User talk:Matěj Suchánek

Archives of very old discussions are available:

• 2013
• 2014
• 2015

Can you exclude redirects with collegamento intenzionale a un reindirizzamento (Q70894304) badge or at least highlight them?

I will exclude them from the next run.

Thank you.

Please delete User:MatSuBot/Disambig errors. Taylor 49 (talk) 16:52, 4 October 2024 (UTC)

Is there a particular reason? It didn't take me long, even after six years later, to find entries for fixing: and more. Isn't generating a new list what you want?

Update is equally good of course. ;-)

I can see that you started updating the page. The "particular reason" for deletion namely "list of problems relevant over 8 years ago but probably no longer now" is invalidated.

Unfortunately some wikis have the habit to contain pages that are both article and disambig. Several such faulty pages hang on Asian Championship (Q2949123) (ru, zh, ...).

Unfortunately, there isn't much we can do about these (more other problems arise). Anyways, after the first run which analyzed a subset of all disambiguation items on Wikidata, I'm now running an analysis of rozcestník stejně pojmenovaných osob (Q22808320) (new entries go to the bottom). These are generally easier to deal with.

Well ... "Wikimedia human name disambiguation page" Wikimedia human name disambiguation page (Q22808320) is currently subclass of both "Wikimedia disambiguation page" and "Wikimedia set index article" Wikimedia set index article (Q15623926).

That's true. But set indices are mostly of enwiki origin (I never understood why things need to be that complicated). And I actually skip enwiki and some other wikis that originally had too many false positives.

Jak založit položku (papírová) kniha, ze které jsem nasdílel velké množství dat (Lietuvos upės: B. Gailiušis, J. Jablonskis, M Kovalenkovienė, Kaunas, Lietuvos energetikos institutas, 2001 ISBN 99968-492-64-5; 789 STRAN)? Chci ji ve mnou editovaných položkách uvádět. @Martin Urbanec:

Kniha nemá internetovou verzi. Má jen jeden svazek (není vícesvazková). Má jen jedno vydání (neexistují dotisky ani opakovaná vydání).

Special:NewItem a pak podle Help:Sources#Books.

Q130353834. Děkuji. ISBN 99968-492-64-5 nelze přidat. (?)

Q130353834#P957.

Hi Matej

My contributions were deleted and now I am unable to view or edit the pages

Is there a way to restore and redo the contributions from scratch?

Thank you

Hi, I can see you created three items:

• Q125808243 (Jeevan Healthcare) reason
• Q125808543 (Your Mind At Siege) reason
• Q125808616 (David James) reason

It is possible to restore the items if you can reasonably challenge why these items meet the notability policy.

Batch undone. Thanks very much as always!

Hi! I have noticed today that there had been in 2022 a dramatically wrong merge of collezione libraria (Q62108745) into collana editoriale (Q20655472); the two concepts are clearly distinct, the first being a collection of books formed by a collector/library institution etc., the second being a collection of books formed by the publisher itself. Unfortunately KrBot changed the first into the second in nearly 3k items and for some reason I cannot undo the batch through EditGroups because it says that the batch has been archived. Could you, with your bot, undo the batch? Thanks very much in advance!

Hi. I have just had it undone all.

Hey Matej, I use moveClaim.js, this is very useful, thank you! For some actions it would be great to have such script for properties as well, f.e. to move complex statements with a few qualifiers like in https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q3220608&oldid=631936872 (P179 -> P4908).

I agree.

Hi. I try to `wbsetdescription` with language "tg-latn", value="maqolai ilmiy". But it hits Special:AbuseFilter/48 (Special:AbuseLog/22137151). However, I can update manually using `wbeditentity`. Is this an expected behavior?

Hi! Thanks for your report, I fixed the filter to ignore codes like *-latn. Indeed, filters can be bypassed using wbeditentity and it isn't really possible to fix that.

Online translation: Please re-hide the vandal's edit in Talk:Q5201818 and my discussion page, as well as block 109.81.89.189.

Hidden. I chose protection over block since the IP changed, though range blocking is possible if attacks persist. Please prefer reporting to WD:AN.

Online translation: Thank you. The main thing is that the result is achieved: no vandalism on 2 pages.

This is my article in Wikipedia - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crisanto_Rances and here's the URL when I got the results for Wikidata. Please check it out, you'll see Wikidata as part of the search results- https://ph.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hspart=iry&hsimp=yhs-fullyhosted_011&type=mcy_mcrltm_16_09&param1=yhsbeacon&param2=f%3D4%26b%3DFirefox%26cc%3DPH%26p%3Dmcyahoo%26cd%3D2XzuyEtN2Y1L1QzutDyEtD0E0Ezz0CzytG0F0B0AyEtGyDtD0CzytG0BtCtB0EtGtBtBtC0F0E0F0A0FzzyC0A0EtN1L1G1B1V1N2Y1L1Qzu2S0F0B0F0ByCyC0FtAtG0B0Bzz0AtGyEtA0E0FtG0ByCtAyBtG0EyEzy0Fzy0EyDyE0D0C0Czy2QtN1Q2Zzu0StCyDtBtCtN1L2XzutAtFyDtFtCyDtFtCtN1L1CzutN1B2Z1V1T1S1Nzu%26cr%3D1362335862%26a%3Dmcy_mcrltm_16_09&p=crisanto+rances

I spoke with Alpho. So, how can we hide Wikidata from showing up in search results-~~~~

Why do we have to? What's wrong on having Wikidata showing up in search results?

Because out of all the articles I've tried to search online to see if their Wikidata will appear for search, I tried it over and over but unfortunately it didn't, but when I search mine it shows up. I just don't feel its acceptable to have it shown while others don't. I want to go on but I guess I made my point. Is it just fine to delete as such?

So the problem is that you can hit no Wikidata item using that engine except this one? Maybe that depends on how complete the item you tried to seach for is. But it still looks like a problem of the search engine, not Wikidata one unless there's a software bug (which you would have to discuss with our developers). I really don't know what can be done about this. I believe that all items are indexed in the same way so each should have the same chance on being in search results...

Yes, except this one. When I search for articles I make sure to put exactly the same name as specified in the article so I won't miss anything, but as I said, almost all of them don't give a single chance to show their Wikidata except mine. If all items are indexed or sort out in the same manner as it should be, well, I guess there's really a software bug that should be fixed, and I believe, that way it could fix my problem. The catch now is, whether or not my Wikidata appears in a search, it should be kept confidential for searching, and limited only for users who can edit it.

It's up to a search enging to decide whether they find it valuable to show a link to their audience. In most cases it seems search engines don't find Wikidata valuable enough to show it to their users. In this case it seems like a search engine wants to provide readers the article. It's Yahoo's business if they consider certain items worth featuring in their search and not others.

In this case I don't see any reason why the Wikidata item should be kept confidential for searching and confidentiality goes against the spirit on Wikidata in the first place.

I guess there's really a software bug in your system because even this conversation pops out in search results at Yahoo. This is embarrassing and frustrating on my part . Please fix your system, otherwise, I'll delete Wikidata.

By the way here's the link result to this conversation at Yahoo - www.wikidata.org/wiki/Topic:Tbugr1auj56uoac5

There's no intention on the part of Wikidata not to show up in search results. It's a feature not a bug if a search engine thinks a page is worth showing.

As far as deleting content on Wikidata, that would be vandalism and likely reverted.

Ok, this has gone too far. If you think, your privacy was violated, then continue with wmf:Privacy policy. But there's nothing we can do about Yahoo search engine, sorry.

my mistake, sorry.

This your bot's edit is incorrect. The eswiki text definitely is not a Polish anonymous translation published in Warsaw (Q270) in 1932. And no way can be merged with this item. If you wish to add it somewhere, you can add it to a "work" item linked from Czarny tulipan (Q60378097).