Property talk:P1990
Documentation
taxa, preferably species, present at a zoo, botanical garden, collection, or other institution. NOT specific animals, not for any geographic location
| Description | species or taxa present at a zoo or other place, NOT specific animals. | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Represents | captive animal (Q57812559) | ||||||||||||
| Data type | Item | ||||||||||||
| Domain | According to this template:
zoos, aquaria, botanical gardens, botanical collections, etc.
According to statements in the property:
When possible, data should only be stored as statementszoo (Q43501), botanical garden (Q167346), herbarium (Q181916), public aquarium (Q2281788), amusement park (Q194195), greenhouse (Q165044), museum (Q33506), hatchery (Q2333552), game reserve (Q1714375) or type of garden (Q96338860) | ||||||||||||
| Allowed values | any species or other taxons (note: this should be moved to the property statements) | ||||||||||||
| Example | North Carolina Zoo (Q1850938) → polar bear (Q33609) Arboretum de la Vallée-aux-Loups (Q2859716) → Sequoiadendron giganteum (Q149851) Florida Aquarium (Q3074266) → pelagic thresher (Q1274522) | ||||||||||||
| Source | Most zoos have a species list on their websites. Commons:Category:Animals in zoos by zoo name and Commons:Category:Animals in zoos by species (note: this information should be moved to a property statement; use property source website for the property (P1896)) | ||||||||||||
| See also | taxon especially protected in area (P6569), taxon found at location (P6803) | ||||||||||||
| Lists |
| ||||||||||||
| Proposal discussion | Proposal discussion | ||||||||||||
| Current uses |
| ||||||||||||
| Search for values |
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Value type Q16521, Q502895, Q38829, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Type Q43501, Q167346, Q181916, Q2281788, Q194195, Q165044, Q33506, Q2333552, Q1714375, Q96338860, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Item P17, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Item P131, search, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Item P625, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Item P856, SPARQL
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P1990#Item P571, SPARQL
Polar bears in Weekly News edit
From Wikidata:Status_updates/2015_07_11#Did_you_know?
- Which zoo has polar bears? Wikidata attempts to answer the question here. Work in progress.
Eventually, there should be about 200-300 zoos listed. Commons:Category:Ursus maritimus in zoos has many. --- Jura 16:46, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- And which property do we use for notable animals: Berlin Zoological Garden (Q154828) -> Knut (Q159697)? --Tobias1984 (talk) 17:07, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Knut > location > Berlin Zoological Garden (Q154828)? --- Jura 17:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Jura1: Or use residence (P551)? --Tobias1984 (talk) 20:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Or add it to the like of Ursus maritimus in the Bronx Zoo (Q20656563)? --- Jura 21:01, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Or create the equivalent of https://www.freebase.com/zoos/zoo/notable_animals ?
- Or adapt has pet (P1429)? --- Jura 04:49, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
- @Jura1: Or use residence (P551)? --Tobias1984 (talk) 20:59, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- Knut > location > Berlin Zoological Garden (Q154828)? --- Jura 17:11, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
All? edit
Should we finally count all kept species? There can be more than thousand of them in one zoo - 1000+ properties per item is too much by now... --Infovarius (talk) 20:51, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Should we widen the scope? edit
@AmaryllisGardener, Jura1, Pigsonthewing, Fralambert, Tobias1984, Infovarius: Hello! I'd like to document which species can be found in any given place on Earth and I thus wonder if this property, for the moment limited to zoos and such, should not be renamed to 'species present', as Pigsonthewing had suggested, so that its scope would widen in the desired way. Some Wikipedia templates for places other than museums and co. already have a dedicated function that awaits the corresponding Wikidata property, for instance |peuplement avifaune= and |peuplement piscicole= in fr:Modèle:Infobox Lac. So, should we rename? Thierry Caro (talk) 03:32, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- If you add it to any type of item, you could have thousands of statements on these items.
--- Jura 05:22, 1 August 2016 (UTC)- That's also true for zoos whatever. But maybe we should also try to limit the number of species listed then, with something like 'typical species present' as the new label. But I am not sure about this specific move either. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
- Most zoos have a limited number of species. Maybe, you'd want to try another property instead. Makes it easier to monitor and coordinate.
--- Jura 11:57, 1 August 2016 (UTC)- I have added only protected area (Q473972) as a compromise. So the property is still not usable by any geographic location but its scope is widened a little bit, whatever. It makes sense as protected areas are often created in order to protect specific species and one may argue that they are sometimes just giant zoos. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
- I don't quite see the compromise. You'd need to replace "present" if you add "protect area". Otherwise this leads leads to a unlimited scope. Maybe you could just create a new property for that if you feel it's needed.
--- Jura 03:36, 22 April 2018 (UTC)- Excuse me, @Jura1: but I disagree. I think that protected area (Q473972) or even national park (Q46169) should be acceptable, as @Thierry Caro: proposed. "Present" could already leads to a unlimited scope, because a lot of zoos and botanic gardens have hundreds of species. So, if you are aware by the scope, it should be better change "present" by "typical", "notable" or "the ten most significant". Create a new property makes no sense, because we were moving the "out of scope" problem to the new one. Please, consider to accept protected area (Q473972) as a valid P31 for items with this statement. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 08:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- A hundred is bearable, but ten thousand isn't. I formulated a separate proposal at Wikidata:Property proposal/taxa found --- Jura 07:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- Excuse me, @Jura1: but I disagree. I think that protected area (Q473972) or even national park (Q46169) should be acceptable, as @Thierry Caro: proposed. "Present" could already leads to a unlimited scope, because a lot of zoos and botanic gardens have hundreds of species. So, if you are aware by the scope, it should be better change "present" by "typical", "notable" or "the ten most significant". Create a new property makes no sense, because we were moving the "out of scope" problem to the new one. Please, consider to accept protected area (Q473972) as a valid P31 for items with this statement. Thanks, Amadalvarez (talk) 08:37, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- I don't quite see the compromise. You'd need to replace "present" if you add "protect area". Otherwise this leads leads to a unlimited scope. Maybe you could just create a new property for that if you feel it's needed.
- I have added only protected area (Q473972) as a compromise. So the property is still not usable by any geographic location but its scope is widened a little bit, whatever. It makes sense as protected areas are often created in order to protect specific species and one may argue that they are sometimes just giant zoos. Thierry Caro (talk) 00:54, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
- Most zoos have a limited number of species. Maybe, you'd want to try another property instead. Makes it easier to monitor and coordinate.
- That's also true for zoos whatever. But maybe we should also try to limit the number of species listed then, with something like 'typical species present' as the new label. But I am not sure about this specific move either. Thierry Caro (talk) 11:24, 1 August 2016 (UTC)
Island edit
Sometimes it makes sense to use this property on an island. Example: University of Tromsø – The Arctic University of Norway (Q279724) owns the small island Ryøya (Q11218274) where they kept Ovibos moschatus (Q184004) for many years, for research purposes. It was not a zoo or a protected area per se; just a privately owned island where local people were strongly discouraged from landing. - Soulkeeper (talk) 15:04, 19 August 2019 (UTC)
Allowing for wildlife refuge edit
I've added wildlife refuges as one of the possible types to which this can apply, with the logic that wildlife refuges, like zoos, are generally established to hold specific species. If a different property is more applicable, I would be interested in corrections. ARR8 (talk) 18:57, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
I just had a similar idea, many of the Naturschutzgebiet (Q759421) designations include a list of species specifically protected in that area, and this property seems to be the one closest fitting. There is of course one difference - in zoos etc. the species are kept actively, whereas for protected area its species which should be preserved. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 09:40, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- As the number of species found is potentially unlimited, how about using taxa found instead? --- Jura 14:21, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
- The use I had in mind was more like "taxa protected" - not all taxa found in an area (which would be impossible to record anyway), but only those which are explicitly mentioned as those specifically protected there. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
- I added a proposal for that at Wikidata:Property proposal/taxa protected. --- Jura 07:08, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
- The use I had in mind was more like "taxa protected" - not all taxa found in an area (which would be impossible to record anyway), but only those which are explicitly mentioned as those specifically protected there. Ahoerstemeier (talk) 14:06, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
How to populate a wd item on a botanical garden that keeps 1000s of species using the species kept property? edit
Botanical gardens can have thousands of species kept in their collection. Should these all be listed using species kept (P1990) or should an inverse property be proposed or initiated? Take for example Meise Botanic Garden (Q3052500) according to their own sources they maintain between 17K and 18K taxa. I have added 200 of those using species kept (P1990). I don't know if Wikidata can handle 1 item, having 1000s of statements. If not, one solution would be to change the direction of the property, e.g. from Meise Botanic Garden (Q3052500) species kept (P1990) Acanthus ilicifolius (Q1021004) to Acanthus ilicifolius (Q1021004) species kept (P1990) Meise Botanic Garden (Q3052500). Maybe changing the label to "species kept at". This would affect about 3480 wikidata items, but I am happy to fix the direction there.
Otherwise, maybe an inverse property to species kept (P1990) should be proposed.
Any input here would be appreciated.
--Andrawaag (talk) 15:59, 15 April 2019 (UTC)
- Couldn't the inverse lead to a similar problem for fairly widespread species? I'd rather try to make separate items for specific sub-collections.
- We could attempt to do an inverse property that would primarily be for large collections. Canonical query would be
?location ( wdt:P1990 | ^ wdt:P8999 ) ?taxon. --- Jura 17:21, 16 April 2019 (UTC)- Botanic Gardens Conservation International has 1,118 gardens contributing to its plant search system. There are more than a thousand Gardens, but few taxa that would be in all of them. Therefore, the list of taxa in a garden is much longer than the list of gardens were a taxa is cultivated. The same is true for zoos. Qgroom (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not sure about zoos. I don't think we would want hundreds if not thousands of zoos listed on some taxa.
- This property currently works quite well for zoos. Let's work with what is actually being done, not with a theoretical possibility.
- For really bulky things, please use data storage on Commons. --- Jura 23:49, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
- Botanic Gardens Conservation International has 1,118 gardens contributing to its plant search system. There are more than a thousand Gardens, but few taxa that would be in all of them. Therefore, the list of taxa in a garden is much longer than the list of gardens were a taxa is cultivated. The same is true for zoos. Qgroom (talk) 14:58, 17 April 2019 (UTC)
Should the scope be widened to animal sanctuaries? edit
Some animals sanctuaries specialize in rescuing specific types of animals, although they're often referred to in general terms: "Big cats" or "Primates". However, it might not be practical or desired to add to general wildlife sanctuaries whose animal species fluctuate depending on need and local rescues. (Or maybe proposing another property, such as "animals rescued" might be more appropriate as the purpose is different--"species kept" sounds more relevant to organizations that set out to collect particular species, such as zoos.) Any input would be much appreciated. Maryacat (talk) 15:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
UK Freedom of Information requests as a data source edit
I've been going through a load of Freedom of Information requests in the UK. There's a UK zoo licencing act 1981 that requires councils to periodically inspect zoos, there's a few hundred FOIs that turn up inspection reports and (more interestingly for us) stocklists.
I'm interested in the idea of adding these on mass and referenced against these reports.
There's quite a bit of pre-processing to do, and I'd want to add slowly and in line with bulk and bot policies.
But I think there's a really interesting prospect here of being able to say "How many {of species x} are there within the UK?" or perhaps identify zoos by a relatively comprehensive list of what they keep?
What do folks think? I suspect I'd be dramatically increasing the usage of this field if so? Huw Diprose (talk) 23:59, 21 May 2023 (UTC)
Might the scope be widened to include property descriptors for subgroups? edit
In particular I'm thinking of UK zoo stocklists which often seem to divide stock into biological sex, or unknown.
I suspect this is of use for breeding programs where matching is important, but I suspect also interesting where there's sexual dimorphism or other differences in appearance of behaviour?
I went looking for a constraint on this field that might allow me to add multiple values as clarifying properties, perhaps:
P1990 - Species Kept perhaps with reference to Q44148 and Q43445?
Would need to work out how best to capture "unknown" which makes up a good deal of the counts, and perhaps other categories or not applicable? I suspect the definition could be complicated, but there must be good precident in existing ways of describing species kept in zoos or such? Huw Diprose (talk) 00:09, 22 May 2023 (UTC)