Property talk:P144

Active discussions


based on
the work(s) used as the basis for subject item
DescriptionThe work(s) used as basis for subject. See also separated from (P807), inspired by (P941), depicts (P180), main subject (P921) and named after (P138).
Representsbased on (Q30171963)
Data typeItem
According to this template: work (Q386724)
According to statements in the property:
work (Q386724), language (Q34770), writing system (Q8192), theorem (Q65943) or artificial entity (Q16686448)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed valuesAny other item (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
ExampleA (Q9659)Α (Q9887)
Ubuntu (Q381)Debian (Q7715973)
Statue of Zeus at Olympia (Q46239)Iliad (Q8275)
State Anthem of the Russian Federation (Q1225991)National Anthem of the Soviet Union (Q251918)
RSS (Q45432)Extensible Markup Language (Q2115)
The NeverEnding Story (Q316555)The Neverending Story (Q463108)
Commons example
Tracking: sameno label (Q42533307)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P144 (Q21037784)
See alsohas cause (P828), material used (P186), inspired by (P941), after a work by (P1877), main subject (P921), sitter (P2634), depicts (P180), study or design for (P6606)
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Main statement36,41999% of uses
Qualifier3070.8% of uses
Reference490.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
  Conflicts with “instance of (P31): rose cultivar (Q26817508): this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P144#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase MediaInfo (Q59712033): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P144#allowed entity types, SPARQL (new)
This property is being used by:

Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

Wie wäre es als Bezeichnung "Vorlage" zu nehmen? --Goldzahn (talk) 19:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

forked fromEdit

See Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#forked_from. Superm401 - Talk 07:50, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

I created separated from (P807) for forked from. Now the question is if this property can be expanded to reflect "inspired by". --Micru (talk) 04:20, 18 August 2013 (UTC)

"based on" is not the same as "inspired by"Edit

I don't think "based on" and "inspired by" should be sharing the same property, it's potentially confusing.

  • A film which is inspired by a book, is highly unlikely to follow the same story as the book. But, would have some similar characteristics.
  • A film which is based on a book, is likely to follow the same story as the book.

There's a big difference between these two things. Danrok (talk) 23:39, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

I agree--Shisma (talk) 15:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
I undid the changes. There is separated from (P807), but it doesn't seem to fit other derivatives, or e.g. a website running a program (although maybe based on (P144) cannot really fit the latter, either). --AVRS (talk) 16:02, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
  Done See: inspired by (P941).--Micru (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Do we have a distinction between influenced by (P737) and inspired by (P941)? d1g (talk) 18:25, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

French translationEdit

En Français, on dit plutôt « adapté de » plutôt que « basé sur ». --PAC2 (talk) 10:01, 18 May 2014 (UTC)

PAC2 : tout à fait d'accord, j'ai rajouté un alias. Kvardek du (talk) 22:46, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
« basé sur » n'est pas correct en français. J'avais renommé la propriété en « fondé sur » mais ce n'était certainement pas parfait puisque Ash Crow l'a récemment renommé en « basé sur » retournant ainsi à un anglicisme. Je propose de renommer la propriété en « adapté de ». O.Taris (talk) 18:54, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
OK pour « adapté de ». J'ajoute aussi « dérivé de » au passage. -Ash Crow (talk) 22:08, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

extended fromEdit

I put extended from per w:Template:Infobox file format. --Rezonansowy (talk) 11:14, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Reverse property?Edit

If a TV series or a film is based on a book, the book is the basis of the TV series or film. But I could not find any reverse property like that... What property should be used in such cases?--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 08:36, 25 July 2015 (UTC), edited

Reasonator? --- Jura 12:54, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jura1: I encountered the problem in The Wind in the Willows (Q936276), which lists four "editions" of the novel. Unfortunately, only one of them is a real edition: of the others, one is a TV series and two are films. I wonder what property to use to properly link to them.--Erasmo Barresi (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
@Jura1, Erasmo Barresi: A reverse property would also be useful for broadcast productions. Example:
The radio drama Q1753249 with multiple productions:
Träume (NWDR 1951) (Q20963058)
Träume (SWF 1955) (Q20963064)
I've used has edition or translation (P747) as reverse property but imho P747 should only used for books. --Kolja21 (talk) 14:48, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
Q860957 is preserved not as the original, but in 4 different copies ( Q39482683, Q39482678, Q39482672, Q39482668). I can say, the copies are "based on", but not, there are 4 copies of the original. Marcus Cyron (talk) 10:24, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
Really has edition or translation (P747) doesn't work as a reverse property. Verdi's opera Rigoletto (Q189234) is based on (P144) Victor Hugo's play Le roi s'amuse (Q1473603), but it is clearly NOT an has edition or translation (P747) that play. We need another property for the reverse. --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:38, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Incarnations of mythical speciesEdit

According to its item, the Warcraft character Thrall (Q820088) is an Orc (Q722547). Orc (Q722547) in this case, refers specifically to the fictional race of characters in the Warcraft universe. One would think such instances would also be instances of orc (Q194061), referring to the general mythical creature, and that Orc (Q722547) would be a subclass of (P279) orc (Q194061). However, currently Orc (Q722547) is only listed as being based on (P144) orc (Q194061). P144 seems to be correct, thinking of it as a creative work based on an earlier myth, but P279 also seems correct. There are a lot of situations like this, where P144 seems to overlap with P279. In these cases, should only P279 be used? Or only P144? Or both? --Yair rand (talk) 22:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Splitting "adapted from" from this propertyEdit

Hey All, So I have been thinking a lot latey about how we use "based on" (Property:P144 to deal with both en:wiki:Literary_adaptation and succession between versions (one of the principle examples at the property, is RSS which is "based on" XML).

And then we have examples of the usage like at Q129049 where the "based on" is pointing at a non-adaptation, but rather precedent historical events (someone's life, without clear work being adapted). This muddies the concept even further, and makes the field almost useles

All and all, if we want to accurately represent adaptation, which is a very specific concept with a huge body of scholarship, we need to make sure that the properties serve two different functions, especially around creative works (topical "based on" vs "adaptation" in the scholarly sense of the term). I am kindof new to this whole property, thing, so would greatly appreciate both feedback and help proposing the split, Sadads (talk) 17:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

Also, I did a Wikidata Query: I think this effects ~ 7000 works out of potentially 9000 that use it at the moment, per the query at [1], Sadads (talk) 17:24, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
We also have inspired by (P941). What about just adding the P794 (P794) qualifier and literary adaptation (Q352425)? Multichill (talk) 11:09, 17 September 2016 (UTC)
Adaptation is closer to based on (P144) than P794 (P794) -- 794 does not imply reuse of the original item's material (adaptation is a process which specifically calls on a work, and then reimagines the original work in a new form -- adaptation is directly attributable and non-trivial, while appropriation (the flip side of adaptation), is using an element -- and might be closer to p794 -- in that the element often is reused in some way often with a wink to the reader, but not always). In part, I am very worried with the current "also known as" for this property, because it muddles the concept with a number of other concepts and then calls them "same as". In particular, the 144 example of Debian-->P144--> Linux implies that progressive derivative work is the same as adaptation.
Perhaps as you imply, 144 + Qualifer of Q352425.... I am still torn... I think it leaves a lot of room for poor use of 144. Can we put some type of filter that allows this to be patrolled for creative/literary works? Sadads (talk) 17:04, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Usage as qualifier would be more preciseEdit

At least for films:

Parody works (films) can parody multiple works at once:

<Film with elements of parody>:

d1g (talk) 15:19, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

Why it should be qualifier in these cases? --Infovarius (talk) 23:16, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

"based upon" "loosely based upon" "directly based upon"Edit

or based on (P144) + <new property> = <loosely|directly>

Undid constraintsEdit

I undid these edits by user:Valentina.Anitnelav because it caused over 21010 constraint violations. Quite an achievement given the fact this item is used about 15.000 times. The current constraints suck, but this seemed like a step in the wrong direction. Multichill (talk) 21:17, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

I made a mistake and I should have discussed the approach first. But I'm a bit curious where you got the number of 21010 constraint violations. The constraint report gives 2251 for the type constraint and 4101 for the value type constraint. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:33, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
@Valentina.Anitnelav: I clicked one of the SPARQL links and removed the limit. Not sure which one. Quite a confusing number. Something probably went wrong.
Anyway, let's see if we can improve the constraints. Probably start with instance of (P31)}/subclass of (P279) -> entity (Q35120) and drill down. Multichill (talk) 20:05, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
artificial entity (Q16686448) could work (it seems to me that anything made by humans can be based on something else made by humans). With that we would cover quite a lot and I don't think that we include undesirable cases. There are a couple of uses with more abstract concepts like data structures and models (in the meaning of model (Q1979154)) which are currently not subclasses of artificial entity (Q16686448). It seems to me that they could be considered a kind of artificial entity (Q16686448), if they can be considered to be based on something.
In my opinion it would be a good idea to add a corresponding type value constraint (probably of the same scope as the domain). P144 is sometimes used in a quite loose way, especially with humans as value (sometimes in the meaning of inspired by (P941), sometimes in the meaning of after a work by (P1877), sometimes in the meaning of main subject (P921), depicts (P180), sitter (P2634)). This would express the restrictions to works (or broader: artificial entities) in the description and the property proposal also in constraints. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:58, 21 December 2017 (UTC)
Using artificial entity (Q16686448) as a type constraint sounds good to me. Since this discussion was years ago, I'm going to add it to the list of allowed classes. I'll also remove subclasses of artificial entity (Q16686448) from the type constraints. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 23:44, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Incorrect contraint flagEdit

Prusa Mendel (Q53944193) is getting a flag for being based on (P144) the Sells Mendel (Q53943559), this is incorrect, both are physical objects.


--John Cummings (talk) 15:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, although the description on work (Q386724) is "physical or virtual object made by humans", neither 3D printer (Q52421079) nor anything in its superclasses has actually been made a subclass of it. I'd say product (Q2424752) isn't necessarily a work, but perhaps artificial entity (Q16686448) should be. Ghouston (talk) 04:13, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
People make artificial entity (Q16686448) a work and other people remove it, it's a bit of a problem. [2] Ghouston (talk) 04:15, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I've added a claim that work (Q386724) and artificial entity (Q16686448) are said to be the same as (P460). Ghouston (talk) 04:21, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Based on subclassEdit

I changed the constraint to permit based on (P144) to be have relation instance or subclass of (Q30208840), so that based on (P144) can be used on subclasses like GNU variant (Q1475825). Ghouston (talk) 04:07, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Inverse constraint "derivative work"?Edit

I'm not really convinced this is useful, but maybe it depends on the uses one makes of P144. --- Jura 17:09, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

12.000+ violations and probably a one-to-many problem. I removed the constraint. Multichill (talk) 21:39, 17 February 2019 (UTC)

Added theorem (Q65943) to the Type ConstraintsEdit

In mathematics, a theorem (Q65943) is often derived from the conclusion of another. It would be reasonable, then, to say Pythagorean trigonometric identity (Q2039117) based on (P144) Pythagorean theorem (Q11518). However, that statement violated P144's type constraints. I've added theorem (Q65943) to the list of constraints, but I think that there is probably a superclass of Pythagorean theorem (Q11518) that could be used instead. Let me know if you have any suggestions. (I also removed performing arts production (Q43099500) because it is a subclass of work (Q386724), which is already included in the constraints). The-erinaceous-one (talk) 21:25, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

Why theorem isn't subclass of work (Q386724)? --Infovarius (talk) 21:39, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
Well, I think there is a debate about whether a theorem is something that a person creates (i.e. a work) or something that is discovered (i.e. it exists before humans are aware of it).The-erinaceous-one (talk) 02:27, 9 September 2020 (UTC)

Cleaned up Type ConstraintsEdit

Based on discussions above, I added artificial entity (Q16686448) to the list of type constraints. I also deleted redundant type constraints that are subclasses of another constraint. The net result is a reduction in the number of constraint violations from around 1500 to ~1200. In order to make these changes, I also added artificial entity (Q16686448) to a couple items (or their superclasses) that were currently listed as type constraints. For example, amusement park was a subclass of recreation area, which I made a subclass of artificial entity (Q16686448). I've also been thinking about whether there is a class that would contain languages and writing systems (maybe "emergent entity"?), but I'll leave that for another day. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 00:26, 4 September 2020 (UTC)

Return to "P144" page.