Talk:Q47521

P31 ist ein Fluß ist wohl eher falsch, da er ein kleineres Fließgewässer ist.--Francis McLloyd (talk) 21:28, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Big separation

@Nikola Smolenski: I suppose you have good reasons to separate als:Bach and bar:Boch from de:Bach? --Infovarius (talk) 23:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, als and bar don't mention the size of the stream, while de explicitly says it is small. But yes, someone who actually speaks the languages should check. Nikola (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Also are you sure about this chain of generalisation: brook (Q63565252) P:P279 stream (Q47521) P:P279 natural watercourse (Q55659167) P:P279 watercourse (Q355304)? How to compare them with creek (Q1437299)? --Infovarius (talk) 23:14, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

I started this separation since many Wikipedias explicitly say that brook (Q63565252) is "small", "smaller than a river", "smaller than 5m" and so on, which is not the dictionary or Wikipedia definition of a stream. I guess a torrent stream isn't necessarily small, although in practice it always is. Perhaps another more general item is needed that would include data streams and so on. Nikola (talk) 13:23, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Nikola, your actions are still arguable. What is your plan? Should category be separated too? What's the difference between stream (Q47521) and natural watercourse (Q55659167)? May be they should be merged? --Infovarius (talk) 18:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure. Again, many Wikipedias in the definition explicitly say that brook (Q63565252) is small (sometimes, explicitly, smaller than a river), while English Wikipedia explicitly says that a river is a stream (Q47521). According to the English Wikipedia's definition, a stream is not necessarily natural, so they shouldn't be merged. Nikola (talk) 12:24, 26 September 2020 (UTC)

What is it?

Is it small? Is it general? Is river subclass of it? Infovarius (talk) 12:40, 18 March 2023 (UTC)

it is all about abstraction, isn't it. There are no sharp boundaries between various types of watercourses. Also every big river starts with a small creek. Where do you measure the riverness? So making them explicit subcategories is vain. The only easy boundary is between still (in the sense of a lake where the water still is exchanged during time) and flowing water. Add a property for the width of a watercourse at the mouth of the watercourse and allow to query by that. This will allow to query whatever you personal concept of a river / creek / etc. is. best --Herzi Pinki (talk) 10:10, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Of course I understand this all but my questions are not simple curiosity. We have some items about flows and we need to build relations between them and to distribute sitelinks between them. --Infovarius (talk) 20:34, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

My comment was a proposal to remove unsharp differentiations. That's how I understood your comment. But I'm not eager to organize and enforce this. Big sigh. --Herzi Pinki (talk) 02:34, 3 October 2023 (UTC)