In terms of navigation from article-items to Commons categories, the policy is very straightforward: set and use the P373 property. This property also makes the inverse very straightforward, to go from a Commons category to a Wikidata item: use the script https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:TheDJ/wdcat.js or the tweaked version at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jheald/wdcat.js which handles diacritics properly. These scripts automatically add a Reasonator link to the Commons category whenever there is a Wikidata article-like item pointing to it with a P373. What we have at the moment is the worst of all worlds -- namely inconsistency which is getting worse. As a result people don't know what to do, and they are not setting the P373 property -- with the result that scripts and queries don't find the connections that they should. What we need is clarity and systematic consistency. Then it is an easy step to adjust the user-presentation to do the right thing. -- James. On 27/08/2015 14:03, Romaine Wiki wrote:

step to adjust the user-presentation to do the right thing. The only way to get that is a software change. Your proposal might bring "systematic consistency" but also breaks almost the complete navigational structure from Commons to elsewhere. If you think this as an easy step, you have thought to simple as you miss an import part. Demolishing almost the complete navigational structure is certainly not the right thing. And I agree completely with what Revi says: like this. 2015-08-27 19:26 GMT+02:00 James Heald &lt;j.heald(a)ucl.ac.uk&gt;uk>: > In terms of navigation from article-items to Commons categories, the > policy is very straightforward: set and use the P373 property. > > This property also makes the inverse very straightforward, to go from a > Commons category to a Wikidata item: use the script > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:TheDJ/wdcat.js > or the tweaked version at > https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jheald/wdcat.js > which handles diacritics properly. These scripts automatically add a > Reasonator link to the Commons category whenever there is a Wikidata > article-like item pointing to it with a P373. > > > What we have at the moment is the worst of all worlds -- namely > inconsistency which is getting worse. > > As a result people don't know what to do, and they are not setting the > P373 property -- with the result that scripts and queries don't find the > connections that they should. > > step to adjust the user-presentation to do the right thing. > > > -- James. > > > > > > On 27/08/2015 14:03, Romaine Wiki wrote: > >> No we have not a clear policy on only linking sitelinks to categories if >> the item itself is about a category. So not let's not break that. >> >> You suggest to break down almost the complete navigational structure >> Commons has in relationship with Wikipedia, and makes it possible to find >> articles that are about the same subject as the category. Without it >> becomes almost impossible to identify a category on Commons to be related >> to an article in Wikipedia. >> Sorry, but your proposal is insane and making the navigational situation a >> thousand times worse. And does it make anything better? No, totally not. >> Only the opposite: worse. >> >> Wikidata is currently heavily used to connect categories on Commons to >> articles on Wikipedia. This so that interwikilinks are shown on the >> category on Commons to the related Wikipedia article. This for >> navigational >> purposes but also to uniquely identify categories on Commons to articles >> on >> Wikipedia and items on Wikidata. >> >> How nice Commons galleries are giving an overview, they are crap in >> speaking of navigational purposes. For every subject a category on Commons >> is created and used and the Commons categories form the backbone to media >> categories. >> >> It has been pointed out for a long time that the linking situation on >> Commons is problematic and this is a software issue, not a user side >> issue. >> This consists out of: >> * There can only be added one sitelink to an item. >> * If no sitelink added (but only added as property), a Commons category >> can't show the interwikilinks. >> * If a category and an article on Wikipedia/etc exist for a subject, only >> one of them can be shown on the Commons category. >> >> The annoying part is that some large wikis, especially the English >> Wikipedia, creates too many categories that are not created on other >> Wikipedias. This causes that categories on Commons are only linked to a >> category on Wikipedia, which is useless for most other wikis and on >> Commons >> we miss an interwikilink to the related article. >> >> A gallery on Commons is a great way as alternative to show images, but is >> not suitable for navigational purposes, as that requires a much higher >> coverage and being a backbone everything relies on. On Commons only >> categories have that function. A counter proposal makes more sense: no >> Commons galleries as sitelinks any more and having Commons galleries only >> as property added. >> >> But this only solves a part of the problem: on Commons I would like to see >> somehow that both the related category as the related article are shown. >> Example: on the Commons category for a specific country both the country >> category on Wikipedia is linked as the article on Wikipedia is linked. >> >> Something I have been wondering about for a long time is why there are 2 >> places on an item where a Commonscat is added. I understand the >> development >> and technical behind it, but this should not be needed. >> >> So the developers of Wikidata should try to find a way to show both groups >> of interwikilinks on categories on Commons. >> >> As long as this is not resolved in software, this problem of 2 items both >> strongly related to a Commons category keeps an issue. >> >> Romaine >> >> >> >> >> >> 2015-08-27 11:29 GMT+02:00 James Heald &lt;j.heald(a)ucl.ac.uk&gt;uk>: >> >> A few days ago I made the following post to Project Chat, looking at how >>> people are linking from Wikidata items to Commons categories and >>> galleries >>> compared to a year ago, that some people on the list may have seen, which >>> has now been archived: >>> >>> >>> >>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Project_chat/Archive/2015/08#Trends_… >>> >>> >>> A couple of headlines: >>> >>> * Category <-> commonscat identifications : >>> >>> ** There was a net increase of 61,784 Commons categories that can now be >>> identified with category-like items, to 323,825 Commons categories in all >>> >>> ** 96.4% of category <-> commonscat identifications (312,266 items) now >>> have sitelinks. This represents a rise in sitelinks (60,463 items) >>> amounting to 97.8% of the increase in identifications >>> >>> ** 80.0% of category <-> commonscat identifications (259,164 items) now >>> have P373 statements. This represents a rise in P373 statements (8,774 >>> items) amounting to 14.2% of the increase in identifications >>> >>> >>> * Article <-> commonscat identifications : >>> >>> ** There was a net increase of 176,382 Commons categories that can now be >>> identified with article-like items, to 884,439 Commons categories in all >>> >>> ** 23.4% of article <-> commonscat identifications (207,494 items) now >>> have (deprecated) sitelinks. This represents a rise in sitelinks (112,595 >>> items) amounting to 63.8% of the increase in identifications. >>> >>> ** 91.3% of article <-> commonscat identifications (807,776 items) now >>> have P373 statements. This represents a rise in P373 statements (110,727 >>> items) amounting to 62.8% of the increase in identifications >>> >>> >>> * In addition, a recent RfC showed considerable confusion as to what >>> actually was the current operational Wikidata policy on sitelinks to >>> Commons: >>> >>> >>> >>> https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:Requests_for_comment/Category_common… >>> >>> >>> In view of the trends above; and the need for predictability and >>> consistency for queries and templates and scripts to depend on; and >>> particularly in view of the apparent confusion as to what the operational >>> policy currently actually is, can I suggest that the time has come for a >>> bot to monitor all new sitelinks to Commons categories, >>> * adding a corresponding P373 statement if there is not one already, and >>> * removing the sitelink if it is from an article-like item to a >>> commonscat. >>> >>> >>> I believe we have clear policy on only sitelinking commons categories to >>> category-like items, and commons galleries to article-like items; but >>> there >>> is currently confusion and unpredictability being caused because these >>> relationships are not being enforced -- breaking scripts and queries. >>> >>> It's time to fix this. >>> >>> >>> All best, >>> >>> James. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikidata mailing list >>> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikidata mailing list >> Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata(a)lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >

People never use gallery to browse image. They just use Category. It is rather irrationale thing to make people do more work to find the maintained list of Commons images. Accept the fact Commons does not actively use Gallery on our image structure system. Category is the only system Commons use. And the ability to put more than two sitelink from one wiki was wanted since Sept 2013 (almost 2 years ago, IIRC.). I remember participating the RfC regarding this but cannot find it right now... -- revi https://revi.me -- Sent from Android -- 2015. 8. 29. 오전 12:11에 "Luca Martinelli" &lt;martinelliluca(a)gmail.xn--com&gt;-4f21ay07k 작성:

I think this subject should also be discussed on the Commons mailing list, as this plan is to demolish the navigational structure of Commons. 2015-08-27 15:03 GMT+02:00 Romaine Wiki &lt;romaine.wiki(a)gmail.com&gt;om>:

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