User talk:Fabartus/Templates and Wikipedia

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to: navigation, search
Transfered from User talk:fabartus#Templates and Wikipedia
          at 10
35, 26 April 2018 (UTC) by FrankB.

Templates and Wikipedia[edit]

Hi Frank. Um...

0. I'm not sure what you're trying to do, or what you're really talking about at Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion. Please just keep in mind that the Commons has to serve all the Wikimedia projects and having Commons 'synched' to the English Wikipedia is not necessarily always a desirable thing...
1. is there some reason templates such as Template:WikiPtmpM are necessary over mere interwiki links??? I think they're a much better solution.
2. And I also strongly dislike such incredibly cryptic names such as WikiPtmpM. What on earth could that mean? I would have no hope of remembering it especially with the random capitalisation.
3. Category:Uncategorized templates seems like a bad idea because it's giving these items a 'false' categorisation, whereas if they just didn't have one, you could easily recognise that (isn't there even a special page that lists such items?)
4. And what is this Template:911hijack, with its mass of redlinks???? I really don't think it's appropriate for the Commons.
5. Why on earth did you create both Category:Navigation templates and Category:Navigational templates? That really baffles me!
6. Did you in fact notice that the Commons doesn't have dynamic nav menus installed and thus Template:Dynamic navigation box does absolutely nothing at all?

Look forward to hearing from you, pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:33, 11 July 2006 (UTC)


Well, don't come down too hard, after a year here I had to steal this for myself: user talk:fabartus/welcome message just now>. Truth is, I should have put more time studying the political system and lay of the land over here much sooner, but I was too focused on productivity to entertain what seemed at the time, unnecessary browsing. (See below about 'helping with maps')

(Convention: Here is the commons, There is WikiP. Ok? Good... even if you didn't mean it! <g>)


0.0 I probably should have known better than to try and make sense at my 4-5ish in the am after dealing with wikiPprojects starting yesterday, now about 26 hours ago. I'm too old for all nighters, anyway. But I'm also dogged, and whittle away until the problem's solved. So sorry if I rambled.

0.1 Let me set that aside and get to your other points made here first. But lets begin at the beginning:
0.2. The reason I'm here at all, is that I'm into history as an avocation I was about to upload a few dozen {{PD-old}} historical maps and found some WikiP categories depreciated over here, and others we didn't have there, and when I follow that back, it lead to Dave Kernow, who was, I thought (until about a few weeks ago) the administering co-ordinator of an official re-categorization project of maps into a sensible heirarchy...
0.2.1. so I pitched into help as soon as I figured out the 'sensible system' they were re-organizing too. Hey! I love my history, and I'm an engineer, so senisible and intuitive count a lot with me.
0.3.0 A few days into it, I realized there were a lot cross-category misses happening, not to mention {{Pd}} images that should be moved over here, etc. So the templates were born after seeing what wikiP was using to cross-link pages.
0.3.1. Such went to cats, but administering a list of things that had been accomplished and administering a list of things still needing work interjected themselves rapidly.
0.3.2. So the templates were born with a simple WikiPcat(egory) here, and Commonscat2 there... to link category to category and make the first list (done status).
0.3.3. But there's a push on over there to link cats to main article pages, and that seemed like a good idea here too, so that was worked in, in a 'dumb mode' then a smarter template evolution. So add the initial 'M' suffix for 'Main article'.


1.0. Soooo, Why not simple wikiPlinks... see the cats needs below, also handles the interlanguage issue (Note each has a 'translation' stubbed in already listed in the guts of the template, so we were focused on language from the outset).

1.1.0. Also, looking ahead to the job finished daze was taken into account; Indirect application via template means the 'extra 'Aministrative' task-tracking cat' can be made to 'vanish' (alà vaporware by simply removing it from the tag (at a later time).
1.1.1. So we put together a system of interwiki connection that is informative, has a specific job or jobs, and the interwiki linking of the templates here to there was the one thing that recieved actual praise in the Tfd and Cfd politics (guess!<g> You may call them the same) formal voting over there.
1.1.2. All you really need to do is learn to equate 'WikiP' and wikipedia (or en.WikiP <g>)... the rest falls out, as you'll see below.


2.0.0. #re:And I also strongly dislike such incredibly cryptic names such as WikiPtmpM. I surmise that means your probably and liberal arts academic, or educated in such a way, and don't dabble with coding of anything in computer languages. It happens! <g>

2.1.0 As an engineer and programmer since the seventies, capitalization of a syllables' starting letters is somewhat second nature as it's a common software naming convention.
2.1.1. Add in that WikiP is an not uncommon abbreviation (tho' prah'ps not 'here' , shrug. My sympathies, but it's just another form of notation or abbrev.), and I'm sure you can guess at what 'cat' may signify (Hint: it's the analog of the commonscat which links article space to your collections here.
2.1.2. It just so happens I'd addressed an email to my template guru about renaming templates about the time you were posting your message. (a little whitespace would be a good thing... paragraph's help a lot. If we're going to do something with the names, the time is best done soonest, before we'd need to change hundreds of pages.
2.2.3. So now we have both established <g> we each have a strongly dislike such incredibly cryptic mutual communications... like a dense ball of text sans paragraphs on many topics...<g> we can go forward in mutual education... besides the naming is no more cryptic than many a template. The one's I'm worried about are the one's used on the en.wikipedia.
2.3.0. Due to details insufficiently considered in depth, the naming convention over there is near the breaking point. The one here is much more consistant and has far fewer templates to start with. We needed a much larger set there to work around other page graphics so there is a left margin and a right margin of each sub-type. One of those is ordered differently so you only need add one arguement to specify a main article with a different style of default name, and the other sub-type assumes a standard, usually needing no arguements.
2.3.1. Add in that I'm obsessive to almost a fault about making things self documenting, and in WP:Btw, and if you looked at the templates themselves instead of just the name, you would see your much better off in my tender hands than that of some of the more careless kids we both must deal with on a wiki! (Trust me)
2.3.2. Add in the knowlege that an 'M' suffix signifies a second link to and for a Main article link, and it's really not hard to remember at all. The templates are designed to do all the hard work and build the links. All you (usually) have to do is try placing WikiPcatM and test both links on a page here in preview mode, and that will tell you whether you're on target or don't have a matched Category and or Main article. If the first, say so using {{WikiPcatNo}} instead as in 'No' cat at home. Easy!


3.0. Category:Uncategorized templates makes sense when you consider it as an 'administrative list' to track a list of things that need done. Also a tracking and filing system so you can find them again... even if someone else thunk it up. Think of the contents as a 'To-DO' list—that's how it's used and categorized over there. Your equivilent over here is Category: Problem templates or some such like that; simple enough, tie one in as a sub-cat. It also gives a place to save and store useful little format things like {{space}, {indent}, and {Left60} and {Right60}. (Dang, I just looked at those cats! Been up way too long!)


4.0. I had nothing to do with Template:911hijack, save to add categorization, you need to speak to user:Pseudomoi. I used it as a reference example in WikiPtmp simply because I'd just categorized it, finished WikiPtmp about the same time, and it was already there on wikipediaSee for yourself. Or the version with all the links: Template:911hijack.


5.0. The category:Navigation templates came about as I mis-remembered 'both' where I'd seen the cat, and it's actual name... to whit, the NavigationAL templates, while similtaneously being situationally unaware of how closely I had to verify which sister project space I was in when creating a cat by following the link from the other.

5.0.1. In a nutshell, it was a big spelling goof. I chose to deal with it 'later' in search of productivity at the time. At that moment I was working out the various templates, testing them, and focused on that. At least the cat let me jump back and forth as I added things.
5.0.2 The rest of the story is that I'm not all that good at HTML nor Wikimarkup language. Add in that at the time I was a virgin at doing any templates... I've coded for decades, know how to organize tools and analyze needs, but this RSS stuff isn't all that close to any programming languages. It's script based, which until these came along left me yawning and running the other direction.
5.0.3. But since I couldn't delete over here (or there save for deep and wide connections and things like {{db-author}}), I posted the problem name to wikipedia:template talk and kept on getting things together. Frankly speaking, The name sucks, and I'm the first to say it and have repeatedly... no one has yet to suggest a better name, though! <g>
5.1. Category:Navigational templates is a de rigor standard category at en.wikipedia, and if you poke around under the skin over there, most if not all templates have a long list of various language categories that match in those respective sister projects.
5.2. In sum, since the categories here are the 'Main Space' unlike most of the other sister projects, you've been missing out on a lot of already developed stuff. WikiPtmp was a way to let {{{PAGENAME}}} tell me whether anything was there when I needed that in mid-edit, or here (Template:Commonstmp from over there) as a check when something was used on the other... or wanted, like {{succession}} and {{succession box}}. (And you pick on my 'WikiPcat' naming... take a look in depth on that latter one and at the obscure template names. Talk about poorly self-documenting!
5.3. In the end, the '...tmp' templates are valuable as auto-listing bookkeeper, navigational links, and to use to cross check to see if a version is more updated on the other project.
5.4. The WikiP... templates are used to tag with the uncomfortably long category insisted upon by the wikipedia Cfd procedure. That's Category:Wikipedia categories equalized with Wikimedia Commons categories which is a mouthful in anyone's typing. So is it's sister: Category:Wikipedia categories matching with Wikimedia Commons categories, which is currently waiting for me to start sorting maps and fixing up categories again over here. The former lists 'done' cats, the latter makes up a To-Do to work to clean-up. Pretty valuable resources when several people are plugging away at a big task on independent schedules.


6.0 Did you in fact notice that the Commons doesn't have dynamic nav menus installed and thus Template:Dynamic navigation box does absolutely nothing at all? Nope, never used the template. Someone had imported both the others it lists as see also's, which in turn listed it as a see also... so I brought it in cause I despise redlinks. If that's a permanent case, then it should be replaced with a Usage note saying such will not work here. Hence if someone does try and use it, say for example User:Astrokey44 who could probably use it badly for the stuff he puts together (Aside, have you seen the animated maps on category:History of the United States... good work, and you won't get that in a dead tree encyclopedia! Hats off to him!)

6.1 On languages. Consider this benefit of interwiki cross connecting cats. 'Templatizing' this side of that category just now, I added all these categories links (all but 'pt:Categoria:História dos Estados Unidos da América', (everybody has people patroling wikiP pages and doing these X-ref 'updates' all the time on geopolitical matters, etc.):

{ 'ar:تصنيف:تاريخ الولايات المتحدة الأمريكية',  'bg:Категория:История на САЩ',   'bs:Category:Historija Sjedinjenih Američkih Država',   'ca:Categoria:Història d'Amèrica',   'cs:Kategorie:Dějiny USA',   'da:Kategori:USA's historie',   'de:Kategorie:Geschichte der USA',   'eo:Kategorio:Historio de Usono',   'es:Categoría:Historia de Estados Unidos',   'fr:Catégorie:Histoire des États-Unis',   'he:קטגוריה:ארצות הברית: היסטוריה',   'hu:Kategória:Az Amerikai Egyesült Államok történelme',   'it:Categoria:Storia degli Stati Uniti',   'ja:Category:アメリカ合衆国の歴史',   'ka:კატეგორია:აშშ-ის ისტორია',   'ko:분류:미국의 역사',   'nl:Categorie:Geschiedenis van de Verenigde Staten',   'nn:Kategori:USAs historie',   'no:Kategori:USAs historie',   'pl:Kategoria:Historia USA',   'ru:Категория:История США',   'sl:Kategorija:Zgodovina ZDA',   'sv:Kategori:USA:s historia',   'zh:Category:美國歷史' }

How's that for a power cross-connect?


7.0.0. Then take a look at something like: Category:Maps_showing_11th-century_history. If I hadn't gotten into 'templates and displays herein, such would be still-born. Some of the century cats have cross-links and many don't. Mininum 'verticle space' links across sister-node in the heirarchy is one thing we hope to build in, just as others are building nifty Navigational boxes like the USA maps template. Or the {{Middle Ages Tall}} I 'ported' from wikiP and will soon adapt for here.

7.1. So am I a revolutionary looking to kick over your category system... en.wikipedia's is the one's wearing the Kill this cat tags.
7.2. Have I added a few carefully chosen one's for good reasons based on productivity and compatibility. Guilty, and proud of it.
7.3. Did I criticize your category system, as chaotic as it seems to be in places? No, I just plan on interconnecting the hell of it as things progress. Alas this is but one of five largish projects I'm currently juggling... and it's summer too! <g>
7.4. I will criticize the commons welcoming committee or the equivilent here. I'm a 'user box' carrying member of WP:Wc.


8.0. In the meanwhile, Dave's asked me to put together a formal projects page, in part because of some of the heat we took for depreciation of wikiPcategories in favor of the better hierarchy Dave and Flamarande and a few others put together back in April-May to fix up the maps filing system here. Lucky me!

8.1 And I'm still just getting around at an uncomfortable crawl herein. So, (I hope) we'll probably split the chore, I do the en.wikipedia projects page side, and he the whatever equivilent over here. (Probably means I have to do a lot more browsing over in Meta too... at least if we take a stab at making it an true interwiki project... will need study, I'm certain.
8.2 Wanna help. Sorry for the delay. But I did loose power in the thunderstorm... and at least six mostly completed edits in the stacks of two browsers. (I don't like to save until I'm 'Done'... this time it cost me six hours or so).


9.0 Nice to meet you... Do you really want to talk about deletion policies? NOT! <g> // FrankB 00:25, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

concurrent note on pfctdayelise

(Above sub-sections added in case someone wants to interleave or revisit sections with links) // FrankB 18:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1 from pfctdayelise[edit]

reply_1/1 xchange[edit]

Hi again. Um... I have no idea how you expect me to reply to this, since you represented my comments by first-level numbers, but then made 2nd and 3rd level numbers your comments. So... I'll just write my reply and you can do whatever you want with it.

Interleaving with an alternate font works, your referencing numbers does too. - FAB

Not much of your explanation in 0-1 made any sense because as I said, I have no idea what you're doing. You said "the templates" like I would know...

Hmmmm, I thought 0.2.0. -- 0.3.2. introduced and built that picture rather well. I'm trying to help cross-wiki the category overhaul that user:David Kernow and user:Flamarande have been working doing for nearly some three months.
I'd thought it an 'official project' upto my wikibreak over our independence day week, but the matter seemed straitforward enough given the skelaton of the new categories they'd put up, and the detrius of the old maps categories, now marked by {{category redirect}}. I hadn't really had any need to poke in to see if there was a project page until I'd met some of the individuals, so to speak.
Then I found it was very 'Ad-hoc' which kind of gave lie to this here title. About the time I created that, I found out there was no official project, but we'd had the category 'blessed' by Cfd and the templates (well, at least the one!) praised in a Tfd. End en.wp politics so far save for posting a notice on WP:AN to please not speedy-delete categories showing empty pages ('Zero Pages') as they were image gallery categories echoing your gallery categories here. Is that a bad idea? Collecting all these lovely images means editors need to find them, so the interwiki links between categories are specific to that task and goal.
Recall why I found the Maps-psuedo project... I wanted to park maps in the right way and in the right place, primarily covering the historic era from antiquity (Greece and Rome) up to the Industrial revolution. Still do, if and when I get back to targeting history articles... among other things, this and four other projects are on my plate, though they interrelate some.
So in part, I started inter-wiki connecting categories which matched, relocating maps per their new system, and duplicating tools used. The interwiki connection is IMO essentially essential to minimizing need for editors to fix up goofs by other less knowledgable editors. It's also an educational window that will attract talent into the commons sister project. Since I'm basically lazy, even when busting my butt, the templates were written to take {{PAGENAME}} and match to the other wiki and tag them with the tracking category, all as automatically and as simply as possible.

reply_1/2 xchange[edit]

Also I have to say you are the only person I have ever seen use "WikiP" as an abbreviation for Wikipedia. "wp" I have seen but is there any reason you can't just use "wikipedia"? This has the advantage of being obvious and simple. Keep your "WikiP" as a RDR for you to use, if you like, but I think it's a really, really bad name for something you intend for others to use (which I presume you do?).

Well, My fingers are very large and clumsy. Regardless of how common it is used, this is a trivial matter of renaming it to a consensus choice. But it's genesis was really just lazy ole me! <g> It related, as I'm always dropping the abbrev. in things like wikiPolitics, wikiPtime, wikiPday, wikiPpay, wikiP_____ as opposed to 'RL' (REAL LIFE).
     'wp', otoh, I haven't seen
('til now), but then on wp, there is little reason to refer to the 'colonial empires of commondom', either! <g> Tests: {{wp}} (Obviously O-U-T comma out!),
Some alternative names of simplistic design
All extant templates can be seen in L to R order here
Case 1 Case 2 case 3 case 4 case 5 case 6 case 7 case 8 case 9
{{wpcat}} {{wpcat1}} {{wpcat1L}} {{wpcatM}} {{wpcat2}} {{wp2M}} {{wpcatNo}} {{wptmp}} {{wptmpM}}
{{wikiPcat}}} {{wikiPcatM}}} {{wikiPcat1}}} {{wikiPcat1L}}} {{wikiPcat2}} {{wikiPcat2M}}} {{WikiPcatNo}} {{WikiPtmp}} {{WikiPtmpM}}
On the Names choices. I cross such bridges as they occur. These made sense to me at the time... when I was much more worried about just making them work at all... followed shortly after by the consequent en-wp side WikiPolitics of Cfd/Tfd. (One empty category of pages filled with commons images... go figure!). Since they're brief and mnemonic, the question is up in the air (as well as already conceded—new proposals in table above!). As I said below in the courtesy note, DK and I have had a brief discussion on same above. His reaction mirrors yours. Now that they're in place and debugged, we can call them 'Purple with pink polka dots' or 'Harriet'. This kind of issue is always subject to debate on wikiP, so your reaction (and Dave's) is hardly surprising. Too me, having them work well was the key... repeat, I was a virtual virgin at templates. - FAB
The other shoe (new biz) is having evolved the logic, they are a lot more capable and flexible than the original go. So I want to go through them and see if we can eliminate one or two before any renaming. -FAB

reply_1/3 xchange[edit]

1.1.0, what on earth are you talking about?

Soooo, Why not simple wikiPlinks... see the cats needs below, also handles the interlanguage issue (Note each has a 'translation' stubbed in already listed in the guts of the template, so we were focused on language from the outset).

1.1.0. Also, looking ahead to the job finished daze was taken into account; Indirect application via template means the 'extra 'Aministrative' task-tracking cat' can be made to 'vanish' (alà vaporware by simply removing it from the tag (at a later time). )

:Tabled for look up - I need to save.

The auto-categorization that templates can do... in this case to 'Done' and 'More Work Needed' administration categories. Once we're finished going through everything, the template can omit the category, and it's no longer around... so becomes vaporware in software-speak. -- FAB /FrankB 23:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/4 xchange[edit]

2.0.0 As it happens I have both an arts education and some education in computer science. I don't see why you should assume that all computer scientists enjoy cryptic abbreviations though. ANYWAY... the point is this is not for tech-heads or computer scientists or people who enjoy cryptic abbreviations. If something is going to be widespread it needs to be simple and can I remind you again, Commons is for all Wikimedia users not just English speakers. If this is cryptic to me as a native speaker I can only imagine what it would be like to a non-English speaker. You may as well call it fgh4Shy8sW or some other keyboard mash.

Is there any reason you don't use spaces? Is there any reason you mix cases (aside from this "WikiP" notation) which is surely bound to be trouble? I just - just - figured out that "tmp" is probably supposed to be "template" (as opposed to its more common meaning "temporary"). So WikiPtmpM is "wikipedia template main"? Not that that makes any more sense...

??? Is there any reason you don't use spaces?
          like where do you propose or mean?
The 'M' in this case would refer to a guideline talk page such as that talking about the BOT on Template talk:Category redirect... it is the least likely to have many applications or see wide usage. Depends on the tools and who wrote them. Usage politics ala wp: One school likes embedding usage in the template as do me and Conrad Dunkerson; the other school wants the usage in the talk page for the template. The writer generally wins. (A lot of templates have and need extensive usage notes, though MOST of those won't find any purpose here... save I don't know how extensive your article space is, or what it's purpose is, so I reserve the right to revise and extend that judgement!)

reply_1/5 xchange[edit]

OK so let's look at this template specifically, Template:WikiPtmpM. I see it's being used on template:Category redirect. So what does it do... it links to the template on English Wikipedia, and links to the template talk page by calling it "Main Article". Why exactly is this template necessary? What is gained by using it that you won't get by inserting a simple interwiki link [[en:template:category redirect]]? Not to mention the unnecessary visual clutter... imagine if 100 wikipedias decide to implement this (or even ten!). It won't be pretty. Interwiki links are concise and neat. I don't understand a single advantage this template has over them.

Ah, finally an issue of substance... but alas off to the side as something of a false start. The visual clutter is very necessary to remind people on either project that there is an equivilent A) template B) sister project. Yes, we could give it as a simple link... which any editor at wikiP could justify removing, or moving to a place of non-prominence. The presence in the templates is just consistancy and auto-categorization. The more complicated templates probably won't be used here at all, but if they are needed, their complicated useage is usually given on talk pages for historical reasons. Those here, can be redesigned to be more muted and less spacious... but I modeled them deliberately on the sister projects standard links as what is the common denominator. WikiBooks, WikiSource, Wiki... whatever all look like these tags... on en.wp, so I made those here look similar.
But 'The Focus' of the templates (even WikiPtmp & 'M') is not templates, but is interconnecting the sister assets here to there and vice versa, as much as possible. Meta has already given that goal a common structure as a starting basis, as you know. The fundamental skelaton of categories is already defined and more or less equivilent. The daughter and cousin categories are sometimes at variance, but not usually in any important way. Take the connectors thing... we did in email. Aren't those article breakdowns the same as one of your galleries? As they should be.
So the templates are supposed to be 'visible' nags (sort of like me wife!) reminding editors of the structure, helping navigate category to category and project to project, et. al. Again, it gives advantages to the commons of visibility and being connected. Getting over here now requires knowing the Url, a shortcut or a hyperlink... that's inconvienient, and a big reason you have a labor shortage, IMHO. Call them advertising if you like. I call it useful convienience and interconnection. You asked above did I want and expect others to use the templates. Damn straight. I want enough compatibility between the two edit worlds that others will feel comfortable donating their time and off-burdening everyone else. I picked on your 'lack of same' to get your attention the other night, N'est pas? I'm big into not letting people waste my time... or that of others. The few occasions where I've gotten sharp with someone on these projects was when they crossed the line and wasted others time.
Right now you have one group of experienced talent chasing the same image issues as you are concerned with over there because people find it easier to upload there in the known culture. Those people could be over here helping clear your backlog were this project better accessible. Many barely know this project exists, and would have to navigate several links figuring out how to get to this url. I asked one of the big-bees in that WikiPimage-managing-project 'hive' how images got transfered into the commons. They are essentially offloaded to a PC and re-uploaded and then tagged as redundant for deletion... Each step needing manpower and time delays and extra computer resources. Stupid. Unconscionable! A tremendous labor sink and waste of time... time that could be at work on your Commons backlog. This current state frankly merges on malfeasance by the foundation. I'll be saying so, soon, on the proper venue.
Cross connecting the cats allows that to be automated as when the image is tagged with an 'equalized' category plus a 'copyright vetted' tag (Say 'transfer' {{xfer}}) auto-category list tagging can be used together to port these images here where they belong. On this side, {{xfer}} will contain a different auto-category, category:Images vetted by Wikipedia editors... another 'Work Done' list that can be used to monitor and spot check the process. (Preliminary talk stage scheme--I've tackled the technical feasibility of same, it's doable per the experts.)
This system will change the current fiasco across the board, because all major category nodes will be cross linked and have the same heirarchy... necessitating far less additional manpower needs as things can go much more efficiently. The computers talk at Megabytes per second. There is no sensible reason that such vetted images can't come over here properly automatically when vetted there and tagged.
Now that's not the map psuedo-project, but the template system that came out of it as a tool. Is there some good reason to not cross connect categories and link to articles with more information? The informed editor will make better decisions, that's an early goal of the foundation (Btw). This small amount of category page real estate these tags take up provides a visible reminder that en.wikip and the commons have those sister resources, which is there lasting purpose. There is no reason you couldn't go with a lower profile interwiki style (say like the below), but I believe (without knowing for sure) that that style was selected at Meta long ago.
Example lower profile
Interwiki sister category: Some Name.
Please see article Alpha-Xray-Zulu for additional information.
The devil is in the details, but this concept is all about connecting same. I don't care how it's implimented, so long as it gets done! // 02:11, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/6 xchange[edit]

Then I see this... Category:WikiP difference with Commons Cats oh wow :o Why are you trying to equalise Commons and English Wikipedia?? Why is it necessary or even important? Are you extending this to all regular categories and templates too or just the "meta" information ones? Either way..... I'm sorry but I really don't think this is scalable or desirable.

Then why pray tell. It is certainly desirable, but My reasoning is pretty well covered immediately above.
'Equalize' is a semantically slippery word, foisted off on us as a 'compromise' solution to the objections of one complainer about naming conventions during the Cfd of it's predecessor. My original bad name (I seem to have a talent for bad names!) was like: 'WikiP equalized with Commons Cats', so I'm really the coiner of the word in either name. My sense is that spelt out below, nothing big or menacing. So don't get too excited and go off on a tangent.
By that, I simply mean the categories of the same names on each sister project have the same parent categories and the same sub-categories... the skelaton or branch structure analogy. I've had to adjust only a few things here and there. (And I'm the only one so far with experience! <g>) Mostly they are already equalized, save for pipetrick sorting. Meta has pretty much done most of that for us on the skelaton analogy. Differences are when a cat level covers materials specific to it's mission. Maps is an excellent example. The various images and media categories off the years/centuries structure are another such good example. The goal is to 'uniformitize' the interconnection catalog tree and main branch structure, not the minor sub-nodes and leafs... save where sufficient materials are in such leafs and they happen to coincide with a category named the same on the sister. It should go without saying, but renaming categories is not the focus, nor is creating the complete tree of each sister. That's where {{WikiPcatNo}} comes into play. It concurrently means the category has been vetted versus compatibility with the sister en.wp, but that such a category was not deemed a good idea. The difference list is a tracking category to see all such decisions. Like the 'Equalized' and 'Matching name' categories, the auto-categorizing can be made to vanish when not wanted. Or resumed at need. // FrankB 02:54, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/7 xchange[edit]

3.0 Category:Uncategorized templates........... in the time it tackes to give a template this category why not just give it a proper one?!

This is a cross-linked en.wikipedia administration category, not my name. For compatibility and ease of porting template tools to this project, I strongly, nay urgently request you live with it's minor illogic, to your way of thinking. If it really bugs you, come up with an alternative name and suggest a renaming on wikipedia Cfd. I'll support you. I only want harmony and peace between sister projects and their strong participants.
You can always ignore it and pretend you never saw it. T'would be better to just tough it out, and figure out where to sub-categorize it in your extant system. (What cannot be cured, must be endured. That's the way soldier! Hup, two, three... <g> (Just don't loose any sleep over it, Okay?) // FrankB 03:02, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/8 xchange[edit]

5.0 You seem to be continuing to use two should-be identical cats, please just request a category move on User:Orgullobot/commands for either category:Navigational templates or category:Navigation templates... it's totally crazy to have both being used.

I gather from that it's far easier to rename a cat over here. It takes an act of congress... in the form of a Cfd with a mandantory seven day wait over 'there'. I'm open to renaming Navigation templates, and posted a note about it on en.wp template talk two weeks ago. No one has suggested an alternate name the last time I checked. Care to take a stab?
'Once we define a formal WikiProject', then it gets easy to rename, as it's really a project template list category, N'est pas? So it morph's to 'Wikiproject interwiki link categories templates' or whatever we call the project. So I council patience. Rome was not built in a day, and when one is explaining in talk or email, one is not being productive, merely respectfully attentive and polite!
'Navigational' is again, an recognized en.wikipedia administrative category... one people will look here for to see if a tool is available should they deign to spend some edit time here. In sum, keep all such (they're tagged with some 'WikiPcat1' variant, or I'm slipping, and suffer to add them to your local tree of tools cats so the rest of us can find those! // FrankB 03:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/9 xchange[edit]

6.0 you say you despise redlinks but you imported Template:Middle Ages Tall and there are redlinks littered all over these templates.... I think this template is really inappropriate. Commons is not at the same stage of development as English Wikipedia....

Do point me to something that explains article space here.
More below

6.1 I don't have a problem with interwiki linking categories. You don't need a template for that.

Beat to death above, Answer me on the point however about those/these being the interwiki standard.
     All begin: <div class="infobox sisterproject">, so I thin' we're looking at a Meta guideline. Your point on other languages (made some where... email?) probably has merit, but the template is again a way to work around That. I'm systematically installing them as the first line, so can be expanded to a nav table across the top margin to margin with other language links small. There are plenty of example navigation templates that can be used as models for something vertically tight, yet with lots of links. See Template:MBTA for one with colors used creatively, the bottom of this for several others.
I can't guarantee my subconscious didn't pick up on this, but I don't think it was because I made it to this part of your message. But I do know, at 19:29, 14 July 2006 it was one of the first things I did today over here. Actually triggered from example cited in the longer email I've been sitting on all of today finished circa my second cup of wake-up. See: category: Middle Ages in use. I also fiddled with it expermentally to see if it worked in 'accessing categories' format. Flunks on both sisters for that, but strikes some gold too. there, here. Needs some study of base articles material and commons resources to see if such sister cats make sense. Certainly the Middle ages Humanities subset is pretty consistent.
In sum, while I hate redlinks, the mere act of porting something doesn't mean I have time that day to fiddle with same... but does mean I had time to add to my to-do list! <g> // FrankB 04:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

reply_1/10 xchange[edit]

7.4 Wow. I think you were right at the start when you said you should have put more time into studying the lay of the land. I have to agree. For one thing, we have enough trouble pulling together anything resembling a community here. Almost all users have have their "home" project where they spend most of their time and it's not the Commons. So all the maintenance work that is necessary here... there's very few volunteers to do it.

We don't even have enough volunteers to check newbies' work each day (not exactly a welcome committee, but related). We don't have enough volunteers to follow up on copyvios let alone categorisation. We have something like a 10,000 image deletion backlog. Why do we have all these things? Because everyone is happy to just come here for 2 second to upload their stuff, then go back to their main project where they would be happy to do maintenance work. But here, it's a losing battle.

All I can say is please, please, please, don't treat the Commons as a mere extension of the English Wikipedia. Please stop and get some more feedback on what you're doing. From what I've seen of what you're doing it's huge overkill and isn't appropriate or necessary. Why don't you write a short summary of what you're trying to achieve on the commons:Village pump. I will let people judge for themselves. But it's really important to have the local users on-side before you implement some huge system all over the top of them.

I've been incredibly negative I know. Normally I would not want to be so negative to someone who is keen to help out. But this just doesn't look helpful to me yet. So, I'm sorry... if you want to ask me anything about the Commons you're welcome to (and yes, we can discuss deletion categories... if you want). But I would really like to know, how does equalising Commons with English Wikipedia benefit the Commons? Regards --pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:42, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually - I suggest you just ask for advice/feedback from User:Duesentrieb. He is extremely experienced with the category system and general Commons organisation. He will listen to you fairly. --pfctdayelise (translate?) 13:46, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion templates[edit]

See my answer at Template_talk:Deletebecause. Arnomane 23:56, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Non-Orphans[edit]

'Orphan' on the Gallery only refers to the image's usage on Commons, meaning it should be in a category or on an article in Commons, so that others will be able to find it in the future. I agree this terminology is not clear, though. (I'll respond to your longer reply later when I'm at home, I'm at uni at the moment.) --pfctdayelise (translate?) 03:40, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Just got your messages... and the wife just came home and wants to talk/see/speak... So will puruse later and answer. I'm told I can move templates (and will automatically create redirects... which work as if new name by my template guru CBDunkerson so I'm quite willing to adapt. Dave Kernow had taken an issue with WikiP... as well above if you read our lengthy exchanges. Bottom line: It seemed a good idea (for a name) at the time <BSEG>. Gotta run. btw recommend co-post to email... If I'm doing engineering or a WikiP night's edit, at least I get the word something's here. (Direct Addy is: Fabartus -at-, with due attention to avoiding webspiders.) Cheers! // FrankB 00:02, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
Hey. My Commons edits are here: [1]. Keep in mind I live in Australia and the English Wikipedia edit-data is months out of date.
Regarding "orphan", sorry I wasn't clear. "Orphan" is usually used in meaning "link orphan", ie the file is not linked to anywhere, so it's not being used. So an 'orphan' on Commons is an image that isn't on any article/gallery and isn't in any category. This makes it much harder to find, especially if it has a poor description, so we request that all media be put on at least one page via a gallery or a category. Does it make sense?
If you go to an image page here, at the top you will see a tab "check usage". Clicking this will give you a list of articles that the image is used in from all the Wikimedia projects (except for English Wikipedia as the data is out of date).
As for my name, it's a reference to a song called "A Perfect Day, Elise" on Is This Desire? By PJ Harvey. My name is Brianna (which you are correct, doesn't appear on my user page). My English Wikipedia userpage is slightly more informative.
cheers --pfctdayelise (translate?) 04:34, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
I'd submit it'd be kinder to the rest of us if you encoded a talk link into your signature! Perhaps, but I don't plan to, sorry. I guess you'll cope. :P pfctdayelise (translate?) 12:36, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Synchronizing Categories[edit]

Hi. I have tried to read through the discussion above, but I'm afraid I don't understand half of it. If I got this right, you want to synchronize the category structure on commons with the structure on the english wikipedia. My thoughts on this:

  • Many parts of the category structure on commons are a mess. Improving the structure is welcome.
  • Improving interwiki links, sister project links, cross-navigation, etc is a good thing.


  • If it ain't broken, don't fix it. Don't change categories that are established and useful, just because they are structured or named differently on another project.
    • Apologies to all on the length and disjoint nature. I was at the same time keeping too many balls in the fire and pulled two and a half-all-nighters trying to keep things moving here and at en.wp after a WikiPbreak.-FAB
    • Concur, though some parts of cat system here are superior (and take less effort to put right with less politics) — I'm thinking the general 'Meta defined' category nodes should be linked and anything that matches. The complimentary {{WikiPcatNo}} and CommonscatNo tagging can be added to build a 'mis-match' list. Which names changes if any are to be determined. I really hadn't seen this as a 'Project', but as a toolset within the Maps reorganization... once I started getting some success, it just makes more a more sense to me.-FAB
  • Commons has different needs than wikipedia. There are many things for which a category does make sense on Commons, but not on a Wikipedia - for example Category:Sheet music or Category:Clip art.
    • Agreed, and touched on, though perhaps more on the emails.-FAB
  • Do not create (nearly empty) "skeleton" structures. Create categories and galleries only as needed. The granularity of the structure should be adapted to the number of images actually available for a subject.
    • Agreed—actually, in my trials, the creation usually goes on on the encyclopedia, not here. As I noted in the email exchange today (repeating point made in this Tfd defense), Image Galleries aren't something I've ever run across on en.wp, save for the backlog list of images to be moved to here. I'm checking that, but I've visited a lot of image pages, and very few even have one category on en.wp that I've seen, at least. -FAB
  • There's no reason to sync to the english Wikipedia and not, say, to the spanish Wikipedia. The fact the category names are (mostly) english only is due to technical issues, and it may change in the near future.
  • Naming conventions on commons are different, due to its international/multilingual nature. For istance, Commons uses Category:Mammalia (the scientific name) while the english Wikipedia uses en:Category:Mammals.
    • The templates are in fact adaptable enough to handle that sort of difference, at least those on en.wp were written with enough options to actually cross to a different category name instead of the default {{PAGENAME}} link page. 'The devil there will be to identify such specific pages and oversee the proper linkage, instead of a creation of a name equivilent category. Function is function. You and Dave and I can do a trial run or five and see what that suggests. He says you're a guru, and I just put his notes about confering with you on maps cats with Brianna's suggestion to consult you when I saw your answer, so I'm very glad to meet you. Expert and Mentors are valuable! <g>
    • Actually, I believe things are already perhaps better synched than you imply, in the sense that various language projects already use their own alternate template and category names inside each of the English wikiprojects. I think the system software does the rest, as it should. Thus by tagging here with the single template I proposed, the system software will 'fix the links' to their own non-English 'equivilent name' as recorded on each en.wp page. (Look at virtually any technical article... the equivilent names are tabulated for such inter-wiki translation already. The only missing piece would be their own translation of the tagging templates... whatever we end up calling the set. They contain the function, the interconnection, not the name used in the specific project where we place them originally. It was realizing this as I answered Brianna's concerns that made me think this needs to be fast tracked into an official (Meta???) WikiProject proposal.) A conclusion I just reached last evening, vice the commons+en.wp project(s) envisioned before my wikibreak.-FAB

I see no point in creating several new templates - especially not if they only refer to the english wikipedia. Look into improving existing templates, like {{Sisterwikipedia}} - that template could for example automatically generate interwiki links. Creating separate "left" and "right" templates is completely useles in any case - placement can easily be controlled using optional template parameters. A template just saying "this needs work" is pointless - it applies to anything on a wiki. A template saying "this is ok" is equally pointles - it's bound to be obsolete (and thus misleading) very quickly. For coordinating restructuring efforts, we could use generic tags like {{todo}} or {{work in progress}} or something. Those should be short term tags.

  • I'd be bold indeed to walk in here an propose everything sucked and was in need of revision. I'm thinking this is far more promising an improvement however than I original shemed. Chaulk one up for 'serendipity', and boo-hiss 'to you' for thinking I might be that revolutionary. <BSEG> CBDunkerson and I had touched on positional controls in an email, but that's a refinement, and so an aside. It'll make for a one character name difference either way it's implimented. My scheme means no pipetricks in most cases. That's got a merit all it's own, but the two can be combined. My scheme is hardly the last word in any wiki environment, merely a trial attempt for the Maps that has grown into it's own concept... as a good general solution will and usually does. -FAB
I do believe we need to test my last para, which you just now challanged, as it were. If the template set 'Commonscat series' is replicated in say French or German (whatever), will it then link back as I believe once said template is placed on their category page. Bet you a Heiniken it will go both ways without any more fuss, than that! Thus the templates are universal, once translated in the local xx.wp project. Can someone bilingual try that with one of the pairs? Suggest Category:Middle Ages as a trial bed. -FAB
  • I'm afraid I'll need to play with {{Sisterwikipedia}}, to know what it does. Not documented to MY standards, I fear. <g> The given 'Lists' are in fact documented as 'very short term', so I disagree. Those Six! (2 sisters X3 on each sister) cats do provide a useful cross check when looked at across the interwiki divide in two browser windows... a missing item on one list should be visible immediately by mere eyeball inspection, to verify all equals are accounted for. The 'To-Do' list allows inter-worker co-ordination... says hey this can use a hand, or has been started. The 'disjoint' I've covered above... gives a place for your category cleanup task force to look hard and long. 'Nuff said!' -FAB

Note that on commons, category schemes are devised and maintained per subject matter, by their respective projects (like Commons:WikiProject Tree of Life). Many areas don't have such a scheme or a "project", though. So, if you want to create such a scheme or project for Maps or History or whatever - great. Even a general Category Cleanup Task Force may be a good idea. But before restructuring massive parts of commons, or creating infrastructure like sets of templates and policy/convention pages, make sure to coordinate with the community and listen to feedback. Please don't try to make Commons into a "back end" for the english wikipedia - import structures, conventions, etc only if they really make sense here for everyone and don't disrupt what we already have.

  • Firstly, we're talking about templates which are already in use... so beg to differ with term 'New templates' <g> They're already tested and used in a small list of test trials. -FAB
On 'especially not if they only refer to the english wikipedia'...Again, covered, I believe. (At least 'very likely so' in 'My Mind'), the disjoint tagging (WikiPcatNo and CommonscatNo) obviate creating sister-project categories (in the first pass at least)... by creating a list of such to work through and resolve things like your example
     'Category:Mammalia (the scientific name) while the english Wikipedia uses en:Category:Mammals.'
     Once identified, such can then be linked via the appropo pipetricked name links, which again tie in (If I'm correct about the system software) to the names given by XX.wp's table of equivilents to en.wp's names. At least I can think of no other reason to add such tags in each article and category on that project. (I even took care to build a 'evolved name' on things like Template:Commonscat2.

That List is: {da:Skabelon:Commonscat2de:Vorlage:Commonscat2fr:Modèle:CommonsCat2hr:Predložak:Commonscat2os:Шаблон:Commonscat2hu:Sablon:Commonscat2nl:Sjabloon:Commonscat2ja:Template:Commonscat2no:Mal:Commonscat2pt:Predefinição:Commonscat2ru:Шаблон:Commonscat2fi:Malline:Commonscat2sv:Mall:Commonscat2th:แม่แบบ:Commonscat2vi:Tiêu bản:Commonscat2zh:Template:Commonscat2 } as adapted from the Original 'commonscat' template, so I believe commonality is already present, with a little judicious effort. The system will need only recruit an interested party to 'tag' their own language wiki-categories to tie into what I propose. The WikiPcatXXX templates will then work for them as well (once they provide the equivilent translation link in the master here like {{WikiPcat}}; the 'pretrial names' have been helpfully added modeled on the above in THAT one, though not all, and that list is
     { da:Skabelon:WikiPcatde:Vorlage:WikiPcatfr:Modèle:WikiPcathr:Template:WikiPcathu:Template:WikiPcatnl:Sjabloon:WikiPcatno:Mal:WikiPcatja:Template:WikiPcatos:Шаблон:WikiPcatpt:Predefinição:WikiPcatru:Template:WikiPcatfi:Malline:WikiPcatsv:Mall:WikiPcatth:Template:WikiPcatvi:Tiêu bản:WikiPcatzh:Template:WikiPcat }.
     So a model is in place, given a suitable template name set, and I infer it will work across all the wiki's with minimal fiddling needed. Or so I strongly suspect. -FAB

Please don't feel put out by my comments - your efforts are appreciated. But please try to get a feel for how commons works (and in what ways it does not work) before starting to revamp major structures. Please keep in mind that commons is a unique project with unique needs, and that commons should server many other wikis in many languages.

  • Well, that would be churlish of me since I asked you to the party and tried to get across the idea I'm looking for input and advice!!!
I'm thinking of this more as adding a much needed parallel capability (and vastly greater visiblity to the commons, which should lighten the load over here, not complicate it!), not in any way revamping what already is (outside the Kernow/Flammerade Maps project), so please relax on that concern. I'll be easing into the culture here too, I'm already on the email list, for example, and have chimed in on a few deletion votes, et al.
Hope this clarifies things for all. Gotta deal with 'RL' for a while. Best to all. Hope you're all having a great weekend! // FrankB 22:17, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Regards -- Duesentrieb(?!) 10:00, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Repeat, on taking time[edit]

Discussion agenda, I hope?!!
  1. Think pushing 'WikiProject until Mid-August will be unwise with Real life demands.
  2. Would like to see continuing discussion...
    1. esp. template names,
    2. reports on some trial attempts by others to use the template system, ...
    3. especially someone that can try in another language and test my assertions of cross wiki scope
    4. really esp. template names from some more multilingual viewpoint.
    5. Anyone want to take a stab at reformulating templates so have positional ability per Duesntrieb's comments, that would be a very good thing.

Best regards to all. // FrankB 18:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

More thoughts on this[edit]

As far as I see, we already have sisterproject links and interlanguage links, and what you propose does not do anything else. Those existing features cane be improved in form and use, but I don't see any point in introducing anything "new". Mainly:

  • This should be in no shape or form about category names. They can be named whatever in any language. The important thing is to link them between projects.
  • Interlanguage links could be used to automatically show "translated" category names - see bugzilla:5638. This is to say: the "real" name of a category may not be so important any more in the future.
  • The category structure on commons is and always will be different from the structure of other projects. This is a good thing. As long as equivalent categories are cross-linked, it does not cause any problems either. Of cause, in places where the category structure on commons is defective, it would be good to look at the structure in other projects (not just the english wikipedia, though)
  • Use existing templates, structures and procedures. Don't re-invent the wheel, improve the scooter :P

Regards -- Duesentrieb(?!) 20:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

PS: please don't send me copies of wiki discussions per email. Just drop a note on my talk page if I don't show up. Please reserve emails for things that should not be public, and for emergencies. Or take the discussion to a mailing list alltogether. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 22:07, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure! -FAB
re: As far as I see, we already have sisterproject links and interlanguage links, and what you propose does not do anything else. Those existing features cane be improved in form and use, but I don't see any point in introducing anything "new".
As an engineer, I despise reinventing the wheel, so to speak, so could you please provide a couple of examples of each so I can compare and contrast. (Hung up on terms! Not sure I understand sense and meaning.) I know I don't follow what is going on or implemented in your bugzilla cite, though it sounds promising. Lastly, the templates provide a minimal interwiki link to A) both an Main article and B) an equivilent or near equivilent category (i.e. when Given an second arguement) or C) are robust to hook to even two sister catgories. Examples: , the latter which actually links two en.wp cats including Category:United States Navy submarines. (Note: WikiProject SHIPS is currently debating ships heirarchy in a big way. You may want to take a peek and have a say.)

So do please clarify what it is I'm supposed to be duplicating that is as noticable and as flexible. // FrankB 18:00, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Look at the wiki text of Category:CommonsRoot - seems simple enough to me. With your proposal, how many boxes would be on the page? And would they be providing additional information that is actually useful? "todo"-type tags should be kept separate from "sister-link" boxes anyway. Interlanguage links probably have to be done manually - the wikipedia sister-box could add them automatically, but that would be confusing if there was more than on link per language.
It would be great of course if more categories had this type of detaild interwiki-cross-links. And perhaps those existing templates can be improved. But in principle, I believe they are The Right Thing -- Duesentrieb(?!) 20:45, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Belated answers below following
Uh, excuse me, what are you dowing now? You added your boxy thing to CommonsRoot... which is redundant to the sisterbox below, and also wrong (the category name clearly does not match). You seem to think that the english wikipedia is special somehow - well, it isn't. When thinking about sisterlinks, you have to think of all projects, and devise a solution that works for all. Creating boxes like yours for each and every of the 670+ projects would be massive overhead - using them all on a page like CommonsRoot would be pretty insane. We need a simple and compact solution for sister links, not a flood of boxes, and no special treatment for the english wikipedia.
Now you seem to be taking this even one step further by making sister-boxes for templates - a bad idea for the same reason as stated above. It's also getting silly at the point where you put sisterlink-boxes on the template page of sisterlink-boxes. Interlanguage links are sufficient for templates IMHO, a somwhat more prominent solution can be used for template categories. That should be sufficient to find what you need, no?
Please help to work on a consistent solution for cross linking to all projects. What you are doing now goes into the wrong direction entirely. -- Duesentrieb(?!) 09:44, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Answers to Dusentrieb[edit]

Root category to root category certainly does now match... it didn't though. <g>
Sorry this seems to have been overlooked. It wasn't, but I'm trying to get ready for a two week vacation. The 'template' version was the second ever made, and serves as all my boxes do to make interwiki connections. I actually wrote here, when the commons failed to have common tools (templates) to various utility templates on en.wp. Since most of those all have interwiki equivilents, perhaps we need a special interwiki link for the commons. Since we don't, the WikiPtmp/Commonstmp pair of templates do the job. If not to the 'exact namesake' then to the functional equivilent. I've been looking at all the sisterwiki templates as you have seen, and tagging it signifies that I also ported it there. I even tested it on several categories. w:music, iirc and a couple of others, but I don't think such an intrusive template will survive the hurly-burly of en.wp politics. My commonscatXYZ and WikiPXYZ templates at least follow the precedent of Template:Commonscat which is used in all the articles over there. So commonstmp 'Boxy thing' was percieved as laudable in the wikipedia Tfd, so perhaps you should consider it's benefits?
Tagging equivilent templates allows one to use only a single click to see the equivilent—that's not an inconsiderable aid to productivity, and neither are the same category names for administering such. I don't care how snobby and ruffled you want to get about this is not en.wp, you still have to deal with the fact that most multilingual people working wikipedias and the greater balance of available editor talent works thereon, not on this tiny sister, comparatively speaking. The more things that are equivilent, or tagged to find the equivilent, the bigger and more productive the workforce here can become.

re: With your proposal, how many boxes would be on the page? And would they be providing additional information that is actually useful? "todo"-type tags should be kept separate from "sister-link" boxes anyway.

My boxes may well merge with the sisterlinks inasfar as true sisterprojects as distinct from sisterwikipedias, iff and when the sisterneeds a link. But that should be handled by a parser function once the need to not put every language's link into the template is eliminated. In sum, we should end up with some self-expaning 'clean' subset of possible links headed up by the wiki-main-article page and wikipedia category pages. Call them user boxes in an array TBDL.
Marrying the two approaches at this point is very premature, as until the system software can do the translations, hand tagging and translating per the high manpower penalty sisterwikilinks boxes is the only way to link those... and any such tagging which correctly identifies a correct en.sister category where not a wikipedia is effort to the good as then the parserfunction logic of what I envision will have that hopefully valid reference.
So my aiming goal is to have a single tag set (on each wikipedia project, translations to the various xx.wikipedia's) for cross connecting by server time, not the time of us volunteers who could be doing more useful less wasteful editing, for all language wikipedias and so every sister's categories work seemlessly by way of what language a person has logged in under. That will be most efficient if it's done in system software, not some problematic script like your bugzilla cite.
All the servers have to do is take the inter-wikilinks and database index the proper alias based on the browser's current language indication. A fast array look up with a simple indirection. Other types of sisterprojects should be handled by a sisterlink defined by a parserfunction.
If the WikiSource has a category that suites one here on the commons, but Wikibooks has none, one shouldn't see the Wikibooks links, which currently show up even when they are false leads. There were three dozen or so multiproject sisterlinks on en.wp that left me shaking my head. Somebody forgot that most 'customer users' aren't editors.
This system I am trying to develop will be far superior to manually editing in 47,345,872 different interwiki links as the current sisterlinks project is pursuing... that simply is far too unmanagable, not to mention hard to edit and prone to error. Such links have to be gotten right in each file for each version, not just once so the database can update itself and index from same properly. I see no sense in manually and tediously programming such impractical templates when the server can parse the edited page, make a language check and index the database of interwiki links in one easy step, or conversely stream out the apropo translated interwiki link when a Bulgarian or a Russian user is accessing the commons.
I'm not sure that the buzilla script will fail, but I am sure that it won't allow linking to a main article page as I also consider to be a high priority goal. Such is not in it's specification, so far as I know.
Which by the way is the answer to your Those existing features cane be improved in form and use, but I don't see any point in introducing anything "new". So are the capability of linking several sister categories as seems needful at times going both ways if you don't want to level and equate the two English language sister's actual category names. My templates will and do currently handle names mismatches. The trend in en.wikipedia is towards more discriptive longer better organized names for categories. Just as the 'Map Categories Reorganization' project here disdained abiguous names like 'Historical maps of ________' in favor of the more precise 'Maps showing the history of _______' or 'Old maps showing the history of ________'. Such disdain is well considered, and I like to think I had something to do with the trend on en.wikipedia, though David Kernow is far more active in pursuing category politics on either sister.
Were we in email contact, you would have recieved some of the discussion therein which pretty much covered all this to Brianna and others. And also the outline of a vetting process to prequalify interwiki transfer images for automatic transfer here —one which will aim to correctly tag them for landing here when the server moves the image—after first also scanning the data and uniquely coding them so duplicate images can be identified and the transfer of the image can be verified before deleting on the sourcing system.
In sum, I'm experimenting to see what needs defined, what is already available as hooks or resources, and what needs there actually are to sensibly interconnect things. Until you know such, one simply cannot write a sensible proposal. All my experimentation has been small scale and certainly unsystematic at this time, save for where we began, in Maps categories, and sparse even there pending David Kernow and Flammerade's say to get going again.
I'm an engineer, and the waste and efficiency is merely appaling to me. There is no reason to put up with it, and I'm quite willing to argue it out with Jimbo if need be, as there is a need. The scripting overhead in bugzilla:5638 does nothing to minimize the inherent data transfer and lookup inefficiencies inherent in that scheme. My thought is that the capability to replace them with that few microsecond blazingly fast array lookup table as mentioned is highly desirable and that solution is at best a dead end.
All (or, at least, most all) the wikipedia's language task force editors tag the en.wikipedia articles with the translated names, there is no reason that such can't be collected and tabulated into a small database on an as needed basis. The new page is entered into the archives after all, and the added overhead is frankly, trivial. Most language task forces also tag the categories as well, but that part of it is inconsistant... perhaps they started tagging the commons categories at some point? I haven't seen a lot of that though and should have. In sum, I'm still investigating ways and means. If one set of the English langages categories are tagged, and the other linked, I'm quite sure people will be able to get around at least, even if the system software cannot reference around the corner when such a tagging issue is in the wrong place. Null tagging is even easier—use the default English article or category per my template.
Sorry for the delay, I guess I thought it off the To-Do when I answered Brianna at length on most of this. See you in a few weeks. If you can give me a reading list to see what is behind the interwiki's that would be appreciated. They apparently aren't currently in the data base now as an independent set of organized dats per CBDunkerson If I have my way with Jimbo's priorities, that will change. Best regards, // FrankB 21:15, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Alternative Category names[edit]

I've come up with two names for the hated Category:Navigation templates I wanted to see if anyone liked.

These are:
       Category:Category templates
       Category:Templates used in categories
and the matching interwiki names
       w:Category:Category templates
       w:Category:Templates used in categories.
  • Alas, I feel the names are TOO general. Feedback? // FrankB 14:58, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
Category:Navigation templates on en.wikipedia has been renamed by Cfd to Category:Wikipedia navigation templates, which makes not much more sense, but is some improvement. Suggest we follow suit here. // FrankB 18:02, 22 July 2006 (UTC)