User talk:Natalie.Desautels/sandbox/Classical and flamenco guitar templates

'New and improved' navigation boxes for classical and flamenco guitar
Hi Everyone,

I've been working hard on implementing most of the suggestions which were so kindly brought forward concerning the classical and flamenco guitar navbox issues; the fruits of my labor so far can be found here.

We've seen all sorts of interesting, at times opposing, ideas proposed during discussion, including A navbox on every page and it's creative nemesis Not everything needs a navbox. Thus, short of running out and finding a Talmudic scholar to make sense of all these laws, I felt it best to roll up my sleeves, delve into my life-long experience in the subject and take the pleasure to implement 'new and improved' navigation boxes on these two complementary subjects, an exciting endeavor, to be sure.

, I would be amiss not to mention your wonderful WP contributions in general, and especially your amazing expertise in navboxes in particular. And of course I would be interested, and then some, if you would be so kind as to once again share your thoughts. Naturally, I'm also eager to hear from everyone. Hopefully I have helped a bit to 'advance on chaos and the dark' in this matter.

PS. I realize that the section 'Grand masters (sourced)' in both navboxes might be construed as non-encyclopedic and non neutral, notwithstanding that this assertion is well sourced; I would think that a dispute of the claim of 'grand master' in the names chosen from mainstream quality sources is unlikely.

kindest regards and best wishes to all, Natalie.Desautels (talk) 20:51, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * the OR/POV issue can be solved by just using categories for navigation. Frietjes (talk) 20:52, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello . Wow, that was a Guiness-record-worthy response time; one minute! Thank you so much once again for your precious input. I think your suggestion is very clever, to wit, to solve the POV issue regarding a 'Grand master' navbox section by using Categories instead; ...excellent compromise, to be sure. Oh, I imagine you noticed that your suggestion of 14 April 2016 was also implemented, that is, that you '...would support adding navigational boxes which included Michael Laucke as one of the items listed within the navigational box. kind regards,  Natalie.Desautels (talk) 21:15, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, . How does one link to categories and make those category links WP:bidirectional? Cheers!  20:14, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Checkingfax, a non-hidden category is by implementation bidirectional. every article in the category has a link to the category at the foot of the article (hence one can navigate from the article to the category), and once on the category page, there is a link back to every article (hence, one can navigate from the category back to the articles).  thus, navigation by category is bidirectional. Frietjes (talk) 20:59, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Thank you, . Cheers!  21:19, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

These should be separate navboxes from the general 'classical/flamenco guitar' navboxes. They should also simply be links to the persons in question. I might suggest creating a network of infoboxes e.g. as below

These would be interesting intersections of the current categories, I think. --Izno (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hello, Indeed, that's an very interesting and exciting idea. Thanks so much for sharing this broader perspective, and helping me step back a bit to better see the forest. Also, elaborating on the manner you suggested, a user visiting an article on a classical guitarist who has little to do with, say, the baroque lute, need not be distracted by this lute entry in the general 'classical guitar' navbox. And so, navboxes could be made more appropriate/specific for each type of article/guitarist. Brilliant; love it! Hm, ...wondering which separate navboxes to create in the network you kindly mentioned ...'Grand masters' would certainly be one ... kind regards, Natalie.Desautels (talk) 22:25, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Omy, nice work. You may be a natural at templates, creating a map of the site. Very good so far, and apparently more to go. I haven't created one from scratch in awhile, it takes an intent that I haven't felt in a long time, but isn't it fun! So yes, bottom line, one result of this spirited discussion is your creation, a result well worth the words pro and con. Randy Kryn 23:27, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi again, Thank you kindly! ...just a quick note hoping that inspiration returns to you for the continuation of creating your very interesting navboxes. Follow your heart (secret to happiness contained therein) and the motivation will surely return . kindest regards, N atalie Desautels  …as within, so without   18:31, 29 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Hi, just having a look at these and I have a few comments. Most of these are due to WP:UNDUE.  Firstly, the image.  By including the image of one guitarist over the other, it puts WP:UNDUE weight over the other guitarists.  If an image is to be used, it should be a neutral image of the topic (a guitar maybe), although personally I find images to be unnecessary and overly decorative.  Also, what is your inclusion criteria for the individuals?  Why are there only selective guitarists?  Selective inclusion gives WP:UNDUE weight to the ones you have included over the others.  But including the hundreds of guitarists at Category:Classical guitarists by nationality would create a navbox which is too large to be useful, which is why a navbox is not suitable for lists of musicians.  Per WP:CLT these are best for lists and categories, which we already have (which I think is the point that  mentions above).  Imagine if we included all the rock guitarists in a Rock guitar template, for example.  Or if we started navboxes for other occupations (Category:People by occupation) - American actors of the 20th century or similar.  However, a navbox for Classical guitar Grand Masters might be appropriate if there was a sourced, corresponding article of Classical guitar Grand Masters, as the inclusion criteria is fixed.  But as far as I can see, it would presently fail all of the criteria #1-5 at WP:CLT.  Do any of the articles mention them being "Grande Masters"? However, if they are to be included (which I strongly oppose), dates and nationalities shouldn't be present after the names, just the linked names, as this is too much biographical information for a navbox, as this kind of clutter hinders the navigation function of a navbox.  Oh, and each article should only be linked to once from within a navbox, we shouldn't be duplicating links.   --Rob Sinden (talk) 08:43, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, (with cc to ). I boldly made some edits based on your comments.
 * The image has been removed
 * Individual inclusion is based on Natalie's lifetime of experience and thousands of hours of research. Categories, lists, and navigation templates tells us to select a few from a list, then post a link to the complete list, which has been done here.
 * According to navbox guidelines it is not undue to pick a few good ones from a list as long as the list link is there too
 * Hundreds will not be added. Guidelines suggest 100 tops.
 * Dates and nationalities have been removed
 * Which links are duplicated? That would be redundant redundancy.
 * Cheers!  21:29, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Checkingfax, Individual inclusion is based on Natalie's lifetime of experience and thousands of hours of research = WP:OR. Frietjes (talk) 22:33, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . You are preaching to the choir. The navbox guidelines just say to pick a few representative ones which she did. If we do not approve we can edit or challenge her picks. We have to start somewhere and she went first. What is your proposed alternative? Cheers!  01:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Checkingfax, relying on WP:OR to generate the initial list, then on WP:OR again to decide which ones to selectively include doesn't somehow stop it from being WP:OR. this is why we use categories, since the only criteria is that the article has been written and is a member of the category. Frietjes (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Where at WP:NAVBOX does it say to only select a few representative articles from a list? I don't see that.  That really isn't in the spirit of a navbox.  Or any reference to 100 entries.  And again, who decides which to include and which to not?  Entirely subjective, and as pointed out, WP:OR and against WP:NPOV.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 07:55, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Oh, in the "Classical guitar" navbox for example, most of the "Grand Masters" have already been mentioned, so these links are duplicate. But, again, there is no corresponding article to source these supposed "Grand Masters", and there are no references to this status at the articles either.  --Rob Sinden (talk) 11:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

I've trimmed the navboxes per the discussion here and jiggered the GM navbox. Some points of additional interest:
 * 1) The "modern" navbox is very tall. Is there a sensible way to squish these--perhaps by continent?
 * 2) I've removed the list of guitarists from the general classical guitar navbox as a result of what I'm calling the network.
 * 3) I've removed the general links that were in the above of the navboxes since those will be prominently linked as appropriate in the biographies. We might plausibly re-add the List of classical guitarists either as the navbox lead link or as an above or as a below, since I expect we would want to have at least one page where all of the navboxes are linked (and that would be the one). --Izno (talk) 13:16, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Hi, . The modern era navbox would substantially shrink vertically if the country groups were removed from all entries. At that point, all the birthdates should be removed, and the artists should be alphasorted by last name. Cheers!   21:19, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * I've taken a shot at moving toward larger areas. Maybe Europe should be split to "Northern","Western","Southern", and "Eastern" Europe, and maybe a split for North America back into Canada and the US? --Izno (talk) 12:29, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * I also added a second cut at that template. --Izno (talk) 12:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)