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 protected]> wrote: > >> On 28 Aug 2015, at 18:40, Reguyla <[email protected]> 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 > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l _______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
