User talk:Desoda

Hello.If you find any repetition of the items.you can merge.Thank you --ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Thank you. I wasn't quite sure about the procedures. It seems Jared Preston beat me to it, though. :) Thanks to both of you. Desoda (talk) 20:32, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Please take part in the Flow satisfaction survey

(That message in other languages: العربية • ‎bosanski • ‎català • ‎Deutsch • ‎Esperanto • ‎français • ‎עברית • ‎polski • ‎português • ‎português do Brasil • ‎русский • ‎اردو • ‎中文 – ‎translate that message)

Hello!

Like some other community members, you have tried Flow.

An increasing number of communities now use Flow or are considering it. Although Flow itself is not scheduled for major development during 2016 fiscal year, the Collaboration Team remains interested in the project and in providing an improved system for structured discussions.

You can help us make decisions about the way forward in this area by sharing your thoughts about Flow — what works, doesn't work or should be improved?

Please fill out this survey (available in multiple languages), which is administered by a third-party service. It will not require an email or your username. See our privacy statement.

Thanks for your ideas and opinions about Flow!

Trizek (WMF), on behalf of the Collaboration team, 12:04, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Giant Bomb

Sorry about that! I misread the diff and didn't realize that two URLs were listed as official site. Trivialist (talk) 22:47, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

No worries, @Trivialist:. Desoda (talk) 12:49, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

removing of a reference/adding a different ?

Hello Desoda. Are there any good reason for removing of my edit (first time) and my edit (second time) of adding a reference to Kai Holst (Q6347399) with that book reference of yours, or was it just an edit-conflict made by the wikidata-setup. Best regards Migrant (talk) 19:06, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@Migrant: Hei. Dette må være et resultat av redigeringskonflikt – Jeg har i alle fall ikke med vilje fjernet dine endringer. Wd har rett og slett ikke informert meg om konfliktene. Det virker som det ikke er slike funksjoner på wd i det hele tatt. Det er noe urovekkende. Og etter min mening burde det ikke vært en konflikt i det hele tatt. Jeg la til og endret på "min" referanse, så den skulle jo bare poppet opp som referanse nr. 2. Wd tolket det tydeligvis som om vi redigerte på samme element... Også urovekkende. Men prøv igjen nå – jeg skal holde fingrene unna en liten stund. — Sincerely, Desoda (talk) 19:22, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Done ! Migrant (talk) 19:29, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

@Migrant: Glimmers! — Sincerely, Desoda (talk) 19:36, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Tror jeg, har sagt mitt i denne saken nå både her, i wikidataoppføringen nevnt ovenfor og på wikipedia:torget på no:wp. Håper ikke du starter på samme... Med vennlig hilsen Migrant (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2019 (UTC)

Kræsj?

Var dette en redigeringskollisjon? - Soulkeeper (talk) 13:47, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Soulkeeper: Oops. Jepp. Wikidata har et problem der. Den støtter ikke at to personer redigerer samme element samtidig, og gir heller ingen advarsel om redigeringskollisjon. Mistet litt oversikt over hvemhvahvor. Er dine redigeringer ok nå?

Btw; Jeg la inn dømt for complicity (Norwegian law) (Q19381284) som dekker norsk strafferett. (La den inn som underklasse av conspiracy to commit a crime (Q3627314) siden den var orphan.) Passer ikke den bedre enn complicity (Q3625599)? Mulig den passer bedre på hans første dom i tingretten. — Sincerely, Desoda (talk) 14:00, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

Ja, skjønte at WD ikke er helt god der, så jeg trakk meg litt unna og begynte å fikle med criminal law (Norway) (Q18646810)-relaterte elementer i stedet.

Ja, enig i at å knytte det til "norsk medvirkning" er bedre enn "generell medvirkning". Når det gjelder overklassen til "norsk medvirkning" tror jeg begrepet conspiracy to commit a crime (Q3627314) er både mer fordømmende og mer presist enn medvirkning, da forbund innebærer planlegging og hensiktsforsett, mens medvirkning kan spenne mellom alt fra forbund til å bare være passiv og ikke ringe politiet. Så jeg endret det til å være en underklasse av complicity (Q3625599). Soulkeeper (talk) 14:22, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

@Soulkeeper: Støtter den. I tingretten ble det vel sagt at han hadde en "begrenset" rolle (2 år, 6 mnd for uaktsom medvirkning [1],) men ble i likhet med de andre dømt for medvirkning til trippeldrap i lagmannsretten og fikk 18 år, selv om de der hevdet han hadde en "passiv" rolle. [2] Kirkemo fikk "kun" 16 og Orderudparet 21. Siden alle ble dømt for medvirkning så ligger han vel i gråsonen et sted, tipper jeg. Han gjorde nok mer enn bare "vite om" drapene, men deltok ikke i dem direkte, antar jeg. Spiller forsåvidt ikke så veldig stor rolle for meg. Wikidata-OCD-en min som slo inn. — Sincerely, Desoda (talk) 14:38, 13 September 2019 (UTC)

2020 coronavirus pandemic in Norway

Hello, I want to know if you will be annoyed if I add the values of the WHO reports in the element. I'm trying to harmonize the elements related to the pandemic so that we have data that doesn't contradict each other for a specific day. If we look at the latest WHO report, they have a little time lag with the national authority. As a result, Norway's frwiki page would be a bit ahead of the others (the infobox use the Wikidata data), but that's not a big deal.

It's up to you! Lofhi (talk) 16:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

I recommend against it. We use the official numbers from the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, which already lags behind updated numbers. To use a foreign source, and a more outdated one at that, for the data is to me counter-productive. — Sincerely, Desoda (talk) 18:44, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Call for participation in the interview study with Wikidata editors

Dear Desoda,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King’s College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research that develops a personalized recommendation system to suggest Wikidata items for the editors based on their interests and preferences. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I would love to talk with you to know about your current ways to choose the items you work on in Wikidata and understand the factors that might influence such a decision. Your cooperation will give us valuable insights into building a recommender system that can help improve your editing experience.

Participation is completely voluntary. You have the option to withdraw at any time. Your data will be processed under the terms of UK data protection law (including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018). The information and data that you provide will remain confidential; it will only be stored on the password-protected computer of the researchers. We will use the results anonymized to provide insights into the practices of the editors in item selection processes for editing and publish the results of the study to a research venue. If you decide to take part, we will ask you to sign a consent form, and you will be given a copy of this consent form to keep.

If you’re interested in participating and have 15-20 minutes to chat (I promise to keep the time!), please either contact me at kholoudsaa@gmail.com or kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSdmmFHaiB20nK14wrQJgfrA18PtmdagyeRib3xGtvzkdn3Lgw/viewform?usp=sf_link with your choice of the times that work for you.

I’ll follow up with you to figure out what method is the best way for us to connect.

Please contact me if you have any questions or require more information about this project.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk)

Call for participation in a task-based online experiment

Dear Desoda,

I hope you are doing good,

I am Kholoud, a researcher at King's College London, and I work on a project as part of my PhD research, in which I have developed a personalised recommender system that suggests Wikidata items for the editors based on their past edits. I am collaborating on this project with Elena Simperl and Miaojing Shi.

I am inviting you to a task-based study that will ask you to provide your judgments about the relevance of the items suggested by our system based on your previous edits.

Participation is completely voluntary, and your cooperation will enable us to evaluate the accuracy of the recommender system in suggesting relevant items to you. We will analyse the results anonymised, and they will be published to a research venue.

The study will start in late January 2022 or early February 2022, and it should take no more than 30 minutes.

If you agree to participate in this study, please either contact me at kholoud.alghamdi@kcl.ac.uk or use this form https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSees9WzFXR0Vl3mHLkZCaByeFHRrBy51kBca53euq9nt3XWog/viewform?usp=sf_link

I will contact you with the link to start the study.

For more information about the study, please read this post: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/User:Kholoudsaa

In case you have further questions or require more information, don't hesitate to contact me through my mentioned email.

Thank you for considering taking part in this research.

Regards

Kholoudsaa (talk) 14:53, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Please reply to the comment at Talk:Q13442814

I left a message for you about your edit of scholarly article (Q13442814). Can you participate in the discussion about your edit? Thank you, Trilotat (talk) 13:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Incorrect use of subclass of (P279)

Hello –

This edit to "certification services provider" (Q13460321) was in error. Because subclass of (P279) is transitive (for example, see this tree of parent classes), such errors lead to numerous false inferences. Before you use the properties instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279), please be familiar with Help:Basic membership properties, and look at the value item in your statement to be sure it's the one you intend. (In particular, note that "A" is only a subclass of "B" if all instances of "A" are also instances of "B".) There is often another property better suited to expressing the relationship you had in mind; you can search for one here. Thanks! Swpb (talk) 19:46, 4 August 2023 (UTC)