Wikidata:Property proposal/Bebo profile numeric ID
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Bebo profile ID[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Not done
| Description | numeric identifier for an artist on Bebo site |
|---|---|
| Represents | Bebo (Q813559) |
| Data type | External identifier |
| Domain | human (Q5) |
| Example 1 | Basshunter (Q383541) → 5206289718 |
| Example 2 | Anthony Horowitz (Q279305) → 8538733607 (found since external links 2 → dewiki) |
| Example 3 | MISSING |
| Source | https://bebo.com |
| External links | Use in sister projects:
|
| Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
| Formatter URL | https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=$1 |
| See also | Bebo profile ID (P6905) |
Motivation[edit]
Bebo profile ID (P6905) is used for profile ID's which has been archived in Wayback Archive. There are also avaiable numerical variants which include more versions of archived profiles. Eurohunter (talk) 19:36, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
Strong oppose 
OpposeThe example does not succeedand other examples are missing. The sister's projects do not give much result. The degree of completeness will inevitably always be incomplete since the site no longer exists. —Eihel (talk) 04:08, 5 July 2019 (UTC)- @Eihel: "The example does not succeed (...)" - what you mean? There is already Bebo profile ID (P6905) so without numerical ids a lot of data is missing. Eurohunter (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eurohunter, Pintoch: For "example does not succeed", it is an archival date error on my part, sorry. When the site was closed, WP users were forced to stop adding Bebo pages. So if you are looking for IA pages, on WP pages, I wish you good luck. To enlighten you, I added other "External links" which will have more chance to meet results, accompanied by an additional example. (As basic url, it will not be necessary either to give IA, but well https://web.archive.org/web/20061230172129/http://www.bebo.com/Default.jsp.) Then the number of catalog entries is no longer the number of Profiles that were on Bebo, but the number of pages saved on IA, ie 62 (a prolific year 2006, but no valid backup). In addition, the link tracking depth during the backup is not guaranteed: the links proposed on the archives will lead nowhere. At this number, we must subtract all redirects, all pages that have no notability and all pages with errors. If you find 10 valid pages, it's already a lot. About "example does not succeed", the ID should not be "https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5206289718", but "https://web.archive.org/web/20131220161120/http://archive.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5206289718" (the last valid backup to take into account). We must not look for a page, but the ID is the link to the right page. You could see several archivers to increase the catalog, but, frankly, I have doubts. Best regards —Eihel (talk) 23:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- Finally, there is an error related to the usage example in the property and in the Item due to the unique item constraint. But it's a drop of water compared to the 17 constraint errors of this Item, mainly on the Identifiers! Aaaah! I understand: you are making a proposal here to integrate IA into an already existing Property. Eurohunter, you have to choose your URL before. Once a property is created you can modify it as you want, but without adding errors. There is no need to make a proposal here. Simply, you only have to put the link of the archive in reference. On Bebo profile ID (P6905), you add to property constraint (P2302): citation needed constraint (Q54554025), constraint status (P2316), and suggestion constraint (Q62026391). —Eihel (talk) 00:18, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eihel: Reference is space for source so adding there variant of url would not make sense. I got idea now to make property called numeric identifier to link to numeric ID which could be used as qualifier for Bebo profile ID (P6905). Eurohunter (talk) 06:07, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- Finally, there is an error related to the usage example in the property and in the Item due to the unique item constraint. But it's a drop of water compared to the 17 constraint errors of this Item, mainly on the Identifiers! Aaaah! I understand: you are making a proposal here to integrate IA into an already existing Property. Eurohunter, you have to choose your URL before. Once a property is created you can modify it as you want, but without adding errors. There is no need to make a proposal here. Simply, you only have to put the link of the archive in reference. On Bebo profile ID (P6905), you add to property constraint (P2302): citation needed constraint (Q54554025), constraint status (P2316), and suggestion constraint (Q62026391). —Eihel (talk) 00:18, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eurohunter, Pintoch: For "example does not succeed", it is an archival date error on my part, sorry. When the site was closed, WP users were forced to stop adding Bebo pages. So if you are looking for IA pages, on WP pages, I wish you good luck. To enlighten you, I added other "External links" which will have more chance to meet results, accompanied by an additional example. (As basic url, it will not be necessary either to give IA, but well https://web.archive.org/web/20061230172129/http://www.bebo.com/Default.jsp.) Then the number of catalog entries is no longer the number of Profiles that were on Bebo, but the number of pages saved on IA, ie 62 (a prolific year 2006, but no valid backup). In addition, the link tracking depth during the backup is not guaranteed: the links proposed on the archives will lead nowhere. At this number, we must subtract all redirects, all pages that have no notability and all pages with errors. If you find 10 valid pages, it's already a lot. About "example does not succeed", the ID should not be "https://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5206289718", but "https://web.archive.org/web/20131220161120/http://archive.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5206289718" (the last valid backup to take into account). We must not look for a page, but the ID is the link to the right page. You could see several archivers to increase the catalog, but, frankly, I have doubts. Best regards —Eihel (talk) 23:02, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eihel: "The example does not succeed (...)" - what you mean? There is already Bebo profile ID (P6905) so without numerical ids a lot of data is missing. Eurohunter (talk) 15:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
@Eurohunter: You are proposing a property with the same name. Bebo profile ID has already been accepted. This page is intended for the proposition of new properties. Now you are proposing a property with very few IDs. Your currently offered IDs are nothing more than archiving pages from your previous property. You have the right to modify a property once it is created. In addition (and I repeat myself), the identifier that you propose is on the archiving schedule. Normally, the identifier should be https://web.archive.org/web/<date_and_time>/http://archive.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=<id_identical_to_your_last_property>. The identifier should be timestamp:identifier and therefore the format of the URL will use a third party. Unthinkable. So I don't see where my idea does not make sense. Let's wait for an additional opinion. Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 06:16, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eihel: https://web.archive.org/web/20121014033831/http://www.bebo.com/Profile.jsp?MemberId=5206289718 marked part is archived version id so formatter URL would include two unique values/parts (both ids are needed 20121014033831 and 5206289718). Do you know how to implement it at Bebo profile ID (P6905)? Eurohunter (talk) 22:11, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
- On WP, archive sites are mainly used for references. The low number of identifiers, the complexity of the URL, the already existing property, etc: I wonder if you consider different opinions. @ZI Jony, ArthurPSmith: Do you have an opinion on this proposal, please? —Eihel (talk) 02:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Eihel: I think it can be done on Bebo profile ID (P6905) but it need way to add alternative urls. Eurohunter (talk) 18:29, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- On WP, archive sites are mainly used for references. The low number of identifiers, the complexity of the URL, the already existing property, etc: I wonder if you consider different opinions. @ZI Jony, ArthurPSmith: Do you have an opinion on this proposal, please? —Eihel (talk) 02:11, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose I do not think we should take it. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:58, 8 July 2019 (UTC)