Property talk:P7047
Documentation
opponent character or group of this fictive character or group
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Type Q95074, Q4271324, Q14514600, Q20830276, Q21070598, Q1145276, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Value type Q95074, Q4271324, Q14514600, Q20830276, Q21070598, Q14623646, Q1145276, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Item P1441, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Target required claim P1441, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P7047#Symmetric, SPARQL
This property is being used by: Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
|
Expanding beyond fiction edit
Would anyone be open to using this property to capture other rivalry relationships in the real world? Is there a better property that captures this? Should I propose a new one?
- Sports Boston Red Sox (Q213959) <-> New York Yankees (Q213417)
- History Ancient Rome (Q1747689) <-> Ancient Carthage (Q2429397)
- Politics Abraham Lincoln (Q91) <-> Stephen A. Douglas (Q433174)
- Business SpaceX (Q193701) <-> Blue Origin (Q885836)
I'm sure there are other domains, but this seems like a good place to start. Wskent (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- I've no idea how to make complex constraints, but I think if both object and subject lack a subclass of / instance of an entity that is a child of fictional entity, there should be a qualifier 'statement is subject of' that describes the enmity, and to which sitelinks/sources could be more comprehensively attached. That said, I've already used this property for real life antagonisms 'under the radar', but it's always better to make the property more amenable to a use where appropriate. Arlo Barnes (talk) 19:52, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- 'enemy' is far too strong a word. Should probably rename the property to 'enemy or rival'--Trade (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
- I'd keep the current scope. There are some items about rivalries, you can add the participants there. --- Jura 16:18, 15 August 2020 (UTC)
Why "enemy of" and not "enemy"? edit
The phrasing "enemy of" is a bit confusing. To be the "enemy of" someone implies that they consider you their enemy. So, really, every statement with this property is actually saying something about the object not the subject. The object is an enemy of the subject; the object considers the subject an enemy. Combined with the fact that the original proposal says that "reverse statement should be added automatically" I'm going to be bold and just change the name of this property and add a symmetric constraint. It makes sense and the symmetric constraint specifically is in line with the proposal. OmegaFallon (talk) 14:42, 8 February 2023 (UTC)