Wikidata:Property proposal/Public presentation

Public presentation

You have not transcluded your proposal on Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work yet. Please do it.

Ready ^Create

Description	time of the first public presentation of a subject by the creator
Data type	Point in time
Domain	concept car (Q850270), type of manufactured good (Q22811462)
Example 1	Renault EZ-Ultimo (Q56878821) → 2018-10-02
Example 2	Samsung Galaxy S9 (Q50102300) → 2018-02-25
Example 3	Bombardier Global 6500 (Q54370182) & Bombardier Global 5500 (Q57078862) → 2018-05-27
Example 4	Bavaria R55 (Q57078990) → 2018-01-20
Source	press releases
See also	date of official opening (P1619), publication date (P577), date of first performance (P1191)

Motivation

date of official opening (P1619) and publication date (P577) are both for other types of works and also signify the actual beginning of public use, while this proposed property is intended to be used for the official announcement of the mere existence of the work. MB-one (talk) 10:02, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Comment I think significant event (P793) is the right property to use for cases like this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

significant event (P793) with qualifiers is currently used for this. But it only really makes sense to use it, if there's a separate wikidata item just for the presentation event, which isn't always the case. This property is intended to be more equivalent to first flight (P606), UTC date of spacecraft launch (P619) or date of official opening (P1619). --MB-one (talk) 17:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Support David (talk) 06:57, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This seems to be a useful addition, however I think it could be even broader, such as an announcement date or introduction date for a new event, building (especially good for buildings that are being built and don't have a start or public opening date yet), or law (Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (Q42955478) -> 2017-11-02 . So I will Support it as "date of first public presentation/announcement" (announcement can also be in the alias). Further it should have a single value constraint as there can only be 1 first presentation. Germartin1 (talk) 07:34, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Of course it could be open for more widely usa. --MB-one (talk) 13:04, 15 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, per ArthurPSmith. Use significant event (P793) with point in time (P585) qualifier, even if there's no dedicated item for the particular item's presentation event, as the property is intended for. --Yair rand (talk) 23:24, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @ArthurPSmith, Yair rand: The problem with significant event (P793) is that it can have as value the specific event or a generall occurence. Let's look at the new Pixel 3 (Q57179556), let's use significant event (P793), do we put as a value Google I/O (Q668984), Google I/O 2018 (doens't exist yet) or just presentation (Q604733) or announcement (Q567303) (announcement should have have series ordinal (P1545)=1 so it's clear that it's the first announcement and not just any), or even both. How do you query it??? Having a simple property "date of first public presentation/annoucement" will make it much easier Germartin1 (talk) 09:01, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - I'm sure this has come up before in other contexts. Maybe we should split significant event (P793) into two, one to point to specific event items, and one to point to generic types of event? In any case I don't think we need special properties for each generic event type. The ones mentioned above were created early on and probably wouldn't be approved now. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:23, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - (edit conflict) @Germartin1: Hm, this is a good point, but it's applicable to essentially all the varied uses of P793. The presence of using specific instances of more general classes in P793 breaks use of qualifiers like P1545, and makes querying more difficult in general. Perhaps we should just eliminate use of such instances, and link the more specific item by a qualifier? I don't think working around it for one specific type by creating a new property is a good idea, but this is something that needs to be fixed somehow. --Yair rand (talk) 20:27, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nepalicoi (talk) 17:10, 11 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the property will find enough usage to warrant a separate property. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:52, 26 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Might be useful for copyright status (P6216) as some rules are based on first public display of an artwork (paintings etc). --Hannolans (talk) 09:51, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ah, we have already date of first performance (P1191). Is that not the same concept as this proposal? --Hannolans (talk) 09:54, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It is similar, but this one is more limited to the announcement/introduction, which predates date of first performance (P1191) which refers mostly to first time i.e a theater piece was performed or broadcasted but not announced. Germartin1 (talk) 13:23, 1 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I was thinking about proposing a property called "announcement time" before I saw this. I will now offer it as a potential alternative name. WanderingWanda (talk) 06:05, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]