Wikidata talk:Property creators

Split

I have very boldly split this page (which is about property creators, i.e. users with a particular user right) to a more general page about property creation: Wikidata:Property creation. I hope this makes the scope of each page clearer. If this is acceptable, then I may move the threads on this page which relate to property creation process over to Wikidata talk:Property creation. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

It has long been slightly confusing that this page represented both things; I have no objection to the split. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:28, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Support SilentSpike (talk) 19:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

 Support Definitely needed Lectrician1 (talk) 15:15, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

 Support --Epìdosis 17:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

Thanks all. I have moved threads about property creation (which was most of them) to Wikidata talk:Property creation — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 22:13, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

• I undid the move of the discussion. It's better to preserve the talk at its history. --- Jura 13:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

  Okay no problem. I have archived it. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 13:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

• Hello MSGJ , Wasn't it better to preserve all the translations already made? —Eihel (talk) 13:30, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  This first remark above also applies to @Ameisenigel:. Question asked 30 minutes before making the changes. So my answer: do as you want. —Eihel (talk) 13:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  Yes definitely. If you know how to do that then please go ahead. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

  Thanks for the notification! I have just added all translations that are 100% identical. --Ameisenigel (talk) 20:26, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

External identifier item creation

WikiProject Properties has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

I am proposing that property creators should now be required to create corresponding external identifier items when creating external identifier properties if they not already have been created. This is so that we can move away from using Wikidata item of this property (P1629) which has been conflated in usage.

For more information as to what external identifiers are and what they're used for, see Wikidata:External identifiers#External identifier items.

To see the discussion that occurred to approve the creation of external identifier items, please see Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2022/12#Creation of items for all external identifier identifers Lectrician1 (talk) 21:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

There's no reason to require this of property creators. If there's a requirement that requirement should be for the property proposal to be valid. Making the job of the property creator take longer isn't good to help with property creation. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 21:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

@ChristianKl The reason we should require them is because property creators are still using Wikidata item of this property (P1629) after they create external identifier properties when they should be creating a external identifier item and describing the parts of the proposal on there. Lectrician1 (talk) 22:11, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

Eventually we could a mandatory constraint for Wikidata item of this property (P1629) that constraints Wikidata item of this property (P1629) as being incompatible with use of instance of (P31)/subclass of (P279) Wikidata property for an identifier (Q19847637). However, the more urgent change needed (I think) is to the templates used for new property proposals, to ensure that we're not asking property proposers to provide a value for Wikidata item of this property (P1629), rather, for external identifiers, we're asking them for the Q item that would be used with Wikidata item of this property (P1629). Dhx1 (talk) 23:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

I think encouragement would be better than enforcing, the property creation process is already tedious enough. We should first catch up with items for all the old identifiers, maybe with QuickStatements. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 23:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC)

If we are using class of non-item property value (P10726) then what is the correct use of Wikidata item of this property (P1629) for external identifiers? I am not clear about where is the "conflation in usage" exactly? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:15, 22 March 2023 (UTC)

The correct use is no use at all. class of non-item property value (P10726) replaces Wikidata item of this property (P1629).

The conflation comes from people using Wikidata item of this property (P1629) to link anything related to the property such as who issued the identifier, the class of the property value, the website it is stored on, etc. For example, see https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property:P2002&oldid=1621598800#P1629

All of those relationships should be described using dedicated properties on the property or the item representing the identifier. Lectrician1 (talk) 16:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC)

Require at least 3 support votes for property creation

Moved to Wikidata talk:Property creation