Wikidata:Property proposal/Natural science

Property proposal:	Generic	Authority control	Person	Organization
	Creative work	Place	Sports	Sister projects
	Transportation	Natural science	Computing	Lexeme

See also

• Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending – properties which have been approved but which are on hold waiting for the appropriate datatype to be made available
• Wikidata:Properties for deletion – proposals for the deletion of properties
• Wikidata:External identifiers – statements to add when creating properties for external IDs
• Wikidata:Lexicographical data – information and discussion about lexicographic data on Wikidata

This page is for the proposal of new properties.

Before proposing a property Search if the property already exists. Search if the property has already been proposed. Check if you can give a similar label and definition as an existing Wikipedia infobox parameter, or if it can be matched to an infobox, to or from which data can be transferred automatically. Select the right datatype for the property. Read Wikidata:Creating a property proposal for guidelines you should follow when proposing your property. Start writing the documentation based on the preload form below by editing the two templates at the top of the page to add proposal details. Creating the property Once consensus is reached, change status=ready on the template, to attract the attention of a property creator. Creation can be done 1 week after the creation of the proposal, by a property creator or an administrator. See property creation policy.

On this page, old discussions are archived. An overview of all archives can be found at this page's archive index. The current archive is located at 2023/09.

Physics/astronomy

• Please review Wikidata:WikiProject Physics before proposing. Ping members of project using {{Ping project|Physics}}
• See also Wikidata:Property proposal/Pending for approved items awaiting the deployment of currently unavailable datatypes.
• Please look at Wikidata:List of properties/science/natural science before proposing a property.

Torino Scale

   Under discussion

Description	The Torino scale level for the astronomical object
Data type	Item
Example 1	99942 Apophis (Q118931) -> Torino Scale Level 4 (Q116879523) (start time (P580) -> 2004-12-23, end time (P582) -> 2004-12-27)
Example 2	(144898) 2004 VD17 (Q139275) -> Torino Scale Level 2 (Q116879519) (start time (P580) -> 2006-02, end time (P582) -> 2006-05-20)
Example 3	2022 QX4 (Q113913449) -> Torino Scale Level 1 (Q116879514) (point in time (P585) -> 2022-09-04)

Motivation

Torino Scale (Q83086) is a scale which was coined in 1996 to evaluate the danger caused by asteroid impacts. This property will be helpful to manage Torino Scale Level for each astromical body. In the most cases, Torino Scale is downgraded to 0 after following observations, so the highest Torino Scale Level for the objects will be subject to this property. (It is also possible to manage Torino Scale Level with start time (P580) and end time (P582).)--Christmas Wreath (talk) 05:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

• Paperoastro Sarilho1 Ysogo Cekli829 Manlleus Meodudlye, with only limited amount of time to spend in the foreseable future. mikeu Jc3s5h VIGNERON Harlock81 Ptolusque J. N. Squire Tom.Reding Mike Peel Shisma Athulvis Romuald 2 Simon Villeneuve Wallacegromit1 - generally like to add ground and space observatory instrument data Path slopu cdo256 Jura1 Kepler-1229b SM5POR Buller1
  Sherman Alexander JenlovesbigD Notified participants of WikiProject Astronomy--Christmas Wreath (talk) 05:03, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment One can easily think of cases in which an object’s Torino Scale levels from multiple time periods or multiple points in time are relevant, for example the level immediately following discovery, the highest level, and the current level; or the levels assessed before each of several approaches. Therefore, making this property about the ‘highest ever’ level seems too restrictive. Rather, we might want to encourage the use of qualifiers. Also, we might want to decide on a guideline on how ranks should be used on statements with this property. And maybe on what to do about Level 0 (the guideline here might be to not record it as a separate statement). ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 07:12, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
  • I agree with you. This property should not be restricted to the highest ones. Qualifiers such as start time (P580), end time (P582), and point in time (P585) should be used. I think the current level should use the prefered rank, rather than the highest rank ever. I don't think objects which have never been ranked above level 0 should have this statement.--Christmas Wreath (talk) 10:31, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

     Support in that form. (The motivation section above could still use an update to reflect the new momentary/qualified rather than maximum semantics of this proposed property.) ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 04:38, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

• Wikidata property descriptions aren't in Wikitext and thus you can't use templates in them. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ArthurPSmith (talk) 21:05, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Biology

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Taxonomy for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Taxonomy}}

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Biology for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Biology}}

Encyclopedia of Cacti species ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a species, subspecies, variety, form, or cultivar of cactus in the Encyclopedia of Cacti
Represents	The Encyclopedia of Cacti (Q111475261)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; taxon (Q16521)
Allowed values	[1-9]\d{0,4}
Example 1	Acanthocalycium thionanthum (Q109397105) → 1
Example 2	Ferocactus gracilis (Q150203) → 11980
Example 3	Wigginsia horstii var. juvenaliformis (Q109421079) → 20355
Example 4	Turbinicarpus beguinii subsp. zaragosae (Q93185058) → 1950
Source	http://www.llifle.com/Encyclopedia/CACTI/Species/all/
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Number of IDs in source	17776 (see http://www.llifle.com/Encyclopedia/CACTI/Species/all/)
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	http://www.llifle.com/Encyclopedia/CACTI/Family/Cactaceae/$1/
Applicable "stated in"-value	The Encyclopedia of Cacti (Q111475261)

Motivation

The The Encyclopedia of Cacti (Q111475261) aims to be a comprehensive encyclopaedia for all cacti species. It provides the accepted Latin name for most species, subspecies, variety, forms, and cultivars, with links to all synonyms by which the plant has been known. It contains 441 plant genera and includes 17776 scientific names and synonyms. 6810 taxa and cultivars have individual description sheets, 2237 of which are accepted scientific names, 419 cultivars names and 14934 synonyms. The encyclopedia is illustrated with 12217 plant photos (see http://www.llifle.com/Encyclopedia/CACTI/). UWashPrincipalCataloger (talk) 23:20, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

 Oppose - uncurated database full of errors. --Succu (talk) 18:49, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Succu can you reference some of these errors? Does this database have more errors than most? Additionally, this database appears to be curated by volunteers...a lot like Wikidata... I see no problem with a crowdsourced database run by enthusiasts. --Crystal Clements, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 23:41, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

@Succu: can you explain BrokenSegue (talk)?

Acanthocalycium chionanthum (Example 1) is a misspelling of Acanthocalycium thionanthum (Q337710). --Succu (talk) 20:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Support--Emwille (talk) 13:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
•  Support --Pteropotamus (talk) 21:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

iNaturalist project ID

   Under discussion

Represents	iNaturalist (Q16958215)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	external identifier (Q21754218)
Example 1	crabs-of-the-world → crabs-of-the-world
Example 2	herpetofauna-de-sumak-kawsay-in-situ-mera → herpetofauna-de-sumak-kawsay-in-situ-mera
Example 3	digital-botanical-gardens-initiative → digital-botanical-gardens-initiative
Planned use	for queries
Formatter URL	https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/$1
See also	iNaturalist taxon ID (P3151), iNaturalist observation ID (P5683)

Motivation

To identify projects in iNaturalist GrndStt (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

To identify places and other geographical objects in iNaturalist

GrndStt (talk) 20:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment @GrndStt: are any of these projects currently listed in Wikidata? Are you planning to add items for them (examples normally use existing wikidata items as the subject for the property statement)? About how many such projects are there? ArthurPSmith (talk) 13:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

  No iNaturalist projects entries on Wikidata as far as I know. I could eventually add one or two as examples. No idea of the total numbers of projects at iNaturalist. In fact I was willing to create most BioBlitzes/projects shouldn't be on Wika property for a iNaturalist in order to reference it at Bioregistry. See for example the bioregistry entry for an observation https://bioregistry.io/registry/inaturalist.observation as you can see it is linked to https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Property:P5683 as external prefix.

  Is it required to have multiples entries (now or in the future) for the creation of a property  ? GrndStt (talk) 17:42, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

  Actually I quickly searched and found one.

  This https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q62770398 is the entry for the Wellington Botanic Garden BioBlitz 2019, it corresponds to the following project on iNaturalist https://www.inaturalist.org/projects/wellington-botanic-garden-bioblitz-2019-secrets-of-the-garden. I can see that there is also a numerical identifier for an iNaturalist project. See url here https://www.inaturalist.org/observations?project_id=34386 GrndStt (talk) 18:00, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

   Comment Each US state has an automatic project (for example, New Mexico's); I don't know whether or not it would be fruitful to link these to the items for the states, or whether that would be considered mixing up the ontology. Arlo Barnes (talk) 05:47, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

We have iNaturalist place ID (P7471) that can cover any geographic region (e.g. New Mexico), and there are dozens of other projects in or associated with New Mexico. Almost any named place or taxon is WD notable. The same can't be said for every iNaturalist project built around places or taxa. -Animalparty (talk) 05:59, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Point of clarification: there are no automatic projects and the linked New Mexico one was created in 2018 by an iNat user. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 19:56, 12 November 2022 (UTC)

 Oppose Very few iNaturalist projects are likely to be notable under WD:N (but I have pinged the Wikidata project in case I'm way off). Most seem to be self-run personal projects with no secondary coverage or significance outside of iNaturalist, thus no reason to include it in a database (City Nature Challenge (Q60772523) is one notable exception). Wellington Botanic Garden BioBlitz 2019 (Q62770398) however seems to be of dubious notability: it was apparently created for or concurrent with en:Wikipedia:GLAM/BioBlitzWBG. -Animalparty (talk) 05:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

Not sure why you'd say Wellington Botanic Garden BioBlitz 2019 (Q62770398) is of dubious Wikidata notability; the event received enough media coverage that it's probably Wikipedia-notable, let alone Wikidata, and has its own Commons category. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 10:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

 Comment I should mention here that I also used to be against creating items for crowd-sourced projects unaffiliated with Wikimedia projects, until I realized through my paintings work that crowd-sourced projects generally overlap with Wikimedia projects as they grow. We already have lots of properties for huge aggregators like VIAF and I see no problem with creating a few properties for smaller aggregators on request from large Wikimedia projects. This is requested by several people highly involved in various specific Wikimedia projects that would benefit greatly for the reasons mentioned. If it turns out over time to become a hub of linkrot we can always delete it again. All of that said, if there is a way to use on focus list of Wikimedia project (P5008) in such a way that the same queries can be run then maybe it's not needed as a separate property. Jane023 (talk) 09:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

user:Ainali user:Ambrosia10 user:AnBalemans user:Andrawaag user:Arlo Barnes user:ChristianSW user:Daniel Mietchen user:DarTar user:Deelthx user:Dendresen user:Denengelse user:Drechmeria-RBGV user:Faendalimas user:Friesen5000 user:Giantflightlessbirds user:GrndStt user:Hyperik user:Jane023 user:JerryL2017 user:Josve05a user:Lmalena user:Loopy30 user:Luojaluoja user:Lymantria user:Major Lyte user:Manojk user:Mcld user:Metacladistics user:Niconoe user:Peteforsyth user:Photocyte user:Pigsonthewing user:Qgroom user:Reosarevok user:Salgo60 user:S.v.Mering user:TiagoLubiana user:Tobias1984 user:Tommy Kronkvist user:Tris T7 user:Vikiolog user:YULdigitalpreservation Notified participants of WikiProject iNaturalist -Animalparty (talk) 05:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Support I feel we should connect projects on different plattforms and iNaturalist and Wikidata has a perfect fit - Salgo60 (talk) 06:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Yes I can imagine this would be very useful for zoos, but also for people linking collections of botanical gardens to actual observations in the vicinity. I was surprised to find out that the original Linnaeus garden has caused a lot of non-native species to proliferate in the area I live. Jane023 (talk) 09:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Bioblitzes are common, bioblitzes are significant public events, they're Wikidata-notable and increasingly will be entered into Wikidata, many of them are organised around iNaturalist projects, and it would be good to link the corresponding project by its iNat ID. Similarly, nature reserves like Bushy Park / Tarapuruhi (Q5001614) have corresponding iNaturalist projects it would be nice to link to. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 10:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
•  Support Great idea! --ChristianSW (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose I love iNaturalist, really, but most BioBlitzes/projects shouldn't be on Wikidata. And for those that are on Wikidata, we have general properties like URL (P2699). If we want a semantic representation of all iNat projects, the best option could be creating a Wikibase Cloud instance: https://www.wikibase.cloud/ I might change my vote if there are multiple examples, specially on the property proposal itself. E.g. is the property for the events or to link the institutions that host such events?TiagoLubiana (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

  Also @GrndStt we have already iNaturalist place ID (P7471) for places, which overlaps with the proposed idea, so I am a bit confused with the scope. TiagoLubiana (talk) 12:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)

  I thought that a iNaturalist project and a place were somehow different. You can have specific filters (e.g. taxonomic restriction) for iNaturalist observations observed in a iNaturalist place. GrndStt (talk) 14:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Support For the reasons expressed byJane023 and Giantflightlessbirds. In particular I'm keen to link nature reserves, botanic gardens and zoos with their corresponding iNaturalist projects. I'm of the opinion that this would be useful in enriching those items and connecting them to species lists observed and generated via iNaturalist at those locations. Take for example Otari Wilton's Bush iNaturalist project. I would very much like to link it to Ōtari-Wilton's Bush (Q7108457).-Ambrosia10 (talk) 22:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: As previously noted Wikidata already has iNaturalist place ID (P7471) and iNaturalist taxon ID (P3151) which could link to any park, botanical garden or taxon on iNaturalist. Places and taxa are almost always notable, with or without iNaturalist presence, so it makes sense to have iNaturalist properties. A notable institution or natural place may have dozens of active or abandoned projects, so there's often not a 1:1 relationship between place and project. But out of the thousands of projects on iNaturalist, how many are likely to be independently notable? Many seem to be of the "biodiversity in my backyard or school" variety ([1][2][3]), of interest to one or a few people. Say for Crabs of the World, assuming it's notable: would Wikidata track observation numbers and taxa and leading observers and do everything already done by the project itself? Would it prompt the creation of Qids for otherwise non-notable private individuals like high school students who participate in the projects? For bioblitzes or other projects that are Wikidata notable and have an iNaturalist component, I think existing properties like described at URL (P973) or URL (P2699) or external data available at URL (P1325) can be used. If the majority are non-notable, I certainly wouldn't want the catalog of all iNaturalist projects to appear when searching for a taxon or place in Mix'n'Match. -Animalparty (talk) 23:24, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

  Crabs of the World is a good example of a project about a specific taxon. Equally good examples, in my opinion, are projects about special places, such as protected areas or bodies of water, which can be linked directly to the Wikidata item for the geographic entity. I also find the idea of starting projects between Wikimedia and iNaturalist exciting. For example, an iNat Bioblitz as a supplement to Wiki Loves Earth. ChristianSW (talk) 09:53, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

But what about, say, Crabs of Australia, Crabs of the Gulf of Mexico, or Crabs of Miss Stephens' 9th Grade Field Trip to the Beach. Such (hypothetical) projects don't graft clearly to taxon or place items, and may not be notable projects. This proposal seems vague on what kind of Wikidata items this property would be used on: would it only be used on items for projects, or would it also be used on taxa, places, and institutions? If the latter, how would we deal with the one-to-many issue (Lepidoptera or Yosemite National Park have tons of associated projects). And I think discussion of new collaborations between Wikimedia and iNaturalist is beyond the scope of this proposal. -Animalparty (talk) 15:06, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

I see your points but hope to save the idea. ChristianSW (talk) 18:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

•  Oppose I love iNaturalist too, but for the same reasons/arguments as TiagoLubiana & Animalparty, I can't see iNat projects as being valuable or notable. Perhaps one could revisit this discussion in five years time, but for now, knowing what projects are actually like on iNat, it's a no from me. Metacladistics (talk) 15:48, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose As an iNat user of 10 years and an involved volunteer, curator, moderator, and project creator: most iNaturalist projects are not worth linking anywhere, including many of my own. There are a lot of misconceptions about the utility of projects and whether most should exist in the first place.[4] I'm curious to better understand what the functional use cases of this would be and which existing properties could be suitable for the handful of notable ones. —Hyperik ⌜talk⌟ 20:00, 12 November 2022 (UTC)
•  Oppose Projects are ephemeral, can be created in ten seconds and mostly left uncurated just as permanent search filters. There are very few projects which are really active and deserve cross-referencing as distinct entities apart from iNaturalist. Actually, I'm curating the project with 3K members, but I do not think it's a good idea to add their IDs to wikidata.--Alliumcepa (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2023 (UTC)

Life stage

   Under discussion

Description	Life stage of an animal, plant, or other taxa
Data type	Item
Domain	item
Example 1	Leptobatopsis mesominiata (Q2855459) has image (P18); needs qualifier life stage → adult (Q80994)
Example 2	Chaoborus (Q2707905) has image (P18); needs qualifier life stage → larva (Q129270)
Example 3	Tortula muralis (Q71869) has image (P18); needs qualifier life stage → sporophyte (Q647173)
Source	phase of life (Q1811014)

Motivation

My primary use case is as qualifiers for images of individuals on commons, i.e. but this may also be used for if there is an item about a particular life stage of an animal, i.e. Chaoborus (Q2707905), which is an image of the larval stage, probably because the larval form is more well known, though in most species the adults form is more well known. Mvolz (talk) 13:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

• @ Mvolz: Can you fix up your examples so they look like Wikidata statements? They should have a subject item and then the value (which is presumably what your current list is of allowed values?) - if you intend this as a qualifier for images or something like that you may need to clarify more how it should be used. See other property proposals for how to do this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 19:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Gave it any attempt - is this okay? Wasn't sure since it's all qualifiers Mvolz (talk) 10:33, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

•  Question Do we have any items that represent life stages of taxa? If so, how would (a) such a modeling of life stages as separate items relate to (b) distinguishing by life stage using qualifiers the images of (and potentially other statements about) full-lifecycle taxon items? Would it be worthwhile to try to settle on either (a) or (b) as a general rule? If (b), then yes, this property would be useful as a qualifier. But I imagine that statements with a lot of properties might eventually get this qualifier (think weight, size, number of feet, prey, vernacular name), so there may be reasons to consider (a). In that case, those images might be linked from the life-stage items, and those items would have to be characterized by a property like this, which would probably not be used as a qualifier. Tobias1984 (talk) Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; * *Andy's edits TypingAway (talk) Daniel Mietchen (talk) Tinm (talk) Tubezlob Vincnet41 Netha Hussain Fractaler Tris T7 ^{TT me Photocyte GoEThe (talk) Egon Willighagen}
  Notified participants of WikiProject Biology. Thoughts? ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 12:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@BlaueBlüte: We have a good number of items representing life stages of individual species, e.g. flaxseed (Q911332)   , mouse embryo (Q105811019)   , chicken embryo (Q70071341)   . There are also some that represent life stages for larger taxonomic groups, e.g. tadpole (Q168525)    or hatchling (Q2892050)   . --Daniel Mietchen (talk) 21:10, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

• @ Mvolz:: Maybe you are refering to biological life cycle (Q513359)? Shouldn't be flaxseed (Q911332) an instance of seed (Q40763)? As a common trait of all seed plants (Q25814)? --Succu (talk) 21:33, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
  • Shouldn't your example Chaoborus (Q2707905) refined to Nematocera larva (Q27477239) rather than to larva (Q129270)? --Succu (talk) 22:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
•  Question As a further modeling concern, how would use of this property as a qualifier on statements linking taxa and Commons images relate to the use of structured data directly on those same Commons images? ―BlaueBlüte (talk) 22:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
•  Question How does this relate to biological phase (P4774)? --Lagewi (talk) 16:25, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Could this property also be used as a qualifier for properties that represent traits of taxa? See Wikidata:WikiProject Biodiversity/Traits This would be useful, for example, in cases where adults are terrestrial but larvae are aquatic. Sylverfysh (talk) 14:58, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MinRo60 (talk) 20:47, 28 Feb 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Jacquelineparedessanchez (talk) 20:52, 28 Feb 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --User:Delia_Gonzale_Marin (talk) 21:05, 28 Feb 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Sylverfysh (talk) 18:15, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose - A lot of unanswered questions. --Succu (talk) 19:50, 3 March 2023 (UTC)

  @Mvolz: Can you clarify the relationship with biological phase (P4774). @Sylverfysh, MinRo60, Jacquelineparedessanchez, Delia_Gonzale_Marin: why are you casting support votes when the question about whether biological phase (P4774) fulfills the use case is open? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:46, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

  biological phase (P4774) has an "as main value" property constraint, so it cannot be used as a qualifier on statements for properties that represent traits of taxa. I think this is an important use case, and "life stage" is the familiar terminology for this type of metadata. Sylverfysh (talk) 13:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

  biological phase (P4774), according to its existing uses, may be a superclass of "life stage". It applies not only to life history (eg: Q14905385) but also to other timescales- the cardiac cycle (eg: Q7663898) and the cell cycle (eg: Q130996) Jenniferhammock (talk) 13:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC)

natural enemy

   Under discussion

Description	One of the causes of death of this living creatures referred to in this item, which is eaten by that creature.
Represents	natural enemy (Q8019841)
Data type	Item
Domain	taxon
Example 1	house mouse (Q83310) -> house cat (Q146), Peregrine Falcon (Q30535)
Example 2	blue wildebeest (Q328809) -> Crocuta crocuta (Q178089), Nile crocodile (Q168745), lion (Q140)
Example 3	Engraulis japonicus (Q516676) -> Thunnini (Q6146274)
See also	main food source (P1034): species, genus or family that an organism depends on for nutrition

Motivation

If you look at Wikipedia's articles describing animals, you can see many of the natural enemies too. Through this, I wanted to describe the animal's natural enemies together. However, there was to "the food they usually eat", but there was no property to "their natural enemy." I think it would be good to add property to natural enemies. Thank you. Animalsorter (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Support A useful data point to include in organism descriptions. References should be required for it. AdamSeattle (talk) 03:06, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
•  Support with required references. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 19:54, 31 January 2023 (UTC)
•  Support that's what I thought was necessary to Wikidata from a long time ago. I suppose too. ―파란여우 (BlueFox) (토론 (talk)) 05:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)
• Comment: If not critically evaluated, this property could lead to enormously broad and vague listings: Panonychus ulmi (Q640085) has over 30 predators identified in a single initial survey that looked only at a very small area (South-Central Pennsylvania). Widespread animals low on the food chain, and/or plants, may easily have hundreds if not thousands of identified "natural enemy" species (predators, grazers). For instance krill and other marine plankton is eaten by multitudes of tiny fish, bigger fish, birds, and whales. The number and identity of "natural predators" may vary widely depending on geographical area, as well as type reference: a scientific journal article may list the dozens of exact species that feed on X, while a more general source may just say "X is eaten by fish, mammals, and birds"). And does "natural enemies" include parasites, herbivores, and micropredators that feed on but don't kill the host? And what does "natural" mean anyway? This study identified 46 predator species of Pomacea canaliculata (Q2005098) in areas where it is invasive: should these be excluded as they are presumably "non-natural"? The complexities of biological interactions often don't readily lend themselves to a general database, and this property, if not carefully and clearly defined may just result in a lot of noise and poor quality data that serves little useful purpose. -Animalparty (talk) 21:35, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

  I wasn't aware of such extreme cases. Originally, I thought of the same amount of data as above. I thought raccoon (Q121439) was a pretty good amount of data. (about 9 kind animals, cougar (Q35255), jaguar (Q35694), coyote (Q44299), Mongolian wolf (Q266883), Ursidae (Q11788), wolverine (Q14334), bird of prey (Q48428), American Crocodile (Q207836), American alligator (Q193327)) If it can be too much like Panonychus ulmi (Q640085) We will also have to devise a method of integrating and calling into one.

  and the word 천적 or 天敵 is mainly translated to 'natural enemy'. it's more naturally to call "predators" maybe. I'm sorry made confuse you. Animalsorter (talk) 05:02, 6 February 2023 (UTC)

•  Wait When I read the description I could not tell the direction in which the property is meant. Please use the words subject and object in the description to make it more clear. It's also unclear to me why the direction should be cat -> mouse and not the other way around. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 23:01, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

  Can't we use main food source (P1034) for the query of the creature that is being feed and the above attributes for the creature that is becoming a predetor? For example, house cat (Q146) can use house mouse (Q83310) in main food source (P1034), and house mouse (Q83310) can use house cat (Q146) with that Property. I'm sorry for confusing you with short English. Animalsorter (talk) 11:32, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

  The issue here is that if a user sees the property and doesn't know under how the two animals relate to each other, I don't think "One of the causes of death of this living creatures referred to in this item, which is eaten by that creature." is going to answer the question. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:13, 11 February 2023 (UTC)

•  Question Example 3 (a tribe) makes no sense to me. --Succu (talk) 19:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

  I wrote it wrong. It's skipjack tuna (Q633957) more specifically, not Thunnini (Q6146274). However, not only this animal, but also all species commonly called 'tuna' were grouped together to the tribe. The description was imported from Korean Wikipedia, and I'm sorry if it wasn't accurate. I wanted to show you that if it's hard to fill in all of particular species, you can use it as like example 3. Animalsorter (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

•  Question Should natural enemy (Q8019841) be merged with predator (Q29017578)? --Succu (talk) 18:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)

  Technically the word '천적' is described from the point of view of the prey. and the predator is usually referred to as another word '포식자', but I haven't disagreement about merging it. however it feels quite different, and the article's contents are slightly different. Therefore likely that a major revision of the article will need to be made. Animalsorter (talk) 03:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)

valeur sur l'échelle de Schmidt (fr) – (Please translate this into English.)

   Under discussion

Description	Schmidt sting pain index, indicating how painful that insect bite is
Data type	Decimal (1) value with a x eg 1.0/1.2/1.8/2.0/2.x/3.0/4.0/4.x-invalid datatype (not in Module:i18n/datatype)
Example 1	Sphecodes (Q15732832) ==> 1.0
Example 2	fire ant (Q1075697) ==> 2.0
Example 3	Pepsis grossa (Q1944635) ==> 4.0
Example 4	Paraponera clavata (Q73901) ==> 4.x

Motivation

Help ranking bite pain on some insects as is documented on Schmidt sting pain index (Q1818052)  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bouzinac (talk • contribs) at 17:58, 13 March 2023‎ (UTC).

Discussion

• I think such a property should be made more generic since there are for instance also a Starr sting pain scale. The index used should be given as a mandatory qualifier value. Infrastruktur (talk) 07:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)

• There doesn't seem to be any existing property for pain scale. I suggest widening the scope to any kind of human physical pain. Infrastruktur (talk) 07:57, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
• As for which qualifier to use to specify pain index, maybe determination method (P459) should be used as this is a subjective measurement? Infrastruktur (talk) 08:14, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
• @Bouzinac: What do you think? Infrastruktur (talk) 22:56, 2 May 2023 (UTC)

Starr sting pain scale look indeed very similar and I welcome the idea to mix both of them. I did not know about starr.

I am not doctor so unsure if this property widening to every stuff that can cause pain might be feasible. But it would be interesting to rank between a simple sting, a broken leg, a cancer, etc which one would be more or less painful. Bouzinac ^{💬●✒️●💛} 05:33, 3 May 2023 (UTC)

Alternative proposal

Adding a generic property for pain that can can use any method of measurement as given by a qualifier. If you instead want to vote for the original proposal do that under "discussion".

•  Support In favor of a general pain property, but no support for the original proposal. Infrastruktur (talk) 06:57, 3 May 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose not usefull. Acceptance? --Succu (talk) 21:19, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

‎Red List of South African Plants conservation status

   Under discussion

Description	conservation status of endemic South African plants assigned by the w:South African National Biodiversity Institute
Represents	Red List of South African Plants conservation status (Q122237794)
Data type	Item
Template parameter	conservation status at en:Template:taxobox
Domain	taxon (Q16521)
Allowed values	new items for conservation statuses in the Red List of South African Plants
Example 1	Aspalathus cordicarpa (Q111620677) => <new item "Extinct">
Example 2	Encephalartos brevifoliolatus (Q3724955) => <new item "Extinct in the wild">
Example 3	=> <new item "Regionally extinct">
Example 4	Agathosma gnidiiflora (Q15387099) => <new item "Critically Endangered">
Example 5	Ceropegia rudatisii (Q15397168) => <new item "Critically Endangered, Possibly Extinct">
Example 6	Elegia squamosa (Q15509297) => <new item "Endangered">
Example 7	Disa venusta (Q10267015) => <new item "Vulnerable">
Example 8	Cotula filifolia (Q15552073) => <new item "Near Threatened">
Example 9	Anacampseros papyracea (Q21243057) => <new item "Least Concern">
Example 10	Aloe nubigena (Q129505) => <new item "Rare">
Example 11	Erica cincta (Q15378975) => <new item "Critically Rare">
Example 12	Zaluzianskya marlothii (Q17751483) => <new item "Data Deficient - Insufficient Information">
Example 13	Malephora flavo-crocea (Q17247390) => <new item "Data Deficient - Taxonomically Problematic">
Example 14	Ulmus procera (Q1342743) => <new item "Not Evaluated">
Source	SANBI: Red List of South African Plants
See also	IUCN conservation status (P141), Red List of South African Plants ID (P6056), NZTCS conservation status (P9888), FAO risk status (P2371), NatureServe conservation status (P3648), Status in the Red List of Threatened Species in the Czech Republic (P5841)
Wikidata project	w:Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa Wikidata:WikiProject Biology

Motivation

South Africa is a megadiverse country and has fully assessed the status of its entire flora. 20 456 indigenous plant taxa were assessed and each given a conservation status. 13 265 of the assessed flora are endemic to South Africa. The majority are not in the IUCN Red List. Please see: Red List of South African Plants. Maqdisi (talk) 03:17, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Comment It would be good to point to similar existing conservation status properties and how we have handled them. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:28, 6 September 2023 (UTC)

Flora of New Jersey Project atlas ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a plant species in the Flora of New Jersey Project atlas
Represents	Flora of New Jersey Project (Q122619607)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; taxon (Q16521)
Example 1	Lobelia siphilitica (Q2720384) → lobelia-siphilitica-l-great-blue-lobelia
Example 2	Datura stramonium (Q30959) → datura-stamonium-l-jimsonweed-thorn-apple
Example 3	Quercus rubra (Q147525) → quercus-rubra
Example 4	Dicentra eximia (Q5272370) → dicentra-eximia-ker-gawl-torr
Example 5	Equisetum arvense (Q107592) → equisetum-arvense-l
Example 6	Dichanthelium latifolium (Q21161621) → dichanthelium-latifolium-l-gould-and-c-a-clark
Source	https://www.njflora.org/
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	https://www.njflora.org/0/0/$1/
Applicable "stated in"-value	Flora of New Jersey Project (Q122619607)

Motivation

The Flora of New Jersey Project is a non-profit incorporated group of botanists and ecologists whose aim is to generate an up-to-date description for each of New Jersey species accompanied by distribution maps for each taxon present or formerly present in the state. The Atlas is being developed plant by plant and will eventually be complete for the New Jersey flora. This will serve as the definitive reference source for New Jersey plants. AdamSeattle (talk) 20:08, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

• It is not necessary for it to be the whole URL. For example, the ID can just be lobelia-siphilitica-l-great-blue-lobelia, with the URL formatter being https://www.njflora.org/0/0/$1/. The date is ignored in the URL; for example, https://www.njflora.org/0/0/lobelia-siphilitica-l-great-blue-lobelia/. -wd-Ryan (Talk/Edits) 21:21, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
• Happy to change it to an external identifier in this case. Didn't know about how to ignore the date in the URL.AdamSeattle (talk) 05:23, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
  • I've changed the datatype and added the URL formatter. AdamSeattle (talk) 18:22, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Emwille (talk) 16:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- And thank you. Prburley (talk)
•  Support Riesengrey (talk) 20:24, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

FloraVeg.EU taxon ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a plant taxon in the FloraVeg.EU online database
Represents	FloraVeg.EU (Q122629978)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; taxon (Q16521)
Example 1	Lycopodiella inundata (Q899476) → Lycopodiella inundata
Example 2	Lycopodiidae (Q6707391) → Lycopodiidae
Example 3	Selaginellales (Q7062996) → Selaginellales
Example 4	Davalliaceae (Q138772) → Davalliaceae
Example 5	Davallia (Q2390278) → Davallia
Example 6	Davallia canariensis (Q2789728) → Davallia canariensis
Example 7	Biarum arundanum (Q25431222) → Biarum arundanum
Example 8	Bambusa multiplex (Q3339098) → Bambusa multiplex
Example 9	Cryptomeria japonica (Q147388) → Cryptomeria japonica
Example 10	Musa × paradisiaca (Q10757112) → Musa x paradisiaca
Source	https://floraveg.eu/taxon/
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	https://floraveg.eu/taxon/overview/$1
Applicable "stated in"-value	FloraVeg.EU (Q122629978)

Motivation

FloraVeg.EU is an online database of European vegetation and flora data prepared in various projects of the Vegetation Science Group, Department of Botany and Zoology, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Brno, Czech Republic, and the European Vegetation Survey Working Group of the International Association for Vegetation Science. The database provides information on vegetation (plant communities), habitats, and species. The Flora part of the database focuses on native and naturalized flora occurring in Europe. Cultivated plants are not within the scope of the database, although the most commonly cultivated crops and woody plants are included. Taxon concepts and nomenclature largely follow the Euro+Med PlantBase. Species are characterized by their biological traits, origin, ecological indicator values and their occurrence in habitat and vegetation types. AdamSeattle (talk) 05:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Support --Emwille (talk) 16:46, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Prburley (talk)
•  Support -- Riesengrey (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Vascular Plants of Iowa species ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a plant species in The Vascular Plants of Iowa website
Represents	The Vascular Plants of Iowa: An Annotated Checklist and Natural History (Q122653218)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; taxon (Q16521)
Allowed values	SPEd1e[0-9]+
Example 1	Abutilon theophrasti (Q606369) → SPEd1e8457
Example 2	Galium tinctorium (Q15456760) → SPEd1e11118
Example 3	Pinus strobus (Q157230) → SPEd1e736
Example 4	Abies balsamea (Q428023) → SPEd1e724
Example 5	jack-in-the-pulpit (Q2716758) → SPEd1e12935
Example 6	Azolla mexicana (Q16949802) → SPEd1e334
Example 7	Osmunda cinnamomea (Q19847984) → SPEd1e602
Example 8	Zigadenus glaucus (Q122654505) → SPEd1e14771
Source	http://uipress.lib.uiowa.edu/vpi/Default.aspx
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	http://uipress.lib.uiowa.edu/vpi/DetailsPage.aspx?species_id=$1
Applicable "stated in"-value	The Vascular Plants of Iowa: An Annotated Checklist and Natural History (Q122653218)

Motivation

This online database provides a definitive account of the vascular plants of Iowa. The checklist provides an accurate and up-to-date listing of species names and common names, synonyms, distribution, habitat, abundance, and origin; county names are given for very rare species, and the most complete information has been provided for all rare plants and troublesome species. AdamSeattle (talk) 23:51, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

• Definitive account? Based on the book from 1994! Not updated since 2012. --Succu (talk) 05:38, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
• Well it was surely was considered definitive at the time of publication, and Wikidata does not just link to only the latest publications. Mammal Species of the World hasn't been updated since the third edition was published in 2005 and yet is considered a useful resource to link out to. For Iowa plants this may be the most comprehensive resource available. 75.172.104.5 17:17, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
  • Mammal Species of the World (Q111172813) is not a "definitive account" about mammals, It's outdated of course today and not "most comprehensive resource available". --Succu (talk) 21:19, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
  • The entry about Opuntia humifusa (Q134419) is more than outdated and incomplete. --Succu (talk) 21:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Emwille (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
•  Strong support -- Definitive as we're going to get--there's not much funding for constant state-level botanical surveys. It's also needed for historical reasons. Prburley (talk)
•  Support -- Riesengrey (talk) 20:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

As expected @AdamSeattle it went the usual way... --Succu (talk) 21:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Biochemistry/molecular biology

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Molecular biology for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Molecular biology}}

Chemistry

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Chemistry for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Chemistry}}

BindingDB ID

   Under discussion

Description	ID of a chemical compound in BindingDB
Represents	BindingDB (Q4914007)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	chemical compounds
Allowed values	\d+
Example 1	dopamine (Q170304) → 55121
Example 2	deoxythymidine (Q422464) → 1
Example 3	aminomethylbenzoic acid (Q695442) → 50408790
External links	Use in sister projects: [ar] • [de] • [en] • [es] • [fr] • [he] • [it] • [ja] • [ko] • [nl] • [pl] • [pt] • [ru] • [sv] • [vi] • [zh] • [commons] • [species] • [wd] • [en.wikt] • [fr.wikt].
Number of IDs in source	41296
Formatter URL	http://www.bindingdb.org/bind/chemsearch/marvin/MolStructure.jsp?monomerid=$1

Another database linked from UniChem. GZWDer (talk) 22:52, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Support + Saehrimnir
  Leyo
  Snipre
  Jasper Deng
  Dcirovic
  Walkerma
  Egon Willighagen
  Denise Slenter
  Daniel Mietchen
  Kopiersperre
  Emily Temple-Wood
  Pablo Busatto (Almondega)
  Antony Williams (EPA)
  TomT0m
  Wostr
  Devon Fyson
  User:DePiep
  User:DavRosen
  Benjaminabel
  99of9
  Kubaello
  Fractaler
  Sebotic
  Netha
  Hugo
  Samuel Clark
  Tris T7
  Leiem
  Christianhauck
  SCIdude
  Binter
  Photocyte
  Robert Giessmann
  Cord Wiljes
  Adriano Rutz
  Jonathan Bisson
  GrndStt
  Ameisenigel
  Charles Tapley Hoyt
  ChemHobby
  Peter Murray-Rust
  Erfurth
  TiagoLubiana
  Notified participants of WikiProject Chemistry Wostr (talk) 17:42, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

•  Support --Leiem (talk) 03:11, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

• Is this the most appropriate URI format string? It seems to be a search endpoint and not a resolution-focused one Cthoyt (talk)
  •  Comment The webservice does not support it either, it seems: http://www.bindingdb.org/bind/BindingDBRESTfulAPI.jsp Are we sure the identifier is stable and meant to be used by others? --Egon Willighagen (talk) 06:58, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

•  Weak support Egon Willighagen (talk) 04:49, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

VMH compound ID (or VMH ID)

   Under discussion

Description	ID for a topic (compound?) in Virtual Metabolic Human database (see Q58106084)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	compound?
Allowed values	string
Example 1	ethanol (Q153) → etoh or metabolite/etoh
Example 2	cholecalciferol (Q139347) → vitd3 or metabolite/vitd3
Example 3	(non-compound) CYP24A1 (Q17912224) → gene/1591.1
Example 4	(non-compound) alkaptonuria (Q651680) → disease/AKU
External links	Use in sister projects: [ar] • [de] • [en] • [es] • [fr] • [he] • [it] • [ja] • [ko] • [nl] • [pl] • [pt] • [ru] • [sv] • [vi] • [zh] • [commons] • [species] • [wd] • [en.wikt] • [fr.wikt].
Number of IDs in source	5607 or 676825
Formatter URL	https://www.vmh.life/#$1

Another database linked from UniChem. But this database contain other type of entities and I am not sure whether we need to create a property for all types. GZWDer (talk) 23:24, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

 Weak support, probably it can be added just like ScienceDirect topic ID (P10376) with these prefixes. Wostr (talk) 17:51, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

 Comment I do not oppose the creation, but I noticed the database hasn't been updated for 3 years, I am not sure how much we can rely on its existence. TiagoLubiana (talk) 19:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

 Support Egon Willighagen (talk) 04:48, 5 August 2023 (UTC)

Universal Spectrum Identifier

   Under discussion

Description	The Universal Spectrum Identifier (USI) is a compound identifier that provides an abstract path to refer to a single spectrum generated by a mass spectrometer, and potentially the ion that is thought to have produced it.
Represents	This property would allow to link a mass spectra to a chemical compound (Q11173). Complementary to SPLASH identifiers (SPLASH (P4964))
Data type	External identifier
Domain	A Wikidata property. QIDs chemical compound (Q11173), chemical entity (Q43460564) or pure substance (Q578779) are types of items that could bear this property.
Allowed values	Local Unique Identifier (LUI) pattern ^mzspec:.+$
Example 1	cocaine (Q41576) → mzspec:GNPS:GNPS-LIBRARY:accession:CCMSLIB00000211412
Example 2	erythromycin (Q213511) → mzspec:GNPS:GNPS-LIBRARY:accession:CCMSLIB00006685311
Example 3	glucagon (Q170617) → mzspec:PXD013100:Diabetes_iPSC_Beta12_5_05Sep14_Alder_14-08-24.mgf:index:40476:HSQGTFTSDYSKYLDSRRAQDFVQWLMNT/3
Source	https://registry.identifiers.org/registry/mzspec and https://www.psidev.info/usi
Planned use	Matching chemical compounds to MS or MSMS spectra
Formatter URL	http://proteomecentral.proteomexchange.org/usi/?usi=$1 https://metabolomics-usi.ucsd.edu/dashinterface/?usi1=$1

Motivation

Matching chemical compounds to MS or MSMS spectra. USI are complementary to SPLASH because they are human-readable and "use a concatenated multi-part key that specifies the collection, mass spectrometry run and index information needed to locate a particular mass spectrum in a repository, defining keys that researchers can easily compose without requiring any special hashing algorithms." GrndStt (talk) 16:12, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

Pinging Saehrimnir
Leyo
Snipre
Jasper Deng
Dcirovic
Walkerma
Egon Willighagen
Denise Slenter
Daniel Mietchen
Kopiersperre
Emily Temple-Wood
Pablo Busatto (Almondega)
Antony Williams (EPA)
TomT0m
Wostr
Devon Fyson
User:DePiep
User:DavRosen
Benjaminabel
99of9
Kubaello
Fractaler
Sebotic
Netha
Hugo
Samuel Clark
Tris T7
Leiem
Christianhauck
SCIdude
Binter
Photocyte
Robert Giessmann
Cord Wiljes
Adriano Rutz
Jonathan Bisson
GrndStt
Ameisenigel
Charles Tapley Hoyt
ChemHobby
Peter Murray-Rust
Erfurth
TiagoLubiana
Notified participants of WikiProject Chemistry GrndStt (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

 Support Interesting idea! Egon Willighagen (talk) 04:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

One small note in case you all move forward (happy to support integration with WikiData), the Metabolomics Spectrum Resolver will be doing a slight migration from UCSD domain name to a more non-university tied one to a separate organization. Will update you all going forward. Mingxun.Wang (talk) 15:57, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

As preliminary note, I am in favor of such mapping. Its success will, however, depend on the quality of our mapping and precision of the description, therefore a few points we should try to answer:

- In "planned use", "representative" MS/MS spectra is written. Who will determine it? How many can be representative? 1,5,100? The paper mentions billions of spectra, how will import of "representative" spectra be limited? Are the ionization conditions another dimension of representativeness?

- "MS/MS" spectra does not seem correct, I think it can be any spectrum.

- I see no notes about adduct type, ionization mode, instruments, etc. I do not see USI as other "classical"external chemical identifiers. Most of the identifier mappings refer to the chemical itself, not an "artefact" of it. So, even if technically it is an external ID...I am not sure about the correct way to model it on WD.

- Do anyone know if curation can happen in an automatic way? Let's say, by matching the exact mass/InChIKey between WD and any retrievable info on the the other side? Can we query mzspec for chemicals present in WD?

My five cents, AdrianoRutz (talk) 06:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

- In "planned use", "representative" MS/MS spectra is written. Who will determine it? How many can be representative? 1,5,100? The paper mentions billions of spectra, how will import of "representative" spectra be limited? Are the ionization conditions another dimension of representativeness?

This is a tough one. And at the moment AFAIK we don't have a way to produce a consensus spectral representation. So here representative was in the sense of "an examplar spectrum". I understand it is a confusing adjective and will simply remove it for clarity. Regarding the numbers, 40-50000 unique compounds with at least a spectrum in all public databases would be a broad estimate. An in the range of 2000 spectra per compound for the very "popular" compound in spectral databases. Again, a wild guess. It would worth doing some stats on https://gnps-library.ucsd.edu/. So overall in the range of what we have for LOTUS data.

- "MS/MS" spectra does not seem correct, I think it can be any spectrum.

Agreed. Changed to MS and MSMS (let's forget MSn MSe and all the rest for now ...)

- I see no notes about adduct type, ionization mode, instruments, etc.

I guess, just like in the case of the found in taxon (P703), were experimental information regarding the isolation and structural determination approach is to be found in the supporting reference; these informations should be fetched in the spectral database linked. USI has a specific layer for spectral interpretation which is specified here https://psidev.info/proforma, it is however oriented for peptides interpretation but as one can see here mzspec:PXD013100:Diabetes_iPSC_Beta12_5_05Sep14_Alder_14-08-24.mgf:index:40476:HSQGTFTSDYSKYLDSRRAQDFVQWLMNT/3, charge state can be encode at least. Would be indeed super cool to have the possibility to specify spectral information for molecules using SMILES, InChI or CXSMILES for example for partially defined structures (for example an adduct were the counterion could not be placed)

- I do not see USI as other "classical"external chemical identifiers. Most of the identifier mappings refer to the chemical itself, not an "artefact" of it. So, even if technically it is an external ID...I am not sure about the correct way to model it on WD.

Me neither. However as you say it is an external ID. Just like PDB structure ID (P638) is not the structure itself but structure + protein it's in the external id section (see caffeine (Q60235)). In fact if we think about an InChIKey (P235) it doesn't refer to the "chemical itself" neither. Its a hash of an InChI (P234) which is the encoding of a structure coming from the interpretation of a spectra.

So I thought the USI this should be a property an appear in the Identifiers section of a chemical but this might not be the best way indeed. How - if it should - should this be done then ?

- Do anyone know if curation can happen in an automatic way? Let's say, by matching the exact mass/InChIKey between WD and any retrievable info on the the other side? Can we query mzspec for chemicals present in WD?

At https://gnps-library.ucsd.edu/ we can at least have the InChIKey so matching with WD compounds should be straightforward. However I don't see SPLASH or USI in the downladable tables. I will have a look around and check with Ming Wang else, he should have a way around ! For the last point regarding direct query of USI their might be something to do with th spectral interpretation layer (see point 3. above) but I dont think its implemented for small molecules at the moment ... GrndStt (talk) 08:56, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

 Neutral. I agree with Adriano that the number of IDs (=spectra) for a compound is huge. This should be avoided in WD at all costs for technical reasons. However, the issuing authority (proteomexchange?) should have some means to list all IDs for a given InChi key and give a permanent URL for that list, and WD should have a means to link to that URL. This is the only way I see. --SCIdude (talk) 08:35, 31 October 2022 (UTC)

On the GNPS side, we can build a mechanism to return a list of USIs for a given InChIKey query. Then for each compound, you could link out to the MS/MS instances. Happy to provide as much of data dumps to do the analysis of coverage and scale of multiple spectra per compound. Mingxun.Wang (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Medicine

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Medicine for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Medicine}}

US-Drug Master file ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for drug master file that a company registered in the database of the FDA
Represents	US-Drug Master file (Q115555635)
Data type	External identifier
Example 1	bupropion hydrochloride (Q27295463) → 11196 Qualifier owned by (P127) Nordic Synthesis Ab (Q117222338)
Example 2	fenofibrate (Q419724) → 11194 Qualifier owned by (P127) Wavelength Enterprises LTD (Q117222389)
Example 3	clozapine (Q221361) → 11195 Qualifier owned by (P127) Shanghai Zhongxi Sunve Pharmaceutical Co LTD (Q117222419)
Source	https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-master-files-dmfs/list-drug-master-files-dmfs
Expected completeness	always incomplete (Q21873886)
Implied notability	Wikidata property for an identifier that suggests notability (Q62589316)
Wikidata project	WikiProject Medicine (Q4099686)

Motivation

These IDs are one of the ways by which the FDA publishes information about drugs and thus it's worthwhile to have them in Wikidata. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:01, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussion

WikiProject Medicine has more than 50 participants and couldn't be pinged. Please post on the WikiProject's talk page instead. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 11:03, 2 December 2022 (UTC) Saehrimnir
Leyo
Snipre
Jasper Deng
Dcirovic
Walkerma
Egon Willighagen
Denise Slenter
Daniel Mietchen
Kopiersperre
Emily Temple-Wood
Pablo Busatto (Almondega)
Antony Williams (EPA)
TomT0m
Wostr
Devon Fyson
User:DePiep
User:DavRosen
Benjaminabel
99of9
Kubaello
Fractaler
Sebotic
Netha
Hugo
Samuel Clark
Tris T7
Leiem
Christianhauck
SCIdude
Binter
Photocyte
Robert Giessmann
Cord Wiljes
Adriano Rutz
Jonathan Bisson
GrndStt
Ameisenigel
Charles Tapley Hoyt
ChemHobby
Peter Murray-Rust
Erfurth
TiagoLubiana
Notified participants of WikiProject Chemistry Egon Willighagen (talk) 08:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

•  Comment The lined resource does not seem to provide a lot of information that makes it easy to link up the data. Ideas? --Egon Willighagen (talk) 08:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)
•  Question: About the content (DMF-record content): per its definition, it is a code to reference to undisclosed information (like secret/private production process etc). "Allow parties to reference material without disclosing DMF contents to those parties". Ir is not verifiable data by its self-definition. How would this be useful or needed information to add? -DePiep (talk) 08:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

  @DePiep: I think it's useful to know which companies have a drug registered for a substance like bupropion hydrochloride (Q27295463) even when we don't know all the information that they have registered with it. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 00:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

  OK, thanks. (Add this to the Description maybe?) DePiep (talk) 07:13, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

  @DePiep: I added a references to companies to the description. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 12:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

‎WHO Aware Classification

   Under discussion

Description	The World Health Organization currently classifies 258 antibiotics into "Access", "Watch", and "Reserve" based partly on the risk of resistance developing as a result of such use and critical nature of the antibiotic in question.
Data type	String
Example 1	amoxicillin (Q201928) -> Access
Example 2	aspoxicillin (Q27114235) -> Watch
Example 3	aztreonam (Q418546) -> Reserve
Source	https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/2021-aware-classification
Number of IDs in source	~258

Motivation

This is an important parameter of an antibiotic. The list will be updated every two years.  – The preceding unsigned comment was added by Doc James (talk • contribs).

Discussion

•  Comment@Doc James: Thanks for the proposal! I'd support it, but I think it could be better modeled as items representing the "access", "watch" and "reserve" on Wikidata with good descriptions of each TiagoLubiana (talk) 17:30, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
• Thanks User:TiagoLubiana, yes agree we need items on Wikidata for each of those descriptions. Also need a year parameter. User:Bluerasberry thoughts on this? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 02:35, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I agree. I am mostly out of office till the week of 28 August. I will set those items then. Please give a week. Bluerasberry (talk) 02:53, 24 August 2023 (UTC)

@Doc James:: I fully agree. At the University of Sfax, the Department of Microbiology releases statistical data about antibiotic resistance every year. This changes every year with auto-medication and limited commitment to drug therapies due to their cost. Concerning AWaRE, there is a new edition at https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/WHO-MHP-HPS-EML-2023.04. So, probably, we need to use start time (P580) and end time (P582). --Csisc (talk) 07:29, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Thanks User:Csisc Yes a new edition will come out every two years. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 14:42, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

Mineralogy

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Mineralogy for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Mineralogy}}

Minerals.net mineral ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a mineral on Minerals.net
Represents	Minerals.net (Q121890280)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; mineral (Q7946)
Allowed values	[a-z\_\-]+
Example 1	spodumene (Q120547) → spodumene
Example 2	pinite (Q121850529) → pinite
Example 3	chrysoberyl (Q422179) → chrysoberyl
Example 4	pyrophyllite (Q409470) → pyrophyllite
Example 5	kernite (Q424502) → kernite
Example 6	salammoniac (Q2451851) → sal_ammoniac
Example 7	iron-nickel (Q121890492) → iron-nickel
Source	https://www.minerals.net/MineralMain.aspx
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Number of IDs in source	several hundred
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	https://www.minerals.net/mineral/$1.aspx
See also	Mindat mineral ID (P6263), Kivid.info ID (P7348), Wikidata:Property proposal/Minerals.net gemstone ID
Applicable "stated in"-value	Minerals.net (Q121890280)

Motivation

Chris.urs-o Sbisolo (User:SbisoloBot, Special:Contributions/SbisoloBot) Tobias1984 John Mortimore lmullberry.urs-o--L.mullbery (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2019 (UTC)lmullberry Bug2266 (talk) 15:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC) Notified participants of WikiProject Mineralogy

The Minerals.net (Q121890280) website is a free informational and educational guide to rocks, minerals, gemstones, and jewelry. "This site has been providing detailed information and photos of hundreds of mineral and gemstone since 1997 and is one of the leading education resources on minerals and gemstones." Information includes a description of each mineral, chemical formula, composition, color, streak, hardness, crystal system, crystal forms, transparency, specific gravity, luster, cleavage, classification, rock type, environment found in, uses, noteworthy locations, common mineral associations, comparisons with other similar minerals, photographs, and links to other online resources. AdamSeattle (talk) 18:58, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

 Support I support. Seems a useful source of information! Riesengrey (talk) 19:17, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 Support I agree with @Riesengrey. metadataguy (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

 Weak support the page in the current state is active for around 10 years with a long period of inactivity. Like many other websites about minerals, this is also a private project, but much smaller than e.g. Mindat. As I stated in Wikidata:Property proposal/Minerals.net gemstone ID I don't think that this requires creation of two properties, one would be perfectly fine, because we don't have any identifiers here, just fragments of URLs. What's more, I don't think that such page is a good source for any physical properties of minerals in Wikidata, proper scientific sources should be used for this. Wostr (talk) 22:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

 Weak support Very good points, particularly about the physical properties. We already have a huge wrong data propagation, and adding a proprietary database that may disappear as source only makes that worse. In that respect, an Internet Archive of that website would help. Egon Willighagen (talk) 07:29, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

 Support I think Wostr is on to something about combining this with the other minerals.net proposal. --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 14:57, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 Support Emwille (talk) 14:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Minerals.net gemstone ID

   Under discussion

Description	identifier for a gemstone on Minerals.net
Represents	Minerals.net (Q121890280)
Data type	External identifier
Domain	item; gemstone (Q83437)
Allowed values	[a-z\_\-\']+_gemstone
Example 1	amethyst (Q79058) → amethyst_gemstone
Example 2	heliotrope (Q430174) → bloodstone_gemstone
Example 3	diopside (Q316671) → diopside_gemstone
Example 4	chromdiopside (Q2754504) → chrome_diopside_gemstone
Example 5	emerald (Q43513) → emerald_gemstone
Example 6	kyanite (Q193450) → kyanite_gemstone
Example 7	malachite (Q164411) → malachite_gemstone
Example 8	rose quartz (Q429911) → rose_quartz_gemstone
Example 9	tiger's eye (Q430007) → tiger's_eye_gemstone
Example 10	azurite-malachite (Q121890693) → azure-malachite_gemstone
Source	https://www.minerals.net/GemStoneMain.aspx
Planned use	adding to items edited or created
Number of IDs in source	several hundred
Expected completeness	eventually complete (Q21873974)
Formatter URL	https://www.minerals.net/gemstone/$1.aspx
See also	Wikidata:Property proposal/Minerals.net mineral ID
Applicable "stated in"-value	Minerals.net (Q121890280)

Motivation

Chris.urs-o Sbisolo (User:SbisoloBot, Special:Contributions/SbisoloBot) Tobias1984 John Mortimore lmullberry.urs-o--L.mullbery (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2019 (UTC)lmullberry Bug2266 (talk) 15:31, 22 March 2019 (UTC) Notified participants of WikiProject Mineralogy

The Minerals.net (Q121890280) website is a free informational and educational guide to rocks, minerals, gemstones, and jewelry. "This site has been providing detailed information and photos of hundreds of mineral and gemstone since 1997 and is one of the leading education resources on minerals and gemstones." Information includes a description of each gemstone, chemical formula, color, hardness, crystal system, refractive index, specific gravity, transparency, luster, cleavage, and mineral class, uses, varieties, sources, similar gemstones, and photographs. AdamSeattle (talk) 19:17, 27 August 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

 Support Support adding IDs from this source. Riesengrey (talk) 19:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 Support I support. metadataguy (talk) 22:06, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

 Oppose as we don't have any identifiers here, I'd rather see this similar to ScienceDirect topic ID (P10376), New York Times topic ID (P3221) or Encyclopædia Britannica Online ID (P1417), i.e. as a one property for both minerals and gemstones (so instead of a value 'amethyst_gemstone', it should be 'gemstone/amethyst_gemstone'). I see no reason to create two properties for a private page. Wostr (talk) 22:42, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Wostr, I see what you're saying here, that these two minerals.net proposals could be one property and include gemstone/ and mineral/ at the start of the values. I can't think of a solid reason why users might prefer two properties over a single combined one. If these URLs are persistent URIs, I think they count as identifiers, and I don't know what the private vs. public status of the page has to do with the number of properties we create for a data source, but I think your suggestion to combine these two property proposals makes sense. --Crystal Yragui, University of Washington Libraries (talk) 15:09, 5 September 2023 (UTC)

 Support --Emwille (talk) 14:42, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Computer science

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Informatics for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Informatics}}

Geology

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Geology for more information.

Linguistics

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Linguistics for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Linguistics}}

Mathematics

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Mathematics for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Mathematics}}

‎underlying structure

   Under discussion

Description	an instance of the subject becomes an instance of the object if some of its data are lost
Represents	forgetful functor (Q2646117)
Data type	Item
Domain	mathematical structure (Q748349)
Allowed values	mathematical structure (Q748349)
Example 1	metric space (Q180953)underlying structureuniform space (Q652446)
Example 2	Lie group (Q622679)underlying structuresmooth manifold (Q78338964)
Example 3	Lie group (Q622679)underlying structuretopological group (Q1046291)
Example 4	graph (Q141488)underlying structureset (Q36161)
Example 5	ring (Q161172)underlying structureabelian group (Q181296)
Example 6	ring (Q161172)underlying structuremonoid (Q208237)

Motivation

The statement metric space (Q180953)subclass of (P279)topological space (Q179899) is strictly speaking not true, because a topological space, even if it "underlies" a metric space, does not have the metric data by which it becomes a metric space. What this statement really wants to say is that metric spaces are topological spaces if we decide to only consider the induced topology. This motivates me to propose a weaker property called "underlying structure". This property is not vague: if there is a faithful functor from the category of A to the category of B, we say Aunderlysing structureB; if further this functor is the inclusion from a subcategory (edit: or if the functor is fully faithful), we may use Asubclass of (P279)B (as in Hausdorff space (Q326908)subclass of (P279)topological space (Q179899)). To simplify the whole data graph of Wikidata we can make it a transitive Wikidata property, and make each statment in each entity in its strongest form (e.g. metric space (Q180953)underlying structuremetrizable space (Q1194053). 慈居 (talk) 07:42, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Discussion

•  Question How much do we currently use subclass of (P279) for this? Is P279 an alternative? Answered in proposal. Jheald (talk) 18:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

  The property subclass of (P279) will be fine if we are allowed to specify how many functors are there (as in bimodule (Q2903821)subclass of (P279)module (Q18848)quantity (P1114)2), or in which sense the statement holds (as in metric space (Q180953)subclass of (P279)metrizable space (Q1194053)criterion used (P1013)faithful functor (Q12175350) and in commutative ring (Q858656)subclass of (P279)ring (Q161172)criterion used (P1013)fully faithful functor (Q120721906)). Actually I will prefer this alternative if this is allowed, but I'm not sure. 慈居 (talk) 22:16, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

  Currently subclass of (P279) seems used most commonly (Lie group (Q622679)); has part(s) of the class (P2670) is also used but less often (ring (Q161172)). The property has part(s) of the class (P2670) requires the subject to be an instance, not a class, so I think it does not fit this purpose. 慈居 (talk) 22:31, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

  Another concern for subclass of (P279) is that statments like ring (Q161172)subclass of (P279)abelian group (Q181296) and ring (Q161172)subclass of (P279)monoid (Q208237) together may confuse people since all abelian groups are monoids; the latter statement might seem redundant and get deleted. 慈居 (talk) 22:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Material

Please visit Wikidata:WikiProject Materials for more information. To notify participants use {{Ping project|Materials}}