Property talk:P13044
Add topicDocumentation
subject item or statement is a characteristic, quality, property, or state of this object (use a more specific property where possible)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P13044#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P13044#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P13044#Type Q1207505, Q937228, Q3505845, Q930933, Q96253971, Q1156854, Q192276, Q16889133, Q29934218, Q100792256, Q524572, Q483247, Q246672, Q30060700, SPARQL
|
This property is being used by: Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Should not be used only as qualifer
[edit]It is unreasable that this property is qualifier-only while its inverse property has characteristic (P1552) is not. It fairly makes sense to say that velocity (Q11465)characteristic of (P13044)physical object (Q223557). 慈居 (talk) 08:43, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
- I put that constraint in the proposal because some editors don't seem to like the potential for redundant statements that inverse properties allow, but I personally don't have an issue with expanding the scope to main values. Swpb (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2025 (UTC)
This property as a replacement for applies to part (P518)?
[edit]In an area I work in (buildings/architecture) I encountered batch changes of applies to part (P518) to characteristic of (P13044), like in this batch edit by @Swpb.
In human language, the statements now read as: (building x) was created in (year), "characteristic of: design". It used to be: "applied to part: design".
This sounds very strange, abstract and complex, and is not very human-understandable. It modifies good-faith previous edits, often batches. It may cause problems where the old qualifiers have been included in re-use cases. Was there a problem with applies to part (P518)? What was the problem? Why this change?
Best, Spinster 💬 09:09, 12 February 2026 (UTC)
- The problem, discussed at Wikidata:Requests for comment/P518 scope, is that there is pushback against using P518 for values that are not strictly parts, but rather forms or aspects, of the subject. Design is an aspect, not a part, of a building. Until there is either a consensus to expand P518's scope in that way, or an "applies to aspect" property is created, I believe P13044 is the most accurate property available. Your input on the RFC would be useful. Swpb (talk) 15:52, 12 February 2026 (UTC)