Open main menu

Wikidata:Property proposal/Ciência ID

< Wikidata:Property proposal

Ciência IDEdit

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Authority control

   Not done
Descriptionidentifier of scientific author in
Data typeExternal identifier
Allowed values(\w{4}-){2}\w{4}
Example 1Carla D. Nunes (Q50228979)7618-69FE-7B54
Example 2G. Espregueira Themudo (Q21341624)A11B-38F7-A1B1
Example 3MISSING
External linksUse in sister projects: [de][en][es][fr][it][ja][ko][nl][pl][pt][ru][sv][vi][zh][commons][species][wd].
Planned useAs e.g. ORCID
Number of IDs in source10.493 (according to its searcher)
Expected completenessalways incomplete (Q21873886)
Formatter URL$1


Another identifier for scientists, sometimes linked from ORCID. Magnus Manske (talk) 16:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)


  •   Support Charles Matthews (talk) 06:25, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question I'm having trouble with that particular example. It doesn't seem to work with the formatter URL. Others do appear to be of that format though. --99of9 (talk) 07:12, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
  •   Comment @Magnus Manske: The example doesn't work for me either, it lands on a "not found" page. Can you add some other examples?  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by ArthurPSmith (talk • contribs) at 17:31, 18 June 2019 (UTC).
  •   Strong oppose   Pending (  New proposal) @Magnus Manske: ↑ Would you be so kind as to complete the proposal correctly, please? —Eihel (talk) 19:10, 24 June 2019 (UTC)
    @Magnus Manske: After 4 weeks and as is, the proposal still does not lead to the creation of a property. According to the gaps, the errors and a lack of motivation, I classify this proposal as   Not done. The proposer will therefore have three days to make a correct proposal before a final archiving. —Eihel (talk) 20:03, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Eihel: if Magnus Manske doesn't respond to this or correct the proposal, I have many interested in propose it again working in parallel with the WikiProject Portugal. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 12:55, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
    Hello @Ivanhercaz: Thanks for calling me. I also "put the hand in the dough", as we say in my language. But:
    1. I do not intend to register on the site in question.
    2. The proposal made by Magnus Manske is frankly not made to please the community. I would say it's the exact opposite: readers will not come looking for the information here.
    3. The first example does not work. So, there is only one example that works and that has not even been added by the applicant.
    4. Unless I'm mistaken, the sister projects show us that there is no use of this site, even on ptwiki.
    5. "sometimes linked from ORCID", where? An example?
    6. You have the opportunity to make a proposal.
    For my part, the proposal, as it stands, can not be a property and reflects my opinion. We must think about closing the proposal, in one way or another. Sorry. —Eihel (talk) 16:51, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Eihel: Hi! I would like to answer some of the points you highlight as weakness of this proposal:
    1. I don't think it would be necessary to register in the site to understand how it works, but I am already registered and I know some Portuguese scientific that might want to register in the site.
    2. I admit the proposal isn't clear to the community and Magnus Manske should have prepared it better and with all the necessary details. However I presume the good faith of him and I think this proposal was made quickly but for the good of the project.
    3. I am agree with the necessity of more useful examples. For that I am going to work in what I think that should be the first phase before to propose it again: analyze the current items for Portuguese researchers in Wikidata and check check how many of them could have the identifier of Ciência ID. If there aren't a lot, it can be a good opportunity for another kind of projects with this organization.
    4. Yes, it seems to not be used but I think it doesn't mean it isn't useful for Wikidata and the authority controls of the Wikimedia projects.
    5. Yes, it should be researched too, I mean, how many ORCID profiles are linked to this identifier.
    6. I will do! But before I am discussing it in the WikiProject Portugal. You can check the discussion in the thread ID proposal: Ciência ID.
    In my opinion, this proposal should be closed to have time to research more about it, as I said previously, and propose it with all the requirements that a proposal has. You have not to be sorry about it. At least I prefer to close it, work more on it and then propose it again. I encourage you to participate in the discussion I linked to you if you have something to say about it or that we should keep in mind before to propose it again. We are working too in another interesting properties proposals in the Portuguese scope.
    Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 18:36, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
  • I am busy now but we can discuss it also with

Alexmar983 GoEThe Joao4669 Miguelmcorreia Waldir Ivanhercaz Sanjorgepinho CatarinaMReis DarwIn Cratophonos

  Notified participants of WikiProject Portugal, if we put it on hold there is no hurry we can reshape it.--Alexmar983 (talk) 10:35, 5 July 2019 (UTC)

I added another example. The first example seems to have been deleted or hidden. GoEThe (talk) 11:43, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support. It seems an interesting property for the items of Portuguese researchers. We should try to do something to check how many items are potential to use this property. Thank you, Alexmar983 (talkcontribslogs), for mentioning me and WikiProject Portugal. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 17:15, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
      Comment But I am agree with Eihel (talkcontribslogs), this proposal need to be completed correctly. I added some details and I will try to add something more. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 17:22, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
      Comment I added a regex pattern to the proposal but it is possible that it coulb be improved. But this is the best I can do with the available time I have today for this task. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 17:40, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
    RegEx corrected —Eihel (talk) 21:51, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
    @Eihel: thank you very much for the correction. Good regex to solve it. Regards, Ivanhercaz (Talk) 12:57, 6 July 2019 (UTC)