Wikidata:Property proposal/Family progenitor

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Family progenitor[edit]

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

   Not done


We have various noble families and other dynastic families. We should have a field to hold the progenitor of the family, the earliest male member in Wikidata moving up the line of fathers. See the examples above. RAN (talk) 06:46, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


  • Symbol support vote.svg Support David (talk) 07:04, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Can't this already be determined by checking which member had the earliest birth date? --Yair rand (talk) 20:07, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Isn't it easier for the reader to find the progenitor with just one click, rather than clicking on 6 people to get there? Although walking the path with a bot would be a great way to automate the process of inputing the progenitor. The path may not be obvious in women who do not carry the paternal surname. We have some royal dynasties that will have more than one progenitor because of endogamy and hundreds of Wikidata entries for ancestors. --RAN (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
Click? A query can check it, you don't need human intervention to determine which date is earliest. What data would be added by this property that's not already in the database? --Yair rand (talk) 23:36, 11 March 2019 (UTC)
You are assuming that there is a continuous path for every family using only Wikidata entries, for instance the article on Samuel Lincoln says that he is the progenitor of the Lincoln family, yet we are missing a connection to him in Wikidata from Samuel Lincoln to Abraham Lincoln. So, I say no, it cannot always exist based on a calculation. --RAN (talk) 23:54, 12 March 2019 (UTC)

User:Paweł Ziemian User:Jura1 (is this project family relationships?) User:Infovarius User:Melderick User:Bvatant

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Parenthood

  • Interesting proposal. I'm a bit hesitant. I added P53 to Samuel Lincoln (Q7412015). --- Jura 09:22, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
  • I am hesitant as well. Maybe this can be useful to record the progenitor of a branch, especially if sources disagree ? Another way would be to add a specific qualifier in the member list to identify more easily the progenitor. --Melderick (talk) 18:33, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
    • Yes, maybe the actual, computable one isn't necessarily the one sources mentions and/or families are fond of. --- Jura 12:04, 17 March 2019 (UTC)
  • not sure, some kinship systems don't have this sense (or are matrilineal or both lineages), not a clear property for me--Barcelona (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2019 (UTC)