[Tagging] graves and relations

[Anne-Karoline Distel]

I mapped a gravestone yesterday, which had three names mentioned on it,
only two of them are buried there. But one of the buried and the other
guy have wikidata entries. So I couldn't use buried:wikidata for all of
them. Because of the limited space in the inscription field, it cut off
one of the names.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9443012671

I know there are way more important things to map than graves, but I'm
trying to get people interested in mapping who are not that interested
in house numbers or cycle tracks or whatever has a higher priority, but
might be convinced to map historical things and THEN understand the
potential of OSM. It's a long shot, I know.

Anne


I just think that if we want to keep up with how Google is showing you
wikipedia entries to locations etc, then we'll have to put this effort
in in a standardized way.

On 24/01/2022 05:16, Minh Nguyen wrote:
> Vào lúc 14:16 2022-01-23, Martin Koppenhoefer đã viết:
>> Are there really memorials for so many people with wikidata entries
>> that a relation is technically required? Almost nobody  (compared to
>> the total number, every village and every quarter has its world war
>> memorial) on these memorials has a wikidata object, nor is it likely
>> they will ever get one.
>
> In principle, a Wikidata item could be created about any clearly
> marked burial site: a mere Find a Grave memorial ID [1] is enough to
> satisfy Wikidata's notability guidelines [2], and I wouldn't be
> surprised if someone is running a bot to automatically synchronize the
> two sites. Find a Grave only requires a photo of the grave for
> verification; however, its coverage probably varies greatly by region,
> given the level of effort required.
>
> Even if a person has their own Wikidata item, that in itself isn't a
> reason to create a relation for them. If we really need to distinguish
> between the person and their burial site, then the burial site can be
> tagged with buried:wikidata=*. Each memorial to the person can be
> separately tagged with subject:wikidata=*.
>
> The only person relation I've personally encountered [3] was added
> before Wikidata existed and has only ever been touched by continent-
> or world-spanning edits, mostly in a long-running tug-of-war between
> people who think this type of relation should exist and those who
> don't. I must admit that, when I first heard of this relation type, I
> thought it was some kind of scheme for tracking the distribution of
> relics...
>
> [1] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P535
> [2] https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Special:PermanentLink/1496779160#2
> [3] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2511501/history
>