Wikidata:Property proposal/lodging

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

accommodation

[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Place

   Not done
Descriptionhotels, campgrounds and other forms of lodging often used by visitors of a specific place, on site and around
Representslodging (Q5056668)
Data typeItem
DomainInstances of subclasses of geographic location (Q2221906)
Example
Planned useFrench Template:Infobox mountain (Q5825897), to specify available mountain hut (Q182676), for instance
See alsovisitor center (P2872)
Motivation

This would enhance our coverage of tourism (Q49389). Thierry Caro (talk) 14:27, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion
  •  Comment can't this be accomplished somehow via coordinate locations? Or is the intent to indicate businesses officially associated with a location, in which case why limit this to "lodging" (i.e. what about shops, restaurants, garages, rental car facilities at airports, etc)? ArthurPSmith (talk) 10:05, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see why this can't be done with location (P276) and its variants? I don't see what the benefit of a dedicated property is. --Yair rand (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Hello, I'm from Wikivoyage. We have a specific policy against stating attractions that are near sleep listings. This is related to our rules against touting, among other things. By all means proceed with this project, but in order to implement such a function on Wikivoyage, we would need to agree on a change of policy. Best of luck with this. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 16:48, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@ThunderingTyphoons!: If I understand correctly, I think you have it backwards. It seems to me that this proposal is about listing sleep listings that are in and around a particular destination, which is allowed and encouraged on Wikivoyage, not the other way around. Mx. Granger (talk) 16:54, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Mx. Granger: Yes, I think that I do have it the wrong way around, but as for the reverse, I don't really see why Wikidata would need to be involved with that. The 'sleep' (accommodation for those unfamiliar with WV) listings on a destination article are all going to be close (relatively speaking) to the 'see' and 'do' (attraction) listings, by virtue of how our destination articles work. Perhaps I just don't understand the proposal? That's entirely possible, too :-) ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:07, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's a good point. While this proposal is in line with Wikivoyage's goals, it's not obvious to me how it would help Wikivoyage. Maybe a bot would be able to look through the items that use the property to suggest new sleep listings for the Wikivoyage articles, which a human could then consider? I suspect it would be too difficult for a bot to add them to Wikivoyage unsupervised, because (for example) it would presumably be hard for a bot to know which price range the listing should go under. But maybe there's some other way it could be useful that I haven't thought of. Mx. Granger (talk) 17:23, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Is it likely that hotels will have Wikidata entries that can be associated with a point of interest? Sure, some places like Walt Disney World have famous hotels that are covered in Wikipedia, but would your average chain hotel or motor lodge ever be expected to have a Wikidata entry? Also, the Wikivoyages curate their accommodations listings for quality and suitability, so we generally wouldn't import this data directly from Wikidata. 98.10.47.214 15:41, 13 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment As a regular contributor to Wikivoyage, I appreciate the effort to help our project. However I can see some potential problems. We sometimes have difficulties with hotel owners etc trying to say that their hotel is convenient for everything in town. I think that it could be tempting for them to add their hotel to anything that is in the same city (say every location in London). I would suggest restricting this to accommodation which is inside the specific place, and only doing so when there are 10 or less possible places to stay. ( Lake District (Q211778) has hundreds of possible places to stay and I don't think it would be useful to list a small selection of them.) If anybody is looking for ideas, I think that it would be more useful to Wikivoyage to have public transport information for a location - this would more readily be integrated into our listings, and is much less likely to attract touts or be subject to opinions on which bus route is better. AlasdairW (talk) 23:17, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with all of that. --ThunderingTyphoons! (talk) 17:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Just a minor question. Who is going to keep track of whether an establishment has been renamed, closed etc. I would not want to go see a place of interest and look for lodging that no longer exists. Not an easy task keeping up with WV listings either. -- Matroc (talk) 06:06, 16 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Potentially, this is far more than just a few hotels. There's at least 3139 serving Disney World in Orlando. This idea seems to go beyond the scope of Wikidata, as things are. Danrok (talk) 19:29, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
We have properties for humans but don't create items on all humans. The same will happen here, I suppose. Thierry Caro (talk) 19:38, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
PR people do have an interest to get their hotel listed, so we might see more hotels than you expect. ChristianKl (✉) 18:48, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
marking as  Not done, discussion has stalled with no support vote after many months − Pintoch (talk) 11:10, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata:Property_proposal/lodging&oldid=634765825"