User talk:Multichill/Archives/2017/September

Link to Timmia on Wikidata

In this edit you linked to "Timmia" on Wikidata, but you linked the wrong Timmia. The Commons category is for the moss (plant), but the Wikidata item is for the both the moss and the genus of worms (animal). This sort of problem is quite common with plant and animal names, so if you haven't allowed for the possibility of duplication of names, you could end up with lots and lots of errors like this one. I've altered the Wikidata item, but I don't know if it will stay corrected, and don't know how common this problem will be. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:25, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

On a related question, why is your bot sometimes linking to a Wikidata item for the category but other times linking to the Wikidata item for the Wikipedia articles? Shouldn't the linking be consistent? --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Please stop your bot

{{Interwiki from wikidata}} is already done by {{VN}}.
It will greatly slow the page computation time to do it twice.
Best regards Liné1 (talk) 07:17, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

That's great! Skipping the ones with {{VN}} for now. Can you make sure it adds Category:Interwiki from wikidata too? Makes it easier to keep track of all the categories that set interwiki links based on Wikidata. Multichill (talk) 09:45, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Ok, I will modify {{VN}}. Cheers Liné1 (talk) 17:13, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

 Done {{VN}} adds Category:Interwiki from wikidata when VN adds interwiki (mainly in categories)

For example, in Category:Passifloraceae: it adds [[ast:Passifloraceae]][[azb:قوناق اوْتو کیمی‌لر]][[no:Pasjonsblomstfamilien]][[hsb:Ćerpjenkowe rostliny]][[eo:Pasifloracoj]][[pnb:پریم شاہی]][[simple:Passifloraceae]] [[Category:Interwiki from wikidata]]

But For Category:Abraeinae: there is no double taxonomic Wikidata items, so no Category:Interwiki from wikidata. Even if one interwiki was automatically added from wikidata but not by {{VN}}

Is it what you expected ?

Best regards Liné1 (talk) 17:37, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Heyyyyy:

Your bot continues the massacre !!!

Here is an example of bad modification. You said you would not impact pages with {{VN}} !!!!

We will need a bot run to remove your modifications !!

Liné1 (talk) 19:34, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

Typo somewhere, don't see any biology stuff in https://tools.wmflabs.org/multichill/queries/commons/commons_need_wikidata_sitelinks.txt now. Multichill (talk) 20:03, 4 September 2017 (UTC)

• Can you add {{Interwiki from Wikidata}} instead, with a capital W, since somebody renamed it? --ghouston (talk) 07:19, 6 September 2017 (UTC)
• Just checking, since my searches turned up empty (and I'm on my phone), does your bot have permission to run this task? I can only find permission for transferring files from nl to Commons. All tasks require their own permission per the policies. --Jonatan Svensson Glad (talk) 23:55, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Minster,_Thanet

Minster, Thanet has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Jheald (talk) 18:20, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

Category:Sutton-in-the-Elms

Sutton-in-the-Elms has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Crouch, Swale (talk) 11:05, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

File:Westermarck-bru.png

File:Westermarck-bru.png has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this file, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it, such as a copyright issue. Please see Commons:But it's my own work! for a guide on how to address these issues. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Jcb (talk) 16:12, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Even ter info, een hele rij betrokken kaartjes is inmiddels verwijderd. Ik ga dat wel uit zoeken de komende dagen, even in overleg met de admins die ze verwijderd hebben. Voor zover ik kan zien heb ik alle lopende DRs voor deze serie geannuleerd en alle bestanden die nog niet verwijderd waren voorzien van correcte source-informatie. Jcb (talk) 17:55, 28 September 2017 (UTC)