Talk:Q467

Property:P21

I removed the Property from this page. I think the property should only be used for Persons and nothing else. --Sk!d (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Subclass of female human?

Should this only be a subclass of female human, or also of human? --WiseWoman (talk) 22:40, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

One is enough. Female human is already a subclass of human. --Infovarius (talk) 20:54, 9 October 2016 (UTC)

Separate items for gender (Q48277)

gender binary (Q5530970):

• man (Q8441)
• woman (Q467)

gender (Q48277):

• female (Q6581072)
• male (Q6581097)

Not sure where it was discussed, but it was contested several times based on page history.

I would keep gender relations as separate items, if we have 4 items. d1g (talk) 20:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

Lexemes

@AGutman-WMF: even the using of literal translation (P2441) in such general concepts as Q467 is problematic. What is "literally translated"? E.g. in English: woman or female or lady? You know that an Item is not a word but a concept. It can't be "translated". And anyway Lexeme senses can be (and are) connected to items, so inverse links are not-necessary. P.S. What is NLG? National Library of Greece (Q1467610)? Infovarius (talk) 09:41, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm using literal translation (P2441) in the absence of a better alternative to link items to lexemes. Unfortunately the inverse link is not available for all APIs, in particular Scribunto. See the discussion in https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T320263#8341702. This is needed for Abstract's Wikipedia Natural Language Generation (=NLG) Scribunto-prototype realization. AGutman-WMF (talk) 14:02, 11 November 2022 (UTC)

What answer for the main first question? Infovarius (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure what is your main question. I'm using "literally translated" as a way to link the main label of an item (as defined in the labels section) to a lexeme. It should be understood as "literal translation" of the labels. AGutman-WMF (talk) 13:19, 14 November 2022 (UTC)

@AGutman-WMF: you know, 1) label (in any language) is not the only word describing this entity, so why to choose only it? 2) labels in different languages can be translated slightly different, so which is the source? 3) what to do with synonimical "literal translations"? Also, there is related discussion for another lexemical property. In brief, my opinion that lexemical properties should be restricted for Lexeme namespace. --Infovarius (talk) 20:31, 16 November 2022 (UTC)

The idea is to have a canonical lexical representation of the item, which gives the answer to the question, "when used in a Natural Language Generation system, how should this item be verbalized (in a given language)?" so apriori we need a single label, and the most natural is to use the label which has already been selected for this item (in every item). Anyhow, once you link to any lexeme, you can explore synonyms in the lexeme space (as there are statements on synonyms there). I understand this is not the best property for this. If you have a better idea which property should be used, I would appreciate that, but in the meantime please do not remove this information. AGutman-WMF (talk) 08:22, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

I have now create a property proposal to create a dedicated proposal for this: Wikidata:Property proposal/Verbalization by lexeme AGutman-WMF (talk) 09:51, 17 November 2022 (UTC)

@AGutman-WMF: Ok, it's a good new place to discuss. I see that you now have more opinions on that. Personally I'll try to read about NLG more so to give some advice probably. I believe User:Denny has his own thoughts too. --Infovarius (talk) 10:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)