Andyrom75

Innanzitutto il benvenuto :)

No, in questa fase non è ancora possibile riportare i dati in Wikipedia a parte gli interlink, però puoi trovare informazioni in questa pagina su meta (in inglese) --ValterVB (talk) 12:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)Reply

Hello Anyrom75! Thanks for your edits. Please be sure that when you blank an item by removing all of its links, report it for deletion at WD:Requests for deletions. Thanks! Del_♉sion23 (talk) 17:39, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

No problem :) glad to be of help. You obviously know when to link articles together, Rfd is just the final step. The only addition I would add to the template is double brackets around the Qyyy. i.e. {{subst:Request for deletion | itemid = Qxxx <--- the page to be deleted | reason = merged with [[Qyyy]] <--- the page where I've shifted the data }}

Happy editing :) Del_♉sion23 (talk) 23:15, 17 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

Template:Autopatroller/text/en Ricordisamoa 17:08, 24 August 2013 (UTC)Reply

I think this one works. --Zhuyifei1999 (talk) 11:42, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Zhuyifei1999, I agree with you, this is fine. Thanks for noticing it. --Andyrom75 (talk) 11:57, 2 February 2015 (UTC)Reply

Are you sure that links that you moved are belongs to this item, and not Netherlands Antilles (Q25227)? --Infovarius (talk) 12:50, 24 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Infovarius, this things has been highlighted time ago from a Wikivoyager but I forgot to make this change at that time. Dutch Caribbean is a region that exists nowadays, while Netherlands Antilles is an historical region (slthough both describe the same islands). So considering that Wikivoyage is a tourist guide, we should link the "current" instance instead of the "historical" one. --Andyrom75 (talk) 18:30, 24 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Oh, "describe the same islands"? But why are there 2 items then? May be there is subtle difference? What about Aruba (Q21203) as a part? --Infovarius (talk) 09:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Infovarius, as written above the subtle difference is that one is pure geographical while the other is historical. Merge those articles in all Wikipedias is a possibility, but maybe there are reasons (that I'm not aware) to not do it.

Let me give you a similar example that I've faced just yesterday: w:Kyrenia District and w:Girne District. Those two articles talks about the same exact territory, but one is from w:Cyprus point of view while the other is from w:Northern Cyprus pov. Also these two (with all the other districts) should be merge, but maybe, because of these different point of views, they have decided to keep them separated. Also in this case I need to undesrtand better which is the most relevant article that will be linked to the Wikivoyage ones. Differently from the previous case, no one of them is historical, both treat the same current territory, with only a "political" difference. Since there's a border between "North" and "South" Cyprus, I'm incline to link the one of Northern Cyprus, but I'm taking more time to investigate better.

PS Aruba with the other 5 islands are inlcuded in both articles. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:08, 26 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the example, the same with Crimea I suppose. They are administrative divisions of different countries so they cannot be merged... And I don't know where to link Wikivoyage articles in these cases. May be the solution is to create 2 articles too? :) --Infovarius (talk) 11:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Gosh, no! :-) Wikivoyage is not linked in any case to politic and in few cases to administrative divisions. Wikivoyage is a tourist guide so each territory is linked only to an article. But this is true within each single language version... because a tourism area do not have a clear border and any region can be divided in different tourist way. For example, de:voy can divide a region from a greographical pov (costline, plain and mountain) while en:voy can divide the same region from an historical pov (old original area, newly merged area), etc. Unfortunately, is nearly impossible to have just one central coordination. I'll give you an example. An user from en:voy has decided autonomously how to divide an Italian region, although a pool of Italian people had a very long discussion on how to divide it in it:voy. The en:voy user felt to be more competent than a group of people that have born there; who am I to say "stop, we are the right one"? :-) Since then en:voy and it:voy has a different toursit division for that region. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:29, 27 October 2016 (UTC)Reply

Dear Andyrom75, I have uploaded today an Image of the village of Montsoreau (which is part of The most beautiful villages of France), as a banner for The most beautiful villages of the world. Given how these administrative structures are linked, this image is relevant. Could you explain your choice? All my very best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 16:28, 18 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Philippe49730, the problem with that image is the dimension. A Wikivoyage banner shall have the follow ratio 7:1, with a minimum resolution of 2100x300. --Andyrom75 (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hi Andyrom75, thank you very much for your answer. It's done. All my very best, Philippe49730--Philippe49730 (talk) 12:48, 22 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Hey, cosa stai facendo con i CAP? :D Sappi che su Wikidata non si eliminano le vecchie informazioni ma si lasciano, modellate opportunamente (con data di inizio, data di fine, magari una preferenza o sconsiglio, ...). Hai qualche problema con l'output su Wikivoyage? --★ → Airon 90 06:36, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Sto aggiornando i CAP in base a quanto indicato nel sito delle poste (direi che è la fonte ufficiale). Alcuni CAP presenti su Wikidata perché riversati da Wikipedia sono errati. Non ho modo di fare un upload di massa quindi procedo manualmente. Ho visto la nota che mi hai lasciato relativamente ai paesi che hanno subito un cambio CAP e in quel caso ho messo "preferito" al CAP attuale e ho corretto anche la data di fine del precedente perché era palesemente errata.

Relativamente a Wikivoyage, vorrei prendere in automatico il CAP da Wikidata ma vorrei che tale CAP sia giusto per non mostrare castronerie :-) --Andyrom75 (talk) 12:02, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Per quanto riguarda i comuni della mia zona ti garantisco che attualmente vale il "doppio" CAP, cioè quello vecchio e quello nuovo. È ovvio che Poste Italiane ti mostra solo quello nuovo ma ciò non significa che ci sia solo un CAP. Come ti avevo detto, in realtà "preferito" va messo quando sarà finito il periodo di transizione e ci sarà solamente il nuovo CAP, quindi le modifiche che hai fatto su Canegrate (Q581) sono state tutte revertate. Quando posso controllerò i CAP anche degli altri comuni della mia zona.

Ribadisco che anche per quanto riguarda gli altri comuni, non si eliminano su Wikidata i vecchi valori solamente perché sono vecchi. Grazie al cielo non siamo su Wikipedia dove c'è la corsa all'aggiornamento dei dati. Se hai quindi rimosso vecchi CAP ti chiedo quindi di ripristinarli e di mettere semmai come qualificatore "data di fine: valore sconosciuto" e di mettere il CAP attualmente in uso come preferito.

Esistono strumenti per modifiche di massa ma stai attento al loro uso perché strumenti molto potenti e a volte limitati, ad esempio QuickStatement non permette la modifica del rank (normale/deprecato/preferito).

Se hai bisogno chiedi pure :) --★ → Airon 90 13:53, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Airon, il principale bisogno sarebbe quello che qualcuno (non io che non li conosco :-P) usi questi strumenti per aggiornare i CAP, mi sembra una modifica concettualmente piuttosto semplice. PS La fonte di Canegrate indicata su Wikidata non porta ad una notizia che parla del CAP, e non sono stato in grado di trovare la spiegazione dell'avvicendamento dei due CAP. --Andyrom75 (talk) 14:22, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Reply

Dear Andyrom75,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits. Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk) 23:28, 6 January 2022 (UTC)Reply

If you are systematically rewriting city elevations according to city hall altitude like here maybe you should stop and think if it's a correct approach. —Mykhal (talk) 13:34, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

Hi Mykhal, thanks for your message. In some Countries (maybe not all), the city hall is the reference to state the altitude of a city. In Q1085, for example, the elevation stated in Wikidata is not referenced, so in my opinion it's better to have a source of information in place of nothing. What do you think? Andyrom75 (talk) 14:31, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I forgot to ping @you Andyrom75 (talk) 14:33, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

I'm not geography expert, but I have a relation to the wikidata item mentioned. I've added ~official reference to the original value (stated in many other sources), saying it's an average elevation.

Often the value is referenced in the wiki article and not yet in WD, so adding instead of replacing might be better, if you don't want to research origin of the present value. Maybe also with some qualifier like applies to part. Regards, —Mykhal (talk) 14:40, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply

@Mykhal, thanks for adding the source of information.

Actually, there's no world-wide accepted rules on the meaning of "territory elevation", as I was saying, some countries adopt the city hall elevation, for the others honestly I don't know. I've noticed that sometimes in Wikidata is used the average elevation (like the one you used), because is a mathematical approach that often is accepted, although the way to calculate the average can be various.

I've also noticed that for many French cities, have been uploaded the lowest & highest elevation in the city territory. These two are objective data, but doesn't address the main topic: "What is the city elevation?".

By the way, thanks for your suggestion. Andyrom75 (talk) 15:44, 23 October 2024 (UTC)Reply