Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons postcards category

Commons postcards category

Originally proposed at Wikidata:Property proposal/Commons

Not done

Description	name of the Wikimedia Commons category specifically for postcards or of this item (without the prefix "Category:")
Data type	Item
Allowed values	Only existing Commons categories are allowed. The name is without the "Category:" prefix
Example 1	Dresden (Q1731) → Category:Postcards of Dresden (Q82326598)
Example 2	Asinus (Q2305786) → Category:Postcards of donkeys (Q82326609)
Example 3	Naumburg Cathedral (Q5938) → Category:Naumburg Cathedral Postcards (Q82326616)
Example 4	Finland (Q33) → Category:Postcards of Finland (Q82326618)
Planned use	In items and Commons infoboxes
See also	Commons category (P373), P3722 (P3722), category for the interior of the item (P7561)

Motivation

I want use this for automation/bots. If a postcard has only the "Category:Postcard" and "Category:Dresden" then we can move it in this category, which we found in this property. sk (talk) 05:28, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Support as an ID für external usage. Conny (talk) 05:44, 15 January 2020 (UTC).[reply]

Support after the change of datatype. Mike Peel (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2020 (UTC) Oppose with the current datatype, I would support if it is using the 'item' datatype to link to a category item per category for people born here (P1464), category for the interior of the item (P7561), category for ship name (P7782) and others - then it will auto-update when Commons categories are moved, rather than requiring manual updates. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 06:32, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: Please change it. I don't know the right value for this datatype. "Item"? Thanks. -- sk (talk) 08:49, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Stefan Kühn: It looks like @Conny: changed the type, I've updated the examples and a bit of the description, does that look OK to you? If so then I'll switch my !vote to support. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mike Peel: That's fine. Thanks! -- sk (talk) 20:52, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose use related category (P7084). --- Jura 10:25, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose already there are too many "Commons xxxx category" properties. How many more? Proposing endless more properties is not a good or sustainable mechanism. We need another, more scalable way to do this. Jheald (talk) 16:52, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment whats the point of structuring Commons categories. There was some general agreement, that categories wont be structured and tags are an alternative system to file sorting on Commons. --Juandev (talk) 15:32, 9 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jheald. Multichill (talk) 19:34, 3 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think we should avoid creating more logic based on categories and instead find a combination of SDC statements to represent this, e.g. location (P276) → Dresden (Q1731) and genre (P136) → postcard (Q192425). Belteshassar (talk) 20:34, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The tagging system on Commons (the “depicts” property) is unsuitable for use at this time. It needs better documentation and user training before it can be considered as a replacement for categories. Senator2029 15:17, 24 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Jheald nad Belteshassar. --Daniel Baránek (talk) 07:40, 6 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not done given lack of consensus. --99of9 (talk) 11:38, 13 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]