Wikidata:Property proposal/Classification of the Functions of Government

Classification of the Functions of Government[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Organization

Done: Classification of the Functions of Government (P9798) (Talk and documentation)

Description	UN classification to compare government agencies across countries
Represents	Classification of the Functions of Government (Q5128413)
Data type	Item
Domain	government organization (Q2659904)
Example 1	Norwegian Coast Guard (Q3267995) → 02 - Defence (source: [1])
Example 2	Swedish Work Environment Authority (Q10416979) → 04.1.2 - General labour affairs (source: [2])
Example 3	Luleå University of Technology (Q1972721) → 09.4.1 - First stage of tertiary education (source: [3])
Source	https://unstats.un.org/unsd/classifications/Econ/Structure
Planned use	Will be added through imports as part of Wikidata:Gov Directory
See also	field of work (P101)

Motivation[edit]

Since this is an established classification by United Nations Statistics Division (Q2265585) (definition, change the search for classification to COFOG in the dropdown) and almost all countries have classified their governmental agencies already, this will make it possible to compare data across the world.

In the example I haven't created items for each of the classes yet, but they should be created and connected in the three levels they exist (possibly with has part(s) (P527)-part of (P361). If I count correctly, there are 188 classes to create as items. This will enable to easily create queries for all agencies in for example 05 - Environmental protection (which could have main subject (P921) → environmental protection (Q832237)) or 03.1 - Police services (main subject (P921) → police (Q35535)) etc. It would also make for a coherent modeling compared to if the related field of work (P101) would be used which makes it hard to make global queries as the number of possible values there is so much greater. Ainali (talk) 17:39, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notified participants of WikiProject Govdirectory Ainali (talk) 21:25, 26 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I know Classification of the Functions of Government (Q5128413) as aggregate statistics at the country level. Do you know if there is a relevant source which could make the mapping between a governmental agency and Classification of the Functions of Government (Q5128413) classes? PAC2 (talk) 06:16, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Here are mappings for Sweden, and here for Norway. I would imagine that most aggregations are based on such mappings but they seem to be maintained by each country. Abbe98 (talk) 09:31, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion[edit]

Support Abbe98 (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Popperipopp (talk) 19:55, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Salgo60 (talk) 13:23, 18 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support John Samuel (talk) 10:56, 27 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Oravrattas (talk) 11:41, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hello Ainali For example 1, the reference https://o.nsd.no/polsys/data/en/forvaltning/enhet/57144 is better (the link of the organism in question and not the parent organism to certify the COFOG ;-). Cordially. —Eihel (talk) 02:25, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Ainali (talk) 07:01, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question Ainali Following this link, Luleå University of Technology (Q1972721) should be classified 09.4.2 (doc cursus in CITE1997. This can no longer be valid with CITE2011, but I do not build the classification ;-) ? —Eihel (talk) 02:31, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
While I see the point, I added the source from Swedish Agency for Public Management (Q10677795). Ainali (talk) 07:02, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question @Ainali, Poslovitch: It would be nice to create the classification to be able to create the property (Items on the examples), no? —Eihel (talk) 02:35, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you think we should do it before we create the property, I'll get started. I didn't think one is a blocker for the other, that's why I waited to see if people would see if people agreed with me about the value (which seems to be the case). Ainali (talk) 07:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Ainali: We see that the community wants the prop. It's not a blocker, but the creation of 02 ; 04.1.2 ; 09.4.1 at least would be beneficial, IMHO. —Eihel (talk) 08:04, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Eihel Agreed. But I think it will be easiest to create them all at once in a quickstatement batch to avoid duplications. Ainali (talk) 08:16, 15 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]