Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2013/Properties/1

This page is an archive. Please do not modify it. Use the current page, even to continue an old discussion.


(Posting this here since there doesn't seem to be any more appropriate forum for it.)

This property is labelled "former member of sports team". Isn't the "former" aspect something that's supposed to be handled by qualifiers once they're available? I think this is probably redundant to Property:P54. --Yair rand (talk) 07:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I was thinking it also. And here we can see the example: meta:Wikidata/Notes/Data_model_primer#Qualifiers. So yes, I support deletion. --Stryn (talk) 07:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I just came to this item while translating, and I agree, it has to be deleted. Janjko (talk) 17:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Should we wait until qualifiers are available or delete this now? --Stryn (talk) 18:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it is better to delete it now, before it is used by many items, rather than correct them all later. --Beta16 (talk) 22:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  Done OK, I will remove and then delete this. James F. (talk) 22:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC) Now done. James F. (talk) 22:49, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P60 (P60): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This is a duplication of an "is a" relationship - it's used for saying things are stars, etc. Instead we want this to be a status of stars/etc. items, but that feature is to come later. James F. (talk) 17:55, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done --Morten Haan (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P67 (P67): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

This property should be of the 'date' type, not 'item'. Beta16 (talk) 19:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

At this time it seems not to be possible to choose that type. Conny (talk) 19:18, 5 February 2013 (UTC).
… and when it is, we do not need to delete the Property - we can alter the link type and use that. James F. (talk) 19:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm not sure that we can change the data type of a property that already exists. I think we should not have this property yet, until the correct data type is implemented. --Beta16 (talk) 20:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
We actually can't change the type once it's been created... --Rschen7754 20:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I suggest we delete the statements who link at this property, delete the property, and wait for the 'date' type to be implemented. There's no need to rush. --Sannita - not just another sysop 22:20, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  Done.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P90 (P90): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) It seems that this proverty is a duplicate of Property:P69. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 21:14, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done - Wiki13 talk 21:16, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
... and cleaned up. James F. (talk) 21:19, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Alma mater is usually associated with universities, it's strange to use it for highscools. Maybe I'm wrong. That's why I created the other tag. Janjko (talk) 21:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it's more normally for Higher rather than Secondary education, yes, but not exclusively-so. James F. (talk) 21:40, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P64 (P64): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

empty and unused Beta16 (talk) 08:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Um, that's not correct. --Yair rand (talk) 08:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Correct, sorry. I've used RequestDeletion gadget that seems have some problem with Property namespace. --Beta16 (talk) 08:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  Done. --Stryn (talk) 08:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


Labelled "ancestral home", with the description "place of origin for Chinese people". I don't see how this could be useful as a property. --Yair rand (talk) 07:37, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

It's a basic property for Chinese people. Please take a look at en:Ancestral home (Chinese) for more information. Regards.--Stevenliuyi (talk) 08:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
So this attribute would be applied to Chinese individuals? Does the concept not exist for any other peoples? --Yair rand (talk) 08:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Yes, it's only for Chinese.--Stevenliuyi (talk) 08:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Request withdrawn. --Yair rand (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Not done --Stryn (talk) 11:15, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P73 (P73): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

S'est enregistré avec la mention "Type de données : Fichier multimédia de Commons" alors que ce n'est pas ce que je voulais faire (?) Ljubinka (discussion) 10:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done. You set a wrong datatype, I guess. --Stryn (talk) 11:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


video (P10): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion)

The same as Property:P18 dega180 (talk) 11:07, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Not done. We can't delete it (yet). See also Property talk:P10, Wikidata:Property_proposal#Image_.2F_Abbildung_.2F_Image, Wikidata_talk:Property_proposal#Commons_media_file. --Stryn (talk) 11:13, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


P79: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Duplicate of P48 MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 11:59, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done --Morten Haan (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Somewhat confused as to what happened here. Could someone please explain? — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 20:47, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I try: MichaelSchoenitzer marked property:P79 for deletion, but because gadget does not work correctly, it added Q79 here. Then Morten Haan deleted Q79, but I don't know why he didn't checked if it's a wrong link. Then I restored Q79 when I noticed it was deleted. Log. --Stryn (talk) 20:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Ahh. So should we now discuss whether or not Property:P79 P79 (P79): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) should be deleted? — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 22:09, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I guess that's the intention. See Property talk:P48#Datatype as well.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:29, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Oops, before you commented, I had deleted as a blank page/duplicate of P48. If you want to undelete, be my guest. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Went ahead and restored, sorry :) Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:35, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Congratulations! I was going to restore, but I found a bug and stopped to report it.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:43, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Well that is strange, I checked the last revision before I undeleted and didn't see this bug. At least my hastiness has found us a bug :) Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:45, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── I just made a check and it seemed it was only because you restored before the version was loaded for me, so it turns out it isn't really a bug. It'd be nicer if the interface was more specific, though.  Hazard-SJ  ✈  23:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Well {{facepalm|supreme}} Regards, — Moe Epsilon 23:57, 5 February 2013 (UTC)


Per discussion, date of birth will be done using TimeValue not Items. Delsion23 (talk) 00:43, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done - will inform the creator. James F. (talk) 00:45, 7 February 2013 (UTC)


P104 (P104): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

I made it without realizing that the necessary datatype is not supported yet. Sorry about that. Soulkeeper (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done James F. (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2013 (UTC)


Labelled "Noble family". I don't see what use this could have. --Yair rand (talk) 07:26, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  • Maybe something to do with European royalty? --Rschen7754 07:38, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
    You mean like "United Kingdom > Noble famlily : British Royal Family" ? --Yair rand (talk) 07:58, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
    Partially - a few centuries ago there were intermarriages between royalty of different countries, I believe. --Rschen7754 08:18, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
    I ment to noble families by country. It can be usful for templates of Nobility ect. In same cases it called "House of ...". Geagea (talk) 18:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
    I still do not see what it means exactly in Q3652004. --Zolo (talk) 14:37, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
    It means that Giorgi Avalishvili is part of Avalishvili princely family (or noble family). --Stryn (talk) 14:49, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
    If this is how it is meant to be used, I do not see the point of adding "noble". But sorry, I meant Q4055316 (or is that one just a mistake ?). --Zolo (talk) 14:59, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
    Two ways of using. First, members of the noble family will be connected to this ticket. second, noble families can have the ticket by country - Georgian noble family, German noble families ect. Geagea (talk) 01:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────I believe we've been generally avoiding having properties that can be used for multiple types of entity. I'd   Oppose deletion, since I think it could have some use for items on individuals, though it might need to be renamed. For items on countries, though, I think we'd need a separate property - "ruling house", perhaps? (I don't think there's much point in trying to sort out the houses themselves by nation, since in the majority of cases there's no one answer - the Mountbatten-Windsors have at various points ruled over a dozen European states.) — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 12:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes, using the same property for two logically different relations does not sound a good idea. A property to mean "member of family" may be ok, though I think we will have to define it better at some point.--Zolo (talk) 09:37, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
O.K, I tried to remove the tag from Q4055316 but unsuccessfully. Geagea (talk) 23:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I removed the tag from [[Avalishvili. Geagea (talk) 00:12, 9 February 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, I think we can close as keep for now, and perhaps have more thoughts about it once things are a bit more advanced ? --Zolo (talk) 10:22, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
  •   Not done per discussion above. --Stryn (talk) 18:36, 11 February 2013 (UTC)


P62 (P62): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

dub of Property:P18 (image) --ThorstenX1 (talk) 11:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done per comments here and here. --Stryn (talk) 15:14, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


ITEMID: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty, not used. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done - we don't have the proper datatype for this right now. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


ITEMID: (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Empty, not used. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:41, 18 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done - we don't have the proper datatype for this right now. Sven Manguard Wha? 23:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)


P130 (P130): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Incorrect datatype JAn Dudík (talk) 20:47, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done Legoktm (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2013 (UTC)


P68 (P68): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs)

Discussions are ongoing

"Municipality" is a property from the list "Added without discussion" (Wikidata:List of properties). Rarely used and with an example that is not convincing: "<Statue of Liberty> municipality <New-York>". --ThorstenX1 (talk) 12:04, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

I suggested it, but somebody other did it: Wikidata:Property_proposal#Municipality_.2F_Gemeinde.2F_Commune. --Stryn (talk) 12:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Should we move it to "Place" with the remark: "<Do not use> municipality <, it is still under discussion>"? --ThorstenX1 (talk) 12:31, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
I don't know why we should not accept this. E.g. In Finland we have 320 municipalities. --Stryn (talk) 12:58, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
We can change its name by location, it might be more meaningful. --Jitrixis (talk) 21:49, 13 February 2013 (UTC)
Municipality should be kept, many countries use it.--Lam-ang (talk) 06:32, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
I am the creator of this property, sorry if I created this property without discussion but I did not know that I had to do so. I think that this property is important to describe the location of objects that are in countries that use municipalities.--dega180 (talk) 00:50, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
For example in Italy I can't immagine how to describe the location of a museum that is in a small town with 1000 people this is not a city!--dega180 (talk) 00:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
@Dega180: For this you will need a property "location", not city or municipality. --Kolja21 (talk) 03:39, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Ok but "location" can means: "a mountain", "an island", "a municipality", a "frazione", "a Neighbourhood", "a park", ecc. instead "municipality" means one thing and therefore data are more uniform. In (I know that this is an international wikitata and not an italian wikidata) it's standard to use "municipality" when you want to describe the location of an object and I think that is so also in wikies use a language spoken in countries that use municipalities. Sorry if my English is bad--dega180 (talk) 09:20, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

The Statue of Liberty is located in the city (Property:P83) New York. And it will be hard to find the right municipality for Yosemite National Park. "Municipality" is not a thing like a tree, it's an administration term, and it's meaning changes from country to country. We need a concept for this kind of terms. Saying "A municipality B" can mean anything. A lived, died, worked, have an job in B. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:28, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Municipality is a necessary parameter, since it is a Third-level administrative country subdivision in many countries. I suggest that as alias of the parameter, or we rename it "3rd level adm country subdivision". Infoboxes for localities in for example Swedish Wikipedia have a parameter called "kommun" (i.e. municipality). In English Wikipedia, the {{:en:template:infobox settlement|infobox settlement}} has solved it in a generic but complicated way, making it possible to use the same infobox both for municipalities, cities and other localities, by using three parameters: settlement_type (e.g. city or municipality), subdivision_type3 (e.g. = Municipality if the settlement belongs to a municipality); and subdivision_name3 (e.g. Gothenburg municipality). I would prefer that we have different properties for different second and third administrative country subdivisions, etc.
In Sweden, each municipality is a merge of several historical "socknar" (civil parishes), and may contain several rural areas as well as country-side villages. Each municipality belongs to one and only one county or region ("län"), i.e second level administrative country subdivision. The term municipality is often confused with city, but Gothenburg city is only part of Gothenburg municipality. The largest settlement in each municipality is often but not always a former city (today cities have no legislative definition in Sweden). Mange01 (talk) 16:46, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Right now there are 10 subdivision properties for a country: Wikidata:List of properties#Country: subdivisions. --Kolja21 (talk) 19:21, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
But nothing appropriate to small towns, and also for cities, what does it mean City? How many hinabitants a living center needs to be considered a "city"? And how many hinabitants a living center needs to be considered a Town? The other subdivision proprerties for a country are not precise, the only precise property is municipality that in many country is defined in a precise way by law.--dega180 (talk) 20:14, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
I suggest that we use some international ontology specification in this case, for example the GeoNames ontology. See . Municipalities are called "second-order administrative division" in that document, while the enwp category is called "second-level administrative country subdivisions". Regarding Dega180:s question on P83: GeoNames uses the term "Populated Place" for a city, town and village. Enwp infoboxes groups these terms into "settlement". Mange01 (talk) 22:24, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
Good suggestion. I've changed Property:P33 (now: settlement) so we can merge it with Property:P83 ("city, relatively large and permanent settlement"). Likelihood of confusion: Where is the difference between the municipality New York City (Statue of Liberty, "head of municipal government": Michael Bloomberg) and the settlement New York City? Should we change "head of municipal government" (Property:P6) to "head of local government"? --Kolja21 (talk) 03:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I Think must be different propoerties for municipality (administrative level with head of execitive) and for settlement (village, hamlet, town). In Czech republic is 6252 municipalities and about half of them consists of several settlements. JAn Dudík (talk) 12:30, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

I changed my opinion, I agree to delete because was created Property:P131.--dega180 (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2013 (UTC)

While we had a nice talk here, there have been made the decision to declare all administrative divisions as DEPRECATED (Wikidata:List of properties). There are two new items (located in administrative unit, type of administrative division) and hopefully later a description and examples how to use these properties will follow. Link to one of the other discussions on this topic: WD:PC#Administrative divisions again - hopefully, last topic. --Kolja21 (talk) 23:45, 21 February 2013 (UTC)
I moved all P68 in P131, so if there is consensus I can delete it. --ValterVB (talk) 21:52, 23 February 2013 (UTC)
  Done as deprecated and unused. If you feel it necessary to undelete, let me know and I can. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 16:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P83 (P83): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:11, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 15:58, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P28 (P28): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 16:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P33 (P33): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 16:00, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P68 (P68): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:12, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 16:02, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P93 (P93): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 16:03, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P34 (P34): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 15:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done as deprecated. If you think there may be a reason to restore, let me know and I can undelete. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 15:56, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P12 (P12): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 17:30, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done Lukas²³ talk in German Contribs 17:40, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P11 (P11): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Deprecated, unused Magnus Manske (talk) 18:16, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done - Wiki13 talk 18:19, 24 February 2013 (UTC)


P151 (P151): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Should be an integer, but I am unable to make such a type. Danrok (talk) 20:22, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done, pure integer values are not yet available. IW 20:39, 24 February 2013 (UTC)

Bulk deletion request

  1. Property:P152 (delete | history | links | logs)
  2. Property:P153 (delete | history | links | logs) (all on TAB)

should have been datatype string, not item. see also diskussion page. --Goldzahn (talk) 06:54, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

  Done Jon Harald Søby (talk) 10:42, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

Property:P31 "is a"

  Not done Ajraddatz (Talk) 20:50, 25 February 2013 (UTC)


P192 (P192): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Just an experiment. Mange01 (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done --Zolo (talk) 20:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)


P203 (P203): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong property type --  Docu  at 00:42, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done-- DangSunM (T · C) 00:57, 6 March 2013 (UTC)


P211 (P211): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Just testing strings Aude (talk) 16:06, 7 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done If you want to restore it please tell me.-- DangSunM (T · C) 16:08, 7 March 2013 (UTC)


Property added without discussion. Only language he: לאום, what means "nation". The "nation" of Benjamin Netanyahu is - according to the use of the property - "Jews", and the "nation" of Yasser Arafat is "Arab people". The correct perperties would be country of citizenship (P27) and religion (P140). --Kolja21 (talk) 23:55, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Based on the usage of the property, I guess what the creator wants is something like "ethnic group", which can not be replaced by P27 or P140. For example, there are ethnic Jews who don't believe in the religion of Judaism, and there are practitioners of Judaism who are not ethnically Jewish. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 06:48, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
This is an interesting example of the limits of a multilingual project. This property has been created in Hebrew, with a short description, and translated into Czech - these two languages are not universally understood, and I don't understand either of them. We can hope that the Czech translation of the Hebrew original is a precise equivalent, we can also fear that it is an approximate translation : I can see that czwiki národ is interlinked to enwiki "Nation", but that the hewiki interlink for "nation" is something different from "לאום". In such obscurity, I don't think it is possible to have an opinion on this, positive or negative. How will that be solved ? I keep it in watchlist and shall see how it goes on. Touriste (talk) 08:29, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
I suppose "ethnic group" is important for cultural workers from multicultural countries, e.g. Taras Shevchenko Citizenship = Russian Empire, used languages = Ukrainian and Russian but he is known as Ukrainian poet --AS (talk) 09:32, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Somewhat related discussion at Wikidata:Property_proposal#Unrecognized_country_of_citizenship.
An "ethnicity" property seems unavoidable (though, as a Frenchman, I am culturally biased against it...) --Zolo (talk) 10:27, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
Aryan and "half-Jewish" included? I think we should have some basic standards for POV properties. --Kolja21 (talk) 17:30, 2 March 2013 (UTC)
1. Rudy Giuliani is a good example, an Italian with U.S. Citizenship. So to him one parameter and one parameter citizenship and nationality / ethnicity. It's two different parameters each one says something different.
2. and this is definitely a good example of a wiki project common to all languages. Good things come out of it with God's help.
3. Sorry for my English .. This translated using Google Translate .. I relatively understand, but not to write
אבגד (talk) 07:20, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Thanks you for your reply. As Kolja says, such a property can have tricky political implications, Even in cases like Rudy Giuliani, things are not very simple : he has lived all his life in the United States and is part of the US national political establishment. Not everyone would agree that he can be considered Italian just because his parents were born in Italy. This property will certainly need further discussion before we know if we can implement it, and how it should be done. --Zolo (talk) 10:54, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Michael Bloomberg for example, is a better example, because he defines himself as a Jew and his citizenship is the United States. It should be the two parameters that each parameter has a different meaning. אבגד (talk) 23:50, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I think we can keep this as "ethnicity" but, absolutely, we will want to demand a very high bar for proof before it is used. James F. (talk) 06:23, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I would postpone it until we have decent general sourcing and possibly also privacy guidelines. --Zolo (talk) 07:28, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  Done DangSunM (T · C) 16:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Use for this property ... In the Ottoman empire, people who were Bosnians, or Serbs or Albanians became Grand Vizier.. At that time there were no countries and it is relevant to indicate their ethnicity. GerardM (talk) 13:59, 22 October 2013 (UTC)


P292 (P292): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong data type (should be QuantityValue). --Kolja21 (talk) 14:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done If you want to restore, please tell me --DangSunM (talk) 15:14, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


P165 (P165): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Duplicate. MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 14:29, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done If you want to restore, please feel free to ask.--DangSunM (talk) 14:32, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
  Comment. This property is still in use in Q12418, because, for some unidentified reason, it cannot be removed (already notified in bugzilla). --Zolo (talk) 14:37, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Now I just restored and redeleted--DangSunM (talk) 14:39, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
I tried to that way, but not removed.--DangSunM (talk) 14:48, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Yes that is bugzilla:45933. I think that the property can be removed nonetheless, as it may be confusing to keep a deprecated property. --Zolo (talk) 15:02, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Property:P97 (Noble title)

noble title (P97): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs | discussion) Was created without discussion and from the (brief) discussion here, I suggest this be deprecated and deleted before it's used too much and we wait for the MultilingualText property value so that uses of the new property are accurate and can be translated. /Ch1902 (talk) 16:15, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done Please ask for undeletion if needed. Regards, Vogone talk 17:18, 23 March 2013 (UTC)




P49 (P49): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Unless we import the Wiktionary here, items are for concepts not for words. "What links here" show that in its current state, the property produces non-sensical results. If we want to have this sort of info, we should use the string datatype (probably one property per language). In its current state, it just does not work Zolo (talk) 17:25, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

  Oppose Tricky case. Property:P49 corresponds to en:category:Demonyms, which includes several list articles, making it useful for phase 3. It is also related to the (unused) template Demonym country, making it relevant to phase 2. It seems possible for a bot to aggregate data from Wikipedia. Already now, someone has added a few dozen countries. Mange01 (talk) 19:06, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
  Orphan, delete, and create new property of "MultilingualTextValue" datatype when possible. Links to items like "Spanish people" for Spain can be done under properties with names like "inhabited by" or "main ethnicities". — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:36, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
... then why not just re-label it to "major ethnicity"? James F. (talk) 06:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
I'd be fine with that, if someone would first check for all cases where the object would no longer be valid (e.g. "Americans" for the US). — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 12:30, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
This is normally not an ethnical group, but a name of all citizens. The text datatype is not a good option, bucause texts are not linkable, it is not possible to produce list articles from them, it is hard to auto-translate without manual work, and they do not contribute to building a machine-readable ontology. Are names missing for some countries? Then we can wait for acceptance of redirected subjects as items, or of wiktionary items. Mange01 (talk) 07:57, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
  Reduction whilst we wait for new data types (but they won't be here for at least a month or so). James F. (talk) 06:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)
weak  Support. It worth not only a multilingual string but a well-developed dictionary structure (in some languages demonym is gender- and mb sth-else-dependent). Currently it collects items of too different kinds. You see, there are very few demonyms notable in Wikipedia. Mb it would be better to create backward field "demonym of", which is attached clearly to demonyms themselves. But this one on current stage obviously it's better to delete then to dig out pearls in what it is. Ignatus (talk) 17:07, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
Just my small exploration of 5 first resulth of WLH:
Now first appeared countries which are not so strong 1-1 associated with any ethnical group:
  • Great Britain ~ British people: people of citizenship and nationality (amn't shure what does the last word mean in English)
  • Russia ~ Rossiyane: members of society of citizens (most close to the concept of "demonym", term specially invented for such cases)
  • Bosnia and Herzogovina ~ Bosnjaki (major ethnicity of a region) and Herzogovinci (people of a region, demo- but not -nym and for Herzogovina): not a demonym ea which must be single word, gender/social-dependent or has several sinonyms
  • DPRK ~ Koreans: major ethnicity which obviosly lives also in Q884, and all over the world more
  • EU ~ European people: disambig (I know these items are allowed, but how are they allowed for meaningful properties?)
  • UAE ~ Emirati people: citizens and an ethnic group (demo- but not -nym)
  • USSR ~ Soviet people: umbrella demonym (finally a true demonym! "rossiyane" is it's "cut" version)
I won't discuss here administrative subdivisions but soup there is even worse including lists of notable people, major ethnicities etc. I can't see here cities whichs demonyms are (dictionary) notable linguistic concepts in Russian. I remarked support to deletion as weak since 1) there are from 1 to 4 true demonyms in list of 11-13 elements inspected and 2) maybe we can rename it to major ethnicity and clear the rest. Ignatus (talk) 20:37, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

  Deleted, as shown by Igatus, usage was really inconsistent, and sometimes non-sensical. Ethnicit can be started as a new property, but that is not the same thing. Large-scale creation of items about words might be possible, but would required careful thinking in a multilingual encyclopedia. Note that some pages are still linked to this property because of bugzilla:45933 --Zolo (talk) 15:28, 28 March 2013 (UTC)


P363 (P363): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong data type, see Wikidata:Property_proposal/Pending GZWDer (talk) 05:16, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done Not against undeleting, but since it was created in error, without discussion and only added to a couple items, it could be deleted. If you want to restore, just let me know. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 07:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)


P362 (P362): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong data type, see Wikidata:Property_proposal/Pending GZWDer (talk) 05:17, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

  Done Not against undeleting, but since it was created in error, without discussion and only added to a couple items, it could be deleted. If you want to restore, just let me know. Regards, — Moe Epsilon 07:10, 29 March 2013 (UTC)

"Type of" properties



Attention: The "section resolved" template needs a valid date. The section will not be archived otherwise. Please use {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} instead.


Attention: The "section resolved" template needs a valid date. The section will not be archived otherwise. Please use {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} instead.


Attention: The "section resolved" template needs a valid date. The section will not be archived otherwise. Please use {{Section resolved|1=~~~~}} instead.














P519 (P519): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong Datatype, needs to be string. --MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 21:42, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

  Done --Stevenliuyi (talk) 21:50, 14 May 2013 (UTC)








P601 (P601): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong datatype.

  Deleted --Stryn (talk) 20:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)


P603 (P603): (delete | history | links | entity usage | logs) Wrong datatype. I don't know whats wrong, I took 'String' as datatype but the created property has datatype 'item'. Wtf? Won't try agin, some other has to create the NUTS-property. -- MichaelSchoenitzer (talk) 22:08, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

  Deleted --Stryn (talk) 20:50, 6 June 2013 (UTC)




Using located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) makes the data more reusable for infoboxes - it's easy to distinguish between the administrative unit something is in from other geographical features it may be part of (P361)
If the various types of administrative units are labelled instance of (P31) 'administrative unit' then we will be able to get a bot to check located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) is only used to link to administrative units.
We will also be able to create a hierarchy of administrative units which is not practical if you mix administrative and other geographical units.
Later we can get the devs to add a special 'subproperty' so we can identify located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) as a subproperty of part of (P361). Filceolaire (talk) 07:41, 6 June 2013 (UTC)




Property:P435 and Property:P436


I would like to challenge this RfD. I created this property and was not informed that it would be deleted. Nobody that supported the creation of this property has voted here (and were probably also not notified). This is not the way things should be done :(. --Tobias1984 (talk) 15:50, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Why was this deletion request closed too early? Why wasn't it at least left open until the 17th? Multichill (talk) 19:48, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
I don't consider the closing too early at all. There is no established timeframe for closings; I close them when I see a clear consensus or when I that the conversation has reached a point where consensus would be impossible to reach (at which point I recommend an RfC). I am sorry that you were not informed of the discussion - that probably should have been done. As for reversing the deletion, which is what I'm sure you're asking for even though you haven't gotten around to actually saying as much, if you can present a good argument for why it isn't redundant to direction (P560), I would be more than willing to re-open the discussion. You can post it right here, below my comment. Sven Manguard Wha? 22:25, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
No need to revive the discussion. I can see the overlap of the two properties. My only wish is that relevant people are informed of such a discussion. --Tobias1984 (talk) 09:04, 12 June 2013 (UTC)


Can someone tell us what this was? Secretlondon (talk) 19:37, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
See Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/8#archipelago_.2F_.2F_archipel --Stevenliuyi (talk) 19:47, 10 June 2013 (UTC)