Wikidata:Property proposal/depicted part

depicted part edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Done: depicted part (P5961) (Talk and documentation)

Description	qualifier to indicate the part of the object that is depicted
Data type	Item
Example 1	Interior of the Saint Paul's church of Antwerp (Q17320036) depicts (P180) St. Paul's Church (Q2272511) → depicted part: interior (Q2998430)
Example 2	AMERIQUE MERIDIONALE divisée en ses Principales Parties (Nicolas Sanson, 1719) (Q56753858) depicts (P180) South America (Q18) → depicted part: whole (Q16868672)
Example 3	CARTE DE LA TERRE FERME DU PEROU, DU BRESIL ET DU PAYS DES AMAZONES (Guillaume de L'Isle, 1703-1708) (Q56759864) depicts (P180) South America (Q18) → depicted part: part (Q15989253)
Planned use	I'd particularly like to be able to record whether maps cover the whole of the object they are said to depict, or only part
See also	depicts (P180), shown with features (P1354)

Motivation edit

Where we have a depicts (P180) statement, it is useful to be able to record whether the whole of the object is depicted, or only a part, and if possible to identify that part.

After a quick enquiry at Project Chat, (here), it seems we don't have a good property for this. applies to part (P518) applies to the subject of the depicts (P180) statement, not its object. shown with features (P1354) specifies features that the object is depicted with (survey: tinyurl.com/y8enulvs), but isn't really appropriate to specify that only a part of the object is depicted. object has role (P3831) is really for what the object is doing or what its significance is, not really for specifying a part of the object, plus object has role (P3831) = part (Q15989253) would be very ambiguous -- part of what? proportion (P1107) = 1 is conceivable, but would be obscure and cryptic.

Given the imperfection of all of the above, the best route seems to be a specific new property. Jheald (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Proposed. Jheald (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support it seems something like this is needed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:45, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment seems like a duplicate of applies to part (P518) , or at least it has been used for that in the past. author TomT0m / talk page 20:00, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
although there might be an ambiguity in which part of the picture depicts which part of the depicted item … I’d tend to think it’s in a lot of cases useful to create items for the parts to describe them with proper statements, qualifiers have their limits. author TomT0m / talk page 20:10, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cwf97 (talk) 16:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support - PKM (talk) 20:25, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support David (talk) 08:32, 4 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd suggest this might be generalized to be "part of object", to cover other cases where applies to part (P518) has been used wrongly. The art use case is an important one, but probably not the only such case.--Pharos (talk) 07:12, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I’m not convinced. The risk of being used as a catch all property and encourage sloppiness is very high. Do you have example usecase ? author TomT0m / talk page 07:38, 5 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The most obvious case I can think of is a qualifier using "part of object" on made from material (P186), as opposed to describing the witches' brew of Three Witches (Q15698345) with the ingredient "eye of (P642) newt". Not sure how proper it actually is to use P642 in that way; if it isn't perhaps it could be replaced by "newt -part of object- eye".--Pharos (talk) 02:35, 6 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support To be clear, I support this proposal, though I did have an idea for it possibly being broader.--Pharos (talk) 18:30, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nepalicoi (talk) 17:12, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I find this qualifier to be a nice addition but still very vague. Which are the possible values? Only part, entirely and interior. If there is picture which only shows the hand and head of a person, what should the depicted part value be: 1. hand; head. 2. body part. 3. part. It's best to write some manual to ensure proper use. Germartin1 (talk) 08:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure the intended use is the most specific value, in this case 1. hand; head.--Pharos (talk) 16:24, 14 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Pharos, ArthurPSmith, Nepalicoi, PKM, Cwf97: @TomT0m, Jheald: Done: depicted part (P5961). − Pintoch (talk) 11:45, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]