I see, its a duplicate. What about services? Can they be manufactured?--Kopiersperre (talk) 13:11, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
There should be a qualifier, whether a product (like the VW Golf) is solely produced by one company, or when its a generic product like steel, by many main producers.--Kopiersperre (talk) 13:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Following your examples of the VW Golf and steel, isn't the fact that one is exclusive and another is generically produced intuitive enough for humans and easily inferable by machines with a qualifier? In other words, are there many cases where a model of a product like the VW Golf is manufactured by multiple entities, and a more generic product like steel is produced by only one entity? My initial impression is that such a qualifier would be of little value. Emw (talk) 13:41, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
The EgliseInfo database has information about nearly 40,000 churches in France. This property would help a lot to improve items and articles about French churches. Peter17 (talk) 15:27, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
The History of Parliament is a long-running scholarly project to write biographies of every MP in the British parliament (and its English predecessors; Scotland and Ireland before the union are not covered). The site is public and free to use, and is probably the main scholarly source on many minor politicians; we currently have links from ~4-5000 enwiki pages to member biographies. One unusual issue is that it was originally published in independent volumes covering fixed timeframes, so many MPs are covered twice (see above) or rarely three times; there is no single unique identifier per person. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:41, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Also - the identifiers suggested here are URLs. The HoP does have internal reference numbers for its biographies, but there's currently no way to get to an entry on the site using these and they're not public. If this changes in future, we'll be able to migrate them. Andrew Gray (talk) 12:48, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
This is a major biographical resource for Welsh people (as the name suggests). I'm currently preparing a list of all DWB identifiers to go into Magnus's mix-and-match tool when this property is ready.
The proposed identifier is English-specific - Welsh ones have a 'c' rather than 's' and use a slightly different URL, /en/s2-LLOY-DAV-1863 versus /cy/c2-LLOY-DAV-1863. We could easily use the Welsh form instead, or we could use one without the initial letter and rely on the user to add the language prefix (eg 2-LLOY-DAV-1863; the problem with this is that some have no number and would start with an initial "-").
The archive database of the Bibliothek für Bildungsgeschichtliche Forschung (Research Library for the History of Education) at the German Institute for International Educational Research offers digitalised entries of the project Personaldaten von Lehrern und Lehrerinnen Preußens (Personal data of the Teachers of Prussia). Each entry (one per scholar) has a stable ID and is accessible online.
The identifiers are already in use in a template on de.wikipedia, a complete list of the articles which include the VorlageːBBF Personaldaten can be found here (the second parameter of that list is the Integrated Authority File (Q36578)). The personal data, accurately digitalised by the Research Library for the History of Education, are precious historical sources for the biography of many Prussian scholars. Mai-Sachme (talk) 11:01, 9 December 2014 (UTC)
Support as a temporary measure. However, I would not consider this authority control per se, but rather a complete collection of primary (archival) sources for a well defined group of people (teachers in Kingdom of Prussia (Q27306) after about 1871) suitable to provide source statements for many sorts of claims.
I imagine a Q-item for the database Personaldaten von Lehrern und Lehrerinnen Preußens (or preferably the couple of individual archival fonds represented by the database - unfortunately a more detailed description did not survive the recent relaunch of BBF's web pages), provided with
To link to YouTube videos of notable audiovisual works. Emw (talk) 19:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
Support, of course it was my suggestion. :-P YouTube has partnered with Vevo and are often the official music video & player. Political campaigns and multinational companies use YouTube as part of their platform. And thanks to Obama's White House there's a non-tracking domain, youtube-nocookie.com. For reference other YouTube identifiers include channel, playlist, and comments. Additional information about the video can be accessed through Google's APIs. Dispenser (talk) 05:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Weak oppose Since Property:P39 is similar to this one, I am going to have to weakly oppose this. --Eurodyne (talk) 04:18, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose I don't think an inverse property for position held (P39) is needed or even useful. For functions and title existing for more than a hundred years, the list will be so long than it would become impossible to edit the item's page. For those type of cases, requests are more relevant. --Casper Tinan (talk) 08:46, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment I think an inverse for P39 would be valuable for linking the leader of an expedition, but I agree that listing all the chancellors of a university would be cumbersome. Not sure how to handle this. - PKM (talk) 21:44, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Motivation : the existing properties native language (P103) and languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) are of no use, as a person can write in languages that are NOT "native" or "spoken", but I don't know which one, and can write in only one of the many languages one can speak (P1412) — I purposely gave examples with "dead" language "latin", and a person whose "native" language is one or the other of the 2 languages (FR/BR), but I do not known which one...
For authors, this is very important, to know whether their works are translations or not (when found without info - frequent in 19th century periodicals). - it is also very important for translator (Q333634)Hsarrazin (talk) 20:24, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
Comment I'd use language of expression/language(s) spoken for this (P1412). I agree that terminology there isn't ideal though. --- Jura 22:21, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
What is the use of it? This property belongs to the items of the works so we should add a language to each work, not to the author.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
please read my explanations above : this is for authors... not for works…
You named it language of works. You should have named it language(s) of author instead. Sounds confusing.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 07:29, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
necessary for wikisource that needs that kind of info to sort authors by language they wrote... this is an info that is stored in Author notices in Unimarc, as writing is an occupation based on language, it is important that we can store this info — for musicians, we indicate the instrument(s), for writers, we need to have the languages of writing... - it is also needed for wp writer's infobox.
also an example : a diplomat published in a French journal : is it a translation ? did he write in French or not?... often, in the 19th century, nothing tells it, on the article...
languages spoken, written or signed (P1412) is not right, since someone can speak and practice 2, 3 or 4 languages, but write/publish only in native language, or another one, depending on the period (15th century : mainly Latin)… how to know which ones ? : Julio Cortázar (Q174210) is from Argentina, but wrote both in Spanish and French, and translated from Spanish to French… it is most insufficient to say that he can speak Spanish and French… many Spanish and French people do the same… but do not write in both languages…
and also... if it is known (with sources) that a person only wrote in "Russian", for example... then, all his/her works are necessarily in Russian… this is much more difficult to determin the other way… ;) - this is sometimes very difficult to tell for Russian authors in the late 19th century, who settled in France… --Hsarrazin (talk) 18:16, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
Führen Bots oder Helferlein irgendwelche Tätigkeiten mit dieser Eigenschaft aus oder sollten sie solche Tätigkeiten ausführen? (etwa in dem sie andere Eigenschaften auf Konsistenz überprüfen, Daten sammeln etc.)
otherwise it is not possible to give information about the burying place in connection with the building, church the person is buried in. Or we should permit place of burial (P119) also for places and buildings --Oursana (talk) 03:38, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Comment You mean it makes sense to list all persons that are burried in a cemetery in its item? This may be hundreds of persons in a big city. A Query will do the same thing within a minute by finding all persons with place of burial (P119) and item of the cemetery without any further edit necessary.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 02:59, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
Oppose. It would be more efficient to use a query. --Casper Tinan (talk) 08:12, 1 December 2014 (UTC)
I think it is helpful to know which (famous) people are buried in a cemetery, more it is interesting even for visiting a church, which people are buried there, as there are not many people buried in a church, as in my example Botticelli in Ognissanti.--Oursana (talk) 19:26, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Institution-space page on Commons; Format "(?![Ii]nstitution\s*:)[^][|]+"
Institution-space page on Commons
Robot and gadget jobs
About half of Institution templates already have a Wikidata link, so it should be possible for a bot to populate the property for those institutions very directly. Exceptions are listed at c:Category:Institution templates without Wikidata link. Semi-automation of an effort to identify corresponding Wikidata items for these should be possible, similar to work currently being done on Creator templates without a Wikidata link.
This is the kind of property we ought to have anyway, to express relations between items and a particular set of wiki pages, in the same way that we now have Commons Creator page (P1472) for the Creator namespace. Jheald (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
A particular further reason to want this property is that efforts are currently underway -- see Template talk:Institution, and some test-cases at Template:Institution/wrapper/test -- to "wikidata-ize" these templates, with the aim of ultimately replacing them all (or almost all) with a single master template drawing information as required from Wikidata automatically.
However an essential step for that is data comparison, and data migration, from the present templates to Wikidata itself. Having a Property for the templates would make it much easier to use eg WDQ to extract data currently on Wikidata to compare with data presently being used in the templates; and to make further ad-hoc queries, as useful.
Once an automated master-template is available, with properly migrated data behind it, these might be of quite useful value to the Multimedia team in their work on the c:Commons:Structured data initiative, designing ways to make Commons file pages draw much more heavily and systematically from Wikidata (and CommonsData, its proposed new sibling). Such research will likely be carried out on the Multimedia team's test copy of Commons.
However it will not be possible to fully replace the current Institution templates on Commons itself until Wikidata Phase 3 is available there, which in turn depends on bugzilla:47930. So if approved this new proposed new Property is likely to be around for a bit of time at least. Jheald (talk) 16:39, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Oppose As mentioned, this is the reverse of member of (P463). As already mentioned too reverse properties are a problem because they is no automatic creation. To avoid Snipre (talk) 13:52, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Reverse properties are not always useful, especially for one-to-many relations. An organization may have dozens of notable members. It would be impossible to edit the item page once one has added all of them. --Casper Tinan (talk) 14:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Could be used in generating infoboxes for sporting events. It is also simply a meaningful bit of data that is needed to fully describe a sporting event, and would be useful for making queries. NavinoEvans (talk) 13:00, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Support This property would be useful to describe sports events.--Casper Tinan (talk) 13:13, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
Similar to Property:P374 (France), Property:P439 (Germany), Property:P772 (Spain), Property:P771 (Switzerland), Property:P382 (The Netherlands), Property:P1168 (Denmark) and many others such an municipal identifier also exists for Poland. Maybe there is an alternative in defining "municipal identifier" in general adding the nation as an necessary attibute? Regards Gelli1742 (talk) 18:25, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
@Filceolaire: Would you support this? --(talk) 11:33, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
Rezonansowy: I think there are better examples than this one. The movie was released with the title Return of the Jedi so it is more than a working title. We already have a lot of name properties but I can see that this one could be useful so I will Support but i think the datatype should be monolingual text not string. Filceolaire (talk) 15:03, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
OK, I'm not an expert in this :) Monolingual text would be better
"putnik, AmaryllisGardener Thinking about this there are a lot of different rating systems. Most countries have their own movie rating systems, there are also video game ratings. I think it would be good to make this property more general. The items this points to can have statements telling whose rating it is and what restrictions that rating implies. Can we change the property name to Rating with description for films, books, video games etc.? Filceolaire (talk) 15:35, 15 November 2014 (UTC)
It seems easiest to express through a dedicatd property.
I note that the French infobox says something like: "pentagonal bipyramid": number of faces: 10 (shape: triangles). Should we also do something like that, using qualifiers ? And how do we apply that to elongated pentagonal pyramid (Q143112) - total number of faces: 11 (5 triangles, 5 squares, 1 triangle) Zolo (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
if we use quanitfiers could there be perhaps a more universal solution like "number of facet" these could be used for facets of any dimension: vertices, edges, faces, cells, and so on..? --opensofias (talk) 17:39, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
@Jakec:. Thanks but still not sure how to use it, per questions above. --Zolo (talk) 09:07, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
Support I would name the property "number of faces" (not "number of facets") because it's good to have properties easy to understand (the concept of "facet" is not so simple). We can use a qualifier if all the faces are the same type (for example "number of faces": 10, "shape": triangle, meaning all 10 faces are triangles). Cuvwb (talk) 21:16, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
Important metadata for many religious leaders. I am aware of it in a Christian context but it could be broader than that. Alias: date of priestly ordination. Sweet kate (talk) 15:29, 2 December 2014 (UTC)
Oppose I don´t thik this is a property that ist really needed. --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:31, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
Ah. I'm starting to see where you're coming from, and it actually proves that my proposed property below of religious rank is quite needed. If we have religious rank, we can do rank of priest or bishop or cardinal and then have start dates that refer to their ordination date as priest, consecration date as bishop, elevation date as cardinal, etc. Again, these ranks are not positions. Having a religious rank property would answer for those in religious hierarchy the same problem that military rank (P410) answers for those in the military hierarchy (and military rank (P410) encourages the use of the start date as well to indicate when someone was elevated to general or whatever). Sweet kate (talk) 15:53, 4 December 2014 (UTC)
Many anatomy articles and navboxes include a Gray's Anatomy 1918 subject number. This represents the position of the represented muscle, artery, bone etc. in the 1918 edition of Gray's Anatomy. Because this text is in the public domain, and through the efforts of a number of users on the EN WP, a large amount of text from the 1918 edition is used throughout anatomy articles. Almost all articles have been given a GA subject number in the infoboxes and navboxes. These serve not only as a method of categorisation based on a very popular anatomy textbook, but also as a way of retaining data relating to how the articles were formed. This data would benefit from being on Wikidata, where (future) comparison, exploration and research could take place. LT910001 (talk) 22:47, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
links a taxon to natural products it produces. Note that it does not say "this taxon is the source of" or "this taxon is a source of" as this may vary. Some products may be yielded by more than one taxon.
Pollinators often form fundamentally necessary mutualistic relations with the plants they pollinate. Looking up what organisms pollinate a plant is of interest to many groups, but despite this no centralized source contains this information. This information can be scraped from disparate sources and collected here though, and would be of interest to these groups as well as data miners who could use this data to investigate the properties of plants that attract types of pollinators, relative importance of different types of pollinators and how that varies on the region, etc. TypingAway (talk) 04:21, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
I don't know. But I think it is important to separate abiotic and biotic vectors of pollination. A clear, but inelegant way to do this would be to just make a property called "abiotic pollination vector" for things like wind and rain pollination. Other similarly wordy options include "method of pollination", "pollinator (abiotic)", etc. It is a bit preemptive creating a pollinator property without any idea of what the abiotic pollinator property should be called. We could also just have a "Type of pollination" property which handles "Wind, rain, flooding, insect, mammal, etc" pollination, and a pollinator category for the specific insect,mammal,etc.TypingAway (talk) 02:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
The point about biotic and abiotic is relevant. I would be inclined to put it all in one property, especially since the abiotic vectors are limited in number. It would also be useful to have the reciprocal property. And perhaps a similar property for dispersing fruits/seeds. - Brya (talk) 04:27, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Did you mean to say irrelevant? Also, I think my concerns would be addressed if we changed the allowed values to item, because then ultimately people could sort the items they want and sort beetles from bees from wind, etc. I do like how there are many broad terms for different pollination strategies anemophily (Q1047706)(wind pollination), Q120806 (bird pollination), hydrophily (Q1372891) (pollination via flowing water), perhaps higher up taxa could use these broader terms. Such as bird pollination for a genus that exclusively uses birds, but whose members use different species of birds. For a reciprocal relationship we could create a property "pollenizer for" for animals which the plant is a source of pollen for.TypingAway (talk) 05:36, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
I went ahead and changed pollinator -> pollination, since pollinator is exclusive to biotic vectors, and created a reciprocal relation, "pollenizer for".TypingAway (talk) 05:43, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Support OK, looks good to me. The only thing that can go wrong is if the reverse property is used too widely, leading to long lists. - Brya (talk) 11:38, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
I changed it again slightly after realizing that the way I wrote it both properties would be listed on the plant's item. Now is it "pollination" to go on a plant's page and describe its pollinators and other forms of pollination, and "pollenizer" to go on the animal's page and describe the animal's sources of pollen. I believe it is safe to limit pollenizer to animals since I believe only animals can be considered to feed off of pollen in the way the term implies.TypingAway (talk) 00:07, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
Support Let's try this. --Succu (talk) 18:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
If you want, you can give every item a label in any given language. There are lots of items that don´t have a "native" language, but in every language a different label. There is no property necessary to give an item a label in a special or "native" language, just switch to desired language and add a label, a description and aliases if necessary.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:46, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
No, I don't want to display all labels in infobox, but one in local language and one in native language for any item if applicable. But infobox does not know what is the native language for the item. Paweł Ziemian (talk) 22:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Comment I would prefer if the native-label-statement would be made with the help of qualifiers or sources. -Tobias1984 (talk) 08:55, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
There is a lot of labels in the item, but they are not claims, but ... labels. One of them could be marked as native if possible, but such mechanism does not exists yet. If you propose a qualifier, then it must be applied to some property, which is...? So I propose a property for such definition. If you are going to some foreign country to some village you don't expects that the traffic sign are in English, but in most cases in the native local language. Such information is useful for village infobox. However, even the native label is given in the set of all available labels, the infobox does not know which one is the native one. Paweł Ziemian (talk) 22:05, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Support. We do have official name (P1448) but some places have an official name as well as a popular short name so this property will be useful. Filceolaire (talk) 20:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Although the "official name" sounds good, there is a risk that an item could have such name in many languages. This property has little different meaning in that it should consists of official name only in one language, which is used locally. An example is United Nations (Q1065), which has official name in many languages, and it is hard to find good value for the proposed property. But in other case i.e. Athens (Q1524) has one good native value Αθήνα, which is copy of Modern Greek (Q36510) label. Paweł Ziemian (talk) 19:50, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
There are many items with some serious issues. It seems the native label of Cologne (Q365) is Köln (de) and Leipzig (Q2079) is Leipzig (de.), however the native Label is Colonia Agrippina (la) and Lipsk (hsb) /(dsb) in Sorbic, an allmost extinct language. Many names of places in the eastern part of Germany have two different names, the original allmost forgotten, the same applies for many names and places in Alsace (Q1142).--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 14:21, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
United Nations is a good example of the use of "official name". It has an "official Name" in each of the 5 official languages; so Official name will have five values. It also has unofficial names (see the 191 article names in the sitelinks on the United Nations (Q1065) item) which will appear in the item labels. Filceolaire (talk) 19:36, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
SupportTar Lócesilion|queta! 14:03, 12 December 2014 (UTC) Useful. This will certainly facilitate our efforts.
Support. As we have name in native language (P1559), we also need this for other stuff - not only for names. So we need more generic property. So I fully support this solution. PMG (talk) 16:17, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
Motivation: As part of the Job and Occupations Task Force, to improve linked data around companies and jobs. I plan to do the same for LinkedIn as well.Teolemon (talk) 08:20, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
Oppose:I don´t know what employee reviews can help Wikidata. I think this kind of data is not neutral in the sense of wikikidata. IMO not useable as a source for Wikidata.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 14:27, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
Oppose: Not a neutral source of authority -- SERutherford (talk) 17:07, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
Oppose I don't see it as particularly notable per our criteria. — billinghurstsDrewth 09:48, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
Sister property to Slovene Cultural Heritage Register ID (P1587) (EŠD), but for intangible heritage where numbers are differently formatted and the source is different. Currently, there are 37 eligible entries, of which 10 (9) have articles. However, there are clues hinting that EID is actually meant to be the universal ID for all Slovene cultural heritage, so EŠD might become merged into EID at some undetermined point in the future. — YerpoEh? 18:54, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Could be "Unique heritage identification (Slovenia)" to avoid confusion. — YerpoEh? 20:47, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
Comment The cited page calls this "Register žive kulturne dediščine (RKD)" (in this case "žive" means "intangible"), so why would you call it differently from its currect actual use? Note that above, your title does not match your description. If one day Slovenia merges this ID with EŠD, renaming the property would be the least worry. So I propose to call it "Register of intangible cultural heritage of Slovenia (RKD)"
Actually, the site calls the ID "Enotna identifikacija dediščine" (first column) which translates to "Unique heritage identification". The register is not the subject here, but an institution that maintains the database of IDs, I don't see a point in equating these two terms. It's just that the ID only represents intangible cultural heritage at the moment, as I explained. — YerpoEh? 15:48, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Following other register identifiers, please call it RKD/ESD identifier (Slovenia). It may be thought of as "Unique heritage identification" by the Slovenian administartion, but it is not globally. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
It would be fine, if every number can only be used once to prevent duplicates. Thank you for help, Conny (talk) 16:59, 18 December 2014 (UTC).
I think the value in the example should be "09274762", not "ID 09274762"; and the datatype should be "string". I'd also like to the URL that that relates to, please. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Fixed some things, thank you. The Lists can only be viewed in hardcopy at the local municipality. Should I do a sample scan of the one I got from my hometown? Greetings, Conny (talk) 13:40, 21 December 2014 (UTC).
Support This is similar to Rijksmonument ID (P359) and should be a string (identifier), not a quantity (value). Please note that this property is for Saxony only, not for the rest of Germany. This is correct as this is how cultural heritage is managed in Germany. The same id may exist in multiple states which means each of the 16 states may need it's own property. --TMg 09:43, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
About 1.2M places, 0.8M in North America, some extra-terrestrial.
Strong historic info and numerous name forms, eg see Siena above.
Available as LOD since Aug 2014. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 22:01, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
It's still a few thousand entries, but is very rich (Getty made the CDWA and CCO standards, which then influenced LIDO), and Getty's developing it intensively. When done with ULAN as LOD (Mar 2015), we'll get to CONA as LOD. Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 23:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Support for all authoritative and stable identifiers — billinghurstsDrewth 09:02, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Support However I made some tests with the formatter URL and the $1 must be replaced with identifier in upper case, otherwise some characters (a,c,e,l,o,s,x,z) are converted to Polish equivalents (Ą,Ć,Ę,Ł,Ó,Ś,Ź,Ż) and the record about subject is never found. Paweł Ziemian (talk) 09:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
(quote) collaborative e-Research tool built upon the foundations of the Dictionary of Australian Artists Online. DAAO is an open source freely accessible scholarly e-Research tool that presents biographical data about Australian artists, designers, craftspeople and curators.
Primary research site for Australian artists, with biographical detail which is often otherwise hard to find for early Australian illustrators. — billinghurstsDrewth 08:51, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
The British Museum person-institution thesaurus has 176461 entries that are not coreferenced to anything in the world. I think they'd see it as a major win if the community helps them to coreference.
Let the Mix-n-matching begin!
This could be followed by importing the 2.5M cultural objects of the BM. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 18:32, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
The property should be the inverse property of named after (P138). In the page of Julian calendar (for example) there is Property P138 (named after) with an item Julius Caesar (Q11184). Now you go to the item Julius Caesar and add this proposed Property (it gave it's name to) with an item Julian calendar.
Support, though a less clunky label than "it gave it's name to" -- like "has namesake" or "has eponym" -- would be nice. Also, let's avoid creating pure-filler "subject items" like Q18507210 ("it gave it's name to"). Emw (talk) 01:30, 14 November 2014 (UTC)
Reject - this is not a useful inverse property in that it creates 1 to many relations rather than 1 to 1 relations. --Izno (talk) 07:54, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Oppose Per Izno: some people gave name to thousands of things. Also, many things have various names or have changed names over time, and this makes more sense to qualify this on the item about the named thing. --Zolo (talk) 08:57, 21 November 2014 (UTC)
Oppose No need of inverse property: the list can be get through a query. Snipre (talk) 11:55, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Oppose per Izno --Pasleim (talk) 14:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
SupportComment: I would support this if the foaf:Person and schema:Person claims were removed from the examples. Those claims warrant discussion before being added. FOAF and Schema.org use simplistic, parochial definitions that do not include thing like "animals, artificial intelligences, or extraterrestrial life, as well as legal entities such as corporations, sovereign states and other polities" as the Wikipedia article Person notes can be classified as "persons". The Coco Chanel discussion has some more on this. While equivalent class would clearly be useful, we should use it carefully. Emw (talk) 23:40, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Done even if I believe that our person (Q215627) as currently defined has nearly the same meaning as foaf:Person and schema:Person (e.g. not including animals…). But it is an other discussion. I agree with the need of a careful application of this property. Tpt (talk) 11:06, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! Supported. Emw (talk) 19:16, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
GZWDerimported from Wikimedia project (P143) or any other properties based on te same principle are corresponding to the defined reference model: if the source is online we use directly the URL, if not we use the corresponding source model. And if Freebase has a source included, we import the source directly too. We need to use the most direct link to the source and don't refer to a website which refer to anotehr one which indicates the original document. Snipre (talk) 21:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Oppose - As with all properties that want to link to the most recent "..." it is better to use a generic property and use time qualifiers. If somebody is champion of something & point in time 2013, then as long as there is nobody with point in time = 2014 then it is the current champion. We will be able to query that in the future and it will save a lot of time updating statements. --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:00, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I think it should be use like a list of people who have held the sport title. Every person will have a year as qualifier. -- Yiyi.... (talk!) 16:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I thought that we already have this property. But I was wrong. I guess the question is then if we should link person --> title or the other way around. What do the other sport task forces think? --Tobias1984 (talk) 16:28, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Also note that this proposal has already been rejected before. --Yair rand (talk) 00:56, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Yair rand: Why is this redundant? And where has it been rejected before - I searched for previous discussions before starting this proposal and failed to find any? Thryduulf (talk: local | en.wp | en.wikt) 07:15, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
Oppose. If an award like Nobel-Price is shared by two or more people, just give each of them the award. Both have the same honour. The only thing that is shared, is the money.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Disagree that the only thing shared is the money. Often awards are given to a team, whether that's a songwriting collaboration, a scientific collaboration, or similar. Think of something like the Grammy Award for Song of the Year (Q1027904) — in 1986 Michael Jackson and Lionel Richie won for "We Are the World." They share the honor, but they also share the one, singular award. It is incomplete data if it is not indicated that it was shared. Neither one person could or should take singular credit without the other. Sweet kate (talk) 20:51, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Support, I've been wanting this for quite some time as I've been doing a lot of work with awards lately, and actually came here to propose this property myself. This would be used as a qualifier for award received (P166). User:Giftzwerg 88's objection doesn't really make any sense to me; for example, in the case of latest Nobel Prize, there were specific reasons why the prize was shared between Malala Yousafzai (Q32732) and Kailash Satyarthi (Q3442375), and the fact that they shared it is relevant to Wikidata. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 01:03, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
@Oursana: Like with Giftzwerg above, didn't see this reply until now... Yeah, I think this may make sense. After all, "award shared with" is a hyponym of "shared with"/"together with", so if we change this property to "together with", it could be used in those cases as well. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 18:19, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
Changed: Since there was no objections for a long time, I've changed this property to read "together with" instead of "award shared with", so it encompasses User:Oursana's property proposal as well. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 00:43, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
We already have ISRC International Standard Recording Code which identifies a Recording, this would identify a work (the Song or Composition). Thadguidry (talk) 23:24, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
Support. Added "code" to prop name, since to many linked-data people ISWC is "international semantic web conference". --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
@Thadguidry: Your proposal duplicates #ISWC Code above. Please merge your proposal (and my vote) there and remove this section.
Support but I don't agree with adding "code" to the property name. The "C" already means "code" and I don't think it makes it any clearer. If you're unaware of the musical work meaning, you'll probably just read it as "international semantic web conference code" and be none the wiser about what the property is supposed to mean. If you are aware of the musical work meaning, I can't imagine a situation where it would actually be confusing. If it really is a problem, why not copy the way International Standard Recording Code (P1243) is done?
@Talmoryair: Please check if the information that I have entered in the request is what you want. It would also be interesting if you could put a link to the template that will be using this info.--Micru (talk) 10:36, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
tnks. can you make a templet to an artpiece too? 22.214.171.124 12:01, 17 August 2014 (UTC)
Question: What does the URL point to? A file containing FOAF (Q1389366) data? The English Wikipedia article is quite unhelpful, and implies that the data could be in any of various formats. What is an example of a URL with valid data that could actually be used? --Closeapple (talk) 08:36, 25 October 2014 (UTC)