Property talk:P488
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Documentation
chairperson
presiding member of an organization, group or body
presiding member of an organization, group or body
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Type “organization (Q43229), religious administrative entity (Q51041800), fictional organization (Q14623646), inquiry (Q21004260), event (Q1656682), professional association (Q829080), voluntary association (Q48204), administrative territorial entity (Q56061)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “organization (Q43229), religious administrative entity (Q51041800), fictional organization (Q14623646), inquiry (Q21004260), event (Q1656682), professional association (Q829080), voluntary association (Q48204), administrative territorial entity (Q56061)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Type Q43229, Q51041800, Q14623646, Q21004260, Q1656682, Q829080, Q48204, Q56061, SPARQL
Value type “human (Q5), fictional character (Q95074)”: This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of (P31)”. On these, the value for instance of (P31) should be an item that uses subclass of (P279) with value human (Q5), fictional character (Q95074) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Value type Q5, Q95074, SPARQL
Property “sex or gender (P21)” declared by target items of “chairperson (P488)”: 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. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Target required claim P21, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
Contemporaries:
if [item A] has this property (chairperson (P488)) 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. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). if [item A] has this property (chairperson (P488)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Contemporary, SPARQL
Required qualifier “start time (P580)”: this property should be used with the listed qualifier. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#mandatory qualifier, SPARQL
Citation needed: the property must have at least one reference (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#citation needed
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Scope, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Entity types
Property “position held (P39)” declared by target items of “chairperson (P488)”: If [item A] has this property with value [item B], [item B] is required to have property “position held (P39)”. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Target required claim P39, SPARQL, SPARQL (by value)
|
This property is being used by:
Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
Contemporaries:
if [item A] has this property (P488) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history.
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). if [item A] has this property (P488) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history.
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P488#Contemporary, SPARQL
Documentation[edit]
I can't find the documentation of this property in archive 6 or 7? --Tobias1984 (talk) 11:32, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think it's still on the proposal page. -- Docu at 09:10, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
- I think I found it. But it wasn't
evenapproved for creation without dispute: Wikidata:Property_proposal/Person#Chairperson_.2F_Vorsitzender_.2F_Pr.C3.A9sident. --Tobias1984 (talk) 10:32, 18 May 2013 (UTC)- I archived it now. They did work out scope/label question. The other comment came after it was created.
- There could always be one guy who thinks we should all to with a single property. This way it will work much better at his other websites. -- Docu at 07:56, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
- What property should I use for the title?
- Example: Maria Ågren (Q4991015) is director general (Q1501800) for Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Q2976522)?
- Even if I don't know who is the chairperson (or if it is vacant), I should be able to make the statement that the chairperson for Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Q2976522) is a director general (Q1501800). /Esquilo (talk) 09:53, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
- I think I found it. But it wasn't
temporary person or ad interim (Q1090635)}[edit]
Usage in military (military position (Q16631188)):
- ИД — исполняющий должность;
- ИО — исполняющий обязанности;
- ВрИД — временно исполняющий должность;
- ВрИО — временно исполняющий обязанности.
Civil:
- и. о.; ИО - исполняющий обязанности
"Chairman" instead of "chairperson"[edit]
@Netoholic: I'm not going to do a wheel-war on this, but "chairman" is not “the most common name that the item would be known by” (cit.), since it is at least 15 years that "chairperson" is the main term used on an international level. Even the relative item, chairperson (Q140686), uses "chairperson" and not "chairman" as main label. You're kindly asked to provide better motivations than the help page about labels. --Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 21:06, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- @Sannita: Here is a Google Ngram showing the dominant use of "chairman" over chairperson up to 2008. Using the NOW Corpus, which covers use in recent sources, showed at last check that "chairman" had 646,437 uses and "chairperson" had 76,080 uses since 2017. Both the property and chairperson (Q140686) should use "chairman" per Help:Label. -- Netoholic (talk) 21:21, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- The word "brother" is dominant over the word "sibling" according to Google Ngram. That is not a valid argument to rename sibling (P3373) from "sibling" to "brother". This property, just like sibling (P3373), is for people of all genders. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 22:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- +1 with Robin van der Vliet, nor the dominancy in general nor ngram in particular (2008 was 11 years ago) are valid arguments. I see now reason not to simply use chairperson especially as any reuser can adapt it in charman/chairwoman if they want. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:21, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
- The word "brother" is dominant over the word "sibling" according to Google Ngram. That is not a valid argument to rename sibling (P3373) from "sibling" to "brother". This property, just like sibling (P3373), is for people of all genders. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 22:47, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
- Even for women "chairman" is much more often used than "chairperson". "Chairperson" is also known to imply a gendered meaning itself, as described in this source as coinages designed to be gender-neutral can easily become feminized when they are only used to refer to women - for example, when a woman is referred to as "chairperson" but a man is "chairman". ADDED: And the NOW Corpus numbers I gave above are exceptionalyl recent 2017-2019 and also prove that chairman is the common name. --
Netoholic (talk) 13:01, 23 May 2019 (UTC)Netoholic (talk) 13:42, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment I fully protected the editing of the property in order to prevent immediately other edit wars. I'd like Netoholic to ask first to propose changes to labels, and then, if and when a consensus is reached, to change them, instead of acting on his own. This is not BEBOLD, this is IMHO pushing for some non-consensual changes. Sannita - not just another it.wiki sysop 13:26, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Sannita: Having already edited this property label and commented here, you are an involved admin and I suggest that you immediately revert your protection action on this page. Worse than just being involved, you are clearly protecting this on your preferred version, and even worse, its a version which goes against Help:Label as all evidence presented demonstrates that "chairperson" is not the most common name. No one has provided any refuting evidence, and so at present, you and Robin van der Vliet are the ones that are edit warring to insert your personal opinion on this. -- Netoholic (talk) 13:39, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- There was an extensive discussion this month on the English Wikipedia about this topic, and the consensus was to use the word "chairperson". A lot of people there supported the proposal to use "chairperson". I don't think we need to have the same discussion here, the easiest solution is to just follow Wikipedia instead of having exactly the same discussion here again. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 14:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- I would also add that this is not the item in question here, it is the property label. While it makes more sense to favor common names for item labels, and it appears that is mainly what the guideline referred to above is about, for property labels, the goal should be about precision and clarity in describing an attribute. Whereas "chairman" can be understood as male-specific, but "chairperson" can generally only be understood as gender-neutral, "chairperson" seems like the best label for the property, since that is the way Wikidata means the property to be understood. Dominic (talk) 16:46, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
Comment As an uninvolved admin I confirm the need for page protection, but I have reduced the protection duration to one week which should be sufficient for discussions. User:Netoholic, you are editing against the long-established consensus here. The label has ever been "chairperson" since this property was created ~6 years ago, and your change to "chairman" has been reverted by different users. Please do seek a clear community consensus for "chairman" first before you change the label again. —MisterSynergy (talk) 15:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- MisterSynergy: More like a silent consensus really. This issue was raised by User:Yair rand in the property proposal (Wikidata:Property_proposal/Archive/7#P488) - and it seems like no evidence-based justification was ever put forth for "chairperson" as being the common name for this position. It clearly is not. Chairperson as a term has been largely rejected and it remains far-less used, even among just women in the position. -- Netoholic (talk) 19:24, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Maybe it is silent consensus, but that is still a consensus. In six years, not a single editor has ever questioned the label. To my understanding, Yair rand did not talk about the chairperson/chairman terminology, but rather about the problem that lots of pretty different positions may be covered by this property, thus "chairperson/man" may be not the best term at all. (Six year later I'd say that it seems to work, however.)
Anyway, you need to convince the community if you want to change the label. I have to mention that—regardless of the label—the definition of the property would not change at all, since labels (and descriptions and aliases) are mere human-readable tags for usability. As both terms appear as either label or alias, there is no real practical difference anyways. —MisterSynergy (talk) 19:59, 23 May 2019 (UTC)- MisterSynergy: The only "real practical difference" is in that the Help:Label should be the most common term used by the most editors that would be adding this property to an item for an organization. If the position is called "chairman" most often, whether it be filled by a woman or man, then this property should be labelled "chairman", because that is what data editors will most often type in to find this property. -- Netoholic (talk) 20:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- As long as there is an alias "chairman" on this property, you can type "chairman" and it will offer you this property. The only practical difference is that the web UI shows "chairperson" for existing statements of this property. However, in contrast to Wikipedias where editors and readers use the same user interface, Wikidata data users usually do not browse items in a web browser as the web UI is in fact an editor tool only. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- The same "its no big deal" argument works the other way - since hardly anyone sees it then, it might as well match the common name presented in the evidence above. "Chairperson" is available as an alias. We should treat this like every other label named per its common use. It certainly seems like labeling it something so rare as "chairperson" is advocacy, rather than than disinterested, rational treatment in the same way we treat other labels. -- Netoholic (talk) 20:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Sure, the reasoning works in both directions, but I repeat myself: you need to convince the community. I am personally not even interested in forming an opinion about the question, as I am not a native English speaker and I found similar decisions regarding use of particular English language or words remarkably complicated in the past. However, I do wonder why this is such a big deal suddenly, as there are only subtle consequences, and nobody cared for such a long time. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:38, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- The same "its no big deal" argument works the other way - since hardly anyone sees it then, it might as well match the common name presented in the evidence above. "Chairperson" is available as an alias. We should treat this like every other label named per its common use. It certainly seems like labeling it something so rare as "chairperson" is advocacy, rather than than disinterested, rational treatment in the same way we treat other labels. -- Netoholic (talk) 20:31, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- As long as there is an alias "chairman" on this property, you can type "chairman" and it will offer you this property. The only practical difference is that the web UI shows "chairperson" for existing statements of this property. However, in contrast to Wikipedias where editors and readers use the same user interface, Wikidata data users usually do not browse items in a web browser as the web UI is in fact an editor tool only. —MisterSynergy (talk) 20:18, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- MisterSynergy: The only "real practical difference" is in that the Help:Label should be the most common term used by the most editors that would be adding this property to an item for an organization. If the position is called "chairman" most often, whether it be filled by a woman or man, then this property should be labelled "chairman", because that is what data editors will most often type in to find this property. -- Netoholic (talk) 20:10, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- The comment I made during the property proposal was not about whether to use "chairperson" or "chairman", although I do think the label should be chairman, which is the most commonly used term for either gender as of 2019 according to all available data. --Yair rand (talk) 22:52, 23 May 2019 (UTC)
- Maybe it is silent consensus, but that is still a consensus. In six years, not a single editor has ever questioned the label. To my understanding, Yair rand did not talk about the chairperson/chairman terminology, but rather about the problem that lots of pretty different positions may be covered by this property, thus "chairperson/man" may be not the best term at all. (Six year later I'd say that it seems to work, however.)
"Chairperson" seems awfully narrow..[edit]
... given that this is used for things like department heads, etc. Is there a more general property here for presiding members who are not considered "chairpersons"? (e.g. the minister in a government ministry, the speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives. etc.?) Because if not, it would seem to me this should simply be "presiding member," which more closely parallels the label in almost every other European language. - Jmabel (talk) 00:53, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Chairperson vs president[edit]
We have separate items president (Q1255921) and chairperson (Q140686), but this property covers both. What can be done when Sam Altman (Q7407093) (president of Y Combinator (Q2616400) is "transitioning to Chairman of YC" (as of March 2019, [1])? Ghouston (talk) 01:30, 22 November 2019 (UTC)
- Many organizations (and many corporations) identify their "leader" as a "president" and not a "chairperson." But there is no "president" property as of yet! Yes, there is "chief executive officer" (CEO) but again, many organizations make a distinction because CEO and "president" (often having both at the same time). Using the property "chairperson" for both a real chairperson and a "president" is not really appropriate.
- Can a property named "president" please be created?
- Also, while you are at it, can a property named "vice-president" also be created?
- Thank you for already having the property "director" (hidden within "director/manager"). but this is hardly consolation for the lack of the other needed properties.
- If we consider the most used names for leaders within organizations:
- + chairperson (also known as "chairperson of the board")
- + chief executive officer
- + president
- + executive-vice-president
- + senior-vice-president
- + vice-president
- + director (really a "managing-director")
- + manager
- only three of these currently exist as properties; these are:
- + chairperson
- + chief executive officer
- + director/manager
- Can the following (organizational/corporate) properties please be created?
- + president
- + vice-president
- + executive-vice-president
- + senior-vice-president
- + vice-president
- + managing-director
- + manager
- Now for the very real future: there is indeed the existing property:
- + chief operating officer
- but what should be done about titles such as (where I do not have a ready answer):
- + chief financial officer
- + chief technology officer
- + chief information officer
- + ** et cetera **
- ?
- Maybe in addition to these specific "chief" officers above there should be something like a general:
- + chief officer
- created as a property also, to cover the remaining more rare types of corporate officers.
- Can some action on this matter please be considered?
- Why was this area of corporate structure so little addressed so far? L.Smithfield (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Rename to "leader" and/or a separate leader property?[edit]
The english term here trips me up every time. I've probably added a few dozens people who run organizations, but I doubt any of them were chairs. In many cases, it just doesn't feel right, because the organization in question is more informal. Very few terrorist groups use Robert's Rules of Order and convene a board session to discuss HR concerns.
There is also some confusion within the term, and between languages. The current German label, "Vorstand", translates to CEO chief executive officer (P169) (or, even more accurately, CXO). But in the context of publicly traded companies, the chairperson heads the board of directors, a role similar in power yet entirely distinct from running day-to-day operations. I guess director / manager (P1037) might work, but director is, again, specific to formal organizations while managers sometimes work below top leadership (in bands, for example). Bin Laden wasn't exactly a *manager* or *director* either?
Assuming that too many chairperson (P488) actually happen to be actual chairpeople, would it make sense to add an umbrella property leader and make sort all these terms below it? Or could director / manager (P1037) be renamed, as it does seem to be intended for this purpose and probably hasn't been used in a very specific sense? Karl Oblique (talk) 07:52, 3 October 2021 (UTC)
French label[edit]
Following this request for comments, the French label now includes the male and the female form. PAC2 (talk) 04:58, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Categories:
- All Properties
- Properties with wikibase-item-datatype
- Properties used on 10000+ items
- Properties with constraints on type
- Properties with target required claim constraints
- Properties with contemporary constraints
- Properties with required qualifiers constraints
- Properties with citation needed constraints
- Properties with scope constraints
- Properties with entity type constraints
- Properties using constraint templates