Wikimolecule

This is a **proposal for a new** Wikimedia sister project.
(working title) Wikimolecules
Status of the proposal
Status	under discussion
Details of the proposal
Project description	a database of molecules
Is it a multilingual wiki?	one multilingual wiki
Potential number of languages	no
Proposed tagline	free molecule directory
Proposed URL	https://molecules.wikimedia.org
Technical requirements
New features to require	N/A
Development wiki	None (yet?)
Interested participants
	User:2007Gtbot
	v; t; e;

Wikimolecules would be a database of molecules (and possibly elements and subatomic partials); similar in design to Wikispecies.

Proposed by

User:2007Gtbot

People interested

Comments

Oppose Aren't there infinitely many molecules? --Username142857 (talk) 05:51, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

But is there even info on alot of them? 2007Gtbot (talk) 13:07, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Can Wikidata cover this rather than creating a dedicated Wiki? Wikidata:Wikidata:WikiProject Chemistry. Vis M (talk) 07:01, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Vis M: Wouldn't it fit more in Wikispecies? --Goodlucksil (talk) 19:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ummm, no. Wikispecies is for species, not molecules. Firestar464 (talk) 15:38, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could Wikispecies be merged with Wikidata, since the former's scope appears to be a proper subset of the latter's? Username142857 (talk) 10:22, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I love molecules Smug uwu (talk)
Weak support it’s at least a decent idea that makes sense, with a unique framework and scope, instead of your usual “Wikipedia but XYZ” or something wildly out of scope that could never realistically work like “free web hosting” or “open source poetry” Dronebogus (talk) 19:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Why are those two unrealistic? The former seems to be the scope of Wikiversity (for informative purposes), sandboxes, and user pages (for everything else), and the latter seems to be the scope of sandboxes and user pages. Also, the cost of running servers can't be the issue, since Wikimedia has plenty in excess donations Username142857 (talk) 10:33, 8 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, if there are Wikispecies, then why not Wikimolecules? Τάρας στον Παρνασσό (talk) 10:20, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

WikiSpecies existed far before Wikidata was created, and far before some Wikipedia bot-owners stopped being too shy to perform the mass creations of autogenerated pages about taxons, in particular. If Wikispecies still exists, then someone needs it, but that's an another question. --Wolverène (talk) 08:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Wikidata fits perfectly for what deemed WikiMolecule is intended for. --Wolverène (talk) 08:28, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SupportI think it would be nice to have a Wikimolecule, just like there is a Wikispecies. Wikipedia may not be able to complete it, so what about all the experts They will gather.--doramiso-meta (talk) 05:19, 19 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Support I kinda like this proposal. Wikidata can't cover all the information on wikispecies and think it will be nice to be implemented on molecule. Agus Damanik (talk) 04:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SupportI think this can cover the part that wikidata can't cover.--Chqaz (talk) 01:14, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Structured data about molecules, proteins, chemicals, etc. all go in Wikidata. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:35, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a job for wikidata (and so is wikispecies, incidentally). 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 16:02, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wikidata is already far too big. 2003 LN6 (talk) 18:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
wdym? Username142857 (talk) 02:43, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there's a such thing as "too big" for something like Wikidata. Benpiano800 (talk) 21:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. It would be like Wikispecies but for chemistry instead of biology. Benpiano800 (talk) 21:21, 1 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. I have serious doubts whether wikidata can currently replace wikispecies. Taxonomy changes may be quite frequent and if you look at wikidata, then you can find quite a lot of seemingless unrelated entries for synonyms. E.g., Q21874373 and Q1161623 and presumably also the very poor records Q87604466 and Q110604432 are the very same species. Similarly, Q160573 and Q21327968 are the same species. I hope that wikidata does better for chemical substances, but I have not really checked this. Therefore, the most important question is what the project could do that wikidata apparently cannot. Which kind of hierarchy or which checks should be used to avoid wikidata-style duplication and confusion? And what are "subatomic partials"? Are these subatomic particles? --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 21:33, 8 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]