Last modified: 2014-06-26 07:44:42 UTC
I understand the design choice to whitelist a specific list of common templates (Artwork, Photograph, etc.), but advanced users have valid use cases for using a custom template. The most important one in my eyes is the use of ingestion templates, as they allow easily to do super-advanced formatting & metadata ingestion in plain wikitext − a method very popular with batch uploaders at the moment. I realise this sort of defeats one of the purposes of the GWToolset − to map metadata − but it is very frustrating not being able to use the full power of wikitext for mapping. (See <https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Mus%C3%A9e_des_Augustins/Ingestion> for an example of such a template)
I will second this one GWToolset produces file description pages which are not up to current standards. For example when a institution uses metadata fields which are missing in one of the standard templates, the current approach is to add fields via the use of https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:Information_field . A better solution, especially for large batches, is to customize one of the existing infobox templates and create new batch specific infobox template matching the provided metadata. See for example https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Infobox_templates:_based_on_Artwork_template for several examples. That approach is not currently possible.
https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/133684/
Change 133684 merged by jenkins-bot: Allow for custom templates https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/133684
the patch has been deployed to production. are you okay with closing the bug now?
I made a quick test on the Beta Cluster the other day. From what I saw I’m very happy with this. (I’ll open specific bugs for enhancement if needed ;-) Thanks a lot Dan for the work!
