Jump to content

Property talk:P598

Add topic
From Wikidata
Latest comment: 2 months ago by IntensionalLogician in topic P642 (P642) is deprecated as well

Documentation

commander of (DEPRECATED)
for persons who are notable as commanding officers, the units they commanded
Representscommand (Q2008856)
Data typeItem
Template parameter"commands" in en:Template:Infobox military person
Domain
According to this template: person
According to statements in the property:
person (Q215627) or character (Q95074)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed valuesmilitary unit (Q176799), vehicle (Q42889) (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
ExampleJean de Lattre de Tassigny (Q81114) → French Far East Expeditionary Corps (Q2997796)
First Army (France) (Q161715)
Stede Bonnet (Q444908) → Revenge (Q3428417)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P598 (Q23909102)
See alsoorganization directed by the office or position (P2389), position held (P39), military unit (P7779), member of (P463)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Total11,046
Main statement10,96699.3% of uses
Qualifier790.7% of uses
Reference1<0.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Value type “military unit (Q176799), vehicle (Q42889), armed organization (Q17149090), fictional mode of transport (Q6619802), military installation (Q18691599), military operation (Q645883), secret service (Q939616), military equipment (Q18643213), fictional military unit (Q18011131), fictional military facility (Q48900561), naval vessel (Q177597), battalion (Q6382533), command (Q2008856), group (Q1040374), wing (Q45364), squadron (naval fleet) (Q955920), squadron (Q679165)”: This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value military unit (Q176799), vehicle (Q42889), armed organization (Q17149090), fictional mode of transport (Q6619802), military installation (Q18691599), military operation (Q645883), secret service (Q939616), military equipment (Q18643213), fictional military unit (Q18011131), fictional military facility (Q48900561), naval vessel (Q177597), battalion (Q6382533), command (Q2008856), group (Q1040374), wing (Q45364), squadron (naval fleet) (Q955920), squadron (Q679165) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Value type Q176799, Q42889, Q17149090, Q6619802, Q18691599, Q645883, Q939616, Q18643213, Q18011131, Q48900561, Q177597, Q6382533, Q2008856, Q1040374, Q45364, Q955920, Q679165, SPARQL
Type “person (Q215627), character (Q95074)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “person (Q215627), character (Q95074)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Type Q215627, Q95074, SPARQL
Item “sex or gender (P21)”: Items with this property should also have “sex or gender (P21)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Item P21, search, SPARQL
Item “occupation (P106)”: Items with this property should also have “occupation (P106)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Item P106, search, SPARQL
Inverse property of “commanded by (P4791)”:
if [item A] has this property (commander of (DEPRECATED) (P598)) linked to [item B],
then [item B] should also have property “commanded by (P4791)” linked to [item A]. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#inverse, SPARQL
Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Scope, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Entity types
Item “position held (P39): commanding officer (Q11247470)”: Items with this property should also have “position held (P39): commanding officer (Q11247470)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P598#Item P39, search, SPARQL


Reverse meaning for the property

[edit]

@ديفيد عادل وهبة خليل 2:: If you want to use the property for both directions (unit → leader as well as the original leader → unit), you need to change the whole property definition, not just the description. Currently, the property requires the item where it is used to be a person (also, it requires the item defines the sex/gender and date and place of birth of the person), and the value of the property to be a military unit or a vehicle (erm). It simply does not allow the property to be used in the opposite direction. Also, the original request stated the meaning of the property quite clearly. I don’t think it is a good idea to combine two meanings in a single property and a new inverse property should be created instead; but in either way, as I said, it is not just a matter of changing the property description (or title). --Mormegil (talk) 16:55, 5 January 2018 (UTC)Reply

Note the reverse property already exists: commanded by (P4791) -- Mormegil (talk) 14:24, 21 August 2018 (UTC)Reply

consensus to delete

[edit]

Per the RfD, this property is marked as deprecated and it will be deleted as soon as all data has migrated to position held (P39). --Pasleim (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

In that case, I will deprecate the reciprocal requirement for commanded by (P4791). Arlo Barnes (talk) 18:01, 6 June 2021 (UTC)Reply
How long is this expected to take?StarTrekker (talk) 11:20, 17 May 2023 (UTC)Reply
@Pasleim, Arlo Barnes, StarTrekker: I have boldly added an item-requires-statement constraint to position held (P39) to encourage speeding up the migration process. Duckmather (talk) 05:01, 27 September 2023 (UTC)Reply
I disagree. This property is useful for military leaders, and universal (contrary to P39). Infovarius (talk) 18:52, 16 May 2025 (UTC)Reply
Note that the example in RfD - Q5777531 has 4(!) different positions instead of 1 common property - much harder to query. --Infovarius (talk) 18:57, 16 May 2025 (UTC)Reply

P642 (P642) is deprecated as well

[edit]

Now that P642 (P642) is also deprecated, I wonder how we want to migrate for the next time. — Midleading (talk) 05:36, 25 May 2024 (UTC)Reply

Is there any consensus on this yet? I have half a mind to suggest un-depreciating this property now that the main suggested replacement has been removed. Pinging other users with experience in this property to see if we can form a consensus: @Infovarius:, @Pasleim:, @Arlo Barnes:, @StarTrekker:, or at least get some ideas for what to do now. — IntensionalLogican (talk) 04:42, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Personally I very much disagree with this property being depricated. Imho next time this site wants to deal with things likes these it should be brought up in a way for more people to give their takes. — StarTrekker (talk) 04:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
organization directed by the office or position (P2389) (see RFC) and represents (P1268) are the qualifiers used by the example item. I'm ambivalent about whether they are good enough to replace this property; and generally I think architectural debates about Wikidata should proceed from a query or auto-infobox point-of-view, as they are the main downstreams. For example, has anyone involved in WikiProject Military history (Q8486702) weighed in? — Arlo Barnes (talk) 09:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
If talking about commander of (DEPRECATED) (P598) I do support an un-depreciating for this property! — Pmt (talk) 09:31, 4 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
Do we need to undelete P642, or re-create the new P642 solely for this? Midleading (talk) 07:39, 5 March 2026 (UTC)Reply
I feel like just undepreciating this property would be an easier solution.StarTrekker (talk) 14:04, 18 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
Agreed. -- IntensionalLogician (talk) 19:39, 18 July 2026 (UTC)Reply
I support un-depreciating P598. 1000mm (talk) 00:06, 15 March 2026 (UTC)Reply