Wikidata:Property proposal/contact area count
contact area count
I got the idea for this when I was looking at CPU sockets here on wikidata. I was looking at an AMD CPU socket and thought could/should there be the pin count here on wikidata. Since this page exists, it does make sense for me since it's a unique property of a CPU socket that never changes and is already collected in information tables on Wikipedia.
My first idea was to name it "pin count". But since I wanted to use it not only for PGA, but also for LGA CPU socket I thought a bit and came up with "contact area count". If anyone has a better name, let me know!
When I thought about other uses outise of CPU sockets I realised that there are many items which have contact pins or areas and that this count is unique for them. So eg. DDR SDRAM bars, EV charging connectors, USB connectors, storage media (eg. FC or SD cards), cables (eg. Molex or SATA power cables). I found much use here witin the IT sector.
Since my work inside of the Wikimedia system focused much more on Commons I may need somebody to explain the structure of Wikidata in case I got something wrong. I hoped that I could get away with using an item, but it does not really look like it. If Q66061119 can not be used for that, don't forget to delete it. One thought I had (this is where the Wikidata structure information would be interesting) is that I also thought about that there could be pin count (PGA CPU sockets, EV charging connectors, CF cards) and area count (LGA CPU sockets, DDR SDRAM bars, SD cards). Not sure if this is really neccessary.
--D-Kuru (talk) 17:09, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- Question What about Wikidata:Property proposal/number of pins, number of pin positions? --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 02:43, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, I have no idea what your question is. Do you have more information for me/a wikilink? --D-Kuru (talk) 10:32, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- If you are referring to my question, I changed the "subject item" in the template of the Property proposal, labelled "Represents", i.e. item corresponding to the concept represented by the property, if applicable. I was asking if it fine. --FabC (talk) 11:18, 9 August 2019 (UTC)
- Comment An idea: As far as I saw there is has parts of the class (P2670) which can be combined with an item and you can insert a value in that item. I saw this for CPUs where L1, L2 and L3 cache is listed in said property. Is this an OK thing to do or is a property prefered here? If it would be fine to use items instead of properties this could be solved quite easy. --D-Kuru (talk) 13:08, 15 August 2019 (UTC)