Talk:Q29842052
Autodescription — fictional white-tailed deer (Q29842052)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “fictional white-tailed deer” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
fictional white-tailed deer⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Bambi
edit@Infovarius: If I understand correctly your comment, you are saying that we should say fictional white-tailed deer (Q29842052)said to be the same as (P460)fictional roe deer (Q29842037) because we are not sure whether Bambi (Q2308402) is a fictional white-tailed deer (Q29842052) or fictional roe deer (Q29842037)? But… that is not a good data model, is it? We are not sure whether John Amos Comenius (Q12735) was born in Uherský Brod (Q664895) or Nivnice (Q1994183), but that does not make us say Uherský Brod (Q664895)said to be the same as (P460)Nivnice (Q1994183). The only meaning we could ascribe to such a claim would be when the taxon itself was uncleanly defined and would state e.g. white-tailed deer (Q215887)said to be the same as (P460)roe deer (Q122069) (and in that case, I’d doubt the existence of such specific items for fictional versions of confused taxons would make any sense). If we want to express the doubts about Bambi, we should use a more general class in its item, i.e. Bambi (Q2308402)instance of (P31)fictional deer (Q27104489) or we might list both variants with the relevant qualifiers. (Also, I note enwiki article seems quite certain that Bambi (Q2308402) was a fictional white-tailed deer (Q29842052) while Bambi (Q27688665) was a fictional roe deer (Q29842037); dunno, I’m no Bambi expert). --Mormegil (talk) 09:33, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I fully agree with you and understand it. But do we really need so granular fictional taxa? My counter-argument is Bambi (Q2308402) showing that these "taxa" are mostly unintelligible. --Infovarius (talk) 19:46, 1 May 2023 (UTC)
- As Mormegil pointed out: the "original" Bambi (from the novel) is a roe deer (Q122069), the Bambi in Disney's animated films a white-tailed deer (Q215887). This is mostly a matter of adaptation / "localization" (Disney wanted to replace the roe deer with something native to North America). I'm not sure why these species are unintelligible in fiction (it certainly mattered during the adaptation process).
- When I created these items there was no other way to express the species of a fictional animal than by creating own items for fictional versions and add them via P31. Now there exists individual of taxon (P10241) and could be used in these cases. But, currently, I see no consensus / plan to migrate the old model (create an own item for fictional versions of taxa and link them via P31) with a new model (see Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Fictional_universes#is_an_individual_of_taxon_(P10241)_and_our_current_approach_to_modelling_fictional_instances_of_species). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 14:14, 2 May 2023 (UTC)