Wikidata:Property proposal/sibling


Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Person

   Done: sibling (P3373) (Talk and documentation)
Descriptionsubject has the object as their sibling
Data typeItem
ExampleJan Martel (Q14755480) (male) → Joël Martel (Q14755483) (male)
Joël Martel (Q14755483) (male) → Jan Martel (Q14755480) (male)
Laura Gibson (Q26880311) (female) → Andrea Gibson (Q4755100) (genderqueer/non-binary)
Sourcereplace P7 (P7) and P9 (P9)
  •   Oppose. The situation is OK with both P7 (P7) and P9 (P9), in my opinion. Thierry Caro (talk) 23:40, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
    •   Comment Not really, it is pretty bad, in my opinion. We can't add genderqueer siblings, I already added an example of such a sibling to the proposal. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 18:02, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
      • On Wikidata, we do store declarations that were once true even if they are not anymore. So I guess we can store someone's sibling as a P7 (P7) even if this other person is not male anymore simply because he/she once was. With that in mind, only a few people would escape the scope of P7 (P7) and P9 (P9), people born with an unidentified sex or gender as early as their birth. This is quite rare and I believe that changing the entire architecture of Wikidata just because of this is not worth it, as P7 (P7) and P9 (P9) otherwise helps us doublecheck the consistency of our data most of the time. And then if one is not satisfied with P7 (P7) and P9 (P9), one might use significant person (P3342) with the item they want as a qualifier. Thierry Caro (talk) 13:48, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support If the proposal is simply about creating a new property. Given that not everybody is male or female having a more general property is useful. At the same time I see no need to delete data that's currently filled via brother/sister. ChristianKl (talk) 11:34, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Even if the RfC turns out negative there should be a gender neutral property for non cisgender persons Pajn (talk) 17:24, 23 October 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support yes this is useful for the reasons others have already given. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:48, 24 October 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Sweet kate (talk) 15:35, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support WiseWoman (talk) 12:45, 4 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Oppose as Thierry Caro, as ChristianKl keep brother/sister--Oursana (talk) 14:34, 13 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support creating this in addition to P7 (P7) and P9 (P9) for persons who gender is not known or who are non-binary. Thryduulf (talk) 20:53, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Saving gender in the property name is not necessarily, I strongly support adding this property and later removing P7 (P7) and P9 (P9) as they are biased to certain languages. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 13:08, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Strong support Algentem (talk) 14:41, 17 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Strong support for creating this property and deleting P7 (P7) and P9 (P9). These two properties add no useful information, complicate things for many languages which don't have this kind of gender distinction, and discriminate against non-cisgender people (who number in the millions: [1][2]). It was a mistake to adopt them in the first place, and it is time to fix it. Mushroom (talk) 13:54, 18 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support ~nmaia d 17:46, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Strong oppose, see Wikidata:Requests for comment/Make family member properties gender neutral. Multichill (talk) 11:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
    • You didn't provide a single good reason to oppose such a merge. The argument that our native language doesn't have such a term doesn't matter at all, there are also languages without words for "brother" and "sister". Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 12:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Strong support --Melderick (talk) 12:50, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Comment shouldn't we go further ? Do we really need P7 (P7) or P9 (P9) (or a merged sibling property), couldn't we just get rid of it ? (like uncle/aunt P29/P139 properties we're deleted in 2013). BTW, there is not really a word for sibling in French :( VIGNERON (talk) 14:53, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
It's the same in Italian (my primary language). But there are other languages that don't have the words for "brother" or "sister", so why should we privilege ours? Mushroom (talk) 17:07, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
My native language Dutch also doesn't really have words for "brother" and "sister", but I still feel that merging is appropriate. This is not a Dutch, French or Italian Wikidata... It is an multilingual Wikidata, for all people, not only for a few Europeans. Robin van der Vliet (talk) (contribs) 12:17, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
The last part of my comment wasn't for or against the merging, I was just stating a fact that in French (I took the language I know best, yet this is true for most languages), I'm not sure that the merging will solve the problem as you will have something similar to « brother or sister : Andrea Gibson » (which seems as offensive/discriminatory as « sister : Andrea Gibson » or « brother : Andrea Gibson », no ?).
Anyway, why don't we jut get rid of these property? father (P22) and mother (P25) seems more than enough to me to store the information. Cdlt, VIGNERON (talk) 13:00, 25 November 2016 (UTC)
  •   Support Wil make the shearch easier on WDQ. --Fralambert (talk) 22:04, 25 November 2016 (UTC)