Wikidata:Property proposal/date popularized
date popularized
editOriginally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Description | point in time the subject became well known to the public, if different from its inception |
---|---|
Represents | popularisation (Q2104295) |
Data type | Point in time |
Domain | item, sense |
Example 1 | Among Us (Q96417649)→2020. |
Example 2 | Quencher (Q123988815)→2023. |
Example 3 | large language model (Q115305900)→2022. |
See also | inception (P571) |
Motivation
editI believe that the distinction between when something was created and when it gained popularity is important, and should be documented on Wikidata. Most of the time, it will be only a year or month. This should require a reference as it could otherwise be subjective. Let me know what you think. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 03:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
Discussion
edit- I think often it would be too hard or unreasonable to pin it down to a year. Does the data-type also allow setting a decade? Or a five-year timespan like 2018–2022? I think that could even be the most common way this is used if this was added to very many items (especially old ones). --Prototyperspective (talk) 11:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support only if setting timespans like that is possible. It probably should also be encouraged somehow when things aren't as clear or quick as for those examples since that is more common for earlier items. It can also be difficult to pin down even if that is possible and the common way this is used – for example would date popularized on the item Q571 (book) have the decade of the printing press adoption or sth earlier or later/broader? This issue can be solved by entering multiple dates, each with refs, with one for example for a time when there was a substantial number and growth of books and one after the printing press adoption picked up. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes! You can set this data type to a decade by typing it like so: 2010s, 2000s, 1850s, etc. I don't think you can add a five-year timespan, but qualifier could be used when unsure, like sourcing circumstances (P1480) → circa (Q5727902). I think that we should rely on references to determine when something is considered popularized. Multiple dates seems fine to me. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support only if setting timespans like that is possible. It probably should also be encouraged somehow when things aren't as clear or quick as for those examples since that is more common for earlier items. It can also be difficult to pin down even if that is possible and the common way this is used – for example would date popularized on the item Q571 (book) have the decade of the printing press adoption or sth earlier or later/broader? This issue can be solved by entering multiple dates, each with refs, with one for example for a time when there was a substantial number and growth of books and one after the printing press adoption picked up. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support i would use this property. PKM (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- How would this even work in terms of referencing? Never thought I'd say something like this, but sounds a little like original research to me. --Azertus (talk) 01:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- For example, this article can be a source for the first example: https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/nov/29/among-us-video-game-100-million-outer-space -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 03:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- What kind of source would you use for the exampel claims? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 15:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- I would think something like a news article confirming an increase in popularity would be good. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- So if there are news reports for different years where it increased in popularity in each year, you would list every year where such a claim would be made? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- I think that would be fine. You can also change it to decade precision if applicable. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- @Azertus, ChristianKl:, would you like to give your opinion? @Prototyperspective: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- I'm okay with it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:53, 13 April 2024 (UTC)
- @Azertus, ChristianKl:, would you like to give your opinion? @Prototyperspective: Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:28, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
- I think that would be fine. You can also change it to decade precision if applicable. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 22:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- So if there are news reports for different years where it increased in popularity in each year, you would list every year where such a claim would be made? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 22:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- I would think something like a news article confirming an increase in popularity would be good. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)