Wikidata:Property proposal/station service succession
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
preceding halt on service[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Transportation
| Description | (qualifier) halt prior to this one at which the service stops |
|---|---|
| Data type | Item |
| Domain | railway stop (Q55678) and subclasses |
| Example 1 | (Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) connecting service (P1192) Q12413177) → Howrah railway station (Q986105) |
| Example 2 | (Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) connecting service (P1192) Q12413178) → Panagarh railway station (Q59912754) |
| Example 3 | (Bandel Junction railway station (Q4854508) connecting service (P1192) Q12415389) → Howrah railway station (Q986105) |
| Example 4 | (Bandel Junction railway station (Q4854508) connecting service (P1192) Q12415391) → Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) |
| Planned use | add to items for rail stations as part of an overall augmentation of information about Indian train services |
| Number of IDs in source | ??? |
| Expected completeness | eventually complete (Q21873974) |
| See also | adjacent station (P197) (for physical trackage), follows (P155)/followed by (P156) (for other orderings) |
succeeding halt on service[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Transportation
| Description | (qualifier) halt immediately following this one at which the service stops |
|---|---|
| Data type | Item |
| Domain | railway stop (Q55678) and subclasses |
| Example 1 | (Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) connecting service (P1192) Q12413177) → Panagarh railway station (Q59912754) |
| Example 2 | (Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) connecting service (P1192) Q12413178) → Howrah railway station (Q986105) |
| Example 3 | (Bandel Junction railway station (Q4854508) connecting service (P1192) Q12415389) → Barddhaman Junction railway station (Q15196704) |
| Example 4 | (Bandel Junction railway station (Q4854508) connecting service (P1192) Q12415391) → Howrah railway station (Q986105) |
| Planned use | add to items for rail stations as part of an overall augmentation of information about Indian train services |
| Number of IDs in source | ??? |
| Expected completeness | eventually complete (Q21873974) |
| See also | adjacent station (P197) (for physical trackage), follows (P155)/followed by (P156) (for other orderings) |
Motivation[edit]
There has been a lot of discussion, to no end conclusion, on the WikiProject Railways talk page regarding what to do to represent stations through which services pass that only operate in one direction, or what to do to reliably distinguish connections between stations that are physical or that are service-based. This proposal is an attempt to address both of these (at least in part):
- This would be used on a station item to indicate a service pattern where stations are skipped (e.g. the 7 and <7> services of the New York City Subway will have different qualifiers at e.g. 61st Street – Woodside (Q2611963)) or where service is unidirectional (e.g. at Heathrow Terminal 4 tube station (Q1592614)) or where there are asymmetries in a service between the two directions it operates (e.g. Mumbai Pune Intercity Express (Q17075439)'s P527 values at Shivajinagar railway station (Q14475834)).
- Using these would keep P197/P81 for use entirely with physical connections between stations sharing a line (exclusively for which to my knowledge they were proposed to be used); the continued mixed use of these properties for both physical lines and functional services will inevitably cause organizational difficulties, particularly when it comes to the presence of incomplete data about either of these things on a large portion of items (as is present on stations along e.g. the Northeast Corridor (Q678233) and the Illinois Central Railroad (Q1093332), or with parts of the Chicago 'L' (Q820880) and the New York City Subway (Q7733)).
- Using these as qualifiers would make the succession of stations on a service in a given direction unambiguously clear, as the use of properties such as follows (P155)/followed by (P156) do not by themselves distinguish clearly that the order in which stations are being served is the 'series' of which the subject station is a part (as e.g. added to Durgapur railway station (Q15215453) and the stations served by the Agniveena Express (Q18109414), or as added to Rokugō Station (Q11392606) and other stations on the Iburi Line (Q1028403)).
Since this overall problem has been approached numerous times before without a resolution, I humbly request that this proposal not be closed/withdrawn without coming to a consensus on how to reliably distinguishably represent this information. I am happy to make significant changes to this proposal if it helps meet this goal. Mahir256 (talk) 05:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
- Mmmh. What's the use for this modeling? What happens with branches like Brétigny (Paris RER) (Q2209526) >> Marolles-en-Hurepoix (Paris RER) (Q1863955) and Brétigny (Paris RER) (Q2209526) >> Gare de La Norville - Saint-Germain-lès-Arpajon (Q1854741) ? What happens when there might be services stopping and services not stopping? Eg Gare de Juvisy (Q628695) having trains either Bibliothèque François Mitterrand Station (Q2856214) or gare d'Athis-Mons (Q2199402) or gare de Vigneux-sur-Seine (Q2703407) or Gare de Grigny-Centre (Q3096584) depending on what the train does and which line it is. I would rather prefer using a new item ligne du RER C with a property stating
- stop (rank 1st ): that station
- stop (rank 2nd) : that other station
- etc.
- Plus I didn't get why adjacent station (P197) is not useful for you Bouzinac (talk) 06:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
- @Bouzinac: I can't speak to the validity of your RER example as it appears that each of the lines in the RER has, for the most part, its own set of dedicated tracks, for which highlighting the distinction between 'lines' and 'services' may be less important (similarly to how such a distinction is less relevant for, say, many metro systems—New York City and Chicago being among a number of exceptions). As for your question on P197, please re-read my second bullet point above. Mahir256 (talk) 14:16, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Question - On the London Underground, there is no distinction between services and lines. Many lines split in two, but are considered the same service. Could the above still be successfully applied here? --IWI (talk) 00:21, 24 August 2020 (UTC)
- This can probably fixed by removing the "on service" part from the label. NMaia (talk) 12:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
- On the London Underground there actually isn't any classification of railway lines at all or at least I haven't found one. The lines of the London Underground are services (or a group of services if you consider every branch a single service). These services are called "... line" but they aren't railway lines. --PhiH (talk) 11:29, 19 June 2021 (UTC)
Notified participants of WikiProject Railways, in the hope to stir up further discussion on this (or clearer consensus that this is the wrong direction). JesseW (talk) 23:40, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about the underlying proposition, that station items should be linked by connecting services (as opposed to or in addition to connecting lines) in the first place. I do agree that adjacent station (P197) should be restricted to physical lines. Mackensen (talk) 11:55, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- @Mahir256: -- got a response/clarification on this? JesseW (talk) 15:09, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
- I definitely agree that adjacent station (P197) should be restricted to physical lines. That means that, if it is desirable to also link station items by service pattern (I don't have a strong opinion about that) that there needs to be some property to use instead. Instead of separate properties for next and preceding station, perhaps a single one "adjacent call on service" with a qualifier towards (P5051) could be used instead (i.e. model it in the same way as for adjacent station (P197)? Other irregularities could be modelled with qualifiers like day of week (P2894), valid in period (P1264), etc. Thryduulf (talk) 00:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
- Question If we use two different properties for preceding and succeeding stations, how do we define the direction of a service? --PhiH (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
- @PhiH: either towards (P5051) or a similar qualifier dedicated to this property. Thryduulf (talk) 12:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
- Question I wish I had more explicit arguments on why splitting P197 when good qualifiers can apply? See eg Map of Mumbai Metro (query) Bouzinac 💬●✒️●💛 09:48, 15 November 2021 (UTC)
Support, an important property for transport.--Arbnos (talk) 12:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)- Support,
Notified participants of WikiProject Railways —MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 18:46, 19 April 2022 (UTC) - Support. This seems like a good way to distinguish between physically adjacent stations and successive calling points on services that don't call at every station. Thryduulf (talk) 12:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Neutral Whilst I get the idea that it is needed to separate physical tracks/lines to commercial lines/services, I still believe P197 would have been good enough with qualifyers. Other question : how do you decide the order from A>>B>>C>>D for first new property and D>>C>>B>>A for second new property ?
- Another question, in the ABCD case. In the B item, say it has preceding:A and following:C statements. What happens if someone decides preceding is in fact :C and following is :A (for X reasons, eg infobox in his language says so?) ?
- Another question2 : in that use case, which is not so rare, what is the following and preceding station when platforms do not coincide
Separate platforms
- @Mahir256, Bouzinac, ImprovedWikiImprovment, NMaia, PhiH: @JesseW, Thryduulf, Mackensen, Arbnos, MasterRus21thCentury:
Done (finally). ArthurPSmith (talk) 15:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
