Template talk:Contentious topics

Requested edit 2024 August 12

Moved from Template talk:Contentious topics/page restriction talk notice base

Would we be cool with adding Category:Wikipedia pages subject to a zero-revert restriction, Category:Wikipedia pages subject to a one-revert restriction, Category:Wikipedia pages subject to a consensus required restriction, and Category:Wikipedia pages subject to an enforced BRD restriction as tracking cats? theleekycauldron (talk • she/her) 06:08, 13 August 2024 (UTC)

Seems like a fine idea. SilverLocust 💬 02:33, 14 August 2024 (UTC)

These also exist as non-arbitration restrictions, so {{Gs/talk notice}} would also need these added via Module:Sanctions. SilverLocust 💬 16:06, 21 August 2024 (UTC)

 Done I'll leave any additional category additions to others, but the request as initially posted is logical (and internal discussion among Arbs has seen no opposition). Primefac (talk) 12:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)

I've also added them to Module:Sanctions. SilverLocust 💬 00:09, 29 August 2024 (UTC)

Deletion of Template:Editnotices/Page/Template:Contentious topics/talk notice

Moved from Template talk:Contentious topics/talk notice

 You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for discussion/Log/2024 August 25 § Template:Editnotices/Page/Template:Contentious topics/talk notice. —⁠andrybak (talk) 13:40, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 23 September 2024

Make consistent naming in "Area of conflict", for example

1. the Arab–Israeli conflict
2. Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts
3. the English Wikipedia Manual of Style and article titles policy
4. the Balkans or Eastern Europe
5. India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
6. Keep same description for both MOS/Titles

This is part of larger set of minimal changes to make reading/scrolling through table of CTOP's easier both on the eyes and sorting inside the tables.

You can find a link to proposed changes in this sandbox {{Contentious_topics/list/cleanup}} ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:47, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

Why? The the is correct for each of those three examples, and adding the to the others wouldn't be. This template isn't just used to create the list at WP:CTOP#List of contentious topics. It is also used in editnotices and talk page notices to create sentences like "Parts of this page relate to the Arab–Israeli conflict, which is a contentious topic." SilverLocust 💬 18:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

@SilverLocust That makes sense and precise grammar there is certainly preferable. Sometimes it refers to pairings of locations, the conflict shared by countries and sometimes just the countries, even though I don't believe the contentious reasons are different. Do you see any inconsistency with some of these current wordings?

1. the topics of Kurds and Kurdistan, broadly construed (also no wikilinks)
2. India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan
3. Armenia, Azerbaijan, or related conflicts
4. the Arab–Israeli conflict

Or with politics...

1. post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people
2. post-1978 Iranian politics

Either way, even if none of the wording changes here {{Contentious_topics/table/cleanup}} may mitigate that by thematically grouping them together, regardless of current/future wording and has far fewer implications (e.g regular readers wouldn't see new/different talk page banners). Thoughts? ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

I'll reply further in the next 24 hours. (Ping me if I don't.) SilverLocust 💬 19:09, 23 September 2024 (UTC)

@Shushugah: Your changes to Template:Contentious topics/table look fine to me, except I would leave the smaller 9pt font. On Vector 2022, the table can easily overflow onto the right toolbar.

I wouldn't want to rephrase the language used by ArbCom in defining each contentious topic area (beyond having "X and Y" and "Y and X" as options like for mos and at or for e-e and b). For example, see the motions defining the contentious topic areas for American politics and Iranian politics and Kurds and Kurdistan. SilverLocust 💬 14:08, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

I have boldly updated {{Contentious topics/table}} with your suggestions, including to keep font size 9. I do think further improvements could be achieved by replacing Wikipedia with WP. But will save that for another edit. I do understand that the letters represent different motions, but the links and templates don't get more granular than high level, so why is there a need for e-e and b? Could be they be listed on one one line, with aliases for each other? I get impression this is not done because of tight coupling between the 4 templates:

1. {{Contentious topics/table}}
2. {{Contentious topics/table/line}}
3. {{Contentious topics/table/usageline}}
4. {{Contentious topics/list}}

~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:03, 24 September 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 20 November 2024

In {{Contentious topics/editnotice}}, drop the U from "behaviour" because there's already "behavior" and replace the S in "authorised" and "familiarise" with Z for consistent spelling, as an American user named Wugapodes created that template. Santiago Claudio (talk) 04:52, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

 Not done I see no need to gratuitously change between American and British English. * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 16:59, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

So, add U to "behavior" to become "behaviour"... agree? Santiago Claudio (talk) 10:01, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

 Completed. Note that this template was created with this inconsistency in English spelling variety. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. ^{put'er there} 16:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)