Wikidata:Property proposal/Type properties

Properties for nomenclatural types

edit

Name-bearing type

edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science

   Not done
DescriptionThe name/identifier for this species' type
Representstype (Q3707858)
Data typeString
Domaintaxa
Example
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
See alsotaxonomic type (P427)

Nature of type

edit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science

   Not done
DescriptionIdentify which subcategory of type this species has, only as subproperty
Representstype (Q3707858)
Data typeItem
Domainitem
Allowed valuesholotype (Q1061403), lectotype (Q2439719), neotype (Q19353453), epitype (Q55195035) (i believe a few extra terms are in use in zoology, but I am not familiar with them)
ExampleSolanum africanum (Q17400483) → Dillenius, Hort. Eltham. 2:365, t. 273, f. 352. 1732 → lectotype (Q2439719), s.c. s.n. (Dill-HE 273-352) → epitype (Q55195035)
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)

Motivation

edit

These two properties allow for the entry of data about type specimens for species and infraspecific taxa (subspecies, varieties etc.), which is actually more crucial to defining taxa than any other data we currently have. All other elements that "Name-bearing type" would need can be handled in a straightforward manner with existing properties:

  • Holding institution: collection (P195) (possibly in combination with object named as (P1932) as they are usually abbreviated)
  • Type locality: location of discovery (P189)
  • Author and place of designation (for all types other than holotype): this would require slight adjustments to taxon author (P405) and P5326 (P5326), but as nomenclatural acts (i.e. whose date is important for priority) being governed by the same codes as species descriptions, there is in my opinion no reason to create separate properties for this. Plus it might lead to a shorter name for P5326 (P5326) that is less likely to overflow into the name of the subproperly directly below it, currently a frequent occurrence.

Also note that the proposed CETAF id above could make use of Nature of type for describing what the specimen is (the proposal currently doesn't include an actual way to do that).

Circeus (talk) 20:43, 7 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

edit

  WikiProject Taxonomy has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead.

  • I think it would be helpful if the labels indicated that these properties are for species. Yair rand (talk) 19:01, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose We have taxonomic type (P427). --Succu (talk) 21:38, 12 October 2018 (UTC) PS: An new qualifier designated by (LT) is probably more valuable. --Succu (talk) 22:13, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment These are two separate proposed properties, and it would be better to have two separate discussions.
    1. the first touches on the perennial question if it is handy to have two separate properties (one with datatype string, and one with datatype item) for the same feature. This would also be handy for synonyms (not all synonyms are notable). I guess a string property for nomenclatural types may work, but it could also cause problems, depending on how it is used. Separate items are safer, but a lot more work. I guess I could be talked into either approach (and in the long run either approach may prove to be wrong). - Brya (talk) 10:50, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    2. the second would probably be useful, but if Wikidata has separate items for types, this had best be a statement, and if Wikidata allows strings for types, it needs to be a qualifier.
    3. a property for "designated by" (LT, NT, EP) may be useful also. - Brya (talk) 10:56, 13 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]