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.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Archives: 1: 30 days

Template-protected edit request on 17 July 2025

This edit request to Template:Contentious topics/alert/first has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

per MOS:CURLY --cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 22:32, 17 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Including a link to the specific restrictions for a given CT

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Edit request regarding SA

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

@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)[reply]

Talk page and editnotice templates need ECR param

@ArbCom Clerks: ECR is now applied to multiple contentious topic areas. Since both PIA and SA suggest preemptive protection, and since many such pages will need protection and application of two CT templates, it would be very helpful if ECR were added as its own parameter to templates like Template:Contentious topics/talk notice and Template:Contentious topics/page restriction editnotice. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 12:56, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

{{contentious topics/talk notice}} already has |ECR= for the topics within which ECR is authorized; is that not working on particular template?

I can look at adding the functionality to Template:Contentious topics/page restriction editnotice. Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 15:58, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HouseBlaster, thanks! I think I didn't realize there was an ECR param for the talk notice because it's not mentioned in the documentation. Can we add a mention? Also, an unexpected behavior of ECR=yes for South Asia topics is that the banner suggests ECR applies to the whole topic area, rather than just castes/IMH. If it's possible to use a template argument to narrow the message, that'd be great. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:24, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HouseBlaster has been improving the talk notice. In the /sandbox version |sasg describes the subtopic rather than just the same thing as |sa. For now, it's fine if the talk notice doesn't mention the ECR (you can just ECP an article without using |ECR=yes). ~ Jenson (SilverLocust 💬) 21:55, 23 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Getting a tailored message for ECR-covered is my next task for the sandbox; I hope to have that complete sooner rather than later.

Looking into the fine details about how ECR is handled in the PIA editnotice, it simply passes through |protection=ecp when creating the notice. I guess we could be more explicit about what ECR entails—it is more than ECP—but when you are editing the page they are identical (unless it only applies to part of the page, which is something not currently supported in the editnotice banner and will be a much bigger project). Thinking through some technical details:

We could probably expand Module:Contentious topics/talk notice to handle edit notices, too
For my mediocre Lua skills, that would be a bigger job than a weekend project, but it is on my list of things to do

In the meantime, I have added some bits to the Template:Contentious topics/talk notice/doc documentation about |ECR=yes (and |RSCR=yes). Best, House Blaster (talk • he/they) 01:09, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]