Wikidata:Property proposal/Rigging
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
rigging[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Transportation
Not done
| Description | type of rigging of a sailing boat or ship |
|---|---|
| Represents | rigging (Q1634158) |
| Data type | Item |
| Template parameter | "Ship type" in en:template:Infobox ship characteristics |
| Domain | sailing ship (Q170483), sailboat (Q1075310) |
| Allowed values | full-rigged ship (Q1581130), barque (Q216057), sloop-of-war (Q928235), brigantine (Q189418), cutter (Q683363), catboat rigging (Q1050011) … |
| Example 1 | Balclutha (Q804713) → full-rigged ship (Q1581130) |
| Example 2 | Rickmer Rickmers (Q479965) → barque (Q216057) |
| Example 3 | Alinghi 5 (Q681813) → sloop (Q210223) |
| Expected completeness | always incomplete (Q21873886) |
Motivation[edit]
To classify sailing ships or boats MB-one (talk) 12:08, 1 May 2019 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
Notified participants of WikiProject Ships
Support David (talk) 06:57, 2 May 2019 (UTC)- Support Makes perfect sense. Scs (talk) 22:06, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Oppose With current specification. full-rigged ship (Q1581130) is a ship class and can simply be used as subclass. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 13:57, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
- Is there a general principle to guide whether it's better to have finer-grained properties, or finer-grained classes and subclasses? A similar question has come up at Project chat#Items for multi-intersection. Scs (talk) 12:13, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Support Cwf97 (talk) 17:33, 19 June 2019 (EST)
- Oppose the values proposed for this property are all "types of ship", which should be used with instance of (P31) (and mostly are, for the given examples). If there were items for the "rigging" itself that was somehow independent of ship type maybe this would make sense, but "ship type" and "rigging", at least for sailing ships, seem to be closely tied so I don't think there is a case for this property at all right now. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:45, 20 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment @MB-one: could you fix the samples per comment by Arthur? Obviously, warship can't be the p31 for Alinghi 5 (Q681813). --- Jura 21:40, 30 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Jura: you are absolutely right. Fixed it. --MB-one (talk) 07:11, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MB-one: I think what he means is that you should have values that are items that describe only the rigging not a type of ship with that rigging. --- Jura 08:21, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- Support Usefull and much more specific than instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279). /ℇsquilo 16:09, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
- @MB-one, Scs, Esquilo, Cwf97: I think the items for types of rigging would still need to be made/updated above. Alternatively, how about calling this w:sail plan? --- Jura 18:57, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Trying to modulate a whole sail-plan in one wikidata property is not possible i think, but the gallery under the section "Types of sailing vessels" provides a good base for a "allowed values" list. /ℇsquilo 19:13, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Ships
WikiProject Ontology has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:49, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Comment See Help:Basic membership properties. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:56, 11 August 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose This is a classification property. Mark any possible values as instance of (P31) if needed, this makes extra easy to find this in queries. See User:TomT0m/Classification for an introduction on classification. As such, regular tools for class trees are easily usable in any case. author TomT0m / talk page 08:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)
Not done no consensus for this property --DannyS712 (talk) 18:29, 14 November 2019 (UTC)
