Wikidata:Property proposal/Editio princeps

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Editio Princeps[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Not done
Descriptionused for the date that a manuscript was first edited and published in a scholarly publication
Representseditio princeps (Q1249682)
Data typePoint in time
Example 1Carmina Burana (Q253716) → the editio princeps would have its own Q-number and could be linked with Bibliothek des Litterarischen Vereins in Stuttgart (Q856542) with the more specific reference "Carmina Burana. Lateinische und deutsche Lieder und Gedichte einer Handschrift des XIII. Jahrhunderts aus Benedictbeuern auf der k. Bibliothek zu München", ed. by J. A. S. [i. e. Johann Andreas Schmeller], in: Bibliothek des literarischen Vereins in Stuttgart XVI, 1, Stuttgart 1847.
Example 2Florentine Codex (Q1106019) (this item is technically not a manuscript--the manuscript and editio princeps have been confused)
Example 3P. Hamb. bil. 1 (Q18086975) (this has publication times of 1936 and 1989, which confuses the production of the papyrus with the subsequent editio princeps and then subsequent scholarly edit)
Planned useI would like to include the Dura Europos papyrus collection, specifying date of creation as well as date of Editio princeps.
See alsoyear of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574)

Motivation[edit]

I am just querying examples of manuscripts and their dates of publication and I see that the property of publication publication date (P577) is being used inconsistently for the date that the manuscript was created by a scribe and the date for when it was first edited and published in print. So there are plenty of ancient manuscripts that are coming up as being published in 1800BCE and others coming up in the 1990s. The later dates obviously refer to scholarly editions of the manuscript. I wonder if it would be helpful to disambiguate these two types of publication: publication date (P577) for initial creation/release/publication and a new property (Editio princeps) for when the work was first published by an editor.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Valeriummaximum (talk • contribs) at 12:50, August 9, 2020‎ (UTC).

Discussion[edit]

  •  Comment I think the idea is not bad, but the Data Type is wrong. It should be an item for said scholarly publication. Circeus (talk) 12:46, 12 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    • I absolutely see your point. I suppose wiki editors can already use P747 for subsequent publications and editions. But I still think we need a property to distinguish the date for the production of the original item and the date for the editio princeps of it, because editors are using publication date inconsistently.Valeriummaximum (talk) 21:19, 13 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I agree there is a confusion between editio princeps (Q1249682) (describing the publication, not the year) and a property like year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) - basically what you are looking for is year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) for manuscripts, correct? In that case, why not expand the definition of year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) or create a parent property "described in year" which year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) is a subproperty? Actually now that I think about it, I would suggest to increase the scope of year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) (assuming taxonomy people are ok with this) or create a parent property for year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) and at the same time create a new property for first valid description (Q1361864) / editio princeps (Q1249682). --Hannes Röst (talk) 00:48, 18 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Property_proposal/Editio_princeps&oldid=1495140669"