Template talk:Metadata

Note
This is a Talk page - please see the documentation about using talk pages. Add newer comments below older ones, sign comments using four tildes (~~~~), and indent successive comments with colons (:). Add new sections at the bottom of the page, under a heading (== ==). Please remember to mark sections as "open for discussion" using {{talk|open}}, so they will show up in the list of open discussions.

Consumed by?

Talk status

This discussion is still ongoing.

Matthew Marchese (Maffblaster) , is the property this Template creates consumed by anything? Was this just a precursor to the "Article description" property and can be removed? I don't see much of a point for duplication if the latter is true. Thanks for your time. --Grknight (talk) 14:57, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Ah, I see it is used in an RDF creation, but I do wonder if anything today consumes it. Perhaps the old packages did. Still investigating. --Grknight (talk) 15:38, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

Brian Evans (Grknight) , RDF creation? Resource Description Framework? I think you're right in the first comment; as far as I understand it was a precursor before the Article description property was created and is subsequently not used on new pages. I believe the only advantage to this was that it was supposed to help web robots better understand wiki pages as they crawl... I'm not opposed to removing since it's not used much around the wiki and I see little advantage to it. --Maffblaster (talk) 18:23, 29 November 2021 (UTC)

If I understand correctly, this template used to govern the inclusion of an article in the main documentation overview. It also worked as a sort of "certified quality" marker, because the template was only added when an article was sufficiently complete and checked. Not a wiki archeologist, I might be wrong on all this.

I'm sure that I read references to how this all worked, not long ago - but I removed them, because it no longer works like that, de facto - and now I can't find the source (I thought it might have been on the Contributor's guide, but it seems it was somewhere else). Is this the "RDF" ?

In passing, recreating a documentation overview is something that I had in mind, for when I get towards the end of the changes I want to make in the coming weeks/months... I was thinking of listing hand-picked articles that are particularly central subjects, whereas the previous incarnation automatically included many articles. Of course, I'll work in my namespace before suggesting anything.

Also, I have wanted to suggest a template, or some other mechanism, to give an indication of article quality... I thought some sort of pointer that an article has bean read over by an editor, and checked to at least have "sane" content could be helpful to readers. {{Stub}}, {{WIP}}, {{Dated}}, etc. warn of potential quality issues, but there is nothing to indicate that things have been checked over, or any other indication of content quality. Perhaps even this template could be rehabilitated for it's previous use? Or a category, a new template, or something else?

I actually started a "Quality Assurance" list in my namespace, so I could track if I had read through articles, and to what degree... but maintaining a list is a lot of copy pasting, so I've put this off to later xD.

As always, thanks for everything everyone :) -- Kyoreln (talk)

RDF is from Special:ExportRDF and that can be consumed by client of all sorts that can read this exchangeable format. The Semantic Mediawiki can also #ask as you found out, but I can no longer find use of it. --Grknight (talk) 00:51, 7 December 2021 (UTC)