Category talk:Templates

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Why do we need a category for what is already a namespace? humanUser talk:Human 15:30, 14 April 2008 (EDT)

I say again, this category adds no value, information or navigability that I can see... ħumanUser talk:Human 19:51, 26 May 2008 (EDT)
For the same reason we have a category for essays. My view is that it promotes navigability (something I value highly). Viewing all the articles in the template or essayspace requires navigating through the Special pages. Those unfamiliar with MediaWiki may not even find it. Or, you can have a category at the bottom, with easy one-click access. A category also allows us to classify pages we use as templates but are not in the templatespace. For example, {{RationalWiki:Contents}} or {{RationalWiki:Miscellanea}} from the Main Page. Or Namuh's joke template {{User:Namuh/shock and awe}} (which was forcibly moved from the templatespace for being useless). Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 21:45, 26 May 2008 (EDT)
Click on help. Click on template help. Most of them are listed - hundreds, in fact, it looks like - with brief descriptions. The category contains about what, 30? Are you planning a template categorizing binge, with major subcats? — Unsigned, by: Human / talk / contribs
It looks like I'll have to, then. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 02:59, 27 May 2008 (EDT)
You still have a long way to go. I think this category just makes no sense... Noobs are not looking for a list of templates. Hell, they aren't even looking at the template itself, until they know how MW works! ħumanUser talk:Human 23:19, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
I'll get it done on this coming Saturday. Scout's honor. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 23:21, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
I suggest not wasting your SaturnDay. This category has no conceivable usefulness, please address my comment above... ħumanUser talk:Human 23:28, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
I have already answered your question above, I believe. Having the category is an important symbolic gesture in fitting with a policy that puts a premium on navigability. If I am willing to shoulder the work in building/maintaining a category to help hypothetical inquiring newbies then I don't see what there is to complain about. Assuming I follow through with my promise come Saturday, the worst that can happen is a promotion of greater navigability across the site. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 23:43, 12 June 2008 (EDT)
OK, if you do all the work, I don't care. BUT, your argument about navigability is not compelling, especially when you invoke noobs. The template namespace is there for anyone halfway familiar with MW to look at, we also have "help" pages (I'd suggest that our template directory is a better way to spend your time). But, basically, people who aren't familiar with MW aren't looking at raw templates ever so they will not gain "navigability" from this silly category, which simply duplicates a namespace - which is two clicks away from any page, via "help". ħumanUser talk:Human 00:29, 13 June 2008 (EDT)