Template talk:NATO

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Interlanguage links 2 Use Military of... 3 FYROM 4 Logo/Flag Discussion 5 Protected over RoM issue

[edit] Interlanguage links

• nl:NAVO

---

Interlanguage links on MediaWiki pages has disruptive effects in the articles where the are used. Moved Interlanguage link to talk. -- Mic 22:38, Mar 23, 2004 (UTC)

You can safely add interwiki links to templates by using <noinclude></noinclude> tags. I've added a few to demonstrate.--Pharos 17:16, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use Military of...

I suggest all the links should point to the Military of' articles (eg Military of Belgium, Military of the United Kingdom) since NATO is primarily a military organisation. At the moment this template is used on *some* country articles, but not all. -- Joolz 16:03, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Should this template be used in country articles (such Belgium or United Kingdom) then? One has to search in such template the country he is currently visiting, because it isn't bolded (the article on Belgium is something else than Military of Belgium). This (at least in my eyes) severely harms the use of the template. -- Sandius 10:35, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

It should only be used in articles such as Military of Belgium, the ones on the country articles should be removed. This follows through on a judgement made er.. somewhere, about the usage of these templates (e.g., Template:WTO is on the Economy of series) - I can't find the place where it was decided now, I'll have a look, it's here somewhere! ;) -- Joolz 13:10, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

It was here I think: Wikipedia:Categories, lists, and series boxes -- Joolz 13:24, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FYROM

See Template_talk:Europe#Republic_of_Macedonia. There has been a point raised that NATO calls it FYROM, and that the template should follow this, but in my view the templates should use the same name (Republic of Macedonia or R. Macedonia) for the sake of consistency. --GunnarRene 15:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logo/Flag Discussion

I see from the history that the NATO flag was removed, though there was no discussion. It was actually the first thing I noticed about the template, was the lack of a logo on either/both sides. While I have seen previous discussions on other templates about not including each individual flag, I believe an organizational logo should remain -- MrDolomite 20:34, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I concur. Will you put the flag back in? —Nightstallion (?) 05:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Adding the flag proved very easy. I have a copy of the source code as a user subpage (User:Mr Minchin/Drafts/NATO) someone can copy to here. Here's what it looks like:

Hope that helps.--Mr Minchin 18:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

That's pretty cool, MrM, I'm still struggling with boxes/frames/tables/etc :) I was going to copy it over but then I figured 1) you should do it and get credit for your work and B) I flipped through some of the others on [[Category:International_organization_navigational_boxes]] and decided I would float two other layouts to the group before changing anything.-- MrDolomite | Talk 19:59, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• User:Mr Minchin/Drafts/NATO- flag inline in the title bar; members list spans whole box
• {{AU_countries}} - flag level with title bar, but on right side; members list spans whole box
• {{OAS}} - flag to the right of both title bar and members list

{{EU countries and candidates}} uses flag to the right of both title bar and members list, but that doesn't seem to work with a landscape orientation flag. I think I would go for either the {{AU_countries}} solution (but that would make the hide button kind of pointless), or this one:

• User:GunnarRene/Template:NATO - flag at the right of the members, title and hide bar spanning the member list and flag.

There. --GunnarRene 20:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

• I hadn't thought about the show/hide, but that is definitely now on my list of things to have, especially for articles with multiple infoboxes. And the size of the logo is more along the lines of what I was originally thinking, without being overly large. -- MrDolomite | Talk 21:30, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Protected over RoM issue

I've protected the template for now. Now, to spell it out clearly: We use "Republic of Macedonia" on Wikipedia, as this is the most neutral way to call this country, despite what some Greeks would like to make us believe. ;) What exactly are your problems with that? —Nightstallion (?) 05:54, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

As I said above, since NATO calls it FYROM, there is some sense in using that on the NATO template, but for consistency, and because Republic of Macedonia is a unique and descriptive name until any of the other Macedonias become republics, Republic of Macedonia it is. See Talk:FYROM for the whoe discussion. --GunnarRene 12:30, 6 July 2006 (UTC)