Wikidata:Property proposal/ifixit ID

ifixit ID

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

   Done: iFixit teardown ID (P7476) (Talk and documentation)

Description	ifixit URL identifier
Represents	iFixit (Q984913)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	electronic device model (Q62008942)
Example 1	Fairphone 3 (Q67174340) → Fairphone+3+Teardown/125573
Example 2	iPhone 11 Pro Max (Q67216219) → iPhone+11+Pro+Max+Teardown/126000
Example 3	Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (Q22341441) → Xiaomi+Redmi+Note+3+Repairability+Assessment/79119
Source	https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown
External links	Use in sister projects: [ar] • [de] • [en] • [es] • [fr] • [he] • [it] • [ja] • [ko] • [nl] • [pl] • [pt] • [ru] • [sv] • [vi] • [zh] • [commons] • [species] • [wd] • [en.wikt] • [fr.wikt].
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	https://www.ifixit.com/Teardown/$1

Motivation

Ifixit performs product teardowns of consumer devices and publishes the results on their website along with their repairability score Germartin1 (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

I'm not sure if these are identifiers - they seem to be individual articles (note one is a "teardown" and one a "repairability assessment"). Wouldn't https://www.ifixit.com/Device/iPhone_11_Pro_Max be a more appropriate link - so the formatter is https://www.ifixit.com/Device/... and the ID iPhone_11_Pro_Max? Andrew Gray (talk) 16:16, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

• • I think the teardown is the most important page and with the ID it is possible the access the API, if there are more teardowns for a device then it certainly makes sense to use your proposed identifier Germartin1 (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2019 (UTC)
    • The third example here is a "Repairability Assessment", that redirects to a URL with /Guide/ in it - that item has no "Teardown". Only about half the items I've sampled seem to have a "Teardown", and a small number (eg iPhone4 seem to have two for a single model. Andrew Gray (talk) 13:11, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

iFixit Repairability Score

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

   Done: no label (P7478) (Talk and documentation)

Represents	iFixit (Q984913)
Data type	String
Domain	electronic device model (Q62008942)
Allowed values	(10
Example 1	Fairphone 3 (Q67174340) → 10
Example 2	iPhone 11 Pro Max (Q67216219) → 6
Example 3	Xiaomi Redmi Note 3 (Q22341441) → 8
Source	[1]

Motivation

Ifixit performs product teardowns of consumer devices and publishes the results on their website along with their repairability score Germartin1 (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Support both David (talk) 13:29, 19 October 2019 (UTC)

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Germartin1, Andrew Gray:  Done: iFixit teardown ID (P7476). − Pintoch (talk) 19:48, 25 October 2019 (UTC)

@Pintoch, ArthurPSmith: Why do you consider a property that doesn't even have a description ready to be created? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 16:44, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

Hmm, I should have looked more carefully, sorry about that. I normally would have waited for at least one more support vote for a property like this anyway, not sure what I was thinking. If you want to propose these for deletion due to premature creation I'm ok with that, but maybe we can address the issues going forward as they are? @Germartin1: could you take a look at what needs fixing here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

I certainly agree that we should wait for more support before creating a property. I have added a description, although it's better clear what the property is about. Germartin1 (talk) 18:38, 29 October 2019 (UTC)

@ChristianKl: You are right that it should be better to enforce that all properties get created with a description. I was thinking about adding that as a check to my property creation script for a while. This is now done. − Pintoch (talk) 08:14, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

@Pintoch, ArthurPSmith, Germartin1: I don't think that a script should do the judgement. We give out the property creator flag because of a belief that it takes a special expertise to see whether a property is ready. I seems to me that human judgement is required. David casts support votes regardles of whether or not a property is ready when it clear his low bars for new properties. Taking one vote from him as evidence that the necessary discussion happened for a property without looking at the individual proposal seems questionable.

I have a hard time imagining for how the meaning of either property is clear to someone who doesn't know what ifixit is. The description doesn't tell me anything about what ifixit is currently. Wikidata users shouldn't be required to google ifixit to interpret the values.

This property lacks a justification for why it should be created as a string property. In the past a rating property like CERO rating (P853) which has individual letter ratings wasn't created as string but as item. A person who reads that a given product has a iFixit Repairability Score of 8 knows nothing about what the 8 means. They don't know whether that's high or low or whether high means it's easy to repair or difficult to repair. (RfD) ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:24, 30 October 2019 (UTC)

I don't think that a script should do the judgement. sure, I don't think that either. − Pintoch (talk) 12:40, 30 October 2019 (UTC)