Wikidata:Property proposal/Law Insider Legal Dictionary entry

Law Insider Legal Dictionary entry

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Lexemes

Done: Law Insider Legal Dictionary entry (P11867) (Talk and documentation)

Description	identifier for an entry in Law Insider's Legal Dictionary
Represents	Legal Dictionary (Q115934436)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item and lexeme
Allowed values	[a-z0-9\-]+
Example 1	mixed-use building (Q47012103) --> mixed-use-building and mixed-use-buildings
Example 2	Securities Act of 1933 (Q994506) --> securities-act and us-securities-act
Example 3	United States Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (Q650978) --> gaap
Example 4	incorporation date (Q118563040) --> incorporation-date and date-of-incorporation
Example 5	felony (L23052) --> felony
Example 6	twenty-four seven (L44134) --> 24-7
Example 7	contract (L5605) --> contract
Example 8	neglect (L14132) --> neglect
Source	https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary
Planned use	adding to items or lexemes being edited or created
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)
Implied notability	Wikidata property for an identifier that does not imply notability (Q62589320)
Formatter URL	https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/$1
Applicable "stated in"-value	Legal Dictionary (Q115934436)
Single-value constraint	no

Motivation

Law Insider (Q115934429)'s Legal Dictionary (Q115934436) provides an abundance of definitions of legal terms that could be included in items for legal concepts or lexemes. The site provides a browseable dictionary of terms as well as a search option that allows users to search for exact phrases and to exclude keywords. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 02:09, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 00:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Emwille (talk) 16:44, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support --cstrickler (talk) 13:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why this property should be used on items, lexemes and senses instead of just items or senses? Midleading (talk) 09:53, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think we should limit this to lexemes only. So9q (talk) 13:28, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @UWashPrincipalCataloger, Tinker Bell, Emwille, Kiwigirl3850, Midleading, So9q: this property is almost ready for creation but it would be good to clarify the domain of use first. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 11:05, 1 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@VIGNERON: I've revised it to just items and lexemes. AdamSeattle (talk) 01:27, 12 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
For items I think the ID only makes sense as a reference. Infrastruktur (talk) 11:37, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

~~IIRC Krbot might not generate constraint reports if there is different property scopes for items and lexemes so perhaps it's best to be permissive here?~~ Edit: Nevermind, I was thinking of property constraints using the constraint scope qualifier here. Infrastruktur (talk) 11:43, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In general, I think external identifiers should always be allowed as statements.

I might also use it as a qualifier on “described by source” statements. PKM (talk) 20:35, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. That some people would like a more restrictive property scope, myself included, is not a good reason to delay property creation. So as far as I'm concerned this proposal is ready for creation. Infrastruktur (talk) 17:30, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@UWashPrincipalCataloger, Midleading, So9q, AdamSeattle, Infrastruktur: Done Harej (talk) 17:20, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]