Snævar

Welcome to Wikidata, Snaevar!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike, and you can help. Go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!
Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familarise yourself with:

• Wikidata:About - About the project.
• Wikidata:Introduction - Another introduction to the project.
• Help:Contents - The main help portal for editing and using the site.
• Wikidata:Project chat - Discussions about the project.
• Wikidata:Tools - A collection of user-developed JS tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

If you have any questions, please ask me on my talk page. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Regards, --Emijrp (talk) 14:45, 7 November 2012 (UTC)

bugreport

Hey Snaevar,

thank you for your bugreport. I know that this is the efficient way to come to change, but I'm a little afraided to be not professional enough to choose right words in bugzilla. Is it possible that I send you a link of my next report and you can check it out? Greetings, Conny (talk) 08:56, 10 November 2012 (UTC).

Making bugreports isn´t really that hard. There are three things to keep in mind.

1. Explain what you did and what did happen before the bug came up.
2. Developers like reproducable bugs. In other words, if you can get the same bug over and over again by doing a set of actions (explained in #1) then it will be easier for the developer to fix the issue and obviously the developer likes that.
3. Mention what you did expect to happen. This is just as important as mentioning the bug itself.

I can´t really promise that I would check a link of an bugreport from you. It really depends on how busy I will be at that moment, whether I do that or not.--Snaevar (talk) 14:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Archiving

I don't think your archiving of the "Description content policy" section was appropriate. The last edit was less than a day ago, and it seems like discussion is ongoing, so I've reverted your change. --Yair rand (talk) 01:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Ok, fine. I tried to filter those out, but I seem to have missed this one.--Snaevar (talk) 01:05, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

mostek i mostek człowieka

http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8481&diff=457522&oldid=360780 http://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q8494&diff=457520&oldid=303871

• pl:Dlaczego?
• eo: Kial?
• en: Why?

Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 12:05, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

For those two changes I had to look up the pl page titles in the dictionary. There it stood that anatomia in polish means anatomy in english. On the english page (article) Human sternum is this sentance: "This article is about human anatomy." So those two should be the same. If not, please correct it (and I see that you allready have). Eo and en are irrelevant, becouse I only changed the pl link. And please don't ask me why in polish. I am most likely not going to understand that. Plus I certinally don't know what "kial" means.--Snaevar (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

P.S. There is an conflict between Q8481 and Q8494.--Snaevar (talk) 13:00, 17 November 2012 (UTC)

Wrong translations for Q1130754

Hello Snaevar,

I saw, from my point of view, errors on page Q1130754.

The Icelandic translation Vinstrihreyfingin – grænt framboð is used for Breton, Danish and norsk (bokmål) as well. That can't be correct.

Regards, --Michawiki (talk) 23:49, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

"Vinstrihreyfingin – grænt framboð" is the original name, as this is an icelandic political party. Sometimes it is considered okayish to use the original name, instead of translating it. You could move the articles to the danish, norwegian and breton translations, if you want (assuming that you have autoconfirmed status on those projects).--Snaevar (talk) 00:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Hey

Now that we have a user right with some actual meaning, and since you did such a nice job on File:Wikidata-check.svg, I was wondering if you'd be interested in creating a similar version for rollback. Perhaps the arrow from File:Wikipedia Rollbacker.svg (without the globe, of course), but with the Wikidata colors overlayed, the same way you did with the autopatroller icon? That'd be cool and minimalist. (Incidentally, it turns out that the Wikidata logo's colors were slightly off – you might want to switch your green from #006698 to #006699.) — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 16:52, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

 Done. I created a file for rollbackers with the filename File:Wikidata-rollbacker.svg and I have fixed the green colour in the Wikidata-check.svg file.--Snaevar (talk) 20:18, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks! {{Rollbacker userbox}} and {{Rollbacker topicon}}, if you're interested.

If you want a real challenge, would it be possible to do the same trick on File:Mop.svg? (Instead of the somewhat dull File:Wikidata mop.svg.) Or is it too narrow a shape, and would it just look weird? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 22:13, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Two more user rights now. Maybe you could work your magic on File:Wikidata bureaucrat.png? We don't have any logo at all for property creators... maybe an uppercase "P" in the same style as the other icons would work? Oh, and I don't think you ever got back to me on a potential better-looking admin symbol... sorry to keep coming to you with these, but they always look so nice. :) — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 09:49, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

All done. I was busy with other things, so I could not do them sooner. The administrator symbol was actually pretty easy, the tricky one was actually the symbol for the crats.

• 
  Symbol for Bureaucrats
• 
  Symbol for admins
• 
  Symbol for property creators

--Snaevar (talk) 23:24, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Bot request

Could you please respond at Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/BotMultichill what your concerns are exactly so I can address them? Thank you, Multichill (talk) 20:44, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Chat

See Wikidata:Project_chat#Links_to_items_and_properties. --  Docu  at 19:28, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Sister project request

Hi there,

I just noticed that you recently created a new sister project portal at Wikidata:Meta. Thanks for this! I wondered if I may ask a favour—I've recently been working on standardizing sister project portals on Wikidata by creating supporting documentation and templates (see Wikidata:Sister projects for more information; Wikidata:Wikisource is one such example of a recently made-over sister project). Would it be possible for you to update the new page you've created as per the instructions found here? It would be great to know that the documentation is easy enough to follow and use (and get some feedback on what to fix if it is not). Thanks for considering.

cheers. -Thepwnco (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Q-template limits

Hello, you removed warning, but did not remove the limit unfortunately. For example see Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P345. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 11:50, 30 August 2014 (UTC)

TL;DR (too long; did not read) note: We are talking about a different limit here, an time limit. I would be fine with having a warning on Template:Label, but not with an fixed transclusion warning as that would be unrealistic since the time transclusion limit flunctuates based on server load. I do think though that the underlying module should be checked to see whether it can be made faster or not.

That warning was originally posted by me to warn against the expensive function limit, which Module:WBHacks reached with the expensive function mw.title.new():getContent(). Those warnings on Wikidata:Database reports ... are time limit warnings. So, we are talking about another limit here. Unlike the expensive function limit there is no set limit of how many transclusions there can be, the reality is that that number flunctuates based on server load. Also, all templates and modules do have an time limit, it is just that high for most of them that it is considered unlikely that any page would reach them. One could argue though that the limit for this template is that low that there would be a reason to include a warning. I do think though that it should be checked first whether the underlying module could be made faster, without removing the features that make it useful. Also, I would not be comfortable with having a warning which displays a fixed number of transclusions as an limit when that is quite far from reality.--Snaevar (talk) 13:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)