Template talk:The Troubles

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Northern Ireland (Rated Template-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Northern Ireland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Northern Ireland on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This template has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Usage[edit]

Can this template first be formatted properly width-wise, and second can the information on it be correct before it's added to any articles please? One Night In Hackney303 21:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Why do you think the infromations not correct? The H-Man2 21:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Totally agree it looks terrible.--Padraig 21:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

What's wrong with it? The H-Man2 21:31, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Some reasons:
  • Remembrance Day Bombing - 1987 not 1985
  • Kingsmill massacre - South Armagh Republican Action Force not IRA.
  • Assembly elections held (1998). Won by SDLP and UUP - won isn't really the right term.
And that's ignoring the spelling and grammatical errors on the template. I'm unsure why certain things have been picked for the chronology and others left out, what is the criteria for inclusion? It's a good start, but it needs work. It looks ok in IE, but causes major problems in Firefox. One Night In Hackney303 21:34, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
It distorts the width of the articles when uncollapsed, try reformating it in groups as on other templates other then in columns, then sort out the information being listed.--Padraig 21:36, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Well they seem very minor reasons and anyway the South Armagh Republican Action Force was only a cover anme for the IRA. Anyway I don't use firefox so I don't see the problems regarding the width but feel free the change the width if you want. And i just tried to put in what I thought were the most imporatnt things. The H-Man2 21:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
The SARAF were IRA members operating outside the IRA command structure. The only simple comparison I can make is that it's like saying the Miami Showband were killed by the UDR. Don't get me wrong, as I said it's a good start. Just there's a few things need ironing out (like the width, which I'll try and fix) before it's rapidly employed if that's ok? One Night In Hackney303 21:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Ok great! The H-Man2 21:51, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I've made a start. I've fixed the first column problem, but I need to work out how to get the width of the Chronology column right, it works ok on IE but Firefox doesn't. I'm unsure about the inclusion of the "See also" part with ETA, Libya etc. It's only really the Provisional IRA that are linked to them, and it isn't made particularly clear who they are linked to on the template itself. Given the lack of actual participation from ETA etc in the Troubles, might it be best to lose that section? One Night In Hackney303 22:08, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I can't figure out how to make the text auto-wrap instead of just extending the width of the columns, any idea Padraig? One Night In Hackney303 22:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
I tried fixing it but couldn't get it right, I think it would be better converting the template similar to the Hunger strike one maybe or like Template:Parliament_of_Northern_Ireland.--Padraig 22:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
How's that look? One Night In Hackney303 22:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Thats fine now the width is correct.--Padraig 22:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Moving forward[edit]

Now the width is fixed, what else needs possible attention?

  • As above, I'm not keen on the "Linked to" section, especially in its current position.
  • The colours in the "Participants" section are problematic. In the British/Northern Ireland governments section the red clashes badly with the blue, in fact AFAIK that's a combination that should be avoided for colour blind people. Might it be best if we just use neutral colours for all three of those headings?
  • Chronology section. Anything that needs adding/removing, or even rewording? I think brevity is the key really, if we include every event the template is going to be huge, and in one particular section leaving it unbalanced.

Anyone else? One Night In Hackney303 22:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree with removing the linked to section, and changing the colours, the 2003 assembly election, and creation of the new executive should be added.--Padraig 22:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Do we need the UFF? That's only a redirect to the UDA anyway? And although I'd prefer to get the clashing colours changed first, I'm happy with the template to go on articles now the most pressing problem has been fixed. Anything else is just minor tinkering in my opinion. One Night In Hackney303 22:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
Didn't realise UFF was a redirect, it was the main name used by the UDA for their killings, they didn't claim many in their own name, I think the colours should be toned down. Apart from that I think it can now ready to be used in articles.--Padraig 23:06, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I change the colours to the same as the title back ground.--Padraig 23:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the Ulster Special Constabulary should probably be in there. Maybe the Ulster Young Militants too. Linked to • Some Army and Police forces should be changed to See also • Stevens Report, or something similar. History of the Republic of Ireland should be in the top section for completeness. And I know it is a work in progress, but there's way too much white space for my liking. Can I also suggest that {{The Troubles|state=collapsed}} is used by default. Stu ’Bout ye! 19:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Any ideas on how to fill in some of that white space? A see also section? A key figures section? Stu ’Bout ye! 20:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking it might be best if the first three columns were combinbed into one column. That should make things more even in size, and the chronology can be resized either up or down to make everything even. It's way beyond my technical limits though :( One Night In Hackney303 23:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I think that is a good idea, ONiH, though I too wouldn't know how to do it. I also think the "linked to" content is problematic. The Stevens Report is certainly worth of a link, but using it to justify making a point about collusion is not really within the remit of a nav-template, especially in such weaselly terms. Rockpocket 00:09, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

layout[edit]

I boldly changed the layout from this to this. the old layout had several problems: (1) use of hardcoded middots for bullets, (2) too wide for narrow displays since the contents don't wrap, (3) lots of unnecessary whitespace. let me know if there is a problem with the new version. Frietjes (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks aesthetically better, but could still do with being broken down into smaller more focused templates instead of trying to be all things to all men. 2 lines of K303 10:47, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
I agree, but at least this is a step in the right direction. I would support splitting it into more focused templates. Frietjes (talk) 16:54, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Broadcasting ban[edit]

I'd like to add a recently created article about the broadcasting ban but thought I should ask here before doing anything. Any thoughts? Paul MacDermott (talk) 12:24, 22 June 2013 (UTC)

I added it as no one responded, but will keep this page on my watchlist for a while in case anyone wishes to comment. Thanks Paul MacDermott (talk) 15:37, 23 June 2013 (UTC)