Property talk:P8794

Documentation

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

BBFC reference
reference number for a film or video game (-2012) media content rating decision on BBFC's official website

Associated item	British Board of Film Classification (Q861670)
Applicable "stated in" value	BBFC database (Q105296939)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	film (Q11424) or video game (Q7889)
Allowed values	[A-Z]{3}\d{6}
Example	Postal (Q700905) → AVV252599 Manhunt 2 (Q1799879) → DDM235014 Postal (Q1049783) → ADM151575
Formatter URL	https://web.archive.org/web/*/https://www.bbfc.co.uk/$1
Related to country	United Kingdom (Q145) (See 326 others)
See also	BBFC rating (P2629), FVLB work ID (P8680), Australian Classification (P3156), Australian Classification ID (P8326), OFLC classification (P7327), PEGI rating (P908)
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 Items with no other external identifier 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/P8794 Map Random list
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 722 Main statement 6 out of 1,319 (0% complete) 0.8% of uses Qualifier 480 66.5% of uses Reference 236 32.7% of uses
Search for values

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

Distinct values: this property likely contains a value that is different from all other items. (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/P8794#Unique value, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)

Format “[A-Z]{3}\d{6}”: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (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/P8794#Format, SPARQL

Type “film (Q11424), video game (Q7889)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31), subclass of (P279)” with classes “film (Q11424), video game (Q7889)” 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/P8794#Type Q11424, Q7889, SPARQL

Item “BBFC rating (P2629)”: Items with this property should also have “BBFC rating (P2629)”. (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/P8794#Item P2629, search, SPARQL

Scope is as reference (Q54828450), as qualifier (Q54828449): 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/P8794#Scope, 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/P8794#Entity types

Scope

If it had to be created, I would propose to change its scope from main value to qualifier, and connect directly to the ratings. Make it a subproperty of rating certificate ID (P2676). Máté (talk) 12:42, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

How about using it as both? @Máté: --Trade (talk) 12:47, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

@Trade: What purpose would that serve? As an external ID, it is totally misguided. – Máté (talk) 12:51, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

I think it makes perfect sense to link the classification decisions with the creative works that they are classifying. It's not like we haven't done that before

WikiProject Movies has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

applsdev Arlo Barnes BugWarp Coloradohusky CptViraj Cupkake4Yoshi Cwf97 Cynde Moya Danrok Datumizer Dexxor Diggr Dispenser Dollarsign8 DoublePendulumAttractor EdoAug Edolusill Eniehack Facenapalm Floyd-out FullyAwesome Harshrathod50 Jean-Frédéric Jotamide Keplersj Kirilloparma Lewis Hulbert LotsofTheories Macocobovi Macrike Master Of Ninja Matthias M. Metafire18 Nicereddy Nw520 Oduci Poslovitch Rampagingcarrot RampantSpirit Sanqui Santer Sight Contamination Sir Lothar thgiex Tomodachi94 VGPaleontologist Wd-Ryan WikiSyn YotaMoteuchi

Notified participants of WikiProject Video games Thoughts? --Trade (talk) 13:03, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Well, then use it as a qualifier. – Máté (talk) 13:12, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

We are not supposed to use qualifiers to replace references. The only reason that the property ended up as it did is because it's more stable. --Trade (talk) 08:19, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Who said anything about using it to replace references? It would replace another qualifier. References would remain intact. – Máté (talk) 10:34, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Moreover, BBFC reference has been depreciated. Ratings from this October on no longer have an identifier. – Máté (talk) 10:39, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

@Máté:, several of the BBFC reference numbers added in November and before have started to die on me. Any idea why? --Trade (talk) 08:49, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

@Trade: I'll try to look it up or contact BBFC but probably it has to do with the website overhaul and the depreciation of the BBFC reference just as this property was on proposal. It would be nice if at least the redirects remained (I've already complained about the old links not working but at least the reference redirects did.) – Máté (talk) 09:41, 5 January 2021 (UTC)