Template talk:Emotion navbox

message: Why are a few of these links external rather than Wikipedia links?? Georgia guy 22:28, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Some words don't have encyclopedia articles, so they're linked to dictionary articles. Rfrisbietalk 23:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I hope that's fixed. Jmlk17 10:35, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Template links are to link to Wikipedia articles, not otherwise. Dictionary links do not count. In fact, if the dictionary definition is enough, you don't need the article. --Mattisse 03:24, 9 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Older discussion

message: Is repentance really an emotion?  Does it belong on this template? Aleta 01:50, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps; maybe it depends on the definition of it to some people. Jmlk17 10:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Repentance

message: I object to this template and will propose that it be deleted if you do not change it so that it does not reflect the field of Psychology.  --Mattisse 21:22, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "it be deleted if you do not change it so that it does not reflect..." Are you perhaps meaning to ask that it's changed so that it does "reflect the field of Psychology"? As far as I know, there is no definitive, complete taxonomy of emotion. The template is expedient, and so I think it should stay and be developed further. Whitespace (talk) 02:04, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  These words are mostly not emotions - template needs to be changed or deleted 

message: Since the very distinction between basic and other emotions is highly controversial (see article on emotions for instance) I suggest that this grouping is removed. I am going to incorporate the basic ones into the main group.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thomascochrane (talk • contribs) 11:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I just saw this template and immediately thought how ridiculous it is. Who has determined this hierarchy of emotions? Are all other emotions supposed to be based on some mixture of these four "basic" emotions? What is the formula for ambivalence? Patience? Surprise? Also, the link from the template to the basic emotions (Emotion#Classification by basic emotions) is broken. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 07:14, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Basic emotions

message: I'm going to merge the content of these templates to here, and deprecate the use of the sidebar , based on the feedback in this thread, and Template talk:Emotion#Template change. I'll also confirm that it is included on all the pages that it links to.
Please discuss any problems here. Thanks. -- Quiddity (talk) 19:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The footer template is small and easy to overlook, and I don't think there was ever a consensus to merge. As a compromise, I advocate using the footer (alone) in all articles except for the emotion article itself, where the sidebar can serve as a useful supplement and conveniently visible reference point. --Jcbutler (talk) 19:45, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Merging

message: Common emotions?! I know some of us didn't like the term "basic" but at least it has some usage in psychology. Common doesn't mean anything except "common" and unless there is evidence showing that anger actually occurs more frequently than affection, let's just call the whole thing off and have a single list already! --Jcbutler (talk) 23:30, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, we should merge the "basic" in, and have a single list. -- Quiddity (talk) 22:18, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

text: I also agree. Supposing those four are, in fact, the "basic" emotions, then are the others the "complex" emotions? Are they combinations of the "basic" emotions? Ambivalence = 1 parts happiness, 1 part sadness; Patience = -2 parts anger, 1 part fear; Surprise = 2 part fear, 1 part anger, 1 part happiness. − Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 22:42, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

text: It's not completely unresearched.  -- Scarpy (talk) 00:37, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Common?

message: The current link to Desire in this template goes to a disambiguation page.  This is not technically correct, as it should rather go to an article, but I'm having trouble figuring out which article to send it to.  WP doesn't currently have an article for Desire (emotion).  Anyone have any ideas? Should I just turn it red? SlackerMom (talk) 14:30, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Desire is a dab page 

message: Are honesty and patience considered emotions?  --BryanD (talk) 01:26, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't consider them emotions. But what is an emotion seems to be very open to question on this template. —Mattisse (Talk) 02:37, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Are these all emotions? 

message: irritability proposed deleted here and then I discovered this template.  Earlypsychosis (talk) 05:09, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  proposed that [[irritability]] be deleted 

message: Shouldn't the emotion "relief" be added? Maybe I'm just missing something. But I think it should be added.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.203.158.104 (talk) 22:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Relief 

message: Check out this tool. Each link in red is a disambig link that must be fixed. Anyone want to help? --JaGatalk 05:08, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  A sea of dablinks 

message: The emotions with no existing articles should either redirect to their synonymous articles or be deleted.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.3.154.230 (talk) 23:02, 21 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Red names 

message: Stress an emotion ? - Or just some catch-all related term ...? - 198.48.2.252 (talk) 04:59, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Stress... 

message: I think Ikigai should be removed from this template, or at the very least moved to fall under the "Worldviews" section. I don't think that possessing a sense of purpose or goal in life is an emotion. Highcollargirl (talk) 07:45, 28 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removal of ikigai