Template talk:Culture of region

Notes

• In coding this template, I have not allowed the automatic creation of list entries based on a nationaltity signifier; i.e. entries such as "List of Xian artists" and "Xian literature". My reason is that doing so would allow confusion between ethnic group signifiers and nationality signifiers, where the same word refers to both. For example, an article on "Russian food" could be expected to refer to food of the Russian ethnic group whereas an article on "Food of Russia" would refer to food in the Russian Federation, both ethnic Russian and otherwise. Being region-oriented, the templates based on this one should refer to the nationality signifier only.

Having said that, sometimes a default list title such as "Literature of X" redirects to a potentially confusing title such as "Xian literature" (confusing for the reason mentioned above). In those cases, it is possible to override the default list title, but only if a more accurate article exists as an alternative. In other words, clarifying the titles of such articles has been left up to the editors of those articles.

Also, where an existing region culture template has already included entries in the format of "Xian things" or "List of Xian things", I have kept those entries while updating the template to the new version. As so many of them include such entries, I'd rather gain consensus for a total removal rather than causing friction by being too bold.

ClaretAsh 00:07, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Concerns

Should we use a generic template that may or may not produce red links?Moxy (talk) 15:07, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted the addition of this template at Template:Culture of Canada sidebar - as per WP:REDNOT - is there a way to fix this so the thing is not full of red links?Moxy (talk) 14:34, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Yes, by creating the redlinked articles or redirecting the redlinks to alternatively named versions (eg. redirecting "Sport in foo" to "Sport of foo" where the former is a redlink and the latter is the actal article). I set the template to show certain default links to articles (both as headings and in some lists) that I believe should exist either as a separate article (under whatever name) or as a section within an existing article. In selecting which links to show by default, I partly followed what articles already existed at the previous templates and what articles I'd expect, as a reader, to find included.

To take the Canada version as an example, the only redlinks at the current time are as follows:

• Traditions of Canada, for which I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist.
• Mythology of Canada, for which I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist.
• Folklore of Canada, for which I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist.
• Festivals of Canada, which could be redirected to List of festivals in Canada.
• Performing arts of Canada, for which I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist.
• Radio in Canada, for which I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist.
• Monuments of Canada, which I concede may not always warrant an article but which may be overridden (see template documentation) with a link to the appropriate category.
• List of World Heritage Sites in Canada, which may be redirected to World Heritage Sites in Canada or World Heritage Sites of Canada, if those articles existed. Either way, I'd expect an article or a section in an article to exist, assuming there are any such sites in Canada.

Nonetheless, if no articles exist on a given topic, I have allowed for an override option but only for the list headings. See the template's documentation or feel free to ask me if there's anything you need help with. For all the redlinks, though, it is still possible to create the article as a redirect to a relevant existing article (even if it's only to Culture of Canada).

All in all, I think it better to admit that there are gaps in the range of articles we're offering our readers and try to fill those gaps than to pretend they don't exist by avoiding linking to them. Anyway, I won't revert your changes to the Canada templates but please keep the above comments in mind. Also, thank you for raising your concerns. I appreciate it. ClaretAsh 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

I will see what others have to say - the new template is not easier to navigate then the template before - nor does if follow our rules on red links. Again lets see what others have to say.Moxy (talk) 00:06, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I have to admit I really don't understand where you're coming from. When I look at WP:REDNOT, which you mention above, it merely forbids the creation of red links to articles that will never be created. However, the articles that are redlinked in some of the {{Culture of region}} templates are blue linked in others, supporting my assertion above that in selecting which links to show by default, I partly followed what articles already existed and what articles I'd expect, as a reader, to find included. In simple terms, if I find a group of articles named "Radio in Country A", "Radio in Country B" and "Radio in Country C", I'd naturally expect to find also "Radio in Country D" or at least a section in "Media in Country D", to which the former may be redirected. Or, to quote, WP:REDDEAL, "an example of a plausible red link might be to driving in Germany, since an article on driving in the United States exists, and country-specific driving articles like these are a likely area for future creation.

I see that WP:REDNOT states that red links are generally not included in navboxes. However, not only is this merely a descriptive statement (neither a recommendation nor a rule), it directly contradicts the facts of navigation boxes in Wikipedia. In fact, some of the templates I superseded (similar structured to the Canadian one) included red links, and they had been manually added by an editor, not appearing by default as with those I created. Nonetheless, the very next sentence at REDNOT clearly describes series navboxes as being an exception to the REDNOT "rule". {{Culture of region}} clearly falls under this definition.

All this aside, I've already stated above that the red links are easy to fix: either redirect the red link to an existing article or, if the red link in question is a list heading, use the override option I included. Actually, this is all written in the template's documentation. I'd happily do all this myself but I do have commitments outside Wikipedia and it will inevitably take time.

Anyway, if you want to seek a neutral opinion, feel free to do so but I'm sure they'll only tell you the same as me. With two solutions available (not counting actually creating the red linked articles), red links in the "Culture of region" templates are a very minor issue. ClaretAsh 07:12, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Red links should be avoided unless they are very likely to be developed into articles, and even if they do, editors are encouraged to write the article first. - We should not make work for others or make others clean up after edits - we now have hundreds of red links on many pages. Anyways to much for me to clean up- I will expand Wikipedia:Navigation templates soon to incorporate this problem.Moxy (talk) 14:04, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I've just spent a few moments blue-linking the above (ex-)redlinks. In some cases, I redirected to the relevant category as per common practice.

On a side topic, I have to admit I was surprised to find no articles on such topics as Canadian mythology and folklore. Even the main article, Culture of Canada, seems to completely ignore the folk customs, traditions, superstitions and whatnot of that country, despite having a lot to say about such vaguely relevant topics as legislation and nationalism. Having seen quite a few culture articles over the past few days, I am forced to say that Culture of Canada is a huge let-down: it tells me nothing about how ordinary Canadians think. Who are their folk heroes? What are their cultural quirks? What songs and stories do they pass to their children?

I'm sorry if these criticisms offend you in any way. They're not meant to disparage the effort that has gone into creating Canadian culture articles. However, you need to understand that there is far more to a country's culture than Bilingualism, Free speech, Immigration, Multiculturalism, Nationalism and Protectionism (to mention some of the borderline relevant topics listed in the current sidebar). That the sidebar I created highlights a shortcoming is, to me, a good thing. I hope we can work together on dealing with that. ClaretAsh 14:40, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I agree about the article, needs lots of work. I have asked for a "Requests for comment" see what othere have to say - I do like the linking of the cats, however this is also not recommended for nav templates. Navigation templates provide navigation between "existing articles" - not categories or to articles that are not there.Moxy (talk) 15:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think REDNOT applies. Rather, RED does, which supports red links. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 15:49, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Please check out Wikipedia:Red link#Avoiding creation of certain types of red links. Quote: Red links are generally not included in either See also sections nor in navigational boxes, nor linked to through templates such as Main or Further, since these navigation aids are intended to help readers find existing articles. An exception is red links in navboxes where the red-linked articles are part of a series or a whole set, e.g. a navbox listing successive elections, referendums, presidents, sports league seasons, etc. The following red links are not exceptions to the above rule. They are a Baggin Shop: Traditions of Poland, Festivals of Poland, Performing arts of Poland, Monuments of Poland. What Monuments of Poland? National? Natural? Historic? Cultural? UNESCO sites? Equestrian statues? This is the definition of make-work.Poeticbent talk 16:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

I'd like to think those articles would be created one day. Monuments page would presumably list all applicable, and be split into smaller ones. I don't think natural objects are classified as monuments. Note we have Category:Monuments and memorials in Poland; I tend to think that most if not all categories should have a parent article. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 17:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

one-day is right - but until then we should follow our policy on the matter and not link "hundred" of articles people would like to see made in these templates (not the purpose of theses templates). Spamming red links all over is not helpful to our readers.

Template:Culture of the Central African Republic (13 red links - 17 after looking a show)

Template:Culture of Cameroon (10 red links before looking a show)

Template:Culture of Botswana (10 red links before looking a show)

Template:Culture of Chad (10 red links before looking a show)

Template:Culture of Cambodia (10 red links before looking a show)

Template:Culture of Burundi (9 red links before looking a show)

Template:Culture of Germany (9 red links before looking a show)

This goes on and on and on see here. I have also asked to have the names space redirects deleted as we dont redirect articles to categories (see here). *Navigation templates located in the top-right corner of articles (sometimes called a "sidebar" or "part of a series" template) should be treated with special attention, because they are so prominently displayed to readers - "Navigation templates provide navigation between existing articles - Your making a template that ends-up dominated by "non-existing articles" the opposite of our policy. (talk) 18:11, 21 March 2012 (UTC) Moxy (talk) 18:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

From the examples I've seen in several other such templates in the past, I was under the impression that we can redirect to categories. I wouldn't have done it otherwise. But I'll respect the outcome of the RfD. ClaretAsh 00:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Would it be possible for you to stop adding this template to many articles till this talk is over?! Pls also try not to sandwich text as per our policy on this Moxy (talk) 23:57, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

?? I stopped adding the Canada template days ago. ClaretAsh 00:19, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

We started talking about this template on 20 March yet by the 22 of March your still adding this all over. Pls stop adding this template that is in dispute until the discussion is over. We are here talking about the hundreds of red links your placing all over not just the Canada template. This is getting out of control way to fast.... pls stop redlinking all our culture articles until this talk is over - we have no need for thousands of red links in templates. Moxy (talk) 14:53, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't think navboxes should have redlinks of this kind. Navboxes are for linking to related existing articles about the subject, not for listing every possible combination of subject-subarticle. Redlinks in navboxes should be restricted to times when excluding them from a series would leave a question in a reader's mind of whether the actual subject exists. The exclusion of something like "Traditions of Germany" wouldn't make a reader think Germany had no traditions if they don't see the redlink. This template shouldn't show the fields for which no information was input. — Bility (talk) 17:50, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

• Fix it.' This should absolutely be fixed to stop redlinking. No sane infoboxes/navboxes ever redlink, and WP:TFD routinely deletes those that do. I know, since I TfD such "reader hateful" junk myself with no mercy. I.e., expect to see this at TfD if it's not fixed. — SMcCandlish   Talk⇒ ɖ∘¿¤þ   Contrib. 23:17, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Redlinks may sometimes be necessary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_Canada *municipal doctor example. I think this page needs to be created to educate people about healthcare in Canada. In situations like these redlinks are necessary, but creating unnessesary redlinks should be a bad thing. Thoughts? Thepoodlechef (talk) 04:47, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Redlinks in general are fine, we're talking about a specific scope of their use in navboxes. — Bility (talk) 15:15, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

More concerns

Without a word of consensus from anybody ClaretAsh (talk · contribs) just started to bestow many different projects with his new template prototype and even reformat articles to comply with its new design structure, i.e. Russian culture → N Folklore of Russia. Please read what our policy/guidelines say about this sort of attitude.

Designing an infobox

Main page: Help:Designing infoboxes

It is a good idea to seek the opinions of other editors before embarking on a design of a new infobox or redesign of an existing one. Most requirements are already met by an existing infobox and most of the remainder can be met with a tweak. Unnecessary duplication leads to clutter and article divergence. Prototype your new design in your own user space. Once prototyped, propose the infobox changes to the appropriate WikiProject and gain consensus before deploying your new design in the template namespace.

For detailed guidance on how to design infoboxes, see Help:Designing infoboxes.

— Help:Infobox

More info at Template talk:Culture of Poland. Poeticbent talk 15:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Be bold - Before editing templates, consider proposing any changes on the associated talk pages and announcing the proposed change on pages of appropriate WikiProjects.Moxy (talk) 14:56, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

@Poeticbent. I've replied to you already at Template talk:Culture of Poland and I've already demonstrated there that your criticisms range from being incorrect to outright bizarre. And your current obsession with Help:Infobox, despite the fact {{Culture of region}} is a navigation box not an infobox, is quite amusing. This aside from the fact that I did "seek the opinions of other editors before embarking on a design" (see here and here), that I did "prototype the new design in my own user space" (check the template history), and that I did "propose the changes to the appropriate WikiProject" (again, see here). I agree there was "unnecessary duplication and article divergence" prior to my introduction of a standardised template. As I've already told you, the previous templates were based on {{region culture}}, {{navbox}}, {{sidebar}}, {{infobox}} and {{culturebox}}, with great dissimilarity in design, layout and scope, allowing similar articles for different countries to evolve in different directions. As for gaining consensus, if I were to sit around waiting for other people to be interested enough to comment, I'd still be sitting here in several years time. Anyway, as only one editor (Moxy) has offered serious criticism, I consider there to be a consensus by silence. Note there that I mentioned only one editor. I do not consider you, Poeticbent, to have offered serious criticism. What you have done, though, is attempt to open a secret discussion (didn't you learn anything from that EEML debacle?) about my editing with the first comment therein being when and from where I registered an account. Naturally, I took issue with the relevance of that and queried it but I'm still awaiting a response. As it stands now, I've addressed ALL your concerns but all you have done is troll for further responses from me (yes, I did notice the snide edit summary here). So here's your backlash. I hope it gives you satisfaction because it is all you'll get from me until you explain, honestly, why you felt called upon to mention when and from where I joined Wikipedia. ClaretAsh 00:21, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

"Consensus can be presumed to exist until voiced disagreement becomes evident (typically through reverting or editing)." 2 people in 24 hours have raised concern so there is clearly no consensus at this time. No more red links spamming pls until this is over!!!!Moxy (talk) 15:36, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Supressing red links and unlinked topics

There is code in the sandbox and examples on the testcases page. Here are the major changes to the template:

1. The "override" parameters are no longer automatically linked, so "Sports" produces simple text as a list header and "[[Sports in Region|Sports]]" will produce a link. Not using the overrides produces the expected link as the template currently does.
2. A new parameter |nolink-main= allows you to unlink the "Culture of Region" title at the top of the template.
3. New "hide" parameters allow the full suppression of an entire topic in cases where there is no list of sub-articles and no main article.
4. The automatic links to Radio, Television, Cinema, World Heritage Sites, Flag, National anthem and Coat of arms have been removed. This requires manually adding the ones that exist to the list parameters of the templates that need them (there are about 70 culture templates, don't know how many of them actually need most of those links). An added bonus I noticed to not using the auto links, is some of the "National anthem of ..." links are redirects to the actual name of the anthem, in which case it would leave a blue link in the template on those pages. By linking directly to the anthem article, it will be bolded normal text in the template so you can see where you are, navigation-wise.
5. Parameter |portal= replaces |portaloverride= and if empty no "Portal:Region" link is added at the bottom.

The reason I prefer to use parameters to control the suppression of topics and links as opposed to {{#ifexists:}} is because it avoids the relatively expensive parser function. Luckily there aren't many (in my opinion) templates using Culture of region, so fixing them up wouldn't take too long. Due to the mechanics of the code, the sandbox version would not be able to replace the current version until all the uses are updated. If you wanted to do a piecemeal approach to the update, you could change individual uses to use the sandbox itself, and when they're all converted, replace the code in the template and change all uses to the main template. Obviously this is all pending the outcome of the discussion on whether to keep red links in the template or not. — Bility (talk) 17:18, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for this - makes life alot easier - over the next week or so I will go over all the templates and fix all the pages that are different in name - in other-words make redirects like Polish mythology (article name) to Mythology of Poland ( template name).Moxy (talk) 00:11, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

If you use the sandbox code you don't need to create any redirects (an added benefit). For instance, you can use |mythoverride= to put [[Polish mythology|Mythology]] into the template. — Bility (talk) 15:19, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Dame this template is all messed up cant belive how much cleanup work we have to do because of this- - what do we do about portals as see at {{Culture of the Federated States of Micronesia}} that links Portal:Federated States of Micronesia that should be pointing to Portal:Micronesia portaloverride= will work for this?.Moxy (talk) 15:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Yep, it's no problem to fix the portal link. The only other link that's hardcoded is the "series of" link at the top. I expect a category will always exist of the region or some override of it, but it can be suppressed too if need be. In short, no need to make redirects if we just fix the template. — Bility (talk) 18:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

Any news if this is going to be fixed or shall we simply remove it? Still have shit like Template:Culture of the Central African Republic 17 red links out of 21.Moxy (talk) 13:30, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

The sandbox code is still ready to be implemented, you can do so at any time. As I said above, I would use a multi-phase approach:

1. Update the 70-odd culture templates to use Culture of region/sandbox instead of Culture of region.
2. Sync Culture of region to Culture of region/sandbox.
3. Re-edit those 70-odd culture templates to point to the main Culture of region template.

As for getting consensus to do this, your guess is as good as mine. — Bility (talk) 15:31, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

We still have project after project replacing this template because of the red link problem. 18:06, 12 February 2013 (UTC)

I've implemented auto-detection. Yes, it's expensive, but better that than this template being either removed or spamming red links on projects that don't go disabling everything. There are still some bugs to iron out (if the hard-coded lists contain entries, but there's no parent link at the list title, it appears as "list"), but it's an improvement from the old sea-of-redlinks. If there are any further bugs please let me know. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2013 (UTC) Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 14:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

History

I think history should link to cultural history, not history. Ex. Template:Culture of Poland should link to cultural history of Poland, and not history of Poland. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 17:23, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

You are free to make a better one for Poland - as seen above this template is very generic and not that useful.Moxy (talk) 18:17, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Geography

Wouldn't a topic on Geography be included in the template? --Ganeshprasadkp (talk) 10:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Disable flag default

Is it possible to disable the automatic appearance of the "Flag" bit in symbols? The "Culture of Korea" template wouldn't work as there's multiple flags toobigtokale (talk) 22:38, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Same with some of the other defaults; I'm creating disambigs but I'd prefer if we could disable the defaults toobigtokale (talk) 22:39, 10 August 2023 (UTC)