Wikidata:Property proposal/two-pointers attempted
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
two-pointers attempted
[edit]Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Sports
Not done
| Description | number of two-point field goals attempted by a basketball player |
|---|---|
| Represents | two-point field goal (Q104661416) |
| Data type | Quantity |
| Allowed values | non-negative integers |
| Example 1 | 1989 Georgetown vs. Princeton men's basketball game (Q90747291)participant (P710)Bob Scrabis (Q98841453) |
| Example 2 | 1989 Georgetown vs. Princeton men's basketball game (Q90747291)participant (P710)Alonzo Mourning (Q310968) |
| Example 3 | 1989 Georgetown vs. Princeton men's basketball game (Q90747291)participant (P710)Sam Jefferson (Q98849016) |
| Planned use | Qualifier to use for box scores of basketball games |
Motivation
[edit]A commonly tracked statistic in basketball box scores. IagoQnsi (talk) 16:08, 4 January 2021 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]
Support Also for using like total goals in career (P6509) (Q615#P6509). Сидик из ПТУ (talk) 09:22, 10 February 2021 (UTC)- Support, an important property for sports.--Arbnos (talk) 15:09, 19 February 2021 (UTC)
Oppose This and a dozen other proposals relate to very specific aspects of a player’s or a match’s sports statistics. The number of casuistry of each sport can lead us to an inflation of the number of properties that, despite being correct, could have a low maintenance due to their difficulty.
- I propose, instead, to create a wildcard property similar to P2670, where the main value would be the "statistical concept" (what we are now asking for as properties), and the qualifiers would be P1114, P5249, P710 (when they are using in a computer), etc. In other words that is:
- Concept + quantity, + period (season or time), represents the total for that period by the holder of the item (person or team).
- Concept + quantity, + period, + participant, represents the total for that period by a member of the item holder
- I ask that before approving these properties, we can discuss whether the proposal makes sense and obviously do more precise and developed work than what I now present. Thanks Amadalvarez (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose as per above --Zblace (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support —MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 07:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)
Not done BrokenSegue (talk) 05:08, 14 September 2022 (UTC)