Property talk:P40

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search


subject has object as child. Do not use for stepchildren
Descriptionthe subject is parent of the linked object, which is its child. The child should have a reverse property, either father (P22) or mother (P25).
Representschild (Q29514218)
Data typeItem
Template parameteren:Template:Infobox_person (children).
Domainperson (Q215627), fictional character (Q95074), mythical character (Q4271324), animal (Q729), deity (Q178885), mythical animal (Q24334299), narrative entity (Q21070598) and sibling group (Q16979650)
ExampleKirk Douglas (Q104027)Michael Douglas (Q119798)
Virgin Mary (Q345)Jesus Christ (Q302)
Zeus (Q34201)Athena (Q37122)
Lord Byron (Q5679)Ada Lovelace (Q7259)
Charles II of England (Q122553)James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth (Q140235)
Robot and gadget jobsThe consistency check gadget (see code) checks if the linked objects are linking back to the analyzed page as father or mother (asymmetric reciprocal relations), but does currently not discover if links are missing from the analyzed page to objects that are linking to it.
Tracking: sameno label (Q42533370)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P40 (Q23908975)
See alsonumber of children (P1971), sibling (P3373)
Proposal discussion[not applicable Proposal discussion]
Current uses
Total1,327,420distinct valuesratio
Main statement1,327,334>99.9% of uses821,4371.6
Qualifier70<0.1% of uses
Reference16<0.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Property “sex or gender (P21)” declared by target items of “child (P40): If [item A] has this property with value [item B], [item B] is required to have property “sex or gender (P21)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P40#Target required claim P21, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value), SPARQL (new)
Item “sex or gender (P21): Items with this property should also have “sex or gender (P21)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P40#Item P21, search, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P40#scope, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
None of 1 (Q199), 2 (Q200), 3 (Q201), 4 (Q202): value must not be any of the specified items. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P40#none of, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
if [item A] has this property (child (P40)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Known exceptions: Louis X of France (Q8384), Jan Kanty Moszyński (Q1681922), George I, Duke of Pomerania (Q314810), François Fagel (Q15875402), Süsü (Q85243498), Giuseppe Di Vagno (Q3770471), Hans Wachtmeister the elder (Q6228002), no label (Q50976340)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P40#Contemporary, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
values per item number of items
1 317909
2 501398
3 1290
4 180
5 33
6 9
7 5
8 3
9 2
12 1
13 1
14 1
This property is being used by:

Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)


I've changed this from "Children" to "child", since all the other properties are phrased as singular. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 22:04, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

We probably need to talk about this somewhere else, but I think it looks more natural to use plural for properties like children, as we often have several of them, and singular for those we have usually just one (like death place). --Zolo (talk) 23:06, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
The parameter name is "children", så I added that as alias. Mange01 (talk) 15:45, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Delete / Replace?[edit]

We have relatives properties in pairs like Sister/Brother, Father/Mother, so I would advocate to have Daughter/Son as well instead of Child(ren).

Danny B. 17:29, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Personnally, I would rather do it the other way round: merge sister and brother, as it is simpler, and avoids problem with the case when a child changes sex (admittedly not a very common case, but that happens) --Zolo (talk) 06:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Also a possibility. I was aiming for consistency and chosed assimilation to majority. Any solution, which is consistent is better than this inconsistency.
Danny B. 06:33, 10 February 2013 (UTC)


Should be this property used for stepchild/stepchildren? Or we need to create separate one? --EugeneZelenko (talk) 04:35, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

I've held off using child for step-children, only adding child to biological parents, because of the comments here and here. I couldn't find any information about qualifiers so I don't know how/when that will be implemented. I don't know if there has been a discussion on Project Chat about the use family properties like there has been for geographical subdivisions, maybe this should be settled properly now bots are starting to run through lists of people? /Ch1902 (talk) 16:27, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

Qualifier instance of (P31) can be used to specify the type of child - step, adopted, in-laws. Filceolaire (talk) 15:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Maybe type of kinship (P1039) can specify the type of relationship, such as adopted son / daughter. Aude (talk) 02:37, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
type of kinship (P1039) seems perfect here. I'll add an example. Andrew Gray (talk) 23:08, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Done (one for illegitimate, one for step), with an example on sibling (P3373) as well. Andrew Gray (talk) 23:20, 1 February 2017 (UTC)
Based on the use other relationship properties (notably the inverse properties father (P22) and mother (P25)), we might rather want to use relative (P1038). There it can also be qualified with type of kinship (P1039), so no information is lost.
--- Jura 14:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

consistency check gadget[edit]

Included and working in User:JonnyJD/consistency_check.js (together with related father,mother,stepfather etc.). The script currently doesn't require a stepchild to be listed as child. --JonnyJD (talk) 13:21, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Group of children[edit]

I think instances of sibling group (Q16979650) (and its subclasses) should be accepted values. For example "Lot (Q40574) : child (P40)Lot's daughters (Q7056503)". -Ash Crow (talk) 19:48, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

(independently of their age)[edit]

What is "independently of their age"? Independent of the age of the child or independent of the age of the parent? Why do we need this parenthetical reminder? --RAN (talk) 17:48, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

@Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ): this was added by Verdy p (Special:Diff/318691770, Special:Diff/318691777), I can't find a discussion about that and I don't see the reason either. I suggest to remove this uneccesary precision or at the very least to rewrite it to be clear. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 20:42, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Wow, I am glad you found what I was talking about, I just now realized I left no link to an example. Thanks. --RAN (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
I'm assuming the idea is that it means "X can be categorised as a child of Y even if X is too old to be called "a child".". But I'd agree we don't need it. Andrew Gray (talk) 20:47, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I guess that makes a little bit of sense. The English property would probably be better as "offspring" and "number of offspring" as opposed to child" and "number of children" ... what do you think? Or do you think just one person was confused? --RAN (talk) 20:54, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
I would leave it as "children". It's much better to stick with the more commonly used term. Andrew Gray (talk) 19:46, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Contemporary constraint[edit]

Are children born after the fathers death so uncommon that it is practical to handle them with exception to constraint (P2303) or could the contemporary constraint be trimmed to allow for nine months slack? /ℇsquilo 12:44, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Foster/adopted child?[edit]

Should the property "child" (P40) refer to not only biological child, but also foster and/or adopted child? Should an item's foster/adopted child be added to the item's statement "child" (P40) with qualifier "type of kinship" (P1039), or to the item's statement "relative" (P1038) with qualifier "type of kinship" (P1039)? If P40 does not refer to stepchild (as Jura1 put it at 14:36, 23 October 2017), why should it refer to foster/adopted child? The edit history of P40's English description is as follows:

Different editors have different opinions on this issue and it seems that there has been no discussion on it. I removed the current English description of P40 and hope that we can reach a consensus before giving a new description. A relevant question is whether father (P22) or mother (P25) should also refer to foster/adoptive father/mother. --Neo-Jay (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

  • See Property_talk:P40#Stepchild above about stepchildren. Frequently, no difference is made between adopted children and biological children. So it's unclear why P40 shouuld do that. --- Jura 12:04, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  • So you support that P40 should include adopted children (Q25858158). Is my understanding correct? If so, does this mean that father (P22) and mother (P25) should also include adoptive father/mother? And how about foster children (Q2793701)? Should P40 also include foster children? --Neo-Jay (talk) 12:28, 29 July 2020 (UTC)