Template talk:Baltimore (virus classification)

Name "Baltimore classification" no longer appropriate
This template seems to have been expanded beyond just the Baltimore classification (which as I understand it was just the I, II, III, IV, V, etc.) It now includes groupings above and below that level. A new title for the template is probably in order. Thoughts? Suggestions? Zodon (talk) 02:07, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

Collapsing - by DNA/RNA/etc. or by Baltimore class?
The template was fairly large, so I added collapsing. They work out about the same screen size. Any thoughts about preferred version? Zodon (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
 * First I tried it with making the groups DNA, RNA and retroviruses collapsible. e.g.
 * Then tried collapsing by Baltimore class (I, II, etc.)

Out of date
This template may be well out of date by now. Editing here to remember to update it later. Bervin61 (talk) 12:03, 19 March 2015 (UTC) Seems to be out of date again: Pithovirus not mentioned as member of NCLDV (of course fam. Pithoviridae is a proposal only). Paramyxoviridae are now of order ...--Ernsts (talk) 05:33, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Indexing for Search Engines
Is it possible to make this template not to be indexed by Web search engines?

If I use a Web Search Engine (e. g. Startpage) 'every looking for any item mentioned in the template, then any article is presented as a hit that has the template included. Because of this there is a lot of useless hits that avoids finding any hits with real information. I zhink there should be a way as articles in one's user area are not indexed.

Kind regards! --Ernsts (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2021 (UTC)