Shortcut: WD:PP/WORK

Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Property proposal: Generic Authority control Person Organization
Creative work Place Sports Sister projects
Transportation Natural science Lexeme Wikimedia Commons


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 (research on 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 2021/07.

Creative work[edit]

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

catalogue raisonné[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionto use with the artist to show whether and which catalogue raisonnée exists
Representscatalogue raisonné (Q1050259)
Data typeItem
Allowed unitsartists
Example 1Lucas Cranach the Elder (Q191748)Die Gemälde von Lucas Cranach (Q64937617)
Example 2Vincent van Gogh (Q5582)J.-B. de la Faille: L'Œuvre de Vincent van Gogh, catalogue raisonné (Q17280421)
Example 3George Bellows (Q167132) → ?

Motivation[edit]

very useful to combine information to the artist's work Oursana (talk) 10:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • It looks like you want "item" datatype here? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:37, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support David (talk) 06:32, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Hi Oursana; shouldn't we broaden the proposal to all types of work's comprehensive lists (like full publications lists)? I would love to have such a tool for researchers, for instance... Nomen ad hoc (talk) 14:34, 2 July 2019 (UTC).
@Nomen ad hoc: I am not quite sure, if I got you right,perhaps you could give an example. The Werkverzeichnis is a very special list, the list for the artist's work, with a great authority.--Oursana (talk) 19:31, 2 July 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support - and with a separate field in the artwork template on Wikimedia Commons --Trzęsacz (talk) 21:09, 3 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question Is there a particular advantage to creating this property for use on the artist's item, over the existing pattern of using instance of (P31) = catalogue raisonné (Q1050259) / main subject (P921) = <artist> on the item for the catalogue? Usually we prefer properties in the direction that connects many items to one, rather than one item to many. Jheald (talk) 17:39, 8 July 2019 (UTC)

--Oursana (talk) 02:28, 15 July 2019 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I agree with Jheald here - the direction of this property feels wrong to me. Is there not a risk that a given item could have a lot of statements for this property? Marking as not ready. − Pintoch (talk) 21:09, 23 July 2019 (UTC)
    • one item to many?? I do not understand the arguments of Jheald and Pintoch. Could you please give an example and explain. There are very few Werkverzeichnis, normally none to one, maximum very seldom 3--Oursana (talk) 10:37, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
      • By one item to many we mean that it would be more natural to add a statement in the other direction, from each "catalogue raisonné" to its subject. The many in this phrase does not mean that there would be too many links to do it in the other direction, it is just a description of the relation (see en:One-to-many (data model) ). − Pintoch (talk) 10:49, 24 July 2019 (UTC)
        • I'm neutral on this one. I'm quite reluctant about creating one to many properties, in this case one person with multiple catalogue raisonnées, but what would be the maximum here? What artist has more than 10 of them? Maybe Rembrandt (Q5598)? @Jane023: as our catalog queen, what do you think? Multichill (talk) 09:40, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
          • Thanks for the ping. Though I am all for more catalogs raisonné on Wikidata for artists, the catalogue raisonné (Q1050259) is currently also in use for all sorts of things, not just "all works by artists", but also "all items in collection". That said, yes it would be nice to have a link from the artist to an item about their most notable (or only!) monograph. But the problem here is exactly the same as the one for the "Notable print" proposal for paintings that I had before. Who is to say that the notable print is indeed notable? Is it notable because it made the painting famous? Or is it notable because it was copied by a notable painter? Or was it made when the painting was in an important collection? Though valid, those questions don't even come near the crux of the matter which is that the print (or catalog in this case) has a specific instance as an edition. Do we want all editions and/or translations? I think not. The way to handle the problem this proposal tries to address is to try and address the issue of having a "reasonator-like link" on the artist page that will point the reader to all Wikidata resources available, such as the creator lists of course, but also (and not limited to) the catalog raisonné listeria list (if it exists). Signed, the catalog queen! Jane023 (talk) 10:18, 27 July 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Use the model suggested by User:Jheald, with a "...has role" qualifier; like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 20:40, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Perhaps we can use described by source (P1343) qualified with type of reference (P3865) (or "object has role" as suggested above)? - PKM (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose While I like the idea, we circumvent the authority problem with using it the other way around. And in the long term we will have several catalogue raisonnés. It would be great if we can show in the future the inverse relation items in a structured manner. --Hannolans (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
    • I am novice here, but inverse relations sounds like Boolean logic, whereas Not, Nand, Nor are attached to inputs as well as outputs. I know this is a long shot here, but I refer to US Military Training, Electronics. Computer (1972), Paptilian (talk) 19:05, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose It is true that the model suggested by Jheald should be enough and I am generally against creating needless "inverse properties". However I sympathise very much with the proposal as there is currently (AFAIK) no way to display all catalogues raisonné for an artist on Wikimedia Commons if the catalogue is only linked from the catalogue's side and not vice versa.Vojtěch Dostál (talk) 14:44, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
    • That is an interesting comment. I suppose I never thought about it in terms of Commons before. I assume you are talking about the creator template? If so, the number of catalogs for Rembrandt (Q5598) would definitely make the artwork template on his Commons paintings look pretty weird if you uncollapse it. It might be better to have it in Category infobox. Since you could easily infer it (see methods explained above), maybe @Mike Peel: could think of a way to show it? Having such functionality could possibly be a justification for having creator categories on Commons that are otherwise empty (due to copyright reasons). Jane023 (talk) 07:11, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
      • @Jane023: Sorry for the slow reply to your ping. I don't know of any way to do this without having the inverse property, so I've !voted support below. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Inverse properties are necessary to display the information in infoboxes (which can't do sparql queries to find the reverse links). In this case the property would be very useful for Commons categories about artists. @Jheald, Pintoch, Pigsonthewing, PKM, Hannolans, Vojtěch Dostál: I would encourage you to reconsider your oppose votes. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2020 (UTC)

web interface software[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionthe software that generates the web interface for the source code repository
RepresentsWeb user interface (Q1981057)
Data typeItem
Domainas qualifier on source code repository (P1324)
Allowed valuesinstances of software (Q7397) or forge (Q3077240)
Example 1https://invent.kde.org/office/kexiGitLab (Q16639197)
Example 2https://anongit.kde.org/kexi.gitno value Help
Example 3git://github.com/KDE/kexi.gitno value Help
Example 4https://www.kuketz-blog.de/WordPress (Q13166)
Example 5https://bbs.archlinux.org/FluxBB (Q1469163)
Example 6https://bugzilla.mozilla.orgBugzilla (Q55671)
Planned useGo trough source code repository (P1324) / protocol (P2700) HTTP(S) statements and replace with “web interface software” or version control system (P8423) where appropriate.
See alsosoftware engine (P408)

Motivation[edit]

The main motivation is to differentiate source code repositories with a web interfaces from repos without a web interface (see example 1, 2, and 3). It is also not unusual that a repo is mirrored so that one can pick an interface based on one’s preference.

“Why not use software engine (P408) instead?” The Wikidata description for software engine (Q2622299) is “central part of a computer program”. Web pages, however, are usually not computer programs and the software that generated the web interface might not be part of the web interface, see static site generator (Q77916592). In Wikidata:Property_proposal/version_control_system User:Waldyrious wrote that “software engine (P408) is too broad for this, so I agree with your suggestion to use a new property.” —Dexxor (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Dachary
Metamorforme42
NMaia
Valerio Bozzolan
MichaelSchoenitzer
Jasc PL
LiberatorG
Dexxor
Waldyrious
Iwan.Aucamp
Airon90
Ainali
Haansn08
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Informatics/FLOSS

  • I generally  Support this property, but I have some comments I'd like your input on:
Long discussion where Waldyrious and I, Dexxor, discuss the name and some minor details of the proposed property rather than discussing whether it should be created.
  1. Do you envision this new property to be linked, via Wikidata item of this property (P1629)/Wikidata property (P1687), to Web user interface (Q1981057)?
  2. I wonder if we could make this more broadly applicable without diluting its meaning as a qualifier of a source code repository property. For example, could something like "web hosting service" work as such a broader property? It would then be also usable as a qualifier for, say, official website (P856) or official blog (P1581).
  3. Another possibility that occurred to me was to allow existing properties like operator (P137) or publisher (P123) to be used for this purpose. That would only require expanding the scope of existing properties, rather than creating a new one.
Looking forward to read your thoughts! --Waldyrious (talk) 16:23, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
  1. No, if we want to link this property to an item, we probably need to create a new item.
  2. I agree that “web interface software” sounds odd for blogs and websites. But “web hosting service” is certainly not the solution (from en:web hosting service: “Web hosts are companies that provide space on a server”). How about “website generator”?
  3. No, possible values for operator (P137) and publisher (P123) are person or organization. If we really want to avoid creating a new property, we should expand the scope of software engine (P408) for websites. —Dexxor (talk) 17:59, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
  1. Can you expand a bit on how exactly the new "web interface software" property would be different from Web user interface (Q1981057)? The distinction is not very clear to me.
  2. "Website generator" seems much more specific about the toolset used to produce the final web assets served as the website — along the lines of static site generator (Q77916592) or web framework (Q1330336). I was thinking more about something reflecting a web hosting service (Q5892272). For example, a website hosted on GitHub Pages (Q30324817) could have "web hosting service" = GitHub Pages (Q30324817) and "website generator" = Jekyll (Q17067385). (By the way, I'd say that the class of companies providing a service should be modeled as a distinct entity from the service itself, as an abstract concept; so I'd suggest creating a new item, e.g. "web hosting provider", distinct from web hosting service (Q5892272), for the meaning you're describing).
  3. I think software engine (P408) would be confusing as a website's platform — IMO it would be more appropriate to subsume the "website generator" suggestion you gave above.
Overall, I believe the main source of dissonance here is that I'm thinking about hosted services, like GitHub, whereas you're focusing on the tools themselves, and considering also self-hosting solutions. With this in mind, I can understand why it's more important to encode what the repository browsing software is, than the provider that hosts it (especially since the URL already provides that information). If you agree with this, then I would suggest making the new property ("web interface software") a subproperty of software engine (P408), and encoding the hosting provider using, e.g. operator (P137) GitHub Inc. (Q28771536) or publisher (P123) GitLab Inc. (Q55589254).  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Waldyrious (talk • contribs) at 20:16, 15 August 2020‎) (UTC).
I distinguish between a web interface and the software which generated the interface but some people don’t. I’m fine with web interface software Wikidata item of this property (P1629) Web user interface (Q1981057) and subproperty of (P1647) software engine (P408).
You are spot-on when it comes to our dissonance. For modeling the hosting provider I suggest internet hosting service (Q1210425). This is a more general term that includes, among other things, web hosting service (Q5892272) (websites) and Git hosting service (version control). —Dexxor (talk) 13:41, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
I agree with all of your suggestions. That would mean that, besides the "web interface software" property we're discussing here, we'd also request a new property associated with internet hosting service (Q1210425) for the hosting provider, right? --Waldyrious (talk) 10:48, 17 August 2020 (UTC)
Yes, internet hosting service would need to be a separate property. If you propose it, I would like to know whether your motivation is “because we can” or something else. —Dexxor (talk) 07:25, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
I believe it would be useful to model whether a web-browsable repository is provided on a self-hosted gitlab instance versus hosted on gitlab.com, for example. But it's not something I feel too strongly about. --Waldyrious (talk) 14:12, 25 August 2020 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Waldyrious, Dexxor: -- If either or both of you are still interested in getting this added, please try and find at least one other supporter, and summarize the discussion above so it's clear to the property creators what exactly is being proposed. JesseW (talk) 17:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

 Support OK, that makes sense to me, so I've marked it as ready. Hopefully a property creator agrees. JesseW (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I thought long about this and am not sure whether I still support this as it stands now. Considering that GitLab and GitHub provide much more than just an interface to Git repositories, I see three ways to proceed:

  1. Change the name of the proposed property to "website powered by" or "website software". Should the over 4000 existing software engine (P408) statements on websites in the Directory of Open Access Journals (Q1227538) and a few on MediaWiki websites be changed to use the new property then?
  2. Limit the property's scope to source code repository software (e.g. GitLab, GitHub, cgit (Q28974765)).
  3. Throw this proposal away and just use software engine (P408) or don't model the relation at all.

@GNUtoo, Uzume: You participated in the previous discussion, what do you think? —Dexxor (talk) 21:56, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'm personally inclined towards Dexxor's proposal #2, but #1 would be fine with me also, if others prefer it. #3 doesn't sound right IMO. --Waldyrious (talk) 23:09, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think the term you are trying to capture has changed over time and thus also changed its names:

You also seem to want to focus this on user interface. We already have properties for software relationships some user interface specific even:

I see no reason why websites/web applications cannot have core engine software as well as user interface libraries and other dependencies (like crypto libraries, etc.). In fact I was one of the ones that lobbied to get web framework (Q1330336) generalized from web application framework to web framework (including software framework (Q271680) for things like web service (Q193424), web resource (Q3427877), etc.).

Really do not see this as very similar to the the discussion for version control system (P8423) (which was once implemented by protocol (P2700) but perhaps could been also have used file format (P2701) depending on the version control system (Q3257930)). @Dexxor: Thanks for the ping. —Uzume (talk) 15:47, 15 March 2021 (UTC)

  •  Support, an important property for websites.--Arbnos (talk) 01:52, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I went ahead with #2, limiting the scope of this property to web interface software for source code repositories, because web interface software would be a weird term for blog software. Changing the name is also not possible because examples 2 and 3 would loose their meaning. For examples 4, 5 and 6 I suggest using software engine (P408) instead. The Wikidata editors using it clearly do not mind stretching the definition of "software engine" a bit, as can be seen with the example "Wikipedia → MediaWiki" on software engine (P408). @Genium, Ipr1, LiberatorG: If you support this proposal, I think it can be marked as ready. I am happy to answer your questions. —Dexxor (talk) 12:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)

 Support I agree with Dexxor's arguments and final suggestion (maybe call it "source code repository browser" instead of "source code repository software"? Otherwise I'm afraid it can be confused with version control system (P8423)). --Waldyrious (talk) 20:43, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

record number[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionnumber or string identifying a record, document or certificate (e.g. birth certificate or death certificate) that is visible on the record
Data typeString
Domainreference, possibly on Commmons, also on items for documents
Example 1File:John F. Kennedy's Certificate of Birth - NARA - 192705.tif → 656
Example 2File:Reagan Ronald BS (cropped).jpg → 9756
Example 3birth certificate of Barack Obama (Q14527788) → 151 61 10641
Example 4File:John Francis Fitzgerald Record of Birth - NARA - 192707.tif → 419582
Named "copy of record of birth". Note Year 1863, Vol. 161, Page 14, No. 587 also included.
Example 5File:LeBaron Hart Lindauer (1878-1945) birth certificate.gif → 419582
Planned useadd to references, based on c:Category:Birth certificates of the United States
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See also

Motivation[edit]

Above lists a few alternative properties, but none seem really satisfactory. For date of birth (P569) of Kamala Harris (Q10853588), I found "State File Number 64-295984, Local Registration District and Certificate Number 6015 15318". Maybe the entire string could go in this property. One could obviously try to distinguish further: the entry in the registry, the certificate based on that entry, etc. (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 10:39, 15 August 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Comment Ideally this would have a mandatory qualifier, otherwise it's not useful information, just arbitrary noise, like an accession number without a collection. "656" or "151 61 10641" mean nothing in isolation. -Animalparty (talk) 04:55, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
    • It's similar to some of the others listed in "see also" above or page(s) (P304): depending on how it's used (in references, as main statement, on Commons files), some additional information needs to be added with other properties. This can be qualifier, but could also be an additional reference property or another property used as main statement. --- Jura 13:42, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
  • ' Support in particular for references. See discussion on civil registry --2le2im-bdc (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support. Nomen ad hoc (talk) 21:33, 22 February 2021 (UTC).

Wangfang article ID[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionID of an article in Wanfang, one of the Chinese DOI provider
Representsno label (Q12903886)
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed units(periodical|thesis|conference|patent|nstr|cstad|standard|claw)/[A-Za-z0-9 -.]+
Example 1A NEW SPECIES OF CYCLOPHORIDAE FROM GUIZHOU PROVINCE, CHINA (PROSOBRANCHIA, MESOGASTROPODA, CYCLOPHORIDAE) (Q98837082)periodical/dwfl200501013
Example 2Q100322994periodical/zhlxbx200402002
Example 3Q47261693periodical/nmgshkx201405008
Number of IDs in source285315804; 134979348 for periodical journal articles only
Formatter URLhttp://d.wanfangdata.com.cn/$1

Motivation[edit]

One of three major platforms of scientific articles published in China. GZWDer (talk) 14:17, 14 November 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • @GZWDer: -- please provide a motivation! JesseW (talk) 13:43, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Surprisingly, there doesn't seem to be an English language Wikipedia entry for this organization. It'd probably be good to try and add one. Looking at a translation of their about-us page, while there is a mention of being a publisher, they also seem to do a bunch of other information-related things. I'd prefer to see more documentation of their context before supporting this property. JesseW (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Also, how does this differ/relate to CJFD journal article ID (P6769) and DOI (P356)? Why is it not redundant with them? JesseW (talk) 21:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
    • CJFD journal article ID (P6769) is another major platform of scientific articles, using a similar but different ID system. Not all articles have DOI.--GZWDer (talk) 11:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Ah, OK. Could you give an example of a paper on Wanfang that lacks a DOI? JesseW (talk) 14:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Evil Angel movie ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a pornographic movie in the Evil Angel movie database
RepresentsEvil Angel movie database (Q104166383)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainfilm (Q11424)
ExampleNSFW:
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Formatter URLhttps://www.evilangel.com/en/movie/$1
Motivation

This new Wikidata property related to erotica or pornography (Q53671196) would enhance our coverage of pornographic film (Q185529). Evil Angel (Q1281891) is one of the biggest companies of the industry, and its database has more detailed information than Internet Adult Film Database (Q1052713) and Adult Film Database (Q732004) (e. g. exact release date, scene list for every movie). See also: WD:Property proposal/Evil Angel video ID. — Mathieu Kappler (talk) 17:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

Evil Angel video ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a pornographic video in the Evil Angel video database
RepresentsEvil Angel video database (Q104166407)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainvideo clip (Q677466)
ExampleNSFW:
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Formatter URLhttps://www.evilangel.com/en/video/$1
Motivation

This new Wikidata property related to erotica or pornography (Q53671196) would enhance our coverage of pornographic film (Q185529). Evil Angel (Q1281891) is one of the biggest companies of the industry, and its database has more detailed information than Internet Adult Film Database (Q1052713) and Adult Film Database (Q732004) (e. g. exact release date, scene list for every movie). See also : WD:Property proposal/Evil Angel movie ID. — Mathieu Kappler (talk) 17:48, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion

 Oppose Contains very little information. --Trade (talk) 23:38, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

@Trade: The advantage is that it has entries about seperate scenes, which the big databases do not have. For many scenes it is the only reliable database that can provide us with release date, which movie it is included in and what it depicts. Regards, Mathieu Kappler (talk) 09:51, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
 Support--Trade (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

SVTplay ID[edit]

   abandoned
Descriptionthis is an identifier at the SVTplay that is the brand used for the video on demand service offered by Sveriges Television
RepresentsSVT Play (Q3444523)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domaintelevision program (Q15416) we also hope SVT should start create more types of external identifiers we can connect Wikidtaa with
Example 1Q104180941video/13978128
Example 2Emil i Lönneberga (Q557990)emil-i-lonneberga
Example 3Banksy most wanted (Q104195912)video/28461981
Sourcehttps://www.svtplay.se/
Planned useas many as possible
Formatter URLhttps://www.svtplay.se/$1
See alsoSVT Play ID (P6817) as Swedish Television is closing down the site SVT Öppet Kanal and move it to SVT Play this property will be obsolete
Proposed bySalgo60 (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Motivation[edit]

Swedish Television is closing down the site SVT Öppet Kanal and move it to SVT play --> SVT Play ID (P6817) will be obsolete. This proposal is for an identifier at the "new" site SVT Play. See also T225394 and EntitySchema:E279- Salgo60 (talk) 22:31, 15 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

 Support--So9q (talk) 14:43, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If there is anything important for the property in the Phabricator ticket, it should be copied into the proposal so it is easy in the future to find everything that was relevant for the creation of the property. (If nothing is important, we can also remove the distracting link.) Ainali (talk) 15:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I feel Wikidata has too much touch and go and linking tasks done and read what people we have spoken with etc. is what is needed to be a more mature network and a more stable community. Sorry if it distracts you... If you have better people to contact inside SVT please let us know... - Salgo60 (talk) 16:25, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

@Salgo60, So9q, Ainali: I am a bit lost about the discussion. Should I create this property right now or are we waiting for something? Pamputt (talk) 21:13, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Pamputt we can close/skip it.. We see no interest from the Swedish Broadcast: I have been in contact with 3 people and metadata is no focus.... sorry - Salgo60 (talk) 21:25, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

AbandonSocios ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a video game or video game company on AbandonSocios
RepresentsAbandonsocios (Q72872763)
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainGerman Grand Prix (Q7998), video game developer (Q210167)
Example 1Skipper & Skeeto: Tales from Paradise Park (Q58609390)Topi_y_Teo_en_el_Parque_Paraíso
Example 2Skipper & Skeeto: The Revenge of Mr. Shade (Q61721644)Topi_y_Teo_en_la_Venganza_de_Mister_Ruin
Example 3Sunes sportlov (Q98688609)Sunes_Sportlov
Sourcehttp://www.abandonsocios.org/wiki/Categor%C3%ADa:Juegos, http://www.abandonsocios.org/wiki/Categor%C3%ADa:Compa%C3%B1%C3%ADas
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source10,000+
Formatter URLhttp://www.abandonsocios.org/wiki/$1

Motivation[edit]

Spanish MediaWiki encyclopedia mainly dedicated to older abandonware games. --Trade (talk) 20:53, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  •  Support, an important property for computer games.--Arbnos (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2021 (UTC)

short DOI[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionshort alias for DOI generated by the ShortDOI service from the DOI foundation
Representsdigital object identifier (Q25670) but we may have to make a new one, sorry all of that is still a bit new to me
Data typeexternal identifier (as in Property:P356)-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
Template parameterShortDOI ? I don't believe it needs to be displayed on Wikidata.
Domainexact same as Property:P356
Allowed valuesSee Property:P356 with the 3 regexps, according to DOI Foundation we could use only the one that matches maximum values: (?i)10.\d{4,9}/[-._;()/:A-Z0-9]+
Allowed unitsnone
Example 110/aabbe
Example 2High-Resolution Structure of ClpC1-Rufomycin and Ligand Binding Studies Provide a Framework to Design and Optimize Anti-Tuberculosis Leads (Q93121951) : 10/ggcjcz
Example 3Paclitaxel-induced apoptosis in MCF-7 breast-cancer cells. (Q38559628) : 10/dv5fth
Example 4Can Invalid Bioactives Undermine Natural Product-Based Drug Discovery? (Q26778522) : 10/f8d4d7
Source[[1]] and [[2]] and [[3]]
Planned usematching publications for our project Wikidata:WikiProject_Chemistry/Natural_products
Number of IDs in sourceas many as DOIs, we are talking 230 millions on Wikidata as of 19 November 2020
Expected completenesseventually complete
Formatter URLhttps://doi.org/$1
Robot and gadget jobsYES
See alsoProperty:P356
Distinct-values constraintYES
Wikidata projectWikidata:WikiProject_Source_MetaData

Motivation[edit]

https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Source_MetaData#Adding_a_ShortDOI_property

I would like to propose adding a ShortDOI property. ShortDOI are used to provide shorter DOIs than things like that: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0258(19980815/30)17:15/16<1661::AID-SIM968>3.0.CO;2-2

it gets translated to 10/aabbe

They are created by an official DOI API: http://shortdoi.org/

And can be used on https://doi.org interchangeably with DOIs on all their services and will always refer to what the original DOI points to.

I contacted the DOI foundation to make sure about the format as they didn't specify it clearly in their documentation. The proposed format is managing all the ones I've seen so far.

The other solution would be to have two statements with a DOI property, but we would see that as messier as we wouldn't know which one is the short doi unless using a qualifier.

Hope it makes sense.

@AdrianoRutz:@GrndStt:@Egon_Willighagen:

For the Wikidata:WikiProject_Chemistry/Natural_products project, Bjonnh (talk) 20:09, 4 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • What's the vlaue of having short DOI's in addition to the other dois? As far as the examples go please add the items where those values would be placed. ChristianKl❫ 21:48, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
    • Articles can be refered as both short DOI and normal DOIs, meaning we could be given short DOIs. Bjonnh (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
  • See Wikidata:Property proposal/WMF short URL, Wikidata:Property proposal/New York Times short URL, Wikidata:Property proposal/The Guardian article ID (and PFD of this property).--GZWDer (talk) 14:59, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment DOI is a costly redirect service. Do we really need to store several variations of it? --- Jura 15:20, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
    • What do you mean by costly? Bjonnh (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
      • It's non free redirect service. Citing the QID is preferable. --- Jura 15:32, 22 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Either a new property or just use DOI (P356) since the formatter is the same. Maybe with qualifier object has role (P3831) and a new item for "short DOI"? Either way it would be very useful to have these recorded in Wikidata for correlation for example with OpenRefine (the long DOI's can be hard to reconcile!) ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:26, 5 January 2021 (UTC)
    • I talked to the DOI foundation yesterday, the format is expected to be the same as DOI (even if internally they only use letters and numbers for now). For them, it is treated as a DOI synonym. So maybe being able to have multiple DOI by article could work. Bjonnh (talk) 15:25, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
    • DOI (P356) is meant to be canonical so I will not support using this for short DOI.--GZWDer (talk) 21:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unclear what the purpose of linking to a shortened form is. JesseW (talk) 18:37, 19 March 2021 (UTC)

Literature.com book ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a book on Literature.com
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainbook (Q571)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1Pride and Prejudice (Q170583)9
Example 2Peter Pan (Q270470)12
Example 3Murder on the Links (Q542293)140
Sourcehttps://www.literature.com/
Number of IDs in sourceseveral hundred
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URLhttps://www.literature.com/book/$1

Literature.com ebook ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for an ebook on Literature.com
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainbook (Q571)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1The Story of a Fierce Bad Rabbit (Q6625640)45265
Example 2The Tragedy of Romeo and Juliet (Q23301380)1112
Example 3The Secret of Chimneys (Q174654)65238
Sourcehttps://www.literature.com/
Number of IDs in sourceover 60,000
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URLhttps://www.literature.com/ebook/$1

Proposed by User:AntisocialRyan

Discussion[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Updated the examples to only have the numerical IDs − the rest is a slug that is not necessary. Jean-Fred (talk) 16:29, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
  • @AntisocialRyan: Could you add an estimate of how many identifiers this site has, and what sort of information each entity contains? JesseW (talk) 13:55, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support, an important property for literature.--Arbnos (talk) 14:33, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
  • @AntisocialRyan, Jean-Frédéric: I added an estimate of the number of books here, also a link to a book that seems to be in their "ebook" collection, but the formatter URL is different. Do you know if there's something in common that works for both types here or do we need two separate id's? ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:32, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    It looks like they are separate. For example, book/12 goes to a different page than ebook/12. AntisocialRyan (talk) 20:45, 14 June 2021 (UTC)
    Agree. Jean-Fred (talk) 10:24, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
  • Ok, I split this into 2 pieces. They seem to have a much larger number of 'ebooks' than regular 'books', but they may be less well known. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:26, 16 June 2021 (UTC)

onscreen participant[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionan agent taking an active role as a participant onscreen in a nonfiction moving image work
Representsonscreen participant (Q104879379)
Data typeItem
Domainmoving image (Q10301427), non-fiction film (Q24960157), factual television (Q5428822)
Allowed valuesQ number
Example 1RBG (Q54829190) has onscreen participant Ruth Bader Ginsburg (Q11116)
Example 2RBG (Q54829190) has onscreen participant Nina Totenberg (Q7038136)
Example 3Shadow Girl (Q26911180) has onscreen participant Maria Teresa Larrain (Q26911182)
Example 4Burroughs: the Movie (Q16249038) has onscreen participant Allen Ginsberg (Q6711)
Example 5The Great Math Mystery (Q56604860) has onscreen participant Mario Livio (Q1898912)
Example 6Chasing the Moon (Q85751667) has onscreen participant Buzz Aldrin (Q2252)
Example 7Chasing the Moon (Q85751667) has onscreen participant Michael Collins (Q104859)
Example 8Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness (Q88306935) has onscreen participant Carole Baskin (Q88495947)
Example 9Tiger King: Murder, Mayhem and Madness (Q88306935) has onscreen participant Joe Exotic (Q83688347)
Example 10Grey Gardens (Q2104352) has onscreen participant Edith Bouvier Beale (Q535330)
Example 11Grey Gardens (Q2104352) has onscreen participant Edith Ewing Bouvier Beale (Q5338542)
Example 12Shut Up & Sing (Q2905624) has onscreen participant The Chicks (Q142636)
Example 13The Last Dance (Q85807688) has onscreen participant Chicago Bulls (Q128109)
Planned useWill add property to nonfiction moving image works as they are encountered; or will change existing property cast member (P161) used on many records to the onscreen participant property, because these people are not actors in a film or television program
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsocast member (P161), contributor to the creative work or subject (P767), participant (P710), talk show guest (P5030)

Motivation[edit]

This proposal originated in a discussion on the Wikidata Telegram channel. There isn't an ideal property to indicate the onscreen participants in a nonfiction film or television program. These are not cast member, as they are not actors in a fictional work. Typically they are interviewees or commenters in documentaries and other nonfiction films and television programs. Having the specific property "onscreen participant" would enable an exact explanation of their role in relation to a moving image work. This property exists in RDA: see "has onscreen participant agent" (http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20279) and its subelements "has onscreen participant person" (http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20363), "has onscreen participant collective agent" (http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20422), "has onscreen participant corporate body" (http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20481), and "has onscreen participant family" (http://rdaregistry.info/Elements/e/P20540). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 05:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

ValterVB LydiaPintscher Ermanon Cbrown1023 Discoveranjali Mushroom Queryzo Danrok Rogi Mbch331 Jura Jobu0101 Jklamo Jon Harald Søby putnik ohmyerica AmaryllisGardener FShbib Andreasmperu Li Song Tiot Harshrathod50 U+1F350 Bodhisattwa Shisma Wolverène Tris T7 Antoine2711 Hrk6626 TheFireBender V!v£ l@ Rosière WatchMeWiki! CptViraj ʂɤɲ Trivialist 2le2im-bdc Sotiale Wallacegromit1, mostly focus on media historiography and works from the Global South Floyd-out M2k~dewiki Rockpeterson Mathieu Kappler Sidohayder Spinster Gnoeee Ranjithsiji Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Movies --- Jura 19:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

  •  Support This will be a useful property. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 16:51, 20 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support This seems like it would be useful for differentiating people in news reports, video footage, etc. from actors playing a part. 21:51, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support--2le2im-bdc (talk) 13:30, 23 January 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't really see how we could do the proposed "sorting" efficiently and avoid having to re-do it frequently. Currently, these people are already identified as participants with P161 (not as actors) and generally referenced with various sources that also do not differentiate as above. Already the difference between cast and "voice actor" is sometimes hard to maintain. --- Jura 09:04, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
    • In almost all of the items that I have looked at, these people are identified as "cast member". "Participant" is too broad and could mean anyone participating in the creation of a film, not just those appearing on camera. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 00:53, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
      • Yes, participant with P161. --- Jura 23:02, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I've thought about a property like this for quite a while. For documentary films, interviews and other non-fictional content, cast member (P161) doesn't seem ideal. Using character role (P453) themselves (Q18086706) kind of works, but doesn't quite convey that the person isn't playing some kind of role. Using a different property could do that.
    On the other hand pretty much all film/tv databases out there don't make any such distinctions and just list all such on-screen participants as cast members. Which makes importing or comparing data more difficult if our data is split among several properties. But having more granularity in our data isn't necessarily a bad thing, we are already doing that with properties like presenter (P371), voice actor (P725) or talk show guest (P5030).
    Although I think instead of creating a new property, we could also repurpose/expand talk show guest (P5030) instead to not include just talk show guests but all kinds of on-screen participants. --Kam Solusar (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
    • If we change this, I think either way, it would be good to see a plan how to implement this fairly large change, before creating the property. @UWashPrincipalCataloger, Moebeus, 2le2im-bdc, Clements.UWLib, Rockpeterson: @Emwille: what do you think? what's your plan? @Kam Solusar: --- Jura 10:44, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • @Kam Solusar: Re:repurposing talk show guest (P5030): one issue is that talk show guest (P5030) is currently used for guests which are *not* "on-screen", because it’s media without a screen (podcasts and radio shows). Jean-Fred (talk) 14:13, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Talk show guest and onscreen participant are very different things. As has been pointed out, talk show guests are not necessarily on screen in a visual resource, they can be guests on radio shows and podcasts. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:09, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
    • Jura makes a good point about maintaining differences and dealing with onscreen participants already identified as cast members. This seems to be an issue that will come up whenever we need more specific properties for roles people play in a creative work. How are these more granular new properties usually dealt with in Wikidata? I don't see how adding "participant" with P161 would sidestep that issue, exactly. "Participant" doesn't add a meaningful distinction because it's so broad, but there would still be maintenance. I don't think repurposing talk show guest (P5030) would be ideal either, because talk show guests are often, as Jean-Fred points out, not on-screen. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 16:49, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
  • I do agree with Jura as it will be a hard and jumbled task to differentiate people as actors and on screen participant and there is no valid source to confirm if he/she is of either category . If we find out a proper method of sorting then this property would be really helpful for proposing a detailed database of the documentary/shows . Rockpeterson (talk) 09:07, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Wouldn't it still be better to input new items with a much more correct property that editors could use instead of cramming people into "cast member"? Why perpetuate this problem, even if it is not immediately possible to correct already existing items? Editors could correct records as they encounter them or need to edit them further. I agree that it might be hard to identify all the statements that need to be corrected, but "cast member" is simply wrong, and that is what is being used primarily now. Perhaps it is possible to gather all nonfiction moving image works that have a cast member property and work on cleaning them up. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 19:31, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
Yes its a great idea @UWashPrincipalCataloger: , it will be more efficient and helpful if we make a project to gather all nonfiction moving image works sort them in years(period) and work on them in a group so that the task will be completed faster . If you agree I am ready to work Rockpeterson (talk) 06:35, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
I would be willing to work on this, and I think some of our media catalogers would also. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 15:51, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
  • Maybe you could start out with the currently existing model and once you have a clear view on how it could be implemented, come back to this proposal. --- Jura 12:21, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't think it's a good idea to have two approaches for the same information nor creating a new one without a clear view on how to implement it. There is nothing inherently wrong with the current approach. It may be that some interpret existing statements incorrectly, but that is essentially their problem. As mentioned, participants are added with the property cast member (P161) and qualified if wanted. We need to make sure an approach can be implemented on the practical level in Wikidata.
    The project has already suffered much in the field of books from people coming here trying to spell out the theoretical ideal approach and, 8 years down the road, WikiProject Books still in an non-ideal shape. Let's make sure we don't undo WikiProject Movies in the same way. --- Jura 13:17, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
    • But @Jura1:, cast members are actors in a fictional work. The cast member property is defined as pertaining to actors. Onscreen participants are not actors. Using the cast member property is not correct for these kinds of participants in nonfictional works who appear as themselves and are not acting. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
      • I understand that this is your point of view. It just not current modeling practice, not here and not at even larger projects we rely on. --- Jura 14:46, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support It seems to me that this property would help us streamline current modelling practices in this area (<cast member><role><themselves> vs. <participant><has role><xy>. --Beat Estermann (talk) 14:37, 28 February 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Pteropotamus (talk) 10:11, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jala360 13:50, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Not sure what the disagreement is. If cast member is not appropriate we need a term that IS appropriate, and this one seems like it would nicely cover many current problems. -- Categerhart (talk) 00:25, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
    • A property for this is already available and used in line with similar properties we are mapping from other leading databases in the field. If you need to query the label, you can add aliases to the existing property. Apparently, some UWashington staff members disagree with the current approach, but still haven't presented a viable way to implement another approach. Maybe, there is just a confusion between Wikidata property, Wikidata label and "term". --- Jura 14:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
      • It would not be appropriate to add "onscreen participant" as an alias of "cast member". They have very different semantics. See below for a possible viable way to implement separate properties for participants in non-fiction works versus cast members in fictional works. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
        • Well, it's the current approach. I understand that you disagree with this. I suppose you are aware of the problems of Wikidata:WikiProject Books. It's advised by 100+ specialists on how to implement it in Wikidata, but 8 years down the line, it still hasn't happened and WMF now considers another project to handle this instead. Maybe you can help them sort it out? In any case, we don't want WikiProject Books problems to proliferate into Movies, don't we? --- Jura 11:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I'd like to propose a way to take on implementation if this proposal is approved. It would address statements already in existence for "cast members" in non-fiction films and television. I used a set of queries for works with the targeted genres and sub-genres (query results for non-fiction films, factual television, reality television, and game shows) to accumulate all the statements we would like to change into an OpenRefine project and posted a copy in a Google spreadsheet here. There are a little over 35,000 statements. I propose that a group of volunteers such as myself, Categerhart, UWashPrincipalCataloger, and Rockpeterson review the proposed changes, in consultation with WikiProject Movies, then make the changes in OpenRefine/QuickStatements after submitting them for bot review (this is enough to require bot review, right?). As for maintaining the distinctions between cast members and onscreen participants during large data imports from databases which do not make the same distinction, I would be willing to help brainstorm implementation ideas to make the distinction during the import process. I don't know who is doing most of that already. Maybe folks involved with WikiProject Movies? What do you think Jura? --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 00:21, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
    • Thanks. That is a start.
      If it goes beyond of what's in the queries, can you store the lists somewhere onsite (or on WMF site)? e.g. Wikidata:Sandbox/1. Contributors should be able to edit without having to use offsite resources.
      I think there are three or four distinct issues to address:
      (1) how to deal with existing statements: sorting as you suggest can address this. How does it go beyond checking genre?
      (2) how to deal with new statements going forward
      (3) how to ensure people can easily add incremental contributions
      (4) how bulk imports or reference additions by bot should work going forward (as most other databases just use one property "cast"). --- Jura 11:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Evighetsrunor[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionSwedish rune project about runic inscriptions "Evighetsrunor"
Representsrunic inscription (Q7379880)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainitem
Example 1Rök Runestone (Q472975)3a61c080-77fc-4a44-b5ac-f3a4b33b3aab
Example 2Upplands runinskrifter 668 (Q18334393)aaac190b-88b5-4a90-abe7-98deae52c5b4
Example 3Uppland Runic Inscription 792 (Q19979013)42fa16bf-8600-41a2-a487-a848070424a8
Sourceapp.raa.se/open/runor/search_results
Planned useused in Wikipedia articles
Number of IDs in source7189
Expected completeness100%
Formatter URLhttp://kulturarvsdata.se/uu/srdb/$1
See alsoScandinavian Runic-text Database (P1261)

Motivation[edit]

This new application "Evighetsrunor" is available through an aggregator K-samsök that is Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260). My argument is that having a specific properties is more as we do in Wikidata and will make easer to write templates and do SPARQL etc... Salgo60 (talk) 19:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Update 2021-mar-27: @Abbe98, Biltvätt: I have now implemented "datarountripping" and Linked Runes to books pages at Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) see meta.wikimedia.org Structured_data_for_GLAM-Wiki/Roundtripping/KMB I still think having a dedicated property for Evighetsrunor makes sense and make it easier for ex. Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) to understand how to link Evighetsrunor. Tools like hub.toolforge.org would make it possible for Swedish Literature Bank (Q10567910) to use Scandinavian Runic-text Database (P1261) to link Evighetsrunor. Also linking directly to Everlasting Runes I feels will make it possible to easier link from articles in Wikipedia that creates a search

- Salgo60 (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

 Oppose It's one line of SPARQL. Let's not duplicate the information into two properties it will just get out of sync and we still need it in P1260 for things like federated SPARQL and general discovery. Abbe98 (talk) 20:02, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg CommentPlease do a POC and show how it will work as Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) now will contain a lot of things related to a runic inscription (Q7379880) in different ways I guess we need a way of understanding from the Linked data in Wikidata what a specific identifier will contain....
If we should select the right Property value from Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) you need qualifiers etc... this suggestion is a more clean and easy maintained Wikidata way having dedicated properties for each of the systems. We also have a year long discussion of the quality of the data in Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) so I feel people have less trust in the K-samsök approach that is impossible for Wikidata to clean if K-samsök is not doing the homework see Swedish Wikipedia discussion - Salgo60 (talk) 12:00, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
Update now has some objects from Evighetsrunor been added to Wikidata in Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) I feel we get a mess as Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) will both have links to "Fornsök" that is geometric areas and "Evighetsrunor" that is runic inscription (Q7379880). You need to check the values and if it contains a string to understand what resource its is linking... feels not like good Linked data ;-) and asking for problems...
- Salgo60 (talk) 05:12, 6 February 2021 (UTC)

 Oppose For the same reasons as Abbe98. It's impossible to know, based solely on the URI, "what" a record in SOCH represents. You have to resolve the URI and read the RDF to know if it's a record for a building, a monument, an artefact, a photo… SOCH URIs from Runor of the form uu/srdb typically represent the physical objects that bear the inscriptions rather than the inscriptions themselves. This is why many of them are owl:sameAs other records representing the same physical objects. The current property Swedish Open Cultural Heritage URI (P1260) describes a link connecting a Wikidata object to a matching SOCH object. An identity; that's all. Inventing different properties for all the different item types in SOCH seems like it would be very difficult to manage, especially as you can't tell the item type just by looking at the URI, with little real benefit. Biltvätt (talk) 10:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Bandcamp Tag[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionThe tag of this location or music genre on bandcamp
Representsmusic genre (Q188451) or geographic location (Q2221906)
Data typeString
Domainitem
Example 1vaporwave (Q15733887)vaporwave
Example 2grindcore (Q188534)grindcore
Example 3Detroit (Q12439)detroit
Sourcehttps://bandcamp.com/tags
Number of IDs in source740
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URLhttps://bandcamp.com/tag/$1
Distinct-values constraintyes

Motivation[edit]

another identifier useful for mapping all music genres --Shisma (talk) 10:06, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment In general, this seems good, but I'm not sure if this is actually a controlled vocabulary. Also, when adding examples it's important that it be limited to instance of (P31) music genre (Q188451), so the "detroit" example isn't good. JesseW (talk) 14:43, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Well not necessarily. Tags for specific regions night be useful for somebody --Shisma (talk) 21:19, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I didn't realize that they used tags for both; I thought "detroit" was just a music genre I didn't know about! It might be better to separate them into two different properties? (I'm really not sure about that, though.) JesseW (talk) 23:12, 20 March 2021 (UTC)


Sweet kate
Galaktos
Sjoerddebruin
AmaryllisGardener
Kosboot
Shingyang-i
Daniele.Brundu
Airon90
Atallcostsky
LinardsLinardsLinards
Infovarius
Hannolans
Ptolusque
Gilrn
Smallison
Sight Contamination
Moebeus
Pigsonthewing
Mathieudu68
Harshrathod50
Buccalon
Tris T7
Olivettilly
Rhudson
Coloradohusky
CptViraj
SilentSpike
Sintakso
Trivialist
Indrajit Das
Monica Berger
Unuaiga
Lanzelotte
Premeditated
Wolverène
Pierre André Leclercq
Ivanhercaz
CrystallineLeMonde
VisbyStar
Wikizummo
Mathieu Kappler
Mccoyle55
categerhart
Shisma
Lectrician1
Coagulans
Youyouca
EN-Jungwon
PeaceSearcher
Kind data
Solidest
Haansn08
Antoine2711
Rtnf
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Music

 Oppose tags are not items. Multichill (talk) 10:18, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
What's the difference? @Multichill:--Trade (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
A tag is just a string like for example "bank" which can be bank (Q22687), shore (Q468756) or bench (Q204776). Multichill (talk) 17:51, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support--Trade (talk) 09:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

number of clicks to opt-out[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionnumber of clicks needed to opt-out of tracking by website
Data typeQuantity
Domainwebsites
Example 1reuters.com (Q22343541) → 1
Example 2DuckDuckGo (Q12805) → 0
Example 3MISSING
Planned useadd to some website
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)

Motivation[edit]

Seems to be be a common feature of websites, fairly easy to determine, but not standardized. Can be qualify with criteria used (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 08:02, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  •  Support, an important property for websites.--Arbnos (talk) 20:41, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: how is this going to be referentiable, considering this could change over time with site tweaks? Are we going to have to do screen recordings or screenshot sequences as references for particular points in time? --Btcprox (talk) 05:44, 8 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment (former oppose): This seems rather difficult to explicitly quantify (how many clicks from where, exactly), and ambiguous (not being tracked in what manner, by which entities), and better recorded off WikiData and cited by us. JesseW (talk) 17:16, 14 March 2021 (UTC)
    • How to quantify it .. it starts when reaching the website, should this be in the description? For the samples, it seems rather straightforward. Also, you can add a reference when inputting or select the reference that suits you when querying. It's clear that more detail can be added with qualifiers if there is interest/need. Maybe you want to share sites or specific references you have in mind? Without the property, I don't quite see how you would add them though. --- Jura 11:49, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
      • For the two given examples -- DuckDuckGo I suppose is clear enough (in that the front page makes loud claims that opting out of tracking won't decrease the, already zero, tracking they do); but Reuters front page does not contain any mention of the word "track" (or "opt", or "out", aside from in headlines) that I could find, which seems to suggest more than one click is required to opt out. Also, to the degree that Wikidata should duplicate statements made by others, not original claims, this seems more like an original (if pretty simple) claim. But I have not found the proposer of this property to be very respectful in discussion, so I'll withdraw my opposition and un-watch this page. Please do not tag me in it further. JesseW (talk) 16:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
  • are there other points that should be addressed? --- Jura 19:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose as the proposal stands. This is original research in away that is depending on what a user does (even though there is a theoretical minimum, unless it is zero it will be very hard to verify that is actually the minimum). If there were some external standards or review process that were commonly used, then it would perfectly fine though. Ainali (talk) 17:42, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
    • It's not really more complicated than adding language qualifiers to the website statements. Are there cases where you think either of them is complicated? --- Jura 18:53, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment: Would websites that don't provide an optout be `novalue`? Arlo Barnes (talk) 05:41, 6 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Wikidata is not a database that stores facts about the world, but a secondary knowledge base that collects and links to references to such knowledge.–CENNOXX (talk) 14:50, 22 June 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose definitely not in scope. start your own website with this info and then we can link to that website's db (or just use QIDs there) BrokenSegue (talk) 20:15, 6 July 2021 (UTC)

secondary topic[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptiontopic of a work, but not the main topic (see also P921: main subject)
Representsmatter (Q26256810)
Data typeItem
Domainitem
Example 1Q1052692
Example 2general relativity
Example 3art
Example 4economics
Planned useI will add a topic of my research monograph.
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
See alsomain subject

Motivation[edit]

Property:P921 is vastly not enough to describe topics of works.

We need also to create another property (I do not propose it, because it would refer to this property that yet has no property ID) to be a superclass of both this property and P921. VictorPorton (talk) 06:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

For example, my book "D, the Best Programming Language, for Former Python Developers" (not described at WikiData) could have Property:Q319268 as its main subject and PQ79872 (PQ79872) and several others as values of this property.

Discussion[edit]

See: Wikidata:Property proposal/subject facet--GZWDer (talk) 09:53, 26 February 2021 (UTC)

Douban book series ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier of a book series in the Douban website
RepresentsDouban (Q5299559)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainliterary work (Q7725634)
Allowed values[1-9]\d*
Example 1Mo Dao Zu Shi (Q67932442)36034
Example 2Moribito series (Q17026389)11681
Example 3Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba (Q24862683)39505
Example 4Karakuri Circus (Q1002695)14205
Sourcehttps://book.douban.com/series/
Planned useAdding to items created or existing items
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URLhttps://book.douban.com/series/$1
See alsoDouban book version/edition ID (P6442)
Applicable "stated in"-valueDouban (Q5299559)
Wikidata projectWikiProject Books (Q8487081)

Motivation[edit]

It'd be more convenient to list books if there is the Douban version of Goodreads series ID (P6947). YukaSylvie (talk) 01:51, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  •  Support, an important property for art.--Arbnos (talk) 16:53, 17 May 2021 (UTC)

defines light characteristic[edit]

Motivation[edit]

On lighthouses, light characteristic of lighthouse (P1030) provides description of the light in a special notation. Some of these use a qualifier to link to an item describing these patterns. Sample: Q4356900#P1030 linking to flashing green light every 5 seconds (Q45735358) mentioned above.

On these items, currently P1030 is used as well as well (sample: Q45735358#P1030).

The other day, we disantangled classifications for subjects when used on works with that subject from their use on the topics they describe (see proposals thanks to @Epìdosis:). depicts Iconclass notation (P1257) and Iconclass notation (P1256) forms a similar pair of properties.

I think we should do the same here: the string datatype property P1030 would remain on items for lights and this new distinct valued property would go on items for light characteristic (Q1738955). (Add your motivation for this property here.) --- Jura 08:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Susannaanas
Jura
Lymantria
pmt
Esquilo
Vanbasten_23
Akuckartz
Bluerasberry
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Lighthouses @MSGJ: --- Jura 08:53, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this proposal. What is going to be changed? /ℇsquilo 18:41, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

@Esquilo: The property being used at statements like Q45735358#P1030 for items that are about the pattern (not the lighthouses), nothing else. --- Jura 18:51, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
And lighthouses should use the qualifier statement is subject of (P805) like in Q4356900#P1030? Is that not pretty much introduced by now? /ℇsquilo 19:07, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
The use (or not) of the qualifier is independent of this proposal, but yes, at least for frequent patterns. --- Jura 19:10, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

I'm not a subject matter expert on lighthouses but... Why not just get rid of the codes on lighthouses, use this property to link to the item and then put the string code on the items? BrokenSegue (talk) 17:19, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

music for work[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionproperty to link a musical work to the work for which it was composed (e.g., incidental music for a play; ballet music for a ballet; motion picture music for a film)
Representsmusical work (Q2188189)
Data typeItem
Domainitem; musical work (Q2188189)
Example 1Wild Swans (Q106877213) is music for work Wild Swans (Q8000817)
Example 2Frozen: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack (Q15530976) is music for work Frozen (Q246283)
Example 3Hamlet (Q50872559) is music for work Hamlet (Q41567)
Example 4The Mayor of Casterbridge (Q106878736) is music for work The Mayor of Casterbridge (Q106878615)
Example 5The Rite of Spring (Q206015) is music for work The Rite of Spring (Q106878397)
Example 6Peer Gynt (Q14912776) is music for work Peer Gynt (Q208094)
Example 7A Midsummer Night's Dream (Q42192954) is music for work A Midsummer Night's Dream (Q104871)
Example 8Theme from Star Trek (Q11590797) is music for work Star Trek: The Original Series (Q1077)
Planned useLinking items for musical works to items for works that they were composed for
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)

Motivation[edit]

There is currently no good way to link an item for a musical work to an item for a related work for which the music was composed. This property could be used to link musical compositions to choreographic works, plays, films, television programs, radio programs, video games, etc. In FRBR and IFLA LRM these are different works that are related to each other. RDA (Resource Description & Access) has several properties for this: is music for work, is incidental music for work, is music for motion picture work, is music for radio program work, is music for television program work, and is music for video work. Only the generic property is needed in Wikidata, since the items for individual works will have statements about what creative form or genre they are. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 00:59, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  •  Support This will be a useful property, especially for ingesting metadata created by libraries into Wikidata. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 01:53, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Pteropotamus (talk) 09:34, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Dominique Bourassa, Yale University Library, 11:05, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --cstrickler (talk) 11:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --User:bibliotecaria9 (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Emwille (talk) 12:52, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Utl jung (talk) 13:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jala360 13:35, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support--Sandrileine (talk) 14:19, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support--As someone who has been putting musical compositions into Wikidata, this property would be quite useful. Cholden86, 18:54, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support --Helianthus74 19:20, 18 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the proposed label doesn't really match the way Wikidata properties usually work - I note that in the examples the proposer added the verb "is" (i.e. "is music for work" rather than just "music for work"). Normally a property label (in English at least) is mainly about the object, not the subject item; "music for work" seems at best ambiguous. Maybe "composed for" or "created for" would be more suitable? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:55, 19 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment ArthurPSmith I went with the name of the property that librarians would be most familiar with, but I am not opposed to revising it to "composed for" if community consensus agrees with the change. "composed for" could still be ambiguous, since one might think the object value could then be a person or organization rather than another work. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 01:42, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose What about a musical work made for an event, such as a famous inauguration, a parade, a famous wedding, etc? So perhaps we could make this a bit broader in scope? The broadest would be a "Thing made/created for a Thing". In that case it would be "created for" but that's a close cousin to the already existing used by (P1535) which I think this proposal mimics but tries to constraint to a more narrower "Work made for a Work". If that's the real need, to have a more constraining used by (P1535), then I think this needs further discussion as to why used by (P1535) could not be used. We might also think of "made or created for a purpose", but that was discussed in the creation of use (P366). But oftentimes the "use" of something is not necessarily why it was "created" in the first place. uses (P2283) could also be used in the reverse. Then we have further "usage" contained in state of use (P5817) As you can see, oftentimes properties that are all similar under the covers are often just "properties that have been constrained to a class or domains" that could be unconstrained a bit and tweaked to be generic properties useful across many domains. So, let's discuss more before we jump quickly ahead here. And also discuss the querying capabilities or needs, for example, are we looking to have easier querying of something like "? created for ?" --Thadguidry (talk) 16:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
  • I can see why you are suggesting that used by (P1535) might be an existing property to cover this, but it seems a bit awkward to say that a choreographic work such as a ballet uses a particular piece of music or the reverse that a piece of music is used by a ballet. It's not completely wrong, but to me it doesn't seem exactly right either. I'd be interested to hear what music catalogers think. There is also the property commissioned by (P88) to indicate that a work was commissioned by an organization or person, but that is not always the same thing as saying something was "commissioned for" another thing. Musical works are often commissioned by one thing for another thing. For example I recently saw the statement that a work was commissioned by the Adelaide Music Festival for the Adelaide Symphony Orchestra. These are two separate relationships. This proposal is identical to a specific relationship found in our cataloging rules (RDA, Resource Description and Access (Q1519318)) that is used to record the relationship of a musical work to another work and it was the intention here to reproduce this specific relationship in Wikidata. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 18:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Adam, do we agree that "commissioned for" is sorta "purpose" driven? I.E. some Thing was created for the purpose of use for another Thing? Take a step back and see that "for" in the "music for work" is really saying what? "created for"? If you agree that there's an underlying tone there to "created for a purpose" here during the creation process, then "created for" seems to cover a lot more use cases for Wikidata. I've been trying to get you to think more about broader usage in designing and improving Wikidata's ontology for the world (not only for Libraries). We want to try to encapsulate more cross-domain usage when we can, which means trying to design with easier and fewer constraints! Ya know, those things we sorta hate to deal with sometimes and get in the way too often? :-) But we often design bottom up with immediate use cases, and when patterns emerge after a few years, we might want to further design a broader property to cover many more things. So, I'd suggest rephrasing this proposal then to "created for". But if you really really want to keep a property around whose constraints are always for a "musical work", then we can keep this proposal as-is and further suggest a new proposal for "created for" to handle many more cases. What do you want to do? Rephrase this to "created for"? or make 2 proposals, this one "music for work" for constraints around "musical work" and another for "created for" to handle more broadly? --Thadguidry (talk) 19:02, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support Oh please yes! This area is so messy at the moment, modelling all over the place. Moebeus (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Fernsebner (talk) 16:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
  • All of you who have indicated  Support or Symbol strong support vote.svg Strong support: do you support changing this proposal to be more general as "created for" or do you prefer the alternative to make two proposals, this one for "music for work" (or "composed for work") and a more broad one for "created for"? (See Thadguidry's comments above). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:31, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol conditional support.svg Conditional support I think this must be broaded to "created for". --Tinker Bell 20:46, 23 June 2021 (UTC)

BIU Santé image bank ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for an image on the Bibliothèque interuniversitaire de santé image bank
RepresentsImage bank (Q107463432)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainitem
Allowed values[a-zA-Z0-9_-]
Example 1Louis Pasteur (Q529)CIPC0020
Example 2Pitié-Salpêtrière Hospital (Q939883)CISA0146
Example 3Faculté de médecine de Paris (Q3064277)00619
Sourcehttps://www.biusante.parisdescartes.fr/histoire/images/index.php
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Planned useThe BIU Santé would like to add to Wikimedia Commons about 3000 images from our image bank. The aim is to create a wikidata identifier for each image, which will allow us to manage the metadata related to the images
Number of IDs in source18000
Formatter URLhttps://www.biusante.parisdescartes.fr/histmed/image?$1
See alsoP5375

Motivation[edit]

BIU Santé - Solenne Coutagne 09:34, 27 May 2021 (UTC) This new Wikidata property will make it possible to improve the quality of the metadata of the images of the BIU Santé uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, by linking them to people, places, events, discoveries...

Two more motivations : This would also be a new Wikidata property related to medicine (Q19887775) which would allow a better coverage of the history of medicine (Q380274) and to facilitate the reuse of the images from the Image bank (Q107463432) added to Commons. BIU Santé - Olivier Ghuzel (talk) 13:26, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  •  Support, an important property for Wikidata.--Arbnos (talk) 15:32, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose what is currently proposed. This is an image id, so it should definitely not be used on human (Q5) or organization (Q43229) items.
Regarding the aim of adding metadata to images, this is obviously useful, but we already have BIU Santé person ID (P5375) for people and your images are internally indexed on it. So I guess you have a basis at least for your metadata on people, but we don't want those 123 image ids added to Louis Pasteur (Q529).--Nono314 (talk) 09:01, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
@BIU Santé - Solenne Coutagne: By the way, is there a reason those metadata are not available in your online pages (ie no link back from image to bio, only the other way round)? I remember when I tried a few years ago to add images from BIU Santé, but it happened to be extremely tedious...--Nono314 (talk) 10:12, 4 June 2021 (UTC)
@Nono314:You are right, our examples are badly chosen and do not describe exactly what this property will be used for: linking an image identifier from our image bank to the wikidata record of this image.
We don’t want to link image IDs with human or organization items. We plan to create new items representing images, for which we will specify the subject. It could be a person, a building, a place, an event or any other relevant subject... (our image bank doesn’t only contain portraits). It’s not the image ID that would be connected with a person (or any other subject), but the person ID that may be specified at the image level thanks to the « depicts » property (depicts (P180)).
For the second point, we know the problem between the biography database and the image bank. It will be resolved soon. BIU Santé - Solenne Coutagne (talk) 14:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)

EUIPO OoC work id[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionEUIPO Out of Commerce id for work
RepresentsOut-of-Commerce Works Portal (Q107190722)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domaincreative work (Q17537576)
Allowed values[0-9a-f-]+
Example 1Q107193292dafcc610-ecdb-4818-a84e-1c9c98db6e22
Example 2Q107193572730af5d4-5d2f-496c-bca3-e59496db9f0e
Example 3Csillag az éjszakában (Q107194735)1fe22037-ea0a-4475-9399-681bfe80ea89
Formatter URLhttps://euipo.europa.eu/out-of-commerce/#/ooc/works/$1
See alsoWikidata:Property proposal/EUIPO OoC-name id
Distinct-values constraintyes

Motivatie[edit]

The European copyright directive creates the possibility to publish works that are out of commerce. For this they just opened a new register that functions as the legal portal to publish those works. This id creates link to a work. --Hannolans (talk) 21:43, 21 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

PsycNET ID[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionID of an scientific article or book chapter in PsycNET
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainscientific article or book chapter
Allowed values(19|20)\d\d-\d{5}-\d{3}
Example 1Sparse Bayesian learning and the relevance vector machine (Q56825010)2001-05315-001
Example 2The imposter phenomenon: Feeling phony. (Q107316527)1986-20664-001
Example 3MISSING
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source5,414,554
Expected completenesseventually complete
Formatter URLhttps://psycnet.apa.org/record/$1

Some articles have no DOI, but have this identifier. GZWDer (talk) 19:25, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Index Theologicus ID[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionID of a publication in Index Theologicus
RepresentsIndex Theologicus (Q1661161)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainpublication
Allowed values\d{9}[0-9X]
Example 1Rethinking the Imposter Phenomenon (Q107316525)1662931263
Example 2Transzendentale Meditation, Levitationserfahrung und Entspannung (Q99491519)109896117X
Example 3MISSING
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source>600,000
Expected completenesseventually complete
Formatter URLhttps://ixtheo.de/Record/$1

Another bibliographic database. GZWDer (talk) 19:55, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

release of[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionthe music release this is a release of
Representsrelease (Q2031291)
Data typeItem
Domainitem
Allowed valuessubclass of (P279) release (Q2031291)
Example 1Taste of Love (Q107051335)Taste of Love (Q106797774)
Example 2Taste of Love – Taste Version (Q107050654)Taste of Love (Q106797774)
Example 3Taste of Love – Fallen version (Q107050890)Taste of Love (Q106797774)
Sourcehttps://schema.org/releaseOf
https://musicbrainz.org/doc/Release
Planned usereplace music releases that use edition or translation of (P629) with this property and add new releases
Robot and gadget jobsmaybe replace edition or translation of (P629) with this
See alsoedition or translation of (P629)
Wikidata projectWikidata:WikiProject Music

Motivation[edit]

Using edition or translation of (P629) (as we do currently) doesn't really make sense for music releases since music releases are always called "releases" and not "editions". edition or translation of (P629) is also book-focused.

Having a dedicated release property would also allow for synonymous linkage between MusicBrainz entities and their Release group -> Release data structure, something we're trying to replicate on Wikidata.

An inverse property called "has release" could also be usefully created.


Sweet kate
Galaktos
Sjoerddebruin
AmaryllisGardener
Kosboot
Shingyang-i
Daniele.Brundu
Airon90
Atallcostsky
LinardsLinardsLinards
Infovarius
Hannolans
Ptolusque
Gilrn
Smallison
Sight Contamination
Moebeus
Pigsonthewing
Mathieudu68
Harshrathod50
Buccalon
Tris T7
Olivettilly
Rhudson
Coloradohusky
CptViraj
SilentSpike
Sintakso
Trivialist
Indrajit Das
Monica Berger
Unuaiga
Lanzelotte
Premeditated
Wolverène
Pierre André Leclercq
Ivanhercaz
CrystallineLeMonde
VisbyStar
Wikizummo
Mathieu Kappler
Mccoyle55
categerhart
Shisma
Lectrician1
Coagulans
Youyouca
EN-Jungwon
PeaceSearcher
Kind data
Solidest
Haansn08
Antoine2711
Rtnf
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Music

Lectrician1 (talk) 02:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral on this property;  Oppose on the "has release" property. Mahir256 (talk) 16:25, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I’m not opposing this, but I found the rationale a bit short: if it’s just a matter of the music lingo using “release”, then we could just rename “edition or translation of” to “edition, translation, or release of” − sure, it becomes a bit the kitchen sink, but how much of a problem is that really?
    Also, just a note that if that property would go ahead, then we might end up using it for video games, if we ever get around defining a multi-layered data model with separate items for platform-realizations, local releases etc. Of course, creating this property should not be blocked on WD:VG deciding how we might want to use it, but putting it on the radar that the scope is likely wider than just music. Jean-Fred (talk) 20:09, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
    @Jean-Frédéric: Actually, now that I look at the Wikiproject Books data model and your video games data model, it seems like we're all dealing with the same thing.
    We need a way to establish a relationship between the "release group" for music, "work" for books, "video game" for video games and their corresponding "releases", "editions", and "releases".
    I think I might go forward with not proposing this property and instead:
    1. Solving the current translation of debate
    2. Proposing renaming "edition of"/"edition or translation of" to "edition/version/release of" Lectrician1 (talk) 01:15, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Symbol neutral vote.svg Neutral I don't know much about music topics, but as Jean-Frédéric said, if the relationship are the same, we don't need to create two properties only because the terms used are different.  Oppose 'has release' --Tinker Bell 18:23, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support I'm very much in favor of a dedicated property, but oppose the inverse like the others before me. P629 currently requires us to use the inverse property P747, which is exactly what we're trying to move away from. Having a dedicated property will make it much easier to set up clear, sensible, constraints that are realistic and manageable. Moebeus (talk) 17:43, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Freeview Australia show ID[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionShow ID identifying a TV show on Freeview Australia web page
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainFreeview (Q5501233)
Allowed values[0-9][A-F][a-f] (32-byte GUID)
Example 1Home and Away (Q1324189) → fb5f9edc-429c-4dc5-8c16-3175662af04b
Example 2Flashpoint (Q71106909) → 4ce417e9-cab1-4e92-a3c4-19fa1dd4e22b
Example 3The Weakest Link (Q7773976) → ee0e23ff-41cb-4a27-bd17-d648b2b4875b
Example 4NCIS (Q4525) → a0182ed9-bdb5-4d55-bebc-655769b06778
Example 5ABC News (Q4650197) → bf8d8d8f-5325-4427-a336-2add7e1d0db3
Example 6ABC News (Q4650197) → 0ebaf1b8-e38b-48b9-a441-e4771dbcbd5a
Example 7ABC News (Q4650197) → 0be63906-5006-41af-bf60-00ee60183d43
Sourcehttps://www.freeview.com.au/
Formatter URLhttps://www.freeview.com.au/watch-tv/shows/$1
Wikidata projectWikiProject Australian television (Q21829468)

Motivation[edit]

Just seen there's some useful info to add in the identifiers onto a TV programme to have a good reference to a guide here. There's still some sort of the things to be figure out as there's no issues if the programme is being broadcasted nationally. However, when there's a multiple IDs shared onto an item then it may need to add up the multiple GUIDs onto an item (Let's take the ABC News state based bulletin have multiple GUID entries as example). Shinjiman (talk) 06:55, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Igromania series ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier of a video game series at the website Igromania.ru
RepresentsIgromania (Q4197757)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainvideo game series (Q7058673), media franchise (Q196600)
Example 1The Last of Us (Q28062624)2
Example 2God of War (Q390137)622
Example 3Resident Evil (Q220260)1180
Example 4Silent Hill (Q236821)1277
Example 5Gran Turismo (Q652928)630
Sourcehttps://www.igromania.ru/game/gameseries/
External linksUse in sister projects: [ar][de][en][es][fr][he][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Number of IDs in source1800
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URLhttps://www.igromania.ru/game/series/$1/-
See alsoIgromania ID (P6827)
Wikidata projectWikiProject Video games (Q8485882)

Motivation[edit]

ΛΧΣ21 Vacation9 John F. Lewis (talk) Bene* talk #Reaper (talk) Josve05a (talk) Chris Mason (talk) FunPika Arthena (talk) Wangxuan8331800 (talk) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) Nicereddy (talk) Syum90 (talk) DrakeCaiman (talk) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) Andreasburmeister (talk) Danrok (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Macrike (talk) Dispenser (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC) --Zache (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC) SharkD  Talk  06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC) ZebaX2010 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Sight Contamination (talk) Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Santer (talk) Cloaker416 (talk) 22:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Rampagingcarrot (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Diggr (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Kirilloparma (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Sir Lothar (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC) Cwf97 (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Peterchanws Brasig Le Yota de Mars YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Coloradohusky CptViraj BugWarp ʂɤɲ User:Nw520 Cynde Moya Dexxor Floyd-out CadetPatrick AntisocialRyan ihaveahax LotsofTheories (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) LotsofTheories (talk) 08:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Facenapalm (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC) Edolusill (talk) 02:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Video games

It is an identifier for video game series in the Igromania (Q4197757) database. It gives a quick access to the all video games for each series. I think it would be a useful addition as we have relatively few identifiers for the video game series. Regards Kirilloparma (talk) 22:45, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

Kartridge game ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for a video game on Kartridge
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainvideo game (Q7889)
Example 1Among Us (Q96417649)300527
Example 2Bloons TD 5 (Q24256086)293176
Example 3Octodad: Dadliest Catch (Q16975080)299640
Sourcehttps://www.kartridge.com/
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URLhttps://www.kartridge.com/game/$1

Motivation[edit]

This is an important online store and game platform featuring thousands (cannot find an exact number) of indie video games, including very well known ones such as Among Us and Octodad. It is owned by Kongregate, a popular website for web games. AntisocialRyan (talk) 02:51, 10 July 2021 (UTC) ΛΧΣ21 Vacation9 John F. Lewis (talk) Bene* talk #Reaper (talk) Josve05a (talk) Chris Mason (talk) FunPika Arthena (talk) Wangxuan8331800 (talk) Sjoerd de Bruin (talk) Nicereddy (talk) Syum90 (talk) DrakeCaiman (talk) --George (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) Andreasburmeister (talk) Danrok (talk) 18:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) Macrike (talk) Dispenser (talk) 16:56, 7 July 2017 (UTC) --Zache (talk) 13:34, 12 July 2017 (UTC) SharkD  Talk  06:41, 9 November 2017 (UTC) ZebaX2010 (talk) 00:49, 21 November 2017 (UTC) Sight Contamination (talk) Lewis Hulbert (talk) 20:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC) Jean-Fred (talk) 10:48, 28 February 2018 (UTC) Santer (talk) Cloaker416 (talk) 22:18, 12 June 2018 (UTC) Rampagingcarrot (talk) 19:57, 28 June 2018 (UTC) Diggr (talk) 08:07, 3 July 2018 (UTC) Harsh Rathod Poke me! 09:42, 7 July 2018 (UTC) Kirilloparma (talk) 00:30, 5 August 2018 (UTC) Sir Lothar (talk) 10:10, 10 August 2018 (UTC) Cwf97 (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2018 (UTC) Peterchanws Brasig Le Yota de Mars YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:09, 22 May 2019 (UTC) Coloradohusky CptViraj BugWarp ʂɤɲ User:Nw520 Cynde Moya Dexxor Floyd-out CadetPatrick AntisocialRyan ihaveahax LotsofTheories (Talk · Contribs · CentralAuth · Log) LotsofTheories (talk) 08:01, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Facenapalm (talk) 11:14, 17 May 2021 (UTC) Edolusill (talk) 02:27, 20 July 2021 (UTC)Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Video games

Discussion[edit]

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So, is it something like Humble Store platform? Sir Lothar (talk) 13:06, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
    If I'm correct, Humble is just a store. Kartridge is like Steam, there's a launcher to play the games as well. AntisocialRyan (talk) 21:25, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
    I see. Thanks for clarifying. Sir Lothar (talk) 23:26, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Sir Lothar (talk) 14:46, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

alternative title[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptiona title under which a work is also known as.
Representsalternative title (Q4736562)
Data typeMonolingual text
Domainitem
Example 1Duck, You Sucker! (Q510657)A Fistful of Dynamite (English)
Example 2Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (Q43361)Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone (English)
Example 3Messenger of Iscandar (Q107415899)Messenger of Iscandar (English)
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See also
  • title (P1476): published name of a work, such as a newspaper article, a literary work, piece of music, a website, or a performance work
  • name (P2561): name the subject is known by. If a more specific property is available, use that
  • alternate names (P4970): qualifier for alternate names given for a subject in a database entry
Distinct-values constraintno
Wikidata projectWikiProject Anime and Manga

Motivation[edit]

Konggaru Starry K. Erne Mogilevich Santer AldNonUcallinme? Thibaut120094 Shikeishu C933103 Sight Contamination -Zest Vulphere Sakretsu Jean-Frédéric Tris T7 TT me
Wallacegromit1 Jeanjung212 Bagas Chrisara ミラP CrystallineLeMonde
Nicereddy Shisma (talk) MatrosMonk Bwk24
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Anime and Manga

Over at WikiProject Anime and Manga it was concluded that we could use a separate property for the title a work is known under, other than its actual or original title-Shisma (talk) 14:34, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]

 Support Can you add some examples where the alternative title is in a different language from the (main) title? @Shisma:--Trade (talk) 22:53, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

ValterVB LydiaPintscher Ermanon Cbrown1023 Discoveranjali Mushroom Queryzo Danrok Rogi Mbch331 Jura Jobu0101 Jklamo Jon Harald Søby putnik ohmyerica AmaryllisGardener FShbib Andreasmperu Li Song Tiot Harshrathod50 U+1F350 Bodhisattwa Shisma Wolverène Tris T7 Antoine2711 Hrk6626 TheFireBender V!v£ l@ Rosière WatchMeWiki! CptViraj ʂɤɲ Trivialist 2le2im-bdc Sotiale Wallacegromit1, mostly focus on media historiography and works from the Global South Floyd-out M2k~dewiki Rockpeterson Mathieu Kappler Sidohayder Spinster Gnoeee Ranjithsiji Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Movies --Trade (talk) 22:54, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Trade here is a very complex example I pulled from anidb.
Fullmetal Alchemist (Q711257) title (P1476) 鋼の錬金術師
Fullmetal Alchemist (English) used in Eglish speaking countries, German speaking countries, Spanish speaking countries, and portuguese speaking countries
Fullmetal Alchemist - Hledání kamene mudrců (English/Czech) used in the Czech republic
Metalinis Alchemikas (Lithuanian) used in Lithuania
Ο Μεταλλικός Αλχημιστής (Greek) used in Greece
Стальной алхимик (Russian) used in Russian speaking countries
אלכימאי המתכת (Hebrew) used in Isreal
Fullmetal Alchemist - A Bölcsek kövének nyomában (English/Hungerian) used in Hungeria
Çelik Simyacı (Turkish) used in Turkey
แขนกลคนแปรธาตุ (Thai) used in Thailand
Челични алхемичар/Čelični alhemičar (Serbian) used in Serbia
钢之炼金术师 (Simplified Chinese) used in China
강철의 연금술사 (Korean) used in Korea
鋼の錬金術師 FULLMETAL ALCHEMIST (Japanese/English) used on the official title card. In Japanese product design, English is often used as an ornament. So this is not necessarily the official title.
Anidb also lists 19 additional aliases but does not specify language or region:

Alchimistul de Oţel, El Alquimista de Acero, FMA2003, Full Matal Alchemist/Stalowy Alchemik, Full Metal Alchemist, Giả Kim Thuật, Hagane no Renkinjutsushi 2003, Metal Simyacı, O Alquimista de Aço, Ocelový alchymista, Pełno-metalowy alchemik, Железният Алхимик, Металният Алхимик, Напълно Металния Алхимист, Сталевий алхімік, Стоманеният алхимик, Суцільнометалевий алхімік, الخيميائي المعدني, 钢之炼金术士

--Shisma (talk) 10:37, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Anidb also lists Hagane no Renkinjutsushi (Japanese written in Latin) and はがねのれんきんじゅつし (Japanese written in kana). Since these are all transliterations of the main title, they should be qualifiers of title (P1476) NOT alternative titles. example --Shisma (talk) 10:52, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Previous detractors to such a property have argued one of the following:
    • Use labels. This does not fly because there might be a mismatch between the language of the title and the language it is used in. For example, the movie The Boat That Rocked (Q856805) is called Good Morning England, an "English" title, in France. We thus need to have monolingual text datatype and relevant qualifiers.
    • Create items for each version, like we do for books. This is a possibility, but it’s just not the data modeling decision made by the relevant projects, like Anime & Manga, video games (though we may or may not change that Some Day™) and (as far as I know) Movies. Solving the issue by splitting items in 15 (like the Full Metal Alchemist example given above) does not seem like a good solution.
      • Thinking more about it, this especially does not fly for TV show episodes, which often have localized titles, but there is little point creating dozens of items for each. Jean-Fred (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
    • Use alternate names (P4970). I mean, sure, but that rather raises the question, why do we have title (P1476) in the first place and we could not just use name (P2561).
      Jean-Fred (talk) 11:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
      • @Jean-Frédéric: Because a few folks at the time of those getting created probably didn't look deeply enough at all the qualifiers and properties, so redundancy crept in with new proposals. Which we should try to slow and take harder looks at new property proposals and be very careful and thorough. --Thadguidry (talk) 00:28, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Another solution is adding all to title (P1476) and set the original to preferred rank.--GZWDer (talk) 12:22, 11 July 2021 (UTC)
Sure, but the same could have been said of alternate names (P4970) − just use name (P2561) with ranks. Jean-Fred (talk) 12:47, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote oversat.svg Strong oppose "title" is merely "appellation" or "name". The English word "title" https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/title has typically signified honor toward works, people, even sections of famous works, and is just a convenient, short way to verbosely say "Creative Work Name" while keeping a narrowing connotation for the Creative Works domain. title (P1476) is short, but it still just annotates "name" of "works" at the end of the day and doesn't annotate some "canonical title". That's where setting Preferred ranks on all the title (P1476) statements comes in to let the community bubble up those appropriately. Since "title" is just "name of work" semantically, I suggest title (P1476) be used with appropriate subclass or instance additionally to constrain to any of our "works" domains. I do understand that many folks in GLAM and elsewhere might want a direct "alternative title" property as proposed here to have a short convenient way to say "alternative name of work" but that in itself doesn't actually imply any constraints where an item MUST be a Creative Work subclass, you still have to always apply properties for subclass or instance on the Wikidata item.

So, simply stated...just use title (P1476) and set Preferred ranks and Normal ranks to as many alternative titles that you need to account for. Then the community consensus can even help judge and make changes to the ranks. You can set as many title (P1476) statements with ranks and usage of qualifiers beneath each to really drive semantic richness way beyond what your traditional GLAM cataloging tools even allow! We have over 296 qualifiers now, so use all of them as needed on your title (P1476) statements! You need some we don't have? Then propose a qualifier instead, or request that an existing property be used as a qualifier as well! :-)

If you are saying, but Thad, we want a direct property to use so we can map our database's "alternative title" field with this nice new specific proposed Wikidata property. Well, then I would say, we have you covered already with alternate names (P4970) and where again you can go crazy by using title (P1476) and then adding alternate names (P4970) as a qualifier or adding over 296 qualifying statements along with it or ask for more if those qualifiers don't cover all your needs!
-Thadguidry (talk) 00:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Thadguidry simply using ranks would also have been my preferred model. I remodelled a few items like this. at least one of these edits have been instantly reverted, probably because @Máté: thought it looked weird?! 🤷 New properties on the other hand bring with it an instant legitimicy: the property exists so, perhaps the model is based on some level of community consentius. But creating an infinite number of redundant properties should not be done for the sole purpose or avoiding confrontation 🤣. --Loominade (talk) 11:08, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, I was just reinstating the item to the currently acceptable stance. If you want to do things differently than how they are done now, first discuss. I don't mind. This is supposed to be a community or something. But don't just assume that it had to do anything with my personal preferences. I most definitely had not. – Máté (talk) 11:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
I've given a bit of thought and that's probably inadequate, right? Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope (Q17738) has had at least four different Hungarian titles so far (all given by Hungarian distributors). Now, one of those could be the preferred one. But then again all English language titles should be more preferred than any of those and one English title should be even more preferred. That just seems too many levels for two ranks. – Máté (talk) 11:29, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Máté I meant no offence mentioning you. I think the original title, or the title the work is best known for, or the title that most people agree upon should always be the preferred one. localised titles should have a normal rank. localised titles that are considered wrong or missleading should be deprecated. --Loominade (talk) 11:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Thadguidry for the input!
Jean-Fred (talk) 13:09, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
I’ve just noticed that alternate names (P4970) has String datatype, so I don’t think anymore it could be a good fit, per my post above, I believe Monolingual text is required here. Jean-Fred (talk) 13:11, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
@Jean-Frédéric:Yes it's a qualifier, I've edited my statement above to be more clarifying.

Well, then I would say, we have you covered already with alternate names (P4970) and where again you can go crazy by using title (P1476) and then adding alternate names (P4970) as a qualifier or adding over 296 qualifying statements along with it or ask for more if those qualifiers don't cover all your needs!

--Thadguidry (talk) 16:42, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 1: I don't think it's a good idea to use alternate names (P4970) for this or to add multiple qualifiers with the information to other statements. A separate statement will make it easier to reference or to retrieve the relevant reference. The qualifier was created for a different purpose. --- Jura 19:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 2: The information is generally also in labels and aliases, but there needs to be structured way to include the information as statements with references. --- Jura 19:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 3: Multiple statements for what is not the title in the original language with title (P1476) seems a break from existing practice. --- Jura 19:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment 4: While we currently use name (P2561) for work titles (also), this doesn't seem optimal. --- Jura 19:34, 13 July 2021 (UTC)
  • GA candidate.svg Weak support In library cataloging land, alternate (or variant) title is definitely a different property from alternate (or variant) name. Resource Description and Access (Q1519318) actually has several different properties, depending on what type of entity is being described: has variant title of work would be used in work descriptions, whereas has variant title of manifestation is used in manifestation descriptions. While I sympathize with the arguments to just use the existing property alternate names (P4970), that property is currently very narrowly defined in an authority context: "qualifier for alternate names given for a subject in a database entry" and has aliases such as "used for" and "unused form". alternate names (P4970) would need a fairly significant revision if it is to be used outside of an authority record context. It isn't clear to me whether this proposed property is intended for use on both items for works (any variant title that a work may be known as) as well as items for particular manifestations (e.g. the title on the cover or spine of a book that differs from the title on the title page; parallel titles in other languages than the title proper). If this proposed property is meant for both kinds of items (works and manifestations), that would have to be very clear in the definition and the examples given. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 06:18, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
@Trade:@Jean-Frédéric:@Thadguidry:@Jura1:@UWashPrincipalCataloger:@Máté: If we can all agree, to use title (P1476) with Preferred rank to indicate the original title, I would withdraw this proposal. --Shisma (talk) 06:47, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
@Trade:@Jean-Frédéric:@Thadguidry:@Jura1:@Máté: If there is a qualifier that could be used to indicate "preferred title" and "original title" that would be useful I think. Not all original titles are going to be the preferred title. For example, Shakespeare's work Hamlet has the preferred title "Hamlet" but its original title is "The Tragicall Historie of Hamlet Prince of Denmarke". UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 14:37, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
UWashPrincipalCataloger sure, i'd use object has role (P3831) set to original title (Q1294573) or localised title (Q107410900) --Shisma (talk) 14:41, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Preferred by you, or me, or someone else?  :-) That is precisely why we have Ranks, to capture community consensus sometimes. It's lightweight and not concrete to allow capturing disputes (using good qualifiers), not avoid them entirely. Facts change over time, preferences are usually localized, and Wikidata's data model allows for all this flexibility. With Wikidata's data model, saying "first" or "original" can be akin to saying "ordinal 1". series ordinal (P1545) is the closest, and can be used for any logical series, but "naming" of works is not always series based, but time-series based (1st edition named "Thad", 2nd edition renamed to "Thad, the benefactor"). Is capturing editions at a Wikidata item level even necessary in Wikidata's data model or ideal? (my opinion is No). I like having a single Wikidata item for the concept of a unique Creative Work, your Hamlet (Q41567) example or Fullmetal Alchemist (Q711257). If that Creative Work goes through name changes (editions or otherwise), based on various criteria, over time, then I think we already have the properties and qualifiers that are necessary. I think Hamlet (Q41567) and Fullmetal Alchemist (Q711257) are great items to use to explore any gaps in qualifiers we might have? I encourage using those 2 items first to explore and discuss on their own discussion pages, instead of this proposal. I would encourage avoiding "preferred" in any property because of bias (even though it's part of the Rank lingo now). I think that "original" or "first" is something that then needs to be explored, but remember that "original" or "first" can be deduced simply by filling title (P1476) statements with start dates (but not always easy to do or the data available), but you know which one of the names or titles was "first" and perhaps just setting preferred Rank along with qualifier reason for preferred rank (P7452) with first (Q19269277) or lexeme sense first (L2)-S1 or lexeme sense original (L324785)-S2 might be the final agreement by all discussing here when dates are not easily available.

I'm not adverse to seeing usage of object has role (P3831) but the statements with it using object localised title (Q107410900) are not necessary at all because localization is already implied with the Language attribute we require as Mandatory on monolingual text strings. So someone is just adding redundant data objects in Fullmetal Alchemist (Q711257) on each title (P1476) statement.

Really this entire property proposal discussion should just move over into the many threads already in https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property_talk:P1476
--Thadguidry (talk) 16:07, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
  • I don't mind there being two English titles at Q102438#P1476, but what would happen to Fullmetal Alchemist (Q711257)? frwiki suggests P1476 should only be "鋼の錬金術師", maybe also "Hagane no Renkinjutsushi", but what with the countless other values mentioned above? --- Jura 14:44, 16 July 2021 (UTC)
Don't forget about uniform title (Q1307840) which is fairly equivalent to "preferred title", that is, the title by which a work is best known by and which is used as the authorized title in authority records/databases. UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 14:48, 16 July 2021 (UTC)

Douyin Video ID[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionIdentifier of a video on Douyin
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainDouyin Videos
Allowed values[0-9]{19}
Example 1Learn To Meow (Q56278279)6553113300429704452
Example 2Q803221116774994538734849288
Example 3Endgame (Q83429809)6928963625684077836
Sourcehttps://www.douyin.com
Formatter URLhttps://www.douyin.com/video/$1
See also
  • YouTube video ID (P1651): identifier of a video on YouTube; qualify trailers with "object has role" (P3831)="trailer" (Q622550). For channels use P2397; for playlists use P4300
  • Douyin ID (P7120): username on Douyin

Motivation[edit]

It's like Youtube Video ID and Bilibili Video ID Kethyga (talk) 09:13, 15 July 2021 (UTC)

Discussion[edit]