Wikidata:Property proposal/has group

has group edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Withdrawn

Description	group some of this group's parts are part of
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Example 1	Loona (Q28025953) → Odd Eye Circle (Q104842908), Loona 1/3 (Q101069486), Yyxy (Q104845871)
Example 2	population of the United States (Q110909121) → population of blacks in the United States (Q111507927)
Example 3	vertebral column (Q482853) → thoracic spine (Q994527), lumbar spine (Q66569716), cervical spine (Q1572320)

Motivation edit

I would like to use this to model musical unit group (Q18444336) as has subsidiary (P355) which is currently used and is not an appropriate property.

I would also like to use this to model populations.

This will be a subproperty of (P1647) has part(s) (P527) and a superproperty of has subsidiary (P355).

Lectrician1 (talk) 23:56, 7 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

It is somewhat unclear what this is for to me. I read "group some of this group's parts are part of" several times before I understood what you are trying to do. The label is a bit too vague—it sounds more like "belongs to group," but it seems you really want something like "has part which is a group". Is there some reason a value that is a subgroup cannot already be used in has part(s) (P527), though? Dominic (talk) 01:15, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dominic I'd particularly like this for musical unit groups because usually has part(s) (P527) is used for listing the members of a group and I don't want to mix the members with the unit groups. For example, see how https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q28025953#P527 stores the members of the group and https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q28025953#P355 stores the unit groups the members are part of (which I want to move to this proposed property). I don't want to mix those things. Separating them will also make querying more accurate. Lectrician1 (talk) 02:03, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t fully get it either.

For example in the third example, has part(s) (P527) should be typically used and I don’t understand why it should not be. Everything is made of other things, almost, so everything is a « group » of other things.

I think you imply that every group has a « type », for example a group of person is made of persons, and « subgroups » are parts of this things with the same type ? For example you’d want a property for the case where the group has a « person » part, and a property for the case where the part is itself a group of person ?

(Ironically, this is a very similar structure of instance of (P31) / subclass of (P279) that if I remember correctly you’d like to suppress)

If that is correct, I think the assumption is false for example for the third example. This is a body part made of other body parts, we don’t really know which kind of body parts it is. Is it supposed to be a group of bones or something like a more generic « body parts » which can be anything ? author TomT0m / talk page 13:36, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@TomT0m

> For example in the third example, has part or parts (P527) should be typically used and I don’t understand why it should not be.

Because has part(s) (P527) should be vertebra (Q180323) as that those are one of the "main components" along with the sacrum (Q233316) and coccyx (Q193176). Thoracic spine (Q994527), lumbar spine (Q66569716), cervical spine (Q1572320) are clearly the "groups" of the spine. Just look at the diagram linked on the item.

> Everything is made of other things, almost, so everything is a « group » of other things.

Yes, but where groups are specifically defined like musical unit groups, populations grouped in a census, or segment groups of a spine - having a property like this makes sense.

> that if I remember correctly you’d like to suppress

I don't anymore.

> we don’t really know which kind of body parts it is

That's okay. We don't need to know what kind of body part it is. We just need to know that it is a group, regardless if it has parts of the same type or not.

Do you not believe thoracic spine is a group? Lectrician1 (talk) 17:30, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notified participants of WikiProject Korean Entertainment Lectrician1 (talk) 17:31, 8 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support, an important property for connectivity.--Arbnos (talk) 18:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@EN-Jungwon @ReVeluv02 Consider supporting this? It's a property for KPOP subunits. Lectrician1 (talk) 17:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --EN-Jungwon 06:24, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose part of (P361) seems sufficient. I don't think has part(s) (P527) and has subsidiary (P355) are good examples to follow. They often lead to large numbers of statements on a single item, duplication of data and inconsistent data. - Nikki (talk) 05:23, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Nikki. Mahir256 (talk) 12:02, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]