Wikidata

Property talk:P225

Latest comment: 6 months ago by PePeEfe in topic Taxon publication

Documentation

taxon name
correct scientific name of a taxon (according to the reference given)
Descriptionthe currently correct scientific name of a taxon (according to the reference provided, or on a Wikipedia page). Usually according to a Code of nomenclature, but clade names are also allowed.
Representsscientific name (Q10753560)
Data typeString
Template parameteren:Template:Taxobox, de:Vorlage:Taxobox etc. (See also: species:Main page.)
Domain
According to this template: taxa - taxon (Q16521)
According to statements in the property:
taxon (Q16521) or fictional taxon (Q15707583)
When possible, data should only be stored as statements
Examplelion (Q140) → Panthera leo
Rosa (Q34687) → Rosa
Mononegavirales (Q1753162) → Mononegavirales
Cantharellaceae (Q80945) → Cantharellaceae
Format and edit filter validationSpecial:AbuseFilter/112 displays MediaWiki:Abusefilter-warning-P225. See below:
Warning: The value for taxon name (P225) in this (or any) item shouldn't be changed (except for spelling corrections). If a taxonomic paper or book introduces a name change, create a new item for the new name (if needed) and add a statement with taxon synonym (P1420) to that item.
Tracking: sameno label (Q22914703)
Tracking: differencesno label (Q32583891)
Tracking: usageCategory:Pages using Wikidata property P225 (Q22914698)
Tracking: local yes, WD nono label (Q22914704)
See alsotaxon common name (P1843), L-number (P7291)
Lists
Proposal discussionProposal discussion
Current uses
Total3,861,067
Main statement3,859,292>99.9% of uses
Qualifier20<0.1% of uses
Reference1,755<0.1% of uses
Search for values
[create Create a translatable help page (preferably in English) for this property to be included here]
Conflicts with “locator map image (P242)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P242, SPARQL
Conflicts with “taxon author (P405)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P405, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “ex taxon author (P697)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P697, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P574, SPARQL
Conflicts with “incertae sedis (P678)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P678, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “nomenclatural status (P1135)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P1135, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “original spelling (P1353)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303). Known exceptions: Biota (Q2382443)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P1353, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “reference URL (P854)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P854, hourly updated report, SPARQL
Conflicts with “location (P276)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P276, hourly updated report, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “country (P17)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P17, search, SPARQL
Conflicts with “BHL page ID (P687)”: this property must not be used with the listed properties and values. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Conflicts with P687, 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 specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Item P105, search, SPARQL
Type “taxon (Q16521), fictional taxon (Q15707583)”: item must contain property “instance of (P31), subclass of (P279)” with classes “taxon (Q16521), fictional taxon (Q15707583)” or their subclasses (defined using subclass of (P279)). (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Type Q16521, Q15707583, SPARQL
Allowed entity types are Wikibase item (Q29934200): the property may only be used on a certain entity type (Help)
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Entity types, hourly updated report
Scope is as main value (Q54828448): the property must be used by specified way only (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Scope, SPARQL
Single best value: this property generally contains a single value. If there are several, one would have preferred rank (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#single best value, SPARQL
Distinct values: this property likely contains a value that is different from all other items. (Help)
Exceptions are possible as rare values may exist. Exceptions can be specified using exception to constraint (P2303).
List of violations of this constraint: Database reports/Constraint violations/P225#Unique value, SPARQL (every item), SPARQL (by value)
Pattern ^Dahlia '(.+)'$ will be automatically replaced to Dahlia ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
Pattern ^Rosa '(.+)'$ will be automatically replaced to Rosa ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
Pattern ^Clematis '(.+)'$ will be automatically replaced to Clematis ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
Pattern ^Dahlia ’(.+)’$ will be automatically replaced to Dahlia ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
Pattern ^Rosa ’(.+)’$ will be automatically replaced to Rosa ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
Pattern ^Clematis ’(.+)’$ will be automatically replaced to Clematis ‘\1’.
Testing: TODO list
This property is being used by:

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

Taxonomy properties
Basic
Qualifiers
Optional
Databases
International
National
Africa
Americas
Asia
Oceania
Europe
Subnational
References
 
Wikidata properties related to name (Q82799)
General
Person
Name
Taxonomy
Science (other)

Discussion edit

Property_talk:P225/Archive 1

Mandatory qualifiers ? edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

As Q14891270 came up on WikiProject Random, I added qualifiers year of publication of scientific name for taxon (P574) and taxon author (P405) to the taxon name (P225) statement. Are there taxa where these shouldn't be set?

If not, these qualifiers should probably be on a required qualifier constraint (Q21510856).

This even if they wont have constraint status (P2316)=mandatory constraint (Q21502408) for long (most items currently don't have these qualifiers [1][2]). We could start with constraint status (P2316)=suggestion constraint (Q62026391). --- Jura 00:03, 21 August 2019 (UTC)Reply

@Jura: autonym (Q1837887) don't have an author citation. --Succu (talk) 15:37, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Note that such item can be instance of autonym (Q1837887) and then an exception for constraint can be set here. Christian Ferrer (talk) 16:42, 29 August 2020 (UTC)Reply
Virus taxa regulated by International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature (Q14920640) don*t need an author citation. The constraints are not helpfull. They blew up the page into uselessness. --Succu (talk) 20:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)Reply

Which quote for cultivars ? edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion
  Windows Alt code combinations Macintosh key combinations Linux (X) keys Unicode point HTML entity HTML decimal
Single opening  ‘  Alt+0145 (on number pad) ⌥ Opt+] Compose+<+' or Alt Gr+⇧ Shift+V U+2018 &lsquo; &#8216;
Single closing
(& apostrophe[1][2]) 		 ’  Alt+0146 (on number pad) ⌥ Opt+⇧ Shift+] Compose+>+' or Alt Gr+⇧ Shift+B U+2019 &rsquo; &#8217;
  1. ↑ "Unicode Character 'RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK' (U+2019)". FileFormat.info. Retrieved 21 December 2018.
  2. ↑ "General Punctuation: Range: 2000–206F" (PDF). Unicode.org. Unicode Consortium. Retrieved 21 December 2015.
The above is from w:Quotation_marks_in_English#Typing_quotation_marks_on_a_computer_keyboard


Following Succu's samples, I try to use the above in taxonames for cultivars. Sample for Rosa 'Perla de Alcanada' (Q16626430):

Rosa ‘Perla de Alcanada’

As I got most wrong, I added autofixes above.

'...'

should be converted to

‘...’

Hopefully that gets them right .. --- Jura 12:56, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply

Additional point: Rosa 'Nyveldt's White' (Q83669228), the taxon name is currently using the "single closing quote" for "'s", but mainly because the Commons category did:
Rosa ‘Nyveldt’s White’
If that should be used in general, more items probably need fixing. --- Jura 16:31, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi Jura! I fixed the problems with my bot. This query should have no results at the moment. --Succu (talk) 17:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Thanks. It also added an Autofix for single closing quotes used instead of the single opening quotes. BTW, I don't think these are generally used in English language labels. --- Jura 17:21, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Creating a cultivar item solely based on a category name is generally a bad idea: eg. Rosa 'Eden Rose 85' (Q83674761). --Succu (talk) 21:58, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
I think it went ok. I think we fully lacked a basic structure in the field. Some synonym/trade designations still need to be sorted out. What property should I use for the later? --- Jura 22:05, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hm. We should start with references of cultivar names to get a grounding. In a next step names like commercial name (Q70382745) shoud be added as known as. --Succu (talk) 22:37, 26 January 2020 (UTC)Reply
Hi @Jura1: the autofix rules are failed now because result values do not match to format as a regular expression (P1793) specified on Property:P225. — Ivan A. Krestinin (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)Reply

Change the data type from string to lexeme? edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

While attending a workshop around the taxonomic data model here on Wikidata, I thought now would be a good time to reconsider whether taxon name (P225) should really remain a string or whether it should be tied to lexemes in some way. For a sample lexeme created for the purpose of exploring this, see Loxodonta africana (L247483). --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 14:57, 13 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

This would make the process of importing a name (based on a sitelink) or creating a new one (based on an external source) a lot more complicate. What are the pros of doing this that way? At the moment I don't see anything helpful. --Succu (talk) 20:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)Reply

IETF tag for values and its parts edit

Latest comment: 4 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion

@Daniel Mietchen, Succu:

What would be the appropriate language tag for taxon names?

  • When using this property, we don't need to set one, but when exporting the string, maybe one could be added.
  • The simple answer could be "la", but most words used aren't classical Latin and they are present in text that is generally not Latin (read: English).
  • In lexemes, Loxodonta (L247700) uses currently "mul".
  • In either case, as IETF includes subtags (official ones and inofficial ones), maybe there should be one just for these names. I haven't really find any guidance on what tag is to be used.

Whatever the solution is, lexeme namespace probably needs some fix as one currently can't set too many codes/languages easily. I had problems changing albopictus (L253532) away from "en" (which I wouldn't actually use).

(I think (1) this is independent of whether there a point of having Loxodonta africana (L247483) in addition to Q36557#P225, (2) having Loxodonta (L247700) can be independent of Loxodonta africana (L247483)) --- Jura 08:37, 8 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

  • I'm not much interested in what language tag we should use. "albopictus/albopicta/albopictum" is a specific epithet (could also be an infraspecific epithet). It consists of to parts: "albus/alba/alum" and "pictus/picta/pictum". How do we model this with the help of lexems? --Succu (talk) 21:28, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
    • derived from lexeme (P5191) on albopictus (L253532) could link to these. Wikidata_talk:Lexicographical_data can help on that.
      About the code, maybe "la-x-taxon" or "mul-x-taxon" could work.--- Jura 18:12, 10 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
      • For the subtag, without knowing about this discussion, I used "mis-x-Q87279025" on Aedes (L253516). The code "la" or a subtag of "la" is probably not a good idea, not all "Latin names" are Latin, a lot are Greek and in other languages (qv. Ginkgo a strange and unclear example but it clearly derives from Japanese). The current tagging system is not perfect and IETF would be good but until then, we should work with what we have. PS: why are we on "Property talk:P225" ? P225 has for datatype "String" not "Monolingual text", so there is no tag at all (which is probably the best solution here). Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 13:09, 12 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
  • Thanks for your input, VIGNERON. "mis-x-Q87279025" (other than being what is currently only possible without configuration work) assumes that a new language code would need to be set up, not only at Wikidata but in one of the relevant standards (instead of "mis").
    "la-x-taxon", "mul-x-taxon" (or similar) would mean that eventually a subtag should be defined (instead of "-x-taxon"). This might be more easily feasible.
    BTW, the language code should describe the (current) language of the "taxon name", not the language(s) it is derived from.
    (For the PS, please see my intro above, no datatype change for this property planned). --- Jura 11:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
    • You could look into this 2003 thread proposing la-Sci by Pigsonthewing. I agree with most of the answers, scientific names are not in a specific language (there is no verbs, no sentences, no specific pronunciations, etc.) so "mis" (for "miscellaneous languages") is probably the best solution ("zxx" or "mul" could work too) and "la" would be very wrong, it's Latinised - at best - but definitely not Latin. Cheers, VIGNERON (talk) 17:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)Reply
      • Interesting read, though I'm not sure what to make of it. At least it lists a few possible solutions. The discussed usecases might be somewhat different from Wikidata's. Also I think "mis", "zxx" or "mul" are mutually exclusive. "mis" still assumes (at least on Wikidata) that one should eventually be defined. --- Jura 17:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

Why does this property contain so many qualifiers? edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

Do we need to reduce the qualifiers in this property? Alphama (talk) 23:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Alphama: Which qualifiers do you want to delete? What amazes me about the list of qualifiers is that it contains the property instance of (P31), which should not be used as a qualifier at all. In contrast, the property object has role (P3831) is not allowed as a qualifier. Personally, I would like to change both of these. --Gymnicus (talk) 18:28, 20 February 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Gymnicus: As of writing, it looks like instance of (P31) has now been removed from the qualifiers list, but object has role (P3831) has not been added instead. Unfortunately, this does conflict with WikiProject Taxonomy documentation such as in Wikidata:WikiProject Taxonomy/Tutorial, which has suggested to use "instance of recombination" (instance of (P31)=recombination (Q14594740)) as a qualifier to indicate a taxon was originally in a different genus. May be a good idea for someone to communicate with the members of that WikiProject about this change, if that hasn't been done already. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:12, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
@Monster Iestyn: Yes, exactly the user Lockal removed the property instance of (P31) as a permitted qualifier. He gave as the reason what I have already written here. --Gymnicus (talk) 14:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Distinct values constraint edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion

Recently I noticed somebody added a distinct values constraint suggestion, presumably to detect taxa that are homonyms I'm guessing. However, there are actually quite a few animal and plant taxa names that are homonyms, and a genus split into subgenera will have a subgenus with the same taxon name. Despite this fact, a warning about this constraint will pop up for both scenarios. So to me at least, it seems impractical to have this constraint at all and it should be removed. Anyone have any opinions on this? Monster Iestyn (talk) 23:13, 10 November 2020 (UTC)Reply

@Jura: Wow, I ...can't actually remember what I was thinking exactly when I made that comment now, that was 4 months ago! I don't know if constraint warnings even pop up anymore for that matter, so maybe there is no problem anymore. Monster Iestyn (talk) 13:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
I think that this discussion is resolved and can be archived. If you disagree, don't hesitate to replace this template with your comment. --- Jura 17:30, 5 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

distinct values constraint edit

Latest comment: 3 years ago5 comments3 people in discussion

@Succu: There are more than 2000 exceptions to the restriction distinct-values constraint (Q21502410). I am aware that it is only a small part of the total number of uses of the property, but from my point of view, the property exception to constraint (P2303) is no longer responsible for such a case. Rather, other ways should be found. But of course I also admit that my approach was not really correct. --Gymnicus (talk) 19:14, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

A first step is to resolve the problem of hemihomonym (Q36033662). A second the naming of autonym (Q1837887) for genera and subgenera within the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (Q13011). --Succu (talk) 19:38, 10 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
It's a problem that was identified from start and developers were asked to look into it. Maybe ask them for an update? --- Jura 19:50, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
To be honest: I lost track about the handling of constraint violations in general. What we need first is a human readable visualisation of the constraints of a property. --Succu (talk) 20:06, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply
Personally, I would probably have qualified P225 statements with "different from" and have dropped the list of exceptions. If the current approach suits or is preferred by contributors, let's keep it. I think Byra mostly worked on this. --- Jura 20:24, 15 March 2021 (UTC)Reply

Latin vs. English edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

As far as I can see, the values of this property follows the Latin nomenclature, and have their first letter capitalised, as in Q25314 (Angiospermae) or Q28502 (Poales). However, there are a small number of of wikidata items that have this property set in all lower case and with an English-language plural: Q78961 (monocots) or Q78961 (fabids).

Is this mixing of formats intentional or accidental? One problem that this leads to can be seen in those Wikipedias where the value of this field is pulled into building the classification in the infobox. And because the unusual pattern is found in a couple of high-order plant taxa, this means that almost every article about a plant will feature an infobox that incongruously mixes the two formats. For example, the infobox at bg:Обикновена шипка lists the following series of clades: Plantae > Tracheophyta > Angiospermae > eudicots > rosids > fabids > Rosales > Rosaceae > Rosa > R. canina. Notice the bits in the middle? Uanfala (talk) 21:30, 23 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Constraint - BHL page id edit

Latest comment: 8 months ago6 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, I propose to remove this constraint. Where the original species description is in the BHL page provided, that is presumably a good identifier and a useful addition to the taxon bars in use in other projects such as enwiki and wikispecies, thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 02:52, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Thank you, in the taxon name box, that looks good; however as eg Anser anser Q25882, there are already 26 references for the name and more will be added by bots with each new checklist release; the original scientific description would then be lost amongst them all; should we have extra lines under the taxon author & taxon year, for taxon publication (& link)? Also, how do you propose we deliver the original description/BHL link (or equivalent) to the taxon boxes across the projects? Q12009011 has an identifier which seems to amount to a google search, presumably the original scientific description in the BHL page (I added, meeting with the constraint issue) helps identify the species. If not appropriate as an identifier, do we need a new identifier that can also be picked up by the taxon bars, "first valid description" or something like that, which can then be completed with the doi/bhl page/etc, thanks, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 05:28, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
Eg enwiki Varanus marathonensis - after the addition of the BHL page (Q12009011 as above), the taxon bar now includes as "Taxon identifiers" not only wikidata and wikispecies (unfortunately with typos in the taxon name and the taxon authority) but also the first valid description. If not this way, do we need a new identifier "BHL qua first description", or how do we deliver this reference across projects? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 05:39, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply
To use "BHL page ID" in reference along with "reference has role" allow interesting things e.g. [4] and [5], see also the folowing discussions: [6] or others there. The data can then used into querries, e.g. in the following one where the "PlaziI ID" are used but when available it could be the "BHL page ID"
SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?referenceHasRole ?referenceHasRoleLabel ?Pages ?BHL_URL ?PlaziID ?PlaziID_URL 
WHERE
{
    ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 wd:Q113756664.
  OPTIONAL { ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 ?publication.
              OPTIONAL { ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 ?publication.
    ?reference pr:P6184 ?referenceHasRole}
               OPTIONAL { ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 ?publication.
    ?reference pr:P1992 ?PlaziID
  BIND(IRI(CONCAT("http://treatment.plazi.org/id/",?PlaziID)) as ?PlaziID_URL)}
               OPTIONAL { ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 ?publication.
    ?reference pr:P304 ?Pages}
               OPTIONAL { ?item p:P225 ?statement .
    ?statement prov:wasDerivedFrom ?reference .
    ?reference pr:P248 ?publication.
    ?reference pr:P687 ?BHLpageID
  BIND(IRI(CONCAT("https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/",?BHLpageID)) as ?BHL_URL)}
}
    SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
}
Try it!

Christian Ferrer (talk) 06:34, 13 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

If the use of a BHL page as an identifier is accompanied by "reference has role" "first valid description", then this would obviate the issue of there being more than one BHL pages for the taxon in question. The benefits for the wikipedia/wikispecies taxon bars of duplicating the bhl page id - once as a taxon name reference as you say/above, once as an identifier, in each case accompanied by "reference has role" "first valid description", are great; this would deliver the first valid description to their pages, a key reference (and, identifier)..., Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 07:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

Taxon publication edit

Latest comment: 6 months ago2 comments2 people in discussion

Hello, is there opposition to/support for a new property (First valid) Taxon publication, that can be used as a qualifier of taxon name? (See the related [7]) Yes, it can be (additionally) added as a reference for the taxon name, and flagged with reference has role (P6184) first valid description (Q1361864), and read by machine, but the number of instances I have come across where this is done are vanishingly small, and with Crested Shelduck (Q902924) there are/were already 26 references, with more to follow with each checklist release, so only an intrepid human (likely to be relied on to populate these in the first place) will look through and find the taxon publication. ((First valid) Taxon publication is perhaps also more purist, as the original publication of Craseomys smithii (Q121536865) does not mention "Craseomys smithii"; also it may not be direct evidence "stated in" for the date (eg On the Dates of the Parts, Plates, and Text of Schreber's 'Säugthiere' (Q121511674)) or even, I think, the author). I guess, alternatively, Taxon publication could be used as a property, instance of: taxon, taxon name, taxon rank, taxon parent, taxon publication. Thank you, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 08:59, 17 August 2023 (UTC)Reply

I completely agree with @Maculosae tegmine lyncis:, the original reference (first valid taxon publication) is a missing field. It is relevant and useful information. It is a lack that I have also missed.
It should be a property that should depend directly on the taxon, not on the taxon name. However, as it stands now the field structure of a taxon, may depend on the name and be one of the recommended properties. PePeEfe (talk) 08:16, 3 October 2023 (UTC)Reply
Add topic
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Property_talk:P225&oldid=2116794729"
Return to "P225" page.