Wikidata:Property proposal/Substances in the reference
Substances in the reference edit
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Generic
Not done
Motivation edit
The proposed property would be helpful for readers to know what substances are covered in the reference work. --Leiem (talk) 12:16, 13 December 2023 (UTC)
Discussion edit
Notified participants of WikiProject Chemistry. --Leiem (talk) 07:08, 14 December 2023 (UTC)- Comment I believe that main subject (P921) is now used for this purpose. Are there any problems with it? Wostr (talk) 11:44, 14 December 2023 (UTC)
- This proposal may be more detailed. For example, main subject (P921) of Studies of the thermal decomposition of copper hydride (Q60363120) is thermal decomposition (Q2611095) (and copper hydride (Q133761)) while "substances in the references" covers copper hydride (Q133761) (as reactant) and copper (Q753) + dihydrogen (Q3027893) (as products). --Leiem (talk) 03:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- More useful (and this is already normal for enzymatic reactions) would be to create a page for the reaction and put the reference there. Examples: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q21096282#P527 or https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q50294500 SCIdude (talk) 13:55, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- This proposal may be more detailed. For example, main subject (P921) of Studies of the thermal decomposition of copper hydride (Q60363120) is thermal decomposition (Q2611095) (and copper hydride (Q133761)) while "substances in the references" covers copper hydride (Q133761) (as reactant) and copper (Q753) + dihydrogen (Q3027893) (as products). --Leiem (talk) 03:17, 15 December 2023 (UTC)
- This approach is fine, but seems incomplete in that it doesn't make the queryable connection to journal articles where these pathways were discussed does it? In the second case these links seem to be under [1] cites work (P2860), which seems to me to be a distortion of its original intent, since that is supposed to be between one scholarly work and another. --99of9 (talk) 02:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
- I might be misunderstanding you, but if we have a separate entity for the reaction, I think main subject (P921) (and described by source (P1343) for the reverse direction) are exactly the right properties to link it with the corresponding article. 2620:15C:161:107:9977:4897:47AD:5467 02:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
- This approach is fine, but seems incomplete in that it doesn't make the queryable connection to journal articles where these pathways were discussed does it? In the second case these links seem to be under [1] cites work (P2860), which seems to me to be a distortion of its original intent, since that is supposed to be between one scholarly work and another. --99of9 (talk) 02:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
- It strikes me that the distinction you're making is really main subject (P921) vs. "secondary topic". There's nothing specific to the topics being chemical substances. 2620:15C:161:107:9977:4897:47AD:5467 02:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)
Support I think this is reasonable as an effective subproperty of main subject (P921). --99of9 (talk) 02:19, 21 December 2023 (UTC)
Oppose Use main subject (P921). Also "in the reference" in the label is confusing - what reference? Wikidata statements should be roughly interpretable as sentences, but "scholarly article" "substance in the reference" <chemical substance> doesn't make sense to me. ArthurPSmith (talk) 20:35, 7 January 2024 (UTC)- Oppose I don't see why main subject (P921) is not enough. Midleading (talk) 04:54, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
Not done, no consensus of proposed property at this time based on the above discussion. Regards, ZI Jony (Talk) 13:49, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
