Property talk:P91

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Documentation

sexual orientation
the sexual orientation of the person — use IF AND ONLY IF they have stated it themselves, unambiguously, or it has been widely agreed upon by historians after their death
Representssexual orientation (Q17888)
Associated item
Data typeItem
Domainhuman (Q5), fictional character (Q95074) and character that may be fictional (Q21070598)
Allowed valuesheterosexuality (Q1035954), homosexuality (Q6636), bisexuality (Q43200), gay (Q592), lesbian (Q6649), non-heterosexuality (Q339014), asexuality (Q724351), pansexuality (Q271534) and gray asexuality (Q8354594)
ExampleAlbert Verlinde (Q1965433)homosexuality (Q6636)
Lists
Proposal discussionProperty proposal/Archive/1#P91
Current uses1,504
Search for values
[create] Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here
One of heterosexuality (Q1035954), homosexuality (Q6636), bisexuality (Q43200), gay (Q592), lesbian (Q6649), non-heterosexuality (Q339014), asexuality (Q724351), pansexuality (Q271534), gray asexuality (Q8354594): value must be one of the specified items. Please expand list if needed. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Known exceptions: anonymous (Q4233718)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P91#One of, values statistics, search, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
Value type “sexual orientation (Q17888): 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 sexual orientation (Q17888) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P91#Value type Q17888, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
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)
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P91#Type Q5, Q95074, Q21070598, hourly updated report, SPARQL, SPARQL (new)
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/P91#Allowed qualifiers, SPARQL (new)
Scope is: 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/P91#scope, SPARQL (new)
Citation needed: the property must have at least one reference (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Constraint violations/P91#citation needed, SPARQL (new)

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

Constraints[edit]

Pictogram voting comment.svg Claims without source
Each P91 claim needs to have at least one (non Wikipedia) source (Help)
Violations query: SELECT DISTINCT ?item { ?item p:P91 ?claim; wdt:P31 wd:Q5 . OPTIONAL { ?claim prov:wasDerivedFrom ?source . ?source ?p ?v . FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?v wdt:P31 wd:Q10876391 } } FILTER(!bound(?source)) }
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P91#Claims without source

Rules for Usage[edit]

Rule Archived Discussion
Use this property only together with a reference in that the person itself states her/his sexual orientation or for historical persons if most historians agree Ongoing discussion (german),

Discussion[edit]

Archived creation discussion[edit]

Sexuality/Sexual Orientation[edit]

Reedy (talk) 00:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose In some cases this might be of general interest, normally it's none of your business. --Kolja21 (talk) 06:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I disagree. If someone has publicly stated their sexual orientation, why should we not include it? Legoktm (talk) 17:12, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "private property"! Wikidata is not yellow press, the same with length, diameter, cup size, how often... Whoever edits a box about a person will feel urged to make a statement about sexual orientation, even if there is no public source about it.--Giftzwerg 88 (talk) 17:34, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose With personal data we must be very careful. For instance, the sexual orientation is an issue on which researchers do not have a consensus if it is a valid classification at all. It is a bit like race, but more complex. --Teemu (talk) 10:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support Sexual orientation is a perfectly valid thing to include in Wikidata if there are clear sources to say someone self-identifies a particular way. And there are a lot of people for whom their sexual orientation is an important matter. Is it "yellow journalism" to say Harvey Milk is gay? Perhaps it's intrusive to say Martin Luther King is black or that the Pope is a Catholic. Tom Morris (talk) 20:25, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Where do we need this info? At least not in Wikipedia, because it's not encyclopedia material, just trivia. --Stryn (talk) 20:31, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
In some cases, like those cited by Tom Morris, those are indeed key things to undertand what makes the pesron important. What bugs me is: where should we stop ? And I am afraid this is something of a cultural matter. For instance, many infoboxes in English Wikipedia include religion or ethnicity, while that would sound rather out of place to many French people. --Zolo (talk) 20:41, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
It isn't just "trivia", any more than the Pope's religion is trivia. There are a large number of categories on English Wikipedia which are based around a person being LGBT. It's of interest to people in gender and queer studies to be able to locate, say, lesbian writers or gay filmmakers. For some individuals, their sexual orientation is of trivial importance, for other people it is of great importance and is, like race or religion or national origin, something which profoundly shapes their character, interests, self-understanding, social role, beliefs and career. You can't understand Derek Jarman or Peter Tatchell unless you understand that they are gay. You can't understand the life of Alan Turing unless you deal with the fact that he was convicted of and punished for being gay. Tom Morris (talk) 20:56, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support No more prone to abuse than any number of properties. It'd have to have a description like "the sexual orientation of the subject IF AND ONLY IF they have stated it themselves, unambiguously, or it has been widely agreed upon by historians after their death", but, I don't see any problem with such a property in general. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 20:51, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Just wait the extension of the referencing to create that property and then delete every entry which doesn't have a reference. Snipre (talk) 21:00, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose At this stage, is this really the piece of information the general support for the project needs to be tested with? I do understand the cultural value of the information, but I oppose to the quantification offered by storing it. --Susannaanas (talk) 11:17, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
✓ Done Created using PinkAmpersand's wording. James F. (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I'm drawing up some proposed guidelines on the talk page, and will post again here to invite everyone to dicuss, once I'm done with them. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Actually, if you really want to undertand someone, you will probably read a real text about him. Just seeing in a database that Alan Turing was gay will not carry you very far. I suppose this kind of property is more useful for data-mining or things like that. --Zolo (talk) 21:08, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

I've posted some proposed usage guidelines at Property talk:P91, and invite all of you to comment. Thanks. — PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:54, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

Proposed guidelines on use[edit]

Note: Unless otherwise noted, "label" in this thread shall be understood to refer to a description of one's sexual orientation, not to a Wikidata label.

I propose that the rules for use of this property be as follows:

  • If the subject is alive, or has died recently enough that the enwiki en:WP:BDP policy might apply (i.e. their depiction has repercussions on the public images of other living people), the property may only be set if they have clearly stated that their orientation.
  • If the subject is open about being non-heterosexual, but has never chosen a specific label, then the property may be set as "non-heterosexual" (Q339014).
  • However, simply being in a public relationship with a member of the same sex should not be considered an admission of non-heterosexuality. For instance, while Lindsay Lohan has never denied her relationship with Samantha Ronson, she's said that she isn't a lesbian, and has declined to classify herself as bisexual. There exist individuals who are in public relationships with members of the same sex who insist that they are entirely heterosexual otherwise (I have a teacher like this), and while some may disagree as to whether or not this is possible, we should respect people's self-labeling, and not simply dub them non-heterosexual because they didn't try to hide a same-sex relationship.
  • (Likewise, if someone has stated explicitly that they aren't heterosexual, and has been in open relationships with both members of the same sex and members of the opposite sex, the should not be assumed to be bisexual. One can be pansexual, polysexual, or any number of less-frequently-used labels. [Note also that while "polysexual" is used as an umbrella term for bisexuals and pansexuals, it also (unlike "non-heterosexual") has significant usage as a label itself, and as such should not be treated as a default term for openly non-heterosexual, non-homosexual people.])
  • Additionally, there is no "default" sexual orientation. To list someone as heterosexual, they must have explicitly stated that they are heterosexual. Doesn't matter if you're talking about Chuck Norris, the Pope, or Ayman al-Zawahiri, no one is assumed to be heterosexual.
  • Finally, technical terms - i.e. "homosexual", "heterosexual", "bisexual", "pansexual", etc., should always be used, unless the subject has explicitly said something like "Oh, 'homosexual' is such a clinical term. I prefer to be called 'gay'."
  • If the subject is deceased (and not subject to BDP), then we have a bit more leeway. If there is a general consensus among historians that they were a specific orientation, then that orientation may be used.
  • If, as often happens, historians agree that the subject was not heterosexual, but disagree as to whether or not they were homosexual, bisexual, or some other label, then it is acceptable to list all non-fringe theory labels. This will make much more sense once we have sources enabled, but, basically, if some people say Lord Byron was gay and some say he was bisexual, then put both, and cite reliable sources for each claim.
  • If there is a significant number of historians who state that the subject was heterosexual and a significant number who state that they were homosexual, then, both claims may likewise be included.
  • However, be very wary of fringe views. Do not include some obscure claim that JFK was gay, or some convaluted argument that "proves" that Alan Turing should be considered straight. (I say this reluctantly, as someone who wrote the first few scenes of a screenplay about Napoleon being gay.)
  • It's only necessary to include a historical subject's heterosexuality if there'd be any reason to doubt it. While some historical figures' sexualities (e.g. Abraham Lincoln's) are the subjects of popular debate to a degree that some historians might have laughingly replied "no, they were straight", there's no reason to list any sexual orientation for someone like... I don't know... Dwight D. Eisenhower or Mao Zedong, who no one has ever seriously claimed was gay.

— PinkAmpers&(Je vous invite à me parler) 21:52, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

  • I can't support the use of this property unless, of course, w:en:WP:BLP is applied to it. And yes, technical terms would be favorable because common terms tend to be imprecise.--Jasper Deng (talk) 07:15, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Delete[edit]

Discussion moved to Wikidata:Properties for deletion. --Stryn (talk) 13:12, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

The discussion is now archived at Wikidata:Requests for deletions/Archive/2013/Properties/1#Property:P91. --Stevenliuyi (talk) 09:57, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

No bots please[edit]

I've just left a message with the operator of Dexbot. The bot has added what is probably thousands of statements about sexual orientation of people (including living people) by simply copying them from en.wiki. On average, that information is pretty good but a bot can't really tell if the info is good enough for the fairly strict restrictions placed in the definition of the property. In particular, I think we can all agree that this is unacceptable for living people. Pichpich (talk) 05:23, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Chirlane McCray[edit]

What should be the "sexual orientation" of Chirlane McCray? She came out as a lesbian at the age of 17, and even wrote an essay "I Am a Lesbian". She's currently married to Bill de Blasio and together they have two children. — Bill william comptonTalk 04:35, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Removal of unsourced P91 statements[edit]

Following discussions at Wikidata:Project chat#Unsourced sexual orientation (P91) statements (September/October 2016) and Wikidata:Project chat/Archive/2016/08#Unsourced and Wikipedia sourced P91 statements (August 2016), I removed all unsourced P91 statements from items about humans (almost 5000 statements). This data can of course be added again, if a valid source is provided as well. Since the complex constraints report of unsourced statements contains also items about fictional characters, you might want to find new violations with this query:

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?sexualOrientation ?sexualOrientationLabel WHERE { 
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 .
  ?item p:P91 ?foo . 
  ?foo ps:P91 ?sexualOrientation . 
  OPTIONAL{ ?foo prov:wasDerivedFrom ?source } 
  FILTER(!bound(?source))
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "en" }
}

Try it!

If only a small amount of items is affected, it would be worth to spend effort into finding sources for the statements in question, rather than remove the data. However, as of beginning of October 2016 an amount of almost 5000 unsourced claims piled up, which would require an estimated time of ~200 hours to source. It is very unlikely that any Wikidata editor spends this time for sourcing. The removed data was to a large extent imported from Wikipedias (which is undesirable anyway), so that most information is not completely lost anyway. If you are looking for sources, I’d recommend to visit Wikipedias and see what they have… —MisterSynergy (talk) 06:35, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

The discussion from WD:PC has meanwhile been archived to Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2016/10#Unsourced_sexual_orientation_.28P91.29_statements. Claims sourced solely by imported from Wikimedia project (P143) have been removed as well. Those can be found by this query:
SELECT ?item WHERE {
  ?item wdt:P31 wd:Q5 .
  ?item p:P91 [
    prov:wasDerivedFrom ?ref
  ] .
  ?ref pr:P143 [] .
  FILTER NOT EXISTS {
    ?item p:P91 [
     prov:wasDerivedFrom ?ref2 
    ] 
    FILTER (?ref2 != ?ref ) 
    FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?ref2 pr:P143 [] } .
  }
}
Try it! . —MisterSynergy (talk)
Is being married to the other gender enough to be a source for their sexual orientation? And if so, what would be the best way to state that? Q.Zanden questions? 20:56, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
No, not really. They can be bisexial, pansexual, asexual, or just simply in a marriage of convenience. – Máté (talk) 04:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Cassandra Rios (Q15266701) isn't a «constraint violation» for sexual orientation (P91)[edit]

As you can read in the provided URL for claim source, Cassandra Rios (Q15266701) does not contain any «constraint violation» for sexual orientation (P91):

  • Cassandra Rios is the pen name or, if you prefer, the heteronim who wrote all of the books. Cassandra Rios is lesbian.
  • Odete Rios is the birthname of the person who wrote all books. At the time of the given interview provided as a source (2001), she was 68 years old. The way that she figured to publicize their personal sexuality was to say
    Português: A opção sexual da Odete é uma coisa... [Bruscamente] Acredito que você poderia respeitar minha privacidade! Acho que pelo menos a Odete deve ficar incógnita. Escritor é um mito, tem que se preservar, não tem que aparecer.
    —Odete Rios, URL provided as a source

Doing it in a similar way that was done on Fernando Pessoa (Q173481) and his heteronims will not properly adress the issue: Fernando Pessoa also wrote works without adopting any heteronim, but all works of Odete Rios have been wrote within the Cassandra Rios name.

In short, this is a single example of ignobious correction that the most prominent Wikimedians does and bites the qualified users from collaborating. The entire Wikimedian movement knowns this issue, but did nothing to properly address it. As we are talking about brazilian writers, maybe the WMF volunteers should read the books by Paulo Freire A.S.A.P. to change their behaviour – until at least is anyone interested to contribute on WMF projects. Lugusto (talk) 17:21, 24 December 2017 (UTC)