Wikidata:Property proposal/archaeological site of

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

archaeological site of

[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

Descriptionat this archeological site the object has uncovered
Representsarchaeological site (Q839954)
Data typeItem
Example 1Teotihuacan (Q103133838)Teotihuacan (Q172613)
Example 2archaeological site of Kish (Q102885646)Kish (Q132272)

Motivation

[edit]

Archaeological site exist at different timeperiods then the uncovered objects and thus it's benefitial for them to have separate objects. ChristianKl15:58, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

[edit]
In this case the archeological site doesn't have a clear start date but there are archeological sites where there's a clear year where the archeologists established the site. ChristianKl16:34, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I strongly support separating archeologic sites // ancient city : they differ on discover date, who owns it, who rule(d) it, opening time to visit is obviously appliable to archeological site, not the old city, etc. Different concepts.
But it's true, can be doable with for instance that kind of statement without specific property : https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q102885646#P31 Bouzinac💬✒️💛 19:09, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
of (P642) can be used but it translates poorly into some languages as the scope of the English word is quite specific to the particularities of the English language, it's generally desireable to have specific properties then to use of (P642) to express important meaning. of (P642) makes queries more complicated as well. ChristianKl19:59, 1 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@ChristianKl, IagoQnsi, Bouzinac, Kiril Simeonovski: ✓ Done archaeological site of (P9047) Pamputt (talk) 23:25, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]