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@mikepeel.net wrote:
On 28 Aug 2015, at 18:40, Reguyla reguyla@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@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l