Property talk:P1598
Documentation
bishop who presided as consecrator or co-consecrator of this bishop
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P39
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Target required claim P39, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P140
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Value type Q5, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Target required claim P735, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Target required claim P21, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Target required claim P569, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Type Q215627, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P735, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P21, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P39, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#citation needed
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Item P106, search
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1598#Target required claim P106, SPARQL
This property is being used by: Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Qualifier suggestions
[edit]- P794 (P794): principal consecrator (Q18442817), principal co-consecrator (Q18442822), principal co-consecrator (Q18442828)
Not all bishops are male
[edit]In using sex or gender (P21) there are some exeptions like Eva Brunne (Q121753) Maria Jepsen (Q69074) Victoria Matthews (Q2522776) Rosemarie Wenner (Q91157)
Statement vs qualifier
[edit]In my opinion, it should be used as qualifier of the bishop (Q29182) when appears as position held (P39) or occupation (P106) of a person (see John Paul II (Q989) as exemple). It make no sense as statement, because it is not a personal characteristic, it's a characteristic of its bishop (Q29182) condition, it means a characteristic of the relationship person-status. Any opinion ?. --Amadalvarez (talk) 05:23, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Change (English) label to "consecrated by" ?
[edit]It might be easier to figure out who consecrated whom with a label "consecrated by" or "has consecrator" instead of the current "consecrator". It shouldn't change the way the property is used. --- Jura 15:23, 28 June 2019 (UTC)
Widening the property?
[edit]@Jura1, Giftzwerg 88: (and Hsarrazin / Thierry Caro) hello. I suggest the property to be widened to diaconal and priestly ordinations. Consecration is indeed the logical following of these two sacraments, that also deal with the notion of apostolic succession. What do you think?
Thanks! Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:07, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
- I think in these case of a priest or diacon it is not appropriate. Maybe it has some siginificance in the life of the priest, but I don´t think it has the same gravitas in the life of the bishop. After all the thousands of priests and diacons are not notable, so these persons must have some more criteria other than ordination to make them notable.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 09:19, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well, sure... I never said that being ordained de facto makes a priest WD-notable. I only would like to deal with the mention of the ordination of the notable ones (including bishops that are first priests...). Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
- I agree that this property existing already, we should probably deal with all similar things through dedicated properties rather than significant person (P3342). Now… should this property see its scope widened or should we get a new property for cases that are not covered yet? For the sake of avoiding multiple qualifiers on bishops, I guess I would rather have a brand new property for priestly ordinations. But then I wouldn't be shocked if we ended up having everything stored under one roof. Thierry Caro (talk) 09:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- OK. Could you please discuss this example? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
- OK. If this is already used that way regardless of whether or not this is for bishops, then I guess we can just rename this property here right away! You have my support. Thierry Caro (talk) 13:47, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- OK. Could you please discuss this example? Nomen ad hoc (talk) 12:38, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
- I agree that this property existing already, we should probably deal with all similar things through dedicated properties rather than significant person (P3342). Now… should this property see its scope widened or should we get a new property for cases that are not covered yet? For the sake of avoiding multiple qualifiers on bishops, I guess I would rather have a brand new property for priestly ordinations. But then I wouldn't be shocked if we ended up having everything stored under one roof. Thierry Caro (talk) 09:42, 14 December 2020 (UTC)
- Well, sure... I never said that being ordained de facto makes a priest WD-notable. I only would like to deal with the mention of the ordination of the notable ones (including bishops that are first priests...). Nomen ad hoc (talk) 09:28, 14 December 2020 (UTC).
Include occupation as well?
[edit]@Epìdosis, shouldn't some of these constraints be under occupation (P106) now, rather than position held (P39)? Elizium23 (talk) 03:35, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
- @Elizium23: of course; it should be ok now. --Epìdosis 07:17, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
Constraint property P39
[edit]Hello, I would like to change the constraint for position held (P39) to the property occupation (P106). We work to transform all general fonction to specific fonction like Michel Dubost (Q551291) to Hippolyte Simon (Q1620042). So when the work is done the constraint reveal a problem because for example Archbishop of Clermont (Q63975409) is not one of the case of the constraint but a "sous-class". Olivier LPB (talk) 12:28, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- All Properties
- Properties with wikibase-item-datatype
- Properties used on 10000+ items
- Properties with entity type constraints
- Properties with scope constraints
- Properties with constraints on items using them
- Properties with target required claim constraints
- Properties with constraints on type
- Properties with qualifiers constraints
- Properties with citation needed constraints