[13:03:56] meh... I was trying to reduce the number of constraint violations on the geonames id report, but what's the point even trying if 18,000 new ones are going to appear in a single day [13:05:57] I have a other task, if you want... [13:07:58] nikki: hey, I saw your message in my talk page. I spent some time and I realized those items are "rural district" of Yemen [13:08:30] which is something different but I can't find any reliable source to verify that [13:08:34] ah [13:11:42] and no, sjoerddebruin, I don't need help finding things to do :P [13:11:56] :( [13:12:26] curious what it is though [13:13:10] Just movies without dates.. [13:16:36] probably not tempting enough to do by hand. I'm still halfway through fixing a bunch of japanese articles about films where the label still has stuff like "(2010 film)" in it >_< [13:17:48] I've added birth dates to almost 1k nlwiki people in the last few days. [13:21:05] ... I just compared the 1st of august report to todays, the number of type=geographic location violations went up by 100,000 [13:21:33] :( [13:22:30] conflicts went down by 55! it's not all bad news [13:52:24] Amir1: I don't suppose the word(s) match any of the blue boxes on https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%84%D9%81:%D8%AA%D9%82%D8%B3%D9%8A%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%8A%D9%85%D9%86-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%AF%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%8A.png do they? [13:53:32] the english page says the districts are divided into subdistricts, and the words it has for governorate and district match the pink boxes, and a google translation of the page that image is on suggests the right column is urban and the left column is rural [14:30:28] yeah but I can't find any related lists or pages of rural subdistrcits of Yemen [14:46:16] yeah, I'm not having much luck either :( [14:47:04] I guess you could create a new item with the persian word and one of us could move them all to the new item, and then admit defeat [14:50:14] :D [14:51:43] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21141250 [14:52:33] thanks [17:58:11] hola. How can I best add a 'Koninklijk Besluit' to a committee with which it has been founded? [17:58:35] For example, https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19930367 has been founded with KB 16-09-1891 no.14 [17:59:16] I would expect that I can somehow add that as a qualifier [17:59:30] to P571 [17:59:47] Hoi eia. [18:00:36] Can't you use https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q20750855 as founder (not as qualifier, but as statement)? [18:01:08] sjoerddebruin: that would be stating the obvious, it is part of the definition of what makes a Staatscommissie :) [18:01:18] A other solution would be https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P828 as qualifier with https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q2864346 as value. [18:01:44] sjoerddebruin: I want to refer to a specific KB, not the concept [18:01:50] otherwise the statement is moot [18:02:08] Ah, just make a new item with P31 > KB. [18:02:33] :| [18:03:00] Or you should request a property for KB's... [18:03:00] the sole purpose for that item being that it is related to this committee? That doesn't quite scale [18:03:36] is there not some kind of general property for 'legislative documents'? [18:03:43] I'm sure this must have come up before [18:03:55] Most stuff require items as value... [18:04:50] which makes sense, if they could be connected to multiple other items [18:05:00] nikki: Do you know something? ^ [18:05:15] here I can only imagine that it may be connected to the persons who signed it (who signed tens of thousands of them, probably) [18:05:52] I could imagine it as a 'source' for the founding data, but that would already be a workaround. The KB also includes more relevant information, so it would make more sense to use it as an identifier somehow [18:06:05] because it uniquely defines a committee [18:21:53] * nikki reappears [18:22:01] not sure I understand it :/ [18:27:39] nikki: A staatscommissie is a committee appointed by the Crown through a Koninklijk Besluit [18:28:01] So mentioning that KB somewhere in connection with the item, would be relevant [18:29:20] nikki: but I don't know how to add them, without creating a special item for the KB (and even then, it would be a workaround, rather than a solution) [18:29:46] context: we're talking about dozens of KB's being created per day, if not more [18:41:44] nikki: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q295967&action=history :( [18:41:57] hmm... the only thing I can think of that makes sense to me (given how little I know about it :P) is using P748 with Q20750855 and a new string property for the KB number as a qualifier [18:42:39] o_O people do weird things [18:44:38] I saw someone earlier who moved the only sitelink to another item (it was a dupe item) and then added some completely unrelated sitelinks to the now-empty item. I admire their desire to not leave empty items lying around even if their solution was the wrong one [18:53:14] shouldn't P748 be limited to persons/bodies? [18:53:32] In this case, that information is covered by P88 [18:54:06] the appointer would be a Cabinet, a Minister or 'the Crown' depending on what level of detail you want [18:54:23] the KB would be the means of appointment [18:54:58] (or rather, the means of founding - people could still be added later, as has happened with a number of committees) [19:01:24] I came across p457 and p92 as well which might fit, but they both require item [19:01:40] it might be better to ask on the project chat page or something, it's not an area I know much about :/ [19:19:56] hey, Raymond_ [19:24:51] eia: hi