Wikidata:Property proposal/gained independence from

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Organization

Motivation I propose this property as the information is key info on all country infoboxes in many languages of Wikipedia. It is therefore essential in forming Wikidata infoboxes such as this one on Wikipedia. I propose that it has a qualifier: date / point in time of one of the following: declaration of independence, consummated or recognised, or choice of three. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 09:23, 27 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

•   Support David (talk) 07:35, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
•   Support Oravrattas (talk) 10:18, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• There are several issues here. Would this be allowed to point to instances of independence of predecessor states, or only of the item itself? Wouldn't time of independence already be available via other properties? What about prior independence of only part of the state? --Yair rand (talk) 22:03, 5 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  Llywelyn2000, as proposer, may have other views on this, but I would expect this to only be about the item itself: predecessor states, or subdivisions of the state, should have their own items, where their own history can be recorded.

  The date of independence is, indeed, currently usually available via inception (P571) on the new country, and/or a start time (P580) qualifier on the instance of (P31). I'm not entirely sure where that's best recorded, and suspect that it probably shouldn't be (at least by default) as a qualifier to this, especially as that can be a complex and disputed process, but that seems like a separate issue to whether this property should be created or not. --Oravrattas (talk) 18:07, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Oravrattas. Keep it simple. All we need to say is country A gained it's independence from Country B on date X. Both are recognised state countries, no bits, no historic deviances - they come later. The dates could be either the Date on when a Decleration of Independence was made, or better still, when the country was internationally recognised. Please look again at my examples. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Wouldn't be better to point at the dependency situation instead of the fact to get "independence". I am asking for myself how such a dependency could be expressed. One possible way may be territory claimed by (P1336) together with end time (P582). But this property seems also fit some declarations only about claims. Another predicate could be owned by (P127) but note sure if a colony is really and always "owned" by the colonial power.. Any ideas? UJung (talk) 19:10, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  located in the administrative territorial entity (P131) is inadequate for showing unusual relations between controlled territories and controlling powers. This is just one of the many issues resulting from a major unsolved problem. --Yair rand (talk) 20:50, 6 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestion, but this really clouds the proposal as both countries (eg Mexico and Spain) are (today) recognised states. What they were called pre-independence is irrelevant. If we stick to that, then the 'unsolved problem' doesn't creep in. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:04, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A property is only useful insofar as it is generalizable. Would the property only be used for modern recognised states? Would Florida (Q812) have "independence from United States of America (Q30), point in time (P585) January 10, 1861"? What does "independence" mean in the context of disputed control and recognition? What value would Czech Republic (Q213) have, if any? What about North Korea (Q423)? The concept of gaining independence is complicated and ambiguous, and I think this should be derived from multiple data points on the status of the prior administration, rather than trying to have one ambiguous property.   Oppose. --Yair rand (talk) 23:56, 9 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You ask: Would the property only be used for modern recognised states? Yes; I suggest UN recognised, like my 4 examples above, and my wording nation state. I see nothing complicated and ambiguous about independence; neither do the states which have gained independence at some point, and the decleration of independence is finite, well sourced and has a point in time. Is the decleration of independence useful? Yes, they are added to all country infoboxes on Wikipedia, in many languages. A second property, as I've already suggested is recognition of the state, by the UN, which is finite, has a point in time, is well sourced, and very useable. I can't see the complications you suggest. if we already have these properties derived from multiple data points then please tell me how my 4 examples would be entered ie what properties do you suggest would give the 4 results/examples for use in Wikidata infoboxes such as the country of Suriname. Please compare the WD infobox on Commons and the one on enwiki. The enwiki infobox (for Suriname) contains the following information: Independence: from the Kingdom of the Netherlands - 25 November 1975. If you look at the WD Infobox on cywiki or Commons, you will find that the information is not there. This is an attempt to rectify that situation. Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:25, 13 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

For declarations of independence, we have foundational text (P457) (eg United States of America (Q30) foundational text (P457) United States Declaration of Independence (Q127912)). --

•   Comment Personally, I prefer the approach with inception (P571). Values could be qualified with separated from (P807), subject has role (P2868) and/or criterion used (P1013) to describe various actual or traditional dates. Currently, this approach seems rarely used [1]. --- Jura 09:51, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  separated from (P807) seems useful here. I was previously unaware of it. Norway (Q20) seems to be the only use of it in this context so far, but I think that approach would work well with all the examples given above. --Oravrattas (talk) 23:39, 15 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Jura1, Oravrattas: - Many thanks to the last three editors for their constructive, helpful suggestions. I think that answers it, on its head! Please take a look at inception (P571) on Mexico (Q96). If that is ok, then do I need to retract this proposal? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 07:24, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• @Llywelyn2000: Based on what I found in w:Treaty of Córdoba, I tried to add 2 statements at Q96#P571. I'd link declaration of independence (Q1464916) which isn't specific to Mexico either with "object has role" (object being the year 1810) or "criterion used" (similar to the criterion for the two other dates). Maybe Grito de Dolores (Q1145411) could be linked with "statement is subject of" from the same date in 1810. Declaration of Independence of the Mexican Empire (Q1131780) and its date should probably also be at Q96#P571. Maybe there is a better text to use than the one I used, w:History_of_Mexico didn't seem of much help. --- Jura 08:03, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I've added the information on Mexico, and it's now too much, as it stands. I'll need to find a way to filter the three main points into the Wikipedia Infobox (see 'Sefydlwyd'). I had a go with separated from (P807) here but there's a 'no string' error; but that's my problem! Thanks again Jura! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:40, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you could add qualifiers into <ref></ref>-tags. This way the will appear on the bottom of the article. Q1464916#P1813 could be an abbreviation. --- Jura 11:10, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• I tried to add two more dates. Don't hesitate to remove them. I found it's easier to build the statement in the sandbox and then copy it over ;) --- Jura 11:56, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Can we continue this conversation on your Talk page, as I need to work out how to abbreviate in the WP WD Infobox! Does this Property proposal needs to be closed? Llywelyn2000 (talk) 12:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC).[reply]

I marked this as withdrawn, but we can continue here. I'm more knowledgeable on query server than infoboxes, so I not the best person to ask. I did make a sample with the module on frwiki at fr:Discussion_module:Wikidata#Test_(Sandbox_2). Maybe this can help you. It's based on Q13406268 and criterion used (P1013) values. --- Jura 13:18, 21 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jura! I've had a good bash at it, but failed miserably (!) as we're using WikidataIB, I'll need ping in Doug. @RexxS:. I've left a few notes on label14 (hidden) on the relevant WD Infobox here. Any help would be appreciated! Please feel free to edit the main infobox, which will show on its doc page the Mexico infobox. And a very happy Christmas and new year too all you good people! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 06:30, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You had the right idea, Llywelyn2000, but you were using a slightly out-of-date version of WikidataIB. I've now fixed that and amended the infobox template to display Datganiad o anibynniaeth. The function getValueByQual will look among the best values for property inception (P571) for any that have the qualifier criterion used (P1013) equal to declaration of independence (Q1464916). With any luck there will be just one (otherwise you'll get however many there are). Hope that solves the issue. Cheers --RexxS (talk) 15:35, 22 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@RexxS: That solves it! Thanks RexxS! I'll work on the others asap! Have a great new year! Llywelyn2000 (talk) 10:12, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]