Wikidata

Wikidata:Property proposal/booking URL

< Wikidata:Property proposal

booking URL edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionofficial URL of the item that allows reservation of a seat, service or ticket related to this item
Representsbooking (Q64883416)
Data typeURL
Example 1Bagatti Valsecchi Museum (Q838986) → https://fareharbor.com/embeds/book/museobagattivalsecchi
Example 2Cinema Arcobaleno (Q37158251) → http://www.crea.webtic.it/Default.aspx?sc=5066
Example 3Principe di Savoia (Q7245128) → https://gc.synxis.com/rez.aspx?hotel=60010
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsowebsite:booking on OpenStreetMap

Motivation edit

This property could be useful for Wikivoyage so that one could buy tickets or booking a room without looking through the website. If a specific property is already set/could be set (e.g. Booking.com hotel ID (P3607)), it must be used ★ → Airon 90 07:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

Airon90 Do not modify the interventions of other contributors, please. —Eihel (talk) 20:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support. That said, your second example leads me to nowhere and probably needs some fixing. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Google Maps has this feature. We should have it too. NMaia (talk) 14:17, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong oppose I think this is a bad idea as someone who edits OSM a lot and isn't personally a fan of the website:booking tag or similar website namespace tags. Since booking url's change way to often. Plus, the word "booking" is semi-ambiguous and widely different depending on the culture anyway. Which you really have to watch out for with these types of things. For instance in America we don't really consider buying a ticket to tour an art gallery "booking" something. Whereas, it seems like you do from one of your example links. Also, say you add the property to something like a casino that contains hotel, restaurant, bar, and an event center. It's rather ambiguous as to which one of those the booking url applies to or if it's just the casino. Those kinds of confusions happen all the time in OSM. Which is why the website:booking tag has been around since like 2011, but has never really been adopted. It is kind of commercialish to like Bouzinac said. There's also no end to the possible sub url's once you go there. Everyone knows what an official url is and it's usually pretty easy to get to booking page. So, it's better just to stick to the official url. --Adamant1 (talk) 10:00, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    @Adamant1:
    • «Since booking url's change way to often». First, citation needed. Second, even official websites change and/or disappear (that is why URL archives exist): should we remove the property official website (P856) because it could change, even «too often»?
    • «Plus, the word "booking" is semi-ambiguous and widely different depending on the culture anyway». I'm Italian and we use the verb "prenotare". If the problem is the label, we can decide which is the best one for this property. You cannot oppose without giving a hint about how to fix this problem.
    • «Also, say you add the property to something like a casino that contains hotel, restaurant, bar, and an event center. It's rather ambiguous as to which one of those the booking url applies to or if it's just the casino» Like in OpenStreetMap you map separately hotel, restaurant, bar and casino, even in Wikidata you create single items which will have their own "booking url"
    • «Everyone knows what an official url is and it's usually pretty easy to get to booking page» Let's delete official blog URL (P1581), web feed URL (P1019), calendar feed URL (P6818), terms of service URL (P7014), privacy policy URL (P7101) and many other property then. Let's use just official website (P856) and one can get info by looking at the site or its source code.
    --★ → Airon 90 17:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Weak oppose Do Wikidata need to start advertising.? Seems to be not a good idea.-❙❚❚❙❙ GnOeee ❚❙❚❙❙ ✉ 14:11, 11 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Gnoeee many Wikivoyage already have contact details of this type, IMHO. —Eihel (talk) 10:04, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The proponent finds my changes adequate, but does not change the proposal. In addition, the fields are not filled to the best. I change my opinion. —Eihel (talk) 20:14, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Eihel: I said "When I have spare time I will look for another example in order to replace the first one". Now I had spare time before working again and I found another example to replace the first one.
What do you mean with "the fields are not filled to the best" and why don't you propose a change? We are working together for Wikidata, not judging one's work in an eternal competition :) I hope you will help me in fill the fields to the best and change your mind again --★ → Airon 90 07:10, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Airon90, Thierry Caro, NMaia:

  •   Question Should the label include "official", possibly with a single value constraint? Or should we allow ticket resellers and scalpers? --- Jura 21:46, 28 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1: For sure this proposal is about the *official* booking URL. I am not sure about single value constraint (I don't like generalizations), maybe we can set this constraint and work on eventual errors. --★ → Airon 90 07:10, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • Can we add something in the description so that we only end up the organizer's or accommodation's booking system in the property and not every website that allows to book rooms in a given hotel or anybody that resells tickets they just siffoned out of the main url. --- Jura 10:32, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jura1: I tried my best by putting "Official" in the sentence. If somebody wants to rephrase the description in order to better transmit the meaning of the proposal is welcome! --★ → Airon 90 12:49, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. I changed it slightly. --- Jura 15:55, 3 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

  Not done Clearly lacking consensus, and hasn't seen active discussion in a long time. JesseW (talk) 02:16, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Property_proposal/booking_URL&oldid=1380180452"