I reverted your change to human who may be fictional (Q21070568). We have gone to a lot of trouble to separate 'fictional humans' from 'humans' so that a search on human (including subclasses) doesn't throw up any fictional characters. Making "human who may be fictional" a subclass of:human messes this up. "said to be the same as" does the job of linking these two items - that is what it was created to do.
Topic on User talk:Koxinga
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Understood. However this means that all the instances of Q21070568 will cause constraints violations when the domain is defined as human (Q5), fictional character (Q95074) (for example for the family relationships like Property:P7, Property:P9 etc.). Is it normal and expected? Does this mean the domain should be extended?
as Q21070568 is neither fictional nor non-fictional then I guess the constraints do need to be changed to add Q21070568 to the domain.