User talk:The Anome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Nohat-logo-XI-big-text.png This user is one of the 400 most active English Wikipedians of all time.


One-cookie universe[edit]

Quick, eat it before it passes into my timecone:

Support request with team editing experiment project[edit]

Dear tech ambassadors, instead of spamming the Village Pump of each Wikipedia about my tiny project proposal for researching team editing (see here: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Research_team_editing), I have decided to leave to your own discretion if the matter is relevant enough to inform a wider audience already. I would appreciate if you could appraise if the Wikipedia community you are more familiar with could have interest in testing group editing "on their own grounds" and with their own guidance. In a nutshell: it consists in editing pages as a group instead of as an individual. This social experiment might involve redefining some aspects of the workflow we are all used to, with the hope of creating a more friendly and collaborative environment since editing under a group umbrella creates less social exposure than traditional "individual editing". I send you this message also as a proof that the Inspire Campaign is already gearing up. As said I would appreciate of *you* just a comment on the talk page/endorsement of my project noting your general perception about the idea. Nothing else. Your contribution helps to shape the future! (which I hope it will be very bright, with colors, and Wikipedia everywhere) Regards from User:Micru on meta.

Tech News: 2016-02[edit]

16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

hi[edit]

do you know how to change the map on Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa so that it will show Liberia is Ebola free, thank you--Ozzie10aaaa (talk) 20:35, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

@Ozzie10aaaa: yes: but it looks like other people have made the necessary changes already. -- The Anome (talk) 10:59, 14 January 2016 (UTC)

JMO[edit]

Just my opinion but per this, I think the account should also be blocked as purely disruptive and talk page access blocked. These sorts of folks need to have no way of demanding attention. But that's my opinion, I'll defer to your judgement. Montanabw(talk) 00:09, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

@Montanabw: Thanks for the heads-up. I've now changed the block to indefinite with talk page blocked, and removed their contributions. They are clearly WP:NOTHERE to build the encyclopedia. -- The Anome (talk) 07:32, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-03[edit]

17:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Uhm P9[edit]

Before you move the page boldly, you should check talk page etc. No consensus. prokaryotes (talk) 14:15, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Discussion, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Planet_Nine_(2016_hypothesis)#Another_move prokaryotes (talk) 14:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

Geodata adding[edit]

Hi! Currently just a question - could you do a one-time run at another Wikipedia with The Anomebot2 for adding {{coord}}? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 23:51, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

@Edgars2007: I'd be happy to. I would need to be granted bot permissions by the admins there, and, before that, to have a native speaker of that language help me with getting the proposed changes approved by that Wikipedia's community before I start. Please tell me more... -- The Anome (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
OK, as the initial answer is yes, we can talk further :) You don't have to worry about bot flag and such things, you would just need to run the bot. So the Wikipedia I'm interested in, is Latvian Wikipedia, we have some 65tk articles, so it won't be some very very big job. We have the same {{coord}} as enwiki does, template placement is also the same. I have some few questions:
  1. Which articles will be affected? Does the bot go through some specific category and its subcategories or through the whole Wikipedia? The second option I think woulld be completely fine.
  2. What is the source? Wikidata, other Wikipedias (if yes, then which - all or some specific?)... What else?
You can surely make some 20-30 test edits without bot flag. Then give me some time to discuss things with colleagues (one or few days), and if everything will be fine (I'm sure, it will be fine), then you can do complete run. --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 07:27, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
@Edgars2007: Yes, Wikidata would be the source for these, and all of the coordinates would be marked "source:wikidata" to ease eventual integration with live sourcing of coordinates from Wikidata, something which still looks to be a couple of years off. I have a process to mine coordinates directly from databases like GNIS and GNS by cross-correlating them with the English Wikipedia category tree structure, but that has years of domain-specific hacks and heuristics in it, and would take too much work to adapt to the Latvian Wikipedia. The Wikidata database contains all, or almost all, of these, and also contains coordinates from other language Wikipedias: the overall quality of the Wikidata data is reasonably good. I believe the Latvian Wikipedia currently has 8881 articles with coordinates on Wikidata (lv:Kategorija:Koordinātas Vikidatos) and 916 without (lv:Kategorija:Koordinātas, kas nav Vikidatos), and a quick pass over the current Wikidata dump shows a total of 12674 entries which have both lvwiki articles and coordinates. Unless there are a large number of lvwiki articles with coordinates which have not yet been copied to Wikidata, the suggests that around 3000 articles remain to be geocoded using my bot -- which is really no problem at all to do.
However, I'll still need to do a bit of language-specific work. There are a few types of pages for which it's inappropriate for the bot to add coordinates to, such as redirects, disambiguation pages, and list articles. I also try to filter out articles on companies, people and other living things, extraterrestrial bodies, and long linear features like roads. Most of these checks are done at runtime, by inspecting article content: I'll need to see how many of these are easy to port to Latvian. -- The Anome (talk) 12:11, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
One of main reasons, why I'm asking your bot to do this: I'm trying to add coordinates at lvwiki articles, which are quite local (buildings, churches in Latvia etc.) and coords are not in Wikidata, and later ask WD bots to import them all. And I want to do less work - not adding coordinates, which can be added from other Wikipedias etc :) But yes, you can add coordinates from Wikidata first. Then we can see, what can be done more, right?
Adding data from databases is not so important. Adding them here for objects in Latvia at enwiki would be completely fine (then they can be imported to Wikidata, and then - to lvwiki :D ).
But if I would give you a list of coordinates, that could be added at Latvian Wikipedia? In such format: "article [separator] lat [separator] lon"? That also could work?
About language work (I'm lowercasing all search strings):
  • redirects would contain "redirect" in page content (the same thing as at enwiki)
  • disambigs would have {{disambig}} or {{nozīmju atdalīšana}}
  • list articles would be a little bit harder. They could have category "%zskaitījum%" (% are wildcards)
  • companies - hmm... also not so easy. They could have infobox "uzņēmuma infokaste" (or "uzņēmuma infokaste v2") or "infobox company"
  • people - also not so easy. They could have category "%dzimušie%"
    • taxons have "biotakso" infobox
But actually, you don't have to worry so much about false positives. I can later check and remove them with AWB, if needed.
Looks good? --Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 12:55, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. That's exactly the information I wanted, and yes, if this works, we need not stop with Wikidata -- I can accept lists of coordinates in any format, provided that they are in compliance with Wikipedia's content policies. I'll work on this later this weekend. -- The Anome (talk) 13:25, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes, sure. When you're ready, then you can make those test edits. Thanks. Edgars2007 (talk/contribs) 13:35, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi. Because of off-wiki commitments, this is probably going to slip to Wednesday/Thursday now. But I haven't forgotten you. -- The Anome (talk) 10:55, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
OK. I have a strategy. I'm going to just do some very simple missing/redirect/disambig/coordinates-already-there live checks on the lv: article at edit, and try to do the person/company/taxon etc. checks via Wikidata, something I've been looking at as a possibility for some time. While this will take a bit of time to write, test and debug, it should mean that the code will be much more portable for use with other languages in the future. -- The Anome (talk) 18:26, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

AnomeBot2 made a geodata mistake on Panopticons[edit]

Hi - this edit to Panopticons is incorrect. The article describes a collection of artworks each of which has different geolocations. Somehow your bot decided to take one of these geolocations and "promote" it to the status of being the geolocation for "Panopticons" itself, which is a mistake. (This mistake has led to a downstream error, where the wikidata entry has the "spuriously exact" coordinate, which causes errors when trying to match Wikidata up against other data sources (in this case, OpenStreetMap).) I'll reverse that edit. Please could you check that your bot won't make similar mistakes in other cases? All the best.--mcld (talk) 14:17, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for spotting that. This should have been caught by the existing blocking heuristics, but since it clearly wasn't, I'll check to see if they can be improved. -- The Anome (talk) 22:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
@Mcld: I've now added another rule to the bot to catch the particular set of coincidences that allowed that edit to go through. Thanks for the feedback.

If you're matching OpenStreetMap data up with Wikipedia's coordinates, I'd be very interested in hearing about what you're doing and how you're doing it. Wikipedia <-> OSM integration is the missing link in all of our geolocation work here, but AFAIK no-one's really found the right way to do it yet, because of the impedance mismatch between our conceptual model of the world and OSM's, problems with identifier stability, and difficulties with license compatibility. -- The Anome (talk) 10:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

I've also removed the claim on Wikidata, see https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q7131478&action=history -- The Anome (talk) 10:51, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for updating your bot! The OSM<->Wikidata matching is not my work, but it's the work of another user on OpenStreetMap's UK mailing list. See the discussion here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-January/018328.html -- --mcld (talk) 20:04, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-04[edit]

16:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-05[edit]

21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Higgs boson closing[edit]

Not an expert on the issue here, but shouldn't the RFC template be removed from the section in Talk:Higgs_boson#if_energy_and_mass_are_equal.2C_higgs_bosons_would_be_the_opposite_of_light? Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 03:20, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't remove it because I wanted the RfC process to run its course: the header has now been removed after the RfC was closed. -- The Anome (talk) 10:33, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Ta[edit]

Just to say thanks for deleting things coming up at RfD. Can't do a WP thank for ém cos, er, they're deleted, but it is noticed. Si Trew (talk) 23:39, 7 February 2016 (UTC)