Property talk:P1552
Documentation
inherent or distinguishing quality or feature of the entity. Use a more specific property when possible.
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: novalue (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: character type (P9071)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: narrative role (P5800)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: victim (P8032), perpetrator (P8031)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: verified account or profile (Q28378282) (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: object has role (P3831)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: expression, gesture or body pose (P6022)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: transitivity (P9295)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: Confirmed (Q116763038) (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property:
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: game mechanics (P4151)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
Replacement property: object has role (P3831)
Replacement values: (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1552#none of, SPARQL
|
Value video game trailer (Q65972034) will be automatically replaced to value video game trailer (Q65972034) and moved to has characteristic (P1552) property. Testing: TODO list |
|
|
Value trailer (Q622550) will be automatically replaced to value trailer (Q622550) and moved to has characteristic (P1552) property. Testing: TODO list |
|
|
Value television series trailer (Q66547489) will be automatically replaced to value television series trailer (Q66547489) and moved to has characteristic (P1552) property. Testing: TODO list |
|
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Element with this property should also contain property instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279) (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT DISTINCT ?item { ?item wdt:P1552 ?value . MINUS { { ?item wdt:P31 [] } UNION { ?item wdt:P279 [] } } }List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1552#Instance or subclass
Domain edit
Is it not supposed to be applied to classes and not objects ? For example if I say that an organism has a hight, I would say :
- . but if I want to state that Barry the bear is 2 meters tall, I'll use:
- ... So I would restrict the domain to classes or metaclasses (see Help:Classification), ... TomT0m (talk) 18:02, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
- Indeed. Added constraint. -- LaddΩ chat ;) 20:37, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
Should we place reflexes here or in another property? d1g (talk) 13:34, 21 June 2017 (UTC)
Automatically add properties for this type (P1963) when this property is used edit
I think properties for this type (P1963) should be used everywhere has characteristic (P1552) is used. Why not automate it?--Malore (talk) 16:25, 19 April 2018 (UTC)
- I like the thought, but the subject of properties for this type (P1963) is a property, where the subject of has characteristic (P1552) is an item. They aren't really compatible. We might want to create a new property, however, similar to properties for this type (P1963) except "qualities for this type." Then automation might be beneficial. — The Erinaceous One 🦔 00:01, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Where is the inverse property, is characteristic of (Q66490689)? edit
What happened to the property associated with is characteristic of (Q66490689)? It now is linked to has characteristic (P1552), but it is clearly supposed to be the inverse property of this. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 21:12, 12 August 2020 (UTC)
- It's because of inverse label item (P7087) in the property. Corresponding items are usually linked to a property thought they are "inverse" to them. How to do it better? --Infovarius (talk) 17:31, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
- @Infovarius: Ah, I think my comment was unclear. The source of my confusion is that it seems like there used to be a property called "is characteristic of" that doesn't anymore. Or maybe it never existed, but either way, shouldn't there be an inverse property to "has characteristic (P1552)"? That way, we can say Runge–Kutta method (Q725944)has characteristic (P1552)number of stages (Q97672364) AND the inverse statement number of stages (Q97672364)"is characteristic of"Runge–Kutta method (Q725944). The-erinaceous-one (talk) 08:25, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- The item is for the gadget "related items" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets.
- I think this property is generally "1 → many" relationship, so I'd avoid creating an inverse property. --- Jura 16:10, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think I agree with that, can you give a couple examples when the property would be one-to-many? On the has characteristic (P1552) page, there are two examples given: HumanHas QualityGender and QuarkHas Qualitycolor charge. In both cases, if we add an "is charateristic of" property that points to the largest relevant class then it would only need a couple statements. For example, we would add genderis characteristic oforganism (Q7239). Similarly, for the quarks example, color charge is only a characteristic of quarks and gluons, so it is two-to-one: color chargeis characteristic ofquarks and color chargeis characteristic ofgluons. In both cases, adding a "is characteristic of" statement to gender (Q48277) and color charge (Q380528) would add a vital piece of information to the knowledge graph. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 03:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- With "this property" I meant has characteristic (P1552). The "list of values" query on the top right shows which are most frequently used ones. --- Jura 07:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- Yes, I understood you were talking about has characteristic (P1552), but looking through the beginning of the list of most frequently used values, we see that they would usually only require one or two "is a characteristic of" statements. Here are several examples:
- Q45171911is a characteristic offilms
- studio recording (Q15975575)is a characteristic ofalbum
- debut album (Q3303814)is a characteristic ofalbum
- cover version (Q155171)is a characteristic ofrecording
- genderis a characteristic oforganism and (there could also be some class of words here, as well as electrical plugs)
- title for Hispanic America (Q27834579)is a characteristic offilm
- surface area (Q1379273)is a characteristic ofgeometric shape (Q815741) and surface area (Q1379273)is a characteristic ofphysical object
- number of stages (Q97672364)is a characteristic ofRunge–Kutta method (Q725944)
- In most cases, there is one top-level class that contains all items for which the quality applies. I can't think of any quality that would need more than three. Furthermore, in each case adding an "is a characteristic of" statement adds helpful context to each item. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 23:50, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- another usecase for "is a characteristic of" is for some more obscure technical terms that refer to some sort of property.
- for a lot of these i use "facet of" to link them, but "is a characteristic of" is a more accurate description of the property.
- an inverse property would also more similar to how "subclass of" and "instance of" function. Binarycat32 (talk) 23:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I understood you were talking about has characteristic (P1552), but looking through the beginning of the list of most frequently used values, we see that they would usually only require one or two "is a characteristic of" statements. Here are several examples:
- With "this property" I meant has characteristic (P1552). The "list of values" query on the top right shows which are most frequently used ones. --- Jura 07:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
- I don't think I agree with that, can you give a couple examples when the property would be one-to-many? On the has characteristic (P1552) page, there are two examples given: HumanHas QualityGender and QuarkHas Qualitycolor charge. In both cases, if we add an "is charateristic of" property that points to the largest relevant class then it would only need a couple statements. For example, we would add genderis characteristic oforganism (Q7239). Similarly, for the quarks example, color charge is only a characteristic of quarks and gluons, so it is two-to-one: color chargeis characteristic ofquarks and color chargeis characteristic ofgluons. In both cases, adding a "is characteristic of" statement to gender (Q48277) and color charge (Q380528) would add a vital piece of information to the knowledge graph. The-erinaceous-one (talk) 03:33, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Domain and scope of this item edit
I'd like to clarify the domain and scope of this item.
I generally used this item to indicate traits of an individual. I think I picked this up as it is the most common use I encountered: Manny & Lo (Q1516532) has characteristic Q45171911, The Top (Q62321816) has characteristic studio recording (Q15975575), etc. Here we would have domain = individuals and scope = trait/attribute value
After having a closer look at the current property examples this does not seem to be the intended use, as it rather points to using it for attributes (in difference to attribute values) characteristic of the members of a certain class (human (Q5) has characteristic gender (Q48277) as every human has a gender (one of female, male, non-binary, etc.), narrative work has characteristic Bechdel Result as every narrative work has (potentially) a bechdel result (one of "passes", "fails", "nor sure/contested")). Here we would have domain = class and scope = attribute.
But this again is not supported by the property example in the property proposal (posthumous birth (Q2106128) => posthumous (Q1395509)) which could rather be read as "posthumous birth (Q2106128) has quality posthumous (Q1395509) as every single event of posthumous birth is characterized by being postum". So here we would have domain = class and scope = trait/attribute value
So: What should be the domain? Classes (e.g. human (Q5), posthumous birth (Q2106128), miser (Q1499127)) or individuals (Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (Q134430), birth of Alexander IV, Donald Duck (Q6550)). What should be the scope? Attributes (gender (Q48277), height (Q208826)) or traits/attribute values (Q45171911, parsimony (Q7798136), 1,70m)?
I guess the major interpretations we have to think about are classes - attributes vs. individuals - traits.
@Trade: I removed the property constraint (P2302) conflicts-with constraint (Q21502838) --> fictional character (Q95074) for the time being as it would be allowed be the first interpretation. It is suggested at Wikidata:WikiProject_Narration#Properties and I'm not aware of any more specialized property that could be used in stead. If there should be any consense/decision to use this property in the second way (domain = classes and scope = attributes) and if there should be a new property for uses in the first way/a dedicated property for personality traits of fictional characters I will readd the constraint again and will start to move the according statements. The same would apply to its use for the Bechdel Test. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:54, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- How do you propose we handle -dere types? With the large import of anime characters a. seperate property might be needed. @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 20:40, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- @Trade: I would use narrative role (P5800) (this property is dedicated to narrative functions (protagonist, antagonist, sidekick) and stock characters/character types as both are not always clearly separated). Just to be clear: I also think that character traits of fictional characters may need a dedicated property (that should not be used on humans). But I would wait with deleting values/restricting this untill this property is proposed/created (if there should be enough support). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- I'm not really sure if using this property with the value Q45171911 as main value is a good or relevant sample of its scope.
Still, even it would probably better be added otherwise, it's relevant in the sense that "has part" and "has part of the class" don't apply to that value. --- Jura 13:10, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- I agree that test results should be modelled differently (e.g. with a dedicated property for test results). I'm rather generally interested by different interpretations of this property. The first (individuals - traits) and the third (classes - traits) are relatively compatible, but the second (classes - attributes) takes a different direction. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:36, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
Replacement of use for test/assessment outcomes edit
Currently this is sometimes used for test outcomes, with values like "fails compliance with <that> test". Wikidata:Property proposal/assessment outcome proposes a replacement for this. --- Jura 08:49, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
Has part and has quality for sailboats edit
See Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Sailing#Has_part_and_has_quality. --- Jura 21:26, 4 May 2021 (UTC)
has feature → verified badge edit
@SilentSpike: verified badge (Q48799541) is a feature ("defining feature"). If not "has quality", is there a replacement property for it? - Coagulans (talk) 17:54, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- @Coagulans: There's a replacement value that's more appropriate which I've reflected on the constraint. If you want to see the usage stats see this query which compares the counts of each: https://w.wiki/4CXh. At time of writing, Q48799541 is used 1772 times and Q28378282 is used 104277 times. A factor of ~58. --SilentSpike (talk) 20:29, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
- ? @SilentSpike: It is the same data as relese date or author. Eurohunter (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- @Eurohunter: Sorry, but I don't follow your meaning. Is there a use case where verified badge (Q48799541) is preferable to verified account or profile (Q28378282)? As far as I have seen the existence of the former has only resulted in lack of data consistency when it is used in place of the latter which we see is significantly more widely used (as well as being more accurate since the badge itself is just a part of the platform, the verification is the quality of the account). --SilentSpike (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not really convinced by the usefulness of this (most account types are somehow "verified", but some just have a badge to show a particular type of verification).
- Anyways, if you keep the constraint, please add
{{Autofix}}to replace one with the other. --- Jura 16:47, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Eurohunter: Sorry, but I don't follow your meaning. Is there a use case where verified badge (Q48799541) is preferable to verified account or profile (Q28378282)? As far as I have seen the existence of the former has only resulted in lack of data consistency when it is used in place of the latter which we see is significantly more widely used (as well as being more accurate since the badge itself is just a part of the platform, the verification is the quality of the account). --SilentSpike (talk) 20:43, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
- ? @SilentSpike: It is the same data as relese date or author. Eurohunter (talk) 20:33, 23 November 2021 (UTC)
NSFW edit
@Trade: Why did you restrict the usage of not safe for work (Q2716583) and NSFW user account (Q81502485)? These are both qualities and the first one is used a lot, like on pornography website (Q11074464), NSFW subreddit (Q83807365), etc.. NSFW user account is also good for website account on (P553). I suggest reverting this to remove all these new errors AntisocialRyan (Talk) 00:53, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- As far as i can tell, Reddit uses pornography website (Q11074464) for both subreddits and accounts. You can see it if you use the site without being logged in @AntisocialRyan:--Trade (talk) 16:19, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not talking about Reddit, your constraint is for all statements that use has characteristic (P1552). AntisocialRyan (Talk) 19:29, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
Why non-material? edit
Why do the descriptions demand that the characteristic be "non-material"? And why does only English has a main label that implies non-materiality ("has quality"), while the labels in other languages (and most of the english aliases) tend to be equivalents of "has characteristic", which can be material?
I think that ignoring the non-materiality requirement, folded (Q108509357)has characteristic (P1552)fold (Q52560700) is the straightforward way of expressing what folded (Q108509357) means. If not this one, which property should be used?
I think that if there is no other property, then the non-materiality requirement should be dropped. GrandEscogriffe (talk) 20:45, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
- I removed the "non-material". GrandEscogriffe (talk) 19:04, 16 October 2023 (UTC)