Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO ID

PeriodO ID

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

Withdrawn

Description	ID for a time period in PeriodO
Represents	PeriodO (Q104904881)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; historical period (Q11514315), temporal entity (Q26907166), occurrence (Q1190554)
Allowed values	11-character string of letters and numbers
Example 1	Korean War (Q8663) → p06c6g3gspp
Example 2	Pastry War (Q856168) → p06c6g3rhd2
Example 3	Anglo-Afghan Wars (Q40837) → p06c6g3k674
Example 4	Middle Kingdom of Egypt (Q191324) → p06c6g3fz6m
Example 5	Upper Paleolithic (Q479505) → p0s2rwk7pr3
Example 6	Cretaceous (Q44626) → p09qtgwjxcm
Example 7	Early Cretaceous (Q752187) → p09qtgwjphz
Example 8	Famennian (Q253839) → p09qtgwh97j
Example 9	Uruk period (Q731494) → p08m57hmnkb
Example 10	Cultural Revolution (Q8690) → p06c6g3bsbt
Example 11	Safavid dynasty (Q161205) → p06c6g35q9w
Example 12	Victorian era (Q182688) → p0kh9dsxp46
Source	https://perio.do/en/
Planned use	Will add this ID to records when editing them. The Library of Congress Linked Data Service includes links to PeriodO, so it is easy to identify some of these when LCCNs are added to items.
Number of IDs in source	6847 as of January 19, 2021
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL	http://n2t.net/ark:/99152/$1
Distinct-values constraint	no

Motivation

PeriodO "is a public domain gazetteer of scholarly definitions of historical, art-historical, and archaeological periods. It eases the task of linking among datasets that define periods differently. It also helps scholars and students see where period definitions overlap or diverge." There are links to PeriodO from the Library of Congress Linked Data Service, and this was how I discovered that there was no property in Wikidata to record a PeriodO ID. PeriodO is the only thesaurus specifically for time period terms that I am aware of. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support This will be a useful property for adding identifiers to historical periods/spans of time. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 16:54, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@UWashPrincipalCataloger: There have been proposals along these lines before - see Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO period ID, Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO definition ID, and Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO collection ID, some of which received considerable support but there were issued raised about duplications and some related concerns. Maybe we should ping those who discussed this previously? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:07, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@UWashPrincipalCataloger, ArthurPSmith: Yes, Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO period ID is the active proposal. Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO definition ID and Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO collection ID are older proposals created before we really understood how the proposal process worked, and should be archived. Rybesh (talk) 01:23, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

- Oh, I didn't see this earlier proposal from December last year, which is still under discussion. I should probably withdraw this one, since it is identical to Wikidata:Property proposal/PeriodO period ID. I'd like to add some of my examples to that one though. How does one delete this proposal? UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:33, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hi @UWashPrincipalCataloger:@ Clements.UWLib:, I personally think this property would be useful in WD and I know that there have been conversations among the PeriodO people recently about how PeriodO could be implemented. The critique in the past proposals was that there were multiple definitions of, say, "Bronze Age" or say "French Bronze Age" and so if say, someone wanted to associate an entity with a PeriodO ID, there would not be a unique identifier. This is completely understandable because there might be lots of competing scholarly definitions of periods. To my mind, one solution would be to have more nuanced definitions of periods in WD i.e. an entity for Roman Republican Period (Stokstad, Marilyn, 1929-. Art history) and an entity for Roman Republican Period (British Museum). This would require a lot of clean up but it would meet the criticisms earlier. Alternatively, I wonder if PeriodO could be used not as an identifier but as a descriptor i.e. if a GLAM object (say, a painting) was identified as belonging to the "Roman Period", a user could associate the object with a PeriodO ID? I think that would be really good but I'm not sure if WD allows for external IDs to be used in statements like that. Valeriummaximum (talk) 00:11, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]