Property talk:P1343

Documentation

• Start a query
• Current uses
• Statistics by class
• List of values
• List of qualifiers
• Count

described by source
work where this item is described

Description	The enumeration of sources where item is described. Dictionary, encyclopedia, etc. Qualificator stated in (P248) shall be used for links to particular article in Wikisource and reference URL (P854) for external reference. Recommended only for printed dictionaries and encyclopedias (including present at Wikisource or their own website). For sites like Internet Movie Database (Q37312) there are additional properties like IMDb ID (P345)
Represents	source of information (Q3523102)
Data type	Item
Template parameter	templates such as ru:Template:ВТ-ЭСБЕ, ru:Template:ВТ-РБС, links to britanica articles from en-wiki, etc.
Domain	any item (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Allowed values	Great Soviet Encyclopedia (Q234535), Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (Q602358), Encyclopædia Britannica 11th edition (Q867541), Russian Biographical Dictionary (Q1960551); any other value, depicting valuable source of information (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Usage notes	이 속성의 값엔 실제로 인쇄된 적이 있는 사전·백과사전 등의 문헌만 넣을 것을 권장합니다. 또한, 값으로 쓰는 문헌을 위키문헌에서 열람할 수 있다면 참고문헌에 "다음 문헌에 서술되어 있음"(P248) 속성을 넣은 뒤 해당 속성의 값에 해당 문헌(을 다룬 항목)을 넣어주시면 됩니다. 만약, 해당 문헌을 위키문헌이 아닌 다른 곳에서 열람할 수 있다면 참고문헌에 "참고한 URL"(P854) 속성을 넣은 뒤 해당 속성의 값에 해당 문헌을 열람할 수 있는 URL을 넣어주시면 됩니다. Skal ha P248 (nevnt i) som kvalifikator
Example	According to this template: print Vladimir K. Zworykin (Q296545) → Brockhaus Enzyklopädie (19 ed.) (Q17377889) with qualifiers volume (P478): "24", page(s) (P304): "672" and section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958): "Zworykin, Wladimir Kosma". item New York City (Q60) → Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (Q602358) with qualifier stated in (P248) with value BaEED / New-York (Q16947036) URL New York City (Q60) → Encyclopædia Britannica 11th edition (Q867541) with qualifier reference URL (P854) with value "http://www.theodora.com/encyclopedia/n/new_york_city.html" According to statements in the property: Vladimir K. Zworykin (Q296545) → Brockhaus Enzyklopädie (19 ed.) (Q17377889) New York City (Q60) → Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (Q602358) metaphysics (Q35277) → Metaphysics (Q661655) George Henry Richards (Q3101646) → A Naval Biographical Dictionary (Q16055052) When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Format and edit filter validation	either link to item with wikisource link or URL should present (may be both)
Tracking: usage	Category:Pages using Wikidata property P1343 (Q51718868)
See also	described at URL (P973), present in work (P1441), complies with (P5009), depicted by (P1299)
Lists	Items with no other statements Most recently created items Items with novalue claims Items with unknown value claims Usage history (total) Usage history (main statement) Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1343 Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343 Map Random list
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 2,219,133 Main statement 2,179,649 98.2% of uses Qualifier 38,819 1.7% of uses Reference 665 <0.1% of uses
Search for values

[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]

Value type “work (Q386724), version, edition or translation (Q3331189), concept (Q151885), correspondence (Q1277575), list (Q12139612), web page (Q36774), book (Q571), scientific book (Q7433672), biography (Q36279), GLAM (Q1030034), video recording (Q34508), group of works (Q17489659), publisher (Q2085381), organization (Q43229), Holocaust train journey (Q61927259), YouTube video (Q63412991)”: This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31), subclass of (P279)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31), subclass of (P279) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value work (Q386724), version, edition or translation (Q3331189), concept (Q151885), correspondence (Q1277575), list (Q12139612), web page (Q36774), book (Q571), scientific book (Q7433672), biography (Q36279), GLAM (Q1030034), video recording (Q34508), group of works (Q17489659), publisher (Q2085381), organization (Q43229), Holocaust train journey (Q61927259), YouTube video (Q63412991) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#Value type Q386724, Q3331189, Q151885, Q1277575, Q12139612, Q36774, Q571, Q7433672, Q36279, Q1030034, Q34508, Q17489659, Q2085381, Q43229, Q61927259, Q63412991, SPARQL

Conflicts with “instance of (P31): Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410), Wikipedia language edition (Q10876391)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL

Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#Scope, SPARQL

None of Wikipedia (Q52), Fandom (Q17459), Internet Movie Database (Q37312), TV Tropes (Q2537428), IMVDb (Q16985801), Spotify (Q689141), Deezer (Q602243), MusicBrainz (Q14005), LyricsTranslate (Q66429487), AllMusic (Q31181), MyAnimeList (Q4044680), AniDB (Q56193019), Anime News Network (Q220509), Discogs (Q504063), Facebook (Q355), X (Q918), DeviantArt (Q46523), Tumblr (Q384060), Snapchat (Q333618), Instagram (Q209330), YouTube (Q866), Vienna History Wiki (Q18029622), Infogalactic (Q55075031): value must not be any of the specified items.
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)

List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#none of, hourly updated report, SPARQL

None of Everipedia (Q44960346), encyclopedia.com (Q48968006), Miraheze (Q42671570), Fandom wiki (Q106513246), Fandom (Q17459), All the Tropes (Q70487275): value must not be any of the specified items.
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#none of, SPARQL

None of Rate Your Music (Q1145963): value must not be any of the specified items.
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#none of, SPARQL

None of Model Mayhem (Q100370116), ReverbNation (Q2146790): value must not be any of the specified items.
Replacement property: website account on (P553)
Replacement values: (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#none of, SPARQL

Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase property (Q29934218), Wikibase lexeme (Q51885771), Wikibase sense (Q54285715), Wikibase form (Q54285143): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#Entity types

None of book (Q571), official website (Q22137024), website (Q35127), web page (Q36774), scientific publication (Q591041), scholarly article (Q13442814), database (Q8513), photograph (Q125191), news article (Q5707594), article (Q191067): value must not be any of the specified items.
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1343#none of, SPARQL

If property value equals to A Naval Biographical Dictionary (Q16055052) then claim military branch (P241) = Royal Navy (Q172771) will be created automatically. Testing: TODO list

If property value equals to A Naval Biographical Dictionary (Q16055052) then claim occupation (P106) = naval officer (Q10669499) will be created automatically. Testing: TODO list

If property value equals to A Naval Biographical Dictionary (Q16055052) then claim sex or gender (P21) = male (Q6581097) will be created automatically. Testing: TODO list

Redundancy of P1343 with existing external identifiers
(Help)
Violations query: SELECT ?p1343 ?p1343Label ?p ?pLabel ?entities ?sample WITH { SELECT ?p1343 ?p (COUNT(?entity) AS ?entities) (SAMPLE(?entity) AS ?sample) { ?entity wdt:P1343 ?p1343 ; ?prop [] . ?p wikibase:directClaim ?prop ; wdt:P9073 ?p1343 . } GROUP BY ?p1343 ?p } AS %counts WHERE { include %counts . SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". } } ORDER BY DESC(?entities)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1343#Redundancy of P1343 with existing external identifiers

This property is being used by: ruwiki ru:Шаблон:Внешние ссылки ru:Модуль:External links ru:Модуль:Sources ru:Модуль:Wikidata ruwikisource ru:s:Модуль:Другие источники da:Skabelon:Infoboks person, da:Skabelon:Infoboks Wikidata person, da:Skabelon:Infoboks F1 kører, da:Skabelon:Infoboks forsker, da:Skabelon:Infoboks kunstner, da:Skabelon:Infoboks pave, da:Skabelon:Infoboks sygdom, da:Skabelon:Infoboks flod, da:Skabelon:Infoboks forfatter, da:Skabelon:Infoboks kanal, da:Skabelon:Infoboks Adelsslægt, da:Skabelon:Infoboks organisation, da:Skabelon:Infoboks seriemorder, da:Skabelon:Infoboks tennisspiller, da:Skabelon:Infoboks virksomhed, da:Skabelon:Infoboks trossamfund, da:Skabelon:Infoboks F1-kører hy:Կաղապար:Տեղեկաքարտ Անատոմիա, hy:Կաղապար:Տեղեկաքարտ Գիտնական, hy:Կաղապար:Տեղեկաքարտ Գիտնական (արեւմտահայերէն), hy:Կաղապար:Տեղեկաքարտ Զարկերակ uk:Шаблон:Архітектор, uk:Шаблон:Залізниця, uk:Шаблон:Картка компанії, uk:Шаблон:Картка:Бібліотека, uk:Шаблон:Музей, uk:Шаблон:Населений пункт Словаччини, uk:Шаблон:Газове родовище, uk:Шаблон:Родовище, uk:Шаблон:Твір, uk:Шаблон:Картка компанії тест ar:قالب:معلومات تدخل طبي (جديد), ar:قالب:معلومات مرض, ar:قالب:معلومات تدخل طبي, ar:قالب:صندوق معلومات تدخل طبي, ar:قالب:صندوق معلومات مرض diq:Şablon:Infobox Dewe tt:Калып:Музыка уен коралы ca:Plantilla:Infotaula format de fitxer arz:قالب:معلومات مرض, arz:قالب:معلومات وباء ary:موضيل:تصنيفات د معلومات مدينة أترية, ary:موضيل:معلومات كائن, ary:موضيل:معلومات مدينة أترية, ary:موضيل:معلومات مطايفة عسكارية, ary:موضيل:معلومات مطايفة مدنية, ary:موضيل:معلومات جبل, ary:موضيل:معلومات كائن ؤسطوري mzn:شابلون:صندخ/مریضی Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

Discussion

Usage

@Vlsergey: You have deleted the example:

• Vladimir K. Zworykin (Q296545) → Brockhaus Enzyklopädie (19 ed.) (Q17377889) with qualificators P357 (P357): "Zworykin, Wladimir Kosma", volume (P478): "24" and page(s) (P304): "672"

The property is used already in this way. I don't understand why these references should be wrong. Are there better ways to add them? --Kolja21 (talk) 10:14, 20 July 2014 (UTC)

• This is my mistake, i confused German Brockhaus Enzyklopädie (19 ed.) (Q17377889) with Russian Brockhaus and Efron Encyclopedic Dictionary (Q602358). I would be incorrect to add German P357 (P357) to Russian dictionary, and vice versa. -- Vlsergey (talk) 07:40, 21 July 2014 (UTC)
  • Perfect. Thanks! I'm sure this property will be of great help. --Kolja21 (talk) 16:28, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

Note: I've changed P357 (P357) to section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958) like suggested by Micru from Wikidata:WikiProject Books. --Kolja21 (talk) 16:38, 24 July 2014 (UTC)

This is supposed to be used as reference only, right!? /ℇsquilo 12:14, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

@Esquilo:, nej, jag tror den (också) kan användas som bas-property. Den kan beskriva att subjektet omtalas i Y. -- Innocent bystander (talk) 12:04, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Example 1

Example for a printed encyclopedia (English):

Wikidata: Property P1343 („described by source“)

Example 2

Example for an online encyclopedia (German):

Wikidata: Eigenschaft P1343 („beschrieben in“)

Biblioteca Europea di Informazione e Cultura (Q3639582) as source

Biblioteca Europea di Informazione e Cultura (Q3639582), German National Library (Q27302) and some other libraries was used as value for this property. I'm not sure that it's a good practice. Maybe we need to create elements like "catalog of Biblioteca Europea di Informazione e Cultura (Q3639582)" and use them instead? —putnik 16:07, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

@putnik: +1. Instead of German National Library (Q27302) one should use GND ID (P227) (= authority file of names, subjects, and organizations). --Kolja21 (talk) 21:23, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Une infinité de qualifiants pour cette propriété

Bonjour, je pense que cette propriété va poser problème à l'avenir. Elle est utilisée pour regrouper toutes les encyclopédies et dictionnaires (papier ou virtuel) qui décrivent l'élément en question. Or il y en a des dizaines dans chaque langue, et sans doute des centaines pour des langues mondiales (anglais, français, espagnol). A terme, cette propriété va devenir ingérable pour chacun des éléments. Est-il envisagé que cette propriété ait juste une utilité temporaire, le temps d'avoir une majorité de propriétés/qualifiants référencés dans Wikidata, et donc qu'elle soit supprimée à l'avenir ? --Consulnico (talk) 10:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Est-ce un problème réel? Pouvez-vous indiquer un exemple? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 21:59, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Bonjour Fnielsen. Je vais prendre l'exemple de Jean-Jacques Rousseau, qui est sans doute référencé dans des centaines de dictionnaires dans le monde. Ce n'est pas un problème aujourd'hui, car seuls 4 dictionnaires sont indiqués, mais il pourrait y en avoir bien plus à l'avenir. Il n'y a qu'à voir le nombre d'identifiants de base de données listés ensuite. --Consulnico (talk) 14:35, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

Allowed values? Non-encyclopedias?

During a discussion about how one can indicate the canonical work for a specific topic, e.g., that Natural Language Processing with Python (Q28193986) describes and can be regarded as the canonical description of Natural Language Toolkit (Q1635410) Daniel Mietchen suggested to use described by source (P1343) to indicate that. I have just made a tentative edit on Natural Language Toolkit (Q1635410) using described by source (P1343). It is not clear from the "Allowed values" that this is ok, and the description states "Recommended only for printed dictionaries and encyclopedias". What are the opinions about this issue? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 16:32, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

For clarification: all the descriptions I see talks only about "dictionary, encyclopaedia, etc." (e.g., "Wörterbuch, Enzyklopädie etc.", "dictionnaire ou encyclopédie qui décrit l'entité", and similar for Nordic languages). We need to change the description of the property if works such as NLTK: the natural language toolkit (Q30452988) and Natural Language Processing with Python (Q28193986) are ok as values. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 19:54, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

As noted above for BEIC, P1343 is currently the best known solution for a number of non-encyclopedic sources which for whatever reason are considered relevant in each case. If someone knows a better solution, I'd like to know as well. Sometimes P528 is appropriate. --Nemo 15:54, 22 July 2018 (UTC)

Encyclopedias

A common case is that a encyclopedia (Q5292) is a collection of work (Q386724). This will give a lot of exception rules! Jeblad (talk) 18:29, 9 August 2017 (UTC)

Use with P248 as qualifier

WD:PC#described by source (P1343) and use of stated in (P248) as qualifier rather than reference. --Yair rand (talk) 10:16, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Inverse property

Is there a property that could be defined as the inverse property (P1696) of this one? This would be useful for sources that cover one or few topics, rather than generalist sources like encyclopedias. Would main subject (P921) be acceptable for this role (assuming it is acceptable that it may take multiple values)? --Waldir (talk) 11:11, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Qualifier

subject named as (P1810) should also be possible as qualifier. --Anvilaquarius (talk) 17:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

@Anvilaquarius:  Done I agree, I was wondering why I got a constraint violation on Adolf Héron (Q60194029). Multichill (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

@Talkpagelinktext: I'd like to use Youtube Video ID when using described by source. Possible? Dprophitjr (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Can be used for every encyclopedia or only for the most authoritative ones?

This property can be used also for encyclopedias like techopedia?--Malore (talk) 15:33, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

To follow... Can any scholarly article item be used here? Trilotat (talk) 15:35, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Why can't be used URL qualifier?

Can be used "reference URL", but shouldn't be more appropriate "URL"?--Malore (talk) 20:57, 19 April 2018 (UTC)

identifiers as qualifiers

Why the only identifier allowed as a qualifier is Google Book ID? --Malore (talk) 23:39, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

@Malore: agreed, I think Google Books ID (P675) should be removed (as this id should already be on the specific item about the edition). @Oursana: could you explain why you added this qualifier as allowed? For information, it's only used on 20 items so far and most of them seems a bit strange, see query. Q2529899#P1343 or Q15980184#P1343 for instance are most strange, there should be an item about this edition. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:26, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

I made an item for the edition

This could be the reason of my change [1]--Oursana (talk) 10:56, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for the change Oursana !

For this, is the Google Books ID (P675) value really needed? It is already on the specific item so it's seems unnecessarily redundant to me, isn't it? Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 11:43, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

You are right, I changed it Cdlt--Oursana (talk) 11:51, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks again. So, I guess we can remove this qualifier everywhere and then remove the constraint. I'll wait some days in case someone want to take part in this discussion. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 11:58, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Value constraint

Why do we want instances of “works” here and not of “versions or editions”? In some cases, not all editions of an encyclopedia or other reference will cover a specific recent (or outdated) topic. - PKM (talk) 20:04, 13 December 2018 (UTC)

@PKM: +1, I guess accepting only version, edition or translation (Q3331189) (and subclasses) would make more sense. But a lot of value would need a cleaning before changing this constraint. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 10:34, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

The language of the source

Even though the language of the source mentioned (or should be mentioned) in the encyclopedia still the language is needed as qualifier. Geagea (talk) 20:24, 22 May 2019 (UTC)

Property constraint language of work or name

Suggestion that we add property constraint (P2302) language of work or name (P407) to make it easier to present sources in preferred language of the reader - Salgo60 (talk) 12:37, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Mandatory language qualifier?

@Salgo60: Hello. In this edit a constraint was added to make the language of work or name (P407) qualifier mandatory. Is that indeed necessary? So far the sources that I've been using with this property already state which language they are in. Therefore, stating the language again in every place in which the source is used looks like duplication. I therefore suggest to at least reduce the constraint to "voluntary", or potentially eliminate it. (I consider this qualifier useful in cases where the source contains multiple languages, so I'm not opposing its use; I'm just concerned about the mandatory nature of the constraint.) Toni 001 (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

@Toni 001: I deleted it 5 minutes later ;-) but added a comment on this discussion page...

• The scenarion I see is that we start add good sources to Wikidata and when an article writer shall write something then we can suggest good sources in the preferred language
• The correct place for language of work or name (P407) is on the source BUT for Sophia Uddman (Q49673281) I have also added Swedish church birth records (Q10501038) and church death record (Q10478639) then we have no language
  • Maybe
    • Swedish church birth records (Q10501038) / church death record (Q10478639) should not be in that section
    • maybe We should have specific objects for Swedish Swedish church birth records (Q10501038) / church death record (Q10478639) were we add language of work or name (P407)

I like the idea of gathering sources used using described by source (P1343) and I also would like to see more description of the quality of sources used - Salgo60 (talk) 13:00, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. (I just happened to stumble over it while adding some new "described by source" statements.) Toni 001 (talk) 13:47, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

Encyclopedias and dictionaries only

Described by source Property:P1343 is currently restricted to dictionaries and encyclopedias, why can't the source be an obituary or a biography or a news article. Most people and events are not in existing encyclopedias, but described by news articles and biographies and obituaries. If we have those news articles and biographies and obituaries as Q entries, shouldn't they be linked by "Described by source"? --RAN (talk) 18:57, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I use "described by source" (judiciously) for other items like exhibition catalogs. I'd like to see this property opened up. - PKM (talk) 20:06, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

• It's only "restricted" by the English label. There's nothing in the constraints. I use it with obituaries, biographies, etc. Ghouston (talk) 22:55, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

I tried to change the label and it was reverted. So I am seeking consensus to make the definition broader. We don't have to link to every news article we have that mentions George Washington or Abraham Lincoln, but if we have news articles on people with no coverage in an encyclopedia, we should link to those news items and books about them. Especially since Wikisource does a poor job of indexing and cataloging their entries. They are indexed by author but not by subject. There is no way to know that John Smith is the same as John Q. Smith is the same as J. Q. Smith across articles at Wikisource. --RAN (talk) 00:16, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

The property was proposed and created for dictionaries and encyclopedias describing the item. Don't just use it otherwise. If people start using properties as they like instead of as intended, it will be chaos. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 08:36, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Or, you know, it'll be managed change. It's perfectly possible to use as a qualifier object has role (P3831) to specify the nature of the source; and that way we get a useful general purpose property. The alternative is we proliferate properties for no good reason, which makes consistency unlikely and reporting a PITA. There doesn't actually seem to be anything at all very useful about restricting the sources to two types, doesn't seem to be anything that'll get broken if we include an obituary or a magazine article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:03, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

It's not clear from me from the proposal that it can only be used with dictionaries and encyclopedias. The labels don't all match either, e.g., en-gb says "dictionary, encyclopaedia, etc. where this item is described", with the addition of "etc." perhaps expanding the usage considerably, and nl says "woordenboek, encyclopedie of naslagwerk", and who knows what "naslagwerk" (reference work) may encompass. So I've treated it as an analogue of described at URL (P973), which I don't think is limited by type of external content. Once you describe the resource at the URL with it's own item, you have to switch to described by source (P1343). Ghouston (talk) 09:09, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I've been using this property to specify "technical standards" which define or describe a concept; but why stop there and not allow any scientific article or source which, well, describes (as the label of the property reads) a concept. Therefore I  Support extending the documented scope of this property to any source. (I think that the current label in en, de, es, fr is good; the description could be updated, but the important point is that the outcome of this discussion should be recorded, say, on the property talk page and property usage examples so that others easily find guidance for how to use this property.) Toni 001 (talk) 10:47, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

I don't think that Project chat is the place to create consenus to change property descriptions. That discussion should happen on the property page, so that in future people can review it easily. If the discussion doesn't get enough attention, link it from here. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

We can always migrate the discussion there when complete, but people only respond to highly visible discussions here. Even when you link to a discussion elsewhere, most people do not click through, including myself. --RAN (talk) 04:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

See for example special:diff/1096069043 by @Trade:. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Using described by source (P1343) seems better than described at URL (P973) for the items on Eurabia (Q737979), given that they have their own Wikidata entries. A problem with both properties is that they may turn into extensive lists, as is already happening there. The item for "London" could potentially list every encyclopedia and guidebook that mentions the city. Ghouston (talk) 01:15, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

We can always limit the number of references to 10 or 15, or only display the first 10, or rank the references by the number of times the subject name gets mentioned. There can be many technical solutions. For some obscure topics, Wikidata may be the only way to link to obscure news articles and scientific papers. --RAN (talk) 04:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

"Better than" described at URL (P973) is not necessarily "good enough", it could still be a maintenance nightmare. –84.46.52.252 13:57, 11 February 2020 (UTC)

• I thought described at URL (P973) was primarily for online resources while described by source (P1343) is for other ones.
  An advantage of described at URL (P973) is that it can be converted to a new property fairly easily once one is created.
  Also, using that before actually creating a separate property ensures that we don't create properties that remain dormant and unmaintained. --- Jura 11:35, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

• Conclusion: While the property was created to contain only encyclopedias and dictionaries, it can be expanded to contain books, biographical articles, obituaries and other textual sources. We create properties to be maximally useful, rather than define dozens of properties to contain single items. --RAN (talk) 13:38, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

 Comment WRT to articles you can always link both items through main subject (P921) (in the other side, though). If the scope is changed... I would not understand why restrict it to "news article" (?), excluding for example "scholar articles" or "books"... strakhov (talk) 20:56, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

I would also support opening this property up at least to include online resources, as I was under the impression from comments on one of withdrawn property proposals that described by source (P1343) with an added reference URL (P854) could be a solution when wanting to reconcile and reference smaller online-only databases, dictionaries, or encyclopedias that aren't at the scale that they warrant a new property, i.e. Edited By – Women Film Editors (Q84798010). I've just noticed another editor has removed my use of this property from Nicole Lubtchansky (Q18058275) and replaced it with a described at URL (P973), which I assume is because of the limited usage currently allowed for by the property, but I find it less elegant and more difficult to construct a SPARQL query that would retrieve all the reconciled items for a given source. (For instance, after the edit, Nicole Lubtchansky (Q18058275) does not appear in a query of Wikidata items described by Edited By – Women Film Editors (Q84798010).) Does anyone have any guidance or thoughts? If the consensus is that this property can be opened up to include digital resources, can we formalize that decision in some way in the label(s)? Or does it seem appropriate to only use described at URL (P973) for the uses I'm describing? Infopetal (talk) 15:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

• There seems to be confusion as to when to use "described at url" and "described by source" We have Wikidata entries for some news stories and scientific articles, and books, and those use "described by source". See Orlando Staton (Q88505446) where I use "described by source" to link to a Wikidata entry for one of his obituaries and I use "described at url" for another obituary that does not have a Wikidata entry. --RAN (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Multiple entries in one book

When there are multiple entries in one work,@GZWDer: told me "A described by source (P1343) should have only one statement is subject of (P805) and section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958), but one item may have multiple described by source (P1343)." But there are many instances of multiple statement is subject of (P805) under one described by source (P1343), like in Salix (Q36050). Should this be corrected automatically? The Master (talk) 07:46, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

@維基小霸王: This is usually incorrect, as section can not be unambigously specified. Note QuickStatements can not add the second statement with same value and different qualifier; you should add them using Pywikibot, or manually.--GZWDer (talk) 08:32, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

OK The Master (talk) 08:40, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Use in references

I have removed from the constraints the possibility to use this property in references, as the standard property for use in references is stated in (P248). --Epìdosis 14:53, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

Conflict with Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410)

There are many entries in Ottův slovník naučný (Q2041543) which contains infomation on more objects/persons with same name (eg Lhota (Q105978928). In that case have sense to connect it with disambiguation. JAn Dudík (talk) 09:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Samples updated

There was a sample with Bolğar (Q105284) that I couldn't find on that item, so I removed it. Also, if there is a dedicated property for a work, this shouldn't be used, accordingly I removed a sample with NYC.

For the remaining samples, I added the qualifiers one would expect to be there:

• either statement is subject of (P805) for works with an item (i.e. those with pages on Wikisource).
• or the relevant qualifiers to locate an article in the work: here it was
  • volume (P478)
  • page(s) (P304)
  • section, verse, paragraph, or clause (P958)

--- Jura 13:46, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

YouTube channels

Currently YouTube channel (Q17558136) is not considered a valid source. This could be resolved by adding group of works (Q17489659) to the list of sources. Vicarage (talk) 13:12, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

@Vicarage: Makes sense to me; looking at your use case - Q696182#P1343 - the source is the channel and the individual video is specified in the URL and media legend. That seems to be a good approach. I've added group of works (Q17489659) as a class, as suggested. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:59, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

club pages not a valid source

Subterranea Britannica (Q10683167) is a reputable club/charity with extensive pages on underground sites, but is not considered a valid source. I suggest that the property scope is expanded to cover organization (Q43229) to allow any organisation to be a valid descriptive source. Vicarage (talk) 13:26, 5 November 2022 (UTC)

As there was no dissent, organization (Q43229) added to allowed classes Vicarage (talk) 08:05, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Use for catalogues

Hi! I would like to propose the following case: given a printed (or handwritten) library catalogue, having an apposite item, surely knowing that it catalogues works of authors Y Z etc. is a valuable information; so, would it be correct to use described by source (P1343) with the catalogue item as value, and suitable qualifiers (volume (P478), page(s) (P304), etc.), in the items of the authors of the catalogued books? On the one hand, P1343 is usually used for publications which contain information about an entity (e.g. biographical dictionaries and encyclopedias) and not a mere citation of that entity; on the other hand, I don't see properties more suitable for such a case (maybe we need a new property?). Thanks, --Epìdosis 16:11, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Epìdosis: As you say, described by source (P1343) is for pointing to prose descriptions where one entity explains another, and not intended to mean a metadata description.

What you are describing sounds like Wikidata:Dataset Imports from metadata sources. To credit that, use stated in (P248) in the reference. You can see examples of this in many papers which credit the source of the metadata, such as Molecular Structure of Nucleic Acids: A Structure for Deoxyribose Nucleic Acid (Q1895685) where the data could have come from many sources but for the import one particular arbitrary source is getting credited as a reference.

Am I understanding you correctly, is this what you wanted? Bluerasberry (talk) 16:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: thanks for the suggestion. The problem, however, is a bit different; there is an 17th-18th-century handwritten bibliography (Mare Magnum (Q116771656) just created), which cites a plurality of works. In order to say that an author is cited there, is a statement like Q105099754#P1343 the best possible solution or do we need a different property? Thanks, --Epìdosis 16:43, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Epìdosis: I looked at what you linked but cannot read the source. Can you tell me what is happening here?

Is it the case that in the source Mare Magnum (Q116771656) there is a prose biography of Benigno Davanzati (Q105099754)? If so, then Q105099754#P1343 applies.

Otherwise, can you be more specific about what information about the human subject is in this source? Are we talking about a source merely citing the work of that person? Bluerasberry (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry: Yes, we are talking about a source (a bibliography) merely citing a work of that person. --Epìdosis 17:52, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps "described by source" qualified with "type of reference" = personal bibliography (Q26876682)? - PKM (talk) 23:03, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

@PKM: maybe, but as of now type of reference (P3865) should be used only in references and not as qualifier (so the constraint would need an enlargement). The other option, of course, is to propose a new property "mentioned by source", which would be more general than "described by source" and the opposite than not found in (P9660). --Epìdosis 07:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry, PKM: to resume, it seems that described by source (P1343) should ideally not be used if a reference work (encyclopedias, dictionaries) or a bibliography or a library catalogue simply mentions something, without providing a thorough description for it. We need a different property; it should be a superproperty of described by source (P1343) and negates property (P11317)not found in (P9660); I have noticed the existence of attested in (P5323) (which seems born for lexemes and seems mainly used for lexemes, but has examples also for items), do you think it could be suitable? --Epìdosis 20:44, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

I think it's a reasonable solution but we'd need to change the description to be wider than lexemes. PKM (talk) 23:06, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

@Bluerasberry, PKM: the discussion is moving to Property talk:P5323#Use outside lexemes. --Epìdosis 12:21, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

How to link Wikisource?

Hello everyone, there is a concept e. g. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q64563151 and there is transcribed book on Wikisource containing a describing article for this concept e. g. https://de.wikisource.org/wiki/Hantzsch:Hohe_Br%C3%BCcke. Is the modelling via "described by source" correct as i did it for the mentioned item? --Arnd (talk) 11:06, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I think you did the right thing. Here is the process:

• For the concept item Hohe Brücke (Q64563151),
• add a statement described by source (P1343)
• refering to the book Name Book of the Streets and Squares of Dresden (Q115729880)
• with qualifier statement is subject of (P805)
• having the value Hohe Brücke (Hantzsch) (Q123113940).

I hope that this documentation of the principle can help someone. --LA2 (talk) 09:13, 25 April 2024 (UTC)

Allowing people to be sources

I think an individual person can be a valid source describing something. A personal website or YouTube channel can provide detailed articles on subjects that are worth documenting, and that would be attributed to the person. Vicarage (talk) 09:34, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

I think in your example the YouTube channel or website should be indicated as source, not the person. The person would be its author or creator. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:14, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Qualifier for size of mention

I have added several P1343 to items gravity (Q11412) and Musa (Q8666090), pointing to articles in 9 different encyclopedias that I have digitized. And perhaps it would be useful to have a qualifier for how large each mention is. One source writes 500 bytes about a subject, another writes 3000 bytes. Should there be a qualifier for this? Should the unit be bytes or words or what? -- LA2 (talk) 09:00, 25 April 2024 (UTC)