Category talk:Bays of Alaska

GeoGroupTemplate

Adding {{GeoGroupTemplate}} per WP:GEO LeheckaG (talk) 11:19, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed Three Saints Bay, Alaska with additional details from USGS GNIS (it had been plotting "off the map"; Latitude 0N, Longitude 0 E/W; for some odd reason - not sure why: multiple coordinates, missing seconds, Infobox issue, ...), but it is fixed now. LeheckaG (talk) 13:04, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually that template is for articles. Categories don't need all of this extra stuff, especially if it is already in the article. Category introductions should be very basic since they provide for navigation. Long introductions, extra text, links for external links should not be in category introductions. Vegaswikian (talk) 20:38, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Currrently, {{GeoGroupTemplate}} also provides "map navigation" to a Category. On Category:Bays of Alaska, If you select "Map of all coordinates", it displays a Google Map with each coordinate from the articles in that Category plotted and labeled with either the Coor/Coord "name=" parameter (if supplied in the article) otherwise the article's PAGENAME. One can click on the labeled map to geographically/visually go to the corresponding Wikipedia Bay article. It is also a useful tool for contributors to update articles. The Three Saints Bay article had obviously "bad" coordinates throwing it "off the map", so I went to the United States Geological Survey GNIS looked up the appropriate details and updated that article. LeheckaG (talk) 05:40, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, so this belongs in the articles as a navigation template. Categories are for grouping articles and provide navigation to like articles. Maps for neighboring likes are for articles. Navigation templates are alternatives to categories and as such really should not be in categories since these are article related tools. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:57, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I brought up your issue on WP:GEO 's discussion/talk page. Currently, the GeoGroupTemplate works on either an Article page or a Category: page (but must be on the Category: page to do so). In response to your issue, I asked whether GeoGroupTemplate can be modified so that one can supply an alternative "starting point" (so one can indirectly refer to Category:Bays of Alaska for instance, but that would mean going into every single article in the Category: and adding it to all of the articles rather than placing it on the Category:Bays of Alaska page in one spot - where it makes more sense; another alternative would be to create a "Stub" article in addition to the Category: page - which again does not make much sense).

To me, I had previously used GeoGroupTemplate on "List of ..." articles which contained several coordinates, seeing its value on a Category: was more recent (GeoGroupTemplate has worked on Category: pages since sometime around or before September 2007, the "recent" change was using more "Live" instead of cached data).

GeoGroupTemplates contributors specifically see it being used on any Category: containing articles with geographic coordinates. For instance it would NOT make sense to put it on categories of "People" (unless they had coordinates of their birth, home, or death - which would be very uncommon). But it does make sense to put it on geographically-related categories (those containing geographic coordinates in either a Geobox/Infobox or inline text). GeoGroupTemplate used to use a "cached" (often months old) list of Categories or coordinates but was recently updated to use relatively "Live" information: within an hour or two, supposed to be "minutes" (maybe on the Categories), but so far my experience has been that coordinate updates appear on the maps which are generated within an hour or two. So, I recently started adding GeoGroupTemplate to relevant "Alaska-related" geographic categories, and I have repeatedly used (from a Category: page) to "discover" several articles with "bad" coordinates and to update them when they do not "map correctly". Currently, it makes a much "easier" mechanism to go to a Category: page and "Map of all coordinates" and then look at the generated map, rather than to "tree walk" through every single article in a Category. LeheckaG (talk) 10:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, while there are other ways for an "advanced" Wikipedian to do so; since it opens up in a new tab or window, it enables an "average" Wikipedia to "toggle" back an forth between a Category: page and the "Map of all coordinates" to see which articles in that Category: need updating (with respect to coordinates). While an "advanced" or "expert" Wikipedia user can write a custom script or use one of "canned" tools like CatScan to determine which articles in a Category: might be coordinate-less or have "bad" coordinates. GeoGroupTemplate makes it easier for the "average" Jane or Joe to do so.

By your argument not to include GeoGroupTemplate on a Category, then why have "navigation templates" to Commons: on a Category: ? LeheckaG (talk) 10:38, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the project to look at this discussion and comment. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:31, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which WP ? I am guessing WP:Categories ? LeheckaG (talk) 19:55, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. Yep. Vegaswikian (talk) 19:59, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

More specifically: Wikipedia talk:Categorization#New template LeheckaG (talk) 20:36, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, I view this as being a navigation template for the category. By looking at the map I can find which article refers to the next bay east or the next bay west. Or zoom in on the map info to find the name of the unmarked bay between existing articles...which is also article navigation if I then write the missing article, it's just being a temporally challenged article navigation. -- SEWilco (talk) 23:29, 5 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]