Wikidata:Property proposal/consequence of text

consequence of text

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Done: consequence of text (P9680) (Talk and documentation)

Description	legislative or executive or other text that was the cause of the statement
Data type	Item
Domain	for use as a qualifer on statements, most commonly on significant event (P793), dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576), etc.
Allowed values	work (Q386724)
Example 1	Coldingham (Q68815157)significant event (P793)boundary change (Q28953942) → consequence of text = Local Government (Scotland) Act 1889 (Q6664029)
Example 2	copyhold (Q1990719)dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576)31 December 1925 → consequence of text = Law of Property Act 1925 (Q6503425)
Example 3	Cambridge Health Authority (Q105087660)dissolved, abolished or demolished date (P576)1 April 1996 → consequence of text = The Health Authorities (England) Establishment Order 1996 (Q99880206)
Planned use	general use; use for consequences of various UK legislative acts and statutory instruments (User:Tagishsimon)
Robot and gadget jobs	replace uses of has cause (P828), end cause (P1534), has immediate cause (P1478) where their values are texts
See also	foundational text (P457), has cause (P828), end cause (P1534)

Synonyms

• "effective text", "effected by", "legislative cause", "result of legislation"

Motivation

We have a property (foundational text (P457)) for legislation, charters, treaties, executive orders etc that bring an item into being; but no similar property for such texts that cause an item to end, or change its state. This proposal would create that property.

The proposal arises out of discussion with User:Tagishsimon when I was looking for such a property. Tagishsimon has recently been doing a lot of systematic work on UK legislative acts and examples of UK Statutory Instrument (Q7604686) and their effects. But without a property like this, he said he was merely using stated in (P248) in a reference to indicate the legislative cause of events, such as at Q105087660#P576. This is unsatisfactory, because a reference could be any text that describes an action that has happened, not necessarily its cause.

It would be useful to be able to identify this very specific type of relation, from effect to legislative cause, and therefore to have a property for it. Jheald (talk) 08:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion

• Proposed. Jheald (talk) 08:07, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Comment Are you planning to propose a similar movement of "foundational text" uses to qualifiers, as a parallel to what is proposed here? Mahir256 (talk) 16:29, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mahir256: I hadn't thought of that. But probably not -- it doesn't seem to be broke, so don't fix it. I suppose the difference with "consequence of text" is that that needs to be a qualifier, because it needs to be attached to a statement to indicate what was the consequence. Whereas for foundational text (P457) the result of the text is the whole item. Jheald (talk) 16:36, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

There's a case to be made for the creation of a 'dissolutional text' property to match 'foundational text', but this proposal does not argue that case. 'Consequence of text' may not be a dissolution. Per JH, 'foundational text' is understood (by me, at least) to be the text that brought the item into being, and it is quite happy as a main property. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:41, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. I have probably hundreds of UK SIs which dissolve institutions previously established by another SI. No very clear way to indicate that the SI effected the dissolution. end cause (P1534) and has cause (P828) are being employe to specify why the dissolution happened - e.g. b/c amalgamation, business failure. An 'effected by' or 'consequence of text' qualifier will allow me to point to the instrument that effected the dissolution. UK SIs which dissolve things, and note that many acts of parliament also dissolve things, such as large sets of local statutory bodies. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:37, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Seems sensible, and well explained. JesseW (talk) 14:44, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:39, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support. I can see how this would be useful. Watty62 (talk) 19:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
•  Support, an important property for Wikidata.--Arbnos (talk) 23:50, 8 June 2021 (UTC)
•  Support per above comments. — The Erinaceous One 🦔 04:32, 18 June 2021 (UTC)

@Jheald, Tagishsimon, JesseW, Pigsonthewing, Watty62, Arbnos: @The-erinaceous-one: Done as consequence of text (P9680) --SilentSpike (talk) 11:34, 26 June 2021 (UTC)