Property talk:P767

Documentation

• Start a query
• Current uses
• Statistics by class
• List of values
• List of qualifiers
• Count

contributor to the creative work or subject
person or organization that contributed to a subject: co-creator of a creative work or subject

Description	A person or organization that contributed in the creation of a creative work.
Represents	contributor (Q20204892), session musician (Q10666486), coauthor (Q15735983)
Data type	Item
Domain	According to this template: published works According to statements in the property: work (Q386724), anthology (Q105420), exhibition (Q464980), series of creative works (Q7725310), discourse topic (Q5281760), artistic theme (Q1406161), artistic technique (Q11177771), version, edition or translation (Q3331189), technology (Q11016), academic discipline (Q11862829), collection (Q2668072), item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264), philosophical concept (Q33104279), discovery (Q12772819), experiment (Q101965), fictional entity (Q14897293) or laboratory (Q483242) When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Usage notes	Use more specific properties if appropriate. For primary authors or creators of individual works, books, chapters, etc. use P50, P170, P86, etc.
Example	Discworld Noir (Q914128) → Terry Pratchett (Q46248) Circle of Life (Q109026) → Hans Zimmer (Q76364)
Tracking: usage	Category:Pages using Wikidata property P767 (Q23909066)
See also	author (P50), creator (P170), has written for (P6872), composer (P86)
Lists	Items with the most statements of this property Count of items by number of statements (chart) Items with the most statements Items with the fewest statements Count of items by number of sitelinks (chart) Items with the most sitelinks Items with the most sitelinks, but no link to one Wikipedia (sample: Welsh Wikipedia, cywiki) Items with the fewest sitelinks Most linked wikis Items with the most identifier properties By value of property Most statements Fewest statements Most sitelinks Most linked wikis Total of sitelinks on items Most identifiers Fewest identifiers Items with no other statements Most recently created items Items with novalue claims Items with unknown value claims Usage history (total) Usage history (main statement) Chart by item creation date Database reports/Constraint violations/P767 Map Random list
Proposal discussion	Proposal discussion
Current uses	Total 46,390 Main statement 46,253 99.7% of uses Qualifier 107 0.2% of uses Reference 30 <0.1% of uses
Search for values

[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]

Type “work (Q386724), anthology (Q105420), exhibition (Q464980), series of creative works (Q7725310), discourse topic (Q5281760), artistic theme (Q1406161), artistic technique (Q11177771), version, edition or translation (Q3331189), technology (Q11016), academic discipline (Q11862829), collection (Q2668072), item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264), philosophical concept (Q33104279), discovery (Q12772819), experiment (Q101965), fictional entity (Q14897293), laboratory (Q483242)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31)” with classes “work (Q386724), anthology (Q105420), exhibition (Q464980), series of creative works (Q7725310), discourse topic (Q5281760), artistic theme (Q1406161), artistic technique (Q11177771), version, edition or translation (Q3331189), technology (Q11016), academic discipline (Q11862829), collection (Q2668072), item of collection or exhibition (Q18593264), philosophical concept (Q33104279), discovery (Q12772819), experiment (Q101965), fictional entity (Q14897293), laboratory (Q483242)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Type Q386724, Q105420, Q464980, Q7725310, Q5281760, Q1406161, Q11177771, Q3331189, Q11016, Q11862829, Q2668072, Q18593264, Q33104279, Q12772819, Q101965, Q14897293, Q483242, SPARQL

Value type “human (Q5), group of humans (Q16334295), organization (Q43229)”: 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 human (Q5), group of humans (Q16334295), organization (Q43229) (or a subclass thereof). (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Value type Q5, Q16334295, Q43229, SPARQL

Qualifiers “series ordinal (P1545), object named as (P1932), author given names (P9687), author last names (P9688), object has role (P3831), applies to part (P518), start time (P580), end time (P582), applies to work (P10663), statement disputed by (P1310), statement supported by (P3680), instrument (P1303), sourcing circumstances (P1480), affiliation (P1416), affiliation string (P6424), identity of object in context (P4626)”: this property should be used only with the listed qualifiers. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL

Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Entity types

Scope is as main value (Q54828448), as reference (Q54828450): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Scope, SPARQL

Conflicts with “instance of (P31): film (Q11424), television series (Q5398426), animated television series (Q117467246), animated film (Q202866)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL

Conflicts with “instance of (P31): music video (Q193977)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P767#Conflicts with P31, search, SPARQL

This property is being used by: el:Πρότυπο:Πληροφορίες βιβλίου Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

using for albums->musicians too?

What do you think, Should this property also be used for music albums and their artist? If so, we also would need something like 'contribution':...

Let It Be (Beatles album)
 property: contributor
  value: John Lennon
   qualifier: contribution
    value: lead vocals
 property: contributor
  value: John Lennon
   qualifier: contribution
    value: backing vocals
 property: contributor
  value: John Lennon
   qualifier: contribution
    value: rhythm guitar
 ...
  property: contributor
  value: Ringo Starr
   qualifier: contribution
    value: drums
  property: contributor
  value: Ringo Starr
   qualifier: contribution
    value: percussion

--Nightwish62 (talk) 17:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Yes, maybe a "type of contribution" would be useful. --Micru (talk) 18:14, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Note

Not to be confused with editor (P98). --Kolja21 (talk) 01:36, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

contributor/collaborator

This has diverged in semantics between contributor and collaborator. Now we do not see only <work> <contributor> <person>, but <person> <collaborator> <person>, eg Angelina Jolie <P767> Brad Pitt. This does not make sense. Also we se <organisation> <P767> <employee>. This is again wrong in my oppinion. I suggest we only use P767 in the sense of contributor/"bidragyder", not in the sense of collaborator/co-worker and not in the sense of employee. That is, keep the domain for the subject to works. — Finn Årup Nielsen (fnielsen) (talk) 11:10, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

If a person writes an article in a book can we say that <person> <P767> <book> e.g Q28555278#P767 in d:Q379406 see article he wrote - Salgo60 (talk) 15:18, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Also to be used as an assistant in sports

As has been proposed and briefly discussed here, this property should be used for assistants in team sports such as football, hockey or basketball. Artem Korzhimanov (talk) 18:20, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

addressing labels — misuse due to ambiguity

We still have issues where this property is being misused outside of the defined scope — and, true, not unique with this property. @Deryck Chan: made a change to the English label, which I have undone as we already seem to lack clarity, and it would be useful to look at this, contributed to creative work (P3919), participant (P710) and participant in (P1344) together to see what needs to be done. The proposal description talks about this being for solely creative works, then later discussions have indicated that it should be "assistant" and sport.

I have done an amount of tidying over time, and have got the constraints down to a list that needs discussion — Wikidata:Database reports/Constraint violations/P767. There are currently links to buildings or parts of building, presumably due to the architectural aspects. If this is correct, then we need to look to amend the constraints and guidance to clearly bring these within scope. If it is not correct, then we need to amend those to a more appropriate property.

If we are making no changes, I would prefer that this label be changed to "contributor to creative work" in all languages to remove the ambiguity.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:19, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

@Fnielsen: who made a similar comment in 2015.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:21, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks billinghurst for starting the discussion. We are dealing with two different kinds of ambiguity here:

1. Grammatical ambiguity. P767's subject is the artwork and the object is the artist, i.e. is productcontributor to the creative work or subject (P767)person; P3919 is the reverse, i.e. personcontributed to creative work (P3919)product. The property description is where we tell people how to get this right. So far the convention on Wikidata is that if the property label is a noun, it applies to the object. See for example author (P50) - object is the author; notable work (P800) - object is the artwork; significant event (P793) - object is the event. Contrast: if the property label is a verb, it applies to the subject. See for example uses (P2283) - subject uses object; contributed to creative work (P3919) - subject contributes to object; used by (P1535) - subject is used by object.
2. Sematic ambiguity. Because Wikidata is a compromise language between different human cultures, we will never fully settle the debate of where we draw the boundaries between author (P50), contributor to the creative work or subject (P767), performer (P175), composer (P86), and indeed any subproperty of creator (P170) without constant policing and discussion of marginal cases.

Therefore I see no ambiguity in the label name "contributor" that "contributor(s) to the subject" doesn't also suffer from. I believe that a property name should be concise and any disambiguation and usage instruction should be in the description, not the property name, unless another property would otherwise compete for exactly the same name. Deryck Chan (talk) 13:56, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

• On scope: perhaps we should broaden the domain of the subject to artificial physical object (Q8205328) to capture all kinds of human creativity? --Deryck Chan (talk) 14:03, 28 November 2017 (UTC)

  @Deryck Chan: and others. Maybe I lacked some clarity in in my explanation, especially in light of the clean up that I have undertaken on this item (for months). Many people seemingly do not look at the descriptive text, and that may be blindness or lack of text in their language. This property has/had been used many times for people to people links, and also to non-creative works, so as such the shortening to "contributor" is not helping, and I would prefer we get more specific with the label, hence my suggestion "contributor to creative work" and have that reflected in each language.

  I also ask that people look at the remaining constraint violations and work out whether we need to broaden the constraints, or broaden our concept of what is a creative work, or remove the violations  —

  billinghurst sDrewth 13:12, 2 December 2017 (UTC)

  @billinghurst: Ping only works when you add a signature in the same edit!

  None of the languages I can read have translated the "to subject" part of the label. They're all translations of "contributor" or "collaborator". I  Support your "contributor to creative work" suggestion to specify the domain of the subject and have updated all the languages I can write to show this meaning.

  Also thanks for your work on the constraint violations, particularly on migrating out all the "humans". I would say that all those "episodes" and subsets of "buildings" are appropriate uses of this property; it's just that their supersets aren't sophistically classified enough to be caught by the constraint. Deryck Chan (talk) 01:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

  @Deryck Chan: For these buildings with architectural attributes, maybe we should be looking to apply something like cultural property (Q2065736) to the constraints, and then apply something like local heritage site (Q18089563). I am not sure that it is sufficiently constraining so if anyone can think of something more appropriate I am open to suggestions; it is not an area of my expertise.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:33, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

  @billinghurst: I think this property can apply to any building with notable contributors (e.g. structural engineers?), which is wider than the scope of any heritage classification. I would prefer to have a loose constraint that allows any building to be included. Deryck Chan (talk) 11:14, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

  That is not the purpose of the property, it is meant to identify creative work. Structural engineers use science, not creativity. Structural engineers are participants in the construction of the design and construction of a building, I suggest that for such you are looking for a different property.  — billinghurst sDrewth 12:51, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Added constraint series of creative works (Q7725310)

I have added Q7725310 as a valid constraint for the parent works. This enables TV seasons to be included. While I have some argument/doubts whether jurors to a series are contributors, or participants, it isn't a fight that I am looking to undertake.  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:18, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Note. I hope that it also picks up those tagged as episode (Q1983062).  — billinghurst sDrewth 23:21, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Add "written work" as valid subject?

Does anyone object to adding written work (Q47461344) and its subclasses as a valid subject, to cover reference works, scholarly works, etc. - PKM (talk) 21:48, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Gender neutral French label

Following this request for comments, the French label now includes the male and the female form. PAC2 (talk) 05:31, 17 June 2022 (UTC)

"title" as qualifier?

See how I'm using this on Ed Ruscha and the Great American West (Q114683868), where different well-known people have contributed essays to an exhibition catalog that has no "author", only an editor (who also wrote an essay, that is attributed to her). People over on enwiki actually cite one of the essays, in a list of the contributor's works.

When the "work" (book) as a whole is a 'compilation', and the parts themselves aren't actually 'notable', I don't see any other way to store this info other than making "part" entities. Jarnsax (talk) 05:28, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

Actually, that's probably just what I should do, lol. Nevermind. Jarnsax (talk) 08:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

constraint "property" "applies to work"

@User:Valentina.Anitnelav I don't think that's right... or at least, I don't see how you intend to use it. This property is only supposed to exist on works, so I think any 'other' work this would apply to would be a "part" of the entity it's on... in which case "applies to part" is better, and already allowed. Jarnsax (talk) 17:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jarnsax, this use is actually an example in the property proposal to "applies to work" (see Wikidata:Property_proposal/applies_to_work, the Mickey Mouse example). This property is also in use on animated characters to indicate its character animators. An animator may have animated the character in one film but not in another. Kind regards, Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:49, 26 October 2022 (UTC)

@Valentina.Anitnelav That actually makes a lot of sense, I just hadn't thought of that aspect. Thanks for explaining. Jarnsax (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2022 (UTC)