Talk:Q9068
Autodescription — Voltaire (Q9068)
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “Voltaire” claims and statements. Constraints report for items data
- Generic queries for authors
This section is generated with {{Generic queries for authors}}.
- List of works written by Voltaire (query)
- List of works authored by Voltaire, ordered by sitelinks (query)
- List of works written by Voltaire with instance of property (query)
- List of written works he/she has authored with genre property (query)
- Timeline of Voltaire (query)
- Narrative location of works written by Voltaire (query)
- Map of narrative location of works written by Voltaire (query)
- List of co-authors, sorted by number of collaborations (query)
- Graph of co-authors (query)
- See also : Synia#author : Voltaire
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Proposing to delete "Incarnation of" with the value "demon"[edit]
What was that? Voltaire was a secular thinker, and I did not make the effort to research why a certain Jean-Baptiste Fiard and an Anne Louise Germaine de Staël - which were cited as source for this "information" - might have once said that one of the greatest philosophers of the age of enlightenment, being the symbol of reason, would be somehow related to a non-existant, mythological, highly undefined "something" as a demon. At best, it was then an opinion or part of a smear campaign against Voltaire. If it was meant, when said or written, as some kind of positive attribute (e.g., "Voltaire was like the demon of reason" or similar), then it is way too complex for Wikidata, because the complexity cannot be transported to the reader. Pittigrilli (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Addition: Just saw that the entry has an undeletable status, and that the entry as a whole is actually meant (opposite to what I understood) to mean the opposite, i.e. to tell that the complete information about that "demon" issue is wrong. Now, the latter intention failed massively with me, I think this is not a good way to deal with this issue. Probably, this entry has a history... I may add that the people active here on Wikidata certainly KNOW that a demon does not exist, but I also add that there are indeed people believing (sic) in such things, which will tend to heavily misunderstand/misinterpret this entry. Pittigrilli (talk) 17:07, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Don't you see "reason for deprecation: superstition"? Matlin (talk) 18:32, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
- Yes I do. Your answer, however, shows that you entirely missed my elaborately described main point (understandably for a person which is supposedly 100% reasonable.) The point is: 1) The overall message is ambiguous at best - who judged that V. would be a demon, and who judged that this would be superstition? Himself? The Wikidata author? The two cited french people? See my point? 2) MUCH more important though: I know (mea culpa) a very small number of (not generically stupid) people who actually do believe in things like demons etc. Now what happens if one of them sees this entry? He (NOT me, the writer) thinks sth. like: "Oh interesting..." and then: "Oh yeah, some un-knowing poor human wrote "superstition" on the side - well, I don't care, there is probably some truth to it, because these things exist..."
- Expressed differently: Instead of making a fat and strong DELETE, the Wikidata indirectly honors some superstitious person some 100 years ago, because his/her NONSENSE is conservated here kind of forever. See my point? See the irony with Voltaire? DELETE, I shout...;-) Pittigrilli (talk) 18:59, 27 January 2021 (UTC)