Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic


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 2020/05.

GeneralEdit

arcade system motherboardEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionArcade system hardware board the system motherboard used by a hardware device
Representscomputer hardware (Q3966)
Data typeItem
Template parameter|placa base= and |sistema arcade= in Ficha de hardware and Ficha de videojuego
Domainproperty
Example 1Tempest (Q1340846) Atari Vector (Q63109245)
Example 2Killer Instinct (Q973459) Killer Instinct arcade motherboard (Q63109134)
Example 3F-Zero GX (Q1940315) Triforce (Q1324477)
Example 4Open Desktop Workstation (Q838593) Pegasos (Q2067286)
Planned useAlmost inmediately, to be used in (Arcade) videogames infobox

MotivationEdit

I want to create this as a series of properties to be used in Videogames infoboxes. This would be an alias for "Motherboard" instead. Namely, this is intended for the motherboard codename, specially in arcade machines, wich several ones uses the same motherboard. Amitie 10g (talk) 22:01, 1 April 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 --Jean-Fred (talk) 17:04, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  Comment Can you fix the examples? NMaia (talk) 01:12, 2 April 2019 (UTC)

I've added the proposed value. Is this a right value for items already existing in Wikidata (ej. the motherboard used in an arcade system)?
If I understand correctly, you would like to express Star Wars (Q54317) Atari Star Wars Vector (Q17462637)?
If so, I have been wondering − shouldn’t we just use Star Wars (Q54317) platform (P400) Atari Star Wars Vector (Q17462637)? This is already used in the wild:
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?platform ?platformLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q7889.       # All video games...
  ?item wdt:P400 ?platform.     # ...whose platform...
  ?platform wdt:P31 wd:Q631229. # is an arcade system board.
}

Try it!

Jean-Fred (talk) 17:15, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  Oppose Agree that platform (P400) could be used instead. Thadguidry (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

  • platform (P400) refers to the platform in general (Arcade, Nintendo 64, etc, wich is used already), while "Arcade system" refers to the details of the hardware (generic or codename of the motherboard). arcade system board (Q631229) is a statement, not a property, what we need for the infobox. "Hardware" could be also a name for this property. --Amitie 10g (talk) 15:44, 9 April 2019 (UTC)
    Well, at some level we get to decide what platform (P400) means :). You could argue the same way for console and PC games, that we should do something like:

Metal Gear Solid (Q6582527) platform (P400) video game console (Q8076)
Metal Gear Solid (Q6582527) <Hardware> PlayStation (Q10677) or
Star Wars: The Old Republic (Q737308) platform (P400) personal computer (Q16338)
Star Wars: The Old Republic (Q737308) operating system (P306) Microsoft Windows (Q1406)

  • The layout of the downstream infobox which will use the data is somewhat irrelevant: as far as I know, there is no need for 1-1 mapping between infobox fields and Wikidata statements − I think the infobox could be coded either way in the Lua.
    (Not entirely sure what you mean by « arcade system board (Q631229) is a statement, not a property » − based on the definitions used here, it’s neither ;-))
    Jean-Fred (talk) 08:51, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Thanks for fixing the example ; however one question: we can’t model free-text like « Proprietary MIPS based hardware system ». In this case, would it make sense to create an item for that particular hardware? Jean-Fred (talk) 08:52, 12 April 2019 (UTC)
Well, as no way to create free text, I'll take care to create new elements for missing ones, as you mentioned (see the examples above, I fixed them). --Amitie 10g (talk) 12:12, 12 April 2019 (UTC)

Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
Bene*
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Ilya
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Pintoch
Daniel Mietchen
Jsamwrites
Tinker Bell
FabC
Jasc PL
putnik
Dhx1
Tris T7
Peb Aryan
lore.mazza004
Rc1959
Premeditated
Iwan.Aucamp
LiberatorG
Primhill.Computers
FWVH (passionné d'informatique et d'électronique)
94rain
So9q
Adrijaned
Sylvain Leroux
SM5POR
  Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics

Before claiming «then it does not have a “hardware” per se − after all», please keep in mind those games has been launched as Arcade machine first, and a browser is just an emulator for the hardware (arcade) the machine ran, so, this property is relevant for videogames first launched as arcade. See the examples I given, specially the Killer Instinct, having its own dedicated hardware, as most of the arcades. --Amitie 10g (talk) 20:32, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
I think we misunderstandood each other here. I don’t disagree that arcade games have specific hardware. What I mean is that the Q7889-items are about games as creative works: Killer Instinct (Q973459) is about both the arcade and the SNES versions − so the statements on that item should (mostly) be applicable to both (although we can use qualifiers to clarify that). For me it would be like using number of pages (P1104) on Les Misérables (Q180736) - sure, there was a first edition of Les Misérables which had a given number of pages, but that does not apply to all reeditions of the text.
I see that the new proposal is about “the system motherboard used by a hardware device” − that sounds good, but right now video games are defined as not being hardware.
My take-away is that arcade games/machines/cabinets are clearly very complex objects (both culturally and technically). I would like us to come up with a comprehensive modeling concept, because I really think that stuffing more data on Q7889 items is breaking left and right and won’t fly much longer (and not only for arcade) (I started writing some thoughts about that). For example, next, we might decide we need a property to model that cabinets are upright or cocktail (a valid data point to record, and an actual field in some Wikipedia infoboxes) − yet I understand that some games (like Space Invaders) were published on both cabinet types.
For example, maybe we need to create items about the machines themselves then (the 'package' cabinet+motherboard+display+audio system) − or maybe not if go down the road of splitting items per platform-realisation (or some yet other solution).
Jean-Fred (talk) 16:58, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Germartin1 (talk) 08:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)
  •   Comment I'm not familiar with nonfree arcade games: are games compatible with specific mainboards? I've looked a bit at the nonfree software history, like the DOS era through the LGR youtube channel (which according to the LGR (Q3820312) wikipedia disambiguation page is "an American YouTuber focusing on retro technology") and as I understand, in DOS, the userspace programs could take over the control of the computer, and also patch the software that is running if they wanted to, for instance by hooking interrupt handlers and so on. While they appear to have been drivers in DOS, many nonfree games didn't use them and instead directly implemented support for specific hardware like adlib or Sound Blaster 16 (Q7564654) compatible sound cards. In such case, the operating system (P306) and/or platform (P400) could be DOS (disk operating system (Q600659)), specific Microsoft Windows (Q1406) versions, etc, but would also be compatible with specific hardware chip (like the Yamaha chip that is in the AdLib Music Synthesizer Card (Q26883996) sound card or other compatibles sound cards with the same chip (Yamaha YM3812 (Q1684767))). Some games are also be compatible with a specific controller (3D gloves, 3D glasses, etc) while the game already runs on a operating system (P306) and/or an platform (P400). In the cases documented by LGR, the games had to be specially modified to support that kind of hardware, so it might apply to a specific version of that game. I'm also not very familiar with nonfree console games, Are there any situations where some games are made for a platform (Gameboy) but somehow only run on the Gameboy color? I'm interested in that as I proposed a Compatible property: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Compatible_with, so it might be interesting to find ways to precisely describe things regarding the compatibility with specific hardware or API, which is different from platform (P400) or operating system (P306). GNUtoo (talk) 00:37, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

expansionEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionExpansions or DLC for software, mainly videogames
Representsexpansion pack (Q209163)
Data typeItem
Template parameter|Expansión= or |DLC= in Ficha de videojuego infobox
Domainvideogames
Example 1Mario Kart 8 (Q13427106) "DLC 1"
Example 2Giana Sisters: Twisted Dreams (Q3762768) "Rise of the Owlverlord"
Example 3Sonic Mania (Q25991770) Sonic Mania Plus (Q50654688)
Planned useInmediately, for the given infobox
See alsomod of (P7075)

MotivaciónEdit

Part of my infobox improvements. This property is intended for expansion packs for such software (mostly videogames), as well as DLC  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amitie 10g (talk • contribs) at 21:34, 16 April 2019 (UTC).

DiscussionEdit

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) 06:28, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I think the inverse property («expansion of») would be better. --Tinker Bell 07:38, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Whether this is approved or not, it needs a different name - when I saw it on the proposal list I was very confused what it was about. "video game expansion" perhaps, or for the inverse, "expansion of video game"? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:17, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Amitie 10g: would you consider updating the label per Arthur's suggestion? --- Jura 04:03, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I've updated the label name. --Amitie 10g (talk) 04:08, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
I think the English name should probably be 'expansion for video game' rather than 'of', and make sure 'expansion' is singular. Nicereddy (talk) 20:30, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Amitie 10g, I see you've updated the name, but I think the property should be like "DLC 1" "expansion of videogame" Mario Kart 8 (Q13427106). Maybe it would be more difficult using it on infoboxes, but data is better organized. --Tinker Bell 03:51, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Trade (talk) 15:35, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Misc (talk) 23:31, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question Is this intended to be limited to video games or not? --Yair rand (talk) 03:13, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
    • As the proporsal says, it is only for videogames software. --Amitie 10g (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Cwf97 (talk) 15:07, 22 June 2019 (EST)
  •   Support With the new name change John Samuel (talk) 09:42, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
Bene*
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Ilya
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Pintoch
Daniel Mietchen
Jsamwrites
Tinker Bell
FabC
Jasc PL
putnik
Dhx1
Tris T7
Peb Aryan
lore.mazza004
Rc1959
Premeditated
Iwan.Aucamp
LiberatorG
Primhill.Computers
FWVH (passionné d'informatique et d'électronique)
94rain
So9q
Adrijaned
Sylvain Leroux
SM5POR
  Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics ChristianKl❫ 13:48, 17 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Oppose this should be made more general to also allow other types of software. Also I agree with Tinker Bell that the inverse would make more sense. We then could also use it for example for Browser Extensions. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 21:07, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above. 轻语者 (talk) 07:48, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
  •   Question I also think that the inverse property makes more sense. I've an example of query here that can be used to retrieve information from an inverse property. Beside that, do you have use cases where you need to express that something is a Downloadable content for a given game that could not be expressed with more generic terms? In that case, could the "content" meet the notability criteria and/or be useful to describe, while not being an add-on or extension? In that case could depends on software (P1547) work for you? GNUtoo (talk) 01:36, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

number of pins, number of pin positionsEdit

   Under discussion
Description2 related properties:
  • number of pins: number of contacts that an electrical connector has (excluding any grounding shroud not used for communication)
  • number of pin positions: number of positions in an electrical connector, including empty or keyed positions
Representselectrical contact (Q394001)
Data typeQuantity
Template parameter"num_pins" in en:template:Infobox connector; "contacts" in w:en:Template:Infobox CPU socket
Domainitem: Subclasses of electrical connector (Q2119531). optical fiber connector (Q2296938) could be added later, pending discussion of how to handle optical module (Q48740842)s (which have electrical contacts on one end and optical connections on the other).
Allowed valuespositive integers
Allowed unitsnone
Example 1USB-C connector (Q58051489)
→ "number of pins" → 24
→ "number of pin positions" → 24
Example 2NEMA 5-15 (Q24288456)
→ "number of pins" → 3
→ "number of pin positions" → 3
Example 36P2C modular connector (Q64831598)
→ "number of pins" → 2
→ "number of pin positions" → 6
Example 4Intel HD Audio connector (Q64764371)
→ "number of pins" → 9
→ "number of pin positions" → 10
citation: https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/support/articles/000005512/boards-and-kits/desktop-boards.html
Example 5Socket F (Q1475023)
→ "number of pins" → 1207
→ "number of pin positions" → 1225
Planned useAnnotating items for electrical connectors. They could also be generalized to optical fiber connectors, since it's fundamentally the same concept.
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Robot and gadget jobsWhen only "number of pins" is specified, "number of pin positions" can be populated with the same value.
See alsoWikidata:Property proposal/contact area count
Type constraint - subclass ofelectrical connector (Q2119531)

MotivationEdit

For annotating items for electrical connectors (see connector (P2935)).

Why are 2 properties needed? Some connectors have additional positions which are not filled. For example, the RJ11 w:en:Modular connector has 6 physical positions, but only 2 of them are populated. Similarly, the Parallel ATA (Q230360) data connector has 40 positions but only 39 pins, since one position is keyed. The unfilled positions should be counted when the connector's conventional numbering includes them.

Aliases: replace "pin" with "contact" or "conductor"; same without the initial "number of" 2620:0:1000:3216:5413:4AF0:7532:8655 23:59, 21 June 2019 (UTC)

Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
Bene*
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Ilya
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Pintoch
Daniel Mietchen
Jsamwrites
Tinker Bell
FabC
Jasc PL
putnik
Dhx1
Tris T7
Peb Aryan
lore.mazza004
Rc1959
Premeditated
Iwan.Aucamp
LiberatorG
Primhill.Computers
FWVH (passionné d'informatique et d'électronique)
94rain
So9q
Adrijaned
Sylvain Leroux
SM5POR
  Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics 169.234.25.175 20:28, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  • In principle, we could do it by combining qualifiers with an entity for a pin; there are just some practical issues:
  • It's not totally obvious for an editor which combination to use, and I don't see a way to hint recommended values. For example, quantity (P1114) with applies to part (P518) looks just as plausible (even if you're not supposed to use it that way). Also, people might use other elements besides the intended "pins" and "pin positions", e.g. pogo pin (Q1400617), wire (Q551997), or lead (Q947546). This will make querying more difficult.
  • It's easier to express a constraint that the "pins" and "pin positions" should be specified together when they are expressed as a property.
  • We might want to generalize this to support w:en:optical connectors; we would then have to add some items for pretty abstract concepts that encompass "electrical contact", "termination of a single optical fiber" (is there even a term for that?), and positions thereof. These would be hard to find.
In any case, there are lots of existing "number of X" properties, where X is a domain-specific part that an item contains. 2620:0:1000:3216:5413:4AF0:7532:8655 20:39, 25 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Seems like a fine idea. —Scs (talk) 11:18, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Split support and oppose   Oppose For the given examples, RJ11 is only valid for countries that only host 2 wires. You can find RJ11 with 4 wires in 6 positions. RJ45 can also be used to replace RJ11, so RJ11 and RJ45 will have several possibilities. In addition, you write "electrical connector" which is quite broad: you give an example of an IC, which enters the electronic domain. With an electronics training, you can find a multitude of cases (so number of pins variable) for a single component (therefore for a single manufacturer and a single function and sometimes with a single denomination). The differences are according to the use of the component: assembly, power, disposition, etc. For the multilingual side of WD and the complexity of the domain (electricity), I fear that this future property brings errors. Of course, in obvious cases, this property will work, but contributors will not stop there. —Eihel (talk) 17:15, 11 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the feedback!
  • Regarding RJ11, the Wikipedia article explicitly says RJ11 requires a 2-wire connector (without citation); if you have better information please update that. I switched the example to 6P2C modular connector (Q64831598) for precision, which I forgot to do earlier.
  • I'm not sure what IC you're referring to, but assume you're talking about the CPU socket. I'm aware that a given IC can be packaged in multiple ways, but as far as I've seen, a given CPU socket necessarily has a well-defined number and arrangement of pins, so I don't see the issue.
  • Regarding the risk of misuse, would a property type constraint (should be used on connectors only and not ICs or other components) address this? I'll update the proposal.
73.202.12.249 23:22, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
  1. w:fr:RJ11#Belgique. Indeed, 6P2C is normalized in the sense of the use of pins.
  2. Yes, CPU sockets remain the same as far back as I can remember. But I suggest you look for the term 7805 on your search engine (only browse images to make your life easier). It is a simple CI used in voltage regulation and there is a multitude of form, manufacturer, etc. , so several possibilities. And it's the same for a multitude of CIs, from the simplest to the most complex. Sorry. There is conflicts-with constraint (Q21502838)
    relation (P2309)instance or subclass of (Q30208840)
    class (P2308)electronic component (Q11653)
    constraint status (P2316)mandatory constraint (Q21502408)
    but this restriction will overshadow many items (In addition I do not know if it works!)
  3. In the content of pages linked to the infobox on enwiki, it seems to be appropriate. 78xx does not contain a number of pins and the page does not contain this infobox. —Eihel (talk) 03:26, 28 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I had pretty much the same ideabut called it "contact area count. The reason is that eg. an LGA CPU has no pins. So I searched for a more general name that can be used for multiple things. number of pin positions is an interesting idea, however I'm not sure if this is really the way to go.
An example: A CPU socket has 1000 pin positions. CPU a) has 900 pins, because it's missing some workstation ECC RAM functions. CPU b) has also 900 pins, but not the pins for ECC RAM, but for the ones for CPU interconnects (so a single socket setup). CPU 3) has only 800 pins. It supports CPU interconnect and ECC RAM. He 200 missing pins are because it's a low end version that does not use as much power. How would you include that for the socket (and is the socket the right place to collect that information or should this rather be collected in the CPU item)
A second example: The Type 2 connector that is used to charge electric cars has 7 pins. The maximum output is ~43 kW with 7 pins. For slow charging out of eg. Schuko plugs it is about 3 kW and here only 5 pins are used. It is the same connector and the same layout. One charging type just misses 2 metal connectors. --D-Kuru (talk) 11:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
  Comment It sounds like maybe the item for the interconnection standard should list in some way the meaning of all the pins? Though that might require an item for each pin position that further describes it? Like, pin 3 carries this signal with this voltage, etc.?? And then items that conform to that standard would specify that conformance, and which specific pins they actually use? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
If it's not an open standard you will never now why one pin is used and the other isn't. A description for every pin is just not usefull in my opinion. In my opinion a "number of used pins" is not really ncecessary since a configuration can change over time and with the used device. If eg. a CPU socket hast 4000 pins and a CPU that fits the socket has 3000 pins, the number of pins for the socket is still 4000 (even some are not used - for now - but could be used at some point) and the CPU also still has only 3000 pins. For me, this applies also for eg. USB or SATA where one pin isn't in use. If USB version 2.0 uses 10 out of 20 pins, the number of pins would be tagged as 10 on the USB connector side. If USB 3.0 uses 20 pins, the pin information could be tagged for version 2.0 and 3.0. But you would not have to set any information about how many pins are not used in the USB connector. What if the USB connector is used anywhere else for some other connection that actually uses all 20 pins right from the start. It's an open standard, so this could happen quite easily. --D-Kuru (talk) 22:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Interesting idea. I'm curious to see how it goes. --- Jura 09:05, 4 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment So if 2 properties are actually needed here, could somebody split the template into 2 separate proposal templates with the appropriate examples etc, to make it a little easier on the property creator(s)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment How many pins and number of pin positions do Mini-USB (Q16578670) or Micro-USB (Q1931429) have? Do they always have 5 pins and 5 pin positions? Or are there case where they have 4 pin or pin positions? What the number of pins / pin positions can apply to? Only connectors and similar things? In any case it's very useful to be able to represent the number of pins. It would also be even more useful to enable to have more in depth proprieties about each of the pins such as the voltage levels, the pin name, if it's connected or not, if it's analog or digital, and similar things. You could then potentially reuse that information in CAD software like KiCad (Q942363) if it's mentioned in components. It might be ultra useful for standard connectors or standards like USB connectors, as people often need just the pinout of such connectors for a given standard like USB 2.0. It could even be used to describe the peculiarities of some connector used on some computers or other hardware for instance. GNUtoo (talk) 15:24, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

value group numberEdit

   Under discussion
Description(qualifier only) an higher level of series ordinal used to separate various lists already with series ordinal (P1545)
Data typeString
Domainany
Example 1(Q3595028) fanqie (P5523) (Q2391630) (series ordinal (P1545)=1, value group number=1), (Q55806623) (series ordinal (P1545)=2, value group number=1)
Example 2(Q3595028) fanqie (P5523) (Q2391630) (series ordinal (P1545)=1, value group number=2), (Q55806688) (series ordinal (P1545)=2, value group number=2)
Example 3MISSING
Planned useUse as a qualifier of fanqie (P5523) and ideographic description sequences (P5753)

MotivationEdit

See User_talk:Ivan_A._Krestinin#Bot_edits_on_P5523 as the background of the proposal. GZWDer (talk) 16:24, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

Item Equivalence Fanqie (initial) Fanqie (final) References
A Guangyun (Q2189818)
A Jiyun (Q35792)
A Hongwu Zhengyun (Q10958946)
B Guangyun (Q2189818)
B Jiyun (Q35792), Hongwu Zhengyun (Q10958946)
C Guangyun (Q2189818)
C Jiyun (Q35792), Hongwu Zhengyun (Q10958946)
D Guangyun (Q2189818)
D Jiyun (Q35792)

There are 9 pairs of data, each consisting of an initial and final character, and these 9 pairs can be further grouped into four equivalent pairs of data (A,B,C,D). Are there any existing properties that can be used to handle this situation? KevinUp (talk) 21:00, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Perhaps the value group number can be modified to "A1, A2, A3, B1, B2, C1, C2, D1, D2" or "1a, 1b, 1c, 2a, 2b, 3a, 3b, 4a, 4b" to mark the equivalence of certain data sets? KevinUp (talk) 21:12, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Opensofias
Tobias1984
Micru
Arthur Rubin
Cuvwb
TomT0m
Physikerwelt
Lymantria
Bigbossfarin
Infovarius
Helder
PhilMINT
Malore
Nomen ad hoc
Lore.mazza51
Wikisaurus   Notified participants of WikiProject Mathematics for suggestions on how to handle this situation. The proposed property may also have other applications. KevinUp (talk) 19:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)

  •   Comment @KevinUp: is the suggestion here to have a general mechanism to handle two-dimensional indexing, not just something specific to these characters? That sounds like a reasonable thing to do in principle, but in practice the items would still show up as a one-dimensional list within the Wikidata UI. "Series ordinal" doesn't have to be just a number, you could for example combine letters and numbers, or have two numbers separated by a comma or other special character. Is this really needed? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:49, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
    @ArthurPSmith: Yes, the idea is to have a general mechanism to handle two-dimensional indexing that can be applied not just to these characters. In the examples given above, "value group number" is used to indicate that group 1, which is represented by (Q2391630) and (Q55806623) and group 2, which is represented by (Q2391630) and (Q55806688) are distinct groups that are not the same. The "value group number" does not indicate any rank but is used to indicate distinction. KevinUp (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
    To add another layer of complexity, in the table I have prepared for the item "笈", there are four different groups (A,B,C,D) and each group can be described by more than one method, e.g. in group D, (Q55414074) (series ordinal 1) + (Q54873157) (series ordinal 2) and (Q54879270) (series ordinal 1) + (Q54873157) (series ordinal 2) are equivalent, so we could perhaps use a second character in the value group number, e.g. "4a", "4b" to indicate equivalence of the subgroups a and b within group 4. KevinUp (talk) 20:40, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
  • If you are using series ordinal like 3a or 3.4, they are not much machine readable or queryable. Although this proposal (with only one property) does not work well in more than two dimensions.--GZWDer (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
    @GZWDer: To solve the issues of [1] series ordinal such as 3a or 3.4 not machines readable [2] the property in this proposal not working well in more than two dimensions, I suggest the following: KevinUp (talk) 17:45, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
    1. Replace fanqie (P5523) with two new properties: initial fanqie character and final fanqie character (as originally suggested by you) - This is because initial and final fanqie have different properties, i.e. the initial character shares the same initial consonant while the final character shares the same vowel, consonant ending and tone with that of the queried item.
    2. Use series ordinal (P1545) for groups A,B,C,D in the example above (this would indicate that the fanqie readings are distinct).
    3. Apply the proposed property (value group number/group ordinal) to values that have the same series ordinal. This is analogous to A1, A2, A3 in the example above.
    For fanqie, values with the same series ordinal but different value group number/group ordinal are similar in a way, e.g. 其,極,忌 (initial fanqie from A1, A2, A3) all share the same initial consonant in Middle Chinese. KevinUp (talk) 17:43, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the responses. So now I'm wondering, where did the proposed label "value group number" come from? Is that a common term used for these character representations, or is that something GZWDer came up with? If we are to do this I think I'd prefer a shorter name if possible. "group ordinal" perhaps? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:19, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
    No, it's not a common term used for these character representations. I also prefer a shorter name such as "group ordinal" as long as it has the meaning "higher level of series ordinal". KevinUp (talk) 17:43, 25 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I remembered a similar situation at disjoint union of (P2738), where different sets are saved. A special value list values as qualifiers (Q23766486) is used as a dummy value and actual list is saved as qualifier. It might be applicable here. It will look like (Q77040173) fanqie (P5523) list values as qualifiers (Q23766486) / follows (P155) (Q55414074) / followed by (P156) (Q54873157).  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Midleading (talk • contribs) at 10:16, December 2, 2019‎ (UTC).

x-offsetEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionoffset on the x-axis or primary axis, abscissa
Representsx-axis (Q25599399)
Data typeQuantity
Allowed unitsif applicable
Example 1SWSW block (Q65965927) → 0 block (Q66319570)
Example 2NWNW block (Q65965923) → 0 block (Q66319570)
Example 3SESE block (Q65965939) → 3 block (Q66319570)

y-offsetEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionoffset on the y-axis or secondary axis, ordinate
Representsy-axis (Q26262125)
Data typeQuantity
Allowed unitsif applicable
Example 1SWSW block (Q65965927) → 0 block (Q66319570)
Example 2NWNW block (Q65965923) → 3 block (Q66319570)
Example 3SESE block (Q65965939) → 0 block (Q66319570)

MotivationEdit

Maybe we have this somehow, but I don't think so. Feel free to add a property for z-axis. Above samples from w:Section_(United_States_land_surveying)#Subdivision_of_a_section (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 01:40, 29 July 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  Comment Could this be somehow done with our geo coordinates datatype? I realize this is for a relative coordinate vs absolute, but as presented here this seems to assume "x axis" = distance eastward, "y axis" = distance northward (I think?) which would otherwise be rather arbitrary. Is "x axis", "y axis" actually the terminology used in the original source for this proposal? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:42, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
Yeah, that was my first thought too, but the datatype has degree as unit hardcoded. For PLSS terminology, see w:Public_Land_Survey_System#Commonly_used_terms; for the axes, w:Cartesian coordinate system. --- Jura 14:32, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
PLSS apparently uses "range" for east-west coordinate, and "township" for north-south, according to your source? Those terms seem confusing though. Anyway, "x" and "y" are definitely not defined. If we do have wikidata properties for this, we definitely need a clearer name. Maybe just "eastward distance" and "northward" distance", if that's how these should be defined? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
By the way, we already have elevation above sea level (P2044) as a property for z-axis, although perhaps a relative measure is needed there too - "relative altitude"? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:21, 30 July 2019 (UTC)
Reading the article last week, I concluded that a township is a much larger unit than a block or a section. I don't think the terminology needs to be identical. --- Jura 11:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment @ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Nomen ad hoc: I updated the sample. I think it's sufficient to define it in terms of blocks. Compare Subdivision_of_a_section. What do you think. --- Jura 11:29, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
    OK. Thank you. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 13:19, 5 August 2019 (UTC).
  • But "block" is an area, not a distance. This whole thing doesn't make sense to me - would these properties only apply to the 16 stated items? Or where else would it be used? If it's less than 100 or so items that could use this, I   Oppose special properties just for this purpose. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:06, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment Prefer x-offset and y-offset as labels. There *might* be other contexts where this could be useful. Jheald (talk) 20:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment thanks for your feedback. I updated the sample and label accordingly. Don't hesitate to improve it further. --- Jura 14:49, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

part numberEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionthe item's part number
Representsidentifier (Q853614)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainproperty
Allowed unitsa string that contains numbers and/or letters
Example 1AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Q66481199) → HDT90ZFBK6DGR (OEM number), HDT90ZFBGRBOX (boxed number)
Example 2AMD Ryzen Threadripper 2990WX (Q56062941) → YD299XAZUIHAF (OEM number), YD299XAZAFWOF (boxed number)
Example 3Core i5-760 (Q15223620) → BV80605001908AN (OEM number), BX80605I5760 (boxed number, english version), BXC80605I5760 (boxed number, english version)
Sourceen:Part number
Planned useAdd to every item for which a part number can be found

MotivationEdit

While working on CPUs, I noticed that this property does not seem to exist. I had primarly CPUs in mind, but I'm sure there are a lot more items that have a part number in real life.
However, as shown in the example, there can be more than one part number for the same productname. So you have to be able to add some sort of referece to the information (eg. "OEM" or "boxed" or something like that) --D-Kuru (talk) 17:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

ChristianKl
ArthurPSmith
d1g
JakobVoss
Jura
Jsamwrites
MisterSynergy
Salgo60
Micru
Harshrathod50
Wildly boy
ZI Jony
Ederporto
99of9
Danrok
Eihel
Emw
Fralambert
GZWDer
Ivan A. Krestinin
Jonathan Groß
Joshbaumgartner
Kolja21
Kristbaum
MSGJ
Mattflaschen
MichaelSchoenitzer
Nightwish62
Pablo Busatto
Paperoastro
PinkAmpersand
Srittau
Thierry Caro
Tobias1984
Vennor
Yellowcard
Ivanhercaz
DannyS712
Tinker Bell
Bodhisattwa
Iwan.Aucamp
NAH


  Notified participants of WikiProject Properties Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
Bene*
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Ilya
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Pintoch
Daniel Mietchen
Jsamwrites
Tinker Bell
FabC
Jasc PL
putnik
Dhx1
Tris T7
Peb Aryan
lore.mazza004
Rc1959
Premeditated
Iwan.Aucamp
LiberatorG
Primhill.Computers
FWVH (passionné d'informatique et d'électronique)
94rain
So9q
Adrijaned
Sylvain Leroux
SM5POR
  Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

  •   Question It’s unclear to me if this is really workable. It seems reading the enwiki article that the consumer of the product may use a different number than the producer itself for example. Your difference in the part number type may come either of this, for example if the processor is used on, say, a samsung laptop and samsung gave its own part number something like
    ⟨ Samsung laptop model XYZ ⟩ has part (P527)   ⟨ processor I42 ⟩
    part number search ⟨ ABCDEF ⟩
(in such a case we don’t have to discriminate between the user part number to the manufacturer one because it’s used by a user in a design)
Or … there is several numbers because there is subdesigns by the manufacturer of the same processor, in which case it may be possible to subclass the processor model item with fresh new items to reflect that, with their own properties and values to reflect the differences. author  TomT0m / talk page 19:25, 18 August 2019 (UTC)
As far as I know the CPU type has a unique ID that changes under some conditions. The manufacturer is not such a condition - at least as far as I know. Since the ID is unique to every processor type I switched the datatype to external-id. It seems that the different numbers are more to indicate which segment of the global market is targeted. If the CPUs ID is ABC1 in the boxed version you will not find an appropriate CPU when it is labled ABC2. Even they are actually the same die under the hood. I don't think that a new item is really the route to go if there is just a different ID, but all other values stay the same. You don't create a new item for every version of some program, do you? --D-Kuru (talk) 20:58, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  Question Is this at all related to Global Trade Item Number (P3962)? See also the discussion on this old proposal. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:50, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Yes and now I would say. The part number is not the European Article Number. There is no bar code on the processor. But it's shares some properties since it's also a unique ID for every product. --D-Kuru (talk) 21:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support given that it's distinct from the EAN. ChristianKl❫ 07:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question for me it's unclear if it is different from the stock-keeping unit (Q399757) given by the manufacturer? Dom (talk) 09:39, 22 September 2019 (UTC)
stock keeping units are retailer codes that track price, manufacturer and product information of the product and are used to track sales. The part number is more like a barcode. An individual code for certain product types. Since it's not about tracking - at least not that I know - they are different in my opinion --D-Kuru (talk) 16:26, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

religion or world viewEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionreligious or world view affiliation of a person, organization or religious building
Representsreligion or world view (Q71966963)
Data typeItem
Domainitem (persons, corporate bodies), e.g. Hans Modrow (Q57241)
Allowed valuesitem (persons, corporate bodies
Example 1Bertrand Russell (Q33760)atheism (Q7066)
Example 2David Malet Armstrong (Q1173590)naturalism (Q56000)
Example 3William Stewart Ross (Q2580659)agnosticism (Q288928)
Example 4Leo von Caprivi (Q10873)Catholicism (Q1841)
Example 5Rudolf Steiner (Q78484)anthroposophy (Q184719)
Planned useI would like to use this property in a to-be-built linked-data contemporary-history dataset held by a German research centre.
See alsopolitical ideology (P1142), religion (P140)

MotivationEdit

Properties religion (P140) and political ideology (P1142) do not intersect nor overlap. Yet I suggest to create the property "religion or world view" that would incorporate both of them in a consistent way. This property would like to describe the religious or ideological affiliation in a more comprehensive way than the afore-mentioned properties do. The to-be-created property wishes first of all to express the German fixed expression "Religionszugehörigkeit oder Weltanschauung", which has a broad use and a high frequence in German-speaking countries, and for which the property religion (P140) is not equivalent. Yet the use of the property "religion or world view" would be helpful for every linguistico-cultural context in order to describe the affiliation of an individual, may he be catholic, atheist, agnostic or polytheist.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by F.Gelati (talk • contribs).

DiscussionEdit

  •   Support if P140 and P1142, became redundant, are then deleted.   Oppose otherwise. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2019 (UTC).
  • Deleting Property:P140 and Property:P1142 is in my understanding premature. P140 is more appropriate e.g. when describing places of worship, because a marginal number of them are agnostic or atheist. P1142 is based on the clearly-defined same-name class Q12909644 and I would not consider it redundant. In my view, all three of them can coexist. User:F.Gelati
  • I'd like to see some more examples (perhaps you have some from German-speaking countries?) where this property would be required and the existing properties would not be sufficient. Your examples so far don't, I think, meet that standard. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:44, 24 October 2019 (UTC)
  • As an example, The German Biography displays personalities' confession: for atheists, e.g. E.Krenz or E.Honecker, the field bears a "/", which is not exhaustive. This database displays religious confessions only but no world view. Creating the property "religion or world view" would allow to solve this disparity. Alternatively, a property from World view could be created, for the relation between religion and world view is debated: see World view. --F.Gelati (talk) 09:36, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
  • Antroposophy is described in English Wikipedia as philosophy, and Nazism as ideology, whereas both of them may be defined as world views too, as their German-written pages do. This proofs in my understanding that the property "religion or world view" would offer an exhaustive alternative to such fragmented solutions. --F.Gelati (talk) 10:16, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I'm inclined to view all of these as one or another kind of religion, but if the people accustomed to using religion (P140) don't want to broaden it in this fashion, then a new property makes sense to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:50, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose. Seems redundant with the existing properties. --Yair rand (talk) 00:51, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Yair rand. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:32, 21 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support A natural parent of political ideology (P1142) and religion (P140) that supports values for which neither of those are appropriate. Suggest alias "philosophical position". Swpb (talk) 15:02, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

CMF identifierEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionComisión para el Mercado Financiero business identifier
RepresentsComisión para el Mercado Financiero (Q47496083)
Data typeURL
Template parameter|Indentificador CMF= at Ficha de organización
Allowed valuesSee below
Example 1Administrador Financiero de Transantiago (Q5549126)RGEIN-99597320
Example 2Compañía Sudamericana de Vapores (Q183454)RVEMI-90160000
Example 3State Bank of Chile (Q5718188)MERCANTIL-300068742
Planned useIn the short term
Formatter URLhttp://www.cmfchile.cl/institucional/mercados/entidad.php?mercado=O&grupo=&row=&vig=VI&control=svs&pestania=1&tipoentidad=RGEIN&rut=$1
Robot and gadget jobsYes

MotivaciónEdit

As part of my infobox improvements, I want to request this property, as identifier with URL, for chilean business/enterprises registered at the Comisión para el Mercado Financiero (Q47496083), and alternatively, the Mercantil website. As the URL varies according to the organization type, the integer value has a prefix to get the proper URL (including Mercantil as alternative).

The request, in details:

instance of (P31)
  Wikidata property for an identifier (Q19847637)   edit
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference


+ add value
Wikidata property example (P1855)
  Administrador Financiero de Transantiago (Q5549126)   edit
CMF identifier RGEIN-99597320
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
  Compañía Sudamericana de Vapores (Q183454)   edit
CMF identifier RVEMI-90160000
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
  State Bank of Chile (Q5718188)   edit
CMF identifier MERCANTIL-300068742
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference


+ add value
formatter URL (P1630)
  http://www.cmfchile.cl/institucional/mercados/entidad.php?mercado=O&grupo=&row=&vig=VI&control=svs&pestania=1&tipoentidad=RGEIN&rut=$1   edit
format as a regular expression (P1793) RGEIN-.*
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
  http://www.cmfchile.cl/institucional/mercados/entidad.php?mercado=O&grupo=&row=&vig=VI&control=svs&pestania=1&tipoentidad=RVEMI&rut=$1   edit
format as a regular expression (P1793) RVEMI-.*
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
  https://www.mercantil.com/ficha.aspx?meco_code=$1   edit
format as a regular expression (P1793) MERCANTIL-.*
syntax clarification (P2916) Mercantil website (alternative)
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
  http://www.cmfchile.cl/institucional/mercados/entidad.php?mercado=O&grupo=&row=&vig=VI&control=svs&pestania=1&tipoentidad=RVEMI&rut=$1   edit
format as a regular expression (P1793) .*
syntax clarification (P2916) Default expression
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference


+ add value
format as a regular expression (P1793)
  [A-Z]+-[0-9]{9}   edit
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference


+ add value

See also this thread at the Project chat for further discussion., in order to get the right regular expression. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  •   Support David (talk) 09:47, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2019 (UTC)
  • @Amitie 10g: the specification you are proposing for the formatter URL is not supported by Wikidata. You can of course create these claims, but that will not generate the URLs you expect for a given identifier value. See this commentPintoch (talk) 11:03, 2 November 2019 (UTC)

Museum of Family History IDEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionDatabase of entities found in the Museum of Family History
RepresentsMuseum of Family History Q76180245
Data typeExternal identifier
Example 1Shmuel Atzmon (Q76178004) --> v8/yiddishpiel/atzmon-wircer-shmuel
Example 2Yiddishpiel (Q7223595) --> 01
Example 3Pesach Burstein (Q7171316) --> burstein-pesach
Sourcehttp://www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/
Planned useingest data into Yiddish Theater project
Formatter URLhttp://www.museumoffamilyhistory.com/yt/$1.htm
Robot and gadget jobsNo

MotivationEdit

(Ingesting data related to Yiddish theater) Celloheidi (talk) 15:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  •   Support David (talk) 15:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
  • What formatter URL are we expecting to use here? Two of the example URLs are http%3A%2F%2Fwww.museumoffamilyhistory.com%2Fyt%2Fv8%2Fyiddishpiel%2F01.htm and http%3A%2F%2Fwww.museumoffamilyhistory.com%2Fyt%2Flex%2FB%2Fburstein-pesach.htm. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)
  • not ready: subject item does not exist, only one example has a Qid, unclear format and formatter URL. − Pintoch (talk) 09:49, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
  • @Celloheidi: Please see the above issues with the proposal. Also do you know what happened to Q76180245? ArthurPSmith (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

cacheEdit

   Under discussion
Descriptionhardware component that stores data for computing
Representscache (Q165596)
Data typeItem
Domainproperty
Allowed valuesone or multiple items that hold integer numbers
Allowed unitsByte or exponential values (kilobyte, megabyte, etc.)
Example 1AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Q66481199)L1 cache (Q28972913): 8 x 64 KB (4-way set associative) + 8 x 32 KB (8-way set associative), L2 cache (Q12635161): 8 x 512 KB (16-way set associative exclusive caches), L3 cache (Q28972917): 6 MB (48-way set associative cachevalue, shared)[1]
Example 2AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1900X (Q56062710)L1 cache (Q28972913): 6 x 64 KB (2-way set associative instruction caches) + 6 x 64 KB (2-way set associative data caches), L2 cache (Q12635161): 6 x 512 KB (16-way set associative exclusive caches), L3 cache (Q28972917): 2 x 8 MB (16-way set associative)[2]
Example 3Pentium N3700 → L1 cache (Q28972913): 4 x 32 KB (8-way set associative) + 4 x 24 KB (6-way set associative), L2 cache (Q12635161): 2 x 1 MB (16-way set associative)[3]
Sourceen:Cache (computing)
Planned useCan be used for every object that has some form of cache

MotivationEdit

I'm working on AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Q66481199) and want to include as much information has possible so that I can use it as template. The cache information is a very important part of a CPU.

There were already two property proposals that suggested the same, but ended in the middle of nowhere and were withdrawn afterall.

The structure would be like this (example below keep the parts that should be read together):

  • Cache: (property)
    • L1/2/3/4 cache (item)
      • L1/2/3/4 cache value
        • value information (applies to)

Information could also not only be added about the type and it's size, but also

  • cache latency
  • cache connection (how many lanes the caches uses to connect to the CPU/IO unit)
  • cache storage type (is the cache only responsible to hold a specific type of data like instructions or data)
  • cache exclusiveness (is the cache per CPU core, per CPU module (eg. AMD Bulldozer architecture) or is it shared for all)
  • cache area (how much area does the cache use. This could be interesting with AMDs chiplet design when maybe different types of cache sits on different chiplets in different manufacturing sizes)

Since there already were some comments on the last proposals I will try to answer them:

  • @GPSLeo:: Should we use multiple properties?: I don't care if there is one or more properties. I want to make it as flexible as possible so that the cache of rather exotic CPUs are much easiert to include when they are only items.
  • @Visite fortuitement prolongée:: We could use volatile random-access memory capacity (P2928) with qualifiers: Is all cache in every IT product volatile? The property seems more to be used in items where there is a fixed ammount of maximum RAM (eg. phones). This usecase is also the only listed case for as property example.
  • @TomT0m:: We could use has part (P527): It would be the same layout, but I do not want to jam all the cache into something that could also house all other values in the item. Some items use has parts of the class (P2670) (Q56062710#P2670) and uses (P2283) (Q51963118#P2283). Since there seems to be no clear wy of how to include such an information there are already multiple forms of it.


Example for AMD Phenom II X6 1090T (Q66481199):

  • L1 cache:
    • 6 x 64 KB
      • applies to associative instruction cache
      • connection 2-way
      • dispersion one per core
    • 6 x 64 KB
      • applies to associative data cache
      • connection 2-way
      • dispersion one per core
  • L2 cache:
    • 6 x 512 KB
      • applies to associative exclusive cache
      • connection 16-way
      • dispersion one per core
  • L3 cache:
    • 6 MB
      • applies to associative cache
      • connection 48-way
      • dispersion shared

DiscussionEdit

Ping to all missing: @ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2:, @Dhx1:, @Amitie 10g:, @MisterSanderson:, @Tobias1984:, @Srittau:, @Jsamwrites:, @Tinker Bell:, @SixTwoEight:
Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
Bene*
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Ilya
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Pintoch
Daniel Mietchen
Jsamwrites
Tinker Bell
FabC
Jasc PL
putnik
Dhx1
Tris T7
Peb Aryan
lore.mazza004
Rc1959
Premeditated
Iwan.Aucamp
LiberatorG
Primhill.Computers
FWVH (passionné d'informatique et d'électronique)
94rain
So9q
Adrijaned
Sylvain Leroux
SM5POR
  Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics

If you have any idea or comment don't hesitate to post it! --D-Kuru (talk) 15:28, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

  •   Oppose I already proposed this, and found a workaround, without needing a property for Cache. --Amitie 10g (talk) 18:05, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
If you already found a workaround please show me the example above in a real item --D-Kuru (talk) 18:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I don't see any problem using has part (P527): has parts of the class (P2670) is intended to use with subclasses, not instances, so it doesn't apply here (although I think it can be confusing sometimes). And uses (P2283) is intended to use with objects that are not part of the subject, that's no the case here. --Tinker Bell 18:42, 2 December 2019 (UTC)
Processor cache?Edit

I'm still new to Wikidata, so I'll reason in more general terms. First, the use case mentioned here looks extremely useful. However, if I look at "cache" usage in hardware, I've some issues with the way the use case mentioned above is implemented:

  • Hard disk have "cache", in some hard disks, the cache consists of RAM chips.
  • Hard disk, or other storage system (a LVM2 volume group for instance) can also have a very different type of "cache" which consist in using faster non-volatile storage like SSDs.

A way to deal with that would be to use the work "processor cache" instead:

  • I don't know any CPU with RAM or SSD as cache for instance.
  • The kind of caches you are describing mainly applies to processors:
    • Discrete CPU caches may exists but they would still be meant for CPUs.

Some caveats:

    • I don't have enough knowledge of GPU architecture to know if they have caches or how it work.
    • I don't know enough FPGAs to see how it could apply there, but I know that some low end FPGA models have some internal volatile memory (block RAM or BRAM) that is different from the main RAM on the FPGA. This BRAM is documented a bit in the FOMU workshop.
    • I don't have knowledge of how chips doing computations without processors work. There were some ASICs done for mining crypto-coins for instance, and they may have some cache too.

In any case, if there are corner cases, the "processor cache" could probably still be abused to also describe the same kind of caches that could also be in use for other cases where there are no processors. For instance if there are caches in ASICs doing computations without processors, people would probably find it natural to refer to such caches as processor caches, even if there are no processor. GNUtoo (talk) 04:28, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

@GNUtoo: I only did include CPUs even there are much more devices that have a cache. Even the proposal started out with CPUs in mind there is no reason why it should be limited to them. If youhave eg. a HDD with NAND flash (Q13405492) as cache you would be able to use cache here as well.
I assume that "Cache" would be created as Property number 666 "P666":
If you know what type of cache it is you could apply this property to every item. --D-Kuru (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
First I think that Processor is better than CPU, because CPU has the word "Central" in it.
Because of that you could think of it as the main processor of a given system, even if it's sometimes it is instead used as a synonym of processor. Because of that it also tend to be relative to a given system. Your smartphone has a CPU, but the modem of your smartphone also has a CPU.
Processor also invite people to think about other architectures like DSP where there can be a cache. It's also more clear when you think of DSP as specialized processor.
As for using the cache and processor cache as synonym, I'm unsure that it's the same thing. There is a Wikipedia article about CPU cache here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_cache and I'm not sure if all that also apply to other type of cache, like the SSD in SSHD, or cache volumes in LVM2 arrays. There is also the fact that in an LVM volume, the cache is not necessarily a hardware feature, but maybe we don't necessarily need to describe that feature of LVM2 in Wikidata in great accuracy. Maybe someone that knows more about storage cache could comment on that. If not there is another way we could try which would be to list all the properties a cache could have in either cases and look if they make sense for both processors and the NAND in an SSHD.
GNUtoo (talk) 23:35, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Thinking more about it, "cache" could be a feature, which could be implemented by SRAM, NAND or processor cache, what do you think of that? For instance in a given SOC, the SRAM is typically used during boot to load the bootloader in memory, and the this bootloader initialize the external ram. I think that in some case this sram is used as a cache, once the SOC is booted. Also in Coreboot the cache is configured to be used as RAM, in order to be able to run the RAM initialization code which is written in C (and so it needs a stack and because of that RAM, or a special compiler, but the later ended up not being maintainable). The big challenge here would be to make sure that people do not make confusion between both. One would be a feature of computer architecture, and the other would be a hardware component / hardware block. GNUtoo (talk) 23:42, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
This proposal is NOT about a property for CPU/processor cache! It is about cache in general where CPUs were used as example. The property would allow to enter every tipe of cache you like. This applies not only to hardware, but also software cache of any type. --D-Kuru (talk) 18:45, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
Do you have examples on how to differentiate the cache made with SRAM, RAM and NAND on an SSHD? GNUtoo (talk) 17:12, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
You just add a qualifier to the statement using of (P642). So it would eg. 64KB of L1 cache (Q28972913). If it is a specialised cache (eg. instruction or data cache) it can be added using another qualifier --D-Kuru (talk) 21:17, 28 May 2020 (UTC)
It's unclear to me how that "other qualifier" would work in practice. Do I need to use has part (Q24575087)? or uses (P2283)? or has quality (P1552) ? GNUtoo (talk) 05:58, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

If we use L1, L2 and L3 caches or a generic CPU cache with a level as property, having properties would work anyway for either cases. The bonus here is that the L1, L2, and L3 caches already mention that they are CPU caches so it avoid the issue we've been discussing above. GNUtoo (talk) 06:17, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

verifiability of propertyEdit

   Under discussion
DescriptionVerifiability of this property, one of "Verified", "Human verifiable", "no value"
Data typeItem
Domainproperty
Allowed values"Verified", "Human verifiable", "no value"
Example 1stated in (P248) → "Verified"
Example 2imported from Wikimedia project (P143) → "Human verifiable"
Example 3retrieved (P813) → no value
Example 4reference URL (P854) → "Verified"
Planned useSourcing SPARQL query
Robot and gadget jobsno

MotivationEdit

We need a way to enforce that results from Wikidata query service are reliably sourced. Currently there is no simple way to require higher reliability standard in Wikidata query service than "wdt". And this means unsourced statements or statements imported by bots from Wikipedia will appear in query result. Simply requiring a source be provided doesn't work, because it can be imported from Wikimedia project (P143) Wikipedia (Q52). Requiring any sources other than imported from Wikimedia project (P143) doesn't work either, because imported from Wikimedia project (P143) can be accompanied by retrieved (P813), and retrieved (P813) triple will be matched by SPARQL software as a valid source. Not to mention we are starting to have new identicals of imported from Wikimedia project (P143), such as Wikimedia import URL (P4656) and inferred from (P3452).

Using this new property, we can write SPARQL query that require the data be properly sourced. Example:

SELECT ?item ?value ?reliablesource ?reference WHERE {
  ?item p:P31 [ps:P31 ?value;
               a wikibase:BestRank;
               prov:wasDerivedFrom [?reliablereference ?reference]].
  ?reliablesource <http://example.com/verifiability> <http://example.com/Verified>;
                  wikibase:reference ?reliablereference.
}

Alternatively, we can link the new items "Verified" or "Human verifiable" to properties using existing properties, for example instance of (P31) or has quality (P1552). But using a new property we can even define a hierarchy of reliability. For example if statement "Verified" next lower rank (P3729) "Human verifiable" exists, we can write the following SPARQL query to require the result having at least one source even if it is linked to Wikipedia (Q52), but do not include unsourced statements or bogus sources, for example a reference with only retrieved (P813):

SELECT ?item ?value ?reliablesource ?reference WHERE {
  ?item p:P31 [ps:P31 ?value;
               a wikibase:BestRank;
               prov:wasDerivedFrom [?reliablereference ?reference]].
  ?reliablesource <http://example.com/verifiability>/wdt:P3729* <http://example.com/HumanVerifiable>;
                  wikibase:reference ?reliablereference.
}

Midleading (talk) 12:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

Data Model: There are multiple ways to model source reliability. We should decide which one we want to use.

  1. "Generic reliable source" > "Unreliable source", as proposed above.
  2. "Reliable source from trusted organizations and governments" > "Generic reliable source" > "Unreliable source". Defines a multi-level reliability hierarchy. More levels can be added if necessary.
  3. "Reliable source of science", "Reliable source of law", "Reliable source of medicine", "Reliable source of biblography", "Generic reliable source", "Unreliable source". Defines reliability by area.
  4. "Primary source", "Secondary source", "Tertiary source", "Generic reliable source", "Unreliable source".

Also we need to discuss the criterion used to define this property, is it about verifiability or is it about reliability? Midleading (talk) 08:06, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  •   Support, seems interesting. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 18:29, 10 December 2019 (UTC).
  •   Support I think it would be very useful. --Tinker Bell 20:28, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support David (talk) 07:01, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment doesn't reliability/verifiability attach to the source, not the way in which it is referenced (i.e. why is this a property to be attached to reference properties?) I can link just about anything I want with reference URL (P854), that doesn't mean it's either reliable or verifiable! (for example if the website domain has disappeared it can probably no longer be verified...) This doesn't feel like the right approach to modeling this. To identify types of reference properties it would probably be better to just subclass Wikidata property to indicate a source (Q18608359), no? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:03, 11 December 2019 (UTC)
Using a subclass technically works, but the new items used to specify property verifiability are subclass of Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446), as they are specific to Wikidata. The properties themselves are subclass Wikidata property to indicate a source (Q18608359) but not indirect subclass of Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446). Also, this new property uses parent relationship next higher rank (P3730)next lower rank (P3729) which is different from subclass of (P279). This property doesn't indicate the results are indeed reliable, the statement can still be incorrect or vandalized, but the reference is listed in query result which you can verify by consulting sources. Without this property, you will be overwhelmed by huge list of values without means to verify.--Midleading (talk) 02:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
Properties are specific to Wikidata too, I'm not sure what your point is there. Here's specifically what I'm suggesting: create new items like "Wikidata property to indicate a verified source", "Wikidata property to indicate a human-verifiable source" as subclasses of Wikidata property to indicate a source (Q18608359), and make stated in (P248) an instance of the first, imported from Wikimedia project (P143) an instance of the second, and leave retrieved (P813) as it is. You can relate the new items with next lower rank (P3729) etc. relationships if you like, and a modified version of your SPARQL will work the same way, but using the subclass relation instead of a new property. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:25, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
I don't think properties are specific to Wikidata because many of Wikidata property to indicate a source (Q18608359) have an external equivalent property, for example publication date (P577) = schema:datePublished . Making them an instance of Wikimedia internal item (Q17442446) is just like saying universe (Q1) is instance of "Wikipedia article". I'm fine with using subclass instead of a new property, provided we maintain the ontology stable so that we aren't forced to use ugly/slow "?reliablesource wdt:P31/(wdt:P279|wdt:P3729)* wd:Q123456789" and/or VALUES statement in next years, and the new subclass can't be used to infer the properties are Wikimedia-only.--Midleading (talk) 05:29, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
They're already listed as instances of Wikidata property to indicate a source (Q18608359) so whether or not you consider them Wikimedia-only, making them instances of subclasses of that won't change anything in that respect. Also have many existing items that were created for purposes like this and should remain stable - for example all the property constraint-related items. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support --Trade (talk) 22:33, 14 December 2019 (UTC)
  • Depending on the source "stated in" can have different meanings. Sources for which we use "stated in" can be of very different quality. I do understand the desire to be able to query better but the approach that ArthurPSmith (talkcontribslogs) proposed seems to be more effective for that purpose and will take less toll on our query service, so I   Oppose the proposal as it stands. ChristianKl❫ 07:54, 18 December 2019 (UTC)
  • If there is concensus to create the two new items and use instance of (P31) instead, can somebody create the two new items, link them to the examples given and close this property proposal?--Midleading (talk) 15:24, 21 December 2019 (UTC)

EAN-13Edit

   Withdrawn
DescriptionEAN-13 is a standard describing a barcode symbology and numbering system used in global trade to identify a specific retail product type.
RepresentsEAN-13 (Q3045807)
Data typeString
Domainproduct (Q2424752)
Allowed values[0-9]{13}
Example 1Lufsig (Q15297359) → 0627644194744
Example 2Robinson Crusoe: Adventures on the Cursed Island (Q39403247) → 5902560380064
Example 3AMD Ryzen 3 1200 (Q65582574) → 0730143308489
Example 4Q78640580 → 8714800007191
Planned useAdd the code to existing products and add easily new ones, thanks to the fact that we would have an unequivocal identifier.
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsoISBN-13 (P212), ISSN (P236)

MotivationEdit

European Article Number (Q357404) is the European standard for identifying a specific product that would be sold. Is the common barcode that everyone see on each item we buy. Books already have ISBN-13 (P212) that is a subset of EAN-13. I think that we could benefit a lot with this new property in order to catalogue well every kind of retail products. There will be a lot of synergies with all the information spread on many online markets (like Amazon, Ebay, but also many many local online stores). Moreover we can finally identify precisely an item, so for example in the food domain we can collect precise accurate information about ingredients and so on (joining the linked data cloud of projects like foodrepo.org and openfoodfacts.org) AlessioMela (talk) 18:50, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

DiscussionEdit

  •   Support David (talk) 06:43, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question @AlessioMela: Am I correct in thinking that every time there is a packaging revision this leads to a new EAN-13, to allow retailers and wholesalers to distinguish this year's version from last year's? If so, it might be only quite a narrow range of items that could be securely identified by only a single EAN-13. Is that something that should worry us? Jheald (talk) 09:44, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

recipient (aliases: to, intended recipient, receiver, target, beneficiary, awardee)Edit

   Under discussion
Descriptionperson, group, or organization to which the given entity is directed, given, or sent
Represents
Data typeItem
Domainitems
Example 1pitch (Q1063937) recipient catcher (Q1050571)
Example 2Orteig Prize (Q1930819) recipient Charles Lindbergh (Q1618)
Example 3Zimmermann Telegram (Q154091) recipient Heinrich von Eckardt (Q1599502)
Example 4consumer complaint (Q1473099) recipient consumer organization (Q1329436)
Example 5Alaska Purchase (Q309029) instance of (P31) purchasing (Q1369832) / of (P642) Alaska (Q797) / recipient United States of America (Q30)
See alsoPossible parent properties:
  • participant (P710) or significant person (P3342) (these do not specify a role without adding a qualifier)
  • Possible sub-properties:

    Other similar properties:

    MotivationEdit

    To express a major thematic relation that is not well addressed by existing properties (as noted in the "See also" field). Swpb (talk) 19:48, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Support David (talk) 06:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   CommentIs it the same as addressee (P1817)?--Midleading (talk) 09:13, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
      • addressee (P1817) at present only covers one of several use cases of the proposed property, but I would not be opposed to a radical expansion of its definition (really, turning it into the proposed property), rather than creating a new property, if folks like that idea. Swpb (talk) 14:31, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   Oppose Widen winner (P1346) instead. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2019 (UTC).
      • That makes no sense. This is for items that are transferred between parties. Winning an event may involve the transfer of a prize to the winner, but often does not. If we were to turn that property into this one, someone would immediately propose a new "winner" property exactly like the old one, and with good reason – these are not at all the same concept. If any property were appropriate to expand into this role, it would be addressee (P1817), certainly not winner (P1346). I gather from Wikidata:Property proposal/general law that your preference is to shoehorn new uses into existing properties whether they fit there or not. In both these cases, not. Swpb (talk) 18:04, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   Support but I would also support expanding the definition of addressee (P1817) if that's the consensus here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:28, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   Oppose I think all usecases are already covered --- Jura 10:15, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
      • Please elaborate by expressing the example statements with existing properties. Without major expansion (e.g. of addressee (P1817) as discussed above), the existing properties simply do not work. Would you allow addressee (P1817) to be changed as described? Swpb (talk) 20:34, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
        • Notably by award received (P166), addressee (P1817) you apparently don't want to see in the "see also" section. I know it makes it more difficult to argue the added value of the property. BTW: first time a proposer deleted valid content from a proposal. --- Jura 20:36, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
          • addressee (P1817) is discussed above; please comment accordingly: would you allow it to be radically expanded for this role? In it's current form, it is explicitly limited to letters and notes. And award received (P166) takes a completely different class as values, namely awards, not people who receive them – its mention was a non-sequitur and presumably an accident. And no, you don't get to edit my proposal; the discussion section is good enough for everyone else, and it will be good enough for you. Swpb (talk) 20:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
            • Do you understand that you are proposing an inverse property for award received (P166)? --- Jura 20:48, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
              • 1) I am not, and 2) if I were, that wouldn't be an argument against. That's also a remarkably different argument from your initial one; I certainly hope your personal feelings towards me aren't the real factor here. Swpb (talk) 20:49, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
                • You might want to have a look at the item used as value in the second sample above, notably the statements at Q1618#P166. --- Jura 20:53, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
                  • And the four examples that have nothing to do with prizes? Covering a use case is not the same as being limited to that use case; which again, wouldn't be a problem anyway. Swpb (talk) 20:57, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
                    • 2 are covered by addressee (P1817). The first by "participant" with object has role. This has the advantage that the pitcher doesn't get omitted. The last one seems to be an error. --- Jura 21:01, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
                      • Ah, so 60% of the examples are not covered by addressee (P1817), unless we expand it! For the third time: are you for that? (Unsurprisingly, I don't find your takes on examples #1 and #5 compelling either, but at least they're valid opinions.) Swpb (talk) 21:05, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
                        • Given that we have 453,654 items with award received (P166), it's likely that 95% of actual Wikidata uses are covered.
    BTW, small correction: 1 is covered by P1817. It's unclear how "consumer complaint" recipient "consumer organization" is covered even by this proposal.
    Maybe you could explain how the seller and the pitcher is meant to be included. --- Jura 21:13, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

    author  TomT0m / talk page Mbch331 (talk) Jobu0101 (talk) Tubezlob (🙋) Flycatchr Koxinga (talk) Fuzheado (talk) Mfchris84 (talk) Manu1400 (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Nomen ad hoc (talk) 07:53, 16 November 2019 (UTC)

      Notified participants of WikiProject Award @GerardM:

    There is no use case for it. It increases bloat in Wikidata. For years now we have found that a user interface like Reasonator shows perfectly well all known instances of recipients of an award. It is safe to say that the best remedy for this perceived need is a user interface Consider bloat, there are awards with over 500 recipients.. Additionally you gain a major pain; synchronising and error checking on duplicate entries (they are the same information). Thanks, GerardM (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2020 (UTC)
    I don't like to use the same property for diverse purposes (addressee, buyer, winner, target, ...). They will probably raise issues when the property is to be translated into every languages, and introduce unwanted items for property users. Can we discuss each of these usecases separately?--Midleading (talk) 13:42, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    external typeEdit

       Under discussion
    Description(qualifier only) main type of entry in external database (i.e. which separating those items into a limited number of broad categories, like P107 formerly did)
    Data typeItem
    Domainvarious
    Example 1Jehan Sadat (Q212190) GND ID (P227) 118604740 <external type> person (Q215627)
    Example 2Nature (Q180445) Microsoft Academic ID (P6366) 137773608 <external type> magazine (Q41298)
    Example 3(normal rank) Microsoft Academic ID (P6366) formatter URL (P1630) https://academic.microsoft.com/journal/$1 <external type> magazine (Q41298) (The current value will be perferred rank)
    Example 4Leonardo da Vinci (Q762) IMDb ID (P345) nm1827914 <external type> personal name (Q1071027)
    Robot and gadget jobsYes

    MotivationEdit

    For example Wikidata:Property_proposal/J-GLOBAL_ID contains multiple different types of entries using the same ID scheme. Microsoft Academic now uses a new URL scheme (though the old one still works currently); if the old scheme no longer work we will be able to migrate data to new properties easily using this qualifier.

    Questions: Should we create new items dedicated to the external types? GZWDer (talk) 10:23, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Amino community IDEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionname of the Amino community associated to this subject
    RepresentsAmino community (Q80002220)
    Data typeItem
    DomainBadabum Amino (Q64221183)
    Example
    Sourcehttps://aminoapps.com/
    Number of IDs in sourcemore than 2.500.000
    Formatter URLhttps://aminoapps.com/c/$1/home/
    See alsosubreddit (P3984)

    --Trade (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2019 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    • Mmm, I don't like how subreddit (P3984) is used, because I tend to think they aren't identifiers per se, but works that can have their own item, and can link their topic using main subject (P921). Anyway,   Weak support. --Tinker Bell 23:21, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   Oppose no motivation was provided in the proposal. Putting a statement on millions of items has a cost, and given that I haven't heard of Amino before I doubt that cost is worth it. ChristianKl❫ 14:09, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl: It's one of the most used mobile social media networking apps currently available. Definitely notable.
    • Do you have any data for that claim? ChristianKl❫ 17:07, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

    type of external pageEdit

       Under discussion
    Description(qualifier only) type (read: status) of external page
    Data typeItem
    Example 1Second Crusade (Q51654) Encyclopædia Britannica Online ID (P1417) event/Second-Crusade <type of external page> <Britannica directory page>
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/BsivkoBot proposed to deprecate all links to Britannica directory pages. I propose to tag them with a new qualifier. See also Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2016/11#Encyclopædia_Britannica's_'empty-ish'_concepts_in_Mix'n'Match. GZWDer (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2019 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Support This seems like a good solution to the problem at hand. ChristianKl❫ 11:16, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

      Support but I still have the feeling that they simply added them for ad revenue. --SCIdude (talk) 15:41, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

    • Actually having such entries is good in some perspective, as 1. this still refers to some clear distinguishable entries and 2. this prevents duplicate and naming conflict, and the "stub" may be expanded to a full article. This is somewhat like a solution similar to mw:Extension:ArticlePlaceholder/Smart red links (cf phab:T123021). --GZWDer (talk) 16:48, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

      Support I had thoughts about kind of parameters (like qualifier) to resolve the problem, but I'm not so expert in Wikidata to make such initiative. Thanks to starter for the proposal. Bsivko (talk) 20:55, 30 December 2019 (UTC)

    •   Support. Sounds OK. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:09, 30 December 2019 (UTC).
    •   Comment Why not use object has role (P3831) for this? Unless you have some other cases where this specific qualifier would be helpful, I think a more generic solution is better. ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:12, 30 December 2019 (UTC)
    • @ArthurPSmith: actually this example Britannica page also has an external type, which is "event".--GZWDer (talk) 07:30, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
    •   Comment why this new very specific property if you can just qualify it with object has role (P3831)? Multichill (talk) 13:08, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
      • Oh wait, Arthur already said the same :-) So   Oppose unless someone can come up with a good reason why it shouldn't be done that way. Multichill (talk) 13:11, 31 December 2019 (UTC)
      • I think you are right. I withdraw my support vote and also   Oppose. ChristianKl❫ 08:03, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
      • It could be there are two identifiers of one scheme on the same item, e.g. one for the real name and another for a stage name. These would probably be differentiated by object has role (P3831)
        BTW not really convinced by the usecase. I don't see why we should link empty-ish pages in the first place. --- Jura 11:33, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

    armament usedEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionarmament used to commit an act
    Representsweapon (Q728)
    Data typeItem
    Allowed valuesany P31/P279 of weapon (Q728)
    Example 1armament used → AGM-114 Hellfire (Q271930) as qualifier under manner of death (P1196) assassination (Q3882219)
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING
    Planned useas qualifier for describing weapons used for assassinations and targeted killings see e.g. Qasem Soleimani (Q892014)
    See alsoarmament (P520), Wikidata:Property proposal/equipment used

    MotivationEdit

    Enables better modeling of targeted killings, equipment and weapon used.--So9q (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    • It doesn't fit. "equippable weapon item for the subject" this is wrong when we are trying to model that this armament was used to kill someone, not that someone was equipped with the armament when killed. See the example. manner of death (P1196) assassination (Q3882219) + qualifiers ordered by=donald trump + armament=hellfire missile is not clear. Who is equipped with the armament? Donald Trump? Armament is used as a main value to e.g. describe the weaponry a military aircraft be equipped with, see https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q816695.--So9q (talk) 19:58, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    • It seems clear enough to me. But maybe some others should weigh in on how this should be modeled... ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    equipment usedEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionequipment used to archive a goal
    Representsequipment (Q16798631)
    Data typeItem
    Domainany object
    Allowed valuesany P31/P279 of object (Q488383)
    Example 1equipment used → MQ-9 Reaper (Q816695) as qualifier under manner of death (P1196) assassination (Q3882219)
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING
    Planned useas qualifier for describing weapons used for assassinations and targeted killings see e.g. Qasem Soleimani (Q892014)
    See alsoarmament (P520), Wikidata:Property_proposal/armament_used

    MotivationEdit

    Enables better modeling of targeted killings, equipment and weapon used.--So9q (talk) 15:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Support David (talk) 04:57, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment can’t we use uses (P2283) for this? - PKM (talk) 05:08, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    •   Question That could also be used to define which equipment has been used to achieve a word record for instance. It would be interesting to know which equipment were used in various long range WoFo distance world record along with the software configuration (drivers, tunning, etc). However I didn't manage to find yet a use case where 'use' cannot be used instead. Do you have uses cases where you cannot express something with 'used' and you need 'equipment used' instead?

    local to a language contextEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionproperty to identify the concepts related to the group of territories where a language is spoken
    Representslanguage territory (Q8561610)
    Data typeItem
    Domainlanguage territory (Q8561610), group of territories where a language is spoken. This is the language context. A concept of a language context is related to both the territorial entities (political territorial entity political territorial entity (Q1048835) and country country (Q6256)) and the culture culture (Q11042).
    Allowed valuesany language Qitem.
    Example 1Naples (Q2634)Italian (Q652), Neapolitan (Q33845)
    Example 2pesto (Q9896)Italian (Q652)
    Example 3Juventus FC (Q1422)Italian (Q652)
    Example 4Vasco Rossi (Q17171)Italian (Q652)
    Example 5Pep Guardiola (Q164038)Catalan (Q7026)
    Example 6Sagrada Família (Q48435)Catalan (Q7026)
    Example 7Andorra la Vella (Q1863)Catalan (Q7026)
    Example 8crema catalana (Q842566)Catalan (Q7026)
    Example 9Inca civilization (Q3404008)Quechua (Q5218)
    Example 10Huascarán (Q200935)Quechua (Q5218)
    Example 11Quechuas (Q134936)Quechua (Q5218)
    Example 12Chavin de Huantar (Q732554)Quechua (Q5218)
    Planned usefor creating selections of prioritized content to bridge the gaps and help language editions reach a higher cultural diversity in their contents.
    See also

    MotivationEdit

    This property is required to identify the most important items that relate to the context where a language is spoken, whether it is composed of one country or region or several. These items can be located in places, but also on traditions, language, politics, agriculture, biographies, events, etc. They are a collection local to a language context (e.g. Branbury cake is local to the English context, but also Time Square or the comedian David Mitchell).

    We suggested this property because in order to bridge the content gaps between language editions it is essential to identify which articles are “local” (see Cultural Context Content or related papers[1][2]), as they tend to be more developed because of their most direct knowledge and access to sources. By identifying which articles are local to every language context it is possible to create lists of essential or vital articles that can be considered to guarantee a minimum of content cultural diversity.

    As said, in a language context there are all kinds of topics. According to the most recent results from the method proposed by the project Wikipedia Cultural Diversity Observatory (WCDO), the extent of content that relates to a language context is around 25% of the articles in the largest 40 Wikipedias. In smaller languages, the percentage is much smaller as they have not devoted enough attention to represent their context. This is clearly a barrier to all the Wikipedia project achieve the sum of human knowledge.

    This property requires a language item. So, based on the data provided by the project WCDO we will create triplets to mark the articles (100 to 500) of that relate to the language context of the three hundred language editions. These are named Top CCC articles.

    ReferencesEdit

    1. Miquel-Ribé, M., & Laniado, D. (2018). Wikipedia Culture Gap: Quantifying Content Imbalances Across 40 Language Editions. Frontiers in Physics.
    2. Miquel-Ribé, M., & Laniado, D. (2019). Wikipedia Cultural Diversity Dataset: A Complete Cartography for 300 Language Editions. Proceedings of the 13th International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media. ICWSM. ACM. 2334-0770

    --Marcmiquel (talk) 15:41, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    @Marcmiquel: Isn't this use case taken care of now by the combination of location properties and language used (P2936) on the geographic items? For example Sagrada Família (Q48435) located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) ... Catalonia (Q5705) which has language used (P2936) Catalan (Q7026) (and others). Or are you trying to accomplish something else here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:38, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    @ArthurPSmith, you are right that some are tackled with location and language properties. The creation of the dataset of articles that belong to a language context for each language edition uses these two properties (and many other aspects, as you can consult in the links/papers). The final selection of articles local to a language context is richer though - it includes items that range from traditions, people, places, language traits, etc. Having these collections is essential to later select the most relevant part of each language context, which should be prioritized in translation to other language editions. This is what the "Top CCC lists" is doing. They are algorithm-generated lists of 100-500 articles of the most essential articles of each language context that every other Wikipedia should have in order to ensure a minimum coverage of the existing Wikipedia cultural diversity. The purpose of this property is to be able to search the gaps using Wikidata queries. --Marcmiquel (talk) 11:02, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Marcmiquel: So it's not just location + language, but also some notion of importance? How would you prevent this property from automatically being applied to, say, every village in Italy, or every type of pasta, to add "Italian" as the context? Or would that be ok? If there's a significance criterion involved then I don't think the label quite matches what you are trying to do here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    It occurred to me that you are perhaps trying to duplicate this property: on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008)? Would that existing property meet your needs? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:30, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    @ArthurPSmith: it is not just location + language, it's everything related to the context where the language is spoken. The notion of importance lies in just using the property for 100 or 500 items. However, the cultural context content of a language is more extense (in the Italian Wikipedia it is a 17.17% of its content, in the English a 44.91%, in the Catalan a 16.62%). With this property as presented, they could apply this property to the entire extent of cultural context content. I think it would be ok, but to mark the first 100 or 500 there should be another way. Or this property should have a criterion of importance in it. The on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) is good for specific projects, but here we are talking about a property with possible 300 values (languages). If we apply it to 100 items per language, then we have 30,000 items which are the "most relevant content for cultural diversity in Wikipedia". --Marcmiquel (talk) 08:53, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Wikidata properties do not work like in your (current) examples. Please replace "is part of the x language context" by "=>". Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:48, 13 January 2020 (UTC)
    Thanks, I fixed it. --Marcmiquel (talk) 10:51, 14 January 2020 (UTC)
    @ChristianKl: Thanks for your answer. Yes, a cultural context is richer than location and language, it's what they create in it the speakers of that language. Could you explain how do you imagine this new property? Isn't it the one I am suggesting? --Marcmiquel (talk) 10:21, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    I think that language used (P2936) should be used on Naples (Q2634) and that language used (P2936) might be subproperty of (P1647) of the newly created property. I don't think the newly created property should be used directly for Naples (Q2634). ChristianKl❫ 15:38, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
    Sorry @ChristianKl:, I'm not sure I understood what you propose as scheme. Could you explain it a bit more? Likewise, could you please guide me a bit on how we should proceed. I'm new at Wikidata property proposal. Thanks. --Marcmiquel (talk) 12:05, 19 January 2020 (UTC)
    Remove all the cases where the usecase is already covered by language used (P2936) or located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) from the list of examples. ChristianKl❫ 08:34, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
    If I remove these other cases covered by these properties, I might also need to remove many other properties. Isn't it possible to have a certain redundancy? --Marcmiquel (talk) 19:19, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
    In general, people doing gap analysis with Wikidata tend to get the completeness of Wikidata or the ground truth wrong. I haven't gone through your papers though.
    1. Can you explain the reasoning (ideally with references) that links "Pesto" to Italian language (second sample above)?
    2. Why has Naples (Q2634) Italian (Q652), but not Neapolitan (Q33845), Latin or Ancient Greek (Q35497)?
    3. Why does the "domain" above mention territory, but the samples use other (people, food, etc.)?
    4. Please fill in the "description" field.
    5. I added a few related properties as "see also" above.
    If it's merely an idiosyncratic approach, I think one would want to go with on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008). --- Jura 09:10, 20 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Jura1:Presenting the idea here is part of the exploration of Wikidata's potential to bridge the gaps. I'm very open to check other possibilities. I'll try to answer your questions. 1. The reasoning behind linking Pesto to the Italian is that Pesto is a concept related to the Italian language territory (territories where Italian is spoken) since it was created there. I collect Cultural Context Content (CCC), which is usually called local content, and it contains all the concepts related to the territories where the language is spoken. This includes people, places, things, recipes, etc. I suggest you check the papers or the project Wikipedia Cultural Diversity Observatory I posted in this section. 2. Yes, indeed, it could be any of these languages (not Latin, as it is not in current use, just in the Vatican). 3. Just did it. 4. Thanks, they make sense. I appreciate your feedback. --Marcmiquel (talk) 19:13, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
    • (1) For "Pesto", that relationship is already indicated by "country of origin" = "Italy".
    (2) I added Neapolitan (Q33845) to the sample. If you exclude Latin, you'd also exclude Ancient Greek I suppose.
    (3) "domain" in the proposal would be the class of items that could hold it. Apparently it's any (populated) geographic location, not just "language territory (Q8561610)", + a few other classes of items.
    I tend to agree with ChristianKl that if the relationship is already covered by another property (or a combination as shown), there isn't much use of adding another one. It would be good to see use cases that aren't covered.
    BTW Another gap analysis done for itwiki: it:Progetto:Coordinamento/Wikidata/Italiani_senza_voce. --- Jura 14:28, 30 January 2020 (UTC)

    next level in hierarchyEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionqualifier: indicates the value at the next hierarchy level which is true for this item, when more than one is possible at the next level
    Data typeItem
    Domainqualifier only in transitive property (Q18647515) with hierarchy (Q188619)
    Example 1111
    Example 2
    Example 3
    Planned usefor select only right values in cases like AB → (C and D) where C is right for A but D isn't
    See alsoterritory overlaps (P3179)

    MotivationEdit

    The question arose here. On the example of geographic hierarchical properties like located in the administrative territorial entity (P131), there are cases when at one level of the hierarchy there are two correct values but only one of them are correct for referencing item from lower hierarchy level. The proposed property will help to make the right choice in the case of such switches. We could do the opposite and indicate for each of the values a list of items corresponding to it from the lower level but in case of Atlanta (Q23556) it will be thousands of streets, non-profit organizations, monuments, schools, cafes etc. So best way to resolve it at the items of monuments or cafes.

    I am sure that this can be useful not only for territorial properties like part of (P361). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 12:40, 28 January 2020 (UTC)3333333333

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Support Since geographic relationships are not always one-to-one (given the examples above), located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) needs to be able to be qualified with a specific "parent" administrative territory. For example, after a natural disaster, I need to be able to search for all museums in a specific county. Without having a qualifier like "hierarchy switch", many museums will show up as being in the wrong county. And as Сидик из ПТУ points out, this qualification may also apply to other hierarchical/transitive properties. -- Clifflandis (talk) 14:02, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support. --Mitte27 (talk) 06:41, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support certainly make sense Ghuron (talk) 06:16, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

    --Micru (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) TomT0m (talk) Genewiki123 (talk) Emw (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC) —Ruud 16:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Emitraka (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Bovlb (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC) --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC) --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC) --Lechatpito (talk) --Andrawaag (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC) --ChristianKl (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) --Cmungall Cmungall (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Cord Wiljes (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC) DavRosen (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC) PKM (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Fractaler (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Diana de la Iglesia Jsamwrites (talk) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Ptolusque (.-- .. -.- ..) 01:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Gamaliel (talk) --Horcrux (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) Bamyers99 (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC) Malore (talk) Wurstbruch (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC) Dcflyer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC) Ettorerizza (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC) Ninokeys (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC) Buccalon (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC) Jneubert (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC) Yair rand (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC) Tris T7 (talk) ElanHR (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC) linuxo Gq86 Gabrielaltay Liamjamesperritt (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC) ZI Jony Ivanhercaz (Talk) 11:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Gaurav (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Meejies (talk) 04:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC) Iwan.Aucamp SilentSpike (talk) Tfrancart (talk) Luis.ramos.pst.ag Sylvain Leroux TiagoLubiana (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC) Albert Villanova del Moral (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC) Clifflandis (talk) 15:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC) --Tinker Bell 16:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC) SM5POR

      Notified participants of WikiProject Ontology

    •   Oppose given the discussion on Wikidata:Project chat and the alternatives explained there. Essentially this qualifier would encourage users to add incorrect statements to the "parent" item. --- Jura 09:39, 15 February 2020 (UTC)
      • This qualifier will not require changing existing statements specified in accordance with the property documentation. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 06:50, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
      •   Support - It seems that User:Сидик из ПТУ offers this evolutionary change that will help to correctly display geo-chains in wiki-cards. The User:Jura1 solution will break geo-chains in the wiki-cards, therefore it is harmful and not necessary. Carn (talk) 14:10, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support This will allow to model the situation en e.g. Georgia, USA as viewed as almost everyone else does it. See also my summary of the discussion in Project chat in Special:Diff/1116318285. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 06:58, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Oppose This propoal assumes that administrative divisions are always organised as a linear hierarchy. Many countries however know branching hierarchies where two or more administrative divisions are subordinated to the same division. In such cases, one can add multiple located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) claims because there are multiple most local admin territories. --Pasleim (talk) 12:30, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
      • So, there will be several (two) administrative divisions for Atlanta (Fulton and DeKalb). Georgia will still not be the most local for Atlanta, nor will Fulton for Patch Works Art & History Center (Q76461608). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 13:43, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
        • You might want to re-read the discussion on project. BTW territory overlaps (P3179) was made for that. --- Jura 13:51, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
          • As I read Wikidata:Property proposal/territory overlapse that isn't true. P3179 was made to: (quote) representing overlapse between territorial entities arising from distinct classifications. Administrative vs religious is one (as with administrative subdivisions of countries vs dioceses), administrative vs political (as is the case with american special districts), geographical vs administrative (landforms vs countries or cities). (end quote) I note the emphasis on different classification types. In the case Georgia, USA municipality and country belongs to different levels of the same type of classification. The municipalities is considered to be in one or more counties, where the counties isn't considered to be in municipalities. In such cases this proposed hierarchy switch will be best to describe the situation. In other cases like the examples in P:P3179 that property is better. So we need both. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 15:52, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
      • This makes sense, if you relax the requirement/assumption that only the "most local" value should go in P131. But it may be tempting for people to delete the "redundant" P131 value if they don't realise why it's there. Ghouston (talk) 08:38, 17 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Oppose Jura points out above that this qualifier will encourage people to add incorrect assertions. I would go further and say that it is only useful in the case when people have added incorrect assertions. While Atlanta certainly overlaps two counties, it is false to say that it lies either "physically within" or "under the administrative control of" either of them. If we want to be able to identify the containing county of some specific landmark within Atlanta, we can simply assert it directly (without requiring a qualifier), or find some intermediate region such as a neighbourhood. Bovlb (talk) 21:54, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
    Not that P30 matters, but the English label for P30 has just "continent", not "located in continent". --- Jura 11:20, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
    The burden of proof (Q1535975) on those who deny the hierarchy (municipality of Georgia (Q76514543)county of Georgia (Q13410428)Georgia (Q1428)). Atlanta seat of Fulton county (but also partly in DeKalb county, how can we say that Atlanta on the same level with counties after this? Are you going to claim that articles County (United States) (Most counties have subdivisions which may include townships, municipalities and unincorporated areasSome municipalities are in multiple counties) and Local government in the United States (Most states and territories have at least two tiers of local government: counties and municipalities) are wrong? Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 12:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
    Oh, you know — there are many labels and aliases of P131 in many languages have not in but true. And counties perfectly match with Wikidata usage instructions (P2559) of located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) in Atlanta case. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 12:35, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
    I suppose we will keep disagreeing on that. --- Jura 17:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
    WikiData is not a separate project, the data from it is used in different language sections of Wikipedia, so you should evaluate your proposal to see if the templates created in the language sections will break. Maybe for you this is another abstract question, for me everything looks different. It seems to me that you "disagree" without a proper level of argumentation at a practical level. Carn (talk) 14:19, 20 February 2020 (UTC)
    The question is you aren't doing the opposite as you are intending: by adding a complex additional element, you just to make sure that it works for a single outside projects that may not have implemented things correctly. --- Jura 20:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
    The approach in which some cities of Georgia have in P131 county while others have a state should be attributed to incorrect ones in the first place.
      Support --AleUst (talk) 14:55, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
      Support, administrative territories are quite well represented as an ascending hierarchy, and this correction would make it work even better. Wikisaurus (talk) 16:33, 19 February 2020 (UTC)

    ──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── The good point of this debate is the highlights a problem: While I'm sympathetic to the problems faced by ruwiki infobox designers, it mainly illustrates that Wikidata should try to provide a basic infobox and breadcrum navigation as otherwise we keep getting requests from wikis that make use of our data in a somewhat sub-optimal way and attempt to tweak the data to their usecase. We already did that in other fields and should to it for that too. --- Jura 13:37, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

    At first, Wikivoyage doesn't use Wikidata for breadcrumb navigation. Secondly, I see Example: Europe > Russia > Southern Russia > North Caucasus > Dagestan where Europe, Southern Russia and North Caucasus are not administrative territorial entity (Q56061) at all. And Russia is not only in Europe too so Europe > Russia > Siberia > Krasnoyarsk Krai > Krasnoyarsk (region) > Krasnoyarsk is simply wrong. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 13:48, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
    I think we understood that earlier in the discussion (please re-read the comment above by DerFussi if you haven't done so), but it's a feature that should be supported directly through Wikidata statements. I think it's useful even for projects/users other than Wikivoyage. --- Jura 13:52, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
    OK. In this case, if we somehow build a hierarchy through Russia then we definitely need a switch in order to choose Asia for Krasnoyarsk and Europe for St. Petersburg. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 13:56, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support The best way now. - Kareyac (talk) 11:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
    • @Сидик из ПТУ, Clifflandis, Mitte27, Ghuron, Carn, Pasleim: @Bovlb, Kareyac, Jura1, Dipsacus fullonum: @DerFussi, RolandUnger, Ghouston: I have altered the English proposed name per a discussion above; please comment below if that changes your view on this proposal. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:42, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
      • It was one or more of several values and I suggest leaving this wording just in case. For example, when two of the three values are true. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 19:17, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
      • My objection was structural, and about the misuse of P131, so I'm afraid your fix doesn't help me. Thanks for trying. Cheers, Bovlb (talk) 16:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment I have another suggestion, which would be to use another P131 statement as a qualifier on the P131 statement, instead of defining a new property. Maybe it would be easier to use that trying to remember the name of the obscure property that changes the hierarchy, and it would still be distinguishable from a redundant P131. Ghouston (talk) 22:21, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
      • Yes, I also proposed to do so from the very beginning, however, this requires special documentation so that users understand in which cases such a qualifier is needed and in which it is unwanted. I believe that a special property allows users to better understand what function it performs. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 08:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment how to we determine what the next level of the hierarchy is? Wouldn't it rather be "alternate hierarchy"? --- Jura 09:30, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
      • It must be one or more of the values that are specified in a similar property at the item to which we add the qualifier. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 10:39, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
        • Yeah, so "alternate hierarchy" fits it better. --- Jura 10:41, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
          • Maybe I do not understand the subtleties of the wording in English but, otherwise, there are no differences from a typical case, county of Georgia (Q13410428) are always the next level of hierarchy for municipality of Georgia (Q76514543). The qualifier allows us to make a choice of several alternative values. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 10:46, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
            • From the discussion, I get the impression that you assume a pyramidal organization of different government entities and likely an infobox that can't handle alternatives. --- Jura 10:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
              • Yes, proposed property is for resolve this. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 11:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
                • Sure, but it's better to fix the infobox than to try to change the underlying data. --- Jura 17:10, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
                  • The infobox algorithm just relies on the fact that Wikidata will follow the rule "You only need to add the most local admin territory". The most local admin territories for Atlanta are Fulton and DeKalb and this is in line with the main point of view of most serious sources. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment If we are going to say (for example) that Atlanta is in both Fulton and DeKalb counties then, yes, we need something like this. But I think that's just bad modeling and a patch to get around it. When geographical entities overlap like this, the city is no more in the county than the county is in the city. I believe that Atlanta, Fulton County, and DeKalb County are each in Georgia; that Atlanta overlaps with Fulton County and DeKalb County; and that any given point in Atlanta is either in Atlanta and in Fulton County, or in Atlanta and in De Kalb County. The fact that a county is somehow "higher-level" than a city does not change this. Five counties of New York State each coincide with boroughs of New York City: this is the one case I know of in the U.S. where counties are proper subsets of cities. Are we really going to say that New York City is in Kings, Queens, New York, Richmond, and Bronx counties rather than vice versa? - Jmabel (talk) 16:20, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    Сидик из ПТУ and I were just discussing New York City over at Property talk:P131#Possible change of usage. Although the two situations aren't legally analogous, I believe they might be ontologically similar enough that a solution that applies to one ought to apply to the other. —Scs (talk) 16:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    Yes, we read articles about borough of New York City (Q408804) yesterday[6][7][8], it emphasizes that they are unique to the United States and are parts of the NYC now. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 17:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Jmabel:, how would you write the location linearly, e.g., in the infobox for c:Category:Baltimore Block on Commons? The question is whether to put the city or county first, or come up with some other way of writing it. Ghouston (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Ghouston: By tradition, in the U.S. (with the exception of New York City) we list city before county regardless of containment, but that's a matter of tradition, not data modeling. I think it might make sense to have a query know that as a rule for U.S. places (should be possible to enforce based on "instance of"), rather than to have to say in doesn't really mean in.
    By the way, New York is a mess in this respect. Pretty much any New Yorker would say that Morningside Heights is in Manhattan, not that it is in New York County, or that Park Slope is in Brooklyn, not that it is in Kings County. As for Richmond County / Borough of Richmond: almost everyone calls it "Staten Island"; after more than 300 years, the effort to give it an English rather than a Dutch name never really stuck. - Jmabel (talk) 23:44, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
    If the query “all cities of the county Fulton” doesn’t return Atlanta then this is a bad base and it doesn’t matter how the data modeling was. If Britannica says in then we follow this as most users who expect that for all the cities of Georgia, a generally accepted order is kept in line with the real situation. As for the local names of the places in New York, I can say the same thing about Moscow, where the districts got their names from the villages, and then these villages ended up in other districts. But it all suggests that New York boroughs are seen as part of the city as a priority and they are named on the English Wikipedia as Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens, The Bronx and Staten Island. There are not separate articles about Kings or Richmond. Everything is clear here. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 07:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
    There's a broader question here, which is: who or what is (or are) the primary user(s) of Wikidata? If it's people browsing our database, as if it were a stylized and highly-structured Wikipedia, then it makes sense to worry about what Britannica says, or what a reasonable New Yorker would say, and to try to have the presented data match that somehow. But if our data is primarily being used by computers running SPARQL queries, or by Wikipedia as it renders infoboxes, then we should favor a data model that fosters clean, consistent, general-purpose SPARQL queries and Lua templates and the like. —Scs (talk) 12:20, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
    Dozens of Wikipedia language sections and a number of other Wikimedia projects need a supported hierarchy for a property. Q18008533 is a Lua module and it is popular, this switch will be useful to it, but, of course, it is required to return the correct sequences like Atlanta→Fulton→Georgia. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 08:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    • I think the point is that you can't write a single SPARQL query; in the general case you have to write a little program, with some loops and if statements, that issues a number of SPARQL queries and makes decisions based on any next level in hierarchy qualifiers it finds. (To be perfectly clear, suppose the question is not, "Show me everything in DeKalb County (Q486398)", but rather, "Show me everything in County X".)
    This isn't necessarily a fatal flaw, but it does need to be acknowledged.
    Overlaps are obviously a mess. I suspect we can have either a data model that's closer to the "real world" but requires more-complicated algorithms to query, or a "refactored" model that's easy to query because it interposes some extra, artificial, constructed entities (like "portion of Atlanta within DeKalb county"), but not both. —Scs (talk) 12:08, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
    Using of "portion of Atlanta within DeKalb county" will make it difficult to work with queries such as "select all Atlanta bus stops". In any case, it’s better to work with real data than to add unobvious database tricks to the imperfection of the world. Alternatives to switch are similar to Procrustean bed (Q10991776). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 08:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Сидик из ПТУ: How does an interposed subentity of Atlanta make it harder to find all Atlanta bus stops? —Scs (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    At least we need to order unobvious where in Atlanta-DeKalb or Atlanta-Fulton. And queries may be to select all bus stops in the capitals of each state or to select all Gerogia bus stops with their cities or select count of bus stops by city, etc. And what P131 is correct for it? If counties then we lose Atlanta in our hierarchy and can’t easily select this city along with other state capitals. If Atlanta then we lose any effect of this. A completely different conversation that such administrative territorial entity (Q56061) do not actually exist so this may lead to misinformation of the users. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 13:25, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    This proposed qualifier is another such trick. I think we'd just stick to the initially suggested solution (add both Atlanta and DeKalb county statements to the bus stop item, but the most local entities) queries remain simple. --- Jura 10:26, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    This will make it impossible to build a hierarchy without a strong knowledge base wired into the algorithm and this will be a false statement that destroys the general logic. By the way, the property can be used without minus and queries like "select all bus stops in county" may contain the requirement to display the most local units for this stops (expected only cities). Maybe somebody can add to my query all organisations where next level of P131 contains only one county. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 10:57, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    Actually, using this qualifier assumes that the qualifier is used in a given level of the hierarchy, thus requiring users to write a program to identify it as Scs mentions. --- Jura 11:02, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    Using P131 assumes that the most local admin territory for the bus stops of Atlanta is Atlanta, not counties. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 11:08, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    You mean, you assume that. --- Jura 11:08, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    The reverse situation will complicate both the algorithms on Lua and the operation of SPARQL-queries when they need to work with the hierarchy. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 11:27, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    I guess it's debatable if "wdt:P131*" is more complicated than the program combined with the qualifier query you linked in some diff, but personally, I find more simpler. --- Jura 11:30, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    Without following the rule of "most local admin territory" cheap hierarchy building will not be possible, however this feature is used in various Wikimedia projects very widely, it's much more relevant than the one-off SPARQL-queries for Georgia like was discussed here. The loss of hierarchy will entail the loss of many other opportunities while the qualifier, on the contrary, creates them. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 11:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    Here we identified that there are actually two "most local admin territories" to be considered (unless "part of Atlanta in DeKalb county" is created) and infoboxes can handle this. It is known that the ruwiki one doesn't do that and apparently ruwiki lacks the resources to keep it in shape .. so we keep getting these requests here. --- Jura 11:52, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    There are two "most local admin territories" for Atlanta (Fulton & DeKalb), it matches to sources. There is one "most local admin territory" for Patch Works Art & History Center (Q76461608) (Atlanta). The machine cannot be taught to choose the "most local admin territory" from two or more values without detailed knowledge base. No one will learn the algorithm to select from the list first the city, then the county and finally the state since several thousand such tasks have accumulated over the history of mankind. We suggest improving the functionality, you suggest destroying it. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 12:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    And the creation of artificial concepts that do not exist in the real world, such as "part of Atlanta in DeKalb county" will make work with Atlanta more difficult. It's not valid administrative territorial entity (Q56061), work with similar items in contrast to the documented property will be less handy and, again, will require a solid knowledge base. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 12:18, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    • I don't think people are willing to dismiss transitivity so easily -- it's arguable that we do need it and should strive to preserve it. And North Yorkshire (Q23086) is no counterexample -- if anything it's proof that (a) real-world political subdivisions are confusing, irregular, and difficult, and (b) people have been representing them improperly in Wikidata for a while, meaning we really need some cleanup and a proper fix (whatever that may be). In particular, North Yorkshire is a ceremonial county of England (Q180673) and, therefore, not strictly an administrative subdivision. [See Wikipedia Subdivisions of England: "For non-administrative purposes, England is wholly divided into 48 counties, commonly known [...] as ceremonial counties".] But you probably can't use North Yorkshire (Q23086) as part of your primary P131 hierarchy -- it's guaranteed to fail. (Just look at the comment -- right in Q23086's description! -- directing you over to North Yorkshire (Q21241814), which actually is an administrative subdivision, and which does not encompass e.g. Redcar and Cleveland (Q1434448), meaning it'd be much easier to use Q21241814 as part of a proper, nonoverlapping hierarchy.)
    Can you say a little more about what you mean when you say "not allowing hierarchies to be done"? The argument for enforcing pure transitivity on P131 is that it makes P131 act like the mathematical operator subset (Q177646), meaning that simple wdt:P131* queries always yield proper results. In this sense saying that Patch Works is in Fulton County, or that Atlanta is in Georgia, is perfectly fine. I think your objection to these relations is that you can't list all cities in Fulton County by doing a simple wdt:P131 wd:Q486633 query, or something, but I'm really not sure.
    Have we asked the folks over at WikiProject Country subdivision for their advice on all this? I bet they've put some thought into how best to resolve these situations. [Footnote: I've now asked them.]—Scs (talk) 13:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    Firstly, neither I nor Russian Wikipedia in general came up with the use of ceremonial county of England (Q180673) at located in the administrative territorial entity (P131). As I understand it, the British themselves began to fill out the data in this way. I am not opposed to clarifying this issue, although the ceremonial counties have changed the form of government over time and I fully admit that at the moment the phrase "Most ceremonial counties are, therefore, entities comprising local authority areas, as they were from 1889 to 1974" is correct. We can argue about the powers of the Queen of the United Kingdom, Governor General of Canada (Q390776) or Lord Lieutenant (Q914752) but if the existing hierarchies are in most cases useful then I do not see an error in such an interpretation where ceremonial county of England (Q180673) in located in the administrative territorial entity (P131).
    Secondly, I think that following the main sources we should consider Atlanta a city in Fulton County (and also in DeKalb County) and make the appropriate statements. I consider it will be a bad decision to be guided in the first place by the rule "is completely in" and state Georgia for Atlanta at P131 with counties for other cities. It will simply be a false statement that the municipality of Atlanta is on the same hierarchy level as the counties. Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 10:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
    Ah, okay, now I get it: You want P131 to mean "is an administrative subdivision of". That makes sense.
    Or, stated another way, P131 represents a direct child relationship, and the proposed new property simply represents a grandchild relationship, for use in cases where we can't properly describe the situation with two ordinary child relationships. (Indeed, we've got some similarly redundant tags for people. Normally we represent human grandchildren as a pair of child (P40) properties, and siblings as two people having the same parent(s), but if we don't have an entity for the parent, we can use type of kinship (P1039) along with grandchild (Q3603531), sibling (Q31184), etc.) —Scs (talk) 16:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
    P.S. When I said "you probably can't use Q23086 as part of your primary P131 hierarchy", I was not referring to you or the Russian Wikipedia; I meant "anybody". But the fact that "the British themselves began to fill out the data in this way" doesn't prove much, either -- as JMabel mentioned in another thread, we shouldn't automatically let popular folksonomies drive our more-precise taxonomic work here. 19:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
    And looking at the real situation, it seems that the warning in the description does not forbid the use of North Yorkshire (Q23086) in the P131 but something like different from (P1889). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 15:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Scs wrote: (quote) I think the point is that you can't write a single SPARQL query; in the general case you have to write a little program, with some loops and if statements, that issues a number of SPARQL queries and makes decisions based on any next level in hierarchy qualifiers it finds. (To be perfectly clear, suppose the question is not, "Show me everything in DeKalb County (Q486398)", but rather, "Show me everything in County X".) (end quote)
    That is not true. Here is single SPARQL query using the proposed query for a search for items in an arbitrary administrative unit:
    # SPARQL code to find items in an arbitrary administrative unit, called Q800000000,
    # using the proposed qualifier, called P8000
    SELECT ?item
    WHERE
    {
      VALUES ?searched_unit { wd:Q800000000 }
      {
        ?item wdt:P131* ?searched_unit .                 # located in the searched unit 
      }
      MINUS
      {
        ?item wdt:P131*/p:P131/pq:P8000 ?other_unit .    # unless next level in hierarchy is a unit
        ?other_unit wdt:P131/^wdt:P131 ?searched_unit .  # at same level in the hierarchy
        FILTER (?other_unit != ?searched_unit)           # and different from the sought unit
      }
    }
    
    Try it! --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 15:47, 26 February 2020 (UTC)
    Thank you. I apologize for my naïveté about the potential power of complex SPARQL queries. —Scs (talk) 11:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)
    • It's essentially two queries which works here because there are not too many items involved and P8000 doesn't exist. For testing, Sandbox-Item (P369) can be used.
    I'm curious to see the version for "all bus stops in Georgia by county". According to an addition on Property talk:P131 this would work for that as well. --- Jura 09:52, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Jura1: Here is a version for all bus stops in Georgia by county as requested:
    # Find all busstops in Georgia by county
    SELECT DISTINCT ?busstop ?county
    WHERE
    {
      ?busstop wdt:P31 wd:Q953806 .       # is busstop
      ?busstop wdt:P131+ ?any_county .    # located in county
      ?any_county wdt:P31 wd:Q13410428 .  # which is a county of Georgia, USA
      OPTIONAL {
        ?busstop wdt:P131*/p:P131/pq:P8000 ?switched_county . # the true county if present
        ?switched_county wdt:P31 wd:Q13410428 .               # if it is a county of Georgia, USA
      } 
      BIND(COALESCE(?switched_county, ?any_county) AS ?county)
    }
    
    Try it! --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Does it assume that the qualifier would be placed on a known layer and the layer is always in the same place of the matrix?
    Would this work if the county was a French department and the French municipality had a switch to the relevant department?--- Jura 09:56, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    Answer to first question: No. Answer to second question: As I understand English Wikipedia a French municipality (commune) is in only one department. But even if that isn't the case, then the next levels in the French administrative hierarchy are cantons and arrondissements, so a commune should never have the proposed qualifier with a value of a department. Please read the description the proposal ("the value at the next hierarchy level"). But anyway, even with a double incorrect use of the qualifier, the query could be changed to give busstops in France by department, and work. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 12:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    I don't think the problem at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_France/Communes#Communes_multi-départementales is solved. --- Jura 13:02, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    I don't understand French, but as I understand the point using machine translation of the discussion, the French communes is always in exactly one department, but which department have changed over time. If that is correct, then this proposed qualifer will not be usable for french communes. Instead the values for P131 somewhere in the property chain should use time qualifers as start time (P580) and end time (P582). If you want help with queries with time qualifiers, please ask in Wikidata:Request a query. --Dipsacus fullonum (talk) 14:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)
    If I recall correctly, there were several problems: one is that they changed over time (not important here), another that that some users include intermediate administrative layers that strech across several departments. It's a similar problem as the Atlanta one, at least if Atlanta had boroughs. --- Jura 20:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)
    Until 2015, France had two parallel hierarchies of administrative-territorial units. One of them consisted only of cantons, and the other was and remains perfectly transitive. To build a second hierarchy according to it, it is enough to simply indicate arrondissement of France (Q194203). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 10:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

    Fails compliance withEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionfails compliance of the test defined in the associated item
    Data typeItem
    Example 1Hackers (Q13908) → "fails compliance with" → Bechdel test (Q4165246)
    Example 2instant-runoff voting (Q1491219) → "fails compliance with" → monotonicity criterion (Q6902035)
    Example 3Copeland's method (Q5168347) → "fails compliance with" → independence of irrelevant alternatives (Q3150644)

    MotivationEdit

    We need the opposite of complies with (P5009) to state when an item doesn't comply with the criterion associated with an item. For example:

    Could someone create a "fails compliance with" property? -- RobLa (talk) 02:49, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Summary of Wikidata:Project_chat/Archie/2020/01 conversation: this is what was discussed over at Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2020/01 as part of the "Reasonably quick way to resolve 'non-compliance property' issue?" topic back in January/February. User:Jura1 suggested modeling this after test taken (P5021) and test score (P5022), allowing us to specify other options besides "complies", "doesn't comply". User:Ghouston suggested instead that we can add qualifiers to this new property if we need to move beyond binary compliance/non-compliance. User:Ls1g suggested a change to the data model to allow statements which negate any existing property, and links to this paper: "Negative Statements Considered Useful" - Hiba Arnaout, Simon Razniewski, and Gerhard Weikum.

    • Comment - Please edit the summary above if you believe there is a problem with it. I'd still prefer taking User:Ghouston's approach as I understand it, which would mean creating a "Fails compliance with" property. -- RobLa (talk) 05:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


    • @Jura1:, can you give details of how you think it should be done? You want to replace complies with (P5009) with a new property, such that there's only a single property for defining compliance? Then the statement itself would be meaningless without interpreting the qualifiers, which would make it harder to write queries. Ghouston (talk) 09:56, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I think the explanation on project chat is fairly clear. Please comment there if you think it needs more input. --- Jura 09:58, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
      • @Ghouston:, thank you bringing the conversation to this proposal page. I agree with you that queries seem a lot easier with the addition of "fails compliance with" than queries involving a new regime modeled after test taken (P5021) and test score (P5022). This page seems like a better place to discuss alternatives to "fails compliance with" than the omnibus project chat page. -- RobLa (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2020 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: I don't think it's correct to say that compliance is not binary. A voting system either complies with a criterion or it doesn't; there is no in-between. The reason that table has cells other than Yes or No is because it combines closely-related voting systems into the same row, and closely-related criteria into the same column. In other words, some of the rows in that table are actually classes of voting systems rather than instances of voting systems. Omegatron (talk) 18:56, 9 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Oppose. There should be a better data model for both this and complies with (P5009) in such cases. Jura1's suggestion looks workable. --Yair rand (talk) 21:47, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Is there any precedent for a statement that's meaningless without interpreting the qualifiers? I can't think of one, but I don't know them all. It would be like X <compliance> Y. Ghouston (talk) 22:21, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
      @Ghouston: disjoint union of (P2738) only allows list values as qualifiers (Q23766486) as a value. --Yair rand (talk) 22:48, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I don't think it's meaningless. It's like the "test taken" mentioned on Project Chat or "significant event". We know that's a valid criterion/test/event for the item, we just don't have full details. The approach seems more suitable for non-binary content like the voting systems description that is planned.
        Also, I don't get why Bechtel test is mentioned. It isn't even used with the other property. --- Jura 23:03, 5 February 2020 (UTC)

    civil classEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptioncivil position (class) in the Russian Empire, according to the Table of Ranks
    RepresentsActive State Councillor (Q2623484)
    Data typeItem
    Domainчеловек
    Allowed valuescivil rank of the Russian Empire (Q28745974)
    Example 1Daniil Mordovtsev (Q1970722)Active State Councillor (Q2623484)
    Example 2Alexander Gorchakov (Q327020)Chancellor (Q837698)
    Example 3Aleksander Griboyedov (Q15001)State Councillor (Q677455)
    SourceTable of Ranks (Q929093)
    Planned useдобавлю свойство для 100 объектов

    MotivationEdit

    Одно из обычных свойств, наряду с имеющимися military rank (P410) или special rank (P5012). — Redboston (talk) 23:25, 3 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Support. An important property for the history.--Arbnos (talk) 14:17, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment. As far as I remember special rank (P5012) was supposed to be used for that purpose, so new property would duplicate existing one. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 14:54, 11 February 2020 (UTC)
      • Исходя из обсуждения того свойства это не следует. Напротив, для свойства special rank (P5012) указан соответствующий элемент Military ranks, special ranks and class rates in Russia (Q4431086). А на странице элемента в описании указано: "звание, присваиваемое сотрудникам, состоящим на службе в правоохранительных органах". Элемент связан со статьёй в википедии w:ru:Специальное звание. Таким образом, это разные свойства. И даже если бы изначально свойство special rank (P5012) предполагало возможность проставления в качестве значения гражданских чинов из Табеля о рангах, то выделение из него нового (предлагаемого) свойства будет иметь положительный эффект в смысле уточнения и систематизации информации по персонам. В качестве дополнительной меры, которая предотвратила бы дублирование, можно прописать соответствующие ограничения для старого и нового свойства.Redboston (talk) 09:29, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

    uses datasetEdit

       Under discussion
    Representsdata integration (Q386824), data analysis (Q1988917)
    Data typeItem
    Template parameterrarely or never in infobox
    Domainscholarly article (Q13442814)
    Allowed valuesonly Wikidata items
    Allowed unitsno units
    Example 1Characteristics of oncology clinical trials: insights from a systematic analysis of ClinicalTrials.gov. (Q42600467)AACT Database (Q76654384)
    Example 2Wiki Loves Monuments (Q1353202)National Register of Historic Places (Q3719)
    Example 3New York Stock Exchange (Q13677) → (whatever the finance data is called?)
    Example 4Wikipedia (Q52)Wikidata (Q2013)
    Planned useno immediate plans

    MotivationEdit

    Can someone give me feedback on whether this is already proposed or if anyone has done something similar? I might pull this back and develop it more but I would like some feedback on how much this makes sense. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:50, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

    Wikidata:WikiProject Source Metadata and meta:WikiCite

    Historically researchers never shared their data. They would collect a dataset and publish their interpretation of results. Previously, publishing a dataset was difficult or challenge because paper media and even digital media used to be hard to share. A consequence of this was that research required trust that one person or team would do both data collection and interpretation, when these are often different skill sets. What is new now is that in the context of the Open Science Movement, researchers are deconstructing the research process. Now one researcher can present a dataset and another research can interpret it.

    Research publication has a history of citing other papers. There are not widely-accepted standards for citing or crediting the use of databases. One common way to note the use of a dataset in a research project is to mention it in prose text of the body of a paper, and another way is to somehow make a nonstandard citation to a database after the model of citing an academic paper.

    Other uses

    Lots of popular services use some datasets. Wikipedia does not currently have many articles on datasets, and Wikidata does not currently make many items for them, but I think this is worth exploring.

    • weather websites, apps, and reports -> (some governmental source of weather data)
    • politics and related journalism -> census data, demographic data, government datasets
    • big websites -> Google search corpus, Amazon marketplace corpus, Facebook user profile corpus (none of these have names, I think)

    We should have a property which communicates when some Wikidata item entity uses a database represented by another Wikidata item. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:43, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Comment Well we do have uses (P2283). Maybe some other existing properties like that could also work? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
      Oppose I think uses (P2283) is sufficient. --Tinker Bell 20:48, 6 February 2020 (UTC)

    energy consumption per transactionEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionenergy footprint per transaction in kWh
    Data typeQuantity
    Domainitem
    Allowed unitsQ182098
    Example 1Bitcoin (Q131723) → 645 (https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption)
    Example 2Ethereum (Q16783523) → 34 (https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption)
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    I would like to list all cryptocurrencies and rank them by their energy consumption per transaction. --So9q (talk) 11:45, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Question Here all examples relate to only one website. Would modelling that as an external identifier for that website be better? For instance "digiconomist cryptocurrency energy consumption identifier" or something like that? In that case is such identifier that relevant? Modelling that as a single value looks very problematic to me. What would be the best way to handle its evolution over time? And the different sources or calculation methodologies? Is adding extra qualifiers (like the date, source and potentially calculation method if there is a way to represent that) the way to deal with that? Would that be obvious to people wanting to add such information? Or would the cryptocurrencies elements end up with a single value that isn't very meaningful, again and again over time? GNUtoo (talk) 17:33, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

    yearly energy consumptionEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionyearly energy consumption in TWh
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    DomainQ13479982
    Allowed unitsQ2659078
    Example 1Bitcoin (Q131723) → 76 (https://digiconomist.net/bitcoin-energy-consumption)
    Example 2Ethereum (Q16783523) → 7.18 (https://digiconomist.net/ethereum-energy-consumption)
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    I would like to be able to rank cryptocurrencies according to their power consumption. --So9q (talk) 12:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    • Sounds like a good idea to me :)--So9q (talk) 20:58, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

    intended subjectEdit

       Ready Create
    Description(qualifier) this statement is deprecated as it is actually about another subject
    Data typeItem
    Domaindeprecated statements
    Example 1See refers to different subject (Q28091153)
    Example 2See applies to other person (Q35773207)
    Example 3See applies to other chemical entity (Q51734763)

    MotivationEdit

    This is a proposed solution of Wikidata:Project chat#How to show the correct item if a statement is deprecated with 'applies to other...' reason?. GZWDer (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Support if we don't have any other established way to do this. Also – if created – this should be an universally allowed qualifier (cf. phabricator ticket). Wostr (talk) 21:00, 14 February 2020 (UTC)
    • {{Status oppose3}} It is a cause that is part of list of Wikidata reasons for deprecation (Q52105174). The property concerned is reason for deprecation (P2241) : it is not a creation of property. That said I am for the creation of an element "intended subject" which is not listed and which can contain the rest of the causes, depending on the subject of the discussion in Project Chat, I notify the user concerned. A discussion in this sense is already underway here. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 13:19, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
      @Eihel: I'm really trying, but can't understand what you're trying to say here. It is about creation a property (i.e. qualifier) to be able to do something like this Wostr (talk) 15:48, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
    CAS Registry Number
      30724-02-8   edit
    reason for deprecation applies to other chemical entity
    intended subject Qxxx
    ▼ 0 reference
    + add reference


    + add value
    • Sadly, you've edited this page after my replay, but you haven't dispelled the doubts, I am almost certain that this is your misinterpretation of the proposal as this has nothing to do with list of Wikidata reasons for deprecation (Q52105174) or stated discussion. Wostr (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
        Support Sorry, I got confused with Phab's task above. And sorry for the late modification, I was looking at the feasibility. —Eihel (talk) 21:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Don't we already have the information noted by having a statement on the item of the other person? ChristianKl❫ 13:45, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I tend to agree with that. Most likely there with a reference that didn't mix it up. I think one should avoid using statements from the wrong item instead. --- Jura 15:09, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support if we merely delete the statement, it probably ends up being re-added. --- Jura 08:27, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

    applies if regular expression matches idEdit

       Ready Create
    Descriptionthe statement is only true, if the id matches this regex
    Data typeString
    Domainproperty
    Allowed valuesvalid regular expression with at least one capture group
    Example 1
    Fandom article ID (P6262)
    formatter URL (P1630)https://$2.fandom.com/$1/wiki/$3
    if regex([\w]+).([\w-]+):([^\s])
    Example 2
    Fandom article ID (P6262)
    formatter URL (P1630)https://$1.fandom.com/wiki/$2
    if regex([\w-]+):([^\s])
    Example 3
    Fandom article ID (P6262)
    https://www.fandom.com/index.php?title=w:c:$1
    if regexno value
    object has role (P3831) → fallback
    Example 4
    Gamepedia article ID (P6623)
    formatter URL (P1630)https://$1.gamepedia.com/$2
    if regex([\w-]+):([^\s])
    Example 5
    Gamepedia article ID (P6623)
    formatter URL (P1630)https://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-externalid-url/?p=6623&id=$1
    if regexno value
    object has role (P3831) → fallback

    MotivationEdit

    Fandom article ID (P6262) and Gamepedia article ID (P6623) use a third party services to resolve ids to urls. but i think it could be done entirely on wikidata, if it was possible to pass multiple variables to the formatter URL (P1630). This is a proposal to do that.

    We'd need a qualifier holding a regular expression.

    1. the regex will be used to determine which formatter url shall be used. therefore it must not match if the supplied id does not hold the required number of variables.
    2. the regex will also be used to extract the variables from the id to the formatter url.
    3. as a fallback an external resolver may be used if no regex matches the id. this fallback should be highlighted somehow. For this proposal I chose no value. formatter urls that match the regular expression must be preferred.

    --Shisma (talk) 21:00, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Do you intend to engage the Wikidata developers so this can be supported in the UI, or how otherwise would you envision this to be actually used? ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:31, 18 February 2020 (UTC)
    @Shisma: Also maybe relevant - see Phabricator Task T150939 ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

    applies to name of objectEdit

       Ready Create
    Description(qualifier) label or alias name (of the claim object) to which the claim applies
    Data typeMonolingual text
    Example
    See alsoapplies to name (P5168), applies to part (P518)

    MotivationEdit

    applies to name (P5168) is intended to be used to indicate to which name a claim applies for the item the claim is on (the subject). However, it's naming (in English anyway) is ambiguous and could be interpreted as the same thing but with respect to a name of the claim's item value (the object).

    This wouldn't be an issue for trivial cases where all of the following is true:

    1. The subject and object do not have similar names
    2. One of (or both) the subject and object is confirmed to have a single name

    In such cases it can be implicitly determined which (the subject or object) the claim was intended to apply to. If they have similar names, then there's an obvious ambiguity. If both have multiple names then there's ambiguity in that (while it may be true the value matches a name listed only for one) it is unknown whether Wikidata could be missing name information which takes us back to the case of similar names.

    I think, in general, it's better to explicitly specify data than rely on an implicit connection by matching the value to a name of either the subject or object and assuming this is always a trivial case. Additionally, by having these two separate properties it fixes any ambiguity in the use of P5168 which was originally intended to only apply to a name of the subject - which if we assume is still the case then this separate property is necessary for situations as described above anyway. I see this as analogous to subject has role (P2868) and object has role (P3831).

    If this property is approved then I would also recommend updating the labels of P5168 to reflect that it is for the subject. Existing statements could be reviewed for misuse by filtering for cases where the value does not match any name listed for the subject. SilentSpike (talk) 15:33, 18 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Oppose This proposal is basically for a "tickbox" property with no actual target Wikidata item, from a data point of view, it just doesn't work (and I don't think we should want it to). Circeus (talk) 13:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
    Huh? I'm afraid I don't understand your objection. It's not a boolean value, it's a monolingual string - a valid Wikidata datatype. It specifies which name of the claim object the claim applies to. Very similar to the existing property which specifies which name of the claim subject the claim applies to. Analogous to the existing role qualifiers for subject and object. There's precedent for properties of this type. --SilentSpike (talk) 13:49, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support I'd use "applies to name of value" or "applies to name of statement value" as label. --- Jura 10:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
      • @Jura1: I figured it should be consistent with the "object/subject has role" properties, but am not opposed to such naming. --SilentSpike (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2020 (UTC)
        • I figured, but "object/subject has role" tends to be ill understood and in combination with "name of", it's likely to get worse. Maybe someone can come up with even a better label. --- Jura 13:05, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

    block creatorsEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionnumber of block creators in a blockchain network
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    Domaincryptocurrency (Q13479982)
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870) → 430 https://tzstats.com/cycle/204 (roll owners)
    Example 2EOS (Q47494147) → 100 https://eosauthority.com/producers_rank (block producers)
    Example 3MISSING
    See also

    MotivationEdit

    This enables us to track block creators in a blockchain over time which is very useful to judge how decentralized the blockchain is at this point in time.--So9q (talk) 20:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Comment If it's a count, then it's not an external identifier. Quantity is what you want, I think. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    Ah, it was somebody else editing your proposal; I undid their change. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:05, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Could you include "blockchain" in the description or label? --- Jura 10:06, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Done.--So9q (talk) 11:05, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    targeted block timeEdit

    MotivationEdit

    It is useful to compare the speed of blockchains by comparing the time to create a block.--So9q (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment I change the datatype. 轻语者 (talk) 09:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
      • I changed it back. Quantity is correct. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:03, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support I believe the datetype should be "Quantity" please add the unit, seconds or milliseconds Germartin1 (talk) 17:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Could you include "blockchain" in the description or label? --- Jura 10:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)
    • Done.--So9q (talk) 21:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support Would be fairly neat to be able to generate a graph of these values to compare blockchains. --SixTwoEight (talk) 21:06, 3 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Needs a valid subject item. --SilentSpike (talk) 14:29, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

    staking percentageEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionpercentage of the funds that participates actively in a proof-of-stake network
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    DomainQ13479982
    Allowed unitsQ11229
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870) → 79 https://tzstats.com/cycle/204
    Example 2COSMOS (no QID yet) → 72 https://www.stakingrewards.com/asset/cosmos
    Example 3MISSING
    See also

    MotivationEdit

    This is a useful measure to judge the health and participation in a PoS-network.--So9q (talk) 21:24, 22 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Comment are there other examples? also you listed it as a percentage but called it a ratio which are different things. BrokenSegue (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

    Yes, added one more. Changed to percentage in the title.--So9q (talk) 11:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    staking lock-up periodEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionlock-up period for delegated (staked) funds in a blockchain network
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    DomainQ13479982
    Allowed unitsdays
    Example 1COSMOS → 21 days https://www.stakingrewards.com/asset/cosmos
    Example 2Tezos (Q55290870) → 0 days (this is what is meant by Liquid PoS)
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    This is an important property in a PoS blockchain because it is the basis for the function of the whole system. Without a lockup period PoS would probably not work. If i understood it correctly lock-up reduces the ability to "hit and run" that causing large fluctuations in staking amounts in a short time (which makes the network vulnerable to attacks, because staking is what defines voting power of the validator) and promotes capital staking that is more long-term. Tezos is different because it implements a delay in payouts of staking rewards instead of locking the capital (like COSMOS does to my knowledge). This means you can move your money but you still wont get your staking rewards before after ~37 days from choosing a delegate.--So9q (talk) 12:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose @So9q: if COSMOS meets notability rules, please create an item for it and add a third example. If not, please add 2 more. Also, how is it important? Please explain what this represents --DannyS712 (talk) 19:12, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

    validator bond lock-up periodEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionthe time period for lock-up of validator safety deposits on a blockchain
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    DomainQ13479982
    Allowed unitsdays
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870) → 5 cycles of ~3 days = 15 days
    Example 2COSMOS (no QID yet) → 21 days https://www.stakingrewards.com/asset/cosmos
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    Freezing of safety deposits is an important feature in any PoS network.--So9q (talk) 15:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose @So9q: if COSMOS meets notability rules, please create an item for it and add a third example. If not, please add 2 more. --DannyS712 (talk) 19:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

    transactions per monthEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptiontransactions during 30 days
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    Domainpayment systems
    Example 1tezos → 357000
    Example 2ethereum → 21066086 (calculated from https://etherscan.io/chart/tx?output=csv)
    Example 3bitcoin → 9386999 (calculated from https://api.blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions?timespan=30days&format=csv)

    MotivationEdit

    This is a very useful measure that says something about adoption and possible congestion.--So9q (talk) 08:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose @So9q: please add the other examples --DannyS712 (talk) 19:09, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
    • Done--So9q (talk) 10:14, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

    compatible walletsEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptioncompatible digital wallets for a cryptocurrency
    Representsitem
    Data typeItem
    Domaindigital wallet (Q1147226)
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870)Galleon (Q88073469)
    Example 2Cardano (Q47273538)Daedalus (Q88073398)
    Example 3Tezos (Q55290870)TezBox (Q88073402)

    MotivationEdit

    This is a useful measure for cryptocurrencies and gives a hint about adoption level.--So9q (talk) 20:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose @So9q: you give the datatype as items, but the examples are strings; please also provide a third example --DannyS712 (talk) 19:04, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
    • Fixed.--So9q (talk) 11:24, 20 March 2020 (UTC)
    • I think the wallet should have to property "supports" or "supported currencies" Germartin1 (talk) 20:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

    minimum amount to run a validatorEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionminimum amount of a cryptocurrency required to run a validator on a blockchain
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    Domaincryptocurrency (Q13479982)
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870) → 1 roll (Q86535507) (=8,000 tezos)
    Example 2Cardano (Q47273538) → no value (no limit imposed)
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    This is a useful metric because it is used by some projects to control the number of validators on a network and to regulate the minimum risk those are willing to take to be allowed to participate in validation of new blocks. If they misbehave they might get slashed (that is they loose some of the bond they put forward to be able to participate)--So9q (talk) 21:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose don't really see the value of this, sorry --DannyS712 (talk) 19:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

    minimum amount required to participate in votingEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionminimum amount required to participate in voting on a blockchain with on-chain governance
    Representsitem
    Data typeQuantity
    Domaincryptocurrency (Q13479982)
    Example 1Tezos (Q55290870) → 1 roll (Q86535507) (=8,000 tezos)
    Example 2waves → 1000 WAVES https://docs.wavesplatform.com/en/waves-node/
    Example 3decred → 1 ticket

    MotivationEdit

    This is an important property of a PoS cryptocurrency because it regulates how much investing is necessary to have an influence on voting. This is important because for different PoS systems different amounts of capital is needed for an attacker to take over the network. Such a malicious take-over is believed to have happened recently with Steem, see [9] [10]. In this case the capital was actually already in place in 3 exchanges staked by thousands of users. The colluding of these 3 validators enabled the take-over by a single actor.--So9q (talk) 15:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose @So9q: please fill in the other two examples, and explain what this means --DannyS712 (talk) 19:06, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

    article in Enciclopedia LibreEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionarticle in Enciclopedia Libre Universal en Español
    RepresentsEnciclopedia Universal en Español (Q1340088)
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Allowed values\S+
    Example 1Tenochtitlan (Q13695)México-Tenochtitlán
    Example 2Mexico City (Q1489)Ciudad_de_México_(México)
    Example 3Pocahontas (Q255430)Pocahontas
    Sourcehttp://enciclopedia.us.es/index.php/Especial:Todas
    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 usePopulating interwikis on many other wikis that doesn't have real interwikis on Wikidata
    Number of IDs in source~65000
    Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
    Formatter URLhttp://enciclopedia.us.es/index.php/$1
    Robot and gadget jobscheck for HTTP 404 errors

    MotivaciónEdit

    Link many libre wikis that don't have any connection with Wikidata. Enciclopedia Libre was the first fork of Spanish Wikipedia. --Tinker Bell 20:03, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Tinker Bell, Rapunzel

    1. ¿Existe alguna desventaja o inconveniente o debilidad si la Enciclopedia Libre queda finalmente conectada con Wikidata? Sin conocer mucho el sistema, no se me ocurren desventajas.
    2. En caso de que no hubieran desventajas, ¿para qué se hace esta propuesta?, ¿por qué no se procede directamente?

    Saludos. Theardyear (talk) 00:27, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

    • @Theardyear: yo soy Rapunzel en EL. No, no habría ningún inconveniente al crear una propiedad para EL, sino al contrario, muchas ventajas: EL podría usar los datos de Wikidata de muchas formas; y también todos los proyectos Wikimedia podrán enlazar sistemáticamente a EL. Las reglas de Wikidata exigen que las propiedades sean propuestas para que cualquiera opine a favor o en contra, al menos durante una semana. Si nadie se posiciona en contra, la propiedad puede ser creada. Si tienes alguna duda, puedo explicaros mejor. --Tinker Bell 02:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
    • I have no opinion against this specific website, but I have a concern that this will open the floodgate of creating properties of countless Wikipedia-like websites (see Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2020/02#Is_Wikidata's_purpose_to_provide_links_to_every_(open)_wiki?).--GZWDer (talk) 06:28, 6 March 2020 (UTC)
    ¡Muchas gracias por tus respuestas! Muy amable, Tinker Bell. Saludos.Theardyear (talk) 11:53, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

    TaDiRAH IDEdit

       On hold
    DescriptionA property to link Wikidata items to the concepts of the Taxonomy of Digital Research Activities in the Humanities (TaDiRAH)
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Allowed values[0-9]\d{0,3}
    Example 1brainstorming (Q191183)94
    Example 2digital humanities (Q1026962)61
    Example 3georeferencing (Q772007)106
    Example 4writing (Q37260)20
    Sourcehttps://github.com/dhtaxonomy/TaDiRAH (source and documentation) and http://tadirah.dariah.eu/vocab/index.php (ID numbers)
    Planned useProvide a mapping from TaDiRAH to Wikidata items, while also profiting from other already present mappings to other controlled vocabularies.
    Number of IDs in source121
    Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
    Formatter URLhttp://tadirah.dariah.eu/vocab/index.php?tema=$1
    See alsoGetty AAT ID (P1014); any property with IDs for topics, such as JSTOR topic ID (P3827)

    MotivationEdit

    TaDiRAH is a taxonomy containing terms to describe digital research activities in the humanities. It was developed with the aim to structure information relevant to digital humanities, thus enhancing discoverability of any tools, methods, projects, or publications related to digital humanities research. Example projects using TaDiRAH concepts are the DH Course Registry, Doing Digital Humanities - A DARIAH Bibliography, and the Standardisation Survival Kit by PARTHENOS.

    Including the TaDiRAH ID in Wikidata would allow to profit from other already present mappings and also help in e.g. finding relevant publications included in Wikidata. On the other hand the usefulness of TaDiRAH itself would be increased. Mtrognitz (talk) 09:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Oh, wow this did go quicker than I expected! Thank you for your support. However, I am not creating the property right away, because yesterday I came to know, that TaDiRAH is going to change host (here is a blog post in German about it: https://dhd-blog.org/?p=13108). This will affect the formatter URL (it will be something like this: https://vocabs.dariah.eu/tadirah) and very likely also the identifying part for each concept won't stay the same. I'll keep an eye on the development and will update the 'allowed values' and 'formatter URL' respectively. Mtrognitz (talk) 16:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

    It's been about a month, any SITREP? We can always create and update the URL format later, as long as the $1 doesn't change. (Given the backlogs in the WD:PP/Authority control, I think we'd rather reduce the number of pages transcluded in that page. — regards, Revi 12:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)
    I got into contact. They are still working on the publication with the new host. And from what I gather everything seems to indicate a change of $1, which is why I would prefer to wait. Especially given that they are also planning on turning off the current host. Mtrognitz (talk) 09:56, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

    HuijiWiki Wiki IDEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionidentifier of a topic's wiki, in huijiwiki.com
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Example 1Final Fantasy XIV (Q868389) -> ff14
    Example 2Dead by Daylight (Q24514682) -> hitman
    Example 3MISSING
    Sourcewww.huijiwiki.com
    Formatter URLhttps://club.huijiwiki.com/wiki/site:$1

    MotivationEdit

    Similar to a fandom wiki farm. But its main target audience is Chinese users. 轻语者 (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Unicode character (item)Edit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionUnicode character representing the item
    Data typeItem
    Domaininstance of (P31)subclass of (P279)* → letter (Q9788)
    Example 1A (Q9659) → See Q9659#P487, each value will be a new item
    Example 2B (Q9705) → See Q9705#P487, each value will be a new item
    Example 3C (Q9820) → See Q9820#P487, each value will be a new item
    Planned usenew items will be created for current values of Unicode character (P487) on instance of (P31) of letter (Q9788). The current values of Unicode character (P487) and Unicode hex codepoint (P4213) will be moved to these new items.
    See alsocode (P3295), Unicode character (P487) and Unicode hex codepoint (P4213)

    MotivationEdit

    Currently Wikidata does not differ abstract symbols A (Q9659) and specific characters representing the symbols. So it may be meaningful to create new items for these Unicode characters. Unicode character (P487) and Unicode hex codepoint (P4213) will be moved to these new items and then a single value constraint will be set.

    Note this does not affect any item about single characters like (Q3595028).GZWDer (talk) 22:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment How will this be different from Unicode character (P487)? And how come the name of the property is "Unicode character (item)" - why is there "(item)" in it? Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 16:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
      •   Oppose I get it now. I don't think this makes that much sense. For one the name does not make sense, if this were to be done you should make it rather "represented by character set code" - so it could potentially be more broad so it can cover Morse code (Q79897) and Unicode (Q8819) - but I think you first have to try and get some consensus on the data model here. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 16:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
      • The disambiguator is needed as we can't have two identical labels for properties. --- Jura 21:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Do we have any items for individual unicode codepoints right now? I don't see that there's a real structural need for an item for each one, but some of them may be notable in themselves. On the other hand, for those notable ones (none of the "A's" count I think) what would point to them with a property like this? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment @ArthurPSmith: See Wikidata:Requests for permissions/Bot/GZWDer (flood) 3. In most cases, I do not want to reuse items like 𐓃 (Q66360724) for unicode character, as the character does not correspond to single Unicode character (it correspond to two, U+104C3 and U+104EB). This property will not have single value and unique value constraint, while (after migration) Unicode character (P487) and Unicode hex codepoint (P4213) will. "structural need for an item for each one": Each specific character itself has various properties (Unicode character property (Q1853267)) that can not be expressed without dedicated item (example).--GZWDer (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment @Iwan.Aucamp: This is really not a new idea and there's some discussion. I am only going to work on this currently (after a break of 18 months) as Unicode 13.0 is released recently.--GZWDer (talk) 17:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment Some symbols may also have multiple characters, like $ (Q11110).--GZWDer (talk) 18:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
      •   Comment @GZWDer: If we are trying to duplicate unicode maybe the lexeme namespace is better for this? It seems like in many of these cases you have a character with several different forms (uppercase vs lowercase) which is captured for example in Lexeme:L20817 (though they probably should not be all under "English" language). ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:56, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
        •   Comment @ArthurPSmith: a Unicode character is not a lexeme as it only correspond to a specific writing system, not a specific language. For example, the letter "a" is used in more than 100 languages, but have only one codepoint (if we restrict it to normal small case letter). In a letter point new lexemes about letters actually used in a specific language may be created (e.g. A and a are same letter and will have one lexeme), which is out of scope of the current task.--GZWDer (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
          • It's possible to have languages such as "mul". Lexemes have the advantage that they don't require multiple labels nor description. --- Jura 21:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
            Sample at (L61046) --- Jura 09:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment I could never really figure out the purpose of Unicode character (P487). It's being used in at least four or five different ways. The above would fix that and it could become an external-id property. --- Jura 21:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Strong support I never understood why Unicode characters were mixed with the glyphs and concepts they represented. --Tinker Bell 06:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
      • @Tinker Bell: It's a little 'meta' I think, but I feel like I don't understand what is the actual subject of an item that is "about" a Unicode character. GZWDer's proposal is, I think, only to use this property where a current item has more than one Unicode character value. So for example for Chinese characters, there is only 1 Unicode character, so the item and the Unicode character are equivalent. Does that mean the "concept" of that character and the Unicode character are the same, or distinct? For the letter 'A' example, Unicode differentiates upper- and lower-case, and also those other special conditions that are sort of the letter 'A' in other contexts. So in each case where a new item would be created, that item would be "about" the conceptual context of the use of that letter, not specifically or exclusively about it as a Unicode character. Right? Or is that not the point here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
        • It is meaningless to split items about character and glyph of Chinese characters, as Unihan database (using Unicode character as primary key) is about the glyphs. Usually different values (contexts) may be differed by object has role (P3831).--GZWDer (talk) 18:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Question can we change this to lexeme datatype per suggestion above? --- Jura 02:06, 28 March 2020 (UTC)
      • I don't think so - a lexeme may still cover multiple character or sequences of characters. For example ? have seven characters; but they should be in one (translingual) lexeme unless thay are semantically different.--GZWDer (talk) 09:13, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
        • Well, the idea is to use lexemes like (L61046) mentioned above. They would exactly be that. --- Jura 09:15, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
          • In addition, lexemes can not handle characters not in Unicode normalized form, like 著 (U+FA5F) (Q55726748) and 著 (U+2F99F) (Q55738328). I don't think we should have lexemes for them as they have no independent meaning.--GZWDer (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
            • It's possible that initially not all can be included. The namespace is still under development and eventually a way can be found. We didn't use items either when no lexemes were available. As each character has a definition, this can be included as S1. The problem with using items is that they require needless repetition of labels and descriptions. Lexemes have all that already included. --- Jura 09:28, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
              • However still some lexemes for symbols may cover multiple characters such as X (L19342). I don't see the point for creating additional lexemes for individual characters with no additional meaning.--GZWDer (talk) 09:43, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
                • I don't think existing entities in some languages should be replaced. They can use the proposed property to point to entities like (L61046) as well. I don't think the question whether or not to create these is much different from the question of creating them as items. If you don't see the point of one, it's unclear why you would want to create the others. Given the 5 or so ways Unicode character (P487) is used, people clearly have problems with the current structure and the more formal approach of the L-namespace could help. --- Jura 09:52, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
                  • An item may easily tie to an specific Abstract Character, while a lexeme is a unit of lexical meaning, comprising a set of Abstract Characters with same semantic meaning. I don't think we should have lexemes for characters with no independent semantic meaning. For CJKV characters, I do not favor creating translingual lexemes for them - English Wiktionary deprecated translingual definitions long ago. --GZWDer (talk) 10:35, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
                    • I think you are mixing "lexeme" and Lexeme: --- Jura 10:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)
                      • Lexemes should be created for symbols like X (L19342), and if we also create lexemes for individual characters, we will 1. unnecessarily duplicate the definitions and 2. make users confused.--GZWDer (talk) 11:17, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

    ────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

    • Can you explain what you think would be duplicated? How users could be confused? (L291359) explains clearly what it's about. For (Q87524936) users would have to find the right language to read the alias to understand what it's about. Seems much more confusing to me. --- Jura 04:43, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

    I have following addition reasons:

    1. You can not add sitelinks to lexemes, so items like Face with Tears of Joy (Q33836537) and (Q3595028) will exist.
    2. Some characters have Unicode aliases (See [11] p924). aliases can not be added to lexemes either.
    3. We will anyway have lexemes for symbols like ( ) - this is a matching pair, and individual characters ( and ) - as a symbol, ( corresponding to multiple codepoints. Users may confuse the symbol with individual Unicode characters if both have lexeme.
    4. Not every Unicode character has meaning, and Unicode names are only names, which does not always tell the meaning of character (like 𗊓 (Q87589786)), and sometimes even unrelated to the meaning. They only exist as aliases, not as definitions.

    --GZWDer (talk) 19:19, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

    • I think it should be possible to solve these too. BTW, I'm not sure if Face with Tears of Joy (Q33836537) should actually have been merged with Q87581513, at least not in the logic you presented above. --- Jura 14:46, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
    Each item is about an "Abstract Character" which may be encoded in multiple codesets (including Unicode). For example, "A" is a Unicode character which is (equals to) "Abstract Character" encoded in Unicode, and the same "Abstract Character" may also be encoded elsewhere. most emojis are also "Abstract Characters", some are encoded in Unicode, some are not. There will be only one item for each "Abstract Character" wherever it is encoded. I think this property should be limited to "Abstract Character" encoded in Unicode (as unencoded "Abstract Characters" are potentially infinite - this is why we have private use areas (Q11152836).)--GZWDer (talk) 20:53, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support Ok, I think I get the point here, yes let's do this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:53, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment There is just too much redundancy in the suggested datatype: compare item at [12] (~900 triples) and lexeme at [13] (~20 triples) --- Jura 14:46, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
      • I don't think this is how we should concern, given the number of Unicode character is limited.--GZWDer (talk) 20:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
        • It's a massive redundancy due to a problem in the modeling. Besides, Query Server has problems dealing with them. Items become difficulte to edit when they have a larger number of triples. --- Jura 15:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Strong support per Tinker Bell (talkcontribslogs). Also there should probably be an inverse statement. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 15:03, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
    • An alternative proposal now at Wikidata:Property proposal/Unicode character --- Jura 15:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Oppose given the redundancy of the proposed datatype. --- Jura 13:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
    •   Oppose in favor of Jura's proposal; if we cannot implicitly or explicitly force a single label--a single triple--to be shown for all languages in the interest of efficiency, then this only promotes more bloat. Mahir256 (talk) 00:35, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

    donated toEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionorganization or entity that received the donation
    Data typeItem
    Domainorganization (Q43229), human (Q5)
    Example 1COVID-19 related donations (Q88542183)Council of Ministers of Italy (Q3687318) (government of italy)
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING
    See alsodonated by (P1028)

    MotivationEdit

    To be used alongside "donated by" as a qualifier denoting who is the receiver of the donation.--So9q (talk) 13:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    @SilentSpike:I don't know, could you give an example?--So9q (talk) 20:32, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
    @So9q: I was thinking like Another Sioux Chief (Q18691633) -> owned by (P127) -> Phoenix Art Museum (Q977015) -> donated by (P1028) -> Sharron and Delbert Lewis (Q18691638). In this way you don't have to rely on implicit matching of start/end times across statements. However, that was based on the usage of donated by (P1028) for ownership of an object, which I see does not match your example use case (which I believe is already using the donated by (P1028) property in an unintended way). I'm actually not sure I understand what the example item represents. --SilentSpike (talk) 10:26, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

    virtual tourEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionURL of virtual tour of museum or other institution
    Representsvirtual tour (Q2915546)
    Data typeURL
    Domainproperty
    Example 1Louvre Museum (Q19675)https://www.louvre.fr/en/visites-en-ligne -->
    Example 2Calouste Gulbenkian Museum (Q211262)https://gulbenkian.pt/museu/colecoes/visita-virtual/
    Example 3Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum (Q201469)https://www.guggenheim.org/collection-online
    Planned usewith quarantined people all over the world due to covid-19 pandemic, interest in virtual tours should increase. I plan on adding url to museum items that I find with virtual tours, and arrange a campaign for people to add links to missing virtual tours, as an offline activity that everyone can do from home. With enough tours added, museum infoboxes can have another parameter added for virtual tours, and maps can be produced with availability of virtual tours.

    MotivationEdit

    with quarantined people all over the world due to covid-19 pandemic, interest in virtual tours should increase. Infoboxes lack this information, and there is no property other than museum website to include this information on Qs. GoEThe (talk) 15:42, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    How would I then get a query to return all the museum that have this qualifier? GoEThe (talk) 16:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

    Wikidata glossaryEdit

    Wikidata glossary entryEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptiondescription of a concept, feature, term or tool as used for Wikidata (in English)
    RepresentsWikimedia:Glossary (Q1389361)
    Data typeString
    Domainitems relevant to a glossary for Wikidata
    Allowed valuesgenerally 2-3 sentences, maybe 7. Start with term in bold. Formatting should be limited and text readable without the formatting: e.g. bolding ("'''"); anchors to other entries: sample [[#Q123456|crossreference]]. Do not use {{Q}} or {{P}}.
    Example 1Cradle (Q55933452) '''Cradle''' is an editing tool to create new Wikidata items based on a form with predefined properties and values.
    Example 2Help:Dates (Q87066524) '''Date''' (or '''time''' or '''timeValue''') is a [[#Q19798645|datatype]] for property values. It allows to enter dates in different precisions and enables date calculations in queries. Hour or minute precision isn't supported. The Wikidata property for the date of foundation ([[Property:P571]]) has such values
    Example 3Wikimedia disambiguation page (Q4167410) '''Disambiguation item''' is a Wikidata item with sitelinks to disambiguation pages. This is its only purpose. Generally, it has a claim with "instance of" (P31)="Wikimedia disambiguation page" (Q4167410).
    Planned use
    Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
    See also
  • scope and content (P7535): a summary statement providing an overview of the archival collection
  • defining formula (P2534): mathematical formula representing a theorem or law. Maximum length: 400 characters
  • Wikidata glossary anchorEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionunique name of term, concept, tool being described in the glossary entry, including related terms or synonyms
    Data typeString
    Template parameter
    Domainitems with property proposed above
    Allowed valuesvalues should be unique names in English
    Example 1Cradle (Q55933452) → "Cradle"
    Example 2Help:Dates (Q87066524) → "Date"
    Example 3Help:Dates (Q87066524) → "TimeValue"
    Example 4Help:Dates (Q87066524) → "Time"
    Planned useavoid duplicate entries and provide stable named links to the glossary. Add unique constraint
    Number of IDs in sourceat least one per entry
    Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)

    Wikidata glossary mentioned entriesEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionother glossary entry linked in entry
    Data typeItem
    Domainitems with property proposed above including a reference to another entry
    Allowed valuesitems with property proposed above
    Example 1Help:Dates (Q87066524)Wikibase datatype (Q19798645) (see full sample above)
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING
    Planned useadd if applicable
    Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
    See also


    MotivationEdit

    Some time ago, Filceolaire re-wrote the Wikidata glossary (User:Filceolaire/Draft:Glossary). Given the format of Wikidata:Glossary, only some got included in the glossary. Wikidata:Glossary has changed a bit since, but, in the last two years, it may well be that other users additions are limited to "Lexeme", "Sense", "Form", duplicating what's in another glossary.

    So we currently have a page that doesn't seem to be much used (looking at pageviews), updated (looking at edits) or expanded.

    Wikidata:Glossary is somewhat hard to maintain:

    • Ideally every help page would have at least one short glossary entry associated with it.
    • One can't easily find what has or doesn't have an entry.
    • Duplication with other glossaries happens.
    • The relation to Wikidata items about the described concepts is missing, making it rather unstructured.
    • There is a risk of anchor duplication.
    • Section editing isn't available.
    • Entries may be out of sync from the help page they point to, as editors of the help page may not be aware of the glossary entry.

    This proposes a somewhat different, more structured, approach:

    • entries are added to items
    • similar to scope and content (P7535), we can provide a short specialist written summary
    • users could query the items directly with WQS
    • users could generate a glossary for their needs on the fly
    • to get translations, one will be able to retrieve conveniently named pages like Translations:Wikidata:Glossary/15397819/fr (identified by the number of the QID the entry is on)
    • duplication with other glossaries would be less likely
    • the value of the property could be displayed on the relevant help page

    Other things don't change:

    • A page like Wikidata:Glossary could still be generated.
    • Translators could still use the translation extension (main advantage of the current format).
    • Sample: test list (see Special:Translate)
    • It's still the English version that is the primary edition

    Editing will be similar:

    • Formatting should/might be simpler
    • As users edit entries one by one that wouldn't change much.
    • To change several at once, one can use TABernacle or a spreadsheet with QS.
    • The sample above still needs a link to the edit the underlying item .. or to go through Bridge.

    Other ways for some of the above may be possible, but this structured approach has its advantages. Please help complete the above proposal.

    Dedicated to Filceolaire (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 13:45, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment I'm not sure I completely follow what you're trying to do, but shouldn't the glossary entries be monolingual text rather than string datatype, so that translations can be added also? The glossary as it stands is (in principle) translated into a number of different languages. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:54, 27 March 2020 (UTC)
      • Wikidata glossaries are currently written in English and translated through the Translation Extension. The extension is a convenient way to translate text and keep it in sync (not really efficiently possible with multiple monolingual strings at Wikidata). The more detailed explanation above shows how this wouldn't change with this proposal. The property value is in English, translations can be retrieved from pages like Translations:Wikidata:Glossary/15397819/fr (for an entry on Q15397819). --- Jura 00:27, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

    Catalogue of Life IDEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionidentifier (name code) for a taxon in the Catalogue of Life
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Domaintaxon (Q16521)
    Example 1beluga whale (Q132072) → d9b93553f1483a53529684b92f3e0872
    Example 2Anolis sagrei (Q790586) → 8d94c1de993da3df2a0b5dc4d7537ee2
    Example 3Mitromorpha mediterranea (Q6882831) → e8a85e1f0482811bf6a486dacd36c37c

    MotivationEdit

    In Wikidata there exist multiple properties to refer to external IDs of biodiversity sources: GBIF ID (P846), Encyclopedia of Life ID (P830) etc. But there is no such property for the Catalogue of Life.

    (Add your motivation for this property here.) Franck Michel (talk) 13:10, 14 February 2020 (UTC)


    DiscussionEdit

    99of9
    Achim Raschka (talk)
    Andrawaag (talk)
    Brya (talk)
    CanadianCodhead (talk)
    Canley
    Circeus
    Dan Koehl (talk)
    Daniel Mietchen (talk)
    Enwebb
    Faendalimas
    FelixReimann (talk)
    Infomuse (talk)
    Infovarius (talk)
    Jean-Marc Vanel
    Joel Sachs
    Klortho (talk)
    Lymantria (talk)
    MPF
    Manojk
    MargaretRDonald
    Mellis (talk)
    Michael Goodyear
    Mr. Fulano (talk)
    Nis Jørgensen
    PEAK99
    Peter Coxhead
    PhiLiP
    Andy Mabbett (talk)
    Plantdrew
    Prot D
    pvmoutside
    RaboKarbakian
    Rod Page
    Strobilomyces (talk)
    Succu (talk)
    TiagoLubiana (talk)
    Tinm
    Tom.Reding
    TomT0m
    Tommy Kronkvist (talk)
    Tris T7 TT me
    Tubezlob
    William Avery
    Minorax
    Culex
    Koala0090
    Mike Krüger
    Friesen5000
    Salgo60
      Notified participants of WikiProject Taxonomy --- Jura 14:41, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

    birth rateEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionthe total number of live births per 1,000 population.
    Representsbirth rate (Q203516)
    Data typeQuantity
    Allowed unitsper capita
    Example 1Norway (Q20) → 1,65
    Example 2Italy (Q38) → 1,22
    Example 3Nigeria (Q1033) → 5,66
    Format and edit filter validation< !-- eksempel: tall med sju sifre kan valideres med redigeringsfilteret Special:AbuseFilter/17 -->
    Sourceall national statistics bureaus, Q863995
    Planned useTo be used in lists, infoboxes and subchapter Demographic in countra articles
    Number of IDs in source400
    Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
    Robot and gadget jobsharvesting annualy from external statistics,
    See alsolife expectancy (P2250) total fertility rate (P4841)

    Motivering/begrunnelseEdit

    Figure for demografics and statistics in articles

    (Legg inn motivering/begrunnelse for forslaget til denne egenskapen her.) Pmt (talk) 15:39, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

    provides dataEdit

    MotivationEdit

    This is not a mature proposal. Actually this information provided is resolver-dependent. Therefore we should rather have the information on individual resolvers. The following might be a better way to model the information:

    GZWDer (talk) 22:25, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    necessary property for classEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionall instances of this class necessarily have the property, even if the property might not be known to Wikidata
    Data typeProperty
    Domainitem
    Example 1human (Q5)date of birth (P569)
    Example 2architectural structure (Q811979)coordinate location (P625)
    Example 3geographic location (Q2221906)coordinate location (P625)
    See also

    This should be a subproperty of properties for this type (P1963).

    MotivationEdit

    I'm thinking about how to make our conception of instance of (P31) and subclass of (P279) more clear and with being more clear also one uniform. It seems to me a key feature of the instance of relationship is that it implies that instances have certain properties. Every human was born at a specific point in time. Every architectural structure has a coordinate location.

    I derivate from the wording of "property for this type" here because I believe it's easier to understand Wikidata if we use class in relation to subclass and don't add the additional word type into our vocabulary to describe the entities in our data model. I would then also seek to rename into "property for this class". ChristianKl❫ 16:30, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    ) 17:18, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

    • @Yair rand: It's similar to that distinction but not exactly. The term mandatory implies that it would be mandatory for each item to have a statement. Ontologically it's necessary to have a date of birth to be a human. At the same time that date of birth might be unknown to Wikidata and thus there will be items for people that don't have date of birth filled and that would be fine. ChristianKl❫ 19:52, 17 January 2020 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl: I guess they could have the values unknown (Q24238356) or not yet determined (Q59496158) if it was the case to have mandatory statements, though. TiagoLubiana (talk) 15:21, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

    --Micru (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) TomT0m (talk) Genewiki123 (talk) Emw (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC) —Ruud 16:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Emitraka (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Bovlb (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC) --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC) --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC) --Lechatpito (talk) --Andrawaag (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC) --ChristianKl (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) --Cmungall Cmungall (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Cord Wiljes (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC) DavRosen (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC) PKM (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Fractaler (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Diana de la Iglesia Jsamwrites (talk) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Ptolusque (.-- .. -.- ..) 01:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Gamaliel (talk) --Horcrux (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) Bamyers99 (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC) Malore (talk) Wurstbruch (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC) Dcflyer (talk) 07:50, 9 September 2018 (UTC) Ettorerizza (talk) 11:00, 26 September 2018 (UTC) Ninokeys (talk) 00:05, 5 October 2018 (UTC) Buccalon (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC) Jneubert (talk) 06:02, 21 October 2018 (UTC) Yair rand (talk) 00:16, 24 October 2018 (UTC) Tris T7 (talk) ElanHR (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2018 (UTC) linuxo Gq86 Gabrielaltay Liamjamesperritt (talk) 08:44, 21 June 2019 (UTC) ZI Jony Ivanhercaz (Talk) 11:07, 15 July 2019 (UTC) Gaurav (talk) 22:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC) Meejies (talk) 04:38, 29 August 2019 (UTC) Iwan.Aucamp SilentSpike (talk) Tfrancart (talk) Luis.ramos.pst.ag Sylvain Leroux TiagoLubiana (talk) 15:12, 2 December 2019 (UTC) Albert Villanova del Moral (talk) 15:43, 6 February 2020 (UTC) Clifflandis (talk) 15:10, 18 February 2020 (UTC) --Tinker Bell 16:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC) SM5POR

      Notified participants of WikiProject Ontology ChristianKl❫ 20:04, 17 January 2020 (UTC)

    There's no community consensus on what "has quality: requirement" means. It could plausibly mean "should", "must" or "necessity" (analog to this property). I believe that it's useful to well defined ways to map relations like this. ChristianKl❫ 08:27, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    1. How would these three be different (if they are).
    2. How would you indicate the meaning of "necessary" in a structured way on the property you propose? Would it be just in the label (i.e. unstructured)? --- Jura 08:30, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    1. When talking about policy I see the difference about must and should as the one defined in RFC2119. Should implies room for reasoned expections.
    If we have an entity A and an item about A named I(A) then necessity in the way I propose means that A has the property but I(A) might not have the property as the relevant information might not be known to Wikidata or otherwise publically known. ChristianKl❫ 14:40, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    So a concept that could get a different item and you would (or could) use on the proposed property? --- Jura 15:47, 21 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Hello @ChristianKl:, I wish you a happy new year 2020 to start. I have time to write. Unfortunately for you, because it falls on you, but it is precisely because I have time. Don't worry, you're not alone (by far). You have to understand the concepts, as you write in your sub-pages. I am writing now, right away, because the contributors seem in a hurry to create nonsense on WD, even if they are asked for time to develop a coherent response on a strongly negative opinion (I take as witness URN formatter (P7470)).
    If I summarize, and tell me if I am wrong: "if use of this class" = "necessary presence of this/these property/ies". I have underlined the term "necessary" which I take from your description. From your first example, we say that Albert Einstein (Q937) is part of Q5, so, as it belongs to this class, we need date of birth (P569) in Albert Einstein (Q937). Does my demonstration reflect your proposal? You give as an example properties for this type (P1963) for identical operation on instance of (P31). Before giving you my opinion, I humbly take you to consider the following, because it will also be useful in the future.
    I have never used properties for this type (P1963) and for the following causes. Do you notice the Data type of P1963? This means that this property is used in other properties. However this is not the case, it is a property used in Items. You get the explanation of this type under Special:ListDatatypes (titled: Property (Wikibase entity id)). The examples can be obtained under Special:ListProperties/wikibase-property. see also (P1659) illustrates my point well: this property is used in the other properties to indicate additional information (similar properties for example, a property on football in connection with a property on football). In short, according to the debate and the description of properties for this type (P1963), the Data type to use must be Items, as here.
    Do you also notice the term "occupation" in the Description of P1963? Well, nothing is introduced on this point in this property.
    Continuing, P31 from P1963 is Wikidata property for property documentation (Q19820110). It is still not the right information (value) for the purpose sought in the debate. formatter URL (P1630) documents properties for example, QED.
    The examples of P1963 give more or less the desired goal: when an Item is "of this nature", it is of a class, and one or more properties can be introduced into the Item.
    We get to the constraints. Why use value requires statement constraint (Q21510864) in this property? Needless. value type constraint (Q21510865) is an Item that may interest you, as it may be useful for your proposal. The relationship can and should be instance or subclass of (Q30208840) as described. Another problem on item requires statement constraint (Q21503247), it is not always possible on an Item to have subclass of (P279), or it should be a suggestion. Last constraint, multi-value constraint (Q21510857) should still be a suggestion constraint (Q62026391).
    Another blunder and not the least: by taking one of your examples at random (I write at random, because it is valid for all the examples that you have put or that you will put), Q5 must necessarily have date of birth (P569). So if we follow this reasoning woman (Q467) must have a date of birth. Impossible. And it’s even more obvious if we used classes. Concerning the classes, we cannot attribute to them characteristics which would impact the subclasses.
    In summary: Data type incorrect, infeasible and comparison (or suggestion of subproperty) with a bad property which is at the beginning an idea almost identical to this proposition (see the proposition of P1963).   Strong oppose and I suggest you already withdrawn in status. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 21:44, 28 January 2020 (UTC)
    @Eihel: One point of this exercise is to become more clear about what instance of (P31) means. woman (Q467) is not instance of (P31) human (Q5). woman (Q467) subclass of (P279) human (Q5). If this property would exist as proposed a new user who asks themselves is woman (Q467) instance of (P31) human (Q5) or woman (Q467) subclass of (P279) human (Q5) could know that it has to be woman (Q467) subclass of (P279) human (Q5) because human (Q5) has no date of birth.
    The fact that you currently think that woman (Q467) instance of (P31) human (Q5) might be valid even through you are an established user, shows that it's important that we produce clarity here. Apart from woman (Q467) and human (Q5) there are plenty of cases in Wikidata where it's even harder to decide about whether to use instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279) and thus more importent to have clearer policy. properties for this type (P1963) alone doesn't allow you to reason as easily about whether to use instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279) because an item like woman (Q467) might have some of the properties for this type (P1963) but not others in both the case where it's a subclass and the case where it's an instance. ChristianKl❫ 08:17, 29 January 2020 (UTC)

      Comment I believe that is a good property, and arguably clearer than using has quality (P1552) for properties for this type (P1963). But it seems quite similar to properties for this type (P1963) in the sense that they would have an overlap Just thinking out loud, maybe the "mandatory" idea, in the ontological sense, could also be achieved with a new property to qualify properties for this type (P1963). Something in the likes of an "ontological prevalence" with values as "total", "often" or "total for subclass", representing how often the instances of such a class harbor the value of these properties in the real world, regardless of whether we have this information in Wikidata or not. An example of "mandatory for subclass" would be for example, human (Q5) - properties for this type (P1963) - date of death (P570) as all humans that are deceased have a date of death (P570) . TiagoLubiana (talk) 19:21, 4 February 2020 (UTC)

      Oppose because I think properties for this type (P1963) is more flexible. However, if there is a difference between both with respect to enforcability of the constraint then I'm in favor of the more enforcable property. --SCIdude (talk) 17:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

      Support Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 20:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

    URL match patternEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptiona regex pattern of URL that an external ID may be extracted
    Data typeString
    Domainproperty
    Example 1IMDb ID (P345) → (one of multiple values) https:\/\/www\.imdb\.com\/(title|name|news)\/([a-z0-9]+)(\/.*)? <replacement value> \2
    Example 2PubMed ID (P698) → https:\/\/pubmed\.ncbi\.nlm\.nih\.gov\/(\d+)(-[^\/]*)?\/ <replacement value> \1
    Example 3ISNI (P213) → https?:\/\/www\.isni\.org\/(\d{4})(| |%20)(\d{4})(| |%20)(\d{4})(| |%20)(\d{4}) <replacement value> \1 \3 \5 \7
    Example 4ZVG number (P679) → http:\/\/gestis-en\.itrust\.de\/nxt\/gateway\.dll\/gestis_en\/0+([1-9]\d+)\.xml.* <replacement value> \1
    Example 5CricketArchive player ID (P2698) → https:\/\/cricketarchive\.com\/Archive\/Players\/\d+\/\d+\/(\d+)\.html <replacement value> \1
    Example 6Fandom article ID (P6262) → https:\/\/([a-z0-9\.-]+)\.(wikia|fandom)\.com\/wiki\/(.*) <replacement value> \1:\3
    Example 7Geni.com profile ID (P2600) → https:\/\/www\.geni\.com\/(profile|people)\/[^\/]+\/(\d+)(#.*)? <replacement value> \2
    See alsoformatter URL (P1630)

    URL match replacement valueEdit

       Under discussion
    Description(qualifier only) see above
    Data typeString
    Example 1see above
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING


    MotivationEdit

    This will provide a way to extract property and ID from a given URL. A future tool or gadget may benefit from this. GZWDer (talk) 23:46, 26 February 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Comment Here's an example of how this would look on Fandom article ID (P6262):

    URL match pattern
      https:\/\/([a-z0-9\.-]+)\.(wikia|fandom)\.com\/wiki\/(.*)   edit
    URL match replacement value \1:\3
    ▼ 0 reference
    + add reference


    + add value

    If a tool wanted to automatically generate a Fandom article ID (P6262) from the URL https://minecraft.fandom.com/wiki/Sheep for example, it would match the regex specified with property against that URL. There are three caputring groups in the regex. The first one is ([a-z0-9\.-]+), and matches "minecraft", the second one is (wikia|fandom) and matches "fandom", and the third one is (.*) and matches "Sheep". The URL match replacement value allows these capturing groups to be put together. \1:\3 turns into minecraft:Sheep, since \N is replaced with the value of the nth capturing group. --SixTwoEight (talk) 01:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)

    •   SupportEihel (talk) 09:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

    number of deceased by period in locationEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionnumber of deaths per year in this country or other geographic region
    Data typeQuantity
    Example 1France (Q142) → 614000 in 2018
    Example 2Italy (Q38) → 633133 in 2018
    Example 3MISSING
    Expected completenessat least one value for the latest available year per country

    MotivationEdit

    Should be possible to query the death per country. And not to be confused with number of deaths (P1120) which stand for a specific event, not a whole country. Bouzinac (talk) 18:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment I would suggest renaming it to 'number of deceased by period'. In this case, the qualifier point in time (P585) should be required. --Tinker Bell 16:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Support - Given that it is renamed to something more specific. If it just for geographic locations i would suggest something like 'deceased by period in location'. Husky (talk) 22:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment I'm a bit worried to have another series of properties with countless values on country items. How about placing this on items like demographics of France (Q1172523) ? --- Jura 13:24, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

    provenanceEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionprovenance of artworks
    RepresentsGemälde (Q3305213), Skulptur (Q860861)
    Data typemonolingual text, multilingual text, time-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
    Template parameterdate, oldowner, newowner, type of owner's change
    Domainitem
    Example 1MISSING
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING
    Planned useI'd like to replace the parameter object history = ... in the template artwork.
    See alsoEigentümer (Q16869121)

    MotivationEdit

    The provenance of artwork could recorded on Wikidata, considering date, oldowner, newowner, type of owner's change. These data could be transfered to the template artwork on commons. (talk) 11:03, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment @Bukk: Wikidata is useful for structured data, but it sounds like you are trying to fold several different pieces of information into one property here. Maybe the best approach would be for each instance of provenance to create a new item "provenance of XYZ artwork" and attach these various structured properties to the new item, then link the artwork to that item with a "provenance" property? I don't think the sort of text field you are proposing would be acceptable. It's possible what you need could be done with a main value and qualifiers though - if you could fill out several examples in detail that would be very helpful. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:31, 9 April 2020 (UTC)
      Comment @ArthurPSmith:. Thank you for your comment. I'll prepare an answer. Greetz! Bukk (talk) 19:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

    quantification instructionEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptioninstruction according to which the ingredient should be quantified
    Representsquantification instruction (Q89895195)
    Data typeItem
    Domainitem
    Allowed valuesQ89895024,Q89895393 (more?)
    Example 1Bloody Mary (Q207711)material used (P186)Tabasco sauce (Q335016) → [this property] → up to taste (Q89895024)
    Example 2Warp 10 (Q87586496)material used (P186)Upper 10 (Q7898449) → [this property] → until cup is full (Q89895393)
    Example 3Russian Spring Punch (Q26883085)material used (P186)sparkling wine (Q321263) → [this property] → until cup is full (Q89895393)

    MotivationEdit

    most recepies prescribe precise amounts for each ingredient. in these cases we can simply use quantity (P1114) to depict the amount. But some recepies also contain an instruction about how to find the correct quantity: such as the offical recepie for Boody Mary: Tabasco, Celery Salt, Pepper (Up to taste). Loominade (talk) 12:11, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Sebleouf
    Teolemon
    Vladimir Alexiev
    Ash_Crow
    AVRS
    d1g
    Dhx1
    Tris T7 TT me
    Gobonobo

      Notified participants of WikiProject Food

    string instrument handednessEdit

       Under discussion
    Representschirality (Q3734365)
    Data typeItem
    Domainentries which include a string instrument (Q1798603) (or subclass) such as guitar (Q6607) or banjo (Q258896)
    Allowed valuesright-handed string instrument, right-handed string instrument but upside down with normal stringing, right-handed string instrument but upside down with strings backwards, left-handed string instrument, left-handed string instrument but upside down with normal stringing, left-handed string instrument but upside down with strings backwards
    Example 1Eric Clapton (Q48187) (naturally right-handed) → right-handed string instrument
    Example 2Jimi Hendrix (Q5928) (naturally left-handed) → right-handed string instrument but upside down with normal stringing
    Example 3Dick Dale (Q346785) (naturally left-handed) → right-handed string instrument but upside down with strings backwards
    Example 4Paul McCartney (Q2599) (naturally left-handed) → left-handed string instrument
    Example 5Eric Gales (Q5386552) (naturally right-handed) → right-handed string instrument but upside down with strings backwards
    Example 6Mark Knopfler (Q185343) (naturally left-handed) → right-handed string instrument
    Example 7Béla Fleck (Q561390) (naturally right-handed) → right-handed string instrument
    Planned useupdate all string instrument players with their instrument handedness if it is notable
    See alsohandedness (P552), laterality (Q10927834)

    MotivationEdit

    This property represents the handedness and configuration of a string instrument (Q1798603), which can be different from the handedness (P552) of a person. The subjects handedness (Q2421902) and laterality (Q10927834) pertain to people only, so the subject of this property is chirality (Q3734365) since it applies to the instrument . This property is meant to be a way to document the entries on the en:List of musicians who play left-handed Wikipedia page. Mordomo (talk) 13:45, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

    Just to clarify, this property would be used as a qualifier on the instrument (P1303) property. For instance, instrument (P1303)guitar (Q6607), qualifier: string instrument handedness → left-handed string instrument. This way the property applies specifically to the instrument, and not to any other instruments the musician may play where this property would not make sense. Mordomo (talk) 00:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    nerve originEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionAnatomical structure, where a nerve begins. For a cranial nerve, it would be a nucleus. For a peripheral nerve, it would be a spinal cord segment. For a branch of peripheral nerve, it would be its trunk.
    Representsnerve (Q9620)
    Data typeItem
    Template parameter"BranchFrom" in en:template:Template:Infobox nerve
    Example 1vagus nerve (Q190140)dorsal nucleus of vagus nerve (Q5298797)
    Example 2femoral nerve (Q545676)L2 segment (Q66569020)
    Example 3posterior cutaneous nerve of arm (Q7234189)radial nerve (Q1365325)
    Planned useclassify nerve origins for subclass of nerve (Q9620) (wikidata query)

    MotivationEdit

    To be able to do anatomical searches. For example to list affected muscles in spinal cord lesions and in nerve lesions. Pavel Dusek (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

      Comment @Pavel Dusek: I thought we already had a property very similar to this but more general. There are a number that seem very close - for example presynaptic connection (P925) and postsynaptic connection (P926) which should at least be referenced via "see also". More generally there's connects with (P2789). There's innervates (P3190). I see we have a very close property for muscles in muscle origin (P3490). So maybe this is needed... Might want to do a bit more searching among existing properties first though? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

      Comment @ArthurPSmith: There are different levels to the problem:

    Thanks for pointing those properties out, they are very useful (for functional connectivity information etc) and I didn't know about them. Pavel Dusek (talk) 11:05, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

    @ChristianKl: Thank you, that's very useful. However, should this be the case also in stating that "femoral nerve begins in L2 to L4 segments of spinal cord"? That's not branch in its proper sense, it's rather the origin, anatomically speaking. What is the consensus? Thanks. Pavel Dusek (talk) 08:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)
    Obviously, the work have have done on the nerves is far from complete. If you have a good argument for listing the nerve origin in addition to the branch I'm happy to hear it.ChristianKl❫ 10:32, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

    interpretationEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptioninterpretation of sentence sense in natural text in rdf format
    Data typeItem
    Domainproperty
    Example 1Genesis 1 Line 1 (Q91393642)Genesis 1 Line 1 Interpretation (Q91460154)
    Example 2Genesis 1 Line 2 (Q91393643)Q91554315
    Example 3Genesis 1 Line 3 (Q91554569)Q91554811

    MotivationEdit

    I want to create rdf interpretations for popular books (like Bible) and than use this interpretations as dataset for machine learning NLP tasks.

    I also think about properties like statement, subject (Q164573), predicate (Q179080), object (Q175026), all types of adverbial (like Time adverbial (Q25592429)) to use in interpretation


       Deepsaged (talk) 05:42, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
    

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment @Deepsaged: Your examples don't provide any information - they are all just new items in Wikidata. Can you give us some actual details of what you're trying to do here, at least some sort of background where somebody has done something like this before? I don't personally understand why the values for this property need to be Wikidata items, nor am I particularly enthusiastic about creating new items for every line of text in even 1 book. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:42, 23 April 2020 (UTC)


    Main idea is to create relations from tokens (lexemes) in text to wikidata items

    I hope if it will be done for big amount of text it will be possible to train some machine learning models to do it automatically

    So we can say that computers can in some way "understand" or create "interpretation" on natural text. In this case under “interpretation” a mean to create correct link from text tokens to wikidata entities and for example solve homonyms

    I have the sketch of the first line interpretation in RDF. It is not well formatted N-Triples, just main concept

    Please look:

    @prefix bible: <example-prefix-for-bible-interpretation> .

    @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .

    @prefix ds: <example-prefix-for-not-existing-entities-and-properties> . # ds is DeepSage :-)


    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1 dcs:interpretations bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretations . #here we point that one text line can have many interpretations

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretations rdf:type rdf:Bag .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretations rdf:_1 bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1 . #this is first, and the only one interpretation for current text

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1 rdf:type rdf:Seq . # here we say that interpretation is array of statements

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1 rdf:_1 bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 . # and here we have our main statement

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 rdf:type rdf:Statement .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 rdf:subject God in Christianity (Q825) . # sentence subject

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 rdf:predicate Q91463220 . # sentence predicate

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 rdf:object heaven (Q4489450) .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 rdf:object Earth (Q2) .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 adverbial time (Q25592429) bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/adverbial/1 .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/statement/1 adverbial time (Q25592429) bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/adverbial/2 .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/adverbial/1 <ds:context-relation> in (Q90219924) .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/adverbial/1 <ds:context-space-part> beginning (Q529711) .

    bible:book/gen/chapter/1/line/1/interpretation/1/adverbial/2 tense (Q177691) past tense (Q1994301) .


    Deepsaged (talk) 18:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

    • @Deepsaged: I like the idea. But you don't need a property to link a work to its corresponding interpretation, because each interpretation can link to the interpretated text with main subject (P921). You can get all interpretations of a given item using SPARQL. Check what I've tried to do in Genesis 1 Line 1 Interpretation (Q91460154). However, in order to model the example you wrote above, we will need new properties. --Tinker Bell 03:05, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

    Popcorndude Nikki SynConlanger Infovarius Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Lore.mazza81   Notified participants of WikiProject Linguistics

    • @Tinker Bell: Thank you for the example! Before creating property proposal I searched properties by names like "sense" "interpretation" "meaning" and was not able to find one. Now I see you example and it is cool that we can use existing properties for my task. Now I will think about other elements of model from my example. Deepsaged (talk) 05:31, 24 April 2020 (UTC)
    • @Deepsaged: I think, it is an interesting idea to describe the bible this way. However I do not think Wikidata is the right database for this project nor do think Wikibase is the right tool for it. --CamelCaseNick (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)
    • @CamelCaseNick: But why not wikidata? May be I do not know something or there is better platform for this task? Deepsaged (talk) 06:50, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

    Compatible withEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionThis work, product, object or standard can interact with another work, product, object or standard.
    Data typeItem
    Domainitem
    Example 1Replicant (Q7314062)GT-I9300 (Q83637336)
    Example 2libreboot (Q20085696)ThinkPad X200 (Q51954707)
    Example 3exynos4412-i9300.dts (Q90612899)GT-I9300 (Q83637336)
    Example 4sigrok (Q14589876)IEEE-488 (Q1135192)
    Example 5Linux kernel (Q14579)Serial ATA (Q188639)
    Example 6Linux kernel (Q14579)Advanced Host Controller Interface (Q379598)
    Example 7Linux kernel (Q14579)Advanced Configuration and Power Interface (Q379523)
    Example 8Linux kernel (Q14579)Internet protocol suite (Q81414)
    Example 9GNU Compiler Collection (Q178940)C++11 (Q1061570)
    Planned useConvert the Replicant, Libreboot and libsamsung-ipc to use that property. Add dts for devices supported by Replicant, and retrieve it in a tool.
    Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
    See alsoplatform (P400), operating system (P306), readable file format (P1072), writable file format (P1073), intended public (P2360)

    MotivationEdit

    The idea is to have the ability to describe when hardware, software, protocols, etc are compatible with each other.

    For instance if I want to tell that the GT-I9300 (Q83637336) variant of the Samsung Galaxy SIII Replicant 6.0 0003 or vice versa I could use such property.

    It is different from the platform (P400) property as a given program might be compatible with different platforms (GNU/Linux, Various Microsoft Windows versions, FreeBSD, etc) and uses libusb to interact with various hardware it's compatible with.

    sigrok (Q14589876) runs on GNU/Linux, Mac OSX, Windows, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, Android and supports several oscilloscopes and logic analyzers. The OS it runs on can be expressed by the platform (P400) property but the hardware it supports cannot.

    libsamsung-ipc (Q83639531) is a library that runs on Android and GNU/Linux which supports several modems of several smartphones which use the samsung-ipc protocol. The modems cannot be described as platform either.

    In some cases qualifiers will have to be used to give more context to this "Compatible with" property:

    • The compatible software might run on the device itself or on a host computer to interact with the device:
      • The Talos II mainboard has a BMC (Baseboard Management Controller) which runs GNU/Linux on its ARM processor(s) while GNU/Linux also runs on the main CPU which uses the PowerPC architecture. So here we need to know, for a given software, if it runs on the BMC and supports the BMC hardware that way, or if it runs on the host processor and supports the BMC by talking to it.
      • Some modems have GNU/Linux in some of their cores. The Quectel Osmocom project wiki has some more details on them. As a result you have software support for the modem protocol in Linux for the host and in userspace drivers in stacks like Ofono, but also for the modem SOC where the code is supposed to run on the modem itself. There is even upstream Linux support for the later.
    • In case of protocol the compatibility could be at different levels. For instance you could be compatible with USB interface, or the USB mass storage, but then both have different standards or part of the standard that describe that.

    DiscussionEdit

    Should I change it in this proposal, or do I need to wait for more comments before submitting a new proposal? GNUtoo (talk) 19:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
    @GNUtoo: No, this means that, for example, if Replicant (Q7314062) <compatible with> GT-I9300 (Q83637336), then GT-I9300 (Q83637336) <compatible with> Replicant (Q7314062). If the property is created, this will be marked in the property as <property> property constraint (P2302) symmetric constraint (Q21510862). --Tinker Bell 03:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment the scope seems a bit vague, e.g. wouldn't the items for Linus and Windows end up linking to almost anything? --- Jura 14:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    It could in theory, however I don't see this as an issue, as people still need to follow common sense, and to link what is noteworthy and/or useful. For now there is also operating system (P306) for just being compatible with a specific operating system like Android, GNU/Linux or Windows. platform (P400) can also be used for platforms like Gaming consoles. However I don't see how to express how a given driver (which can run on multiple operating systems for instance) could be compatible with a given hardware component, hence the need for a more generic property. GNUtoo (talk) 20:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    The fact that the property (will) use by design a symmetric constraint (Q21510862) also enables people to only link things one way: If a given driver supports way to many devices and that it's actually useful to tell that a device is supported by this driver, you could simply link things on the device element page and not on the driver page. GNUtoo (talk) 20:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Personally, I think a symmetric constraint makes things even worse. Would the OS property be sufficient? --- Jura 05:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
    Using operating system (P306) doesn't work: You cannot tell that a specific oscilloscope is compatible with sigrok (Q14589876) because sigrok (Q14589876) isn't an operating system. You also cannot tell that exynos4412-i9300.dts (Q90612899) is compatible with GT-I9300 (Q83637336) because exynos4412-i9300.dts (Q90612899) isn't an operating system either. This is precisely why I proposed this property: because after looking for hours and hours I found no way to express things like that. sigrok (Q14589876) and IEEE-488 (Q1135192) are not platform either. readable file format (P1072) and writable file format (P1073) don't work either for sigrok (Q14589876) and IEEE-488 (Q1135192) as none are file. And abusing intended public (P2360) as compatible be really missleading as hardware or protocol aren't people. GNUtoo (talk) 02:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

    House Divided IDEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionID of a topic in House Divided: The Civil War Research Engine at Dickinson College
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Domainvarious
    Example 1Dickinson College (Q1210045) → 17946
    Example 2John Quincy Adams (Q55725954) → 4954
    Example 3Ada County (Q109820) → 19736
    Example 4The U.S. Transatlantic Slave Trade, 1644–1867: An Assessment (Q92660833) → 23152
    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 source~48000, though some are not relevant for items
    Expected completenessuncertain
    Formatter URLhttp://hd.housedivided.dickinson.edu/node/$1
    Robot and gadget jobsMix'n'Match may help

    MotivationEdit

    (Add your motivation for this property here.) GZWDer (talk) 01:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    Southwest Harbor Public Library itemEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionThe number in URL of a Southwest Harbor Public Library item
    RepresentsSouthwest Harbor Public Library (Q7571287)
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Domainvarious
    Allowed values\d+
    Example 1Edward Lothrop Rand (Q20828375) → 8595
    Example 2File:Yampa yacht 1890.jpg → 8398
    Example 3Hinckley Yachts (Q16975757) → 8529
    Example 4Claremont Hotel (Q19864826) → 9405
    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 sourcesee below
    Expected completenesssee below
    Formatter URLhttps://swhplibrary.net/digitalarchive/items/show/$1

    MotivationEdit

    SWHPL have multiple types of items:

    • Document (543) - a specific written or printed document.
    • Gallery (74) - collection of other works
    • Image (7117) - a specific image
    • Map (693) - a specific image
    • Publication (180) - a specific book or article
    • Reference (2975) - information about a person, place, or thing, sometimes with a PDF description.

    Other than Reference, they ties to a work, so we may create items for e.g. the specific image, or upload the image to Commons if it is in public domain. The archive contains material not in public domain.

    A Reference refers to things other then publication and image.

    Note: The internal number of items is different from the number in URL, this proposal uses the latter. GZWDer (talk) 05:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    • Note this will be a property about an American town with less than 1800 people. It may have some uses in both English Wikipedia and Commons.--GZWDer (talk) 05:08, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

    die axisEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionmeasurement of a coin that describes how the obverse and reverse dies were aligned to each other when it was struck, either in degrees (0-360) or hours (0-12)
    Representscoin orientation (Q5141550)
    Data typeQuantity
    DomainQ41207
    Allowed unitsheure (hour) or degré (degree)
    Example 1Q29401431: no description → 12 h [14]
    Example 2Musée Saint-Raymond, 2000 14 51 (Q28822821): no description → 3 h [15]
    Example 3??? (creation in progress) → 12 h [16]
    See also

    MotivationEdit

    The die-axis (alias coin axis, coin alignment or coin orientation), axe in French, is a type of measurement used by numismatists and museums to describe coins in professional publications and databases.Die alignment is expressed in degrees or in hours (as a clock face hour). Some publications use arrows to describe die alignment. Christelle Molinié (talk) 12:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Comment I found Q5141550 ("coin orientation") and added that above. Also, I tried to complete the proposal, fix the samples. Maybe coin alignment (Q23017425) and medal alignment (Q23017424) could have the property too. --- Jura 13:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)
    • To what extend is this property special for coins? Can we find a more general way to specify the relationship that can also be hold outside of the domain of coins? ChristianKl❫ 17:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)
    • I asked the question to a numismatist of the french national library who doesn't know other uses in different fields. As a reference he gave us the link to the Nomisma ID http://nomisma.org/id/axis. This can be helpful. --Christelle Molinié (talk) 12:18, 14 May 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment I know nothing about this and have never thought about it before, but it makes sense. Can someone show more sources which report this value? Right now the three examples are from toulouse.fr, which seems to be the government website for Toulouse (Q7880). For me to be more certain that reporting axe is customary, could someone show any museum or numismatic website listing which reports this value? Also, could someone fill out more of the proposal form, including "planned use" to communicate which collections could soon be annotated and "number of ids" to say something about the number of coins for which this data gets reported. I do not understand whether this is something that always gets reported in coin evaluation, or if it happens only in a small percentage of instances. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Here are some examples from the collection of the American Numismatic society, The collection Calvet and another one in Commons. It is not always reported in coins description but it is used enough to be a research field in the American Numismatic Society database. --Christelle Molinié (talk) 16:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

    IDU general item IDEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionGeneral identifier for items in the Theatre Institute database
    RepresentsArts and Theatre Institute (Q12021673)
    Data typeNumber (not available yet)
    Allowed values[1-9][0-9]{0,3}
    Example 1National Theatre (Q732697) → 1
    Example 2Building of National Theatre in Prague (Q23042822) → 1
    Example 3Opera troupe of the National Theatre (Q14541739) → 1
    Sourcehttps://www.idu.cz/cs
    Planned usecreate a Mix'n'Match catalogue if possible
    Number of IDs in source2800
    Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
    See alsoIDU theatre company ID (P7637), EUTA theatre ID (P4535), EUTA person ID (P4534)

    MotivationEdit

    The Treatre Institute in Prague have offered their data to be uploaded to Wikidata. The id itself mainly groups various related items in the Theatre Institute database. Because of its structure, this id would help considerably to identify, sort and group various types of data and create their relations to each other that would have been impopssible to perform without it.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Purkii (talk • contribs) at 11:51, 15 April 2020 (UTC).

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose Hello @Purkii:, You write identifikátor (cs) and ID (en), does this agree with datatype = number? Should this field be replaced by external-id? I made changes, but I don't know if it's fair: I don't understand your proposal. —Eihel (talk) 19:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

    Dear @Eihel:, thank you very much for your opinion. My colleague actually submitted more thorough version of the same proposal at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/IDU_theatre_name_ID_(2) where it has been approved, so this proposal of mine is already obsolete. Pardon me, please, this page slipped out of my attention. Feel free to delete it, if you know how it's done. Thank you very much for your kind understanding.

    Seoul Information Disclosure Plaza document management numberEdit

       Under discussion
    Descriptionmanagement number for documents made public in Seoul Information Disclosure Plaza site Q89559266
    RepresentsQ36646373
    Data typeExternal identifier
    Template parameter"문서관리번호" in ko:틀:문서 정보
    Domainproperty
    Allowed valuesQ template or text
    Example 1Seoul Citizen Safety Guard (Q88905460)
    Example 2Seoul municipal council (Q12601388)
    Example 3Seoul Metropolitan Government Environmental Policy (Q12601386)
    Example 4Design Seoul (Q16185004)

    MotivationEdit

    There are 19,256,698 documents in the site. management number will be helpful to address the other items.

    DiscussionEdit

    •   Oppose incomplete examples, description with internal link, false subject item, unsigned, etc. Eihel (talk) 19:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

    local timeEdit

       Under discussion
    Representsqualifier for properties that have a date
    Data typeItem
    Allowed valuestime of the day (Q1260524)
    Example 1Valentina Blackhorse (Q92079066) / date of death (P570) -> 22:22 (Q55812761)
    Example 2MISSING
    Example 3MISSING

    MotivationEdit

    The obituary for Valentina Blackhorse (Q92079066) makes it clear that there is cultural significance given to the time at which this person died. Defining this in Wikidata is not possible at the moment. 1Veertje (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

    DiscussionEdit

    ah, that works. Thank you. I'll add "local time" as an alias there. 1Veertje (talk) 21:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

    daughter languageEdit

       Under discussion
    DescriptionLangue(s) issue(s) de cette langue (fr) – (Please translate this into English.)
    Representsdaughter language (Q94583596)
    Data typeélément (item)-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
    Domainlinguistique (Q8162)
    Allowed valuesmodèle Q
    Example 1Middle French (Q1473289)French (Q150)
    Example 2Early Modern English (Q1472196)English (Q1860)
    Example 3Mycenaean Greek (Q668366)Ancient Greek (Q35497)
    Sourceréférence externe, article de liste de Wikipédia.
    Planned useSur les langues d’Oïl et indo-européennes dans un premier cas, mais servira vite pour toutes les langues
    Expected completenessno label (Q21873974 (complète à terme))
    See alsolangue mère, langue sœur


    MotivationEdit

    Je suis en train de classifier les langues et notamment leurs relations diachroniques entre elles. Cette propriété sera vraiment utile pour lier les langues et générer des arbres linguistiques en diachronie. Lyokoï (talk) 22:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

    Popcorndude Nikki SynConlanger Infovarius Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Lore.mazza81   Notified participants of WikiProject Linguistics


    DiscussionEdit

    •   Weak oppose as there may be too many values. The inverse property seems unnecessary.--GZWDer (talk) 10:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
    •   Neutral I also agree the reverse property (of "mother language") is not really necessary but I won't go as far as opposing it if others think it is needed. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 10:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
    •   Comment The WikiProject Languages has not yet been notified. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 19:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)