Shortcuts: WD:PP/GEN, WD:PP/Generic
Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Property proposal: | Generic | Authority control | Person | Organization |
Creative work | Place | Sports | Sister projects | |
Transportation | Natural science | Computing | Lexeme |
See also
[edit]- Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending – properties which have been approved but which are on hold waiting for the appropriate datatype to be made available
- Wikidata:Properties for deletion – proposals for the deletion of properties
- Wikidata:External identifiers – statements to add when creating properties for external IDs
- Wikidata:Lexicographical data – information and discussion about lexicographic data on Wikidata
This page is for the proposal of new properties.
Before proposing a property
- Search if the property already exists.
- Search if the property has already been proposed.
- 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.
- Select the right datatype for the property.
- Read Wikidata:Creating a property proposal for guidelines you should follow when proposing new property.
- Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below by editing the two templates at the top of the page to add proposal details.
Creating the property
- Once consensus is reached, change status=ready on the template, to attract the attention of a property creator.
- Creation can be done 1 week after the creation of the proposal, by a property creator or an administrator.
- See property creation policy.
![]() |
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 2024/07. |
General
[edit]relates to sustainable development goal, target or indicator
[edit]Description | indicates a relation between the subject and the SDGs or one of the components |
---|---|
Data type | Item |
Domain | item |
Allowed values | Items that are instance of (P31): Sustainable Development Goal (Q53580881), Sustainable Development Goal Target (Q56724848), or Sustainable Development Goal Indicator (Q56726345). And also Sustainable Development Goals (Q7649586) itself. |
Example 1 | biodiversity (Q47041)→Sustainable Development Goal 15 (Q53581245) |
Example 2 | climate change adaptation (Q260607)→Target 13.1 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57590883) |
Example 3 | Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction (Q22907841)→Indicator 13.1.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57595592) |
Example 4 | early neonatal mortality rate (Q97210258)→Indicator 3.2.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57595404) |
Planned use | Add on phenomena, processes and policies. |
Wikidata project | WikiProject Sustainable Development (Q56507949) |
Motivation
[edit]A property like this will make it much easier to connect Wikidata items to the Sustainable Development Goals (Q7649586) and enable a straightforward and queryable data model. Ainali (talk) 15:25, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Sustainable Development. Ainali (talk) 15:38, 19 May 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]Support We need better mechanisms to tag relationships of Wikidata entities to such measures of sustainable development, and the proposed approach looks good to me. --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 00:43, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
Oppose Generally, is a label that's longer than the property description a bad indication.
- Properties exist to specify how two entities are related. This property just says that they are somehow related which is very imprecise. If we take early neonatal mortality rate (Q97210258) and Indicator 3.2.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57595404), I would call that relationship something like "is measured by" (and maybe we can find an even better name). ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:45, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
- I agree that it is a long label, and was contemplating inf the "relates to the SDGs" would have been a good enough one, but thought that it might not have shown the intended use clearly enough. But perhaps that should be switched, I am very open to that.
- Regarding specifying the relation, generally I would agree with you. But in this collection, and for all different kinds of items and how they could be connected with the goals, targets or indicators, it would be too complex to create an overview in a query to find out what is having a relation to, for example, a specific indicator. Yes, it is a generic relation, but as the relations are to a well-defined and particularly notable subset of items of high general interest, I think it is called for. Ainali (talk) 06:39, 22 May 2024 (UTC)
- If I want to know what has relationships to a specific indicator, I could just look at that page and use the reverse label. I would expect that there are also other ways you can write your query.
- As far as this being a particularly notable subset of items, to me that means that it's even more important to be specific about how they relate to other items. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:24, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
Oppose The SDGs are unscientific, flawed, and self-defeating / self-contradicting. The main reason for why this shouldn't be included however is that nearly everything has some kind of relation to them (colloquially speaking). Instead of using very flawed overly broad subjective inspecific goals some alternative(s) could be used and these may already exist such as climate change mitigation (Q898653), methane emissions mitigation (Q124806283) or pollution prevention (Q7225750) which are in need of complements and expansion. --Prototyperspective (talk) 11:38, 24 May 2024 (UTC)
Support -- LevandeMänniska (talk) 12:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Support Would be useful for eg many governmental projects explicitly targeting sustainability goals. -- Arvelius (talk) 13:10, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- How would it be "useful"? Also I don't see why it wouldn't be better to just use clearer alternatives. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
- Are you arguing against the SDGs? This property proposal is not about their usefulness, but how we can describe what is happening in the world, and in that sense it is useful. Whether you like them or not, it is undeniable a framework that is used by the United Nations and a majority of the member states when developing policy. Besides the examples above we have items like Sustainable Development Goal 12 in the European Union (Q122222559), Sustainable Development Goals and Australia (Q104856926), Sustainable Development Investment Partnership (Q25215461), Q110547062 etc. Even for a critic, it would be useful to be able to see how things connect according to this framework, especially since it won't exclude other properties to be developed if you have suggestions on other frameworks to document. One could say that religion or worldview (P140) or official religion (P3075) are not useful nor scientific, but as Wikidata editors, we should describe that those are used in the world, whatever we ourselves think about them. Ainali (talk) 08:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes but that is only one of two objections I have against including these, please see above for some links about why I object to them, e.g. because they're themselves against sustainability, and the other reason. Countries don't actually use this framework when making policy, and there have been studies about whether they do. Again, nearly everything has a relation to them in some way. Instead, of linking this at nearly every page and advocating for SDGs on Wikidata, with btw no usefulness beyond that, people should invest their time in expanding and integrating specific goals such as "Methane emissions reduction". Official religion for example is scientific as that can be objectively evaluated, in many cases countries have that even codified somehow. Yes, we should describe things of the real world which is why there is a wikidata item and Wikipedia article(s) for the SDGs, they don't need to be linked at every economy or environment-related page. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- I would oppose less if this was used only sparingly for items as related to each as early neonatal mortality rate (Q97210258) to Indicator 3.2.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57595404). And, again, more specific goals and problems are not yet well featured in WD so it would be better if people did that first or at least alongside this instead of mostly only having SDG items and properties. SDGs are not good or well suited as the only framework for considering global issues / problems in terms of measuring, formalizing and addressing them. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please clarify the comments above by @Prototyperspective:. @Prototyperspective, ChristianKl: any changes in your opinion? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ZI Jony Sure. The request for other goals is a bit of whataboutism in my opinion. We can of course have several properties for different frameworks in Wikidata, but the lack of interest in other frameworks is not relevant to this proposal. Regarding the framework not being used is an unsupported claim. It is clear that the EU member states, for example, report about their progress and that it is aggregated upwards so there must be hundreds if not thousands of civil servants dedicated just to the reporting. Ainali (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, it makes sense...I only very weakly oppose it at this point (mainly due to concerns of how the property would be used) but think the item should only be used for items directly matching the SDG goal as the one in the example not also to items somewhat related/relevant to them. Prototyperspective (talk) 14:40, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I still think that it's better to specify the nature of a how the two relate in a property and not only that the object of the property has something to do with sustainable development goals. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:33, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please look into comments above. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please look into comments above by @Prototyperspective, ChristianKl:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 04:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes! I think a way to mitigate blatant adding of only loosely connected items would be to have a property constraint reminding that this property needs a source. That way, at least someone else has had the judgement to make the connection, rather than it being "original research" by the Wikidata user. Ainali (talk) 09:22, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please look into comments above by @Prototyperspective, ChristianKl:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 04:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please look into comments above. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:55, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ZI Jony Sure. The request for other goals is a bit of whataboutism in my opinion. We can of course have several properties for different frameworks in Wikidata, but the lack of interest in other frameworks is not relevant to this proposal. Regarding the framework not being used is an unsupported claim. It is clear that the EU member states, for example, report about their progress and that it is aggregated upwards so there must be hundreds if not thousands of civil servants dedicated just to the reporting. Ainali (talk) 13:01, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Ainali:, could you please clarify the comments above by @Prototyperspective:. @Prototyperspective, ChristianKl: any changes in your opinion? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:43, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- I would oppose less if this was used only sparingly for items as related to each as early neonatal mortality rate (Q97210258) to Indicator 3.2.2 of the Sustainable Development Goals (Q57595404). And, again, more specific goals and problems are not yet well featured in WD so it would be better if people did that first or at least alongside this instead of mostly only having SDG items and properties. SDGs are not good or well suited as the only framework for considering global issues / problems in terms of measuring, formalizing and addressing them. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:39, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
- Yes but that is only one of two objections I have against including these, please see above for some links about why I object to them, e.g. because they're themselves against sustainability, and the other reason. Countries don't actually use this framework when making policy, and there have been studies about whether they do. Again, nearly everything has a relation to them in some way. Instead, of linking this at nearly every page and advocating for SDGs on Wikidata, with btw no usefulness beyond that, people should invest their time in expanding and integrating specific goals such as "Methane emissions reduction". Official religion for example is scientific as that can be objectively evaluated, in many cases countries have that even codified somehow. Yes, we should describe things of the real world which is why there is a wikidata item and Wikipedia article(s) for the SDGs, they don't need to be linked at every economy or environment-related page. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:04, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- Are you arguing against the SDGs? This property proposal is not about their usefulness, but how we can describe what is happening in the world, and in that sense it is useful. Whether you like them or not, it is undeniable a framework that is used by the United Nations and a majority of the member states when developing policy. Besides the examples above we have items like Sustainable Development Goal 12 in the European Union (Q122222559), Sustainable Development Goals and Australia (Q104856926), Sustainable Development Investment Partnership (Q25215461), Q110547062 etc. Even for a critic, it would be useful to be able to see how things connect according to this framework, especially since it won't exclude other properties to be developed if you have suggestions on other frameworks to document. One could say that religion or worldview (P140) or official religion (P3075) are not useful nor scientific, but as Wikidata editors, we should describe that those are used in the world, whatever we ourselves think about them. Ainali (talk) 08:55, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
- How would it be "useful"? Also I don't see why it wouldn't be better to just use clearer alternatives. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:18, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
Support AmandaSLawrence (talk) 02:23, 4 June 2024 (UTC) Would be useful for grouping SDG related entities and reuse of wikidata in SDG projects
agent of action
[edit]Description | thing that does the action |
---|---|
Data type | Item |
Domain | action (Q4026292) |
Example 1 | German December 16 suprise attack in the Battle of the Bulge (Q116504918)agent of actionArmy Group B (Q157572) Source |
Example 2 | Opening of Tokyo 2020 games (Q116504974)agent of actionNaruhito (Q217096) Source |
Example 3 | Johann Philipp Reis demonstration of the Reis telephone to the Physical Society of Frankfurt (Q116504999)agent of actionJohann Philipp Reis (Q77124) Source |
See also | https://schema.org/agent |
Motivation
[edit]I would like to create a data model to describe notable actions agents have made that are described in various Wikimedia articles. We should allow users to document actions so that they can be used to create timelines of events that can then be easily translated. They can also be used as a source to generate detailed Wikipedia article content for Abstract Wikipedia.
This property is the first to be proposed of the data model and follows the Schema.org data model for actions: https://schema.org/Action
participant (P710) exists, however that's usually used usually for events and not actions. It also requires that you use object has role (P3831) to specify the role of the participant. For a relationship as critical and common as an agent is to the action they perform, we should have a dedicated property and not be required to add object has role (P3831)agent (Q24229398) to every single agent statement. Lectrician1 (talk) 22:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]Support -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 19:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- Would this work? telephone call (Q2296401)agent of actioncaller (Q113293705). Also, an alias (or better label) could be "done by", more usable than practiced by (P3095) for non-professions. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
- I actually was considering using telephone call (Q2296401) as an example! However, I think the what that item is describing is the act of talking to someone over a telephone. Not the act of calling someone on a telephone. The agent of a telephone call (Q2296401) is just a normal human then.
- Good catch with the similarities to practiced by (P3095)! I almost thought for a second that we could maybe just broaden the scope and rename practiced by (P3095) to "done by" but then I realized that the domain of practiced by (P3095) includes "fields" which are not really actions. I think it's important to distinguish that this is meant for actions by maintaining "action" in the label. Lectrician1 (talk) 02:19, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
- Would this work? telephone call (Q2296401)agent of actioncaller (Q113293705). Also, an alias (or better label) could be "done by", more usable than practiced by (P3095) for non-professions. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
Comment See my concerns with the related property proposal “object of action”. The examples given here make is appear as if those concerns mightn’t apply here, but already users are considering more general use of this proposed property like telephone call (Q2296401)‘agent of action’ (Pxxx)caller (Q113293705) (see above), which would be subject to those same concerns. ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 04:20, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
Comment The examples can be converted to use participant (P710), and we have officially opened by (P542) too. Midleading (talk) 03:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I wouldn't use those properties for classes, though. Not sure why the only examples are for instance values, class values look much more valuable here to me. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 03:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, this property should be updated with class examples. But the problem with telephone call (Q2296401) is why the value is not Q5. We also have countless dailiy activities that every person can do. Perhaps the label should be "action performed by role" for telephone call (Q2296401). The significant overlap with practiced by (P3095) and participant (P710) is noted, and they have already used like this (crime (Q83267)→criminal (Q2159907), competition (Q841654)→contestant (Q5165152)) Midleading (talk) 08:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I wouldn't use those properties for classes, though. Not sure why the only examples are for instance values, class values look much more valuable here to me. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 03:51, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Question Is this intended to contrast with/be complemented by a (potential future) property patient of action (Pyyy)? For example:
Johann Philipp Reis demonstration of the Reis telephone to the Physical Society of Frankfurt (Q116504999)‘agent of action’ (Pxxx)Johann Philipp Reis (Q77124)
Johann Philipp Reis demonstration of the Reis telephone to the Physical Society of Frankfurt (Q116504999)patient of action (Pyyy)Physikalischer Verein (Q2089433)
(The ‘agent’ property would indicate who performs the action, the ‘patient’ property, to whom it happens.)―BlaueBlüte (talk) 03:15, 18 March 2023 (UTC)- Isn't "patient of action" "object of action"? Lectrician1 (talk) 05:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Intuitively I’d have (in the telephone example) associated the telephone with ‘object’, but yes, ‘patient’ and ‘object’ are probably hard to keep apart in any consistent way. ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 08:43, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
- Isn't "patient of action" "object of action"? Lectrician1 (talk) 05:39, 20 March 2023 (UTC)
Comment @Wd-Ryan, Midleading: Regarding the telephone-call example, note the close similarity with the dog-walking example in the proposal for a property “frame element” that attempts to capture actions from a frame-semantics angle. One might want to look into whether the frame-semantics approach is better-suited to statements over classes and the the approach proposed here, to statements over instances. At any rate, I think one and the same property should not be used for both class statements and instance statements. (A property like this here one but for class statements should have the distinctive interpretation of something like “instances have agents of type”.) Insofar I support the current choice of examples for this property proposal. ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 03:33, 18 March 2023 (UTC)
Support we need a generalized property to describe this kind of relationship, for example I suppose conjugation of gametes (Q11742512)→gamete (Q211050) and fertilization (Q14890574)→egg cell (Q1321695),sperm (Q17145). --Mzaki (talk) 01:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Question How about broadening the use of perpetrator (P8031) instead, removing the (un)ethical assessment? One man's terrorist... Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:10, 24 November 2023 (UTC)
- @Maculosae tegmine lyncis Not a bad idea... I like it. @Arbnos @Wd-Ryan @Mzaki @BlaueBlüte @Midleading what do you think? Lectrician1 (talk) 00:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- I would strongly support this, I've been unable to add a group that performed an event without the implication that it was "immoral". It could be renamed to "done by". -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 02:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- Having given this only a moderate amount of thought I’d say
no (to broadening perpetrator (P8031)), because the domain of perpetrator (P8031) includes (instances of) classes that are not subclasses of action (Q4026292) as proposed here, but for example of occurrence (Q1190554). And instances of occurrence (Q1190554) can have multiple agents, only some of which might be considered perpetrator (P8031) (say, versus ‘victim’), a distinction that users of perpetrator (P8031) probably rely on.
But perpetrator (P8031) could perhaps be made a subproperty of this new property ‘agent of action’ (Pxxx) (although similar reservations might apply). ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 07:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- Having given this only a moderate amount of thought I’d say
- I would strongly support this, I've been unable to add a group that performed an event without the implication that it was "immoral". It could be renamed to "done by". -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 02:46, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
- @Maculosae tegmine lyncis Not a bad idea... I like it. @Arbnos @Wd-Ryan @Mzaki @BlaueBlüte @Midleading what do you think? Lectrician1 (talk) 00:28, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Support, an important property for the completeness of Wikidata.--Arbnos (talk) 22:44, 11 January 2024 (UTC)
Comment There is a more general method of indicating the participants of actions (including agents) proposed at Wikidata:WikiProject Events and Role Frames. Mahir256 (talk) 11:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1:, could you please clarify the comments above by @Mahir256:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahir256 @ZI Jony @Anatole Gershman using object has role (P3831) as a qualifier for practiced by (P3095) on action items seems silly. I still concur with my original reasoning that
Lectrician1 (talk) 18:18, 6 July 2024 (UTC)For a relationship as critical and common as an agent is to the action they perform, we should have a dedicated property and not be required to add object has role (P3831)agent (Q24229398) to every single agent statement.- @Mahir256:, would you like to give your final opinion based on the response? @Midleading, Maculosae tegmine lyncis, Mzaki, BlaueBlüte, Lectrician1, Wd-Ryan: pining for attention. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- At least the examples should be updated. It should be used to describe relation between classes, not instances. Midleading (talk) 11:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with Midleading. Either way, I've been wanting a property like this forever, so I support. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1:, could you please clarify the comments above. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:46, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- I think instances of actions are okay. Lectrician1 (talk) 11:28, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Midleading and @Wd-Ryan, pinging for your attention and feedback. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really mind having instances, but the examples should have some classes too to show the range. That's what I'll be using it for most. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1, could you please update the examples as suggested so that we would be able to move forward. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 17:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really mind having instances, but the examples should have some classes too to show the range. That's what I'll be using it for most. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Midleading and @Wd-Ryan, pinging for your attention and feedback. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:50, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
- Agree with Midleading. Either way, I've been wanting a property like this forever, so I support. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:44, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- At least the examples should be updated. It should be used to describe relation between classes, not instances. Midleading (talk) 11:07, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Mahir256:, would you like to give your final opinion based on the response? @Midleading, Maculosae tegmine lyncis, Mzaki, BlaueBlüte, Lectrician1, Wd-Ryan: pining for attention. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:48, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Lectrician1:, could you please clarify the comments above by @Mahir256:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 06:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
Support! Thought I had already voted here, but apparently not. Anyway, this is very much needed. Swpb (talk) 20:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
exception to constraint (lexeme)
[edit]Description | lexeme that is an exception to the constraint, qualifier to define a property constraint in combination with P2302 |
---|---|
Data type | Lexeme |
Domain | property |
Example 1 | Breton Favereau dictionary lexeme ID (P11068)single-value constraint (Q19474404) except korrandon (L628622) |
Example 2 | Breton Favereau dictionary lexeme ID (P11068)single-value constraint (Q19474404) except kaoc'h (L627729) |
Example 3 | DWDS lemma ID (P9940)single-value constraint (Q19474404) except Cyberstrategie (L905505) |
Example 4 | DWDS lemma ID (P9940)distinct-values constraint (Q21502410) except Bändel (L815181) and Bendel (L815180) |
Example 5 | Nynorskordboka-ID (P10041)distinct-values constraint (Q21502410) except daglegstove (L1141770) and daglegstue (L1141771) |
See also | exception to constraint (P2303) |
Motivation
[edit]For constraints, we need the equivalent of exception to constraint (P2303), but for lexemes. In particular, it is necessary for identifier properties used on lexemes (usually linking to dictionaries which often have a few weird exceptions like natural languages often have).
Notified participants of WikiProject property constraints
Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 12:37, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]Support - of course, since "element type" properties cannot be used on lexemes, this would be necessary --Hsarrazin (talk) 16:13, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Support ―Eihel (talk) 16:28, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
- Makes sense. I'm only leaving out the vote because that will make it easier for me to create the property. Infrastruktur (talk) 18:40, 1 October 2023 (UTC)
Support --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 11:03, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Support AdamSeattle (talk) 16:52, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
Support --99of9 (talk) 05:25, 3 October 2023 (UTC)
Support --So9q (talk) 06:51, 4 October 2023 (UTC)
Comment Please keep in mind that, until the necessary software changes (in WikibaseQualityConstraints and/or KrBot) have been made, this property will have no effect except to confuse users why it isn’t working. There should at the very least be an associated Phabricator task, and IMHO the property should only be created once the Wikidata team has committed to implementing the support in WBQC soon. I’d like to avoid a repeat of Wikidata:Property proposal/applies if regular expression matches. --Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE) (talk) 11:15, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): I figured that pretty much, thanks for the reminder and yes, indeed, we should absolutely
Wait to hear from the dev team. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 18:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
- @Lucas Werkmeister (WMDE): I figured that pretty much, thanks for the reminder and yes, indeed, we should absolutely
Strong support Useful for some Lexemes. Solaris5296 (talk) 20:28, 15 January 2024 (UTC)
voting date
[edit]Description | vote date, date on which people decided or cast their ballot |
---|---|
Represents | legal act (Q1864008) |
Data type | Point in time |
Template parameter | "date votation" in fr:modèle:Infobox Initiative suisse |
Example 1 | French constitutional referendum, 1958 (Q2319128)→28 septembre 1958 |
Example 2 | Federal popular initiative "for the protection against gun violence" (Q663241)→13 février 2011 |
Example 3 | 1932 German presidential election (Q706684)→13 mars 1932 + 10 avril 1932 |
Example 4 | Veil Act (Q3258255)→20 décembre 1974 |
Example 5 | 2024 United Kingdom general election (Q78851988)→4 juillet 2024 |
Example 6 | 2000 United States elections (Q7892455)→7 novembre 2000 |
Single-value constraint | yes but there can be exceptions (two-round system (Q615255)) |
Wikidata project | WikiProject Law (Q8486941) WikiProject Human Rights (Q115677469) |
Motivation
[edit]To help distinguish votes/votations/referendums/laws between announcement date (P6949) effective date (P7588) and date of promulgation (P7589) and publication date (P577)Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 05:25, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]- Given that there are going to be a lot of expections I don't think a single value constraint is a good idea. Many modern elections allow people to cast their ballets before polls open via mail-in voting. The current description would suggest that all dates where mail-in voting was acting would be a "date de vote". ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:42, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Bouzinac:, could you please clarify the comments above by @ChristianKl:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it's difficult to model since you have plenty of ways to voting. There are countries where double voting is common (first round and second round), where you can cast ballot in different ways (voting proxy, mail, etc). There would be three way to solving this:
- either set a "date of vote/last day of possible vote" and having a single-value-constraint. It would mean the last day where a ballot can be casted/counted is the one to record.
- or set a "date of vote(s)" and having a single-value-suggestion. Letting people set the context with qualifyers.
- or decide to rephrase the property as to the main date (the most common significative date : that is the date where most of ballots are to be decisive/counted) + single value constraint
- I don't have any preference. Thoughts? Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 19:21, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl:, would you like to give your final opinion based on the response? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Given that the property still lacks an English name, it's far from a state where it warrents anything like a final response.
- The ideal way forward would be to look at prior art and see how other people define the concept to see whether someone else has already come up with a good definition. Maybe, some UN agency that cares about voting has a controlled vocabulary that has a term? Maybe someone else? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:51, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl: proposal updated by @Swpb:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 04:08, 17 July 2024 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl:, would you like to give your final opinion based on the response? Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:18, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it's difficult to model since you have plenty of ways to voting. There are countries where double voting is common (first round and second round), where you can cast ballot in different ways (voting proxy, mail, etc). There would be three way to solving this:
- @Bouzinac:, could you please clarify the comments above by @ChristianKl:. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 03:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
tastes like
[edit]Description | taste that a food or drink has |
---|---|
Data type | String |
Example 1 | apple pie (Q1068034)schmeckt nachapple (Q89) |
Example 2 | Cuba libre (Q471753)schmeckt nachcola (Q134041) |
Example 3 | Nogger (Q1995439)schmeckt nachchocolate (Q195) |
Wikidata project | Bunte Tüte (Q127598560) |
Motivation
[edit](Die Eigenschaft "schmeckt nach" ermöglicht eine präzise Beschreibung des Geschmacks von Lebensmitteln und Getränken auf Wikidata. Dies ist besonders nützlich für die Gastronomie, Lebensmittelwissenschaft und Konsumenten, die nach spezifischen Geschmäckern suchen. Darüber hinaus trägt die Eigenschaft zur Bereicherung der Datenbank bei und unterstützt die Verknüpfung von Produkten und deren Geschmacksprofilen auf einer strukturierten und zugänglichen Weise.) – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Geja3001 (talk • contribs) at 14:38, July 18, 2024 (UTC).
Discussion
[edit]- @Geja3001: this might be a good idea, but I don't think your examples make sense. Not all drinks taste like cola, for example! ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:33, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
- I have revised the examples to better illustrate the proposal. What do you think? Histimtu (talk) 19:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment When it comes to these examples at least I tend to oppose because I think this should be solved by specifying "Ingredients" and setting the qualifier "dominates taste" to these or via related/similar ways. --Prototyperspective (talk) 11:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment Prototyperspective's solution could be accomplished without a new qualifier property, just a new Wikibase reason for preferred rank (Q71533077). Swpb (talk) 02:00, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Comment I prefer Prototyperspective's solution too, but this might be a difficult property to define even in that way and could be very dependent on the editor - many but not all people believe that Q65523167 (what I would call coriander) tastes like Q34396 (soap), and there is evidence that it does taste like that to them, but not at all to others. And there are likely a range of views of the flavour of Q855853, for instance, all shaped by local culinary comparisons... Zeromonk (talk) 08:32, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
identifier of FranceTerme
[edit]Description | identifier of a term recommended by the Commission d'enrichissement de la langue française (French language enrichment commission) |
---|---|
Represents | FranceTerme (Q3080560) |
Data type | External identifier |
Example 1 | commonality (Q110765520) → [1] |
Example 2 | no frills (Q1365464) → [2] |
Example 3 | fake news (Q28549308) → [3] |
Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
Formatter URL | https://www.culture.fr/franceterme/terme/$1 |
Motivation
[edit]- FR: FranceTerme regroupe les termes recommandés et publiés au Journal Officiel de la République Française. A l'heure actuelle, cette base de données compte 8060 termes qui pourraient être liés à Wikidata. YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
- EN: FranceTerme includes recommended terms published in the Journal Officiel de la République Française. At present, this database contains 8060 terms that could be linked to Wikidata. YotaMoteuchi (talk) 08:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]has semantic role
[edit]Description | item that describes a role in an event/action class |
---|---|
Data type | Item |
Domain | item, occurrence (Q1190554) |
Example 1 | military offensive (Q2001676)"has semantic role"attacker (Q31924059) |
Example 2 | military offensive (Q2001676)"has semantic role"defender (Q111729140) |
Example 3 | throwing (Q12898216)"has semantic role"actor (Q23894381) |
Example 4 | throwing (Q12898216)"has semantic role"target (Q1047579) |
Example 5 | throwing (Q12898216)"has semantic role"projectile (Q49393) |
Planned use | add to (possibly newly created) items describing occurrences/actions |
Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
This proposal is a substantial revision of Wikidata:Property proposal/has semantic role.
Motivation
[edit]Consider concepts that describe classes of events, actions and processes, roughly the subclasses of "occurrence (Q1190554)". For the lack of a better inclusive term, we call them "event/action" classes. (They are sometimes called "eventualities" in linguistic literature.) All event/action classes have core semantic roles, as illustrated by widely used resources such as "FrameNet (Q1322093)", "VerbNet (Q7920918)" and "PropBank (Q7250039)". For example, “eating" has an "eater" and something "eaten"; "throwing" has the "thrower", the "target" and the "projectile". These roles are not optional. Every act of "eating" has an "eater" and something "eaten" independently of how it is expressed and in what language. While Wikidata has over 300 existing properties for roles in event/action instances (e.g., "participant (P710)", "victim(s) (P8032)"), there are very few that are used with event/action classes. The two most common are "practiced by (P3095)" and "uses (P2283)". The vast majority of event/action classes have no statements describing semantic roles. For example, until very recently, "military offensive (Q2001676)" didn't have any semantic roles at all. Clearly, every military offensive has an attacker and a defendant. We added these roles using two statements:
military offensive (Q2001676)has characteristic (P1552)attacker (Q31924059)
military offensive (Q2001676)has characteristic (P1552)defender (Q111729140)
Here, "agent (Q392648)" and "theme (Q118826633)" are instances of "thematic relation (Q613930)". The property "has characteristic (P1552)" is extremely generic and has many uses. Our proposed “has semantic role” property would be a specific sub-property of "has characteristic (P1552)" for designating semantic roles.
Some of the existing event/action classes already have statements indicating semantic roles. For example, the creator in "creation (Q11398090)" is indicated by the "practiced by (P3095)" property. We would not change this, but, since this property has many uses, we added a qualifier:
creation (Q11398090)practiced by (P3095)creator (Q2500638)
The item "creation (Q11398090)" did not have a statement for the "object of creation" role. So, we added:
creation (Q11398090)has characteristic (P1552)artificial object (Q16686448)
If we had the proposed "has semantic role" property, we would have used it instead of the generic "has characteristic (P1552)" property.
This proposal is a part of a wider project: "Wikidata:WikiProject_Events_and_Role_Frames". We encourage the interested parties to visit and join the project discussion. Anatole Gershman (talk) 21:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]Strong support I find the proposal much improved and fully support it. Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 23:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support I am very happy with this proposal and also strongly support it. MarthaStonePalmer (talk) 22:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support I definitely support the addition of the "has semantic role" property. HajicJanSr (talk) 17:09, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support I fully support this property proposal. SkatjeMyers (talk) 16:25, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
FDC ID
[edit]Description | U.S. Department of Agriculture FoodData Central ID |
---|---|
Represents | food (Q2095) |
Data type | External identifier |
Example 1 | chicken egg (Q15260613)→747997 |
Example 2 | apple (Q89)→168204 |
Example 3 | whole wheat bread (Q14650718)→335240 |
Example 4 | Coca-Cola (Q2813)→2678649 |
Source | https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/ |
Number of IDs in source | 467293 (according to the tab bar) |
Formatter URL | https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/$1/nutrients |
See also | USDA NDB number (P1978) |
Motivation
[edit]contains nutritional data about generic foods (13807) and branded food products (453486). USDA NDB number (P1978) seems to be an entirely different id but the website provides a mapping to the FDC ID:
buttermilk (Q106612) → USDA NDB number (P1978) → 1088 → FDC ID → 2259792
–Shisma (talk) 07:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]@Elf_Pavlik, Kolja21, Pigsonthewing, Vladimir Alexiev, Bluerasberry, Hackfish:
Notified participants of WikiProject Food
Support Very useful data. By the way, in the open source app Waistline (largest foss calorie tracker app) these can be used for generic foods (see here) – so far they aren't using Wikidata in any way. --Prototyperspective (talk) 15:44, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
- @Prototyperspective: it is also used by OpenNutriTracker (Q127445131) which I actually discovered in your edits. I thought it would be nice if it could use images from wikimedia commons when selecting an FDC item. Thats why I proposed this property 😅 –Shisma (talk) 07:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Strong support -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 18:50, 26 July 2024 (UTC)