Wikidata:Requests for comment/Extinct taxons

An editor has requested the community to provide input on "Extinct taxons" via the Requests for comment (RFC) process. This is the discussion page regarding the issue.

If you have an opinion regarding this issue, feel free to comment below. Thank you!

THIS RFC IS CLOSED. Please do NOT vote nor add comments.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

stale --Pasleim (talk) 08:43, 20 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I have created using Wikidata list template this mammals families list. The problem is that some of this taxons are extinct. So... I think that there are two options: creating a yes/no "Extinct" property or changing "taxon" to "extinct taxon". What do you think about this? -Theklan (talk) 10:26, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't IUCN conservation status (P141)=extinct species (Q237350) do the job? --Pasleim (talk) 14:39, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Not for, let's say, any Dinosaur. Or for any taxon that is not a species. Genus, families or so on are not listed in IUCN list. -Theklan (talk) 13:06, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Theklan have you pursued this further? In my view the simplest thing is creating an "extinct taxon" item and making any taxon that is extinct an instance of it. I did something similar for the nuclides, creating a stable isotope (Q878130) item and using instance of (P31) to indicate a nuclide that does not decay. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I see you had this property proposal which I even commented on! Anyway, I think I agree with the several of the comments there, find or create a suitable class item and use instance of (P31) for this. ArthurPSmith (talk) 18:52, 18 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

+1 on ArthurPSmiths comment. However here is a related thread. So far does this suggestion seems clearer/better. There are fossils of humans but they/we are not extinct. --Averater (talk) 06:02, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.