Wikidata:Property proposal/urban population

urban population edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Done: urban population (P6343) (Talk and documentation)

Description	number of people living within the territorial entity who live in it's urban parts
Represents	urban population (Q30127246)
Data type	Quantity
Domain	territory (Q1496967)
Allowed values	\d{1,10}
Example 1	Dakshin Dinajpur district (Q533839) → 236295
Example 2	Balurghat community development block (Q4853084) → 14762
Example 3	Gangarampur (Q1656762) → 56217

Motivation edit

The primary motivation to create this demographic property is Indian census data, but also can be used in other demogrphic datasets of any country. Bodhisattwa (talk) 13:50, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion edit

~~Oppose~~ The urban area should have it's own item with a population statement. I proposed a property for doing that linking. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 18:54, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKl: If you take a look at a Primary Census Abstract from the last census (the 33rd page of Census of India 2011 (West Bengal): Dakshin Dinajpur District Primary Census Abstract (Q55972011), for example), you will see that the district has a well-defined urban population (339,231) and rural population (57,175), which do not necessarily correspond to separately contiguous or otherwise separately regarded areas. Mahir256 (talk) 23:10, 30 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think I misunderstood the proposed property. I rewrote the description. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:51, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support David (talk) 13:27, 31 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seem a good idea to slipt total with urban and rural population. --Fralambert (talk) 22:49, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(See also Property_talk:P1082#"rural"_vs._"urban"_populations_in_census_data, where this came up recently.) Oppose. This needs a more general solution than trying to patch up every population sub-group with its own property. --Yair rand (talk) 01:25, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support It would allow importing a mass of useful information from the (enourmous) Census of India. While I agree with Yair that other Census data sets may have other distinctions, and a more general solution would be better, such a solution does not readily come to mind, and I support creating this property, to describe population data of about a seventh of the planet in greater detail, even if in the future, when a more generic solution is found, it is deprecated in favor of that solution (and data is easily remodeled to the future solution based on this property). Asaf Bartov (talk) 14:41, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Asaf Bartov. I generally try to avoid "per person" comments in discussion. But Asaf has told everything I wanted to say here, so +1 to it --Titodutta (talk) 21:32, 3 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Ijon, ChristianKl, Titodutta, Bodhisattwa, Mahir256: @Fralambert, Yair rand: Done: urban population (P6343). − Pintoch (talk) 18:21, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]