90,866
edits
→Categorizing: good idea
(categorizing) |
(→Categorizing: good idea) |
||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
I noticed that this template places adds <u>all</u> of the pages displaying this header into the category '''''location'' FamilySearch Record Collections'''. It displays differently for '''''scheduled''''' collections and '''''no CID entered''''', but does not categorize them differently. I was wondering if we should add the "scheduled" and "no CID" pages to a different category or more simply to the parent category of '''FamilySearch Record Collections''' where they can be easily found and updated or corrected. [[User:Lotje2|Lotje2]] 20:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC) | I noticed that this template places adds <u>all</u> of the pages displaying this header into the category '''''location'' FamilySearch Record Collections'''. It displays differently for '''''scheduled''''' collections and '''''no CID entered''''', but does not categorize them differently. I was wondering if we should add the "scheduled" and "no CID" pages to a different category or more simply to the parent category of '''FamilySearch Record Collections''' where they can be easily found and updated or corrected. [[User:Lotje2|Lotje2]] 20:42, 5 July 2012 (UTC) | ||
:I think that adding additional categories for scheduled situations would be better. Each article should be added to the location category, but a category for scheduled collections would useful and perhaps another maintenance category for collections without a CID. I think this is a good suggestion. --[[User:Cottrells|Steve]] {{toolbar|[[User talk:Cottrells|talk]]|[[Special:Contributions/Cottrells|contribs]]}} 07:03, 6 July 2012 (UTC) | |||