Wikidata:Property proposal/featured in

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

featured in[edit]

Return to Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

   Under discussion
Descriptionidentifier for items which appear in creative works of fiction (movie, television show, season of television show, novel, musical composition, or video game)
Data typeItem
Allowed valuescreative work
Example 1My Heart Will Go On (Q155577)Titanic (Q44578)
Example 2Twist and Shout (Q60527247)Ferris Bueller's Day Off (Q498906)
Example 3Mona Lisa (Q12418)Mona Lisa (Q1164190)
Example 4Chateau Marmont (Q741123)Somewhere (Q1338368)
Example 5Tiffany & Co. (Q1066858)Breakfast at Tiffany's (Q193066)
See also


Create a relationship to indicate when items are featured in a creative work. Featured items could be either animate or inanimate. This would allow Wikidata to reflect the instances when items are depicted in popular culture. present in work (P1441) comes close to serving this purpose, but that property was created to identify when a fictional entity (Q14897293) or historical person is present within a creative work. Jbandrews (talk) 23:00, 1 November 2019 (UTC)


  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I added a few related properties and proposal. From the samples given, it's unclear if there is actually a need for this. At least if you consider some of the inverse relationship. Please bear in mind that we don't need every film featuring New York to be added to New York City (Q60).
Also, I changed "creative work" from "domain" to "allowed values" as I suppose the values should be creative works. --- Jura 16:33, 2 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Seems useful. Moebeus (talk) 17:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Capturing these kinds of relationships seems like something Wikidata is uniquely positioned to do. This may be getting ahead of this conversation, but would it also make sense to have a companion property called "features" - or something to that effect - for the work that features other works? I could see this being useful for queries. Wskent (talk) 17:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I believe the restriction of creative works is not needed and will not vote for another too narrow (just like P1441) property. This makes this name bad as we would need a third property for all the cases when there is a non-creative but notable item that is featured in a creative work that we would want to capture. A better name for this narrow case would be "creative work featured in". Ainali (talk) 17:53, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
    • Examples of other things that could be added is persons in songs or books, concepts that are featured (but not the main theme), notable individual animals or mass produced items etc. Ainali (talk) 17:59, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
      Would it be accurate to summarize your use-case as something like “mentionned in”? Jean-Fred (talk) 18:46, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Not really. A concept, notable individual animals or mass produced items could be featured in a film without being mentioned. Ainali (talk) 18:56, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Ah I see. I think I have seen some use of depicts (P180) in the wild to do that. Jean-Fred (talk) 13:01, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
Well, that might work for those two. But how about a concept? Ainali (talk) 10:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I strongly favor just broadening present in work (P1441) for this purpose. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:40, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support, although I would also be happy with broadening present in work (P1441). - PKM (talk) 20:07, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose wrong way round. --- Jura 20:16, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment I would prefer just broad present in work (P1441), but I think we should use a calificative to distingish between main characters and references. --Tinker Bell 20:45, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment Originally I was going to oppose and agree that we should broaden present in work (P1441). However, I'd raise the question if a character appearing in the works for which that character was created and appearing in other works as a featured character has a different relationship to said work. Although now that I think about it that could be captured with a qualifier. --SilentSpike (talk) 20:58, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Jura. ChristianKl❫ 22:15, 4 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think you can use the dedicated properties on the work item: for music featured there are for example soundtrack release (P406), theme music (P942), maybe even has melody (P1625) (I tend to use it on short films without a soundtrack album), for places narrative location (P840) and filming location (P915).
    As this was brought up by others: I oppose the use of present in work (P1441) for the examples mentioned by you. present in work (P1441) is used to indicate entities that appear as part of the story of a fictional work, not as part of the soundtrack, cast or film set; e.g. there is a difference if Marlene Dietrich (Q4612) "appears" in a film as a character or as an actress and I think it is useful to be able to distinguish between those cases. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:50, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I don't see how Jura's inexistent argument is supposed to work. We'd have two otherwise identical relations (the "otehr way around" of this, and present in work (P1441)) that work in opposite directions. A recipe for disaster if there ever was one. Circeus (talk) 19:05, 5 November 2019 (UTC)
  • @Circeus: A given book might have hundred characters present in work (P1441) is intended to allow each of those characters to be linked with the book without having 100 statements on one item. If you have a historical person like Abraham Lincoln there might be 100 creative works that somehow feature Lincoln. Adding those 100 statements to the item for Lincoln would be problematic as it makes that item take long to load.
It seems that @PKM: transformed present in work (P1441) in a way that has the potential to make items to big to be effectively interacted with in Wikidata and nobody stopped him but I don't think that is a reason to add further potential disruption. ChristianKl❫ 14:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
  • As far as the description goes, in what sense is this supposed to be an identifier? It's a property but it doesn't seem to me like an identifier. ChristianKl❫ 14:51, 6 November 2019 (UTC)