[WikiEN-l] Policy on including templates in automatic categories

[Sam Korn]

On 11/10/05, Phil Boswell <phil.boswell at gmail.com> wrote:
> I've been altering templates, as and when I come across them, so that the
> template itself is **not** included in the category to which it
> automagically adds articles.
>
> I've been doing this with a cunning combination of the <includeonly> and
> <noinclude> tags, which enable me to add in rubric to the template warning
> people that it adds articles to a category, and which category.
>
> However I've just been reverted (here: http://tinyurl.com/7b7gw ) with the
> explanation "rv, it's important for these templates to be a member of their
> category".
>
> First off, I disagree: I think it clutters up the categories pointlessly
> with **self references** which are evil(TM).
>
> Second, in this particular case, the template doesn't even appear unless you
> know which letter to click in the {{CategoryTOC}}.
>
> Third, the template is already documented in the category description (here:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Book_covers ) perfectly adequately.
>
> Whatever, I'm wondering whether there is a policy on this, since these tags
> are so new, and if so where is it?
>
> Rather than enter into a revert war, I'd rather thrash it out properly
> first.
> Phil
> [[en:User:Phil Boswell]]

I agree with you.  I have had the same idea myself from time to time,
and it is more sloth than doubt that has hindered me from doing this. 
It is ludicrous to say that these templates should be in the category.
 That implies something that just isn't true: that the template is
licensed in the same way as the category.  Yes, the category certainly
needs to recognise that it is the table that forces the inclusion of
the category, but that can easily be done with a link in the category
page to the template.  This seems a wholly more appropriate method of
sorting this problem; one that doesn't imply something false.

Sam