Topic on User talk:Llywelyn2000/Flow

Any particular reason that you removed instance of (P31) = civil parish (Q1115575) from Kenwyn (Q6392533) ? (diff) ?

Kenwyn is still very much a live civil parish according to ONS : .

It's important that we should be able to query for all civil parishes within a larger location, so this P31 value was needed.

Also, without this instance of (P31) value, items within the parish will show a constraint error on statements which say located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) = Kenwyn.

If you have made any more edits like this, please fix them.

Kenwyn (Q6392533) is a village (Q532) and suburb of Truro. Kenwyn Civil Parish (Q116180182) is the civil parish (Q1115575). Two distinctly different items.

If you really want to have a separate item for the built-up area from the civil parish, then please make sure all the identifiers end up connected to the right items, please make sure all the incoming P131 statements are pointing to the correct item, please make sure your built-up area item has a P131 pointing to the parish item, please update the relevant objects on OSM to point to the right items, and please split images and sub-categories on Commons appropriately between categories for each.

I'm not here to finish the jig-so: just to make Wikimedia projects slightly better. Others can add images etc. I differentiated between a village and a parish as the sources dictate that they're distinct items. Please search for similar names before wrongly correcting editors in the future. 'If you have made any more edits like this, please fix them.'

Sorry, but it's not my job to clear up after you. Parishes in England systematically (over 80% of them) use the same items as settlements of the same name. If you want to separate them, then fine. But do the whole job. Make sure you update any statements that need to be changed as a result of your redefinition; make sure identifiers end up connected to the right items after your redefinition. Make sure external objects you know about - in particular OSM - get updated to take account of your redefinition. And don't break Commons, which relies on categories accurately matching wikidata items, or otherwise lots of auto-categorisation tools break (in particular the ones related to the import of geograph images). It's also helpful to try to make sure that articles on wikis remain connected via mutual sitelinks to (some appropriate) Commons category.

If you change the meaning of an item, it's on you to make sure everything is adapted accordingly. If you break it you own it.

I didn't ask you to clean up! Wikimedia projects are ongoing, unfinished. Nothing is broken!

If an identifier is connected to an item that doesn't belong to it and isn't appropriate to it, that's broken (and can be highly misleading). If the map gadget on an item is picking up a misleading map outline from OSM, because the OSM object hasn't been updated to point to the right item, that's broken. If places have a located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) pointing to an item that's not an administrative area, that's broken. If the Commons category (typically for a parish) is no longer connected to an item that represents a parish, that's broken. All of these breakages in turn break queries and workflows.

Bottom line: if you change the meaning of an item, you have to follow through and make sure you've fixed the consequences. Otherwise the action is not "making a Wikimedia project slightly better", it's making things that did work no longer work, so things are worse.