This template falls within the scope ofWikiProject Writing systems, aWikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating towriting systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop bythe project page and/or leave a query atthe project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Russia, aWikiProject dedicated to coverage ofRussia on Wikipedia. To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at theproject page, or contribute to theproject discussion.RussiaWikipedia:WikiProject RussiaTemplate:WikiProject RussiaRussia
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Rusyns, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofRusyns on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.RusynsWikipedia:WikiProject RusynsTemplate:WikiProject RusynsRusyns
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Ukraine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofUkraine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.UkraineWikipedia:WikiProject UkraineTemplate:WikiProject UkraineUkraine
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Serbia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofSerbia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.SerbiaWikipedia:WikiProject SerbiaTemplate:WikiProject SerbiaSerbia
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Montenegro, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofMontenegro on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.MontenegroWikipedia:WikiProject MontenegroTemplate:WikiProject MontenegroMontenegro
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject North Macedonia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofNorth Macedonia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.North MacedoniaWikipedia:WikiProject North MacedoniaTemplate:WikiProject North MacedoniaNorth Macedonia
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Belarus, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofBelarus on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelarusWikipedia:WikiProject BelarusTemplate:WikiProject BelarusBelarus
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Kyrgyzstan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofKyrgyzstan-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.KyrgyzstanWikipedia:WikiProject KyrgyzstanTemplate:WikiProject KyrgyzstanKyrgyzstan
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Tajikistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofTajikistan-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.TajikistanWikipedia:WikiProject TajikistanTemplate:WikiProject TajikistanTajikistan
This template is within the scope ofWikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage ofBulgaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can jointhe discussion and see a list of open tasks.BulgariaWikipedia:WikiProject BulgariaTemplate:WikiProject BulgariaBulgaria
Opening up a discussion about the scope of this navbox, as it is already moving rapidly towards the situation of the old Cyrillic alphabet sidebarwhich was deleted earlier this year: that's to say it includes a lot of red links, a lot of redirects, as well as embeded images that link nowhere.
The major question as I see it is what the threshold that a letter should pass to be included, in other words,should we include red links? Should we include redirects?
My position is that we shouldn't include either. Including a letter likeKomi Dje (as of now a redirect, which I expect to remain that way) which was partially adopted for a period of 10 years and then abandoned is confusing and obscures the purpose of the navbox, which in my view is an aid to navigating between information on different Cyrillic alphabets and the most common letters which are used by them. I don't see any utility in trying to duplicateList of Cyrillic letters, especially in a format that doesn't allow any annotation.
Redlinks currently present should becommented out until the article is created, as they are covered in reliable sources. I have specifically included the embedded images as they link to actual articles. Redirects shouldgenerally not be included unless the subject of the redirect can be shown to be notable and have its own article. I specifically re-added Komi Dje to be consistent with the whole series of "Molodtsov letters", which I believe once had an article but was merged intoKomi alphabets. We should also establish notability criteria for letters, as they are distinct enough from the GNG in terms of this.🪐Kepler-1229b |talk |contribs🪐18:50, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If we are talking one or two red links that's fine, but a sea of red links makes this template unhelpful. The same thing for commented out text, where some is fine, but a giant wall of text makes it much harder to edit. The edit history, or if needed, a post here, can be where you can list any non-links.
In the end the navbox should only include links to articles, no section links, no repeated links and no redirects. PerWP:BIDIRECTIONAL, the navbox should be placed on the pages it links to.Gonnym (talk)10:26, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would remove all redlinks, because determining notability of obsure letters (i.e. finding enough sources or failing to do so) can be quite difficult. The article creators should prove the topic's notability by finding enough sources and referencing them, and then the letter could be added to the navbox. In the same spirit, I would also remove all redirects.Janhrach (talk)18:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Janhrach I don't see why that justifies only having one link per article. It's fairly obvious that theYus article should be split, but even if that weren't the case, grouping them together as "Yus" in a list of letters is not helpful. Also, I disagree that "its purpose is to list articles, not letters" - it's quite clearly intended to give both, and any user unfamiliar with the system will be looking at a list of letters with links, and is unlikely to care if some links go to the same place.Theknightwho (talk)20:45, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
WP:NAV:A navigation template is a grouping of links used in multiple related articles tofacilitate navigation between those articles (emphasis mine). The purpose is to aid navigation, not to act as a transcludable version ofList of Cyrillic letters. I do not think linking to the same article twice aids navigation. If you would like to splitYus, go for it.Janhrach (talk)20:55, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Janhrach You addressed absolutely nothing I said.
It doesn't aid navigation to unexpectedly treat Ѫ and Ѧ differently to every other letter in the list, and they went to different redirects for obvious reasons. If it were just a list of articles, then we would simply list them by name without giving the letters at all, so given we don't do that, unexpectedly grouping them together makes absolutely no sense.Theknightwho (talk)21:54, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also,WP:NAV explicitly states"Likewise, redirects should also normally be avoided for the reasons outlined inWP:NAVNOREDIRECT.The general exception to this is when the redirect represents a distinct sub-topic of an article rather than simply being an alternative name." Emphasis mine.Theknightwho (talk)22:00, 22 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
to unexpectedly treat Ѫ and Ѧ differently to every other letter in the list – We do the same forCyrillic O variants and implicitly for other letters; e.g. not including ѽ in the template, because it is covered atOmega (Cyrillic), which is included.
If it were just a list of articles, then we would simply list them by name – I do not think this is sound reasoning.
Also, WP:NAV explicitly states [...] – I wasn't aware of this, but that doesn't change my opinion. (Actually, I thought it was the opposite, because ofthis edit byGonnym, who is a much more experienced editor than me.)Janhrach (talk)07:52, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirects, section links, repeated links, red links, external links - all of these should never be used in agood navigation template. The purpose of a navigation template, is to navigate between articles.Gonnym (talk)08:19, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gonnym They're not repeated if they're dealing with separate topics within the same article, as neatly expressed by that sentence. Clearly the point of navboxes is to navigate betweencontent, not merely articles, so I don't buy that argument at all in this case, given the two letters are clearly separate subtopics of that article. Quite honestly,this edit referred to earlier was completely unhelpful for anyone trying to find information about those topics.Theknightwho (talk)11:29, 23 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to reverse a few more removals of letters, as I myself have found it extremely annoying that arbitrary letters are missing at random from the navbox when trying to use it. The fact that you were guessing which letters can and can't be merged ("I guess the situation with reverse yu is the same") does not inspire confidence in your ability to judge which letters are and aren't appropriate to display.Theknightwho (talk)10:23, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
.svg)
.svg)
