Wikidata:Property proposal/Gfycat tag

Gfycat tag[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

Not done

Description	tag used to identify an entity or concept, on Gfycat.com
Data type	External identifier
Allowed values	[\w]+(\+[\w]+)*
Example 1	bicycle (Q11442) → bicycle
Example 2	drum (Q11404) → drums
Example 3	Penn Jillette (Q4129653) → penn+jillette>
Source	https://gfycat.com/
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].
Number of IDs in source	Many 1000s
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL	https://gfycat.com/gifs/tag/$1
Robot and gadget jobs	I will be adding a data set to Mix'n'Match
See also	Wikidata:Property proposal/Gfycat user ID

Motivation

Popular GIF upload site. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:22, 22 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support David (talk) 12:28, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support as a useful depiction of subjects --Habst (talk) 15:29, 25 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As external identifier. A tag is not authority control.--Micru (talk) 14:19, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- That would be why the dataype is called "external identifier" and not "authority control". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:43, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Pigsonthewing: I believe David is responding to |topic = authority control in the proposal, given that external identifiers such as the one you are proposing are very frequently used for that purpose. Mahir256 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Then he would do well to raise his concerns on the talk page of that page, and not as an objection to this proposal. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:04, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - @Pigsonthewing: We already have hashtag (P2572) as String. Why cannot this property be String too?--Micru (talk) 20:33, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support by analogy with similar properties for Twitter and proposed for Instagram, though some concerns in the Instagram proposal may be applicable here as well. Mahir256 (talk) 15:57, 26 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as mentioned above, the datatype seems to have the usual defect. Would be fine as a string datatype property, as other search strings/tags.
--- Jura 13:27, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose tags are just strings, not stable identifiers for a concept. This will just cause noise in our dataset. Multichill (talk) 10:41, 13 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Create as external ID. I see no merit in making this a string, rather than an external ID, when it exists purely to retrieve content from an external website. Given a binary divide between properties for general purposes in the main section, and those which relate purely to retrieving content from external sites, segregated below the fold to distinguish them from general statements about the item, this seems to belong squarely in the latter category.

As to Multichill saying this is just clutter, and we shouldn't create it at all, I don't agree. If the website has dominant hashtags for content related for particular items, that would facilitate linking in each direction, then that seems to me information well worth having. Jheald (talk) 16:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I think this suffers from the same problems as other tags on social media. They aren't curated in any way and can be freely chosen by the users, so there isn't necessarily a strong connection between the string and a specific thing/concept here on WD. While hashtag (P2572) was created despite objections, Wikidata:Property proposal/Instagram tag was rejected a couple of months ago and Wikidata:Property proposal/Flickr tag is still under discussion) Just look at something like tree, only some of those gifs actually show tree (Q10884), many seem to show people smooking weed (probably thanks to /r/trees) or all kinds of other stuff. --Kam Solusar (talk) 17:32, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Multichill… why would "bicycle" be the tag for bicycle (Q11442)? "bike" works too. Or maybe "velo"? We would just end up adding labels and aliases of each item as values for this property: no thanks. − Pintoch (talk) 19:22, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Pintoch: Perhaps, but the number would be likely to be fairly finite. Is recording a short list such a problem? Jheald (talk) 00:41, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Jheald: just because we generally try to avoid redundancy? As a data consumer you can already list the labels and aliases in an item and deduce from that the possible Gfycat tags for the item. − Pintoch (talk) 07:01, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Storing multiple data values is not "redundant". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - Oh sorry, I thought it was, but since you assert it with such certainty, I must be wrong. − Pintoch (talk) 14:53, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Multichill --Pasleim (talk) 22:53, 22 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it seems that this "tag" s just a duplication of the label (and/or the alias), so why is this property needed? Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:10, 23 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- As can be seen from the examples, this is not "just a duplication of the label (and/or the alias)". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 11:26, 25 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- It looks like Q11404 lacked the alias "drums" (fixed).
  --- Jura 15:18, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Pigsonthewing: can you explain your deletion? --
    --- Jura 18:41, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Germartin1 (talk) 18:58, 19 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Not done, no consensus − Pintoch (talk) 09:07, 7 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]