Tinker Bell added Wikidata property for an identifier that suggests notability (Q62589316) to this property. Accordingly Bovlb undeleted several items per this request. As this seems to be user-generated content by another project, I don’t really see why this property should confer notability within Wikidata. --Emu (talk) 09:01, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

It's a special case. The presence of this property on an item page signals structural need in the OpenStreetMap project. We thus usually keep these items, although quite some of them would otherwise be deleted here. —MisterSynergy (talk) 10:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

Okay, but how do OSM structural needs factor into Wikidata notability? Isn’t that essentially a loophole to create notability? --Emu (talk) 10:39, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

There are already so many loopholes… OSM has pretty much the same ethos as Wikidata/Wikimedia does, so I think it is fine. There are people that look after these items, and they are usually independent of the described entities. The property was created after OSM users repeatedly found their used items deleted (usage was difficult to track before this property existed). You can read in the proposal that there was quite some support for this property. —MisterSynergy (talk) 11:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

I see your point that OSM is a friendly, mostly high-quality project.

However, the property proposal explicitly states: “I don't think the presence of this property on an item would establish notability by itself, given that OSM isn't considered an authority on store locations. But it could give administrators a little more clarity when assessing whether a business-related item is merely undeveloped or whether it's spam.” And there were four deleting admins, so it’s not even that clear that this is an established practice. --Emu (talk) 17:35, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply

@Emu: I probably could've phrased that better. I do think inclusion in name-suggestion-index establishes notability – the index's purpose is to standardize tagging of individual branch locations for chains of a certain size or larger. What I meant is that NSI isn't an authority on the subject. NSI uses (user-contributed) OSM data to discover missing chains to add, but there is editorial control in the sense that contributors debate whether a chain is of sufficient notability. Something like [1] probably wouldn't be added even if it satisfies Wikidata's structural need criterion for notability. Minh Nguyễn ^💬 23:20, 9 November 2022 (UTC)Reply

Since NSI.guide doesn't show how many items are in brands category, this JS snippet can return quickly the number:

Array.from(document.getElementsByClassName("category")).map(v => parseInt(v.children[1].textContent.split("/")[2].slice(0,-1))).reduce((a,p) => a+p, 0);

--Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 16:13, 15 August 2022 (UTC)Reply