Property talk:P6634

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

LinkedIn personal profile ID
identifier for a person, on the LinkedIn website
Applicable "stated in" valueLinkedIn (Q213660)
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed values[\p{L}0-9\-&_'’\.]+
ExampleJoan Rivers (Q240933)joan-rivers-ba163a15
Deborah Lehr (Q50308926)deborahlehr
Hélène Gasnault (Q42310145)hélène-gasnault-a2543562
Formatter URLhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/$1/
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P6634 (Q73494303)
Related to country United States of America (Q30) (See 762 others)
See alsoLinkedIn company or organization ID (P4264)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Total107,533
Main statement90,16283.8% of uses
Qualifier82<0.1% of uses
Reference17,28916.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Single value: this property generally contains a single value. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Steve Shadle (Q109522980), Suman Preet (Q113645741), Jenefer DeKoning (Q116113059)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6634#Single value, SPARQL
Distinct values: this property likely contains a value that is different from all other items. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6634#Unique value, hourly updated report, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)
Format “[\p{L}0-9\-&_'’\.]+: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (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/P6634#Format, SPARQL
Conflicts with “website account on (P553): LinkedIn (Q213660): this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (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/P6634#Conflicts with P553, search, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): 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/P6634#Entity types
Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as reference (Q54828450), as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P6634#Scope, hourly updated report, SPARQL
Pattern ^https?://(\w+\.)?linkedin\.com/in/([^\s\/]+)/?$ will be automatically replaced to \2.
Testing: TODO list

required qualifier constraint: online access status[edit]

@Epìdosis: A lot of LinkedIn accounts qualify for registration required. (which is quite annoying, btw) - Coagulans (talk) 11:11, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Coagulans: As I said, I agree about the usefulness of the qualifier :) Now I have readded it with two possible values and an explanation in constraint clarification (P6607), could you check it? Thanks! --Epìdosis 11:22, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Clarified now. Added on LinkedIn company ID. - Coagulans (talk) 11:41, 23 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I don't really know exactly how LinkedIn works. Is there also a set of accounts which can only be viewed after becoming a friend/connection of someone or is that not a thing? Is the registration required (Q107459441) a dark pattern by LinkedIn, where they randomly put a number of accounts behind a registration wall? --Azertus (talk) 10:52, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
ETA, if it's the case it's a dark pattern aimed at increasing user registrations, can we be sure the online access status (P6954) will be a reasonably stable property? --Azertus (talk) 10:53, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Epìdosis, Coagulans: forgot to ping --Azertus (talk) 12:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Azertus: I'm honestly unsure about the stability of this; regarding accessibility in general, I can say that when I am not login I can only see the name of many profiles and I have to login in order to see other information. --Epìdosis 12:17, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Epìdosis, Azertus: The stability issue could he handled by coupling online access status (P6954) with point in time (P585), see Renamed accounts? or Adding a mandatory point in time (P585) qualifier constraint (Twitter). Indeed, it's reasonable to believe it's a dark pattern - Coagulans (talk) 16:47, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Epìdosis, Coagulans: point in time (P585) is never a bad idea, but I don't think it solves the problem. I've added the qualifiers to some statements and you and others have as well. See this query. Now I opened a private window and started visiting some links. Some of the registration required (Q107459441) profiles I could read fine and others that were free to read (Q24707952) redirected to the authwall instead. What's more, after trying a certain number of links (maybe 5-10), *all* profiles lead to the authwall. With the way the wind is blowing, I don't think it makes sense to try and capture this, since it's so variable. Can you confirm these results? --Azertus (talk) 12:54, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Azertus: In my experience, when I am logged-in I have no problems in seeing other profiles. Anyway, I surely agree about the variability of the info, so I would support removing the constraint. --Epìdosis 14:08, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there an error with this URL?[edit]

Why is there an error with this URL? kathrin-dräger-421586183 (see Kathrin Dräger (Q100452371)) --HarryNº2 (talk) 20:32, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HarryNº2: This seems to be a bug in PCRE. The current regex [\p{Ll}0-9\-&_'\.]+ includes \p{Ll} which matches lowercase Unicode characters. For some reason, ä and Ä are both considered uppercase (see [1]) and ẞ is incorrectly considered lowercase. —Dexxor (talk) 07:12, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Dexxor: How can you fix the error now? Maybe create an exception for this URL? --HarryNº2 (talk) 08:52, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Even the change to all Unicode letters (\p{L}) did not fix it. —Dexxor (talk) 18:39, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]