Wikidata:Property proposal/rating

rating edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Done: rating (P4271) (Talk and documentation)

Description	qualifier to indicate a score given by the referenced source indicating the quality or completeness of the statement
Data type	Item
Example	BRAF V600E (Q21851559) → positive therapeutic predictor for (P3354) → vemurafenib (Q423111) with qualifier rating (this proposal) CIViC 2-star trust rating (Q28045397) North Epping (Q7055322) → Australian Statistical Geography 2011 ID (P4014) = "SSC11745" with qualifier rating (this proposal) very good (according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics) (Q31833890)
Planned use	Upon acceptance we plan to use this property as qualifier immediatly in our efforts to capture the rating used use in genetic cancer variant annotations in Wikidata
Robot and gadget jobs	This property will be added by bots adding data with ratings attached
See also	review score (P444)

Motivation

Some of the primary sources being synchronized on wikidata come with a rating score indicating quality or completeness of a given record. Currently, we can't add these annotations. There is the property review score (P444) but this only allows string values, which makes it hard to compare with other existing rating schemes. A 3-star rating in one resource might not express the same level as a 3-star rating in another (related) resource. To be able to compare between ratings we need to express those as Wikidata items. Examples of such rating items are CIViC 1-star trust rating (Q28045396) and CIViC 5-star trust rating (Q28045399) When accepted this property should be used in a set of qualifiers applicable to a statement Andrawaag (talk) 12:35, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support better to have these as items than strings. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:45, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Andrew Su (talk) 20:46, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gstupp (talk) 20:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dhx1 (talk) 12:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 12:30, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, I've been waiting for something like this. I've added another example of usage. See if you agree with it. I suggest synonyms like "confidence" or "quality". --99of9 (talk) 03:42, 15 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I largely agree with your example. I would however extent the description of "very good" to include the authority. I added this in your example. --Andrawaag (talk) 11:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yes I saw that and am ok with it. I wonder if this property will later be split to narrow the scopes, but for now I'm happy to share with your proposal :). --99of9 (talk) 11:37, 19 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I removed "ready" as this lacks a description. Please complete.
--- Jura 07:48, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 20:59, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Andrawaag, ArthurPSmith, YULdigitalpreservation, Gstupp, Dhx1, Gstupp: Done Created as rating (P4271). ChristianKl (talk) 13:09, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]