Open main menu

Property talk:P1056

Documentation

product or material produced
material or product produced by a government agency, business, industry, facility, or process
Representsproduct (Q2424752)
Data typeItem
Template parametere.g. Template:Infobox mine (Q6157431) : "products ="
Domain
According to this template: chemical elements, metals, rocks, oil & gas (= natural resources)
According to statements in the property:
organization (Q43229), industry (Q8148), facility (Q13226383), process (Q3249551), mine (Q820477), brand (Q431289), community (Q177634), craft (Q2207288), government agency (Q327333), profession (Q28640), occupation (Q12737077) and human (Q5)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed valuestypes of chemical substance (Q79529) (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
ExampleJaduguda Uranium Mine (Q15229130)uranium (Q1098)
Groningen gas field (Q2069152)natural gas (Q40858)
SourceMostly various websites and some fact books. (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896))
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P1056 (Q21037880)
See alsomanufacturer (P176), material used (P186), fabrication method (P2079), by-product (P2821), natural product of taxon (P1582), produced by (P2849), has effect (P1542), produced sound (P4733)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses11,052
Search for values

Limit to materials or expand to all products?Edit

We need to be able to claim things like, this factory produces cars, aircraft, etc. or that this company's products are mobile devices.

But, should we create a new property for products, or use this one? Danrok (talk) 15:35, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

In the property proposal, Snipre suggests that this would be a good use for this property, to which I agree (and apparently you do also). I see little reason not to; there may be some clarification needed in other languages however. @Infovarius, snipre:. --Izno (talk) 12:51, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Of which class would be target? --Infovarius (talk) 14:40, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
If you are referring to the current constraints, I think the "organization" constraint is fine. The other constraint would need to be removed or modified to "chemical OR product OR etc." Are the constraints what you are asking about? --Izno (talk) 14:55, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
I agree about expanding this property. When considering finished products, P1056 is the inverse of P176, so I would say target classes should be the same as the domain classes of Property:P176, plus Q79529, so: Q79529 or Q2424752 or Q811430. The only issue is that P176 has leaky constraints with items that are "model"s, such as Q3231690, which is a constraint violation at P176 and actually the number one user of P176. So maybe also include Q17444171 for both the domain of P176 and the targets of P1056. --Haplology (talk) 02:42, 14 April 2015 (UTC)

  Comment I expanded values to goods (Q28877)     because it is associated with process (Q3249551)     and organization (Q43229)     d1g (talk) 07:44, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Expanding this property for the domains of biology and medicineEdit

A similar property is required for biology and medicine, I have initiated a property proposal for its reverse property 'produced by'. Instead of generating a new property 'produces', the domain of this one could be expanded for biology and medicine. Sebotic (talk) 00:51, 3 October 2015 (UTC)


Andrew Su
Marc Robinson-Rechavi
Pierre Lindenbaum
Michael Kuhn
Boghog
Emw
Chandres
Dan Bolser
Pradyumna
Chinmay
Timo Willemsen
Salvatore Loguercio
Tobias1984
Daniel Mietchen
Optimale
Mcnabber091
Ben Moore
Alex Bateman
Klortho
Hypothalamus
Vojtěch Dostál
Gtsulab
Andra Waagmeester
Sebotic
Mvolz
Toniher
Elvira Mitraka
David Bikard
Dan Lawson
Francesco Sirocco
Konrad U. Förstner (talk)
Chris Mungall (talk)
Kristina Hettne
Hardwigg
i9606
Putmantime
Tinm
Karima Rafes
Finn Årup Nielsen
Jasper Koehorst
Till Sauerwein
Crowegian
Nothingserious
Okkn
AlexanderPico
Amos Bairoch
Gstupp
DePiep
Was a bee
SarahKeating
Muhammad Elhossary
Ptolusque
Netha
Damian Szklarczyk
Kpjas
Thibdx
Juliansteinb
TiagoLubiana
SCIdude
  Notified participants of WikiProject Molecular biology Tobias1984
Doc James
User:Bluerasberry
Wouterstomp
Gambo7
Daniel Mietchen
Andrew Su
Peter.C
Klortho
Remember
Matthiassamwald
Projekt ANA
Andrux
Pavel Dušek
Was a bee
Alepfu
FloNight
Genewiki123
Emw
emitraka
Lschriml
Mvolz
Franciaio
User:Lucas559
User:Jtuom
Chris Mungall
ChristianKl
Gstupp
Geoide
Sintakso
علاء
Dr. Abhijeet Safai
Adert
CFCF
Jtuom
Lucas559
Drchriswilliams
Okkn
CAPTAIN RAJU
LeadSongDog
Ozzie10aaaa
Sami Mlouhi
Marsupium
Netha Hussain
Abhijeet Safai
ShelleyAdams
Fractaler
Seppi333
Shani Evenstein
Csisc
linuxo
Arash
Morgankevinj
Anandhisuresh
TiagoLubiana
ZI Jony
Viveknalgirkar
  Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine

@Sebotic: The type statistics Wikidata:Database_reports/Constraint_violations/P1056#Types_statistics_2 already show that the property has been adapted to many use cases. If you think your use-case fits with the others we just have to update the constraint template and some of the descriptions. --Tobias1984 (talk) 10:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
@Tobias1984: Yes, I think that would work very well as a biologic cell, tissue, organ, gland is basically a biochemical factory. Furthermore, the National Cancer Institute Thesaurus (C51980), the Bio Assay Ontology (BAO_0003067) and the Systems Biology Ontology (SBO_0000011) know the concept of 'product'. Thanks! Sebotic (talk) 05:18, 4 October 2015 (UTC)
How would this be a similar property? What is the relation between the two? Could you give a simple description that would cover the full use of this property were it to be extended as you propose? --Yair rand (talk) 06:52, 16 December 2015 (UTC)

Why not "has product"?Edit

I think the English label of this property should be changed to has product, in order to emphasize the fact that the subject is the producer and the object is the product. In general I find that property labels have a clearer meaning when they contain verbs. Mushroom (talk) 16:40, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

why is subclass of product not validEdit

Why is product (Q15401930) and their subclasses like artwork not valid for this item? A product is the result of a production process. --Hannolans (talk) 12:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

@Hannolans: Probably because the "relation" (P2309) of "value type constraint" (Q21510865) was "instance of" (Q21503252), the items as class were not valid. I changed the "relation" from "instance of" to "instance or subclass of" (Q30208840). Hope this can solve the problem. --Neo-Jay (talk) 23:45, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

CraftsEdit

Can we add craft (Q2207288) as a valid class of subjects for this property, so that "lacemaking" <material produced> lace is a valid statement? - PKM (talk) 18:20, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Support. Swpb (talk) 15:33, 3 July 2018 (UTC)
No objections, so I will make that change. - PKM (talk) 03:58, 9 July 2018 (UTC)


(Open) StandardsEdit

Please support open standard (Q681263) as a valid class of subject for this property. --Mcrusoe (talk) 11:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)

Products of brandEdit

Will it be right to use this property for brand (Q431289) and trademark (Q167270)? For example,

--Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

The brand doesn't produce the material, so I would assume not. --Yair rand (talk) 02:29, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
Return to "P1056" page.