Wikidata:Property proposal/Wikimedia outline

Wikimedia outline

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects

Done: Wikimedia outline (P5125) (Talk and documentation)

Description	item about an outline of the topic at Wikimedia sites
Represents	Wikimedia outline article (Q26884324)
Data type	Item
Domain	any
Allowed values	instances of Wikimedia outline article (Q26884324)
Example	Albania (Q222) → outline of Albania (Q7112173) Australia (Q408) → outline of Australia (Q7112191)
Planned use	link instances of Wikimedia outline article (Q26884324)
See also	history of topic (P2184) geography of topic (P2633) has list (P2354) Wikidata:Property proposal/topic's main Wikimedia outline

Motivation

Seems to be missing (Add your motivation for this property here.)
--- Jura 08:38, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support David (talk) 10:55, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Micru (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Shouldn't it be called "outline of topic" to be consistent with the other properties? Micru (talk) 11:09, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I hesitated about that. In general, I'd think these outlines are Wikimedia-specific.
  --- Jura 11:12, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Previous proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/topic's main Wikimedia outline. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:57, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I didn't recall that one.
  --- Jura 06:02, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per my comment the last time this was proposed; where I pointed out that "This is achievable using the inverse relationship, instance of (P31) = Wikimedia outline article (Q26884324), qualified with main subject (P921), like this". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:27, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support by analogy with topic's main Wikimedia portal (P1151), topic's main category (P910), and topic's main template (P1424). The reverse property may also be acceptable by analogy with category's main topic (P301), template has topic (P1423), and Wikimedia portal's main topic (P1204). Mahir256 (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, some of those should be done away with, and replaced with the model I describe above. "Foo" is a property of "Wikipedia portal Foo"; the portal is not a property of "Foo". Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:07, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Andy. I prefer to avoid Wikimedia internal stuff on topic items, so I think it is cleaner if we use the reverse direction instead (by the way, why on earth do we need category's main topic (P301), template has topic (P1423) and Wikimedia portal's main topic (P1204) when main subject (P921) can be used?) − Pintoch (talk) 07:47, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- I think it's to help Wikipedia, not for some unknown application. @Pintoch: Which site would be able to use main subject (P921)? Can you clarify? Besides, I don't think P921 is actually used in the way suggested last year. This is probably a good indicator that it doesn't actually work.
  --- Jura 08:16, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - We currently have things like Category:Germany (Q1410828)category's main topic (P301)Germany (Q183), couldn't we replace them by Category:Germany (Q1410828)main subject (P921)Germany (Q183)? We already have Category:Germany (Q1410828)instance of (P31)Wikimedia category (Q4167836) so we already know that this item is about a Wikimedia category: why do we need separate properties for categories, templates and portals? − Pintoch (talk) 08:24, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - We might know, but Wikipedia's tools (LUA|#property) don't. Obviously. they could work with the one property instead of three (P301,P1423,P1204), but it might be more efficient to not do that.
      --- Jura 08:37, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
      - I don't think there is any performance benefit to this situation. The cost of retrieving a property on a given item is not linked to the number of uses of that property on other items. @Mahir256: do you have any insights about this (as you brought these inverses up)? − Pintoch (talk) 08:40, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Maybe you could try to write code that displays the category name for any Wikipedia article without using P301.
        --- Jura 08:44, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Sure, I would neither use category's main topic (P301) nor main subject (P921): I would just use topic's main category (P910). − Pintoch (talk) 08:58, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Can you show it? I'd like to test it on fr:Paris.
        --- Jura 09:09, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        {{#property:P910}} − Pintoch (talk) 09:27, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        I mixed-up the ids. Obviously, to demonstrate your initial point, one would need to not use topic's main category (P910), but only main subject (P921) (or category's main topic (P301) as it currently exists).
        --- Jura 09:34, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        Yes there are two separate issues: this property proposal, and category's main topic (P301), template has topic (P1423) and Wikimedia portal's main topic (P1204) being redundant with main subject (P921). Do you agree with me for the latter? − Pintoch (talk) 09:37, 14 April 2018 (UTCi
        They are subproperties. A difference between P301 and P921 might be that P301 has a single value constraint. I haven't really tried to do anything with the other two (templates/portal pages), I'm not sure if they are of much use to Wikidata.
        --- Jura 09:49, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
        
        I agree with Pintoch; but we need to split that discussion from this proposal (which should probably be put on hold until the wider discussion is resolved). Maybe we should start an RfC? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 10:12, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- @Pintoch: to return to the proposal. Can we agree that this consistent with the other properties and currently in line with mediawiki software?
  --- Jura 12:51, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Jura1: yes, this is consistent with the rest, but I am not very happy with the state of the rest ^^. It is correct that things like topic's main category (P910) are useful to retrieve efficiently links that could not be queried easily in Lua otherwise, but for the particular case of outlines I do not really see a compelling use case in templates: what sort of template would use it? Topics which have outlines are pretty rare AFAICT, and I do not see what sort of infobox or navbox would apply uniformly to them. But maybe you have a particular use case in mind? We should certainly create this property if there is a concrete need in Wikipedia, but I am still reluctant otherwise. − Pintoch (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - I like to make them available in a more systematic way. WP could include links, e.g. from categories. I think they might be a good starting point for users to navigate Wikidata hierarchically in an additional step.
      --- Jura 13:12, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Support Since there are a lot of outline articles (270+) in the English Wikipedia, I suppose such a property won't be out of place. IMO, the main subject property is too general for this work.--Russian Rocky (talk) 14:57, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]