Talk:Q26689701
Autodescription — August 2016 Central Italy earthquake (Q26689701)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “August 2016 Central Italy earthquake” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
@ValterVB: I am afraid your revert that removed all my edits for damaged (P3081) with a comment calling them "nonsense" is a bit premature and potentially uninformed. Please check this discussion on the property proposal and the examples of usage of the corresponding property in Freebase. All structures mentioned as "damaged" are: 1) about items that already exist in Wikidata (in virtue of some notability condition) and 2) are sourced to reliable sources in one or more linked Wikipedia articles (the references, granted, were still missing, but that's not sufficient ground for removing the statements altogether). I'll restore and source these edits. Happy to discuss this further if you have doubts on the application of the property.--DarTar (talk) 06:24, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @DarTar: You can add [1] in f. e. Sant'Agostino Church (Q3672267). Regards, thank you, Conny (talk) 06:46, 28 August 2016 (UTC).
- @DarTar: The problem is that you can add all with this property. In notability we say that we can create an item if: «It fulfills some structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful.» Teorically I can creat an item about the police station or about the butcher of the country and add them to this item. So where is the limit to add things with this properties? --ValterVB (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @ValterVB: why is that a problem? If it is reliably sourced that the police station and butcher's shop were destroyed then I see no reason why we should not include them here. Thryduulf (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- Reverted the edit, but I don't like --ValterVB (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @ValterVB, Thryduulf, Conny: thanks all for the comments. ValterVB: to try and address your concerns, I see the property primarily as a way of representing links between events and the damage they produce to some notable structures. The main use case I had in mind was this one: 1997 Umbria and Marche earthquake (Q2609430) → damaged (P3081) →Upper Basilica of San Francesco d'Assisi (Q3635787). Having these relations explicitly represented will eventually allow us to answer questions like all notable military structures damaged by earthquakes in the Southern hemisphere with a magnitude equal or greater to 6.0 by year as well as all events that damaged the Assisi Basilica by year. Like Thryduulf I personally don't see a problem with the creation/proliferation of items as long as they are reliably sourced, but I don't believe this is what the property aims to incentivize. Lastly, consider that the property is also designed to accept numerical values, see examples on damaged (P3081).--DarTar (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @DarTar, Thryduulf, Conny: I understand the usefulness of the property but in this case perhaps the best solution is to use a reciprocal property: damaged / destroyed by. Example: Upper Basilica of San Francesco d'Assisi (Q3635787) → damaged by → 1997 Umbria and Marche earthquake (Q2609430) --ValterVB (talk) 17:03, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @ValterVB, Thryduulf, Conny: thanks all for the comments. ValterVB: to try and address your concerns, I see the property primarily as a way of representing links between events and the damage they produce to some notable structures. The main use case I had in mind was this one: 1997 Umbria and Marche earthquake (Q2609430) → damaged (P3081) →Upper Basilica of San Francesco d'Assisi (Q3635787). Having these relations explicitly represented will eventually allow us to answer questions like all notable military structures damaged by earthquakes in the Southern hemisphere with a magnitude equal or greater to 6.0 by year as well as all events that damaged the Assisi Basilica by year. Like Thryduulf I personally don't see a problem with the creation/proliferation of items as long as they are reliably sourced, but I don't believe this is what the property aims to incentivize. Lastly, consider that the property is also designed to accept numerical values, see examples on damaged (P3081).--DarTar (talk) 15:36, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- Reverted the edit, but I don't like --ValterVB (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @ValterVB: why is that a problem? If it is reliably sourced that the police station and butcher's shop were destroyed then I see no reason why we should not include them here. Thryduulf (talk) 08:40, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
- @DarTar: The problem is that you can add all with this property. In notability we say that we can create an item if: «It fulfills some structural need, for example: it is needed to make statements made in other items more useful.» Teorically I can creat an item about the police station or about the butcher of the country and add them to this item. So where is the limit to add things with this properties? --ValterVB (talk) 08:02, 28 August 2016 (UTC)