Wikidata:Property proposal/reissue

music reissue of

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Creative work

Done: reissue of (P9237) (Talk and documentation)

Description	Reissue of musical work (usually album (Q482994)s or extended play (Q169930)s)
Represents	reissue (Q2568454)
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Allowed values	instance of (P31), subclass of (P279): reissue (Q2568454)
Example 1	Summer Nights (Q55318433) → music reissue of → What Is Love? (Q51088400)
Example 2	Merry & Happy (Q44501916) → music reissue of → Twicetagram (Q42129371)
Example 3	The Year of "Yes" (Q59417914) → music reissue of → Yes or Yes (Q57776510)
Source	w:Reissue
Planned use	documenting the relationship between music reissues and their original issue/release
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)
Distinct-values constraint	yes
Wikidata project	WikiProject Music (Q5830855)

Motivation

I am documenting discographies for artists and many times I come across album (Q482994)s or extended play (Q169930)s that have reissues.

Currently there is property for indicating what musical work is a reissue of another. This also means that there is no qualifier to indicate this either.

This relationship data is relevant and needed.

--Lectrician1 (talk) 21:32, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Previous Proposal

Previous proposal: has reissue reissue of

@Moebeus: you might be interested since you manage discographies.

Neutral on "reissue of" but Oppose on "has reissue" due to the bloat it will introduce. Mahir256 (talk) 00:56, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I think that the need for inverse data outweighs the possible "bloat". Sometimes reissues have a different name than the original album or aren't immediately released as the next album. Both properties are needed because of these discrepancies. Also, I intend to use both for Template:Infobox album (Q5927576), so having especially "has reissue" on-hand as a property make the infobox easier to configure. --Lectrician1 (talk) 04:23, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - I think it's a bad idea modelling data exclusively thinking on how data will be used on infoboxes, Wikidata has a lot of uses. Also, in the future SPARQL queries will be available for Scribunto modules, so inverse properties will not be needed in this case. So, I only Support "reissue of"; Oppose "has reissue". --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 19:46, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would love something like this, but I have to agree with TinkerBell that property+inverse property is not the way to go, we've been trying to move away from that for some time now. I would also like to see how this relates to has edition or translation which has been used quite a bit to indicate reissues (for lack of a specialized property). Moebeus (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as it stands given that there's no definition of what a reissue is or discussion in what way it's something that's special to musical works. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:50, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Current Proposal

Current proposal: music reissue of

@ChristianKl, Moebeus: Okay so after doing some research on what a reissue technically is, I think this property should be for music publications that explicitly say that they are a reissue.
In that case, it would a subproperty of has edition or translation (P747). The property should also be renamed to music reissue of.
I tried configuring the property for all types of reissues (including books and movies), however books are particularly hard to define as reissues because "reissue" can sometimes be mixed with "reprint" or "edition".
For example, This and this version of a book seem to be the same, but the of the two seller websites, the first one declares is a reissue
On the other hand, Album/EP reissues always has a different song, content art, etc. and are a much-more defined term in the industry. Whether the music publisher declares it a reissue or not of course should always be the defining trait.

Now regarding the possible conflicts with has edition or translation (P747), I looked into what albums currently have the property. Of them, I wasn't able to find any that were used as reissues, however I learned more about the difference between editions and reissues for albums. Editions for albums are usually different distribution formats (cd, digital, vinyl, etc.), geographic release target audiences (U.S., Japan, Worldwide), and content warnings (explicit vs. clean). This one set of heavily-documented items showed these different types of editions for a release:

Thank U, Next (Q58192616) (main item, 2019 studio album by Ariana Grande)
- Thank U, Next (Q60977064) (2019 explicit CD album by Ariana Grande)
- Thank U, Next (Q60977065) (2019 digital album by Ariana Grande explicit version)
- Thank U, Next (Q60977066) (2019 digital album by Ariana Grande clean version)

These examples aren't really relating to the definition of the property, but just are example of items that are not reissues. They are instead editions of the first release, so they have they have the correct property as-is. Editions/versions for a release are defined well on MusicBrainz too.

In conclusion, the proposed property music release of, is meant for music reissues. --Lectrician1 (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm on board with a one-way property, reissued/repackaged releases are an increasingly common phenomena so will be helpful. Moebeus (talk) 23:18, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@ChristianKl, Tinker Bell, Mahir256: revote? --Lectrician1 (talk) 14:06, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lectrician1: I'm okay with having a specialized property but it would need a property description that ideally doesn't just reuse the word "reissue" but describes what a reissue is. This is especially important for getting translations right. Descriptions also don't support Wikitext formatting. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 14:46, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, that would be noted. --Lectrician1 (talk) 14:56, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 21:27, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Lectrician1, Moebeus, ChristianKl: Done --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 03:56, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- @Tinker Bell: I don't see any consensus for creating the property in the form you created. Both Lectrician1 and me agreed above that it needs to have a different description before it's fit for being created. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:46, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - @ChristianKl: So should we change the property label to music reissue of or change the property description? --Lectrician1 (talk) 01:21, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]