Wikidata:Property proposal/test taken

test taken

You have not transcluded your proposal on Wikidata:Property proposal/Person yet. Please do it.

   Ready ^Create

Description	subject took the test or exam
Data type	Item
Allowed values	subclasses of test (Q27318)
Example	Ben Bernanke (Q201795) → SAT (Q334113) "test score" 1590 Unit: SAT score of 1971 (Q44212908) * Freddie Ng Ting Fat (Q22004282) → Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (Q5894355) point in time (P585) 2008 (year)
See also	determination method (P459), academic degree (P512), criterion used (P1013), complies with (P5009)

test score

You have not transcluded your proposal on Wikidata:Property proposal/Person yet. Please do it.

   Ready ^Create

Description	score that the item achieved in a test; use as qualifier for "test taken"
Represents	test score (Q7705804)
Data type	Quantity
Allowed units	subclasses of test score (Q7705804)
Example	Ben Bernanke (Q201795) "test taken" SAT (Q334113) → 1590 Unit: SAT score of 1971 (Q44212908)
See also	review score (P444) and rating (P4271) for reviews of creative works, number of points/goals/set scored (P1351) for scores in a competition, points for (P1358) for points in a league table

Motivation

SAT scores are an interesting statistic and there's currently no good structured database to look them up. While in many cases the scores aren't public there are many people for whom the scores can be sourced from public sources. ChristianKl (✉) 22:35, 30 November 2017 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Support ok, as long as there's some way to verify these. This is another property that might be considered private information for living people... ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:38, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
  • I agree that it makes sense to add it to the list. ChristianKl (✉) 17:41, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Support David (talk) 17:27, 1 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Comment I am looking this property from a privacy perspective. The names of top scorers (in exams) usually appear in newspapers/official websites. Adding such information from official sources may not be an issue. However, clear guidelines must be provided before its use. If there is a consensus, this property can be further generalized to 'score in exam', where qualifiers can be used to specify the exam, SAT (or others). John Samuel 11:46, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  • From a privacy persective I think the data of this property is as sensitive as mass (P2067) or blood type (P1853) and upon creation of the property I would add it to the list on https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Living_people_(draft). If you have ideas about how that page can get improved, feel free to ship in. ChristianKl (✉) 13:40, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
•  Oppose in its current form. This is both too specific and too wide at the same time. It's too specific because:
  1. By extension, are we saying every notable public exam around the world with numerical scores should have its own property? (UCAS Tariff (Q7863911)? Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (Q5894355)? IELTS (Q490396)? TOEFL (Q487425)?)
  2. If one day the SAT test gets abolished we'll end up with a main property that will only hold historical data.

  But it's also not specific enough: we need to qualify it with a unit which specifies the exam taken. Can we instead call the property "exam score" so people can input a numerical score from any notable examination? Deryck Chan (talk) 21:27, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

  • Given the desire for a more general property I renamed the proposal into "test score".@Deryck Chan: Do you support the proposal in this form? ChristianKl (✉) 23:04, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl:  Support but  Wait. It occurred to me that we're more likely to know that a famous person has taken a certain exam than the score they got. So I would personally recommend the statement and the qualifier around:
      • Ben Bernanke (Q201795)took examSAT (Q334113)test score1590 (unit: SAT score of 1971 (Q44212908)) point in time (P585)1971 (year)

    This will also allow us to add statements where we have reliable sources that say they took an exam but not the score they received, e.g.

    • Freddie Ng Ting Fat (Q22004282)took examHong Kong Certificate of Education Examination (Q5894355)point in time (P585)2008 (year).

    And furthermore this allows future extension with another qualifier to include letter grades, pass and fail, etc...

    ...is this too crazy an idea? Deryck Chan (talk) 01:26, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

    • • @Deryck Chan: I changed the order according to your recommendation. I kept the name as "test" instead of "exam" to have it more general. ChristianKl (✉) 00:17, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

• @ChristianKl: Thanks for taking my suggestions. I think these properties are good enough to go. Do you expect this property to be used by items that describe things other than a human being, e.g. tests of manufactured products - airworthiness certificate (Q2946885), Emission test cycle (Q5372631)? Some items currently use award received (P166)airworthiness certificate (Q2946885) but our "test taken" proposal will be more appropriate for tests that isn't just pass/fail. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:22, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

• I agree that it would also be useful for items that aren't human beings. ChristianKl (✉) 13:40, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

•  Comment Maybe this could be expanded to cover Wikidata:Property_proposal/Complies_with.
  --- Jura 08:06, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

  +1, though I'm unsure of how that should work. "test score" with a number datatype wouldn't have room for "passes" or "fails". Perhaps a different qualifier could be used for certain tests? Or we could have "passes/fails X test" as a straight unqualified value for some options... Also, the phrasing "test" probably isn't ideal for all uses here. (I recommend not creating the property/properties until this is figured out.) --Yair rand (talk) 22:11, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

  • Maybe with "evaluation" as property label? I'd try a different qualifier for pass/fail ones.
    --- Jura 09:44, 18 December 2017 (UTC)

  • I can see how complies with can use qualifier "test score" when the standard test produces a numerical score (rather than an opinion rating or just pass/fail). However, I think it will be useful to create a separate "complies with" property because "complies with" means passing a standard test and thereby qualifying for something, with a fine conceptual distinction that neither award received (P166) or "test taken" would capture. Deryck Chan (talk) 19:42, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

 Questions

Outcome and failures ?

I see from « Invalid topic given

   Under discussion

Data type	MISSING
Example 1	MISSING
Example 2	MISSING
Example 3	MISSING

 » that there is a question over there about the failures. Is there a way to add a qualifier « outcome: pass » or « outcome : failure » to model success of failure ? Is « outcome : no value Help » a good way to model a failure ? actually if I did not pass a test we know I did not pass, so it seem to comply with the definition of « no value ».

Items about test instances themselves ?

Take an event like « Einstein passes its doctoral thesis ». It would be an instance of « scolarship test », or a subclass of it. Such an item would have properties such as « organisation/person that passes the test » / examiners (or jury), date, and maybe « work element» for the intellectual content of which is actually judged by the jury (the manuscript, the dissertation, the theory described in the manuscript, I don’t know) … Maybe we have articles about famous failures of regulatory affairs (Q18749628), or cases about court cases about such events. It seem that there is a file that needs to be filled to ask for an authorisation. Do we need to model them ?

If we have an item about « Einstein passes its doctoral thesis » maybe we just can use significant event (P793) to link Einstein’s item to that item, and leave the details about the exam out of Einstein’s item. This includes the score. The class of exams should include details about the scoring system. author  TomT0m / talk page 14:32, 30 January 2018 (UTC)