I recently came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Outlines and it took me a while to realize the full extend of this desaster. Some part of en.wp's authors is duplicating Wikipedia, this time without text.
For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_outline_of_Algeria is a list of articles somehow related to Algeria. This purpose is better served by either [[:en:Algeria]] (with full sentences) or by [[:en:Category:Algeria]] (with proper software, without full sentences).
My recommendation would be to delete them on sight. Given the situation at en.wp, this is better done with a formal VfD, triple-signed by someone else and already attached objections and specialized templates for revision and arbitration, right?
Mathias
This apparently was originally [[List of basic topics]] and its children, and the rename to Outlines was done by [[User:The Transhumanist]]. [[List of basic topics]] dates to 2001 and was started by Larry Sanger, so this is not a new thing.
-Matt
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
I recently came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Outlines and it took me a while to realize the full extend of this desaster. Some part of en.wp's authors is duplicating Wikipedia, this time without text.
For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_outline_of_Algeria is a list of articles somehow related to Algeria. This purpose is better served by either [[:en:Algeria]] (with full sentences) or by [[:en:Category:Algeria]] (with proper software, without full sentences).
My recommendation would be to delete them on sight. Given the situation at en.wp, this is better done with a formal VfD, triple-signed by someone else and already attached objections and specialized templates for revision and arbitration, right?
Mathias
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:32 PM, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote:
This apparently was originally [[List of basic topics]] and its children, and the rename to Outlines was done by [[User:The Transhumanist]]. [[List of basic topics]] dates to 2001 and was started by Larry Sanger, so this is not a new thing.
I never assumed it was a new thing. And I don't assume that it actually started as the thing it has now become.
In 2001, there were no categories and most links would have been red. So, to some extend, it could have been a nice feature in a different namespace (another concept that did not exist in 2001).
Mathias
The Wikiproject about it is quite new. The way I see it, topic outlines are more of a topical glossary that lack the subcategorizing that a regular category would have. They could be of some use.
bibliomaniac15
--- On Thu, 1/22/09, Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com wrote: From: Matthew Brown morven@gmail.com Subject: Re: [WikiEN-l] VfD against every article in Category.Outlines that is also in namespace 0? (aka: please stop writing another perverted encyclopedia inside wikipedia) To: "English Wikipedia" wikien-l@lists.wikimedia.org Date: Thursday, January 22, 2009, 2:32 PM
This apparently was originally [[List of basic topics]] and its children, and the rename to Outlines was done by [[User:The Transhumanist]]. [[List of basic topics]] dates to 2001 and was started by Larry Sanger, so this is not a new thing.
-Matt
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:15 PM, Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com wrote:
I recently came across http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Outlines and it took me a while to realize the full extend of this desaster. Some part of en.wp's authors is duplicating Wikipedia, this time without text.
For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_outline_of_Algeria is a list of articles somehow related to Algeria. This purpose is better served by either [[:en:Algeria]] (with full sentences) or by [[:en:Category:Algeria]] (with proper software, without full sentences).
My recommendation would be to delete them on sight. Given the situation at en.wp, this is better done with a formal VfD, triple-signed by someone else and already attached objections and specialized templates for revision and arbitration, right?
Mathias
WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
_______________________________________________ WikiEN-l mailing list WikiEN-l@lists.wikimedia.org To unsubscribe from this mailing list, visit: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikien-l
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Scientia Potentia est bibliomaniac_15@yahoo.com wrote:
The Wikiproject about it is quite new. The way I see it, topic outlines are more of a topical glossary that lack the subcategorizing that a regular category would have. They could be of some use.
Pages like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_outline_of_Algeria simulate layers of sub-categorization by indent.
In some cases, they are even re-inventing templates and infoboxes like it is 1999:
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Topic_outline_of_Algeria&actio...
* Algeria is: a [[country]] * Location: ** [[Northern Hemisphere]] and lies on the [[Prime Meridian]] *** [[Africa]] **** [[Sahara|Sahara Desert]] **** [[North Africa]] ***** [[Maghreb]] ** [[West Africa]] ** [[Time zone]](s): [[]] ** [[Extreme points of Algeria]] * [[Population of Algeria]]: 33,769,669 people <ref name="cia">[https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ag.html ''CIA World Factbook'']</ref> (2008 [[estimate]]) - [[List of countries by population|35th most populous country]] * [[Area of Algeria]]: 2,381,741 [[km²]] (919,595 [[sq mi]]) - [[List of countries and outlying territories by total area|11th largest country]] * [[:commons:Atlas of Algeria|Atlas of Algeria]]
What could possibly the use of this page that is not already done by any other existing and more-or-less maintained page?
On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 02:38:49PM -0800, Scientia Potentia est wrote:
The Wikiproject about it is quite new. The way I see it, topic outlines are more of a topical glossary that lack the subcategorizing that a regular category would have. They could be of some use.
The pages I familiar with here used to have names such as [[List of basic algebra topics]]. These can be viewed in several ways:
* As a topic glossary highlighting the most important basic topics in the field
* As an extended 'see also' list that is linked from the main article on the field. So [[Algebra]] links to [[List of basic algebra topics]]
These lists are clearly of some value for readers who are interested in learning the basics of a topic. And the lists have some support among current editors; see [[Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Topic_outline_of_algebra]] which was closed this week.
I don't know as much about the country articles, such as [[Topic outline of France]].
- Carl
My recommendation would be to delete them on sight. Given the situation at en.wp, this is better done with a formal VfD, triple-signed by someone else and already attached objections and specialized templates for revision and arbitration, right?
VfD? What year are you living in?
2009/1/22 Mathias Schindler mathias.schindler@gmail.com:
For example, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Topic_outline_of_Algeria is a list of articles somehow related to Algeria. This purpose is better served by either [[:en:Algeria]] (with full sentences) or by [[:en:Category:Algeria]] (with proper software, without full sentences).
I'm not entirely sure it is. It can take quite a bit of digging through the large "geographical" articles to find the sections on economy or education or the like (especially when it turns out to be under a confusing heading), and navigating down through the category structure can require a bit of browsing - especially if it has several hundred members.
These seem to be a half-useful navigational "handlist" for a user. They're a bit clunky, but they do seem to fill a niche that might otherwise not be served very well; I really don't see how they're some kind of abomination that needs taken out and shot Right This Minute.
2009/1/22 Andrew Gray andrew.gray@dunelm.org.uk:
These seem to be a half-useful navigational "handlist" for a user. They're a bit clunky, but they do seem to fill a niche that might otherwise not be served very well; I really don't see how they're some kind of abomination that needs taken out and shot Right This Minute.
...come to think of it, this sort of objection might be better laid against something like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Algeria-related_articles - at least the hierarchical one is organised in a more sensible manner!