Template talk:Copts

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Coptic Coat of Arms[edit]

Most copts do not know about this "coat of arms". It is only used by a few actvists and shouldnt be in the info box. The Cake 1 (talk) 07:26, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

not true, many copts are holding the coptic flag in dimonstartions and place it on their websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 05:08, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Please read this and add your comments there or on my talk page. If I don't get any response in a week, I'll assume you agree and remove the "Coat of Arms" and the link to the flag page, Thanks. George (talk) 19:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

I reverted the page to my last edit, please do not revert it again without explaining your reasons. George (talk) 20:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Pleeeeease explain your reasons for undoing my changes on my talk page or here. George (talk) 23:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I removed it again, Wikipedia works by building consensus, you shouldn't readd the flag without giving an explanation here. George (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see any good reasons why the coptic design to be removed. It seams that people suport it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Coptic_flag —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:46, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't represent copts in general, only a group of activists that most egyptians have never heard about. I'm only saying it shouldn't be in the infobox, see Talk:Copt#Coptic flag 2. George (talk) 00:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

why is still here?? (talk) 04:07, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

There have been several anon. edits that were disruptive and were ones that I considered to be vandalism (ie: continuously unexplained removal of an image on this template). For that reason, I have requested for the protection of this template from more vandalism. Also, you anon. guys need to at least try to comply with Wikipedia Policy, as continuous vandalism may also result in the blocking of several disruptive users, whether anonymous accounts or sockpuppet accounts (refer to recent discussion found here). ~ Troy (talk) 22:05, 17 June 2008 (UTC)

Please make this table collapsible[edit]

Please, make the table collapsible, because it unnecessarily occupies big parts in pages and limits the visibility of other tables, as in Coptic alphabet#Alphabet table, unless we we have a wide screen and the browser is fully maximized. --Mahmudmasri (talk) 02:37, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Five years later, after looking at several pages with this template, I came here to write the same thing. It really needs to be made collapsible. I will do that in a few days if no one objects. Ohff (talk) 22:57, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
On second thought, there seems to be an ongoing content dispute between this older version and this newer version (with the newer version being the one that can easily be given collapsible lists). Obviously I can't work to make the template collapsible while the dispute is ongoing. I have no desire to take any side, but I would like to invite the people involved in the dispute to discuss it here. So, I will ping the people who seem to be involved (and I apologize in advance if I pinged you by mistake): @Frietjes: @Meritamun: @Th4n3r:. Hopefully the issue can be resolved! Ohff (talk) 06:24, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
collapsible is fine, but use {{sidebar with collapsible lists}}. going back to last decade by using html table markup is not the answer. Frietjes (talk) 13:11, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


Can we please vote on the way the tab;e looks like? I don't see why we have to use a standard format that looks ugly if we can use a much nicer looking format. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 19:49, 7 March 2015 (UTC)

sure, I vote for the current format. Frietjes (talk) 20:13, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
I vote against the current format and for the old much nicer one. Anybody else? — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:57, 19 March 2015 (UTC)