Property talk:P101

Active discussions

Documentation

field of work
specialization of a person or organization; see P106 for the occupation
Representsfield of work (Q627436)
Data typeItem
Template parameteren:Template:Infobox scientist "fields".
Domainhuman (Q5), organization (Q43229), group of humans (Q16334295), animal (Q729), position (Q4164871), fictional character (Q95074), person (Q215627), periodical (Q1002697), fictional company (Q5446565), fictional gang (Q56561355), fictional criminal organization (Q56561357), fictional organization (Q14623646), project (Q170584), industry (Q8148), museum (Q33506), award (Q618779), convention (Q625994), service (Q7406919), collective (Q13473501), group of mythical characters (Q20830276) and art (Q735)
ExampleBastian Sick (Q89460)German (Q188)
Marie Curie (Q7186)radioactivity (Q11448)
ACS Award in Pure Chemistry (Q1777741)chemistry (Q2329)
Robot and gadget jobsDeltaBot does the following jobs:
Tracking: sameno label (Q42533436)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P101 (Q23908981)
See alsofield of this occupation (P425), practiced by (P3095), occupation (P106), position held (P39), interested in (P2650)
Lists
  • <items with the most statements of this property>
  • Count of items by number of statements (chart)
  • Count of items by number of sitelinks (chart)
  • Items with the most identifier properties
  • Items with no other statements
  • <most recently created items>
  • Items with novalue claims
  • Items with unknown value claims
  • Usage history
  • Chart by item creation date
  • Database reports/Humans with missing claims/P101
  • Database reports/Constraint violations/P101
  • <random list>
  • Proposal discussionProposal discussion
    Current uses129,409
    Search for values
    [create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
      Value differential equation (Q11214) will be automatically replaced to value theory of differential equations (Q28575007) and moved to field of work (P101) property.
    Testing: TODO list

     
    This property is being used by:

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


    labelEdit

    Changed from "field" to "field of work", as that was ambiguous. --Zolo (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

    field of profession (P425)Edit

    For the analogus property where the domain is a profession, see field of profession (P425). For example, on the lawyer item, use <field of profession> law. Superm401 - Talk 19:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

    QualifierEdit

    Should this property be used a qualifier of property "profession"? --Viscontino (talk) 10:30, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

    I ask myself too. Conny (talk) 10:29, 21 February 2015 (UTC). I asked here also. Conny (talk) 10:35, 21 February 2015 (UTC).

    Used it in Antonia Mills (Q16499798) as property - looks good. Are there other optionons? Conny (talk) 10:50, 21 February 2015 (UTC).

    SpecificityEdit

    Should we use very broad terms like "mathematics" and "history" or more specific one like "differential equations" and "archaeology of India". I would prefer the latter, as it is more informative and minimizes redundancy with occupation (P106), but it is not the way it is done in en.wikipedia. --Zolo (talk) 06:00, 17 June 2013 (UTC)

    I think it should be as specific as possible/reasonable. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:18, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
    Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen), Zolo specificity might have some issue with the lack of plural forms. For example here I have to write "liquid crystal" instead of "liquid crystals". It sounds a little strange.--Alexmar983 (talk) 02:41, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

    Extend the domain of application of this property to processesEdit

    A physical process acts on some objects, like plant reproducion applies on plants. I think we could extend the domain of this property to add processes, does this seem a good idea ? Like a reasearcher domain of study, a process has a domain of application. TomT0m (talk) 20:16, 14 April 2014 (UTC)

    Person reference removedEdit

    see [1].--GZWDer (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

    I do not understand this note. What does @GZWDer: mean? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:20, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

    I suppose that this relates to the removal of the restriction of field of work (P101) to only work for persons. Where is this discussed? Some of the language labels has "field of work" which pertains to persons only and the initial domain was "Person". Has this edit been discussed? It erases "domain=person"? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

    needs cleanupEdit

    As is, this property is fairly messed up. Its English description seems to indicate that this links some unspecified items to fields of work (i.e. job specializations), the example links some item to some other item, none of the related to jobs in any way, while at least the German description, the instance of (P31) property and the vast majority of uses seem to indicate that this links persons to their specializations. Lets fix this by restoring the example, English description, and qualifiers to this rationale. Any objections? --Srittau (talk) 12:56, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

      Done --Sebari (Srittau) (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2016 (UTC)

    Use for programming packageEdit

    I came across Apache Spark (Q7573619) where field of work (P101) was used big data (Q858810) and distributed computing (Q180634). To me, this doesn't sound as a right application? — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 08:20, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

    Values about sportsEdit

    Compare sports discipline competed in (P2416) with field of work (P101) at Gebrselassie Haile (Q171500).

    Should we use field of work (P101) with athletes? d1g (talk) 12:25, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

    Use only for peopleEdit

    Documentation of industry (P452) says to use field of work (P101) for people, but field of work (P101) is used both for people and organizations:

    --Malore (talk) 14:36, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

    Constraint extension to instances, not only subclassesEdit

    I'm currently getting a warning for the statement Maurice Krafft (Q15052805) field of work (P101) volcanology (Q102904), apparently because volcanology (Q102904) does not have the subclass of (P279) property, and field of work (P101) requires as a constraint that its values have it. However, in my opinion, it makes no sense to apply the "subclass" attribute to volcanology (Q102904), as it is not a class itself (there are no instances of class "volcanology"). At the same time, it makes perfect sense to have a statement of the form Maurice Krafft (Q15052805) field of work (P101) volcanology (Q102904). Therefore, I propose to broaden the constraint of field of work (P101) so it includes subclass of (P279) or instance of (P31) (as it is the case here). --Rohieb (talk) 17:15, 6 August 2018 (UTC)

    The subclass statements are used throughout the sciences etc., e.g., geology (Q1069) is a subclass of natural science (Q7991). You may be right, and perhaps part of (P361) would be a better fit, and constraints like the one here should be improved or droppped. Ghouston (talk) 23:42, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
    Should be a ping @Rohieb:, given the time elapsed. Ghouston (talk) 23:43, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
    @Ghouston: OK, thanks for the feedback, I have included instance of (P31) in the value constraint for now. I've not yet seen any reason to also include part of (P361), but that bridge can easily be crossed once someone gets to it. (BTW, there also seems to be a lot of confusion between the properties subclass of (P279) and instance of (P31) on several items I looked at… but that's another story.) --Rohieb (talk) 19:59, 1 September 2018 (UTC)

    Books and journals ?Edit

    Can we use this property for books and journals ? We also have main subject (P921) but it seems somewhat different. For example the same item could have main subject (P921): "poverty" and field of work (P101) economics or sociology.--Zolo (talk) 10:57, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

    Return to "P101" page.