Ontology:Q10912

1. Grass-type Pokémon (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Characteristics in draft

Properties

item type

S0 1:(-)1:(-)1

label (en)

Grass-type Pokémon (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

alias (en)

--

label (ja)

--

QID references [Item] 1:(-)1:(-)1

Grass type (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

color swatch references [Item]

Grass type (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

instance of

Pokémon (being) 1:(-)1:(-)1

instance of

category of Pokémon

kind of category

Pokémon type (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

consists of components [Item]

Pokémon (being) 1:(-)1:(-)1

embodying metaphysical category

Grass type (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Wavebuilder combinations

[P] (pronounced [P]) Wavebuilder (pronounced Wavebuilder): forms result [Item]

--

along with [Item]

--

Characterizations

Wavebuilder (pronounced Wavebuilder): route [Item]

Grass-type Pokémon (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

along with [Item]

Pokémon (being) 1:(-)1:(-)1

forming from [Item]

Pokémon (being) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Grass type (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Grass-type Pokémon (Pokémon) 1:(-)1:(-)1

Usage notes

An entry like this really feels like "the poison to kill Cuzco? Cuzco's poison?". Keep in mind: this kind of entry exists to simplify other entries by holding repeated fundamental statements. Lithographica functions differently from Wikidata: instead of entries copying each other's information onto each other, entries are treated as fundamental building blocks of other entries. Thus, categories like Pokémon of a type may be used to simplify "consists of components" / "instance of" statements, as long as speaking of that concept in isolation would make sense — for a concept like "Grass-type Pokémon" which can be mentioned very often, it does.