Template talk:R from television episode

message: How should this template be used when an episode article with alternate names gets merged/redirected? E.g. Citizen Joe and Citizen Joe (Stargate SG-1), and potentially Citizen Joe (Stargate SG-1 episode)? It's either episodes appearing as duplicates in the category, or not properly. – sgeureka t•c 14:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Good question.  The best I was able to figure out from my readings last night/this morning would be to certainly put the ER to list entry on Citizen Joe (the article's "official name"), and the regular alternate name one on the rest?  I could be wrong though. :P AnmaFinotera (talk) 14:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: I think either ER can be added, or just use both templates. I've been putting both when using it for a merge, and ER to list entry alone where the redirect was created just to be a shortcut to the list. AnmaFinotera (talk) 02:11, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: And just wonder how it should be used.  Do you add this to every episode that's been redirected or just one from a series?  Also, do you do this to all episode articles that have been redirected or just ones where the redirection is contested?  Hewinsj (talk) 15:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: It should be for any episode that is redirected to an episode list page.  Yes, it's a lot of work if a large episode set is merged down, but it does help for future referencing. --MASEM 16:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: That's fine, just checking for clarification.  I'm working on moving episodes from an animated series to the list of episodes for that show, and while I prefer the list I wouldn't mind doing this while I'm at it. Hewinsj (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

text: Unfortunately it follows other specific-type redirects (MER for middle earth topic redirects, CR for comic-related redirects.)  Now, that's not to say we can create a template that redirects to the proper name for the redirect, maybe "EpR to list entry".  --MASEM 17:09, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  I like it 

message: Is there a way to add a sort argument to the template, or is this function perhaps already implemented? Currently an episode titled "The Horse" would sort under T rather than H, which is of course not the way we typically sort here.— TAnthonyTalk 00:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: At the moment, no, there isn't. Something to look into, for sure. Not sure if adding a defaultsort to the page would work or not. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Added.  Second parameter (not required) will allow you to set the sort key for the categories. --MASEM 05:54, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Cool, thanks.—  TAnthony Talk 06:11, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Sorting

message: What reasons are there to use this template instead of the related category directly (or vice versa)? -- ToET 02:48, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The same reason templates are used for any redirect page? (now, what that is, I don't know...off hand :P). -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:50, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:Categorization#Categorization using templates would seem to indicate that direct category placement is preferred to template use.  In WP:Categorizing redirects#When to categorize a redirect, under "Categories just for redirects" it says "They are often applied using templates, though such categories can also be created and populated directly."  I am interested in the template vs direct categorization question in general, but my immediate concern is with regard to fixing a hundred or so broken (mistargeted) X-Files episode redirects.  Some are already tagged with  while others use :Category:The X-Files episode redirects to lists directly.  Which should I use for the untagged redirects, should I replace one style with the other in those redirects I am editing anyhow, and should I make that replacement in those redirects that I would not otherwise need to edit? -- ToET 03:21, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: The template is really preferred, I'd think, as it does the categorization automatically, and makes it easier to track them as a whole. So I'd replace those with direct category links with the template, to more clearly identify them. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 03:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Another feature that this one doesn't currently use is to add text to the redirect page to explain what the redirect is in addition to the category.  Should that text be added, it will automatically appear on all redirects that use this, but not those pages that only use categories. --MASEM (t) 03:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, templates it is. -- ToET 03:43, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

text: Nope, as it wouldn't really have much purposes. Articles usually are not merged into an individual episode article. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I get a little confused when I see  tags, such as on .  WP:CAT-R#When to categorize a redirect starts out , "Most redirects should not be categorized", so that template seems to imply that something in particular is missing. I think I need to do some more reading. -- ToET 05:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Template vs category 

message: Currently the template's name and description intend for this to be placed on episode redirects leading to a list of episode article. However, not all episode redirects are to these articles. Articles such as crossovers or multi-part story arcs, have redirects from the individual episodes leading to them, such as Legends of Today and Legends of Yesterday leading to Heroes Join Forces, or Attack on Central City and Attack on Gorilla City leading to Gorilla City (The Flash). The template name should probably be changed to Template:R from TV episode and it's text updated to reflect that it can also lead to targets like those given above. This will also make it similar to other fiction-related redirect templates like ,  and . --Gonnym (talk) 11:40, 17 December 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Issues with the name and scope of the template 

message: * Option 2, since it's accurate, while Opt. 1 is not and is confusing, and is dwelling on a rare edge case. Details below in extended discussion section.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  06:56, 5 February 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments