LifeBot
Seems like a good compromise. I suggest "FAMILIA (indexed)" as category name, since (as far as I can tell) we tend to use the term "indexing" rather than "registering" to indicate that an image has been added to a gallery, and the parenthetical post-position is common to indicate Wikimedia-specific nomenclature as opposed to something existing in the outside world (for instance, "Registered Rosa" might be a category for registered rose hybrids). Stan Shebs 17:35, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
- Yes. Much better solution. I'll update the bot page. Or maybe wait a few days for the final take. Thanks! -- Ayacop 17:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
1 day block edit
Hi Ayacop, I blocked this bot for one day. I think maybe more discussion about its activities are needed, and it definitely needs a bot flag! It should have received one after the test runs but before huge numbers of actual edits. See Commons:Bots. Please gain a bot flag before continuing to run this bot.
Was this discussed at COM:VP or at ToL or anywhere else? Creating double category structures is not something I'm really comfortable with and I would like to see more rationale for it.
Please don't consider that I am trying to outlaw what this bot is doing - just delay it. I think it never hurts to take a bit more time to make sure we are doing the right thing. There is no rush, after all.
cheers, pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:54, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
See also Commons:Administrators'_noticeboard#User:LifeBot. pfctdayelise (说什么?) 01:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- On the 'double category structure': No. There will only be one additional category per family (I know this was an issue not clear from the start and there are earlier posts from me stating the contrary; some technicalities only clear up with time). A side effect is that now all pics from a family can be viewed together, not triggering that bug in a mixed view. -- Ayacop 09:05, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- While I agree that double categories may not be the optimal solution, I have to concur with Ayacop that it is surely preferable to the situation as it was beforehand, with many Pictures being removed from categories altogether! Regards (layman) Sean Heron 00:17, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
| Category discussion notification | Category:Annonaceae (Indexed) has been listed at Commons:Categories for discussion so that the community can discuss whether it should be kept or not. We would appreciate it if you could go to voice your opinion about this at its entry. If you created this category, please note that the fact that it has been proposed for deletion does not necessarily mean that we do not value your kind contribution. It simply means that one person believes that there is some specific problem with it. If the category is up for deletion because it has been superseded, consider the notion that although the category may be deleted, your hard work (which we all greatly appreciate) lives on in the new category. |
A question edit
I'm slightly confused. When we mean indexed, do we mean that the image is in a WM article of the species in question or wikipedia article? Just checking, I know its a bit stupid query. AshLin 12:06, 26 September 2007 (UTC)