Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects
|Property proposal:||Generic||Authority control||Person||Organization|
|Creative work||Place||Sports||Sister projects|
|Transportation||Natural science||Lexeme||Wikimedia Commons|
- Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending – properties which have been approved but which are on hold waiting for the appropriate datatype to be made available.
- Wikidata:Properties for deletion – proposals for the deletion of properties.
- Wikidata:Lexicographical data – information and discussion about lexicographic data on Wikidata
|Description||URL of revision of Wikipedia article or other page on a WMF site being used|
|Allowed values||Wikipedia article or other pages on Wikimedia sites|
|Example 1||Q11300151#P989 → https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=22382928|
|Example 2||Q2513#P989 → https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1040778|
|Example 3||Q727#P989 → https://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=21670671|
|See also||spoken text audio (P989), Wikimedia import URL (P4656), revision identifier, reference URL (P854), Wikidata:Property proposal/image revision-id, full work available at (P953)|
spoken text audio (P989) currently includes files with the spoken text of a Wikipedia article associated with the item. It's generally not the most recent one, but one specified by a revision-id of the wiki. As this number is meaningless without the wiki, the above proposal includes the full url.
Wikimedia import URL (P4656) can have similar values, but, as reference URL (P854), it doesn't seem suitable as it's used in another context. Please help complete the proposal/add more samples. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 07:52, 12 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment. Maybe full work available at (P953) could do? But whatever I support the proposal. Thierry Caro (talk) 17:54, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- Comment For giving a URL for a reference to Wikipedia, always use Wikimedia import URL (P4656) with the appropriate "permanent link" url (which can be simplified to just the kind of url above). It's not clear what other use-case (if any) the present proposal is considering. Jheald (talk) 22:27, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
- There is a risk that it gets confused with these. It's the revision-id of the Wikipedia article that is spoken. I added the corresponding template fields. --- Jura 07:20, 14 October 2019 (UTC)