Glennznl
Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:
- Introduction – An introduction to the project.
- Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
- Community portal – The portal for community members.
- User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
- Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
- Project chat – Discussions about the project.
- Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.
Best regards! Neo-Jay (talk) 15:43, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
Automated report of empty item: Q12961935
editHello, 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) 07:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
Western Punjabi
editNote that correct item for Western Punjabi is Lehndi (Q1334774) عُثمان (talk) 12:31, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: I reverted your edits because you had added language articles to a writing system item and created orphaned items. --Glennznl (talk) 13:41, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl Where did I do this? عُثمان (talk) 13:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: The Western Punjabi articles at Q1389492 that are there at the old revision are left orphaned by you. Also you are adding the language article زبان شاه مکهی پنجابی to the writing system Shahmuki at Q133800. So please stop revering. Thanks. --Glennznl (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl I am confused what your objective is here—there is no language called “Western Punjabi.” It is up to those wikis to figure out how to address that issue, but just because a wiki page exists does not mean an inaccurate language item should be constructed for it. Ultimately they need to be corrected so they can be linked to the item for Lehndi, the proper name for the group of western Punjabi dialects. Lehndi (Q1334774) Only one wiki has done this so far so that is linked to the item. The Punjabi Wikipedias don't have a general Lehndi article and instead have articles for specific subdialects.
- The article you are linking to on Persian Wikipedia is not a language article. The title of it is "Shahmukhi" شاہ مکھی which is the name of the script. There is very little Persian text on that Wikipage. Everything after the first line is a writing sample of Punjabi in the Shahmukhi script, and it is actually written in an Eastern dialect of the language. عُثمان (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- Note that I do have to revert these because I use the Shahmukhi item extensively for Punjabi lexemes and it is causing property constraint problems. It also breaks the interwiki links; English Wikipedia is now linked by a redirect instead of the actual page. That is more of an issue than lacking a place to link articles that do not contain any verifiable information عُثمان (talk) 21:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان:Apparently there is something worth describing, a "Western Punjabi" language variety. I don't see the problem with the old state of the item. Creating orphaned articles by yourself and saying "it is up to the wikis to figure out how to adress that issue" is not the Wikipedia way of doing things. You'll have to either keep the old version or work on a solution, you can't leave behind a mess like that. --Glennznl (talk) 22:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl What would "working on a solution" look like? I cannot write an article on each of these wikis. Likewise the role of Wikidata items is not solely for supporting Wikipedia; these items are used within Wikidata and on other Wikimedia projects, so their state should not be governed by what Wikipedia happens to be doing. عُثمان (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl I took a closer look at the orphaned articles and this is my proposed solution:
- I have linked the Swahili and Polish wikipages to Lehndi (Q1334774). Despite their titles, the content clearly includes accurate information about Lehndi on these wikis.
- The remaining nl, la, pms, ru, and ja wikis are linked to Western Punjabi (Q1389492). These clearly do not contain accurate information about Lehndi. If you are able to write articles on any of these Wikipedia sites, I would happy to help you with providing sources and information necessary to fix the article so it can be linked to Lehndi (Q1334774)
- The Persian wiki page is still on Shahmukhi because it even has the title as the name of the script.
- عُثمان (talk) 17:37, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: I think that is a good solution, thanks. The only thing I think is incorrect is the Persian article. I don't read Persian but from Google Translate I can tell: "Shahmukhi Punjabi language is a type of Punjabi language that is popular in Pakistan and has more than 62 million speakers.[1]" and the categories: "Categories: Punjabi language, Pakistani languages, Punjabi languages, Pakistani languages, Indo-Aryan languages." It is clear that this article is about a language variety (it seems that the same "Western Punjabi" is meant, which equals the Pakistani version of the Punjabi language in Shahmukhi script), and not a writing system. --Glennznl (talk) 09:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl So in the "see also" links of that article there is a link to a different one which is more clearly intended to described the western varieties of Punjabi: زبان های لندا ("tongues of the west" — زبان literally means "tongue" as in the body part but its meaning is extended metaphorically to mean language in Persian).
- My main point of contention with conflating "western Punjabi" with "Punjabi in Pakistan" is that the only thing that is different between Pakistan and India is the writing system. Due to extensive historical migrations, the dialect geography does not match their origins any more. The predominant dialect of Jalandhar, in the far easf of Indian Punjab is a Lehndi (western) dialect, and the dialect of Faisalabad in Pakistan is a Charhdi (eastern) dialect. The difference between language and writing system in the region has been blurred for political/historical reasons... the only difference between Hindi and Urdu is the writing system and it took years of arguing for English Wikipedia to finally at least somewhat state that these are two written forms of one language.
- All that said, these articles are short enough that I think I can make the wording more clear and add proper sources to them later today. (Persian has a lot of shared vocabulary with Punjabi.) A name like شاهمکهی املا ("Shahmukhi orthography") would be more fitting. عُثمان (talk) 14:18, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: Thanks, it sounds like the 2 articles should be either merged or fixed using proper sources. Perhaps some warning templates could be added to the pages in the meantime. --Glennznl (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl I have started updating them; I just need to accumulate enough edits on fawiki before I can move the page titles. عُثمان (talk) 14:01, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: Thanks, it sounds like the 2 articles should be either merged or fixed using proper sources. Perhaps some warning templates could be added to the pages in the meantime. --Glennznl (talk) 10:25, 5 April 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: I think that is a good solution, thanks. The only thing I think is incorrect is the Persian article. I don't read Persian but from Google Translate I can tell: "Shahmukhi Punjabi language is a type of Punjabi language that is popular in Pakistan and has more than 62 million speakers.[1]" and the categories: "Categories: Punjabi language, Pakistani languages, Punjabi languages, Pakistani languages, Indo-Aryan languages." It is clear that this article is about a language variety (it seems that the same "Western Punjabi" is meant, which equals the Pakistani version of the Punjabi language in Shahmukhi script), and not a writing system. --Glennznl (talk) 09:17, 31 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان:Apparently there is something worth describing, a "Western Punjabi" language variety. I don't see the problem with the old state of the item. Creating orphaned articles by yourself and saying "it is up to the wikis to figure out how to adress that issue" is not the Wikipedia way of doing things. You'll have to either keep the old version or work on a solution, you can't leave behind a mess like that. --Glennznl (talk) 22:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @عُثمان: The Western Punjabi articles at Q1389492 that are there at the old revision are left orphaned by you. Also you are adding the language article زبان شاه مکهی پنجابی to the writing system Shahmuki at Q133800. So please stop revering. Thanks. --Glennznl (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Glennznl Where did I do this? عُثمان (talk) 13:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)
Empty items.
editHi @Glennznl,
Are you planning to populate the items you have created using QuickStatements? RVA2869 (talk) 16:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RVA2869: Hello, which items are you referring to exactly? I ran Petscan on the Dutch wiki, which resulted in hundreds of new items. It could be that a few of those articles have been deleted since, resulting in empty items. --Glennznl (talk) 16:24, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- By empty I mean the absence of any statement (only wikipedia link)
- The items of Belgian municipality flags for example.
- https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions/Glennznl&target=Glennznl&offset=20230913124836&limit=500 RVA2869 (talk) 17:03, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RVA2869: I am not knowledgeable enough about most of those topics to add statements to the items without research, which would take days. Hopefully the authors of those articles will add statements. I did merge items where possible and added statements to items that will likely get articles on other wiki's at some point. It would take too much time to do that for the hundreds of extremely niche items like those flag articles. --Glennznl (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- You see, now I have to fix a lot of avoidable things... Items without any explanation are basically the same as an empty item. Please don't do this again in the future. RVA2869 (talk) 17:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RVA2869: If I did not create them with Petscan, a bot would have created them automatically in a few months. The result is the same, I don't see the problem. --Glennznl (talk) 19:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- You see, now I have to fix a lot of avoidable things... Items without any explanation are basically the same as an empty item. Please don't do this again in the future. RVA2869 (talk) 17:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
- @RVA2869: I am not knowledgeable enough about most of those topics to add statements to the items without research, which would take days. Hopefully the authors of those articles will add statements. I did merge items where possible and added statements to items that will likely get articles on other wiki's at some point. It would take too much time to do that for the hundreds of extremely niche items like those flag articles. --Glennznl (talk) 17:09, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
Hoi Glennznl, kan je alsjeblieft ophouden met het aanmaken van lege items? Dat is echt bijzonder nutteloos en mateloos irritant. Nu staat Wikidata:Database reports/without claims by site/nlwiki weer helemaal vol met lege items. Allerlei items ook die binnenkort weer verwijderd moeten worden. Er zijn allerlei mensen die dit in de achtergrond bijhouden en als het echt heel lang duurt dan komt vanzelf mijn bot langs om de missende items aan te maken. Dus het vriendelijke verzoek: Zou je nooit meer lege items willen maken voor de Nederlandse Wikipedia met QuickStatements? Alvast bedankt, Multichill (talk) 16:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Automated import
editI see you imported 700+ sitelinks again, the same way like above. In the last few days I was working on this in the tool Duplicity, now this is not an option anymore and we are having a huge backlog. Do you have any indication when you will add statements to these items? Several users were asked in the past not to import huge amounts of "empty" items for the Dutch Wikipedia. Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) 16:41, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ja, ik vind dit ook echt een waardeloze actie. Er worden items aangemaakt voor artikelen die op de verwijderlijst staan, er worden items aangemaakt die al in andere taalversies bestaan. Net als Sjoerd was ik bezig het aantal artikelen op de Nederlandse wikipedia gecontroleerd op Wikidata aan te maken, nu wordt er in één keer een grote bende over de schutting gegooid. Helemaal niet handig, het overzicht raakt zo kwijt. Overleg zo'n grote actie anders eerst even in het Wikidata-café op nl.wikipedia, dan kunnen we bepalen hoe we zo'n achterstand het beste gezamenlijk kunnen aanpakken. GeeJee (talk) 16:52, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Multichill, GeeJee, Sjoerddebruin: De vorige keer had iemand daar ook commentaar op, maar toen werd in deze discussie gezegd dat dat geen probleem is. Ik had nog door de lijst gescrold en had voor een paar items handmatig een item aangemaakt of gemerged aan een bestaand item. Overigens snap ik het probleem niet zo, een item is op het begin altijd leeg, dus of je nou een voor een 600 items moet aanmaken en invullen, of 600 bestaande lege items moet invullen, dat lijkt mij evenveel werk. Maar goed, ik zal het niet meer doen. --Glennznl (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dat er Wikidata-items met enkel een sitelink geaccepteerd worden, betekent nog niet dat het handig is. In de discussie waarnaar je verwijst, is er ook duidelijke kritiek op de actie. Je creëert troep, die weer moet worden opgeruimd. Meer werk in plaats van minder. Bijvoorbeeld dubbele items die moeten worden geïdentificeerd, items voor artikelen die op nl.wikipedia als niet relevant later weer worden verwijderd, items die niet duidelijk te herkennen/onderscheiden zijn. Beter is het om gecontroleerd die Wikidata-items aan te maken en ze in ieder geval een basis aan onderscheidende statements mee te geven. Hierdoor hoef je ook het artikel op nl.wikipedia niet eerst door te lezen om te begrijpen waar het over gaat en is vanuit anderstalige wiki's makkelijker een koppeling te maken. GeeJee (talk) 11:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Multichill, GeeJee, Sjoerddebruin: De vorige keer had iemand daar ook commentaar op, maar toen werd in deze discussie gezegd dat dat geen probleem is. Ik had nog door de lijst gescrold en had voor een paar items handmatig een item aangemaakt of gemerged aan een bestaand item. Overigens snap ik het probleem niet zo, een item is op het begin altijd leeg, dus of je nou een voor een 600 items moet aanmaken en invullen, of 600 bestaande lege items moet invullen, dat lijkt mij evenveel werk. Maar goed, ik zal het niet meer doen. --Glennznl (talk) 17:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Revert
editHi! I agree that these are not 1:1 the same subject in the english language, however, currently, consensus on the dutch wikipedia appears to be that the one article covering them both will be the one I changed the link towards. I'm not too familiar with wikidata procedures about this, but it doesn't make too much sense to keep the dutch one separate in its own little bubble just because the translated name yields a slightly different result. I think it makes more sense to separate to keep the link the way I left it until such a time as the dutch Wikipedia decides to split the article up. Maybe you know a better solution? Best regards, Licks-rocks (talk) 13:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Licks-rocks: Well gender-affirming care is a type of transgender health care, so my advice would be to change the name of the article to the broader concept (transgender healthcare), when covering both subjects under one article. Then it should be fine to change the Wikidata links. --Glennznl (talk) 14:12, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, but in case that doesn't work out, is there a possibility to let the interlanguage links function without changing the wikidata item? PS: Ik zie net pas dat jij ook nederlands spreekt hahaha Licks-rocks (talk) 14:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Licks-rocks: Ja dat klopt, en ja die mogelijkheid is er. Als je [[en:Transgender health care]] onder het artikel voegt (en soortgelijke links maakt voor het artikel in anderen talen), dan hoef je het Wikidata item niet te veranderen. Ook kun je op Q28130218 de redirect nl:Transgenderzorg plaatsen. Dan kunnen mensen die eerst op het Engelse artikel uitkomen maar toch willen overschakelen naar het Nederlandse, via de redirect bij het artikel uitkomen. Dat laatste doe ik wel even. --Glennznl (talk) 18:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- aha! reuze bedankt voor de informatie, ik kom hier niet vaak hahaha Licks-rocks (talk) 20:03, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Licks-rocks: Ja dat klopt, en ja die mogelijkheid is er. Als je [[en:Transgender health care]] onder het artikel voegt (en soortgelijke links maakt voor het artikel in anderen talen), dan hoef je het Wikidata item niet te veranderen. Ook kun je op Q28130218 de redirect nl:Transgenderzorg plaatsen. Dan kunnen mensen die eerst op het Engelse artikel uitkomen maar toch willen overschakelen naar het Nederlandse, via de redirect bij het artikel uitkomen. Dat laatste doe ik wel even. --Glennznl (talk) 18:27, 9 October 2024 (UTC)
- I agree, but in case that doesn't work out, is there a possibility to let the interlanguage links function without changing the wikidata item? PS: Ik zie net pas dat jij ook nederlands spreekt hahaha Licks-rocks (talk) 14:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)