Property talk:P108
Documentation
person or organization for which the subject works or worked
| Represents | employer (Q3053337) | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Data type | Item | ||||||||||||
| Domain | According to this template:
human (Q5)
According to statements in the property:
When possible, data should only be stored as statementshuman (Q5), fictional character (Q95074), fictional human (Q15632617), fictional location (Q3895768), group of humans (Q16334295), human whose existence is disputed (Q21070568), mythical character (Q4271324) or humanoid robot (Q584529) | ||||||||||||
| Allowed values | All kinds of employers: businesses, educational facilities, branches of government, non-profit organizations, provider of honorary positions etc. (note: this should be moved to the property statements) | ||||||||||||
| Example | Albert Verlinde (Q1965433) → Stage Entertainment Germany (Q181192) Neil Armstrong (Q1615) → National Aeronautics and Space Administration (Q23548) Angela Merkel (Q567) → Zentralinstitut für Physikalische Chemie (Q26882567) Hayley Westenra (Q231985) → UNICEF (Q740308) | ||||||||||||
| Robot and gadget jobs | DeltaBot does the following jobs: | ||||||||||||
| Tracking: same | no label (Q42533327) | ||||||||||||
| Tracking: usage | Category:Pages using Wikidata property P108 (Q23908983) | ||||||||||||
| See also | affiliation string (P6424), affiliation (P1416), occupation (P106) | ||||||||||||
| Lists |
| ||||||||||||
| Living people protection class | property that may violate privacy (Q44601380) | ||||||||||||
| Proposal discussion | Proposal discussion | ||||||||||||
| Current uses |
| ||||||||||||
| Search for values |
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Value type Q43229, Q14623646, Q16334295, Q5, Q95074, Q327333, Q1248784, Q1002697, Q102496, Q13002315, Q3895768, Q105420, Q5446565, Q35127, Q783794, Q10648343, Q15632617, Q11812394, Q1370598, Q2659904, Q15416, Q16560, Q24634210, Q15911314, Q2001305, Q3152824, Q56061, Q11032, Q1555508, Q245016, Q820477, Q2385804, Q13235160, Q13226383, Q6056746, Q1474440, Q22988604, Q21070568, Q167037, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#allowed qualifiers, SPARQL
if [item A] has this property (employer (P108)) linked to [item B],
then [item A] and [item B] have to coincide or coexist at some point of history. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Contemporary, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Type Q5, Q95074, Q15632617, Q3895768, Q16334295, Q21070568, Q4271324, Q584529, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Scope, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P108#Conflicts with P31, SPARQL
What is it?
editDescription reads "organization for which the subject works or worked". But that sounds very broad, for example, a person may be sub-contracted but not directly employed by the organisation they are working for.
Should use be limited to organisations which the person has worked for directly, or what?
One issue is that we may never be able to establish exactly which organisations a person was employed by. We don't have access to people's employment contracts.
Perhaps the property name should be changed to worked for which would be broader, and can be more easily sourced. Danrok (talk) 20:55, 25 February 2013 (UTC)
- Sure why not. Go for it! I see someone reverted my change from "employer" to "employed by". It's too bad we can't explain changes in edit summaries; I had a reason! Espeso (talk) 18:18, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
Suproperty of P1416 (affiliation)
editA more general type of relationship between people and organisations is given by affiliation (P1416). I have added a subproperty of (P1647) statement to record this. I think the constraints on affiliation (P1416) should be relaxed to account for this; see the discussion on P1416. --Markus Krötzsch (talk) 09:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
Person as the employer?
editThe description says the employer must be an organization. The property has Wikidata item of this property (P1629): employer (Q3053337), which can be a person or company. --AVRS (talk) 17:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- @AVRS: agent (Q24229398) means "a person or a company" d1g (talk) 18:09, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
- @D1gggg: So? Are you suggesting that I add it, or? --AVRS (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
- @AVRS: I also think that the employer can be a person, and I added human and fictional character as value type constraint. --Neo-Jay (talk) 21:51, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
- @D1gggg: So? Are you suggesting that I add it, or? --AVRS (talk) 19:32, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
problem with P39 it says political
editHow can I enter an ordinary contractor employee (Q703534) using P108? d1g (talk) 18:08, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
location (P276) as qualificator
editCan location (P276) be used as Wikidata qualifier for employer (P108). Especially where there are many locations? Breg Pmt (talk) 10:58, 30 September 2017 (UTC)
- I'll add work location (P937), it seems appropriate. Ghouston (talk) 07:55, 26 September 2018 (UTC)
changed constraint "as" to "subject has role"
editI removed the constraint P794 (P794) and add subject has role (P2868). This is in line with the deprecation of P794. Noting that position held (P39) which had a similar function is already in place. — billinghurst sDrewth 06:58, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
Directorships?
editDo we have a good way to represent that someone was a director (= board member) of a company? They are often not employees as such, particularly historically, and it doesn't really make sense to grpup them in with people who worked for the company. We could use position held (P39):director (Q1162163):of (P642):[company] but not sure quite how suitable that is. Andrew Gray (talk) 11:43, 13 January 2018 (UTC)
Constraint violation (false negative)
editNewsweek (Q188413) as employer (P108) results in a warning, as it needs to be a sub class of newspaper (Q11032), which is not true for Newsweek (Q188413), which is a magazine (Q41298). Either the constraint should be adapted for a higher class of „publication“ or … ? Thanks for checking. --Elya (talk) 13:24, 7 October 2018 (UTC)
Employment Sort Order
editNot all employment is known at the time of recording in a database. This leads to sort-orders, where the first employment is not shown in the first place. Legibility and comprehensibility of the data-set is significantly obscured.
Is there any way to change the sort order in Property Property:P108 is other than the true temporal order? As a sample see Jason Reese. Yotwen (talk) 06:59, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
Professorship as a qualifier of Employer
editShouldn't Professorship (P803) be allowable as a qualifier under Employer? If used that way, it currently gets a constraint violation. It seems to make more sense to put this under employer than as a separate property of a person. For example:
Trisha N. Davis (Q30347547)
employer University of Washington
start time 1 July 1994
position held chair
full professor
professorship Earl W. Davie/ZymoGenetics Endowed Chair in Biochemistry
This makes more sense to me than having professorship as a separate property, as the person could have held different endowed chairs at different universities.
Gender neutral label in French
editFollowing this request for comments, we need to find a gender neutral label.
Since in many cases the employer is an organization, I'm not sure that it is relevant to use both male and female form ("employeur ou employeuse").
Maybe we should use a verbal form ("employé ou employée par").
What do you think? PAC2 (talk) 05:03, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Pretty hard to understand
editthat "Organization" is a viable constraint, but Non-Profit organization is not. Could that be mended or explained? Yotwen (talk) 14:42, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
How to reflect gaps in employment
editPossibly a silly question, but is there a way to use qualifiers to reflect (for example) someone who was employed from 2002-2012, then returned to the same employer in 2023? I tried using two start time qualifiers but it says it should only have one value. Thanks for any assistance! Emwille (talk) 20:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)
- You can simply add multiple statements. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 18:09, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
- headdesk* Yep, I sure can. Thank you!
- Emwille (talk) 20:17, 30 March 2023 (UTC)
Ping about discussion on Project chat
editJust a note that I opened a discussion on Project chat about preferring this property as a qualifier-only on occupation (P106). Ainali (talk) 21:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)
Conflict on dates?
editNot quite sure the reason of potential conflict on dates, 1294 which seems to trigger an alert. Is it not considered part of the 13. century? See the property in Item Q8190792. Thanks for your help. jshieh (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
- “13th century” is internally represented as 1300-00-00, which is obviously later than 1294-02-18, and constraints use this internal representation instead of the real value, see phab:T168379. —Tacsipacsi (talk) 13:35, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
P1416 and P108
editFYI I'm currently raising some doubts regarding the current utilization of affiliation (P1416) and employer (P108) (along with other related properties) in the discussion here. I appreciate any feedback in advance. Alexmar983 (talk) 16:25, 17 February 2024 (UTC)