User talk:Sapphorain

Identifiers

Please do not remove valid identifiers, as you did recently with Invaluable.com person ID (P4927) on three items. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:38, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Goodreads id for Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Thanks for noticing! I messed up between the id of the book (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/342561) and the id of the author... Koxinga (talk) 19:36, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

BEIC GLAM project and Wikidata

Dear Sapphorain, the edits you rejected as "irrelevant" are a part of a bigger GLAM project, see Wikidata:BEIC, running since 2014. Also few data that you consider "minor" are a part of the Mix'n'Match catalogue and are an essential part of the project, and they will be automatically reinserted in the next update. So that you are now aware that we know exactly what we are doing, please do not revert our edits. Thank you for your collaboration. --Marco Chemello (BEIC) (talk) 15:54, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Sorry. I didn’t realize this was (at last) a sound project. (There are so many bot trainers now on Wikidata who are importing any sort of crap from anywhere without ever checking whether what they import has any sense at all, that I become sometimes too quick in reacting). Sapphorain (talk) 16:36, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Napoleon

Hi. So why is this an "inappropriate entry"?--Sporti (talk) 11:14, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Hi. Napoleon wasn't a partner of "No label defined (Q61314753)". This makes no sense. Sapphorain (talk) 11:19, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata is in many languages. --Sporti (talk) 11:19, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikidata contains one single page for each item. See Emilie Kraus von Wolfsberg (Q1337332). Sapphorain (talk) 11:29, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Yes but "No label defined" means there is no label in your language. Anyway restored it and added en label. --Sporti (talk) 11:33, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

No. You still don't understand: you created a second page on the same person (Emilie Kraus von Wolfsberg (Q1337332)). It should be deleted. Sapphorain (talk) 11:37, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Ok I see merged them. --Sporti (talk) 11:40, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia as an acceptable source

Dear Sapphoroin, you wrote that Wikipedia is not an acceptable source for Wikidata. So, I think there is a mystery, because more than one tool (like HarvestTemplates and PetScan) were developed to do this, and many users (not only me) use them to import thousands of thousands data into Wikidata. Please kindly let me know where is this specifical guideline that forbids importing from Wikipedia and/or other Wikimedia projects. Thank you in advance. --Marcok (talk) 20:32, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Since Wikidata and Wikipedia are both wiki encyclopediae, it is essential that every assertion be sourced INDEPENDENTLY of both. Wikipedia is not in itself an acceptable source, and Wikidata is not in itself an acceptable source. You can import an information from one to the other (and an importation is NOT a reference) only if the assertion is correctly and independently sourced where you import it from. And in that case, there is no reason to import it: you can just source it with the same independent source! But you have been systematically importing unsourced assertions from WP.it (from articles that sometimes contain no source at all!). There is a big problem when you do that: in some languages, for instance in WP.fr, there are infoboxes that directy import assertions concerning personalities in Wikidata into the article in Wikipedia. This means that an unsourced assertion from WP.it is imported in Wikidata, and then imported back into WP.fr. So I systematically delete any assertion that is labelled "imported from WP....". Sapphorain (talk) 21:02, 9 February 2019 (UTC)

Dear Sapphorain, when I import data I always do my best to check errors. So a such rollback is hardly acceptable because the data are correct and well known. I think your opinion is respectable but not necessarily shared by the community, as the evidence suggests a significant percentage of assertions in Wikidata are based on Wikipedia imports, and a (bigger) percentage is totally without a source. I asked you to cite a specifical guideline page on Wikidata to support you opinion. Again, please kindly provide a link to that page. If you cannot, I kindly ask you to avoid any rollback based on questionable or personal opinions. Of course any fix of real errors will be welcome. Thank you. --Marcok (talk) 08:44, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, but no. I am not going to loose my time to find a specific guideline confirming that an assertion in wikidata must be verifiable: this is simply common sense. And verifiable means a source must be available. And if a source is available it can easily be given. So it's as simple as that: if an assertion is sourced neither in Wikipédia, nor in wikidata, I erase it in both. Sapphorain (talk) 09:33, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

Q1871443

Well, I can see in Q24447087 (был первым президентом совета 500) that he was Member of the Council of Five Hundred (Q28218611). This encyclopedy is quite dated, but I see no reasons to believe that it is a mistake --Ghuron (talk) 07:48, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, but then the reference given should be just that, not "Wikipedia in Russian", which is not a reference in itself. In any case, the declaration that he was a member of the council of 500 is already present in his page (with zero reference), so your entry either was redundant, or should have replaced the existing one. Sapphorain (talk) 10:27, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Based on Property talk:P463#voluntary? I'm assuming that for politicians we should prefer P39, not P463. If you know the place, where P39 vs P463 cases was discussed in more details, let me know. I've re-added statement with explicit reference to Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (Q602358), if you believe P463 is redundant - go ahead and remove it --Ghuron (talk) 11:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Thanks. Sapphorain (talk) 13:25, 11 March 2019 (UTC)

Here we have "la Real Academia Española de la Lengua le otorgó el diploma de Miembro Correspondiente", so Miguel Febres Cordero (Q1358473) technically not a full member. How would you suggest to express this in wikidata? --Ghuron (talk) 11:40, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Either he is a member, or he is not. If there is doubt the only correct way is not to express it in Wikidata at all. I really think you should stop importing assertions without saying from where you import them, and with zero valid reference.

By the way: there are still dozens of absurd declarations you made, on April 5, putting people in the « Académie française ». Letting them stay is confining to vandalism (I don’t know which kind of vandalism: malicious, or ignorant destruction?). Sapphorain (talk) 18:37, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

I'm looking here and do not see dozens of absurd declarations I've made. Can you please give me a few examples? --Ghuron (talk) 09:38, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

??? The items you mention don't contain most of the ones you modified on April 5, 2019. Please stop playing. In fact, please stop doing anything on wikidata, it will be better. Sapphorain (talk) 16:02, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Yesterday I've reverted my erroneous edits and the query above lists all items with member of (P463)Académie Française (Q161806). Based on your remark, I thought that you have "dozens of absurd declarations" that I missed, which apparently is not the case. I'm fed up with pointless conversations like this, so this is the last message I'm writing to you. Of cause, I keep doing what I believe is beneficial for wikidata. --Ghuron (talk) 17:05, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Vandalisme?

Hello, this edit is not vandalisme. At France (Q142) there is capital "Algiers" (1942-1944) - and there is opposite consistency rule between them. I know, it seems silly, but its not a vandalisme. --Frettie (talk) 09:26, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Then source your edits, and there will be no problem. You also inserted the declaration that Algier and Geneva are twin cities, and this is patently false simply because the city of Geneva decided not to have any twin city. Sapphorain (talk) 10:24, 14 April 2019 (UTC)

Merci !

Ah... Merci... ! Sauf que maintenant que je vois ta page de discussion, je me dis que je vais devoir secouer ma paresse et ne plus utiliser "importé de Wp", même quand c'est correctement sourcé sur le Wp en question et que je recule devant l'ennui de créer des éléments pour les références. Ceci étant, je crains que nous nous battions dans le vide. Bon, re-merci. --Cgolds (talk) 22:24, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

Pas dans le vide, mais contre des "bots" qui sont programmés pour faire à la chaîne des centaines de modifications, sans aucune sérieuse vérification. C'est assez affligeant, il semble qu'une part grandissante des contributeurs n'a aucun intérêt réel dans une information correcte, mais veut juste faire fonctionner le dernier joujou informatique qu'il a mis au point. Bon, courage... Sapphorain (talk) 08:04, 12 July 2019 (UTC)

Do not delete imported from Wikimedia project (P143)

Merci de répondre à la discussion à Talk:Q2331658 avant de supprimer d'avantage de contenu. --- Jura 18:32, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Do not delete references in Russian

Merci de voir Talk:Q311265. --- Jura 18:43, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

As I wrote there, the problem is not that it is in Russian, the problem is that it is an element of wikidata: wikidata cannot be a reference for itself. Sapphorain (talk) 22:55, 30 August 2019 (UTC)

Louis Jurine

Salut Sapphorain, j'ai vu passer ton revert concernant la worlplace de Louis Jurine (Q116878). Il l'est un des membres fondateurs du Musée académique de Genève, comme tu pourras le lire en page 35 de ce pdf (zou, j'ai créé l'item : 150 ans du Muséum d'Histoire naturelle de Genève (Q67117849) si on veut le donner comme référence). Le Musée académique a déménagé plusieurs fois, avant de finir à son emplacement actuel, et sous son nom actuel de Muséum d'histoire naturelle de Genève.
Est-ce que cela te paraîtrait plus judicieux de créer un nouvel item pour ces différents intitulés ? Je ne connais pas les pratiques en vigueur, et j'ai peur d'ajouter plus de confusion que de précision. Dis moi ce que tu en penses :)
Cordialement, Totodu74 (talk) 12:10, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Je pense à quelque chose de ce genre. Totodu74 (talk) 12:27, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Tout est parfait, sauf la déclaration "employeur". Il faut mettre "fondateur" ou "membre fondateur". Sapphorain (talk) 13:34, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Q673977

Notiker died there of the plague Ghuron (talk) 10:59, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Right. Thanks. Sapphorain (talk) 11:37, 7 October 2019 (UTC)

Reminder

If you think a statement needs additional references, please add possibly invalid entry requiring further references (Q35779580) to it. DO NOT DELETE IT FROM WIKIDATA. --- Jura 08:01, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

I cannot ask for additional references if there are no references in the first place. Sapphorain (talk) 08:05, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

• AFAIK, there is no requirement for every statement to have a reference and the absence of a reference is not a reason to delete statement, especially if you don't want to add a reference yourself to a statement.

Going forward, please seek consensus on project chat before deleting any statement on Wikidata. --- Jura 08:13, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps not every statement needs a reference, but the statement that a university holds precisely 25537 students, without any precision of date, definitely needs a justification, and cannot just stand there waiting. Sapphorain (talk) 08:22, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

If you think so, please discuss this on project chat before deleting it. --- Jura 08:25, 7 December 2019 (UTC)

Flags as aliases

Bonjour Sapphorain

Merci pour votre annulation sur Q39. Mon apport était effectivement idiot ; à vrai dire, j'ai voulu insérer ce caractère spécial à l'instar de ceux renseignés sur Q142, Q17 ou encore Q30, sans mure réflexion. De plus, je m'aperçois que le code que j'ai ajouté n'est pas forcément lisible sur chaque navigateur et quand bien même, il ne s'agit pas d'un alias au sens strict, comme vous l'avez très justement souligné. Du coup, je me pose la question de l'intérêt des symboles présents en tant qu'alias sur les items cités supra (et sur tout un tas d'autres, d'ailleurs). Qu'en pensez-vous ?

Amicalement, --- ʂɤɲ ✉ 08:47, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Oui, effectivement, tous ces drapeaux devraient être supprimés des alias (et éventuellement déplacés ailleurs dans l'élément, s'il y a une place appropriée pour ce type de symboles). Sapphorain (talk) 10:02, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

Discussion on project chat

In case you didn't receive the ping. Please note Wikidata:Project_chat#Content_deletion_by_Sapphorain and refrain from making large scale changes before this is sorted out. --- Jura 13:43, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

P17

Hi! As you can see in located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), there is a constraint value-requires-statement constraint (Q21510864) with property country (P17). This mean that every object of P131 must have a statement with P17.

When we face a first-level administrative subdivision, it's obvious that the administrative territorial entity where the subdivision is located in is the whole country. So, a first-level administrative subdivision must have P131 that links to the country and the country must have P17 (that obviously links to itself).

This, in fact, is the standard for every country: you can check it by yourself picking a random State (e.g. Afghanistan (Q889) or Italy (Q38)).

Honestyl, I don't see the problem in having a self reference, nor it seems forbidden. Anyway, you can see in Property_talk:P17 that this is a long time discussion, so if you want to re-discuss it, you can open there a new section. --BohemianRhapsody (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

This is one more nonsense in wikidata (on top of numerous others, I agree). These absurdities and misfits are becoming hopeless. And if you cannot see the problem, this is even more hopeless. Instead of just calling a cat a cat, or a country a country, you give to a country the fancy (and incorrect) name of « first level administrative subdivision », the incorrectness being the use of the word « subdivision ». « First level administrative entity » would be as fancy, but at least it would be correct. Recall that a « subdivision » is « a part of a larger part » (Webster’s). A country is an administrative entity, which is not an administrative subdivision of anything, not even of itself. Sapphorain (talk) 17:04, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

Repeated vandalism

Please stop deleting random content from Wikidata. Given that there is no consensus for your deletions, this is close to vandalism. Please refrain from such acts. --- Jura 20:53, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Please stop restoring inappropriate content in wikidata. Even given that there is no consensus for your restoration, I will not accuse you of vandalism. But please stop. Sapphorain (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

• There is no consensus for your deletions. You are removing valid information from Wikidata. If you think your the content should still be removed, please re-open the discussion.

If you persist deleting content, I will seek to seek admin assistance. --- Jura 21:14, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Seek, seek. Sapphorain (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of random imported from Wikimedia project (P143) from items

Was your deletion at [1] discussed beforehand? If not please refrain from deleting imported from Wikimedia project (P143) from items. It is added by @Matlin: to indicate the wiki the statement was imported from . --- Jura 21:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

A wiki can be stated as a reference when there is no independent source available. If there is one, it can be deleted. Sapphorain (talk) 21:10, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

• Was this discussed somewhere or is this another one of your personal reasons for deletion? --- Jura 21:17, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

This is clearly stated in Help:Sources. Sapphorain (talk) 21:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

sourcer un alias... ?

Bonjour, Comment est il possible de sourcer un alias ? les autres champs je vois bien mais l'alias je ne pense pas cela possible (demandé par vous dans une suppression de contribution). Par avance merci de votre réponse. Sapcal22 (talk) 20:45, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Non, effectivement, ça n'est pas possible. Je suppose qu'il s'agissait d'un alias suffisamment bizarre et/ou difficile à vérifier pour que cela mérite une note en page de discussion de l'élément. Mais il faudrait me rappeler où j'ai fait ça... Sapphorain (talk) 21:44, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Terentia (Q435936)

Bonjour. Vous avez annulé ma modification en spécifiant qu'elle était fausse. Pourriez-vous m'indiquer en quoi c'est le cas ? --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 07:33, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Qualifier de "noble" un romain est de toute façon un anachronisme, mais se qui s'en rapproche le plus est "patricien". Terentia faisait partie de la "gens Terentia", une famille riche mais plébéienne, et non pas patricienne. Sapphorain (talk) 10:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

OK pour l'anachronisme, "aristocrate" aurait sans doute mieux convenu. Mais la différence entre patricien et plébeien au Ier s. av. J.-C. est pratiquement nulle, socialement parlant : ce qui compte c'est l'ordre, sénatorial ou équestre, et Térentia appartenait à l'un ou à l'autre. --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 11:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Pourquoi vouloir absolument mettre un qualificatif vague et sujet à interprétations, (« aristocrate »), plutôt que la description exacte, courte et factuelle « issue d’une riche famille plébéienne » ? Sapphorain (talk) 11:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Je n'y tiens pas absolument (vous noterez que je n'ai rien changé à Terentia depuis votre modification) mais j'essaie de faire en sorte qu'il y ait une certaine systématique entre les éléments d'un même ensemble. Il y a actuellement 37 "nobles romaines", pour certaines d'époque impériale où la distinction patricienne/plébéienne n'est pas appropriée. Puisque vous trouvez "aristocrate" trop vague, est-ce que vous auriez un terme qui le serait moins pour être appliqué à ces personnes ? --Jahl de Vautban (talk) 11:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Non. Ni "noble", ni "aristocrate", ni un quelconque synonyme. Systématiser un anachronisme vague n'est jamais approprié, il faut s'en tenir à une description factuelle exacte. Sapphorain (talk) 12:27, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

HLS identifier

Hi, I saw that you reverted my edit here. The reason is that the article https://hls-dhs-dss.ch/de/articles/001313/2011-10-06/ is about "Appenzell (Bezirk)" or "Appenzell (commune)" and not about the town. So the correct Q item for the identifier is Appenzell (Q67125) and not Appenzell (Q209270). If you agree, I would like to undo your revert. --Hannes Röst (talk) 14:48, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

As you can easily check, there is no article in the HDS for Appenzell (town), as there is no article in the HDS for Genève (city). In general, for most town and cities, the HDS contains only one article that describes both the locality and the commune, and is an appropriate identifier for both. (In any case I think there should not be two different wikidata pages for Appenzell (commune) and Appenzell (town)). For instance there is only a page for Genève (the city) in wikidata, and a proper HDS identifier for it is nevertheless Genève (commune), since the HDS does not contain an article for Genève (the city).--Sapphorain (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2020 (UTC)

Albert Gallatin was not seated legitimately

I see you made this change, but Albert Gallatin (Q500046) served in the seat but illegitimately per this page. Please see the definition of DeprecatedRank.

Wikipedia is not a reliable acceptable source for another Wiki. On the other hand the Historical dictionary of Switzerland certainly is an independent reliable source.--Sapphorain (talk) 07:40, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

@Sapphorain: I'm not sure what I'm supposed to learn from the link you posted. My source was the Biographical Directory of the United States Congress which states "the Senate determined that Gallatin did not meet the citizenship requirement, and declared his election void". If you click through to the XML you'll see he's not credited for having served in the Senate. This is obviously an edge case because he appears to have sat for the Senate, but had that service declared void. I think a deprecated status applies here per the description of the data model above. Regards, Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 13:17, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

I don't think the description of definition of DeprecatedRank applies to this case: it applies to incorrect data, and this is not an incorrect data: it is at most data needing some additional precisions. After all Albert Gallatin (Q500046) did serve as a senator for nearly three months; the fact that his election was declared void afterwards cannot change this. A precision like de facto (Q712144) could be given. Regards, --Sapphorain (talk) 16:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

As I said, I agree that this is an edge case. Mostly, I'm looking for a way not to co-mingle it with the legitimately elected senators. Currently there is no way to tell the difference. Do you have any suggestions? I don't think that de facto (Q712144) sounds right and would prefer giving it a deprecated rank to using that. Deprecation has the added merit that it's less "truthy" which sounds like the behavior we want to model. Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 09:43, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

I don’t think a deprecated rank should be used in this case. Deprecated rank should be kept exclusively for suspected false claims backed by a source. As I said before this is not a false claim, let alone a suspected false claim, but a true claim needing some precision. Something similar to Contested Election Cases in the House of Representatives: 1933 to 2011 (Q59635629) for the senate (but it doesn’t exist) could possibly do the job, but I still think the best solution is de facto (Q712144).

I see what you're saying about de facto (Q712144), though it doesn't match the way I'm used to the term used. I'll think on it a bit. Thanks, Gettinwikiwidit (talk) 04:07, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Q39

Avec ta réinitialisation de mon changement, je ne suis pas d'accord. Il ne s'agit pas d'un logo, mais d'un émoji qui peut être utilisé pour parler de la Suisse, par exemple. FreakyN (talk) 15:16, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Whatever... un logo, un symbole, un dessin, une photo, un drapeau, un emoji, ne sont pas des alias, par définition. Un alias est « un mot servant à designer une personne, un animal ou une chose » (Larousse). Voir aussi la discussion de la page Q39. --Sapphorain (talk) 17:29, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Benedetta Carlini birthdate

In Immodest acts : the life of a lesbian nun in Renaissance Italy - page 21 we can see: "In this idyllic place, on the night of St. Sebastian of the year 1590, Benedetta Carlini was born.". Catholic Encyclopedia tells that the feast of St. Sebastian is 20 January. [:w:Gregorian calendar|Gregorian calendar] in the Catholic countries was introduced several years before, in October 1582. Why we can not learn the precise date of birth of Benedetta Carlini from these sources?--Alexander Roumega (talk) 12:18, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Yes, you are right: I reverted myself. Thank you. --Sapphorain (talk) 13:04, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

Warning

Help:Aliases explains that aliases are alternative names for items, and that there can be as many aliases for an item as necessary. There is no point of deleting an alias (unless it's a vandalism) because there is more chance an item could be found through the search option. I see that you have had several warnings in this talk page of different editors telling you what you did wrong, but still refuse to accept Wikidata policies. This is a collaborative project, so it is a big problem if you do not listen what other editors tell you. So next time you try to push your point of view by force (reverting over and over edits, for instance), you might be blocked. Andreasm ^{háblame / just talk to me} 15:36, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

No. I understand very well that « John W. Smith » can be an alias for «  John Smith ». But Help:Aliases, very correctly, doesn’t suggest in any way that « Mr John Smith » (or «  Dr John Smith », or « John Smith, Esq. » ) can be. This would indeed be quite ridiculous. But I will not fight for this, against an apparent majority of contributors, who don’t even want to look in a dictionary for a correct definition, who have decided once and for all that « alias » means « related to », and who threaten those that don’t agree. --Sapphorain (talk) 20:29, 7 November 2021 (UTC)

Republic of Geneva

Dear Sapphorain, firstly: apologies for my poor French writing skills! Regarding your reversal of my deletion of "Republic of Geneva" as country of citizenship for Emile Plantamour: well, I would argue very strongly that there is indeed a rock-solid foundation for my deletion, since Plantamour was born on 14 May 1815, which was over a month AFTER Geneva joined Switzerland on 6 April 1815! Best regards from Versoix, R. RomanDeckert (talk) 20:36, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello. The correct date of entry of Geneva in the Confederation is May 19, 1815, see the official site of the city of Geneva: [2]. --Sapphorain (talk) 21:03, 22 June 2022 (UTC)

Isabelle de Charrière

Bonjour,

Pourquoi vous avez annulé ma modification ?

Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 10:52, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Eh bien, mais parce q'effectivement Isabelle de Charrière était une écrivaine et compositrice neuchâteloise d’origine néerlandaise et d’expression française. Persister à vouloir supprimer sa nationalité et son origine pour ne conserver que sa langue d'expression est extrêmement réducteur. --Sapphorain (talk) 11:13, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

La réduction est présente partotu dans Wikidata, qui n'a pas le même rôle que Wikipédia. Selon votre perception, il faudra alors revoir les résumés de toutes les personnes qui ont une entrée dans Wikidata, parce qu'on a « oublié » d'écrire qu'elles sont issues d'une région ou d'une ville, ce qui donnerait par exemple « écrivaine d'origine normande d'expression française » ou encore « géologue d'origine tokyoïte d'expression japonaise et anglaise ». Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 11:23, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Mentionner d'autres cas de descriptions insuffisantes n'est pas un bon argument pour en justifier une de plus.--Sapphorain (talk) 11:28, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Votre replique à mon premier message est un argument d'autorité. Inutile de continuer cet échange. Cantons-de-l'Est (talk) 18:47, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Yasmina Khadra

Bonjour Vous avez annulé ma modification sur la citoyenneté française de Yasmina Khadra. Je vous ai envoyé une autre source, en espérant que celle-ci est plus fiable. Paul Bilange (talk) 22:37, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Non. Le simple qualificatif "franco-algérien" dans un titre de média n'est pas convaincant du tout. Cela peut se référer au fait qu'il habite en France depuis longtemps, ou simplement être une erreur. Aucun des identifiants sur sa page Wikidata ne l'indique comme français. Même la BNF ne l'indique que comme algérien dans sa fiche. Il faudrait une source sérieuse pour contredire la BNF.--Sapphorain (talk) 08:01, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

Votre annulation

Bonjour,

En plus de mon résumé, je vous prie de prendre connaissance de Help:Aliases/fr#Inclusion où il est stipulé
Vous devriez toujours ajouter les versions sans Unicode des libellés contenant des caractères Unicode (accents, indices dans les formules chimiques).

Ma modification est tout à fait justifiée. Ce n'est pas le même fonctionnement que Wikipédia, où il faut éviter de citer plusieurs fois une info inutilement.

Cordialement. ―Eihel (talk) 18:22, 11 April 2024 (UTC)

Couleur des yeux

Bonjour Sapphorain.

La raison de mettre la couleur des yeux au pluriel, c'est que la plupart des humain en ont deux, et que je voudrais que l'information couleur des yeux apparaisse au pluriel dans l'infobox biographique. Bob08 (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Ben il ne faut pas. La rubrique "couleur des yeux" est une locution substantive ("(la) couleur des yeux") qui appelle comme réponse un autre substantif, par exemple "(le) bleu", mais en aucun cas un adjectif accordé au complément "yeux" de la locution. Bref, "couleur des yeux: bleus" n'est pas correct en français. --Sapphorain (talk) 20:45, 23 August 2024 (UTC)