Wikidata - User contributions [en]

Property talk:P248

2021-01-27T12:00:42Z

2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654: add

{{Property documentation
|filter = 54
}}
{{Complex constraint
|label=Value shouldn't be an item for a date
|description=use {{P|813}} or {{P|577}} instead
|sparql=SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?p ?value ?valueLabel
{
?item ?p [ prov:wasDerivedFrom / pr:P248 ?value ] .
?value wdt:P31 wd:Q47150325 . SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" }
}
LIMIT 2000
}}
{{Autofix|pattern=Q964|replacement=Q964|move_to=P1343}}
{{Autofix|pattern=Q17037575|replacement=Q17037575|move_to=P1343}}
{{Autofix|pattern=Q50573136|replacement=Q50573136|move_to=P1343}}
{{ExternalUse|
* [[:ast:Plantía:Persones/referencia]]
}}
{{Reference properties}}

= {{Capitalize | {{Int discussion}} }} =
== URLs ==

How would one use URLs with this property? Does it make sense to create an item for a web page merely to use it for sourcing a statement? Or would a better solution be to have another property identical to this one except that its data type is string? Or if a URL data type is planned to be added, is it best to wait until it's available? [[User:Silver hr|Silver hr]] ([[User talk:Silver hr|talk]]) 23:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
:Yes, the way we will use source is still rather unclear. Most webpages would not be acceptable items under [[wd:Notability]], but in most cases, they would not be very good sources either. I think one possibility will be: add the website as the property value (when it is notable enough to be an item), and the exact URL as a qualifier. --[[User:Zolo|Zolo]] ([[User talk:Zolo|talk]]) 07:24, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
::I think there are legitimate cases for sourcing with webpages. I can show you an example. In [[Q6153452]], there is a statement that the owner is Wyndham Worldwide. I think a source of sufficient authority for this statement is [http://www.wyndhamworldwide.com/about-wyndham-worldwide/wyndham-hotel-group/tryp-by-wyndham Wyndham's website], but I'm not sure how much sense it makes for it to be an item. If I'm interpreting the [[m:Wikidata/Data model]] correctly, there should be an IRI datatype which could, when implemented, be used in a source property, right? [[User:Silver hr|Silver hr]] ([[User talk:Silver hr|talk]]) 15:25, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
:::Yes, it seems likely that we will need a differnt datatype for such cases, and an IRI datatype is foressen. Another possibility is that we wil not use this property at all, I really dont know. --[[User:Zolo|Zolo]] ([[User talk:Zolo|talk]]) 16:55, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

== merge this property with [[Property:P92]] ==

A discussion about merging this property with P92 (legally estahblished by) is running [[Property talk:P92|there]] [[User:Snipre|Snipre]] ([[User talk:Snipre|talk]]) 09:31, 30 March 2013 (UTC)

== Receiving Warning on P248 ==

Today, I have started getting this error message when setting a reference 'stated in':
"An error occurred while saving. Your changes could not be completed. Details
Warning: Use imported from (P143) instead."

First off, I think that it would be a mistake to deprecate this property (P248) in favor of P143. As far as I can tell, discussions for the last two years have clearly indicated that there is a semantical difference between those two. There are reasons for retaining both properties.

Secondly, if P248 should be deprecated, where is the discussion around this? At least there should have been a reference to such a discussion from this Talk page.

To top it all off, on [[Property talk:P143]] (and [[Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Sourcing_requirements_for_bots]]) there's previously been discussions regarding deprecating P143 (not P248).

So I really see no valid reason for the error message that I am getting today. At the very least, this should have been discussed thoroughly (and if it has been, it should have been referenced here).
[[User:Johansen.fred|Fred Johansen]] ([[User talk:Johansen.fred|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 13:02, 1 February 2015 (UTC)
:I have also seen the message on occasions, then spent a good hour trying to find a latest guide and failing. To me, I feel that P143 (imported) is for bots and P248 (stated) is for humans. P143 has been blindly copied, P248 has some thought behind it. [[User:Periglio|Periglio]] ([[User talk:Periglio|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 02:02, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

== "Stated in" vs "source of declaration" labels ==

The property clearly need the "source of declaration" label. The example used in the description is
Richard III of England:
place of death: Bosworth field
reference:
P248: Polydore Virgil
So because "stated in": "Polydore Virgil" makes no sense, the appropriate label is "source of information". That's valid for all languages that use "stated in" translations. I know that there were edits that tried to change that but they are of course not legit. --[[User:Ogoorcs|Ogoorcs]] ([[User talk:Ogoorcs|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

:This reference qualifier is supposed to be used with work items as values, not humans or organizations. Seems you’re looking for another reference claim, but please do not touch this one with 26M uses before consensus about changes has been reached. —[[User:MisterSynergy|MisterSynergy]] ([[User talk:MisterSynergy|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 19:55, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

*For your sample, the value should probably be "Anglica Historia" not the item for its author. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 19:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

:: The example above in this page report a human as 'source of information' and that seems correct to me.
:: Even the description explicitly says
to be used in the references field to refer to the information source in which a claim is made; for qualifiers use P805

:: There are no indications whatsoever that this property should only be used for works. A property for other items would be redundant and useless. Further, there are lot of statements whose reference urls have 'source of informations' who are notable entities that with a works only restriction wouldn't have any other statements. You can see two example in the property page: references taken from microsoft website and the statement by Polydore Virgil (the fact that the statement was in 'Anglica Historia' does not exclude the case of public available statements not actually present in a 'work', like the ones on Microsoft website).
:: Also you have to note that it's your usage that is not the 'default' one, not mine. --[[User:Ogoorcs|Ogoorcs]] ([[User talk:Ogoorcs|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:12, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::We don't allow original research. A statement by a person needs to materialize in some form to be added to Wikidata. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 20:18, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::: I never said that; also, in the context of software version statements, the signature of the software author and thus its official website is probably the MOST valid reference for the statement and that not constitute original research. Also statements automatically inferred from other wikidata statements are not original research, when the inference is itself referred.
:::: In the case of a reference containing a link to a state organization (that is indeed valid), the ref could not point to a precise 'work'. Despite this, that organization is a valid 'source of information'. --[[User:Ogoorcs|Ogoorcs]] ([[User talk:Ogoorcs|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::::: Something that is published by an organization is an „is a valid 'source of information'“. No the organization itself. --[[User:Succu|Succu]] ([[User talk:Succu|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:36, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::::*The property just indicates where the same statement can be found. [[Help:Sources]] attempts to explain how various forms are included and which properties to use. If there are cases that aren't covered, maybe this needs a new property. BTW, in the meantime, I made a few items about works for Polydore Vergil. Seems we didn't have any. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 20:43, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::: So should {{Property|P123}} or {{Property|P50}} and not 'source of information' be used to describe valid references that point to urls that are not works and that belong to humans or organizations?
:::::: EDIT: in the case of a state agency or university, if publisher is limited to 'book, periodicals, games and software', should author be used? --[[User:Ogoorcs|Ogoorcs]] ([[User talk:Ogoorcs|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 20:58, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
::::::: Use the {{Q|732577}} not related stuff. --[[User:Succu|Succu]] ([[User talk:Succu|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:09, 12 October 2018 (UTC)
:::::::: Sorry, can you rephrase? {{Ping|Jura1}} {{Ping|Succu}} {{Ping|MisterSynergy}}--[[User:Ogoorcs|Ogoorcs]] ([[User talk:Ogoorcs|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:27, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

== Value constraint ==

Can we change the <instance of> relation to <instance or subclass of>? Currently <stated in> {{Q| Q257303}} throws a constraint violation because Companies House is an instance of “company register” which is a subclass of “Information” (a valid value for <stated in>). - [[User:PKM|PKM]] ([[User talk:PKM|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 23:50, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
:Just for the record, I understand this has been changed a few days later; see [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P248&oldid=907123152 here]. --[[User:Diegodlh|Diegodlh]] ([[User talk:Diegodlh|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:29, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

== Links to SPARQL queries seem wrong ==

This property has an "as references" scope constraint. However, links to SPARQL queries in this talk page seem wrong, as they seem to be treating it as a "as main value"-constrained property.

See for example the "List of values" [https://query.wikidata.org/#%23Values%20used%20by%20property%20P248%0ASELECT%20%3Fvalue%20%3FvalueLabel%20%3Fct%20%3Fsampleitem%20%3FsampleitemLabel%0AWHERE%0A%7B%0A%20%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20SELECT%20%3Fvalue%20%28count%28%2a%29%20as%20%3Fct%29%20%28SAMPLE%28%3Fitem%29%20as%20%3Fsampleitem%29%0A%20%20%20%20WHERE%0A%20%20%20%20%7B%0A%20%20%20%20%20%20%3Fitem%20wdt%3AP248%20%3Fvalue%0A%20%20%20%20%7D%0A%20%20%20%20GROUP%20BY%20%3Fvalue%0A%20%20%20%20ORDER%20BY%20DESC%28%3Fct%29%0A%20%20%20%20LIMIT%201000%0A%20%20%7D%0A%20%20SERVICE%20wikibase%3Alabel%20%7B%20bd%3AserviceParam%20wikibase%3Alanguage%20%22%5BAUTO_LANGUAGE%5D%2Cen%22%20%7D%0A%7D%0AORDER%20BY%20DESC%28%3Fct%29%20ASC%28%3Fvalue%29 link] at the top of the Documentation section above. Line 9 of the SPARQL query is:

?item wdt:P248 ?value

Isn't that retrieving only items which are violating the constraint? That is, items which use the property as an "as main value"-scoped property?
I am a Wikidata beginner, so maybe I'm getting something wrong. Thanks! --[[User:Diegodlh|Diegodlh]] ([[User talk:Diegodlh|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 21:58, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

== Organization as value type? ==
It seems value type constraint has become pretty much useless ever since national library was added as valid value type about year ago ([[Special:Diff/973587822]]). Now several organization classes are listed, as opposed to original "work", "database" and alike as value types. I think library isn't an actual source where something is stated in, and rather the actual publication (may be available in some library) should be given as "stated in" value. Similarly, I'd expect other organizations to be linked using {{P|123}} or some other more appropriate property. [[Special:Contributions/2001:7D0:81F7:B580:9587:D3CB:74EF:6AF3|2001:7D0:81F7:B580:9587:D3CB:74EF:6AF3]] 18:26, 29 November 2020 (UTC)
*Agree. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 10:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

== Please explain the processing ==

{{ping|Jura1}} I'm a little surprised because of your massive editing of the property restrictions. It is primarily about this [https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property%3AP248&type=revision&diff=1345375760&oldid=1345373016 processing]. Can you please explain why you did it. In any case, there was no discussion here on the discussion page. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:25, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
*[[Help:Sources]] explains how this is property used in the reference/source section of statements. I don't really see how organizations could be used there and why they were added as allowed values. Maybe this was discussed somewhere. Organizations would generally be publishers or possibly authors of publications used as values. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 10:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
::A sports association, such as the {{Q|547007}}, often provides information about athletes in its database, which is used here on Wikidata and also in Wikipedia. This information is therefore verified by the sports association. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 10:42, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
:::How is this relevant in terms of [[Help:Sources]]? --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 10:43, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
:::I'd expect the value for P248 to be the item for the database you mention. {{Q|547007}} would probably be its publisher. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 10:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

{{ping|Jura1}} This can probably best be explained with an example. It's about giving Matthias Guggenberger's weight. This statement requires individual evidence and the weight of the athletes is often given in the IBSF database. For this reason, for example, the weight of {{Q|331430}} is verified by the IBSF. Due to your editing an error occurs there. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:08, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
{{Statement+
|P={{P-|2067}}
|V=75 Kilogramm
|r1.p1={{P-|248}}
|r1.p1.v1={{Q-|Q547007}}
|r1.p2={{P-|2991}}
|r1.p2.v1=[https://www.ibsf.org/en/athletes/athlete/129811 129811]
|r1.p3={{P-|407}}
|r1.p3.v1={{Q-|1860}}
|r1.p4={{P-|813}}
|r1.p4.v1=21. January 2021
}}

*I think it's correct that this displays as an error. {{Q|Q547007}} should be used with {{P|123}} or {{P|50}}. [[Help:Sources#Databases]] is the relevant section. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 11:13, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
::{{ping|Jura1}} In point 3, however, it says that the error now displayed is incorrect. The {{Q|547007}} data object belongs to the property {{P|2991}}. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:21, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
::*Point 3 currently reads "link it to the database item". [[Q547007#P31]] has different statements. A database item still needs to be created. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 11:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
::::{{ping|Jura1}} No. At least in German there is talk of „Objekt zur Datenbank“ (english for "object to database"). And as you can look up on the {{P|2991}} property, that is the object {{Q|547007}}. In addition, nowhere in the [[Help:Sources/de#Datenbanken|German version]] does it say that the "object to the database" must be a database. As in the case of the IBSF, the "object to the database" can in principle also be the operator. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 11:41, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::It's a known problem that P2991 values are suboptimal<s>problematic</s>. This is why we have {{P|P2378}} and {{P|P9073}}. [[Q547007]] is perfect as value for [[Property:P2991#P2378]]. However none of this changes the general idea of [[Help:Sources]]. Did you note point 2? "Ensure that at least the following statement is added to the database item: instance of (P31) → database (Q8513)". --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 11:59, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::It's fairly easy to fix this by bot. If you create an item for the database, you can add a request at [[Wikidata:Bot requests]]. --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 12:02, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
::::::In principle, that's not my job, it's yours. – I understand the intention behind the plan. But you should have thought better of how to implement the plan. Simply doing extensive editing and then hoping that the others will correct the mistakes is definitely not the right approach. You could have looked at them beforehand, where errors could occur and eradicated them in advance. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 12:15, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
:::::::I'm not saying it's your "job", it would just be nice if you would create an item for the database, so we could have them corrected eventually. While constraints have helped quite a lot getting statements right, one can't rely on them exclusively to ensure that additions are optimal. Constraint violation reports also help identify problems and correct them in bulk. Obviously, this can take some time, but generally eventually happens (BTW I don't think I added any of the incorrect statements). Are there any open points about [[Help:Sources#Databases]] that need clarification? --- [[User talk:Jura1|Jura]] 12:31, 21 January 2021 (UTC)

{{ping|Jura1}} I still believe that your approach was incorrect. Just because you and the IP (in the discussion about it) were not satisfied with the current variant, you can't simply remove it without discussion, especially when so many errors occur. You are now saying that they can now be easily removed using bots. That is certainly true. But before you could have found out by means of SPARQL queries which database properties do not have an associated database object. Then you would have had the opportunity to create a database object for each of these properties. And then you would have made a bot request recommended by you and many errors had been corrected in advance. I would call that acting with foresight and that is very important in such a far-reaching process as yours. A little tip from me for you. --[[User:Gymnicus|Gymnicus]] ([[User talk:Gymnicus|{{int:Talkpagelinktext}}]]) 18:22, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
: Well, comment about it was made nearly 2 months before value types were restored. While in the first place and not that long ago these organization classes were added without any discussion or explanation at all, which would pretty much justify restoring the ''status quo'' even without discussion. Also, the errors are there regardless of constraint. Constraint just allows users to know that things aren't quite right, as long as we don't make the constraint useless by allowing pretty much any value. [[Special:Contributions/2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654|2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654]] 11:50, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
: More generally, I've been wondering if it's really a good idea to display constraint warnings to all users. My impression is that average user just adds whatever class relation as long as it makes the warning go away, without caring if their "fix" actually makes sense. [[Special:Contributions/2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654|2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654]] 12:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)

Property talk:P248

2021-01-27T11:50:01Z

2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654: reply

Q4166951

2021-01-27T11:30:13Z

2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654: /* wbsetclaim-create:2||1 */ Property:P669: Q12364943

Q12364943

2021-01-27T11:29:11Z

2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654: /* wbeditentity-update-languages-short:0||en, nl, et */ LabelLister V3 (beta) - : label(edit[en(-7), nl(-7)]), desc(new[nl]), alias(et[-1])

Q4166951

2021-01-27T11:26:28Z

2001:7D0:81F7:B580:A99A:4B67:BEDC:A654: /* wbsetclaim-update:2||1 */ Property:P625: 58°22'58.99"N, 26°43'8.40"E