Shortcut: WD:PP/P

Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search
Property proposal: Generic Authority control Person Organization
Event Creative work Term Space
Place Sports Sister projects
Economics Transportation Natural science Property metadata

See also[edit]

This page is for the proposal of new properties.

Before proposing a property
  1. Check if the property already exists by looking at Wikidata:List of properties (manual list) and Special:ListProperties.
  2. Check if the property was previously proposed or is on the pending list.
  3. Check if you can give a similar label and definition as an existing Wikipedia infobox parameter, or if it can be matched to an infobox, to or from which data can be transferred automatically.
  4. Select the right datatype for the property.
  5. Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below and add it in the appropriate section.

Creating the property

  1. Once consensus is reached, change status=ready on the template, to attract the attention of a property creator.
  2. Creation can be done 1 week after the proposal, by a property creator or an administrator.
  3. See steps when creating properties.

On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2017/06.


image of representative work[edit]

   Under discussion
Description image of work created by this person
Data type Commons media file
Domain people
Allowed values Commons image link

I've been doing a lot of image work adding Wikidata images (image (P18)) to Wikipedia articles and have very frequently run into cases where someone has put a painting/building/drawing done BY the person in the image field. Often this then pulls in to various wikis as the official infobox "portrait" of the person, which gets very confusing. It's particularly undesirable when, for instance, a male painter painted a man, and this painting is listed as image (P18), making it seem for all intents and purposes that it is a portrait OF the artist. (Like the one I just came upon had Peter Hurd (Q7174800)'s image as "LBJ National Portrait Gallery.jpg", which is a portrait of LBJ.) It is also very odd when a building pops in as the main image of an architect, or a book title page as the main image of a 17th-century author, etc.

It's a similar issue to those that led to the creation of properties like commemorative plaque image (P1801) and image of grave (P1442). I know image properties are fraught with abuse and confusion, and Wikidata can only be as good as its wide-ranging contributors, but it seems worth getting a discussion going. Sweet kate (talk) 17:27, 1 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. The intent is certainly a good one. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:28, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
  • (was support) Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment another way to do this might be to have a "representative work" property that links to an item for which the image does what this property proposes. Not sure which approach would be better but one or the other seems useful. ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:30, 3 April 2017 (UTC)
    • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment we actually have that already.
      --- Jura 03:50, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
      • notable work (P800)? Then maybe this property isn't needed? ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:11, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
        I would prefer that approach and it is what we do for authors, and would like it to be attempted unless it clearly isn't going to achieve the aim. We need to stop the use of P18 on people pages for their work. At the same time, "notable" is a term that can have issues if users conflate its meaning with that used by the WPs.  — billinghurst sDrewth 21:59, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
        • In that case I Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose this property being created until that other route is attempted first. ArthurPSmith (talk) 17:28, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
      • I have mixed feelings about this solution, with the "perfect being the enemy of the good" mantra rolling in my head. Topmost is that, as @billinghurst: referenced, editors are going to keep putting works in image (P18) (especially when the Wikidata Game image games exist) unless there's a clear, easy solution otherwise. Many, many of these artists/architects etc. have images of work on Commons, but no associated Wikidata items for these works, so a lot more work is required. Then logistical query questions come into play — to pull a notable work image into a wikipedia article using some sort of template would have two levels of query, since it would not need the label of the notable work, but instead the image (P18) property of the notable work, which is another level deep. So you couldn't just query "go get this item's notable work" in a standard way, you have to have a chain. I'm not as knowledgeable on use cases here, but I'm not sure that possible or preferred. Sweet kate (talk) 02:38, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
        • On the flip side, maybe the perfect is worth striving for. I just really, really want to stop the practice of non-portrait images getting fed to 20 language wikis in the primary "photo of this person" property. On English Wikipedia, where I have to add things manually, I can choose not to add the P18 image, or change it in the Wikidata item, but a lot of other languages pull in image (P18) automatically and it's often a misleading (if not straight up erroneous) mess. Sweet kate (talk) 02:42, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
          • We should try to find a way to do a cleanup if there are too many non-portraits in P18 for people.
            --- Jura 10:14, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
            • I would love a push to 1. remove wrong, non-portrait images from P18 for people 2. change P18's description to clarify it is OF the subject, not BY the subject or whatever and 3. work with the various image-related Wikidata games to update all the surrounding text to discourage selecting someone's work as P18 for the creator. Sweet kate (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
          (ec) If we adjusted the current descriptions, 1) to add "image of representative work" as an alias to "notable work"; 2) update image (P18) to say "image of person/subject" or similar.  — billinghurst sDrewth 10:25, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
          • notable work (P800) has a domain of "item," not a Commons image, so the alias wouldn't quite work. The image link would go in as P18 of the work's item. Like in David (Q179900). Sweet kate (talk) 15:00, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
            • If this work is relevant I would prefer to create an item in WIkidata for a relevant work as that work (painting, building, sculpture) would sooner or later get an wikidata item anyway, or has already. --Hannolans (talk) 09:36, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support "image of representative work" with link to an image, could be a twin of notable work (P800) with image instead of a item. That could ease the process of cleaning up image (P18). We could also have process of converting "image of representative work" properties to notable work (P800). --Jarekt (talk) 13:14, 12 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose
    If the motivation for this property is doing a cleanup, then I'm asking why we cannot do it without a new property.
    Redundant to notable work (P800)/image (P18), works are different concepts than their authors, so images of works do not belong to items of authors. Matěj Suchánek (talk) 11:37, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per Matěj Suchánek. --Marsupium (talk) 16:24, 25 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment So Q114112#P18 should be removed since File:Fotografi av fris med fyra män, från Parthenontemplets norra del i Aten - Hallwylska museet - 103044.tif depicts a work of Callicrates (Q114112) but not himself? I think it is the best thing to do to state this – or discuss it previously – at Property talk:P18 and prevent bots from importing images without knowledge about their content. --Marsupium (talk) 15:45, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

coinhabites household with[edit]

   Under discussion
Description the two people live or lived in the same household
Data type Item
Domain person (Q215627)
Example Mark Zuckerberg (Q36215)Dustin Moskovitz (Q370217)
We currently have no way to say that Mark Zuckerberg (Q36215) and Dustin Moskovitz (Q370217) were roommates. The US census also often lists people who live in the same household together.
As far as the wording goes I'm uncertain and open for better suggestions. ChristianKl (talk) 11:11, 25 May 2017 (UTC)


MyAnimeList people ID[edit]

Description identifier for a person or group of people on MyAnimeList
Data type External identifier
Domain person (Q215627)
Allowed values \d+
Example Hayao Miyazaki (Q55400) → 1870
Formatter URL$1/
See also Anime News Network person ID (P1982)

MyAnimeList is one of the largest/most-used English-language databases of Japanese anime and manga. It would be very useful to have a link from anime/manga-related people (or groups of people; e.g. CLAMP / Clamp (Q334471)) to their entry on MyAnimeList. IagoQnsi (talk) 22:23, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support--NewDataB (talk) 23:39, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support A darn shame this hasn't been touched in a month. Mahir256 (talk) 04:06, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Gedbas genealogy person ID[edit]

   Ready Create
Description identifier for a person in the genealogical database of the Verein für Computergenealogie e.V. on
Data type External identifier
Domain human
Allowed values [1-9]\d*
Example Albert Einstein (Q937) 1178245646]
Formatter URL$1

The Verein für Computergenealogie e.V. hosts a lot of good genealogical data in their database. ChristianKl (talk) 17:45, 14 June 2017 (UTC)


JewAge person ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a person on JewAge, a genealogical database for Jewish people
Data type External identifier
Domain human
Example Albert Einstein (Q937) → P0520433729
Formatter URL$1

JewAge is a database that contains a lot of information about the ancestry of Jewish people. ChristianKl (talk) 12:04, 20 June 2017 (UTC)


Symbol support vote.svg Support Mahir256 (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

WeRelate person ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a person in the Creative Commons licensed genealogical database WeRelate
Represents (Q7983244)
Data type External identifier
Domain human
Example Albert Einstein (Q937) → Albert_Einstein_%281%29
Formatter URL$1

WeRelate is a Creative Commons licensed genealogical database and worthy to be referenced. They also frequently list our ID so, it might be easy to import identifiers. ChristianKl (talk) 17:23, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


ChristianKl (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Genealogy ChristianKl (talk) 22:32, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Familypedia person ID[edit]

   Under discussion
Description identifier for a person on Familypedia, the genealogical database by Wikia
Represents Familypedia (Q5433416)
Data type External identifier
Example Eddie August Schneider (Q5335826) → Eddie_August_Schneider_(1911-1940)
Formatter URL$1

Adding another identifier for a genealogical database. ChristianKl (talk) 23:10, 24 June 2017 (UTC)


ChristianKl (talk) 15:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)

Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject GenealogyChristianKl (talk) 23:11, 24 June 2017 (UTC)




travels and stay abroad[edit]

   Under discussion
Description A period of time a person stays in one place (mostly abroad) for education purposes or work, which is not compliant with P551.
Represents kunstnerkoloni
Data type emne-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
Template parameter "ophold i udlandet"
Domain geographic places, groups
Allowed values kolonier, byer/steder, institutioner
Example Skagen Painters (Q726483), Bornholm school of painters (Q4946127)
Source Weilbachs Kunstnerleksikon
Planned use Alle kunstnere skal tilføjes deres udlands ophold hvis tilgængeligt (Se Weilbachs Kunstnerleksikon)
Robot and gadget jobs Ja
See also residence (P551), educated at (P69) - Both do not comply with this.
This is especially notable for many artists (painters, for example) A period of time an artist stays in one place (mostly abroad) to educate him/herself or for his/her work. These stays can be years, months, or just weeks.
this is not compatible with residence (P551) and educated at (P69) fx. residence (P551) is a place where one "lives" - come home to. When you travel to - and stay 10 weeks in Berlin in a collective, or 6 months residence (P551) would not apply. When you travel around the world, and stay periods of time in several places, you still can have your home address registered, which is residence (P551).
residence (P551) is where you LIVE. The new property would be where you STAY AT.
We have work location (P937) with start and end date for the place where people work, wouldn't that do? If not what would be the difference and when should we use which? --Hannolans (talk) 14:12, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Agree with Hannolans re "work location" which should be evident enough to describe where someone is located. If it is permanent, it is called emigration/immigration and that should describe the act of departure or arrival, and for which we don't have a specific event type, and we would use significant event (P793). I don't see sufficient difference in requirement to concur with the need for a new property.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:38, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment re P551. In English the meaning of residence would allow for someone to reside at a place, and not to think of something as a physical building/location. If someone was living in Berlin for a year, I would call it a "residence" whether they have a piece of real estate in London where they family may be residing whether they own/rent/squat in either place. It would be helpful to ensure that the guidance for P551 clarified such.  — billinghurst sDrewth 04:43, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
"Residence" as a noun has various meanings, "home" being the simplest. In some of these uses the person may not live in - or have ever visited one of their residences so the meaning is "a home" rather than home of the person involved.
Natural language is more likely to be "he made his home among the Wanamani" or "he lived in Paris for a while". Quite how long one needs to spend in a place for it to constitute "living there" vs "staying" or merely "visiting" is of course fuzzy. ("Wherever I hang my hat, that's my home.")
It's also not necessarily the case that these visits constitute "work" though they are often work, or education - consider the Grand Tour, or journeys in pursuit of hobbies, or honeymoons.
All the best: Rich Farmbrough08:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC).
In that case it the property could be something like 'visited'? And that can be a museum, concert, country, conference and anything else. --Hannolans (talk) 09:56, 3 June 2017 (UTC)


   Under discussion
Description mtDNA or Y-DNA haplogroup of somebody. This is very sensitive information, only used with a reliable source.
Represents Haplogroup (Q80686)
Data type Item
Domain people
Example Benjamin Franklin (Q34969)Haplogroup V (Q1458022)
Source en:List of haplogroups of historic people
Robot and gadget jobs No

(Add your motivation for this property here.) GZWDer (talk) 18:39, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Dhx1 (talk) 15:15, 8 February 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Once the information is there.--Arbnos (talk) 16:23, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Doc James
Daniel Mietchen
Andrew Su
Projekt ANA
Pavel Dušek
Was a bee
Chris Mungall
Pictogram voting comment.svg Notified participants of WikiProject Medicine Does this property look reasonable? ChristianKl (talk) 09:51, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

  • GA candidate.svg Initial support If we are going to implement this, we need 2 properties, "mtDNA haplogroup" and "Y-DNA haplogroup". Because these 2 concepts are about 2 different parts of genomes (mtDNA and Y-DNA), nothing related to each other and mutually independent. So one property is not enough. If splitted, I support. --Was a bee (talk) 13:22, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting question.svg Question I am not sure. Can someone comment on whether Was a be is correct in saying that it is standard to list both of these and that the property only makes sense when both values are given? Can anyone show an example source which classifies people in this way? The source given is an English Wikipedia article. Can someone point to a place in that article where the information is presented as it should be and everything is correct? Here is the Benjamin Franklin section and here is the source backing it. Is this the kind of data presentation which is ideal, and is this the kind of sources which we will use? I am sure that if this goes live I do not want the sources to be "English Wikipedia", and instead this information should go to the original source. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

psychological test result[edit]

   Under discussion
Description result of a psychological test that a person took (only use this property with a reference). Use with qualifier "determined by test"
Data type Item
Domain human (Q5)
Example Stephen Colbert (Q212886)INFP (Q2670566) "determined by test" Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Q897939)
  • From en:Myers–Briggs Type Indicator: "the MBTI exhibits significant psychometric deficiencies, notably including poor validity (i.e. not measuring what it purports to measure) and poor reliability (giving different results for the same person on different occasions)." Therefore: Oppose'. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 16:41, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

determined by test[edit]

   Under discussion
Description qualifier for "psychological test result" that specifies the test that was used
Data type Item
Domain qualifier for "psychological test result"
Example Stephen Colbert (Q212886) psychological test result INFP (Q2670566)Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Q897939)

It's worthwhile to be able to store the results of tests like the IQ test and Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Q897939) in Wikidata. ChristianKl (talk) 09:06, 3 March 2017 (UTC)

  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment are there really reliable sources for this information? How many individuals would we have data for? It would be mostly BLP data so we definitely want it sourced (and I'm glad your description emphasizes that). ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:33, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
Interesting question about scope. In principle, should Wikidata include information that is of dubious theoretical validity and where should it draw the line? I assume "religion" is in scope while "number of Yeti sightings" would not be. The Land (talk) 12:47, 16 March 2017 (UTC)

academic affiliation[edit]

   Under discussion
Description university or college where this person was a teacher
Data type Item
Template parameter "workplaces" in en:Template:Infobox scientist
Domain people
Allowed values subclass of academic institution (Q4671277)
Example Basil Lanneau Gildersleeve (Q810037)Johns Hopkins University (Q193727)
Robot and gadget jobs yes

Until now, academic affiliation is represented using employer (P108)  university (Q3918). From a European viewpoint, this is not ideal. While the university funtions as employer to most of it's faculty, there are various kinds of academics not being formally employed by but still teaching at a university (in Germany Privatdozent (Q1402736) and assistant lecturer (Q1644594), for example). Currently, there is no way of properly displaying this kind of academic affiliation in Wikidata.

Therefor, I propose we create a new property called something along the lines of "academic affiliation" ("Universitätszugehörigkeit"). This will serve as a supplement or substitute for employer (P108). Both can be used together whenever appropriate.

A similar proposal was made by Suzanne Beulemans last year (Wikidata:Property proposal/academic institution), it was but declined due to the scope being ill-defined. I hope this proposal is more clear about that.

In a very European manner, I that academic research and teaching should be thought of as one. Therefor I suggest we use this property for affiliation with research centers as well (like Aage Niels Bohr (Q103854)Institute for Advanced Study (Q635642)). But this is a debatable point, and I leave it up to you to decide if we should broaden the scope of this property in that way, or if we should restrict it to academic teaching. Jonathan Groß (talk) 11:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)


@ChristianKl, ArthurPSmith, Jura1: Thoughts? Jonathan Groß (talk) 11:48, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

  • Given the existing name I think it would likely be used outside of teaching. If you want to restrict the property to teaching, I think the name should be changed. ChristianKl (talk) 12:05, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
    • @ChristianKl: I actually want it to be used for both research and teaching institutions. I can still change the description accordingly. Would that a bad thing? Jonathan Groß (talk) 12:22, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  • No, I don't think it would be bad. From my view the important thing is that name and description are consistent. ChristianKl (talk) 13:36, 25 April 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support and I think it should apply for both research and teaching affiliations. ArthurPSmith (talk) 12:34, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @ChristianKl, ArthurPSmith: I just found affiliation (P1416). Now I think that this current proposal should be more specific: We should design this property for academic teaching only. Do you concur? Jonathan Groß (talk) 08:59, 29 April 2017 (UTC)
  • @Jonathan Groß:I'm fine with limiting the proposal to academic teaching but I think that would need a slightly different name. ChristianKl (talk) 13:31, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
@ChristianKl: Like "university affiliation"? Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:24, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
I don't see how "university affiliation" gives the impression that it's limited to teaching. ChristianKl (talk) 20:20, 21 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose When an university is an employer, it can be any rank, any function. When you want to be more specific about these, it is separate from the employment but you can make it a qualifier. It is quite obvious that employment remains correct and, it is not only faculty that we have in Wikidata even for European universities.. Trust me in this. Thanks, GerardM (talk) 20:17, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
    • @GerardM: At least in Germany, you can teach at a university without being employed by it. You can be Privatdozent (Q1402736) at university A with teaching obligations but not employment, no money, no insurance whatsoever, while at the same time working as research fellow (Q1706722) at university B and not teaching there. This hypothetical academic would need a statement of "employer:B" and "academic teaching:A" but not vice versa. Jonathan Groß (talk) 08:31, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I've crossed out my support above - I don't actually see why affiliation (P1416) doesn't work for teaching affiliation here. If you need to be more detailed about the type of relationship with the institution then a qualifier specifying the type of position held might do all that's needed. In Jonathan's hypothetical example above, employer (P108) B and affiliation (P1416) A seems perfectly appropriate. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:13, 19 June 2017 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per ArthurPSmith. Mahir256 (talk) 21:42, 19 June 2017 (UTC)

place of birth/death string[edit]

place of birth string[edit]

   Ready Create
Description when the source states the name of the place of birth but possibly multiple different places share the same name, this property can be used instead of P19
Data type Monolingual text
Domain person
Example Siegmund Friedrich Dresig (Q114384) → Vorberg (cf. w:de:Vorberg)
See also place of birth (P19), author name string (P2093)

place of death string[edit]

   Ready Create
Description when the source states the name of the place of death but possibly multiple different places share the same name, this property can be used instead of P20
Data type Monolingual text
Domain person
Example Herbert Coleridge (Q5733811) → 10 Chester Place, Regent's Park
See also place of death (P20), author name string (P2093)

Just like author name string (P2093) can be useful when importing data about work (Q386724)s where an ambiguous string is the only information we have the author, in many case we only have the string of the name of a place of birth when importing the place of birth from sources that only list the city name. The same goes for the place of death.

Having the property will make it easier to import authority control data from sources that just store the names of the places of birth and death as strings. ChristianKl (talk) 19:38, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

GA candidate.svg Weak support do you have some examples where the place name is actually ambiguous and this would really be helpful? Otherwise I'm not sure allowing more unstructured data is a good thing here. ArthurPSmith (talk) 16:59, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
I remember entering biographical data where the place of birth was labeled as "Washington". That could be Washington state. It could also be Washington DC. There were also other cases where I don't remember the specifics.
In cases, where there's zero ambiguity, a bot might add place of birth (P19) and place of death (P20). When a GLAM partner uploads a larger set of authority control data and only has strings for the place of birth/death it would be helpful for the GLAM partner to not have to worry about matching the strings to Wikidata items the same way that the GLAM partner doesn't have to worry about choicing the right author when uploading authority control data about scientific papers. A bot that's specifically designed to do the task of turning the string into Wikidata items well, would likely do a better job than whatever ad-hoc solution a GLAM partner would use. ChristianKl (talk) 10:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support I could think of a bunch of use cases. Think of all the homonymous cities in the U.S., or of obscure historical villages which don't exist anymore or can't be identified properly. Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:29, 16 June 2017 (UTC) Edit: I took the liberty of changing the datatype from "string" to "monolingual text", and replaced the Albert Einstein example with an actual use case. Jonathan Groß (talk) 09:36, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
Thank you. ChristianKl (talk) 10:35, 16 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment How about using the actual properties with the special value "unknown" and qualify it with quote?
    --- Jura 21:32, 18 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose per above.
    --- Jura 17:56, 22 June 2017 (UTC)
    @Jura1, ChristianKl: Siegmund Friedrich Dresig (Q114384) might be a poor example, but that doesn't mean that this property isn't a good idea. Jonathan Groß (talk) 17:21, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
    It's better than the Albert Einstein one that was replaced. With or without, I think we get the general idea. One can obviously support building a parallel structure with string properties (or not). Personally, I think the alternative I suggested with unknown and quote should be equivalent.
    --- Jura 09:29, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support I just came across this yesterday when I was annotating a letter written in 1918. It listed several locations in France and a place where a body was buried and Wikipedia gave me a disambiguation page for that name, eventually I was able to firm it up with research that they were in Ardennes from the context. I also come across locations that were probably farm names or hamlets that never became census designated places in old New York Times obituaries. They are not in the GNIS database. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 16:38, 24 June 2017 (UTC)