Template talk:Bahraini uprising of 2011
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Bahraini uprising of 2011 template. |
|
 | This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
Links to HR reports?
I wonder if this template should still contain links to Human Rights reports that don't have their own articles, nor seem likely to; my understanding is that templates are primarily for navigation, and this section of the template doesn't seem useful for that, more like a mini-article. In addition, there are already covered well in the main article on the topic. Does anybody have any counterarguments I'm not thinking of? --
talk) 17:31, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
]
- Sorry, I saw that the first two links do indeed have independent articles. I should have looked more closely before opening my mouth. For now I'm removing all the redirects from the template; should these get articles in the future, they can be restored. Fair enough? -- talk) 17:32, 24 January 2012 (UTC)]
- I don't mind. The number of reports is growing. Just today Front Line released a new one. I was going to list reports by the publisher's names instead of report names. The wiki links don't necessarily need a separate article (See talk) 19:00, 24 January 2012 (UTC)]
- I don't mind. The number of reports is growing. Just today Front Line released a new one. I was going to list reports by the publisher's names instead of report names. The wiki links don't necessarily need a separate article (See
Deaths
I also wonder if some of the deaths just added should be removed from the template, and the master article included instead (Bloody Thursday). Per
talk) 19:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)
]
- Oh. I agree after reading talk) 19:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)]
- Oh, I just meant you might mention or link to them in infoboxes like {{Infobox 2011–2012 Bahraini uprising}}, which go into more detail about the events. Looking at that one specifically I'm not sure that it's a good idea, though; obviously the killings you mention here are more notable than some others, but if there are 60+ casualties so far, it's probably better to just have the number instead of trying to list names. Maybe a possibility to keep in mind for the future, though. Keep up the good work! -- – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:12, 26 March 2017 (UTC)]
- Oh, I just meant you might mention or link to them in infoboxes like {{