User talk:Fabartus/Archive03

transfered several years of mostly being inactive today // FrankB 02

43, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Since you seem to be

I doubt I need to point this out, but bots are stupid. :) The auto-categorizing the upload bot does is terrible. Nearly every week I send my bot out to remove some obviously wrong categories (for example). Of course, humans still have to review the image pages anyway, but this keeps maintenance and higher-level categories clean. When reviewing these images, the main thing to check is the categories, everything else the bot normally gets right. After you get those in order, you can simply remove the template (no need to comment it out). You can also remove incorrect categories and useless things like "no original description". What I do to find categories is I start typing in the search bar or at the bottom (category bar) and look for existing categories in the drop down (some might be redirects). Or do a search, of course. Anyway, I cleaned up the page so check that out for what I normally do. We're not use to seeing <references /> here since we're not an encyclopedia, have no verifiability policy, etc. etc., but if there's some good informative links to include than I normally just make them superscripted number links. I added Category:Fiction for now since I couldn't find an appropriate subcategory (we have no where never the category system in place that en.wp has). Also, don't be afraid to add non-existent categories to images if you think they should eventually be created (and remember it only takes one image to make a new category ;). I hope that helps. Rocket000 (talk) 06:57, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

the number of CFD discussions I've seen picking on a cat for having 4-5 members Not here on Commons. :) We have many categories with one or two images. The reasoning is that they will be filled in at some time in the future. Unlike categorizing encyclopedia articles, we don't have to worry about things such as notability, undue weight, and making categories too narrow in scope. We just categorize what's uploaded and make new cats accordingly. If you don't want to create the category, just add the red link category to the image anyway.

About merging (or renaming) categories, never do it by hand unless there's only a few. We got a bot that takes commands. Only admins can give him commands, but you can propose merges/renames on the talk page or just ask an admin directly. An easier way is to use {{Category redirect}} and a bot will regularly go through Category:Non-empty category redirects and recategorize (see the template's source for how that category gets filled), however these should only be used if the target category already exists and you actually want the redirect in place. We need to use category "redirects" sparingly as they cause more problems and aren't that useful for navigation anyway. My bot can also make runs whenever needed (just ask). Rocket000 (talk) 07:28, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I'm a wikiworkaholic too. I don't know of any such script off hand, but I'll look around and let you know if I find something. Cheers, Rocket000 (talk) 07:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Bot request

Well, the easiest to do is to "rename" the whole category. For example, every instance of [[Category:Atmospherical optics]] on every page would be changed to [[Category:Atmospheric optical phenomena]]. If there's only some that should be moved, I recommend using a tool such as Cat-a-lot.js. I could do it with AWB and a list too but the other way is faster. Should I go ahead and do Category:Atmospherical optics → Category:Atmospheric optical phenomena? Rocket000 (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I went ahead and made the merge. I'll leave it to you to pick out those that should go in Category:Atmospheric optical phenomena of Earth. Either turn on the Cat-a-lot gadget and do it yourself or drop me off a list (just replace whatever is on User:Rocket000/Sandbox with the list if you want). I strongly encourage using the gadget—it's fast and easy. Rocket000 (talk) 09:14, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Just checked ... I've no move tab. Your last came as I was doing so... Heh, it's not that easy yet. Every page in the category still needs to be edited. We rely on bots to do the work, specifically SieBot who can be given commands trough User:CommonsDelinker/commands. Rocket000 (talk) 09:50, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

re: ' Heh, it's not that easy yet. Every page in the category still needs to be edited. We rely on bots to do the work, specifically SieBot who can be given commands trough...'
'Heh heh heh--It never is, is it. It never is... Though I did' 'had thunk the developers were planning on that "soon"... 'a very relative term' being edujamcated well in the sciences me thinks personally, they use the units of the geologic time scale. Not quite sure why they can't do such as a sort of superbot and tack that into the system, pretty quickly. Every time I recall hearing about some new "goody"/change, seems like it's taken a good year and a half or p'raps two! Sigh. I'm starting through de cats now so will get back on botting those pages we've "misfiled temporarily". // FrankB 15:41, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Rocket000#We need a compromise on this

Just a note that I replied to your message there. Rocket000 (talk) 20:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)

Pong

Hehe, I know what a ping is, I just meant to leave you the message here. I'm so use to replying on my talk page... and I never see edit summaries since that notice banner takes you right to the page itself, so I don't think to use them. Ping, BTW. ;) Rocket000 (talk) 00:31, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Again. Rocket000 (talk) 02:16, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Bad category

re: [http://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Vinter.JPG&action=history |Visited via| Ponds edit... apparently left a note on cats...

Hi Frank, Thank you for your interest. My picture, Vinter.JPG, was changed by Sop066 on 17 April 2007. I shall undo this change and rename my original picture as [[Image:Vinter2.JPG]]. In that connection I shall give it the categories, it deserves. --Sten Porse (talk) 17:53, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

reply

Your welcome...

'KAy, sound good, so go 'fer' it. But at the least, annotate the picture with where (The five newspaper questions: Who, what, when, where, and why) would be a big help to others, otherwise may never get used, save perhaps for generic "Winter scene". More than one language too if you can handle that using the language templates ({{De}}, {{En}}, {{Fr}}, {{It}}, etc.). If the pond name is known, should also identify that too. That gives at least three cats right there, towm/city + pond + winter... four if you know the date. (Might be part of the camera data) // FrankB 00:59, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

The image now has geocoding, descriptions in Danish and English, and five categories: Denmark, Winter, Ponds, Ice, and Habitats. That must be enough?

Looking closer at the substitute image (Vinter.JPG) I believe that it must show some place in Norway or Sweden - considering building style and landscape forms - but that's only guessing...--Sten Porse (talk) 13:26, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

A template challange

A got a template problem maybe you can help me solve. I created {{Txrow}} to work like {{Tlrow}} but for slightly different purposes. I wanted to demonstrate all the "tl", "lts", etc. link templates in a table, however, I found tlrow to not be suitable.

1. For one thing, I was going to be giving examples of certain templates more than once (just different parameters) but I didn't want the "links talk view" links to be repeated. Easy enough to solve.

Should I presume this is where you installed example=...?

1. The other issue I had, which I would like help with, is that tlrow doesn't demonstrate empty parameters correctly for templates that don't ignore them; {{Tlf}} being one of them.
   1. (Example: {{the_next_param_is empty||see?}}).

You can see the table on Template:Txrow comparing the two templates including how txrow should work (accomplished by using a very ugly workaround). I hope this makes sense; it's kinda confusing when you're talking about examples of templates that are used to create examples of templates. ;)

Basically, figure out a way for {{txrow|tlf|1|2| |4}} to work right without having to do {{txrow|tlf|1|2| |4|example={{tlf|1|2| |4}}}}.

Thanks! Rocket000 (talk) 23:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

(refactored above)

1. After taking a quick look, my first impression is tlf is a fundamental problem. I'll have to experiment with it's #ifeq:x behavior for starters, but might try guts of w:template:tl2 {{tl2}} (I just updated it here, t'was way behind

--contrast with {{tlf}}) vice the chain in that or {{tlx}}
In the meantime, let me look at some tables on wikipedia, in comparison. Some of these used to have such help:: [[Wikipedia:Template:lc|lc]] , [[Wikipedia:Template: lcs|lcs]], [[Wikipedia:Template: cl|cl]], [[Wikipedia:Template: cld|cld]], [[Wikipedia:Template: lts|lts]], [[Wikipedia:Template: lt|lt]], and [[Wikipedia:Template: ...|...]], IIRC.

1. Is there a specific page in particular (or a history page link to one that didn't) where you've got a larger table up that shows some things the way you want, and others that funk out so I can examin what's happening?
2. Are you familiar with passing a parameter to a subtemplate to be used and manifest in the subtemplate as a template call? {{ {{{1}}} }} or {{ {{{1}}}|{{{2|}}}|{{{3|}}}|... }} forms. See {{[[WikipediaTemplate:32 Stories|32 Stories]]}} and subtemplates using a switch.

Sorry about the delay, but I took family time last night and vegged. // FrankB 15:24, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

xposted from User talk:Rocet000#your question on templates

ping // FrankB 15:26, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

2) Also see diff, morphing by substituting {{Tl2}} for {{Tlf}}... is this closer? Not knowing where you did your "ugly workaround", seems like a start on a cleaner output in other columns. // FrankB 15:34, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

3) FYI's

1. {ttNN} are 'community' sandboxes on a number of sisters,
   1. so template namespace sensitive parameters can be worked with and tested in namespace contexts.
   2. Also useful for morphing a template and spot checking it's behavior versus expectations and not affecting lots of pages while verifying it's lack of adverse consequences or better behaviors, etc.
2. That diff is your {{Txrow}} plus an inline comment identifying it's source. No changes otherwise... until the diff generation.
3. I've some errands to run today, so will be here on and off. Will make it a point to be around this evening (mine officially "starts" about six hours from now, but the two-three hours after that are flakey-availabilty depending on the wife's mood. Shrug.)
4. Not gonna proceed further until I hear from you. That example of a page blowing up, would so I can see the picture and problems would be most helpful. I generally use the talk:TtNN pages for such, if you already don't have a place. You might also want to take a look at {{Lts/}} for the links part of your table.

Glad to help, but my head's not "in dealing with template quirks" right now, so I'll wait for clarifications. // FrankB 15:55, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Category:Maps by region

"Maps of subcontinental scales" seems like a very awkward category name. "Subcontinental maps" is just another way of saying "Maps by region" in my opinion.

I suggest we combine all 3 into the existing "Category:Maps by region". It is more intuitive, and a lot simpler in my opinion. --Timeshifter (talk) 22:45, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Trouble with that is

1. T'was not the way we schemed the hierarchy back in 2006-2007; though in my absence and that of David Kernow, I see the commons guideline subpage has disappeared.
2. Subcontinental I agree is intuitive... but is also vauge. It sure has picked up a lot of supracontinental maps, which you caught me in the middle of sorting and recatting.
3. Continents are just a region, which have a well defined and understood existance, so I'm trying to tie that heirarchy into the countries... which leaves the odd group of smaller size, generally larger than countries.
4. But the death blow, is it changes the "Maps ..." / "Old maps..." naming schema... so the "of subcontinental scale(s) was the best I could think up on short notice...

Bear in mind there are specific subcontinents of long established meaning... India or Indian subcontinent and the Horn of Africa and Arabian pennisula... Indochina... I suppose, Southeast Asia, is debatable... but others I'm sure. So t'was trying to avoid naming collisions with that group of regions as well.

Thoughts now? Given a hierarchy of sizes... (Not sure what I've got in partial edits in back edits... but that was where I was headed.) // FrankB 23:01, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

A lot of people have worked on categorizing maps since 2006-2007. And we have had a fairly good working consensus. An organic consensus.

I think you misunderstood what I wrote. I wasn't saying that "subcontinental" was intuitive. I was saying that Category:Maps by region was intuitive. I don't think I am the only one that dislikes the word "subcontinent" in category names. Also, it seems that Category:Subcontinental maps has become a dumping ground for maps that people don't know where to put. I would rather they dump them in Category:Maps by region for now. We can create more subcategories therein to put those maps in over time.

Category:Maps by region has the benefit of working as a parent category for both subcontinental and supracontinental maps. I don't want to use those names as parent category names though. It would be OK, in my opinion, to use them specifically as in Category:Maps of the Indian subcontinent though. Since Indian subcontinent is a phrase that is actually used. --Timeshifter (talk) 23:29, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure where we've got a disagreement then, or where I'm differing from any Template:Wdy concensus(???), save I want to delineate a midsized region (Slippery word that "region" thing! By extension, so is subregion! Both "Relative" and so "Contextual", so either needs to have context defined... which leads to Maps by country subdivision(s) ... [eventually]. But there is a middle classification too, and categorization is all about classification, N'est pas?) larger than a country, but generally smaller than a continent, and keep the Maps... prefixing—organizing all in a hierarchy large to small. (And I know many have worked maps since! <g> RaHTHER obvious, that!) Regions per se, are large expanses, like continents, and oceans. I've been here now and again since too.

By "Organic consensus" do you mean: "(sociology) a form of social solidarity theorized by Emile Durkheim that is characterized by voluntary engagements in complex interdepencies for mutual benefit (such as business agreements), rather than mechanical solidarity, which depends on ascribed relations between people (as in a family or tribe)." (ala Wiktionary)

If so, how do you explain the overall disorder in many Maps categories? Something needs adjusted, clearly... or I would be happy donating my volunteer time elsewhere. My wife's ready to kill the foundation as it is! <g> // FrankB 23:50, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there is that much disorder. There are a lot of uncategorized maps though. I mean there are a lot of maps dumped in upper-level categories. But that is true in many areas of the commons. Pasting in {{Categorize}} in the relevant categories seems to help.

As for "mid-sized" regions. I always thought we used common terms for naming in Wikipedia/Wikimedia. We can't just invent new terms, I believe. And as for "hierarchy large to small" that is where Juiced Lemon lost his mind (also just my opinion). Not saying I am any saner. :)

And that definition of "organic consensus" sounds messy enough that it might actually work as a definition. Kind of like how people walk around each other in the kitchen. Getting work done in tight spaces without stepping on each others toes too much.

And regions can be almost any size. See w:Region. --Timeshifter (talk) 00:45, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Not sure about Juiced Lemon reference... clue me in. Know I've just seen his name.

Category names flow historically has gone from here to en.wikipedia generally, or we wouldn't have had all those CFD's a year plus back to match the schema DK and I put in place here. Used to have all sorts of ambiguous Historical maps of... Historic regions of, whatever. DK did most of the hard work, a month long study really (Gave him a barnstar for that! Deserved several really!), resulting in the Subnational entities data much has been organized to since.

Concur on Regions meaning, so constrained with the annotations, since we'd already set the Subnational entities up with Deusentrieb and the whole schema from countries to smaller divisions.

Actually rather unfond of {{Categorize}}... last thing I need told! <g> It's a little large for my tastes.

re: I don't think there is that much disorder. There are a lot of uncategorized maps though. I mean there are a lot of maps dumped in upper-level categories.,... I guess that's what I meant overall, but there have been some surprising extensions by themes that no one seems to have thought of... Category:Maps showing memberships by region or Category:Maps by regions and membership, which ever name seems best overall for one... I've had to add others too.

Gotta take a dinner break... or the missus will have nose really out of joint. TTFN // FrankB 01:09, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. I will reply in more detail later after I get some rest. One quick thing though. I have never understood the difference between distributional and membership maps of the world. --Timeshifter (talk) 02:19, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I'd inferred distributional was 'demographic' termish, and ... memberships were sub-categories of International organizations... to which I just subcategorized it AND Membership maps of the world. (I'm back btw, so yer 'OK' is belated. Perhaps I shoulda pinged. Sorry.) // FrankB 02:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I suggest we create a category called "World maps by theme". It is shorter and follows the "by theme" pattern elsewhere. Then we put all the world maps there that have a theme. We break them up with many subcategories. This would be intuitive and a very useful category for wikipedia illustration. Right now it is far less useful due to the lack of subcategories and the nonintuitive parent category names.

I just condensed {{Categorize}}. I thought it was too big also. It does seem to help though better than previous boxes. I notice more results over time after it is placed in a category. It gives newbies permission to categorize, and to create subcategories. --Timeshifter (talk) 09:42, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Aside: FYI, putting in the category uptree, helps keep such straight (usually)... see links of Template:Catlist-up (Edit Discussion links Page history) and Template:Cms-catlist-up (Edit Discussion links Page history). Whole list of links at Template:Catlist (Edit Discussion links Page history) but may show some others (non-ups) too, as the common subtemplate. // FrankB 02:38, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

Brilliant thought!

re: this message and Category:World maps by theme... though I'm finding there is haphazard organization structure there already for those belonging to International organizations, which I will opine further, is likely to be the majority. Suspect it returns to a question DK and I kicked around about how many categories is right and proper. From what I've been seeing, many cat to parents or grandparents and don't look for an appropriate maps category at t'all, at all— so to speak.

So my take has been that it is happening because too little is annotated about what goes in a cat, so I digs and make an edit like this... this for what is probably a soon to be discarded organization, or this and this to build the category structure such should have and force into a proper maps cat respectively. The other thing I think important in the parent categories is to pipesort maps into "|Space theme name" pipe sorting — so the Maps category tree "hits people" in the eye.

However, I hadn't thought of it in terms of an overall strategy, but was just handling cases that didn't have proper places. So kudos! Good thought. What if we extend to regional maps by theme? Makes sense in International organizations from what I can see. Roughly (by impression, which is to say a guess) there is a 50:50 split with one potential wrinkle... as illustrated by this diff where I <Brainfart!> initiated left the redlink cat Multiregional international organizations that someone else had tagged several images with. (Obviously I was ambivilant on that one... guess I figured we could consolidate later if it turned out to be a non-productive classification. Does fit within maps of regions by themes and I would advise Maps of the world by theme would be a better name than your redlinked "World maps by theme". Gotta run. Taxi Dad time again. // FrankB 22:52, 19 July 2008 (UTC)

I have been very busy. One quick thought though. It does not matter to me if the overall category is Category:World maps by theme or Category:Maps of the world by theme. But the maps currently in Category:Distributional maps of the world need to be in subcategories with manageable category names in my opinion. For example;

Category:World maps of incarceration rates for

Image:Prisoner population rate UN HDR 2007 2008.PNG

Category:World maps showing press freedom rankings for

Image:Reporters Without Borders 2007 Press Freedom Rankings Map Finnish.PNG

and so on. --Timeshifter (talk) 13:51, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

Agree, certainly in priciple. Also noting that one seed cause of the "problem" is lack of a system of subcategories in such parents a International organizations, and perhaps higher. Appears to me that need to have divisions by governmental and non-governmental and so forth. // FrankB 16:12, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

Yes, as the number of items in a category increase the need for subgroups increases. --Timeshifter (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2008 (UTC)

TUSC token 25f2bf2a6c27cc0f460ec9b96b11b491

I am now proud owner of a TUSC account!

Category:Location maps (2008 standard)

Sorry 'bout the delay...

re: Category:Location maps (2008 standard) is a newly-created category. Should this be called Category:Locator maps (2008 standard) instead. I haven't categorized much in this area. Locator or Location or both? I am not sure it is a good idea to use both. It seems "locator" is the standard here: Category:Locator maps. See also: Category talk:Location maps (2008 standard) and User:NordNordWest. I think it is a language thing. Maybe we should call the category something like Category:Locator maps (2008 geolocation standard). See w:Geolocation --Timeshifter (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I left a note on the project page on the German wiki about that just now (and ammended that before closing this!). For what it's worth, there is a discussion on that page that links back to a commonsFrench wp page here on standard color schemes for maps, apparently that began on the French wikipedia, then was moved here. here w/o using Meta or Commons international forums. Sigh.

To address your question directly, Locator maps predominates as was put in place by Deusentrieb, David Kernow et. al., and I questioned the originator of "Location maps" about ten days back (User talk:NordNordWest) and didn't get a response. ... he replied on his talk... I've updated my post linked above on that basis... See the template on en.wikipedia...

I was aware of the programable ability on some maps on en.wikipedia, but not being a maps graphics manipulator, hadn't realized the scope of the system being put in place internationally, so to speak. The upshot is that it looks like 'Locator' and 'Location maps' are both needed and that there needs to be a differentiation tagging and link template, more than anything else. It happens the technical difference is (I infer, but could be wrong) rectilinear equality of N-S and E-W axes, which gives an equal area projection—a format invented here in Massachusetts that I happened across a long while back now—in all places, in my kids pediatricians' offices! He's a mapophile. Unlike a Mercator projection, both Lat and Long curve, so it doesn't swell the size of things at higher latitudes (compare the shape of any landmass above 40 degrees north on a world map to a globes tracings). It's technically close in effect to a hemispherical projection from directly overhead, but zoomed in close so like a globe, it shows the true shape of the region on which it is centered. So there is a big technical difference, to which is added apparently that one can display an overlay of a "location dot" by specifying a correct and compatible geo-coordinate.

Other than that, just make sure they are subcategories of locator maps categories, and the hierarchy should shake out fine... discounting the SVG maps ambiguities rampant in the whole schema.

Visiting Category talk:Location maps (2008 standard), you seem to have found the right guy to deal with on this... from what I read on that de.wikipedia page, his English is good and I was going to close this and ask him if he'd help come up with a template. The only concern I have on all this is these projects are acting independent of international discussion forums, and if they are setting up standards, they need to invite more people to the table. // FrankB 20:31, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Can we copy all this to Category talk:Location maps (2008 standard)? You are a LOT more informed on this topic than me. I think you guys can work things out. --Timeshifter (talk) 20:38, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Do it... I'm working on the prototype template on the German de page as I write. // FrankB 21:04, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

OK. I copied this discussion over to Category talk:Location maps (2008 standard). --Timeshifter (talk) 21:17, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Category for Template:2008 Standard Location maps

So far, I've been working with mostly high level categories and haven't gotten into sub-categorizing into more specific groupings yet. I admit, some of these categories are not very useful but it's mainly to get them all in one place so people (like you) can start sub-categorizing in the areas that interest them. Right now we have Category:Category description templates which seems like a good cat or parent cat for the template you pointed out (idk if the others are similar). There's also Category:Category header templates. If you had a chance to check out User:Rocket000/Template category scheme you'll see that it's only for "by namespace" and "by type", not "by subject" (but I am listing them anyway). So feel free to make a new category if you think it would be a useful grouping. Rocket000 (talk) 00:00, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Botched move/Bot

re: category:Locator maps of countries of the European Union Vs. category:Locator maps of EU countries I can have my bot fix all those links. Otherwise, a hard redirect would be appropriate here (since it's empty and unlikely to ever be filled unknowingly). Rocket000 (talk) 00:31, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

1. Thanks, do so then. I already fixed one see also link to it, which clued me in.
2. What you guys don't double-dip with a hard redirect and a category redirect? // FrankB 00:36, 26 July 2008 (UTC)

Template documentation

I was asked to do some documentation for Geocoding templates, however, I only ever used a few of them and am not that familiar with how they work. I was wondering if you'd be up for doing some documentation. I was going to do some but I just got overwhelmed with all the parameters. I know you do a lot of documentation for templates you create and I've seen you in the history of some of these templates, so hopefully it will be much easier for you. I would really appreciate any help. Thanks! Rocket000 (talk) 05:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Give me a list below via ({Tl|Template list}} and sure... happens as I want to investigate those myself as I'm bumping into some of them over on Location maps and subcats all the time now. (I'm also trying to claw my way back to your page with a post 95% written, for which I was trying to access Latin Compasses and Compass by facts vice surmise. See you soon THERE!) // FrankB 05:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll make list tomorrow; I need sleep. And ping, BTW. Rocket000 (talk) 09:20, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I'm kinda late but... your Commons:SVG marker templates (now in the right namespace) reminded me about this. Do you think you can make a similar page for everything (or almost everything—use your discretion) in Geocoding templates? Keep in mind, most of the work is already done for you. See Commons:Geocoding and Commons:Geocoding/Panorama. Ideally, this would be a subpage of Commons:Geocoding. Maybe Commons:Geocoding/Templates? Check out the growth of geocoded images over the last year: Image:Commons geocoding graph.svg. That means the need for better documentation of these templates is also increasing at a pretty fast rate. Rocket000 (talk) 09:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

FUNNY! I was just changing out of "funeral clothes" and thinking I needed to get a handle on these/those... (See discourse below on diffs [my page] of categorization ideas on Location vs. much larger body of locator maps...

    Anywho... err how... SURE. (really just letting you know I'm "Just In").

On the script... what's a tool box? So don't know... I've rather paranoid about using tech I know nothing about so NOT experienced at all, at all with scripts...

    1st (Cherry) trial... loaded whatever to BOT move images here... that updated and created my monobook.js on wikipedia... somewhen the last two weeks.
    2nd... tried some 'popups tool' on wikipedia (very briefly) yesterday I'd stumbled over... that acts automatically on a link and has drop down options one grabs with the mouse... so "INTUTITIVE" once you see the drop down menus embedded in the popup. It also had a formal wikipedia help page and a edit protected source script, so I said what the hell...
    So... figure I be same fourteen y.o. girl who liked sex once and this one is coming across as first "premature experience"...
    IIRC/understood correctly, He opined he thought he'd fixed the Toggle Off... Search my signature in Posts on w:WP:VPT and his name on my talk there, my query back to him on his talk... (he answered on the VPT)... then you'll know more than me.
    I'm clueless. I do hardware and firmware and occasional C/C# or assembler... not CS/IT/browser techs. [Don't even load "plugins" unless feeling insane that day. Actually need to rethink that too... on my desktop, before my last mozilla upgrade, was able to text search into the edit window... that no longer works which is a real handicap on wikipedia.] Anyhow, I'm in... and I'll recheck to see and report what I DO see... things did appear different. OK... found it... that's a tool box Huh... Hmmmm, OK. Tried Maps of Bolivia and went off... nothing to turn back on shows up, right? Trying Maps of United States HUH! Maps of New York... -> Maps of Bolivia (maps 'back') --> "Off"... Same... [F5]... maps reappear... Actually not what I wanted but will be of limited use.
   My "Vision/wish" (not really specified this way) was for toggle off so could go cat to cat and not have to wait for thumbnails to load... This is useful locally too though. I'll thank him and report success, and ask if the other mode would be possible too. Handling the ability to retoggle it should be incorporated. [Is there a "Goodies" page(s) here? Someplace to list stuff like this? // 16:37, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Please no

Category:Multilingual support templates. We already have a whole system here. Please don't create another one. Please. See Category:Internationalization templates. Rocket000 (talk) 18:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

You're making me cry. We already use the "Lang-" convetion for language link templates. Rocket000 (talk) 18:07, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

put

"template:lang-" in your search bar?

Where are they? There are 5-8 longer named templates there, and I suspect you've deleted the one's I imported... if so, you deserve no help!!! What's the fucking rush!

Um, did you miss all [these? And no, I did not delete a single one of those templates. Rocket000 (talk) 03:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Template:Lang-es,

Deutsch:

... whew ~8)) !!! (Hmmmm ... is there some system setting here limiting the expansion of that drop down list? I'd get em all on en.wikipedia... not a few.

Before I get to the above, you made and edit to Template:Cms (Edit Discussion links Page history) with an edit summary along the line of "Why so complicated..."

It comes down to unfinished business and/or original flavors... and lack of due diligence.

Overall was morphing that family to an internationally capable template like this format... then Pathoschild pissed me off so much I left all the wiki's for anything but a rare much needed edit on en.wiki for a few months... maybe even six-eight... then gradually got sucked back in...

so now need to revisit old work, adjust and so forth for identical tested operation.

• It should be obvious that that format

(Aside: I think that logic was tested and verified... did that somewhere somewhen at somepoint... interesting experience, not being multilingual!)

... can be morphed with a language suffixed front end template so {{wpd-de}}, {{wpd-es}}, {{wpd-fr}} ... or alternatively: {{de-wpd}}, {{es-wpd}}, {{fr-wpd}} linking versions can be created that work between all sisterprojects. Or such similar names as make sense mnemonically on their language's sites. (redirects are cheap!)

The plan was to have that inline linking set for all templates listed in {{Wikimacro usage}}, which still needs more work to reflect THAT direction, but which has usage towards the bottom started during the beginning of the planned changeover.

• The simplest and for a time basic version of these would use the macroregisters: [[{{CMS}}{{{1}}}|{{{2|{{{1}}}}}}]], which is in fact (somewhere) the form they once had or may still do.

the whole motivation

Is shit should give some usage! Going to an image or a category page shouldn't require guessing games if a link can be provided... which is where en.wikipedia's lang-XX templates comes in.

1. So far as I can tell, the function isn't onto... not one to one.
2. Many international editors (Not active here... maybe this is in part WHY!) know and annotate the en.wiki versions on pages.
3. I kept getting burned annotating pics/maps/categories with fast oneline edits where the lang-xx templates had a presence really slowing things down... I'm referring to the following procedure, which can be really fast... iff the tools are here:
   1. Make some edit (pick one of the above) where an annotation would be useful
   2. form a link using {{Wpd}} and
      1. follow that and grab the intro sentences of the germane topic...
      2. paste into notepad, Globally replace ]] with }}, [[ with {{wpd|
   3. paste into where you started. Embed in {{En}} AND PROOF.
   4. Save and done... with whatever other changes you were making.

So that was my reason... note the category is linked to the international category you mention, so I saw those... different syntaxes... no name collisions here but for Template:Lang-ar (Edit Discussion links Page history) which was both uncategorized and maliciously vandalized, so it trashed the 5-7 pages here someone else had used it on. (Did I fix that??? -- no, someone else caught it though: "07:21, 1 August 2008 Herbythyme (talk · contribs) deleted "Template:Lang-ar" ‎ (Page is test, spam, vandalism or bot created: content was: 'Como a Petrobrás anunciou a descoberta de um novo campo de petróleo leve e gás natural no bloco BMS-11, na Bacia de Santos, em frente aos municí...' (and the only contributor was '[[Special:C)")

That's my story and I be sticking to it. If you think that is a problem, why? Obviously if a name is in use there is one case. If it's empty, why not give people templates they are probably more used to? Any which are identical can be changed to redirects. Shrug. In my opinion, if the sister projects were to spend more time trying for common tools and less time worrying about template counts (WHY???) more people would find it congenial to edit in this site... it's frustrating to not have a common base, when there is no good reason not to. En.wiki and the commons share many image template names and functions, even if differently appearing... the function is the same.

Why not other templates too? I'll be back later, if you're in yet... weren't around when I first saw this. // FrankB 19:59, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

It causes confusion over what templates to use. It causes inconsistency. It makes a mess of the template namespace. Rocket000 (talk) 03:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

---

The other day you mentioned {{Tl}} and {{Tgl}}, and I infer that the ISO code for tagalog (IIRC?) is "tl"...

Have you all considered case shifting? ON wikitionary, everything is lowercase by default, and Template:Wdy is a very different beast, iirc, along your direction if I infer correctly. See also [1]...

• I'll be glad to support international uniformities so long as the template systems come further into alignment.
• Here, and the other sisters involved in template sharing the case Alternative Template:TL (Edit Discussion links Page history) already exists as a redirect...
  • Why not code that up with {{TL's}} content, then bot replace all occasions of Tl with the expanded template or subst of TL...(whichever works). They bot replace Tl that way on wikipedia now and then... it's appears and grows after all.

That would give you a fresh 'start' for tagalog... and people can just get used to capitalizing that. From the standpoint of statistics though, two character mnemonics or codes are a far more restrictive set than three character places. 26^³ more combos/codes! // FrankB 20:43, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Replacing all the uses is no problem, it's breaking people of the habit of using it. I know I myself would have a difficult time adjusting. As for {{TL}}, I hate capitals in template names. It goes against most template conventions and is harder to type. If we ever do change {{tl}} to a language template, I'm in favor of making {{T}} the new {{tl}}. Rocket000 (talk) 03:30, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea why my deletion of a vandal created page (which was not actually a template) means I have something to contribute to this but if I can help I will. --Herby ^{talk thyme} 08:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: beg to differ

Hello Fabartus.
I deleted this cat link because cat:location maps is already a sub-cat of cat:locator maps. I understand that many people may not make the difference at first sight between “location” and “locator”, but I think we shouldn't maintain this doubt: yes, these two types of maps are used to locate a place on a map, but the technical way to use them is completely different. Locator maps work as a whole, they have the area of interest in an other color and don't need additional information to be used. Location maps alone are useless because they are blank with neutral colors and need the use of a geocoding process in order to display an information. And more: while the locator maps can be created using whatever projection, the location maps, to be able to work properly, need absolutely to follow an equirectangular projection (or a conical one if the area is in higher latitudes) and have their precise geographic limits indicated in the description page. That's why, if they might be close in the final purpose, their technical needs are completely different and can't be mixed in same cats.
Cat:Location maps is a new cat which has started to be filled with maps respecting precisely these technical needs and for the first time in the project we have maps following a same colorimetric standard agreed by two of the biggest WPs which are also the leaders in maps creation (WP-de and WP-fr are the only WPs having a workshop specifically for maps). For more information you can also take a look at Project Mapmaking Wiki Standards.
Like user:NNW proposed, I think the cat tree can follow this pattern:

• Category:Maps by type
  • Category:Locator maps
    • ...
  • Category:Location maps
    • ...

I don't see well the necessity to mix them, and if we mix the sub-cats it will be a mess. The bridge between both types should be made with a link ("See also:...")
Because of all of this I will try to keep these cats as clean as possible so everyone can easily find the type of map he's looking for, at last: there are already so many maps miscategorized due to a misunderstanding of classification that it would need days and days to clean this mess. Let us try to make the things right from the start.
If you think the warning banner needs more explanation about those differences, no problem, we can try to develop that for everyone to be able to understand clearly the aims.
A last thought to finish: WP is becoming more and more technical as we can see it with the templates or the geo-coding sections, needing more and more a good knowledge of wiki syntax in order to understand how it works. Categories, if they might look simple, may also be of great importance as miscategorized medias are of little use as almost nobody will find them.
Greetings. Sting (talk) 15:38, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Is it correct that this is the third user talk where this topic is discussed? Is it discussed at all? I fear I'm losing the plot... *sigh --NNW (talk) 18:30, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Rocket000/Template category scheme

And if you have any suggestions for that stuff on the bottom ("Still needs to be worked out") I would love to hear it on the talk page. Rocket000(talk) 20:03, 16 August 2008 (UTC)  

Useful link

I noticed one of your questions on Tim Starling's talk page asking about a list of "simple" projects. Here's a good link to know: Special:SiteMatrix. Cheers, Rocket000(talk) 05:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Naval ships of the United States

Category discussion notification

Category:Naval ships of the United States and Category:United States Navy ships have been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

-- Jmabel ! talk 06:27, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Not duplicate

Hi! You marked File:Theodor Aman - Ursarul.jpg as a duplicate or scaled-down version of File:AmanUrsarul.jpg. In my view they are not duplicates. One is black and white the other in brown colors. The small image have more details than the larger one. If you still want the image deleted i suggest Commons:Deletion requests. --MGA73 (talk) 18:35, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Template:MainBold

Template:MainBold has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

--The Evil IP address (talk) 17:36, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Category:Interwiki_utility_templates

Category discussion notification

Category:Interwiki_utility_templates has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss ways in which it should be changed. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for discussion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. In all cases, please do not take the category discussion personally. It is never intended as such. Thank you!

Rd232 (talk) 20:29, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Template:Wpd

Template:Wpd has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

sarang사랑 07:11, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Template:Tracking category

Template:Tracking category has been listed at Commons:Deletion requests so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this template, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. Please remember to respond to and – if appropriate – contradict the arguments supporting deletion. Arguments which focus on the nominator will not affect the result of the nomination. Thank you!

Foroa (talk) 17:17, 22 September 2012 (UTC)