CZ:Proposals/Should we allow article specific subpages?
This proposal has not yet been assigned to any decisionmaking group or decisionmaker(s).
The Proposals Manager will do so soon if and when the proposal or issue is "well formed" (including having a driver).
For now, the proposal record can be found in the new proposals queue.
Driver: Chris Day
Complete explanation
At present only subpages from a generic list of subpages can be created. The core of this proposal is to allow some subpages that are article-specific subpages (AS-subpages). Such AS-subpages would not be available as a choice in the list of unused subpages but designated in the metadata for each specific article.
To add an AS-subpage to a cluster the "tab1 = " (or tab2, or tab3, as the case may be) field in the metadata page for the article needs to be edited to contain the name. Up to three different AS-subpages can be designated at the moment.
There are two distinct roles for this AS-subpages.
- One role is for a limited set of subpages that would never be generally applicable to CZ articles. For example, CZ:Isotopes is an experimental AS-subpage type being tested on Oxygen, Iron and Hydrogen. It is designed to be a tab-navigable subpage used on articles about elements that have a lot of specific isotope data. Clearly, such a tab is limited to a subset of specific articles
- A second role is as a way to customise subpage tabs and allow the subpage format to develop more freely rather than restricting ourselves to a subset of "approved" subpages. An example of such a case might be CZ:Honorees currently being tested at Damon Knight Memorial Grand Master Award/Honorees.
Reasoning
Generic subpages such as "Catalogs" can be useful for storing data related to the article but the tab name for the subpage is not very specific for the kind of data available. The ability to create up to three specific subpage types will increase the usability of the article for casual readers who are not familiar with the articles structure. For example, chemistry students will be immediately be aware that one of the subpages has information relating to different isotopes if the tab is actually named Isotopes rather than Catalogs.
But why not make Isotopes a generic subpage?
- Certainly this is possible but there are three reasons for not having all subpages hardwired as generic subpages. First, there is a timelag for authors to get new subpage titles approved this can be frustrating for authors. Second, by allowing authors to experiment with up to three unique subpages for an article we are fostering an environment that encourages creativity with respect to subpages. Third, the list of unused subpages that we currently have on the talk page could become massive if filled with rarely used but useful subpage types.
If any Article specific subpages starts to become popular it can always be upgraded to generic subpage status.
Implementation
This proposal has already been implemented for testing. The MSDS and Isotopes subpages are examples of two types of Article Specific Subpage that are currently being tested.
Discussion
A discussion section, to which anyone may contribute.
Speaking as a newbie, I'm especially glad that this came up. My initial reading of subpages was that, indeed, article-specific ones were possible. Until I read this proposal, I was uncertain that they were not.
This is a question as much as an observation, since I may be thinking of a concept of "hierarchy" -- I've also seen reference to "cluster" -- that may or may not be consistent with the idea of an article-specific subpage. In some cases, article-specific subpages, not necessarily replacing linked pages, may be a kindler and gentler way to edit.
For example, while randomly looking through pages, I came across "Pearl Harbor", which was a bit ambiguous to start in that it referred both to the place, and to the battle of December 1941. That ambiguity should be resolved, since the first is part of the geographical topic of the Hawaiian Islands and the latter variously part of World War II, or the "Pacific War", or various other historical terms.
Rather than reverting, since I don't have a good sense of rules and custom in doing so, I put some content concerns on the article talk page. IMHO, it really doesn't give proper historic perspective to say, as the article did, that the attack led to the nuclear attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Had article-specific subpages been possible, I would have created, and then started on, at least:
- Pearl Harbor: Warning of the Attack of December 7, 1941. This would tie in with MAGIC, SIGINT (signals intelligence) and/or the subset COMINT (communications intelligence, Intelligence (information gathering)/Indications and Warning, and so forth.
- Pearl Harbor: Why did the Japanese choose this target? Might be more alternative to have a higher-level article about Japanese strategy for expanding the Pacific War out of China
- Pearl Harbor: Immediate military consequences and roughly concurrent attacks (e.g., Clark Field_
- --something about the next period of the war, including the Doolittle Raid, Battle of the Coral Sea, Battle of Midway, and Guadalcanal/Operation WATCHTOWER.
Do I have something completely different in mind that what this proposal conceived? Should some or all of what I described simply be independent pages hyperlinked to the main article? Howard C. Berkowitz 07:57, 2 May 2008 (CDT)
- Howard, I'm of the opinion that we can't use those particular topics as "subpages" for the simple reason of title lengths. The titles of the {{subpages}} are going to appear in tabs along the top of the "main" article, so if the names are kept short, we can fit a reasonable number of them and the system has some significant advantages.
- Chemical masses, boiling points, atomic numbers, compounds, material-specific hazards/safety equipment requirements, basically anything that is bunches of lists of pre-formatted numeric/alpha-numeric data can benefit from a coherent system of reference and indexing...like an MSDS or an Isotopes page for instance. A example of a history article specific subpage might be a say...a timeline page, which could link to each of the articles you mentioned.
- Another approach you could take is perhaps to briefly summarize the separate articles and make a sub-section in the main article for each. That way you can link to the expanded ("sub") article at the bottom (or even at the top) of the section for the reader who is not satisfied with a brief summary, but don't bloat the main article with a bunch of ancillary stuff.--David Yamakuchi 09:48, 2 May 2008 (CDT)
Howard, David is right that the type of subpages you'd like to see would not work under this proposal. For starters the name has to fit in the tab. It sounds to me like the topics you mention above would be articles in their own right. As far as the term "cluster", that represents all pages associated with one article. The Biology cluster includes subpages such as Biology/Gallery, Biology/Related Articles, Biology/Signed Articles and even sub-subpages such as Biology/Signed_Articles/Simon_A._Levin. Chris Day 10:36, 2 May 2008 (CDT)
| Proposals System Navigation (advanced users only) | |
|
Proposal lists (some planned pages are still blank):
|