Shortcut: WD:PP/WORK

Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search


Property proposal: Generic Authority control Person Organization
Event Creative work Term Space
Place Sports Sister projects
Economics Transportation Natural science Property metadata

See also[edit]


This page is for the proposal of new properties.

Before proposing a property
  1. Check if the property already exists by looking at Wikidata:List of properties (manual list) and Special:ListProperties.
  2. Check if the property was previously proposed or is on the pending list.
  3. Check if you can give a similar label and definition as an existing Wikipedia infobox parameter, or if it can be matched to an infobox, to or from which data can be transferred automatically.
  4. Select the right datatype for the property.
  5. Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below and add it in the appropriate section.

Creating the property

  1. Once consensus is reached, change status=ready on the template, to attract the attention of a property creator.
  2. Creation can be done 1 week after the proposal, by a property creator or an administrator.
  3. See steps when creating properties.


On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2017/08.

Creative work[edit]

See also: Wikidata:WikiProject Infoboxes/works
Software products and brands, see: Wikidata:WikiProject Infoboxes/terms
Books, see: Wikidata:WikiProject Books

publication manager[edit]

   Under discussion
Description person legally responsible of the content of a periodic or another publication in france
Represents director of publication (Q3029421)
Data type Item
Template parameter "directeur de publication" of Template:Infobox newspaper (Q9460683) View with Reasonator View with SQID in frwiki
Domain human (Q5) View with Reasonator View with SQID
Example Le Monde (Q12461) -> Louis Dreyfus (Q16661304)
Motivation

Needed for the infobox. author  TomT0m / talk page 17:55, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

Symbol support vote.svg Support. Tubezlob (🙋) 19:52, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment can't the infobox use employer (P108) or corporate officer (P2828) with qualifier position held (P39) specifying director of publication (Q3029421)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:52, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
    • @ArthurPSmith: Probably, but it's supposed to work from the journal to the person - as it's an important role in a journal. And we still can't retrieve the information from the journal article if the statement is in the person one.
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Does this mean newspaper editor (Q17351648)? If so, how if it different from editor (P98)? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 15:42, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
    • @Pigsonthewing: I don't know, probably but I can't get much information from this item. There is no article to understand what it is and absolutely no definition in description of what it's supposed to mean. I proposed this property partly because it has a specific legal status. What I'm sure is that the two notions has different names in french (scientific editor and journal editor) - and distinct definitions can be found ( http://www.eurekoi.org/quelle-difference-y-a-t-il-entre-un-directeur-de-publication-dune-part-et-un-editeur-scientifique-dautre-part/ ) :
      scientific editor 
      Personne ou collectivité responsable du contenu intellectuel de l’édition d’un document, quel que soit son support_: édition critique d’un texte, édition d’un ouvrage collectif, etc. => person or organisation who is responsible for the intellectual content of the edition of a document, whatever the support : critic edition of a text, edition of a collective work, ... (translation almost word for word as I'm not sure I understand every subtlety of the original)
      journal editor 
      someone responsible of the editions of a journal [...]
      But digging a little more we can find arguments for the specialized denomination for newspaper of a similar role : in this human sciences help for publication : Si la responsabilité principale incombe à un éditeur scientifique sa fonction est indiquée par l'abréviation "éd.", entourée ou non par parenthèses. NB. Il n'y a pas de raison de différencier le directeur de publication par l'abréviation "dir." : le directeur de publication est effectivement un éditeur scientifique. => in bold, there is no reason to differentiate the director of publication by "dir." : the director is in effect a science editor".
      So maybe it's enough to add an alias and to put a different label in each infoboxes indeed. author  TomT0m / talk page 19:46, 7 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment. Maybe can we use the newly created significant person (P3342)? But this is just a suggestion to let you know that such an option is now available. Thierry Caro (talk) 20:34, 15 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This proposal appears to abandoned? Thryduulf (talk) 22:15, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Web mapping service link[edit]

   Under discussion
Description Link to the external service, where the image or map can be retrieved as a zoomable resource
Data type URL
Domain image, map
Allowed values URL
Example MISSING
Planned use This property can be used to link to resources where an image or map is available as a zoomable resource
Motivation

It will be possible to link to resources where the map items (also images) can be found as zoomable tiles. Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 10:04, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion
Could you provide an example? --Pasleim (talk) 10:22, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Protocols Supported[edit]

If this property is used, it should have a qualifier of any of the following types:

  1. Web Map Service (Q974922)
  2. Web Feature Service (Q2296308)
  3. Tile Map Service (Q1280407)
  4. Web Map Tile Service (Q10908558)
  5. Keyhole Markup Language (Q79587)

>> Any other? --Batje (talk) 11:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

What is the unique ID of this property?[edit]

There are several ways of modeling this behaviour.

A. The URL is the key[edit]

That is the current proposal. This property becomes very flexible and can point to anywhere on the interwebs. There is not a lot of intelligence in this property, if the qualifier for the protocol (see below) of the link is ommitted, it becomes very error-prone.

B. The external qualifier is the key[edit]

This is similar to for example BnF ID (P268) which requires every external resource to register as a seperate property, and then use the formatter URL (P1630) property to tell us more about the required format of the URL. Every of these P's could then have multiple formatter URL (P1630) for every protocol qualifier (WMS/WFS/etc.) it should create a new one.

C. The external qualifier *and* the protocol are the key[edit]

We create properties for every protocol, similar to URI used in RDF (P1921). Then, we go back to B, and create a Property for every service. Eg. The Mapwarper would have its own property:

  • PXXA: TMS URL
  • PXXB: WMS URL


Then the Wikidata Item for the map belonging to [ [File_dummy: New_haven_line_map.png] ] will have:

  • P18: File:New_haven_line_map.png
  • PXX: 1591

--Batje (talk) 11:36, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose as the proposal seems to be incomplete with no apparent interest at the moment in determining what structure is desired. Thryduulf (talk) 16:37, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @Susannaanas: You never entered an example. Does that mean that you don't need this property and the proposal can be closed? ChristianKl (talk) 10:08, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
    • I would need input from the community to the above questions. It can also wait until later, when it's more articulated. – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 10:26, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Google Play Music artist ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an artist on the Google Play Music website
Data type External identifier
Example Heikki Kuula (Q4276848)Alcizqffis4gtt7yjhjjftzlya4
Formatter URL https://play.google.com/store/music/artist?id=$1

Google Play Music album ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an album on the Google Play Music website
Data type External identifier
Example Suomalainen mies (Q27687809)Biaqn6hnnzfac7fr2ppg4asoedu
Formatter URL https://play.google.com/store/music/album?id=$1

Tidal artist ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an artist on the Tidal website
Data type External identifier
Example Heikki Kuula (Q4276848)4768947
Formatter URL https://listen.tidal.com/artist/$1

Tidal album ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an album on the Tidal website
Data type External identifier
Example Suomalainen mies (Q27687809)63596443
Formatter URL https://listen.tidal.com/album/$1

Tidal track ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of a track on the Tidal website
Data type External identifier
Example Lambada (Q15897084)63596443
Formatter URL https://listen.tidal.com/track/$1

Tidal video ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of a video on the Tidal website
Data type External identifier
Example Tuulisii (Q20826667)50956283
Formatter URL https://listen.tidal.com/video/$1

Microsoft Store artist ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an artist on the Microsoft Store website
Data type External identifier
Example Heikki Kuula (Q4276848)f3860700-0200-11db-89ca-0019b92a3933

Microsoft Store album ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description ID of an album on the Microsoft Store website
Data type External identifier
Example Suomalainen mies (Q27687809)8d6kgx0s7tp6
Motivation

We have many properties about music streaming services and stores, like Spotify track ID (P2207), Deezer album ID (P2723) or iTunes album ID (P2281). I just discovered LinkFire and I think that Wikidata can compete for offering an up-to-date CC-0-licensed database of external IDs of music services and stores. By now I just added some of the most famous (Google Play Music (Q3238917), Tidal (Q19711013) and Microsoft (Q2283)). AFAIK there isn't a simple way to link to Microsoft Store. -- ★ → Airon 90 16:59, 4 November 2016 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hmm, is it feasible in the long run to create properties for every supported category on every service? I would prefer a generic property where the service can be specified as a required qualifier. Of course there is the question about formatter urls, right now I don't think there is support for having them be different for different qualifiers? To me adding that support in the UI and then removing all of these for one (either just one, or one for artists, one for albums and so on) and then differentiating them using a qualifier pointing to an item would be better. That would support all services with much fewer properties. I don't oppose adding these as this is the way we have to add them right now and a migration could easily be made by a bot later on. But I would at least like to discuss a generic solution first. --Pajn (talk) 20:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Given that no discussion of a generic solution has apparently happened yet, it seems pointless to delay this further even if it is only used for the interim. Thryduulf (talk) 16:35, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

possessed by spirit[edit]

   Under discussion
Description item which is possessing this item
Represents demonic possession (Q1782082)
Data type Item
Domain fictional characters
Example
Motivation

Allows some interesting queries. Also: How would we make per example a relation between Regan MacNeil and Pazuzu for the movie The Exorcist? 213.221.205.53 14:36, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Discussion

No. of articles[edit]

   Under discussion
Description Number of articles published in an encyclopedia or a wikipedia.
Represents Project:Article (Q3891539)
Data type Number (not available yet)
Template parameter "ערכים" in he:תבנית:ויקיפדיה בשפה
Domain Encyclopedias
Allowed values integers
Example Hebrew Wikipedia (Q199913) → 200,260
Source special:statistics
Planned use I plan to request a bot that will update the articles number daily and then I'm gonna link it to the template in hewiki and other wikipedias.
Robot and gadget jobs Bots should add the data as I mentioned before
Motivation

I want to add it to the template in hewiki Mikey641 (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

International Standard Text Code[edit]

   Under discussion
Description unique identifier for text-based works
Represents International Standard Text Code (Q1666944)
Data type External identifier
Domain literary work (Q7725634) View with Reasonator View with SQID
Allowed values [0-9A-F]{3}-20[0-1][0-9]-[0-9A-F]{8}-[0-9A-F]
Example March of the Volunteers (Q156136) → A11-2012-00000032-C
Robot and gadget jobs Probably
Motivation

(Add your motivation for this property here.) GZWDer (talk) 09:43, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Editions of the same work have the same ISTC. According to Wikidata:WikiProject Books we should create for each edtion a seperate item, so this property will then not be unique. --Pasleim (talk) 02:46, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
@Pasleim: No, this just meens it should not be put in the editions items but in the work item only. author  TomT0m / talk page 09:31, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I agree with TomT0m that this would work if we be sure to use it at the level of the work. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Which authority creates the identifier? Can you add that information to the description? ChristianKl (talk) 07:25, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support ~ Moheen (keep talking) 19:15, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

PROSPERO ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a study, in the PROSPERO database
Represents PROSPERO (Q28736078)
Data type External identifier
Domain scientific article (Q13442814)
Allowed values CRD\d+
Example Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors versus placebo in patients with major depressive disorder. A systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis (Q28736049)CRD42013004420
Source https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ PROSPERO at one year: an evaluation of its utility (Q24288905)
Formatter URL http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.asp?ID=$1
Motivation

Systematic reviews are important sources of information for Wikipedia et al. PROSPERO is a effort originating in UK, but registers international systematic reviews. They are referenced from publishers (at least BMC), see [1] under "Systematic review registration". — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 16:59, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Comment: In the exmaple, should the ID be CRD42013004420? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:42, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
    • Good question. I was wondering about that too and was almost going to write about. My rationale for suggesting it without the "CRD" prefix was that all items in PROSPERO seem to have the CRD prefix and that we are using prefixless number for PMCID (P932), a related property. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 20:00, 9 February 2017 (UTC)
I think I am to blame for the prefixless PMCIDs here, and having used these for a while now in all sorts of contexts, I am not sure this is necessarily the best way to go, but I still have a slight personal preference for dropping the prefix. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:52, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
I have got a reply from one of the researchers behind the database. The "4" is also part of the prefix apparently, i.e., the full prefix is "CRD4". The next four digits are the year. Perhaps I should change the format to the full string, e.g., "CRD42013004420". — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 14:20, 13 February 2017 (UTC)
I would prefer the ID with the full number "CRD42013004420". Otherwise Symbol support vote.svg Support. ChristianKl (talk) 14:49, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

official image[edit]

   Under discussion
Description image designated by an authority
Data type Commons media file
Domain persons, artworks, conventions, ceremonies
Allowed values images
Example
Formatter URL https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:$1
Motivation

This is meant for official images of a person, artwork, or event, as designated by the relevant authority. Could apply widely to officeholder portraits (including every US federal official), as well as artwork files released by museums, and of event photographs from the event organizers. This is meant to co-exist alongside image (P18), as sometimes the official image will be most appropriate for illustrating an infobox, and sometimes not.

But with the new property, the official image will always be queryable if it is desired for a particular use-case. One particularly relevant case is that of Yellow Milkmaid Syndrome, and being able to query the museum's version of the artwork (though again, this will not always be the one used in the infobox, etc). Pharos (talk) 02:30, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

I see this as potentially useful for three separate purposes:

  1. The digital version of an artwork that the GLAM indicates is the canonical reproduction (where for example there might be dozens of versions on Commons)
  2. The official portrait (painting, photograph) of a public figure (many politicians will have an official portrait commissioned).
  3. The official photograph of an event - like a document signing, conference, international meeting.

All of these are things that it could well be useful to identify - both for Wikipedia-infobox automation and also for downstream querying. However, I have some questions...

The proposal specifies Commons media files as the allowable target. What about when the official image is itself a Wikidata item? For example The Hon E G Whitlam (Q28877954) is the official portrait painting of an Australian prime minister - it is a notable painting and on permanent display in the parliament building. Furthermore, and to continue that example - that painting is IN copyright and therefore NOT a file on Commons. This might also be the case for many "official photographs" - for example all of the official portrait photographs of Australia's federal politicians are 'all rights reserved'[2] Therefore - could/should your proposed property be used to link not only to files on Commons, but also to external URLs or other Wikidata items?

Another area is that this proposal seems to be primarily addressing 'how to track provenance' of an image - in particular GLAM content. The ability of GLAM partners to be able to know which of their images are on Commons (and which are used in articles, and also which are NOT being used in articles because there's a lower-quality one that was uploaded earlier!) is a longstanding request. I suspect/hope that the 'structured data on commons' project will help a lot with this - where it will be able to more accurately specify the origin of the image (regardless of who uploaded it) make that fact queryable. However, if better 'provenance' for GLAM-images is the primary/main aim of this proposal the I think that a property on Commons is not the way to go about it - that should be an improvement in the Commons attribution templates. If, on the other hand, we're talking about a flexible way to indicate that a particular visual representation of a wikidata item has been officially sanctioned by the relevant authority (somehow akin to the 'official website' property) - that is valid for several different fields (human portraits, glam digitisations, notable event - then I think this is a viable way to do it.

That said - to reliably indicate that the image is sanctioned by the relevant authority as the 'official' image then any use of this proposed property would also *really* need a reference to prove that statement - to strongly differentiate it from the the existing 'image' property. In all cases the 'image' property refers to the file on Commons that the community believes to be the best representation of the subject - whereas THIS proposed property is saying something about the authority of the image, not necessarily its quality, copyright status (and therefore usability on Commons), or appropriateness to illustrate a wikipedia article. Wittylama (talk) 16:16, 7 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Certainly, I agree that it would be good to allow an item as the value as well (for official portraits that have their own Wikidata item, etc). And also that it would be valuable to require a qualifier for the authority that has desgnated this image; in the case of a GLAM the qualifier might just be collection (P195) and the collecting institution, though other times it will be a particular government office or similar.--Pharos (talk) 18:15, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great idea and it will help alleviate Milkmaid Syndrome! Missvain (talk) 17:28, 7 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Why a new property instead of solving it some qualifier? ChristianKl (talk) 04:12, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose A sounds use-case, but achieveable using image (P18) with a qualifier Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 23:11, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl, Pigsonthewing: Using image (P18) with a qualifier would probably be acceptable as an alternative, but some have questioned whether it would be appropriate to do that on a mass-scale, and using it in too novel a way. I'd like this discussion to come to a resolution on implementing the use-case, by whatever method consensus here agrees to.--Pharos (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this kind of information should be stored on Commons or maybe a qualifier. I'm pretty sure I've seen seeing similar kind of proposals to create subproperties of image (P18) being rejected on the same grounds, but can't find it. Multichill (talk) 17:23, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
    • @Multichill: We know it can't be stored on Commons, not without months/years of software development anyway. If you'd like to help with storing as a qualifier, then great :)--Pharos (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I wonder if this doesn't mix different things. People on one side, artworks on the other. Hopefully GLAMs avoid the Yellow Milkmaid Syndrome, but being published by one doesn't necessarily offer the ideal reproduction. Maybe identifying official portraits of oneself and suitable reproductions of artworks shouldn't be combined.
    --- Jura 17:10, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
    • @Jura1: The idea isn't that the official version will always be the best one (which would generally go in image (P18) and in the infobox, etc), but simply that it is useful to be able to query the official version. Similar with official photos of politicians.--Pharos (talk) 02:05, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I would support this as either one property or two (one for the Yellow Milkmaid issue (perhaps "official digital representation"), the other for official portraits). Thryduulf (talk) 21:16, 14 April 2017 (UTC)

Straw poll on qualifiers[edit]

I'd like to suggest a straw poll on whether it would be appropriate to at least use qualifiers to achieve this use-case — as for example I've prototyped at Mérode Altarpiece#image. This may not be a long-term solution as perhaps it will migrate to structured data on Commons in one or two years, but this is meant to be functional in the interim.--Pharos (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@Wittylama, Missvain, ChristianKl, Pigsonthewing, Multichill, Jura1:

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support use of qualifiers (as proposer).--Pharos (talk) 18:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure that qualifying with The Met object ID (P3634) is correct - that UID applies to the original artwork, not an image of it, better to create a new "official image" item and apply that, using "has role"; like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
    • "official image" as an ITEM (official image (Q28946213)) is an interesting option - that is certainly less burdensome than as a property. Can you elaborate how you would see that working for the other cases I described in my first comment above (official portrait paintings of people - especially when that painting is also a known wikidata item; official photographs of groups/people (e.g. it might be in-copyright image and not on commons)... Wittylama (talk) 16:57, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
      • @Pigsonthewing, Wittylama: It's not representing it in exactly the same way, but I think you could put on the painting item's page "instance of official image (Q28946213)", with a qualifier "of (P642) the person depicted".--Pharos (talk) 23:16, 18 March 2017 (UTC)
        • That works only when the Wikidata item is itself about the official painting/photograph/whatever. That is a qualifier on the Wikidata item for a painting, not a qualifier on the Wikidata item of the subject of that painting. I have done this now on "The Hon E G Whitlam (Q28877954)" using precisely this structure: instance of -> official portrait -> of Gough Whitlam (Q23333) (with a reference to the URL for the Parliament's portrait gallery collection website). However, what you wanted in your original proposal is a way to indicate on the Wikidata item of the subject (a person, object, event...) that it has an 'official image' (according to someone) - which might be hosted on Commons, might be a URL, or might indeed be its own specific Wikidata item. Wittylama (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
  • I acknowledge the wish to be able to point at better-quality or preferred images, having seen my share of shitty ones, also in Wikidata statements. But I'm not a great fan of the term 'official'. 'Official' determined by whom? In my head I've been toying with the term 'canonical image' but that has the same problem: canonical according to whom? - and might be superseded by higher quality again at some point. I would be most in favour of using a qualifier like issued by (P2378) or publisher (P123) <a certain institution> in order to facilitate querying at this point. I do agree with Multichill that this kind of information eventually belongs on Commons, not on Wikidata, so we should decide on a solution that will eventually make it easy to move this kind of information there. Spinster 💬 20:55, 19 March 2017 (UTC)
    • @Spinster: This was my initial idea on a qualifier, to do it by the collection. Perhaps we could use two qualifiers, one for the institution issuing, and one for Andy's idea of an "official image" item (or a more appropriate subclass item, like "collection image"). Also agree on using whatever appropriate format that will ease an eventual move to Commons, although it is not practicable to just wait for new Commons software, and not do anything for the next months or years.--Pharos (talk) 14:25, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
    • I remain convinced that the way that this proposal should be 'seen' is not [only] about pointing to a file on Commons, but as a statement which can refer to a file on commons, or an external URL, or equally a Wikidata item. If we are indeed thinking of a scope that is specifically about "there is a better/more-official file on Commons than that which is currently listed in the Image property", then yes, that ought to be something included in the scope of the COMMONS [attribution/provenance] Metadata. However, if we are talking about a statement to say that "this subject has an 'official portrait/image' according to xyz" then that ought to be a statement in its own right, on the Wikidata item about the subject. It should be able to be qualified to answer the 'official according to whom?' question, but it should not be limited to only pointing to Files on Commons.

For example, as mentioned above, I have now made this statement: On "The Hon E G Whitlam (Q28877954)" -> instance of -> official portrait -> of Gough Whitlam (Q23333) (with a reference to the URL for the Parliament's portrait gallery collection website). Now, what I want to do is make the equivalent and reverse statement on the item about the person - that he has an official painting of him. It IS the official portrait in the national parliament and very notably so (this painting was quite controversial and famous. In this case the painting is IN COPYRIGHT so we do not have it on Commons, but we do (now) have it as an item on Wikidata, with appropriate references to prove that it is 'official' according to the parliament art collection itself. I believe that a statement of this fact on the item for Whitlam is a valid thing to include, and CAN be done with the 'official image' property, but perhaps there's another way? Wittylama (talk) 15:29, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Comment I'm going to brain dump here for a moment... I am less interested in official portraits as I am finding a solution to have a painting, for example, with the "best version" of itself. Hence, the Milkmaid Syndrome. We don't have to always call it official, as sometimes the "official" photograph of a painting provided by an institution may be low quality. But, when I think about it, why bother, when we can just ensure that the best quality image or "official" portrait is happily placed in the property "image". Missvain (talk) 16:38, 21 March 2017 (UTC)
    • Meaning, why should a crappy image be in the image property at all? Why would Donald Trump's "image" property have some poor quality snapshot someone took of him at an event, versus his official portrait? Same with a statue at the Met or a painting by van Gogh. Unless, of course, there is no option option (like many van Gogh paintings). Hmm.. Missvain (talk) 16:39, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

If i follow your meaning - I agree that the "image" property should be understood to mean "[best available] image" with a practical test of "would THIS image be the one chosen to use in the infobox about this subject in its Wikipedia article". Furthermore, the 'provenance' of the file on Commons (e.g. "this image is the one that came from the MET website, and that image came from WebGalleryofArt (regardless of who did the upload) is a different thing as well - and should be handled in File's metadata in Commons. What is missing, IMO, is a way to indicate a status of "this subject has a visual representation that has been 'approved/sanctioned' by the subject itself". Wittylama (talk) 17:30, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

influenced[edit]

   Under discussion
Description this item influenced the item
Data type Item
Template parameter Influenced
Domain Creative work
Example
Planned use A creative work influenced another creative work.
See also influenced by (P737)
Motivation

A creative work influencing another creative work. Currently, it is possible to represent this type of relationship by making use of influenced by (P737), i.e., one creative work influenced by another creative work. However, it is not possible to represent this same relationship the other way around. It is interesting to note that Wikidata has two properties part of (P361) and has part (P527) allowing two possible ways to represent relationship between two items. Bidirectional usages of 'influence' can be seen in many software related topics. Refer the infobox of C programming language. Jsamwrites (talk) 22:13, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
Thanks Jura for the above link. Unfortunately the property has been deleted. Going through the discussion in the above thread, it seems that the property was deleted as it focused on 'Human influencing Human'. However, the rationale used there cannot be applied to creative works since we see the bidirectional use of 'influence' in several cases (especially in infoboxes) of softwares, programming languages and other works. It is equally important to know both how a work was influenced as well as its influence on other (future) works. The number of members may not be as large like in the case of 'Human influencing Human'. Jsamwrites (talk) 10:05, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Azertus
Pintoch
Jsamwrites
Fractaler
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics. Jsamwrites (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. We really don't need an inverse for this. --Yair rand (talk) 21:37, 14 August 2017 (UTC)

symbolizes[edit]

   Under discussion
Description symbolism of an artistic element
Represents symbol (Q80071)
Data type Item
Domain work of art (Q838948)
Example
Motivation

To be used primarily as a qualifier on depicts (P180) for the symbolic meaning of a particular depicted element. Pharos (talk) 20:48, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is the symbolism of a given item objective or subjective? i.e. does everyone agree that e.g. fire striker (Q1409712) symbolises Order of the Golden Fleece (Q465774) in Armor of Emperor Ferdinand I (Q28790437) or is it (sometimes) a matter of debate? If it is subjective or not universally agreed we need some qualifier to note who states X symbolises Y. Thryduulf (talk) 22:19, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
    • If we have a reliable source that says "X symbolizes Y", we should simply source the statement. - PKM (talk) 01:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I'd like to be able to use this property. - PKM (talk) 01:23, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Study for[edit]

   Under discussion
Data type Item
Domain work (Q386724)
Allowed values work (Q386724)
Example Supper at Emmaus (Q29211543) - study for - Disciples at Emmaus (Q29211544)
Planned use potentially Commons:Template:Study for
Motivation

Quite a few items are about artworks that are sketches or studies for another one.

Alternative solutions:

User:Zolo
Jane023 (talk) 08:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
User:Vincent Steenberg
User:Kippelboy
User:Shonagon
Marsupium (talk) 13:46, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
GautierPoupeau (talk) 16:55, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Multichill (talk) 19:13, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Susannaanas (talk) 11:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC) I want to synchronize the handling of maps with this initiative
Mushroom (talk) 00:10, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
Jheald (talk) 17:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
Spinster (talk) 15:16, 12 September 2014 (UTC)
PKM (talk) 21:16, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 17:12, 7 January 2015‎ (UTC)
Ham II (talk) 09:24, 31 October 2015 (UTC)
Sic19 (talk) 21:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
Wittylama (talk) 13:13, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
Armineaghayan (talk) 08:40, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
Hannolans (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Visual arts --Zolo (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So for one way we can use based on (P144), but we have nothing the other way around probably because we're afraid of the 1:n problem (a lot of works are based on just one work). This seems to be an excellent solution to limit the scope, but still able to make the link. Multichill (talk) 13:48, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jane023 (talk) 18:19, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Support as very useful. - PKM (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Great! Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral --Marsupium (talk) 20:03, 9 April 2017 (UTC), 12:20, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems useful! – Susanna Ånäs (Susannaanas) (talk) 06:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Hi folks, we should study this a bit more (pun not intended) and not be hasty about it.
    • CCO pp22 "Relationship Type and Reciprocity" says "CCO recommends that relationships between entities be reciprocal" and then gives a great table
    • CONA In Depth pp46 explains the various associative relations
    • CONA Editorial Guidelines is most detailed and gives 23 symmetric relations and 19 inverse (reciprocal) relation pairs (some curious ones are cartoon, pastiche, counterproof).

I think we should decide an approach and then model it comprehensively. We should copy the CONA relations to a new page "Visual arts/Relations", and argue/decide and document the representation for each of those relations.

Now my personal opinion: we shouldn't add 23+19+19=61 props for these relations (some of these exist, eg "different from"). I think we should group them into semantically coherent groups (eg "predecessor-successor", but I'm not claiming this is a good name for it) and use one relation per group, qualifying with an item to elaborate the detail. I think the qualifier should be on the relation, not on "instance of", i.e. something like this. The benefit is that we can extend the CONA nomenclature of relations as needed, eg see the last bullet (which is not in CONA):

  • Supper at Emmaus - successor - Disciples at Emmaus / role Study
  • Disciples at Emmaus - predecessor - Supper at Emmaus / role Study
  • Rodin's Gates of Hell in Paris - same genesis (same production) - Rodin's Gates of Hell in Zurich / role Cast
  • Cup - same context (used together) - saucer / role Conjuncted with
  • Roman marble statue - predecessor - Greek bronze original / role Copy
  • Greek bronze original - successor - Roman marble statue / role Copy
  • Andy Warhol's Colored Mona Lisa - predecessor - Leonardo's Mona Lisa / role Parody (I think it's this piece)

Hmmm, those roles don't sound entirely good when made symmetric... What do you think, maybe we should use the original detailed relation names --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 13:42, 12 April 2017 (UTC)

@Vladimir Alexiev: Interesting resourcse, but if we try to solve the whole issue, I feel like will end up in one of those endless and sometimes ultimately fruitless discussions. Still, a few thoughts:
About symmetric properties
  • We should probably avoid that 1 property in 1 way correspond to two properties in the other way. Like use "map of" and "study for" in one direction. And use "based on" as a symmetric for both.
  • I am not convinced we really need to have the create all symmetric properties. I think we need "study for", but not sure for its symmetric "study is". More generally the properties that tend to be N:1 seem more usable than 1:N (at least it makes items easier to read).
Subproperties vs qualfiers:
  • Using subproperties documented with subproperty of (P1647) is less annoying to type, and also more human-readable than more general "predecessor" / "successor" + qualifiers~. I don't think we should shy away from creating new properties when needed. Actually there are not so many of what CC0 calls "works that are related as steps in the creation proces". And all those in CCO are also in the CONA.
Label Symmetric Property Symmetric property CONA CCO Note
preparatory for based on - - Y Y based on (P144) has a wide scope, not sure it includes this "based on"
study for study is Y Y
prototype for prototype is Y Y
cartoon for cartoon is Y
model for model is Y Y
plan for plan is Y Y
original print counterproof from Y Y
printing plate for printed from plate Y Y
negative for printed from negative Y
I would be fine with creatign a property for each --Zolo (talk) 12:01, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Zolo: "avoid that 1 property in 1 way correspond to two properties in the other way": please elaborate, I don't understand. "no symmetric": ok, agreed, but can you always tell 1:N or N:1? "create CCO props but not CONA props": not sure this is the good decision, but ok we can start with this. "based on": yes, that is a bad name in CONA. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 14:47, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

@Vladimir Alexiev:
"avoid that 1 property in 1 way correspond to two properties in the other way" I mean if we want a symmetric property to "study for", it should be "study in". It should not be, say, a property that is symmetric to both "study for" and "prototype for". It imply that we should rescope based on (P144).
"no symmetric": we can't always tell 1:N or N:1, that why I wrote "tend". Generally speaking, the preparatory works are the N and the final work the 1. Said differently, I think we need properties linking from a preparatory work to its final work, but not so much the symmetric linking from the final work to the preparatory work.
"create CCO props but not CONA props": I don't think I suggested that. That said, I feel we can safely create properties supported by both systems.--Zolo (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
@Zolo: Sorry, that's how I interpreted the limited table above. CONA has plenty more --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 05:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
@Vladimir Alexiev: CONA has many more "associative relatonships", but I think the table shows all those linking a preparatory work to a finished work. --Zolo (talk) 15:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
  • This property currently lacks a description. ChristianKl (talk) 12:59, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
  • What prior art exists for this relationship? Are there existing ontologies that model it out there? ChristianKl (talk) 13:02, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: The prior art is CONA and CCO, see links above --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 05:29, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

corporate author[edit]

   Under discussion
Description corporate body (like a organization, group or conference) responsible for the intellectual or artistic content of a document, corporate creator of a document
Represents author (Q482980)
Data type Item
Domain work (Q386724)
Allowed values organizations, meetings
Example Daytime Protocol (Q1179179)Internet Engineering Task Force (Q217082)
World Development Indicators (Q8035640)World Bank (Q7164)
Source cf. for example http://libguides.tru.ca/c.php?g=194005&p=1418555
Planned use As soon as tools like quickstatement allow it, I would like to add the full set of entries required for correct references for some of the statistics used in country infoboxes.
See also author (P50), editor (P98), publisher (P123), creator (P170)
Motivation

Most bibliographic styles use not only authors who are persons but also corporate authors (organizations responsible for the content of a work). Many require the corporate author(s) as the first entry if there is no personal author given and don't repeat it if the work is for instance distributed through the webpage of the organization. There is at the moment no adequate property to indicate the corporate author: author (P50) (and editor (P98)) are restricted to persons. (Given the precedence of personal authors over corporate ones in at least some styles it would be helpful to keep the restriction and add the newly proposed property.) Creators and publishers might coincide, but often they do not. Indicating corporate authors with publisher (P123) makes it impossible to create bibliographic references in agreement with the styles mentioned. (Normally corporate authors are also no "Verlag" given as German translation of the property.) creator (P170) is not specific to documents and serves according to its description for artists of creative work. 123 (talk) 22:41, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • why is a author (P50) restricted to persons while creator (P170) is not restricted to persons, but companies as well? Shouldnt we accept a group of persons as authors? --Hannolans (talk) 07:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
    • I don't know why the restriction was introduced. There was from Nov. 2014 to Sept. 2015 a discussion about it on the Property_talk:P50 page, two people in favor of removing it, one in doubt about it, but nothing was changed. Clearly we need the possibility to indicate organizations (or congresses etc.) as authors, as this is normal practice in most bibliographic styles. To have a property for persons as authors and one for organizations etc. has the advantage that it easier to distinguish between them programmatically, which is useful as corporate and personal authors are treated differently in at least some styles. 123 (talk) 13:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
      • Note that for importing from external databases, it seems easier to extend author (P50) to group of humans (Q16334295) as library systems seems to have those two types of authors mixed and it is hard to detect automatically if the author is a human or not --Hannolans (talk) 21:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
        • Library systems I know of provide the necessary information to distinguish between the two, but I admit that automatic imports are easier if one lumps the two categories together. One also would have to allow meeting (Q2761147) to cover academic conferences and conventions. 123 (talk) 22:13, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
          • meeting (Q2761147) is a subclass of event (Q1656682) and not a legal entity. so who owns the copyright of work that has meeting (Q2761147) as author? --Hannolans (talk) 23:53, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
            • Authorship and copyright are related but different concepts. All too often copyright no longer belongs to the author. (But the publisher for instance.) However that may be, many bibliographic styles have special rule for conferences, like ISO 690: "If no person or organization can be identified as the creator ... of the proceedings of a single conference, the name of the conference should be treated as the first element." (The first element indicating the creator.) 123 (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support however, if it is decided to expand the domain of author (P50) I am fine with that as an alternative also. It looks from the discussion there that everybody agreed to expand it but the constraint was never changed? Perhaps we ought to ping some of the involved people? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:34, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

Aubrey
Viswaprabha (talk)
Micru
Tpt
EugeneZelenko
User:Jarekt
Maximilianklein (talk)
Don-kun
VIGNERON (talk)
Jane023 (talk) 08:21, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Alexander Doria (talk)
Ruud 23:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
Kolja21
arashtitan
Jayanta Nath
Yann (talk)
John Vandenberg (talk) 09:14, 30 November 2013 (UTC)
JakobVoss
Danmichaelo (talk) 19:30, 16 February 2014 (UTC)
Ravi (talk)
Vlsergey (talk)
Mvolz (talk) 08:21, 20 July 2014 (UTC)
Hsarrazin (talk) 07:56, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
Accurimbono
Mushroom
PKM (talk) 19:58, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
Revi 16:54, 29 November 2014 (UTC)
Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 23:36, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Almondega (talk) 00:17, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
maxlath
Jura to help sort out issues with other projects
Epìdosis
Skim (talk) 13:52, 24 June 2016 (UTC)
Marchitelli (talk) 12:29, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
BrillLyle (talk) 15:33, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
Alexmar983 (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2016 (UTC)
Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 10:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Chiara (talk) 14:15, 29 August 2016 (UTC)
Thibaut120094 (talk) 20:31, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Ivanhercaz | Discusión Plume pen w.png 15:30, 31 October 2016 (UTC)
YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 17:35, 10 November 2016 (UTC)
User:Jc3s5h PatHadley (talk) 21:51, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Erica (ohmyerica) (talk) 19:26, 1 January 2017 (UTC)
User:Timmy_Finnegan
Mauricio V. Genta (talk) 05:38, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
Sam Wilson 09:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Sic19 (talk) 22:25, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
Andreasmperu
MartinPoulter (talk) 09:21, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Books John Vandenberg (talk) 09:30, 2 December 2013 (UTC) Aubrey (talk) 12:15, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Daniel Mietchen (talk) 12:47, 11 December 2013 (UTC) Micru (talk) 13:09, 11 December 2013 (UTC) DarTar (talk) 01:37, 15 January 2014 (UTC) Randykitty (talk) 14:57, 15 January 2014 (UTC) Maximilianklein (talk) 00:23, 28 March 2014 (UTC) Mvolz (talk) 08:10, 20 July 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy 22:17, 27 July 2014 (UTC) Mattsenate (talk) 17:26, 14 August 2014 (UTC) author  TomT0m / talk page JakobVoss (talk) 14:25, 16 June 2016 (UTC) Jsamwrites Dig.log Sic19 (talk) 22:46, 12 July 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Periodicals Mattsenate (talk) 13:11, 8 August 2014 (UTC) KHammerstein (WMF) (talk) 13:15, 8 August 2014 (UTC) Mitar (talk) 13:17, 8 August 2014 (UTC) Mvolz (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2014 (UTC) Daniel Mietchen (talk) 18:09, 8 August 2014 (UTC) Merrilee (talk) 13:37, 9 August 2014 (UTC) Pharos (talk) 14:09, 9 August 2014 (UTC) DarTar (talk) 15:46, 9 August 2014 (UTC) HLHJ (talk) 09:11, 11 August 2014 (UTC) Lawsonstu (talk) 15:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC) Blue Rasberry (talk) 18:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC) Micru (talk) 20:11, 12 August 2014 (UTC) JakobVoss (talk) 12:23, 20 August 2014 (UTC) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2014 (UTC) Jodi.a.schneider (talk) 09:24, 25 August 2014 (UTC) Abecker (talk) 23:35, 5 September 2014 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 14:21, 24 October 2014 (UTC) Mike Linksvayer (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2014 (UTC) Kopiersperre (talk) 20:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC) Jonathan Dugan (talk) 21:03, 20 October 2014 (UTC) Hfordsa (talk) 19:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 15:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC) Runner1928 (talk) 03:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC) Pete F (talk) econterms (talk) 13:51, 19 August 2015 (UTC) Sj (talk) author  TomT0m / talk page guillom (talk) 21:57, 4 January 2016 (UTC) ·addshore· talk to me! 17:43, 18 January 2016 (UTC) Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:08, 29 January 2016 (UTC) Ainali (talk) 16:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC) LeadSongDog (talk) 21:42, 23 March 2016 (UTC) RobLa-WMF (talk) 01:24, 25 March 2016 (UTC) BrillLyle (talk) 04:27, 30 March 2016 (UTC) Kosboot (talk) 20:45, 30 March 2016 (UTC) Sydney Poore/FloNight♥♥♥♥ 15:10, 14 April 2016 (UTC) Peaceray (talk) 18:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC) PKM (talk) 16:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC) BrillLyle (talk) 03:20, 22 August 2016 (UTC) Aubrey (talk) 12:42, 25 August 2016 (UTC) Chiara (talk) 12:47, 25 August 2016 (UTC) Marchitelli (talk) 19:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 17:44, 9 December 2016 (UTC) Satdeep Gill (talk) 14:59, 2 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 09:44, 28 February 2017 (UTC) Raymond Ellis (talk) 16:06, 1 April 2017 (UTC) Crazy1880 (talk) 18:21, 16 June 2017 (UTC) T Arrow (talk) 07:55, 22 June 2017 (UTC) PokestarFan • Drink some tea and talk with me • Stalk my edits • I'm not shouting, I just like this font! 04:03, 21 July 2017 (UTC) GerardM (talk) 08:25, 30 July 2017 (UTC) With a particular interest of opening up sources about Botany and opening up any freely licensed publications. Clifford Anderson (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2017 (UTC) Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Source MetaData

danskfilmogtv title[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a film in danskfilmogtv.dk
Data type External identifier
Template parameter danskfilmogtv in da:Skabelon:Infoboks Film
Domain film (Q11424), television program (Q15416)
Allowed values \d+
Example Pelle the Conqueror (Q370707)10827
Source http://danskfilmogtv.dk/
Formatter URL http://danskfilmogtv.dk/content.php?page=media&value=$1
Motivation

This is a Danish film database for Danish films and TV. Steenth (talk) 17:49, 19 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Why the name "danskfilmogtv title" instead of "danskfilmogtv film"? ChristianKl (talk) 12:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:09, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Till the question about the name is resolved. ChristianKl (talk) 13:20, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • @ChristianKl: title is more general than film. The property will also cover TV series and episodes of TV series. Why should it be film? --Steenth (talk) 18:58, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I was not aware of this website. I seems rather comprehensive. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 21:27, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --Zoizit (talk) 17:42, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support as danskfilmogtv ID, to avoid excluding any specific group of media. Mahir256 (talk) 04:03, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
That won't work, we already have danskfilmogtv person (P4112) so this has to indicate it's not about people at least... ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:13, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Last update[edit]

   Under discussion
Description aliases: modified, updated, revised
Data type Point in time
Allowed values time
Example Brugada Syndrome (Q28071746) -> November 17, 2016 (see website)
Source dct:modified
Planned use Adding date for latest revision to dynamically changing publications
Motivation

We need a property for the last date when a work was revised. Sometimes referred to as "last update" or "time of last revision", or "last touched date". #WikiCite2017 Sj (talk) 11:39, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. We searched together, and I'm very surprised there's no such prop yet! eqivalentProperty: dct:modified --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 12:05, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Is there prior art for how this relationship is called in other ontologies? ChristianKl (talk) 12:43, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • There is a related rfc that might be relevant in this context --Andrawaag (talk) 12:51, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
    Which one? Sj (talk)
  • I think we should be wary of making such a claim, when the subject might well have been modified between our last edit and the point in time when the data is accessed. Perhaps "date of last version consulted"? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
    • On reflection, this can be done with significant event (P793) -> "modified", qualified with point in time (P585). Hence Object. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:23, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
      • See the example site for context. This isn't about citing a wiki page (which always shows the most recent revision) and recording the date consulted. This is about citing a timestamped revision, for a document that has a publication date along with a number of major updates, and recording the update-date. Various works, rather than having a version number or distinct ID for major changes, keep the same ID but add "updated <date>" in or close to the title. So there could be distinct cites for "Brugada Syndrome (Q28071746), updated June 10, 2013" and for "Brugada Syndrome (Q28071746) updated November 17, 2016" Sj (talk) 15:18, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

documents[edit]

   Under discussion
Description used for proceedings that documents an event
Data type Item
Domain publications
Example Proceedings of the International Symposium on Open Collaboration (Q27611306) documents → value OpenSym (Q7999831)
Planned use modeling conference proceeding references
Motivation

needed to model the relationship between conference proceedings series & conferences; could be used to match an individual conference with an individual conference proceedings volume as well. No other property found includes the idea of "documents." If this is too vague, could go with the proceedings proposal here from Fnielsen for these relationship properties: <is proceedings from>, <is proceedings series from>, <has proceedings>, <has proceeding series>. Phoebe (talk) 13:48, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • At the first glance I would be more happy with <is proceedings from>. There's less room for confusion. In case you prefer this name, can you give reasoning for why you prefer this name?
    This also sounds like the kind of relationship for which there might be prior art, have you checked for prior art? ChristianKl (talk) 13:07, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Use main subject (P921). Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:44, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support though I think "is proceedings from" sounds like a better label - "documents" could be a verb or a noun, seems like it could be easily misinterpreted. As to main subject (P921) I've always thought that was for linking to "topics" (as the description says) - i.e. a conceptual thing, not a specific event like a conference. I don't think that's the solution here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:40, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

BMI work ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description Registration of a song at BMI
Represents Broadcast Music (Q891885)
Data type External identifier
Domain song (Q7366)
Allowed values \d+
Example Beat It (Q210218)94886
Dancing Queen (Q870786)275475
Planned use reference to ISWC code and the artists of a song
Formatter URL http://repertoire.bmi.com/DetailView.aspx?detail=titleid&keyid=$1&ShowNbr=0&ShowSeqNbr=0&blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=True
See also ISWC (P1827)
Motivation

In the United States BMI, ASCAP and SESAC are responsible for the management of music rights. BMI handles the rights of 12 million musical works created and owned by more than 750,000 songwriters, composers and music publishers. The BMI work number gives access of a song to the songwriter, composer and label as well as all performers of a song. Besides that it gives access to the ISWC number of the song as well as the IPI numbers of the artists. --Hannolans (talk) 15:18, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

EDIT: the deeplink doesn't seem to work, only after accepting the disclaimer conditions and do a search. Also, the disclaimer say it isn't allowed to link. If we can;t deeplink technically or legal wise, the proposal is to have the BMI number without a link for the moment. Using the BMI number without a link is less useful, but it might be available in the future somehow somewhere and it can be helpful as at the moment this database is a trusted source to verify ISWC and author information. --Hannolans (talk) 12:00, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

It looks like the above links only works when you first accept the disclaimer on this page: http://repertoire.bmi.com/Disclaimer.aspx?blnWriter=True&blnPublisher=True&blnArtist=False&blnAltTitles=False Is there a way to circumvent this or otherwise, how do we deal with this limited access sites? --Hannolans (talk) 18:37, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

  • That disclaimer says "You may not copy, distribute, download, publish, modify, reformat, reconfigure, extract, scrape, link, incorporate into other software, databases or online material, or otherwise appropriate the database or any part thereof, without the express written permission of BMI." maybe it's worth contacting them about this before creating a property? ChristianKl (talk) 13:19, 26 May 2017 (UTC)
    • What is the Wikimedia policy towards linking? In the Netherlands it is allowed to create deeplinks to content. If Wikimedia doesn't allow deeplinking and BMI is not in favor, would it make sense to have this id nonetheless as a property but without a link? Or is it useless without a link? --Hannolans (talk) 11:00, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
    • Such a term is unenforceable in UK law, and surely in US law? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:04, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Just found out that the concurrent organisation in the US, ASCAP, do make share links available to individual works they have: see for example Dancing Queen (version of Laakso, not the Abba version) I will do a proposal for that one as well --Hannolans (talk) 12:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)

influenced programming language[edit]

   Under discussion
Data type Item
Template parameter influenced in en::Template:Infobox programming language
Domain programming language (Q9143)
Allowed values programming language (Q9143)
Example
Planned use Search for programming languages influenced by a given programming language
See also influenced by (P737)
Motivation

A programming language can influence one or more programming languages. Currently, it is possible to represent this type of relationship by making use of influenced by (P737), i.e., one programming language is influenced by another programming language. However, it is not possible to represent this same relationship the other way around. It is interesting to note that Wikidata has two properties part of (P361) and has part (P527) allowing two possible ways to represent the relationship between two items. Wikipedia infoboxes of several languages have properties called 'influenced' (en), a influencé (fr), ha_influenzato (it), Beeinflusste (de), pochodne (pl) etc. as discussed in Wikidata:WikiProject_Informatics/Programming_Language#Mapping. For example, refer the infobox of C programming language. A property named 'influenced' for generic use is no longer available (Reference: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#influenced). Jsamwrites (talk) 18:40, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Tobias1984
Emw
Zuphilip
Danrok
콩가루
TomT0m
DrSauron
Ruud Koot
Andreasburmeister
Toto256
MichaelSchoenitzer
Metamorforme42
Pixeldomain
User:YULdigitalpreservation
Dipsode87
Azertus
Pintoch
Jsamwrites
Fractaler
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics Jsamwrites (talk) 18:41, 26 May 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose we do have some inverse properties but as a general rule one-sided properties are better: new entries and updates need to be entered in only one place, and there is no chance of the two sides being out of sync. In general a simple SPARQL query lets you invert any property programmatically, and I hope that should be sufficient to put the information in infoboxes. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:16, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Arthur. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:17, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, per ArthurPSmith. --Yair rand (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

publication status[edit]

   Under discussion
Description To indicate whether a work has been published, has not yet been published, or was cancelled.
Represents Release status of a creative work, such as a novel, movie, or video game.
Data type Item
Domain A creative work, such as a novel, movie, or video game.
Allowed values released, in development, cancelled
Example Fortress (Q153070) → "cancelled", Dungeon Lords: The Orb and the Oracle (Q5315132) → "cancelled", Elveon (Q5368016) → "in development" or "unreleased", Famicom Jump II: Saikyō no Shichinin (Q4893630) → "released"
See also publication date (P577)
Wikidata:Property_proposal/Estado_actual
Motivation

I am updating several lists with information about video games. These lists are sorted chronologically, and being able to discern between released, not yet released (or "To Be Announced"), and cancelled items is important. SharkD  Talk  03:23, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Alternately, the property could be named "development status", with values of "in development", "released" and "cancelled". SharkD  Talk  03:29, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment it would be best to have an "item" datatype for this instead of string, either pointing to existing items (for example abandoned (Q30108381) perhaps?) or creating new ones with your labels. Also you should provide one or two concrete examples in the template to show how you plan to do this (specific existing wikidata items for which this property would apply). ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:04, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

readership[edit]

   Under discussion
Description average number of readers of a newspaper per issue
Represents readership (Q3228779)
Data type Number (not available yet)
Template parameter |readership= in Template:Infobox newspaper, for instance
Domain Mostly periodical literature (Q1002697)
Allowed values 0 to tens or hundreds of millions
Example
See also number of subscribers (P3744)
Motivation

This is a basic property needed for newspaper and the likes. It differs from number of subscribers (P3744) because of course newspapers can be bought on the go and also because they can reach other readers after the subscriber has read them. The property will likely be used with qualifiers such as statement supported by (P3680), I guess. Thierry Caro (talk) 20:47, 7 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Your example doesn't specify a timeframe. Is that intentional? ChristianKl (talk) 13:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
    • Well, most of the type this will come with a date qualifier, of course. Thierry Caro (talk) 17:07, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Are you distinguishing "readership" from newspaper circulation (Q759811)? - PKM (talk) 01:33, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

remake of[edit]

   Under discussion
Description Property to indicate that a movie, video game or other work is a "enhanced remake" of a previous work.
Represents video game (Q7889), film (Q11424)
Data type Item
Domain work of art (Q838948)
Allowed values Item
Example Monster Hunter XX (Q30186745)Monster Hunter Generations (Q20856979)
Source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remake
Planned use I am going through a list of video games, adding missing fields and fixing errors. This will be one item I will change.
See also edition or translation of (P629), based on (P144)
Motivation

I am going through a list of video games, adding missing fields and fixing errors. This will be one item I will change. This will be useful for other projects as well, presumably. SharkD  Talk  00:19, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Howe does this relates to edition or translation of (P629) and based on (P144) ?

I don't know. I'm not that well versed in how Wikidata works. SharkD  Talk  14:29, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
In the provided example Monster Hunter XX (Q30186745) the property based on (P144) was already used to link to Monster Hunter Generations (Q20856979) so how will this differ and can you work with that already existing property? --Hannolans (talk) 15:31, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

uses software[edit]

   Under discussion
Description This property will indicate software used in a research study as mentioned in a scientific article
Data type Item
Domain scientific article (Q13442814)
Allowed values software (Q7397)
Example
Planned use I would like to add this property to scientific articles if the authors state the software used in the study somewhere in the text of the article.
Motivation

Creating relationships between the items for scientific articles and items for software will allow us to present more structured data about scientific publications. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 18:01, 15 June 2017 (UTC)


Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support This property could correspond to a "usedSoftware" property in the DMS ontology that has recently been suggested. https://github.com/mesbahs/DMS/blob/master/dms.owl I am a bit concerned about the name. If the items where it should be used should be confined to scholarly articles and similar (should it?) could "uses software" be misunderstood to a more general property, e.g., an iPhone (Q621427) would "uses software" iOS (Q48493) (similar to P306). Could/should we do anything about this? Call it "used software"?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Fnielsen (talk • contribs) at 21:39, 15 June 2017 (UTC).
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose use uses (P2283) and cites (P2860) instead. -- JakobVoss (talk) 07:39, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment There is one thing that annoys with uses (P2283): The paper itself is not what uses (P2283) the software (Q7397). Rather it is the experiment that the paper describes that uses (P2283) the software (Q7397). — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 13:23, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
      • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So to be precise the experiment should have it's own item. An alternative would be a very specific property such as "software used in the experiment described in this work". Why can't we view paper=experiment unless there is an item for the experiment? It's not obvious where experiment ends and writing begins, isn't it? For instance Jupyter Notebook (Q18633895) can be used for both. -- JakobVoss (talk) 07:07, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @YULdigitalpreservation: Given your examples it seems like allowed value should be software and the domain should be scientific papers. Can we get more clear about what the domain is supposed to be? ChristianKl (talk) 22:40, 17 June 2017 (UTC)
  • @ChristianKl: Thanks for suggesting those changes, they make sense to me. I've revised the proposal. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 13:47, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support with the constraint that a quote (P1683) from the paper supporting the claim be present in each use of this property. Mahir256 (talk) 21:29, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

cover ilustration[edit]

   Under discussion
Description artwork on the cover of this (edition of a) book or other physical work
Data type Item
Template parameter Illustrateur de la couverture dans fr:Modèle:Infobox Titre de livre-jeu
Domain jeu, livre-jeu, jeu de rôle
Example Le grand mammouth (Q33024212) -> "item for the cover of Le grand mammouth", with artist Marcel Laverdet (Q23708238)
Planned use fr:Modèle:Infobox Titre de livre-jeu et ses centaines de titres concernés / fr:Modèle:Infobox Titre de livre-jeu and his thousands of concerned title
Robot and gadget jobs non
Motivation

in french Bonjour, nous sommes actuellement en train de réaliser pour le projet livre-jeu la mise au propre des pages concernant les livres-jeux, or nous ne parvenons pas à faire distinguer clairement l'illustrateur de l'intérieur du livre de celui de la couverture, et nous sommes réduits à utiliser le paramètre créateur (P170), ce qui n'est pas adapté. Raison pour laquelle nous souhaiterions la création d'une propriété propre : l'illustrateur de la couverture. (par exemple, Marcel Laverdet (Q23708238) est l'illustrateur couverture de Le grand mammouth (Q33024212)

in english Hello, we are working on the Gamebook portal, cleaning up Wikipedia articles related to gamebooks, and we cannot properly distinguish the author of the artwork on the front cover from the author of the illustrative pictures inside the book. The only way we've found is to use the creator parameter (P170), which is not accurate. This is why we would like the addition of a property : 'Illustrator of the cover atwork'. For instance: Marcel Laverdet (Q23708238) is the illustrator of the cover artwork of Le grand mammouth (Q33024212)

PhiJai (talk) 14:44, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Many books like Alice in Wonderland (commonly cited) have been illustrated and currently, we use 'illustrator' (illustrator (P110)) for this. Why do we need one more additional property? Jsamwrites (talk) 16:27, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment well, I think *cover* illustrations are different from illustrations within a book. However, I think here it would make more sense to have instead a property for "cover illustration", which can then be given a full set of properties as for any artwork, rather than having a special property just for the person who created it. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:31, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree, a property for "cover illustration" would be perfect, the name is amended PhiJai (talk) 21:17, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support with this meaning, however the examples, French translations and some other parts of the proposal here still need to be fixed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:59, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

Would this be the property version of no label (Q29043496)? --Hannolans (talk) 20:46, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Patreon person ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a person on Patreon
Represents Patreon (Q15861362)
Data type External identifier
Domain humans
Allowed values [^\s\/]+
Example Amanda Palmer (Q240377)amandapalmer
Source https://www.patreon.com/
External links Use in sister projects: [de][en][es][fr][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][Wd][Ws].
Formatter URL https://www.patreon.com/$1
Motivation

I am trying to make it easier to surface ways to support artists directly instead of going through intermediaries. LydiaPintscher (talk) 19:59, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
  • Comment: I see that Amanda Palmer can also be referenced as https://www.patreon.com/bePatron?u=36361 Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:35, 16 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support - I wonder if this should be on the list of BLP properties to be careful about though? Not that it's confidential, but if the id is wrong that might be an issue of some concern for the artists. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:50, 17 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. I support the creation of this property. I can see how it will be a useful identifier for many artists. YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 12:09, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Mahir256 (talk) 16:08, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
  • I renamed the property into "Patreon person ID" to make it clear that the property is for persons. The property also needs a description before it's ready @LydiaPintscher: ChristianKl (talk) 07:57, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
    • Ah sorry I overlooked that. Fixed now. --LydiaPintscher (talk) 10:55, 4 August 2017 (UTC)

Rijksmuseum id[edit]

   Under discussion
Description id for an item on the rijksmuseum website
Data type External identifier
Allowed values string
Example The Night Watch (Q219831) --> SK-C-1779
Planned use Add with bot
Formatter URL https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/$1
Robot and gadget jobs Add based on other existing property
Motivation

PokestarFan • Drink some tea and talk with me • Stalk my edits • I'm not shouting, I just like this font! 03:05, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I prefer to have all museum/collection identifiers modelled with inventory number (P217) and collection (P195). Using for some museums a specific property and for other museums a generic property makes querying extremly hard. --Pasleim (talk) 19:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose that's an inventory nummer. The concept of a "Rijksmuseum id" does not exist. Multichill (talk) 20:45, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentShould certainly not get rid inventory number (P217) but supplementing it with an external-id type property might be useful. We already have that for other museum (The Met object ID (P3634), Atlas ID (P1212), J. Paul Getty Museum object ID (P2582)). In the case of the Rijksmuseum, it happens that the identifier values seems to be the accession number rather than an unrelated numeric value. But I don't think this should be a reason why we should not create the property. Beside, the Risksmuseum has a bilingual website, with a different URL pattern for English and Dutch https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/en/collection/SK-C-5 vs https://www.rijksmuseum.nl/nl/collectie/SK-C-5. We could document that in the property documentation, making it possible to retrieve the link in the right language for the client. --Zolo (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support The use of an external id property + formatter URL (P1630) provides a way of linking which cannot easily be achieved otherwise. In WD, Sqid, Reasonater or custom tools, a direct link to the correct page of a collection is very helpful for users. Besides, combining inventory number (P217) with collection (P195) as a qualifier seems to be legal as well as combining collection (P195) with inventory number (P217) as a qualifier. When a collection is on the web, a specific property + formatter URL (P1630) looks less ambiguous. Jneubert (talk) 16:17, 17 August 2017 (UTC)

Sefaria ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Data type External identifier
Domain works, authors
Example
Source https://www.sefaria.org
Formatter URL https://www.sefaria.org/$1
Motivation

Sefaria (Q33424604) is a online library of Jewish texts with freely licensed content. --Yair rand (talk) 00:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)

Discussion