Talk:Q29838881
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — stag (Q29838881)
description: male deer
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “stag” 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)
- ⟨
stag⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
Age?Properties?[edit]
And what age is this male? Still a baby or an adult? With horns or without?--Fractaler (talk) 18:20, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- adult. - Brya (talk) 19:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- "male organism" is only "adult"? --Fractaler (talk) 12:35, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- adult. - Brya (talk) 19:33, 28 December 2017 (UTC)
- That is a different question, belonging with Q44148. But I suppose "male organism" is only "adult". - Brya (talk) 17:32, 29 December 2017 (UTC)
- I agree that P31 deer (Q29838690)/male organism (Q44148) is rather odd. This item does certainly not represent an individual animal, but a concept that applies to many animals (so P279 should be correct).
- sex or gender (P21) should be used only on individual organisms. According to Property_talk:P21#Documentation P279 can be used on groups of the same gender. I found no hint how to deal with classes of animals distinguished by sex. I can imagine to use P21 also then, but this should be probably discussed and recorded on the property's talk page (man (Q8441) is currently using both, P21 and P279, woman (Q467) only P21). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:27, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- Given that Infovarius has shown himself to be opposed to both P31 and P279, the argument so far is messy anyway. The item does not represent a class of animals but a concept about an animal. - Brya (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- Please don't lie: I don't oppose to P279. Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- OK. I see that you did not; you made so many reverts that you had me confused. - Brya (talk) 18:18, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- Please don't lie: I don't oppose to P279. Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- Given that Infovarius has shown himself to be opposed to both P31 and P279, the argument so far is messy anyway. The item does not represent a class of animals but a concept about an animal. - Brya (talk) 11:44, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- The history of this item shows a strong preference for P279. The item represents a concept which extension is a set of animals (I would call it "class", for short) - it makes sense to say about an entity "this is a stag". If nobody opposes I'll just change P31 deer (Q29838690) back to P279 deer (Q29838690). I'm not sure where to put male organism (Q44148) - both P21 and P279 are used in similar cases - but P31 seems wrong here, too. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:44, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Valentina.Anitnelav: Full support from me. You need just to assure Brya and Succu. --Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- Full support for sex or gender (P21)? I disagree using instance of (P31), but claiming subclass of (P279) makes no sense to me too, Infovarius. It's the same like declaring all green things to be a subclass of green. --Succu (talk) 22:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- It was full support for P279. Interesting note about green, but I regarded the statement as "male deer is a subclass of male organism". Labels are such. --Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- So anything called e.g. „Rudolph“ (a Rangifer tarandus (Q39624)) constitues a subclass relationship of its own, because it's male? --Succu (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- Each single "Rudolph" is not a subclass, why do you say so? It can be P31=Q29838881 and hence P31=male organism. --Infovarius (talk) 13:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
- So anything called e.g. „Rudolph“ (a Rangifer tarandus (Q39624)) constitues a subclass relationship of its own, because it's male? --Succu (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- It was full support for P279. Interesting note about green, but I regarded the statement as "male deer is a subclass of male organism". Labels are such. --Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
- Full support for sex or gender (P21)? I disagree using instance of (P31), but claiming subclass of (P279) makes no sense to me too, Infovarius. It's the same like declaring all green things to be a subclass of green. --Succu (talk) 22:36, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- @Valentina.Anitnelav: Full support from me. You need just to assure Brya and Succu. --Infovarius (talk) 13:13, 3 January 2018 (UTC)
- There is doe (Q46643175) (deer, female organism, adult). "Deer, male organism, adult" must also be. The question is, what item is it? --Fractaler (talk) 09:59, 3 January 2018 (UTC)