Category talk:Flagship Modules
Revision as of 05:49, 11 November 2005 by Svdb (talk | contribs) (→Post-move discussion: linking to lists is better)
Source information & edit history
This category is based on the old Category:SIS Modules category, with the original edit history as follows:
- 17:46, 9 Oct 2004 Fadookie
Move from Category:SIS Modules to Category:Flagship Modules
Is there any easy way to change/rename this to a Category:Flagship Modules? --Fyzixfighter 09:46, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- No, I don't think so. Even if you move the Category (to preserve the edit history), you still have to visit each page in this Category and change the text manually. I'll do it, I've been thinking about it for a while as well. --Phoenix (t) 14:11, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- Ah, just looking at the tabs I see that it isn't possible to move it. I guess it'll have to be a full manual move (copy & paste). I suggest we do a text copy & paste of the edit history into the Talk page of the new category. Thoughts? --Phoenix (t) 14:13, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- Darn, I was afraid it was going to be a full manual move, though with a category will only have to copy/paste the category description and the image; the rest will change automatically when we change the category on each page. As for the history, there really is only one entry on the history page so it's very doable, but I don't know if it's really worth it. The only reason I see is to give Fadookie credit for the initial creation. It'd also be nice to somehow transfer/archive this talk page discussion over to the new page. --Fyzixfighter 17:08, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- The talk page can be moved. Just make sure you don't add anything to the talk page of Category:Flagship Modules and you'll be fine. :-) --Phoenix (t) 17:33, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- Darn, I was afraid it was going to be a full manual move, though with a category will only have to copy/paste the category description and the image; the rest will change automatically when we change the category on each page. As for the history, there really is only one entry on the history page so it's very doable, but I don't know if it's really worth it. The only reason I see is to give Fadookie credit for the initial creation. It'd also be nice to somehow transfer/archive this talk page discussion over to the new page. --Fyzixfighter 17:08, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
Post-move discussion
Excellent work, Fyzixfighter. I moved the talk page, and redirected the category page to this one, but I'm not sure if redirecting it was such a good idea. Perhaps I should delete the category page? What do you think? Or perhaps this is something we should ask Svdb. --Phoenix (t) 17:57, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- Blast, you beat me to it. Yeah, the redirecting dilemma is one of those "extra features" of the category pages. I say give the old category page the axe, but first make sure that no articles link there.
- On that thought, when should the links in articles be to the list versus to this category. IMHO the list and article should work in tandem: in the text of the articles, links should be made to the list, while links to the category should mainly be reserved to the category field at the bottom of articles. But it is a hazy area, lists and categories being so similar. --Fyzixfighter 18:04, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- As Category is more of an infrastructure document, I'd rather see links from the main articlespace to the list page instead of the category. A category should only be used to group articles together in a category. In any cases where one would be tempted to link to the category, create a list of these articles, and link to the list instead (that's how it's down in Wikipedia). --Phoenix (t) 18:15, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)
- Yeah, linking to the list is better. Additional info can be added there, like in List of Alien Artifacts. In the case of the Flagship Modules, I can imagine a table with image (rotated?), name, price, and short description for instance. I'll probably do that some day if noone beats me to it. — SvdB 06:49, 11 Nov 2005 (CET)
- As Category is more of an infrastructure document, I'd rather see links from the main articlespace to the list page instead of the category. A category should only be used to group articles together in a category. In any cases where one would be tempted to link to the category, create a list of these articles, and link to the list instead (that's how it's down in Wikipedia). --Phoenix (t) 18:15, 10 Nov 2005 (CET)