Template talk:Michael Jackson
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This template is huge and needs to be cut down substantially. As it is, when present on Michael Jackson, this simply duplicates a lot of the information already in the article. Also see my comments on Talk:Michael Jackson. android79 04:37, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Again, it's for use as a navigational device, not to actually present any information. --FuriousFreddy 10:56, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand their purpose, but my concern is their size, especially when stacked one atop the other in Michael Jackson. I'll throw out some ideas for streamlining them here sooner or later. android79 20:55, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
- Michael Jackson is the only page where that should be a problem, since he's both "Michael Jackson" and a member of "The Jackson 5". I wouldn't want to stretch them horizontally (they're both 500px across, to compensate for folks still using 800x600 displays). Perhaps streamlining the information (removing all compilation albums or low-charting singles) would be a good idea? --FuriousFreddy 21:45, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- Android, The whole point of templates is for summary purposes. You pointed out about it duplicating a lot of information when it is on the michael jackson page. That point makes no sense whatsoever!. Even on the michael jackson main page, the links are not ordered in an easy to find fashion. The template, therefore gives the reader a clear ordering of possible interests related to the article. Think about why the concept of templates were devised in the first place.
- Michael Jackson is the only page where that should be a problem, since he's both "Michael Jackson" and a member of "The Jackson 5". I wouldn't want to stretch them horizontally (they're both 500px across, to compensate for folks still using 800x600 displays). Perhaps streamlining the information (removing all compilation albums or low-charting singles) would be a good idea? --FuriousFreddy 21:45, 23 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I understand their purpose, but my concern is their size, especially when stacked one atop the other in Michael Jackson. I'll throw out some ideas for streamlining them here sooner or later. android79 20:55, August 23, 2005 (UTC)
On the point of the template being huge, no it's not huge. It's not huge by any standard. Not huge by wikipedia's standard. We have all seen far bigger templates, I don't believe I need to give anyone examples of truly 'huge' templates. Please don't go there!--161.74.11.24 11:48, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- Actually, I've realized that it is huge; gargantuan, even. I've cut it down. --FuriousFreddy 00:37, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Image Removal
Quote the sentence, which state that images are only allowed in article-space, else put it back. --161.74.11.24 12:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- It's right there, on the page linked from my edit summary: The material should only be used in the article namespace. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. Pretty straightforward. android79 12:20, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
- Any one could have put that on the page. As far as I can see, there's no logic in saying that one can use an image on an article, but yet not use the same image on a template. The template is subsection or part of the article. Therefore, saying that an image can be used on an article, but not a template which the article uses in incoherent and illogical. Either, the information placed on the help page is incorrect or there's misintepretation on your part. I want some sort of confirmation that that hasn't happened! --161.74.11.24 11:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- The template is not a subsection or part of the article; that's the point of that guideline. The template is Template:Michael Jackson. The article is Michael Jackson. One could just as easily apply the template to Fruitcake, which would be in violation of fair use. See Wikipedia_talk:Fair use#Album covers: Strike two lines from policy?. Despite being extensively debated, that language remains. Copyrighted images used solely for decorative purposes are not fair use. android79 13:52, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- Any one could have put that on the page. As far as I can see, there's no logic in saying that one can use an image on an article, but yet not use the same image on a template. The template is subsection or part of the article. Therefore, saying that an image can be used on an article, but not a template which the article uses in incoherent and illogical. Either, the information placed on the help page is incorrect or there's misintepretation on your part. I want some sort of confirmation that that hasn't happened! --161.74.11.24 11:45, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The bias in this template
Michael Jackson controversies is a major part of michael jackson. I think it should be included. Skinnyweed 22:38, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
