User talk:JAn Dudík/Archiv 32

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Heilbronn and Heilsbronn

Hallo JAn_Dudík,

Q84688982 does not describe Q715, but Q427153. You seem to have realized this [1], yet you have added it again to the wrong object. Why? Regards Rosenzweig (talk) 07:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Adding of these statement is semiautomatic task. First is import from wikisource to wikidata, then I run query for each encyclopedia (examples) and next I copy source data to quick statement. But now there are thousands of to-do items, so it runs several hours, everytime, when my homo computer is on. And when is some item in queue, it will be added even if source data changes in meantime. I had two independent queues, so it might be in both. There is now about 2200 items in queue, most of them was probably too in second run which ended recently. JAn Dudík (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Confusing the encyclopaedia article and its subject

Hi, can you check your bot on Q309719 and Q3140? It's adding instance of (P31)encyclopedia article (Q13433827) on them which they are not. They might be other qids concerned. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 12:20, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jahl de Vautban Hi, both items contains incorect link to en.wikisource - article in encyclopedia, so bot marks them as article. Correct solution is delete incorrect statements + remove incorrect sitelink. JAn Dudík (talk) 19:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #608

Repeated bot import errors

Please stop making this edit. It's incorrect. --EncycloPetey (talk) 15:56, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey This edit is correct per source, incorrect might be value on en.wikisource - but both article and disambiguation are about more Antigones. Until it is deprecated or repaired in en.wikisource, it might be imported again. JAn Dudík (talk) 17:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
You have misinterpreted the source and the meaning of the property. There is nothing at the source that states your edit is correct. The main topic of the encyclopedia article is not a Wikimedia disambiguation page. There is no error at Wikisource. The issue is that templates will not permit the linking of multiple Wikipedia pages. The data item already has the two topics correctly listed. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
@EncycloPetey No, wikisource template should have two parameters, wikipedia and wikipedia2. And now is in that page |wikipedia = Antigone (disambiguation), so bot import this value. JAn Dudík (talk) 17:26, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
So, you know the value is incorrect, but you will keep importing it, despite being told that it's wrong? That's what I'm hearing. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
I know it now, because you told it to me. But there were tens of thousands pages to import, so the import was for several days and there was more threads, so one page might be reimported, if was incorrect value repaired only on Wikidata and not on Wikisource. JAn Dudík (talk) 18:20, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
So I now repaired Antigone. If you find another case, you can repair it too. JAn Dudík (talk) 18:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Here is another such bad edit. The main subject of the article is not George Eliot. The link is made because the author is the nearest substitute since there is no English Wikipedia article about the poem. Your interpretation of the link as indicating the "main subject" is erroneous. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Here is another such bad edit. The main subject of the article is not George Eliot. The link is made because the author is the nearest substitute since there is no English Wikipedia article about the poem. Your interpretation of the link as indicating the "main subject" is erroneous. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Here is another such bad edit. The main subject of the article is not the poem but character, and I linked in the data item for that character. The link at Wikisource is made because the poem is the nearest substitute since there is no English Wikipedia article about the character. Your interpretation of the link as indicating the "main subject" is erroneous. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:00, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Bot is machine and import values. If there is bad value, is possible to correct it on wikisource or deprecate on wikidata.
There are 36700 articles in EB11, almost all of them (36000) have main subject (P921) (strings wikipedia and wikipedia2) and several pages, where this string in not 100% correct. I am not able to check more than few random pages. If you find incorrect value, you can repair it. If you find detectable case not for import (e.g. pages containing disambiguation), I can add exception for future. But Is not possible to check from source that link leads to author if article is about work - this is possible by some query after import.
Now is import complete and I am planning only import new and changed pages in future. JAn Dudík (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
You can stop re-adding data that has been manually corrected. You are making a flawed assumption. The fact that a Wikisource page links to a Wikipedia article does not mean that the link target is the main subject of that article. Your interpratation of the way Wikisource works is inherently flawed, and this problem has been pointed out. Please stop making such edits blindly. Running a bot requires responsibility for the actions of the bot. If you use your bot to re-add known bad data, that constitutes edit warring and is reason for revoking of bot usage. --EncycloPetey (talk) 23:46, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Please correct these errors, and prevent your bot from making them again. Bot owners are expected to control their bots, not to blindly import data when informaed that the values are incorrect because of a misinterpretation of the data. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Your bot is now adding duplicate values. Please check whether items are already present before adding duplicates. --EncycloPetey (talk) 17:40, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

@EncycloPetey I found probably cause, should be fixed for future. JAn Dudík (talk) 18:27, 2 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #609

Wikidata weekly summary #610

Železniční doprava v Praze

Potřebuji pomoc, něco jsem nezvládla. Kategorie na Commons "Rail transport in Prague" (Železniční doprava v Praze) je kromě železniční dráhy (jak je běžně chápána) nadřazená i kategoriím pro pražské metro, tramvaje a lanové dráhy. Původně byla propojena se článkem "Železniční doprava v pražské aglomeraci", tedy nejen pro Prahu, ale i pro Středočeský kraj. Kategorie na wikipedii "Železniční doprava v Praze" se zase týká pouze železniční dráhy (jak je běžně chápána), tedy bez metra, tramvají atp. Chtěla jsem ve Wikidatech tyto kategorie propojit, ale nakonec jsem se ve významu ztratila. Prosím o pomoc. Alena Pokorná (talk) 22:33, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

@Alena Pokorná Tady asi odkážu na @ŠJů:, který se v problematice drážní dopravy rozhodně orientuje lépe než já... JAn Dudík (talk) 21:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
@Alena Pokorná: "Rail transport" je ekvivalent termínu "kolejová doprava". Pokud bychom chtěli něco specificky železničního, pak místo adjektiva "rail" používáme "railway". Pak ještě v české a slovenské terminologii máme "drážní dopravu", což je termín do většiny ostatních jazyků a terminologií nepřeložitelný, protože v našem pojetí zahrnuje i trolejbusy a visuté lanovky, zatímco ve většině zemí světa trolejbusy jsou typem autobusů a visuté lanovky zařízení, která mají blíž k výtahům než k vlakům. Nebýt této anomálie, drážní doprava by byla zhruba ekvivalentem kolejové dopravy. Pro železnici máme v Commons kategorie "railway lines" a víceméně i "train stations", ale kategorizační úroveň "railway transport" chybí (existuje jen pár ojedinělých kategorií, které unikly přejmenování, protože visí jako anomálie mimo řádnou kategorizační strukturu, např. commons:Category:Railway transport in České Budějovice, commons:Category:Railway transport in Vienne (Isère), commons:Category:Railway transport in Beaucroissant či commons:Category:Railway transport in Białowieża). Ono ze světového hlediska je dost obtížné roztřídit různé typy místních, příměstských a speciálních drah na "železniční" a "neželezniční". U nás třeba metro do roku 1994 mezi železniční dráhy nepatřilo, ale od roku 1995 ano, i když speciální. Ani u nás takové striktní rozdělení neexistovalo odjakživa, například tramvaj do Vysočan stejně jako železnice do Bechyně původně byly obě provozovány jako "elektrická drobná dráha". Není to rozlišení ani nadčasové, ani mezinárodně univerzální. Berme to tak, že na Commons byla kategorizační úroveň "railway transport in..." někdy před téměř deseti lety zrušena a tedy české železniční kategorie na Commons nemají ekvivalent. A české drážní kategorie (byly-li by) ekvivalent nemohou mít z principu, protože v angličtině náš pojem "drážní dopravy" neexistuje. Kdybychom o propojení hodně stáli, mohli bychom z důvodu mezijazykové kompatibility na české Wikipedii vytvořit kategorie "kolejové dopravy". Ale vždycky budou nějaké nejasnosti, např. jestli tam počítat tu či onu autobusovou dráhu, tramvaje na pneumatikách s vodicí kolejnicí, gumokolové metro, různé šikmé výtahy, magnetickou dráhu na vozovce atd. Anebo lze s přimhouřenými očima ty commonsové "rail" kategorie brát jako v širším smyslu "železniční" s vědomím, že tramvaje, pozemní lanovky a průmyslové dráhy v tomhle smyslu jsou vlastně specifickými typy železnice v tom širším významu "kolejové dopravy", a přitom se zároveň můžeme na české Wikipedii řídit tím naším užším smyslem. Našlo by se určitě víc případů, kdy nějaký pojem je v každé zemi (v každém jazyce) jinak široký, tj. interwiki nezaručují ani nepředpokládají absolutní totožnost pojmů. --ŠJů (talk) 21:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata weekly summary #611

Wikidata weekly summary #612