Talk:Q102158
Autodescription — Narva (Q102158)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “Narva” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Infovarius, I don't think that you made it more exact here. This town not being part of Estonia (Q191) before Treaty of Tartu (Q1056439) and later during occupation is not a bright-line concept. In order to show what overlapping periods under country affiliation were about, there was a statement is subject of (P805) qualifer. Using a qualifer seems to be a reasonable way distinguish disputed affiliations, e.g. I see that similar solution is used for Kashmir (Q43100).
For all of these history related statements we should avoid making straighforward claims on subjects that aren't straighforward. Otherwise the presentation is misleading. For instance, I doubut if anyone really thinks that Estonian Soviet Socialist Republic (Q130280) was a country for these a few days before being formally taken into the union. If this really is considered in some reliable source and can be referenced, then we can try to add qualifers. Though, I'm not sure what these qualifers should be and making the subject clear enough still might not work out here in form of statements. Then we can omit exact dates here and keep them with their interpretations in Wikipedia. 90.191.81.65 13:56, 16 March 2018 (UTC)
Regarding area revert. Another area value with a source was added a few days ago. So I believe it's appropriate to remove unsourced value in favour of sourced value. Even if unsourced value is also correct it's unknown what criterion applies to it. I would explain that sort of things in edit summary if there was edit summary for adding/removing statements. Putting things back and forth is kind of messy. Instead, if some edits aren't self-evident then it'd be nice if you could ask me before reverting. 90.191.81.65 15:49, 16 March 2018 (UTC)