Template talk:Commons

Should the box not appear inline?
Sometimes editors replace "See also" links to Commons categories with this template. This disassociates the link from the "See also" section, because the box that the template renders to appears in the right margin. It can even entirely remove the link from view, when the box is pushed down by other images. The result is that readers will no longer notice the link. In cases where the Commons category is a good source of examples, this can reduce article quality.

Here is an example of such an edit: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Skew-T_log-P_diagram&diff=884596089&oldid=823247733 After the edit, the box with the link was pushed two sections further down, to "External links", requiring scrolling to make it come into view.

Two templates, or one with an option, would give authors a choice of whether to move the box to the right margin. I think the default should be to make the link appear inline, wherever the template is used. --RainerBlome (talk) 13:04, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * My question is why the template should be used at all, given that the link to Commons appears in the right margin via Wikidata. Peter coxhead (talk) 15:25, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * If you really want it inline, use . -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 23:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)
 * While many editors know of the Commons link in the sidebar, my guess is the average reader of Wikipedia is less aware of the sidebar in its entirety. A prominent link provided by the template is helpful. Shunting valuable links to arbitrary pockets on the edge of the screen does not help readers one bit. I've seen some users removing Commons links with the logic "it's covered by Wikidata now". Big whoop! The entire sidebar is inaccessible to when reading in mobile view, which is a large proportion of readers. --Animalparty! (talk) 06:14, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * So why try to get round the design decision to remove such links in mobile view (by not having the sidebar or other navigation templates shown)? Why is the Commons link so important? What about the Wikispecies link, which editors also duplicate in desktop view? Why don't we create one-off links for all those in the sidebar or navigation templates not shown in mobile view? Why not go back to adding explicit links to each of the other language wikis? Peter coxhead (talk) 10:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Because providing useful links to readers is important (otherwise why have any external links at all?) 2) Because Commons has useful content the viewer may otherwise be unaware of. 3) If the Wikispecies link is present, it should be added per 1 & 2. 4) Mobile view can and should be improved. Until then, we have to make wisest use of resources. 5) Because that would be excessive and less likely to provide unique and useful content to readers. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:17, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * You might, perhaps, be able to persuade me that the Commons link is sufficiently useful to be duplicated in desktop view solely in order for it to be present in mobile view, but the Wikispecies link? No. Wikispecies has fewer active editors than we do, is frequently behind with taxonomic changes (at least in the areas in which I usually edit), and its pages contain little useful information. Peter coxhead (talk) 22:45, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Very much agree with Animalparty! there. Also if the category contains some/many useful relevant media files, it should not be buried beneath large lists of references. There is no reason for making relevant media hard to find (media files about the article subject are usually of interest to many readers especially since they often have very useful files not yet embedded in the article) and make WMC even less visible/known/used than it already is. could you please revise MOS:LAYOUTEL?
 * Agree with Peter coxhead on the Wikispecies link for the reasons he gave and because for most articles, even if the target page was high-quality just very few readers would be interested in these pages. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 16 January 2020
Add Logan Brewster to Drummers under "B". Logan currently plays drums with Adam Brand. Owen.brewster (talk) 03:01, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * There is no article on Logan Brewster. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 04:00, 16 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Besides which, this is the talk page for discussing improvements to the template . Please make your request at the talk page for the page concerned. -- Red rose64 &#x1f339; (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Proposal to use Module:Commons link as core logic for this template
There is a proposal at the Village Pump to use Module:Commons link (function getGalleryOrCategory) as the core logic for this template, as in Commons-inline. Please feel free to join in that discussion. — hike395 (talk) 19:54, 30 August 2020 (UTC)


 * I am going to make this change go live. If anyone else wants to discuss, or if anyone finds a problem, please notify me here. — hike395 (talk) 13:49, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Template:Commons and Template:Commons category
Now there is link to article's category on Wikimedia Commons added below "In other projects" part of left bar (below logo, those links...). Before, template Commonscat (now Commons category) was being added in External links section. I think now that there is some problem with existing and/or using of the link in left bar along with two templates Commons category and Commons which should go in External links section (latter, Commons, leading to page itself and not category page). --5.43.73.49 (talk) 08:05, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Req: Linktext should be extended from " " to "has media related to "
- More semantic

- Larger clickable area

- a11y

Jontajonta (talk) 11:17, 5 October 2021 (UTC)


 * If we did this, we should change Commons category also. This would affect many pages: I would recommend getting consensus at the WP:Village Pump. — hike395 (talk) 06:16, 6 October 2021 (UTC)