Wikidentify (also termed Reverse Wikipedia) could be a project, to identify objects on earth, like we know from en:identification keys in botanic. There could be existing many ways to identify things parallel. Base could be Wikidata, finally you get the Wikipedia article. You can combine in these keys inclusion, exclusion and anabolic properties.

This is a proposal for a new Wikimedia sister project.
Status of the proposal
ReasonThis can be done by Wikidata, once phab:T154426 is resolved.--GZWDer (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2017 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Details of the proposal
Project descriptionidentify objects on earth
Is it a multilingual wiki?one mulitilingual wiki
Potential number of languagesmany
Interested participants
See below.

usage example Edit

  • You select yellow, diesel fuel and exclusion pickup truck and you get a car, which was only produced in that color with this options.
  • You select a height, a location and option tree growing often in the shadow and get f.e. three fitting species to choose.
  • You select a weight, a color and surrounding other pieces of details and got, that is maybe a fruit of a apple tree.
  • You select a loudness and a country with a label you saw on it and how many propellers and you get the type of the plane.
  • ...

Proposed by Edit

Alternative names Edit

  • Wikidentification – All other WMF projects are nouns.

Related projects/proposals Edit

Domain names Edit

Mailing list links Edit

  • not yet

Demos Edit

People interested Edit

  1. Conny (talk)
  2. Harald Krichel (talk)
  3. Gregor Hagedorn
  4. Emw (talk)
  5. Arnaugir (talk)
  6. Nick1372 (talk)
  7. Andreas Plank (talk)
  8. ProtossPylon (talk)
  9. --Seonookim (talk) 06:15, 23 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  10. --Natuur12 (talk) 14:38, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  11. Wolf Lambert (talk) 12:31, 1 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  12. Bothvar (talk) 01:15, 18 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  13. Interested in the functionality, not necessarily through a new project. Daniel Mietchen (talk)
  14. Hkjacksonhk08:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  15. Interesting concept. Abyssal (talk) 16:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  16. This is concept interesting... --►Cekli829 08:06, 17 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  17. very interesting Miguel2706 (talk) 00:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  18. Coldbolt (talk) 16:15, 30 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  19. Sounds quite interessting. MGChecker (talk)

People opposed Edit

  1. This sounds like something to be implemented in WikiData; we don't need another sister project. Chris Troutman (talk) 01:33, 27 July 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Maybe sounds, but is more complex (just take the GUI). There are thinkings from experts necessary I think. Conny (talk) 13:40, 1 August 2013 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  2. I agree with Chris that this should be seen as a WikiData tool. I support its creation, but I don't see the need for a separate wiki for that. --Piotrus (talk) 03:57, 18 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hm ok, maybe a seperate skin for Wikidentify is enough, if there is a way to integrate special needs like Klaas mentioned. Hope you opposers read discussion from specialists f. e. in german wikipedia (linked) and support overload of data for items to identify then. Maybe not everyone is interested in Wikidentify, but so this people maybe become the information overload in Wikidata... Thanks, Conny (talk) 09:43, 20 August 2013 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  3.  Klaas|Z4␟V:  09:13, 18 August 2013 (UTC) Agree with Chris. Great task for an advanced tool in WikiData perhaps even a special namespace there, I suggest to move this proposal to a suitable team of developers there.Reply[reply]
  4. Wikidata will be doing this. comment on why this project would be needed in addition to the current plans for Wikidata because I fail to see the need for this in addition to the current plans. Blue Rasberry (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  5. Weak oppose based on current scope. It makes sense to create dichotomous key to identify biological species but adding others into the scope makes it a bit too broad. (Ok, I can see that niche audiences like aviation fans would potentially treat this site as the go-to source to identify aircraft types but I want to see more listed in the proposal on how to carry out its goal.) OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:18, 23 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  6. This would be a great add-on to Wikidata, but it's hard to see how a separate project is needed. -- Ypnypn (talk) 18:04, 27 August 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  7. I hope that Wikidata will offer such a tool, eventually. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 09:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  8. As proposed, I don't see a use for this. Sven Manguard (talk) 22:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  9. Completely duplicate with query feature of Wikidata.--GZWDer (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]