Property talk:P1307
Documentation
identifier for a member of the Swiss Parliament since 1848
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Item P735, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Item P39, search
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Item P102, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Item P1412, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Item P734, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Entity types
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1307#Scope, SPARQL
This property is being used by: Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.) |
il devrait y avoir 200 membres (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT (wd:Q5 as ?item) (COUNT(DISTINCT ?p) as ?ct) (?ct=200 as ?ok) { ?p p:P39 ?st1 . ?st1 ps:P39 wd:Q18510612 . ?st1 pq:P580 ?a1 . FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?st1 pq:P582 ?z1 } } GROUP BY ?item
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1307#200 CN sans date de fin
il devrait y avoir 46 membres (Help)
Violations query:
SELECT (wd:Q5 as ?item) (COUNT(DISTINCT ?p) as ?ct) (?ct=46 as ?ok) { ?p p:P39 ?st1 . ?st1 ps:P39 wd:Q18510613 . ?st1 pq:P580 ?a1 . FILTER NOT EXISTS { ?st1 pq:P582 ?z1 } } GROUP BY ?item
List of this constraint violations: Database reports/Complex constraint violations/P1307#46 CE sans date de fin
|
|
Statements on items / data model for offices
editItems for members of the parliament currently follow the following model. There is one position statement for every continuous period. This may cover one or several parliamentary terms. This is consistent with various references, notably dhs and the parliament website.
If there non-consecutive periods, several P39 statements are needed.
--- Jura 10:11, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Additional properties
editfamily name (P734) seems to be missing frequently. I suggest we add a constraint for that.
--- Jura 10:11, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Add parliamentary term qualifier?
editIs there any benefit in adding the qualifier for the parliamentary term to P39 statements? It seems that it can easily be queried with start and end dates.
--- Jura 10:31, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Add electoral district qualifier?
editIt seems helpful to qualify the position for either council with the electoral district .
--- Jura 13:20, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
Work location
editHi @Jura1:, why should there be a "Work location: Bern" constrain? This is utterly wrong, as being a MP in Switzerland cannot be qualified as "work" and they are required in Bern only 4 times a year. —Omnilaika02 (talk) 15:21, 16 April 2020 (UTC)
- It's meant to be mostly the "location of activity". I know some think they don't actually do any work there, but I think that is a mistaken assumption. For other uses of the property, see "Jack the Ripper" mentioned on Property talk:P937. Don't worry too much about adding the statements, it's mostly done by bot/script and I think @Olaf Kosinsky: already added many. Obviously, most items will have other work locations as well. --- Jura 13:24, 17 April 2020 (UTC)
- It cannot be qualified as work due to the militia system ; if it's location of the activity as a federal MP, it should be a qualifier of the designated activity and not the whole item ; and the french label should read « lieu d'activité » and not « lieu de travail »… —Omnilaika02 (talk) 09:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Interesting thought. So from what percentage of their work week or income do you think they "work"? --- Jura 15:54, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- It depends on the implication and the number of commissions, and is nowadays considered a 60-80%. But again, due to the milita system, it's not "work" and the property does not accurately describe the reality of the whole person, but does just qualify where the voting process (4x a year) takes place ; it should just be used in "fonction – federal MP". — Omnilaika02 (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- It does sound much like a regular employment. They still do that in Bern, dont they? Anyways, if you think the French label of work location (P937) needs changing, feel free to edit it. In any case, I don't think it should be re-scoped in the way you sugggest and the current approach maintained. BTW, please use "residence" (Property:P551) to indicate where they actually live. The advantage of P937 is that they don't need to match. --- Jura 04:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- And after being an MP ? Take for example Philippe Nantermod (Q16669767) : according to his website, he works as a lawyer in Sion, and is in Bern when needed by the federal politics. After being an MP, he's gonna keep his page on the federal assembly website, but will no longer "work" in Bern : that's one of the reason why I think the property should describe only said activity. I'm not confident enough to suggest a change in work location (P937) as I do not understand all of the implications of it. I don't get your hint, I always used residence (P551) to indicate where they actually live. —Omnilaika02 (talk) 12:55, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- It does sound much like a regular employment. They still do that in Bern, dont they? Anyways, if you think the French label of work location (P937) needs changing, feel free to edit it. In any case, I don't think it should be re-scoped in the way you sugggest and the current approach maintained. BTW, please use "residence" (Property:P551) to indicate where they actually live. The advantage of P937 is that they don't need to match. --- Jura 04:43, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
- It depends on the implication and the number of commissions, and is nowadays considered a 60-80%. But again, due to the milita system, it's not "work" and the property does not accurately describe the reality of the whole person, but does just qualify where the voting process (4x a year) takes place ; it should just be used in "fonction – federal MP". — Omnilaika02 (talk) 16:58, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- Interesting thought. So from what percentage of their work week or income do you think they "work"? --- Jura 15:54, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
- It cannot be qualified as work due to the militia system ; if it's location of the activity as a federal MP, it should be a qualifier of the designated activity and not the whole item ; and the french label should read « lieu d'activité » and not « lieu de travail »… —Omnilaika02 (talk) 09:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)