Wikidata:Property proposal/restored in
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
restored in[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Not done
| Description | Year in which an object restoration, revision, rehabilitation or general overhaul was finished. |
|---|---|
| Data type | Point in time |
| Example | Q41175281 → 2008 |
| See also | inception (P571) |
- Motivation
Viele Objekte werden im Laufe der Zeit aufwendig saniert, von Malereien, Gebäuden bis hin zu größeren Objekten wie Brücken. Meinungen gefragt: Unklar ist, ob die Eigenschaft auch für Ersatzneubauten verwendet werden soll, d.h. wenn Vorgängerbauten komplett oder teilweise abgerissen werden und der Neubau nur die Funktion, aber nicht notwendigerweise andere Eigenschaften des Vorgängers übernimmt. Cmuelle8 (talk) 01:38, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Discussion
Support ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2 (talk) 07:49, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
Comment I don't think wikidata's time datatype can handle time periods as suggested here (2007/08 is not valid, is it?). It might be better to model this as significant event (P793) reconstruction (Q1370468) with qualifiers start time (P580) and end time (P582) to set the time period. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:44, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Thanks for the hint to significant event (P793). It will work if the exact time period of the restoration is of interest - and btw to add exakt periods for inception (P571) as well. The initial motivation however was a sibling to inception (P571) because there is a very close relation between restoration and initial completion. Terms restoration or restored might be looked up just as often. The example admittedly was not chosen well to support this. Like inception (P571) it should rather target the year a restoration is finished, not the whole span. I have revised the proposal to reflect this. Notice that it is possible to enter a resolution for time data types (so 2007/08 may not work, but 2000s or 2010s e.g.). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 01:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- I also doubt that significant event is true in any case restorations are done. Sometimes they are spectacular, yes, other times routine work, like an overhaul in the painting or corrosion protection. These are notable, but significance in such cases is in the eye of the beholder. Maybe it is better to reserve significant event (P793) for usages such as damage by fire, war or structural failure or festive inaugurations!? I'm unsure myself, but looking at current data a lot of people simply entered restoration dates in the description (propably because they did not find a term in the property list that fits; significant event (P793) may be a tad too far off). --Cmuelle8 (talk) 01:52, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
Oppose use significant event (P793) with appropriate qualifiers. --Pasleim (talk) 18:05, 11 October 2017 (UTC)- Oppose per Pasleim. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 22:03, 11 October 2017 (UTC)
- Oppose per Pasleim. ChristianKl (talk) 22:26, 12 October 2017 (UTC)
- @Pigsonthewing, Pasleim, ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2, Cmuelle8, ArthurPSmith: Not done, use significant event (P793) with appropriate qualifiers. ChristianKl (talk) 09:25, 30 October 2017 (UTC)
