https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=63168

--- Comment #1 from dan <d_ent...@yahoo.com> ---
* GWtoolset fields.

The unexpected fields 'gwtoolset-title-identifier' and
'gwtoolset-url-to-the-media-file' are currently causing the template to throw
warnings, which look unsightly.

If these are going to be placed in the artwork template, please edit that
template, so that it doesn't throw warnings.

But is the artwork template actually the best place for these fields? They
don't relate to a description of the artwork, rather a description of the
upload process.

The standard place to describe the history of the upload process is in its own
template, separate from the image description template -- compare for example
the template left by the Flickr2Commons bot in the 'licensing' section of the
page
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Furnival%27s_Inn,_Holborn_-_Shepherd,_1828.jpg

The advantage of this is that the 'artwork' template can be kept to a very
specific function, without having its code cluttered up by other stuff.  Think
what the effect would be if every upload process wanted to add its fields to
the artwork template -- maintenance, or even reading the code, would become a
nightmare.  Instead, much better to put this content in your own template, to
mark the GWtoolset upload process, perhaps with an additional master parameter
to turn visible output from the template off or on.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are on the CC list for the bug.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l

Reply via email to