: The birthdate was in the wrong place. Please see other people (such as i.e. Werner Wolfgang Rogosinski (Q27373)) for how to enter it correctly. Good luck. Hjart (talk) 05:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Hjart. Would appreciate your input on deleting of data about Peter C. Gøtzsche Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard#Please protect Peter C. Gøtzsche page, stop User:Valepert from deleting legitimate data, (the summary is in the ending) thanks in advance and best regards. Fabius byle (talk) 11:37, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The correct name of the game is Hvem er bange for den sorte mand?. No reason to block me in the Danish WP. Unblock me. Thanx.

If the current article name really is incorrect, the article should be moved, not replaced the way you did it. We consider maintaining article history important.--Hjart (talk) 18:27, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hejsa, så tilfældigt da jeg kopierede en beskrivelse at du er kommet til at skrive "Denmmark" en del gange. God fornøjelse :) TherasTaneel (talk) 18:04, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TherasTaneel hvor? Hjart (talk) 18:05, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, lidt over det hele, hvis du søger på "Denmmark" kommer der en lang liste, ved dog ikke om de alle er fra dig, men dem jeg har set, f.eks. Q12337343 og Q890318. TherasTaneel (talk) 18:08, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Det er en enkelt batch jeg kørte sidste år: https://quickstatements.toolforge.org/#/batch/93483. Den kan jeg fixe med en lignende kørsel. Tak. Hjart (talk) 18:12, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why this revert and also Special:Diff/2068270718? These churches are specifically described as domus or dome cathedral, while all cathedrals aren't. 2001:7D0:81DB:1480:A46E:743:F55:94F6 08:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I understand both of these are still seats of bishops and therefore most appropriately described as cathedral (Q2977). Hjart (talk) 08:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

domus (Q16966) is currently set as a subclass of cathedral (Q2977), so these being seats of bishops was still indicated. Or even if it truely isn't a subclass then why not classify these churches additionally as domus (Q16966) instances (as was the case here)? Locally these churches are normally descirbed as domus (Q16966) rather than cathedral (Q2977). 2001:7D0:81DB:1480:2861:A234:F647:A0A4 14:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why are these reverts Special:Diff/2101945025 and Special:Diff/2101944841?

Et skib kan få nye navne, sejle for andre ejere i andre lande, osv.

Derfor er det nyttigt at identificere et skib ved dets IMO nummer, som altid bliver det sammen.

— Template:IMOcat

If the ships are ever renamed, will you change the names of the items every time: Yakov Grebelskiy (Q108767604) and Yevgeniy Khorov (Q108767961)? There are already items with such names: Category:Yakov Grebelskiy (tugboat, 1978) (Q108767608) and Category:Yevgeniy Khorov (tugboat, 1982) (Q108767962). --212.32.207.80 13:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's the intention. Please note that other entities, such as humans, buildings and companies too are renamed from time to time, but are not normally referred to by numeric identifiers either. IMO numbers are good for computers, not humans, so IMO numbers should not appear as labels. Hjart (talk) 06:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mht. redigeringen: Hvorfor kommer der stort bogtav på etiketten? Er det WE-Framework gadget der gør det?— Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 07:17, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Fnielsen Det er fordi jeg kopierede fra artiklens indledning og ikke lige på det tidspunkt tænkte over at etiketten ikke skulle med stort indledningsbogstav. Det vil så vidt muligt gøre fremover. Hjart (talk) 07:29, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Jeg troede det var et eller andet med gadgettens opsætning. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 13:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hvorfor skal et drab reduceres til en “begivenhed”?
- Sarrus (c • t) 22:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarrus Det er ikke for at reducere det. Jeg foretrækker bare at beskrivelsens ordlyd ikke blot er en gentagelse af etikettens ordlyd. Hvis du kan komme på en ordlyd, der er mere passende uden at være en gentagelse af etikettens ordlyd, vil det være fint med mig. Hjart (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Det skal vel være en beskrivelse af, hvad artiklen handler om. Og det er et drab. Kan ikke se, hvorfor det skal formuleres anderledes.
- Sarrus (c • t) 22:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarrus Læs venligst min begrundelse igen. Hjart (talk) 22:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har skam læst den :-).
- Sarrus (c • t) 22:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarrus En gang mere tror jeg vil være godt for forståelsen. Hjart (talk) 06:52, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Jeg har skam forstået, at det er fordi du ikke bryder dig om gentagelser. Men når du kalder det en begivenhed får du det næsten til at lyde som et årligt hestemarked og ikke en tragisk hændelse :-). Jeg kan stadig ikke se problemet med at kalde det hvad det er, så lige et spørgmål: Er der en nedskrevet konsensus på Wikidata der forbyder gentagelser, eller er det “bare” en personlig preference?
- Sarrus (c • t) 07:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarrus Som sagt ovenfor, hvis du kan kan komme på en beskrivelse, der er mere passende uden at være en gentagelse af etikettens ordlyd, så gør du bare det. En gentagelse gør helt grundlæggende ikke folk klogere på hvad sagen handler om. Hjart (talk) 07:24, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Tilfreds?.
- Sarrus (c • t) 07:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Sarrus Det er bestemt bedre. Gode beskrivelser kræver ofte at man er lidt kreativ. Jeg tænker dog at "i Hjallerup" kan udelades i beskrivelsen da det ogå forekommer i etiketten. Hjart (talk) 07:45, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar with Wikidata and how it works. Can you please explain to me what's the difference of the source of the two same years of birth in the template of this page?

@TheMonolith79: First please notice that one of the birthdates in Theodoros Kolokotronis (Q319678) is preferred, which means that only that one date will appear in infoboxes and queries. Also please note that one of the dates has 2 references pointing to where the date can be verified, while the other date has 1 reference saying that it was imported from Belarussian wikipedia. Generally having references referring to external sources is more valuable.--Hjart (talk) 02:19, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Άννα Παναγιωτοπούλου Γέννηση: Πληροφορίες γέννησης: 30 Ιουλίου 1945 Άννα Παναγιωτοπούλου Γέννηση: Πληροφορίες γέννησης: 30 Ιουλίου 1945 https://www.tvtime.com/people/645939-%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%BD%CE%B1-%CF%80%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B3%CE%B9%CF%89%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%85%CE%BB%CE%BF%CF%85?character=12461057 https://www.retrodb.gr/wiki/index.php/%CE%86%CE%BD%CE%BD%CE%B1_%CE%A0%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B3%CE%B9%CF%89%CF%84%CE%BF%CF%80%CE%BF%CF%8D%CE%BB%CE%BF%CF%85 https://crash.gr/pethane-i-anna-panagiotopoulou-2 Συζήτηση χρήστη:DS Lioness ΟΧΙ 1947

Hi, why are you doing a lot of revert on my edits whitout specifying any reason in the subject? Specifically, South Funen Archipelago (Q1270287) is an archipelago (i.e. a group of islands that lie in a sea) and isn't itself a sea. So you cannot use located in or next to body of water (P206) with it. Therefore I created, as a different item, Danish Southern Sea (Q130066125) that is indeed a sea. Why are you removing reference to that sea? Thanks. BohemianRhapsody (talk) 11:59, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BohemianRhapsody That's because South Funen Archipelago (Q1270287) actually refers to the waters south of Funen rather than the islands in it. The German and English names and descriptions are a bit misleading. Please see i.e. https://denstoredanske.lex.dk/Det_Sydfynske_%C3%98hav. Hjart (talk) 12:06, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for your answer. But I think that - regardless of the fact that in Sweden the same name is used both for the waters and for the archipelago - in Wikidata we should have two different item (becasue they are very different objects), and use them accordingly to their definition, so every island will be part of (P361) the archipelago and will be located in or next to body of water (P206) the waters. What do you think about it? --BohemianRhapsody (talk) 13:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@BohemianRhapsody As the Danish name suggests, I don't think that it's generally thought of as merely a bunch of islands. I'm really leaning towards just leaving it as it is. Hjart (talk) 17:51, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hej Hjart. Pressenævnet er oprettet to gange herinde. Her: Q113612713 og her: Q11996206. Den første kan slettes, da det ikke er her, der er forbundet artikler til. Vil du se på det? Tak :) --Brandsen (talk) 03:09, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Så vidt jeg kan forstå repræsenterer de to emner to forskellige institutioner. Den første eksisterede 1964-1991, og blev erstattet af den anden. Du kan evt. se på emnernes historik og spørge opretter om meningen. Hjart (talk) 06:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Brandsen Hjart (talk) 06:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ja, du har ret. Nevermind :-) Brandsen (talk) 12:49, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you rollback me on this page? Rollback is for obvious vandalism, if that's not the case you need to use 'undo' and add an explanation. In this case the image is clearly applicable, because it depicts one of the churches of this parish. Or maybe I am missing something? Jcb (talk) 06:08, 7 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]