Talk:Q1037
Add topicAutodescription — Rwanda (Q1037)
Useful links:
View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
Report on constraint conformation of “Rwanda” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
This section is generated using {{TP organization}}
- List of organizations which have Rwanda as parent organization (P749) (query)
- List of organizations of which Rwanda is a subsidiary (P355) (query)
- Queries based on employer (P108)
- Queries based on member of (P463)
- See also: WikiProject Organizations
- See also EntitySchema for organizations: E98
See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
circular reference
[edit]Q1037 has a P17 property to Q1037 . This happens also for P1246.
I don't know why only these 2 countries (according to my bot) have a circular reference.
If it is a mistake, please correct it (I don't know how...)
I guess this should be forbidden by a rule . Goulu (talk) 05:30, 14 August 2024 (UTC)
Harmonizing Rwanda’s location description (Q1037)
[edit]There are inconsistencies in the way Rwanda (Q1037) is described and categorized:
- In some language descriptions, Rwanda is simply "sovereign state in Africa."
- In others, it is described as "sovereign state in Central Africa."
- The "located in/on physical feature" (P706) statements also sometimes classify Rwanda under *Central Africa* rather than *East Africa*.
This is problematic because major international sources consistently place Rwanda in **East Africa**, not Central Africa:
- African Union (AU): Rwanda is a member of the East African Community (EAC).
- United Nations geoscheme: Rwanda is in the Eastern Africa subregion.
- World Bank: Lists Rwanda under East Africa.
Proposal
[edit]- Harmonize all descriptions so that they read: "country in East Africa."
- Update P706 (located in/on physical feature) to reflect East Africa as the primary region.
- Optionally retain regional groupings like "Great Lakes region" as secondary classifications.
- Ensure consistency across language versions to avoid confusion in re-use (e.g., Wikipedia infoboxes, Google Knowledge Panels).
This change would make the item more accurate, reduce ambiguity, and align with authoritative sources. Irifasum (talk) 17:13, 2 October 2025 (UTC)