query-bd3fb90b568d098d14b4c79a016cda56
Values for P248 “stated in”Hello, I ran across this kind of statement : >(Q30)United States of America <(P248)stated in > -- (Q30)United States of America <(P1376)capital of > (Q61)Washington, D.C. <:. Jura1I am doubtful regarding that use of P248 “stated in”. As far as I have looked into it, many statements seem to have been added by @The reason behind this seems to be able to write things like : >(Q219060)State of Palestine <(P248)stated in > -- (Q219060)State of Palestine <(P1376)capital of > (Q1218)Jerusalem < >(Q801)Israel <(P248)stated in > -- (Q801)Israel <(P1376)capital of > (Q1218)Jerusalem <Is this really recommendable ? 14:07, 19 January 2016 (UTC)) d (Tinm Corrected the property used, I indeed meant P1376. —p.s.) 23:07, 18 January 2016 (UTC) d (Tinm—01:20, 21 January 2016 (UTC)) talk (Yair rand+1. -- 01:04, 21 January 2016 (UTC)) talk (Michiel1972No idea. Please delete these nonsense P248 claims. 11:06, 19 January 2016 (UTC)) talk (SrittauWhat are these statements supposed to express? Wikidata can hardly be a source for itself. This is utter nonsense and counter-productive, since it does not allow us to easily find unsourced statements. -- 07:48, 19 January 2016 (UTC) Jura--- . P36 makes no sense there. (P36)capital , not (P1376)capital of BTW, the property in the sample should be JuraI think what we found is that: (1) people don't add missing statements manually. (2) users don't use reasonator to find missing inverse statements when doing a 10-page analysis of what the capital may be. (3) An indication on the statement is needed to ensure that people are aware why they are there and possibly fix both if they are incorrect. --- There are various possible approaches and I tend to follow whatever is suggested at the moment. I think the bot request to change them may have failed as people couldn't agree on a practical solution. The last values you mentioned seem comparatively stable given earlier revert issues. 23:37, 18 January 2016 (UTC)) talk (Yair randNo, these source statements are terrible and incorrect. (They're also constraint violations, but for some reason those still aren't showing up in the reports.) Jura1, I thought you had some plan to switch those to Q20651139? (I don't approve of that being used either, tbh, but it's better than this mess.) -- source referencing the property value. Please help clean that up: (P248)stated in This is a list of all (item, property) pairs that include a
Use at
- https://query.wikidata.org/sparql
PREFIX prov: <http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#>
PREFIX p: <http://www.wikidata.org/prop/>
PREFIX r: <http://www.wikidata.org/prop/reference/>SELECT ?s ?p WHERE {
?srcStmt r:P248 ?src . # all source statements
?stmt prov:wasDerivedFrom ?srcStmt . # statements these source statements are used in
?stmt ?stmtProp ?src . # statements where the object references the source
?s ?p ?stmt . # subjects/predicates of these statements
} LIMIT 100