Template talk:Contentious topics
 | This template is within the jurisdiction of the Arbitration Committee, as one of its associated enforcement processes. Therefore, you must not make significant changes to the wording or functionality of this template without the Committee's consent. Thank you! |
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Contentious topics template. |
|
Archives: 1Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
Template-protected edit request on 17 July 2025
[edit] | This edit request to Template:Contentious topics/alert/first has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
| − | + | Wikipedia's norms and policies |
per MOS:CURLY --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 22:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sure,
Done, though curly apostrophes can be used in non-article namespaces where the Manual of Style doesn’t apply. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 00:15, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Including a link to the specific restrictions for a given CT
[edit]The template output identifies the specific CTs for a given article, and says "Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page." But it doesn't say anything about the specific restrictions for the CT that prompts the appearance of the template on that talk page. If someone isn't already familiar with the restrictions for that topic, it requires going to Wikipedia:Contentious topics, then down to Wikipedia:Contentious topics#List of contentious topics, and then clicking again to see what's said for that specific topic. In addition to the general notice naming the CT(s) in play, is there any way to add a direct link to information about the specific CT restrictions for the identified CT?
An example: the Zohran Mamdani article has BLP and AP restrictions, plus A-I restrictions for one section of the article. Is there any way for the template's output to link directly to WP:CT/BLP, WP:CT/AP and WP:CT/A-I? FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:25, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Most CTs don't have any automatic restrictions, so the template doesn't automatically list any. If an article is under a CT that does have automatic restrictions, they should be manually added to the template. For example, at Mamdani, someone should add custom restrictions with the 1RR, ECR, and word limit restriction. I'm neutral on linking the cases, but we shouldn't rely on a link to the case to explain the active restrictions. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:47, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I haven't ever used this template, and I hadn't looked carefully at what options were available, and I see now that it can already accomplish what I think it important, as long as an editor makes use of those options. Do you know if there's any WP:__ page that lists which CTs have custom restrictions and what they are? Or, if the editor who adds the template doesn't already know, does that editor need to go to that case to check? FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- It's not up-to-date, but Wikipedia:General sanctions is the closest to what you're looking for. If anyone has time, ARBPIA4 needs to be update to ARBPIA5 and the Indian military history case changes need to be effected. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 16:14, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I haven't ever used this template, and I hadn't looked carefully at what options were available, and I see now that it can already accomplish what I think it important, as long as an editor makes use of those options. Do you know if there's any WP:__ page that lists which CTs have custom restrictions and what they are? Or, if the editor who adds the template doesn't already know, does that editor need to go to that case to check? FactOrOpinion (talk) 16:08, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
Edit request regarding SA
[edit] | This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Regarding South Asia CT, didn't you mention Bhutan on the area? Ahri Boy (talk) 08:28, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. P.I. Ellsworth , ed. – welcome! – 17:26, 20 July 2025 (UTC)
- @Ahri Boy: Bhutan wasn't one of the countries that the Arbitration Committee voted to include. The countries that were selected had each been mentioned as part of WP:CT/IPA, WP:GS/CASTE, or WP:CT/SL. This has been brought up at WT:ACN#Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Indian military history closed, but the list of covered countries will only be expanded if the Committee votes to do so. ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 19:25, 20 July 2025 (UTC)