Note to other editors: My personal computer has malfunctioned, so I can now only edit Wikidata from library computers. As such I am taking something of an unplanned wikibreak. For prior discussion on this talk page, see /Archive 1. Regards, Arlo Barnes (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

jan (Q105816257)Edit

I saw you created jan (Q105816257). I do not think "jan" really counts as a term of esteem or respect for a person, just like "ma" is not a term of respect for a territory. They are just words used before proper nouns. I think it makes more sense to model "jan" as part of the nickname, see nickname (P1449) at Sonja Lang (Q12854). Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 17:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

Your edits seem good to me. The reason I made the item was that I was working on jan Misali (Q105816235), not that I was trying to make bold claims about the language (about which I know little); I was probably confusing it in my head with the identical honorific from Pashto. I am curious why you removed the 'form of label' statements, since at those property pages it is suggested that languages that make no distinction should have the same statement for both, but I'll defer to your judgment on that. I see also an IP editor helpfully capitalised 'Toki Pona', I had mistakenly thought it was lowercased. Arlo Barnes (talk) 19:52, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

dummy (Q65088916)Edit

I saw you made this a subclass of Wikibase reason for deprecation (Q27949697), and hence made it indirectly a subclass of Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446). I've contradicted the claim, as I wasn't sure what you intended by it. I'm not quite sure of the intended purpose of dummy (Q65088916) - indeed, its description says it's used for various purposes. But subclasses of dummy include for example toy weapon (Q356049) (a substitute nipple) and toy weapon (Q356049) (a dummy of a projectile weapon). These classes certainly shouldn't be subclasses of Wikimedia internal item. Should dummy perhaps be an instance rather than a subclass of reason for deprecation, in order to avoid these implications by transitivity? Dsp13 (talk) 21:55, 27 October 2021 (UTC)

Ah, that indeed seems problematic. At the root is that the item is overloaded, I guess. What I wanted to express was that a value wasn't a 'true' value, but rather stood in for one (in a given source, say) and therefore shouldn't be given a normal or preferred rank. So perhaps a 'Wikibase dummy' that merely points to the dummy item? Arlo Barnes (talk) 22:01, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
Not totally sure I understand your use case, but agree that a dedicated 'Wikidata dummy' item might be safest. That could be an instance of both dummy (Q65088916) and Wikibase reason for deprecation (Q27949697). I don't think it needs to be a class at all. Dsp13 (talk) 22:11, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
  Done Wikibase dummy (Q109290665) Arlo Barnes (talk) 22:32, 27 October 2021 (UTC)