Property talk:P11527

Documentation

• Start a query
• Properties using this qualifier (statistics)
• Count

applies to use with property
qualifier that specifies that the statement refers to usage with the property

Data type	Property
Domain	Wikidata property (Q18616576)
Example	human (Q5) → instance of (P31) politician (Q82955) → occupation (P106) unfast adjective (Q115557831) → paradigm class (P5911)
See also	model item (P5869), model lexeme (P11464)
Lists	Most recently created items Items with novalue claims Items with unknown value claims Usage history (total) Usage history (main statement) Chart by item creation date Database reports/Constraint violations/P11527
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 571 Qualifier 569 99.6% of uses Reference 2 0.4% of uses
Search for values

[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]

Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase lexeme (Q51885771): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P11527#Entity types

Scope is as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)

List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P11527#Scope, hourly updated report, SPARQL

Type “Wikidata property (Q18616576)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31), subclass of (P279)” with classes “Wikidata property (Q18616576)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P11527#Type Q18616576, SPARQL

Entity types

@Kirilloparma, @ChristianKl, @GZWDer: I believe allowing applies to use with property (P11527) on a Wikibase lexeme is a mistake, or at least premature. It's primarily intended as a qualifier for model item (P5869) and model lexeme (P11464), though additional main statement properties may become relevant in the future. However, both those properties themselves sit on items only, not on lexemes (thugh the value of model lexeme (P11464) is a lexeme), and all the entities given in the examples are items, so to me Wikibase lexeme seems like inappropriate territory for this qualifier. Or am I overlooking some aspect here? --SM5POR (talk) 07:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

While the example claims are about model item and model lexeme, the wording is purposefully open enough that the qualifier could also used in other contexts. When creating new Wikidata properties it's useful if they are not only solving the problems of the person who wanted to create the property.

At the moment I can't imagine how someone would use this qualifier in a problematic way on Wikibase lexeme (Q51885771) and thus I think it's good to keep that in. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

As long as the constraint is deliberately chosen in anticipation of future use, I'm fine with that. --SM5POR (talk) 07:30, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Main value?

I could imagine applies to use with property (P11527) being used also as a standalone statement on the subject item itself, such as politician (Q82955)applies to use with property (P11527)occupation (P106), to serve as a hint as to what properties are likely to point at the subject item in a meaningful way. Multiple values should be possible, such as occupation (P106), main subject (P921) and depicts (P180) for lawyer (Q40348), or conflict (P607), commemorates (P547) and time period (P2348) for World War II (Q362)

This makes it somewhat similar to properties for this type (P1963), though the latter property should be limited to listing properties that are expected to be found on items that are instance of (P31) the subject, while applies to use with property would be more geared towards listing plausible or reasonably common properties.

I'm not suggesting changing the property scope constraint until others have weighed in on the issue though. Thoughts on this? --SM5POR (talk) 07:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I have to correct myself; properties for this type (P1963) is not as similar as I suggest above, but applies to use with property (P11527) rather relates to the properties it lists like properties for this type (P1963) relates to instance of (P31) or occupation (P106) specifically, and with an entirely different purpose. --SM5POR (talk) 07:54, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

"though the latter property should be limited to listing properties that are expected" if there are other limits that are not already obvious, reusing this property for that purpose is problematic because it's not clear where the users would learn about those limits. Intuitively, it feels to me like a bad idea to reuse this property for that purpose. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@ChristianKl: The limitation you quoted is what already applies to properties for this type (P1963) and not something I intended for applies to use with property (P11527); I mentioned it for contrast only.

Now, I get your point about not risking confusion or diverging interpretations of the same property due to different scopes, so I retract that idea. What I'm actually looking for is a way to provide additional guidance to the user about how to use model item (P5869) in particular contexts beyond what a few Wikidata usage statements on the property itself can tell.

However, Wikidata property example (P1855) should not be used on regular Wikibase items, only on properties (according to its constraints), and I'm not inclined to propose yet another property for this experimental purpose, which includes determining the adherence of an item to a set of model items in an automated or semi-automated fashion (and automation is the main reason I'm not satisfied with natural-language guidance given in the Wikidata usage instructions (P2559) property). Maybe I can infer the information I want from the value-type constraint (Q21510865) of any properties identified. --SM5POR (talk) 07:35, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Translations

For the Swedish label I picked the original short expression "applies to property" and translated that (though Google translates it back to "refers to property" which should mean the same thing); I expect Swedish editors to read the English documentation to fully understand the context.

The aliases I added translate as follows:

• "with respect to property"
• "concerning property"
• "property in focus"

For the description I wasn't satisfied with the somewhat "dry" definition in English (which I think sounds awkward in Swedish), and instead I expressed it in a way more leaning towards the expected use of the qualifier with the model properties, something like "property that forms the basis of a selection, or the value of which is shared by multiple items or lexemes".

Is this deviation from the English-language description okay, or does it have to be a more literal translation? --SM5POR (talk) 07:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think translations in other languages should add details like adding something about being used with model properties. Having translations out of sync is a recipe for people misunderstanding how a property is used. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough; I neutralized the description by removing the reference to shared values and selections. I hope it better corresponds to the English description now (it hardly says anything more than what is already in the English label).

What I find awkward about many Swedish translations in Wikidata is the vocabulary used; it sounds almost machine-translated, giving me the wrong connotations. I try to avoid using that vocabulary myself without confusing the reader. --SM5POR (talk) 07:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)