Category talk:United Nations Security Council resolutions templates

International relations: United Nations Category‑class

	This category is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations 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.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations articles
Category	This category does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This category is supported by WikiProject United Nations.

Concensus edit

Latest comment: 11 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Okay, I have a few ideas with these templates, and I would like to not just arbitrarily do as I will with them, but to hear what other people might think.

Idea 1 edit

Merge a number of the templates in the 1950s - they are awfully short! 1959 counts a single resolution! Now is that justified, to have a template that is transcluded to a single page? I somehow doubt it. The following templates should be merged in my opinion: 1951-55 and 1957-59. Possibly we could leave 1951 out, as it has 7 resolutions, and again, if we make it a rule of thumb to merge years with less than 10 resolutions, 1962 and 1963 should also be merged together. Also, a reason for me to be writing here is that I may do all this myself, but I am not given the privilege (nor do I desire it) to delete templates, and a number of templates would become unused through these actions.

Idea 2 edit

The linking in the namespace of the templates has changed over time, but I am under the impression that there was zero discussion connected to that. What was originally "United Nations Security Council resolutions adopted in 1946" has became "United Nations Security Council resolutions adopted in 1946". Now, I would like to go back to the original version with 4 links, but if that would again change at the whim of an editor passing through, what have I achieved? So let us decide this thing one way or the other, and stick to that version.

My rationale for the 4-link version is: ignorant readers. As a student of physics, I have been instructed by my professors to always write my works in a way that the supposed reader is fully ignorant to the subject being discussed. And to just send a reader to United Nations Security Council resolution - perhaps that is not where one should start. And the year is a compromise, as we (as of yet) do not have articles in the lines of "1946 in international conflicts and United Nations peacekeeping", neither do I expect them to be created.

Sorry for being so long-winded. --... there's more than what can be linked. 19:44, 29 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Add topic