Talk:Q182580

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Work period

[edit]

@Quesotiotyo: why not to use separate values for each particular activity? Infovarius (talk) 14:50, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Infovarius: It would work rather neatly in this instance because her two main professions are disparate in nature and did not overlap, but I think for most cases things are a bit more muddled. There are currently over 300,000 uses of the work period (start) (P2031) property and only 60 or so of those have a qualifier specifying a particular occupation, and that is using a variety of properties (subject has role (P2868), of (P642), applies to part (P518), field of work (P101), occupation (P106)), so there is no clearly established precedence for how to model this. With the start time (P580) and end time (P582) qualifiers on the occupation (P106) statements, I'm not sure that there is even a need to have work period (start) (P2031) and work period (end) (P2032) in addition. Reading through the property proposal, it appears that these props were originally intended to be used as a substitute for date of birth (P569)/date of death (P570) for people whose exact lifespan is not known (similar to floruit (P1317)). A quick glance at a random sample of uses suggests to me that the scope has since expanded and that these two properties are often used to signify the start/end of a person's professional career, which I can understand because P106 statements rarely make any sort of distinction between professional vs. amateur vs. hobby level of participation in whichever activity.
I will go ahead and put it back to how it was (though with subject has role instead of object has role), but I am eager to see if you (or anyone else who might see this) have any other ideas for how this information could best be entered.
--Quesotiotyo (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]