Jump to content

Wikidentify/nl

From Meta, a Wikimedia project coordination wiki
This page is a translated version of the page Wikidentify and the translation is 100% complete.
This is a proposal for a new Wikimedia sister project.
Wikidentify
Status of the proposal
Statusrejected
ReasonThis can be done by Wikidata, once phab:T154426 is resolved.--GZWDer (talk) 06:16, 8 February 2017 (UTC)[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.

Wikidentify (ook wel Reverse Wikipedia genoemd) zou een project kunnen zijn, om objecten op aarde te identificeren, zoals we die kennen van identification keys in de botanica. Er kunnen veel manieren zijn om dingen parallel te identificeren. De basis zou Wikidata kunnen zijn, uiteindelijk krijgt u het Wikipedia-artikel. U kunt in deze key insluiting, uitsluiting en anabole eigenschappen combineren.

Voorbeeld gebruik

  • U kiest voor geel, dieselbrandstof en exclusief pick-up en u krijgt een auto, die alleen in die kleur is geproduceerd met deze opties.
  • U selecteert een hoogte, een locatie en een boom die vaak in de schaduw groeit en krijgt bijvoorbeeld drie geschikte soorten om uit te kiezen.
  • U kiest een gewicht, een kleur en andere details en wat u krijgt, is misschien fruit van een appelboom.
  • U selecteert een volume en een land met een etiket waarop je hebt gezien en hoeveel propellers en je krijgt het type vliegtuig.

Voorgesteld door

Alternatieve namen

  • Wikidentification – All other WMF projects are nouns.

Gerelateerde projecten/voorstellen


Domeinnamen

  • not yet

Demonstraties


Mensen die geïnteresseerd zijn

Mensen die tegen zijn

  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]
    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]
  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]
    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]
  3.  Klaas|Z4␟V09:13, 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]
  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]
  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]
  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]
  7. I hope that Wikidata will offer such a tool, eventually. — Ivan Shmakov (dc) 09:05, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  8. As proposed, I don't see a use for this. Sven Manguard (talk) 22:50, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Completely duplicate with query feature of Wikidata.--GZWDer (talk) 14:04, 23 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]