Wikidata:Property proposal/Political foundation

‎Political foundation

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Organization

   Withdrawn

Description	The property allows a link between a political party (usually) and its related political foundation, as is common in Germany, in the Netherlands or at the European level. The reverse property ("political party" or "political party affiliation", still different from P102 which is for individual membership) would be useful too.
Data type	Item
Template parameter	"think tank" in en:template:infobox political party
Domain	political party (Q7278), European political party (Q24649)
Allowed values	party political foundation (Q104832689), European political foundation (Q7210312)
Example 1	Friedrich Ebert Foundation (Q836469)political foundation ofSocial Democratic Party of Germany (Q49768)
Example 2	Wiardi Beckman Stichting (Q979801)political foundation ofLabour Party (Q275441)
Example 3	Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies (Q5062434)political foundation ofEuropean People's Party (Q208242)
Example 4	In case of reserve property: Social Democratic Party of Germany (Q49768)political party ofFriedrich Ebert Foundation (Q836469)
Source	For German political foundations: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_foundation_in_Germany For Dutch political foundations (NL): https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wetenschappelijk_bureau For EU-level foundations: https://www.appf.europa.eu/appf/en/parties-and-foundations/registered-foundations
Planned use	Link political parties to their political foundations and, in case the reverse property is created, link political foundations to political parties.

Motivation

More generally, these are useful properties, as political foundations are often required to be linked to a political party, so the political foundation should be explicitly tied to its party on the Wikidata page (more clearly than by using "instance of" as for Friedrich Ebert Foundation (Q836469)). Julius Schwarz (talk) 09:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Comment I know it’s tempting to be very precise here. But the concept of political foundations is quite specific, which is why I would be cautious about creating too specific properties here. Wouldn’t founded by (P112) = Party or member of political party (P102) = Party combined with instance of (P31) = party political foundation (Q104832689) suffice in this case? --NGOgo (talk) 19:08, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the proposal. I'm not quite sure. I see where you are coming from and I see that the idea is to compromise; quite honestly, I want to keep an open mind, but I am just not sure how exact we need to be. And political foundations are neither founded by a party, nor are they a member of that party. Cases surely differ based on applicable laws, but the relationship is one of affiliation. Since we have properties such as "parliamentary group" or "youth wing", and, on the Wikipedia side, extra fields like "women's wing", this felt like just one similar property for a specific type of affiliated entity. Julius Schwarz (talk) 19:55, 15 September 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks. In that case, I would use affiliation (P1416) = Party. But I'm not sure about the fidelity either. Hope we hear some more ideas/comments. Best NGOgo (talk) 18:36, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

  That's good; I hadn't found that one. Let's indeed wait for more input, but that could be an interesting option. Thanks! Julius Schwarz (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment How many cases are there? There are similar institutions in the Czech Republic (inspired by the German model), but probably only ten. In the case of a small number of cases, a special feature is not appropriate. But it is certainly appropriate to express the connection in the party and institute items.

In party it is appropriate to use has subsidiary (P355) and qualifier object of statement has role (P3831) party political foundation (Q104832689), in foundation item both parent organization (P749) and founded by (P112), perhaps also the aforementioned affiliation (P1416). --Jklamo (talk) 13:45, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. However, I think it depends on the applicable legal framework. At least in the European case, affiliation (P1416) is better suited than has subsidiary (P355), as the link between the two is not one of subsidiarity. Likewise parent organization (P749) and founded by (P112) would not be accurate, but maybe that works in countries where the link has a different legal basis. Julius Schwarz (talk) 13:55, 17 September 2024 (UTC)

• NGOgo (talk) Bogger (talk) PantherStrix (talk) PKM (talk) Jklamo (talk) Nw520 (talk) Olyammon (talk) 03:46, 2 August 2022 (UTC) Saiphani02 (talk) Jeanne Noiraud (talk) 20:34, 30 June 2024 (UTC) Laurenz Sommerlad (talk) tdombos (talk)
  Notified participants of WikiProject Nonprofit Organizations --Jklamo (talk) 13:47, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
•  Comment Hi, interesting to discover this system, it is not as common in France though. Party sometime does their own fundraising directy. I also think affiliation (P1416) may suffice to describe the political attachement to a party. You can maybe add funder (P8324) to describe the financial relationship ? Jeanne Noiraud (talk) 11:56, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

  Hi, not sure you got this correctly. Political foundations, in this sense, are not made for (nor allowed to carry out) fundraising. They mostly do awareness-raising, research, discussions, advocacy, etc. Julius Schwarz (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2024 (UTC)

•  Comment FYI I decided to use affiliation (P1416). Not sure how to close this.

  I think that is the best way to model it. I marked this proposal as withdrawn.--So9q (talk) 08:42, 19 September 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks! Julius Schwarz (talk) 10:02, 19 September 2024 (UTC)