User talk:Edoderoo

Previous discussion was archived at User talk:Edoderoo/Update 1 on 2021-12-29.

Dear Edoderoo,

I hope this message finds you well!

We are researchers at King's College London investigating how content gaps arise and can be measured in Wikidata. Currently we have explored existing research papers to identify several categories of gaps. However, we have noted a lack of consideration of editors’ experiences in this existing research and are keen to hear about editors’ views on and methods for identifying and addressing content gaps. While this topic has seen a lot of attention in Wikipedia, we believe Wikidata presents unique challenges and content which warrant further investigation.

We are reaching out as we understand you have previously taken part in a research study with our colleague Kholoud and thought as an active and experienced editor, you may be able to share your experiences with us. We would therefore like to invite you to participate in an interactive online workshop to explore this topic further.

This will consist of a 90 minute online call consisting of a group discussion and collaborative editing of a document (in Miro). We will ask you to rank gaps according to your familiarity and your opinion of their importance, give feedback on which types of metric might be most valuable to you as an editor and give some initial thoughts and potentially even sketches of how a content gap monitoring tool might look for Wikidata.

The main goal of the workshop is to understand your perspectives on how to measure and monitor content gaps as well as potentially identify further metrics or even to propose new methods to identify and quantify gaps in Wikidata.

Participation is completely voluntary. All personal data will be kept confidential in compliance with GDPR. If you are interest in taking part, you can find out more about the workshop from our participant information sheet. You can also read more about the research at our meta page.

You can sign-up to take part from our registration form.

The workshop will take place online using Microsoft Teams. We are hoping to host the workshop in the coming weeks, but if you would like to take part and are unavailable during the proposed times, we may be able to find an alternative time.

If you have any questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact us at anelia.kurteva@kcl.ac.uk and neal.t.reeves@kcl.ac.uk

Thank you for considering taking part in this workshop and supporting our research.

With kind regards,

~~~~

Hello Celestialtoast, since the userpage of Edoderoo is on my watchlist, I take the liberty of inserting this message from him: ''I left Wikimedia on january 9th, you can ask the Dutch community why. Although I guess they will have laughter about the drop that made the bucket flood, and will not know nor care about the bigger picture. Edoderoo (talk) 10:42, 20 February 2022 (UTC)". Cheers.

Hallo Edoderoo weet je hier raad mee? Thanks a billion ~~~~

• sorry, wrong user page*

Beste Edoderoo,

I would like to know why you indicated that Pierre van Outryve d'Ydewalle is Dutch (cf. P27 and the description as well) [cf. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q2172359&diff=277417275&oldid=242616877]

This does not correspond to what is indicated for example on his Wikipedia page: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_van_Outryve_d%27Ydewalle

Kind regards,

Anne

Hello Anchardo thank you for your remark. In the meantime I fixed it. Cheers :-)

Beste Edoderoo,

Allereerst spijt jouw (tijdelijke?) vertrek op nl.Wikipedia mij ontzettend !

De aanleiding is mij niet geheel duidelijk (links geboortedata?) en de discussie in kwestie heb ik niet gevolgd. Ik zag dat je je gebruikers- en overlegpagina had leeggehaald. Maar misschien moeten we het daar maar niet over hebben.

In ieder geval hoop ik dat je (snel) terugkomt. (Anders: heel hartelijk dank voor de prettige samenwerking‼️)

Het betekent toch hopelijk niet dat je Wikidata ook verlaat ?

Prettige dag verder.

Hartelijke groet, ~~~~

Die "links naar geboortedata" is vooral de bekende druppel. Ik schreef vorig jaar meer dan 1100 artikelen, maar het ging het hele jaar alleen maar om gezeur. Een ArbCom-zaak omdat ik "alleen maar de sfeer verziek", en mijn artikelen onbetrouwbaar zijn, of gebaseerd op onbehoorlijke bronnen, dat ik niet mag zeuren "want het is voor de moderatoren ook maar een hobby". En als je dan niet binnen de lijntjes van een ander kleurt ben je een artikelbaas en wordt er met straffen gesmeten. Wel keer op de keer de suggestie dat ik dan maar een peiling moet gaan organiseren, om af te dwingen dat ik geen haakjes om de geboortedata hoef te zetten. Voor mij was geen peiling nodig, ik haalde die haakjes wel weer weg, maar sommige gebruikers moesten daar per se een edit-war over beginnen. En dan wordt de moderator die het minst de mores van nl-wiki kent erop gezet om de straf uit te delen.

Er zijn nog 25.000 (vrouwelijke) sporters te beschrijven die op de Olympische Spelen deelnamen, waaronder vele wereldkampioenen. Die mogen de criticasters nu gaan aanmaken. Maar de meeste criticasters maken geen artikelen aan, die geven enkel af op het werk van anderen. Zolang dat de waardering is die je krijgt voor je vele vele vele uren werk, dan is het project mijn medewerking niet waard.

Ik heb wel gezien dat enkele gebruikers nog een trap na hebben gegeven. Dat kenmerkt de verziekte sfeer. Ik ben geen masochist, en ik ben te trots om mij te laten treiteren door zielige figuren met een schuilnaam.

Zo, dan is er veel gebeurd waar ik niets van heb meegekregen. Jammer dat je op deze manier afscheid moet nemen/hebt genomen. Mijns inziens heb je veel voor de encyclopedie betekend en hopelijk in de toekomst nog. Die bewerkingsoorlogjes zie ik soms ook en met lede ogen aan. Triest dat er ook tijdens deze hobby zoveel onenigheid voorkomt.

Vooralsnog: het ga je goed! En hopelijk komen we elkaar nog eens onder prettigere omstandigheden tegen.

Hartelijke groet, Woordenbrij2

Sommige mensen op met name de Nederlandstalige Wikipedia beheersen de 'edele' kunst van het muggenziften tot in de kleinste puntjes en weten harde en minder harde werkers op deze manier alle plezier te ontnemen en weg te treiteren. Zodanig dat zelfs jij daar een slachtoffer van bent geworden, Edo.

Hopelijk doet een tijdje rust - een maand nu bijna - je zo goed dat je binnenkort(?) weer als vanouds gaat bijdragen. Hartelijke groeten uit Amsterdam.

Nee hoor, ik kom niet meer terug. Zolang de "beloning" voor meer artikelen schrijven betekent dat je meer gezeur krijgt, is het het beste om helemaal niets meer te doen. En al die keren dat mij voor de voeten is geworpen "dat ik toch alleen maar de sfeer verpest" betekent ook dat anderen nu heel blij zullen zijn, en nu veel effectiever hun ding kunnen doen, toch? En ik kan wat zinnigs met mijn leven gaan aanvangen. Het ga jullie goed.

Hi colleague! Tell me please, is there such a tool with which you could update the automatic headlines? I mean to make [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q849414&type=revision&diff=1563507042&oldid=1563236107 Here] the current update.

The fact is that I renamed a lot of articles [https://ce.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9A%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B5%D0%B3%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B8:%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BD_%D0%B3%D3%80%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%88 from here], but the launches of these articles on Vikidata remained old.

Hi! In this element https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q12172081 your bot made a big mistake. Ukraine is not Russia. https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q12172081&diff=296727377&oldid=259368532 Hope this doesn't happen again. All the best

This has been brought to my attention at least ten times before: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q12172081&oldid=418968051 at the time my bot made this edit, the first P27 was Russia, which made it a Russian politician for my script. If you prefer something different, that is fine with me, but that is not a mistake, and definitely not a big mistake. But your wording shows me that you are most likely not completely neutral in this yourself, so ...

As you understand, I cannot know that you have already been told about it at least 10 times. Well, you know ... if this is not a big mistake, then, based on this logic, it is necessary to combine f.e. the articles Ukraine and Russia. I hope you were joking like that ... As well as my neutrality ...

If you have seen the link I gave, you will see that the person in question had two nationalities defined. My script always uses the first one, you like the second one more. Then feel free to manually update the description, instead of blaming the script of "BIG" mistakes. No one told to merge articles, that is your interpretation.

Hello! Edoderoobot has recently added generic descriptions to railway lines. During this process, several already existing descriptions were removed that were written by a human and included useful information. Please do not add a description to an item if there already is one.

You are right. I have already changed the script yesterday evening, as this was not what I meant to do. Unfortunately it will be pretty undoable to trace back those occurences :-(

Please. It seems you believe vandalism is to erase the amount of money a sports person gets because his/hers sport activities. You published this info about money in Q2626756. I think the vandalism is on publishing monetary legal gains of anyone. That may lead to offense, crime.

You mean this edit? Deleting this kind of info looks like vandalisme to me, not to "sharing knowledge", especially since this information is shown in several infoboxes. I do not see the releation with offense or criminality, so please explain.

Monetary earnings is a personal information. I disagree about using Wikipedia as if it were a newspaper. What are the purposes of the infoboxes publishing personal information? I imagine is publicity, which is far from the purposes of Wikipedia.

This is published for many many years on most languages-wikipedia's (and since 2014 out of Wikidata for many) on about 4770 tennis players. So I do not know where your opposition is suddenly coming from, but blaming me for criminality is not the way to get this discussion addressed.

Hi! I am looking currently for true duplicates and merge them. It seems that the rest of Dutch true duplicates are the template-pages created by you, see https://w.wiki/4Fif. Would you like to merge them yourself?

That's a nice query, and full of true mergable items. Too much work to be done manually, if you don't have a way to merge them with a script or a tool, then I will figure out how to do that. If I remember well, I merged soccer players with QuickStatements, so probably I can merge these too.

I don't have a tool for that.

I am curious how it was possible to create five identical items Q98375316-Q98375320 with quckstatements v.2.0. Is it a bug in quickstatements, do you know?

I don't know either. I use PetScan for edits like this, and since a while that is using QuickStatements. It might be a caching issue somehow.

When you create lines like MERGE|Q123|Q321 and feed those to QuickStatements, it will merge Q123 into Q321, leaving a redirect from Q123 into Q321. With the output of your query I can re-shape this easily in a spread sheet (or NotePad++) into this format. Then merging will be a 10 minute job, without error prone copy/paste actions.

That would be great, thank you!

The only issue I need to resolve first ... every item is twice in the list now ... one A->B and on the other line B->A. This is not going to work just like that. But I will work around that somehow.

Yeah. Even more than twice if the number of duplicates is more than two.