Category talk:Roads

Roads are locations
Hmmm, I know Lhyn has gone edit crazy and I like his infobox... it suddenly occurred to me that roads are like settlements and Movie could probably just add a intersection link in the Location infobox to match a location to a road... then there would be no use for all these road categories... thoughts? - Darkwynters (talk) 03:28, April 5, 2015 (UTC)


 * Yes, that works. See the "Roads in Luskan" link in the infobox on this test page. If there is consensus, I will update the infobox templates. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 12:14, April 5, 2015 (UTC)


 * I love it, Movie... It makes sense, Rat Alley, while in Luskan, it is also a road in the Sword Coast North. +1 vote!!! - Darkwynters (talk) 16:34, April 5, 2015 (UTC)


 * I like it too. Feel free to tweak my infobox as needed accordingly. (I'm glad you like the infobox, Dark.) ~ Lhynard (talk) 19:04, April 5, 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks, Lhyn... one thing, with Movie's interection links, we do not need the Roads to Location categories... like the Settlements categories... can you remove the auto category maker on your infobox so it just creates a link, such as the Traslim's Cut is located in the Castle Ward of Waterdeep. - Darkwynters (talk) 00:29, April 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * Sure. I'll have to go back and add links to all 79 road pages, though, and the weekend is ending, so it will happen slowly over the next week. ~ Lhynard (talk) 01:03, April 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * (The template is fixed though.)


 * I don't think you have to do anything to the road pages, they should be fine. Locations will need the "roads = yes" parameter added eventually, once a road page is made for a particular location. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 18:29, April 6, 2015 (UTC)


 * Movie, what I need to fix is this: I had made it so you put a location, say "Foo", without brackets, and the template would make both the link " Foo  " and the category "Roads in Foo". But now, "Roads in Foo" is generated by your (awesome, by the way,) intersection category, so I changed my template to stop auto-making links and cats. This means that the ~80 pages I edited to add the new template need to be fixed so that "Foo" becomes "  Foo  ", which I'll do this week. (DarkWinters did one for me.) ~ Lhynard (talk) 21:47, April 6, 2015 (UTC)
 * (P.S.: The new Manshaka update has "road = yes", but I need to add Drudach Street before it works.)

Road Names/Road Category Names
As I'm going through and categorizing the roads one-by-one, two issues have come up. I would like some feedback. ~ Lhynard (talk) 23:41, April 12, 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) Three road articles are on roads that do not have given names. These are:
 * 2) * Everlund to Silverymoon (Road),
 * 3) * Everlund to Sundabar (trail), and
 * 4) * Silverymoon to Sundabar (Road).
 * These do not work well with Template:Road nor with the categorization system. There was some talk of this already at Talk:Silverymoon to Sundabar (Road), but I would propose naming all of these roads, basically by renaming the articles to remove the parentheses. Is this ok with everyone?
 * 1) There are two different Old Roads,
 * 2) * Old Road (High Forest) and
 * 3) * Old Road (Vilhon Reach).
 * I imagine this is bound to happen again as the wiki continues to expand. How do we deal with the categories for such cases? Do we just have categories such as Category:Locations on the Old Road (High Forest)? The auto-category generation templates are going to have some issues with this, I think.


 * I don't know what you mean by "not work well with Template:Road". It works fine. You don't like the parentheses or something? The template will only use the page name if you do not specify the name parameter. If left blank, you would get links to categories like Category:Locations on Everlund to Silverymoon (Road) which, though a bit clunky, would still work. One possibility would be to set name to "Everlund to Silverymoon Road" and usethe to "yes". Then the generated category links would link to Category:Locations on the Everlund to Silverymoon Road, which reads better.
 * Uh, same answer as #1? Set the name parameter to whatever gives you the best category names. No need to change the page name. Does that answer your question, or am I missing something here?
 * &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 04:11, April 13, 2015 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the confusion! I wasn't very clear. I didn't mean an issue with your scripting per se; I meant an issue with policy, consistency, style, and readability.


 * More clearly, the issue is that the auto-categorizing limits infobox names. For example, if I have a noble (Haedrak Rhindaun III has about five middle names) or Calishite with a really long formal name, I "can't" put that in the infobox, because the category generated would also include that name, and our policy is to avoid such full names in article titles and (I assumed) category titles. (On Wikipedia, there is a tag for essentially, "The actual name of such-and-such is foo, but it is listed here as bar for technical reasons.") Another example is book titles. They should be italicized, but can't be in the article names or category names. In this case, I've just made the infobox template italicize them by default, but that sort of solution won't always work. I supposed we could add a field  to infoboxes to avoid this. Bringing the conversation full circle, the name of the road is "Old Road", not "Old Road (High Forest)". It would be most satisfying if the article title and category used "Old Road (High Forest)" but the infobox and article text said "Old Road".


 * Basically, my poorly explained questions in my first post break down to these:
 * Are we okay with infobox names having parentheses? (my vote: no)
 * Are we okay with categories having parentheses? (my vote: yes)
 * Are we okay with infobox names not matching article names? (my vote: yes, infoboxes should have the most formal, complete name, without parentheses, and with proper formatting)


 * Since I have seen no cases of the first two things, and I saw no policy on the third, I just wanted to get a general consensus before changing things to what I prefer.


 * My vote would include changing the page names of Everlund to Silverymoon (Road) et al. regardless, perhaps to "Road from Everlund to Silverymoon", which reads the most naturally to me. For the Old Road cases, I like the idea of adding a  field to the infobox. Thus, we would have Old Road (High Forest), "Old Road" as the displayed infobox name, and Category:Locations on the Old Road (High Forest).


 * ~ Lhynard (talk) 12:44, April 13, 2015 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. The problem with changing page names is that the search box suggests results based on the first characters. I don't have a problem with a few pages named "Road from..." or "Road between..." for those roads that don't have a name. Hopefully there are very few of them. (I prefer "Road between A and B" over "Road from A to B", since roads go both ways.) I would like to keep the parentheses in page names, because that is our standard way to disambiguate. I don't mind the infobox name being different than the page name (but I won't say it will never have parentheses in it) because the page name is prominently displayed in the header anyway. The display_name idea offers the most flexibility and it is already in use. See the link parameter in Category jump. I'd still like to hear from other admins/editors before proceeding. &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 15:57, April 13, 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the reply. I actually prefer "Road between A and B" also, now that you mention it.


 * Anyone else have an opinion? ~ Lhynard (talk) 16:13, April 13, 2015 (UTC)

Reciprocal Categories?
In the categories, we regularly put Settlements on Roads, but should we also make the road a Location in the Settlement? I can see that Daerlun is in Category:Locations on the Way of the Manticore, but if I look at Category:Locations in Daerlun I don't find Way of the Manticore, so I don't know what road(s) it's on. The reason I ask is that sometimes I like to brachiate my way through the categories to see what I can find without reading an article. (I used to do this with the three "see also" links at the end of an article that were pulled from categories that the current page was in. Remember those?) Maybe Daerlun is a bad example and we don't have this problem elsewhere...okay, I spot checked a few cities and it's about 50/50. Granted, the road may not have the same name inside a city as it does outside, but that's okay. I think we should treat a name change as an intersection. Thoughts anyone? &mdash;Moviesign (talk) 01:16, April 23, 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes, we should make roads passing through settlements locations in that settlement. I also like the idea of name changes as intersections. ~ Lhynard (talk) 14:47, May 3, 2018 (UTC)