iNat curator and long-time (but somewhat lapsed) Wikipedia contributor here.
My view is that the ideal tool we’re all looking for (and may need to build) is some type of community-edited multi-access key framework, but that doesn’t mean that we should not also add properly sourced identification information to Wikipedia articles.
Here’s an article I wrote on Sisyrinchium albilapidense, a narrowly distributed Iridaceae species from Brazil. The Taxonomy section has a couple of short paragraphs on how to distinguish the species from three related species. That’s all fine, but it’s still suboptimal on several counts:
- It requires quite a lot of effort per species
- It’s a lot harder to use than a well-designed key
- It doesn’t include any photos or audio (and doing so would require even more effort)
- Wikipedia’s source-citing requirements may be a little too onerous for our purposes
Here is what I’d love iNat (or the iNat community) to develop
- A framework that allows the creation of an unlimited number of multi-access keys, like the ones highlighted in the examples here: https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/create-identification-matrix/1567/4
- Free to create keys, free to use them
- The ability to “chain” keys, to lead users from family to genus to species
- Some ability to create a user-friendly narrative and UI around the keys, with the goal of the site being usable by novice naturalists, just like iNat.
- Ability to link to external ID resources (field guides, other keys) with context.
- Supports images (to show diagnostic characters) and audio files (e.g. for birds, bats, stridulating insects)
- “Community-owned” in much the same way as WP and iNat, so contributors agree to license their contributions under a Creative Commons license.
- Appropriate policies on sourcing and review. These might be a blend of WP and iNat policies.
On that last point, I have in mind something like this:
- I’d suggest that all contributions need to be sourced to published data, but with an emphasis on productivity and flexibility. So you add a published paper to the internal database, and then cite it just by choosing it from your “favorites” as many times as you need to use it.
- Some type of review for new and changed contributions, to minimize vandals and spammers, possibly with “sampling” of contributions for more experienced contributors.