Bureaucrats, checkuser, Interface administrators, interwiki, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Editors (Semantic MediaWiki), staff, Suppressors, Administrators
83,693
edits
WikiIndex talk:How do categories work: Difference between revisions
m
→CamelCase: fix redirects - no other text changed
(looks correct to me) |
Hoof Hearted (talk | contribs) m (→CamelCase: fix redirects - no other text changed) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
:: Great question, Robin. The point is that we're not just linking to the category, we're putting the page in question into that category as well. We do that by simply using <nowiki>{{tag|CATEGORYNAME}}</nowiki> in the description text. If the term doesn't appear in the text, then just use <nowiki>[[Category:CATEGORYNAME]]</nowiki> at the end, as usual. [[TedErnst]] | <small>[[User talk:TedErnst|talk]]</small> 17:04, 4 Apr 2006 (EDT) | :: Great question, Robin. The point is that we're not just linking to the category, we're putting the page in question into that category as well. We do that by simply using <nowiki>{{tag|CATEGORYNAME}}</nowiki> in the description text. If the term doesn't appear in the text, then just use <nowiki>[[Category:CATEGORYNAME]]</nowiki> at the end, as usual. [[TedErnst]] | <small>[[User talk:TedErnst|talk]]</small> 17:04, 4 Apr 2006 (EDT) | ||
== CamelCase == | ==CamelCase== | ||
Is using [[CamelCase]] still necessary for naming the categories? Personally, I've been blithely breaking this rule. Does this break something for someone somewhere down the line? Or is this a legacy instruction? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 21:30, 8 October 2009 (EDT) | Is using [[CamelCase]] still necessary for naming the categories? Personally, I've been blithely breaking this rule. Does this break something for someone somewhere down the line? Or is this a legacy instruction? --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 21:30, 8 October 2009 (EDT) | ||
At the time when I wrote this, I was unaware of the history of CamelCase in wikis. Having started out on Wikipedia, I have tended to emulate that style and thus avoid CamelCase, as well as the gratuitous use of uppercase letters. But, even though it feels wrong to me stylistically, I now see why we would want to keep this tradition alive. And on the practical side, using this convention might help us avoid category duplication such as we have with "open source": | At the time when I wrote this, I was unaware of the history of CamelCase in wikis. Having started out on Wikipedia, I have tended to emulate that style and thus avoid CamelCase, as well as the gratuitous use of uppercase letters. But, even though it feels wrong to me stylistically, I now see why we would want to keep this tradition alive. And on the practical side, using this convention might help us avoid category duplication such as we have with "[[:Category:Open source|open source]]": | ||
* | *Category:OpenSource | ||
* | *Category:Open source | ||
* | *Category:Open Source | ||
However, fixing all the categories which I have created which do not follow this model will be fairly labor-intensive. Hopefully, someone knows how to use a bot to do it. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:17, 15 March 2010 (EDT) | However, fixing all the categories which I have created which do not follow this model will be fairly labor-intensive. Hopefully, someone knows how to use a bot to do it. --[[User:MarvelZuvembie|MarvelZuvembie]] 15:17, 15 March 2010 (EDT) | ||