Property talk:P3153

Distinct values: this property likely contains a value that is different from all other items. (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/P3153#Unique value, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)

Single value: this property generally contains a single value. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: UNSW Canberra (Q45133425)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3153#Single value, SPARQL

Format “[1-9]\d+”: value must be formatted using this pattern (PCRE syntax). (Help)

List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3153#Format, hourly updated report, SPARQL

Type “organization (Q43229), facility (Q13226383)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “organization (Q43229), facility (Q13226383)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (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/P3153#Type Q43229, Q13226383, SPARQL

Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): 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/P3153#Entity types

Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as reference (Q54828450): 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/P3153#Scope, SPARQL

Item “ROR ID (P6782)”: Items with this property should also have “ROR ID (P6782)”. (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/P3153#Item P6782, search, SPARQL

How good is the quality of Crossref. I noted that Novo Nordisk Fonden (Q22723716) (a very large Danish foundation) is not to be found, but "Novo Nordisk" and "Novo Nordisk UK Research Foundation" are there. This seems odd. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 21:48, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many GRID ID (P2427) merge multiple Fundref ids, so it seems to me that Fundref has a very high granularity (see grid.4991.5 for an example). − Pintoch (talk) 20:40, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am a bit disappointed to find out that three different properties can be used to link a Wikidata item to a Fundref record:

• Open Funder Registry funder ID (P3153), used 21 times
• DOI (P356) with prefix 10.13039, used 4530 times
• P1905 (P1905), used 4 times

Shouldn't we just pick one and stick to it? I am responsible for the vast majority of these DOI (P356) uses, so as you can guess I consider it a better choice:

• The whole point of the DOI system is to create a unified identifier across many publishers, so I do not really see why we would create a property for each publisher.
• The DOI system supports content negotiation and is inter-operable with bazillions of APIs
• The default formatter URL on Open Funder Registry funder ID (P3153) is unhelpful as it does not display any institution metadata except the name. So good luck if you want to distinguish between Fundref 100011130 (University of Maine (Q1307345)) and Fundref 501100005715 (Le Mans University (Q834825)). The URL generated by DOI (P356) is much more useful, because it contains some location information, alternate names, official websites, and so on. It is arguably less user-friendly if your browser does not know how to display JSON properly, though.

− Pintoch (talk) 20:16, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notified participants of WikiProject Universities

Hi Pintoch - you may have noticed I made a comment suggesting we just use DOI on the property proposal but was outvoted... ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:49, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Completely agree. Please note that there are 5.8k matches on Mix-n-Match https://tools.wmflabs.org/mix-n-match/#/catalog/388 that are against the DOI, though in catalog "FundRef", so the number of DOI uses can be increased even more. The DOI also serves useful data, eg see http://data.crossref.org/fundingdata/funder/10.13039/100010263, including links renamedAs/continuationOf. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 12:15, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Hmmm; the example given above, https://search.crossref.org/funding?q=100011130 has Crossref ID 100011130 and DOI 10.1037/h0093695. These are not the same ID. Am I missing something? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:20, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Pigsonthewing: When you resolve the Crossref ID https://search.crossref.org/funding?q=100011130, it displays the list of publications associated to this institution, with their own DOIs. In this case, there is just one, which has indeed DOI 10.1037/h0093695. That is different from the DOI for the institution, 10.13039/100011130. This is why the current resolver URL for Open Funder Registry funder ID (P3153) is confusing! − Pintoch (talk) 21:14, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, In that case, I suggest "merging" those two properties (effectively, deleting Open Funder Registry funder ID (P3153)), but keeping P1905 (P1905), which has text values - perhaps for use as a qualifier like this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 21:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That would be a nice way to display the name, but there is a constraint saying that DOI (P356) should not be used with any qualifier: {{Constraint:Qualifiers}} − Pintoch (talk) 12:04, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Contraints should serve us, not vice versa. Bad constraints can be fixed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:24, 29 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Manu1400, I have changed back the preferred formatter URL to its previous value. The problem with the formatter URL you have set is that it does not display any metadata about the institution, which makes it hard to distinguish between things like Fundref 100011130 (University of Maine (Q1307345)) and Fundref 501100005715 (Le Mans University (Q834825)). It can also cause confusion between the DOI for the papers it displays, and the identifier for the institution (see above). I know a JSON payload is not fantastic for end users, but unfortunately that is all we have for now. − Pintoch (talk) 10:20, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not manage to do content negotiation using formatter URI for RDF resource (P1921) values to get an RDF representation of the CrossRef funder catalog entries. Could someone check that they are indeed correct? They seems contradictory with the ones stated for DOI (P356) that prefers "http://dx.doi.org/$1" to "https://doi.org/$1". Tpt (talk) 11:09, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Crossref has announced their plan to deprecate the Open Funder Registry and to merge into Research Organization Registry (ROR)[1]. We have ROR ID (P6782) for ROR entries. Mzaki (talk) 09:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have added exception to constraint (P2303)item-requires-statement constraint (Q21503247) to just advise us to add ROR ID (P6782) when an item lacks it. Mzaki (talk) 09:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]