Property talk:P1071
Documentation
place where the item was conceived or made; where applicable, location of final assembly
if [item A] has this property (location of creation (P1071)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Contemporary, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Target required claim P31, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Value type Q618123, Q3895768, Q17334923, Q868557, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Type Q8205328, Q3231690, Q559026, Q17489659, Q3407658, Q2095, Q10929058, Q17334923, Q386724, Q2031291, Q98142361, Q15306849, Q978, Q43229, Q9779, Q17537576, Q3658341, Q214609, Q728, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Conflicts with P740, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1071#Scope, SPARQL
(Help)
Violations query:
SELECT ?item ?value { ?item wdt:P1071 ?value. ?value wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q3895768. FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?item wdt:P1080 [] } FILTER NOT EXISTS {?item (wdt:P31/wdt:P279*|wdt:P279*) wd:Q14897293} }
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1071#Fictional
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Manufactured objects edit
I would propose that for manufactured objects, the valid value is the assembly plant, not the place where parts were made. For ships, I think we can provide the shipyard here. --Zolo (talk) 06:17, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
- No! For ships use P198 (P198) for the shipyard. Use this property only for ships not built in a proper shipyard. /ℇsquilo 10:25, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
- @Esquilo: I guess that no longer applies...--Micru (talk) 09:12, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
- Current practice is to use manufacturer (P176) for the shipyard. Revent (talk) 14:29, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
- But manufacturer (P176) is actually a company who is building particular ship, and this company can own few shipyards in different places..! Or company can even have a headquarters (and registration) in one place, but shipyards who is physically assembling ships in another place ! This property (location of creation (P1071)) is specifying an actual "place of final assembly". I think we also can use this property as a qualifier to manufacturer (P176). --Rodion 4000+ (talk) 04:01, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
Propose rename edit
Given that "final assembly" is not relevant to many of the artworks this property is applied to, I propose the label be modified to simply "location of creation", and details about final assembly, where applicable, should only go in the property description.--Pharos (talk) 20:51, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes I agree. The "final" part of the name sounds like some old dispute about parts and/or packaging and shouldn't be in there. For most things it is not relevant as qualifiers can do the rest. Jane023 (talk) 12:00, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I strongly agree, for books, paintings, records and many other creative works the phrasing 'final assembly' seems out of place --OlafJanssen (talk) 17:40, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Pharos: thanks for bringing this up and changing it. A good improvement. Multichill (talk) 21:18, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
Mountain as location of creation edit
Why can't I state a mountain as location of creation (P1071)? I tried it on Commons SDC but there is a value-type constraint (Q21510865). A mountain is currently not considered to be a geographic region (Q82794). I think either that should be changed or the value type constraint should be changed to also include mountains.--Leit (talk) 08:32, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Allow materials edit
Could material (Q214609) or perhaps product (Q2424752) be permitted to have a location of creation (P1071)? Currently, Buchberg sandstone (Q106405643)location of creation (P1071)Guntliweid Quarry (Q106405518) is getting marked as a type constraint violation. --Sascha (talk) 08:32, 7 April 2021 (UTC)
Conflicts with country constraint edit
I removed the conflicts-with constraint (Q21502838) country (P17) constraint as it currently has about 13.000 violations (about 17%) and quite a few are legitimate usage. Quite a few are in cases where multiple domains overlap (like art and cultural heritage). Multichill (talk) 11:20, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Remove country constraint ? edit
Hi,
Given that 66 043 of 87 418 items (about 76 % !) don't have a country of origin (P495), and since it can be (more or less easily) infered in most case, I suggest to remove the P495 constraint.
@Multichill, Martimpassos, Danrok, MartinPoulter, Daniel Baránek, Nvrandow: @Jane023, Bodhisattwa, Ederporto: (top user of this property) what do you think ?
Cheers, VIGNERON en résidence (talk) 12:23, 21 April 2023 (UTC)
- I support that change. I think country of origin (P495) is useful to have, but need not be a requirement. MartinPoulter (talk) 11:13, 2 May 2023 (UTC)
- I have removed the constraint. For one reason I want to use this property for ideas that were derived at a regional, not country level. Vicarage (talk) 12:19, 2 October 2023 (UTC)