Template talk:Bildindex
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Change against intention
[edit]@Speravir: Why did you change this template. It was intended for use in References only. If you want to create a template for use in the Source field, I suggest you create a seperate template, like, for example, Template:From Google Art Project. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 09:51, 10 January 2016 (UTC)
- I do not really understand your concern: I added two optional parameters with empty defaults. So in fact nothing hinders the further use for references. The reason I made the changes was to make it far more easier to add source information for images from Bildindex. The description in Images from Bildarchiv Foto Marburg, as it is now, is partly too complicated, and partly wrong. I intended to rewrite it and to strongly recommend there using the template. --Speravir (Talk) 16:33, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- Sorry I was a bit snippy. My corcern is that originally this template was intended as a simple url and maybe some particulars such as attribution etc. By making this template suitable for source description it became quite complicated, needlessly, I'd say. And besides, source information should ideally also contain a link to the home page of a website. See for example Template:From Joconde. All this is in my opinion reason to create a seperate template, something like Template:From Bildindex. This would also make the documentation considerably simpler and easy to understand. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
- (I think, you wanted to link to the documentation: first version.) I am still not convinced. Where’s the problem in enhancing? Let's go through the points:
- I repeat, the template is still fully usable for references. We can, of course, change the order, how the parameters are explained in the doc: the as parameter again as the second one – but the link to the individual photograph should also be useful for references, when the object consists of more than one part: It gets confusing on some level, to which of the parts the reference went.
- The use of this template for source attributions is not my idea, I just wanted to make it much more convenient. In fact, I learned of this template’s existence, because it is used as example in Images from Bildarchiv Foto Marburg (see my link behind “now“ above). There are 115 uses today in a source field according to
[https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Search&limit=250&offset=0&ns6=1&search=insource%3A%2F%5C%7C%5Cs%2Asource%5Cs%2A%3D%5Cs%2A%5C%7B%5C%7Bbildindex%2Fi+ Search results for „insource:/\|\s*source\s*=\s*\{\{bildindex/i“](made link inactive, --Speravir (Talk) 17:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)), a relevant fraction of this was added by me, but not all of them (and I changed some of the already existing ones, too). - There are much more complex and complicated templates, and actually I intentionally included line breaks in HTML comments to give more structure and ease the readability of the template source. BTW I do not consider me an expert in template writing.
- Missing link to home page: You cannot blame me, you yourself have never linked to it. I simply moved the string “Bildarchiv Foto Marburg, Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur” out of the link to the object page (Special:Diff/180695698/184172890). OK, the reason was that I added an optional and linked parameter for another page on this site. But I just now have an idea: How about linking alone the numbers (i. e. unlinking “object” and so on)? And if you take a look on the page behind “Über uns” on the site you can see, they call themselves “Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur” with main title, and Bildarchiv Foto Marburg is actually the mother organization – so how about writing (with link):
Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur (Bildarchiv Foto Marburg)? This all should together give a more readable look (dividing of links).
- --Speravir (Talk) 21:05, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
- You can do that if you want to. But source information usually consists of a link to the home page, the webpage and the pic. For example:
- rkd.nl : Home : Info : Pic
- In my opinion an online reference does not need to contain the homepage. If a link is broken it can usually be fixed easily by editing the template.
- However, if you want to use this template for source description, I could always create a new template exclusively for use as a reference.
- And I know this not your fault. I have noticed this template having been used for source description before, but I just didn't think much of it then. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding “… source information usually consists of a link to the home page …”: This is a valid point, where you got me! (Though I’ve seen attributions without, I am with you here.) This could be solved with another optional parameter, but I think, this would be too complicated first in rewriting and later in using the template. So, I will create a template for source attributions and change all cases, where {{Bildindex}} is used for these in the moment. I will then remove all added parameters here and in documentation, but a small part of my changes is useful in my eyes. I will notice you, Vincent, when it is done. Please be patient. --Speravir (Talk) 17:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you for your understanding. If you need any help, let me know. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 18:31, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding “… source information usually consists of a link to the home page …”: This is a valid point, where you got me! (Though I’ve seen attributions without, I am with you here.) This could be solved with another optional parameter, but I think, this would be too complicated first in rewriting and later in using the template. So, I will create a template for source attributions and change all cases, where {{Bildindex}} is used for these in the moment. I will then remove all added parameters here and in documentation, but a small part of my changes is useful in my eyes. I will notice you, Vincent, when it is done. Please be patient. --Speravir (Talk) 17:34, 14 January 2016 (UTC)
- (I think, you wanted to link to the documentation: first version.) I am still not convinced. Where’s the problem in enhancing? Let's go through the points:
- Sorry I was a bit snippy. My corcern is that originally this template was intended as a simple url and maybe some particulars such as attribution etc. By making this template suitable for source description it became quite complicated, needlessly, I'd say. And besides, source information should ideally also contain a link to the home page of a website. See for example Template:From Joconde. All this is in my opinion reason to create a seperate template, something like Template:From Bildindex. This would also make the documentation considerably simpler and easy to understand. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 20:29, 11 January 2016 (UTC)
@Vincent Steenberg: I’m not finished with changing all uses of {{Bildindex}} in source indications, but I’ve changed all cases, where I had added optional parameters. Hence I removed these parameters from the template here and updated documentation. Take a look, whether there’s something you cannot stand at all. --Speravir (Talk) 19:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
- Great. Thanks very much. I added template:i18n/as for internationalisation and a break just in case. No complaints otherwise. Regards, Vincent Steenberg (talk) 21:18, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Trim the website name
[edit]How about making the website name shorter? In fact they call themselves only “Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur”, which is long enough. I intend to remove the additional “Bildarchiv Foto Marburg” also from {{From Bildindex}}, and the category already has been renamed to Images from Bildindex der Kunst und Architektur (by me after discussion in Commons:Forum). --Speravir (Talk) 21:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- I think that's a good idea. Vincent Steenberg (talk) 23:19, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
- OK, done. --Speravir (Talk) 23:44, 4 February 2016 (UTC)