Template talk:The Protocols

message: After moving this a few times, although I dislike the " (quote) marks around the title, I think the rule should be: 
: as long as the 'parent' article "The Protocols" has quotes around it, then this template should too.
-- RHaworth 19:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Quotes

message: :I'm still a novice at creating & editing Templates. So cleanup is badly needed. Also, I'd like a break between the two (2) images.
:The Luther title should go under his image. But I can't do it since I still do not understand the Syntax - by which I do not mean a tax on sinning.
:--Ludvikus 14:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The template is a bit wide, if someone can fix that problem, it would be appreciated. Yahel Guhan 00:47, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Changed it to fontsize 3. --Ludvikus 03:33, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: The above needs editing - as it redirects to the previous template. --Ludvikus 04:07, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Now it should work OK. M0RD00R 10:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Need another fix - renamed, etc., so the problem came back. --Ludvikus 13:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  '''v . d . e''' 

message: Since the list is long - can someone adjust the Breaks between names appropriately? Thanks. --Ludvikus 14:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The [[Protagonist]] list is long 

message: Do we really need all these wiki links to influence, anonymous, editors, item etc. in this template? I think we can easily get rid of them. M0RD00R 11:13, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Best to you, Dear Wikipedian. --Ludvikus 12:14, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually my point was rather technical one. By linking simple words like item and editor we are not creating much additional value to the template. Of cause it does not harm to have these links but usually only subject related definitions are linked in the templates. M0RD00R 12:44, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you. But I think there's an exception. I would not do this for an ordinary scholarly article. But I believe its useful for articles which attract crackpots - like the Protocols of Zion. It's quite complicated for me to try to explain to you how crazy minds work. Let me just say that I think it's useful to be exact with most of the words we use in an article which deals with crazy stuff. I adopt a very different style where pure scholarship, rather than where psycho-pathology is involved. Thank you for your thoughts. I will see, though, if I can tone done that stuff without sacrificing the integrity or purpose of the Template. Maybe one idea may be of help to you at what I'm aiming at: there's no such thing as The Protocols of Zion; nevertheless, most writing about it is As If there were One Text. --Ludvikus 23:08, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikilinks

message: Change to 'debunkers of the protocols' or similar? Could read better. 123.255.55.96 06:31, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Great idea! I've been trying to think of a better word, I didn't like "exposers", but "Debunkers" is great. Thanks! — Malik Shabazz (Talk | contribs) 07:56, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Defenders against the protocols 

message: It appears the purpose of this template has shifted greatly from its initial creation.  I now question its value.  As I see it, sidebar navigation templates (I don't know if there's a agreed upon name for them, so go with me on this) appear to be used as portals, when a overlying topic branches off into many sections, each of which are wholly a subsection of the overlying topic.  They generally don't go into elements that are merely related to the topic as this one currently does.  The list of names of people involved doesn't really facilitate navigation for an encyclopedia.  inline interwiki links in the various articles are sufficient for this purpose.  Thus, the only links that clearly would belong in such a template are:
*The Protocols of the Elders of Zion
*Protocols of the Elders of Zion (versions)
*The Cause of World Unrest which doesn't count, as it redirects to the "versions" article above
I hardly consider this sufficient to justify a template, especially not a large sidebar template that crowds an article that's already rather busy.  Further, I raised an issue at talk:Protocols of the Elders of Zion (versions)  where that article needs a clear scope and purpose, and needs to be renamed. -Verdatum (talk) 18:05, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: See WP:CLN#Navigation templates. I think several of the disadvantages cited in the guideline fit this template (2, 4, 6, and 8), but I don't think the template has any of the advantages described there. Per the guideline, I think a category is more appropriate than a template. — Malik Shabazz Talk/Stalk 18:37, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the link.  I presumed it was discussed in a guideline somewhere, but didn't know which. -Verdatum (talk) 20:27, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Purpose?