Talk:Q105285756

Isn't this item incorrect? If it is the inverse of P485, it should also be a property. As it is we can't use it to indicate the archives held by an institution. - Kosboot (talk) 14:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

• Kosboot The property that ought to be used for archives held by an institution is Property:P485. This item is an inverse property label item (Q65932995) for Property:P485, or, an "item with label/aliases for inverse relation of property – this helps the relateditems gadget to function". This item is a correct example of inverse property label item (Q65932995) as far as I know. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 17:03, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

  @Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries Thanks for the response. I guess I didn't pose my question correctly. I've used P485 many times. I was thinking and looking for the inverse property of P485 which I would think would be something like "archival holdings" of a particular institution. Is there such a property? - Kosboot (talk) 20:47, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

  @Kosboot Oh, that makes more sense. There is no such property, but the inverse property label automatically makes an inverse statement from the object back to the subject of the original triple. So, if Johann Sebastian Bach (Q1339) archives at (P485) Bach-Archiv Leipzig (Q798038), when you go to Bach-Archiv Leipzig (Q798038) and click "show derived statements", you can see that Bach-Archiv Leipzig (Q798038) "has archives of"(inverse of archives at (P485)) Johann Sebastian Bach (Q1339). I think the purpose of inverse property labels is not to need to make inverse properties in these cases. I don't know what the criteria are for when to create an inverse property label vs. a new property. Do you need an inverse property rather than just the inverse label? Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 23:58, 5 April 2022 (UTC)

  Thank you @Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries - yes I would like an inverse property. I was thinking of asking the creator of P485 to create one, but if you want to, that's fine with me. (I've never created a property.) - Kosboot (talk) 13:27, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

  I don't have the property creation skill yet, either. The creator of P485 could create a property, but I'm not sure they would (you should ask them if you want to though!). I was just asking whether you need an "archival holdings" or "holds archives of" property for some goal that archives at (P485) and this inverse label can't accomplish. Is there a reason why adding P485 to the items that are the subject of an institution's archival holdings and relying on the inverse property label to express the inverse relationship is insufficient? A property proposal for an inverse property of P485 would need a strong use case. To me, a new property here seems a bit redundant, because I can't envision what you'd be using it for. What do you think @UWashPrincipalCataloger? Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 14:30, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

• Inverse properties are now highly discouraged and will not likely be approved, because there really is no need for them. The inverse property label can generate the inverse display, and it is easy to query the inverse property in a SPARQL query. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 14:39, 6 April 2022 (UTC)