Talk:Q1070912

Type or instance?

@LlywelynII: if you think that this item "is a" division then pleaase add its coordinate. Infovarius (talk) 21:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

It is a division regardless of what either of us might think to the contrary.

No idea what you're trying to express by 'coordinate', though. It normally refers to rough geographical position, which obviously has nothing to do with levels of administrative hierarchies. LlywelynII (talk) 16:19, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

@LlywelynII: If this is a "level of administrative hierarchy" then it can't be P31 of administrative territorial entity (Q56061), it should be subclass of (P279) of it. As for coordinates - it's just example of a property that instances usually has - compare to other instances. You can also read Help:Basic membership properties to understand the difference between P31 and P279. --Infovarius (talk) 19:27, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Again, if "march" or any of the other various classes of administrative divisions fall under "administrative territorial entity", so should this. It's not a "class of" anything. It's a specific designation.LlywelynII (talk) 01:07, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

@LlywelynII:administrative territorial entity (Q56061) is a class (not metaclass) of territorial entities, while administrative territorial entity type (Q15617994) should be used for "specific designations" (so this is a metaclass). Do you understand the difference? Did you watch the results of the query?? --Infovarius (talk) 21:30, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

See above. It's fine if march &c. are miscategorized and the categories are just terribly named. Of course "administrative division" can only be a metaclass and it'd be better for me if those issues were corrected but it's not a systemic problem until more people make similar mistakes. (They seem too, as with march &c., but I get that currently you're only processing this as a me problem and won't feel the need to fix this mess until you've heard from other editors.) LlywelynII (talk) 11:54, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree with Infovarius:

administrative territorial entity (Q56061) is an indirect subclass of territory (Q4835091) meaning that every instance of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) is also an instance of territory (Q4835091) (relatively stable since 2014 [1]). zhou (Q1070912) is not a territory.

Besides, it has several instances (which are proper administrative territorial entity (Q56061)). Just to mention some: Bingzhou (Q1038508), Youzhou (Q39928), Yangzhou (Q2817241).

To make zhou (Q1070912) an instance of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) is both against the definition (via subclasses) and the current usage of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) (Infovarius provided a list of its current instances). It is a bit confusing that administrative territorial entity (Q56061) is linked to Category:Types of administrative division (Q6542726) as its main topic, though. Not sure if there is a reason.

I'm curious why you think that administrative territorial entity (Q56061) should be a class of types or levels of administrative division. Is there some decision in a certain WikiProject or on a Discussion page I'm not aware of? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:35, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

What may be also elucidating is to look at the properties mentioned via properties for this type (P1963): Q56061#P1963. Besides the coordinates mentioned by Infovarius: Can the household wealth (P2220) of zhou (Q1070912) be given? The area (P2046) or unemployment rate (P1198)? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:45, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

If you use the English interface you may also see generic queries for administrative territorial entities right above this discussion. These queries include places in zhou, list of monuments, list of highest buildings, people born in zhou, list of items with narrative location in zhou. Do you think that these are meaningful queries for a level of administrative division? I don't think so.

If your mind is set on the thought that zhou (Q1070912) must be a administrative territorial entity (Q56061) in Wikidata you may argue that this list of generic queries, the description of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) and all the other instances of administrative territorial entity (Q56061) must be false. But honestly, in this case it is easier to just assume the opposite: that zhou (Q1070912) is not a administrative territorial entity (Q56061) in Wikidata. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:58, 5 January 2023 (UTC)