Wikidata:Property proposal/has member

has member

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic

   Withdrawn

Description	subjects belonging to an organization, club or musical group. Do not use for members of ethnic or social groups, nor for holding a political position.
Represents	has member (Q65971553)
Data type	Item
Domain	Item
Example 1	⟨ Iron Man (Q180704)    ⟩ member of (P463) ⟨ Avengers (Q322646)    ⟩
Example 2	⟨ Iring Fetscher (Q1672692)    ⟩ member of (P463) ⟨ PEN Centre Germany (Q2043519)    ⟩
Example 3	⟨ Diana Ross (Q36290)    ⟩ member of (P463) ⟨ The Supremes (Q218837)    ⟩
Example 4	⟨ Singapore MRT (Q40176)    ⟩ member of (P463) ⟨ Community of Metros Benchmarking Group (Q5155002)    ⟩

Motivation

member of (P463) exists and is in widespread use, and is an obvious candidate for an inverse property, but does not have one. Currently items such as Avengers (Q322646) uses has part(s) (P527) to represent members. This property does have "has member" as an alias, but by the same justification that member of (P463) exists instead of just using part of (P361), so too should "has member" instead of just using has part(s) (P527). Being a member of something is different to being part of something. Supertrinko (talk) 21:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Oppose Unnecessary inverse; also in some cases this would add a VERY large number of statements to already-large items. There are other ways of handling inverse properties in Wikidata. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

I'm unclear on whether you're opposing inverse statements in general (which are in very common use here), or opposed to this particular inverse. Supertrinko (talk) 04:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

This one in particular, but new ones in general should be carefully assessed for why they would be needed. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

• Previous proposal: Wikidata:Property proposal/member.--GZWDer (talk) 18:47, 26 January 2022 (UTC)
•  Comment the samples seem to be the wrong way round and use "member of". --- Jura 16:31, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose --Gymnicus (talk) 16:00, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Agree with Arthur, this would be an unnecessary property and sounds like the requestor wants to showcase relationship data on Wikidata's item pages. Wikidata's item pages are not for showcasing relationship data, instead SPARQL or other means are necessary. Please give a SPARQL query example that you are struggling with for display so we can help - is the right approach. Since oftentimes, folks struggle with inverses and showcasing information in the way they want or need with WDQS. And still another way to handle your use case would be to use Listeria and have someone help you make a custom display list for organizations you'd like to see members of. --Thadguidry (talk) 16:49, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose we should not add additional inverse properties unless there is a very good reason for it, which I dont see here. I dont see the problem this is supposed to solve. --Hannes Röst (talk) 18:32, 31 January 2022 (UTC)
• Satisfied with the response. Though it's not clear why we allow inverse properties in some circumstances, but not others, e.g. has part(s) (P527) and part of (P361). Supertrinko (talk) 00:32, 1 February 2022 (UTC)

• I remember from previous discussions, that inverse properties aren't logically needed for Wikidata queries, but are sometimes needed for infoboxes in other projects. In this case, as mentioned, has part(s) (P527) tends to be used as a workaround. Ghouston (talk) 09:08, 1 February 2022 (UTC)