Template talk:Korean diaspora
Latest comment: 14 years ago by CaliforniaAliBaba in topic Koreans in Italy
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Edits in February 2007
editAbout recent changes to this template:
- This template is not about "Koreans and people in Korea"; the whole point is that every group mentioned are OUTSIDE of Korea
- The "name" parameter of the template has to match the actual page name, otherwise the "edit" button of the template would be broken
- There is no continent called "Middle East" nor are the Arab countries collectively referred to as "Arabia" in this century.
- Templates should point to the actual page names and not redirects, so that when using the template for navigation, the current page's name is displayed in bold
- There are no such names as "Korean Sakhalinians", "Korean Arabians", or whatever other nonsense has been made up in the name of "standardisation"
- The North and South American continents are referred to collectively as "The Americas", not "America"
- The "group/list" function of the navbox should be used to cluster similar items, instead of using ugly manual headers and linebreaks
- {{·}} does not need a space before it
See other templates of a similar type like {{Iraqi diaspora}}, {{Overseas Vietnamese}}, etc. for best-practise examples. Regards, cab (talk) 00:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Koreans in Italy
editThey deserve their own article- it's larger than the communities in Spain or Poland (both of which have articles). 99.27.108.59 (talk) 01:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Whether or not a topic "deserves" an article is not determined by size but by coverage in reliable sources. Please see WP:N and WP:BIGNUMBER. cab (talk) 01:41, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
- Someone find reliable sources for Koreans in Italy!! 98.154.125.78 (talk) 13:48, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
- You people are odd! Not one of you can find a reliable source on Koreans in Italy- I discovered an old article was deleted at the end of August 2009 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.27.108.59 (talk • contribs) 03:50, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- Uh yes, it was deleted because there were no reliable, non-trivial sources about the topic. cab (talk) 04:03, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
- non-trivial?? So YOU WANT trivial info for an article??