Category talk:Authors

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Use a SMW Concept for this?

Would be possible to replace this category by a concept? i.e. If someone has authored anything on the site, then they get assigned to this concept. It means tat someone who is an author but who hasn't authored anything on the site will be omitted from the category -- but then if they're an author of note, perhaps it's a good practice to have at least one thing they wrote, at leas in extract, on the site? The main advantage of such an idea would be maintenance; once it had been set up, it would populate itself with authors automatically. Robin (talk) 03:19, 17 December 2013 (GMT)

I'm quite happy to try it out but we should leave the category as is until the superiority of any alternative is proven. Thing is 'Authors' - ie a single word plural noun is just about the simplest possible form of category. If something else is better, then what does that say about ANY use of categories? I try not to lose sight of the fact that one of the simplest forms of semantic query is use a category as the primary selection criterion and to include various properties from the category pages in the results. The simple query on the JFK timeline is a good example. It selects every page in Category:JFK Timeline Event and display the properties 'Start', 'End' and 'Description' - see: JFK Timeline Events. The irony of that as an example is that the category is anything but a simple plural noun; semantically it is Category:Event with 2 x sub-categories 'JFK and 'Timeline', ALL of which COULD me replaced by properties and sub-properties - I'm Still waiting for my Eureka moment! --Peter P (talk) 08:30, 17 December 2013 (GMT)
I've had a sort of half-eureka moment: The reason I originally defined named authors as categories was to facilitate simple selection of all their WS publications - ie they got a category page if I thought WS was likely to be publishing lots of their stuff. However, with SMW installed, neither named-author categories nor 'Is author' properties are required to do that selection. All that is needed is a SMW query with selection criteria of 'Category:Authors' AND 'Author name'. Author name does not have to be a property. It can be any value you care to supply - although I guess an 'Is author' property would be needed to provide a drop-down box of available authors in a form. --Peter P (talk) 08:46, 17 December 2013 (GMT)
Is 'Category:Authors' needed for anything except browsing? Is the purpose to use it to make a drop down on a search form? Robin (talk) 09:33, 17 December 2013 (GMT)
I was oblivious to the existence of Semantic forms and their drop-down boxes when the category was created. It was created on much the same criteria as most of the other categories, ie to categorise pages about people who, among other obvious attributes, were authors. John Pilger and Sibel Edmonds are examples of "among other obvious attributes" viz: Pilger is also in Category:Investigative Journalists and Edmonds is also in Category:Whistleblowers. But scanning those who ARE currently in Authors reveals many who, on the same basis, should be in other existing sub categories of 'People' too - such as Category:Academics; Peter Dale-Scott and Ola Tunander for example - Oh dear! I'm relaxed about discontinuing use of Category:Authors but we probably need to follow thru with consistency towards all the other sub categories of Category:People too. --Peter P (talk) 11:09, 17 December 2013 (GMT)