Talk:Q30061600
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Autodescription — undead in a work of fiction (Q30061600)
description: undead appearing in a work of fiction
- Useful links:
- View it! – Images depicting the item on Commons
- Report on constraint conformation of “undead in a work of fiction” 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)
- ⟨
undead in a work of fiction⟩ on wikidata tree visualisation (external tool)(depth=1) - Generic queries for classes
- See also
- This documentation is generated using
{{Item documentation}}.
What do you mean by fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) undead (Q239872)? Do you suppose that can be undead (Q239872) in real world? Infovarius (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC
- Ok, from this perspective property fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) is really unfortunate.
- I used fictional deity (Q17624054) as a template for linking the fictional (in this context meaning "not assumed to exist") correspondents of classes of assumed entities (gods, ghosts, undead...) to their "real-world" counterparts (objects of real-world belief systems like folklore, religion, non-science). And fictional deity (Q17624054) is linked via fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) to deity (Q178885).
- If you suppose that a class another class is a fictional analogon of must have instances existing in the real world (at any time), this becomes weird, of course.
- When I used fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) undead (Q239872) I was rather thinking of undead (Q239872) and their subclasses (ghoul (Q208446), vampire (Q46721)) as "real" in the meaning that they are part of a real-world belief system in opposition to subclasses of undead in a work of fiction (Q30061600) (ghoul (Q5557475), lich (Q1165928)) with no roots in folklore. In this vein undead in a work of fiction (Q30061600) is a fictional analogon of undead (Q239872) because they're similar regarding their fundamental idea (deceased ones behaving as if alive) but different in that the one is somehow believed in and the other one not.
- I admit that this works better with fictional deity (Q17624054) as the act of worship and belief is also essential for fictional gods. (Fictional gods are a fictional analogy of gods because they are believed in in a fictional world, not in the real world). For fictional undead it is rather seldom essential that they are believed in in their fictional world. Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2017 (UTC)