Template talk:Violence against Hindus in East Pakistan and Bangladesh

Size
This template is pretty big and, alas, it is likely to get bigger as the years go by. I've not been through every entry to see whether or not some could be jettisoned but, assuming that isn't possible, we might be reaching the point where it needs to be split in some way. Does anyone know of any templates that have been split by, say, decades? Just so we could get an idea of a way forward. - Sitush (talk) 20:47, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * A large chunk of it is 1971 Bangladesh violence, which should be grouped together in some way. In fact, I am not sure why they are all separate articles even by themselves. Kautilya3 (talk) 21:38, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * This is just a thought, but rather than splitting it by chronology, what if we were to split it by a combination of region and time period? This, IMO, would match the breakup of sources, and the type of violence, more closely. We could have one template looking at violence against Hindus in post-independence India (of which there have been many instances, frequently retaliatory or terrorist in nature); we could have another that looks at contemporary violence in countries where Hindus are in the minority; and another looking at more archaic examples, such as during the Mughal period or under Tipu Sultan. The "related" articles can probably be jettisoned, there is no support in the sources for most of those. Thoughts? Vanamonde93 (talk) 21:43, 6 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is annoyingly long. And what is its utility except templat`ing articles and remaining a bone of contention? I think chronological grouping might reduce its length. But perhaps region is even more suitable, but that may not help reduce the length significantly. --AmritasyaPutra T 02:35, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * True, which is why I am suggesting a combination of those methods, though I want to hear Sitush's thoughts on that. Titling might be a problem. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, in my world the thing would not exist at all. "Bone of contention" puts it mildly and templates such as this will forever be a source of unnecessary friction, POV pushing, vandalism and the like. Alas, my world and Wikipedia clash on such things. I can see the attraction of a themed approach to splitting, the attraction of a chronological approach, and also of a combination of the two. I'm not sure which I would prefer to see: my primary point is that the thing is getting out of hand. It isn't the only example, of course: there are some other horrendous sidebars and navboxes knocking around which I see while editing India-related stuff. Perhaps this discussion needs a neutral announcement at a few project noticeboards? India, Hinduism, Bangladesh, Pakistan etc? I doubt that many people have templates on their watchlists. - Sitush (talk) 06:26, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
 * We can have two sub-topics: One by location and one by chronological order. - Vatsan34 (talk) 15:22, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Vatsan, that would reduce the length of this template, but each article would still have the same vast number of links in the sidebar, because you would have to add both templates to every article; what we want is for each article to have a more focused and concise sidebar. Linking Amarnath to Seringapattanum makes no sense; but post-independence incidents in India, for instance, should be linked. Vanamonde93 (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2015 (UTC)


 * Collapse or split: Until splitting criteria are decided, collapse it. Preferably change the color too to #ff6600. --Tito Dutta (talk) 06:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm not a fan of sidebars, period. They are particularly problematic in short articles and especially so if someone decides to include an image and an infobox also. Navboxes, which run along the bottom of the article page, tend to resolve that. One day, I will look at a messy page - such as one using the History of Andhra Pradesh/Telanagan sidebar + Middle Kingdoms of India etc templates - using my phone or tablet and see what happens. My bet (hope!) is that the mobile version eliminates them entirely. - Sitush (talk) 07:41, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
 * For starters, I found that there is already a navbox about persecution of Bengali Hindus. In articles where that applies, it is used over this one; so I plan to delete the links in that template, from this one. Not ideal, I know, but a small step in the right direction. Vanamonde93 (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Have grouped the incidents as pre-Independent India and post-independent Pakistan, Bangladesh and India. Looks less lengthier now as I have added flatlist. - Vatsan34 (talk) 07:31, 18 October 2015 (UTC)

Remove
Could we rediscuss this? I mean this topic is pretty lame and judging by the way its organised, it ought to be changed. No offense though! FindMeLost (talk) 07:52, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Discuss what? - Kautilya3 (talk) 09:49, 18 October 2015 (UTC)