Template talk:R with possibilities

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This template survived a request for deletion. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete.

• Courtland 02:48, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

This template was considered for deletion on 2006 April 7. The result of the discussion was keep.

• User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 00:26, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What does that explanation mean, anyway??

"This is a redirect from a title for a topic more detailed than the topic of the page this redirects to."
What?? Does this actually make sense to anyone? - Liberty Miller 26 Jan 2005

This is one of the more common R-templates that I've been including in redirects .. despite the fact that they don't function right now.

To me it means that there is a subtopic that is included in an article that, if there were more information, could be split off as an article in it's own right. Take a facetious example: money. Let's say that I started an article entitled "Money" and there was no article on "US dollar" and I didn't feel like or couldn't add enough information about "US dollar" to justify to myself that it should be included either as a stub or an article. So I write my one line in "Money" about the all-mighty dollar and make a redirect from "US dollar" => "Money" in anticipation that someone might have the wherewithall to say something about the greenback at some point beyond "The US Dollar is the base currency of the United States" .. which is what I said about it in "Money".

I'm not using it for that purpose, really, but for more symmetrical references. For instance, there is an article on Thyroid-stimulating hormone but there is no article on Thyroid-stimulating hormone receptor. In biology saying something about a receptor and it's cognate ligand are two very different things. However, for my present purpose I don't want to start an article on the receptor, so I set up a couple of reasonable redirects around alternate names for the receptor and put what I have at present in the TSH article, where it fits but it's not in the best possible context. I'm not saying anything false by putting the information together as I have, but it's just not the best of all possible configurations. Later, maybe, I'll drop in and write a receptor article ... or maybe someone who works on the receptor will do so. Courtland 03:07, 2005 Feb 23 (UTC)

[edit] rename to {{R subtopic}}

I'd like to change this tag to be a more precise and better understood "R subtopic".

I've outlined some other changes I'd like made at Village pump/proposals

I also think the title of the template is very strange. I'd rather change the officially advertised title to the one suggested above.--Imz 20:10, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

• Agree, after some thought. There are many uses of the template that are do not strictly abide by the topic-subtopic relationship, but these could be considered misuses of the template rather than an opportunity for descriptive revision of the template title and text. Perhaps renaming to the subtopic title will lead more people (myself included) to use the template more narrowly. Courtland 21:32, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

The majority of templates under Category:Redirect_templates also use the word "from" or "to". So, let's use {{R from subtopic}}. Shawnc 13:01, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Or not, as you moved it twice today! Anyway, this is a bad idea, there are other things in the category than just "subtopics". And it took me a couple of hours to undo the damage today. There's a process for renaming templates and categories, and you didn't follow it. Please don't do that again!

--William Allen Simpson 17:41, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the template name is unclear, and there has been concensus on renaming the template to something different from "R with possibilities". Users who have prefered a change include User:Ceyockey, User:Imz, User:Pengo. Shawnc 17:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

To deal with redirects from non-subtopics, we could rename this template to cover those as well, such as "R from related topic". How's that? Shawnc 18:02, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

All uses I've seen of "possibilities" are for subtopics. If there are other cases, these should be delt with case by case (or perhaps these rare, exceptional cases can get another template for "related topic"). It is not desirable to combine "subtopic" and the rare "other possibilities/related topic". Note that my original suggestion was to remove all the "to" "from" and "with" words from all the R template names because they are inconsistant and don't help, but removing these words should be considered separately to this proposal. —Pengo 02:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Please discuss rename proposals at Wikipedia talk:Redirect, WP:RM, and WP:VPR. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 13:44, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Songs

Do you suppose this would be a good template to add to song titles that redirect to albums? —Gordon P. Hemsley→✉ 03:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest using Template:R from subtopic even though that template redirects here; that template is, as discussed above, a subtopic of this one, actually. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:33, 6 December 2006 (UTC)