Hi all,
before we write off the category system (as
living-in-the-future-Gerard seems to do ;-) we should probably rather
think about killing galleries. All of them. Completely. Galleries
require a considerable maintenance overhead, and I would argue that
that work is better spent on categorizing our content. We could
replace galleries by allowing select images to retain high level
categories (for example through a template so the don't accidentally
get diffused down the tree). The captions in galleries are just an
i18n nightmare and a data duplication of the description texts.
This does not entirely solve the problem of still having the Creator
namespace, but if were up to me, we'd _not_ interwikilink there, but
rather to the "Works by .." category, because that is what I think
people expect to find on commons: Images
Cheers,
Daniel
On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Michael Peel <email(a)mikepeel.net> wrote:
On 28 Aug 2015, at 18:40, Reguyla
<reguyla(a)gmail.com> wrote:
This is one reason I create the pahbricator request for Commons to have its own Site box
rather than fall under "Other wiki's". That would allow us to link an item
to its corresponding Gallery, Category, Creator or whatever. Right now we can only like to
Commons category via the Other Wiki's and although we can link Galleries, Creator and
the like as data items, they are not "linked" as site links.
This would be very useful - I think this would be a good way forward that would avoid the
whole 'page vs. category' debate. The Phabricator ticket is at:
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T102417
Thanks,
Mike
_______________________________________________
Commons-l mailing list
Commons-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l