If 'dominant culture' needs indicating, I think it would make sense to do this as a 'qualifier' on the relevant culture (there may not be an appropriate property for this yet). Similarly, you could specify 'start-date' and 'end-date' qualifiers to indicate when each people was associated with the site/object/concept.
Lawrence
"Culture" seems a good idea. I was considering whether "associated
peoples" might be better than "inhabited by" - with a constraint to
make it clear that values had to be an instance of a nationality,
ethnic group, population, etc., rather than individuals. It seems to
overlap a bit with "culture".
This would let us have "countries" like:
* Aztec empire : associated peoples : Mexica (and others)
* France : associated peoples : French people
but also could be used for both historic & contemporary cultural
concepts/objects/sites/etc:
* Armenian dance : associated peoples : Armenian people
* Sutton Hoo : associated peoples : Anglo-Saxons
* Highland dress : associated peoples : Scottish people
Unlike the culture idea, it wouldn't be implicitly "dominant culture".
This may or many not be a good thing :-)
Andrew.
On 14 January 2016 at 10:48, Lawrence Troup <lawrencetroup@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi James,
>
> This is quite similar to my proposal for a "culture" property [1], which
> would be used e.g. for Tenochtitlan [Q13695] has "culture" Mexica [Q3307681]
> (and probably also has culture Aztec [Q12542]). You could potentially extend
> the usage of this attribute so that you could have the "culture" of the
> Aztec Empire set to Mexica.
>
> I agree with Andrew that "inhabited by" is a property that needs adding -
> though in this case, it wouldn't indicate that Mexica were rulers of the
> Aztec Empire, just that they lived in it.
>
> Thanks,
> Lawrence
>
> [1] "culture" property proposal:
> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Property_proposal/Creative_work#culture
>
> On Thu, 14 Jan 2016 at 09:49 Andrew Gray <andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Hi James,
>>
>> Interesting question, this one. There's no easy way to link, eg,
>> "France" and "French people".
>>
>> We have a property for "category of associated people" (P1792), so:
>> France [P1792] Category:French people; & in turn that has a
>> "category's main topic": Category:French people [P301] French people -
>> but this is very convoluted!
>>
>> I wonder if this might be something looking for a suitable new
>> property - "inhabited by"? "associated nationality"?. Alternatively,
>> we could use P17, "country", on the item for the population group -
>> this is a bit generic, but it would work.
>>
>> Andrew.
>>
>> On 13 January 2016 at 18:58, <james@j1w.xyz> wrote:
>> > I want to add relationships between Mexica :Q3307681and Aztec Empire
>> > :Q794210 [1] where Mexicas were an indigenous people of the Valley of
>> > Mexico, known today as the rulers of the Aztec empire. I haven't found
>> > any properties that seem appropriate to me so I'd like to get your
>> > insight before adding any. What properties would be most appropriate?
>> >
>> > [1] ConceptMap link: http://bit.ly/1RMVgsD
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> > James Weaver
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Wikidata mailing list
>> > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> - Andrew Gray
>> andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wikidata mailing list
>> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikidata mailing list
> Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
>
--
- Andrew Gray
andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk
_______________________________________________
Wikidata mailing list
Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata