Talk:Q839954
Autodescription — archaeological site (Q839954)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “archaeological site” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- archaeological site (Q839954)
- location of discovery (Q1291195)
- human-geographic territorial entity (Q15642541)
- archaeological record (Q2686349)
- →(◊) geographic location (Q2221906)
- archaeological site (Q839954)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
archaeological site⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Image (P18)[edit]
Please note: This item represents the class of archaeological site, but in the Image property I found that it had 4 images depicting actual, particular archaeological sites -- so therefore I removed them. Those particular images may be used for the corresponding instances (items that represents those exact sites depicted), but they do not depict the concept of an archaeological site, so it would be faulty to allow them at this (abstract) item. Fred Johansen (talk) 16:05, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Scope[edit]
The zhwiki/jawiki/kowiki page have a wider scope and should be moved to Q101068465, corresponding label should also be changed. Foe example, the Chinese page includes Yuan Ming Yuan (Old Summer Palace) as an example (and jawiki includes Q11239346), which has nothing to do with archaeology. The Chinese redirect page "考古遺址" should be included here. --173.68.165.114 06:42, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
- (Removed edit-protected tag as this is only semi-protected and doesn't need attention from sysops.) I can see the argument why you would want to that, but I'm still not sure if the difference is large enough to warrant separate items. I won't strongly object, I'm simply not sure. whym (talk) 13:52, 20 February 2021 (UTC)