This template is within the scope of WikiProject Spaceflight, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
spaceflight on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpaceflightWikipedia:WikiProject SpaceflightTemplate:WikiProject Spaceflightspaceflight articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Albums, an attempt at building a useful resource on recordings from a variety of genres. If you would like to participate, visit the
project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the
discussion.AlbumsWikipedia:WikiProject AlbumsTemplate:WikiProject AlbumsAlbum articles
This template is within the scope of WikiProject Library of Congress, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Library of Congress on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Library of CongressWikipedia:WikiProject Library of CongressTemplate:WikiProject Library of CongressLibrary of Congress articles
The solution to the "navbox not in article" issue is to improve the articles in question, not rip a series of links out of this navbox. Deleting multiple names is not an improvement to this navbox and actually a bit
talk) 07:35, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
IMHO, people don't work very well for this navbox: it will always be either an awkward selection (e.g., why not Beethoven: wasn't he a contributor to the recorded music perhaps?) or a disproportional large list of names doubling both the relevant category and the lists provided on Voyager-related articles. So I propose to remove this part of the listing from the navbox (and remove the navbox from biographies and articles on groups). --
Francis Schonken (
talk) 08:10, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
Alternatively, we could list people more or less directly involved with the realization of the Voyager Golden Record in the template (and/or make a separate category for them?), omitting all others, which I suppose are:
I don't see any problem with having people on this navbox as it is a fixed entity that will not expand. It makes absolutely no sense to strip out the musical performers. If you wanted to limit the list to exclude composers that could make sense, but in its current state it's denuded of anything useful. It was
fine as it was before.
talk) 10:12, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
A "navbox" (abbreviation of "navigation box") is intended for navigation, that is, from one article to another thematically related article (as opposed to a list, like the lists included in
Contents of the Voyager Golden Record, where one has to return to the list before clicking to the next related article). The navbox was failing that for most of the persons included in it.
For many persons who have some link to the Voyager Golden Record, their involvement with the record is a far side-aspect of what they are known for on a worldwide scale. Typically articles on such persons already have (or should have) a handful of navboxes relating to contexts that are more significant for what they represent: so adding this navbox to articles on such persons may be less opportune.
If you have a proposal on how to make this work, I'm all ears, but, essentially, a list page that somehow got misplaced in template namespace would make no sense imho. --
Francis Schonken (
talk) 11:37, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
Thanks for explaining what a navbox is. Until today, this navbox did precisely as you describe, enabled the user to move "from one from one article to another thematically related article". Now, thanks to your content deletions, the user will now have to dip in and out of the list page to find related content. It's pretty useless now.
talk) 12:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
Again, no, that was not how it was working: if the navbox is not included on a page it links to, there's no other option than to *return* to the previous page if one wants to visit the next entry in the box. I hope that clarified the confusion. Please can you explain how you would like to address this actual problem? Tx. --
Francis Schonken (
talk) 12:53, 25 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply
My view is that it would be better to improve the individual articles rather than remove the links from this navbox, but we can tackle it another way instead. I always prefer constructive editing over deletion. I'm sorry, I realise I'm probably coming over as too defensive of this navbox. It's just that I care about having a good user experience within an encyclopaedia and dislike when that is compromised just to fit in with the rules. Perhaps if we had discussed this issue first it might have been better. Anyway all that aside, and taking into consideration your concerns, maybe we can sort out some framework here.
Perhaps we can agree:
Yes to including performers in this navbox once the Golden Record is mentioned within their individual article
No to including composers (I quite like having them but I'm prepared to let that go if you want to ditch them)
TheWhistleGag (re-)expanded the list of contributors in the navbox, and added the box to the corresponding biographical articles. So far so good. I can live with the current arrangement: my fear was rather that for many articles this navbox is too far from what the person is about, and that it might be removed from such articles for that reason. I won't be removing such boxes from such articles, but let's keep an eye open whether these boxes are stable on these articles, and decide on a different course of action if and when something significant happens in that sense. --
Francis Schonken (
talk) 11:28, 28 April 2021 (UTC)Replyreply