Template talk:Tag

This template is for inline tags. If you don't want tags to show up on the page at all, just put the [[category:whatever]] at the bottom of the page. TedErnst 21:37, 22 Jan 2006 (EST) (edited to bring up to date TedErnst | talk 17:54, 27 October 2006 (EDT))

I think these tags are not really wonderful, you have to use the name of the category within the text, that's stupid. --Peu | talk 14:20, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

If the name of the category you want appears on the page, use the tag template. If not, they just use a standard category at the bottom of the page. TedErnst | talk 17:52, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

Take a tour to what linkes to this template Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Tag: there are pages that mainly belong to non-existing categories. In my opinion this (oat first glance) helpful template generates much work. --Peu | talk 17:34, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

I'm not understanding how it creates more work. Could you please say more?

Ted, sometimes you have to create the cats and link it to existing cats, otherwise you cannot find them without visiting the categorized wiki page itself, or looking on wanted cats. The categorization is only useful if it make at least one hierarchical tree. --Peu | talk 18:10, 27 October 2006 (EDT)

I disagree. Redlink categories are just fine, because they're tags. Like tags at del.icio.us - we decided on purpose here not to impose a hierarchical category structure - of course one might emerge, but there's no reason to enforce any kind of scheme at this point - I'd guess at least half our wikis don't have categories at all - that would be really useful work, tagging everything - then if some semblance of structure emerges from that, great! The idea is to be bottom-up. TedErnst | talk 20:46, 27 October 2006 (EDT)