Talk:Tag cloud
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Any ideas on where the "tag cloud" or weighted list was originally conceived?
Contents |
[edit] Spam links in Examples section
Removed '1000tag tag listing' as it was not a tag cloud, just paid-for links to advertisers. --- bigpinkthing
[edit] Link collection?
This article seems to have turned into large link collection, it might be a good idea to remove all but the more essential links. --Bomkia 02:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Done. In the interest of keeping this article free of fluff, I have cleared out the entire ==External links== section, moved only a few examples from ==Examples== to EL, and cleaned out the rest. All those links simply aren't needed.
- Note to future editors: the ==External links== section should not be repopulated with external links as it was prior to this edit. Wikipedia is not a linkfarm. See WP:NOT & WP:EL. --AbsolutDan (talk) 02:51, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
- Are you going to call this a stub now? Dpd 13:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- I'm not a wiz with the wiki syntax, but is there any reason there couldn't make a static example of a tab cloud in the article? That would remove the need/temptation for people to add external links as examples. Pimlottc 18:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
- Hmmm - maybe an image of a tag cloud would be simplest (and best)? I don't think it would need to be a working example... --AbsolutDan (talk) 04:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- I've added an image of a tag cloud -- specifically, a portion of that used on Flickr. --Konstantine Simakis 03:59, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
-
[edit] Prior Art?
There is a similar idea demonstrated here ( http://www.phpinsider.com/smarty-forum/viewtopic.php?t=174 ) that predates flickr. As I was the poster, I won't edit this article.
- I don't think that can be classed as a tag cloud; although it is visually similar, the individual items are not Tags and their sizes are not determind by popularity.
- In retrospect (as the original poster of the question), I tend to agree with the above comment. Those aren't really tags and the weighting is based on hierarchical rank. Never-the-less, it is a similar visual picture -- but probably only that. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if certain popularizers of tag clouds had seen that page before implementing their own ideas.
Can we have an expanded description here ? I still can't work out what these cloud-tags actually are from the (well-written - but sparse) description.... :-)
- What don't you understand?
[edit] Comprehension
I agree with the person above. I was fairly tired when I read this and I too had problems understanding it. I don't know if it'll be the same when I'm more awake but perhaps screenshots to demonstrate HOW tags work (or better yet, diagrams) might help the article.
- I tried to address some of the clarity issues in my most recent edits. It's a start, but the article remains a bit light on information and especially history. The reference to Flickr's role in the history of tag clouds is either incomplete or simply wrong, but I'll hold off on tinkering with it until I can find hard facts. Konstantine Simakis 04:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
200.108.27.63 17:45, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Editorializing?
I found that some of the article seemed to be leaning towards editorializing, rather than providing encyclopedic info, so I removed some content regarding suggested improvements for the usefulness of tag clouds. Some of the text to which I'm referring, though, also struck me as unclear (i.e., I sensed it involved opinion rather than fact, although I couldn't quite grasp what the opinion entailed). Feel free to review the recent edits, and let me know if you think I removed any useful information. livefastdieold 04:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
