Template talk:Ds
 | Future discussions may take place at Template talk:Contentious topics. |
 | This template was considered for deletion on 2017 October 10. The result of the discussion was "keep". |
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 30 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Subcategorizing topics
[edit]Per my post at WP:VPPR, and on Category talk:Wikipedia pages about contentious topics: With nearly ten-thousand articles in this category, I wonder if perhaps we can divide out some subcategories for specific large groups of contentious topics, such as those falling under American politics or COVID-19 editing restrictions
. Right now this massive category has precisely one subcategory, Category:Pseudoscience articles under contentious topics procedure. My intent is to create additional subcategories for a dozen or so major areas of contentious topics, and subcategorize the contents accordingly. It has been suggested to me that the best way to do this would be to modify this template so that specific template calls such as {{Ds/talk notice|ipa}} (which produces the line, "The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic") would also subcategorize the page in question into a Category:Wikipedia pages about contentious topics relating to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, with comparable subcategories created for other well-populated groups of contentious topics. BD2412 T 20:07, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
- (As a minor aside, Tamzin suggested doing the same in the ARCA mentioned in the thread above, cc Tamzin. Izno (talk) 04:07, 24 May 2023 (UTC))
- .... and I see the same discussion was started and fruitfully discussed at Template talk:Contentious topics#Subcategorizing topics. Izno (talk) 04:10, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
Template:Ds/talk notice for multiple topics
[edit](Posted at Template_talk:Contentious_topics/talk_notice#When_an_article_deals_with_multiple_contentious_topics, since this template says it's deprecated and to use that one, and in any case the issue applies to either.) -sche (talk) 02:38, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
/talk notice
[edit]Template:Ds/talk notice clearly uses British English, yet is primarily used on articles related to America. Looks like an ENGVAR violation to me. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 06:03, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- MOS:ENGVAR applies to article content, not to internal interface elements, and this is a talk-page notice (talk pages are not part of articles). Our largest pool of editors are Americans, and our largest pool of nationally-specific articles are also American, but we're not going to go through all project pages and template code and force everything to American dialect. (And I say that as an American.) — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 06:17, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, but it does appear to be primarily used for talk pages for articles related to America, which makes its use of British spelling definitely odd. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 06:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's not odd that someone who normally uses British spelling wrote a template, or that it gets used on pages that pertain more often to people who use another dialect. I'm not sure where you're getting this expectation (what's actually "odd" here) that the writing used in creating an internal template has dialectally anything at all to do what pages it gets used at by completely different editors later. That said it just doesn't matter what dialect the template uses, so if it bugs you all that much, you could probably change it, though you might get reverted as making pointless and annoying-to-others changes for no good reason. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Alright, you've won this discussion. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 18:00, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- It's not odd that someone who normally uses British spelling wrote a template, or that it gets used on pages that pertain more often to people who use another dialect. I'm not sure where you're getting this expectation (what's actually "odd" here) that the writing used in creating an internal template has dialectally anything at all to do what pages it gets used at by completely different editors later. That said it just doesn't matter what dialect the template uses, so if it bugs you all that much, you could probably change it, though you might get reverted as making pointless and annoying-to-others changes for no good reason. — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼 07:49, 16 October 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, but it does appear to be primarily used for talk pages for articles related to America, which makes its use of British spelling definitely odd. IPs are people too 🇺🇸🦅 06:46, 16 October 2023 (UTC)