I notice someone has typed the topic "Dr. Who" (the series) as a "fictional universe." The topic "Whoniverse" already exists as a fictional universe. So, this is confusing people. I think the former topic should be de-typed and the latter seems correct.
One thing I'm confused about: How should one link the universe (e.g. "Whoniverse") to the fictional form that describes it (e.g. the series "Dr. Who") is that what "Works Set Here" is for?
Abstract types like this really need better descriptions than what is provided on this page. We should delineate how the type should be used and what each property is for.
let's not conflate the work of fiction with it's universe...
-
-
-
whoops, I didn't mean "this page" I meant the documentation on the "fictional universe" type page
http://www.freebase.com/view/filter?id=/fictional_universe/fictional_universe -
I'm seeing this a lot (Firefly, The Simpsons, Brazil, etc). Are the statements above still valid, and should we have separate universes for all of these?
-
It's a bit of a judgement call, well known (ie fictional works that have inspired a myriad of fan-fiction and/or authorized novelizations of cannon-based/non-canon storylines) tend to have a topic instance already in existence...Firefly might have an existing 'verse but I couldn't find that Brazil has one.
One could mark the Brazil topic for a split or better yet we can remove the fictional universe type association as it seems to have little value at this time.
The Simpsons topic is based originally upon a Wikipedia article that is about the TV show, history, cultural impact other media, etc...It almost is a universe topic, just heavily weighted towards the TV series aspect. It can easily be marked as a split, but as is, it could remain a multi-typed topic.
-
