Talk:Q107649491
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — type of Wikidata property (Q107649491)
description: Wikidata metaclass for properties
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “type of Wikidata property” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
type of Wikidata property⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
@Miraclepine: What is wrong with subclass of (P279)Wikidata property (Q18616576)? Why do we need type of Wikidata property (Q107649491)? --Haansn08 (talk) 00:59, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Haansn08: I created the item as a more convenient way to track all types of Wikidata properties than a Listeria table or Wikidata query or searching haswbstatement:P279=Q18616576 (which doesn't include subclass of those items unless they have subclass of (P279)Wikidata property (Q18616576)). It's useful for patrolling related changes, especially those edits where new instances of this type are created. ミラP@Miraclepine 01:23, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Miraclepine: I don't think we should be introducing redundancies in the data scheme because the current software does not handle your use-case very well. --Haansn08 (talk) 06:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Haansn08: I think the software does and that it's more useful than other methods (you just have to go to the selection on the top and change to "Show changes on pages linking to") if the item is most likely to be used solely for one property (in this case instance of (P31)): while (as of this edit) 407 items are instance of (P31)type of Wikidata property (Q107649491), the only item that appears when trying to search for items with Q107649491 without it being an instance of Q107649491 is the item itself. At least it's better than nothing. ミラP@Miraclepine 19:34, 28 July 2021 (UTC)
- @Miraclepine: I don't think we should be introducing redundancies in the data scheme because the current software does not handle your use-case very well. --Haansn08 (talk) 06:22, 28 July 2021 (UTC)