Template talk:Object photo

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search

Error categories[edit]

Template no longer generates categories.
Suggestions:

  • make it more robust: generate error, warning, maintenance category when object description is not found (after cat move, wrong description, …)
  • Warn the user that when using the template, its object description might need to be adapted after a category rename. This is the task of the template user.
  • Maybe using a hard redirect in another name space towards the actual category name might be a more simple work around to avoid maintenance problems. Don't really know. --Foroa (talk) 07:18, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I have added a check for non-existing categories. Warning users that they may need to update the object would be nice, but I cannot think of any way to do it. I have tried to use object = some redirect category on an unused low quality file to see if bots can fix redirects.--Zolo (talk) 09:37, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I don't think that this can work. What I meant is passing through a hard redirect in another name space.
I think that there are several files using template:Object photo without object description as this was the only way to remove the category. I might be a good idea to tag such uses too. --Foroa (talk) 09:53, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
I am not sure that it will work either, just wanted to check. It it does not work, I will try to ask a bot to add it to its instruction set.
Using another namespace would require to maintain one additional page per object, and in that case, it would probably be simpler to move the whole content of the category to the template namespace.
I added a more specific message when the "object" parameter is missing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zolo (talk • contribs) 10:15, 11 July 2012‎ (UTC)

"author" required[edit]

The "author" field should not be required for this template, and an empty "author" field should not set Category:Media lacking author information. {{artwork}} does not require an author, so this template should not either. The requirements come from {{photograph}}, but they can be switched off by setting strict= in {{photograph}}. I propose to do this!? What do you think? Thanks in advance, --Marsupium (talk) 00:14, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
PS: An example for the template’s current undesirable effects: File:Tizian 066.jpg#Summary.

It may be more cautious to keep requiring the author and add "author: {{unknown}}" when necessary. This template is mostly useful when there is sufficient data about the photo, so that we may not want to use the standard {{Photograph}}. And these files have more chance to be photographs of 3D objets, where author information are usually required. --Zolo (talk) 11:06, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Well, I thought that the template is ought to be used for files whose object information is stored in a {{Category definition: Object}} template regardless of the information existing for the photograph or the dimensions of the object!? My point was that the situation makes file descriptions like File:Tizian 066.jpg#Summary appear messy. But you are right, using {{unknown}} is a good clean solution I stupidly had not thought of, it has other advantages of course! Thank you, --Marsupium (talk) 12:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
Oops, yes, sorry this template is supposed to be used with {{Category definition: Object}}. I though we were on {{Art Photo}}'s talk page :]. Not sure of what the best solution would be for this template. --Zolo (talk) 19:42, 11 March 2014 (UTC)