User talk:Haplology

Welcome to Wikidata, Haplology!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can 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.

Best regards, Bene* (talk) 14:32, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Autopatroller

You seem to be providing useful edits, so I've given you the autopatroller permission. Thanks for your contributions. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 09:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Word styling

Hello! Just to let you know that chief executive officer is spelled with lowercase initial letters, as per grammatical rules which we're following on Wikidata (unlike Wikipedia which is in error due to some legacy problem with the way it was designed and coded). Danrok (talk) 04:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Revert

Thanks for your revert! I did a wrong click by mistake with the wikidata game and I forgot to fix it later. :-)--Kippelboy (talk) 05:54, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Admin?

Hi Haplology. I noticed that you have done a significant amount of RFD and counter vandalism work. Maybe you would want to consider a RFA? I think you will make a good admin. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 09:07, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Jianhui67: thanks for the vote of confidence. Maybe at some point I'll RfA but I don't want to get that deeply involved right now. I'm sorry for the extra work that the admins have to do at RFD by deleting pages. I have rollbacker privileges now, and that's enough to do counter vandalism. I don't really understand the deletion policies or the blocking customs in this site's community, and it seems like a scary responsibility. --Haplology (talk) 11:09, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nah it's okay. It's your choice after all. You can let me know if you are ready. Regards, Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 15:16, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Haplology/descriptions

Thanks for collecting this list. If you do not mind, I moved User:Haplology/discriptons to this name. If you have any issues with the move, please just move it back.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:13, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Haplology/es

Hi, Haplology. I am wondering, what should be done with this list? Given that I am a Spanish native speaker perhaps I can help a little. Allan J. Aguilar (Ralgis) 16:26, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Ralgis: Hi, the list is of descriptions that might be vandalism or just mistaken, but some are okay so it needs a human being to check them. It looks like many of them have been fixed already, so there might not be work left. Thanks --Haplology (talk) 00:06, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Widar

What widar tools do you use to claim surname on items? --Eurodyne (talk) 00:16, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

@Eurodyne: Hi, I use QuickStatements to make the claims and add references. --Haplology (talk) 00:20, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How do you exactly get thing to work? Could you give me an example? --Eurodyne (talk) 01:32, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

First I generate a list of statements myself, and then I copy them into the text box and click "do it." For example one line is

Q11463588	P735	Q5770364	S143	Q177837

, where all of the values are separated by tab characters. It sets the given name (P735) of Q11463588 (a woman named Hiroko Konishi) to Q5770364 (Hiroko) with the reference S143 (imported from) Q177837 (Japanese Wikipedia). The format of that line is explained on the documentation on the quickstatements page. The way I generate the statements is by scanning a dump of a Wikipedia using my own scripts to find names. The quickstatements tool cannot make those statements. You have to make them yourself somehow. --Haplology (talk) 01:43, 10 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

...for cleaning up the mess I made. It's obviously an autolist2 run that went wrong but as it was two weeks ago, I don't remember what the query was. Apologies, Pichpich (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok. I've been searching for incorrect genders using a keyword scan and just now by searching for people marked as both male and female, so it's no special focus on your edits. Actually the most mistakes come from the Virtual International Authority File. --Haplology (talk) 16:21, 11 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Adding imported from without any import

Hi, please stop adding false references about importing from xxwiki. According Help:Sources statements that are only supported by "imported from (P143)" are not considered sourced statements, so adding just "imported from" "reference" without any real import does not make any sense. --Jklamo (talk) 18:59, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand... I imported those statements from xxwiki, so aren't they the same as anyone else's imported statements? What do you mean by a "real" import? What am I doing that isn't being done by everyone else? --Haplology (talk) 23:54, 19 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is totally OK to add imported from xxwiki reference after you imported statement, but it is not acceptable to add only imported from xxwiki reference to existing statement. --Jklamo (talk) 19:27, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see lots of statements with multiple "imported from" references, so I highly doubt that. I have looked for some consensus on this site about how to use S143 properly, and it looks like it is still a controversial issue. Anyway I've modified my code only to add new statements, so I won't add anymore references to pre-existing statements barring some mistake, but I actually I'm not convinced that your opinion is consensus and I disagree with you. --Haplology (talk) 23:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that multiple "imported from" references were accepted in past (one or two years ago), but they are no longer accepted (as they are not considered as sourced statements and people are encouraged to remove them and replace with more reliable source). See Help:Sources#Different types of sources, that seems like clear consensus for me, also i have not seen anyone adding these "references" for existing statements for a long time, vice versa removing them is not rare.

Anyway thanks for code modification. --Jklamo (talk) 09:13, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Corrupted dates

Hello, please see [1], [2]. The error is caused by invalid precision parameter. Please do something with used software and fix the next items:

page	problem
Q11618745	Unrecognized time format: +00000001815-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17210031	Unrecognized time format: +00000001838-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q4803109	Unrecognized time format: +00000001841-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17191242	Unrecognized time format: +00000001843-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17191082	Unrecognized time format: +00000001845-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q1562579	Unrecognized time format: +00000001845-07-00T00:00:00Z
Q11533143	Unrecognized time format: +00000001847-05-00T00:00:00Z
Q11379356	Unrecognized time format: +00000001851-10-00T00:00:00Z
Q11486409	Unrecognized time format: +00000001854-09-00T00:00:00Z
Q11358887	Unrecognized time format: +00000001862-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q982721	Unrecognized time format: +00000001873-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17222002	Unrecognized time format: +00000001873-06-00T00:00:00Z
Q11060810	Unrecognized time format: +00000001875-09-00T00:00:00Z
Q3103185	Unrecognized time format: +00000001877-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q11365997	Unrecognized time format: +00000001878-05-00T00:00:00Z
Q2827697	Unrecognized time format: +00000001881-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q3277602	Unrecognized time format: +00000001881-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17226602	Unrecognized time format: +00000001882-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q269182	Unrecognized time format: +00000001882-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q367697	Unrecognized time format: +00000001882-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q11416895	Unrecognized time format: +00000001882-03-00T00:00:00Z
Q6119654	Unrecognized time format: +00000001884-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q10537789	Unrecognized time format: +00000001891-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q17211754	Unrecognized time format: +00000001898-10-00T00:00:00Z
Q11460394	Unrecognized time format: +00000001904-04-00T00:00:00Z
Q17225939	Unrecognized time format: +00000001904-05-00T00:00:00Z
Q17216356	Unrecognized time format: +00000001911-00-00T00:00:00Z
Q11535775	Unrecognized time format: +00000001948-08-00T00:00:00Z

— Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 03:34, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm working on it now. --Haplology (talk) 03:41, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the corrupted dates from those items, and identified the problem (program naively accepting months or days of zero) and fixed the software so that (hopefully) it won't happen again for any reason. Sorry everyone... --Haplology (talk) 04:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of atheist (Q15934597) field of this occupation (P425) atheism (Q7066) and similar

I don't know what was the reason of this. Connections seem appropriate. --Infovarius (talk) 17:37, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(1) They were listed as constraint violations, and I think it was right, because (2) one's religion is not a profession. Being an atheist is not a person's job. --Haplology (talk) 23:03, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I still disagree but I don't want to argue about it so I've added all of the removed religion-profession claims that I have found, but tomorrow there will be more items on Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P425, and the next person who thinks that religion is not a profession or occupation, like it says on Property_talk:P425, might remove them again. --Haplology (talk) 23:23, 12 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"many examples"

Hi Haplology, thanks for adding examples for the use of properties. But: We need good examples, not like you write "many examples". What is the use if you tell people: Hi, you can add a novel, and you add a novel, and you can add a novel, and - did I tell you - you can add a novel? --Kolja21 (talk) 01:25, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to remove excess ones. I only added more than three examples to a small number of property pages, and I'm done adding examples for now. --Haplology (talk) 01:27, 27 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Surnames and given names

Hi Hapology, thanks for adding name properties to items depicting Japanese people, but please note that you are adding surname and given name items that represent transliteration of several Japanese surnames and given names. This means that people with different Japanese surnames but with the same transliteration would appear to have the same surname on the database. Please take a look at the kanji script of the people's names before adding these properties. Thanks. —Wylve (talk) 23:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I was aware of that fact (I take the assumption that I did not as a bit patronizing. I can read kanji, thank you.) and I do not think that there is either (a) consensus that my way is wrong (b) that there is a practical way to handle names any other way with the current state of properties and qualifiers (or lack of them) or (c) any general consensus about names to begin with. Those items link to Wikipedia pages that describe a name as one name having a variety of spellings. This is the convention across multiple Wikipedias, and I was simply linking people to pages about their names using properties, which is what Wikidata is supposed to be all about. The current proposed alternative (as I understand), having one item for every spelling-pronunciation combination, would require roughly ten or twenty times as many items, nearly all of them without any WM links, and if they all link to each other with "said to be the same as" properties, we have hundreds of statements for each name. If other people want to do that, they are welcome to do so. --Haplology (talk) 02:16, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. The problem with the current approach is that Wikipedias with Latin script do not distinguish fundamentally different surnames in other scripts. Wikidata should fix this problem. It would be incorrect to a Japanese user to see a person with the surname 古賀 described on Wikidata to have the surname of 久我, just because the two surnames are romanized the same way and are pronounced the same. Names should not be distinguished by pronunciation but by its spelling. Therefore, it would be unnecessary to link the two surnames with "said to be the same as" since they are not the same and only share the characteristic of being the homophone of each other. Again, the Wikipedia method introduces ambiguity and it should not matter that large number of items are to be created. —Wylve (talk) 02:46, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikidata was not created to fix the Wikipedias. It was created to support them. The Wikidatans are not entrusted to "fix" any WMF projects.

I realize that the treatment of names in Wikidata is still being worked out, and I think the more respectful and constructive approach to a disagreement is to suggest that the issue be worked out in a forum. I am (a) unswayed and (b) insulted by your tone towards me. I was at least respected to some degree on Wiktionary. Look up a few Japanese names there, and see who made them. --Haplology (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Q324493

Please consider reverting this edit cause the person shown in picture is not consistent with the wikidata item. It's not Shvarn but Mindaugas. You can easily confirm it by visiting commons:Category:Mindaugas. --Cheers, 217.21.43.22 10:14, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take your word for it. I assumed it was vandalism because the page on Russian Wikipedia showed the same picture that had been removed. There are many such types of vandalism every day, and nobody can check every one in every language. I've reverted my revert. Sorry! --Haplology (talk) 11:32, 28 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Q207652 - chimica industriale - your revert

I am Avesan, italian user. Maybe you thought of vandalism, but it is not so.
Please see the links below and you'll see that the corrections that I was doing was correct. Everything is due to the fact that I created the term Industria chimica (Chemical industry) in itwiki, which partially replaces the Chimica industriale (industrial chemistry) in itwiki.

and, if you have five minutes, you can verify the correctness of the link to (it) Industria chimica and not more towards (it) Chimica industriale.
Will you please arm yourself vocabulary and quickly undo your corrections because they can be considered vandalism. Avesan (talk) 16:19, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, solved, with the help of user:ValterVB.
Next time, please, wait a moment, and take a few clicks to a check.
Good job. --Avesan (talk) 21:40, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, noted, but in my defense:

Re: please wait a moment: It had been 18 minutes and you had removed a lot of stuff and not re-added any of it anywhere. (diff).
take a few clicks to a check: I did check all of those unlinked articles and the Italian ones. Apparently I got it wrong. Thanks to ValterVB for fixing it. I'm sorry if I don't speak ten languages.

I really appreciate your polite tone with the insulting "arm yourself vocabulary" and the sarcastic "good job." It makes my day. --Haplology (talk) 01:08, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, and now a nice good job ... :-) --Avesan (talk) 08:55, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Administrator

Have you ever considered wielding the mop of truth? ;) George Edward C – Talk – Contributions 07:14, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I assume that means you think that I should, and if so thank you, I appreciate the vote of confidence. I'm not sure though. I get overly upset when it appears that people are not editing in good faith, or just if there's some conflict. I'm also ignorant of a lot of areas of the project and have never run a bot or helped create a property. I think admin powers are mostly blocking and deleting, but the community here appears to be very conservative with blocks, and I'm still not entirely sure what should be deleted. Even protecting seems a little scary. I do nominate a lot of items for deletion but rely on another pair of eyes to make sure it's the right call. --Haplology (talk) 07:42, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

+1. I asked before too :D Give it a try. Feel free to ask me or other admins you are in doubt. You have great CVU experience and has filed many good RfDs. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 09:18, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Haplology, I also believe that you would be a really great addition to our admin team here at Wikidata. However, I take my hat off to your very honest and self-controlled statement. And for sure you're also a very important member of our community if you request your deletions and blocks the way average mortals do it ;). --YMS (talk) 10:25, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jianhui67 and YMS. If possible I'd like to continue editing as usual but with an eye to maybe joining the admins in the future, if it seems right at that time. In the meantime thanks for checking my requests for deletion and other requests. --Haplology (talk) 12:43, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The last thing I want is to throw you off-course, but I too think you'd be a great admin. At the end of the day, it's no big deal either way. You're doing a great job here as you are! Personally, it's nice to know that you have feelings and that you're not a robot. Nobody should expect anything else of you. By all means, give yourself a couple of weeks. Your help though, as is abundantly apparent, would obviously be welcome in the future! Jared Preston (talk) 19:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your honest comment above and respect your decision, but do know that if you ever wanted to apply that you would have my support. You do very good work here and I think you'd make a fine admin. All the best, Ajraddatz (talk) 02:10, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You should really consider running for adminship. I see many valid and justified deletion requests from you. I trust your judgement that you can delete those items yourself. I can nominate you if you want to. Best, Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 04:43, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm prepared now to run if someone will nominate me. Thank you. It seems like a scary process but my RFDs are probably annoying people by now. --Haplology (talk) 04:59, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get to writing your statement now. Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 06:05, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is done. Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator/Haplology. Please accept the nomination and transclude the RfA by yourself on Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Administrator. Thanks and good luck! Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 07:12, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have. Thanks again. --Haplology (talk) 08:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of label

Why did you remove en description from Q12035846 ?? --Jklamo (talk) 09:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Because the English is god-awful. Frettie has added tens of thousands of labels with typos or English errors and has refused to fix any of them or acknowledge my message on his user page. He's not going to fix them, and nobody has time to re-translate the Czech (what did he mean by "dabing actor"? etc) and sort out the correctly translated words from the guesses.

I admit simply removing the label is drastic. If you want to fix each and every one yourself, that's fine. --Haplology (talk) 10:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is bad that Frettie's labels have typos and he is unwilling to fix them, but removing labels (after 3+ months) because of typos seems too drastic for me. I think that for users are better labels with typos than no labels. As cs speaker I can help with "re-translation" (for example "dabing actor" means voice (over) actor), fixing using bot seems more adequate that fixing each and every one manually. --Jklamo (talk) 17:49, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

See User talk:Frettie#hláskování. --Jklamo (talk) 18:19, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks for helping. I won't mess with Frettie's descs anymore, or prob anything for a while. --Haplology (talk) 18:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

		The Wikidata Barnstar
		You're one of our best vandal fighters! I'm not even sure how you do it! xD Keep it up! (oh, and good luck on that RFA of yours ;) ) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) 06:45, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I hope that my reversions have been helpful and contained a minimum of unjustified actions. This is actually the first barnstar I've ever received for anything, and I really appreciate it. I can do it mainly because I am obsessive and have way too much time on my hands, hehe. For a while there was little to no competition for the position of best vandal fighter, but recently there are more people watching recent changes for vandalism, which I am very grateful for. I think a group response to vandalism is the only sustainable and healthy way for a wiki to survive. The situation in that respect has improved very much this year. --Haplology (talk) 07:42, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Dear Administrator!

An offering for our new administrator from your comrades... (our gift is better than the one at Commons or Meta)
You have your gun; now here's your badge: `{{User admin}}`/`{{#babel:admin}}` and `{{Admin topicon}}`. Enjoy!

Haplology, congratulations! You now have the rights of administrator on Wikidata. Please take a moment to read the Wikidata:Administrators page and watchlist related pages (in particular Wikidata:Project chat, Wikidata:Requests for comment, and Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard), before launching yourself into page deletions, page protections, account blockings, or modifications of protected pages.

Please feel free to join us on IRC: #wikidata-admin @ irc.freenode.net. If you need access, you can flag someone down at @ irc.freenode.net. You may find Wikidata:Guide to Adminship to be useful reading. You may also want to consider adding yourself to meta:Template:Wikidata/Ambassadors, and to any similar page on your home wiki if one exists. (Check Wikipedia:Wikidata/Wikidatans (Q14964498).)

Please also add/update the languages you speak to your listing at Wikidata:List of administrators. You may also like to add your username to this list if you would not like that items you delete at RfD get marked as deleted automatically. Again, welcome to the admin corps!

Please accept my congratulations.--Ymblanter (talk) 13:38, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!!! My crystal ball found! xD Jianhui67^{talk★contribs} 13:39, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Have fun, Haplology! Jared Preston (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. --Haplology (talk) 02:51, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!--Nikosguard ^talk 11:01, 17 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

winner (P1346)

Thank you, i didn't know that and it seems really strange to me but I won't add it anymore on the winner items. What property should I then for these items? I didn't see the reverse property listed… --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 17:11, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Harmonia Amanda: You're welcome, and I'm sorry to bother you about it. I'm not an expert but the closes ones I can find are award received (P166) which is close to an inverse property, except it's for awards, not competitions, and participant in (P1344) which is for competitions but doesn't mean that the person won. --Haplology (talk) 01:31, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I already use award received (P166) for awards et participant in (P1344) and it isn't the same at all… winner (P1346) was great to link competitions with winners and winners to competitions. When a sportsperson participated in many competitions, listing those they won was great information and it's sad to need to use Reasonator or a query to find these. --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 23:10, 25 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't create this property, I'm just trying to keep the constraints violations down. --Haplology (talk) 12:34, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

embarrassment (Q1761451) & single (Q134556)

I am trying to understand [3]. I suppose this was just a mishandling in Magnus Manske's game? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 17:35, 18 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Invitation to Wikidata user study

Dear Haplology,
I am a researcher of the Web and Internet Science group of the University of Southampton.
Together with a group of other researchers from the same University, we are currently conducting a research aiming to discover how newcomers become full participants into the Wikidata community. We are interested in understanding how the usage of tools, the relationships with the community, and the knowledge and application of policy norms change from users' first approach to Wikidata to their full integration as fully active participants.
This study will take place as an interview, either by videotelephony, e.g. Skype, phone, or e-mail, according to the preference of the interviewees. The time required to answer all the questions will likely be about an hour. Further information can be found on the Research Project Page Becoming Wikidatians: evolution of participation in a collaborative structured knowledge base.
Any data collected will be treated in the strictest confidentiality, no personal information will be processed for the purpose of the research. The study, which has submission number 20117, has received ethical approval following the University of Southampton guidelines.
We aim at gathering about 20 participants, chosen among experienced Wikidata users who authored a large number of contributions.
Should you be interested in taking part or wish to receive further information, you can contact us by writing to the e-mail address ap1a14+wikidata_user_study@ecs.soton.ac.uk.
Thank you very much, your help will be much appreciated!
--Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 08:52, 26 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback request

Greetings,

The team that made ORES is working on a new tool called JADE. The new tool is for humans to review the work of ORES, to provide human feedback and oversight. The team would like to hear about how your experience using ORES has been on your wiki, and what you might expect from a tool like the one proposed. If you are interested, you can comment on this page on mediawiki.org.

The team is also interested in sharing updates with you as JADE is developed. Short messages will be sent to this talk page every month or two, linking to a page with further information. Is this something you would like to sign up for? Simply reply to me here if so and I will put your name on the list.

Happy editing to you. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 19:23, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You can also sign yourself up for updates anytime. Keegan (WMF) (talk) 17:37, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

How's ORES working out for you?

Hi Haptology, I'm working with User:EpochFail (@halfak on irc) on a research study to look into how mw:ORES is working out on wikis where it has been enabled. I was hoping to talk a little about what the kind of work you do on Wikidata and about how the ORES edit filters and classifiers have been working out. Do you use any tools other than Special:RecentChanges or Special:Watchlist that take advantage of ORES? Do you know of any other tools that are used to patrol that do not use ORES? I'm also interested in any other observations you may have about how the ORES scores are working out. Thank you! Groceryheist (talk) 23:57, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]