Property talk:P189

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search


location of discovery
where the item was located when discovered
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Value type “location (Q17334923), fictional location (Q3895768), geographic entity (Q27096213): 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 location (Q17334923), fictional location (Q3895768), geographic entity (Q27096213) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P189#Value type Q17334923, Q3895768, Q27096213, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)


should be merged with Property:P65? JAn Dudík (talk) 20:26, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

I noticed that it causes a conflict of labels, but I think they are really two different things. In this case, the property points to the place where the item itself was located. For an astronomical object, it points to observatory that found the item, and clearly the item itself was not located there. --Zolo (talk) 20:31, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
I made the description more specific. The problem is that discovery is an act which can occur in a different location to the thing which was discovered. Danrok (talk) 21:10, 3 March 2013 (UTC)

roman city[edit]

This property is used for small items. Can I use it for example in Q23048 (roman city that became cologne, germany) to connect the roman city to Cologne too? --Molarus 10:55, 19 November 2014 (UTC)

I do not see anything wrong with using this property for large things, but I do not really see what the discovery place of a city means. A city do not move, so it has to be discovered at the place where it was located. Using coordinate location (P625), P766 (P766) etc. sounds more relevant to me. --Zolo (talk) 06:48, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
p625 would be OK, but P766 (event location)? Another example Q22647. Troja (3000 BCE) (p131) is in the administrative territorial entity of a province of Turkey. How strange is that? And Troja was really discovered. Some things of Troja are now located somewhere else, which is true for some parts of Q23048 too. What would be suitable is a new propety like <was located near><item>. At least I will stop using this property at the moment. So far I inserted it in Q23048, Q1027384, Q1046167 and Q1146198. --Molarus 12:57, 20 November 2014 (UTC)