Template talk:Contentious topics/talk notice

Requested edit 30 January 2022
Add a comma after the closing brackets in, per correct grammar. —Compassionate727 (T·C) 19:12, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
 * ✅.  P.I. Ellsworth &thinsp;, ed.  put'r there 10:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

When an article deals with multiple contentious topics
Does this template have the functionality to display a single article-talk-page notice "this page is related to [X], [Y], and [Z], which have been designated as contentious topics"? For example, JK Rowling's talk page currently has two big boxes back to back, one for Gender and one for BLP (technically they are Template:Ds/talk notice boxes, but the result is equivalent), and an American politician with similar views could add a third box for AmPol, but I think one box would be less clutter and hence more likely to actually be read... -sche (talk) 02:37, 15 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Honestly this is a feature I think we really should have in all of the CTOP alert and notice templates. On article talk pages, especially for those articles that fall into multiple simultaneous contentious topic areas, having 2, 3, or 4 of the notices easily contributes towards banner fatigue. And when issuing alerts on user talk pages, it would be much simpler to be able to just do something like, instead of having to issue one alert/first and multiple other alerts in the same edit. Sideswipe9th (talk) 02:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Coming here from Talk:Robert F. Kennedy Jr. which has three of those. This is definitely a feature to implement asap. –Vipz (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Hi @Sdkb! SilkTork told me you're the best person to approach regarding this, since you're taking a lead in reducing talk page banner blindness. –Vipz (talk) 17:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Looking at the code of this template, there's three that might be troublesome to integrate into a single banner; Template:Contentious topics/gmo talk notice, Template:Contentious topics/Arab-Israeli talk notice, and Template:Contentious topics/The Troubles talk notice. Those all have added restrictions beyond being just CTOPs, and their exact text is drawn from those complete subtemplates. The others all use the same base text, substituting in content drawn from Template:Contentious topics/list based on the passed in topic code.
 * Unfortunately that's where my knowledge of Wiki templates starts to dry up. I know you can do multiple of the same input parameters, as Template:Contentious topics/aware allows you to provide a list of all topic codes you consider yourself aware of, but I'll be damned if I can figure out how that works right now. Sideswipe9th (talk) 17:22, 10 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping, and for flagging that rather hideous example at RFK Jr.! I'll get to work in the sandbox and see what I can manage.
 * Broadly, I feel that there's an issue with a lot of hot topic-type banners overlapping with each other, as I described here. I'd be interested to see others propose some mergers and see what happens.
 * Cheers, &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 02:04, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * @Sideswipe9th@-sche@Vipz, I coded up a version in the sandbox that allows you to use topic2 etc. to designate multiple topics. See the testcases page for examples. The code isn't pretty, but then again, neither is the code I'm building off of, so it's not like I'm mucking up a pristine garden. It doesn't work if any of the three oh-god-no-why-on-earth-did-we-make-an-exception cases are used as the first parameter, but it should work alright if they're used as a subsequent parameter (just without the extra restrictions, which would have to be provided separately).
 * Contentious topics templates aren't my normal specialty, so it'd help to have someone more familiar look over the changes before I implement. @Dreamy Jazz and @ToBeFree, I see you both in the recent edit history; would either of you be interested in taking a glance? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 03:52, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Ideally a warning should be displayed if "topic2" or "topic3" have any of:
 * gmo
 * a-i
 * tt
 * Because these need to display the restrictions that apply topic wide in the banner and the only way to do that currently is to have a separate banner for those three and then the rest can be combined in this way. Dreamy Jazz talk to me &#124; my contributions 09:56, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Having a separate banner for those is a really poor way to code it. Could we just introduce a piece of code that lists the restrictions in the normal banner? &#123;{u&#124; Sdkb  }&#125;  talk 14:24, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So the template draws the scope for each topic code from Contentious topics/list, which is then added to the base text of the template. A naive solution is perhaps to make a similar template to Contentious topics/list, except that instead of containing the scope text it contains the list of additional restrictions that apply to special cases, perhaps in a bullet point format, that then gets added with the furthermore, the following rules apply... text if those topic codes are used?
 * This would have the benefit of making it easier for any future arbcom cases to add similar restrictions for any future cases, without having the need to create a bespoke template whenever a new special case arises. The only downside with this naive approach would be that if you have a page which is for example both a-i and gmo, the 1rr text would appear twice.
 * The ideal approach would be to store the text of each type of special case restriction in a template like Contentious topics/list, along with a separate list of which additional restrictions apply to each topic. Then when constructing the template you parse the list of additional restrictions for each topic, filter out duplicates, and add the necessary text to the output. That sort of data manipulation might only be possible in a Lua module though? Sideswipe9th (talk) 01:42, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I've come across this discussion from Talk:Anthony Fauci, another one with three. I was highly tempted to just write the module described above until I realized the number of incredibly similar-but-not-the-same templates connected to the contentious topics family that all work ever-so-slightly differently (as it always goes, should've expected, really). The "easy" way to do it would be to copy all the contentious topics/list and other similar templates' data into JSON, or perhaps a data storage module (like Module:Convert/data or similar), but then it's all duplicated (not that it isn't now).
 * The other potential thing would be to move the data we already have in contentious topics/list et al. into a format actually designed for data storage, leaving the template as a wrapper and using the data directly where convenient. My fear if that change was made, though, is that this web of templates is so large that nobody would have any idea that some template with 2 uses somewhere just broke because nobody knew it existed. I suppose that in theory, if it exactly duplicated the functionality, it would work the same, but I would nonetheless be at least a little uncomfortable. I would be perfectly happy to slap such a module together in a sandbox somewhere if anybody was remotely interested in seeing how it might look.
 * ToBeFree and Dreamy Jazz, I've seen you in the histories of essentially every template I've gone through in this family, so perhaps you have some advice or suggestions, or know something I'm missing and can tell me that this is a horrible idea for some reason I haven't considered (which of course is a substantial possibility), though I already know that this would be a lot of work. Tollens (talk) 08:07, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I wrote contentious topics/list as a module just now, wrapper that works nearly the same (only difference far as I know is it gives error messages rather than failing silently) is at User:Tollens/sandbox. It occurred to me that this is really not something to discuss on this page so I went to Template talk:Contentious topics and found that similar work is ongoing, I will move there and drop a link to this discussion also. Tollens (talk) 07:55, 20 June 2024 (UTC)
 * (thanks for the ping – currently no opinion) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 16:40, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

"Awareness criteria" in the |style=brief talk notice
Since WP:CT2022, the "awareness criteria" have been moved to a footnote, and there is no section WP:CTOP (but rather WP:CTOP). (This is what it looked like before.) Because of that, the second sentence in  no longer makes sense. I suggest this replacement.

Current:

Suggested:

SilverLocust [//w.wiki/8xwX &#x1f0cf;] 💬 11:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Changed to an edit request after waiting a month for any feedback. I don't think this two-word change is sufficiently substantial to consult ArbCom. SilverLocust 💬 21:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ SWinxy (talk) 20:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Extended-confirm notice
Currently the notice placed on top of talk pages in the Israel/Palestine area (and other articles subject to Arbcom restrictions I assume) point out that one is subject to the following restriction: You must be logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days. This notice is insufficient. It should be briefly lengthened to indicate that this restriction relates to edits on the English Wikipedia only, no matter how many edits one may have in other projects. That would address confusion that arises from time to time.

If this is the wrong place to make this suggestion, I would appreciate being pointed in the right direction. Coretheapple (talk) 15:11, 20 February 2024 (UTC)


 * I think I've found a better place to discuss this. Disregard! Coretheapple (talk) 23:01, 20 February 2024 (UTC)
 * For future observers, this was moved to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration Committee. SWinxy (talk) 20:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Edit request 10 April 2024
Fix spelling of "prodedures" to "procedures". When template editors of the world's greatest encyclopedia can't spell as well as Nigerian princes it makes me very sad.

Diff: Sandboxing typically not required for spelling fixes in displayed textRadioactiveBoulevardier (talk) 12:02, 10 April 2024 (UTC)
 * ✅ firefly  ( t · c ) 12:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)

Sri Lanka topic code
Now that ArbCom has designated Sri Lanka as a contentious topic, independently of IPA (as far as it seems), can a topic code and corresponding text be added? Daniel Case (talk) 18:39, 12 April 2024 (UTC)


 * I would hope that this happens when the motion officially passes which requires 1 more arb vote and then 24 hours before it can be implemented. Barkeep49 (talk) 18:41, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

Making wording clearer for ECR for A-I
While editing Talk:Killing of journalists in the Israel%E2%80%93Hamas war, I noticed this template did not specify how the ECR restriction is applied (Cannot edit article without EC/Cannot edit article without EC + Non-EC editors can only make Edit requests on talk/something else). I think there should be slightly clearer wording on what restrictions apply to talk versus the article.

I can try to suggest specific wording, but someone else will probably have a better wording anyway. Soni (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 15 July 2024: American English for American politics
When on a talk page about "post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people," it is inappropriate to impose weird to see a template with British English. It is very hypocritical weird to see this above another box requesting American English. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 08:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)


 * "Inappropriate" and "very hypocritical" are big words for the use of British English on the talk page of any article. If this is implemented, Template:Contentious_topics/editnotice should probably receive the same change. &#126; ToBeFree (talk) 08:49, 15 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I toned things down now that the unexpected novelty wore off. Anyway, it's weird to have a template telling me to use AmE while the template above it uses BrE. While talk page editors are not expected to use an unfamiliar engvar, templates are held to a higher standard.
 * I agree Contentious_topics/editnotice should receive the same change. Possibly even a change in the other direction for the word "behavior". Also, that template doesn't seem to be pushing any specific engvar because it uses both, but the mixing of engvars itself is strange. 174.92.25.207 (talk) 09:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)