Property talk:P571

Active discussions


Representsdate of establishment (Q3406134)
Data typePoint in time
Template parameteren:Template:Infobox company : |founded=
ExampleSociety of Jesus (Q36380)
Dracula (Q41542) → 1890sdate QS:P,+1890-00-00T00:00:00Z/8
Church of Saint Michael (Q1076187) → 14th centurydate QS:P,+1350-00-00T00:00:00Z/7
Commons example
Tracking: sameno label (Q32085204)
Tracking: differencesno label (Q22013004)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P571 (Q22013005)
Tracking: local yes, WD noCategory:Inception not in Wikidata, but available on Wikipedia (Q22013003)
<complementary property>dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576), discontinued date (P2669), service retirement (P730), date of official closure (P3999)
See alsoservice entry (P729), date of official opening (P1619), location of creation (P1071), publication date (P577), production date (P2754), date of commercialization (P5204), start time (P580), age estimated by a dating method (P7584)
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Main statement2,238,849>99.9% of uses
Qualifier2,054<0.1% of uses
Reference122<0.1% of uses
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Single best value: this property generally contains a single value. If there are several, one would have preferred rank (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Known exceptions: Italian National Society (Q3487466)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P571#single best value, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410), Wikimedia category (Q4167836), Wikimedia list article (Q13406463): 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/P571#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
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.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P571#scope, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): film festival edition (Q27787439): this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P571#Conflicts with P31, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): human (Q5): 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/P571#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Conflicts with “instance of (P31): Wikimedia template (Q11266439): this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P571#Conflicts with P31, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Conflicts with “start time (P580): 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/P571#Conflicts with P580, 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/P571#allowed entity types, SPARQL (new)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Inverted month/day on items with 2 dates
Items with 2 dates, day of the first date = month number of the second date, month of of first = day of the second. To fix, set on to preferred or deprecated rank (Help)
Violations query: SELECT * { ?item wdt:P571 ?d1 ; wdt:P571 ?d2 . FILTER( ?d1 < ?d2 && MONTH(?d1) = DAY(?d2) && DAY(?d1) = MONTH(?d2) && YEAR(?d1) = YEAR(?d2) && DAY(?d1) != DAY(?d2) ) } LIMIT 10
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P571#Inverted month/day on items with 2 dates
This property is being used by:

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



I think this property is so general, lacking enough accuracy for data extraction queries turn out. It includes a wide range of place domains: cities, sport clubs, organizations, shops, airports, etc. and maybe domains which are not considered as a place. As well as, it includes a wide range of time domains from millisecond to century. I propose to pick it into several properties. And the next and more delicate point is that the label is so vague if it is used for cities (meaning establishment), stores (meaning opening) and so on. — دوستدار ایران بزرگ (talk) 14:18, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Qual è la differenza tra "creation date" (Property:P571) e "start date" (Property:P580)? -- 02:08, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
I seem to remember the original purpose of this property was quite narrow: foundation date or establishment date, in the formal sense. In the case of a modern company this would be the date that appears on the company's registration documents. Danrok (talk) 20:59, 31 August 2013 (UTC)


I think this property needs qualifiers. Stockholm was founded as an urban area 1960 (Swedish urban areas in it's modern definition are never older than that.), was founded as municipality 1971, founded as city-municipality 1863, as town/city 1463 and as settlement 1252.

It would also be nice to show how it was founded. -- Lavallentalk(block) 04:24, 1 September 2013 (UTC)

I agree, I notice that some old organizations in the UK were founded by a Pope, and then re-founded by a King or Queen, after the creation of the Anglican Church, and a the move away from the Catholic Church in England. Danrok (talk) 02:51, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
I would have thought that this property is a qualifier, or it needs splitting to be a number of things that have a start and end date.  — billinghurst sDrewth 11:55, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
I would like to add some thougts about Lavallens example. First, let's consider what the item Stockholm (Q1754) actually is. Is it a urban area? No, Stockholm urban area (Q94385) is. Is it a municipality? No, that is Stockholm Municipality (Q506250). Is it the city-municipality? No, we've got Stockholm City (Q10680648) for that. Is it about the town/city? Yes it is! But the fact that it was granted town privileges in 1463 was only a formal recognition of its status. The city/town/settlement was already there and it was already there in 1252 when Birger jarl wrote his letter granting privileges for Fogdö kloster. That letter just happens to be the oldest written record mentioning Stockholm. But Birger jarl wrote the letter in Stockholm and also wrote in the letter that it was from Stockholm. That indicates that there already was a settlement there noticable enough to be mentioned by the Jarl. The only source available stating the exact year for the foundation of Stockholm is Visby Franciscan chronicles (Q10716064) and that says it was founded in 1187. /ℇsquilo 14:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)

ISO 8601Edit

Kial ne estas uzita [Q50101|ISO 8601]] do: JJJJ-MM-TT ekzemple 2013-10-12 sed estas "oktobro 12 2013"? Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 21:10, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Kie vi vidas tion? --AVRS (talk) 20:37, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
Ĉie. Ekzemple: Q143 (interfaco pl, eo, en). Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 10:06, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
The data is stored as "+00000002013-10-15T13:09:40Z". It's the User Interface that writes everything in wrong order. -- Lavallen (talk) 11:10, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
La dato estas montrata en la formo difinita ie por la unua lingvo en la listo de "Helpaj lingvoj" sur la paĝo "Redaktado" de oniaj preferoj.
The date is rendered as specified somewhere for the first language on the "Editing" page of the user preferences .
--AVRS (talk) 17:35, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Dankon. Estas bone. Marek Mazurkiewicz (talk) 23:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Q10893166#date of foundation or creation (P571)Edit

Please see Talk:Q10893166#date of foundation or creation (P571). --Jeremyb-phone (talk) 05:07, 15 June 2014 (UTC)


Are there any plans to restrict the domain of this property to organizations? Or the intended domain is an artifact? If not, I see no sense in keeping that property, since Property:P580 has the same meaning. -- Apohllo 14 January 2015, 16:57

animal raceEdit

Would you say this property can be used to record when an animal race was first created (by crossing two other races), for example in Swabian-Hall Swine (Q769449) inception (P571) 1820? —DSGalaktos (talk) 21:53, 14 May 2015 (UTC)


It seems that Nativity of St. John the Baptist (Q18602467) was painted in the years 1633-1635. Which year should be used in this case? And what about the precision value if it is not exactly in a certain year but 'decade' would be too imprecise? Bever (talk) 04:04, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

@Bever: I think start time (P580) and end time (P582) are intended for this use-case, so
⟨ Nativity of St. John the Baptist (Q18602467)      ⟩ inception (P571)   ⟨ 1630s ⟩
start time (P580)   ⟨  1633 ⟩
end time (P582)   ⟨  1635 ⟩
. Or perhaps earliest date (P1319) and latest date (P1326), but I think those are intended for cases where the exact date is unknown, which isn’t the case here. —DSGalaktos (talk) 10:56, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

The renaming of this property without discussionEdit

I don't see any discussion about the renaming of this property. The single word inception is misleading when the main component of this is that it is a date or a time, not the concept of wikt:inception. Can we please have the element of the time component added back.  — billinghurst sDrewth 14:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Counter-argument: one “inception” statement can be used not only to record the time at which the inception occurred, but also other things. For example, see P:P1191, which is “first performance”, not “date of first performance”, since it’s often also qualified with location (P276), performer (P175), etc. – these qualifiers make more sense when you read them as “location of first performance”, not “location of date of first performance”. (For examples, see The Blue Danube (Q482621) and Symphony No. 9 (Q11989).) (However, in this particular case, I’m not sure if that argument applies – I haven’t seen many qualified inception (P571) statements.) —DSGalaktos (talk) 16:37, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Difference to date of official opening (P1619) ?Edit

Please see Property_talk:P1619#Relation_to_inception_.28P571.29_.3F. --- Jura 08:13, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

First half or quarter of a centuryEdit

How should the first half of the 18th century be indicated? And how the first quarter of the 18th century? Or beginning of the 18th century? Romaine (talk) 02:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

As 18th century (precision: 100 years), with qualifiers earliest date (P1319) and latest date (P1326), I think. —Galaktos (talk) 18:03, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Note that the new-ish qualifier refine date (P4241) supports this directly. - PKM (talk) 00:36, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Qualifiers "start date" and "end date" for this propertyEdit

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?inception ?start ?end ?instanceofLabel 
  hint:Query hint:optimizer "None" .
  ?item p:P571 ?statement .
  ?statement pq:P580 ?start . 
  ?statement pq:P582 ?end . 
  ?statement ps:P571 ?inception . 
  ?item wdt:P31 ?instanceof 
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }

Try it!

There is some discussion about it on French project chat (Topic:U8ugv72dm20md1is).
--- Jura 11:31, 10 March 2018 (UTC)

How to proceed when there is more than one creation date?Edit

I am working on Rouillon bridge (Q3397110), a bridge which has been destroyed 3 times, and reconstructed 4 times. Both inception (P571) and date of official opening (P1619) only allows one date for this property. How should I note these multiple dates in this element? Should I:

Dirac (talk) 18:12, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

I have the same problem with the closing and reopening of a professional association (Q33037862).--Hienafant (talk) 10:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)

I would regard the bridge being being built four times as four separate instances, four separate incarnations, so there are four entities, each of them with a different inception date, and all of which instance of (P31) Rouillon bridge (Q3397110). -- 𝒦 (🗪 | 🖹) 13:58, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

Use for countries and criterion used (P1013)Edit

Following the discussion with @Llywelyn2000: at property proposal, here are a few items that can be used for the qualifier criterion used (P1013):

Sample use with actual dates for Mexico in the sandbox.

Obviously, for some countries criteria could be different/some not applicable. Please list them here. --- Jura 07:08, 22 December 2018 (UTC)

Two dates of P571Edit

The system gives an error, you cannot put two dates of creation. This restriction is not correct. Exemple: Q61767271 is an abbey created in 12th century and closed during the French Revolution. It was reopened in 1898. I don't find anyway to put this two dates in de wikidatafile, though they are both correct. I know a lot of other examples.--Flamenc (talk) 17:04, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

Objects created between two datesEdit

Is there a way to indicate that an object was created between two dates (when the precise date of its creation is unknown (examples in: Q11765908; Q1142058)?--Braaark (talk) 19:43, 20 April 2019 (UTC)

@Braaark:, here's one way to do this using "earliest date" and "latest date" as qualifiers: Tunic with Frontal Figures (Q60756150). - PKM (talk) 21:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
PKM: thank you for answering. However, this method, which is the one I used in the two examples I provided, does not work for Wikipedia infoboxes.--Braaark (talk) 19:27, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

"Nature of statement" as qualifierEdit

Is there any objection to adding nature of statement (P5102) as a valid qualifier for this property? - PKM (talk) 21:36, 14 June 2019 (UTC)


Have often dates, that a inception (P571) is before a date. In 1470 there is a mill, but inception (P571) is before... How to define? Regards, Conny (talk) 16:24, 21 July 2019 (UTC).

  • with the "latest"-qualifier? --- Jura 16:28, 21 July 2019 (UTC)

Use as date of a photographEdit

I notice that a bot is now routinely using this property on Commons for the date on which a photograph was taken, e.g.,_Oregon_-_Wallace_Building_(former_J.C._Penney).jpg&diff=390006982&oldid=265512026 . Is that actually the intention of this property? (If answering, please ping me, I don't keep a watchlist on Wikidata, thanks in advance.) - Jmabel (talk) 02:36, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

+1, same question. @Multichill: as the owner of BotMultichill. I don't think this is the intention of this property. @Jmabel: --Herzi Pinki (talk) 20:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Removing inverse property (P1696)Edit

I don't think it's appropriate to say that inception (P571) inverse property (P1696) dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576), as the property currently does. The documentation for inverse property (P1696) makes it clear that "inverse" is not here a synonym of opposite, but in the sense of inverse function (Q191884): the inverse property (P1696) is making the claim that Wikidata (Q2013) inception (P571) 29 October 2012 implies that 29 October 2012 dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576) Wikidata (Q2013), which is nonsensical. What we really need to properly model the relationship is to create an equivalent to opposite of (P461) for properties, but as there aren't very many properties with clear opposites, this might not be worthwhile.

Since I already made this change and got reverted, I want to see whether this line of reasoning makes sense to others.

Vahurzpu (talk) 01:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

@Vahurzpu: Sorry, I haven’t checked the documentation for inverse property (P1696), I just saw that you removed this property, then added opposite of (P461), then removed that again, so I thought that you just forgot to readd P1696. Feel free to revert my revert. (By the way, if I move some data from one property to another, I always first add the new one, and only after that do I remove the old one, in case anything stops me from finishing my edits—my browser crashes, I have to go to the toilet instantly, my house gets on fire etc.—, the data is still there. If you’ve edited in this order, it would have been much less suspicious for me.) —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:22, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

not dated paintingsEdit

How to add "not dated" for paintings? --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:06, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

  unknown value Help
0 references
add reference

add value

--Matthias Winkelmann (talk) 22:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)

Approximate datesEdit

I have a department at the University of Washington whose web page states that it was established "about 1961". Not sure how best to record an approximate date. For now I did this:

inception: 1961 qualified with: stated as: about 1961

Is that the best way to do this, or is there another way to include an approximate date as the value for inception? --- Adam Schiff 19:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)

See Help:Dates#Inexact_dates, specifically "Qualifier for circa". --- Jura 18:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)


It would be interesting include somewhere a link to the Wiktionary definition of inception, for more information. --BoldLuis (talk) 11:14, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

Return to "P571" page.