Template talk:Bodily Fluids Triptych

Create such a template based on the coinage put forth by John Patterson, due to the themes which are expressed and I feel an additional template was needed, especially how McQueen has expressed themes and connections between his works; with the themes of love. But I may alter 'Bodily Fluids Triptych' to 'Precious Bodily Fluids Triptych' but the former seemed a tad bit less cumbersome. --Bartallen2 (talk) 21:09, 20 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Have a look at WP:NAV, WP:NAVBOX and WP:BIDIRECTIONAL to see why this navbox is completely inappropriate. --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you just keep them separate? --Soetermans. T / C 13:14, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep what separate? --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:27, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Firstly, per WP:NAVBOX, "There should be a Wikipedia article on the subject of the template". There isn't, so we cannot establish WP:NOTABILITY of the topic. Secondly, per WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, most of the links are inappropriate, as it would be inappropriate to transclude the proposed navbox on the articles in question. However, the proposed template also fails other aspects of WP:NAVBOX and WP:NAV. --Rob Sinden (talk) 13:31, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Much of what is trying to be included here is broad topic stuff: sex, love, Provisional Irish Republican Army, etc, which is not directly related to the intended concept for this navbox. Also, generally for films and film series, we do not include performers or crew, as they are not directly related to the concept, and inclusion of these in templates leads to navbox "candystriping" on their individual articles. Also, we should not duplicate links to the same articles in the navbox. So once you take all of that out, you are left with nothing but the films. And the "concept" of a "Bodily Fluids Triptych" links back to a single Guardian article and is thus not notable. --Rob Sinden (talk) 14:53, 22 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]