Template talk:Infobox fictional race

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Infoboxes, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Infoboxes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InfoboxesWikipedia:WikiProject InfoboxesTemplate:WikiProject InfoboxesInfoboxes articles

Fictional characters

This template is within the scope of WikiProject Fictional characters, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fictional characters on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fictional charactersWikipedia:WikiProject Fictional charactersTemplate:WikiProject Fictional charactersfictional character articles

This template was considered for merging with Template:Infobox Primeval creature on 2019 April 14. The result of the discussion was "no consensus".

On 31 July 2021, it was proposed that this page be moved to ?. The result of the discussion was not moved.

Requested move 31 July 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Vpab15 (talk) 20:07, 11 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Infobox fictional race → ? – I think we should take the word "race" out of the title of this template. And before anyone accuses me of being politically correct, hear me out.

A "race" is "a group of sentient beings, particularly people, distinguished by common ancestry, heritage or [physical] characteristics". That just doesn't apply to a lot of the fictional entities on which this infobox is used. Gelatinous cubes, Tribbles, Slayers, the Dominion, Autons, Lost Boys, Mandalorians, and the Klingon High Council are among the plainest examples, and many more are arguable. (Actually, that last one probably should use some "fictional organisation" infobox—I'm sure we have one...)
Over time, many different templates have been merged into this one. Several—"Infobox D&D creature", "Infobox StarWarsSpecies", "Infobox Buffyverse species" (manual merge)—didn't use the word "race", I expect because it wasn't suitable for some or all of their examples. That, no doubt, explains some of the ill-fitting entries just noted.
This ill fit leads to arguments and edit wars. The article on Mandalorians has to have a comment in the infobox to stop overzealous editors from changing the template's name, on the basis that they're a creed, not a race.
It also leads to weird outcomes like Myrmidons being called a "Greek mythology race" (italics in original). Admittedly, that's because someone decided to put "Greek mythology" as the "series" in the infobox. But some articles where "series" would be applicable don't use it, I can only assume because "race" wouldn't be apt.
And of course, "race" is a loaded term, and various authors and franchises are moving away from it. We're not here to be activists, but if it's becoming inaccurate to use for works where it used to fit (like Dungeons & Dragons), we should stop using it.

What do we change it to? "Creature" is the broadest, most neutral term I can think of, and so "Infobox fictional creature" was my initial suggestion. I'm happy to have alternatives suggested! So far we have…

beings
class of beings
creatures
creature type
kind

If the move is made, the infobox will need some changes to match, like changing "series name race" to (e.g.) "X from series name"—where X is a configurable argument taking values like "creature", "species", "nation", and yes, "race" for anywhere that it is appropriate. But that can wait. -- Perey (talk) 12:28, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral for now. I can see the objections to "race", but the problem with "creature" is that it implies the infobox is about an individual fictional creature, like Smaug or the Kraken, not about a "type" (for want of a better word, which we're trying to find) of creature. "Species" won't work, as many of the types covered are not Linnaean species, and many are groups of humans. I would suggest "beings" or "class of beings". Tevildo (talk) 22:18, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't agree that "creature" implies an individual rather than a kind; I would see nothing wrong with saying that "a gelatinous cube is a creature from Dungeons & Dragons", and indeed the template merged with this one was called "Infobox D&D creature". But "being" is a perfectly good alternative, so thanks for suggesting it! -- Perey (talk) 08:40, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - "Kind" would be perfect, had it not been appropriated by the Creationists. I'd support it if it were to be formally suggested, but I doubt it would be successful. Tevildo (talk) 09:25, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that creature isn't good. A single unique entity should use {{Infobox fictional character}}, while this template deals with a group. The title proposed does not make that distinction. Gonnym (talk) 09:29, 1 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Tevildo. "Race" has problems, but the other suggestions also have problems. "Infobox fictional creature type" would work for the D&D articles, but less well for the Doctor Who articles. I do not have a better suggestion yet. User:力 (power~enwiki, π, ν) 02:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Given the uncertainty over new title, I have removed the first suggestion and listed what we have so far (plus a few alternatives). -- Perey (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Currently oppose all options as they are inferior to the current title. Gonnym (talk) 12:24, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Inferior in what way? I would say they are no worse than the current title at encompassing the range of species/cultures/social groups/artificial lifeforms that the infobox currently spans, and that they are all considerably better in avoiding the problematic side of "race". What's the downside that I'm missing? -- Perey (talk) 13:01, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  First of all I don't see a real issue with using "race". It gives a good enough idea what the template is about and the rest the template documentation supplies. Now, regarding the options. "Kind" is just horrible and gives no real value; "creature" is singular and gives a connotation of an animal; "creature type" suffers from the same animal issue; "beings" can be mistaken for singular uses also. Which then leaves "class of beings" which with the full name would be "Template:Infobox fictional class of beings" - and that is just too long. Gonnym (talk) 14:52, 2 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  Gotcha. At the very least, I've realised that "creatures" should be a plural, so I've changed that. And while I don't think "beings" would be mistaken for a singular, or that "creature" implies "animal", the best title is what's most clear to the greatest number of editors, not "what Perey thinks makes sense", so thanks for your feedback! -- Perey (talk) 12:28, 4 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Discussion at Template talk:Infobox character § Propose removal of the Color parameter

You are invited to join the discussion at Template talk:Infobox character § Propose removal of the Color parameter. It is currently being discussed whether to remove the |color= parameter from infoboxes about fictional characters and elements. InfiniteNexus (talk) 21:02, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]