Wikidata:Property proposal/Best climber classification
Best climber classification edit
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Sports
For proposition, see Wikidata:Property proposal/classifications. --Fralambert (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Oppose
Comment I don't think your idea would work at all for what the purpose of these properties are for. They are specifically meant for listing stage or race results on the page of these races, not for showing a participant's achivements. I don't know how the code for the cycling templates works (neither do I have any knowledge of Lua), but with my general knowledge of programming, I believe that doing it that way would make a whole lot more server load than how they are implemented on the other classifications. Also it would make it a lot more complicated (and time-consuming!) for the average users to add the data, as one would have to "jump" around to the different participant profiles instead of adding them all to a single list. Also it would completely flood the entities of some of the best riders, since we use it not only on whole races, but also on single stages in a stage race to show the current standings after each stage. Let's say a rider gets the polka dot jersey on one of the first stages of Tour de France and keeps it all the way to Paris, that makes it around 20 occurencies. Then he does the same in Giro d'Italia the same year. And also in a lot of other races during the season. I believe it could be more than 100 per year, and for those that are active for 10-15 years, it is obvious that it would not look pretty. Bergenga (talk) 22:22, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- ok, I see the point here. And the voting seems strongly in support anyway. Marked as ready ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:00, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
Support I read your idea, the experience show me if a system is difficult and/or time-consuming, it is not adopted by the users, users that enter the datas on Wikidata and enrich it. We currently have a system well developped for Template:Cycling race/stageclassification (Q24788814) and Template:Cycling race/generalclassification (Q24788750), and we have a consensus to continue to expand this system for other classifications because this system has proved its worth. Finally I will add that if so many rankings have already been filled, it is only because the data are reusable and reused in the different Wikipedia. Trying to impose a much more restrictive system will not increase the number of datas on the subject, I think on the contrary that this very heavy system will be a brake. Jérémy-Günther-Heinz Jähnick (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2017 (UTC)
- With one pro and one contra vote there's no concensus for the property and thus it's not ready. ChristianKl (talk) 09:35, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Support Needed on most stage races. I suggest that the English title should be "mountains classification" to be more consistent with the existing stage classification (P2417), general classification of race participants (P2321), points classification (P3494), teams classification by time (P3497) and teams classification by points (P3496). Bergenga (talk) 22:42, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
- +1 on calling it "mountains classification" in English. Frankieroberto (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
Oppose, use
- significant person (P3342) = XXX
- Qualifier: award received (P166) = climber classification ChristianKl (talk) 20:55, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Support I was just about to also propose this, after being surprised that we already had the properties for general classification and points classification, but not for mountains/best climber classification. Frankieroberto (talk) 19:13, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
- Support that is good for cycling items --Mr. Ibrahem (talk) 17:19, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
- Support -Theklan (talk) 17:30, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I tried to format the sample. Please revert if you think it's more confusing.
--- Jura 18:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)
