Property talk:P303

Active discussions


EE breed number
breed identification number per the EE list of the breeds of fancy pigeons (ELFP)
DescriptionThe object is the identifier of breeds in the EE-List of the breeds of fancy pigeons - EE
RepresentsEE-List of the breedsof fancy pigeons (Q26736122)
Data typeExternal identifier
Template parameteren:Template:Infobox pigeon breed : eegroup
According to this template: subclasses of Domestic pigeon (Q204179) (see subtree)
According to statements in the property:
Domestic pigeon (Q204179)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed values
According to this template: list as of 01-06-2012
According to statements in the property:
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
ExampleDanish Suabian (Q5219796) → 0404
Berne Gugger (Q824567) → 0411
Sourceen:Template:Infobox pigeon breed (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896))
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses308
Search for values
  Distinct values: this property likely contains a value that is different from all other items. (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P303#Unique value, hourly updated report, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value), SPARQL (new)
  Single value: this property generally contains a single value. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P303#Single value, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Format “[0-1][0-9]{3}: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P303#Format, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Type “Domestic pigeon (Q204179): element must contain property “subclass of (P279)” with classes “Domestic pigeon (Q204179)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P303#type Q204179, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
  Conflicts with “instance of (P31): pigeon breed (Q15623573): 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/P303#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)

Maintenance listsEdit

Lists of pigeon breeds:

Items having defective statements:

claim[303] and noclaim[279:(tree[204179][][279])]
claim[279:(tree[204179][][279])] and noclaim[303]
claim[279:204179] and claim[279:(claim[279:204179])]

Items with statements related to deprecated "pigeon breed (Q15623573)" (see Removing "pigeon breed" below):

claim[31:15623573] and noclaim[279:(tree[204179][][279])]

information: EE and ELRT / LERP / ELFPEdit

EE, kurz für Entente Européenne d’Aviculture et de Cuniculture:

ELRT / LERP / ELFP, kurz EE-Liste / liste EE / EE-List

  • Deutsch: EE-Liste der Rassetauben (ELRT)
  • fr: liste EE des races de pigeons (LERP)
  • English: EE-List of the breeds of fancy pigeons (ELFP)

Significance / Bedeutung / significationEdit

EE-No. de fr en Q commons
0001–0065(0099) Formentauben Pigeons de Forme Utility Pigeons form pigeons (Q13099336) Category:Utility pigeon breeds (EE 0000)
0101–0118(0199) Warzentauben Pigeons Caronculés Wattle Pigeons wattle pigeon (Q13360246) Category:Wattle pigeon breeds
0201–0207(0299) Huhntauben Pigeons type Poule Utility Pigeons utility pigeon (Q13367662) Category:Utility pigeon breeds
0301–0352(0399) Kröpfer Pigeons Boulants Pouter / Cropper pouter and cropper (Q5192262) Category:Pouter and Cropper pigeon breeds
0401–0487(0499) Farbentauben Pigeons de Couleur Colour Pigeons colour pigeon (Q1396328) Category:Colour pigeon breeds
0501–0517(0599) Trommeltauben Pigeons tambours Trumpeter Q7847813 Category:Trumpeter pigeon breeds
0601–0613(0699) Strukturtauben Pigeons de Structure Structure Pigeons structure pigeon (Q14239520) Category:Structure pigeon breeds
0701–0727(0799) Mövchen Pigeons cravaté Owl Frills and Owls (Q1958205) Category:Owl pigeon breeds
0801–1008(1199) Tümmler und Hochflieger Pigeons culbutants et haut-volants Tumblers and Highflyers tumbler and highflyers (Q7852566) +Highflying pigeons (Q1621786) Category:Tumbler and Highflyer pigeon breeds
1101ff. Spielflugtauben –//– –//–
1101–1004 Ringschläger Ringbeater pigeons (Q13099338) –//–

Removing "pigeon breed"Edit

Excerpt from a conversation at User talk:PigeonIP#Removing "pigeon_breed".

Hi PigeonIP, I do not understand this type of change. Being a subclass of any pigeon taxon means that these items are instance of (P31) pigeon breed (Q15623573). What is wrong about that? LaddΩ chat ;) 21:26, 22 May 2014 (UTC)

Hallo Laddo,
Beeing a subclass of Domestic pigeon (Q204179) should be enough of work? Do we have to overdo?
pigeon breed (Q15623573) has no article, is not defined. Commonscat "Pigeon breeds" is part of Category:Pigeon breeds (Q8273906). pigeon breed (Q15623573) should be deleted.
There are very different definitions about beeing "a pigeon breed". There are breed groups on Wikidata with instance of (P31) pigeon breed (Q15623573) as well. That is wrong. There is not one structure pigeon (Q14239520) for example. A "pigeon breed" should not be defined without external reference.
There are different definitions of "breed" within the breeders organisations as well, and there are special standards. Every pigeon with an EE-number (not 0000, 0100, 0200, 0300, 0400, 0500, 0600, 0700, 0800 these are groups) for example is a breed within the european breeders organisation Entente Européenne d’Aviculture et de Cuniculture (Q1344553) and is a fancy pigeon. The Americans, for example, do define "fancy", "utility" and "sporting" --> and there are Tippler-fancy-pigeons (do look well) and tippler-sporting-pigeons (do fly a loooooong time)...
And in Europe/Germany a Hybrid, like Labradoodle (Q38229) (dog) or the Lohmann Brown (Q10436300) (chicken) would never be a "breed". --PigeonIP (talk) 17:54, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
Enother example: the Silesian Cropper (Q13407623) is a breed in EE. Some of them are of a type of colouring, the "marking", named "Schalaster" - with white wings-.(--> de-standard, commons:Category:Schalaster marked pigeons). In other breeding organisations/definitions "Schalaster Pouter" is a breed, itself. So: is Schalaster a breed or is it a marking of a breed?
In Europe it is not a breed. But it is a subclass of fancy pigeon (Q5433715) and a subclass of pouter and cropper (Q5192262). --PigeonIP (talk) 20:21, 24 May 2014 (UTC)
@PigeonIP: OK you convinced me. The concept of "breed" seems indeed too vague in this case and more precision can be obtained from a more specific set of subclass of (P279) statements. I'll rework a bit the maintenance lists on Property talk:P303. Cheers LaddΩ chat ;) 13:18, 25 May 2014 (UTC)

Distinguish pigeon breed groupsEdit

Subclasses of Domestic pigeon (Q204179) include individual pigeon breeds (like Australian Performing Tumbler (Q4824553)) but also groups of pigeon breeds (like homing pigeon (Q138756)). Normally these are distinguished by instance of (P31): for example, groups could be instance of (P31)="pigeon breed group" while individual breeds could be instance of (P31)=pigeon breed (Q15623573), or have a taxon name (P225), or have their own EE breed number (P303). What is the best scheme to distinguish breed groups from specific breeds? We could add constraints to check that condition. @PigeonIP: - LaddΩ chat ;) 23:44, 25 May 2014 (UTC)


  1. first of all: pigeon breeds don't have a taxon name (P225) (historically some do, but nowadays it is not correct)
    • mostly all breeds are Domestic pigeon (Q204179) so there taxon name (P225) is Columba livia domestica
    • White Barbary Doves -as I know- are a breed in the US, as well. They are not a breed within the EE (commons:Category:White Barbary Doves) and may even not have the status of being "domesticated", like white Tigers or Lions. Their "taxon name (P225)" is Streptopelia risoria (domesticated).
    • There is/was a discussion, if all forms of "domestica" are a Taxon or not. I think the result was: it is not.
  2. As I told you instance of (P31)=pigeon breed (Q15623573) is suboptimal. There are different definitions what a breed is.
  3. pigeons with their own EE breed number (P303) are fancy pigeon (Q5433715). One number, one breed. With 9 exceptions. 0000, 0100, 0200, 0300, 0400, 0500, 0600, 0700 and 0800 are groups. (also have a look at Property talk:P303#Significance / Bedeutung / signification or/and User:PigeonIP/ELRT)
  4. there are so much subclasses because
    • nl-Infoboxes refer to Domestic pigeon (Q204179)
    • en-Infoboxes refer to the main US-breed-groups fancy pigeon (Q5433715), flying/sporting pigeon (Q5463334) and utility pigeon (Q7902851). But they name the Austrian and European breed groups as well. (these systems are different from each other but do also have their overlaps: AU "Asian feather and voice pigeons" correspond with the european structure pigeon (Q14239520) and Q7847813 )
    • de-infoboxes shall name the 9 EE-breed-groups and the ee-number.
    • Groupings are different from breeders organisation to breeders organisation and sometimes from author to author as well.
    • Shall we define other properties for US/AU/EE-breed groups? (3 properties, with 3 possibilities for US and nine for EE?)
  5. Still open:
    • how to handle homing pigeon (Q138756) (breed or breed group. not a fancy pigeon. but there are descendants that are fancy pigeons... )
    • how to handle small breed groups, that are subclasses of the main breed groups. (like Q13580239, Q15848080 and others...
    My best example are Ringbeater pigeons (Q13099338). Together with Groninger and Gelderse Slenke they are "Spielflugtauben" (de). "Spielflugtauben" are the 6 breeds with EE-numbers higher than 1100. They belong to ee-breed-group tumbler and highflyers (Q7852566) are fancy pigeon (Q5433715) but also flying/sporting pigeon (Q5463334)...

--PigeonIP (talk) 09:09, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

  Comment @PigeonIP, Laddo: I would say a breed group could be a
< group > subclass of (P279)   < pigeon breed >
. Then a breed can be if the groups are labelled more explicitely, such as <breed of tumbler and highflyers pigeons>. It implies we take care not to put specific pigeons in those classes, for example
< my pigeon > instance of (P31)   < tumbler >
is ok but not
< my pigeon > instance of (P31)   < breed of tumbler and highflyers pigeons >
An alternative could be to say
< tumbler and highflyers > subclass of (P279)   < pigeons >
< tumbler and highflyers > instance of (P31)   < EE pigeon class >
, and say
< EE breed > subclass of (P279)   < EE pigeon class >
. Then we could have
< my pigeon > instance of (P31)   < tumbler and highflyers >
if we don't know in more details. Maybe it's a better option, depending on the viewpoint. TomT0m (talk) 19:35, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
< group > subclass of (P279)   < pigeon breed >
is wrong --> is better.
"pigeon breed" without any qualifier is worth nothing. It is the same like telling someone "5". 5 what? Meters? Seconds? Apples? That was one reason I proposed for P303, so eyeryone can see it is an EE breed.
The alternative version is better, as well.
But: "Helmet" is not an EE breed group. But the EE knows 5 Helmet-breeds... As well as fantails, barbs, ... --PigeonIP (talk) 20:06, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
  1. The first model is not wrong if we want to model a breed group. Pigeon Breed is the class of all pigeon breed. A subset of those breeds can be called a breed group if we want to.
  2. But I agree the second is probably better. I think you did not understand <My pigeon> was supposed to be a concrete pigeon. The pigeon that I would own and would feed if I had one. So there is no point to say it's a subclass of something, it's an instance of the <pigeon> class and some of its subclasses. TomT0m (talk) 08:43, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
  1. Again: The class of all pigeon breed is Domestic pigeon (Q204179). Or fancy pigeon (Q5433715) if you are talking about breeds with written standards, like GerardM intended while creating "pigeon breed".
  2. I did. but The King of Rome (Q594) is not a subclass of Domestic pigeon (Q204179), a specific breed is. --PigeonIP (talk) 10:45, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
  1. @PigeonIP: The class of all pigeon breed is Domestic pigeon (Q204179). Wrong (and badly wrong). Domestic pigeon (Q204179) is a class of special kinds of animals, also special kind of birds, of the same species. Considering the following facts
    1. Stating the class of all pigeon breed is Domestic pigeon (Q204179) would mean that
      < a specific breed (b) > instance of (P31)   < Pigeon >
      is true.
    2. Now
      < X > subclass of (P279)   < Y >
      reads all As are Bs. So, as any domestic pigeon is a pigeon, we got (A) , right ?
    3. A property of the subclass relationship, implies that any instance of a class is also an instance of his parent classes. So if 1 an too are both true, we got
      < our specific breed > instance of (P31)   < Pigeon >
      and both true, so we are mixing classes and individuals. Do we agree on that ? TomT0m (talk) 11:35, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
No, because:
< specific breed > subclass of (P279)   < Domestic pigeon (Q204179)     >
<---> . --PigeonIP (talk) 11:44, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
And why the hell shall mixing breeds and groups or breeds and markings be better than mixing individuals with breeds? --PigeonIP (talk) 12:00, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
I don't understand your first assertion, can you explain the <---> meaning ?
Why the hell: Because the matter is a fundamental property of a classification. We have individuals, classes, who are sets of individuals. We should always know if we are talking of an individual or a class. See type–token distinction (Q175928)    . That said we can also class the classes, this is allowed in knowledge expression systems like OWL2, which are actually a strong inspiration for instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279), see Help:Basic Membership Properties.
This allows us to have three levels : the individual levels (0), the class level (1), and the class of classes level (2). The level (1) is useful to precise the nature of an individual by assigning it to classes of individuals of the same nature: pigeon, domestic pigeon, pigeon of some official breed, ... The second level is useful to regroup classes by properties, and express things such as : this breed is defined by that organisation, as this other breed.
It's also useful to build class of classes such as all kind of the pigeon classification classes used by that organisation. Breeds are some of them, breed groups are others. To be more precise, we can say breeds defined by this organisation are special kinds of those classes used by that organisation. Then this class of classes is a subclass of the first class of classes we defined.
This is a very good way to deal with the fact breeds organisations can have different definitions. TomT0m (talk) 19:31, 27 May 2014 (UTC)
TomT0m: I discussed this matter beforehand with several pigeon authors of several wikipedias. I know, what I do. We also discussed this strong inspiration for instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) as well, allot.
this <---> is the difference between an individual and a group of individuals. A
< specific breed (a group of individuals) > subclass of (P279)   < Domestic pigeon (Q204179)     >
and for individual pigeons we shall use .
If you are happier with it, we can also say , so it is even more clear that the "King of Rome" is an individual and no breed.
I'd like to discuss, if we shall propose for a property "breed by association" that can be used not only for pigeons, but also for every other breed (poultry, dogs, cats...). Together with
< specific breed > subclass of (P279)   < Domestic pigeon (Q204179)     >
that would be a better conclusion than "instance of (P31) pigeon breed". Second advantage of that property would be, that no item, that uses this "breed by association"-property shall use properties of taxon name (P225), taxon rank (P105), parent taxon (P171), taxon author (P405) or year of taxon name publication (P574). (see Wikidata:Taxonomy task force) --PigeonIP (talk) 16:29, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
@PigeonIP: There is no need for this new property, as this problem is project wide and generalisable : some organisms defines some classes according to their criteria, pigeon and other breeds, scientific taxonomy, and a lot of others are just special cases. This can easily be dealt by instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279) by saying
< Specific pigeon breed > instance of (P31)   < breed defined by specific organism >
, as we mark
< pigeon > instance of (P31)   < taxon >
for scientific classification. The current constraint system and the current generic taxonomy properties handles this fine. If you wand to find all the breeds defined by the orgnism, query all instance of the <class breed defined by specific organism>. Then you can work with them as you wish. TomT0m (talk) 19:12, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Return to "P303" page.