Property talk:P453

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

character role
specific role played or filled by subject -- use only as qualifier of "cast member" (P161), "voice actor" (P725)
Descriptionqualifier for cast member (P161) or voice actor (P725) to specify role played by actor/actress in film
Representsrole (Q1707847), character that may or may not be fictional (Q21070598)
Data typeItem
Domainfilm (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Allowed valuescharacter or person - person (Q215627), fictional character (Q95074) in particular (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Usage notes"출연한 사람"(P161)이나 "출연한 성우"(P725)의 한정어로 사용하세요.
Veuillez l'utiliser comme qualificatif de "distribution" (P161) ou "comédien de doublage" (P725).
Выкарыстоўваць толькі як кваліфікатар для ўласьцівасьцяў „галоўныя ролі“ (P161) і „актор агучаньня“ (P725)
Example
According to statements in the property:
Adrien Brody (Q104514) → Władysław Szpilman (Q157176)
William Shatner (Q16297) → James T. Kirk (Q16311)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Robot and gadget jobsDeltaBot does the following jobs:
Tracking: sameno label (Q42533265)
See alsovoice actor (P725), cast member (P161), subject has role (P2868), name of the character role (P4633), object of statement has role (P3831), notable role (P10606)
Lists
  • Most recently created items
  • Items with novalue claims
  • Items with unknown value claims
  • Usage history (total)
  • Chart by item creation date
  • Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P453
  • Database reports/Constraint violations/P453
    • Proposal discussionProposal discussion
    Current uses
    Total116,919
    Main statement49<0.1% of uses
    Qualifier116,855>99.9% of uses
    Reference15<0.1% of uses
    Search for values
    [create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
    Scope is as qualifier (Q54828449): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
    Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
    List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P453#Scope, SPARQL
    Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
    List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P453#Value type Q21070598, Q95074, Q215627, Q18086706, Q1707847, Q24577840, SPARQL
    Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
    List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P453#none of, SPARQL
    Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase MediaInfo (Q59712033): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
    Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
    List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P453#Entity types
    Missing characters
    Items with character role (P453) qualifier which are missing the same characters (P674) (Help)
    Violations query: SELECT DISTINCT ?item WHERE { ?item p:P161/pq:P453 ?value . MINUS { ?item wdt:P674 ?value } }
    List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P453#Missing characters
    Missing character roles
    Items with characters (P674) and cast member (P161) but without the same character role (P453) qualifier (Help)
    Violations query: SELECT DISTINCT ?item WHERE { ?item wdt:P674 ?value; wdt:P161 [] . MINUS { ?item p:P161/pq:P453 ?value } }
    List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P453#Missing character roles

    Type of property

    [edit]

    I don't think that item is more appropriate type. It's better a multilanguage text. How I can use thisin de:Die zwölf Geschworenen or it:La parola ai giurati (film 1957)? --ValterVB (talk) 17:31, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    You could just create items called "Juror #1", "Juror #2", ..., "Juror #12". I think multilingual text has more problems. For instance, roles like Adolf Hitler appeared in hundreds of films and TV shows, if we use multilingual text we must translate it to 200+ languages hundreds of times, workload will be increased dramatically, and it will be difficult to check errors. Furthermore, we will not able to query lists such as "Adolf Hitler in film". --Stevenliuyi (talk) 08:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    This is a general problem. But what about creating a second property with the same name with "string" as data type? Has this ever been discussed already somewhere else? I think we shouldn't create hundred thousands of empty items for fictive characters. If there will be someday an article about a fictive person the property could be replaced in the corresponding items. --#Reaper (talk) 10:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I have created items to have an example here. --ValterVB (talk) 11:38, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    @Reaper: The problem is we can't have properties with same names. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 11:57, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I think creating the Juror1, ... Juror12 items is good. but, let say there is another movie with 12 juror, can use the juror 1 to refer again to another person in the movie? Would that make sense to use juror1 to juror12 again? --Napoleon.tan (talk) 06:24, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Scope

    [edit]

    I'm assuming this property can be used in other areas, for example see: Avro Lancaster role = Heavy bomber. Danrok (talk) 18:45, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I agree. The scope of this property should be extended to the role something or someone has within a certain context.--Kompakt (talk) 05:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I believe P453 should be reserved for qualities where instance of (P31) or subclass of (P279) can not be used. For example, Fairchild-Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II (Q192443) is a attack aircraft (Q208187), but its role is close air support (Q1050818). /Esquilo (talk) 08:09, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]
     Strong oppose. This property was created to indicate characters, and I doubt other uses make any sense with the names of this property in other languages. --Yair rand (talk) 10:44, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    How sure are you? I have checked and as far as I can tell, this word is used in much the same way in many languages. Danrok (talk) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you think that all of the necessary 7000 or so languages have the same term for both of these largely unrelated concepts? I think that is extremely unlikely. Even if, by incredible coincidence, all languages have the same term for "character played by" and "function/purpose used for", we should still have separate properties for them because they are conceptually different. --Yair rand (talk) 07:04, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    The concept of theatre originates in Greece, one place, not 7000 places. Danrok (talk) 14:50, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't see how that is relevant. --Yair rand (talk) 04:21, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    There are at least 21 "air force" items that need this property removed: Q378442, Q381576, Q570232, Q634542, Q639225, Q648653, Q698296, Q918504, Q921432, Q1092290, Q1351405, Q1416238, Q1814147, Q1935224, Q1966995, Q2331387, Q2443729, Q2628695, Q2735209, Q5201852, Q6542847, along with probably a bunch of other items. Just because English has some odd homonyms that allow the word for "character played" to be used as "function or position of something" does not mean that it's the case for all languages, and this is a multilingual project. Please create a separate property for the second sense if necessary. --Yair rand (talk) 10:59, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Propose amending English label

    [edit]

    Looking at the use, and the confusion in the title, I am proposing that the English label to be "character role" to drill to the specific mentioned. The word "role" has a broad meaning in English so to disambiguate the meaning for this property, I believe that rename is required.  — billinghurst sDrewth 02:31, 13 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    I made this change, and hope that it suits.  — billinghurst sDrewth 03:34, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

    Voice actors

    [edit]

    Per the discussion now archived at Property talk:P725, I've modified the description to mention that the property can also be used as a qualifier of voice actor (P725). --Yair rand (talk) 05:11, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]


    [edit]

    On the item used with P453, which property should link back to the film? "part of" or "described in"? --- Jura 05:14, 20 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    General objects?

    [edit]

    Is it okay to use general professions as the object for this statement, not just items for individual characters? Would be very useful for minor roles (e. g. character role (P453)police officer (Q384593)). —DSGalaktos (talk) 17:25, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    I think the idea is to use P794 (P794) in such cases. --- Jura 17:30, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point. —DSGalaktos (talk) 19:02, 26 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

    WD-Items for every role?

    [edit]

    We have ca. 200.000 items for films, is it planned to create an item for every single character in them? For example shall I create the item for Franz Pokorný (played by Rudolf Hrušínský (Q444097) in Murder Czech Style (Q24265376)? Queryzo (talk) 12:06, 4 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    Yeah, this is a dumb idea. I've noticed some of the recent items and just have to facepalm. --Izno (talk) 13:20, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

    cameo

    [edit]

    What value to use 1) when some "actor" plays himself or herself? cameo appearance (Q191796) or self (Q18086706) generates constraint violation. 2) when some interviewer interviews interviewee? --Infovarius (talk) 21:01, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

    For 1), why not just use the actor's Q#? As for 2, you seem to be describing two different character roles, or neither if in a documentary. Arlo Barnes (talk) 03:07, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    Historical persons are not allowed?

    [edit]

    Is there good reason why real humans are not allowed by value-type constraint? See That Hamilton Woman (Q1637967) as example of problem. --EugeneZelenko (talk) 03:41, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    @EugeneZelenko:, @Trade: ✓ Done —Eihel (talk) 19:26, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Someone who potrays a real life person in a creative work are still playing the role of a fictional character. Whether or not we are talking about a historical film or a superhero comic is irrelevant. --Trade (talk) 00:22, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Notified participants of WikiProject Narration Thoughts on this discussion? --Trade (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Sometimes another item is made for the person in fiction (example: Akhnaten (Q55018699) and Akhenaten (Q81794)) but usually the same item is used. Arlo Barnes (talk) 01:08, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    It's true, Trade, but… Exactly what Arlo Barnes writes, contributors (who are not always acclimated to this subtlety) seek out the person (who is therefore usually a known personality) and add them to the items. Two scenarios: either the prospect of creating a new item disappoints the contributors, or the personality item really seems to be the right one, out of ignorance. In these 2 cases, the violations will continue to add up without resolving this problem, so we might as well live with it. Just like people don't care to read the lines in movies like "The characters in this work are purely factual". Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 11:32, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    How bad is the problem?--Trade (talk) 12:09, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    As to this query (https://w.wiki/3emn - number of films in which a certain real human was portrayed by an actor) there are quite a lot cases, currently. I agree with Arlo Barnes and Eihel; I would still encourage the creation of "fictionalized version" items for real persons, but I think it may be okay to use the item for the real human, too. These are still useful data, even if not perfectly modelled. If somebody sets out to model all movie representations of Anne of Austria (Q151209) this should still be allowed and should not raise a notability issue. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:34, 19 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    historical / biographical roles revisited

    [edit]

    Well, to tell the truth I don't have much to add to what was said in the section above, but I thought I'd make a new section so that this one can be discussed through the frame of constraints. There's currently a hard-to-interpret constraint clarification in French and English talking about directorial vision and suggesting use of 'inspired by' somewhere. The better relation between items for a person and an item for a portrayal or portrayals of them, if separate, is fictional or mythical analog of (P1074). So I edited the constraint clarifications to mention this talk page section to renew discussion about it. Arlo Barnes (talk) 04:38, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

    Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property_talk:P453&oldid=2269595321"