Wikidata:Property proposal/co-applicant

co-applicant

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Done: co-applicant (P10601) (Talk and documentation)

Description	grant, program or other entity to which the given person, group or organisation is co-applying to
Data type	Item
Domain	items
Example 1	NFDI4Ing (Q98380344)co-applicantResearch Centre Jülich (Q697111)
Example 2	SFB 874 (Q7389939)co-applicantUniversity of Düsseldorf (Q317032)
Example 3	SFB 884: Political Economy of Reforms (Q48975701)co-applicant Q1485220
See also	Wikidata:Property_proposal/applicant

Motivation

With the property "co-applicant", research projects can be described in greater detail. The properties "applicant" and "co-applicant" reflect distinctions in applicants' status made by many research funding organisations.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Havre-kakor (talk • contribs) at 10:27, March 4, 2021‎ (UTC).

Discussion

•  Support--LukasCBossert This is a property that is most welcome, since it enables to differentiate the different roles of institutions in the funding constellation of research projects. As far as I can see there is no other property that would describe this specific role. I do vote for this. LukasCBossert (talk) 10:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support--Hannes Röst (talk) 02:42, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
• Why not use "applicant"? --- Jura 13:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
• In some cases, applicants are distinguished by status (applicant / co-applicant). This is very common in research funding, for example. Having both properties would allow for more detailed descriptions of research projects, and potentially other areas as well. --- Havre-kakor
  • The qualifier object has role (P3831) can be used to describe the status of an applicant. --- Jura 17:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)
    • not really, there are usually two distinct categories of applicants and they have specific roles and duties. Its not really the case that a co-applicant is a type of applicant but there are two distinct types of applicants: "applicant" and "co-applicant". We could try and model this with qualifiers as "primary applicant" and "co-applicant" but it would be wrong to say that one is a subset of the other. --Hannes Röst (talk) 03:28, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
      • Maybe the label of the property proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/applicant needs improvement. Obviously, the actual designation for the role of an applicant can vary, but we shouldn't create a new property each time. --- Jura 05:01, 16 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Oppose use the property "applicant" once it's created. --- Jura 20:28, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
•  Support Germartin1 (talk) 12:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment somehow the currently proposed property description seems the wrong way round. --- Jura 13:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)
• @Havre-kakor, LukasCBossert, Hannes Röst, Jura1, Germartin1:  Done as co-applicant (P10601). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 07:12, 10 April 2022 (UTC)