Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons category for ship name
Commons category for ship name[edit]
Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Sister projects
| Description | Commons category for a name of the ship |
|---|---|
| Represents | ship name (Q56351075) |
| Data type | Item |
| Domain | item |
| Allowed values | [^{}\[\]<>]+ |
| Example 1 | Queen (Q63676401) → Category:Mississippi Queen (ship, 1987) (Q63648354) |
| Example 2 | RMS Queen Elizabeth (Q533218) → Category:Queen Elizabeth (ship, 1940) (Q81142744) and Category:Seawise University (ship, 1940) (Q81142824) |
| Example 3 | To come |
| Planned use | Ship items in the Commons category tree |
| See also | category for the interior of the item (P7561), topic's main category (P910) |
Motivation[edit]
While Wikipedias have one article on a ship, covering all of its different names, Commons often has a main category based on an IMO number, and individual categories for the same ship under different names. This requires separate items for each name for the sitelinks, which can then be linked to the main category. commons:Template:Wikidata Infobox can then be used in each category to show the Wikidata information. This setup is analogous to other existing items, such as category for the interior of the item (P7561), but this one would not be restricted to a single item. (Another option would be analogous to taxon synonyms, see [1], but that's probably not as good as this solution.) Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 18:26, 29 December 2019 (UTC)
Discussion[edit]
Strong support. I will suggest to broad the scope to any item, not just ships. --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 16:02, 2 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Tinker Bell: I'd prefer to leave the scope as-is, as I think this is a particular case of notable things that get repeatedly renamed, but I'm open to widening if if you have examples of similar situations. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 05:50, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Mike Peel:
Done --Tinker Bell ★ ♥ 21:00, 6 January 2020 (UTC)
After creating of property[edit]
Strong oppose I totally don't understand what's happening in this property? Name of property is non-sense. There weren't discussion in creating of property. Skim (talk) 23:26, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
Documentation?[edit]
Appears that lots of people have difficulty understanding the system resulting from the introduction of this property and I totally agree that it's really not all that straightforward. I've tried explaining it to various contributors several times (with very varying degrees of luck). Is there a page somewhere that I can point them to?--Hjart (talk) 07:52, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
- @Hjart: can you put the description in the description of the property? or maybe Wikidata usage instructions (P2559)? Maybe @Mike Peel: can do so? BrokenSegue (talk) 15:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
- @Hjart, BrokenSegue: I've added a short description using Wikidata usage instructions (P2559), does that help? Feel free to tweak/rewrite it. Also, we should probably be having this discussion at Property talk:P7782. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 19:08, 1 February 2023 (UTC)