Talk:Q15642541
Autodescription — human-geographic territorial entity (Q15642541)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “human-geographic territorial entity” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
human-geographic territorial entity⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
@TimurKirov: About artificial object (Q16686448) If you check the definition, you will see this is about anything who is created by a human, by mind or by hand. A territory with a limit develloped by a human mind enter this definition, it added as a subclass of human-geographic territorial entity (Q15642541). The case who are problematic are often village, protected area, hamlet, or neighbouhod. I don't see why i have to add a "heritage site" to this places when we created heritage designation (P1435) to say the place is have a heritage value for a country. --Fralambert (talk) 21:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
@Fralambert: - if it would be for everything created by humans it should also catch humans and catch all classes, since classes itself are artificial. For the problem with heritage status there is probably a solution. Maybe change the constraint to something more useful? TimurKirov (talk) 22:05, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
SMP, statement P279=artificial geographic entity (Q27096235) is not correct as far as the latter is defined as a physical object ("of the ground or the underground"). Subclasses of human-geographic territorial entity (Q15642541), such as adminstrative territory, cultural region etc. in most cases aren't physical objects, their boundaries are not necessarily marked on ground. 2001:7D0:81DA:F780:24B2:CC5:ECA1:4984 09:29, 31 January 2022 (UTC)