Template talk:Category scheme space travel

This is the discussion/talk page for: Template:Category scheme space travel.

Created

The file for "Template:Category scheme space travel" was created on 8-December-2004 (at 10:23 UTC) by User:Srbauer. -Wikid77 04:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Showing actual link

21-Nov-2007: Three years after creation, I linked the actual article-name in the notice, as an italicized article title. After days of trying to find NASA image categories (especially for space probes), I came across that article revealing the mysterious outline of over 110 subcategories (article "Commons:Category scheme space travel"). I suppose seeing the word "category" made me imagine that link was just another major category, rather than an article name clarifying the overwhelming mystery of how to determine those 110 spaceflight/NASA subcategories, which took me 2 days to fully understand why I didn't think it would be worth reading. I changed the link name to be obviously the important article-name, not just a meek, mealy-mouthed reference to another "category" (hey, like I needed to see a link to yet another category, after having seen dozens in just a couple of days). Remember: wiki burnout occurs due to each 2-day delay of users stumped by things as simple as not seeing a category-tree of 110 subcategories. -Wikid77 04:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Beware any more wiki-burnout

21-Nov-2007: Also causing wiki-burnout: losing edit-pages due to transmission error with "page cannot be refreshed after timeout" and the oh-so-brilliant edit-conflict (because another user modified one word, so we threw out the entire edit-session, because we have the "sum of all human knowledge" and we're not utterly stupid, or are we? wiki-duh). There's "dumb" & "dumber" and then there's pitifully stuck-on-stupid "wiki-duh" as the standard procedure for throwing away an entire edit-session upon finding an edit-conflict. Uh huh, the "sum of all human stupidity" is a more-accurate phrase for what MediaWiki version 1.6 edit-conflict is all about in year 2007. -Wikid77 04:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Redo boring phrasing

21-Nov-2007: The wording about the category scheme is too bland. Note the problem:

"This category is part of the category scheme space travel."

Such bland wording involves critical issues:

• Category fatigue: Due to people seeing an overwhelming ocean of category names, the lower-case word "category" won't generate much curiosity; more is needed to capture a new reader's attention.
• Overwhelming mystery: The reality of over 110 subcategory names (for space travel, alone) presents a massive, mysterious confusion for sorting images into the various subcategories. Most people zone-out trying to discern/remember perhaps 20 sub-groupings, so the article explaining the scheme mystery is crucial to an understanding of the extensive list of 110+ subcategories.

The wording needs to address those problems, by saying more than mumbly "category" which will likely deter users (for days) from checking that "category scheme" link. Hence, I suggest using the term "category-tree" to focus attention for the link actually clarifying the overall structure, rather than being yet another "category" to view. -Wikid77 04:45, 21 November 2007 (UTC)