Talk:Q216200
Autodescription — legal norm (Q216200)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “legal norm” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
legal norm⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
(Ping @Arctic.gnome:)
This statement doesn't seem right. Wouldn't it be more correct to say that rule (Q1151067) is a subcategory of legal norm (Q216200)? --Yair rand (talk) 21:29, 9 September 2014 (UTC)
English term and Wikipedia page
[edit]I removed the link to en:Precept for now. It is not correct in light of pages in other languages, like fr:Règle de droit and es:Norma jurídica. The issue is that I think the English Wikipedia page may be correct in indicating that "precepts" can include religious rules (not just in the narrower context of law from religious sources), for instance, whereas a règle de droit or norma jurídica is a legal concept which refers to any legal rule including those created by statutes, executive orders, the common law, etc. It is a bit tricky since in English, it seems to me that "law" (indefinite, not a law) can refer both to the aggregate of the legal rules applicable in a jurisdiction ("He is well-versed in American law.") or to the singular ("What is the applicable law regarding when one may park on this street?"). Règle de droit and norma jurídica refer to the singular (and can be written in the plural by adding "s" as appropriate). I'm eager to hear what others think. KuduIO (talk) 18:44, 13 June 2020 (UTC)
- Dear KuduIO, I have changed the linking, by adding the page en:legal rule on English Wikipedia. It is currently now a redirect to en:law, but I assume that it is a redirect with possibility to be expanded into the independent article in future. As far as I can see from this Requests for comment, this is how it should be done now. Correct? --212.178.219.89 14:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)
- 212.178.219.89, I'm not an experienced editor of Wikidata, only of English Wikipedia, so I couldn't tell you for sure if it's correct, but that sounds good to me! I only hesitated to do that because unlike the Spanish and French terms I mentioned, I couldn't find "legal rule" or another term other than "law" being widely used to refer to this concept in subject-matter academic/reference writing. But I agree that that will probably make things most clear for now! KuduIO (talk) 20:41, 14 June 2020 (UTC)