User talk:Matlin

Please do not start new discussions as I am blocked and will likely be blocked completely soon. So the discussion will not change anything. Alternatively, please contact Emu.

RETIRED

Yes, I can't fight you anymore. I don't even have time to convince you of anything. You are ...

I had a look through your contributions since @Emu: partially blocked you from the main namespace. Since then, you have been:

• Circumventing the block using edit requests: Talk:Q5931493, Talk:Q96384659, to name just two of numerous examples;
• Not fully resolving the concerns Emu raised when they blocked you. On a collaborative project like this you are required to respond appropriately to others' concerns especially when using automated tools of any kind.
• Generally displaying a poor pattern of communication:
  • Shutting down conversation threads on your talk pages with summaries before the other user has a chance to continue the discussion (for example, the "time period" topic, the "BNE" topic), which has a chilling effect.
  • Needlessly uncivil/combative comments: Wikidata:Edit groups/QSv2/207034, Talk:Q118927300 (calling labels "junk quality"), Talk:Q63160902 (calling a description "junky")

You've been continuing this for eight whole months without much sign of improvement. Consequently I am upgrading your block to the whole site until you agree to a plan to remedy these issues. The first two issues are the greatest reason for this upgrade of block. Contrary to what your description says, you can be unblocked with a successful unblock request with {{unblock}}.

You just emailed me with "Go fuck yourself. It's clear to me that your fucking action is revenge for my vote against the admin. This has been done to me many times. Fuck you and I wish you the worst." and "summarized" this section with "Fuck you". Firstly, I have not !voted in the administrator nomination and did not cite that as a reason to block you. Secondly, this gross incivility is beyond inappropriate and has resulted in the loss of your talk page and email access.

Sorry, it's hard to keep an alcoholic from getting drunk. The trance is too deep. (to be clear: in this metaphor, I'm an alcoholic and alcohol is MNM).

Please be aware that you are matching the same entries that I have literally unmatched a few times right before you. Mix-n-match descriptions are often outdated, so please check the descriptions on the ODNB website - the dates and names are different there.

Nor do they need to be made N/A. The IDs are correct, but the descriptions need to be updated.

This user didn't read the note about not starting new discussions and doesn't fully understand wikidata rules. Please contact with Wolne Lektury staff (https://wolnelektury.pl/info/Kontakt/)

I see a lot of mix-n-match pages like this one, where the auziliary data has a "time period" for a work of literature, and the data is being add by bot to Wikidata.

What does a time period of "ancient history" indicate? That the work was written in ancient times? That it was published in ancient times? That it was performed in ancient times? Or does it mean that the setting of events in the story take place in ancient times? Or something else?

In general, "time period" is meaningless for a work of literature without additional context. --EncycloPetey (talk) 05:26, 30 March 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand the need for all these recent edits where you mark a data item for a person or work as "different from" a Wikimedia disambiguation page. Disambiguation pages are always different from content pages.

I see this has been done multiple times in your current run. Please identify these cases and undo them.

This has been brought up before, e.g. see Special:Diff/1487800404. Earlier in Topic:Wfha67wwl1prtfjk I also made an attempt to explain the purpose of different from (P1889), but Matlin apparently chooses to ignore this for the most part.

Hi,

@EncycloPetey: I don't understand you either, what's wrong to point to (or from) a disambiguation page? Yes, obviously they are different, otherwise the statements wouldn't make any sense, the goal is to tell from what they are different and that could be confusing (because the label is similar for instance).

For the record, I just checked and it's done on 245 444 items right now (https://w.wiki/6G9h).

That's the point: They are OBVIOUSLY different, and so are not likely to be confused. The property is for items that someone might reasonably confuse because the distinction ISN'T obvious. Numbers of uses aren't relevant if the uses are wrong.

"obvious" is subjective, they have the same label so confusion is possible (and even likely I would say).

Beside the very high number of uses, I see nothing on the property saying it shouldn't be use on/for disambig items.

But YOU said they were obviously different. How can you say "obviously they are different" and "confusion is possible (and even likely I would say)"? Those two statement are at odds with each other. I say it's unlikely that an "instance of" a Wikimedia disambiguation page would be confused with any other kind of "instance of".

Ambiguous labels are very common. I believe this alone can confuse only users who are entirely careless and don't bother to check even description or any basic statement. To other users such use of P1889, interlinking all items having the same label in any language, is probably just noise.

As discussed earlier, some P1889 links to disambigation pages are probably justified, namely in items of given names/surnames (see Topic:Wfha67wwl1prtfjk). Of these 245 444 items, majority (158 204 items) are such items. Large part of the rest probably results from mechanical batch editing, as such is the case for Matlin's edits, lacking any assessment if invdidual item is actually confused with a disambiguation page.

Discussion is over. Next step will be in AN.

I have blocked you for not being responsive to issues brought up on your talk page. Since this is not the first time, please provide a detailed plan about how not to run into this problem again. CC @Mastrocom, @Kolja21, @Multichill, @Mormegil, @Trade.

Thanks for blocking Matlin. Now I have time to check his edits. He was constantly missusing authority control.js. Starting with the lowest ID:

• Norway (Q20)
• Hungary (Q28)
• Italy (Q38)
• Atlantic Ocean (Q97)
• Bulgaria (Q219)
• Australia (Q408)
• European Union (Q458)
• Dominican Republic (Q786)
• Nizhny Novgorod (Q891)
• Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic (Q2184)

In all ten cases he was adding non valid IDs. And there are many more errors to be corrected.

One more thing: zero emails even though I asked because of my communication problems. In fact, this is enough to abandon the principle of goodwill. I can't prevent you from writing anything, it's unacceptable based on the "spirit" of the Wiki project, but I don't want you to be in my talk pages.

Please accept the fact that nobody is under any obligation to use email in communicating with you. Please also accept the fact that you can’t prevent other users from using your talk page to address grievances they might have with your edits.

Please accept the fact that nobody is under any obligation to answer (no such rule in Wikidata:List of policies and guidelines. So unblock or do the same as @Multichill: Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard + normal temporary or forever block, and you're not doing circuses somehow.

Could you please rephrase your comment? I don’t understand what you are trying to say.

Kolya uses manipulation. The corresponding GND identifier EXISTS in VIAF (https://viaf.org/viaf/155855229/ GND 000430420). So it is not a malfunction of the tool. Is that a dead link? This is what "deprecated rank " is for.

There is no GND 000430420. It’s more or less a display issue of VIAF.

@Matlin: Wow, after thousands of edits, many complains and long discussions you still don't know how to read VIAF? Take a look at VIAF 155855229: DNB|000430420 and you will find many numbers:

• http://d-nb.info/gnd/43042-0
• (DE-101)000430420‏
• (DE-588)43042-0‏
• (DE-588b)43042-0

You always picked the wrong one. BTW: There is also an page called Help:P227.

Sorry, i missclicked "thank you" button. I don't want to thank you XDDDD

I closed this discussion, but I would also like to put a stop to the i, so as to finally dismantle the arguments of the people who persecute me here.

Let us take an example: the paper encyclopedia gives an incorrect date of birth: instead of 1945 it gives 1954. Doesn't the date 1945 exist, does it "display" incorrectly? If someone has problems with vision or perception - maybe so. It exists, it is just a wrong date, which should be marked with an outdated rank, according to the help page. Reason, according to the help page: "it allows other users to know not to re-add the value to the item" or others). And the reason for the obsolete rank (according to Q52105174): for example, Q21441764, Q54975531 or Q14946528.

The GND identifier in the wrong form "EXISTS", even if "not displayed correctly". It is visible on the VIAF website (https://viaf.org/viaf/155855229/) and has a separate page on this website (https://viaf.org/processed/DNB%7C000430420). It is in one form and not another. It is not the fault of the author of the edit that he wants to copy the ID faithfully.

Let me mention, although it is slightly less substantive, that your colleague uses these tools (or at least one of them) in the same way (see screens). It's not a bad thing, and I do too - as many people do. I am only surprised that you are not protesting in his affairs. Wrong entries in MnM still exist (https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/entry/98727051). It is so persistent and malicious (although Emu usually deleted these entries) that it was strange and downright shameless and, above all, to the detriment of WD (one or two clicks was enough). So this is semi-vandalism in my opinion.

There is no point in showing me the help pages for the ID. This is not my plot. I was just using tools to transfer values to Wikidata. 99.9% were successful. 3,074,258 editions, 73,401 reverted (2%), of which the vast majority are auto-corrections and not related to external identifiers, but big batches in Harvest Templates.

So finish this topic. Of course, I will close the thread again, but the point is that you, because we do not know what my future will be here, should not touch on this topic and accept that this is what is being done in this project. And there are quite reasonable methods of working in such cases (no, no blocking me XDDD because others will do it too). In the future, Wikidata and its tools will be better and better, and these "prostheses" in the form of eg an deprecated rank will be unnecessary.

Kolja, I am asking you to leave the case of my blockade, because your previous (and most likely present) actions have shown that you are not willing to compromise (probably Mix'n'match and others gadgets are unknown to you), you view my edits selectively and therefore I cannot assume that you are acting in good faith. Normally your editions, e.g. for Norway, would be revert by me (and set rank "deprecation" (source: Help: Deprecation], "it allows other users to know not to re-add the value to the item" ), but your colleague came up with the "toll" idea of blocking me again and therefore not being able to model the data better by me .I am not responsible for my edits while blocked, because I have no chance to correct them - before and after noticing mistakes by others.

The rank "deprecated" is only used for a valid source. For example for a different year of birth stated in a dictionary. Your edits don't give a source and the IDs I've deleted are simply wrong. They do not exist. It's an abuse of tools like authority control.js where it says: only add checked identifiers. You never checked your edits. I only find the most obvious errors. (Non existing IDs and duplicates.) There are many wrong IDs that still need to be corrected. - And about the communication: You've been blocked multiple time for the same reason. After the blocks you are very talkative. There is no reason for writing an email. It's not a private issue and you know how to use a talk page.

>valid source:

Viaf is valid source XDDDD better is: to add viaf as source and set rank than reverting, when someone re-add it in future.

> They do not exist.

So why they exist in the tool XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDddddddddddd However if If the tool has such a serious bugs then maybe I really should be more careful.

> You never checked your edits

Its a lie. Next time I will report those kind of comments on Administrators' noticeboard (If I be not blocked from doing it). You have to write more carefully because admins can take your words too seriously and have a distorted view of reality. These words can cause damage.

>duplicates

Bot is removing duplicates, so checking this is waste of time. Duplicate items are checking by me (not only mine, but others).

>There are many wrong IDs that still need to be corrected.

So correct it. I correct mine and others' errors during my work in WD. Showing 10 wrong edits out of 247k (September 2022)) is strong manipulation.

>You are very talkative.

Another untruth. See time between blocks and unblocks. I don't want to talk with (to put it mildly) unpleasant, demanding, biased and unable to compromise people (there are also many helpful and pleasant users, but unfortunately the most of them (but not all) for some reason avoid my talk page 🤣🤣🤣). I do this (talk) only when i have to, for the sake of the project. Because of this, I was even ridiculed on the Wikimedia Polska Discord server (even by admin of plwikisource!). Having to deal with such a toxic part of the community has a very negative impact on my mental well-being.

Since: I observe the ways of editing by others, I read the guidelines from time to time, I revert revert's only when it is strongly justified (for example: valuable statement loss), everyone make mistakes and the most answer for the most complaints would be "unerstandable" - there is no reason for me to answer.

And even "spamming" (let no one take this term seriously) on my site will have the opposite effect, as it will create an atmosphere of bullying me and getting closer to making a "tolle" (term from discuss on @Emu talk page XD) decision to block me.

I really don't feel comfortable in this community....even though I did a lot for the project.

> There is no reason for writing an email.

Yes, there is: I am asking for it. If you act in goodwill with the goal of successfully persuading someone to be right, you do it.

> It's not a private issue.

Who says its private issue? You can write: "please see this issue/topic: [url]". It is better than nothing.

>you know how to use a talk page

You also know how to use MnM, I explained it to you once, right? XD

One more thing. Your actions (and that of other administrators in the past and possibly in the future) are not appropriate and reasonable in my opinion:

Noticing a group of users below the information about my blockade creates an atmosphere of persecution. What are these users to do about it? Start accusing like Kolja? By te way: I feel seriously haunted by this user at times. This is confirmed by Kolja's confrontational statements. It may even be "stalking" / "bullying".

What will these accusations do, since the starting problem of the block is allegedly my silence, not erroneous edits. I can't edit so what should I do about these bugs? All I can say is "yes, they are mistakes". I do it (but not by answers of course) in ca 98% of cases. And what's next? To tell everyone where they come from (most often from incorrect edits of other users, but also in minority my mistakes, for example 90minut.pl conflation), to prove what I do with these errors - it is usually ineffective (see especially Kolja's behaviour).

I really don't know what the purpose of this is. The only explanation, unlikely, and I do not assume it, is to provoke my aggression and provoke offensive statements that would justify the blockade.

Therefore, I am waiting for the final decision of the administrators or for immediate unblocking. Obviously, the longer the waiting time, the more WD is lost. In fact, without me, the elements related to Poland (P31: Q5) would be (a term from the Danielmagical universe) "feces and lentils" xD. This is more than even, let's assume, several dozen wrong identifiers, the introduction of which could have been avoided if the goodwill of the other side and quick familiarization with the tools.

EOT at this moment.

You have not addressed most of the issues brought to you on this talk page in the last weeks and when you did, I mostly see attacks and insults. I have not seen any assurance of you that you will try to address any problems that may arise in the future in a timely manner. I have therefore decided not to lift your block. You are of course free to address your concerns of unfair treatment on WD:AN.

And yes, if such a request is not made by you, I will do it for you. It is a pity, because by telling me the alleged "lack of cooperation" you are not able to cooperate with me in minor matters. Even Multichill respected my request.

The AN request will be based on the following matrix:

Attempts to contact these users end up with a serious deterioration of my mental health, which even makes my daily functioning impossible. This is not asking for mercy, but an indication that there is very little inclusiveness towards people with disabilities (I assume this is not the first time) in this project. So I ask the following (I omit the reasons and the description of the situation, they are in the previous Multichill report as well as on my talk page, especially with a user named "Kolja ...").

If the block cannot be removed and the blocking administrator remains passive, I request that I be blocked completely, because I will not change my behavior, because I am not obliged to do so (there is no such written obligation). At the same time, I believe that my behavior is appropriate.

Simultaneously I deny the information that I do not want to cooperate. I have never said that, my actions also indicate it. Cooperation is not only about exchanging messages.

I deny that I am taking responsibility for edits out of myself. Edits marked with my username are mine, but the fallacy of these decisions may come from other users: those who, for example, incorrectly match the MnM element to the WD element, or those who know that the error does not repeat, you need to remove the match from MnM ( discussions with Kolja). The adequate cause-and-effect relationship is not on my side. This has been discussed many times, but the users attacking me are unable to accept it or present a valid argument against it.

It's sad that most likely only the administrator's opinion will count anyway. A user with a disability and communication problems (not due to ill will) will be at a loss here. Even if he repeatedly made concessions and compromises.

It might actually be too vain, but it's a shame WD won't have me. I did a lot and had even more in mind.

Obviously, I ask Kolja to respect my request not to join this discussion because, as I have proved in discussions with this user, he is biased towards me, acts in bad faith and is incapable of compromising.

I am sorry to hear that you are experiencing health problems. I am more than willing to meet you halfway but the things you keep demanding just aren’t acceptable:

1. Yes, cooperation isn’t only about exchanging messages but if there are legitimate concerns about your edits, we can’t really do without exchanging messages. At the very least you should cease to perform controversial types of edit.
2. Yes, we have discussed the MnM issue many, many times. But as you have been told repeatedly, there is no obligation to use MnM in a way that you want to. And that’s really the end of the story, I’m afraid. It is your obligation to sanitize any edits that rely on MnM information. If you can’t do it, just don’t import MnM data.
3. I have yet to see any concession or willingness to compromise on your part. You seem to have resorted to trolling me by pinging me in random discussions. While this doesn’t affect any blocking or unblocking decisions, this isn’t really helpful at all.

Maybe you could pledge not to perform certain controversial types of edits like MnM imports? That would be a good way to find a way that you can continue to benefit this project. --Emu (talk) 16:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

At this point I think it's better to go for a community ban. Matlin isn't learning and keeps making the same mistake.

@Emu:

Of course, I haven't forgotten about the case, I'm busy with my new job. I'm not sure what tactics I'll take yet. But now I see that I am being treated unfairly. I've noticed many examples of not responding to issues (Nurni), not being banned for supposedly incorrect edits (Vojtěch Dostál). Recently, Reinheitsgebot flooded WD with external identifiers (BTW Kolya must have had a heart attack xD). Partly also on my own initiative (I work in MnM) This is also good. You still have the option of unblocking me amicably, then if my request is accepted by the administrators (small chance, but still), you will be accused of abuse for a longer period.

Duly noted.

I'm out of the loop. What happened, again?

@Trade I just pinged you because you wrote something on GTA VI on their talk page without a response.

That got solved by someone else long time ago. I have nothing to add here

Hello! I have a question about Mix'n'match. When I do the "Manually sync catalog" function, you are automatically listed as the user who "matched" the items that it retrieves from existing Wikidata statements. I was wondering why that is? For instance, see the matches in https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/catalog/5534.

I can see you aren't the one that added them on Wikidata, even some that I added are attributed to you. Why you? Thanks!

It is manual sync from https://mix-n-match.toolforge.org/#/sync/5534 (first button). That means: id's already present in Wikidata are added to MnM catalogue.

Does the one that presses the button get the credit?

see description of this page

I'm working with the BNE id and i'm undoing several of your edits. I have found 310 values ​​that are in two elements and most have been set by you. Please be careful. Thanks.

You seem to have added a lot of redundant incorrect claims like . Please clean up these incorrect edits. Will block if you're not responsive again.

Never got any response. I'm reverting your batches and cleaning up your mess. I see you're already blocked. Let's keep it that way because this isn't working.

It is wasting of good edits (on the verge of vandalism). Besides, there are still references to Q29999 in frwiki. Someone in the future (sooner or later) will repeat this batch, as I did many times. @Syced:, you should delete this too.

Ask @Emu: for immediate unblock, if I could edit, you can point me to the problematic batches that I will MANUALLY check, item by item.

He still blocks me for an unjustified reason (and so did you, but you have reflected on yourself - explaining it with a lack of time, but it's still better behavior than Emu or some administrators on Commons, which I appreciate).

As I said, I still think your block is necessary. The corresponding rationale in the blocking policy would be #1: local abuse because a pattern of local abuse has been established. I’m the fourth admin to block you for the same behavior so I somehow doubt that this is against policy. I might be wrong. Again, if you disagree, the right place would be to complain at WD:AN. Pinging me at random discussions won’t change much.

Discussion is over.

For example Apparently you are taking Mix-n-match for bare truth without checking. This is not hepful.

I don't have bot XD And you don't delete wrong matches in MnM, nor talking to match authors (User:Tagishsimon in this case). And if you want me to correct something here, ask User:Kolja21 .

You made the edit, please take responsibility for your actions. It’s not an “unjustified complaint.” It’s correct that you are blocked at the moment not least because of your unwillingness to take responsibility for your actions and to show efforts to cooperate with other users.

Please do not get involved in a discussion that does not concern you, because your statements are manipulation: I have never said anywhere that I am not cooperating with users, and my previous statements and editions testify to this. If you do not know my statements, please refrain from doing so. I am also waiting for your activities in AN.

Hello, please check your massive edits: in the item above, it's impossible he died in 1990 since he was born in 1985 --

Have you read the message above? I undid your edit 3 times. Get stop please

Unfortunately this user only responses when he is blocked. Please leave a message @Wikidata:Administrators' noticeboard.