Talk:Ach Gott, vom Himmel sieh darein

Hauptlied

The fact that it is the Hauptlied for the 2nd Sunday after Trinity was translated from the German Wikipedia. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:46, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Navbox by Zahn number

The positioning of the new navbox at the top of all navboxes has been reverted, and should be discussed per WP:BRD. I believe that most of our readers will have not heard about Zahn's catalogue, nor have desire to navigate by numbers alone, while I assume they will rather want to navigate to other Lutheran hymns. Please leave Zahn at the bottom - here and all similar articles - or discuss. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:45, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

I like the boxes that are more likely useful to a general readership closer to the categories (which are also rather general readership). That makes more sense to me, so that's the way I put them.

That's also the style (i.e. boxes from most specialised to most general) I think I encounter most often.

I've been looking whether there was something in the guidance about navboxes on how to approach this, but haven't found anything thus far, so it's a style-related editor preference which should not be changed by another editor who likes a different style, per MOS:STYLERET.

@Gerda Arendt: please stop following me around: I think about every article I edited for the first time these last few days was shortly thereafter edited by you. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:04, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

This last comment doesn't belong on an article talk page. I hate the suspicion, sorry. I only follow my watchlist. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:49, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

When I'd add a navbox to an article I didn't create, I'd place it modestly at the bottom. The top position signals prime importance to me, which I find offensive, by someone who didn't create this article. Where could we discuss these different views with a larger public? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:53, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Um Francis, you may have the following thing the wrong way around; Gerda started this article.[1] Ceoil (talk) 22:57, 21 June 2020 (UTC)

Re. "you may have the following thing the wrong way around" – thanks for the suggestion, but I didn't. First and second navbox (not added by Gerda – neither of these navboxes are still in the article, so not much can be derived from it); second navbox changed (by me); changed last navbox and added another (by me); fourth navbox added (not by Gerda); two navboxes removed and another added (not by Gerda); previous edit to navboxes undone (by me); one navbox removed, one added, and regroup (by me); navbox that was most recently added moved to another place, half an hour after it was introduced (by Gerda – Gerda's first and only edit to navboxes in this article).

I stick to my previous rationale. I think that the "concluding" place (that is the last place in the body of the article) is far from the most "modest" place. Placing a new navbox there is as if the one who places it there wants to have "the last word" on the article, which is not the most modest of attitudes. In short, this "modesty"-related reasoning for navboxes is going nowhere, it is, imho, not the way one can sensibly reason about navbox order.

Further considerations (apart from the reasons already given above):

• when I want to find an article related to the article I'm reading, I scroll completely down, and start from the bottom (categories) then navboxes above that, starting with the last one, etc. Thus most general makes sense (more than "most specialised") for the last one, for practical usage.
• In the particular case of Lutheran hymns, some of the navboxes are rather big. As one would know, I have done some effort to reduce size of these navboxes, by splitting, initiating topic-specific ones, etc. Anyhow, the one that is the largest (meaning, mere size wise) should not be the first, while it may knock all other navboxes out of sight when opening it. That is another reason why I prefer the smallest (and the Zahn number one is likely the one that will remain the smallest even if it is completed with all articles that are eligible for it) on top.

--Francis Schonken (talk) 06:48, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

This article talk seems not the right place to have a general discussion. I am a top to bottom reader, and assume many readers will have no idea of what Zahn number means. We would not mention ISBN numbers in leads of articles, and make navboxes for them, - I am skeptical of the whole project, confessing that I never ever look at either categories and navboxes when reading. I used the one for Bach's cantatas because it provided red links for correct titles, - long ago. - A friend died, so I am not willing to devote much time to these minor issues. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:06, 22 June 2020 (UTC)