Property talk:P405

Value type “human(Q5)”:This property should use items as value that contain property “instance of(P31)”.On these, the value forinstance of(P31)should be an item that usessubclass of(P279)with valuehuman(Q5)(or a subclass thereof). (Help)

"exceptions" is incompatible with "mandatory" parameterList of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Value type Q5,hourly updated report,SPARQL

Type “taxon(Q16521)”:item must contain property “instance of(P31)”with classes “taxon(Q16521)”or their subclasses (defined usingsubclass of(P279)). (Help)

List of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Type Q16521,hourly updated report,SPARQL

Item “taxon name(P225)”:Items with this property should also have “taxon name(P225)”.(Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.Exceptions can be specifiedusingexception to constraint(P2303).
List of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Item P225,search,SPARQL

Item “parent taxon(P171)”:Items with this property should also have “parent taxon(P171)”.(Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.Exceptions can be specifiedusingexception to constraint(P2303).
List of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Item P171,search,SPARQL

Item “taxon rank(P105)”:Items with this property should also have “taxon rank(P105)”.(Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.Exceptions can be specifiedusingexception to constraint(P2303).
List of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Item P105,search,SPARQL

Allowed entity types areWikibase item(Q29934200):the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)

Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist.Exceptions can be specifiedusingexception to constraint(P2303).
List of violations of this constraint:Database reports/Constraint violations/P405#Entity types

This property is being used by:

Please notify projects that use this property before big changes (renaming, deletion, merge with another property, etc.)

Deletion-Request

The following discussion is closed.Please do not modify it.Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

KEPT- In the absence of a clear consensus for deletion, I will not delete a property that is in use. It is clear that there are significant divisions as to how best to convert taxon authors, but a deletion discussion is not the proper venue for resolving it. Please take this discussion to theWikidata:Project chatso that the broader community can reach a consensus on the issue.SvenManguard Wha?19:24, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

QuestionIs there a discussion that overrules the interpretation of the consensus at the item's creation, where the closer says "I understand the proposer's ideal behind using StringValue, but the community thinks this can be done with items"?SvenManguardWha?20:28, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Liné1commented:Cannot be an Item because there are standardized author syntax like '(L.) Oken' where L. is the first author and Oken the author renaming.Thats true and only a simple example, but to render ist right two items are required: (L.)Oken.--Succu(talk)20:47, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(conflict) Most taxon author are a person if a line seeQ1043,it sould be abble to put [[Carl von Linné|L.]] if it is a plant or [[Carl von Linné|Linnaeus]] if it is a animal. I beleive item is the best value for this properties, since generally taxon autor have the notoriety for a article. --Fralambert(talk)20:56, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@Succu The best will be a creation of StringValue «botanist autor acronym» and «zoologist autor acronym» to put with the autor. --Fralambert(talk)21:29, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complitly other question:L.vs.Linnaeusist alwaysQ1043.--Succu(talk)21:39, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If this would be String wouldn't it be possible to store the Item to the Persons in the References with another extra Property? --Sk!d(talk)11:06, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to persons like (L.)Okenwould be a nice feature, but it requests a sophisticated new datatype. One that can handle structures like this: (Person1, Person2 & Person3 ex Person4) Person 5 ex Person6 et al. --Succu(talk)13:32, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't think that we have to link it. The correct String would be enough. But we could store the information to the items in the references, but I am not sure if this is a valid and wanted use of the references. --Sk!d(talk)18:17, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I dont't like bot-created statements like "Quelle=Deuschsprachige Wikipedia". Smart references are another and really complex topic. But please: lets us try this little suggested correction. Its usefull. --Succu(talk)19:34, 15 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't the datatype be a normal string with wiki syntax, like literally "([[Q1043|L.]]) [[Q61993|Oken]]" The user (most likely a Lua-function in the Wikipedias) could then look up the referenced items.Byrial(talk)11:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hint: There is a newProperty:P428(botanist author abbreviation). --Succu(talk)06:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Use of taxon author is described aten:Author citation (botany)anden:Author citation (zoology).It can be done using items and qualifiers, but will be complicated. You will need qualifiers for "year" (zooology), "not original placement" (to place author and possibly year in parenthesis), order of authors if several, "ex" (first publication not valid), "in" (if authorship of the publication is different), "emend." (if changed) and possibly others. A string is much simpler, but has the disadvantage that there will be no direct links to items for the authors.Byrial(talk)13:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose- hewiki already uses it to link to taxonom. e,g:he:כולכית_מצויה.Eran(talk)20:03, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Eran, please read the discussion and understand the problem. --Succu(talk)20:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I read the discussions both here and in the talk page (creation proposal) and I think item is the correct type for it. Item type allows linking and string doesn't. In non latin Wikipedias the author isn't always specified in latin (fa:شیر_(گربهسان),he:האדם_הניאנדרטלי). String can't be used here...Eran(talk)20:53, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can't handle author citations likeAndinobatesTwomey, Brown, Amézquita & Mejía-Vargas,2011 with this property. That's the main point. --Succu(talk)14:17, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can handle citations for this case with Lua: iterating over the items associated with this property, extracting the last names and adding the year as different parameter. The real problem is actually for latin names.Eran(talk)14:48, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As a proof of concept: go toen:Andinobates,edit the page, add {{#invoke:Taxobox|taxbox}} and show preview (please dont save - the new taxobox isn't yet ready).Eran(talk)15:24, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I found a the wrong author citation (Brown, Amézquita, Mejía-Vargas, Twomey) - parentheses, no year. What aboutProperty:P428(botanist author abbreviation), special abbr. as "ex", "et al" (see above)? --Succu(talk)15:40, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK I removed the parentheses, but the case is that you can handle multiple authors with Lua, and items can allow correct links, and support i18n (as mentioned before - in non latin wikipedias the author isn't cited the same way). To get botanist abbr we need support either in Lua or with phase 3 queries to get property of linked item (P428 of the author), which isn't yet supported. Regarding et al and ex I'm not sure what is the correct solution here. Maybe we should add to the authors "et al" (or some fake entity) as the author, or define it as a different property.Eran(talk)16:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposal has other drawbacks. The statement cound be read as four different claims: BrownorAmézquitaorMejía-VargasorTwomeyisthe one and only taxon author. --Succu(talk)14:00, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive.Please do not modify it.Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Taxa

Taxa do not have authors, it is scientific names that have author citations. Author citations may include persons who have made descriptions, but they may also exclude them (lots of the names that Linnaeus gave were not for taxa first described by him). Author citations may also include persons who did not themselves publish anything. (Taxa have taxonomists who circumscribe taxa, and a given taxon may have been circumscribed anew any number of times.) -Brya(talk)10:37, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So, what do you want?:) --Izno(talk)16:19, 29 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that is the question, isn't it? Obviously, first of all, awareness that "taxon author" is a misreprestation and is misleading to the reader. Secondly, I would be much happier if this could be replaced by "author citation" (or at a pinch by "authorship", which is less accurate but shorter). -Brya(talk)05:39, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope what Brya wants is to replace "taxon author" with words with specific and known meaning. It is an "author citation" that goes with the validly published scientific name of a taxon; it is not the "taxon author," which I assumed, initially, was describing the person who named the taxonomic rank (Riv. ex L. or something!).

I realize this is in its early stages, but creating odd phrases like "taxon author" to mean something else will create problems when you try to build on it.

I just wonder why wikidata is creating new and different names and ways of doing things. I thought the idea was to make a database with use across projects and throughout cyberspace. I am not sure.

--AfadsBad(talk)04:36, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

So I'm going to throw this at both of you:Project:Be bold(Q3916099).You know more than I.:) --Izno(talk)03:10, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Author citations

I gave this some further thought and I came to the conclusion that what is needed is a field for a text string (as in the field below the label "enter description" ). I do not have any idea how easy it would be to make this, from a technical perspective, but it appears to be the only way to handle this.

Some notes:

Author citations may accompany scientific names. Scientific names are governed by Codes of Nomenclature. There are about half a dozen of such "Codes", all different from one another.
Author citations are not part of the scientific name, and as a rule do not convey any (real) information. If all author citations were deleted from all Wikipedia's this would not decrease the information in these Wikipedia's. However, author citations have been added on a large scale in all Wikipedia's and they are here to stay. As author citations have been (fairly) strongly standardized, they are very suitable for inclusion in Wikidata.
There may be many elements in an author citation as in the abovementioned:

AndinobatesTwomey, Brown, Amézquita & Mejía-Vargas, 2011

Kniphofia uvaria(L.) Oken (1841)

and an indefinite number of further examples may be added

Andinobates daleswansoni(Rueda-Almonacid, Rada, Sánchez-Pacheco, Velásquez-Álvarez, and Quevedo-Gil, 2006)

BruniaceaeR.Br. ex DC. (1825)

GentianalesJuss. ex Bercht. & J.Presl (1820)

etc, etc

None of the Codes of Nomenclature require a year to be added to the author citation, although the Bacteriological Code does recommend doing so. The zoological Code and the 'botanical' Code lead by example, mostly using the formats "Hymenolepis diminuta(Rudolphi, 1819) "and"Linum radiolaL. (1753) ". In the Bacteriological Code two years may be included:"Bacillus subtilis(Ehrenberg 1835) Cohn 1872 "
I don't see how this can be encompassed in a data structure. Anyway, there is no such thing as a "taxon author" (taxa do not have authors) and there is no particular relationship between "the author citation" and the "author(s) of the first scientific description" (Linnaeus is the author of many names of taxa that were first scientifically described well before his time, and he gave credit where credit was due).

-Brya(talk)05:50, 5 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

French label

Followingthis request for comments,the French label now includes the male and the female form.PAC2(talk)04:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Property talk:P405

Contents

Documentation

Deletion-Request

Taxa

Author citations

French label

Navigation menu