Talk:Q26401003
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — individual animal (Q26401003)
description: singular named exemplar of an animal (e.g., the gorilla named Koko; the cat named Socks)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “individual animal” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
For help about classification, see Wikidata:Classification.
- Parent classes (classes of items which contain this one item)
- Subclasses (classes which contain special kinds of items of this class)
- ⟨
individual animal⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Untitled
[edit]Why not to use simplify animal (Q729) (or some more specific class)? --Infovarius (talk) 13:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)
- Yes, instance of animal would be enough. Syced (talk) 12:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Label
[edit]"Famous animal" or "individual animal"? --Fractaler (talk) 07:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- Instances of individual animals are only allowed on Wikidata if they are famous, so "Famous animal" is unnecessary. Syced (talk) 12:54, 16 February 2018 (UTC)
Necessary item?
[edit]There was discussion at Wikidata:Requests_for_deletions/Archive/2022/12/14#Q26401003 Estopedist1 (talk) 07:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- @ChristianKl please first reach consensus here, and then RFD may be started if needed Estopedist1 (talk) 07:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- @Estopedist1 Why do you think that this discussion page will see more eyes than an RFD discussion? ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 19:46, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- So let me repeat the case here:
- taxon (Q16521) is second-order class (Q24017414) and that means that individual instances of animals can easily instance of (P31) the right animal without any need for a general item like this.
- Using the specific taxon is the most common modeling. We currently have 659 uses of this and 2101 direct uses of taxon items (okay maybe a bit less because the 2101 counts of lexemes and items). With this modeling being only used in 1/4 of the cases I don't think you can say that there's a precedent for using it over the more common modeling. ChristianKl ❪✉❫ 20:15, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
- Some uses of "P31=some taxon" are strange, see Q17247809. --Infovarius (talk) 12:21, 16 December 2022 (UTC)