Shortcuts: WD:PP/GEN, WD:PP/Generic

Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

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

See also[edit]

This page is for the proposal of new properties.

Before proposing a property

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

Creating the property

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

On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2018/06.

Generic properties[edit]

SNOMED CT identifier[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier in the SNOMED CT catalogue codes for diseases, symptoms and procedures
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed unitsthere are not units, just an identifier
Example (lymphadenopathy), (osteoporosis), (age related macular degeneration)
Source and
Planned uselink diseases with SNOMED CT terms
Formatter URL$1
See alsoICD-10 identifier (, ICD-9 identifier


SNOMED CT is a well established terminology. It has existed since 1965. Since 2007 it changed legal form to be an international standard development organization. There are existing properties for ICD 9 and ICD 10 and SNOMED CT is very similar to those. Example wikipedia term where this property could be used would be It is similar to identifiers listed there (e.g., ICD-10)

The infobox template relevant to this property is The identifier must be a number. (see )

Wuser6 (talk) 03:52, 14 April 2018 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment It is not sufficient, because we would like to add it to the medical condition info box and in order to do that having it linked the same way as ICD is the only way to have that advanced functionality. Wuser6 (talk) 15:04, 3 May 2018 (UTC)

donation platform[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionplace to make donations for this person or project
Representsdonation (Q1124860)
Data typeItem
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)


My idea is that this would work similarly to website account on (P553). I'm not entirely sure how to handle self-hosted donations platforms, such as Wikimedia's, so the third example given is tentative. Any suggestions? NMaia (talk) 12:32, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @Ivanhercaz: For self-hosted donation platforms we can create an item with the label "self-hosted service".--Micru (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 10:16, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose P553 or a dedicated property can do.
    --- Jura 06:46, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose better think deeper about how to model donation information in general: what information is required, e.g. where to find information about donation, which account to donate to (bank account, donation platform...), whether donations could be tax-reducible... Some of this information can already be modeled with existing properties. New properties and/or qualifiers might make sense but this particular proposal is not convincing. -- JakobVoss (talk)

cryptocurrency address[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionaddress for this project or organization's cryptocurrency wallet
Representscryptocurrency (Q13479982)
Data typeExternal identifier
Domainprojects and organizations
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)


Similar to Property proposal/donation platform, this is valuable for donations. We probably need tight controls on this to, eg. spot new users changing this statement. NMaia (talk) 12:59, 21 April 2018 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment @NMaia: Please make examples correct links David (talk) 14:39, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
    • Which link is incorrect? NMaia (talk) 15:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
      • For your first example, Firefox reports "The address wasn't understood". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:31, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
        • You need a program that can open links like that, like a bitcoin wallet. This is a similar scheme to 'mailto'. I took the link directly from NMaia (talk) 14:05, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support But, is a link with 'bitcoin:' scheme valid? Would be better using a HTTP link like --Giovanni Alfredo Garciliano Díaz diskutujo 22:06, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this information is useless because it cannot be trusted. We would need to add a big warning sign not to send money to this address without having checked at the organization. A cryprocurrency account is different to similar information (e.g. traditional bank account, street address...) because there is no way to withdraw a transfer -- JakobVoss (talk) 09:10, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

has program committee member[edit]

   Under discussion
Data typeItem
Domainscientific event (Q52260246)
Allowed valueshuman (Q5)
ExampleWiki Workshop 2018 (Q47035167)Miriam Redi (Q43372605) [1]
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsoreviewed by (P4032)


Scientific meetings (conferences/workshops) has a group of researchers that determine which contributions (articles/abstracts/presentations/demos) that will be accepted to the meeting. This is usually called the program committee. For modeling scientific events a property catching this relationship is wanted. Alternatively one could establish a new item for the program committee and declare a person to be a member of that item. However then we would need another property to link scientific meeting Wikidata items to program committee Wikidata items. Alternatively, one could have the inverse property, on person item pages that directly links to the scientific meeting. Program commmitees might be from about 10 to over 1'000 members. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 10:55, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

See the inverse property suggestion at Wikidata:Property proposal/is program committee member of.


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support David (talk) 10:49, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support John Samuel 10:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment both properties have been supported and marked as ready but at a quick glance it is not clear to me whether the proposer and supporter want both properties to be created, or should we just pick one? − Pintoch (talk) 07:22, 17 May 2018 (UTC)
@Fnielsen: ^ − Pintoch (talk) 09:06, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

values for this type[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionthe value of this qualifier is shared by all the instances/subclasses of the subject item
Data typeQuantity
Domainqualifier of properties for this type (P1963)
Allowed unitsall units
Examplecredit card (Q161380)
properties for this type
Normal rank length Arbcom ru editing.svg edit
values for this type 85.60
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
+ add value


It allows to indicate specific values that every instance/subclass of the subject item should have. Malore (talk) 16:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support David (talk) 10:50, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I think if a class item has some quantity property, you can already now infer that all instances of this class have the same quantity value. For example, credit card (Q161380) has the statement length (P2043)  85.60mm, therefore all subclasses and instances thereof have the same length and thus properties for this type (P1963) is redundant. --Pasleim (talk) 12:20, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment it is not the case the property values of classes are propery values of their instances. This is a common error in modelling that has been debunked many times over.
Consider, for example, the USS Carter Hall (Q2468798). It has a length of 610 ft (not represented in Wikidata, though). It is an instance of Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship (Q1586054) (also not represented in Wikidata).
However, Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship (Q1586054) does *not* have a length of 610 ft or indeed any other length. How can it have a length, after all - it is not a physical object. Instead it may have a design length (maybe even of 610 ft). English Wikipedia actually gets this bit right, having a general characteristics section of the InfoBox for, with a length of 609 ft 7 in.
Harpers Ferry-class dock landing ship (Q1586054) does have some property values for properties that make sense for its instances. For example, it has a short name of Harpers Ferry, which it definitely not a short name for the USS Carter Hall (Q2468798). Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 15:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
@Peter F. Patel-Schneider: I thought the same but @Pasleim: can be right: I can't find examples of property values that are true for the class and false for the instances/suclasses. As regards your example, I think that if all instances of a class share some property value, then the class should have that property value, too: if all known stars have a temperature higher than 6000 C (I don't know if it's true), then also the star class should have such a property value.--Malore (talk) 00:08, 9 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This proposal only applies to quantitative values; item or string or other typed values may also apply through to subclasses & instances. I think we need a more general discussion of how this ought to work in wikidata - perhaps a general qualifier: is there a technique with our current WDQS system that would facilitate this at all in some way? Pinging the ontology project ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:16, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This proposal needs more clarification. For example, what does "should have" mean here. Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose This proposal adds to the representational power of Wikidata. Either there needs to be some Wikidata process for adding these values to instances, or every consumer of Wikidata needs to be changed to look for this information when it is looking for property values. Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 16:01, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The example could be expressed as credit card (Q161380)length (P2043)  85.60. People and machines thinking in formal logical might have a problem with this statement but it makes more sense and is more easily to understand for anybody else. -- JakobVoss (talk) 09:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

--Micru (talk) 21:46, 24 August 2014 (UTC) Tobias1984 (talk) TomT0m (talk) Genewiki123 (talk) Emw (talk) 03:09, 9 September 2014 (UTC) —Ruud 16:15, 9 December 2014 (UTC) Emitraka (talk) 14:32, 14 October 2015 (UTC) Bovlb (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Peter F. Patel-Schneider (talk) 22:21, 23 October 2015 (UTC) ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:51, 5 November 2015 (UTC) --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 20:53, 3 January 2016 (UTC) --Harmonia Amanda (talk) 22:00, 27 February 2016 (UTC) --Lechatpito (talk) --Andrawaag (talk) 14:42, 13 April 2016 (UTC) --ChristianKl (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2016 (UTC) --Cmungall Cmungall (talk) 13:49, 8 July 2016 (UTC) Cord Wiljes (talk) 16:53, 28 September 2016 (UTC) DavRosen (talk) 23:07, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 07:01, 24 February 2017 (UTC) Pintoch (talk) 22:42, 5 March 2017 (UTC) Fuzheado (talk) 14:43, 15 May 2017 (UTC) YULdigitalpreservation (talk) 14:37, 14 June 2017 (UTC) PKM (talk) 00:24, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Fractaler (talk) 14:42, 17 June 2017 (UTC) Andreasmperu Diana de la Iglesia Jsamwrites (talk) Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:39, 24 August 2017 (UTC) Alessandro Piscopo (talk) 17:02, 4 September 2017 (UTC) Ptolusque (.-- .. -.- ..) 01:47, 14 September 2017 (UTC) Gamaliel (talk) --Horcrux92 (talk) 11:19, 12 November 2017 (UTC) MartinPoulter (talk) Bamyers99 (talk) 16:47, 18 March 2018 (UTC) Malore (talk) Wurstbruch (talk) 22:59, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Ontology

Maintained by WikiProject[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionLink to WikiProject that maintain a property
Data typeItem
Allowed valuesWikiProject (Q21025364)
Exampleencoded by (P702)WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology (Q15884967)
Planned usesplit Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/Mandatory constraints/Violations and other reports by projects
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Robot and gadget jobsKrBot (talkcontribslogs)
See alsoWikidata project (P4570)


Reports like Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/Mandatory constraints/Violations are too long. Project-related lists will be more efficient. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support better than Wikidata project (P4570) David (talk) 10:41, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If doing any kind of automated things based on this property data (e.g. posting report to talk page, etc), I think we need to specify language edition. Because each projects are working generally independently. So what do you think about using qualifier like this...? --Was a bee (talk) 12:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Maintained by Wikiproject
Normal rank WikiProject Molecular and Cellular Biology Arbcom ru editing.svg edit
of English Wikipedia
of French Wikipedia
of Wikidata
▼ 0 reference
+ add reference
+ add value
  • I will use the property inside Wikidata project only for now. Your suggestion is good if it will be used for another projects. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 19:23, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh I see. This would be good and useful property. Thank you for answer. Symbol support vote.svg Support --Was a bee (talk) 06:25, 30 April 2018 (UTC)

GNOME Wiki ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionentry in GNOME Wiki website for an application or project
RepresentsGNOME Wiki (Q29605393)
Data typeExternal identifier
Planned useIntegrate in the software infoboxes
Number of IDs in source278
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886), GNOME will make more apps in the future
Formatter URL$1
Robot and gadget jobsNone
See alsoFree Software Directory entry (P2537)


I think this property is an useful data, different from official website (P856), for example: Gtkmm (Q284796) has official website (P856) value:, and we could have a GNOME Wiki Id property, with a possible value: --Giovanni Alfredo Garciliano Díaz diskutujo 22:56, 1 May 2018 (UTC)


visible by means of[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionitems of interest can be visible through other items (e.g. webcams)
Data typeItem
Allowed valuestype of linked items: Q template
Examplea water well such as Mosaikbrunnen (Q27229889) might be live-visible on a web cam such as NZZ WebCam (Q53678107)
Planned useafter the WVZ data set import (, we want to mark the fountains that are visible live on the webcams of the city
See alsooffers view on (P3173), webcam page URL (P4238)


When people want to see an item of interest real time through the internet, this gives them a hint how to do so. Another application may be tourist binoculars available in many city- or mountain-viewpoints.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ralfhauser (talk • contribs) at 03:19, May 18, 2018‎ (UTC).

"offers view on" (P3173) appears to be the reciprocal approach.

Probably, there is yet another property needed "in focus of URL" because the webcam URL is only likely to give access to the webcam, but some webcams hopefully allow to specifiy by means of an url also what (i.e. which direction, focus, zoom) they should point


production website[edit]

   Under discussion
DescriptionAn official page of a television series hosted by the network or production company.
Data typeURL
Template parameter"production website" in en:template:infobox television
ExampleMy Mister (Q43111245)
See alsoofficial website (P856)


Production website is used in the English infobox. It would be nice to be able to link it to other languages Wikipedia pages just like official website (P856). CherryPie94 (talk) 12:27, 18 May 2018 (UTC)


Do you have an example where it would be different from official website (P856)? Perhaps just a qualifier on official website (P856) would take care of this? ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:34, 18 May 2018 (UTC)
If we are to link it to Wikipedia infobox it would not work. Currently, the official website is migrated from Wikidata to Englis Wikipedia, but since there is no property for the production website, that can't be done. This TV series has 1 official link, and 2 links to the production company pages about the TV series. CherryPie94 (talk) 10:42, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Ok, I was mainly just looking for the property template to be filled out, I added your example. ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:01, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose the proposal lack more examples, domain, infobox parameter, cardinality (can it have multiple values?) etc. URL (P2699) with a qualifier could be used, couldn't it? -- JakobVoss (talk) 06:22, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Political coalition[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionagreement for cooperation between different political parties
Representspolitician (Q82955)
Data typeItem
ExampleDilma Rousseff (Q40722)position held (P39)President of Brazil (Q5176750) → Political coalition = For Brazil to keep on changing (Q5466690)
See alsoparliamentary group (P4100)


I'm involved in a project of strutured narrative about brazilian elections that I think it will be useful to improve elections items at Wikidata. The database of the official electoral institutions can provide a lot of information. Scrap and bring this data is part of the plan. A political coalition is an agreement for cooperation between different political parties. In a parlamentary item, besides party, it would be great to have the coalition that politician was involved while the electoral process. Ederporto (talk) 01:19, 20 May 2018 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment position held (P39) statement tend to be overloaded with qualifiers. Maybe an item for each coalition government works better.
    --- Jura 17:57, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1: Can you be more clear? I didn't get it. Thanks, Ederporto (talk) 23:01, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support David (talk) 12:45, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

sense for this name[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionsense of a lexeme corresponding to name
Data typeSense (not available yet)
ExampleWarsaw (Q270) native label (P1705) "Warszawa" → Warszawa/capital of Poland


Not sure how to do this. (Add your motivation for this property here.)
--- Jura 15:22, 13 May 2018 (UTC)


It sounds like you are trying to create an inverse of item for this sense (P5137) (which you created though we can't use it yet)? Or is this somehow different (can you clarify)? In any case, I think the inverse direction (which P5137 may already cover) is the better one here, otherwise you'll have one statement per language on each place item. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:48, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I'm trying to figure out how to solve last year's usecase. I'm not sure if P5137 would be sufficient. Maybe we could try an equivalent of statement is subject of (P805). This could be used as a qualifier for a statement such as 'native label = "Warszawa" '.
    --- Jura 15:12, 14 May 2018 (UTC)
  • I updated this accordingly.
    --- Jura 12:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, this is intended to connect a Statement on an Item to a Lexeme using a qualifier. The use case makes sense to me, but if I understand the structure of this page correctly, this request is misplaced: this section appears to be for Properties to be used on Senses. The proposed Property refers to a Sense, but would be used as a Qualifier on a Statement (supposedly on Items), on on Senses. So the request should probably be at Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic. -- Duesentrieb (talk) 11:24, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

SPARQL endpoint URL[edit]

DescriptionURL of the SPARQL endpoint of the database/website
RepresentsSPARQL endpoint (Q26261192)
Data typeURL
ExampleWikidata (Q2013)
See alsoofficial website (P856), feed URL (P1019)


Seems preferable over other solution, such as adding a second value to P856 and attempting to qualify it.
--- Jura 12:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)


Symbol support vote.svg Support, looks useful − Pintoch (talk) 10:56, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
I think JakobVoss has a good idea here - why don't we try a more generic property like that. If we get an overwhelming number for a particular protocol we could split that off separately as its own property, as we've done in some other cases before. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:04, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Oa01 pointed out that URL (P2699) is already being used for that here: Q5674339#P2699. Do we even need a new property for API endpoints or should we just use that? − Pintoch (talk) 11:12, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
I first though URL (P2699) and qualifiers is enough but it turns out to be difficult to query API endpoints when no standard protocol has been defined (e.g. custom REST APIs). I'd prefer a dedicated property for API endpoints as subproperty of URL (P2699) -- JakobVoss (talk) 12:43, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1: Would you consider this generalization? Lymantria (talk) 05:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
I think we already have more general properties that can be used in the suggested way (some were suggested for that). So there wouldn't really be the need for an additional one. The advantage of this proposal is that we wont have to repeat a basic aspect of sparql on every node. Details, if needed, can be added to the property itself.
--- Jura 05:32, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
URL (P2699) is too specific to query generic API endpoints independent of the protocol, this should justify an "API endpoint" property. -- JakobVoss (talk) 06:44, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I agree with JakobVoss concerning the name. It's better to rename this property 'API endpoint' and make use of protocol. John Samuel 20:08, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1, Pintoch, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, ArthurPSmith, JakobVoss, Pigsonthewing:@John Samuel: ✓ Done for the narrow proposal, now SPARQL endpoint (P5305). A broader approach can be discussed later, SPARQL endpoint (P5305) might become a subproperty of that one. Lymantria (talk) 08:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
@Jura1, Pintoch, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, ArthurPSmith, JakobVoss, Pigsonthewing:@John Samuel: Sorry, this procedure is not right, we had an ongoing discussion and no reason to hurry. Please delete the property and let's exchange arguments and examples first: Wikidata:Properties_for_deletion#SPARQL_endpoint_(P5305) -- JakobVoss (talk) 13:27, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

Scope of this property[edit]

This property was created by accident before rough consensus could be reached, whether to have a specific property for SPARQL endpoints or a more generic property for API endpoints and a qualifier for SPARQL protocol. Let's collect arguments to find a solution that everybody can work with! -- JakobVoss (talk) 21:17, 13 June 2018 (UTC)

@JakobVoss: given the deletion discussion I think at this point it's best to just propose this as a separate property, I think you'll get some support! ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:39, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Arguments for/against SPARQL specific property[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support it's easier to express and query SPARQL endpoints (the particular use case of this property) -- JakobVoss (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

Arguments for/against generic API endpoint property[edit]

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support API's are intended for machine interaction and so making that distinction from our existing URL properties is useful; there are many protocols, and in fact a lot of places have custom protocols defined by something like OpenAPI (Q18393146). ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:40, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I likee the idea that protocols can be defined just by their Qid - this potentially lets us make interesting SPARQL queries. − Pintoch (talk) 13:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support So we can record API endpoints in general. It seems intuitive that we should create more generic properties first, then create more specific sub-properties as required. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:08, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support for generic properties first, big number of protocols and ease of specifying protocols as mentioned (it seems to get a voting here now more than a collection of arguments, so I want to use it this way …:) ). --Marsupium (talk) 13:33, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Arguments for/against both "SPARQL endpoint" and "API endpoint" properties[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more difficult to query all API endpoints because SPARQL is additional property to explicitly query for (subproperties are not included automatically) -- JakobVoss (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question What services will have separate SPARQL and API endpoints? If that were the case, will the API endpoints all need object has role (P3831) to clarify what APIs they are? Taking Wikidata as an example, one may also argue that the API endpoint is is the endpoint for Wikidata, whereas is actually the API endpoint for the Wikidata Query Service. Deryck Chan (talk) 17:13, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Arguments for/against having none of them[edit]

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The property creation proposal above clearly demonstrated it will be useful to have at least one new property to record SPARQL endpoints, either with a "SPARQL endpoint" property or with an "API endpoint" property. --Deryck Chan (talk) 15:56, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose more difficult to express and query API endpoints (always need to check qualifier, use special qualifier value "unknown" for unknown protocol) -- JakobVoss (talk) 19:57, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

number of rocket stages[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionnumber of stages for a rocket
Representsrocket stage (Q4809)
Data typeQuantity
Domainrocket (Q41291)
Allowed unitspositive integers
ExampleSputnik (Q1393751) -> 2



Ideally this would have a less unwieldy name like "number of stages", although I'm afraid people would then start adding it to stuff like 2018 Tour de France (Q28859163).--Reosarevok (talk) 19:34, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose has parts of the class (P2670) with an item like "rocket stage of Sputnik" and quantity (P1114) would be a better way to specify this relationship. The proposed property is too specific. ChristianKl❫ 14:05, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

reference has role[edit]

   Ready Create
Descriptionrole, or specific nature, of the given reference
Representsreference (Q121769)
Data typeItem
Allowed valueslimited list of allowed values
ExampleAS PART OF REFERENCE → first description (of a taxon) (Q1361864)
Robot and gadget jobsconvert existing uses of P31 as a reference to use the new property
See alsosubject has role (P2868), object has role (P3831)


We currently have about 50,000 cases where instance of (P31) is used as a property in a reference, rather than as a main statement. See queries: (counts of values), (examples). The use on e.g. Q101538#P225 is typical.

In my opinion, use of P31 in this way is ugly and confusing -- IMO it would be better if P31 was only used for its main purpose, as a direct statement on an item giving its nature.

Use of P31-on-references is similar to the way P31 once used also to be used as a qualifier. But those uses have now everywhere been removed and replaced with subject has role (P2868) and object has role (P3831).

P31-on-references is currently doing some important work. In particular, the #1 value of P31-on-references, first description (of a taxon) (Q1361864), to be able to indicate that the reference in question contained the first description and definition of a taxon is extremely valuable and important to be able to highlight for taxonomic references.

To me it therefore makes sense to propose a new drop-in replacement "reference has role" for P31-on-references, as a specific property to take over this function, which is different from the normal use of P31; and which would allow a constraint to limit acceptable values to an agreed controlled vocabulary. -- Jheald (talk) 14:30, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


Achim Raschka (talk)
Brya (talk)
Dan Koehl (talk)
Daniel Mietchen (talk)
Delusion23 (talk)
FelixReimann (talk)
Infovarius (talk)
Joel Sachs
Josve05a (talk)
Klortho (talk)
Lymantria (talk)
Mellis (talk)
Michael Goodyear
Nis Jørgensen
Peter Coxhead
Andy Mabbett (talk)
Prot D
Rod Page
Soulkeeper (talk)
Strobilomyces (talk)
Tommy Kronkvist (talk)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Taxonomy -- Jheald (talk) 14:56, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Appears to me, a relatively inexperienced Wikidata-er, to fill a niche role. If/when created, could instance of (P31) be software-restricted from being placed in references, to avoid confusion & accidental placement? —Tom.Reding (talk) 15:24, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
The software wouldn't completely prevent it, but it would register a constraint violation, and place a warning error sign next to it. Jheald (talk) 19:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment - This is not an isolated proposal: publication in which this scientific name was established also deals with this issue, but proposes to move this to a statement. Since there are so many cases for this, and likely to become more, a separate property (making this a statement) seems well justified. The qualifier "first description (of a taxon) (Q1361864)," looks quite awkward to me (also wrong: it is the establishing of a name that matters here, not the description): if there are three references listed, will the software that reads in data be able to determine what reference this qualifier belongs to? A separate property would make this unnecessary. - Brya (talk) 17:12, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
@Brya: I don't see the two proposals as necessarily in conflict. Firstly, there are other reasons why one might want to annotate a reference: establishing a taxon is only one example. Secondly, even if there was a separate statement for when the scientific statement was established, one might still want to note of a reference that it was the originating paper, or the statement that redefined the taxon, or some other notable thing about the paper. But it would be a good thing to get rid of the current P31s.
As to your technical question, the annotation becomes part of the reference (as the present uses of P31 do). It is therefore uniquely associated with a single reference, just as much as the properties "stated in" or "volume" or "page" would be. There is no danger of crosstalk with any other reference. Jheald (talk) 19:52, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes, on this last point, I had realized that the danger of software reading it out wrong was quite limited. It will still be confusing to the reader. - Brya (talk) 16:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

mathematical concept defining formula[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionmathematical formula representing the definition of a mathematical concept
Data typeMathematical expression
Domaininstances and subclasses of mathematical concept (Q24034552)
Exampleabsolute value (Q120812)
absolute value (Q120812)
See alsodefining formula (P2534)


defining formula (P2534) allows to add the formula that defines a mathematical statement, but currently there isn't a property to add the formula that defines a mathematical concept. Malore (talk) 18:00, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


Arthur Rubin
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Mathematics

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support David (talk) 16:21, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Arthur, just use defining formula (P2534) - feel free to broaden its description and usage instructions to reflect that. − Pintoch (talk) 13:50, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

mathematical concept definition[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptiondefinition of a mathematical concept in natural language
Data typeMultilingual text (not available yet)
Domaininstance or subclass of mathematical concept (Q24034552)
Exampleabsolute value (Q120812) → "unsigned" portion of a number
absolute value (Q120812) → distance of a number from zero


It's the same of "mathematical concept defining formula" but expressed in natural language instead of mathematical expression.

It differs from the item description because the latter should be a short sentence used only to identify the item. Another difference is that a mathematical concept can have multiple definitions.

It should contain as few symbols as possible to be comprehensible by everyone. Malore (talk) 18:27, 10 June 2018 (UTC)


Arthur Rubin
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Mathematics

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, but for me is exactly the same as the description. The Wikipedia article fills the function of disambiguate the possible interpretations or definitions of a formula. The item exists to show the metadata about the formula, not its interpretation, if someone is curious about the possible meanings of it, they should go to the Wikipedia article. Good contributions, Ederporto (talk) 23:48, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, this is so subjective. The quantity of symbols does not ensures the unserstanding, the choice of words is more dangerous than the use of symbols. Ederporto (talk) 23:53, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this is what the description field is for. Also multilingual text (data type) does not exist. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@ArthurPSmith: They have differentt goals. The goal of the description field is to distinguish the item from similar ones, while the goal of this property is to give all the definitions of the concept. It is the same of "mathematical concept defining formula" (the other property I proposed) but in natural language instead of symbols. --Malore (talk) 21:41, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Wikidata is designed to store structured information, definitions of concepts in natural language are not structured. Descriptions can be used for that. − Pintoch (talk) 13:52, 15 June 2018 (UTC) Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose -- JakobVoss (talk) 06:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC) ID[edit]

Descriptionidentifier for a German politician, in the database (Q320307)
Data typeExternal identifier
DomainGerman politicians
Allowed values[1-9][0-9]*
Example 1Angela Merkel (Q567)79137
Example 2Cem Özdemir (Q12839)79102
Example 3Xaver Jung (Q15813187)79269
External linksUse in sister projects: [de][en][es][fr][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Planned uselink to all profiles for German politicians, create potential missing items for German politicians not on Wikidata
Number of IDs in source709 (Bundestag); > 1.500 altogether
Expected completenesseventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL$1

Motivation is a non-profit Internet portal that allows German citizens to question their representatives in German parliaments publicly. Users of the site can contact representatives of national Parliament (the Bundestag), German deputies of the European Parliament and of the German federal states.

The ID is a numeric value for all current members of parliaments and candidates running in the elections to these parliaments. is the most complete collection of German parliamentary politicians that is freely available. Data is offered to the public through open APIs

I propose this property in my function as an employee of (database editor) and a member of the Wikidata community. a_ka_es 07:16, 15 June 2018 (UTC)


T.seppelt (talk) 21:00, 18 February 2016 (UTC) Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 11:59, 13 March 2017 (UTC) GerardM (talk) 15:58, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:52, 26 March 2017 (UTC) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits Jneubert (talk) 13:47, 29 April 2017 (UTC) Framawiki (please notify !) (talk)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Authority control ChristianKl Bigbossfarin Galaktos Labant Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Germany --Lucas Werkmeister (talk) 08:41, 15 June 2018 (UTC)

API endpoint[edit]

   Under discussion
Descriptionbase URL of a web service
Data typeURL
Domaindata set (Q1172284), web service (Q193424)
Example 1Wikidata (Q2013) (no standard protocol)
Example 2Library of Congress (Q131454) → "unknown"
qualifier described at URL (P973)
Example 3Library of Congress (Q131454)
qualifier protocol (P2700) Search/Retrieve via URL (Q337367)
Example 4GitHub (Q364)
qualifier protocol (P2700)
qualifier described at URL (P973)
Example 5GitHub (Q364) API → (no standard protocol)
qualifier file format (P2701) JavaScript Object Notation (Q2063)
Sourcewebsites of each item and third-party directories such as
See alsoSPARQL endpoint (P5305), feed URL (P1019), URL (P2699)


Specify API endpoints to access databases via web services. Standard protocols can be added with qualifier protocol (P2700) and link to API documentation with qualifier described at URL (P973). This property was also discussed as part of Wikidata:Property proposal/SPARQL endpoint. API endpoints can already be specified with URL (P2699) and qualifier protocol (P2700) but many endpoints don't follow a standard protocol and it's more convenient to query endpoints without qualifier. -- JakobVoss (talk) 06:58, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


Symbol support vote.svg Support (but please don't support your own proposal - it makes it clearer to assess at a glance if there is consensus) − Pintoch (talk) 08:23, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:44, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose duplicates the existing property proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/48#P2699. I don't think it can work work as intended by the proposer ("it's more convenient to query endpoints without qualifier."). Maybe it's just that the use case isn't specified.
--- Jura 06:15, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
This makes no sense to me: you just argued the opposite at Wikidata:Property proposal/SPARQL endpoint -- JakobVoss (talk) 21:07, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't think I did, but it's possible that I just don't understand your usecase. As you haven't given it, that seems normal. So what do you want to do with this property that you can't do with the one proposed for the same at Wikidata:Property proposal/Archive/48#P2699. Please include a sample query and application.
    --- Jura 04:05, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support - Bit sad that we already have SPARQL endpoint (P5305), because this seems to be much more versatile. Husky (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support - I actually like that we have SPARQL endpoint (P5305) as well, because I think that a SPARQL endpoint has particularly strong relevance for people working with Wikidata. But I do think this property is a useful distinction over generic URL (P2699) -- an API for data extraction is a very specific sort of URL, that it is useful to separate from other sorts of URLs the site may offer; and the API URL statements are already going to be quite complicated, with quite a lot of potential qualifiers flying around. It's a lot cleaner to be able to consider them separately, without them being muddled together with all sorts of other URLs, with all sorts of other role-specific qualifiers. Jheald (talk) 21:05, 19 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose As noted above, this duplicates URL (P2699), whose documentation should be clarified. It may, though, be useful to have a new property with an $1 component. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:23, 20 June 2018 (UTC)
@Pigsonthewing: More accurately, it's a specialisation of P2699 rather than a duplication. This property is proposed to segregate off a specific subset of things currently loaded on the reserve backstop property URL (P2699). Jheald (talk) 11:06, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

type of water[edit]

   Under discussion
Representsfour types of water are specified by the data set data set (Q1172284) fountainsWVZ (Q53629101)
Data typeItem
Example 1Water distribution pipe network (Q53633635)
Example 2own water supply (Q53634173)
Example 3groundwater (Q161598)
Example 4spring water (Q1881858)


For any fountain, it is interesting what type of water it supplies. Also, this is a column in the original data set and we would not want to loose this information upon import. (Will make type of water (Q53673519) obsolete) Ralfhauser (talk) 11:50, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


Symbol support vote.svg Support This property will be useful to indicate the type of water (e.g., spring water, tap water) that we get in the data set that we would like to import from Open Data Zurich into Wikidata []. Cristina Sarasua (talk) 11:59, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support The type of water is a relevant piece of information, because e.g. groundwater has more minerals than water from the distribution mains. Matthew (talk) 12:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support I'm working for the City of Zurich and think that this property would be really useful +1 Marco Sieber (talk) 12:18, 16 June 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment The examples as supplied are not valid - please follow the example pattern shown with both a subject item and (for item datatype) a value item for each example. ArthurPSmith (talk) 14:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment This is type of water supply, rather than type of water, I think. It seems very specific. All the best: Rich Farmbrough10:31, 20 June 2018 (UTC).

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. I don't get it. The proposal is badly formatted. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:12, 22 June 2018 (UTC)