Template talk:Merge school

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Merge
WikiProject icon This template is within the scope of WikiProject Merge, an attempt to reduce the articles to be merged backlog and improve the merging process. If you wish to help, you can edit the page attached to this talk page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
 
WikiProject Schools (Rated Template-class)
WikiProject icon This template is related to WikiProject Schools, a collaborative effort to write quality articles about schools around the world. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page.
 Template  This template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

School district[edit]

I've removed the reference to school districts from this template. School districts only seem to exist in North America so the terminology is confusing for the rest of the world. There is also no consensus that all school districts are notable and should by rights have their own article (see discussion at WP:Schools). Dahliarose 12:24, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I agree, but if there is a school district article, then that's preferred as the merge target, over the locality. Quarl (talk) 2007-03-11 13:06Z
I think that it would depend on the specific school district and locality. In a large city, schools might belong in an Education in Foo sub-article. In many mid-sized cities and suburban areas of the U.S., where a high school might be one of several in a specific locality while it is one of a dozen in the school district, it probably belongs in the school district article. In a small rural city, township, or county, where there is only one high school, it might fit best into one of the locality articles, until it is expanded sufficiently to justify its own article. And, despite the possibility that the U.S. is unique in this regard, many school districts meet the "notability" standards, with extensive news coverage in addition to the official reports available for county, state and federal agencies. Most school districts have independently elected boards, many U.S. politicians begin their political careers on school boards, many districts have long histories of contentious elections and bond issues, many are the largest employers in their localities and have the largest budgets of any local public agency. I am reverting the template.--Hjal 17:40, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
I've reverted the template as school districts are only applicable to the US. Wikipedia is a world encyclopaedia and not just a US encyclopaedia. If there is a need for a mention of school districts perhaps there should be a separate US-only template. However, it is very confusing to have a template mentioning school districts when they don't even exist for the rest of the world. Such local terminology can only lead to confusion.Dahliarose 18:10, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I have added a parameter, so if you want to merge to a particular article, you can say {{merge-school|school district article}}. Quarl (talk) 2007-03-13 09:49Z

I think that parameter should be required. How can one propose merging to an article when one does not know whether the article exists in the first place? DGG (talk) 04:04, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Is it not likely that a district, village, township, town or city article exists? All those geography stubs? AnteaterZot (talk) 04:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
for the US, school district is preferred unless it is a small town,and such stubs have not been automatically created. But the point is that it is worth finding the right place when you tag the article. for one thing, it shows one are paying adequate attention to each specific article, and it makes thew ork easier for those who will actually follow and do it. DGG (talk) 04:19, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I'll use the parameter. If no district/town article exists, I'll create one and merge all the schools there. AnteaterZot (talk) 04:24, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

It has been suggested... This is only a suggestion[edit]

Is this redundancy really needed? It's far too reminisent of the Emergency Broadcast System tests. I keep hearing that About this sound "Bwaa, bwaa, bwaa"  every time I read it. Pairadox (talk) 00:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Shortened text 80% in tag-box[edit]

13-July-2010: The text in this template tag-box has been shortened, 80%, by moving the reasons-to-merge onto the template-doc page. Reducing the tag-box wording avoids the massive cluttering of a school article by the rambling, and utterly excessive, verbosity of all the various reasons why the article should be merged, if only anyone cared. In the years since this template was created, Wikipedia has changed to use shorter tag-boxes, which are less alarming to the readers. In the future, consider placing such tag-boxes only on the talk-page of each school article, because some tag-boxes are viewed by 28,000 people before anyone replies to them. If no one cares about the merge, then the tag-box could be left on the talk-page, for the same number of years, without cluttering the article as displayed. The index, Category:School articles to be merged, would still support clean-up actions, but by listing talk-pages, not the related article pages. Tagging of talk-pages is the preferred method to avoid alarming and frustrating the other "28,000" readers who do not edit these articles for merger issues. -Wikid77 (talk) 06:26, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Template doesn't categorize properly[edit]

This template doesn't place the articles in the appropriate monthly merge categories. This needs to be fixed now. If no one does so in the next week or so, I will nominate this template for deletion. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 12:42, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Can anyone help?[edit]

There seem to be problems with the coding of this template. It should point to the talk page of each article that is taggged but instead the box points back to the merge template. Does anyone know how to fix it? Dahliarose (talk) 10:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you give a link to a page where it doesn't work as you expect? It worked in all pages I tried. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Sorry I think I've misunderstood how the template is used. I was clicking on the template here rather on the actual pages for the schools to be merged. Can the coding be changed so that the tag links to both discussion pages? The proper procedure for a proposed merge is for a discussion to be initiated on the talk pages of both articles affected as per Wikipedia:Merging. I think this template needs some additional guidelines for usage to ensure that people don't just plonk the tag on a page without initiating a discussion on the relevant talk pages or giving any reasons why they think a merge is appropriate, as they are doing at the moment. Also at present some people are linking to the locality article and others are linking to the school article. I'm also finding this tag being used on some very lengthy well referenced articles where a merge is entirely inappropriate. We need to make it clear that a merge is only appropriate for very short articles with insufficient content to merit a standalone article. Dahliarose (talk) 12:31, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
The template places tagged articles in Category:School articles to be merged. It is a hidden category. For any template, you can find uses by clicking "What links here" in the toolbox to get Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Merge_school. See more at Help:What links here. Merge discussions should only be in one place. Wikipedia:Merging#Proposing a merger says: "Discuss the merger proposal on the destination article's discussion section". I have coded the template to accept a discuss parameter as in Template:Merge to#Usage. If there is no discuss parameter then it links to the talk page of the destination article. If there is no destination article then it links to the talk page of the tagged article. The documentation can be edited at Template:Merge school/doc. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:01, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. The Wikipedia guidelines seem somewhat contradictory. Wikipedia:Tagging pages for problems tells us to start discussions on the article's talk page. The problem with this template as it currently stands is that editors are not initiating any discussion on the talk page of the destination article so few people if any know that a merge is being proposed. The templates seem to languish on the article pages for years with no action being taken one way or another. Dahliarose (talk) 13:32, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

The pages with this merge template will never be resolved, period, almost guaranteed. Us folks working thru merges at WP:MERGE use the monthly categories to make sure we do the oldest first, but this template doesn't put articles in the monthly categories. Thus, we'll probably never get to these. I propose that the code for this template be replaced with the standard merge-to template and add a school symbol. D O N D E groovily Talk to me 15:34, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, this template can be viewed and treated as a special case of {{merge to}}. wbm1058 (talk) 02:33, 24 February 2017 (UTC)