MisterSynergy

Hi MisterSynergy,

through my work at wikidata, I figured out that some people which are deleting items are not writing "accurate" like you.

For example, you write "Does not meet the notability policy: content was: "ABCDE"

But others just write "deleted page Q123456789 (RfD: Not notable)"

I always "hate" when this appears, because a volunteery person who is using time to create something good, does not now which item was deleted, when their is no history visible. The "Deletion log" is not helpful.

May be you can help and show me any explaining page, how I could figure out which items were deleted.

My fair question are:

1) how can I see which item it was? I fairly would understand, if a item I created it is not notable but it should be fair for th the volunteer getting his "work" back. Even a change of a item is documented in a history tab but after deletion, only admins or backrollers are seeing this according to

2) why are other deleting persons are not following your schema? In your schema I could decide, Okay he is right, its not notable, So I leave it. But without your schema it is unclear what was deleted for the user. Even in OpenStreetMap you can see everything and it is understandable.

Is there a "Deletion workshop page" for persons who want to delete stuff, to discuss the schema / transparency for users? (I dont want to delete stuff, but like to understand more. I also try to fix things through merging and do QAQC. So merging is like a deletion of one of the duplette.)

3) How can I get back a historic version of a deleted item (not a undeletion, I mean, just seeing the version of the data of the item before deletion). I know there is the wikidata Dump but, If it is just one JSON, it should be possible to get this data and leave the decision by the deleting person / marked for deletion"-person and go on.

4) I also do not understand, why there is this "fast quick deletion process", and not a friendly alert / hint "hey your creation is not 100% right, could you please add more references?" even one week before deletion

5) As I see your "User talk", you get into interaction after deleting with the users. Is this the normal process? For that, they know what is deleted becuase of your schema. So thank you for beeing more transparent than others!

6) Why do yu have this nice user talk page, How can I implement this ? I saw people with many user talk also archive that. Is this somewhere described how to install it?

It would be really nice if you can help

Thanks a lot

Let me ask in bullet points, I hope that I do not forget any aspects.

• The deletion dialogue has two fields, a dropdown menu and a free text field. Based on the selection in the dropdown menu, there is alreadys a default text in the free text field provided—some of them contain a label of the deleted item in some language in order to indicate to users what the content of the item was about. You can see at MediaWiki:Deletereason-dropdown what the default values are. Admins can, however, overwrite or modify the default values at their discretion. Please also mind that sometimes the item labels are not suitable for display in a public log file.
• You can see items created by you, but meanwhile deleted, at https://xtools.wmcloud.org/pages/www.wikidata.org/Ms040got/all//deleted. By default, you do not have any insight into which content was behind these items, but you may ask the deleting admins what it was. The deleting admin is also able to explain to you what was wrong, and whether there is a chance to get the item undeleted.
• We do have the page Wikidata:Requests for deletions. It is meant to make admins aware of items that shall be deleted, and there is no minimum dwell time for cases listed on the page.
• Item pages may even be deleted without any prior discussion or notification ("fast quick deletion process"), and this happens to the vast majority of cases (usually some thousands per week). Wikidata is at its core a project where automated editing dominates over manual editing by a wide margin, and this applies to item creation as well. We have difficulties to keep up with non-notable item creation with this "fast quick deletion" mode, and it is way beyond our capacities as a community to discuss cases on an individual level when item creation is often automated and not related to any significant cost/effort.
• If an item has been deleted and you disagree, you should usually first contact the deleting item and ask for undeletion, and what was missing from the item that led to its deletion. Depending on the situation, undeletion might often be a rather straightforward process—but not always, of course.
• The format of this user page is called a "structured discussions board", a software which the Wikimedia foundation has written almost 10 years ago. It is unfortunately in the process of being removed from Wikimedia wikis, thus there is no possibility anymore to activate it—and I think I will be losing mine as well in the future.

Hope that helps. Otherwise feel free to ask follow-up questions.

Hallo, könntest du bitte dieses Item undeleten?

Der Dialekt ist ein wichtiger Bestandteil anderer Datenbanken und dementsprechend Notable. Z.B hier wird er direkt verlikt (unter Kolonialvenezianisch)

Danke!

Erledigt, aber das Datenobjekt ist komplett leer. Kannst Du da bitte Informationen ergänzen?

Klar, Vielen Dank!

Hello there, please restore this item Q125191253 and it seems that this person was popular and he has a million followers on social media but there are references that stated him (incl. Newsweek) as usual. Telex80 (talk) 00:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

The item has been deleted by User:Ymblanter. Please contact them first.

It looks like the bot that updates Wikidata:Database reports/Deaths at Wikipedia(and subpages) stopped working sometime in July. I noticed on that page's Talk that you had talked about getting it working a couple years ago; if you are still responsible for it, would it be possible to get it up and running again? If not, who should I talk to?

Thanks for the notice.

The bot uses the petscan tool for data retrieval in the background, and it seems that the petscan endpoint has changed recently. I have updated it and triggered the job to run now, and based on this diff I am optimistic that it is fit again. The other reports will likely take a couple of hours to update as well.

Thanks for the quick fix! It looks good to me now.

Hallo MisterSybnergy, ich weiß nicht, was im Datensatz drin stand, allerdings ist der Artikel im RAT drin, aber auch mit GND NUmmer etc. kannst du ihn mir bitte wieder herstellen. danke K@rl (Diskussion) 13:26, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

Erledigt. Ein GND steht bisher nicht drin.

Hi MisterSynergy,

please restore the item of https://web.archive.org/web/20200316111602/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Remondi notable as CEO of Navient (Q19903490).

Thank you in advance

Do we have actual sources for this person? The archived, but deleted Wikipedia article is not enough.

There is press coverage on him. If certain Wikidatans work on them all mayors of large cities, all recipients of notable science prizes and all CEOs of major companies get listed at Wikidata. Such serial data becomes useful only if complete.

Inclusion here at Wikidata depends on the availablility of serious sources, not on a position held by the person.

Unfortunately, I cannot read the NYT article due to a paywall, and it is otherwise somewhat difficult to obtain a clear overview of Remondi's activities based on an Internet search. Do you have something else? This does not look like a clear case to restore at this point, but I'd be willing to reconsider in case you bring the evidence.

Einen vollständigen Lebenslauf gibt es unter https://nmefoundation.org/nme_team/jack-remondi/

Alle Vorstandsvorsitzenden der SLM Corporation (Q1569558) (wie auch dem "Zwilling" Freddie Mac (Q935969)) sollten relevant sein.

It is restored, please expand the items with references.

As I said, the availability of serious sources is key to inclusion at Wikidata, not the mere fact that someone held a certain position. Without sources (and Wikipedia sitelinks), it is often impossible to understand what an item is about if you are not an insider already.

This item meets the inclusion criterion "It refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity that can be described using serious and publicly available references". Can it be restored?

Do we have independent sources for this company?

Yes:

• https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/gaming-boss-jailed-for-14-years-for-murdering-wife-as-she-slept-6472958.html
• https://opencorporates.com/companies/gg/1-49289
• http://web.archive.org/web/20081217125049/http://www.gemlifestyle.com/company.asp
• https://gemlifestylebiz.wordpress.com/
• https://martin271.wordpress.com/

Questionable whether this is sufficient, but I have restored the item.

Hello. Please undelete Q128210473 as it is meant to support the addition of architect:wikidata tags to buildings in OpenStreetMap. This architect's existence is documented in print and in Lisbon Municipal Archive's website, where a list of his works is available. Futher statements will be added to the element as further research on off-line documents is finalized.

Done. But it is in serious danger to be deleted again in this condition. Please add some basic and sourced information to the item quickly.

Duly noted. I must have let it slip while editing other elements. It has more data now. Thanks!

Hi. Please undelete Q113573313. It's about a third-league Romanian team. We maintain wikidata items for these teams mostly for structural reasons. For instance, this is the current team where Q30238685 plays.

Done

Hi MisterSynergy, was having a look at Wikidata:WikiProject sum of all paintings/Duplicate paintings. Only the "Paintings with same image" currently works, but is full of suggestions like Sunflowers (Q157541) & Sunflowers (Q21948567) that shouldn't be in the list. Looking at the source, can you change the query to only instance of painting and not all subclasses? I needed to add a limit to prevent it from timing out.

https://w.wiki/A$wi for the inventory number query completes just in time and I had to remove the sort from https://w.wiki/A$wo to complete the catelog query. Maybe you can update the code based on that?

Hey Multichill, this looks like a very reasonable suggestion, so I have removed all instances of subclasses from the "Paintings with same image" list. The list is now much shorter, and it seems there are quite a lot of actual duplicates on it.

As for the other two lists, I think I need to have a closer look at the situation as "just completes in time" is not really a good state either. Interestingly, the "Items with same inventory number of the same collection" list does sometimes contain results based on the revision history of the report page, so it is not completely off scale anyways.

That said, a solution that does not rely on WDQS that much and does the heavy lifting elsewhere (e.g. via Python/pandas) could be much more robust, but this would not be in scope of Deltabot anymore.

Thanks for implementing it. I see plenty of items now that need merging or other work (like usage of File:Hendrik Willem Mesdag - De Noordzee bij storm - 1513 (MK) - Museum Boijmans Van Beuningen.jpg, o no!).

I wonder if the fork of the query service will actually improve performance. For now I don't have any plans to use another source than the query service. I wonder if we can set a smart constraint for inventory number (P217) and catalog code (P528) that will trigger if another item with the same combination exists. Than we could probably just use that data?

I don't expect that the upcoming graph split is going to make things easier for end users. It is much more an effort to keep this thing administratable on the backend.

In the past, I have used the WDQS slicing service a couple of times, and mostly with code fragments from other tasks I can quickly offer something like this:

• https://public-paws.wmcloud.org/User:MisterSynergy/pair_duplicates.ipynb

It compiles a wikitable of P217 (main value) + P195 (qualifier) or P528 (main value) + P972 (qualifier) duplicates, limited to instances of the painting item Q3305213. Could easily be written to a wiki page and automated, of course, or formatted differently, or filtered further if necessary.