Property talk:P166

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

Documentation

award received
award or recognition received by a person, organisation or creative work
Description Notable awards attributed to the subject. Qualify with point in time (P585), if possible.
Represents award (Q618779)
Data type Item
Template parameter en:Template:Infobox person (awards)
Domain person, organisation or creative work (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Allowed values award (Q618779) (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Example Jehan Sadat (Q212190)Pearl S. Buck Award (Q20879923)
Aaron Swartz (Q302817)EFF Pioneer Award (Q31323)
Rolf Stengård (Q22676744)Prix Europa (Q1421817)
Panikos Krystallis (Q7131158)Cypriot First Division top goalscorers (Q16327504)
Source IMDB, Nobel Prize website, Olympics website etc. (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896))
Tracking: same no label (Q42533369)
Tracking: usage Category:Pages using Wikidata property P166 (Q22911624)
See also nominated for (P1411), winner (P1346), together with (P1706), for work (P1686), trophy awarded (P4622)
Lists
Proposal discussion Property proposal/Archive/2#P166
Current uses 333,323
[create] Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here
Value type “award (Q618779), order of chivalry (Q2003221), class of award (Q38033430): This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value award (Q618779), order of chivalry (Q2003221), class of award (Q38033430) (or a subclass thereof).
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P166#Value type Q618779, Q2003221, Q38033430, SPARQL
Qualifiers “follows (P155), followed by (P156), location (P276), start time (P580), end time (P582), point in time (P585), field of work (P101), statement is subject of (P805), conferred by (P1027), for work (P1686), together with (P1706), winner (P1346), series ordinal (P1545), prize money (P2121): this property should be used only with the listed qualifiers.
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P166#Allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
Mandatory qualifier “point in time (P585): this property should be used with the listed qualifier.
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P166#mandatory qualifier, SPARQL
This property is being used by:

Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

"subclass of" or "instance of" "award"?[edit]

The property documentation says that the value type of this property should be "subclass of" "award". Now almost all awards currently seem to use "instance of" "award" though, which I think is not actually wrong. After all an award like the Nobel Prize in Chemistry is a concrete object. Maybe one could argue there is an addional "layer" below with a subject receiving an "instance" of that award, that way you could argue for such awards being a "subclass of award". --Bthfan (talk) 06:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

See http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/autolist.html?q=CLAIM%5B31%3A618779%5D and http://tools.wmflabs.org/wikidata-todo/autolist.html?q=CLAIM%5B279%3A618779%5D for the two item lists of instance of/subclass of. --Bthfan (talk) 06:56, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
On top of that most of the awarded items are actually ceremonies and not awards. Like BRIT Awards is an item about the ceremony and should be a subclass of award ceremony. Should it also be a subclass of music award so that it can be awarded? Can it/should it be a subclass of both? RolandBeck (talk) 08:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I changed the relation in the constraint from "subclass" to "instance" as it is more natural to look at an award like the Nobel Prize in Chemistry as a concrete object with several receivers than a class. --Pasleim (talk) 14:28, 12 October 2014 (UTC)

Standardizing statements[edit]

For the Nobel prizes, we generally have an item about each years award. Currently we have at least three different ways of stating that someone has been awarded one:

  1. One statement with one qualifier:
  2. One statement with two qualifiers:
  3. Two statements:

Could we try to agree on one standard? While 1 is a bit lacking, both 2 and 3 both seem like valid ways of describing the same information. In number 2, however, "point in time (P585) 2012" will be stated both in 2012 Nobel Peace Prize (Q4626364) itself and in the qualifier used with award received (P166). Thus, number 3 seems like the more elegant and fail prone solution to me. Danmichaelo (talk) 12:49, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

I think there has already been somewhere a discussion and that solution 2) was favored. In any case, this is what I would support, because this can be easily applied to all awards while 3) is awkward in many cases (it would require items like "1949 edition of teenywiny village entertainer prize, and seems hard to apply to awards that are not periodical, like military decorations). It is easier to use in clients without too much reprocessing. Actually, the fact that the date given in the awardee item seems like a good thing. For example, {{Timeline|Q43179}} mentions that she got the Indira Gandhi Prize, but not the Nobel prize, because the template does not get fetch dates from linked items (and enabling that wihout creating a lot of nonsense may actually be rather tricky).

: birth in Monrovia
-: studies at College of West Africa
-: marriage
: lives at United States of America
-: studies at Harvard University, Cambridge
-: studies at University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder
: lives at Nairobi
-: works for Citibank
-: works for United Nations Development Programme
: doctor honoris causa
-: President of Liberia
: Presidential Medal of Freedom
: doctor honoris causa
: doctor honoris causa
: doctor honoris causa
: Nobel Peace Prize
: doctor honoris causa
: Indira Gandhi Prize
: Global Economy Prize
: 100 Women

  • I believe first AND second variants are both good. The difference between 1 and 2 is additional optional qualifier. Third variant is not good because it would be very hard to select entities for all years. Also third variant (as said before) implies creation of award-by-year entries. -- Vlsergey (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
I agree with Vlsergey. Option 1 with option 2 as an enhancement where additional info is available. Filceolaire (talk) 19:18, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Pop up of qualifier NOT "point in time" in initial list[edit]

Can someone please explain to me the qualifier pop-ups. Usually the pop-ups when a qualifier is added are those expected to be added, yet for me the "point in time" (a mandatory component) isn't in the initial presented list, it only appears when halfway into the word. Is there a means to have the mandatory qualifiers appear first?  — billinghurst sDrewth 00:25, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Revocation date[edit]

Would there be any way to notice the revocation date of an award? Let's say some person received a medal from an institution and some years later that same institution considers them unfittable for whatsoever reason... --Toniher (talk) 16:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

@Toniher: start and end time qualifiers define events in past
we can adjust constraints. d1g (talk) 19:03, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Awards awarded for a previous period[edit]

Sometimes, an award is awarded for a previous period of time, like an awarded given in March 2016 for the best movie of 2015. How should we deal with that ? I have created Wikidata:Property proposal/Awarded for period. --Zolo (talk) 07:49, 2 August 2017 (UTC)


add 'field of work' and 'for work' as allowed qualifiers?[edit]

I've been working on the WD item for this year's most prominent winner of the Ig Nobel prize - and therefore using this property. I've come across two constraint violations in the process which I think shouldn't be violations field of work (P101) and for work (P1686).
My example case: Q40728819#P166. The two qualifiers, in this example, are field of work (P101) -> physics (Q413) and for work (P1686) -> On the rheology of cats (Q43085371).
Could these two be added to the list of allowed qualifiers, or someone suggest an alternative? Thanks, Wittylama (talk) 16:33, 13 November 2017 (UTC)