Wikipedia talk:Navigation templates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Essays
WikiProject icon This page is within the scope of WikiProject Essays, a collaborative effort to organise and monitor the impact of Wikipedia essays. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion.
 High  This page has been rated as High-impact on the project's impact scale.

Fourth point under "Navigation templates provide navigation between existing articles"[edit]

  • Note: In navigation boxes about musical ensembles, it may be appropriate to list all of the members of the ensemble, to avoid the perception that the ensemble is a solo act, provided that at least one member of the ensemble is notable.

This makes absolutely no sense. Why is it an exception to list members with no Wikipedia articles with the justification "to avoid the perception that the ensemble is a solo act", while this rule is entirely ignored when dealing with songs and albums with no Wikipedia articles that can be justified with "to avoid the perception that the ensemble has released fewer songs and albums than it has in reality"?

I bring this up as a result of what happened on Template:F.T. Island, where another editor removed all songs and albums with no article entries. As a result, the template looks incomplete and entirely ridiculous, especially when members with no articles can remain because of the exemption noted above. It removes most of the band's discography: most of their Korean- and Japanese-language studio albums, most of their Korean-language EPs, all of their Japanese EPs, all of their other albums (live albums, compilation albums, and a cover album, in both languages), most of their Japanese-language singles, and the entirety of their Korean-language singles, both promotional and digital. I'm sorry, but this version looks absolutely pathetic in comparison to this version.

I'm well aware that the purpose of navigational templates is to link existing articles, but this inconsistent exception makes no sense at all to me. This type of needless bureaucracy is far more hurtful to navigational templates and to the readers of related articles than it is to simply list songs and albums without articles. — ξxplicit 02:23, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind if the members of the band without articles are removed from the navbox, too. The navbox is not intended to serve as a discography for an artist (unless, of course, each of the artist's albums has an article), that's what F.T. Island discography is for which is clearly linkable from the bottom of the navbox. --StarcheerspeaksnewslostwarsTalk to me 02:53, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
I also agree...many editors actually believe navboxes serve more than navigation, but to represent the topic as a whole. I think we should make it explicitly clear thats not the case.Lucia Black (talk) 22:30, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
What is the purpose of navigation template if you aren't even presenting topics what are related to the topic, even if the articles don't exist yet? The "that's what F.T. Island discography is for" excuse renders all music-related template like this one entirely useless with such logic. You're essentially saying that, even if all the articles existed, the template doesn't do the job the discography does, so use that instead. Removing 84% of the band's discography from the template isn't helpful to anyone who wants to quickly glance at a neat horizontal presentation of releases without needing to navigate a discography page that can be ridiculously long. — ξxplicit 02:25, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad somebody finally brought this up. A navigation template should only contain working links to extant articles. Period. These are article navigation templates after all, not infoboxes or discographies. Text which does not link to a Wikipedia article serves no purpose within an article navigation template. I've never really understood why we list members in a bar above the rest of the content, and generally put all members' names whether articles about them exist or not. I've been thinking for a while that the title banner for any navbox should say "Wikipedia articles on <subject>" or "Part of a series on <subject>", the way that {{Socrates}} and some other navboxes do. That would make it clear that these things are lists of Wikipedia articles, not infoboxes or discographies. The members should then be taken out of the upper bar and placed in a section labeled "Members", only including those that have articles. For example, my version of Template:Black Flag would look like this:
--IllaZilla (talk) 00:56, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

I guess this was the "good old days." Just tried to enforce it and was rv by someone pointing out Wikipedia:Navigation_templates#Navigation_templates_provide_navigation_between_related_articles. Where is the discussion for that? I guess I missed it! Student7 (talk) 15:43, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Large navigational boxes[edit]

I have started a thread at Template talk:The Beatles. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 15:04, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

Geodesy sidebar[edit]

In the Wikipedia:Navigation_templates#Types section, it says that sidebars are useful for "smaller amounts of directly relevant links". Beside it is the Geodesy sidebar for illustration. Is this really a good illustration of the criteria? RockMagnetist (talk) 02:40, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Did I do something wrong?[edit]

See Template:Oxford Professor of Poetry. --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:43, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

the smallest syntax error near the bottom. I've fixed it for you, and restored the name. Seemingly it can't live without a name either, choosy beast.--Lockley (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
  • @Lockley: - Many thanks for your help...totally missed that small error at the bottom. I saw one of the help pages mention an example without the name parameter, hence why I removed--since their example there worked (but didn't for me). I appreciate it. --ColonelHenry (talk) 18:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
Very happy to assist! --Lockley (talk) 18:11, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Template:The Sun Also Rises use[edit]

{{The Sun Also Rises}} keeps getting removed from The Sun Also Rises. Does anyone care to comment at Talk:The_Sun_Also_Rises#Template_removal?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:06, 2 April 2014 (UTC)


WT:NAVBOX brings you to this page which turns out to be the talk page for WP:NAV, but not WP:NAVBOX. Can people here get the Shortcuts reassigned correctly.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:38, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Done. --Rob Sinden (talk) 12:36, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

merging advantages from guidance essay into guidelines[edit]

I'd like to stop the duplication between the present advantages section and that of the guideline. Thanks for your comments. Fgnievinski (talk) 01:58, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Possible contradiction[edit]

The advice given under the "Alternatives" section (to not create a template that significantly overlaps with an existing category page) seems to contradict the guideline that overlapping categories and navigation templates are not considered duplicative. Is there a good way to reconcile these? Pigby (talk) 22:53, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

outline sections (not articles)[edit]

Please see: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Outlines#outline_sections_.28not_articles.29. Thanks. Fgnievinski (talk) 04:01, 17 November 2014 (UTC)

Circumventing WP:EXISTING on a major scale[edit]

An editor has inserted {{American Revolutionary War}} into Committee of Safety (American Revolution). This appears to be a way of circumventing the limitation of templates to WP:EXISTING. The super-template includes all templates relating to the war, including the one which actually includes CofS. But the rest do not.

The problem is, without specific guidelines/policy, where does this all end? Can I include a supertemplate "American History." If not, why not? Where does macro inclusion of templates end? Student7 (talk) 02:48, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Sport(s) navigation template names[edit]

Feel free to paritcipate in the discussion I started at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Sports#Sport(s) navigation template names. עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 07:06, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

Linking to sister projects[edit]

Please comment Should we link to sister projects such as Commons or Wikiquote? It seems useful for readers and is common in the below section of navboxes. What do you think? —Justin (koavf)TCM 04:36, 12 February 2015 (UTC)

We want our own articles in navigational templates. WikiCommons is okay as a generic template in itself. I think I've seen a generic one for Wikiquotes. While we don't want to deny readers access to possible references, we don't want to feature them as highly as our own.
In point of fact, they are not directly linkable (considered external links). Student7 (talk) 21:52, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Images in navigational box titles[edit]

please comment in this thread. Frietjes (talk) 15:43, 23 February 2015 (UTC)