Property talk:P648
Documentation
identifier for a work ("W"), edition ("M") or author ("A") for book data of the Internet Archive
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P648#Unique value, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P648#Single value, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P648#Type Q5, Q17537576, Q386724, Q43229, Q61002, Q3331189, Q7725634, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P648#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P648#Scope, SPARQL
|
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
OL identifier ending with M should only be used with editions. (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT ?item ?val{ ?item wdt:P648 ?val . FILTER(SUBSTR(?val, STRLEN(?val), 1) = 'M') MINUS { ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q3331189 } }List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P648#Unsuitable OL identifier M
OL identifier ending with W should only be used with works. (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT ?item ?val{ ?item wdt:P648 ?val . FILTER(SUBSTR(?val, STRLEN(?val), 1) = 'W') MINUS { ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q47461344 } }List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P648#Unsuitable OL identifier W
OL identifier ending with A should only be used with humans, pseudonyms or organizations. (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT ?item ?val{ ?item wdt:P648 ?val . FILTER(SUBSTR(?val, STRLEN(?val), 1) = 'A') MINUS { ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 } MINUS { ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q43229 } MINUS { ?item wdt:P31/wdt:P279* wd:Q61002 } }List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P648#Unsuitable OL identifier A
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Danger, Will Robinson!
editAuthor Identifiers OL\dA are often non-unique. Several such OL records may exist for a single author, even with the exact same spelling of the name. In other cases, one OL record may reflect many authors with similar names. OL has been dragging its feet for years on implementing consistent authority controls. I've tried to get their attention on this problem to no avail. We'll need to be able to deal with this. Work Identifiers OL\dW are often non-unique, with the same or varying title, linked to various author records. Cleaning up the mess at https://openlibrary.org/search?q=Odyssey&author_key=OL6848355A could take weeks. Edition Identifiers OL\dM are even more of a mess. They conflate different editions under one record, and have multiple records for one edition. All this said, however, OL remains one of the most useful ways to locate a freely-readable copy of many sources. As such, OL identifiers are given for editions or works cited, per w:en:SAYWHEREYOUGOTIT. We'll need to accommodate the multiple OL identifiers attributed to one work, edition, or author. We'll also need to distinguish the multiple works, editions, or authors conflated by one OL identifier. It's nontrivial. It may be impossible to code. Ideas? LeadSongDog (talk) 17:30, 16 June 2016 (UTC)
- @LeadSongDog: Thanks for the info! For specificity, can you give examples of such duplications for A, W, M? (I haven't yet seen a M ID, I'd like to see one).
- Authors with many OL ID, OL ID mapping to several authors (first one is a mistake on WD)
- IMHO WD only needs to worry about the multiplicity if OL goes ahead and removes duplicate IDs without keeping a redirect to the surviving (merged-to) ID: do you have evidence of this happening? Otherwise WD could help OL by finding such duplicates (as constraint violations) but WD can't clean up OL's database. If you yourself say OL IDs are useful, we should keep them. --Vladimir Alexiev (talk) 10:07, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
- @Vladimir Alexiev: Well, an obvious case is OL2624944A. The appropriate quick intervention (which I did in this case) is to suffix " (undifferentiated)" to the author name. The harder job is to mine each of the linked works and its editions in order to find sourcing for more completely spelled names (often via an edition's ISBN or OCLCno), then edit the OL\d*W record to reflect that finding. In most cases there will already be an OL\d*A record to link in. Sometimes there are duplicates even at the better (more specific) spelling. [1] and [2] are the same person, while [3] is quite another. VIAF and ISNI can help to clarify these cases. The latter died before the former was born. LeadSongDog (talk) 17:06, 7 June 2017 (UTC)
Split this property
editThis property is currently used for the OpenLibrary identifiers for works, editions and people. But, sadly Open Library is using different URI patterns for each of these type (https://openlibrary.org/works/$1, https://openlibrary.org/authors/$1...). It would be nice to split this property in 3 to avoid this problem and to be able to have better constraints. I would suggest to keep this property for the author identifiers (around 119117 usages) and create two new properties, one for works (around 956 usages) and one for editions (around 34324 usages). What do you think about it? Tpt (talk) 14:15, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- I think a feature was requested to address the uri question. It seems to be in the works somewhere. If the existing property is re-purposed as suggested, users might get incoherent results.
--- Jura 14:19, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
- Agree, it would make sense to have distinct properties OpenLibrary author identifier, OpenLibrary work identifier, and OpenLibrary edition identifier as subtypes of OpenLibrary identifier.LeadSongDog (talk) 16:55, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
Support for having independent properties for works, authors, .... Toni 001 (talk) 12:07, 11 September 2019 (UTC)- Support There should be 3 independent properties. --WolfgangRieger (talk) 12:29, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Weak support the present way technically works, but having three independent properties would be clearer. I would propose continuing the use of this property for authors and creating two new properties for works and editions, transferring to them the pertinent values. --Epìdosis 12:34, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
Author duplicates
editI leave here two useful queries I've been using in the last months in order to find duplicates on Open Library:
- Most urgent duplicates (= [4]) -> 4+ duplicates
- Simple duplicates (= [5]) -> 2+ duplicates
--Epìdosis 11:23, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- Why do you delete additional identifiers added for the same author? --- Jura 15:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Jura1: Because they have been merged, so they are useless redirect. --Epìdosis 16:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- I don't really see the point. If someone added them before, they probably thought them to be useful. --- Jura 17:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- In about two thirds of the cases I added them by myself. I thought they were useful until they were merged - I added them in order to make evident that they were to be merged. After the merge, they are useless redirect, just as redirects on Wikidata. --Epìdosis 20:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- I don't think redirecting items on Wikidata are useless. I think you could also merely set them to deprecated rank and try to find a bot to do these updates. --- Jura 12:14, 24 August 2019 (UTC)
- In about two thirds of the cases I added them by myself. I thought they were useful until they were merged - I added them in order to make evident that they were to be merged. After the merge, they are useless redirect, just as redirects on Wikidata. --Epìdosis 20:12, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- I don't really see the point. If someone added them before, they probably thought them to be useful. --- Jura 17:02, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
- @Jura1: Because they have been merged, so they are useless redirect. --Epìdosis 16:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)
Work/edition duplicates
editA lot of items about works have duplicate ids, because one id represents the work, the other represents just one specific edition. The second one is wrong; there are many editions and the item is about the work, not about some edition. I think this happened mostly because a bot imported both Openlibrary_work and Openlibrary_edition from Internet Archive. Examples: Q466412, Q3603012, Q331651 (or see this search on it.wiki, 950 pages have duplicate external links because of wikidata). Please fix it --Bultro (talk) 10:13, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- I think the wrong id is always the one that ends with "M". Their urls redirect to openlibrary.org/books... instead of openlibrary.org/works... --Bultro (talk) 10:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Nearly 40k M identifiers in non-instance of (P31)version, edition or translation (Q3331189) items, all listed here:
#Edition IDs in non-edition items
SELECT ?p ?site WHERE {
?p p:P648 [ps:P648 ?site].
filter(contains(str(?site),"M"))
MINUS { ?p wdt:P31 wd:Q3331189 . }
}
- Before removing them (which is technically easy), I would like to hear some opinions from
WikiProject Books has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.. --Epìdosis 13:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I agree they should be removed, but first only the ones with a Work id (maybe a bot can find the work from the edition) and if we don't want Reinheitsgebot to add them again, the responsible mix-n-match catalogue should be stop.
- I looked if I found it, it seems to be du to auxiliary data from archive.org, but I don't know from which catalog.
- catalog 98 is only for human (Q5), and 2184 for version, edition or translation (Q3331189).
- Maybe Magnus Manske can find it ? — eru [Talk] [french wiki] 17:39, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- Hi, I have an observation about this batch edit here.
- — Linus (disc) 19:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
Is the book borrowable or free access?
editTo my mind open library books can be classified as not available on open library, borrowable, or freely available. That is an incredibly important thing for me to know from Wikidata without having to go the openlibrary itself. I simply want to get a list of the books I can borrow from Wikidata. Am I correct in saying that is not currently possible with the current schema design? Thankyou. -- Deirge Ó Dhaoinebeaga(a)talk 21:13, 6 September 2022 (UTC)
- It’s currently not possible. I also don’t remember seeing it in the open library dump data. Karl Oblique (talk) 11:06, 15 November 2023 (UTC)