Jump to content

User talk:RexxS/Archive 30

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 25←Archive 28Archive 29Archive 30Archive 31Archive 32→Archive 35

MCEllis has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Thanks for staying up trying to fix the error I was getting with Module:Wikidata. I'm sure someone will figure it out tomorrow.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Deleting articles, etc.

Hi RexxS,

It was good to see you at the meetup yesterday.

You asked me to write here, asking for help with how to access the stuff that places delete tags. But coincidentally, yesterday evening, in this thread, I was advised to use "the DI tab". With some difficulty (it isn't a tab, and it usually doesn't exist) I managed to find it. It turns out that I've had twinkle installed for years, and had never noticed the TW tab. Maproom (talk) 13:37, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

and, on the subject of discouraging new users from trying to create articles, I have collected some discussions at User:Maproom/New users and New articles. Cheers, Maproom (talk) 17:46, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi Maproom, it was good to see you too, as always.
Twinkle is intended to simplify some processes, such as proposing deletion, then tracking down and notifying the editors concerned - all of which could be done manually, of course, but TW takes the drudgery out of that. Files may be kept locally on Wikipedia or fetched from hosting on Commons, but you'll only see Twinkle's DI tab on the description pages of files that are hosted here. That's why it's not always present. You can see it, for example, on pages that are marked as "keep local" (check Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Keep local).
I've been thinking about your suggestion of a flowchart to show the steps an editor needs to go through to propose a deletion, and I'm convinced it could be worthwhile. So here's a text outline:
  • Is the article/image/other page such an obvious candidate for deletion that WP:Speedy deletion would apply to it? There are 13 general-, 8 article-, and 11 file-related criteria (as well as 2 for redirects, 2 for categories, 2 for templates 2 for portals, and 4 for user pages) that you need to understand.
  • If YES: then add the relevant speedy deletion template to the page and notify the author/uploader of that page/image and any major contributors.
  • if NO:
  • Is it an article that is biography of a living person, and has no sources?
  • If YES: then propose the article for deletion by adding a BLPprod tag as explained at Wikipedia:Proposed deletion of biographies of living people.
  • If NO:
  • Is it a mainspace article, list or dab page, and would the page's deletion be uncontroversial to any uninvolved editor? You also need to check that it hasn't been proposed for deletion before.
  • if YES: then propose the page for deletion by adding a prod tag as explained at Wikipedia:Proposed deletion.
  • if NO:
  • Propose the page for deletion at WP:Articles for deletion (AfD) for articles, WP:Templates for discussion (TfD) for templates, WP:Categories for discussion (CfD) for categories, WP:Redirects for discussion (RfD) for redirects, WP:Files for discussion (FfD) for images/media, or WP:Miscellany for deletion (MfD) for other stuff. There are more detailed instructions at each of those pages, and step-by-step guidance for AfD at WP:AFDHOWTO.
  • The CSD nomination can be automated by using the 'csd' Twinkle tab.
  • The PROD nomination can be automated by using the 'prod' Twinkle tab.
  • The AFD/etc. nomination can be automated by using the 'xfd' Twinkle tab.
What do you think? Could you make a usable flowchart from that? --RexxS (talk) 18:24, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
I think I could. I probably will. And then there'll be the task of maintaining it, keeping it in line with changing guidelines and nomenclature at WP:Speedy deletion etc. That is more worrying.
In any case, many thanks for creating the above list. It is enormously useful. I shall copy it to a subpage of my user page, so that I won't lose it. Maproom (talk) 18:33, 18 April 2016 (UTC)
I found a site http://code2flow.com/ with a free-to-use flowchart generator, and used it to make the above into a flowchart. You can see the result here, it's really not good. I could try to find a better generator, or I could write my own Perl code to do the job better (i.e. with user control over positioning and size of elements). Maproom (talk) 19:49, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
I must admit I like my flowcharts to have orthogonal lines and only to enter and leave decision boxes at the vertices, but I think that might be a hang-over from programming styles dating from 50 years ago. If you write Perl code to make generalised flowcharts, it would be good to license it as CC-BY-SA. Somebody would likely adopt it and make it available for other editors. --RexxS (talk) 23:31, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Wikidata Lua

Hey RexxS. I've been reading along with your posts and work at Module:Wikidata. I am working on some modules that are tailored to some WP:VG purposes. We're looking to use Wikidata as a source for video game review scores and related data. This "VG Wikidata" if you will is at Module:Video game wikidata/sandbox and the template we are working on for integration is Template:Video game series reviews/sandbox and accompanying Module:Video game series reviews/sandbox. I was wondering if you might be so kind as to read over it and point out any obvious flaws. While I'm a programmer by trade, Lua is not one of my usual languages and I've only really used it here on Wikipedia. Plus I'm still learning Wikidata itself.

Following this experiment, I'll also be looking into integrating Module:Wikidata into Template:Infobox video game, though that will be with #invoke and not with a Lua module. -- ferret (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

That's come full circle for me. The first demo I made for an auto-populating infobox was Template:Infobox video game series/Wikidata back in August 2013. I've looked at Module:Video game wikidata/sandbox and you've done a huge amount of work. I can't see any obvious flaws, but you should make as many test cases as you can. I usually test by pasting a #invoke into a short section of a relevant article and previewing (not saving!). It helps if you can have two windows open at once.
A couple of points for you to consider:
  • We still actually only have consensus to fetch data from Wikidata to use in infoboxes, although the RfC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Wikidata Phase 2 is nearly three years old now, but you ought to be aware of it.
  • In the code, when working through a complex structure, there's some syntactic "sugar" to allow alternative forms that object-oriented programmers may find more palatable. For example, reference['snaks']['P577'][1]['datavalue']['value']['time'] may be written as reference.snaks.P577[1].datavalue.value.time. That's only if it seems more natural to you, of course; I don't know your background, although the habit of terminating each statement with a semi-colon gives me some clues (Lua doesn't need them as I guess you know).
It's nice to meet you anyway. Perhaps if you start running into problems, you can let me know. I'm getting old and find it easier to focus on narrowly defined problems these days :) Cheers --RexxS (talk) 20:05, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
C syntax by training :) I've used a bunch of different languages but these days its mostly REXX and Java. I do REXX the same way I do Lua... No, those parenthesis aren't needed but I like them :) I have a range of testcases at Template:Video game review score/testcases and Template:Video game series reviews/testcases. I need to build a proper Module:Video game wikidata/testcases soon though. -- ferret (talk) 21:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

Gabriel-Alexandre Belle

Hi RexxS,

I've just translated this page into English but I first tried to use the Wikipedia translate tool and then things went horrendously wrong. I'll never do that again. The complete translated text won't be accepted. What should I do now? Thanks for your help; LouisAlain (talk) 09:22, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Louis, I've translated the first part and added a claim for notability (the Légion d'honneur) plus a reference for it. That should stop it being quickly deleted. You should be able to add the list of Belle's works (ses Œuvres de fr:Gabriel-Alexandre Belle). Don't translate the titles. You can use Google translate to get the descriptions in English, e.g. "vaudeville en un acte" = "vaudeville in one act", etc. I'd probably call folie a costumed revue or extravaganza, but somebody will no doubt rectify any mistranslations for us. --RexxS (talk) 14:58, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks RexxS, the problem it appears was that this link

*Chevalier of the [[Legion of honour]] <ref>[https://archive.is/57qX8 ''Annuaires des titulaires de la Légion d'Honneur'']</ref>. was instantly blocked. LouisAlain (talk) 16:50, 3 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, archive.is urls are on a blacklist for us. What you have to do is look at that webpage: it's actually just a redirect from http://web.archive.org/20060426142245/www.patrimoine-de-france.org/hommes/honneurs-31.html and that causes no problems as the Internet Archive is regularly used here to reference sites whose content has changed or disappeared. So I used that to create the reference at Gabriel-Alexandre Belle. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 21:08, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
Aaaaah, the things you learn everyday. How could I have known? Grazie mille, LouisAlain (talk) 15:00, 4 May 2016 (UTC)

Decompression

[1] Yeah, I almost made that edit instead--general agreement that we should avoid columns for complex wikitext, since none of the nice browser columns templates are really meant for the complex stuff. --Izno (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

It's instructive to look at how {{multicol}} behaves when the browser window is narrowed. Normal wiki-text wraps properly onto increasingly shorter lines, but the table doesn't alter and eventually the left table overlaps the right column. That's the price we pay for using a layout table to implement multicol - it just doesn't degrade gracefully in the way that divs set with display:inline-block would do. --RexxS (talk) 15:10, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

A little disturbance on my talk page

Hi RexxS and sorry to bother you with a little fix that is needed on my talk page. A sysop from the French Wiki has just sent me a friendly message and I have answered him. Just, I've discovered that my T.P is now inundated with tons of texts whose origin is totaly incomprehensible for me and i'm not sure if my answer will be visible to my correspondent. Do you think you can help? Thanks in advance if you can do something about it. LouisAlain (talk) 13:55, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

(talk page watcher) Fixed; you'd unintentionally transcluded the entire Emoji article in your reply. ‑ Iridescent 14:02, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Thank you, Iridescent, for the fix. Louis, the problem was that the English Wikipedia has a page called -) which is a redirect to the article Emoticon. As Iridescent said, when you wrote {{:-)}} - which I guess you expected to be a template for the smiley face - it actually made a copy of the Emoticon article and placed it in your talk page. All fixed now, :-) --RexxS (talk) 14:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for your joint efforts, I now understand the origin of the problem yet, things haven't really improved in the sense that on the "contents" board of the T.P many topics are announced which actually aren't part of the T.P but when I click on #19 (origin of the term) for exemple, it actually gives access to a paragraph that shouldn't be here and the same goes for all the following. I don't want to delete all that isn't part of my T.P fear of worsening the situation. Very confused about that (there must be an icon, just, I don't know where and which they are, LouisAlain (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Template:Infobox person/Wikidata

I found an article that was using this template. I'm concerned as this is a test template. I became even more concerned at how many articles use it. I'm not sure what to do except to tell people not to use it. Any suggestions? Bgwhite (talk) 22:53, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

@Bgwhite: Tom Morris and I created it three years ago as a proof-of-concept, but of course others have used it as a test bed for their ideas since. That's probably sufficient to justify its existence, so I don't think we want to delete it. Nikkimaria has recently suggested that when we implement Wikidata-aware infoboxes we should consider creating a separate template, rather than amending the generic template, at least as a first step. I have some sympathy with a cautious approach, to make sure we carry opinion with us. So if we are ever going to make Template:Infobox person Wikidata-enabled, we will probably need something called Template:Infobox person/Wikidata. I see it presently has 177 transclusions, so you could assume that a few editors have found it sufficiently usable in mainspace to try it out. I guess that if people haven't found it problematical, then perhaps it's serving a purpose? Would there be any point in trying to tell folks not to use it? - they'll do what they want, regardless of what we say.
Anyway, it's probably been around long enough to upgrade from "test" to whatever comes next, but it's not the worst culprit. Module:Wikidata (which the template uses) has been rated alpha. i.e. "may be used on a few pages to see if problems arise, but should be watched" and now has 62,000+ transclusions. I wonder who's watching all of those? I'm certainly not. --RexxS (talk) 23:37, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
62,000? Egads. I just hope things get rolling to have the option to use Wikidata in Infoboxes and in a standard way. It's confusing right now. Some people goto great and weird lengths to add Wikidata into templates that don't support it. Some template parameters use only the parameter from the infobox to calculate their value, even though Wikidata is used in the template. I only have four brain cells and my brain is already too overloaded.

Encouraged to try again

Thank you for your helpful comments in the first FAC of Reger's Requiem. I try again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:03, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

A cupcake for you!

Thank you for creating infobox horse trainer. It's something I have been wanting for a long time! White Arabian Filly Neigh 19:04, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2016 May 28#Template:Paragraph break

Your input would be appreciated here. You might wanna skip past the bickering to my 21:14, 25 May 2016 (UTC) comment onwards. Izkala (talk) 18:43, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Wow, what a can of worms. Of course my normal reaction is that if editors want absolute control of how text displays, they should stop using a markup language and set up their own wiki using Pagemaker. Sadly, that's not going to be a popular stance, so I'll try to find time to sort out some response. I do think though, that if a solution works for Graham, it's almost certainly the solution we need to promote. Give me a while to read up on the whole issue. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 19:37, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

Émile Moreau (playwright)

Hi RexxS,

I've just translated that page only to find out that another Émile Moreau (writer) page exists which simply is entirely wrong and is based solely on IMDb which in turn is wrong of course. Sorry to bother you but imho the Émile Moreau (writer) article must be deleted. LouisAlain (talk) 10:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Looks to me like two different people, no link to the "writer" though, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:49, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
It does look like there are two different people: one lived 1852–1922 and the other 1877–1959. I've taken an axe to the content of Émile Moreau (writer), who is very unlikely to have written Cléopâtre (1890) at the age of 13. The IMDb entry does not distinguish between them and can't be used as a source as you say. It's probable that someone will eventually nominate Émile Moreau (writer) for deletion as there is no longer a claim of notability. --RexxS (talk) 14:15, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Émile Moreau (writer) for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Émile Moreau (writer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Émile Moreau (writer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:51, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I've added my voice to the argument for deletion. --RexxS (talk) 22:54, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Grime and rust

You know, I wonder what would happen if I ran again. I haven't picked up any restraining orders or anything like that, in part because I only edit in trivial areas and never make any real decisions, but it's impossible to be here for a long time and not make enemies. Let's take Gamaliel, for instance: even if that April Fool's Day thing had never happened, enforcing ArbCom sanctions in Gamergate is just a guarantee he'd never pass RfA again, I think. Or what if I were some serious commafucker, wreaking havoc all over the MOS without ever using my bit for it. Would it not be possible for me to still be a fairly decent admin, even if I were restricted from that area? I think one of the problems here is that we generalize too quickly and don't easily allow common sense to play the appropriate part. Muse, muse, muse. Have a great day, Rexx--while you're turning something into an FA, I'll be, I don't know, playing with the kids some, in the pool. There's work horses and luxury horses, as the Dutch say. Drmies (talk) 14:12, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

I'd vote for you, if you'd like my (formerly restricted) vote ;) - did you mention common sense, really? not a word known to arbitration, at least as I got to know it, nor good faith. I'd vote for you to change such things. Yes, look at Gamaliel, - the moment I had the feeling that we understood each other a bit better he was gone. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:22, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Yikes, I just realised that I've been intending to write something at the workshop, analysing the evidence and supporting Gamaliel, whom I consider to be one of the "good guys". It took him a while, but he realised his mistakes and made his apologies, so there's really nothing to be gained from pillorying him. I bet it's too late now. I don't know where the time goes.
I doubt I'll be turning something into an FA any time soon - I've still got work to do on Nitrogen narcosis and Decompression sickness, which have been languishing as GAs for several years now. Somehow my wiki-time has been refocussed into dealing with accessibility issues and creating the coding that fetches Wikidata for use in Wikipedia articles. I sometimes get to give a bit of help to folks like LouisAlain (see above) who is a prolific translator of articles from French to English, but my retirement from work doesn't seem to have yielded any more time for working on articles. As Douglas Adams observed: "Time is an illusion; lunch-time doubly so". You have a great day too! --RexxS (talk) 14:39, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
I don't think you need to have been around for very long, Drmies. My Wikipedia experience was ruined only a few months in. Izkala (talk) 15:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Drmies, you are preaching to a sympathetic choir. Want to nominate me at RfA the next time I run?  ;-) (Seriously, I probably am going to run again, just not this month or next...) Montanabw(talk) 03:12, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

World Recreational Scuba Training Council

I see diving as a sport - even though it isn't, as far as I understand, competitive. Am I wrong?Rathfelder (talk) 12:56, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

@Rathfelder: Yes, you're wrong - check our article on Sport and look at the references for (1) SportAccord's definition of 'sport' and (2) its list of members:
  1. "Definition of sport". SportAccord. Archived from the original on 28 October 2011.
  2. "Members". SportAccord.
You'll find CMAS among the list of members, but not WRSTC.
Also don't edit war - once you've been reverted, take it to the article talk page, not my talk page. --RexxS (talk) 13:07, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed

An arbitration case regarding Gamaliel and others has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Gamaliel is admonished for multiple breaches of Wikipedia policies and guidelines including for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point, removing a speedy deletion notice from a page he created, casting aspersions, and perpetuating what other editors believed to be a BLP violation.
  2. DHeyward and Gamaliel are indefinitely prohibited from interacting with or discussing each other anywhere on Wikipedia, subject to the usual exemptions.
  3. DHeyward (talk · contribs) is admonished for engaging in incivility and personal attacks on other editors. He is reminded that all editors are expected to engage respectfully and civilly with each other and to avoid making personal attacks.
  4. For conduct which was below the standard expected of an administrator — namely making an incivil and inflammatory close summary on ANI, in which he perpetuated the perceived BLP violation and failed to adequately summarise the discussion — JzG is admonished.
  5. Arkon is reminded that edit warring, even if exempt, is rarely an alternative to discussing the dispute with involved editors, as suggested at WP:CLOSECHALLENGE.
  6. The community is encouraged to hold an RfC to supplement the existing WP:BLPTALK policy by developing further guidance on managing disputes about material involving living persons when that material appears outside of article space and is not directly related to article-content decisions.

For the Arbitration Committee, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) via MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:39, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Discuss this at: Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee/Noticeboard#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Gamaliel and others closed

[2]

Wikidata filled infoboxes for Biosphere Reserves

Hi Rexx

I wanted to ask you about using your Wikidata infoboxes on Biosphere Reserve articles. UNESCO has made the descriptions of the Biosphere Reserves available under CC-BY-SA and I'm encouraging editors to create the articles for the missing sites, the instructions are here. There are currently 291 reserves with English Wikipedia articles and 374 without, I'm hoping that number will go down quickly. I wanted to ask you if it would possible and what would be the process of creating Wikidata fed infoboxes for these pages. The data in Wikidata for the sites has varying degrees of information, however all sites have the minimum of:

  • UNESCO Biosphere URL (the link to the inscription page on the UNESCO website
  • Country
  • Coordinates
  • Commons Category
  • Member of: Man and the Biosphere Programme

Some sites have a lot more information than this e.g Yellowstone National Park is a Biosphere Reserve.

Can you tell me what needs to happen to create the infoboxes? Also do you think this may be possible for Grade I and Grade 2* listed buildings in the UK? I know that there are items for all the sites on Wikidata because they were added for Wiki Loves Monuments, the same is true for all monuments in France.

Thanks

John Cummings (talk) 09:38, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi John. Existing articles like Yellowstone National Park make use of an infobox called Template:Infobox protected area. I've made a start at creating a Wikidata-enabled version of that template at Template:Infobox protected area/Wikidata. It is normal for us to modify existing templates in such a way that we do not alter the display of existing articles where they are to be used.
However, I'm running into problems because the current infobox does not display:
  • UNESCO Biosphere URL
  • Country
  • Commons Category
  • Member of: Man and the Biosphere Programme
The coordinates unfortunately don't return from Wikidata in a format that Template:Coord understands, so there's more work to do there.
Which doesn't leave much to fetch from Wikidata. I have tested fetching the IUCN category, which works ok for Yellowstone National Park. I'm stopping at that point to work out where you want to go.
You need to work out precisely how you want the Wikidata-enabled infoboxes to display and I can make them for you. But you will have a problem if they are not compatible with the infoboxes already in existence. I'll mock up an infobox that fetches the your suggested info so that you can try it out in preview or in a new article. I'll call it Template:Sandbox/Infobox biosphere reserve for now. --RexxS (talk) 17:10, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Update: You can paste {{Sandbox/Infobox biosphere reserve |fetchwikidata = ALL}} into a section of an article like Yellowstone National Park and preview it (please don't save!). You'll see some of the data available from Wikidata for that article. Let me know if you want more fields and how you want them displayed. --RexxS (talk) 17:43, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
@RexxS:, amazing, thanks so much, I'll have a think about the information to draw from Wikidata some more and get back to you, there are other fields I can add, Biosphere Reserves are a lot of kind of places including national park, islands and areas that include cities so not sure it will fit with an existing infobox. One question, is there a way for the URL field that it could hide the bare url and display as something else? Thanks again --John Cummings (talk) 18:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Yes, John, it's dead easy to make a link display any text we want. But you have to tell me what text you want. I assume you don't want it to display "something else" :P --RexxS (talk) 18:57, 31 May 2016 (UTC)
Update: John, I've gone ahead and guessed at "UNESCO Biosphere entry" but that can be changed. I've also solved (I think) the problems of fetching coordinates from Wikidata, so that's implemented now. You can preview {{Sandbox/Infobox biosphere reserve |fetchwikidata = ALL}} in Moor House-Upper Teesdale for example, and also in Braunton Burrows which doesn't have a UNESCO Biosphere URL in Wikidata. I imagine you'll most likely want the infobox for new articles to get them started, so have a think about which fields are likely to exist in Wikidata and I'll implement them for you. --RexxS (talk) 20:59, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

@RexxS:, amazing, I guess that means you fixed the issue for all coordinates in infoboxes? I am still importing information so I'll get back to you once I've done that about the fields. I've also been looking at Grade I and Grade II* listed buildings in the UK, there is a lot more information about many of them on Wikidata than Wikipedia (all the data was imported by Magnus last year). However I can't work out which infobox would work, they are all sorts of buildings, many of which have specific infoboxes e.g churches. The reason I'm asking is I'm working on this project which plans to import a lot of monument data into Wikidata from different countries around the world, it would be really cool to get something working to show how the data would be used on Wikipedia. What do you think would be the best approach to get the Wikidata fed infoboxes working for them? This page was helpful in seeing the difference in the amount of data on Wikipedia compared to Wikidata. --John Cummings (talk) 08:46, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Until somebody finds a set of coordinates that don't work, I think I have it sorted. I created a "tool" to look at what Wikidata is available for an article by pasting and previewing {{#invoke:Sandbox/RexxS/WdRefs|seeRefs}} in an article. I can always add more fields to {{Sandbox/Infobox biosphere reserve}} if you find ones that are commonly available in Wikidata. Just do some sampling and let me know. The best way to get started with Wikidata-enabled infoboxes is to select a few WikiProjects who are likely to be sympathetic and post at their talk page to arrange with them to conduct a trial. Say for example, that you get Wikipedia:WikiProject Religious Buildings, Architecture and Monasticism interested; I'll make a modified version of {{Infobox church}} and you/they can try it out on a few pages as a proof-of-concept. How does that sound? --RexxS (talk) 20:52, 7 June 2016 (UTC)
@RexxS:, @John Cummings: Hi all, just stumbled across this chat from a search. I've been adding Protected area infoboxes to biosphere reserve articles as I create them, but as you've noted there's no place for the UNESCO link. Here's an example of one of mine: Jornada Biosphere Reserve. A wiki-data created infobox would be fabulous, especially as we add more data to wikidata. A place for "located on terrain feature" property would be useful in the long term. - PKM (talk)
@RexxS:, amazing, thanks I will contact one of the wikiprojects you have suggested. @PKM: thanks for finding us :) in case you are not aware UNESCO have made all their Biopshere descriptions available under CC-BY-SA which will help a lot in producing the missing articles, here is more information. Regarding infoboxes for Biosphere Reserves they don't fix exactly into infobox:protected area because only the core are is protected, however I don't think matters too much. PKM I think you know more about the fields in the protected areas infobox than me, the data we have imported into Wikidata for all the sites are:
  • Name
  • Country
  • Member of: Man and the Biosphere Programme
  • Reserve URL on the UNESCO website
  • Date the site was designated a Biosphere Reserve
  • Date the site was withdrawn (if applicable)
How do you think this would fit best within infobox protected areas?
Thanks again
John Cummings (talk) 09:42, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

@RexxS:, @John Cummings::

Thanks, I did see the Open Source announcement via a couple of the mailing lists - that's what got me started building these. I don't think the Protected area Infobox is a perfect fit, and I agree with RexxS that we should consider a separate Infobox for UNESCO biosphere reserves. I do think we should allow for fields that users will add to WD.

So in addition to having fields for all of the data you listed above that you are importing, I think we should add:

  • Image
  • Official website URL
  • Governing body
  • Encompasses (this would pick up the "has part" property from WD; people are adding these - not just me!)(these would need to link to the EN wiki article for the Q ID - don't know how tricky that is)
  • Area
  • Terrain
  • Map (this would be P1943 location map or P1944 Relief location map). @RexxS:, if WD has P1943 filled in can we use the same relief=yes logic that Infobox protected area uses to display the related relief map? So the logic would be P1944 if exists, else P1943 with relief=yes flag)

(John, my thought is that a relief map is preferable since the biospheres are often based on geographic features.)

Maybe we should pose the question of what should be in a UNESCO BR Infobox on the project Talk page at Meta to get perspectives from some other folks working to complete these articles.

Thanks so much for getting these going! - PKM (talk) 17:39, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It's always better with a picture. Here's a rough mockup of my idea. I can annotate it with WD fields if that would be helpful. - PKM (talk) 19:35, 9 June 2016 (UTC)


@PKM: Thanks very much, this looks really good, I'm very happy someone else understands the quirks of Biosphere Reserves. @RexxS: do you think this is possible to make?
PKM, do you know anyone else who writes about Biosphere Reserves who would be interested either using the CC licensed text? I'm also running Wiki Loves Earth Biosphere Reserves throughout June, if you know anyone or any groups who would be interested in taking part please let them know, this would include taking photos, encouraging Biosphere Reserves to upload photos and also sharing information about the project (details on the website).
Thanks again
John Cummings (talk) 12:40, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Yes, John, we can make that - and autopopulate some of the fields from Wikidata as required. I'm only just back from a Board meeting, so I'll take a good look at the job later. I'll let you know when I've got something to look at. --RexxS (talk) 19:01, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Oops, I forgot the date fields on my mockup. Added now!
@John Cummings:, the only folks I know of who would be interested are the people already posting about this on the discussion page in Meta. - PKM (talk) 19:43, 11 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks @PKM: --John Cummings (talk) 09:19, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@RexxS: I left a message on Wikipedia:WikiProject Religious Buildings, Architecture and Monasticism, however the Wikiproject has only two people in the list of participants who have not been active recently, many of the articles don't have infoboxes at all and the articles are often 2 sentences receiving 1 edit per year, in short there doesn't seem to be much of a community to ask. My feeling is that adding heritage status, coordinate location and national register number for the country it is in to Infobox:Church would probably be a sensible approach. John Cummings (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

@RexxS: One of the members of WikiProject Religious Buildings, Architecture and Monasticism got back to the message I left and agreed that Infobox:Church would be the best basis for a Wikidata fed infobox. --John Cummings (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Template comparisons

Hi RexxS. If I wanted to do a comparison on a talk page between {{Infobox person/Wikidata}} and a non-Wikidata infobox, is there a way to make the Wikidata box display properly? It threw up an error message when I tried it on Talk:James Cuthbert Smith, so I ended up doing a test diff as a workaround, which doesn't allow for the same side-by-side view that I was hoping for. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:21, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi Nikki, unfortunately {{Infobox person/Wikidata}} was written before the developers enabled arbitrary access. That means that the infobox will only fetch information if it's on the article page itself (i.e. talk pages, etc. give an error). The messy work-around is to screen-shot the two infoboxes and create a side-by-side image to illustrate the point. I just put your diff view on another monitor and can see the comparison. For what it's worth, I agree entirely with your assessment on that talk page that the information supplied from Wikidata is generally poorer. In truth, for any well-developed article, editors will probably want to replace what comes from Wikidata with a locally supplied value. Wikidata-enabled infoboxes are more useful for new articles as a "starter".
I'm developing a new "generation" of Wikidata-aware infoboxes to allow greater editor control over how Wikidata is fetched, and they are capable of being called from any page, so the problem of side-by-side comparisons will eventually be fixed for you. Sorry I don't have an {infobox person} version yet.
As an aside, I wanted to fix one of the problems at James Cuthbert Smith (Q19664103) by changing UCL to Middlesex Hospital Medical School, but annoyingly I can't find the reference that supports that (Internet Archive is offline right now), and I've made a rule for myself never to change Wikidata without supplying a reference, otherwise we never really improve the quality at WD. The EThOS reference shows UCL as the "current institution" - not terribly helpful :( --RexxS (talk) 21:32, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for the info. There's a source for alma mater here; I tried changing that myself, but I couldn't get it to accept "Middlesex Hospital Medical School" with or without a source. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
Thanks. Middlesex Hospital Medical School is a redirect on en-wp, so doesn't have an entry on Wikidata. I'll fix that and use your reference. --RexxS (talk) 23:16, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
On a related note, what do you think of the French version of the template? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:16, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
It's quite new and I see that there's a move to suspend its use already. It's what would be called "opt-out" here, as you have to write |parameter = - to suppress Wikidata in each field you don't want. Personally I don't think it's a good idea to use that on infoboxes that will be used on large numbers of articles, because of the problem of 'silent' adding of fields when the upgrade is done. I mean, you don't want to make {{Infobox person}} into a Wikidata-aware template using "opt-in" because you'll end up with hundreds of irate editors complaining about fields showing up that they don't want and don't know how to get rid of. It's ok when the infobox isn't used much as the editors doing the infobox upgrade can be expected to check all the articles transcluding it. Your idea of having a whitelist is a much better solution for heavily used infoboxes where each article needs the whitelist to be added before it fetches anything from Wikidata. --RexxS (talk) 13:24, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Infobox Biographie2 is their version of Infobox person/Wikidata; they have Infobox Biographie still edited locally as the generic Infobox person. Obviously I completely agree with my own solution ;-) but I do like the way they've set up the pointer to edit Wikidata - linking each parameter to the specific property and with a uselang modification. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:45, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Well, I think {Infobox Biographie2} was obviously planned to complement and eventually replace {Infobox Biographie}, unlike {Infobox person/Wikidata} which was knocked up three years ago as a test-bed for the nascent Module:Wikidata, and later escaped from its sandbox. But I understand your point. I am very impressed with the edit icon - they can do that easily because they code the entire infobox in Lua, rather than using a call for each parameter, which was my preferred route as it allows the modification of existing templates by folks who don't code in Lua. I think I'll try that technique in Module:WikidataIB and see if it gains any traction. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
Update: Implemented in Module:WikidataIB. You should be able to preview {{Infobox book/Wikidata/Sandbox |fetchwikidata=ALL }} in any book article to get a few fields as a demo (The infobox isn't finished yet!) --RexxS (talk) 15:36, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Clark1974.svg

Thanks for uploading File:Clark1974.svg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

  • make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
  • Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 12:14, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

Just text and lines
As can be seen from the file histories of File:Clark1974.svg and File:Clark1974.png, I created these files in 2009 as a replacements for a similar file by Gene Hobbs, File:Clark1974.jpg. The image consists of text (the effects of Oxygen toxicity) and lines that associate these effects visually. I created the images from the text in Clark's 1974 "The Toxicity of Oxygen". Either this is insufficient "sweat of the brow" to create a copyright, in which case they are in the public domain; or the creative work in making that arrangement of the text and lines is mine alone, and I've already released the files into the public domain. Consequently, I've declined your inaccurate {{di-no permission}}, and suggest you do some basic WP:BEFORE before you mark valid files for deletion. If you disagree with my right to release my copyright into the public domain, you know where to find WP:FFD. --RexxS (talk) 17:11, 22 June 2016 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RexxS/Archive_30&oldid=1089987792"