Property talk:P3085
Documentation
this event qualifies for that event
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3085#Type Q841654, Q623109, Q27020041, Q34542757, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3085#Value type Q841654, Q27020041, Q16510064, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3085#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3085#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P3085#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.) |
|
Discussion
[edit]Usage
[edit]Moved here from Wikidata:Property proposal/team qualified for continental competition. --Srittau (talk) 12:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
@Srittau, Pasleim: Please check 1962–63 Cypriot First Division (Q2635672). I have added qualifies for event (P3085) with 1963–64 European Cup (Q500084). Do I must to use Anorthosis Famagusta FC (Q141688) to show that the team which qualifies for that event was Anorthosis Famagusta FC (Q141688)? Xaris333 (talk) 01:46, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- @Xaris333: Looks good to me. --Srittau (talk) 12:32, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
@Srittau: Can you check the same property at 1964–65 Cypriot First Division (Q2635725)? I have used it with a different way. Instead of league or competition (P118) we could use a qualifier name "to" Wikidata:Property proposal/at. The same way we are using promoted (P2881) and relegated (P2882). Xaris333 (talk) 12:41, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
- That is the wrong way around. This way we can not - for example - mark the qualification of an upcoming or ongoing event or league. It's basically supposed to be event or leaguequalifies for event (P3085)another event
winner (P1346)winning team, where the qualifier is optional. --Srittau (talk) 12:48, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
Yes, I understand. The qualifier winner (P1346) is a little problem. I can't think something else. Xaris333 (talk) 12:54, 20 August 2016 (UTC) ΄
@Srittau: How about this way [1]? Xaris333 (talk) 12:57, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
@Srittau: Pls check this way [2]. Xaris333 (talk) 13:06, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
Question about the property restriction
[edit]I have a question regarding the limitation of this property. Personally, I don't understand why the "value type" property restriction exists twice? The second use brings from my point of view unnecessary trouble. --Gymnicus (talk) 11:29, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Correct, I fixed it. —MisterSynergy (talk) 12:08, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks --Gymnicus (talk) 12:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)