Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Property proposal: Generic Authority control Person Organization
Creative work Place Sports Sister projects
Transportation Natural science Lexeme Wikimedia Commons

See alsoEdit

This page is for the proposal of new properties.

Before proposing a property

  1. Check if the property already exists by looking at Wikidata:List of properties (research on manual list) and Special:ListProperties.
  2. Check if the property was previously proposed or is on the pending list.
  3. Check if you can give a similar label and definition as an existing Wikipedia infobox parameter, or if it can be matched to an infobox, to or from which data can be transferred automatically.
  4. Select the right datatype for the property.
  5. Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below and add it in the appropriate section.

Creating the property

  1. Once consensus is reached, change status=ready on the template, to attract the attention of a property creator.
  2. Creation can be done 1 week after the proposal, by a property creator or an administrator.
  3. See steps when creating properties.

  On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2020/06.

Creative workEdit

See also: Wikidata:WikiProject Infoboxes/works
Software products and brands, see: Wikidata:WikiProject Infoboxes/terms
Books, see: Wikidata:WikiProject Books

IMFDB work IDEdit

Descriptionidentifier for a work of fiction (movie, television show, season of television show, anime or video game) on the Internet Firearms Database
RepresentsInternet Movie Firearms Database (Q6055596)
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainInternet Movie Firearms Database (Q6055596)
Example 1Die Hard (Q105598)Die_Hard (movie)
Example 2MythBusters (Q486844)Mythbusters (television show)
Example 324, season 1 (Q217261)24_-_Season_1 (season of television show)
Example 4Future Diary (Q62034895)Mirai_Nikki (anime)
Example 5Far Cry 2 (Q176336)Far_Cry_2 (video game)
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoInternet Movie Database (Q37312)


A very comprehensive and detailed database that described the use of firearms in works of fiction.

I might be wrong but this might be our first property related to firearms. Once we are done, we can make properties for actors, firearms and manufactors as well.

Another thing to note, animated televisions shows (that doesn't include anime) are usually banned unless the firearms are clearly identifiable.

I'm not sure whether or not placeholder articles should be included. --Trade (talk) 20:50, 27 June 2019 (UTC)

ValterVB LydiaPintscher Ermanon Cbrown1023 Discoveranjali Mushroom Queryzo Danrok Rogi Mbch331 Jura Jobu0101 Jklamo Jon Harald Søby putnik ohmyerica AmaryllisGardener FShbib Andreasmperu Li Song Tiot Harshrathod50 U+1F350 Bodhisattwa (talk) Shisma Wolverène Tris T7 TT meEsteban16 Antoine2711 Hrk6626 TheFireBender V!v£ l@ Rosière /Murmurer…/ WatchMeWiki! CptViraj ʂɤɲ Trivialist Franzsimon 2le2im-bdc Sotiale

  Notified participants of WikiProject Movies Konggaru Starry K. Erne Mogilevich Santer AldNonUcallinme?Thibaut120094 Shikeishu C933103 Sight Contamination -Zest ReaperDawn Sakretsu Jean-Frédéric Tris T7 TT me
Wallacegromit1 Jeanjung212 Bagas Chrisara ミラP

  Notified participants of WikiProject Anime and Manga ΛΧΣ21 Vacation9 John F. Lewis (talk) Bene* talk #Reaper (talk) Josve05a (talk) Chris Mason (talk) FunPika Arthena (talk) Wangxuan8331800 (talk) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) Nicereddy (talk) Syum90 (talk) DrakeCaiman (talk) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) Andreasburmeister (talk) Danrok (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Macrike (talk) Dispenser (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC) --Zache (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Mohammed Adam (T) SharkD  Talk  06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC) ZebaX2010 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Sight Contamination (talk) Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Santer (talk) Cloaker416 (talk) 22:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Rampagingcarrot (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Diggr (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Kirilloparma (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Sir Lothar (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC) Cwf97 (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Esteban16 (talk) 00:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC) Peterchanws Brasig Le Yota de Mars YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Coloradohusky CptViraj BugWarp ʂɤɲ User:Nw520 Cynde Moya Dexxor PaulGorduiz106   Notified participants of WikiProject Video games


  •   Support David (talk) 05:55, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Cwf97 (talk) 15:46, 27 June 2019 (EST)
  •   Support.--Vulphere 16:02, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. --Ysangkok (talk) 19:37, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Trade, Cwf97, Vulphere, Ysangkok:   Done IMFDB ID (P6992) Esteban16 (talk) 22:06, 8 July 2019 (UTC)


   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for artworks in the collection of the state museums of Berlin
RepresentsDer Jungbrunnen (Q20828882) => Ident.Nr. 593; Pergamonaltar (Q158058) => Ident.Nr. Pe. 1 und viele weitere mehr
Data typeExternal identifier
Example 1Senmurv-Platte => Ident.Nr. I. 4926
Example 2The fountain of youth (Q20828882)Ident.Nr. 593
Example 3Pergamon Altar (Q158058)Ident.Nr. Pe. 1
See alsoinventory number (P217)


the Ident.Nr. is an unique identification of artwork within the IT systems of the Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin - Preußischer KulturbesitzM1fischer14 (talk) 08:42, 28 June 2019 (UTC)


  •   Support David (talk) 06:32, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment inventory number (P217) is generally used for this. --- Jura 17:31, 29 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Either use inventory number (P217) or the label on this identifier needs to be much more specific (for example "Staatlichen Museen zu Berlin ID"). About how many artworks are in the collection and have these identifiers? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:15, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
Agree that the name needs to be a lot more specific. --Ysangkok (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Some items have really weird Ident.Nr., like e.g. this Bluse. What is the value of having the Ident.Nr if the museum doesn't actually use it itself for indexing? As you can see, the URL's do not reference it. It's called a Nummer, but is not actually a number. How do they actually use the number in the museums? Because their IT departments don't seem to cherish the system... --Ysangkok (talk) 19:33, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
    • It doesn't matter if there is no formatter url/direct way of linking. --- Jura 23:52, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Conditional support @M1fischer14: There are arguments above, have you read them? Would you be kind enough to complete your proposal, please? You can help yourself with comments next to the lines to fill in or get inspired by other propositions. Otherwise the proposal may be badly received. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 03:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Trade (talk) 16:33, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support--Cwf97 (talk) 19:50, 29 May 2020 (EST)

catalogue raisonnéEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionto use with the artist to show whether and which catalogue raisonnée exists
Representscatalogue raisonné (Q1050259)
Data typeItem
Allowed unitsartists
Example 1Lucas Cranach the Elder (Q191748)Die Gemälde von Lucas Cranach (Q64937617)
Example 2Vincent van Gogh (Q5582)J.-B. de la Faille: L'Œuvre de Vincent van Gogh, catalogue raisonné (Q17280421)
Example 3George Bellows (Q167132) → ?


very useful to combine information to the artist's work Oursana (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)


  • It looks like you want "item" datatype here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support David (talk) 06:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Hi Oursana; shouldn't we broaden the proposal to all types of work's comprehensive lists (like full publications lists)? I would love to have such a tool for researchers, for instance... Nomen ad hoc (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC).
@Nomen ad hoc: I am not quite sure, if I got you right,perhaps you could give an example. The Werkverzeichnis is a very special list, the list for the artist's work, with a great authority.--Oursana (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support - and with a separate field in the artwork template on Wikimedia Commons --Trzęsacz (talk) 21:09, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question Is there a particular advantage to creating this property for use on the artist's item, over the existing pattern of using instance of (P31) = catalogue raisonné (Q1050259) / main subject (P921) = <artist> on the item for the catalogue? Usually we prefer properties in the direction that connects many items to one, rather than one item to many. Jheald (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

--Oursana (talk) 02:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Comment I agree with Jheald here - the direction of this property feels wrong to me. Is there not a risk that a given item could have a lot of statements for this property? Marking as not ready. − Pintoch (talk) 21:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
    • one item to many?? I do not understand the arguments of Jheald and Pintoch. Could you please give an example and explain. There are very few Werkverzeichnis, normally none to one, maximum very seldom 3--Oursana (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
      • By one item to many we mean that it would be more natural to add a statement in the other direction, from each "catalogue raisonné" to its subject. The many in this phrase does not mean that there would be too many links to do it in the other direction, it is just a description of the relation (see en:One-to-many (data model) ). − Pintoch (talk) 10:49, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
        • I'm neutral on this one. I'm quite reluctant about creating one to many properties, in this case one person with multiple catalogue raisonnées, but what would be the maximum here? What artist has more than 10 of them? Maybe Rembrandt (Q5598)? @Jane023: as our catalog queen, what do you think? Multichill (talk) 09:40, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
          • Thanks for the ping. Though I am all for more catalogs raisonné on Wikidata for artists, the catalogue raisonné (Q1050259) is currently also in use for all sorts of things, not just "all works by artists", but also "all items in collection". That said, yes it would be nice to have a link from the artist to an item about their most notable (or only!) monograph. But the problem here is exactly the same as the one for the "Notable print" proposal for paintings that I had before. Who is to say that the notable print is indeed notable? Is it notable because it made the painting famous? Or is it notable because it was copied by a notable painter? Or was it made when the painting was in an important collection? Though valid, those questions don't even come near the crux of the matter which is that the print (or catalog in this case) has a specific instance as an edition. Do we want all editions and/or translations? I think not. The way to handle the problem this proposal tries to address is to try and address the issue of having a "reasonator-like link" on the artist page that will point the reader to all Wikidata resources available, such as the creator lists of course, but also (and not limited to) the catalog raisonné listeria list (if it exists). Signed, the catalog queen! Jane023 (talk) 10:18, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Use the model suggested by User:Jheald, with a "...has role" qualifier; like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Perhaps we can use described by source (P1343) qualified with type of reference (P3865) (or "object has role" as suggested above)? - PKM (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose While I like the idea, we circumvent the authority problem with using it the other way around. And in the long term we will have several catalogue raisonnés. It would be great if we can show in the future the inverse relation items in a structured manner. --Hannolans (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

translated titleEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionThe canonical (official or recognized) translation of the title of an work (usually an scientific article) in a foreign language (usually English), where the work itself is usually not translated. It is usually translated by the author of the work.
Data typeMonolingual text
Example 1The band structure in microwave frequency for quasi-1-D coaxial photonic crystals (Q66665412) → The band structure in microwave frequency for quasi-1-D coaxial photonic crystals (English)
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
Robot and gadget jobsMass import from 1. bibliographic database with multilingual title 2. databases which only records the English title (e.g. PubMed)
See alsohas edition (P747) for work that is translated; literal translation (P2441)


Per this edit a new property may be needed. GZWDer (talk) 00:37, 22 August 2019 (UTC)


  •   Comment I'd argue the referenced edit was in error. If the article has an official title in any language, that should be under title (P1476), with the appropriate language tag. This doesn't seem in any way wrong or confusing. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:45, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Why would we do it differently for Chinese articles? --- Jura 20:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
      • Why would this be special for Chinese? Articles in Canadian media may have both a French and English title, and I'd consider it the right thing to do to add both to the Wikidata item. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:01, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
        • Thanks for clarifying your POV. --- Jura 22:38, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

Mattsenate (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Mitar (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Mvolz (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
Merrilee (talk) 13:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Pharos (talk) 14:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
DarTar (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
HLHJ (talk) 09:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)
Micru (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
JakobVoss (talk) 12:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 09:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Abecker (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Mike Linksvayer (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
Kopiersperre (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Jonathan Dugan (talk) 21:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
Hfordsa (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)
Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
Runner1928 (talk) 03:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
Pete F (talk)
econterms (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
Sj (talk)
author  TomT0m / talk page
guillom (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
·addshore· talk to me! 17:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Ainali (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Shani Evenstein (talk) 21:29, 5 July 2018 (UTC)
Skim (talk) 07:17, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
PKM (talk) 23:19, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
Ocaasi (talk) 22:19, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Trilotat Trilotat (talk) 15:43, 16 February 2019 (UTC)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Source MetaData ChristianKl❫ 17:10, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

    • So should we have some way to differentiate original and non-original title? Using a new property or rank?--GZWDer (talk) 18:21, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Why not just use the label? — eru [Talk] [french wiki] 18:26, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
    • Label can not be sourced and does not imply the translation is official.--GZWDer (talk) 22:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Some further clarification needed as to how the usage of this property would differ from the present practice of adding literal translation (P2441) qualifiers to the title (P1476) statement to give translations of the title into different languages. Do we need both approaches? Can we clearly identify when one should be used rather than the other? Jheald (talk) 18:55, 26 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support given that labels in some fields are polluted with not translated titles. Should we also allow translated titles by, e.g. pubmed? Many English titles seem to come from there, but I don't think this matches the current definition. Any that can be referenced? --- Jura 09:53, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose The cited edit was in error. Also, use a literal translation (P2441) qualifier. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:20, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Per Andy, literal translation (P2441) exists and enough for this, feel free to add this name to P2441 as alias. --Liuxinyu970226 (talk) 15:42, 30 November 2019 (UTC)

maximum number of playable charactersEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionNumber of total playable characters in a video game.
Representsplayer character (Q1062345)
Data typeQuantity
Domainvideo game (Q7889)
Allowed valuesnumbers
Example 1Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3 (Q2073725) → 51
Example 2Injustice 2 (Q24717189) → 38
Example 3Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga (Q55214) → 160
Example 4Mortal Kombat: Armageddon (Q1299648) → 63
Example 5X-Men: Mutant Academy 2 (Q4021195) → 19
See alsomaximum number of players (P1873)


(Add your motivation for this property here.) Cwf97 (talk) 15:07, 24 September 2019 (UTC)


ΛΧΣ21 Vacation9 John F. Lewis (talk) Bene* talk #Reaper (talk) Josve05a (talk) Chris Mason (talk) FunPika Arthena (talk) Wangxuan8331800 (talk) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) Nicereddy (talk) Syum90 (talk) DrakeCaiman (talk) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) Andreasburmeister (talk) Danrok (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Macrike (talk) Dispenser (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC) --Zache (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Mohammed Adam (T) SharkD  Talk  06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC) ZebaX2010 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Sight Contamination (talk) Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Santer (talk) Cloaker416 (talk) 22:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Rampagingcarrot (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Diggr (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Kirilloparma (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Sir Lothar (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC) Cwf97 (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Esteban16 (talk) 00:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC) Peterchanws Brasig Le Yota de Mars YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Coloradohusky CptViraj BugWarp ʂɤɲ User:Nw520 Cynde Moya Dexxor PaulGorduiz106   Notified participants of WikiProject Video games--Trade (talk) 20:22, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

  •   Support David (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Is there some reason you picked String datatype instead of Quantity (integer values are fine) or even Item (we have items for all integers up to many thousands)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:24, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
    Was changed to Quantity in Special:Diff/1019484244 Jean-Fred (talk) 15:49, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I’m not convinced by this proposal:
  • Jean-Fred (talk) 16:30, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm also skeptical about this property. IMO characters (P674) would be enough in this case. Sir Lothar (talk) 13:49, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
    • That means one would need to know all characters, enter all characters, be sure that a given Wikidata item includes all characters. Not sure how one could do the last one and if it's efficient to do the first two in advance. --- Jura 15:43, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
      Hmmm, looking deeping, I guess there is some precedent for that, with things like number of children (P1971), number of episodes (P1113), number of seasons (P2437) (although, for the last two, the count is inferred via inverse properties) ; or the combo number of parts of this work (P2635)/tracklist (P658).
      I find the argument “how can we be sure that characters (P674) is complete” a bit curious to be honest − it could apply for a lot of properties − “number of actors” for cast member (P161), “number of editions” for has edition (P747), “number of parts” for has part (P527), etc. − no?
      Also, is this supposed to be qualified to make the difference between, starter characters, unlockable characters and downloadable characters? How about palette swaps?
      Jean-Fred (talk) 17:04, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
      “one would need to know all characters” → Are there cases where one would know the number but not have the list? Jean-Fred (talk) 17:05, 4 October 2019 (UTC)
      Having a list isn't enough, we also need someone to add all of them to Wikidata in a structured way. Which is a ton of work and IMO way more work than the few people currently active in that area on Wikidata are able to handle. --Kam Solusar (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I'm not sure about the need for this property as I don't edit these items, but I tried to spell out what would the underlying assumptions of the "use P674" argument. I don't think it's comparable with "number of editions" as that is not a static number. --- Jura 11:39, 5 October 2019 (UTC)
        • Well, from a gamer's point of view, i just don't see how this property could be useful, that's why I wrote I'm skeptical. It's much more informative to write for example, that one can choose Raiden, Sub-Zero or Scorpion in Mortal Kombat (Q150294), than to say it has max. number of 7 playable characters. Sir Lothar (talk) 08:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
          • I imagine it would be useful in infoboxes for example. --Kam Solusar (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
            • Which one for example? I don't recognize any Wikipedia project which would use such information in infobox - as they would be treated as not encyclopedic and trivial (see for example video games articles on and Sir Lothar (talk) 10:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support, this is an important parameter for computer games.--Arbnos (talk) 16:58, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. List the characters with characters (P674) / object has role (P3831), per above. --Yair rand (talk) 17:31, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment @Yair rand:, that only works if every player characters each have their own item. --Trade (talk) 19:06, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
      @Trade: Any character that doesn't have its own item can have one created. That's how such properties work. --Yair rand (talk) 20:08, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
      Can have its own item. Unfortunately, in practice, that's not the case, not even remotely. Creating items for all characters takes time and effort, even more so if we expect those tens of thousands of character items to contain more than just a label and description in one or two languages plus a instance of (P31) statement. I've worked quite a bit in this area here on Wikidata and AFAICS we only have very few game items that have a complete list of all characters (playable or otherwise). There simply aren't enough active users here compared to decdicated gaming databases, and not enough users willing to invest all that time and work to create, expand and source thousands of such items manually. Plus users of our data have no way of knowing whether a game item has a complete list of characters or if some/most are still missing. Which would make numbers of characters derived by counting the listed characters inherently unreliable. At least for the forseeable future. --Kam Solusar (talk) 15:24, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Yes, in theory the number could be derived from the characters listed on the game's item. But we're very, very far from having items for each and every character and no way of marking a character list as complete. At the current state of things I really can't see us getting to the point where it would be a reliable method, at least within the next decade or so. But a simple "number of characters" statement as proposed would be way less work to implement and would be reliable and of use for users of our data instantly, instead of potentially being somewhat reliable many years down the road. --Kam Solusar (talk)
  •   Strong oppose I think doing Lego Star Wars: The Complete Saga (Q55214) has parts of the class (P2670) player character (Q1062345) / quantity (P1114) <160> / nature of statement (P5102) maximum (Q10578722) is sufficient. --Tinker Bell 21:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I personally don't see any value in adding this property. The number of characters should be derived from the list of characters. Yes, it's a lot of work to add each character for each game, but that's the nature of a database. If it's important enough, someone someday will do it, either manually or automatically. What we should be doing today is setting up the foundations for that to be possible. I'm still too new to Wikidata to say with confidence whether Tinker Bell's approach is the best one, but from what I can tell, it makes sense to me. Keen to see what others have to say about this, though. Macrike (talk) 22:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

featured inEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for items which appear in creative works of fiction (movie, television show, season of television show, novel, musical composition, or video game)
Data typeItem
Allowed valuescreative work
Example 1My Heart Will Go On (Q155577)Titanic (Q44578)
Example 2Twist and Shout (Q60527247)Ferris Bueller's Day Off (Q498906)
Example 3Mona Lisa (Q12418)Mona Lisa (Q1164190)
Example 4Chateau Marmont (Q741123)Somewhere (Q1338368)
Example 5Tiffany & Co. (Q1066858)Breakfast at Tiffany's (Q193066)
See also


Create a relationship to indicate when items are featured in a creative work. Featured items could be either animate or inanimate. This would allow Wikidata to reflect the instances when items are depicted in popular culture. present in work (P1441) comes close to serving this purpose, but that property was created to identify when a fictional entity (Q14897293) or historical person is present within a creative work. Jbandrews (talk) 23:00, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


  •   Comment I added a few related properties and proposal. From the samples given, it's unclear if there is actually a need for this. At least if you consider some of the inverse relationship. Please bear in mind that we don't need every film featuring New York to be added to New York City (Q60).
Also, I changed "creative work" from "domain" to "allowed values" as I suppose the values should be creative works. --- Jura 16:33, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Seems useful. Moebeus (talk) 17:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Capturing these kinds of relationships seems like something Wikidata is uniquely positioned to do. This may be getting ahead of this conversation, but would it also make sense to have a companion property called "features" - or something to that effect - for the work that features other works? I could see this being useful for queries. Wskent (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I believe the restriction of creative works is not needed and will not vote for another too narrow (just like P1441) property. This makes this name bad as we would need a third property for all the cases when there is a non-creative but notable item that is featured in a creative work that we would want to capture. A better name for this narrow case would be "creative work featured in". Ainali (talk) 17:53, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
    • Examples of other things that could be added is persons in songs or books, concepts that are featured (but not the main theme), notable individual animals or mass produced items etc. Ainali (talk) 17:59, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
      Would it be accurate to summarize your use-case as something like “mentionned in”? Jean-Fred (talk) 18:46, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Not really. A concept, notable individual animals or mass produced items could be featured in a film without being mentioned. Ainali (talk) 18:56, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Ah I see. I think I have seen some use of depicts (P180) in the wild to do that. Jean-Fred (talk) 13:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Well, that might work for those two. But how about a concept? Ainali (talk) 10:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  Comment I strongly favor just broadening present in work (P1441) for this purpose. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  Support, although I would also be happy with broadening present in work (P1441). - PKM (talk) 20:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose wrong way round. --- Jura 20:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I would prefer just broad present in work (P1441), but I think we should use a calificative to distingish between main characters and references. --Tinker Bell 20:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Originally I was going to oppose and agree that we should broaden present in work (P1441). However, I'd raise the question if a character appearing in the works for which that character was created and appearing in other works as a featured character has a different relationship to said work. Although now that I think about it that could be captured with a qualifier. --SilentSpike (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Jura. ChristianKl❫ 22:15, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I think you can use the dedicated properties on the work item: for music featured there are for example soundtrack release (P406), theme music (P942), maybe even has melody (P1625) (I tend to use it on short films without a soundtrack album), for places narrative location (P840) and filming location (P915).
    As this was brought up by others: I oppose the use of present in work (P1441) for the examples mentioned by you. present in work (P1441) is used to indicate entities that appear as part of the story of a fictional work, not as part of the soundtrack, cast or film set; e.g. there is a difference if Marlene Dietrich (Q4612) "appears" in a film as a character or as an actress and I think it is useful to be able to distinguish between those cases. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I don't see how Jura's inexistent argument is supposed to work. We'd have two otherwise identical relations (the "otehr way around" of this, and present in work (P1441)) that work in opposite directions. A recipe for disaster if there ever was one. Circeus (talk) 19:05, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Circeus: A given book might have hundred characters present in work (P1441) is intended to allow each of those characters to be linked with the book without having 100 statements on one item. If you have a historical person like Abraham Lincoln there might be 100 creative works that somehow feature Lincoln. Adding those 100 statements to the item for Lincoln would be problematic as it makes that item take long to load.
It seems that @PKM: transformed present in work (P1441) in a way that has the potential to make items to big to be effectively interacted with in Wikidata and nobody stopped him but I don't think that is a reason to add further potential disruption. ChristianKl❫ 14:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as the description goes, in what sense is this supposed to be an identifier? It's a property but it doesn't seem to me like an identifier. ChristianKl❫ 14:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Jura – not that this direction is "wrong", so much as that the other direction is more elegant. Swpb (talk) 16:36, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

general lawEdit


Laws can be ordered in general-specific relation. Specific law applies first, and then general law applies where there is no related provision in the specific law.

Currently, there is no way to express the relations of statutes. This property should be created to relate statutes in general-specific order. – Kwj2772 (talk) 01:47, 4 November 2019 (UTC)


  •   Comment Isn't part of (P361) sufficient? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:31, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
    • Relation covered by the property I proposed is near to relation of general principles and exceptions, rather than whole-part. That means, if there is a relevant provision in a specific law, the provision in the specific law applies directly and provisions in general laws are excluded in application. Conversely, if there is no relevant provision in the specific law, provisions in general laws are applied mutatis mutandis. That's why part of (P361) is not applicable. – Kwj2772 (talk) 00:49, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Please use charter URL (P6378). Nomen ad hoc (talk) 11:13, 5 November 2019 (UTC).
    • I don't see how charter URL (P6378) fits the purpose at all. As it's name suggests, it takes a URL, not a law. I don't know enough about law to cast a support vote, but it seems like this reason for an oppose is not valid. Swpb (talk) 16:41, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
  • What prior arts exists for modeling this relationship? ChristianKl❫ 12:04, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose As far as i can see laws applied (P3014) is sufficient. --Hannolans (talk) 22:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
  •   Question @Kwj2772: I think I have a vague understanding of where you’re going with this (next-higher level in the hierarchy of sources of law as relevant to the application of law, as opposed to the next-higher level in the hierarchy of authority when it comes to competency for declaration of law), but can you elaborate on the difference between laws applied (P3014) and this proposed property?―BlaueBlüte (talk) 08:18, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

references work, tradition or theoryEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptioncreative work, tradition or theory this creative work references by allusion, quote or similar means (for citations in scholarly and legal works use P2860, for other more specific properties have a look at "see also" on the property page)
Data typeItem
Domaincreative work (Q17537576)
Allowed valuescreative work (Q17537576), genre (Q483394), theory (Q17737), tradition (Q82821)
Example 1Lolita (Q127149) -> Au lecteur (Q17357164)
Example 21Q84 (Q208971) -> It's Only a Paper Moon (Q387410)
Example 3Buddenbrooks (Q326909) -> Oratio in Catilinam Secunda Habita ad Populum (Q42151775)
Example 4Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde (Q217352) -> Genesis 4 (Q12490446)
Example 5Lolita (Q127149) -> psychoanalysis (Q41630) subject has role (P2868) parody (Q170539)
Example 6The Tin Drum (Q899334) -> Bildungsroman (Q223945)
Planned useThere are already some statements using cites work (P2860). I would move them to the new property.
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See also


Intertextual figures are an important aspect of literary works, but also for other kinds of works their reference to other works is an important feature. I tended to use cites work (P2860) in those cases, but after some thought I think this is a bad practice and it would be best to reserve cites work (P2860) to formal citations and create a new property for all those non-formal references (allusion, unattributed quotes, parody) between creative works. This property would be equivalent to It would be a superproperty of cites work (P2860), has melody (P1625), samples from work (P5707), has lyrics (P6439) and quotes work (P6166). Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:43, 7 November 2019 (UTC)

Some comment about sourcing: References to other works may not be explicit and their detection may thus be a matter of background knowledge and interpretation. To be able to attribute such statements to a certain person, work and/or context they should be backed up by appropriate sources. What is "appropriate" depends besides others on the coverage of the work in secondary and tertiary literature and how explicitly the reference is made. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:59, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


  •   Support I agree that cites work should be reserved for formal citation and that a property is needed to establish a link between works that simply pay tribute to others via reference --SilentSpike (talk) 11:54, 7 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment I broadened the scope of this property to include also traditions (in the broadest sense) and theories: I spotted some ill-defined uses of depicts (P180) with traditions in the broadest sense (especially literary conventions like genres) or theories that may be best placed within the scope of this new property. Sometimes secondary sources say that a work alludes to/replies to/is a parody of a genre, tradition, theory or other "body of thought" (e.g. Lolita (Q127149) being said to be a parody of psychoanalysis (Q41630)). This could be also used for references to traditional stories or literary themes like the one of Tristan and Isolde that can not be attributed to a single work. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:16, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment: This seems well intentioned, but may attract a lot of trivial detritus from superfans. A single episode of The Simpsons (Q886) or Family Guy (Q5930) may have dozens of historical and pop culture references, sight gags, homages, musical parodies, etc, from Hamlet (Q41567) to Dogs Playing Poker (Q2963501) to Three's Company (Q245996), and a film, novel or non-fiction book may easily have hundreds. Will there be arguments over what references/allusions are most appropriate? Which are explicit and which are implicit? Is mere mention of a title enough to qualify (in Mallrats (Q39999), Brodie mentions The Punisher War Journal (Q7758751), Fletch (Q1428153) and at the end is said to become host of The Tonight Show (Q1338655), in addition to countless comic book and video game references. Do we need to model all of this?) I think the scope is far too broad, and question the practical merits. I see this becoming akin to the trivial "In popular culture" sections that plague so many Wikipedia articles. -Animalparty (talk) 05:52, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  • References between works are not only a matter of popular culture and a topic of interest to some scholarly fields (traditionally literary studies, but it is also of interest to other fields in the humanities). References are dealt with in scholarly articles and explained in annotated works. So I think it has merit to be able to model this relationship and in many cases there are enough sources to back up one's claims. As to the number of possible statements: There are also academic works citing hundreds of other articles, which can be modelled via cites work (P2860). Of course there may be arguments if a certain supposed reference is really there, like there may be arguments about almost any statement in Wikidata. In the case of doubt the general rule should apply: The one who wants to keep the statement should provide a source stating that. One could develop lists and rules of thumb about accepted or rather controversial sources for certain types of works and genres. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:03, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Generally too many for long books; don't you think so? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:14, 12 November 2019 (UTC).
    • On average I expect less statements than cites work (P2860)-statements for formal citations in academic works. Lolita (Q127149) may be a good example with respect to how many references to other works a literary work may feature (Lolita is known for featuring an abundance of references to other works): Q127149#P2860 (currently indicated via cites work (P2860), would be moved to the new property, if accepted). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:50, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
      • Thank you for the example. This list is very long... Nomen ad hoc (talk) 08:16, 13 November 2019 (UTC).
  •   Neutral I've long felt that there are too many properties for works that draw on other works, and their distinctions are too subtle for the average users, leading to inconsistency. I would support any proposal that would lead to consolidation of these properties, but it's not clear that the proposed property would do that, or is even meant to. Swpb (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support, an important property for Wikidata to reveal this topic.--Arbnos (talk) 20:38, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

mentions named entityEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionnamed entity mentioned only by name in a work (use P1441 for entities present in the events of a work; use P840 for locations that are part of the setting of a work)
RepresentsName-dropping (Q1424112)
Data typeItem
Domaincreative work (Q17537576)
Allowed valuesAny entity with a property that's instance of (P31)Wikidata property to indicate a name (Q19643892)
Example 1Nobody Speak (Q26885626)Donald Trump (Q22686) (named as (P1810) → "Trump")
Example 2That's Not Me (Q18164235)Gucci (Q178516)
Example 3We Didn't Start the Fire (Q1448949)Budapest (Q1781)
Example 4Paper Towns (Q1138063)The Mountain Goats (Q145515) ("Ben and Radar showed up at eight on the dot. I got in the backseat. They were shouting along to a song by the Mountain Goats.")
See also


I think this is interesting cultural data to capture, for instance, it provides data on things like which fashion brand is name-dropped the most in rap. However, there is also application to literary works - with the distinction from present in work (P1441) being that these entities are not actually present in the events of a work, only mentioned by name. See discussion at project chat here: Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2019/11#How_can_we_state_that_a_person/entity_was_named_in_a_creative_work

The difference from other proposals such as Wikidata:Property_proposal/mentioned_in_work and Wikidata:Property_proposal/Mentioned_at is the better defined scope/application of this property not currently covered by existing related properties (and also this property is a statement on the work item, since an entity could be mentioned in thousands of works - leading to excessive statements on the entity item). --SilentSpike (talk) 16:44, 8 November 2019 (UTC)


  •   Support Seems useful. A lot of editors have been using a lot of different properties to model this relationship, this makes it a lot clearer. If this goes through, I propose a "mini task force" to identify and migrate previous edits using "main subject", "present in work", etc. to map mentions. Moebeus (talk) 17:00, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
  • I would like to see this property be able to be extended (with a qualifier) to cover allusions as well as specific mentions. E.g. Everything Zen (Q5418126) referencing Life on Mars? (Q2077201) ("Mickey Mouse has grown up a cow") or "Yes, I's Finished/Abie Baby" from Hair (Q1165499) paraphrasing Gettysburg Address (Q214524). (Alternatively, rather than a qualifier there could be two separate properties.) - Jmabel (talk) 18:06, 8 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I like SilentSpike's example of name-dropping in rap and I think that Moebeus (above and in the discussion at Project chat) and Jura (in the discussion at project chat) have a good point: There are already attempts to model this kind of relationship (with reasonable motivations), just that other properties are exploited for that. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:13, 9 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Responding to some of Jura's questions (from project chat) here for archival purposes:
What type of work would this apply to? How many such statements should we have? Most works have a person or place index should these all be included?
  1. I think this can apply to any sort of work that has written or spoken content. My main motivation is the application to lyrical works as that's where I see the most value in how this represents cultural influence and reach (i.e. if many songs name the same entity, then it is shown to be culturally significant). However, the same line of thinking can be extended to written works (see example 4 of the proposal) where the existing property for something's presence in the work doesn't quite cover the case of an entity only mentioned by name.
  2. As many as are valid statements? I don't see an abundance of statements existing for most works since the use case and allowed values of this property limit what it applies to (i.e. persons/locations actually present in the work are already captured via other properties and this is also only applicable entities with names - aka "grass" does not mean there should be a statement for grass (Q643352)). As for works that are very referential, that seems to me like a valid use case where there may exist many values and the use of this property helps to establish that the work is heavily referential in a machine readable way.
  3. Good question, I'm not sure to be honest. My gut reaction is no since those seem like metadata about the work rather than actually being part of the work. However, perhaps they should with a qualifier to indicate that they're part of the index (also keep in mind, persons/places that are present in the work are already captured by other properties and don't belong in this property about entities only named).
--SilentSpike (talk) 11:40, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Is this proposal equivalent to Wikidata:Property proposal/references ? Presumably one wouldn't need both? Should the proposals be merged? Jheald (talk) 17:46, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
    • I don't believe so since there's a distinctly different set of allowed values. That property would cover works paying tribute to other works by borrowing ideas, concepts or events specific to them (which cannot really apply to any given entity). Whereas this property can apply to any given entity explicitly named (only) in a work. I feel like that's not the best explination possible, perhaps Valentina.Anitnelav can shed some light on the difference more succinctly. --SilentSpike (talk) 19:55, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
    • Currently they are not exactly equivalent (as explained by SilentSpike) and I admit that I'm also a bit partial to having a distinct property for references between works. On the other hand it might be actually possible to subsume this ("mentions") proposal under Wikidata:Property proposal/references by broadening the latter's scope to include all kinds of entities. If such a property should be accepted (in spite of concerns that it might be too broad) one should probably follow Jmabels proposal to indicate the kind of reference via a qualifier, maybe a new one along the lines of <kind of reference> that may take values like "mention", "allusion", "parody", "copy of style", etc. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 20:08, 11 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Neutral Generally too many in long books; don't you think so? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:15, 12 November 2019 (UTC).
    • Do you have an example? I can't really respond since I can't think of any books that include many mentions of entities which aren't characters or locations in the setting. --SilentSpike (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
      • But what about essays? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:47, 12 November 2019 (UTC).
        • Good question, I suppose it's worth considering how (or if) this should apply to non-fiction works which may mention many entities due to their nature (e.g. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology (Q1210336)). I almost feel like it shouldn't since in those cases the entities are part of the subject of the work and not merely mentioned by name. --SilentSpike (talk) 21:39, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
          • For non-fiction books that aren't dictionaries nor encyclopedias, perhaps could we consider that the property should be used chapter by chapter (each one having an item)? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:53, 12 November 2019 (UTC).
  •   Oppose For now, If papers with 2,000 authors are causing problems, then how are we going to deal with works that mention 2,000 - or 20,000 - people or things? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:04, 17 November 2019 (UTC)
    • This seems like a vote to   Wait. Presumably until there is a solution/rule/agreement in place to handle items which could have many statements? I'm still personally sceptical of the existence of works with so many name-dropped entities (outside of non-fiction works which this could be refined to exclude), but admit that it's a possibility that one could exist. --SilentSpike (talk) 00:24, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support i need a property like this.--Shisma (talk) 17:09, 18 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Pigsonthewing. There's no standard here for the significance of a "mention", so this will lead to an explosion of trivial statements. Swpb (talk) 16:53, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. We can't list every mention of anything anywhere, and this is insufficiently precise to exclude anything. --Yair rand (talk) 17:36, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
    • @Yair rand, Swpb: Do you have any suggestions on how this could be restricted further to make it a viable property then? Perhaps only allowing values that are persons/brands/organisations? --SilentSpike (talk) 11:54, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
      • No, I don't think that restriction would appreciably curtail trivial use. Frankly, I don't think there is any such tweak that could make this an appropriate property. A property like "includes a meaningful discussion of named entity" would theoretically be limited to non-trivial uses, but it would still need a clear, objective rule for what counts and what doesn't – and it would (rightly) exclude all of your examples. Swpb (talk) 15:04, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
        • What if we instead limited to domain to musical works only? The most problematic use case for this seems to be when applied to literary works due to their potential volume of applicable statements (which is not an invalid use, but undesirable). --SilentSpike (talk) 15:55, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
          • For me, still no. No matter the domain, you need a simple, workable standard for distinguishing meaningful from trivial mentions, and I don't think one exists. And again, if one did, all your example statements would fall on the wrong side. Swpb (talk) 20:08, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Oppose like Yair rand. Looks like the "trivia" that infest Wikipedia are trying to expand here --Bultro (talk) 10:41, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

text features (bis)Edit

number of charactersEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptioncount of characters in text without spaces or punctuation, text is available at Wikisource
Data typeQuantity
Domaintextual works
Example 1Ambition cannot find him. (Q19037174) → 151
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
Planned useadd to some items on Wikidata:Lists/poems_by_Emily_Dickinson
See also

number of linesEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptioncount of lines in text, text is available at Wikisource
Data typeQuantity
Domaintextual works, notably poems
Allowed unitsnone
Example 1Ambition cannot find him. (Q19037174) → 7
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
Planned useadd to some items on Wikidata:Lists/poems_by_Emily_Dickinson
See also


Some time ago we created number of words (P6570) and number of sentences (P6695) thanks to @Hsarrazin, Dhx1, Lymantria: and I finally added a few of the first property to items on Wikidata:Lists/poems_by_Emily_Dickinson. Given the genre, number of sentences (P6695) doesn't work that well and the above might be more suitable.

Please help complete the proposal.

@Ogmios: who seems to be using the properties too. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 15:59, 7 December 2019 (UTC)


Flanders Architecture Institute - Archive IDEdit

   Under discussion
Data typeExternal identifier
Example 1BE/653717/0006-PS
Example 2BE/653717/0006-PS/0188
Example 3BE/653717/0006-PS/0189
Example 4BE/653717/0016-ENG


The Flanders Architecture Institute bases in Antwerp manages a collection of archives, models, photos and drawings that documents the history of building and designing in the Flanders region and Brussels. More information about the contents of this collection can be retrieved at

Starting from 2019 we give access to this collection with the website We want to optimize the retrievability and usability of our collection by publishing the archive and objectdata on Wikidata and sharing our public domain images om Mediawiki Commons. With this operation, we want to enrich the data about architects and designers in Wikidata and provide useful links to archival material and building information, such as the information that for example has been uploaded by the Flemish organization of Immovable Heritage. ~~~~  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by WimLo (talk • contribs) at 27 November 2019‎ (UTC).


access status of contentsEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionwhether all content published by a publisher (journal, TV channel, etc.) is directly readable online
Representsacademic conference (Q2020153), conference series (Q15900647), News media (Q1193236), broadcaster (Q15265344)
Data typeentity-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
Template parameter"openaccess" in en:template:Infobox Academic Conference and in en:template:Infobox Journal
Allowed valuessame values as access status (P6954)
Example 1International Conference on Database Theory (Q25106323)free to read (Q24707952)
Example (Q5614018)free to read (Q24707952)
Example 3Nature (Q180445)paywall (Q910845)
Example 4Netflix (Q907311)paywall (Q910845)
Planned useadd information about scientific venues following existing lists like [1] or [2]
See alsoaccess status (P6954)


This is about adding a property to indicate which publishers make their work available online at no cost. The main motivation I see is to keep track of en:Open access scientific venues (journals and conferences) but the notion would make sense more broadly, e.g., for online newspapers (some require a subscription and some do not), online TV channels, etc.

We already have access status (P6954) but this is explicitly intended as a qualifier to indicate whether the DOI for a *single entity* (e.g., a single article) is open-access or not. So I think this is complementary to the proposal: it's better to indicate the access status of individual articles with access status (P6954) when they have a Wikidata entity, but for all the research articles, news articles, etc., that don't, then the availability status could be inferred from the status of the publisher.

There may be some corner cases in the definition, e.g., some scientific publishers distribute some works as open-access if the authors pay an extra charge; so I think the proposal should indicate the default status of articles (i.e., requiring no extra payment), possibly in a certain date range.

Another possibility is to use access status (P6954) as a qualifier of ISSN (P236) but this would not work for media without an ISSN. --A3nm (talk) 15:50, 14 December 2019 (UTC)


Thanks @ArthurPSmith: @Jheald: @Swpb: for the feedback! It also sounds reasonable to me to allow access status (P6954) as a main property, with the semantics that on an entity it describes the access status of that entity (or its "contents", e.g., the proceedings of a conference series). How would one go in suggesting this? Would it be on Property_talk:P6954? Or can I just edit access status (P6954) and use it directly? --A3nm (talk) 21:23, 5 January 2020 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: @Jheald: @Swpb: asking again, how can I proceed to help move this forward? Thanks! --A3nm (talk) 13:23, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
@ArthurPSmith: @Jheald: @Swpb: how can this move forward? thanks! --A3nm (talk) 19:39, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Be bold and change the constraints on access status (P6954). If anyone opposes, start a discussion on the property's talk page. Swpb (talk) 19:59, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! I have done this, and am creating my example facts using this system. If we do it this way, then my proposed property should not be created. --A3nm (talk) 16:31, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Patamu Certificate IDEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionIdentifier of Patamu Registration Certificate
Data typeExternal identifier
Example 1Targa Scan (Q54165632)118571-977
Example 2Zuppometro (Q50213306)98058-e10
Example 3SIM Scanner (Q54855571)98060-c76
Formatter URL$1


Patamu is a web platform that provides a service of protection from plagiarism and storage of creative works (music and lyrics, literary works, code and software, visual arts, cinema and theater, science and research, design and architecture, other type) 18:04, 10 February 2020 (UTC)


  •   Comment It's not clear what Wikidata items your examples apply to, can you fix this? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:37, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I have provide Wikidata items for my examples. Best 07:51, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
Hmm, they all have the same creator. Does this certificate apply to anything else in Wikidata, created by somebody else? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:14, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
Yes of course. Potentially over 100.000 creative works can use this certificate and all of them have international validity. But I don't know somebody else to show in example. 15:58, 25 February 2020 (UTC) queryEdit

   Under discussion
RepresentsStar Trek character (Q73502569), Star Trek episode (Q61220733), astronomical object from the Star Trek multiverse (Q57083319), fictional spacecraft (Q14637321), Robert Duncan McNeill (Q508333), Star Trek novel (Q72996181)
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed values([\w]+)\/\1\.php\?([\w]+\=[\w\d]+)(&[\w]+\=[\.\d\w]+)?
Example 1Who Mourns for Adonais? (Q3487403)avsnitt/avsnitt.php?trek=tos&avsnitt=2.2
Example 2Borg cube (Q11338913)skepp/skepp.php?klass=21
Example 3Robert Duncan McNeill (Q508333)personer/personer.php?person=618
Formatter URL$1
See Database ID (P7512)

MotivationEdit is a fan-curated fairly complete database of things related to Star Trek (Q1092). Unfortunately they don't seem to have a URI system or canonical link element (Q1033568). This has the disadvantage that its not an id in that there is no single canonical string that represents an article. For instance these two ids:


are different but they refer to the same entry. Also there is a lot of redundancy in every value. -- Shisma (talk) 10:16, 9 February 2020 (UTC)


  • The datatype should be URL.--GZWDer (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

IGCD fictional car IDEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier of a fictional automotible in the Internet Game Cars Database
RepresentsInternet Game Cars Database (Q82559395)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainfictional automobile (Q15707563)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1Danville (Q61157068)19949
Example 2Eiswolf (Q61157070)157938, 17979
Example 3Atlasbreaker (Q60618469)10000036, 59614
Example 4FBI (Q61157071)7973, 17982
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL$1


 – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trade (talk • contribs) at 15:21, February 27, 2020‎ (UTC).


  •   Comment Why are there are more than one number for some of these examples? Is it really an identifier? Or do our items join together several distinct fictional vehicles? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
  • Hmm, I notice that your id's for Eiswolf and FBI are the same, also, something seems wrong there! ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
  • @ArthurPSmith: Some of these fictional vehicles appears in more than one video game hence why some of them have multiple numbers. Specific unique vehicles such as Luz' Eiswolf should have their own item. --Trade (talk) 18:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
  • But why are there two cars with the same identifier value - 17982 ? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

mix'n'match temporary cross-referenceEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionstatement generated by mix'n'match to sync items lacking "main subject" (P921). Once a catalogue is completed, its statements will be removed. Generally not added manually. See help page for details.
Representsitem lacking "main subject" (P921) about the subject of the statement, e.g. "biography of John Doe" on the item about John Doe
Data typeExternal identifier
Template parametern/a
Domainvaries from one catalogue to another
Allowed valuesQ\d+
Example 1changes, theoretical sample: Arthur S. Keats (Q89185969) → Q46360334
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
SourceMix'n'match (Q28054658)
Planned usesimilar to P2536 is used by see Help:Add main subject with Mix-n-Match
Number of IDs in sourcevaries
Formatter URL$1
Robot and gadget jobsReinheitsgebot syncs with Mix'n'match (Q28054658)
See also


Help:Add main subject with Mix-n-Match explains the steps of using Mix'n'Match (MxM) to identify items that are values for main subject (P921).

Initially, I used Sandbox-External identifier (P2536). That works mostly, but could use a few improvements. To avoid problems with other experiments, this proposal for a temporary property. Also, a dedicated property would make it easier to include custom code in MxM.

Note it's temporary in the sense that items for a given catalogue only use it for some time, but it's a permanent property as it can be used by other catalogues later. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 20:35, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


  •   Comment Maybe I'm missing something here, but can't one just use main subject (P921) directly? This seems like an abuse of mix n match... ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
    • How would you do it? --- Jura 18:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
      • @Jura1: Assuming I understand the idea here, let's say I have some titles of items that are "about" other items. I'd put those titles and their QID's into a csv file, load it into OpenRefine, tweak the titles to pull out likely label matches, then do OpenRefine's reconcile process to match those labels to Wikidata items, then dump out those title QID and matched QID pairs and load into Quickstatements to add the main subject (P921) statements. Or there might be a way to do it directly in OpenRefine. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:55, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
        • I haven't tried OpenRefine's matching recently, but essentially, I would have to do all of them myself ;) Also, I couldn't see what's matching in other MxM catalogues. --- Jura 18:12, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

file page offsetEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionoffset between page numbering of the file (pdf/djvu) and the main numbering used in the reproduced work (generally Arabic). Helps getting closer to the correct page by skipping prefaces, title page and blank pages. Determined at the initial pages of the document (e.g. page 30 of the pdf = page 2 of the work, offset is 28)
Data typeQuantity
Domaingenerally a qualifier for document file on Wikimedia Commons (P996)
Example 1Decameron di Giovanni Boccaccio corretto ed illustrato con note (Q43437721) document file on Wikimedia Commons (P996) File:Boccaccio - Decameron di Giovanni Boccaccio corretto ed illustrato con note, 1827.djvu → 58 (djvu file page 60 is numbered "2", 60-2=58)
Example 2Il Decameron (Q43431543) document file on Wikimedia Commons (P996) File:Boccaccio_-_Il_Decameron_I,_1877.djvu → 26 (djvu file page 28 is numbered "2", 28-2=26)
Example 3Dekameron (Q80977948) document file on Wikimedia Commons (P996) File:PL Giovanni Boccaccio - Dekameron.djvu → 28 (djvu file page 29 is numbered "1", 29-1=28)
See also


Can speed things up when trying to look for a page in a pdf and one doesn't want go through too many other pages. Note the actual page might still be after that, but the offset brings one closer. Please help complete the proposal (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 22:25, 12 April 2020 (UTC)


WikiTrek IDEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionIdentifier of a WikiTrek article
Data typeExternal identifier
Template parameterN/A
Domainproperty, External identifier like Property:P3302
Allowed valuesURL safe title of an article ^[a-zA-Z0-9_-]*$
Allowed unitstext string
Example 1Star Trek: Discovery, season 2 (Q51902986)Categoria:Discovery_-_Titoli_italiani
Example 2Brother (Q56605466)Brother
Example 3If Memory Serves (Q56605473)If_Memory_Serves
Format and edit filter validationI honestly don't understand what it is required here: «sample: 7 digit number can be validated with edit filter Special:AbuseFilter/17»
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Planned useInclude external link in pages like Episodi di Star Trek: Discovery (seconda stagione)
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL$1
Robot and gadget jobsPossibly, but not necessarily
See alsoProperty:P3302


WikiTrek is an italian language Mediawiki-based wiki that contains resources on episodes, films, books and related concepts to Star Trek. In order to be able to use its resources as external links, for instance, a External identifier-type property is needed, something similar to Property:P3302. This request fulfil this need. --Lucamauri (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

  • @Lucamauri: I don't think this looks like an actual identifier system, just plain URLs. You should use, for example, described at URL (P973), to link to an external web resource. Dominic (talk) 00:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support seems alright, except for the 1st example Germartin1 (talk) 13:45, 23 May 2020 (UTC)


has groupingEdit

   Ready Create
Descriptionsection or grouping used in the appendix, list or table
Data typeItem
Allowed valuesvalues used for grouping, not table rows
Example 1Promotions and Deaths from "The Navy List", July 1849 (Q24024844) → promotion
Example 2Promotions and Deaths from "The Navy List", July 1849 (Q24024844) → appointment
Example 3Promotions and Deaths from "The Navy List", July 1849 (Q24024844) → death
Planned useadd to a few Wikisource appendices, e.g.

has sortingEdit

   Ready Create
Descriptionentries are sorted by this in the appendix, list or table
Data typeItem
Example 1Promotions and Deaths from "The Navy List", July 1849 (Q24024844) → seniority, date of appointment
Example 2Deaths not noticed in the body of the work (Q24036500) → alphabetical
Example 3Appointments to Ships A (Q89420148) → officer
Planned usesee above

has columnEdit

   Ready Create
Descriptioncolumns for entries in the appendix, list or table
Data typeItem
Example 1Appointments to Ships A (Q89420148) → Name of Officer, rank, ship, captain, date of appointment, date of discharge
Example 2Deaths not noticed in the body of the work (Q24036500) → name, rank, date of death
Example 3MISSING
Planned usesee above


Wikisource includes tables and lists, but we seem to lack properties to describe these in detail. Above a start.

Please help complete the samples/proposal (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 09:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@M2k~dewiki, Mfchris84: might work for the recent imports --- Jura 09:35, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

@Nomen ad hoc: as you proposed most related properties: what are your thoughts on this? --- Jura 16:34, 26 May 2020 (UTC)


measure of gobbledygookEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionassessment of readability with this index or grade. Qualify with "quantity" (P1114) to include the actual score/grade/index level.
Representsreadability test (Q2114712)
Data typeItem
Domaintext, generally with a full text version at Wikisource
Allowed valuesinstances of readability test score (Q91797784), e.g. SMOG grade (Q91745089); not the tests themselves (e.g. SMOG (Q7391268))
Example 1Moby-Dick (Q174596)Flesch reading ease score (Q91742269), qualified with quantity (P1114) = 57.9 [3]
Example 2Green Eggs and Ham (Q2759523)Flesch–Kincaid grade level (Q91743051), qualified with quantity (P1114) = -1.3 [4]
Example 3MISSING


In order to conceive and create this wikipage to propose and initiate the creation of a new Wikibase/Wikidata entity of the entity-type property, myself, as its author, attempt to spell out the following, after considering and pondering the applicability, usefulness, non-inutility and purposivity of alternatively potentially applicable modalities, and debating at length with other possible options, after writing, drafting and formulating an initial version or edition that hasn't seen the light of the day, the reification of the informational content in the scope of this proposition will lead to an onthologically beneficial result and outcome or solution. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 11:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

@Dhx1: as per previous discussions --- Jura 11:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Comment @Jura1: How about a quantity datatype, where the units are items such as SMOG grade (Q91745089)? Dhx1 (talk) 12:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
    • @Dhx1: It's an option I considered. An aspect is that the values wouldn't be meaningful by themselves and one would have to retrieve the (unconvertible) units to actually get the information. --- Jura 12:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)
    • @Dhx1: another aspect is that on the Wikidata GUI, there is just no link to the unit and its item. --- Jura 14:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    • @Dhx1: shall we move ahead with this? --- Jura 16:44, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: What about a quantity datatype (no units?) and determination method (P459) as a mandatory qualifier? Otherwise I think it'd be best to have a property created for each type of readability scoring method if the intent is to use the data directly in infoboxes. Dhx1 (talk) 23:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
      • @Jura1: Cancel my previous suggestion, as determination method (P459) would probably describe the process used to generate the readability score. For example, a particular software product and version was used, or a score can be generated in two or more ways. Besides creating multiple properties for each readability score method, use of units still seems to be most appropriate despite the limitations you mentioned. Other approaches such as using measurement scale (P1880) as a mandatory qualifier don't match the intended use of the existing properties, even though the labels may imply they could be used. As a third suggestion, I suppose determination method (P459) could be used with two values--i.e. both a scoring mechanism (paper describing the readability scoring system?) and calculating mechanism (software?). Dhx1 (talk) 23:21, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
        • @Dhx1: I hadn't thought of P1880. Let me think about that one. There is indeed a need to indicate the tool used and applying P459 for both would be suboptimal. BTW Talk:Q2114712 has a summary of measures and different formulas to calculate them. --- Jura 09:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)
        • @Dhx1: do we have any cases where quantities with multiple, unconverted values really work out? It's already not simple for population numbers or elo ratings. The more I think about this proposal, the more like the initial form. --- Jura 14:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

SerialZone serial/episode IDEdit

Descriptionidentifier for a series or episode in the Czech database SerialZone
RepresentsSerialZone (Q31175727)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domaintelevision series episode (Q21191270), television series (Q5398426)
Allowed values[a-z0-9-]+(/epizody/[a-z0-9-]+)?
Example 1The Simpsons (Q886)simpsonovi
Example 2Crystal Blue-Haired Persuasion (Q63344441)simpsonovi/epizody/kouzelna-moc-krystalu
Example 3Futurama (Q73622)futurama
Example 4Space Pilot 3000 (Q185831)futurama/epizody/vesmirny-pilot-3000
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Formatter URL$1/
See alsoČSFD film ID (P2529)


Hello, I would create new property simillar to Property:P2529. Patriccck (talk) 15:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC) Tobias1984 Vojtěch Dostál YjM Wesalius Jklamo Walter Klosse Sintakso Matěj Suchánek JAn Dudík Skim Frettie Jura1913 Mormegil Jedudedek marv1N

  Notified participants of WikiProject Czech Republic ping czech republic project --Frettie (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

  •   Support--Trade (talk) 00:27, 20 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Neutral i dont know, identificators dont seem right for me.--Frettie (talk) 20:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Jedudedek (talk) 14:58, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support yes, it's useful --Robins7 (talk) 10:48, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --YjM | dc 18:38, 29 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support --Jan Myšák (talk) 19:10, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


media franchiseEdit


media franchise (Q196600),

a collection of related media in which several derivative works have been produced from an original creative work of fiction, such as a film, a work of literature, a television program or a video game
— English Wikipedia
The intellectual property, related data, and content shared among a group of cultural objects to which one or more video games belong.

At time of writing this there are 457 items with it as instance of (P31) (although many of them have more than one P31).

Right now media franchise (Q196600) are used with:

on characters:

present in work (P1441)
I think this is mostly fine modeling ; although formally characters are present in works (specific book or game) and franchises are not works, which would justify moving these relationships so Princess Peach (Q507001) <media franchise> Mario franchise (Q4803535)
Also, relationships between characters and franchises is sometimes established through P31, via items like Mario franchise character (Q33093124)

on works, using:

part of the series (P179)
for video game (Q7889), this is distinct relationship. A game can be part of a series (or sub-series), and of a distinct overall franchise. For example, Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 2 (Q2712053) is the second episode of the Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi (Q63107942) series (following Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi (Q2414858) and followed by Dragon Ball Z: Budokai Tenkaichi 3 (Q2520122)), but all belong to Dragon Ball (Q2020). Critically, “series” are expected to be ordered, and franchises are not (a work just belong to a franchise or not).
based on (P144)
these are made to model relationships between works, while the franchise is an overarching umbrella over all these works. For example, Resident Evil Survivor 2 Code: Veronica (Q3282068) is based on Resident Evil – Code: Veronica (Q1050284) and both belong to the Resident Evil franchise. Similarly, Tomorrow Never Dies (Q1195880) (the game) is based on (P144) Tomorrow Never Dies (Q207916) (the movie), and both belong to the James Bond franchise ; but the game James Bond 007: Nightfire (Q161188) is not based on any James Bond movie (while still belonging to the James Bond franchise).
from narrative universe (P1080) / takes place in fictional universe (P1434)
formally universes are different than franchises. Also, universes is an in-universe concept (obviously!) while franchises are out-of-universe. Franchises are also more straightforward than universes when it comes to spin-offs (do Metal Gear Acid (Q2630695) or Metal Gear Survive (Q27534668) share the same universe as the rest of the Metal Gear series?) or canon/non-canon (Oh, gosh, Star Wars expanded to other media (Q3551295)…) or alternate continuities/timelines − for example, the Tomb Raider (Q270503) video games span three distinct continuities (see also reboot (Q1343020)), and arguably the movies in a different one altogether − the same goes for the Resident Evil movies… It’s also true outside of games: the James Bond (Q844) movies take place in widely different eras − is that then still the same universe? Franchises are more straightforward: the whole of Metal Gear Something titles belong to Metal Gear (Q216655).
And practically there are:
Finally, many franchises do feel (to me at least) that they do not warrant a fictional universe item (although that may be my mistaken understanding of that concept): arguably the Back to the Future, James Bond or Indiana Jones movies ; or the Call of Duty games, take place in what looks enough like "our universe" that it would feel overkill to create a universe item about it.
See also the paper Relationships among video games: Existing standards and new definitions (Q50180192), which outlines “Franchise” and “Universe” (as well as “Series”) as distinct first-class grouping entities, the former defined as “A commonly used name that refers to the intellectual property, related data, and content shared among a group of cultural objects” and the latter as “An intellectual and/or creative domain represented by the recurrent ideas, themes, and/or settings from multiple video games or game series” (I personally find their explanations and definition of what a “universe” is very confusing and somewhat uncompelling ; but in general this serves my point that media franchise is a much better defined concept).
part of (P361)
which feels unspecific/unprecise

Other relevant properties are:

series spin-off (P2512)
to link a spin-off to the main series ; but that relationship is transversal: for example CSI: Cyber (Q16919551) is a spin-off of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation (Q117396), and both belong to CSI (Q264198)
plot expanded in (P5940)
Another property linking works together ;
Current issuesEdit
For games, the current situation leads to what I would view as bad modeling, with having items like:
Difficult querying
At the moment, there is no good way to list « all Dragon Ball video games” or “all works related to Pokemon”.


Looking at what other databases are doing:



1. Usage of media franchise (Q196600)

SELECT ?propertyItem ?propertyItemLabel (COUNT(?item) as ?count) WHERE{
  ?franchise wdt:P31 wd:Q196600.
  ?item ?propertyRel ?franchise.
  #?item wdt:P31 ?type.
  ?propertyItem wikibase:directClaim ?propertyRel.
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
} GROUP BY ?propertyItem ?propertyItemLabel

Try it!

2. Most linked-to franchises:

SELECT ?franchise ?franchiseLabel (COUNT(?item) as ?items) WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?franchise wdt:P31 wd:Q196600.
  ?item ?propertyRel ?franchise.
  ?propertyItem wikibase:directClaim ?propertyRel.
GROUP BY ?franchise ?franchiseLabel

Try it!

3. Item types most-linked to franchises:

SELECT ?type ?typeLabel (COUNT(?item) as ?items) WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?franchise wdt:P31 wd:Q196600.
  ?item ?propertyRel ?franchise.
  ?item wdt:P31 ?type.
  ?propertyItem wikibase:directClaim ?propertyRel.
GROUP BY ?type ?typeLabel

Try it!


ΛΧΣ21 Vacation9 John F. Lewis (talk) Bene* talk #Reaper (talk) Josve05a (talk) Chris Mason (talk) FunPika Arthena (talk) Wangxuan8331800 (talk) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) Nicereddy (talk) Syum90 (talk) DrakeCaiman (talk) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) Andreasburmeister (talk) Danrok (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Macrike (talk) Dispenser (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC) --Zache (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Mohammed Adam (T) SharkD  Talk  06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC) ZebaX2010 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Sight Contamination (talk) Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Santer (talk) Cloaker416 (talk) 22:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Rampagingcarrot (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Diggr (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Kirilloparma (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Sir Lothar (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC) Cwf97 (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Esteban16 (talk) 00:08, 27 October 2018 (UTC) Peterchanws Brasig Le Yota de Mars YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Coloradohusky CptViraj BugWarp ʂɤɲ User:Nw520 Cynde Moya Dexxor PaulGorduiz106   Notified participants of WikiProject Video games --Jean-Fred (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC) Valentina.Anitnelav Thierry Caro Shisma (talk) Arlo Barnes (talk) Tsaorin (talk) 16:37, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

  Notified participants of WikiProject Narration --Jean-Fred (talk) 09:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC) TomT0m Valentina.Anitnelav Shisma (talk) ElanHR Arlo Barnes (talk) Maria zaos (talk) 12:31, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

  Notified participants of WikiProject Fictional universes --Jean-Fred (talk) 09:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  •   Support Genius idea!  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Trade (talk • contribs) at 22:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC).
  •   Support I like the idea. Do you think this is ready to be discussed with others projects outside of Video games ? If we want to clean the existing relation, we might need some coordination with them. --Misc (talk) 21:23, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
    • So, I just heard about the story of Harvest Moon and Story of Season (see the comments), wouldn't that cause issue to decide where is the franchise exactly ? The original one in japanese (Bokujo Monogatari) is translated under the name Harvest Moon before 2013 and Story of the Seasons after 2013, and the Harvest Moon name is used for different serie of games. So would the franchise be the japanese one, or the US/Europe ones, or would we have 2 differents franchises with some properties to describe the market ? --Misc (talk) 23:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
      • It seem to me that this is essentially a commercial and intellectual property issue. Maybe we should probably stick to use it when IP rights are actually been sold, with reference. Overwise it seem more flexible to use work classes when appropriate. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:18, 16 May 2020 (UTC) (for example, the « ghost in the shell » franchise seems essentially to be the class of all works who take place in the Ghost in the shell universe, with its characters and so on. author  TomT0m / talk page 08:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
  • this is a great idea   Support --Shisma (talk) 16:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:54, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support This would be a great improvement Nicereddy (talk) 00:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
  • To be clear, this would only be used by real-life entities, correct? (That is, actual products, as opposed to fictional entities.) --Yair rand (talk) 19:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
    @Yair rand: That’s up for guideline I would say − that’s definitely my primary goal, and that’s reflected in the examples I put in the header.
    However, as I developed in the text, I do believe that Luigi (Q210593) instance of (P31) Mario franchise character (Q33093124) is a fundamentally flawed data modeling (are we going to create a “character from X” item for every franchise out there?), and I would see a strong argument for Luigi (Q210593) instance of (P31) fictional character (Q95074) + Luigi (Q210593) <media franchise> Mario franchise (Q4803535). Jean-Fred (talk) 09:04, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Looks like someone repurposed James Bond (Q844). I undid that. You probably want to use another sample. --- Jura 14:51, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
      Done. Jean-Fred (talk) 17:15, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

correspondent ofEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionpeople who are written correspondents of each other
Data typeExternal identifier
Example 1Charles Dickens (Q5686) → correspondent of → Queen Victoria (Q9439)
Example 2Alfred Stieglitz (Q313055) → correspondent of → Georgia O'Keeffe (Q46408)
Example 3Ada Lovelace (Q7259) → correspondent of → Charles Babbage (Q46633)


We are very new to using Wikidata, apologies for the inevitable errors. We are working on a project where we are adding people of local importance that we have materials about within our university archives into Wikidata. One of the pieces of information that we see as being helpful for our users and possibly for other archives or researchers is who corresponded with who. Similar to "influenced by" and "significant person" and the properties associated with artists and their influences but so far missing from Wikidata properties - adding "correspondent of" would show more of the connections between literary, political, religious, creative, and other people of note and which is important historical data to represent.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by UVicMetadata (talk • contribs) at 22:43, May 13, 2020‎ (UTC).


significant person
  Charles Babbage   edit
object has role correspondent
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference

+ add value

--Tinker Bell 03:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Goodreads work IDEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionThis is a unique identifier for written works (Q47461344) on Goodreads. This property should not be confused with Goodreads book ID, which is a unique identifier for versions, editions, or translations (Q3331189). For any one written work like War and Peace there should be only one Goodreads work ID but there may be multiple Goodreads book IDs. You can get this value from the "all editions" link on a Goodreads book page.
RepresentsGoodreads (Q2359213)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainliterary work (Q7725634)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1The Art of Electronics (Q3985697)556821 ( Goodreads book ID (P2969) 556821 resolves to an edition of "History and the Idea of Progress", which has a Goodreads work ID of 5020760)
Example 2War and Peace (Q161531)4912783 ( Goodreads book ID (P2969) 4912783 resolves to an edition of "Robotics in Alpe-Adria Region: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop (Raa '93), June 1993, Krems, Austria", which has a Goodreads work ID of 4978325)
Example 3The Forever War (Q5406934)423 ( Goodreads book ID (P2969) 423 resolves to an edition of "Where I Was From", which has a Goodreads work ID of 1371028)
Example 4Demian (Q860577)5334697 ( Goodreads book ID (P2969) 5334697 resolves to an edition of "Tell Me What to Eat If I Have Type II Diabetes", which has a Goodreads work ID of 5402183)
Planned useI want to use this when enhancing literary work (Q7725634) items. No exact plan for automated use at the moment. This could eventually be used to link different ISBNs to a single Item.
Number of IDs in sourceMore than 5000000, less than 6000000.
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoOCLC work ID (P5331), OCLC control number (P243), LibraryThing work ID (P1085), Open Library ID (P648), Goodreads book ID (P2969)


I think more identifiers for literary work (Q7725634) will be useful, and this one seems decent. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 11:37, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Viswaprabha (talk)
Maximilianklein (talk)
Jane023 (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Alexander Doria (talk)
Ruud 23:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Jayanta Nath
Yann (talk)
John Vandenberg (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
Danmichaelo (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Ravi (talk)
Mvolz (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Hsarrazin (talk) 07:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
PKM (talk) 19:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Revi 16:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Almondega (talk) 00:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
Jura to help sort out issues with other projects
Skim (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Marchitelli (talk) 12:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Alexmar983 (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Chiara (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Thibaut120094 (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Ivanhercaz | Discusión   15:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
PatHadley (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Erica (ohmyerica) (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 05:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Sam Wilson 09:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Sic19 (talk) 22:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
MartinPoulter (talk) 09:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
ThelmadatterThelmadatter (talk) 01:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)
Zeroth (talk) 15:01, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
Beat Estermann (talk) 20:07, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
Shilonite - specialize in cataloging Jewish & Hebrew books
Elena moz
Oa01 (talk) 10:52, 3 February 2018 (UTC)
Maria zaos (talk) 11:39, 25 March 2018 (UTC)
Wikidelo (talk) 13:07, 15 April 2018 (UTC)
Mfchris84 (talk) 10:08, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
Mlemusrojas (talk) 3:36, 30 April 2018 (UTC)
salgo60 Salgo60 (talk) 12:42, 8 May 2018 (UTC)
Dick Bos (talk) 14:35, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
Marco Chemello (BEIC) (talk) 07:26, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 徵國單  (討論 🀄) (方孔錢 💴) 14:35, 20 July 2018 (UTC)
Alicia Fagerving (WMSE)
Louize5 (talk) 20:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
Viztor (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
RaymondYee (talk) 21:12, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Merrilee (talk) 22:14, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Kcoyle (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
JohnMarkOckerbloom (talk) 22:58, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
Tris T7 TT me
Helmoony (talk) 19:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Shooke (talk) 19:17, 12 January 2019 (UTC)
DarwIn (talk) 14:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
I am Davidzdh. 16:08, 18 February 2019 (UTC)
Juandev (talk) 10:03, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
Buccalon (talk) 15:51, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
MJLTalk 16:48, 8 April 2019 (UTC)
Rosiestep (talk) 20:26, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
Dcflyer (talk) 12:23, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Susanna Giaccai (talk) 05:56, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Asaf Bartov (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
Msuicat (talk) 17:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
SilentSpike (talk) 15:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
TheFireBender (talk) 12:40, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
Jumtist (talk) 21:45, 22 October 2019 (UTC)
DrLibraryCat (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
ShawnMichael100 (talk) 20:04, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
Lmbarrier (talk) 19:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Satpal Dandiwal (talk) 17:32, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Rosiestep (talk) 17:08, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
Clifford Anderson (talk) 01:37, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Discostu (talk) 09:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
Subodh (talk)
Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 14:02, 27 April 2020 (UTC)
Алексей Скрипник (talk) 15:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
MLeonStewart (talk) 18:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
ArielBritoJiménez (talk) 16:17, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Books

T.seppelt (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 11:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC) GerardM (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits Jneubert (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC) Framawiki (please notify !) (talk) Sic19 (talk) 20:42, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Wikidelo (talk) 21:15, 8 May 2018 (UTC) salgo60 Salgo60 (talk) 07:09, 10 June 2018 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:52, 22 August 2018 (UTC) PKM (talk) 19:40, 23 August 2018 (UTC) Ettorerizza (talk) 06:44, 8 October 2018 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 03:47, 19 December 2018 (UTC) Daniel Mietchen (talk) 16:30, 7 April 2019 (UTC) Eihel (talk) 15:13, 19 June 2019 (UTC) NAH (talk) 20:29, 18 August 2019 (UTC) Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 21:48, 3 October 2019 (UTC) Epìdosis (talk) 23:49, 22 November 2019 (UTC) Sotho Tal Ker (talk) 00:52, 1 May 2020 (UTC) Bargioni (talk) 09:48, 02 May 2020 (UTC) --Carlobia (talk) 14:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

  Notified participants of WikiProject Authority control


  Oppose - there is already Goodreads book ID (P2969) and it is not clear to me how the creation of this property would offer anything extra. This new property would be linking to a page that links to, and is linked from, the location of Goodreads book ID (P2969). For example, The Art of Electronics (Q3985697)Goodreads book ID (P2969)569775 links to the proposed Goodreads work ID 556821, which has a reciprocal link. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 16:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

@Sic19:: Goodreads book ID (P2969) is an identifier for ?item instance of (P31) version, edition, or translation (Q3331189) where as Goodreads work ID would be a identifier for ?item instance of (P31) written work (Q47461344). This is similar to the distinction between OCLC work ID (P5331) and OCLC control number (P243). Yes OCLC work ID (P5331) will link back to the same value that is in OCLC control number (P243), but these belong on different Wikidata items (if they exist). This will also facilitate the lookup of a Wikidata item relating to a work from ISBN even if the ISBN is not registered in wikipedia as you can lookup the ISBN on another service and link it back to an identifier that is on wikidata (the same can be done with Open Library ID (P648) as there are IDs there for works and editions and with OCLC work ID (P5331) and OCLC control number (P243)). The alternative would be to create 1,683 items with edition or translation of (P629) War and Peace (Q161531) and add Goodreads book ID (P2969) and ISBN-13 (P212) on each individual item. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 21:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)
@Iwan.Aucamp:, the type constraints for Goodreads book ID (P2969) are instance of written work (Q47461344) or version, edition, or translation (Q3331189), so there would be overlap between the properties. I agree with everything else you've said and will withdraw my opposition (and most likely support) the proposed property if it is updated to clearly explain the relationship to Goodreads book ID (P2969) and how the usage differs. It also seems reasonable that there is agreement about the necessary changes to Goodreads book ID (P2969) before the new property is created. Fundamentally, the new property will be useful but, for me, it is sensible to spend a little extra time now getting the details right instead of fixing problems later. Simon Cobb (User:Sic19 ; talk page) 20:51, 1 May 2020 (UTC)
@Sic19: There are already overlap between identifiers for written works and identifiers for editions. Both OCLC control number (P243) and ISBN-13 (P212) (which are identifiers for editions and not works) are allowed and used on both written work (Q47461344) and version, edition, or translation (Q3331189) and I don't really have a serious problem with it, I think the semantics and usage instructions could be made clearer for both OCLC control number (P243) and ISBN-13 (P212) but it is not that unclear. To me it is clear that if a written work has ISBN-13 (P212) it that it is an identifier of an edition of said written work. And it is also clear to me that if there is an Q-item for that specific edition then the ISBN-13 (P212) belongs there instead of on the written work. It is also clear that when ISBN-13 (P212) is used on an edition it should be with qualifier.
I have created a discussion section for Goodreads book ID (P2969) here where I have raised some inconsistency with the property and suggested we clarify the use a bit through documentation. If you have any other problems with it you should raise it otherwise please provide feedback on the proposal.
I have expanded the description of this property and hope it is clear enough now. I want to avoid documenting other properties or the ontology used for written works and editions in this property - that should be and is documented on WikiProject books. The Domain of this property has been literary work (Q7725634) from the start - which already actually makes it pretty clear. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 22:00, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

  Support Note that I'm not a books specialist. Still I've done a bit of research and here's what I found:

  • The Goodreads work ID ($1) is different from the book ID ($1). Both seem to be very different concept. For instance Free as in Freedom "edition" contains the same text in different format, and possibly translated in many languages, whereas Free as in Freedom(2.0) has, in addition to the same base text, many comments from the person that is subject of the biography were added. The additional comments takes a significant part of the book (more than 10% if my memory is correct, maybe 20% or 30%).
  • Having more identifier is a good thing as it helps better understand what constitute a work and what constitute an edition. External identifiers may not map exactly to Wikidata definition of edition and work. Even if both had exactly the same definition, mistakes could occur in both data sets, and having more identifiers helps spotting these. It's also probably impossible to have definitions that can clearly distinguish between different things and there is often some grey area between things: As I understand from the Functional_Requirements_for_Bibliographic_Records Wikipedia page, there is no crystal clear boundary to distinguish if two expressions are from the same work or from a different work that is inspired from the first one. Collective works that are done in an acentralized fashion like stories that are told between people and generations but not written down (yet) and drift from each other in different places are probably hard to characterize. For instance, as I understand the Commedia dell'arte "work" was a story that was told accros people and generations Commedia_dell'arte which was then written down by Carlo Goldoni.
  • However the description of the properties should be crystal clear on both goodreads work ID and goodreads book ID on which is which in order not to have people confuse both. As the URL are different there may also be ways to check for mistakes if someone uses a book ID instead of a work ID and vice versa.

GNUtoo (talk) 15:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

  Comment How do we determine whether a specific identifier is for a work, an edition, or something else? --EncycloPetey (talk) 01:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

  • @EncycloPetey: in this case it is stated in the domain. The domain in this proposal is and has always been literary work (Q7725634). I guess part of the issue is that for Goodreads book ID (P2969) there is a lack of clarity, but to be fair, the same lack of clarity exists for ISBN-13 (P212) and OCLC control number (P243). I have suggested the documentation be updated for Goodreads book ID (P2969) (proposal here, no responses) to clarify this though but maybe another property to represent the domain independently of the constraints is needed. Again though, this property is perfectly clear on the matter, I don't mind fixing other properties but other properties will always be broken and new properties are created in the face of that reality all the time. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
    • That doesn't answer the question I asked. I did not ask whether this property was for a work, an edition, or something else. What I asked was how we distinguish the identifier value inserted into this property as being a for a work, an edition, or something else. --EncycloPetey (talk) 21:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)
      • @EncycloPetey: from just the value itself you cannot determine whether it is for a work, edition ("book"), character, author or series. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 16:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
        • Since there is no way to make the determination, why create a separate property? --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:41, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
          • @EncycloPetey: Because it identifies something different? If I have a number, say 3000, and no other information, how do I know whether it is a OCLC work ID (P5331), LibraryThing work ID (P1085), OCLC control number (P243) or RfC ID (P892)? I don't, but we still have different properties because they are different identifiers. If I put a RFC ID in OCLC work ID (P5331) then it will just be wrong and resolve to the wrong thing. Their are different identifier spaces, not any single one claims to be a UUID. And neither this proposal nor Goodreads book ID (P2969) is a UUID. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
          • I don't actually understand why that even matters, if you just have a bunch of numbers with no other information, why would you use them for anything? Just discard them. Actual use cases, like scraping would involve you getting the identifer from a place where it is clear what it identifies, like if I got the identifier from an RFC page, I would not put it in Goodreads book ID (P2969) even though there is no way for me to tell, from the value alone whether it is a RFC ID or a Goodreads book ID (P2969). The exact same thing applies here, if you got the identifier from a work page or link on Goodreads, why would you be confused as to whether or not it identifies a work? Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
          • By this standard almost all identifiers should be deprecated and we will be left more or less just with URI based identifiers. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:54, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
            • I asked if there was any way to tell them apart, and you said no. Most other identifiers have the means to distinguish works from editions. Those that do not have led to serious problems. Because there is no means of distinguishing them, there is no reason to have two properties. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

  Oppose - there is already Goodreads book ID (P2969), and there is no means to distinguish a work from an edition,there is no reason to have two properties. --EncycloPetey (talk) 18:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

  • @EncycloPetey: If you put the edition identifier as a book identifier it will just be wrong. For example, if you take the Bookreads work identifier for The Art of Electronics (Q3985697) which is 556821 (clearly stated in the proposal), and resolve it using the Goodreads book ID (P2969) formatter URL (P1630)$1 (instead of the formatter url which is in the proposal) - it will resolve to an edition of "History and the Idea of Progress" with ISBN-13 of "9780801481826". If your reasoning here is valid then why is OCLC work ID (P5331) and OCLC control number (P243) both justified? Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:38, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
    Yes, it would be wrong, but the discussion above has established that we have no means of making that distinction. --EncycloPetey (talk) 19:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
    @EncycloPetey: I really don't get your objection. Say I give you a value 24041 and ask you is it a Tidal artist ID (P4576), Tropicos publication ID (P4904), C-SPAN organization ID (P4725), Gamebase64 identifier (P4917), Goodreads author ID (P2963), Goodreads character ID (P6327) or a Goodreads character ID (P6327)? What would your answer be? I mean the right answer is that it is a valid value for all of those identifiers, but since they are not the same identifier we have different properties for them instead of suggesting someone put values for Tidal artist ID (P4576) inside Goodreads character ID (P6327). Can you answer why you don't have similar objections to OCLC work ID (P5331) and OCLC control number (P243)? Unless of course you do have similar objections, in which case I would be grateful if you could raise them on whichever of those you want deprecated to help clarify what the problem is. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 21:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
    I don't understand what you're asking or how it applies to the current issue. OCLC (WorldCat) is a total mess. --EncycloPetey (talk) 22:28, 15 May 2020 (UTC)
    @EncycloPetey: Maybe I'm misunderstanding here, but it seems like you have some hangup to create properties that have positive integer values as there is no way to look at a positive integer value and decide what it identifies. If so, do you mind proposing this rule in for all properties? And if you do mind, or do not think the rule should apply in to all properties, then why do you want to enforce this rule here?
    You asked "how we distinguish the identifier value inserted into this property as being a for a work, an edition, or something else.". I said that we cannot distinguish, the value is a positive integer without distinguishing features on it, the same as the value for Tidal artist ID (P4576), Tropicos publication ID (P4904), C-SPAN organization ID (P4725), Gamebase64 identifier (P4917), Goodreads author ID (P2963), Goodreads character ID (P6327) or a Goodreads character ID (P6327) (and 100s of other properties). Yet we still manage to use them correctly, because we know they are not the same identifiers. When I get a value for C-SPAN organization ID (P4725) from somewhere my process of adding it wikidata is not to find any external identifier property that can take an positive integer and add it there and seize up if there is more than one such property. My process is to add it to the property that is intended for C-SPAN organization ID (P4725).
    Failure to do so is not a reason to not have a property for C-SPAN organization ID (P4725) either in my view, in such a case someone should take it up with the editor adding incorrect values, but with enough authority control and automation we can also very easily check things, we can check the structure against Goodreads, and OCLC, and other databases to see if there are discrepancies. So what I'm asking is, why do you expect that there should be something about a value for a numeric identifier, that is generated as sequential positive integers, and associated with works, to distinguish it from a value for a numeric identifier, that is generated as sequential positive integers, associated with editions?
    What is the use case we are trying to satisfy here? You just have a bunch of positive integers and you want to put it somewhere on wikidata? For that you can maybe do a query of all external identifiers that accept positive integers, get their formatter URLs, lookup their metadata on the external database, match it to wikidata and then if the metadata matches add the identifier to the item. So even this quite quirky use case could be covered without having something in the value itself which distinguishes it.
    You keep saying OCLC is a mess, please be more specific here. Some parts of WikiData is a mess, yet we don't stop editing it because of this, we work to make it better, cleaning up the mess. We describe what we think is wrong and try and get consensus on how to address it. Is the mess with OCLC that people mix up OCLC work ID (P5331) and OCLC control number (P243)? Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 11:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)
    Within the OCLC database, they do not always distinguish between works, editions, and instances. That makes it a mess. A data item might be for one of those things or simultaneously two or more of those, and each work / edition might have multiple values. Hence, it is a mess. There are values in their database that cannot be aligned with our database or with any library database because of the sloppiness in the values within their database. I still don't understand how the rest of your comments apply here. When you say "Goodreads character ID (P6327) or a Goodreads character ID (P6327)", those are the same thing, and most of the items you mention have no bearing on distinguishing works from editions because they are not works or editions. --EncycloPetey (talk) 16:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

  Comment related: Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Books#Clarifying_the_use_of_identifiers_for_editions_of_written_works_on_written_works_themselves. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 18:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

  Support - Definitely. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 04:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Book Marks IDEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a book at Book Marks
RepresentsBook Marks (Q94648362)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainbook (Q571), literary work (Q7725634)
Allowed values[a-z\-\d]+
Example 1Until the End of Time (Q85847910)until-the-end-of-time-mind-matter-and-our-search-for-meaning-in-an-evolving-universe
Example 2Coffeeland (Q94661738)coffeeland-one-mans-dark-empire-and-the-making-of-our-favorite-drug
Example 3Dear Edward (Q85756021)dear-edward
Example 4The Mirror and the Light (Q7751674)the-mirror-the-light
Example 54 3 2 1 (Q28846426)4-3-2-1
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in sourcethousands
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1


The book review aggregator by Grove Atlantic's LitHub. It's highly useful. INS Pirat (t | c) 23:47, 17 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support--Cwf97 (talk) 19:53, 29 May 2020 (EST)

Absolute Games game IDEdit

Descriptionidentifier for a game at the Absolute Games website
RepresentsAbsolute Games (Q3918839)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainvideo game (Q7889), expansion pack (Q209163),
Allowed values[a-z\-\d]+
Example 1Fallout (Q60102)fallout-a-post-nuclear-role-playing-game
Example 2Half-Life 2 (Q193581)half-life-2
Example 3Mother 3 (Q2383167)mother-3
Example 4Cyberpunk 2077 (Q3182559)cyberpunk-2077
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source395,360+
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoProperty proposal/Absolute Games person ID, Property proposal/Absolute Games developer and publisher IDs


A video game online database. One of the most famous and comprehensive Russian-language websites of this kind. In addition to basic info, some game entries include the editorial reviews. INS Pirat (t | c) 20:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


AusStage work IDEdit

   Ready Create
Descriptionidentifier for a work at AusStage
RepresentsAusStage (Q4822836)
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1As You Like It (Q237572)160
Example 2Arsenic and Old Lace (Q1654459)1068
Example 3Away (Q4829950)658
Example 4After Dinner (Q17000702)1092
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source897
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoProperty proposal/AusStage person ID, Property proposal/AusStage venue ID, Property proposal/AusStage organization ID


The Australian Live Performance Database funded by the Australian Research Council. --INS Pirat (t | c) 07:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support --Gerwoman (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support Dhx1 (talk) 18:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

GameBanana video game IDEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a video game on GameBanana
Representsvideo game (Q7889)
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainGameBanana (Q84324518)
Example 1Counter-Strike: Source (Q473673)2
Example 2Team Fortress 2 (Q382108)297
Example 3Counter-Strike (Q163628) -> 4254
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source1707
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoMod DB video game ID (P6774)


One of the worlds oldest and still running video game modding sites. --Trade (talk) 20:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)


NexusMods video game IDEdit

   Ready Create
Descriptionidentifier for a video game on the kodding website NexusMods
Representsvideo game (Q7889)
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainNexusMods (Q7021267)
Example 1The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (Q323862)skyrim
Example 2Fallout 4 (Q10493813)fallout4
Example 3The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim Special Edition (Q31602948) -> skyrimspecialedition
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source962
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoMod DB video game ID (P6774)


One of the worlds most popular modding websites.--Trade (talk) 22:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)


Semantic Scholar corpus IDEdit


Note each article with a Semantic Scholar paper ID (P4011) also have a corpus ID, and vice versa. But CORD19 only provides Corpus ID directly. GZWDer (talk) 04:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support--Cwf97 (talk) 19:50, 29 May 2020 (EST)

Xfinity Stream IDEdit

   Under discussion
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainfilm (Q11424), television series (Q5398426)
Example 1Fantastic Four (Q224130) → 7454691794814153112
Example 2The Simpsons (Q886) → 6440918268753874112
Example 3Scooby-Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed (Q581666) → 7996578282107058112
Example 4Scooby-Doo (Q936302) → 5118810779787014112
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoNetflix ID (P1874), Hulu movie ID (P6466), Hulu series ID (P6467), Disney+ movie ID (P7595), Disney+ series ID (P7596), Tubi movie ID (P7760), Tubi series ID (P7761)


(Add your motivation for this property here.) Cwf97 (talk) 19:30, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


heraldic attitudeEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionProperty to describe the attitude or posture of a charge on a coat of arms (e.g. lion rampant). May be used as a main statement or qualifier in "depicts" statements (and possibly other types of statements).
Representsheraldic attitude (Q1243409)
Data typeItem
Domaincharge (Q1424805), as a main statement or qualifier
Allowed valuesany instance or subclass of heraldic attitude (Q1243409)
Example 1Barberini coat of arms (Q95691023) depicts (P180) bee (Q857492)volant (Q58810764)
Example 2Leopard (Q355564)passant (Q47462389), → guardant (Q47462197)
Example 3lion rampant (Q3241798)rampant (Q1469340)
Planned useTo correctly describe family coats of arms depicted in paintings and tapestries
See alsoexpression, gesture or body pose (P6022), direction (P560), has quality (P1552)


We do not have a proper way to describe the canonical heraldic attitude of an animal or person in a coat of arms. In the early days of 2014, the prototype item Coat of arms of the municipality of Östersund (Q10728131) used direction (P560) for this, but that causes a constraint violation. The item lion rampant (Q3241798) uses has quality (P1552). expression, gesture or body pose (P6022) is the closest property we already have, but I think it would best to create a unique property for "heraldic attitude" with its restricted vocabulary of values (Wikidata has 26 of them). PKM (talk) 21:38, 28 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 08:15, 30 May 2020 (UTC).
  •   Comment if the description is meant to be made with items like bee (Q857492), I think it would be better done with a property other than depicts (P180), e.g. "has part" or a new one. --- Jura 07:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)
    • There are some coat of arms items that use "has part" for the elements of the achievement, and some that use "depicts". The Heraldry project (now mostly inactive) recommended "depicts" but that was in 2014. I would be happy to open this question for feedback - where would you like to do that? - PKM (talk) 21:15, 1 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Maybe in a new property proposal? As far as this one is concerned, I suppose the qualifier could be applied to whatever comes out of it. --- Jura 18:42, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
    • For reference, ~500 items use “depicts” and ~30 use “has part” currently. I will think about what a new property might be called - as you say, it’s tangential to the discussion at hand. - PKM (talk) 00:57, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
    • It seems you had seen Wikidata:Property proposal/blazon by @Tinker Bell: some time ago. --- Jura 06:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support. Jheald (talk) 08:23, 3 June 2020 (UTC)
  •   Wait I think before making a property proposal, we should discuss many other things about modelling blazons, maybe at Heraldry wikiproject. I would also share an attempt to define a structured representation for coat of arms, it maybe could give us some hints for the task. --Tinker Bell 04:54, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
    • Can you do this onwiki? How would it impact this proposal? --- Jura 13:29, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

HBO Max IDEdit


Identifier for HBO's new streaming service. The ID format is the same that HBO has been using for HBO Go and HBO Now, so it seems stable. Trivialist (talk) 02:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)


  •   Support--Cwf97 (talk) 16:40, 29 May 2020 (EST)
  •   Support - PKM (talk) 23:30, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

BoardGameGeek family IDEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a game series on the BoardGameGeek website
RepresentsBoardGameGeek (Q887528)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainboard game franchise (Q28114062)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1Exit (Q31837127) → 36963
Example 2Catan series (Q28114052) → 3
Example 3Carcassonne series (Q28912766) → 2
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in sourceI do not know. The ID is shared between some other types.
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1
See alsoBoardGameGeek ID (P2339), BoardGameGeek game publisher ID (P6160), BoardGameGeek designer ID (P3505)


This property would fit right into the other BoardGameGeek properties. — Dexxor (talk) 21:11, 30 May 2020 (UTC)


introduced in version, removed in versionEdit

introduced in versionEdit

removed in versionEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionInverse of introduced feature (P751).
Data typeItem
Allowed valuessoftware
Example 1APIEditBeforeSave (Q21675045)MediaWiki 1.34 (Q89096161)
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
See alsodeprecated in version (P2379)


A software version can introduce a large number of new feature that can not be added to the version item.

Previous proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/introduced in version

--GZWDer (talk) 07:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

strike toneEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptiondominant note of bell
Representsstrike tone (Q2238224)
Data typeItem
Domainbell (Q101401)
Allowed valuesitems for tones
Example 1Vespruccio (Q95982011) → <new item for B♭3/Si♭3>
Example 2Terza (Q95982115) → <new item for E4/Mi4>
Example 3Winchester Cathedral bell (Q96050593)Middle C (Q32700582) ref
Planned useAdd to bells of Leaning Tower of Pisa (Q39054). Possibly some others of the 1000s we have.
See alsoit:Torre_di_Pisa#Campane


Sweet kate
Sight Contamination
Tris T7
Indrajit Das
Monica Berger
  Notified participants of WikiProject Music

Seems to be a feature worth storing for bells. Open question at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Music#strike_tone_(Q2238224). Please help expand the proposal (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 18:39, 2 June 2020 (UTC)


  • @Jura1: I think it could be worth generalizing this property to make it analogous to highest note (P1897) and lowest note (P1898). The property could also potentially be applicable to pitched drums and other instruments which only play one note. Furthermore, if the items for notes are batch-created, it would need to be decided how to label the items and what statements to add to each of them by default (for example, how to indicate that a note's frequency is N hertz but only in equal temperament tuning with A4=440). Special:Search/:haswbstatement:P31=Q263478 indicates that the only item for a note with a specific octave is Eighth octave C (Q5349143), which could be relabeled "C8". Jc86035 (talk) 19:00, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
    • I'm open to any solution more musically minded people find useful. From what I read about bells between yesterday and today, it seems the tone used as value isn't meant to be the only tone that is being heard, but one that is representative by some methodology (does that make sense musicologistically?) . --- Jura 20:56, 2 June 2020 (UTC)
  •   Support nerdy and great idea Germartin1 (talk) 08:21, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

depicted withoutEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionimage illustrates this, generally fixed, part as missing. Only use with values that are present in similar images. Compare with "depicts" (P180)
Data typeItem
Allowed unitsn/a
Example 1File:Tower of Pisa Italy detail top.jpgQ95982109
Example 2MISSING
Example 3MISSING
Example 10
See also


Commons uses depicts (P180) to describe what's visible in an image. Some images are suitable to illustrate elements that can be expected there, but aren't. Obviously not any value should be used with this property. Generally, there would be another image with that element visible. For the first sample this would be File:T de Pisa, Pisa, Italia, 2019 01.jpg.

Given that does not have part (P3113) is meant for has parts of the class (P2670) or has part (P527), I think we lack a suitable property.

Please add more samples. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 15:53, 3 June 2020 (UTC)


AnyDecentMusic album IDEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for album reviews at AnyDecentMusic
RepresentsAnyDecentMusic? (Q4778122)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainalbum (Q482994)
Allowed values\d+\/[A-Za-z\-\d]+
Example 1Græ (Q94585302)11400/Moses-Sumney-gr
Example 2Set My Heart on Fire Immediately (Q95977659)11395/Perfume-Genius-Set-My-Heart-On-Fire-Immediately
Example 3RTJ4 (Q96054303)12425/Run-The-Jewels-RTJ4
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in sourceseveral thousand
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1.aspx


A music review aggregator. It's already widely in use in enwiki. INS Pirat (t | c) 13:34, 4 June 2020 (UTC)



   Under discussion
DescriptionPosition of a person or an object on a photo where there are multiple persons or objects
Data typeItem
Domainpositions: e.g. left, right, top, bottom, top left
Example 1File:Myrthe Morrees, Lynn Wilms en Joelle Smits - 1578063654.JPG Myrthe Moorrees (Q2145911) -> left (Q13196750)
Example 2File:Myrthe Morrees, Lynn Wilms en Joelle Smits - 1578063654.JPG Lynn Wilms (Q56676525) -> middle
Example 3File:Myrthe Morrees, Lynn Wilms en Joelle Smits - 1578063654.JPG Joëlle Smits (Q56676398) -> right (Q14565199)
Format and edit filter validationonly as a qualifier
Planned useUsage as qualifier for SDOC
See also


There is currently no good way to describe which person is where on a photo with multiple persons. Eg. File:Myrthe Morrees, Lynn Wilms en Joelle Smits - 1578063654.JPG, how to say in Structured data that Myrthe is on the left, Lynn in the middle and Joëlle on the right? series ordinal (P1545) isn't suited, because why should we start counting on the left? Mbch331 (talk) 19:04, 7 January 2020 (UTC)