Property talk:P1092
Documentation
quantity of item produced
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#Range
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#Type Q2424752, Q1002697, Q3331189, Q10943, Q559026, Q10929058, Q21146257, Q571, Q113813711, Q811701, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#Single value, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#Units
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#integer, SPARQL
|
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Discussion edit
domain: instance??? edit
The constraint demands the domain item to be an instance. This seems to be paradox to me. For instances the value of total produced (P1092) should always be 1, shouldn't it? All domain items have to describe classes I think. So let us change the constraint! (BTW: I have proposed to replace product (Q2424752) in the constraint with artificial physical object (Q15222213) here.) --Marsupium (talk) 14:55, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
- Hi, no objection to using artificial physical object (Q15222213), but "total produced" suggests a product. Regarding "instance of" rather than "subclass of", again I don't object changing it: looking at one example: Honda Civic (fourth generation) (Q1268524), that is both instance of (P31)=motor car (Q1420) and subclass of (P279)=Honda Civic (Q216747). Since Honda Civic (Q216747) is subclass of motor car (Q1420) which is subclass of product (Q2424752), the constraint is already respected whether we use "instance" or "subclass". I kind of agree that items bearing "number produced" will more commonly be classes (weird, in the violation report there seems to be as many violations as there are items using the property! I don't understand why.) LaddΩ chat ;) 23:03, 25 April 2014 (UTC)
Domain - add Limited edition edit
I'd like to add limited edition (Q6549529) as a valid domain for this item, so we can use it for the press run of limited edition books and vinyl records. I'd also like to add made from material (P186) as a valid qualifier (see Kelmscott Chaucer (Q4219142) for an example - there were 425 copies printed on paper and 13 on vellum). Any objections? - PKM (talk) 21:26, 23 July 2018 (UTC)
- @Marsupium, Laddo: FYI... - PKM (talk) 20:09, 26 July 2018 (UTC)
- Both changes seem OK to me. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 01:17, 27 July 2018 (UTC)
Units edit
No unit is allowed for this property, but there are edits like this. Is there any better property or this should be modified? Wostr (talk) 22:21, 28 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Wostr: this constraint was added by @ערן: and indeed, I'm not sure it's a good idea. In most cases, a unit is needed and useful. I think we should adapt this constraint to allow unit. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 09:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
- VIGNERON and Wostr, thank you for raising this issue. I understand the meaning of this property as "total number produced" based on the examples in the top of this page and in the Property:P1092#P1855 but maybe I misunderstood it. I changed it 0.5 year ago and I don't remember what was the trigger. Looking in Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P1092#Units statistics, it looks like minority of ~1.5% of the usages compared to no units are tonne (Q191118). This usage looks little bit non conventional, maybe there is a better property to cover it? (I admit I can't find any better) If we allow any unit, would range constraint (Q21510860) will be still relevant? Anyhow, I don't object to adapting this constraint, but it would be nice to include example for usage that has units. Thanks, Eran (talk) 10:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
use for circulation edit
It feels odd to use this for newspaper circulation, which is a rate (i. e. units / time) and not a total. I happened upon all days of the week (Q26214163) and its suprisingly close to a reasonable way to model this... but that's obviously still lacking, although the worst problems are probably hidden right by the invalid "unitless" requirement.
| total produced (P1092) |
| ||||||||||||||
| add value | |||||||||||||||
I'm wondering if a new property is needed, or if it might suffice to change the name here. Something slightly more general than total produced might work, such as production numbers (or quantity)? Suggestions welcome. --Matthias Winkelmann (talk) 00:51, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Out of range for 126960000 ? edit
I wanted to add some production statistics for various important China manufacturing cities from official sources. I noticed that there was a constraint violation that I don't understand why it is not within the allowed range. Help? See entity Anhui (Q40956) and the "coal" production statistics I tried to add.
The value for total produced (126,960,000 tonne) should be between 0 and 10,000,000,000.
--Thadguidry (talk) 18:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)
Downgrade lack of citation from an error to a warning edit
Total produced does not need a citation any more than any other wikidata property, so I propose downgrading the current harsh error its omission produces to a warning. Vicarage (talk) 08:29, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
- Turns out you can't change it to a warning, so I've removed it entirely. Vicarage (talk) 21:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)