Template talk:IsPartOf

From Wikivoyage
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Information about this template[edit]

Where can information about this template (especially on when and where to use it) be found?

I think the only discussion about it (so far) is on Project:Breadcrumb navigation#IsIn template without underscores and such. -- (WT-en) Ryan 03:14, 18 November 2006 (EST)

District subpages[edit]

"It is not needed for breadcrumb navigation on district subpages". What districts would that be? Districts in a country? In a city? Somewhere else? Explanation needed so we get a correct translation of the template on sv:. Riggwelter (talk) 16:38, 5 October 2012 (CEST)

That's for districts of cities that use a slash in the article title. For example, Paris/14th arrondissement automatically links back up to Paris without any need of templates. -- D. Guillaume (talk) 02:25, 7 October 2012 (CEST)

#isin:[edit]

Where do I find documentation on the #isin: function?--Traveler100 (talk) 15:37, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Template:IsIn is no more in use now, however here's the link to its documentation [1]. --Saqib (talk) 17:54, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
The actual #isin tag (and not the template) is mw:Extension:GeoCrumbs, but the documentation there is poor to non-existent (aside from source code and server installation info, which are provided). K7L (talk) 18:28, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

Category of IsPartOf[edit]

I would like to propose that an article with this template should also be placed in a category of the name of the location parameter. This would allow readers to not only see other places in the same region but allow them to walk down the breadcrumb trails as well as up. Also provides a method of checking for pages that are tagged as IsPartOf but is not mentioned in the appropriate region article. I have created a sandbox version of the template as proposal. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:14, 28 December 2012 (UTC)

It isn't enough just to stick a category: tag into {{isIn}} and {{isPartOf}}; someone (or something, as this is an obvious candidate for a 'bot script) needs to create all of those categories (one for every page except the bottom-level articles) and make each a subcategory of whatever the corresponding article "isPartOf". K7L (talk) 20:02, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
That was going to be my next question after there was some consensus on this being a good idea. Note this has been done on the German Wikivoyage so maybe there is a bot available.--Traveler100 (talk) 20:59, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
It looks like voy:de applies {{IstIn|Albanien}} and [[Kategorie:Albanien]] separately to pages, so there the "isPartOf" tag doesn't apply the corresponding category. They also apply breadcrumbs plus categories to the subcategory description pages, so de:Kategorie:Albanien {{IstInKat|Südosteuropa}} [[Kategorie:Südosteuropa]]. Occasionally, they do put a page or subcategory into multiple categories, although some of these are redundant (ie: "Europe" and "Southern Europe"). I don't see any mention of a 'bot on the de: categories. K7L (talk) 23:31, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
Looking at Spremberg this article uses the template IstInKat which creates the breadcrumbs and category in one step. It also looks like the IsIn is no longer required on the site. Do people think creating a IsInCat is a better way to go than editing this template? --Traveler100 (talk) 05:27, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Think about this, could not the template create the categories itself? Can check ifexist on category. Is there a way to enquire what the parent article name is of a #isin parameter? could then create the category and add to that article the category of the next level up? --Traveler100 (talk) 08:31, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Not sure if auto creation can be done, or even if a good idea, but I have set an option to place a create category link in the article if category does not exist (see sandbox). Cannot work out however how to automatically set the parent region name.Traveler100 (talk) 15:24, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
In the past there has been opposition to using categories for organizing geographic hierarchies (see Wikivoyage:Categories and some of the early discussions on that article's talk page), but as long as it is clear that geographic categories should not be directly added to an article then I don't see any problem with this proposal. Those who want to use categories to navigate the hierarchy could do so, and those who don't could ignore the categories. The biggest issue, as already noted, will be maintenance of the category structure as articles/regions are renamed and moved around, but it seems like a bot could probably handle most of that. -- Ryan • (talk) • 17:37, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Template code certainly is not able to create or edit any page, including new categories. The only easy way to do this is with some sort of 'bot script. Pywikipediabot is capable of creating an article from a text file, but that file would need to be generated (for each category) and fed to the 'bot. I have a raw list of isPartOf tags, but that would need to be pared down so that categories are not created for individual city/town/local-level place names. The proposal would then need to go to Wikivoyage:Script nominations#isInKat. K7L (talk) 17:48, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Related discussion Wikivoyage_talk:Breadcrumb navigation#Navigating down a breadcrumb trail and Wikivoyage:Script_nominations#isInKat. Pashley (talk) 19:22, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Maintenance is my main concern; some of our geographical hierarchy is well-established and more-or-less set in stone, but very large swaths of the world, even well-developed areas including most of the United States, undergo significant changes as more content is added, or as new contributors take an interest in the area. Updating the IsPartOf templates is tedious but fairly simple; categories, on the other hand, need to be deleted (an admin-only function) and re-created and renamed. It's a parallel process, and we risk asynchronization to an extent. LtPowers (talk) 21:23, 31 December 2012 (UTC)

Maintenance is a concern if we don't have categories. When breaking part of a province or state into subregions, there needs to be a way to find every article in the old region to update them. The breadcrumbs don't seem to let us do that, short of downloading the entire database dump and searching that file for "isIn" and "isPartOf". The list of ==Cities== in our region articles are often not synchronised with the actual breadcrumbs; categories might allow installation of Extension:DynamicPageList, an extension used on Wikinews to generate lists of pages in a particular set of categories. Categories would also let us find dead ends in the hierarchy and pages with missing breadcrumb trails, as they provide tools to display a categorytree and lists of unusedcategories, wantedcategories, uncategorizedcategories and uncategorizedpages which could be useful for maintenance. Currently, sticking {{isPartOf|Orange County}} on a page breaks the breadcrumbs of every page beneath it (as OC is a disambig page with no crumbs) but there's no easy way to find these - at least nothing built into the wiki itself.
As far as I know, extension:GeoCrumbs doesn't create a database table with all of the tree information. That's making it harder to determine what's missing or broken. K7L (talk) 22:13, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
"When breaking part of a province or state into subregions, there needs to be a way to find every article in the old region to update them." As I said before, they should all be listed on the old region's page. If they are not, they are considered "orphaned". LtPowers (talk) 18:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Famous last words: "should be". It's a parallel process, and we risk asynchronization to an extent. K7L (talk) 19:10, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
It is one thing saying they should be considered orphans, but how do you find orphaned pages? The list under special pages is incorrect. Some of those listed there do have links to them and there are pages that do not have links to them, except from perhaps user pages, that are not in the list. As I see it at the moment this site is not in a position to be clean up by anyone expect a few who no this insides of the system. --Traveler100 (talk) 19:50, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
As far as I know, special:lonelypages lists pages with no inbound links at all - it does not distinguish between a page linked from the "cities" or "regions" section of a region article as compared to an article only linked from talk: or user: space (or as a "go next" for an adjacent destination). There are no special: pages designed to maintain geocrumbs as the extension itself does not create a database table to store the entire tree. The only way programmatically to get the tree is to retrieve every page and extract all the "isPartOf" tags. That's doable by grabbing the project:database dump and picking through it offline - but then the information is a couple weeks old.
As a substitute for categories, the "crumbs" have always been a kludgey solution in that they don't properly handle a location (such as Jellystone Park) falling on one or more region boundaries and in that they don't provide a means to display the whole structure (the way categories have various special: pages for maintenance info). It'd take drastic changes to the extension code to address these issues, although using a 'bot script offline (or on a site like toolserver.org) to generate the tree and find problems might be a partial workaround. K7L (talk) 20:34, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
Traveler100 is asking how to do things but the answer is "we currently cannot". I don't know how to be any more clear. There's no point recriminating the people who've worked on the site for years for their failure to anticipate every contingency. LtPowers (talk) 22:07, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
I do not want this conversation going off in the wrong direction here. I see that a number of functions are currently not possible, what I want do know is do people think this change will solve it. What I am proposing is a category structure that matches the breadcrumb hierarchy. This will allow readers to browse down as well as up the trail. It should help identify articles that should have links on a region page but do not. It should also provide a structure for manual and semi-automatic clean-up operations such as identifying orphan pages. What I would like is someone to critically appraise and test the template update in the sandbox. I really would like a second and third opinion before making a change that will update the majority of pages on Wikivoyage. --Traveler100 (talk) 08:53, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
I like the proposal. It would be very helpful. It should be given a chance to demonstrate that it will do much greater good than harm. Regions stay the same far far more often than they change. Travelpleb (talk) 10:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like a good idea to me. 41.145.126.109 10:52, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Made a small test with a number of pages. See Category:Orange County (California)for category example, Seal Beach for page with category and Orange County (California) for page without category (note the creation link at bottom left). Only issue I see is some people will be a little confused that pages do not instantly get placed in a category after it is created. Sometimes articles and categories need to be re-saved for the updates to take place. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:41, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Categories for article type[edit]

I am not (yet?) convinced that duplicating the breadcrumb hierarchy with categories is a good idea.

However, I think categories for our non-destination articles — itineraries, travel topics & phrasebooks — probably is. We already have manually maintained lists at List of itineraries, Travel topics & List of phrasebooks, and I am not suggesting deleting those, but automated searches might save work and be more reliable. Pashley (talk) 14:17, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

If the {{itinerary}} template has category:itineraries, than anything with that tag goes into the category. That would allow us to spot any that are missing from the list of itineraries. Wikinews has an extension (DynamicPageList) which goes one step further by allowing a page in mainspace to dynamically include a list of articles in a category or matching some criteria. The extension isn't currently on any other WMF wikis, although it might be possible to request it as its previous use on wikinews: does make it "proven technology" and more likely to be adopted than a new extension. K7L (talk) 18:09, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Hidden categories may be helpful for technical reasons, but I don't think that we should switch to a new navigation principle based on categories. Travel topics is a perfectly organized and very useful list. We should strive for keeping it in order and up-to-date. We should not replace this nice list with dull categories. --Alexander (talk) 18:19, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
The best way to keep it organised and up to date is to have some easy means of finding entries which are missing. Categories or templates are possible ways to do this; otherwise, we need to find everything with "this article is a travel topic". K7L (talk) 18:23, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Yes I bet I am not the only one who has created an itinerary and not added it to this or another list. Category generated from the itinerary template would be useful for people keeping lists up to date.--Traveler100 (talk) 18:46, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
If all the category does is duplicate Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Traveltopic, I don't think it's worth the trouble. LtPowers (talk) 19:44, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
I think the counterargument to using Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Traveltopic is that people will generally be more familiar with categories, they are more user-friendly, and they can be chained together into hierarchies such that you could have (example only) "Category:Wikivoyage articles" --> "Category:Itinerary articles". -- Ryan • (talk) • 19:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
That's why I said "If". If the proposal extends beyond slapping Category:Travel topics inside the template, then my statement no longer holds. LtPowers (talk) 21:12, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
For maintenance purposes, we may need to be able to find mainspace pages with no tags (ie: not isPartOf, disambig, itinerary, traveltopic) - something which special:uncategorizedpages looks almost able to do. That wouldn't find pages which are tagged stub or outline but need isPartOf but it would detect a page with no tags at all. K7L (talk) 22:03, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

Outdated documentation?[edit]

Currently this states:"Note that this is only for destination guides. If you use it on other pages, you'll get breadcrumb menus all right, but you'll mess up other software. Please, don't do that."

1) What is the software that will be messed up?

2) Surely this template should be used for any major travel topics which have a geographical hierarchy of articles - not just destinations? -- Alice 20:09, 4 February 2013 (UTC)

Beginning to think the same thing. It is being used on other article types and I see no problems with it. However moving policy points on this site is a painful journey. --Traveler100 (talk) 22:13, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
You're not wrong (rueful grin). However, we still need to know whether the baleful warning of "If you use it on other pages, you'll get breadcrumb menus all right, but you'll mess up other software. Please, don't do that." is outdated or not before we can consider changing this "policy". I have a feeling that this is no longer a true statement now that RDF is obsolete. -- Alice 22:47, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
The RDF code sent a signal to machines reading it that the article in which it was included was a destination guide, and it was a subdivision of the article it IsPartOf. Even without the RDF code, I'd be wary of breaking those semantics. LtPowers (talk) 00:24, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
What about using this template for any major travel topics which have a geographical hierarchy of articles - not just destinations - will that break those semantics, please? -- Alice 00:33, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
This template has been used on dive guide topics for a long time (years). The dive guides are also in a geographical heirarchy parallel to, but not identical to the one for destinations. As far as I can see this functions well and without surprises. There are several hundred articles and sub-articles using this, and if it were to be changed, they would need an equivalent system. There are ongoing discussions about possibilities for cruising guides, which would also need a breadcrumb trail system to improve utility. Either the same template, or another one which has a very similar effect is needed. I would also like to know what software is affected and how: If it is just the message quoted above, maybe the message should be changed a little. Alternatively a similar template, perhaps {{PartOfTopic}} will be necessary to do the same job, but deliver a different message. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 05:23, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
I have updated the contents of Category:Travel topics to show examples of how the isPartOf parameter would work with travel topics. --Traveler100 (talk) 12:44, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
Just occurred to me that maybe a better method is not to use the isPartOf template in the travel topic article but to expand the {{traveltopic}} template to accept a parameter and build the breadcrumbs from that if it exists.--Traveler100 (talk) 12:53, 5 February 2013 (UTC)
There is a problem in that only some classes of travel topic need a breadcrumb trail. It would not be appropriate for a large number of them.
How would the template be expanded and the breadcrumbs built from the parameter? I dont understand the procedure sufficiently to know if it is even possible. I guess I should go take a look at IsPartOf code. • • • Peter (Southwood) (talk): 14:03, 5 February 2013 (UTC)

In sub-districts[edit]

I'd like to revisit the question about "It is not needed for breadcrumb navigation on district subpages, but it should be used anyway to ensure that the RDF relationships are correct." RDF is no longer an issue, as all of the RDF code has been removed. Does that mean that we shouldn't use IsPartOf on district subpages? Or is it still necessary to make categories work correctly? LtPowers (talk) 16:50, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It is useful to have IsPartOf on districts. As you say it adds the article to a category which is very useful for clean-up and update bots going down through regions. Also helps with article counts such as check that the number of destination articles (ispartof) matches the number of article status tags. --Traveler100 (talk) 18:42, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
There's no problem with having Huge Cities have categories, then? LtPowers (talk) 00:18, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
I was thinking that there was no need for isPartOf on districts, but I do kinda like the idea of huge city categories. I know that Sydney ideal example of a districted city. In fact it may be the worst. But it would be nice to have a category of all the articles within it. --Inas (talk) 06:52, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Just playing Devil's Advocate here, but in what way would it be nice? What processes are improved by having access to such a category? LtPowers (talk) 13:51, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Because organising and maintaining a good geographical hierarchy is hard. Keeping track of what is contained within what, gives a view across a district to enable planning. --Inas (talk) 20:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
After doing it the other way on pt: for several months, I now think having IsPartOf in districts is a must. Not having the navigation breadcrumb at the top is strange and disorienting, and I think we need it there to always provide a link back to the main city article or region in a predictable easy-to-use place. In addition, keeping the district articles together in the city category makes it easier to distinguish and separate them from the other destinations in the parent region, such that Category:Tokyo (prefecture) doesn't have to include the 34 district articles under Category:Tokyo, some of which do not have "Tokyo/" in their name and would otherwise be blended into the list of other destinations in the parent region. Texugo (talk) 22:46, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Wait, so being a subpage doesn't automatically provide breadcrumbs anymore? It used to. And why are there districts of Tokyo that don't follow our naming conventions? Inas: can't you easily see what districts are in the city by looking at the city's Districts section? LtPowers (talk) 23:23, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
In the example I just gave, you clearly can't. In a well organised and maintained city you can. The categories would assist us in getting from the one state to the other. --Inas (talk) 23:27, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

No, they no longer generate automatic breadcrumbs (I just checked). At any rate rather than arguments as to why we should keep things as they are, which I think Inas and I have already demonstrated to have at least some utility, I think the onus would be on whoever wants to get rid of them to demonstrate why that would be advantageous. I don't see any advantage to making this less organized. Texugo (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

If the list of districts were a category, would it be worth requesting DynamicPageList (a Wikinews extension) be installed to generate the ==Districts== section of the city article automatically as a list of everything in the category? K7L (talk) 13:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
I think not, because it's not supposed to be merely a list. They should ideally have one-liner descriptions and color codes to match a map of the districts. Texugo (talk) 14:31, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Pyongan not appearing in hierarchy[edit]

Swept in from the pub

I just noticed that Pyongan province is not appearing under the North Korea hierarchy.

I tried using the same tag as other provinces, i.e. {{IsPartOf|North Korea}} but it isn't working and I can't work out why. Can someone take a look? Thanks! --Andrewssi2 (talk) 07:51, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Just discovered the banner being set to an invalid image causes this. Sorry, all good now. --Andrewssi2 (talk) 08:47, 1 February 2016 (UTC)