Template talk:Bahá'í

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Specifics of Linking 2 Wikinews link 3 edit box 4 'the' vs 'a' 5 Proposed new look 6 Other template 7 Other Star 8 Bahá'í Faith in fiction 9 teachings

[edit] Specifics of Linking

I noticed that there are two links on this that go th the same page: The Gaurdian and Shoghi Effendi. Now I realize that here is that there was one Guardian, and he was Shoghi Effendi, but the Gaurdian and Shoghi Effendi were two distinct entities. In 'God Passes By' Shoghi Effendi didn't refer to himself regarding noteworthy historical developments, but rather to the Gaurdian as being the participator.

So basically I think it would be ideal to link 'The Gaurdian' to another or a new article about the Gaurdianship. Perhaps I'll do that in the next couple of minutes. LambaJan 16:39, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I understand what you mean. But I think explaining the guardianship under Shoghi Effendi's page would be helpful because his page is pretty bare. And making a separate page might invite attacks. Remember its a sensitive issue. Cuñado - Talk 19:12, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

I agree that it's useful to have that information on Shoghi Effendi's page, but perhaps there could be a new page for the sake of accuracy and a balance reached between the two. Neither needs to be terribly exhaustive. As far as attacks, there was a note that I agree with that was left on my talk page that addresses this:

An excellent idea to separate these articles. Right on-point. I anticipate that this will likely generate controversy with OBF if it deals with the succession. May I suggest that you deal with that in the article by only addressing the office, not addressing succession in detail (perhaps merely pointing to the Will and Testament of `Abdu'l-Bahá), and directing further inquiry to Bahá'í divisions? Even with that you may still have to bird-dog the article.

Thank you for taking this on. MARussellPESE 17:56, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Let me know what you think about this. LambaJan

Sounds like a smart guy, or maybe girl. Cuñado - Talk 16:58, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikinews link

Why has this been deleted? AndrewRT 23:59, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry I didn't mean to be insultive. I should have left an explanation somewhere.

I had two reasons: one is that it made the template twice as wide as it was (a huge asthetic problem), and two is that those kinds of links usually go in the actual article. Cuñado - Talk 00:04, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Didn't realise that - it looked ok on my version. I've added the link to teh main BF article instead AndrewRT 13:30, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] edit box

I really don't like the edit box that was added to the bottom of the template. It takes up extra space and it's not really necessary. Would anyone object if I remove it? Cuñado - Talk 23:12, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for asking Cuñado, please see this talk to better understand why it's there. Thanks. Netscott 00:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 'the' vs 'a'

Nescott, I'm sorry but I disagree with you. It sounds much better to have "the series", and since there is only one series there's no grammatical issue. Saying "a series" implies that there are multiple series about the Baha'i Faith. I think if we resolve the whole "series" issue and change the wording this won't be an issue. For something that has been around for years you need to get some better consensus before insisting on changing it. Cuñado - Talk 04:04, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed new look

I've put together a proposed revision of the template modeled on the one for Zoroastrianism that looks quite nice. As I did I made a few small changes to the text which I hope will more accurately describe the links to which they refer. It was difficult to find a color of yellow that was nice; at any rate, it seemed that the yellow would look better against a white rather than a gray background, so I removed the link to the toccolours css class. I think it would be best to solicit comments rather than simply putting the proposal up. Please let me know what you think. I notice that the edit box at the bottom seems to come from the Tnavbar; I have no opinion on whether it should stay or go. modify 12:34, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Posted reply at User talk:Modify/Sandbox -- Jeff3000 14:50, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

If I understand the comments so far, the consensus seems to be that the current look is a good one and that the proposal would not be an improvement. The comments have been helpful, and I'm grateful to those who have had an opportunity to look at the proposal. modify 16:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, how bout one of two templates at User:Jeff3000/Sandbox2. They are based on Modify's proposal, but have a smaller width, and different colours. -- Jeff3000 03:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

I feel both these two are great, better than the current one. Both colours are fine, but if you want me to choose, let it be for the purple one on the left.

I don't see a problem with any of those. Although I like the shorter wording on the top "part of the series". Whatever. Cuñado - Talk 23:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the nice proposals, Jeff3000. The blue one has inspired four more possibilities: User:Modify/Sandbox2 and User:Modify/Sandbox3. They're just ideas and can be set aside. I hope they don't make it difficult to reach consensus, and I personally am happy with the current template. I like all four colors, and the green in particular, although the green might lead to confusion with the series on Islam or the series on Baha'i literature. In all four, more of a margin between the links and the border would be nice. modify 19:30, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

They look good. My favourite colour is the blue one in User:Modify/Sandbox2. My favourite text at the beginning is at User:Jeff3000/Sandbox2. My favourite subheading fonts are at User:Modify/Sandbox2. As for the cellspacing, I'm not sure which one is better. -- Jeff3000 19:56, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

I have an idea, and it's just an idea. Actually two separate ideas. First, to solve the wording issue, we could re-format it to look like the African American template, and instead say "Baha'i Faith topics" or "Topics on the Baha'i Faith". There was a big issue about using the word "series" because it's technically not correct. (a series is an ordered list, the correct word would be 'set') The other idea is to use either color in User:Modify/Sandbox2, and use the same color on Template:Bahá'í books, and likewise Template:Apostles of Bahá'u'lláh. That way we could keep a theme running. I like the blue and the green. Cuñado - Talk 02:03, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

I think at this point, all of the choices are better than the current one (mainly because of the subheading font). I would just not pick green, as that is the Islam template cover. -- Jeff3000 02:55, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Everyone ok with going with the blue one from User:Modify/Sandbox2. If no one comments in the next day or so, I'll switch it. -- Jeff3000 14:38, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

Please do so. - Wiki-uk 16:27, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to come in a bit late here, but I'm wondering about crimson (#DC143C), seeing as how we're the 'companions of the Crimson Ark' and all. I suppose none of this color business is actually very important, but since we're on it I thought I'd add that. It may also be notable that, generally, Baha'u'llah's books are printed in crimson, The Bab's in green, Abdu'l-Baha's in blue, and Shoghi Effendi's in brown. -LambaJan 01:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other template

Might I suggest someone also change the color and format of Template:Baha'i-2? Cuñado - Talk 18:05, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Other Star

Hi! I prefer this star. IMO it is much more friendly than the other one. --84.162.78.205 18:17, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

This star looks fat to me. I prefer the current one. -- Jeff3000 18:21, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jeff! Fat sounds funny ;-) Being fat is a matter of size. I would use it a little smaller than the current one. --84.162.78.205 18:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I added the pointy star to compare. I prefer the current, more pointy star. Also, the fatter star does not have a transparent background. Cuñado - Talk 20:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hello everybody! Tastes differ. German and Russian Wikipedia is using the "fat one": de:Portal:Religion and ru:Портал:Религия --Mipago 20:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

So far two to one for current star. -- Jeff3000 20:38, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Somehow I prefer the so-called fat star as well. I realize that the debate happened four weeks ago but I thought I'd throw in my two cents. Iainsona 03:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope you get my point. The so-called fat star has a lot more harmony in it. The current one looks somehow aggressive to me. --Mipago 19:05, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bahá'í Faith in fiction

apologies. I was on the portal page as the most general place for a place to link the Baha'i Faith in fiction and the smallest most general corner at the bottom of the Baha'i Faith Series seemed to be that - until I found it was posted in dozens of pages (I thought you'ld have to go to the portal page, and then go all the way to the bottom....) Anyway, I took it out after I saw that it was so often used.... Then I tried to figure out how to get it to show in the ..in fiction page and that still stumps me but it seemed a good idea.....--Smkolins 03:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] teachings

I suggest removing the list of teachings. In my opinion, it would make the template more NPOV, and there is already a link under "see also" for teachings. Cuñado - Talk 03:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

+1. I agree. --Christian Edward Gruber 08:31, 17 January 2007 (UTC)