Property proposal started as:
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Generic#statement_disputed_by

I guess all additional parameters (page, chapter, etc) can go in the references section.

We will be able to say things like:
birth<followed by>baptism
---<time span until next event> 1-7 days
---<disputed by> GerardM

What about the uncertainty qualifier? What would be a good name? "statement considered uncertain by"?

Thanks,
Micru


On Tue, May 6, 2014 at 5:26 PM, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijssen@gmail.com> wrote:
Hoi,
In the Netherlands it used to be that people were baptised as soon as possible after birth. The notion that "he must have been born a few days earlier" is not necessarily correct.
Thanks,
     GerardM


On 6 May 2014 17:18, Joe Filceolaire <filceolaire@gmail.com> wrote:
Having a property with multiple values can mean a number of things:
* All the values are equally valid e.g. because a work has multiple authors
* All values are valid but one is preferred - usually the current value e.g. when we have population figures back over time or all the kings of Denmark. 
* One of the values is shown because it is widely used but is deprecated because it is wrong e.g. Beethoven born on 17 December 1770 (that his date of baptism so he must have been born a few days earlier).

The case described by Freidrich where we have two (or more values) which are both disputed (because they can't both be right) although one value is more widely supported then this is harder to represent semantically. I would go with adding a 'disputed by' qualifier to BOTH claims and marking the more widely accepted value as 'rank:preferred'

But that is just me

Joe

_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l



_______________________________________________
Wikidata-l mailing list
Wikidata-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata-l




--
Etiamsi omnes, ego non