Template talk:Underground laboratories

Edit discussion: Should "Kolar" be struck through?
In this edit, User:Brycehughes removed the strikethrough on the grounds that it is ugly and makes the navbox hard to read. (Much discussion at User_talk:Brycehughes.) I think it's a bit ugly, but neatly and compactly expresses "not any more".

Some options that were discussed:
 * Use a more legible style than strikethrough to mark the laboratory as closed.
 * Combine "closed" and "not open yet" into a single "not operating" category indicated by italics.
 * Drop the link to Kolar completely. That has its merits, depending on the purpose of the navbox: is it more a list of laboratories, or of Wikipedia articles?

But basically, this is an aesthetic judgement, not something that can be decided conclusively. I put it in there originally, so obviously I like it that way, but I don't own the template. So additional opinions are solicited. (Since I don't think this template or talk page gets a lot of traffic, a WP:3O request will be submitted.)

I do request that it anyone is inspired to WP:Be bold and make a change, they change the documentation to match. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:26, 3 May 2015 (UTC) Interesting! I wasn't expecting that to be the preferred option. That wouldn't be a very interesting list, as Kolar is the only underground laboratory of any note that's been closed. (It's actually barely a laboratory, but was what passed for one in its day.) I'll allow a few more days for others to chime in, then make the edit. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 01:30, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Edit discussion: Should "Fréjus" be listed?
In this edit, User:Brycehughes simplified "LSM/Fréjus" to just "LSM". (The first half used to be a red link, but Brycehughes recently created a Modane Underground Laboratory article.)  I went and changed it back to LSM/Fréjus. There was a lot of discussion.

I'm really torn. Arguments for including Fréjus:
 * The lab is also very commonly referred to as "Fréjus underground laboratory" or "Frejus" for short, even on official web sites. Per WP:OFFICIAL, WP uses the most common name(s), even if they're not the official ones.
 * That usage appears to be ongoing, not just historical.
 * This is unlike the names "DUSEL" and "Homestake"; current usage is clearly shifting to SURF.
 * There's no obvious connection between the names "LSM" and "Fréjus".
 * Although LNGS is commonly referred to as "Gran Sasso", there's less need for an alternate listing because of "GS" in the initialism and "Gran Sasso" in the mouseover text.
 * "/Fréjus" is pretty short, so it doesn't take a huge benefit to keep the cost/benefit ratio good.

Arguments for using "LSM" only:
 * A navbox is space constrained.
 * For consistency: give each lab one name.
 * It is the official name, and also commonly used.
 * As User:Brycehughes pointed out, the box also includes flags; someone looking for "Fréjus" would probably think to try the only lab in France.

That last point is a good one, and has me hanging in the balance. Other opinions are very much requested! 71.41.210.146 (talk) 06:26, 3 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. This is the current situation, so no action is required. If anyone else would like to chime in on the subject, it's not permanently closed. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 01:53, 5 May 2015 (UTC)

Addition discussion: Kimballton Underground Research Facility
I saw it in the article for Kimballton, Virginia and it has a web site: http://www.phys.vt.edu/~kimballton/. Apparently it has 1450 mwe shielding. It's located in a working limestone mine, which leaves nice clean dry chambers behind, and has drive-in access. The facility was very cheap ($200K); it mostly consisted of installing a dust-proof building inside some pre-existing open space.

But it doesn't have an article yet. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 15:49, 18 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Well, in the spirit of WP:Be Bold, I added it. It's currently named "Kimballton"; "KURF" is another alternative. 71.41.210.146 (talk) 19:10, 18 August 2015 (UTC)