Property talk:P5892
Documentation
іdentifier for elections in Brazil containing voting data for each position per State
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Single value, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Unique value, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Format, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Item P17, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P5892#Scope, SPARQL
New parameter
[edit]Hi to all that might be reading this. Going through the Brazilian municipal elections, I found that the identifier will get a flag about the unicity of it, once every municipality of a state would have the same identifier "YEAR/POSITION_ID/STATE_ACRONYM" for the election. So looging in the website, I found the parameter &dados-municipio-ibge-id=<IBGE CODE OF THE MUNICIPALITY>. For example, the candidates for the mayor of Rio Branco in 2016 are listed by the identifier in https://noticias.uol.com.br/politica/politicos-brasil/resultado.htm?ano-eleicao=2016&dados-cargo-disputado-id=11&dados-uf-eleicao=AC&dados-municipio-ibge-id=1200401.
So, I propose modify the identifier to allow a optional fourth parameter. It would be like: Q28679251 → 2016/11/AC/1200401 Ederporto (talk) 06:47, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- Ah, ok. We definitely want it to be unique and the formatter URL to send you to the right place. I can update the formatter to work with this, but probably not until early next week. I don't think we need to consult with others on this, maybe just set a date when we'll make the change? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:46, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Thank you! The 19th, as you mentioned in your discussion page works perfectly! Once again, thanks! Ederporto (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Ederporto: I've made the change to the resolver, please test it out and let me know if it's what you need! ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Thank you so much! Everything seems right. Volta Redonda municipal election, 2016 (Q60667680), Volta Redonda municipal election, 2016 for Councillor (Q60676126) and Volta Redonda mayoral election, 2016 - first round (Q60675995) are my models. Do you think that new examples should be added to the description of the property? Ederporto (talk) 11:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- You should probably add or replace at least one example that requires the additional parameter... ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Thank you so much! Everything seems right. Volta Redonda municipal election, 2016 (Q60667680), Volta Redonda municipal election, 2016 for Councillor (Q60676126) and Volta Redonda mayoral election, 2016 - first round (Q60675995) are my models. Do you think that new examples should be added to the description of the property? Ederporto (talk) 11:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Ederporto: I've made the change to the resolver, please test it out and let me know if it's what you need! ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:21, 19 February 2019 (UTC)
- @ArthurPSmith: Thank you! The 19th, as you mentioned in your discussion page works perfectly! Once again, thanks! Ederporto (talk) 23:39, 15 February 2019 (UTC)
- All Properties
- Properties with external-id-datatype
- Properties used on 100+ items
- Properties with single value constraints
- Properties with unique value constraints
- Properties with format constraints
- Properties with constraints on items using them
- Properties with entity type constraints
- Properties with scope constraints