Carcharoth wrote:
On Fri, Apr 2, 2010 at 9:05 AM, Charles Matthews
<charles.r.matthews(a)ntlworld.com> wrote:
Samuel Klein wrote:
A feature to improve the curating and
presentation of these links
might be handy. We have a few places were having a "set of links" as
a first class member of the wikiverse would be useful
* external links or further reading
* a list of images related to an article (which may not all fit
neatly in the article)
* interlanguage and interproject links to a set of articles about the
same topic
On the final point, the "poster" style of interwiki link to
sister
projects begins to look dated, at least to me. It obviously doesn't
scale well; or in other words it puts the onus on the project linked to,
to organise the material relevant to one WP topic, in such a way that a
single link can carry the whole weight. Innovation is at least possible.
That's an interesting point. I presume you mean wikisource here. For
Commons and Wikiquote (I'm unsure about the other projects) it is
fairly easy to have a corresponding page or category or both. If the
Wikipedia article is a person who is an author, then a wikisource page
is possible, and if the Wikipedia page is about a book or other
published work that could be on wikisource, then again a single link,
page or category is usually possible. But there are some articles
where this system does fall down. I presume the place to put links to
editorially selected wikisource pages would be in the external links,
or as a courtesy link in a citation.
Yes, Wikisource is on my mind in particular, but there are a couple of
points here. Some work could be done (perhaps I'm not up-to-date,
though) with stacking those poster boxes more successfully: they are
more eye-catching than really convenient. There are three kinds of
template: poster, citation and attribution, and it is really more
elegant to use the citation links in the external links section, if more
than one is relevant. The Wikisource category system is not really
developed enough to do the task right now; its dab system likewise (and
it is supposed to disambiguate texts, really); and the Wikisource:
namespace plays a surrogate role for a "topic" namespace (rather than
being just project pages). But enough of our troubles.
There does seem to be a possibility for a bit of lateral thinking here.
If, say, the current external links and interwiki sections were done by
transclusion from something separately maintained (a set of pages
organised by both language and topic?), how could that be implemented,
and how could it relate to efforts to make hard-copy bibliography more
modular?
Charles