Wikidata talk:WikiProject Music/2022 review proposal

Starting a 2022 review proposal

Feel free to change typo mistakes, and start a discussion. Thanks Amadalvarez (talk) 10:05, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Re: band members

After going back and forth on the subject I've come to the conclusion that member of (P463) on the individual band members is the better option. This has a few advantages over using part of (P361) / has part(s) (P527):

• Only one place to maintain qualifiers like start time (P580)/end time (P582)/subject has role (P2868) etc. Having to do this on "both sides" (band and band member) is time consuming and error prone.
• Adding constraints becomes possible.
• The naming is better and less ambiguous, matches the wording in member category (P6365), member of this band, musical group (Q65966973), and various band member categories.

Personally I would like to see an effort to move all current uses of part of/has part to standardize on member of. Moebeus (talk) 10:07, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I see that you are friend to avoid the opposite properties. Me too. However, I have the theory of the less effort (for read and for maintenance). In general, to me there are two situations:

• When one direction is a large multivalue and opposite has a discrete number. Ex.: Paintings property. The paintings must have owned by (P127), but the museum must not have owner of (P1830), because has thousands of paintings. In terms of person-group relationship in this situation we have the fotball player and its clubs. As the number of players are larger in the lifetime of club than the number of clubs when a sportman will play in his career, this info is NOT on the club, but in person item.
• When relationship produces similar number of entries. Ex.: parents and kids, spouses, etc. In this case, have the info only in one side is unpair (who is the main one?) and, specially, because affects to efficiency in access. However, as now is implemented in these example cases, must have a constraint detector that mark with a flag the inconsistency.

What is most important / accessed, the chronology bands for a music, or the composition of a band ?. How many entries may exist in normal case ?. less than 5 ?. Doesn't seem a problem.

Why not used member of (P463) ? (my thesys, of course). Musicians have not only this occupation along their lifes and, in non music persons, the P463 is used for a members of historical, economical or cultural institutions and applications as infoboxes should differentiate both situations for this especific occupation.

Specifically, we have +7000 entries of musicians with P463 ≠ music group: https://w.wiki/5RNw

I agree that name sounds better "member" that "part of", but it's just a cultural aspect; why the musicians of a band are called "members", instead of "components"?. Just concept naming. Amadalvarez (talk) 16:15, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

It's ok for me

I'm quite new to this project and my experience comes mainly from the Wikidata:Wikiproject_Lieder I started here. Thus, I revised this changes (mainly those which affect my project) and I see no problem in implementing these changes. Thanks @Amadalvarez for this great effort! Robertgarrigos (talk) 17:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Robert. I'll ping to you when a debate was opened. Amadalvarez (talk) 17:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)