Property talk:P1114

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

quantity
number of instances of this subject in the universe of the subject (the actual number of instances in Wikidata may be lower or higher)
Representsnumber of objects (Q41792217)
Data typeQuantity
Template parameterfor example, "current_number" in en:Template:Infobox_subdivision_type
Domainall (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
Allowed values
According to this template: most likely: positive integers
According to statements in the property:
0 ≤ 𝓧 ≤ not applicable
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Allowed unitsnot applicable
ExampleU.S. state (Q35657) → 50
Cities in Russia: Encyclopedia (Q28442534) → 50,000
Fabergé egg (Q331225) → 71
Robot and gadget jobsDeltaBot does the following jobs:
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P1114 (Q21037774)
See alsoproportion (P1107), numeric value (P1181), collection or exhibition size (P1436), number of works (P3740), number of records (P4876), number of branches (P8368), units sold (P2664)
Lists
  • <search Commons for files with depicts-statement and this property as qualifier>
  • Items with the most statements of this property
  • Count of items by number of statements (chart)
  • Count of items by number of sitelinks (chart)
  • Items with the most identifier properties
  • Items with no other statements
  • Most recently created items
  • Items with novalue claims
  • Items with unknown value claims
  • Usage history (total)
  • Chart by item creation date
  • Minimum and maximum
  • User:Laboramus/Units/P1114 (Units used)
  • Database reports/Constraint violations/P1114
  • Map
  • Random list
  • Proposal discussionProposal discussion
    Current uses
    Total247,372
    Main statement12,2835% of uses
    Qualifier235,07495% of uses
    Reference15<0.1% of uses
    [create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
    Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: LID milestone (Q55003547)
    List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1114#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
    Range from “0” to “+∞”: values should be in the range from “0” to “+∞”. (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/P1114#Range
    Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200), Wikibase MediaInfo (Q59712033): 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/P1114#Entity types
    Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as qualifier (Q54828449), 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/P1114#Scope, SPARQL
    Units: “novalue”: value unit must be one of listed. (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/P1114#Units

    Generalizing this property

    [edit]

    As per discussions about the need of a property to indicate the number of parts in a system, it has been suggested to generalize this property. The suggested label is "number of elements". If there are no objections I will change the label in a couple of days. See Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#number_of_parts.--Micru (talk) 07:25, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    I support the generalization (actually I thought the property could and was already used for that) but I am not sure "element" is very clear. It seem that train Xnumber of elementsfive could be used to mean that the train is made of 5 carriages. I have no better suggestion for a label though. --Zolo (talk) 08:54, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zolo: That is not a problem because you can use qualifiers, for instance: <train> has part <carriage> with qualifier number of elements <5>. If you just say <train> number of elements <5>, it means that there are 5 trains.--Micru (talk) 09:18, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Micru:. I understand it is what is intended, but I am not sure that the word "element" makes it perfectly clear. "number of element of train X" seems to mean how many parts there are in a typical train X not how many instances of train X there are. . --Zolo (talk) 09:28, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Zolo: If you have any other suggestion I'll be glad to hear it. It could also be just "quantity" (in German it is already called "Anzahl", and we have it as alias now).--Micru (talk) 09:41, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    @Micru: Yes, perhaps simply "quantity" or even "number" as quantity might imply a measurement unit. --Zolo (talk) 09:53, 10 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that dropping "of elements" is best. Like Zolo, I think "number" or "quantity" would be better, with the former being slightly better than the latter. Micru, thanks for taking the initiative on this! Emw (talk) 12:53, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    I've changed it to "quantity" because "number" is too ambiguous. The statement "number: 5" can be interpreted as this is the fifth of someting. /ℇsquilo 16:13, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    Good point, thanks. Emw (talk) 03:09, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

    Using for a quantity of a medication

    [edit]

    It has been proposed that we use this "quantity" for the "dose" of a medication.[1]

    I am fine with that but we will need to remove the constraint for "integer constraint" and allow units like milligrams

    Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:05, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

    "quantity" is primarily a datatype .. so let's use it accordingly. --- Jura 12:02, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jura1: For the record, it was meant to be used as a qualifier at proposal times, if I recall (but the creation discussion seems lost, actually). As the description states, it was primarily meant to represent the number of existing instances for a class (like human (Q5)) at a certain point in time (around 7 billions right now). It seems to have been renamed to « quantity » in english afterwards. Funny enough, there is a « quantity » proposal just below the proposal for this one that was rejected … weird mixup. author  TomT0m / talk page 12:15, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems that the proposals were somewhat linked. Maybe some clean-up on current uses is needed. --- Jura 15:49, 22 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]