Wikidata talk:WikiProject Narration

From Wikidata
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Odysseus and the sirens (Q57083124)

[edit]

Valentina.Anitnelav and all, could you check (the instance of (P31) of) Odysseus and the sirens (Q57083124)? And how to describe its relationship to Odyssey (Q35160) as its (first) appearance? --Marsupium (talk) 18:20, 8 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting finding, Marsupium. Using story (Q217086) here seems a bit of a stretch, as it is normally used for the supposed whole chain of events behind a (complete) narration and Odysseus and the sirens (Q57083124) refers only to a part of it. I am not aware of a "canonical" term for this kind of narrative element and I would just create a new item called in English "narrative segment" (I found the term in this article: Towards Annotating Narrative Segments), in German "Handlungsabschnitt", unless somebody else has a better idea. Additionally I would add motif (Q1229071).
To indicate the relationship to the Odyssee first appearance (P4584) could be fitting. It is originally intended for characters, but I see no reason for not using it for this kind of thing (probably the German label has to be adjusted, then). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 06:34, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Valentina.Anitnelav, vielen lieben Dank für Deine Antwort! I'm disposed to follow all that advice!
  • As to the German label of first appearance (P4584): What about simply swapping your German label and alias?
  • We should we add story (Q217086) – and the item for "narrative segment" to the subject type constraint (Q21503250) of first appearance (P4584), no?
  • What subclass of (P279) should the item for "narrative segment" get? And it should get part of (P361)story (Q217086), right? (Other examples btw are these Shahnameh scenes (links to Commons categories, I haven't created items for them (yet)): Guruy executes Siyavush, Faramarz slays Varazad and Giv kills Tazhav. I think we can or even should have a whole lot of them when we get into more detail in literature in visual arts content description.)
Thank you, --Marsupium (talk) 14:20, 9 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Marsupium, after having these other examples I changed my mind: I think that these are best modelled as mythical event (Q24336466) (or fictional occurrence (Q14136353) for non-mythology-cases). Odysseus and the sirens (Q57083124) does not show its "eventiness" in the label/title (there is no action indicated) but it can be modelled as an event, too (Odysseus encountering and overcoming the Sirens). This would yield a much simpler model. I changed the labels/descriptions and constraints at first appearance (P4584) to cover all fictional/mythical entities.
To stay consistent with the modeling of fictional events in other storyworlds (e.g. War of Wrath (Q538499) from Tolkien's Legendarium) we should probably use participant (P710) or significant person (P3342) instead of characters (P674) to link to Odysseus. Apparently this could also be used to link to siren (Q150986). They seem to be a fixed group of (later named) characters. But then the item siren (Q150986) does not represent them as such in its labels and descriptions. Maybe one should create a new item to explicitly refer to them as a group and not as a mythical (type of) creature. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:11, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot for the help and edits! mythical event (Q24336466) sounds good! I've used participant (P710) now. With those creature type/group items I'm not too familiar. I'll leave that for another one or another time :-) --Marsupium (talk) 12:49, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

is Monster of the Week a genre or a class?

[edit]

should I link Monster of the Week (Q72607030) to a story using the genre (P136) or the instance of (P31) property? --Loominade (talk) 10:31, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer genre (P136) here. I could not find a source that calls Monster of the Week (Q72607030) a genre, but somehow it is a category based on thematic criteria. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:59, 15 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

fictional occupations that are real occupations

[edit]

@Jul-Ar:

Valentina.Anitnelav Thierry Caro Shisma Arlo Barnes Tsaorin SilentSpike Maxime জয়শ্রীরাম সরকার Wolverène Rampant Spirit Rtnf dseomn lijil

Notified participants of WikiProject Narration

so Alfred Pennyworth (Q159051)s occupation (P106) is valet (Q13472752). But his occupation is also secretary (Q76451097). So he has some real and some fictional occupations.

What does that imply? Is he a fictional type of secretary that has no real life equivalent like a space pirate (Q898031) or vampire hunter (Q1058307), lets say a vampire space secretary. Shouldn't that be a subclass of secretary (Q76451097)?

Or should we create fictional analogues for every subclass of profession (Q28640) that a fictional character might have? I think that adds some unnessesary complexety to queries.

I'd propose using subclasses of fictional profession (Q17305127) only with instance of (P31) and not with occupation (P106) unless the occupation only exists in fiction. what do you think? --Loominade (talk) 16:37, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's pretty interesting to read through the conversations from when fictional entities were first data-modelled. Basically, it was agreed that the separation need only exist when fictionality cannot be inferred from context; saying someone is a real secretary is not a problem when it is easy to see that they are a fictional character. Arlo Barnes (talk) 21:12, 10 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that instances of fictional occupation should only be created if there is no analogue in the real world. Generally I would not use fictional profession (Q17305127) with instance of (P31). If it is useful to indicate an occupation via a fictional occupation I would use occupation (P106). If it is not useful to indicate an occupation via a fictional occupation (because this occupation exists in the real world) I would rather merge this item into the real occupation (probably deleting all labels) if there is no Wikipedia article. I'm not completely sure what to do with items for occupations in fiction with a Wikipedia article, like fictional detective (Q3656924).- Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:14, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

why don't we regard fictional professions as subclasses of fictional character (Q95074)? Example:

Sherlock Holmes (Q4653)
instance of (P31) fictional detective (Q3656924)
occupation (P106) detective (Q842782)

--Loominade (talk) 11:38, 11 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To me it is like indicating occupations of real persons via instance of (P31). It is possible to say that x is a worker but there is already a dedicated property for that. I think it suffices to just state Sherlock Holmes (Q4653) occupation (P106) detective (Q842782). The instance of (P31) fictional detective (Q3656924) is not really needed (and the instance of (P31) section is already quite crammed for some characters). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Valentina.Anitnelav: but it is a helpful shortcut for queries. --Shisma (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Shisma: I fear that it makes some queries more complicated. E.g. to get an overview about occupations in fictional characters one would then need to query both for occupations indicated via occupation (P106) <occupation> and for occupations indicated via instance of (P31) <fict. occupation>. <fict. occupation> instance of (P31) fictional activity (Q32859534); fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) <occuption>. You can't presume that people always express the same fact in both ways. On the other hand I would probably not delete instance of (P31) <fict. occupation> statements but check if this fact is also expressed via occupation (P106). Maybe one could set up a query monitoring items with instance of (P31) <fict. occupation> but without occupation (P106) <occupation>... - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jul-Ar: It seems that you prefer to create new items for occupations of fictional characters (e.g. maid (Q76451740), butler (Q76451848)). Do you think this is necessary? There are some concerns that it makes a lot of additional unnecessary work. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:53, 15 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Jul-Ar: does't seem to receive notifications. what should we do now? --Loominade (talk) 13:18, 20 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I support nominating these items for deletion. @Germartin1:--Trade (talk) 11:14, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Personally, I think we should use "schoolteacher" and not "fictional schoolteacher", etc. as occupation. --- Jura 11:24, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Came across this in the wild and found the discussion here, I agree that extra items for these "fictional" occupations don't make sense. A character being fictional tells us nothing about whether their occupation is also fictional (unless you're conflating the instance and class). Police officer is a real occupation, teacher is a real occupation, etc. The only edge cases I could see are fictional universes where a "police officer" is something different to the real occupation in which case it makes sense to have a separate item for that. --SilentSpike (talk) 14:19, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @J 1982:, sorry, I just noticed that you created some of the items in question and that you had not been pinged. I started to merge some of the (supposedly) fictional occupations following this discussion. Is it okay with you or did we overlook some important aspects where these items could be useful? Regards, - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Shisma: Is this item needed apart from spacecraft commander (Q11077692) or could they simply be merged (the fictional or mythical analog of (P1074) statement was not present at creation so maybe the analogue item has not been found, then). Is it actually an analogue in the strict sense or does it differ from the real profession? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:44, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late response. I'm not an expert but 'captain' implies a naval tradtion, which is prevalent in star trek. Ship captains also perform wedding ceremonies and act as judges. Spaceship commanders don't have these duties (yet). I'd argue it has no analogue in the real world. But i also don't oppose merging. Shisma (talk) 09:41, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done. Some items can (should) not be merged because either 1) they are linked to an article or 2) they have subclasses that are purely fictional (e.g. fictional law enforcement officer (Q61750569) has auror (Q1050486)). I think we can keep the latter for the purpose of structuring fictional occupations, but they should not be used along with occupation (P106). I added them as a none-of constraint (Q52558054) with the real occupation as replacement value [1]. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:58, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When real and imaginary worlds conflict

[edit]

What is this project's guidance when a property has a valid value from both a real-world and in-narrative perspective? (Apologies if I've missed an FAQ -- I'm an en.wikipedia vet but quite new to Wikidata.) For example, manufacturer (P176) for USS Enterprise-D (Q845684) could be both Industrial Light & Magic (Q746676) and Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards (Q3655759). I've read the thread above and elsewhere in the project's space about the premise that it's okay to attach a "real world" property (e.g. date of birth or manufacturer) to a fictional device so long as it's fictional-ness is established. But I'm fuzzy on a case like this. Would the best course in this instance to say under manufacturer (P176) both 1) Industrial Light & Magic (Q746676) of (P642) physical model (Q11784425) and 2) Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards (Q3655759) present in work (P1441) Star Trek: The Next Generation (Q16290)? Am I missing a property that is in-narrative specific (I could imagine the utility but that doesn’t seem to be the model adopted here)? Something else? If the answer is “Yes to all three,” I’d appreciate any guidance on this specific example to help me generalize in future cases.

Alternatively, or relatedly, is there a threshold (beyond Notability) or are there examples when an element of fiction has a separate entry from, say, it's real-world production source -- in other words, any guidance or experience around whether it would conceivably make sense to have an entry for the make-believe spaceship Enterprise and a separate item for its production model, linked with some “X is the same as or connected to Y in Z way” properties?

Any and all insight and feedback appreciated. --EEMIV (talk) 23:41, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

just a small comment. physical models can also have entities:
Starship Enterprise (Q63762231) (this one is an exhibit) → depicts (P180) → USS Enterprise (Q834003)
at least in your example case that approach would be more appropriate, since there are multiple scale models as well as cgi models. not all made by ILM--Shisma (talk) 13:18, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is no guideline for this case, yet (a similar case would be Pinocchio (Q6502703), who has a real creator (Carlo Collodi) and a fictional creator (Gepetto)). Probably it would be a good idea to define a set of properties for fictional entities that can be only used for real-world facts (e.g. creator (P170), contributor to the creative work or subject (P767))) and a set of properties that should be only used for in-narrative facts.
In your case I could imagine to use contributor to the creative work or subject (P767) Industrial Light & Magic (Q746676) with qualifiers object of statement has role (P3831) model builder (Q47498464) (maybe there is a better value) and manufacturer (P176) Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards (Q3655759) as manufacturer (P176) is usually used for the in-narrative manufacturer.
I already created items for models: Bruce The Shark (Q76825159) was nominated for a Golden Raspberry Award for Worst Actor and so I created an item for this model as there is some kind of structural need to express this fact. I see some value in creating items for props/models/miniatures. Often they have their own history and you can find them in museums. One could even think about creating an own WikiProject about this topic. To link the model to the fictional object manifestation of (P1557) comes to my mind. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:45, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I also like Shismas idea to use depicts (P180) in order to link between model and fictional entity. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:48, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry I'm a bit late to this discussion, but for my own uses I made Watsonian–Doylist dichotomy (Q96102788) so that the two parts of that could be used with 'statement is subject of'; does that help in these cases? Arlo Barnes (talk) 21:46, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

narrative location (P840) vs set in environment (P8411)

[edit]

Hello,

This was raised by @Trade:: should heaven (Q4489450) and hell (Q564) be used with narrative location (P840) or set in environment (P8411)? The constraints will allow both (as fictional location (Q3895768)).

Thanks, Jean-Fred (talk) 09:37, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say set in environment (P8411) is for general types of locations (desert/underwater/jungle, etc.), while narrative location (P840) is for specific locations. On one hand, there's the stereotypical depictions of heaven as a place with white, fluffy clouds and white lights; and hell as the volcanic hellscape of fire and brimstone. Which are kind of generic settings, I guess. But on the other hand, many works also depict both places in various other ways. Hell might be depicted as dark caves, a swamp or Downtown L.A, while heaven might be a friendly neighborhood or a bright, generic place that isn't necessarily in the clouds. Which means that heaven/hell doesn't always refer to a specific kind of environment.
TV Tropes (Q2537428) for example has entries for both the general topics Heaven and Hell, but also separate pages for the more specific depictions Fluffy Cloud Heaven and Fire and Brimstone Hell. So maybe a solution would be to use heaven (Q4489450) and hell (Q564) for narrative location (P840) (unless the version of this work/universe has it's own item) and create items for the "fluffy cloud" version of heaven and "fire and brimstone hellscape" hell to use with set in environment (P8411) for works that depict heaven/hell that way. --Kam Solusar (talk) 14:58, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jean-Frédéric, Trade, Kam Solusar: I think heaven (Q4489450) and hell (Q564) should use set in environment (P8411). According to the description and the Wikipedia articles I checked these items rather deal with general concepts present in several religions/mythologies - not with a specific place or a specific notion in a specific mythology or religion (as opposed to Shamayim (Q63105482) or Heaven in Christianity (Q5694585)). I would also delete fictional location (Q3895768) from both of them. I plan to clean up the uses in narrative location (P840) and will have a closer look at heaven (Q4489450) and hell (Q564), then. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:13, 5 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Simpsons Alter Ego

[edit]

I created an item for one of the Alter Ego's that Bart Simpsons used when prank calling Moe Szyslak. How should i model the relationship between an alter ego and the person using it? I. P. Freely (Q102381105). @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 09:17, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Tough question. For real persons and their personas/alter egos performer (P175) is used (see Borat Sagdiyev (Q5651141) or Ziggy Stardust (Q2465713)) but for a fictional persona/role this could be also used for the real-world (voice) actor (which would be probably Nancy Cartwright). On the other hand one could argue that the performer of a fictional role must be a fictional person - so Nancy Cartwright would be the performer of Bart performing as I. P. Freely.
So in the end I would nevertheless tend to use performer (P175), to keep things consistent with the modelling of real-world entities. There is also persona in a work of fiction (Q65048168) which could be used for I.P. Freely to distinguish it from real-world-personas.
Just for documentation purposes, as I collect cases like this (somewhen a subpage may be useful): This is somehow related to the question above Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Narration#When_real_and_imaginary_worlds_conflict where a fictional entity can have a real-world creator and an in-narrative creator (e.g. Collodi - Pinocchio vs. Gepetto - Pinocchio or the inital expample of USS Enterprise-D (Q845684) - Industrial Light & Magic (Q746676) and USS Enterprise-D (Q845684) - Utopia Planitia Fleet Yards (Q3655759)) or the Beedle-the-Bard issue (the author of The Tales of Beedle the Bard (Q43050278) (as a fictional book) is current Beedle the Bard (Q15273054) and not J. K. Rowling). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:21, 27 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leisure Suit Larry 4: The Missing Floppies (Q1118622)

[edit]

'Leisure Suit Larry 4: The Missing Floppies is the name for a never-made fourth installment, often regarded as an in-joke. The name, used by official sources and fans, refers to rumors that the reason for the cancellation of the game was the losing of the game's original production floppies, after which the developers refused to remake the game from scratch. Other sources claim that it was nothing but an internal office prank.[6] The franchise's installments were numbered as if this installment had been published; the actual fourth installment was Leisure Suit Larry 5: Passionate Patti Does a Little Undercover Work.' I am not sure how this should be modelled in the item? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 10:36, 4 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: To me this looks fine. I just changed the qualifier of instance of (P31) video game (Q7889) from has characteristic (P1552) to nature of statement (P5102). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:04, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I undid my change: nature of statement (P5102) canon (Q53815) is probably better suited for statements about the narrative world - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:09, 5 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Localized Titles

[edit]

How would you rather record translated/localized titles? Here are my proposals:

  1. record all titles with title (P1476) and mark the original title as Preferred rank preferred.
  2. record translated titles under a separate property.
  3. record the original title under a separate property.
  4. record translated titles under name (P2561).
  5. record all translations of a work under a separate entity with its own title (P1476).

any other ideas?

Valentina.Anitnelav Thierry Caro Shisma Arlo Barnes Tsaorin SilentSpike Maxime জয়শ্রীরাম সরকার Wolverène Rampant Spirit Rtnf dseomn lijil

Notified participants of WikiProject Narration --Shisma (talk) 20:14, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, that last option is the recommended way right now, correct? That is, the 'work' item uses the title of the first edition in the original language, and the 'edition' items (including manuscript if any) use their own titles? Arlo Barnes (talk) 21:40, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know. Who recommended it when and why? Shisma (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the model chosen for books (works vs. editions) and also in practice for audiovisual works (Wikidata:WikiProject_Movies/Properties#Core_properties vs. Wikidata:WikiProject_Movies/Properties#Synchronisation). title (P1476) on the work item should hold the original title and every edition/localization should use title (P1476) for the title of the edition. When it comes to adding information about the translated/dubbed/localized version of a work (e.g. voice actors of the dubbing, translator, director of the dubbing, etc) it is better to create an own item than to add everything to the original item with some sort of qualifier.
Apart from that I like your second approach to just add the localized title where an own item may seem a bit over the top. It is certainly better than the current occasional use of has characteristic (P1552) (see Q2345#P1552). title (P1476) currently has the constraint single-best-value constraint (Q52060874) so it actually allows your first approach. But this was added only recently, there may be some (strong) opposition in some WikiProjects (WikiProject Books, WikiProject Movies) and I'm not even sure if they are aware of it. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:15, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Just because an anime television show have a localised title it does not necessarily mean that it have been dubbed into the language of said title. Anime subs are quite common. @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)-[reply]

Okay, my assumption was, that the Work entity should hold all titles of all Editions with preference given to the original title. My use case are TV Episodes like オレは男だ! らんま中国へ帰る? These might not even have distinct Editions in certain languages in languages they have titles for--Shisma (talk) 15:38, 8 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, there are some thoughts about this issue in Cataloguing Practices in the Age of Linked Open Data: Wikidata and Wikibase for Film Archives published in FIAF web (Film Archives) by Adelheid Heftberger and Paul Duchesne, june 2020.

Thoughts on dubbing of television series (Q104217129), dubbing of television series episode (Q104217120) and dubbing of anime television series episode (Q104217105)? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 20:16, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: To me it looks like dubbing of anime television series episode (Q104217105) is not really needed as the same information could be provided by dubbing of television series episode (Q104217120). (The dubbing is not really dependent on the form of the medium (live-action/animation)). I actually think that we need only one item for audiovisual works. But then I did not do much work on TV series/episodes/anime series, etc and I do not know all its pitfalls. I think that this should be best discussed in Wikidata:WikiProject_Movies and/or Wikidata:WikiProject_Anime_and_Manga. Possibly Tsaorin could help, too. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 21:51, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is a difference knowing that a show have been dubbed into a another language and then also having information on the dubbing of an individual episode.--Trade (talk) 10:57, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you are right. I would just use P31: "dubbing of audiovisual work" for both, the dubbing of the series and the dubbing of the episode. So you would have:
I would also apply these to films. With respect to literary works version, edition or translation (Q3331189) does also cover all sorts of forms - short stories, short story collections, novels, comic books, etc. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:31, 18 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property/Properties for plot types, plot conventions and plot devices

[edit]
Valentina.Anitnelav Thierry Caro Shisma Arlo Barnes Tsaorin SilentSpike Maxime জয়শ্রীরাম সরকার Wolverène Rampant Spirit Rtnf dseomn lijil

Notified participants of WikiProject NarrationI think we need a property for plot types (e.g. marriage plot, quest), plot conventions and plot devices (Some time ago I started to collect some I found in Wikidata here: Plot elements and devices). Actually I think we need two properties as I can't think of a property that is "elegantly" applicable to both plot types and plot conventions and plot devices, as a plot type is rather the general categorization of a given plot while plot conventions and plot devices are rather elements used to build this type of plot. My thought now (that could be definitely improved) is of two properties. <plot type> and <uses plot convention or plot device>. Any thoughts about that? Did maybe somebody already try to model these kinds of things? Did I miss other interesting aspects? I'm also pinging @Wallacegromit1: as we touched upon this topic only recently. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:18, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Would the Aarne–Thompson–Uther classification system (Q301545) numbered/named folktale archetypes for instance be included? We have Aarne–Thompson–Uther Tale Type Index (P2540) as a property for individual tales but it is just an external ID (edit: and one currently deadlinked at that), not very semantic-data-nature currently. Arlo Barnes (talk) 23:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to have an own, dedicated property for the relationship between folktale archetypes and folktales... That would also solve my Stoff (stoff (Q42109240))-problem (see here: Wikidata:WikiProject_Narration#Main_themes,_literary_themes_and_narrative_motifs). Could we maybe have a property like "story archetype" or "story type", similar to "character type"? This does not need to be restricted to folktales, but could include other Stoff like Romeo and Juliet story (Q13188825) or other "legends" or oral tales that appear in different versions.
I would not like to use one property for marriage plot (Q6772896) and Cinderella (Q11841) as these are different things (plot types are much more general, while stoff (Q42109240) is already distinguished by a (fluid) set of motifs, characters and events). But I admit that I see that we will probably not get both, a plot type property and a story archetype/story type property (for most people the difference will not be that striking as to me) - so I will start to get acquainted to the idea to use one property for both. It is certainly better than to have none :). We could work with a good class structure to make it possible to query only for Stoff or folktale types and exlude all plot types. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Property for seasons, months, holidays and other recurring events a work is set in

[edit]

I'm thinking about proposing a property similar to "set in environment" but for significant time-related events; e.g. seasons (spring, winter), holidays (e.g. christmas, easter), months (e.g. april). I just can't think of a good title :). Does somebody have an idea? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So as set in environment (P8411) was set up as the class-y version of the instance-y property narrative location (P840), so the proposal would be to establish a counterpart for set in period (P2408) and date depicted (P2913)? Maybe then 'set during recurring event' which fits your examples, and encourage translators to revise 'set in period' descriptions and labels to better clarify the difference (perhaps 'set during historical event'?).Arlo Barnes (talk) 23:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I will propose it using "set during recurring event" as soon as at least one of our character related properties is ready. Surprisingly there is little misapplication of set in period (P2408) to seasons or months when I last checked, unlike set in period (P2408). Nevertheless we should definitely have a look at descriptions and encourage people to clarify them. We should also consider Wikidata usage instructions (P2559). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Done: set during recurring event (P9215) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:56, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Property for video game stats

[edit]

How should stats such as movement speed, health, damage, firing speed, range, reload speed, magazine capacity, recoil, weapon spread, ADS time, XP value, point value be modelled when it comes to video game characters and weapons? @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 00:54, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: I think this should be discussed in Wikidata:WikiProject_Video_games. Any decision would be fine with me. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:12, 6 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Something a bit more relevant here: On Special Ridden (Q104713404) should i use class of fictional entities or group of fictional characters as an instance? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 12:31, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: I think both could be reasonable (I don't know this game; this is only based on the fandom articles linked to the items). I mostly use "group of fictional characters" for a collection of potentially enumerable characters. For species-like entities class of fictional entities seems to be more appropriate. They actually seem to me species-like (they are introduced as a "variant" of Common Infected). In this case I would make The Ridden (Q104385217) a class, too and Special Ridden (Q104713404) and Common Ridden (Q104388969) a subclass of The Ridden (Q104385217). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 18:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)edit:strike through as this was already the case - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On Bruisers (Q104390611) should i list his attack (Melee Slam (Q104698489)) as a superhuman feature or ability (P2563) or uses (P2283)? Maybe it's time to split up superhuman feature or ability (P2563) into a new subproperty dedicated to in-narrative attacks and abilities that have unique names. And what about Cleaners (Q104764845)? At what point does a fictional profession or occupation also become a fictional group of characters? @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 00:58, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

applsdev Arlo Barnes BugWarp Coloradohusky CommanderKefir CptViraj Cupkake4Yoshi Cwf97 Cynde Moya Danrok Datumizer Dexxor Diggr Dispenser Dollarsign8 DoublePendulumAttractor EdoAug Edolusill Eniehack Facenapalm Floyd-out FullyAwesome Harshrathod50 Jean-Frédéric Keplersj Kirilloparma Lewis Hulbert LotsofTheories Macocobovi Macrike Master Of Ninja Matthias M. Metafire18 Nicereddy Odjob16 Oduci Poslovitch Rampagingcarrot RampantSpirit Santer Sight Contamination SuperUltraHardCoreGamer - Joined to add things about Steam Deck verified/playable titles. Skills: Basic editing. thgiex Tomodachi94 VGPaleontologist Wd-Ryan WikiSyn YotaMoteuchi Athayahisyam

Notified participants of WikiProject Video games

Airon90 Julián L. Páez MGChecker Tris T7 TT me Tris T7 (talk) OmegaFallon Lewis Hulbert (talk) Benpiano800 ...

Notified participants of WikiProject Pokémon

@Trade: I think that it would be better to have an own property for attacks (pinging Project Video games and Pokémon for their opinion).
As to "at what point does a fictional profession or occupation also become a fictional group of characters": I generally think that this is not that clear-cut and would rather have to be decided on a case-by-case basis. Maybe one question could be if they would consider themselves as a group, e.g. by their individual relationship (friendship), their goal or shared identity (e.g. would they say "we are the Cleaners"?). With reference to the fandom article Cleaners Cleaners (Q104764845) looks fine, to me; you have a group of characters that is mainly based on their goal/occupation 'zombie hunter'. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:09, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
In the Dead Rising series the game uses the term 'Psychopaths' as a way to refer to the minibosses but the name is never actually used ingame by any of the characters. --Trade (talk) 12:14, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think this counts, too. In this case the game refers to them as group. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

What's the correct 'language spoken* to use on character who only communicated through incoherent screaming, crying and verbal utterances? 'language'? I'm using the bird-like character Coco as an example. @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 08:07, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: I think I would use no value/some value in this case. If they are thought to communicate verbally but the language is unknown (there is also no fictional language) some value, if they are thought to not communicate verbally at all no value. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:28, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Wait, how do you use some value? Never heard that one before. --Trade (talk) 09:33, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I mean unknown value. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 22:58, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Which instance of (P31) do you think makes most sense? this or this? @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 12:29, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Unfortunately I have zero knowledge about rifles... so I really don't know. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

borderline cases for narrative role (P5800)/character type (P9071)

[edit]
Valentina.Anitnelav Thierry Caro Shisma Arlo Barnes Tsaorin SilentSpike Maxime জয়শ্রীরাম সরকার Wolverène Rampant Spirit Rtnf dseomn lijil

Notified participants of WikiProject Narration

I started to move information from narrative role (P5800) to character type (P9071). But I encountered some borderline cases where I'm not completely sure where to put them. For that reason I would like to know your opinion.

narrative role (P5800)

[edit]

This property should hold character categories that refer to their function in the story or for story telling

roles with respect to the character's position in the story and/or importance to the story

roles with respect to the character's function in storytelling

roles with respect to characterizations:

other aspects:

Unsure with tendency to narrative role (P5800)

[edit]

roles with respect to the character's position in the story/relationship to the protagonist:

Unsure

[edit]

Unsure with tendency to character type (P9071)

[edit]

character type (P9071)

[edit]

character categories that refer to certain characteristics of a character (e.g. archetypes or stereotypes):

What do you think? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:21, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are emo (Q934451) and Goth (Q212954) considered character types? @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 16:31, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: I don't think so. I would rather use movement (P135) or lifestyle (P1576). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:04, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hero (Q162244) and supervillain (Q6498903) are both marked as occupation (Q12737077) rather than stock character (Q636497). And should occupations be banned from being used as a value of character type? What gives? --Trade (talk) 08:17, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is hero (Q25535646) for the type. supervillain (Q6498903) has both, a type and an occupation. I would say it is a character type whose manifestations can have multiple occupations (at least in the English description it is marked as such), but I see why other people want to use it as an occupation given that superhero is used as an occupation, too, and that there has not been an own property for character types. Generally occupations should be banned, I think (with these two items - super hero and super villain - as exceptions). Unfortunately Wikiproject Comics does not seem very active on Wikidata and there does not seem to be an own collaboration for the superhero genre. Do you know people actively working on Superhero/Supervillain items in Wikidata? We could ask them. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:10, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Can we both agree that hero, villain, supervillain, antihero, antivillain should not be used on instance of (P31)? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 15:37, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Some time ago, i removed the above mentioned items from characters with these occupation. Do you know an easy way to find these contributions so i can re-evaluate them? --Trade (talk) 15:41, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: 1) Yes, I agree 2) No, I don't know, unfortunately. There is Wikidata:History_Query_Service but it is down, right now. I would not bother too much about it. As long as it is stated as either an occupation (occupation (P106)) or a character type (character type (P9071)) it is fine, I think. You can query it using (wdt:P106|wdt:P9071) - all superheros in Wikidata . If there should be a decision we can move all statements from P106 to P9071 (or the other way round). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:12, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that brings up the question: Can someone be a superhero character type without necessarily being a superhero of occupation?

I just created enemy type (Q106253710). Thoughts on how it should be used? The subclasses (rusher, suicide bomber) are mainly intended for enemy types who's defined by their sole weapon, attack or characteristic --Trade (talk) 08:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

narrative location (P840) for The Mentalist (Q204228)

[edit]

To add P840 to episodes of The Mentalist, I'm trying to figure out how to add them. The map on the series talk page already includes some.

Narrative location for most episodes is somewhere in California, around Sacramento. Most episodes have a handful locations, some identified on screen, others not.

  • Some of these places actually exists. Sample: Sacramento. Accordingly, I added that as value for P840.
  • others have fictional names, but specify that the place is in California. Sample: Hangtree, California. For that, I added California and specified the name in a qualifier: Q105095404#P840. What do you think?
  • For some of these places, they can be described further: a school, a vineyard, a house. Maybe this can be added with an other qualifier or statement.
  • The main location is CBI headquarters (Q105221674) that appears in most episodes and has probably descriptions elsewhere available. For that one, I made a new item.

BTW, parts of 6 and season 7 are elsewhere. Not that it matters, but filming was generally in or around Burbank, even for places that actually exist somewhere else. --- Jura 14:01, 8 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jura1:
To use object named as (P1932) for cases of fictional places that don't warrant an own item looks fine to me. (I would still encourage creating items also for fictional places)
Are you aware of set in environment (P8411)? This could be used to express that it is set in a school or in a vineyard. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:25, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, but I'm not really sure how to combine them or if I really want to make a simple list of location too complex. For this type production, maybe a monolingual string based list of scenes could be handy. These could be qualified further. --- Jura 18:02, 10 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe time index (P4895) could be an option. This could also be helpful to combine location with time or location with character. I tried out its use based on chapters for literary works. I think this could be used similarly for scenes in TV shows if represented by their number. I'm not sure if there actually exist "canonical" list of scenes. There is the problem that there is not really an "end time index" (so there is this ridiculously long list at Oskar Mazerath just in order to be complete). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 17:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plot element of the week: locked room mystery (Q1141200)

[edit]
illustration for The Murders in the Rue Morgue (Q459667): novella by Edgar Allan Poe

A short list to start: https://w.wiki/3AFL --- Jura 08:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It uses genre (P136)=locked room mystery (Q1141200), please help expand. --- Jura 09:16, 6 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

P1441 usage described here doesn't match property page

[edit]

The usage of present in work (P1441) as a qualifier to restrict statements to specific works is not reflected in the (English at least) description of P1441, nor is there an example showing its usage as such. It's also not part of the original property proposal so I'm curious to know if such usage was agreed by consensus somewhere and if the property should be updated to reflect it? --SilentSpike (talk) 09:44, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@SilentSpike: There was a (very short) exchange about this on the property talk page and nobody opposed: Property_talk:P1441#Use_as_qualifier?. I rather thought of this as an "exceptional use" and I am not sure how widely accepted this is to promote it on the property page. But if you think it might be useful please update the property description. Currently, the use as a qualifier is still restricted to in-narrative-facts. E.g. it should not be used to restrict the contribution of a real artist/author to a certain work. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:42, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

personality trait of fictional character (P9652) values

[edit]

A lot of the have multiple instance of (P31) that are not personality trait (Q2393196). Shouild we split them?

not a personality trait

personality trait and other instances of

--Trade (talk) 11:58, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 14:31, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: My opinion:
1. Items that don't need to be split
Moral qualities: I think the following are fine, as they are an instance of a subclass of personality trait (Q2393196):
Psychopathological symptoms that refer to dispositions:
  • attention seeking (Q2899872): I think we can just add personality trait (Q2393196) to that (it is a personality trait that may be a psychopathological symptom). There could be an own item for attention seeking as a behaviour (at least this is the topic of the en-Wikipedia article)
2. Items with a tendency to split them
Emotions: I think all personality traits that refer to a relatively stable emotional disposition should get their own item as a personality trait, distinct from the emotion.
(Mental) states: I would tend to treat them similar to emotions
  • apathy (Q309406) - psychopathological symptom , health problem -> [apathy]: personality trait characterized by a relatively stable disposition to be apathetic (we can link them using has characteristic (P1552))
3. Items that should be split up
Physical states: All items that (may) refer to a physical state, e.g.
Cultural expressions: To make a difference between the cultural expression (that may vary between cultures) and the (individual) tendency to behave in accordance to that)
4. Items I'm currently unsure about

- Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:29, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 08:37, 18 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade:
1. Items to be split
2. Items that are rather not a personality trait
I think the following concepts do rather not refer to a personality trait
3. Items that could be split up
I think the following could be split up (but this involves probably a bit more work):
4. Items that could stay this way
  • psychopathy (Q366886) - it is rather a personality disorder than a mental disorder (and I would allow personality disorders as values of personality trait)
5. Items that are tricky
  • dark triad (Q1266051) - as this is rather a group of personality
  • loneliness (Q107263352) and loneliness (Q223270) - I'm not sure if loneliness is a personality trait (apart from introversion or "unsociableness' and similar). Maybe one could call it "unsociableness" or "unsociable" and make "lonely/loneliness" and alias? Let's keep it this way.
  • anxiousness (Q107253515) and nervousness (Q1978097)- I'm not sure if nervousness is a personality trait (apart from anxiety and similar). Maybe one could call it "anxiousness" anxiety and make "nervous" an alias?
I will look if I find a good reference as to personality traits. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:56, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Have you seen https://vndb.org/i39? My hope is that every entity here will be linked to a WD item. @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 11:15, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I found "The Wiley Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences". Loneliness has an own entry here - so I guess it merits its own item as a personality trait. (The entry introduces loneliness as a subjective state but then it focuses on issues of prolonged loneliness, putting it into the category of a relatively stable emotional disposition). But we should probably rather use "anxiety" instead of "nervous" as the main label. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 14:53, 19 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If you are in doubt whether or not something is a trait you can try and look it up on https://anidb.net/tag/?do.search=1 @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 20:21, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Swpb: Thoughts? --Trade (talk) 22:07, 21 June 2021 (UTC) @Infovarius: You think we should split up leadership?--Trade (talk) 22:52, 24 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 23:22, 12 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think there should be a description of the personality trait outside of Wikidata. The description does not need to be psychological - personality traits were assigned to persons long before there was a academical or clinical psychology, but may also be one in the field of cultural studies, anthropology, literary studies, or simply "everyday encyclopedias". - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:11, 13 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Does alcoholic (Q9148481) fit with the property? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 23:50, 14 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure. By description it refers to a person and not to a character trait. There is also the possibility to express things using medical condition (P1050) alcoholism (Q15326). I would probably prefer this for characters that are described as having problems with alcohol. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:23, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a bit unsure when to add medical condition (P1050) alcoholism (Q15326) --Trade (talk) 00:08, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
We should add medical condition (P1050) alcoholism (Q15326) only when it is presented as such (e.g. the character having health or mental problems due to alcohol). For other cases we would need something like lifestyle (P1576) tobacco smoking (Q7212330) in the sphere of alcohol. Maybe lifestyle (P1576) alcohol abuse (Q7331102) or lifestyle (P1576) alcohol consumption (Q2647488)? @Trade: - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 09:36, 17 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I can see AniDB have a trait named effeminate. I've already made femininity (Q110672512) to use on a male character so i'm unsure if i should consider them to be the same. @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 00:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Yes, I think they can be considered the same. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 07:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Should empathic, friendliness and kindness be different items? --Trade (talk) 23:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Narrative location and fictious media

[edit]

Full Dive: This Ultimate Next-Gen Full Dive RPG Is Even Shittier than Real Life! (Q103822236) is a light novel series. Most of the series takes place with the protagonist playing an in-universe massively multiplayer online virtual reality game (Q107608170) video game called 'Kiwame Quest' which again takes place in (among others) a place called 'City of Ted'. My question is: Should 'City of Ted' be included as the narrative location of Full Dive: This Ultimate Next-Gen Full Dive RPG Is Even Shittier than Real Life! (Q103822236)? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 21:53, 21 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade:. Yes. You can make it explicit that this is the narrative location of the embedded story using applies to part, aspect, or form (P518) embedded story (Q863900) as a qualifier. I did something similar at [Titanic (1997)] to indicate the time period. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 06:42, 22 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
So it's a fictional video game that exists within in a television show. Should i use television character (Q15773317) on the fictitious characters? @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 00:06, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Trade: Yes. There is also character in a fictitious work (Q87483734). So you can use television character (Q15773317) (as the audience experiences the character through the medium of television) and character in a fictitious work (Q87483734) (to make clear that the character is meant to be fictional in the story world.) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 10:20, 23 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mind chiming in on Topic:Wf4a79ll6c6lbljo?@Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 06:52, 3 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Valentina.Anitnelav: I replied --Trade (talk) 18:08, 4 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Valentina.Anitnelav: Second reply--Trade (talk) 20:53, 6 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Skin colours of fantasy creatures

[edit]

when describing fictional characters, alien races or fantasy creatures, there are a lot of properties to describe physical features of the thing:

Now many fantasy creatures have a particular skin colour: like Blue, Red, Green, Purple. I'm sure I am not the first person thinking about to propose a skin colour property. But what should be the scope of such a property besides fictional character (Q95074)?

There is a standardised way to categorise human skin colours: Fitzpatrick scale (Q2976543), but I personally wouldn't want to assign such a property to real living humans. Perhaps because i feel that in my cultural environment it is considered inappropriate to describe people with the skin colour or ethnic group (P172).

It could be applied to animals or species of animals but I have no idea what exactly constitutes as skin. Are scales a type of skin? is a feather a type of scale? Do fruits have skin colour?

We could also just use this generic way of assigning colours: 

SELECT ?item ?itemLabel ?color ?colorLabel WHERE {
  SERVICE wikibase:label { bd:serviceParam wikibase:language "[AUTO_LANGUAGE],en". }
  ?item p:P462 ?statement.
  ?statement ps:P462 ?color.
  ?statement pq:P518 wd:Q1074.
}
Try it!

any other ideas? Comments? Thoughts? --Shisma (talk) 17:23, 10 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for getting this only now. I also feel a bit uneasy about having a property Fitzpatrick scale (Q2976543). I like your approach to use color (P462) with qualifier applies to part, aspect, or form (P518) skin (Q1074) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Re: constitution of skin -- probably the more species-agnostic concept is integument. Scales are part of a reptile's or fish' integument, for example, and feathers part of a bird's. Fruits don't have integuments but rather rinds. For fictional applications it matters less however, as the best way to model it is just whatever the work presents it as. So despite Zhaan (Q21281074) being described as a plant or plant-descended, she is also referred to as having blue skin (and of course is played by a human actor with blue makeup on her skin). Arlo Barnes (talk) 20:10, 16 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

FMV

[edit]

Should characters who appear in FMV games be considered both video game characters and film characters? @Valentina.Anitnelav:--Trade (talk) 22:38, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: Interesting question. I would rather not consider them film characters but I can't give a good argument why. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:41, 3 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

deadpan (Q1616750)

[edit]

Should we use this item as a genre? It's used as a genre on ENWP @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 01:08, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: rather not. One could think about using has characteristic (P1552) or uses (P2283) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 08:39, 23 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Policy on labeling unnamed characters

[edit]

I made unnamed character (Q109934238) to use as an analogue to silent character (Q21561303) . Thoughts? Should it be used with narrative role (P5800)? Also, how do you feel about the labeling of.

In all three cases, the characters are not named in the credits of their respective works and as such we have to decide on the labels ourself. @Valentina.Anitnelav: --Trade (talk) 18:15, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Trade: I don't think that unnamed character (Q109934238) is really needed - we can just have statements given name (P735)/family name (P734)/birth name (P1477)/name in native language (P1559) set to to unknown value. The labelling of the three cases looks fine. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 19:05, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
If something doesn't have a name a description is generally the label. --- Jura 19:06, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Should we include 'unnamed' in the label? Or is that too obvious? @Jura1:--Trade (talk) 19:14, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe in the description? There is obviously a risk that people just copy it to other languages (e.g. to "nl" at Q22340337 or Q23581940). Personally, I don't mind unnamed character (Q109934238). --- Jura 19:17, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think i should do when the character is the protagonist/player character? 'Protagonist'? 'The Protagonist'? It gets a bit finicky with multiple characters as seen below. @Jura1:--Trade (talk) 19:25, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it depends on the context what to include in the label. --- Jura 19:38, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

date depicted (P2913) vs. set in period (P2408)

[edit]

Only recently I noticed uses of date depicted (P2913) for narrative works and I first started to move these uses to set in period (P2408) as I was a bit worried if we can make a clear difference when to use set in period (P2408) and when date depicted (P2913). set in period (P2408) is commonly used for any time period (no matter if day, decade or year, not just historical periods like Victorian era (Q182688)), so the uses do overlap. After some thought I think that we could actually make use of date depicted (P2913) if we make sure that everything that could be expressed with datatype time should be indicated via date depicted (P2913) (including 1983-08-14, 1983-08, 1983, 1980s, 20th century, etc.) and everything that could not be indicated with datatype time using set in period (P2408). I think one advantage is to make a difference between relatively "neutral" time periods that put a work on a timeline and historical periods and events that put it in a more specific background (geographical region, actions, etc.). There is also the advantage that we don't need to create day/year/decade items for works set in the distant future. Does anybody see disadvantages with this approach? Otherwise I would propose to move all time statements from set in period (P2408) to date depicted (P2913) and document this approach. (If the use of date depicted (P2913) should be rejected for narrative works I will move the remaining date depicted (P2913) statements to set in period (P2408)) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 14:15, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Mith, Kam Solusar: (as two contributors of date depicted (P2913) for narrative works); this could be relevant for narrative projects, too (The Books Narration WikiProject does not exist. Please correct the name. has too many members) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 14:23, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Valentina.Anitnelav interesting. I proposed a similar property back in the days which was rejected because there is narrative location (P840) which can have a time expressed in qualifiers. At least this allows more specific properties like start time (P580), end time (P582), point in time (P585) and even time index (P4895). The disadvantage is of course, that everything needs a location first. But how would you handle narratives that span a lifetime and alike? I mean with a start and end --Shisma (talk) 16:03, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
At the moment I'm just thinking about 1) if we include date depicted (P2913) in our data model for narrations and 2) how to delimit it from set in period (P2408) ^^. I think that date depicted (P2913) could be useful if we restrict set in period (P2408) to items that don't represent time periods (e.g. 1983-08-14, 1983-08, 1983, 1980s, 20th century, etc.) and use date depicted (P2913) in these cases. But I'm not sure if some of the advantages mentioned in the four last sentences above outweigh the disadvantage of possibly more confusions due to more properties. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:14, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are two possibilities to indicate spans: 1) add all time items / times (e.g. 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, 1980s), 2) add a time with less precision (e.g. 20th century) along with start and end date (set in period (P2408)20th century (Q6927)start time (P580)1950s (Q36297)end time (P582)1980s (Q34644) or date depicted (P2913)20th centurystart time (P580)1950send time (P582)1980s) - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:47, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take Bram Stoker's Dracula (Q107325) as an example. Currently there are three set in period (P2408) statements:

set in period (P2408)
Normal rank Victorian era (Q182688) edit
0 references
add reference
Normal rank 1897 (Q7847) edit
0 references
add reference
Normal rank 1462 (Q6546) edit
0 references
add reference
add value

Two of the statements indicate a year, one a historical period.

If we would adopt date depicted (P2913) as a property for narrations we could do something like this:

set in period (P2408)
Normal rank Victorian era (Q182688) edit
0 references
add reference
add value
date depicted (P2913)
Normal rank edit
0 references
add reference
Normal rank edit
0 references
add reference
add value

But I'm not sure if there is an advantage.

One of the items where I first noticed the use of date depicted (P2913) as a property for narrations is Donnie Darko (Q426828). Here it indicated the four dates mentioned in the movie. I moved it to set in period (P2408), then [2]. If we should decide to use date depicted (P2913) for dates and other time periods I would move it back, of course. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 16:30, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Is having to create items about specific dates really such a hassle that we need to use two properties for the narration period? (honest question; I'm not very familiar with how set in period (P2408) is used) Querying the narration period will be more inconvenient if the data is split across two properties. And if you absolutely need a value of datatype time for whatever reason, you can convert a date item into a time value by simply querying its point in time (P585) value—the other way around is less efficient. But most importantly, date depicted (P2913) was never intended to be used for narrative works and I'm not sure whether its non-English labels make sense for narrative works. Dexxor (talk) 17:58, 13 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
By 'narrative' do you here mean 'fictional'? Seems to me like the media examples at the property page convey narratives (of a ship battle and a town). Arlo Barnes (talk) 06:16, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Good catch! When using the term "narrative works" I mainly had fictional works in mind as well as novels based on a true story. Images should always use date depicted (P2913) instead of set in period (P2408). —Dexxor (talk) 17:39, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with you that querying might be more inconvient, especially for people who are not acquainted with the model. But the original description at Wikidata:Property_proposal/date_depicted does include the option to use it for literary works ("The date that is represented in a painting, map or even in a literary work."). The comment "(for narrative works use P2408)" was introduced by me only recently, without previous discussion. So this should be the discussion to decide about its use. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship with WikiProject Fictional Universes

[edit]

I see a lot of overlap. How do you guys see things ? @Valentina.Anitnelav what do you think as creator of this project and listed as contributor in the fictional universe one ? author  TomT0m / talk page 10:57, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there is (Wikidata:WikiProject_Fictional_universes is the first project listed as "related project"). Wikidata:WikiProject_Fictional_universes is about representing fictional universes, this one about elements of narratives. As fictional universes are in large part sustained by narratives they are closely interlinked. But questions about narrative techniques or plot devices are probably less relevant to WikiProject fictional universes (as I read its aim). Questions about modelling a geography or taxonomy of a certain fictional universe probably less relevant to WikiProject narration. I see also an overlap with WikiProjects Movies, Books, Anime and Manga or Computer Games. Apart from the overlap: do you see a problem with this? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Which property to use?

[edit]

which property describes best that fictional character is a rogue AI (Q62992273): a software, computer or robot that has it's own (maybe harmful) agenda. such as HAL 9000 (Q833933), GLaDOS (Q605125) or Auto (Q24879147). Currenty properties such as instance of (P31), manifestation of (P1557), character type (P9071), and character role (P453) are used. What would you use? – Shisma (talk) 16:46, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Shisma! :) character role (P453) is wrong and I don't really like instance of (P31), especially as we have more specialized properties with manifestation of (P1557) and character type (P9071). Of these two I prefer character type (P9071) (it seems more specialized to me, while manifestation of (P1557) is more generic. You made me think if we could model character type (P9071) as a subproperty of manifestation of (P1557). Is it eligible to say that every character of a special character type can be thought to be a manifestation of this character type? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk)

discussion about the use of is an instance of taxon (P10241) for fictional animal items

[edit]

individual of taxon (P10241) exists, now, and may be used for items for fictional animals. I started a discussion about how to use it at Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Fictional_universes#is_an_individual_of_taxon_(P10241)_and_our_current_approach_to_modelling_fictional_instances_of_species. If you have any thoughts about this please join! - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 13:22, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

adventure film character (Q66808903)

[edit]

The use of adventure film character (Q66808903) crossed my watchlist with eg Major Anderson (Q18002419), used as instance of (P31). I don’t really understand this item − isn’t this just a character that happens to show up in a film of the adventure genre, and is thus better expressed with characters (P674)/present in work (P1441)? It seems to only exist for the Wikipedia category (which in its English version literally says “Characters depicted in adventure films.”). Even if this item should exist − some characters show up in vastly different work types (one random example that comes to my mind is Sousuke Sagara (Q1042621) that is the protagonist of both the 'serious' mecha/SF Full Metal Panic *and* of the the comedy Fumoffu), so that would be more suited to be expressed relative to the work(s) it’s present in? Finally, it certainly should not belong as P31 when there is character type (P9071). Thoughts? Jean-Fred (talk) 12:28, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We also have horror film character (Q15780329). In may opinion those items may just be deleted (after we made sure that information is preserved via the film item). - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 12:34, 3 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
(@Jul-Ar: who made the edits I noticed Jean-Fred (talk) 12:23, 5 September 2023 (UTC))[reply]

present in work (P1441) & fan games

[edit]

Are we allowed to include fan games when adding present in work (P1441) to characters? This is a common problem when it comes to characters of the Touhou franchise where the fan games are often just as popular (if not more) than the official bullet hell series Trade (talk) 13:54, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

third-person perspective (Q117941521) and third-person limited (Q130032444)

[edit]

Hello! I added third-person perspective (Q117941521) and newly created third-person limited (Q130032444) to the project's watchlist − in hope that some of more knowledgeable participants can help to sort their relationships with the subject of narration. Flipping Switches (talk) 13:10, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I just mentioned it below, but I will add it (duplicate it) here for completeness: [...] it seems to me that the concept of a personal narrator (Q2331098) coincides with the concept of third-person limited (Q130032444). I'm not sure what to do: should we just merge them or link them in some other way? And if we keep both which should we use when? The same applies (more obviously) to third-person perspective (Q117941521) and third-person narrator (Q63532437). What do you think? - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 18:20, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I connected the first pair you mentioned with "said to be the same" for now - they seem to be that, in different languages/systems. "Third-person..." items with all their connections still look confusing to me. Flipping Switches (talk) 04:58, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Valentina.Anitnelav Also, an 'objective' narrator/POV is more often than not mentioned together with omniscient and limited one, but how to connect them?... What would you say about making 'limited' a label for 'personal' (as more often used in English)? Flipping Switches (talk) 21:00, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which combination of property and qualifiers to use?

[edit]

What might be more precise way to describe the work narrated in multiple third person limited which changes every chapter (with rare exception), than what I tried: The Expanse (Q19610143)narrator (P2438)third-person limited (Q130032444), uses (P2283)multiperspectivity (Q26929413)has part(s) (P527)chapter (Q1980247)? Flipping Switches (talk) 11:36, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Flipping Switches: I never read anything from The Expanse (Q19610143), but from what I understand from your account I would model your example as The Expanse (Q19610143)narrator (P2438)personal narrator (Q2331098) - it seems to me that the concept of a personal narrator (Q2331098) coincides with the concept of third-person limited (Q130032444). I'm not sure what to do: should we just merge them or link them in some other way? And if we keep both which should we use when? The same applies (more obviously) to third-person perspective (Q117941521) and third-person narrator (Q63532437).
In addition we could use multiperspectivity (Q26929413) as a qualifier (e.g. The Expanse (Q19610143)narrator (P2438)personal narrator (Q2331098)has characteristic (P1552)multiperspectivity (Q26929413)) or, following Genette's idea of focalization (Q1307662), we could create own items for "fixed internal focalisation" (single reflector/viewpoint character), "variable internal focalisation" (relating different events of the story from the point of view of several reflectors/viewpoint characters) and "multiple internal focalisation" (relating one event from the point of view of several reflectors/viewpoint characters). This would result in The Expanse (Q19610143)narrator (P2438)personal narrator (Q2331098)has characteristic (P1552)variable internal focalisation.
Additionally you could create items for the characters of the story and indicate that they are viewpoint characters in some chapters. I did this for Bastian Balthazar Bux (Q1077745) (Q1077745#P5800). This is the basis for the following visualisation: Viewpoint characters of The Neverending Story. I hope this helps. Kind regards, - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 18:16, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Valentina.Anitnelav, that is a nice visualisation! Where do you use it? Flipping Switches (talk) 05:44, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Flipping Switches: Currently I don't use it anywhere :(. I should probably start a section with interesting queries here when I find some more time. - Valentina.Anitnelav (talk) 19:37, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's a loss. I asked because it reminded me of the series' POV table so I thought there might be some similar way to use it. Maybe a link on the book's page? (Doing this type of graph for the whole series would be quite 'expensive' though, especially if it's only for one's eyes. But it's an interesting way to learn more about the work.) "Variable internal focalisation" looks on point and focalization - as the right fit to use as qualificator. Your suggestion indeed helped me to reform the whole description as one statement, thanks! Flipping Switches (talk) 20:34, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Wikidata_talk:WikiProject_Narration&oldid=2255234514"