User talk:WiK14ot0g

Welcome to Wikidata, WiK14ot0g!

Wikidata is a free knowledge base that you can edit! It can be read and edited by humans and machines alike and you can go to any item page now and add to this ever-growing database!

Need some help getting started? Here are some pages you can familiarize yourself with:

• Introduction – An introduction to the project.
• Wikidata tours – Interactive tutorials to show you how Wikidata works.
• Community portal – The portal for community members.
• User options – including the 'Babel' extension, to set your language preferences.
• Contents – The main help page for editing and using the site.
• Project chat – Discussions about the project.
• Tools – A collection of user-developed tools to allow for easier completion of some tasks.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask on Project chat. If you want to try out editing, you can use the sandbox to try. Once again, welcome, and I hope you quickly feel comfortable here, and become an active editor for Wikidata.

Best regards!

--Alexmar983 (talk) 09:59, 26 September 2024 (UTC)

Why creating "type of legal entity in X"

Hey WiK14ot0g, why creating an entity type of legal entity in X, when legal form (P1454) + applies to jurisdiction (P1001) gives the same information? It's just bloating the system and in worst case someone is creating "type of legal entity for non-profit-organizations in British Guiana". Or is there any added value I don't see? Best NGOgo (talk) 05:44, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

BTW: If type of legal entity in Bulgaria (Q130450035) is also used for nonprofits like Foundation (Bulgaria) (Q126870167) it can't be a subclass of type of business entity (Q1269299) since foundations are not business entities. NGOgo (talk) 05:47, 7 October 2024 (UTC)

thanks for asking, I saw that it already exists for some other countries before I added new "type of", I also addapt that to similar entities.Foundation (Bulgaria) (Q126870167) is a subclass of foundation (Q157031), but I think foundation (Q157031) can not be a legal form (Q10541491) and a legal concept (Q2135465) in the same moment. A legal form (Q10541491) should be someting with "applies to juristriction" = "country X". That´s why "type of legal entity in X" makes sense for me.

I think there are two other issues.

First, someone said type of business entity (Q1269299) said to be the same as legal form (Q10541491) but in the same moment it was attributed with being a subclass of legal form (Q10541491). That means someone thinks it is a subclass of legal form (Q10541491). For me it means, all these "type of legal entity in X" are a subclass of type of business entity (Q1269299) and this is subclass of legal form (Q10541491). For my understanding, legal form (Q10541491) could be replaced by every "type of legal entity in X" for every legal form in a country where it is the same "applies to jurisdiction"

Second, someone started adding other "type of legal entity in X" before me. I found some alternate writings of this "type of legal entity in X" like "type of business entity in X" or just "legal form in X", so I just tried to adapt like some others.

Are my changes difficult for your work/ queries? In kindly understand, that might over "bloating" something

The thing is, if you check WhatLinksHere for Q1269299 you find many legal forms which are marked as type of business entity (Q1269299) and not legal form (Q10541491), so I just gave these entities (in my understanding) the "right" "type of legal entity in X".

I do not know who started with this "type of business entity"-stuff and not leaving it to "legal form".

Sure, if these both would be merged, all "type of legal entity in X" stay a subclass of legal form.

I just looked at some of the first "type of legal entity in X", like France. I think because of the categories Category:Types of companies of France (Q8877969) they needed something for category's main topic (P301)

I think that is the reason, If people in wikipedia create these categories. They want to match them to wikidata entity in wikidata. WiK14ot0g (talk) 15:02, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

BTW you may see in Q9097472 that you added legal form (Q10541491) to category's main topic (P301) , but their need to be only one due to single-best-value constraint (Q52060874).

I secondly understand that through looking on the categories main topic in Category:Legal forms (Q13299250) where it shows a distinct-values constraint (Q21502410).

I also looked at the german category page of "legal form" and "type of business entity", and it looks quite different. I guess that is not the same.

Actually in the Austrian case in the category I would prefer "type of legal entity in Austria" instead of legal form / applies to jurisdiction.

There might be a solution, if "type of business enity in X" is a separate entity than "type of legal enity in X / legal form in X" ???

because "legal form" and "business form" might not always be juridically the same, but for normal people it is not clear, what juridical person is, because they just see a business/company, not their juridical person (who/what ever this is).

Actually the other issue "company vs business" is actually a other big issue (the have both "said to be the same" and "diffent from") How could that be. I never understand a "company" in english as a legal form, always the same as business. I though business is more like they are in the internet business, so it is a internet company, but often I see "companies" with the instance of = business instead of company. but that is another issue. WiK14ot0g (talk) 16:25, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I brought the main question to the project chat.

• For type of business entity (Q1269299), I think it's mainly there because of the Wikipedia-articles. But because of that, the translations are quite different. When meant as "legal form of business entity" as stated in the english translation it's fine to be a subclass of "legal form" as there are also legal forms for nonprofits or government agencies. But actually I don't think there is added value in using it.
• You are right. The generic items like foundation (Q157031) or private limited company (Q17376040) should not be a legal form (Q10541491), because they are not specific to a jurisdiction. They are still used a lot, since historically there were only legal forms for a few very active countries. But I added all legal forms with an ELF code (P10421), so most countries should have proper legal forms by now.
• Yes. Special:WhatLinksHere/Q1269299 is a good list of "messy" legal forms (some with multiple jurisdictions, which are only similar, but not the same).

Best NGOgo (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

I have an example Q137670 for Belgium, where they created two entities.

One for the legal form, and one for the business type. Both the same name, but the attributes are clear. WiK14ot0g (talk) 22:31, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

case 1) For Switzerland Anstalt des öffentlichen Rechts (Q89651843) you actually add the ELF but did not change to "legal form" ;)

I think the "type of business entity" does not match the term "Rechtsform", more like "Unternehmensform". But GmbH is legal form right?

So these "type of ... entity in X" are kind of important for some countries, because they have a category-page.

I think business entity (Unternehmensform) and legal entity (Rechtsform) should be separated.

I would say, if a country (like Switzerland) has a topic's main category (P910) inside of type of legal entity in Switzerland (Q19588327) and their is a wiki-page "Kategory:Rechtsform (Schweiz)", it should be kept. I mean we will not delete that, but we could fix that to be a Category for legal forms in Switzerland and not "business types"

case 2) Actually I found once a russian type, where it was written "legal form of business entity in Russia" at unitary enterprise (Q1389604)

I am not fully sure, but I saw that S.K. in 2015 for "type of business entity" and Moebeus in 2019 actually were really active in some cases of "legal form in X"

case 3) In Korea I found public institution in South Korea (Q12592379) which are just businesses and not legal forms according to the their list Q12592378.

Through "Special:WhatLinksHere" of public institution in South Korea (Q12592379) some Linked Entities have this entity as instance or legal form. But in my opinion it is not a legal form. WiK14ot0g (talk) 00:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Deleting MUL

Hi WiK14ot0g, I think using MUL with the official language name for legal forms is a good idea. If you have a better translation in another language, that will overwrite MUL anyway. Why do you delete it link in European Cooperative Society (Q130280929)? NGOgo (talk) 09:20, 16 October 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, you are right. I newly figured out what this mul is. But I do not understand how a english name could be german, if there is a english name for it?

What do you think? WiK14ot0g (talk) 20:40, 17 October 2024 (UTC)

In that case you can add an English one. But usually the original name is better than nothing and in non-English speaking countries better than an english translation. Best NGOgo (talk) 20:14, 18 October 2024 (UTC)