Property talk:P2507

Documentation

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

corrigendum / erratum
published notice that corrects or amends a previous publication

Description	a published correction
Represents	erratum (Q1348305)
Data type	Item
Domain	According to this template: article (Q191067) According to statements in the property: scholarly article (Q13442814) or statute (Q820655) When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Usage notes	This property goes on the item of the initial publication, not the corrigendum itself
Example	EVOLUTION IN MENDELIAN POPULATIONS (Q5418627) → Evolution in Mendelian Populations (Q20746731) Supercollider physics (Q21709583) → Erratum: Supercollider physics (Q27346421) Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations (Q38736264) → Corrigendum: Dopamine transients are sufficient and necessary for acquisition of model-based associations. (Q54715161)
Source	journals and repositories (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896))
See also	is retracted by (P5824), replaced by (P1366), amended by (P2567)
Lists	Items with the most statements of this property Count of items by number of statements (chart) Items with the most statements Items with the fewest statements Count of items by number of sitelinks (chart) Items with the most sitelinks Items with the most sitelinks, but no link to one Wikipedia (sample: Welsh Wikipedia, cywiki) Items with the fewest sitelinks Most linked wikis Items with the most identifier properties By value of property Most statements Fewest statements Most sitelinks Most linked wikis Total of sitelinks on items Most identifiers Fewest identifiers 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) Chart by item creation date Database reports/Constraint violations/P2507 Map Random list
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 38,788 Main statement 38,781 >99.9% of uses Qualifier 4 <0.1% of uses Reference 3 <0.1% of uses
Search for values

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

Type “scholarly article (Q13442814), statute (Q820655)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “scholarly article (Q13442814), statute (Q820655)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (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/P2507#Type Q13442814, Q820655, SPARQL

Value type “erratum (Q1348305)”: This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value erratum (Q1348305) (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/P2507#Value type Q1348305, SPARQL

Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): 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/P2507#Entity types

Scope is as main value (Q54828448): 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/P2507#Scope, SPARQL

Legislation

I have added statute (Q820655) as a valid class of items alongside scholarly article (Q13442814), as errata are very common. e.g. National Heritage Act 2002 (Q100161543) has corrigendum / erratum (P2507) of correction slip to the National Heritage Act 2002 (Q110845603). Theknightwho (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

What if errata for a source has URL but no WD item?

To whom it may concern: please take a look at my question at Wikidata:Project chat#What if errata for a source has URL but no WD item?. --colt_browning (talk) 17:08, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

I think the solution is to create a new item for the erratum. Theknightwho (talk) 17:30, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

A new item that would be an instance of what, web page (Q36774)? Is this acceptable? --colt_browning (talk) 21:48, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Here's one I made yesterday: correction slip to the National Heritage Act 2002 (Q110845603). Also have a look at something like Erratum to: DNA methylation age of human tissues and cell types (Q22000591) if you want to see one for an academic article. Theknightwho (talk) 22:54, 8 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. But I seriously doubt that such items as correction slip to the National Heritage Act 2002 (Q110845603) satisfy WD:N. So I guess I'll stick to the solution I proposed at the project chat: Genius At Play (Q104403703)described at URL (P973)https://siobhanroberts.com/genius-at-play/errata/applies to part (P518)erratum (Q1348305) colt_browning (talk) 21:37, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

@Colt browning I don't see how it doesn't satisfy WD:N: it refers to an instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity. Your solution isn't a good one, because it requires additional interpretation to understand and is inconsistent with how most of Wikidata operates. It's far more likely to create incomplete data and cause confusion. Theknightwho (talk) 00:08, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

An instance of a clearly identifiable conceptual or material entity which can be described using serious and publicly available references, as is required by WD:N? I believe web pages are usually not considered a "serious reference" for themselves.

I disagree that my solution inconsistent with how most of Wikidata operates but agree that it requires additional interpretation to understand. That is why I am looking for a better solution. colt_browning (talk) 14:01, 3 April 2022 (UTC)