Property talk:P2429
Documentation
describes whether a property is intended to represent a complete set of real-world items having that property
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P2429#Item P2302, search, SPARQL
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The values[edit]
Hello,
Today, this is not a major change on a property in which you participate, but a simplification of use. Values welcomed for P2429 (expected completeness (Q66364359)) were not obvious to me at first. Then I notice after several property creations, through several discussions and following the property proposals, that they are not easy to approach: either it is a problem of interpretation (in this case, I think that many users go to the simplest, without condescension), or it is a problem of lack of information. When I say that it is not easy to approach, I mean that I find errors, but I may be wrong. Would not it be wise to supplement the current offer with additional explanations for the 5 values, expected completeness (Q66364359) and for the property using Wikidata usage instructions (P2559) for example. @Andrew Gray, Jheald, Filceolaire, ArthurPSmith, Jane023, Pigsonthewing: I call on the original protagonists who have a clearer vision and thus be able to harmonize future uses in the properties. By that, I mean that we must find an explanation to give on the catalog entries that will be grafted on WD through property. Examples: The books will never stop appearing, so ISBN-13 (P212) is incomplete. On the other hand, we know all the teeth on Earth so ISO 3950 code (P5209) or ISO 3166-1 numeric code (P299) are complete and the medieval music stops in time, Littera ID (P6130) or ISO 639-2 code (P219) will be eventually complete (Q21873974). Etc. When I look at pages related to different values (Special:WhatLinksHere), I think there are a lot of mistakes. For is complete, but new values may exist in the future (Q47169297), I find that Bibliothèque de la Pléiade ID (P5613) is a more telling example. It will help those who are interested in introducing good value. Greetings —Eihel (talk) 04:49, 25 September 2019 (UTC)
- For me, it is OK for the original 3 values: is complete (Q21874050), we already have a complete set of wikidata items corresponding to all real-world instances; eventually complete (Q21873974), we don't have a complete set at the moment, but we can make it complete by some efforts since there are a fixed or stable (slowly or occasionally growing) number of real-world instances; and always incomplete (Q21873886), we won't have a complete set even in future, because there are a rapidly growing number of real-world instances and it's not feasible to catch up them.
- In my understanding, we can divide the properties with is complete (Q21874050) into 2 classes: one is permanently complete since there is only a fixed number of real-world instances, and the other is transiently complete since there is a stable but occasionally growing number of real-world instances. I guess is complete, but new values may exist in the future (Q47169297) was created for the latter in 2018.
- For is complete for existing Wikidata items only (Q60447462), created in 2019, is not clear to me. I feel it could be a duplicate for is complete, but new values may exist in the future (Q47169297). @Thierry Caro: could you make some comments? Mzaki (talk) 06:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- First one says it is currently complete for all the items Wikidata already has but then that Wikidata doesn't have all the relevant items that could get the property eventually. In other words, it says things have been deployed everywhere we could but then without creating new items that are eligible. The second option is about the external website growing all the time. Different things. Thierry Caro (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you! So is complete for existing Wikidata items only (Q60447462) is a subset of eventually complete (Q21873974) + always incomplete (Q21873886), right? Mzaki (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
- First one says it is currently complete for all the items Wikidata already has but then that Wikidata doesn't have all the relevant items that could get the property eventually. In other words, it says things have been deployed everywhere we could but then without creating new items that are eligible. The second option is about the external website growing all the time. Different things. Thierry Caro (talk) 14:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
Should only be used on identifiers[edit]
Proposal[edit]
If you create a new property proposal the boiler plate content says
|expected completeness = for identifiers, the coverage we can hope for in Wikidata: Q21873886 (always incomplete) or Q21873974 (eventually complete)
This is however not captured in constraints or in documentation for this property. I suggest we add it to constraints and documentation.
Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
WikiProject Properties has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.
Notified participants of WikiProject Authority control
Discussion[edit]
Comment add support or oppose here. Iwan.Aucamp (talk) 21:38, 17 May 2020 (UTC)
Support --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 02:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)- Comment Currently, expected completeness (P2429) is used in a lot of properties that are not identifiers. --Horcrux (talk) 14:58, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
