Wikipedia:WikiProject Highways/Internet Relay Chat/Logs/2007-06-08 (debate)

 TwinsMetsFan: Vishwin: how are the PUSRD templates a self-reference? TwinsMetsFan: from WP:PORTAL - In the main namespace, the top-level portals are linked to directly from the Main Page and individual portals are linked from relevant articles using. These templates should be located at article ends in See also sections (or equivalents). vishwin60: let the portals link to the articles, but not articles to portals TwinsMetsFan: vishwin: disagreed vishwin60: it's distracting to the article vishwin60: from WP:SELF: Put simply, this policy is about remembering that the goal of Wikipedia is to create an encyclopedia, not merely to perpetuate itself, so the articles produced should be useful even outside the context of the project used to create them. TwinsMetsFan: if you think a small box is distracting, then i can't help you TwinsMetsFan: uh, portals are supposed to help the reader find similar articles vishwin60: then how'd the state highway box come to be? vishwin60: the portal is redundant in this way TwinsMetsFan: browsing didn't exist then TwinsMetsFan: yes, the portal would be redundant *if* it was placed on all 7500 articles TwinsMetsFan: not the 50 state list pages vishwin60: the portal link was placed on the article Highway vishwin60: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Highway&diff=prev&oldid=136906682 TwinsMetsFan: well, that's stupid vishwin60: if we want the portal link, link it on the state highway template TwinsMetsFan: as an aside, removing links to the portal kills the portal TwinsMetsFan: as if it needed to be killed, it's pretty much a zombie anyway vishwin60: 20 min till beer oclock JohnnyAlbert10 entered the room. mode (+v JohnnyAlbert10 ) by ChanServ JohnnyAlbert10: hello vishwin60: 18 min till beeroclock JohnnyAlbert10: whats going on? vishwin60: me removing P:USRD links from state highway list articles JohnnyAlbert10: o vishwin60: TwinsMetsFan: I'm transplanting the state highway template JohnnyAlbert10: vishwin60: why do you wanna remove those templates? vishwin60: at first I conceived it as WP:SELF vishwin60: but now, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:US_state_highways <--brand new JohnnyAlbert10: hmm TwinsMetsFan: what about articles like United States Numbered Highways? JohnnyAlbert10: that does need a portal link vishwin60: the portal link is provided in the template TwinsMetsFan: you mean the non-existent template on that page? vishwin60: which non-existent template? TwinsMetsFan: is not transcluded, nor should it be, on United States Numbered Highways TwinsMetsFan: so right now, there is no link to the portal TwinsMetsFan: where there should be vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: contains links to all of the systems vishwin60: all of the *major* systems, that is JohnnyAlbert10: but we dont need that on articles JohnnyAlbert10: just the portal link vishwin60: here comes the department of redundancy... TwinsMetsFan: um, how? JohnnyAlbert10: is already on the list articles JohnnyAlbert10: we dont need them at United States Numbered Highways vishwin60: however, what appears is Numbered highways in the United States vishwin60: U.S. Routes *are* numbered highways vishwin60: as is with Interstates JohnnyAlbert10: but we dont need a state highway template there TwinsMetsFan: this isn't categorization vishwin60: of course it isn't vishwin60: ok moved to TwinsMetsFan: just because the portal is on one article relating to a topic does not mean it can't be on another vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: WP:PORTAL isn't a policy or guideline vishwin60: WP:SELF is a guideline TwinsMetsFan: and WP:SELF doesn't apply vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: it applies on all articles TwinsMetsFan: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WP:SELF#Examples_of_self-references - nowhere are links to portals forbidden JohnnyAlbert10: but vish who are readers gonna know theres a portal on US roads if they arent linked to major articles? vishwin60: template vishwin60: i've already said it's for numbered highways, not state highways vishwin60: USRD covers all roads in the US TwinsMetsFan: and how does that cover every conceivable article? vishwin60: U.S. Routes is a numbered highway system vishwin60: there is a line between state highways and numbered highways TwinsMetsFan: United States Numbered Highways TwinsMetsFan: i don't give a damn about the lists, they have the template vishwin60: now I may have thought of another idea TwinsMetsFan: this article *shouldn't* have the US numbered highways template, because those link to lists TwinsMetsFan: not to articles about the system vishwin60: United States Numbered Highways is about the system TwinsMetsFan: that's...what i just said TwinsMetsFan: it's an article on the system, not a list TwinsMetsFan: the others, with few exceptions, are lists vishwin60: lists with a definition of the system JohnnyAlbert10: you can link the template to lists but not articles vishwin60: lists and articles are the same vishwin60: they're just formatted differently TwinsMetsFan: perhaps we should approach this a different way: what was wrong with the way it was? vishwin60: placement is wrong TwinsMetsFan: care to elaborate? vishwin60: portal links should exist in see also, if standalone TwinsMetsFan: most did vishwin60: ok, I think this can be a good compromise vishwin60: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:U.S._Routes <-- click on the U.S. Route shield TwinsMetsFan: and for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System ?... TwinsMetsFan: the US box doesn't solve that page vishwin60: same thing, will make the Interstate shield link to P:USRD vishwin60: the US box is transcluded into United States Numbered Highways JohnnyAlbert10: oh great, my internet wont work TwinsMetsFan: i suppose that works for now, but that's not a catch all TwinsMetsFan: oddly though, some of the articles that i believe worthy to have never had it vishwin60: if this compromise can prevent me or anyone else from griping about WP:SELF, so be it until a better solution can be found JohnnyAlbert10: we need to reach an agreement vishwin60: this *is* the tentative agreement TwinsMetsFan: Transportation in the United States - relevant, none of the above navboxes are transcluded vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: there's a template at the bottom vishwin60: I can make it so that only appears in this article vishwin60: err, scratch that JohnnyAlbert10: maybe we need to think here for a sec JohnnyAlbert10: where do we need portal links? vishwin60: in areas of the article where the majority of the readers won't see TwinsMetsFan: readers are *supposed* to see portals JohnnyAlbert10: ya TwinsMetsFan: portals are for the reader's benefit JohnnyAlbert10: in da bottom of the article JohnnyAlbert10: a right hand link vishwin60: that's what I was thinking vishwin60: but we have to make it so that the readers won't get distracted from it JohnnyAlbert10: i think things were good the way they were vishwin60: but the placement in the road section was way off http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Transportation_in_the_United_States&oldid=134646200 TwinsMetsFan: then fix the placement vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: my concern is distraction TwinsMetsFan: i guess no other portals care about "distraction" - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Whatlinkshere/Template:Portal vishwin60: hmm vishwin60: obviously editors *must* think about the readers JohnnyAlbert10: correct vishwin60: i don't think readers *need* to go into a portal until they've finished reading the article JohnnyAlbert10: that's their decision JohnnyAlbert10: it doesnt really matter where you put da link vishwin60: actually it does vishwin60: per the MOS, an applicable image, such as a shield in the roads case, *must* be put in the top right-hand cornder vishwin60: corner* vishwin60: and probably an infobox, if one exists and is strongly recommended vishwin60: portal links are *not* important JohnnyAlbert10: so? a little link in da article doesnt matter vishwin60: mm-hmm, but the placement matters JohnnyAlbert10: place it in the topright corner vishwin60: no TwinsMetsFan: then put it in the see also section, like Template:Portal describes vishwin60: that' vishwin60: oops vishwin60: I was going to say that vishwin60: the see also section is practically the end of the article vishwin60: that's where readers would want to browse to other articles TwinsMetsFan: ok, we've got that established TwinsMetsFan: so, what's wrong with ? vishwin60: not much TwinsMetsFan: ok, 2 for 2 TwinsMetsFan: now, why was the template flat out removed from Transportation in the United States instead of being moved to the bottom? vishwin60: WP:SELF assumption in the beginning vishwin60: you can add it back; I'm currently taking care of TwinsMetsFan: so, other than placement in select cases, you agree there was nothing wrong with and its usage TwinsMetsFan: except for non-US articles like Highway vishwin60: hmm JohnnyAlbert10: in other words, it was fine b-fore today vishwin60: the thing is, the portal should be semi-invisible TwinsMetsFan: then why does Template:Portal exist, using the *exact same formatting* and used on thousands of articles? vishwin60: because everyone else was too lazy to create their own portal templates ;-) JohnnyAlbert10: i concur w/ TMF JohnnyAlbert10: so, do we agree on something? vishwin60: sure make it appear somewhere not in the main article text vishwin60: without giving any prominence TwinsMetsFan: so, when you refer to semi-invisible, you mean sending it to see also or the bottom, and not editing the transparency or something else? vishwin60: correct TwinsMetsFan: ok JohnnyAlbert10: we have a consensus vishwin60: it *can* be in templates TwinsMetsFan: so, like JA10 said, you agree that other than placement and some undeserving articles, it was fine before today vishwin60: almost TwinsMetsFan: and the reservations are...? vishwin60: that a portal should not be given any prominence TwinsMetsFan: none is given when the box is near the bottom vishwin60: good vishwin60: discussion closed
 * vishwin60 looks at WP:P
 * vishwin60 is reading the MOS and its associated pages
 * vishwin60 thinks