Property talk:P53

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

family
family, including dynasty and nobility houses. Not family name (use P734 for family name).
Representsfamily (Q8436)
Data typeItem
Domainhuman (Q5), fictional character (Q95074) and character that may be fictional (Q21070598)
Allowed valuesfamily/dynasty name (generally a single item) (note: this should be moved to the property statements)
ExampleElizabeth II (Q9682)House of Windsor (Q81589)
Barack Obama (Q76)family of Barack Obama (Q643049)
Tracking: sameno label (Q42533348)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P53 (Q21085095)
See alsofamily name (P734), gens (P5025)
Lists
Proposal discussionOriginally created without a formal discussion
Current uses28,172
[create] Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here
Type “human (Q5), fictional character (Q95074), character that may be fictional (Q21070598): element must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “human (Q5), fictional character (Q95074), character that may be fictional (Q21070598)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P53#Type Q5, Q95074, Q21070598, SPARQL
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/P53#Item P21, SPARQL
Value type “noble family (Q13417114), fictional noble family (Q19791817), family (Q8436), fictional family (Q15331236): 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 noble family (Q13417114), fictional noble family (Q19791817), family (Q8436), fictional family (Q15331236) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P53#Value type Q13417114, Q19791817, Q8436, Q15331236, SPARQL
Single value: this property generally contains a single value. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P53#Single value, SPARQL
Without qualifiers: this property should be used without any qualifiers. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P53#Allowed qualifiers
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/P53#scope
Contemporaries:
if [item A] has this property (P53) 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.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P53#Contemporary, SPARQL
This property is being used by:

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

Deletion discussion[edit]

Started at WD:RFD#Property:P53. --Yair rand (talk) 07:27, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Rules[edit]

Please comment on these proposed rules:

  • Target family would be a term ? an organisation?
I had been wondering about this one. Organisation makes sense to me. Danrok (talk) 00:09, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Agreement on that one, let's formalize it LaddΩ chat ;) 22:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
  • Target family would be noble family or royal house or dynasty?
  • Target family would be a list of persons ?

LaddΩ chat ;) 23:00, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I comment this Proposed Rules : Target family would be noble family or royal house or dynasty?, the two other rules seems to be accepted.
It's not so simple. Actually, target family has the property instance of (P31) thats is set with value family (Q8436), noble family (Q13417114) or dynasty (Q164950). There is a problem about value family (Q8436). --Odejea (talk) 09:20, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
I have just seen these values on Clan Bruce (Q845196) for instance of (P31) : royal house (Q1156073) and Scottish clan (Q499247)--Odejea (talk) 10:24, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
I agree, not all three at the same time. I would like a check that the target is family (Q8436) OR noble family (Q13417114) OR dynasty (Q164950) - but there is no Template for that yet. In the future maybe. LaddΩ chat ;) 22:01, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
Not all Scottish clans are noble families. Danrok (talk) 00:11, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Not all noble family articles will be lists of persons. Danrok (talk) 00:15, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
OK so no condition on target type, but i guess it is safe to expect that it is a list of persons - since most families or clans or dynasties will have famous members that would eventually be attached to the item. LaddΩ chat ;) 22:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Other families[edit]

What about non-noble families? Could they be included here too, or could there be another property for that? I wanted to add a connection between Q826719 and its members, but there doesn't seem to be a property for that. - Andre Engels (talk) 10:03, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

I'd include them. --- Jura 06:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)

I'm concerned about this too. Japanese person infoboxes often include clan membership as one field, but clans are often not nobility. Maybe in Europe the fighters were also the nobles, but in Japan the fighters were closely associated with nobles, and held a very high social status, but were often not nobles themselves. If this property really is meant to include clans, the name seems Eurocentric. --Haplology (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

I suppose we could have a property focusing on European medieval nobility, but even in the European context, the property is being used for families that might just have a special social status. Already the "Scottish clan" mentioned in the property documentation example seems to be an incorrect use.
Outside the medieval context, the label "noble family" is likely to lead to many anachronisms. --- Jura 13:26, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

Roman gens[edit]

Is this property appropriated to indicate the Roman era "gens" of a person (like "Julii" for Gaius Julius Caesar) or should a separate Gens property be created ? -Ash Crow (talk) 17:28, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

I'd include them. --- Jura 06:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
As long as it works with this property, there is no need to create a new property or to modify anything. --Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2015 (UTC)

P1629[edit]

@Jura1, Larske: et al. The discussions above maybe should be followed up by changing subject item of this property (P1629) in the property to family (Q8436) instead of noble family (Q13417114) -- Innocent bystander (talk) 10:19, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Jura1: ✓ Utfört in English (en), svenska (sv), bokmål (nb), nynorsk (nn) og dansk (da). -- Innocent bystander (talk) 08:54, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
Thanks. I did a few more and moved other labels to the alias column.
--- Jura 14:54, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

Roman gens again[edit]

Normally, we are placing the gens of a Roman on this property; however, the gens was not the family, but a group of families sharing the same nomen. For example, Crassus was a member of the Licinia gens and his family was the Licinii Crassi; Lucullus was a member of the Licinia gens and his family was the Licinii Luculli; and so. I think we should have a specific property for gens. --Romulanus (talk) 08:00, 26 March 2018 (UTC)