Property talk:P1249
Documentation
- Start a query
- Current uses
- With precision and calendarmodel
- Statistics by class
- By century
- Date precision
- Calendar models
- List of qualifiers
- Count
first time a subject was mentioned in writing
| Description | the year or exact date when the item was first mentioned in written records. Qualify with stated in (P248) to indicate which document mentions it. | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Represents | earliest written record (Q12047344) | |||||||||
| Data type | Point in time | |||||||||
| Template parameter | "year_of_first_mention" in en:Template:Infobox German location | |||||||||
| Domain | According to this template:
places, persons from ancient or medieval times, institutions etc.
According to statements in the property:
When possible, data should only be stored as statementshuman-geographic territorial entity (Q15642541), architectural structure (Q811979), fixed construction (Q811430), obsolete medical term (Q61915880), human settlement (Q486972), locution (Q3257782), human (Q5), folktale type (Q47451145), folklore character (Q25810847), language (Q34770), legendary figure (Q13002315), traditional story (Q7832362) or phrase (Q187931) | |||||||||
| Allowed values | According to this template:
date or at least year of origin of the reference document
According to statements in the property:
When possible, data should only be stored as statements≤ 𝓧 ≤ unknown | |||||||||
| Example | According to this template:
Munich (Q1726) => 1158, qualified with "stated in (P248)" => Augsburger Schied (Q760561)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements | |||||||||
| Source | external reference (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896)) | |||||||||
| Tracking: usage | Category:Pages using Wikidata property P1249 (Q32765226) | |||||||||
| See also | time of discovery or invention (P575), described by source (P1343), start time (P580), inception (P571), object named as (P1932), date of the first one (P7124) | |||||||||
| Lists |
| |||||||||
| Proposal discussion | Proposal discussion | |||||||||
| Current uses |
|
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1249#Range
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1249#Single value, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1249#Type Q15642541, Q811979, Q811430, Q61915880, Q486972, Q3257782, Q5, Q47451145, Q25810847, Q34770, Q13002315, Q7832362, Q187931, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1249#Entity types
Sample visualization[edit]
Proper link from "former populated place" to "human-geographic territorial entity" ?[edit]
Q4369434 is "former populated place" - but not connected to "human-geographic territorial entity" - what is the correct way to link them? Retired electrician (talk) 13:05, 10 March 2021 (UTC)
use on people[edit]
Currently the documentation says: "Domain According to this template: places, persons from ancient or medieval times, institutions etc." which makes sense as for many people there is a time they are "first mentioned". However currently using this property on people leads to an error "type constraint" which states that this property should not be used on people. In addition there is the more specific property work period (start) (P2031) which is only to be used on people. Therefore, should we either change the documentation here to state that it shall not be used on people and introduce work period (start) (P2031) as a sub-property of this property or change the constraints on this property? On the other hand work period (start) (P2031) is not really the same as time of earliest written record (P1249) as someone could be mentioned (eg baptism, marriage etc) *before* any sort of meaningful "work" was done and therefore "work period" would not really apply and so maybe we should keep these separate? Thoughts @Jura1: @Slomox: @Skim: ? --Hannes Röst (talk) 14:49, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
- If you think it's need, feel free to adjust values. Maybe we can add a complex constraint to avoid that it gets added to people born after 1901 (or 1700 ..). --- Jura 11:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
- @Hannes Röst: I think, that time of earliest written record (P1249) in human (Q5) is useful (59 results now). So I am proposing to improve constraints. work period (start) (P2031) is different thing. Skim (talk) 22:13, 18 January 2022 (UTC)
subject type constraint[edit]
Right now I stumbled into d:Q4322527 which certainly has been "first mentioned" in 1016 chronicles, but does not fit the current whitelist. It seems that "first mentioned.." is applicable to far more classes that can be reasonably whitelisted. Perhaps the contstraine should be removed altogether? Retired electrician (talk) 06:49, 22 May 2023 (UTC)
- I would agree, we just used it in d:Q122812575, because that is when this item was first mentioned in writing. --Wuselig (talk) 14:55, 23 November 2023 (UTC)