Shortcut: WD:PP/P

Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

From Wikidata
Jump to: navigation, search

See also:
Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending - Properties which have been approved but which are on hold waiting for the appropriate datatype to be made available.
Wikidata:Properties for deletion - proposals for the deletion of properties.

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:AllPages.
  2. Check if the property is already pending or has been rejected.
  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. See WD:WikiProject Infoboxes for suggestions.
  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. Creation can be done after 1 week by a property creator or an administrator.
  2. See steps when creating properties.

Add a request

This page is archived, currently at Archive 32.

To add a request, you should use this form:

=== {{TranslateThis | anchor = en
| de = <!-- PROPERTY NAME IN German (optional) -->
| fr = <!-- PROPERTY NAME IN French (optional) -->
<!-- |xx = property names in some other languages -->
}} ===
{{Property documentation
|status                 = <!--leave this empty-->
|description            = {{TranslateThis
  | en = ...
|subject item           = <!-- item corresponding to the concept represented by the property, if applicable; example: item ORCID (Q51044) for property ORCID (P496) -->
|infobox parameter      = Wikipedia infobox parameters, if any; ex: "population" in [[:en:template:infobox settlement]]
|datatype               = put datatype here (item, string, media, coordinate, monolingual text, multilingual text, time, URL, number)
|domain                 = types of items that may bear this property
|allowed values         = type of linked items (Q template or text), list or range of allowed values, string pattern...
|source                 = external reference, Wikipedia list article, etc.
|example                = {{Q|1}} → {{Q|2}}
|formatter URL          = 
|filter                 = (sample: 7 digit number can be validated with edit filter [[Special:AbuseFilter/17]])
|robot and gadget jobs  = Should or are bots or gadgets doing any task with this? (Checking other properties for consistency, collecting data, etc.)


(Add your motivation for this property here.) ~~~~


For a list of infobox parameters, you might want to use table format:

{{List of properties/Header}}

{{List of properties/Row|id=
|title          = audio
|type           = media
|qualifier      =
|description    = Commons sound file
|example-subject= Q187 <!-- Il Canto degli Italiani -->
|example-object = Inno di Mameli instrumental.ogg


For blank forms, see Property documentation and List of properties/Row

Person / Person / Personne[edit]

work period (start) and word period (end)[edit]

   In progress
Description period during which a person flourished (fl. = "floruit") in their professional activity
Data type Time
Template parameter "workperiod" in c:template:creator
Domain persons (including pseudonyms, house names etc.)
Allowed values any date
Example Vincent van Gogh (Q5582) => between circa 1880 and circa July 1890
Format and edit filter validation (sample: 7 digit number can be validated with edit filter Special:AbuseFilter/17)
Source eg Commons:Creator:Vincent van Gogh, "fl." in biographies, VIAF, museum sites, etc
Robot and gadget jobs Should or are bots or gadgets doing any task with this? (Checking other properties for consistency, collecting data, etc.)
Proposed by Jheald (talk) ammended by Filceolaire (talk)
   In progress
Description period during which a person flourished (fl. = "floruit") in their professional activity
Data type Time
Template parameter "workperiod" in c:template:creator
Domain persons (including pseudonyms, house names etc.)
Allowed values any date
Example Vincent van Gogh (Q5582) => circa July 1890
Format and edit filter validation (sample: 7 digit number can be validated with edit filter Special:AbuseFilter/17)
Source eg Commons:Creator:Vincent van Gogh, "fl." in biographies, VIAF, museum sites, etc
Robot and gadget jobs Should or are bots or gadgets doing any task with this? (Checking other properties for consistency, collecting data, etc.)
Proposed by Jheald (talk) ammended by Filceolaire (talk)

Proposal amended as the discussion below Filceolaire (talk) 23:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
Standard property for artists, creators etc: it's not unusual that we may not know when they were born, when they died, etc, but know quite well when they were active and their works were produced.

I'm also looking to migrate content from the Commons Creator template to WD, with a view to ultimately dematerialising it from Commons altogether (see Template:Creator/wrapper/test for some early tests). But I don't want to lose any functionality or data in the process. I've done my best to fill out the birdcage above, but need some help to know how best to code what are often likely to be probably quite approximate date ranges. Jheald (talk) 23:23, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

@Jheald: Would floruit (P1317) work? --Jakob (talk) 23:59, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jakec: it's kinda different. For usual "life" "floruit" floruit (P1317) should be used, but we still need new property for years of active sport career or art career. -- Vlsergey (talk) 01:02, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
@Jakec:, @Vlsergey: Thanks, I had missed floruit (P1317). I think P1317 probably should work, but would need some adaptation to its existing rules and regulations. In particular, as per the Vincent van Gogh example above, one should be able to use it when one does know the date of birth and date of death, to indicate the period of activity. Secondly, we'd need to check that standard library routines for extracting and presenting such dates (eg Module:Wikidata) cope well with a range that can be actually quite precise. Per mw:Wikibase/DataModel#Dates_and_times, one could try to code this 1885-06-00 / precision:10 / before:5 / after 5.1, but I suspect that would probably decode to "about June 1885" (@Zolo: ?); in particular, there would be no way to specify that the two ends of the range have different precisions. Alternatively, does one make two entries, with separate start date and end date qualifiers? But then does the software know how to pick that up, and to interpret it as a range? Also, with two entries, it's hard to link them to show that the range has been specified by the source. Perhaps what's needed is an adjustment to the time datatype, to make it more possible to specify ranges with really quite well-known start and end points. Jheald (talk) 06:56, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
I think it's better to have two properties. Usually only the start point is specified and end point is assumed. -- Vlsergey (talk) 14:40, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
On further thought, having looked for typical examples of how this is used on c:Template:Creator templates, I do agree with User:Vlsergey that there is a case for the two different properties.
floruit (P1317) is good for asserting a particular moment in time when the artist worked.
But often what existing c:Template:Creator templates specify is much more precise -- an actual range, with well-identified start and end points.
That's a different thing. But the question remains, how best to specify the property. start time (P580) and end time (P582) are useful as qualifiers, but what assertion should they qualify? And could one still specify end cause (P1534) as a qualifer to a qualifier? Or if one wants to be able to use properties like end cause (P1534), does that mean a new first-rank property is needed? Jheald (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
Jheald if end cause (P1534) is used as a qualifier and the qualifiers subsequently all get moved out of order it is still clear what it means so there isn't a 'qualifier of a qualifier proplem. It can be a qualifier just like start time (P580) or end time (P582). Filceolbaire (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
Maybe two new properties. 'Floruit (start date)' and 'Floruit (end date)'?. Note that the span for a 'point in time' date - like 'Floruit' uses - is an uncertainty. It should never be be used for a range. Filceolaire (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2014 (UTC)
I think you're right. I think that's a good way forward. Symbol support vote.svg Support. Jheald (talk) 01:34, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Based on the comments above, I Symbol support vote.svg Support. Eurodyne (talk) 23:43, 11 December 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support, though I like work period better than fluorit for these start and end dates. Still, we can have aliases. - - PKM (talk) 02:54, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support based on above comments and because I think it could be useful for writers/artists/musicians, whose exactly birth date (or death date) is unknown but we know the period of their activity. --Nastoshka (talk) 23:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

I don't understand what exactly is the proposal here: to replace "floruit" with two properties 'Floruit (start date)' and 'Floruit (end date)'? But then, sometimes we just know that the author was active in a particular year, but we are not sure how many years he worked before and after that moment. How do you model that with two properties? BTW, I think "work period" is a better definition than "floruit": floruit makes sense when talking about writers, artists and the like, and doesn't sound good with sportsmen or politicians or others; while "work period" is in fact more general and can cover all cases. Candalua (talk) 08:59, 17 February 2015 (UTC)

Candalua The proposal is to add a new property. The discussion has raised an alternative proposal - to replace "floruit" with two new properties giving the start and end date. This is appropriate even if the person was only active in a particular year since quoting a year in wikidata technically refers to an instant in time which we are uncertain about exactly when. It does not refer to a period in time. To refer to a period - even one year - you need a start and end date, even if these appear to be the same because all we know is that both are sometime in the same year.

Pictogram voting question.svg Question. Why not just use start time (P580) and end time (P582) on occupation (P106)? Mushroom (talk) 00:31, 13 March 2015 (UTC)

Mushroom This is a special property to use when we don't have a date of birth or death. Filceolaire (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Instead we should replace "Floruit" with two new properties - 'Floruit (start date)' and 'Floruit (end date)'. Filceolaire (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Jheald Mushroom Candalua Nastoshka Eurodyne I have rewritten the property proposal and added the proposal below as the discussion above. I want to use this property for collective pseudonyms as well - these have their own items, separate from the individuals using them. Filceolaire (talk) 23:00, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • BA candidate.svg Weak oppose I'm getting the impression that Wikidata support for time intervals (start - end) as a data type is not under pursuit. The split into two properties has slight advantages over the current one for life dates floruit (P1317) (start and end date can be qualified individually, however one usually does not want to provide individual references) but will become problematic for persons with several professional careers: The proposed properties would have to be qualified by their corresponding occupation and I see no gain over using e.g. field of work (P101) or occupation (P106) qualified by the usual start and end date properties start time (P580) / end time (P582) or perhaps in this case more often time of earliest written record (P1249) or earliest date (P1319) / latest date (P1326). (And for persons with two careers in the same field both approaches are equally messy).
Furthermore I cannot see how floruit (P1317) and the proposed properties could coexist: Except for rare cases where a person is mentioned in the context of a specific point of time the mor common usage for P1317 is to record a work period (manifest in works still extant or mentioned in some written records). -- Gymel (talk) 06:25, 28 May 2015 (UTC)
  • I havge merged the discussion on these two properties because it was starting to get disjointed. Gymel seems to raise valid points. Would you like to address them Filceolaire or anyone else? MSGJ (talk) 08:32, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

 Not done No consensus.--Micru (talk) 14:34, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Micru can we hold back on closing this discussion while I answer Gymel's weak Oppose.
Filceolaire, reverted. If flourit is deleted I guess this properties could take its place.--Micru (talk) 07:58, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Gymel; These properties are for cases where we don't know birth or death dates. They should also be of use for collective pseudonyms and double acts as well since a pair of people don't have a birth or death date. I don't think start time (P580) / end time (P582) quite work for these cases.
I agree that floruit (P1317) doesn't coexist easily with these properties and I would propose that floruit (P1317) be deleted if these properties are created since, as you have said, floruit should refer to a period, not a single date. Filceolaire (talk) 02:32, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Did I say so? Sometimes only one painting or one mentioning is known, and even that date is so unsecure that it deserves qualifying by sourcing circumstances (P1480). But I agree, one can certainly view upon this as kind of degenerate interval. Having two properties as proposed introduces an artificial obstacle, one would have to decide whether this single date is of "start" or "end" kind. OTOH several values for floruit (P1317) are hard to understand, and qualifying them with start time (P580) and end time (P582) is just a kludge. Going with three properties (floruit begin, floruit end, floriuit point in time) seems overkill: Right now the connection to date of birth (P569) and date of death (P570) is not close enough to be detected by many applications I suspect (floruit seen as best approximation for birth and death dates which are not known). Thus perhaps it would be wise to introduce two Q-items "earliest/latest indication of activity" and allow them as values for sourcing circumstances (P1480) to be used with birth/death dates or the current floruit (e.g.: floruit 17th century, qualified by 1680 earliest / 1695 latest)? Ooops, no: for floruit that would be almost completely redundant to using start time (P580) and end time (P582).
So sorry, I simply can't think of a solution: Having one property seems best, and having several properties seems to be calling for trouble. But lacking "compound" data tyües the only way to keep "related" dates together seems to lie in keeping them within one property and not spreading them. -- Gymel (talk) 08:38, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose "floruit" should do. --- Jura 06:01, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Fédération Française de Golf ID[edit]

   In progress
Description Fédération Française de Golf professionnal golfer id
Data type String
Allowed values 7-digits number
Example 0565613
Format and edit filter validation Special:AbuseFilter/17
Source external reference, Wikipedia list article, etc.
Formatter URL$1&annee=2015&circuit=tous&from_site=www

Source for professionnal french golfers. JeanBono (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment: @JeanBono: Datatype changed to string (as is usual for integer identifiers). A formatter URL with the year "2015" in it doesn't look sustainable. Please provide the "Q" value for your example. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 09:57, 4 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support. Clear and useful. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 17:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
  • @JeanBono: Please can you respond to pigsonthewing above, or if it doesn't make sense I can try to explain more. MSGJ (talk) 12:18, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    I don't understand what to add about my request. Your submission form is quite difficult to understand for me. This was just a tryout, I don't really care about golfers. I think I won't try to submit something again. JeanBono (talk) 16:09, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    Okay, well if you need a property for something that you do care about, then feel free to ask for help. MSGJ (talk) 11:25, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Information seems dependent on year and also the circuit. There is no landing page for each person, so not sure how this could be incorporated into a property. MSGJ (talk) 11:30, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
    URL datatype would the way to go. We already use this for another site that doesn't have identifiers. --- Jura 11:37, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
    But if it's dependent on year, the best we could offer would the current year's statistics. I don't think this is very useful. Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose unless a better formatter URL is available MSGJ (talk) 21:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Is there any guarantee that the IDs are consistent, and consistently unique, across different years? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:40, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

military unit[edit]

   In progress
Description Military units to which the subject was attached.
Represents military unit (Q14946396)
Data type Item
Domain Person
Allowed values Item should be an instance of human (Q5) or fictional character (Q95074); linked item should be an instance of military unit (Q176799), or child thereof.
Example Guy Gibson (Q1385145)No. 617 Squadron RAF (Q1158122)
Ty Carter (Q16208557)61st Cavalry Regiment (Q4641796), 4th Infantry Division (Q231293) & 7th Infantry Division (United States) (Q261179)
Source External references, Wikipedia biographies etc

To allow items about soldiers, etc, to cover their military career; complementing the high level military branch (P241) and military rank (P410). We have commander of (P598), which is similar, but this property could cover all members of a unit rather than just the commanding officer. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 10:56, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose. We can use part of (P361) (or employer (P108)) with qualifying dates to detail a military career without needing to create a too-specific property. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 17:52, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
    I don't think part of (P361) is appropriate here. I can see employer (P108) but I'd put that at the same level of military branch (P241); a soldier is technically employed by, for example, the United States Army and not by 4th Infantry Division or 61st Cavalry Regiment. (S/he could even be said to be employed by the state or the DoD/MoD equalivalent of that state). - AdamBMorgan (talk) 22:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
@AdamBMorgan: I can see the point on employer (P108) but can you elaborate on why you don't see part of (P361) as useable? Josh Baumgartner (talk) 15:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment how will it be different to military branch (P241)? --Pasleim (talk) 22:13, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
@Pasleim: military branch (P241) is a very high level, very broad category: just country and branch, such as Fooian Army, Fooian Navy, etc (practical examples would be items like Royal Navy (Q172771), Royal Air Force (Q165862), United States Marine Corps (Q11218), United States Army (Q9212) and so forth) — at least in theory and by design; it might be misapplied in practice. This property would be for a lower level, giving specific regiments, squadrons etc (such as Grenadier Guards (Q772054), 45 Commando (Q4638181), 101st Airborne Division (Q165256), 2nd Foreign Infantry Regiment (Q2703367) etc). As such, military branch (P241) is supposed to be limited to a single value, because it is unlikely for a person to transfer between, for example, the Army and the Navy; while this property could potentially have many values, each qualified with start and end dates, because transferring between units within a branch is common. - AdamBMorgan (talk) 11:00, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
@AdamBMorgan, Pasleim: I agree about branch. Even if a person does serve in multiple branches (I served alongside some who did) that is fundamentally different than tracking the actual unit they are part of and needs to be maintained as its own piece of data. For example, a Navy corpsman may be assigned to a Marine unit; they are still Navy, but the unit they are assigned to is not. Josh Baumgartner (talk) 15:48, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I see. There was apparently a German translation error, that's why I was confused. --Pasleim (talk) 07:43, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support per discussion above. Filceolaire (talk) 22:59, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support --- Jura 11:27, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

PolSys ID[edit]

   Done: P1980
PolSys ID
identifier for a person in the PolSys database of Norwegian politicians
Data type String
Template parameter Parameter 1 in no:Mal:PolSys and nn:Mal:PolSys
Domain people
Allowed values [0-9]+
Example Wilhelm Frimann Koren Christie → 10552
Formatter URL$1
Robot and gadget jobs My bot can import the values from nowiki and nnwiki

This is a database of Norwegian politicians of all kind, and the template linking to it is used in hundreds of articles already. Jon Harald Søby (talk) 16:08, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Symbol support vote.svg Support Filceolaire (talk) 02:37, 27 June 2015 (UTC)
Symbol support vote.svg Support checks out. Antrocent (talk) 06:24, 29 June 2015 (UTC)

@Jon Harald Søby, Filceolaire, Antrocent: ✓ Done PolSys ID (P1980) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:01, 6 July 2015 (UTC) bio link[edit]

   In progress
Description A link to an MP or Peer's biography on
Data type String
Domain members of both Houses of Parliament
Example David Cameron (Q192)commons/mr-david-cameron/1467
Source external reference, Wikipedia article, some can be extracted from Template:UK MP links or Template:UK Peer links
Formatter URL$1

To allow easy reference for MPs and Peers, like US Congress Bio identifier (P1157), MEP directory identifier (P1186), Riksdagen person-id (P1214). Rock drum (talk) 13:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC)

  • The unique identifier in User:Rock drum's example seems to be "1467". It would be worth finding our whether there is a formatter URL that will work from just that. I'll ask my contacts at the HoP. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 17:32, 20 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Move this proposal to the Person proposal page or the Authority proposal page. Avoid to disperse the proposals and if someone can delete this page we will be able to concentrate the proposals. Thanks Snipre (talk) 12:41, 22 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Note: moved from Wikidata:Property proposal/References. Rock drum (talk) 20:39, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support, sounds sensible. James F. (talk) 19:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)


   In progress
Description the brother of one's spouse or the husband of one's sibling
Represents brother-in-law (Q2914212)
Data type Item
Template parameter attributs d'infobox de Wikipédia, s'il en existe ; par exemple : « population » dans fr:Modèle:Infobox Subdivision administrative
Domain human beings (P31:Q5)
Allowed values modèle Q
Example John Tukey (Q382207)Frank Anscombe (Q3896195)
Source référence externe, article de liste de Wikipédia, etc.
Robot and gadget jobs Devrait-il y avoir ou existe-t-il des bots ou des gadgets qui effectueront des tâches avec cette propriété? Par exemple: vérifier les autres propriétés afin d'être cohérent, collecter des données, automatiser un lien externe, etc.
  • Français :
     : On a des propriétés pour décrire les liens de parenté (ex Property:P7 pour les frères) mais pas de propriété pour décrire les liens par alliance qui peuvent aussi être très importants.
  • English:
     : We have properties which describe siblings (for instance Property:P7) but nothing for siblings in law.

(Ajoutez ici vos motivations pour la création de cette propriété) PAC2 (talk) 12:43, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

Q: Do all cultures use the same term for both of the relationships described? Also, what about sister in-law? Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 18:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, déductible à l'aide des propriétés époux(se) et frère/soeur. TomT0m (talk) 18:42, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose, deducible from existing properties. --Yair rand (talk) 20:13, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose You may either deduce it, or use relative (P1038) with type of kinship (P1039). Matěj Suchánek (talk) 08:02, 7 July 2015 (UTC)